On Russia-Ukraine, the misdiagnosed patient is flatlining

Responsible Statecraft ^ | Oct 27, 2025 | George Beebe

[E. Pluribus Unum]

All along we've been told this was about aggressive expansionism and applied a strategy of deterrence. That was wrong.

With the imposition of new U.S. sanctions on Russian oil producers and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s dismissal of visiting Russian envoy Kirill Dmitriev as a “propagandist,” the Trump administration’s efforts to end the war in Ukraine seem to be hanging by a thread.

Their success or failure will depend on a simple premise: one must understand a problem in order to resolve it. Unfortunately, the West has been misdiagnosing the problem it faces in Ukraine for more than a decade, with increasingly tragic consequences. And the time in which President Trump can correct this diagnosis — and corresponding policy prescription — is quickly running out.

Since at least 2014, the year of Ukraine’s Maidan Revolution and Russia’s subsequent decision to annex Crimea and back separatist fighters in the Donbass region, the West’s foreign policy stalwarts have regarded Russia’s military actions against Ukraine as something that President Putin views as an elective, an “unprovoked” ambition to acquire land and rebuild empire that is little more than a product of Russia’s authoritarian impulses.

As a result of this diagnosis, they have focused their efforts on raising the costs to Putin of conducting the war, cranking up pressure on Russia’s economy, ensuring that its military suffers high personnel and equipment losses, and attempting to turn Russians into international pariahs. If Putin sees that his grab for power and prestige has only produced weakness and humiliation, they reason, he will withdraw his invasion force or otherwise bow to Ukrainian terms for a settlement.

This diagnosis has also shaped Western terms for any post-settlement order. It underpins the insistence that Ukraine must be backed by a NATO Article V-style guarantee and/or a...

[kiryandil]

But foreign reporting is totally believed.

Even the MI-6 puppets in the Brit press.

[Petrosius]

Are you still sticking to those Russian lies? The CIA did not overthrow the Ukrainian government. Yanukovych fled after he tried to turn his security forces against popular protests against his betrayal to Russian pressure to renounce the EU economic agreement which was approved by 2/3 of the population. Nor did we install a handpicked successor. There was a national election. Indeed, there have been two national elections since 2014 which picked candidates from different political coalitions. Nor was their a terrorist campaign against ethnic Russians, much less a law that disenfranchised them. They were disenfranchised by the Russian occupation which prevented them from participating in Ukrainian elections. But continue with your Russian lies if you want.

[Petrosius]

Zelensky offered no NATO in exchange for Russian withdrawal back in 2022. Putin refused. It was not enough. He has always maintained the goal of “de-Nazification,” which means the replacement of the elected government with a pro-Russian one and the suppression of Ukrainian nationalism. This was never just about no NATO.

[POGO163]

I know you keep wishing it were. But you keep getting to be paid to say it is a hoax.

[Mount Athos]

What you have written is probably false, and easily so.

We have validated audio recordings of Victoria inland proving the IS planned and executed the overthrow of this government, and bragging they had chosen the successor. The name given was the man who took over.

[Mount Athos]

Proovably false

[Mount Athos]

By the way, I got great news last week. One of my friends escaped Ukraine last week, of draft age

[Reverend Wright]

Yup.

The phony English accent seems to have an effect on some people.

Buying into the Brit obsession with Russia is a recipe for foreign policy disaster.

What is the deal there, anyway ? Britain is the furthest country from russia in europe.

[kiryandil]

Yes, I’ve been thinking about The Brit Great Game obsession with the Muscovites.

[Petrosius]

I just love how Russian propagandists a quick to call those who disagree with them liars but never offer any specifics. So what did I say that is false?

1. That 2/3 of the Ukrainian people supported the EU economic agreement? No, this is true.
2. That Yanukovych originally supported the agreement? No, this is true.
3. That the Russians put pressure on Yanukovych to back out of the agreement? No, this is true
4. That Yanukovych buckled to this pressure and repudiated the agreement? No, this is true.
5. That the Ukrainian people rose up spontaneously against this betrayal? No, this is true.
6. That this protest was originally peaceful? No, this is true.
7. That Yanukovych sent his security forces to squash this protest? No, this is true.
8. That Yanukovych fled the country on his own initiative? No, this is true.
9. That there were two national elections since 2014? No, this is true.
10. That the these two elections picked candidates from different political coalitions? No, this is true.
11. That there was no terrorist campaign against ethnic Russians? No this is true. Despite repeated Russian claims, the claim of such a campaign is unsubstantiated.
12. That ethnic Russians were disenfranchised by the Russian occupation and not by a law targeting them? No, this is true.

