Why Did Russians Really Attack Ukraine

Russian motives are key to peacemaking because the Western public supports the war effort only because Kyiv and NATO lie about it - find out the true non-evil reasons

Jul 18, 2024

Languages: UA | RU || BG | CS | DE | EL | ES | FR | HR | HU | IT | PL | RM | TR |

Reading time: 41 minutes (or 44 minutes with footnotes)

Welcome to the peace initiative for Ukraine in which you can contibute by raising your awareness as well as your consciousness^[+] and spirit to the modes^[+] of neutrality^[*^], decency, respectfulness, wisdom^[*^], objectivity, mastery of the intellect, surrender (ego and mind to God’s will), and finally peace (inner then outer). To properly grasp everything, we recommend reading the articles of this peace initiative in the order that we^[*^] designed it, which is listed in the CONTENTS. So if you haven’t read the previous articles, we urge you to do it, please. With this article we start “The Roots of the Crisis in Ukraine” segment in this peace initiative, in which we discuss Russia’s Role and Ukraine’s Role, as well as the Trigger Events.

Russia didn't start the war but a special military operation to drive Ukraine to a negotiation table to end the Donbas war^[+]^[+]^[+] and NATO intrusion, so when Ukraine rejected a peace deal in April of 2022, it was de facto Ukraine that started the war as a proxy for US-led NATO.

Putin said on several occasions such as in October 2023 at the Valdai Discussion Club^[+]: "I repeatedly said that we had not started the so-called war in Ukraine, on the contrary, we’re trying to end it." And on 26 January 2024, during a meeting with students participating in the SMO^[»]: "The start of the SMO was not the beginning of the war. They started the war in 2014 in the Donbas. What we're doing is trying to stop that."
“Russia did not start the war, it is putting an end to it, and this is a conceptual truth that should be conveyed to the world”, Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said^[+]. Russia has often indicated that former Ukrainian President Poroshenko "gave orders to his tanks and guns to shell Donbas1, as he was using the army against his own population".

Russia didn't start its SMO2 to occupy Ukraine but to end the war^[+]^[»], defend itself3, and stop the state-sponsored terrorism and tyranny, demanding to demilitarize and denazify the corrupt, repressive, anti-Russian regime backed by the US-led NATO.

Since the war started in 2014^[*^], it was not Russia that attacked first but the Ukrainian military by launching what they called “anti-terrorism operation”^[+] against the natives of Donbas in April 2014^[»], killing almost 14.000^[+]^[+]^[+] ethnic Russians by the time Putin sent his troops to end the Donbas war^[+]^[+]in February 2022.

Even Wikipedia states on its page on Russo-Ukrainian War^[+] that it began in 2014. Conservapedia calls it straight out the “NATO war in Ukraine”^[+] that started by the United States in 2014 with the violent overthrow of the democratically elected government of Ukraine in collaboration with neo-Nazi traitors to the Ukrainian nation.
Russian military engaged first in February 2022; thus, they didn't start the war. Crimea seceded from Ukraine and rejoined Russia peacefully through democratic referendum (there was no war about it; not a single bullet was fired).

When there is any problem, apart from dealing with the effects, to solve it at the core level so that it doesn't reoccur, we need to find the true answer to the question: WHY?

WHY Did Russians Attack And Why Ukraine?

Putin said^[+] the purpose of the operation was to protect people in Donbas who “have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kyiv regime4.” There are also other reasons, such as to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, as well as to demilitarize and denazify it.

Why Russians Did NOT Attack – Imperialism

Most people in the West are led to believe by NATO authorities that the root of the problem or cause of the war in Ukraine is Putin's or Russia’s attempt to rebuild either the Russian empire or the Soviet Union citing imperialistic or irredentist motives but no one has ever provided any valid facts, evidence, or logic to support that ridiculous claim.

We searched high and low for a long time and after a thorough investigation came to the conclusion that this allegation is not true, as we will now provide the arguments and evidence. In fact, it turns out that the Western or NATO authorities are afraid of a possible reunification of the former republics of the USSR and therefore are projecting their fears rather than admitting them. It is in fact NATO that has imperialistic motives, as it is NATO, not Russia, that has been expanding all the time, luring and bribing corrupt leaders to join the alliance, which invades and bombards all nations that do not subjugate to it, as NATO is defending its economic interests.

NATO expansion — American hegemony uses NATO military alliance to force states to submit to it

In politics, there is a cunning scheme to deceive the public called blame shifting or misdirection, which anticipates what the ruling party may be accused of and so as to counter it in advance, they then accuse the rival over and over again of beinge exactly that, so that the public is programmed to believe that the rival and not the actual culprit is guilty of it. The art of blame shifting is so perfected by CIA, MI6, and other NATO secret service agencies that most of the public in the West has been fooled into believing that it is not NATO but Russia that are imperialists despite the fact that in 25 years of Putin’s reign either as President or Prime Minister, he has never tried to conquer any country. The US, on the other hand, has invaded and neocolonized many countries with over 750^[+] overseas military bases, and continues to build more to encircle and threaten Russia, China, and Iran. American hegemony keeps expanding in Europe both as economic-political union (the EU) and a military alliance (NATO) in which Washington makes the rules and all other states are just vassals. Knowing that “offense is the best defense”, American and other NATO leaders are proficient at projecting their culpabilities onto others.

In psychiatry, there is a defense mechanism called projection by which one accuses others of their own actions, or own traits and emotions are attributed to someone else. But, when it comes to NATO, its warmongering officials and propagandists are not just projecting but it is a premeditated scheme designed to deceive the public into Russophobia and into supporting the war effort rather than peace talks.

