Thanks I sent this to a friend of mine who keeps saying that Maidan was a CIA plot, Zelensky is a CIA stooge etc. I don't think this will change his mind, but who knows? It's weird because he is a lefty American, but he hates US foreign policy so much that now he's on the side of Russia basically. And there seems to be no shortage of American commentators and professors etc who blame NATO for Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Thanks for reading Bob. I agree and I think the worst part of the argument is that it removes agency from the Ukrainians. I also have my doubts that the CIA had the resources; at that time they were putting 90% of their efforts into counter-terrorism. Just a couple years earlier, Bin Laden had been killed. There might have been some subtle influence, but it would have been nothing compared to the overt Russian influence coming from the Kremlin.
Yes, and doesn't the whole argument that Russia invaded Ukraine because of NATO remove agency from Russia as well? As if Putin and Russia had no choice but to invade, and Putin had none of his own imperial or political objectives. Again, the similarity is the assumption that the USA/CIA controls everything, which to me seems like a kind of America-centric conspiracy thinking that ignores the behavior and motivations of other actors. Does that make sense?
Absolutely. The “NATO made Russia invade” argument strips Moscow of agency the same way “the CIA ran Euromaidan” strips Ukrainians of theirs. It treats Putin like a wind-up toy reacting to Western inputs instead of a leader pursuing long-standing imperial goals.
It’s fair to say NATO expansion irritated Putin. It bruised his sense of status and fed his narrative that Russia was being boxed in. But irritation is not causation.
If you step into Putin’s head, what you find isn’t a man terrified of NATO tanks in Estonia. You find a man furious that former Soviet republics keep choosing a future without him. Every time a neighbor joined NATO or the EU, it wasn’t a security loss for Moscow, it was a political humiliation: another state demonstrating that Russian influence wasn’t inevitable.
The bigger truth is this: NATO didn’t “creep east.” Eastern Europe ran west. Poland, the Baltics, Romania, Bulgaria... these countries begged to join because they remembered what Russian domination looked like. Putin wasn’t reacting to NATO expansion. He was reacting to the collapse of the sphere of control he believes Russia is entitled to. That’s the part Westerners sometimes miss.
If NATO had frozen in place in 1999, Putin’s worldview, and his goals, would look the same. His speeches, his essays, and his actions all point to a desire to reassert control over Ukraine, Belarus, and the post-Soviet space. NATO didn’t cause that. It only got in the way.
Wes, do you only hit home runs? This is gold. A great outline of the forces that have shaped Ukrainian resolve. So grateful for your voice for justice. I wish Washington would listen. I have no doubt you will make an exceptional lawyer. You are already skilled at pushing a pen and winning hearts. Success to Ukraine and you.
Agree whole heartedly except more than just an outline. I am sending to my Congressman as a reminder of what he already knows and sharing with friends to rally their spirits.
Thank you for this. I think group three: «ideological echo chambers in the West; voices convinced that every protest on the planet is secretly cooked up in a Langley basement» is among the most problematic. Russias disinformation work wouldn’t succeed without it. This group is also very often stuck in a Cold War mindset and easily agrees with a «sphere of influence» theory. Citing the Cuba crisis as an example that USA does the same as Russia. Strangely enough these (often leftist) also ignores that other countries have their own agency. And they don’t understand that they are stuck in the Cold War.
Thank you for taking the time to clearly explain how the,
“Victoria Nuland, 5 $Billion, and the CIA staged a coup”.
is patently ridiculous.
It astounds me how so many “experts” can be sold a narrative that utterly wilts under the most cursory examination. Though, I’m begrudgingly accepting the fact that it’s not only common, but to be expected. Sadly.
Thanks I sent this to a friend of mine who keeps saying that Maidan was a CIA plot, Zelensky is a CIA stooge etc. I don't think this will change his mind, but who knows? It's weird because he is a lefty American, but he hates US foreign policy so much that now he's on the side of Russia basically. And there seems to be no shortage of American commentators and professors etc who blame NATO for Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Thanks for reading Bob. I agree and I think the worst part of the argument is that it removes agency from the Ukrainians. I also have my doubts that the CIA had the resources; at that time they were putting 90% of their efforts into counter-terrorism. Just a couple years earlier, Bin Laden had been killed. There might have been some subtle influence, but it would have been nothing compared to the overt Russian influence coming from the Kremlin.
Yes, and doesn't the whole argument that Russia invaded Ukraine because of NATO remove agency from Russia as well? As if Putin and Russia had no choice but to invade, and Putin had none of his own imperial or political objectives. Again, the similarity is the assumption that the USA/CIA controls everything, which to me seems like a kind of America-centric conspiracy thinking that ignores the behavior and motivations of other actors. Does that make sense?
Absolutely. The “NATO made Russia invade” argument strips Moscow of agency the same way “the CIA ran Euromaidan” strips Ukrainians of theirs. It treats Putin like a wind-up toy reacting to Western inputs instead of a leader pursuing long-standing imperial goals.
It’s fair to say NATO expansion irritated Putin. It bruised his sense of status and fed his narrative that Russia was being boxed in. But irritation is not causation.
If you step into Putin’s head, what you find isn’t a man terrified of NATO tanks in Estonia. You find a man furious that former Soviet republics keep choosing a future without him. Every time a neighbor joined NATO or the EU, it wasn’t a security loss for Moscow, it was a political humiliation: another state demonstrating that Russian influence wasn’t inevitable.
The bigger truth is this: NATO didn’t “creep east.” Eastern Europe ran west. Poland, the Baltics, Romania, Bulgaria... these countries begged to join because they remembered what Russian domination looked like. Putin wasn’t reacting to NATO expansion. He was reacting to the collapse of the sphere of control he believes Russia is entitled to. That’s the part Westerners sometimes miss.
If NATO had frozen in place in 1999, Putin’s worldview, and his goals, would look the same. His speeches, his essays, and his actions all point to a desire to reassert control over Ukraine, Belarus, and the post-Soviet space. NATO didn’t cause that. It only got in the way.
I know such types. Yes, they are leftist in a way. But first of all they are anti American.
Wes, do you only hit home runs? This is gold. A great outline of the forces that have shaped Ukrainian resolve. So grateful for your voice for justice. I wish Washington would listen. I have no doubt you will make an exceptional lawyer. You are already skilled at pushing a pen and winning hearts. Success to Ukraine and you.
Agree whole heartedly except more than just an outline. I am sending to my Congressman as a reminder of what he already knows and sharing with friends to rally their spirits.
Hi Wes, thanks for this article, I get the same tired trope from people that I discuss Ukraine with and having this summary is very helpful.
Thank you for this. I think group three: «ideological echo chambers in the West; voices convinced that every protest on the planet is secretly cooked up in a Langley basement» is among the most problematic. Russias disinformation work wouldn’t succeed without it. This group is also very often stuck in a Cold War mindset and easily agrees with a «sphere of influence» theory. Citing the Cuba crisis as an example that USA does the same as Russia. Strangely enough these (often leftist) also ignores that other countries have their own agency. And they don’t understand that they are stuck in the Cold War.
Cheers for
The Ukrainian people. I hear they are intellect and well educated. Wish we could do that with our populace.
Thank you for taking the time to clearly explain how the,
“Victoria Nuland, 5 $Billion, and the CIA staged a coup”.
is patently ridiculous.
It astounds me how so many “experts” can be sold a narrative that utterly wilts under the most cursory examination. Though, I’m begrudgingly accepting the fact that it’s not only common, but to be expected. Sadly.
Thank you Wes, very interesting SubStack.