And what about the Nuland phone call? Have you actually listened to the call. There was no talk about removing Yanukovych from office. It was about who to suggest to work with him as president, disproving your point. Nor is it nefarious that Poroshenko was named Prime Minister. He was a popular politician that was acceptable to a broad coalition. It was only natural that Nuland also thought that he would be a good candidate. But note that Nuland suggested that he work with Yanukovych, not replace him. Also note that Poroshenko removed him from office in 2016.

So what turns out to be a lie is the Russian claim that there was coup and that the west installed its own government, a lie that you have bought hook, line and sinker.

[Mount Athos]

I’ll tell my ukrainian friend who just escaped the country that I’m told I’m a propagandist, he’d get a laugh out of that.

I know what I know from my Ukrainian friends, and having been there.

So if you are this great swallower of all the propaganda on Ukraine, then why haven’t you gone to fight?
Why do the people who have left ukraine not volunteer if this government is so popular and beloved.
And my friend who escaped, maybe you think he is a propagandist too.

One less person to get thrown in a van and dropped into a trench... for nothing

[Petrosius]

Nice try, but which one of my points are false?

[Mount Athos]

We’ve been through all this before.

I know that you know many of your points are bogus or sophistry. So why again. The oh so spontaneous peaceful demonstrations, without any foreign participation or influence... the snipers you are very sure of when you can’t be. The “national” elections without the participation of the regions that voted the other way in the past... The banned political parties and media outlets. You know all this but you plug your ears and close your eyes and insist on a reality you know is not true at all.

See, I don’t think you even believe what you type about Nuland, it just isn’t possible.

Plus, remember I caught you in big lies about Donetsk and the attacks on ethnic russians before. I don’t trust anything you say anymore

[Petrosius]

Nice spin that you are trying to put on the events. No, the protests were spontaneous. The recent protests against the changes in the anti-corruption laws show that the Ukrainians are easily able to protest on their own and do not need foreign help. And it was Yanukovych’s security forces that started the violence. Do not try to spin it any other way. Contrast this with how Zelensky, the supposed dictator, listened to the people and repealed his reform. 2014 could have ended the same way if Yanukovych had listened to the Ukrainian people and signed the EU economic agreement that he had earlier supported.

The only reason that the occupied regions did not participate in the national elections is because they were under Russian military occupation, not because they were barred by Ukraine. And for you to bring up those bogus referenda only shows the hollowness of your position.

As for the Nuland phone call, read the transcript. She was suggesting someone to work with Yanukovych, not replace him, no matter how much you want to spin it the other way.

Nor have you shown anything I said about Donetsk was untrue. Were there civilian casualties? Yes, on both sides. But there was no directed targeting of ethnic Russian civilians. UN reports based on those submitted by the Donetsk and Luhansk “republics” themselves do not support the claim. All you have are baseless claims by the Russians.

[Reverend Wright]

If Alberta votes to secede, and Alberta is militarily attacked by the Ottawa Regime, are you going to support the Ottawa Regime ?

Because that is exactly what happened to the Donbass.

[Petrosius]

No, that is not what happened in Donbas. Russia seized the territory using militias from the ethnic Russian minority and then held sham referenda to justify their actions. Independent polls have shown that the residents of Donbas prefer union with Ukraine over union with Russia. But you will not accept that because it does not fit your narrative.

[Reverend Wright]

“...the residents of Donbas prefer union with Ukraine over union with Russia. But you will not accept that because it does not fit your narrative.”

---

This American volunteer who fought in the area doesn’t agree with you.

https://youtu.be/nk2pBDEc6cQ?t=1068

and

https://youtu.be/nk2pBDEc6cQ?t=2570

[Petrosius]

No one denies that there are pro-Russians, just not the majority.