They also lie^[+] that Russia occupied Transnistria (from Moldova); Abkhazia and South Ossetia (from Georgia), when in fact, these territories declared independence with the help of Russia and are not annexed by Russia (like Crimea is). If what they claim is true, then that would mean that America has occupied Kosovo since it helped it to gain independence and built its biggest military base there but for a dubious reason hypocritical Wikipedia doesn't state that the US occupied Kosovo.

To find out who is actually guilty of anything, including of imperialism, apart from just simply looking who is expanding more, NATO^[ꚛ]^[ꚛ] or Russia, one needs to just follow the money, and that pointer leads to the US MIC5 and WEF6. All globalists are under the WEF roof and eager to rule the world by dominating the markets. Also, the most lucrative industry and the biggest employee in the US is so-called defense industry, which is just an euphemism for war industry, with a most complex network of lobbyists, war profiteers, and contractors, all of whom serve the military agenda of imperialistic expansion or neocolonialism.

In other words, since globalists are neocolonialists who want to rule the global markets and America has the most military bases across the globe, it is safe to conclude that it is West, not Russia, who are guilty of imperialism!

Russia is one of the most famous countries in the world that has fought against imperialism for over a century, so one must be really dumb to accuse or believe that Russians are now, out of the blue and for no reason, for imperialism. Russian people overthrew the Russian empire for a reason – from experience, they knew that the class system was bad so they formed another system in which the people, not the elites or aristocrats, rule or run the government. Russia has too much land (one of the lowest population density in the world^[+]) so, surely, Russians are no fools to go to war to die for more surplus land, yet heavily-propagandized Western masses do not even consider that but blindly fall for “Putin imperator” narrative.

Especially during communist times, anti-imperialism or neocolonialism was the most prominent theme as Russians and all other communists fought against neocolonialism and intervention or influence from a global superpower. Anti-imperialism is central to the struggle against capitalism^[+]. If anyone was against capitalism, then it was communists and Soviets, yet NATO propaganda tools like Wikipedia^[+] and such want us to believe that anti-capitalists are imperialists! Go figure! A feature which distinguishes communist countries or parties from other tendencies which define themselves as “capitalist” and “socialist” is their emphasis on anti-imperialist solidarity. Therefore, to accuse communists and their successors today as imperialists is the highest form of idiocy. It is like calling Jesus a pharisee, or calling peace activists “warmongers”!

Russia with its leader Putin is the most prominent advocate of multipolarity, seeking to undermine American or Western hegemony in the world, which is why Western ruling elites demonize him and call him the wannabe imperator. Dumb masses easily fall for that narrative regardless of the fact that there is no evidence to back it up. How is someone a wannabe imperator if he calls for multipolarity?!

Even American Wikipedia, often manipulated^[+]^[+]^[+] by the CIA and FBI, under “Contemporary Russian imperialism”^[+] can’t provide a single shred of evidence to back its claim but states that Russia “has been accused of trying to bring back post-Soviet states under its rule,” whereby not even stating who is accusing it! Anyone can make accusations but how is that valid info for an encyclopedia?! Since when encyclopedia states hollow, anonymous accusations? Wikipedia is compromised and no longer encyclopedia but American or NATO propaganda tool engaged in conflict-of-interest editing^[+]. Even so, they could not come up with any evidence whatsoever of Russian imperialism, whereby we provide plenty evidence to the contrary below, so keep on reading.

They^[+] want us to believe that because Russia uses other forms of integration such as the economic initiatives and unions, this is supposed to mean it is imperialistic! Why is then the EU and its founders not classified as imperialists?! The mere fact that they use only accusations and such ridiculous justifications is evidence in itself that Russia and its President Putin can not be classified as imperialists.

the EU expansion (Brussels is run by Washington puppets)

The problem with info sphere is that too many humans are dumb and lazy! They just take everything that ruling elites serve them through mass media at face value without making any effort to seek truth, fact-check, or be free thinkers. The ruling elites have taken advantage of that fact to use propaganda tools to sway the public into obedient cogs in their war machine and globalist agenda as they program gullible masses into believing anyone who does not fall in line and obey Washington is either evil, or dictator, or terrorist, or imperialist, or such.

Russia poses a serious threat to the American or West's hegemony but if Russia would reunite with some other former Soviet republics, such as Ukraine, the further implications would seriously diminish American world dominance.

To counter the threat of Russia challenging America ruling the world and its or NATO's expansion, a conspiracy theory was concocted. People looove conspiracy theories, so the Anglo-Saxon elites fed the credulous public with one about the evil wannabe imperator Putin. He is also a dictator. He has to be. Because, all who refuse to do as told by Washington are labeled as dictators. Never mind that the “dictator's” folk love him because, you know, the poor people are all victims of his manipulations and threats. Coming from top levels, this conspiracy theory was easily and quickly spread across all levels of society, including obedient politicians, academics, and media pundits and embedded in movies, documentaries, news, plays, literature and other cultural formats, so that it became a popular belief and common knowledge. On top of all that fiction, all kinds of false flag operations were created for the theory, fiction, and “reality” to merge. “Russia did it”^[*^] narrative became a bestseller. You could poison a guy you don't like and blame it on Putin or Russians and so get away with it.

So, the well-entrenched conventional wisdom in the West is that evil Russian President Putin unprovoked invaded Ukraine to conquer it and make it part of a Greater Russia. Then, he would move on and conquer other countries in eastern Europe. The counter-argument, which enjoys no attention in the West, is that Putin was mainly motivated to intervene by the threat of NATO admitting Ukraine and deploying its hostile military and missiles on Russia's border. For him and other Russian elites, Ukraine in NATO was an existential threat and rightfully so — just look what NATO did in Yugoslavia^[+], Iraq^[+]^[+]^[+]^[+]^[+]^[+], Afghanistan^[+], Libya^[+], Syria7^[+]^[+]^[+]^[+], Somalia^[+]^[+], Yemen^[+]^[+], etc. and all the NATO’s countless regime changes to install US-puppets across the globe, including most of Eastern Europe).

The negotiations in March-April 2022 make it clear that the conspiracy theory-turned-conventional wisdom on the war's causes is wrong, and the counter-argument is right because right at the start, Putin agreed^[+] to end the conflict if Ukraine abandoned the idea of aligning with NATO and instead remained a neutral state. If Putin was bent on conquering all of Ukraine, he would not have agreed to end it before he conquered it all and he would not have agreed to these talks in the first place, as they conflicted the prospect of Russia conquering all of Ukraine. One might argue that he went along only to mask his larger ambitions. There is no evidence, however, to support this line of argument, not to mention that the size of Russian Armed Forces operating in Ukraine was not capable of conquering and occupying all of Ukraine.

However, the conspiracy theory is so deep-rooted in Western consciousness that Westerners can't just forget it and start believing Putin is a good guy instead. It takes a serious leap of consciousness to uproot the deep core beliefs and all the phobia and hatred that come with it – this is as easy as quitting smoking after seeing warning messages on the packaging of cigarettes concerning their health effects. You know it's bad for you but you can't quit just like that. It takes time until it sets in and until you wise up and gather enough mental strength to oppose your urge to go on as usual. Likewise, you know Putin wanted to solve it diplomatically for eight years with Minsk agreements since 2014, and you know he wanted to end the war right in the beginning, and you know that Russia’s principal goal for the war wasn’t to invade the whole of Ukraine but to force Ukraine to become a neutral country but there is something in you that just can't let the old feelings go – you simply hate to admit you have been fooled all this time. It is too embarrassing and humiliating. Especially if you are German, Italian, Japanese, and Ukrainian nationalists. Oh, not again! History repeats itself. People get fooled by their leaders again and again, generations after generations.

It turns out Putin is not as evil as we are led to believe. Demanding neutrality is not a crime. Protecting human rights of ethnic Russians is not a crime. Doing whatever it takes to suppress the ruling neo-Nazis is not a crime. So, how do you criminalize all that if you are a Western hegemon bent on punishing Putin for refusing to bow to you, pledge allegiance, and pay you tributes (natural resources)? You keep on telling your gullible folk to ignore it all because it is all just Russian propaganda! And this works. Any evidence contrary to the establishment's narrative (conspiracy theory) is scorned as “Russian propaganda” and anyone telling the truth is smeared as a Russian troll, Putin agent, stooge of Moscow, Kremlin propagandists, Russian spy, or such.

For those who prefer to think with their own heads rather than just buy that served narrative, it is also worth considering that, unlike with Crimea, Russia did not annex the four Ukrainian regions until September 2022, seven months after it seized them and more than eight years after two of them declared independence and requested annexation from Russia – if Putin was bent on conquering all of Ukraine, he would not wait that long or at all but would jump at the chance to annex them right away, right after annexing Crimea. Especially given the fact that at first chance, in May 2014, Ukraine was in no position to resist or defend itself as it was militarily weak, hence they did not fight against Crimea's annexation. This fact punches a huge hole in the “imperialist Putin” narrative, doesn't it?

Russia may have an irredentist^[+] desire to reunite all the Eastern Slavs8 or all former Soviet republics but not by force and this is definitely not why they conducted a special military operation in Ukraine. If reunification of former Soviet states is what they wanted, logically, they would start by annexing friendly post-Soviet states, such as Belarus and Kazakhstan, the same as the EU is annexing evermore states that play by their rules. Putin and Russia have no irredentist nor imperialistic motives at all, which we will now prove using facts, evidence, and logic. Unlike Western warmongering leaders who never back their claims with any evidence.

As for allegations of irredentism, Putin said indeed that “the demise of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century” but he enlarged on it, saying: “Anyone who doesn’t regret the passing of the Soviet Union has no heart. Anyone who wants it restored has no brains.” So, no, Putin does not want to turn back the clock. This quote punches a huge hole in the “irrendist Putin” narrative, doesn't it?

Not a single knowledgeable student of international relations believed that Russia posed an aggressive threat to Europe at any time since the collapse of the Soviet Union (in December of 1991). They would find laughable any claim that Russia is motivated by world conquest in Ukraine if it had not been for propaganda so ubiquitously parroted by the state-sponsored Western media. Unfortunately, the majority of the public only listens to propaganda from the authorities instead of hearing out both sides. There were too few truth-seekers and free-thinkers out there to have a voice big enough to nip the war effort in the bud. However, even though governments declare themselves as the “single source of truth”, more and more people find it to be untrustworthy. Unfortunately, plenty of evidence shows that governments cannot be trusted. Without the social media, it used to be easier to control the narrative. By now, they lost the plot.

When investigating why Russians attacked, even more important is to uncover the truth about why they attacked if they had no imperialistic motives. And why Ukraine?

For some reason, NATO propagandists in Western mass media are ridiculing or concealing the real motives behind the unfounded accusations of Russian imperialism and irredentism^[+] (desire to incorporate post-Soviet republics or at least Russians outside of Russian borders into Russia). After the Cold War finished, some Western leaders fear a possible reunification of 15 post-Soviet states^[+], which would diminish their influence and power, hence the old “divide and conquer” tactic came into play.

It is peculiar how the greatest accuser of alleged Russian imperialism is the one that is most notorious for it: American imperialism^[+] and regime changes by the US^[+]. American hypocrisy knows no boundaries.

Imperialism is not when one country invades another, especially if a country invades only one country in a decade. Otherwise, Ukraine would also be imperialist, as it participated in the invasion of Iraq. Ukraine participated with approximately 5.000 soldiers^[+] in the illegal invasion of Iraq.

The list of US invasions is so long that the US would deserve the title of “World's Top Imperialist” since WWII. Just one recent example, before and during the time of the war in Ukraine, the US has invaded Syria and has been stealing Syrian oil since 2011 but no one is sanctioning or freezing their assets for some reason. Since 2001, France has made military interventions in Mali, Ivory Coast, Chad, Somalia, the Central African Republic, Syria, and Iraq, so why is no one accusing the US and France of imperialism? Portugal has a military deployment in Mozambique. Britain has thousands of troops in countries such as Ireland and Kenya. Why is Russia any worse or unlike others condemned as imperialistic and evil? Propaganda.

Ukrainian and NATO authorities’ unfounded conspiracy theories^[+]^[+]^[+]^[+]^[+]^[+]^[+]^[+]^[+] about Putin's imperialistic motives lack any valid evidence while there is enough substantial evidence to the contrary as we are about to bring to light.

NATO leaders and their puppets spread a conspiracy theory about Putin’s and Russia’s “devious” plan to conquer Europe to conceal the fact that it is, in fact, them who are trying to rule not just Europe but the whole world with their New World Order’s “Great Reset” plan. If anyone, NATO should be accused and condemned of the imperialistic agenda, given its expansionism. Watch this one-minute short video^[»] to gain insight into NATO's expansionist ambition, the very thing they accuse Russia of. In that video, you will also see how since WWII Russia has not expanded at all, which means that no one has any right to claim that there is some threat of “Russian imperial aggression”. Therefore, all this “Russian imperial aggression” labeling is a clear case of adulterers casting stones or “the pot calling the kettle black”, which is in social sciences known under various terms such as projecting^[+]^[+], deflection^[+], gaslighting^[+], diversion^[+] and so forth, signifying a psyop^[+]^[+] method to blame others for own faults.

We will expose NATO's imperialism or hegemony with undeniable expansionism^[ꚛ]^[ꚛ] in a separate segment in the article on NATO^[*^] but in this context, we would like to just briefly why is NATO projecting. In short, NATO needs to monger the fear of Russia to justify its existence. With its mind control machinations, smear campaigns, character assassination and similar psyop tactics, the US made Putin into a boogey man to get European countries to join NATO and pay 2% of their GDP, most of which goes to the US helping it to preserve its world hegemony. An almost perfect plan that has worked out until the “boogey man” showed his teeth and exposed that “Emperor is naked”.

The military expenditures of all NATO members together account for more than 70 percent of the global total. Here lies the main purpose of the existence of this alliance. What is the justification for such monstrous spending for destructive weapons rather than for constructive means? Without having Russia as an alleged enemy, European states would never consent to paying such massive fees to the monstrous US military industrial complex. In 2023, defense spending of all the NATO members and Sweden amounted to 1.207 trillion euros, although only eleven of the 31 countries met NATO's 2% target. The US pockets most of that "common pot" for defense as the US is the largest producer of armaments for NATO and deploys most troops (paid by NATO).
All this is reminiscent of the protection of small shopkeepers by gangsters.
If you looked closely at the true state of affairs in the alliance, you would be surprised to notice that the combat capabilities of the participating countries are greatly weakened while only American is strong. Stupefied EU goes along nonetheless.
But what if it is proved that Russia does not threaten anyone and is not going to attack anyone? It would be a disaster! How many people will be out of work! Therefore, it’s a matter of the honor of these “world saviors” to constantly maintain the “degree” of tension, invent threats, and even independently organize provocations and sabotage in the form of downed civilian aircraft, attempts to poison people in the UK or Syria. All this is accompanied by media propaganda machine and politicians’ backing.

A List of Evidence Debunking the “Imperator Putin” Narrative

Anyone eager to know the truth needs to allow the possibility that what each of us believes might not be true and that there are deceitful forces out there, so we invite everyone to join us in this self-inquiry. Without succumbing to any propaganda let's use a simple logical line of reasoning to answer these key questions and get to the truth:

If Putin or Russia started this war due to imperialistic motives, why did they agreed to withdraw their troops in March 2022 when they already conquered 27% of Ukrainian territories? As peace talks intermediaries in the first weeks of Russian military intervention – former Israeli PM Bennett^[+]^[+]^[+]^[»]^[»], Turkish foreign minister Mevlut Cavusoglu^[+], former German Chancellor Schröder^[+]^[+], the Ukrainian^[+]^[+]^[»]^[»]^[+»]^[+]^[+] and Russian^[+]^[+] delegations, and Western media^[+]^[+]^[+]– all confirmed that in March, Russian President Putin agreed^[+]^[+]^[+]^[+]^[+]^[+]^[+] to major concessions^[+]^[+], which is also proof of his non-imperialistic intentions: Putin agreed to withdraw Russian troops and that all the borders stay the same as before so Ukraine would have preserved its territorial integrity and sovereignty. No imperator would do that at the time when Russia was ahead and winning (in just matter of days seized a quarter of Ukraine). As many reports prove, including the videos with the members of Ukrainian delegation during March/April 2022 peace negotiations such as head of Zelensky's political party, Davyd Arakhamia^[»]^[»] with former Deputy Foreign Minister of Ukraine Alexander Chaly^[»], and Oleksiy Arestovych^[+»], Putin was ready to end the war^[»]^[+] already in the first weeks upon launching the SMO under one main condition: Ukraine had to enshrine “permanent neutrality” in its Constitution, nothing much else, which was all very reasonable and so advantageous to Ukraine that they already opened a champagne^[+»] to celebrate it, but then Zelensky rejected it due to pressure from the UK and the US, who wanted Ukraine as a NATO member and as a pawn to debilitate Russia. It proves that Russia never meant to occupy Ukraine! This totally destroys the “Imperator Putin” narrative!
If Russian Federal Constitutional law prohibits annexation without the mutual consent and a proposal initiated by the authorities of the annexed regions, how could Putin or Russia have imperialistic agenda? Many haters will reply that it does not matter because Putin does not obey laws but we challenge you to prove it, to prove a single Russian law that Putin violated! Anyway, if Putin or Russia have imperialistic motives, why didn't they make any attempts to change that law so that they could just legally seize Kyiv, western Ukraine, Baltic states, Poland, or any other Russophobic lands, whose leaders claim they are next on Putin's evil agenda??
In Chapter 1, Article 4(2) of the Russian Federal Constitutional Law, for any state to be accepted into the Russian Federation, there must be mutual consent of Russia and the other state. Article 6(1) of the Federal Constitutional Law requires that the foreign state be the “initiator of a proposal concerning acceptance in the Russian Federation as a new subject of a foreign State or part thereof” in accordance with Article 4(2) of the Federal Constitutional Law. In other words, by Russian law, Russia could never annex any independent state that does not initiate the request for annexation.
If the Russian Federation Council (the upper chamber of the Russian Parliament) gave the Russian president the right to use armed forces in Ukraine in 2014^[+], and Putin chose not to exercise that right neither then nor in the following 8 years because he preferred to solve the issues by political and diplomatic means – how can that be behavior of an imperator; is this how imperators act?
If Putin or Russia started this war due to imperialistic motives, why did they attack a 44 million population of Ukraine with less than 100.000 troops^[+] (even though the West inflates the Russian numbers, they reported^[+] that Russia had attacked with more than half of the 150.000-plus troops it had arrayed around Ukraine, which means more than 75.000 troops), plus 40.000 Donbas and 5.000 Wagner troops? Ukraine had more than 10 million^[+]military-age men, so it is clear proof that Russia had no intention to conquer Ukraine with a 100 times smaller army. For comparison, when Hitler attacked Western Poland (smaller population^[+] and size^[+] than Ukraine) in 1939, he did so with an army of 2,2 million troops. Further hole in that narrative is the fact that the Western officials kept listing evidence of how weak the Russian army was, which contradicts an army that is allegedly set to conquer not just Ukraine but the whole of Europe.
If Putin or Russia started this war due to imperialistic motives, where is any evidence for that claim? There is no evidence whatsoever of Putin ever saying that it is desirable and feasible to conquer Ukraine, or that is what he is doing.
If Putin or Russia started this war due to imperialistic motives, why didn't they annex the two Donbas republics9 as soon as they declared their independence and expressed their wish to join Russia in 2014? Any imperialist would jump at the chance to seize the territories whose residents are welcoming them and at the time when Ukraine had no military power to defend itself, thus this suggests that there were no imperialistic aims.
If Putin or Russia started this war due to imperialistic motives, why didn't they annex the two Donbas republics as soon as they took control there in February 2022 (no invasion because the locals welcomed them)? As we all know, Russia annexed them and two other regions only in September 2022, seven months later. This makes no sense if we take them as evil invaders and imperialists. As such, they would annex them immediately.
If Putin is imperialistic-minded, then why did he go along with the Minsk agreements^[+] in 2014 and 2015, which would have allowed Ukraine its sovereignty and preserve its territorial integrity? It was Ukraine, not Russia that violated those agreements, therefore Russians changed strategy after waiting 8 years for Ukraine to honor the agreements. Why would some alleged imperialist agree to the Minsk agreements and allow his folk in Ukraine to be tyrannized for eight long years to intervene militarily?! Many observers are stunned by Putin's and Russia's patience. If Putin or Russians were imperialists, they could have taken eastern Ukraine there and then just as they took Crimea, knowing that Ukraine had no capable Army to defend itself. We all have to consider such facts to come up with a logical deduction, as genuine scholars do, instead of relying on a propaganda machine.
If Putin or Russia had imperialistic motives, why didn't they act imperialistically toward Abkhazia and South Ossetia and annexed them after those two small pro-Russian republics on the Russian border seceded from Georgia in 2008? Even before that, 90% of Abkhazians and South Ossetians had Russian passports^[+]. Any imperialist would jump at the chance to seize the territories whose inhabitants are welcoming them or weaker, thus this, too, suggests that there were no imperialistic aims.
If Putin or Russia had imperialistic motives, why didn't they act imperialistically toward Transnistria and annexed it after or since it seceded from Moldova in 1992? More than 220.000 Russian citizens permanently reside in the region. Transnistria, largely Russian-speaking, broke away from Moldova and, after a brief war in 1992, set up its own national government. The appeal to Moscow was made at a special session of Transnistria’s Congress of Deputies, a Soviet-style assembly that rarely meets. At its last session, in 2006, the assembly asked to be annexed by Russia, though Moscow did not act on that request. If Putin or Russia had imperialistic motives, why didn't they annex Transnistria?!
If Putin is imperialistic-minded, then why did he write off more than $20 billion of African nations’ debts^[+] and more than $32 billion given to Cuba^[+] – would an evil dictator or imperialist do something like that? This was an act of generosity and pragmatism that Western media never reported – why? Because it doesn't fit the narrative they are pushing about Putin and Russia.
If Putin is imperialistic-minded, then why did he wait until reaching his retirement age to pursue imperialistic goals??? He is 70 years old now. Do you know any imperialists in the history of mankind who started occupying foreign lands in their late age even though they already ruled for decades like Putin? If we all use logic, we may discern that it makes no sense to wait until old age to start living out one's alleged imperialistic pursuits, thus condemning Putin for that would be false. We may condemn him for his true faults but not for the false ones. If NATO leaders are using this false claim of imperialistic or irredentist motives as the main or root cause of this war, that would mean that they couldn't reveal the true motives since those would discredit them and disclose their wrongdoings. Think about it. Propositional logic^[+] would go like this: The imperialists never wait to be 70 years old to start imperialistic wars. Putin is 70 years old. Conclusion: Putin is not imperialist.
If Putin was motivated to start this war because he is an imperialist, then why did he wait 22 years to pursue his imperialistic goals? He came to power in 1999 as Prime Minister and then in 2000 as President. If he had imperialistic or irredentist ambitions, logically, he would start conquering foreign lands right away, wouldn't he? Again, it doesn't make sense. Propositional logic^[+] would go like this: The rulers never wait 22 years to start being imperialists. Putin rules Russia for 22 years. Conclusion: Putin is not imperialist.
Do you know any evil imperialistic authoritarian who is always as calm, reserved, and demure as Putin? You have to admit, he is not behaving like all other known dictators. His rhetoric is also different from all known tyrants. He is never rude and never uses any foul language in public nor does he ever engage in any disgraceful behavior such as swearing, character assassination, or public shaming. His appearances are also different from all known imperators as he never ever shows off with his attire or his cars, homes, etc. while all other Russian tzars and oligarchs did as well as many tend to off their medals and other trophies but Putin never does. Propositional logic^[+] would go like this: All imperialists are extroverted. Putin is an introvert. Conclusion: Putin is not imperialist.
Who is a show-off here?
If Putin or Russia had imperialistic motives, why didn't they attempt to occupy Belarus? Why Ukraine and not Belarus, which is much more inclined toward Russia? Logically, it would make more sense to seize Belarus. See? Again, it makes no sense to attack Ukraine to occupy it when there are other easier lands to occupy if this is what Russians are allegedly after.
Do you really think Russians need more land? They are giving it away even to foreigners in their own country – by Federal Law No. 119 FL^[+]^[+], enacted by generous Russian President Vladimir Putin in 2016, anyone, including foreign nationals may get one hectare (2.5 acres) of land free of charge in certain huge thriving areas where they can build their homes and grow food for themselves. Fact. Russia is the largest country in the world. By the way, do you know any other country's president who gives free land to anyone? Think about it if this generosity can be a trait of an “evil dictator”. Moreover, Putin issued an order^[+] stipulating that free land plots in the suburbs of Moscow, Crimea, and Sevastopol will be given to the heroes of the war in Ukraine. Furthermore, Russia has one of the world's lowest population density per km² – 8 persons per m²^[+], which means it surely doesn't need more land for its population. Why would they be so desperate to go into a war for something they don't need? Think about it. Also, the birth rate is decreasing and is in minus (same fertility rate as in Germany^[+], natality is lower than mortality)^[+], which means that they need less rather than more land. Some may argue that occupying Ukrainian land is about controlling the resources of the land and trade routes but if those were so valuable to die for it, why was Ukraine the poorest land in Europe when it had it all? Furthermore, before the whole conflict with Ukraine started in 2014, Russia had a thriving economy^[ꚛ] with plenty of natural resources, and then war brought it down, so surely, they didn't start the war for economic reasons, especially knowing that its economy had been one of the best in the world when it comes to trade balance and no debt^[+]. Russia's economy is better than Germany’s^[+]^[ꚛ] and all the other countries in Europe (not just the EU but also better than in Switzerland, the UK, etc.)^[+]. So, definitely, Russians don't need more land, especially not at the cost of countless lives, billions of euros, and world condemnation. American Senator Tommy Tuberville^[»]: “Putin does not need Ukraine. He doesn't need Europe. Damn it, he already has enough land of his own. He just wants to make sure that there are no US weapons in Ukraine aimed at Moscow.”
If Russians were imperialistic-minded, why did they then give Crimea to Ukraine in 1954^[+]? And why didn't they take it back upon the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991? Think about it. Putin became President 23 years ago, in 2000, so if he was imperialist, he could have annexed it a long time ago but he didn't.
Further proposition that Russians as all Slavs were never imperialistic invaders (since it is not in their blood and culture) is in the Appendix section on Historical Evidence That Slavs, Including Russians, Never Waged Wars To Conquer^[*^]. History counts. In the history of mankind, Slavs (including Russians) never invaded another country to conquer or occupy, just to protect (e.g., socialism or its empire or its folk in other countries) or to help liberate an occupied nation. The only exception was the Russian emperors Romanovs in the 18^th century but they were not real Slavs and they acquired most territories through treaties rather than invasions. Romanovs' bloodline^[+] at the time was not Slavic or Russian but mostly German and Baltic, which is why we don't count their actions or policies as Slavic or Russian.
Besides, Russian emperors or tzars acquired their imperial territories almost exclusively by adjacence. Unlike Britain and France, which jumped thousands of miles beyond their own borders to other continents to colonize many lands, Russia moved to annex whatever land or peoples stood next to its borders, mostly per treaties rather than by force. Russian emperors were not as imperialistic as the US makes them seem as they attained most lands through treaties rather than invasions and they did it mostly to create buffer zones between their borders and foreign invaders. Heck, they even gave away land per treaties. For instance, a Russian emperor (Alexander II) granted Alaska^[+] (for a symbolic price) to the US in 1867 – if Russian Emperors were as imperialistic as the US alleges, would they give Alaska to the US? Think about it.
In Africa, Russia is viewed as the only major European country to eschew colonialism, thus Russia is widely praised, unlike former colonial powers from the other Western nations that are notorious for being imperialists and colonialists throughout history but are accusing Russia now of that very crime they have been committing – a clear case of the adulterers casting stones. No one is innocent but let's not deceive ourselves with hypocrites and provocateurs. If justice needs to be served, then let us hold all imperialists and invaders accountable.
In his speech on Red Square on Victory Day 2023, Putin said^[+] “We believe that any ideology of superiority is abhorrent, criminal, and deadly by its nature.” – do you know any imperator who abhors superiority?

Even if any of these individual points don't prove much on their own, never mind because, in conjunction with all the others, a set of all these premises together surely amount to enough evidence. We used logical reasoning only for 9 premises but there are many more, as we believe we don't have to waste more time on this. This is enough for anyone using their brain to deduce that Putin and Russia didn't start the war to rebuild the Russian empire as American propaganda outlets insist on it. If they lie about that, imagine what else they also lie about. There is too much disinformation and speculation out there that prevent common people to distinguish truth from lies, which is why we appeal to everyone to use this kind of logical questioning and reasoning.

Furthermore, chief propagandists from NATO states try to push some other alleged Russian objectives onto all their followers for which they have not one single piece of evidence nevertheless some gullible, ignorant people fall for it anyway while many others take it as further proof of Western propaganda. Despite Russian demands^[*^] being very clear, US Secretary of State Blinken, for instance, said in February 2022^[+], that the aim of Russia was to topple Ukraine’s democratically elected government, and a year later, in February 2023^[+], he said that Putin’s primary objective was to conquer Ukraine, end its existence as an independent country, and absorb it into Russia – which is contradictory to his earlier claim because those two objectives contradict each other since there is no need to overthrow a government when one plans to absorb the whole country; and he said^[+]^[+] that Russia's objective was to erase Ukraine from the map – when did Russia or Putin ever insinuate^[+] any of that, please?! Russian demands^[*^] are very clear from the start and none of them included anything Blinken claims. We will go through these specific demands in the next segment^[*^].

The mere fact that Russians didn't engage in a battle to conquer Kyiv (not counting the initial short attack intended to make threats during the negotiation period), says enough to those who use brains rather than just blindly believe NATO officials’ speculations without looking into Russian demands. However, with Ukraine's refusal to meet Russian demands^[*^] (no demand included erasing Ukraine from the map and absorbing it into Russia) and all the developing hostilities, we would not be surprised if Russia changes its initial plans and seizes Kyiv.

As if all that was not ridiculous enough, Blinken said^[+] that this war is an attack not only on Ukraine but on the international rules-based order^[»] that allegedly seeks to defend international peace and stability, ludicrously suggesting Russians attacked Ukraine because they want to destroy international peace and stability. As if Russia had any gains from destroying international peace and stability! Of course, as usual, he provided not even one single piece of evidence or justification for his bizarre allegation.

But here is just one of many evidence that the so-called Western rules-based order is destroying international peace and stability: in March 2024, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said^[+] at the European Union summit in Brussels that the income from Russian assets does not belong to anyone, therefore it can be used for military aid to Ukraine. This is Western rules-based order! If you invest or put your money in the EU, your earnings do not belong to you but to the EU or whomever the EU wants to give it! They do not even hide it that if they do not like you, they will just steal your money, as if this is legal in the EU! If the West had any credibility left in 2024, this has surely destroyed it and with it any resemblance of stability and peace. Politico reported^[+] that Latvian central bank governor claimed that without stealing there’s no winning! How mentally challenged or cognitively dysfunctional one must be, to believe that stealing leads to victory, so those who feel they must steal to win are clearly losers.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister (and participant of the Bilderberg Conference^[+]) Kuleba reiterated^[+] that Russia not only seeks to destroy Ukraine but also aims to destroy the world order based on international law and the UN Charter – also, not giving any piece of evidence or justification for his allegation. Even more ridiculous was his statement that Ukrainians “are defending the entire democratic world”! Right. Australians, didn't you know that Ukrainians are fighting for defending your democracy?! In other words, they are attempting to depict it as if Ukraine loses, then the whole democratic world loses. A-ha.

These are the guys who are telling the world why Russia attacked Ukraine and whom we should trust. We are talking about the same Blinken who during the 2020 US presidential election campaign requested the forging of a letter from 51 CIA officials to blame Russia for disinformation on the issue of Hunter Biden's laptop^[+]^[+]^[+] (revealing corruption^[+] by then-Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden with documents exposing IRS tax crimes and illegal foreign interference in the presidential election which would make Biden lose to Trump if it was not dismissed as an alleged Russian ploy thanks to Blinken's ploy with lying CIA officers).

Instead of listening to speculations or baseless allegations, the smartest thing would be to hear it straight from the horse's mouth. Right before launching the offensive in February 2022, Putin addressed the public^[+] in a televised broadcast10 stating the motives for their special military operation. Of course, he would not say they had imperialistic motives if they had any but from this speech, it is quite clear what the motives are. Also, an “evil imperialistic authoritarian”, as he is portrayed in the Western media, would not bother to explain himself to anyone to such an extent, would he?

President Putin announced^[+] it as a “special military operation” aiming for the "demilitarization" and "denazification" of Ukraine in response to NATO’s provocation and Ukraine's persecution and a terror campaign against Russian ethnic minorities since 2014. Putin stated that they supported the right of the people of Ukraine to self-determination and had no plans to occupy Ukrainian territory or carry out aggression against the Ukrainian people but against the neo-Nazi group that seized power in Kyiv. In other words, the only reason the military operation escalated into a war is that the Ukrainians and their Western allies didn't allow Russians to denazify and demilitarize the governing radical nationalists and extremists. If Russians would have managed to enter Kyiv and capture the culprits of the Odesa and Donbas massacres without much destruction (they could have shot more rockets and missiles but after they faced fierce resistance, they withdrew because peace talks started and they didn't want to destroy the city) or if Ukrainians would change the anti-Russian, the US puppet regime today, the Russians would withdraw tomorrow. Therefore, the end of the war and suffering are in the hands of the Ukrainian public. As long as they support the anti-Russian government controlled by the US, the conflict will not end even if the war ends.

The demand for denazification is covered in a separate article^[*^], so we won't go into that now other than just pointing out to some neo-Nazi-like provocations that caused Russians to start the war. Apart from offensive NATO expansion^[ꚛ] to Russian borders, Putin said the purpose of the military operation was to protect the people in the predominantly Russian-speaking region of Donbas^[+] who for eight years have been facing humiliation and terror (similar to genocide) perpetrated by the Kyiv regime and its neo-Nazi battalions. As Putin pointed out, politicians, journalists, and public activists who opposed the anti-constitutional actions of the US-appointed^[+]^[+]^[+]^[+] new regime that forcefully ousted the democratically elected government were harassed, publicly humiliated, and many of them even tortured and killed.

The Russian government has been infuriated to punish all those responsible for thousands of murdered people of the Russian ethnic minority in eastern Ukraine between 2014-2021, including the 2014 Odesa massacre, for which crime the Ukrainian authorities never prosecuted anyone and instead praised the perpetrators. This event triggered the two Donbas republics to declare independence a week later and Russia to seek justice. Kherson Region Governor Vladimir Saldo stated^[+] that any chance for independent Ukraine ended after the Ukrainian government allowed Ukrainian neo-Nazis to conduct that 2014 Odesa tragedy and go on unpunished – further saying that the current Ukrainian state "will either radically change or sink into oblivion as a mistake of history."
In Odesa, in May 2014^[+]^[+]^[+]^[»], 116^[+] (officially 48) peaceful protesters of Russian ethnicity were brutally murdered by being burned alive, and no one was prosecuted for that although the felons are known, unlike the 100 anti-government protesters 3 months earlier who are commemorated as the Heavenly Hundred Heroes – this fact alone proves there is no justice or rule of law in Ukraine. Where was law enforcement during the massacre? The Ukrainian police were filmed just standing by the trade union building where Ukrainian Russians were trapped while being burned and shot at. No police stopped or arrested the radicals of the Right Sector organization and soccer hooligans when they attacked and burnt a tent encampment at Odesa’s Kulikovo Field public park^[»], where city residents had been gathering signatures for a referendum on the federalization of Ukraine and granting Russian official language status. Under attack, many supporters of federalization took refuge inside the adjacent Trade Union House but the mob of radicals surrounded the building and set it on fire, blocking the exits and shooting at those who tried to escape. The Nazi-era slogan – Slava Ukraini – which is now used by Kyiv’s Western supporters was shouted as people were dying.
Svoboda Party MP Iryna Farion^[+] posted on Facebook the next day^[+] “Bravo Odesa...Let the devils burn in hell”11 and Fatherland Party MP Lesya Orobets celebrated the "liquidation" of the kolorady (a derogatory term for pro-Russians); the Right Sector paramilitary confederation celebrated the deaths, describing the massacre as “yet another bright page in our fatherland’s history” and its leader Dimitro Yarosh became a candidate for the Ukrainian presidency and later an MP; Oleksiy Goncharenko12, who took part^[ꚛ]^[+] in the Odesa massacre was later elected to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe – these fascist lawmakers were responsible for terror against ethnic minorities. This corroborates that since 2014, Ukraine is a fascist state^[*^].Since then, around 14.000^[+]^[+]^[+] more Russian people were killed and almost 6 million were displaced by the time Russia militarily intervened to defend (not invade) the Russian ethnic minority in Ukraine.

As for demilitarization, this too is covered in a separate article^[*^], so we won't go into that now either other than just pointing to the Russian concern that Ukraine plans to create its own nuclear weapons and all the increased military aid from the West since 2014. If Ukraine acquires weapons of mass destruction, the situation in the region would drastically change for the worse, especially for Russians as Ukrainians have been extremely hostile to them ever since 2014. Russia had no choice but to react to this real danger by demanding Ukraine's demilitarization.

Russia may have also other motives to conduct its SMO^[+] but it is unjust to speculate them without any evidence as countless Western commentators do. Many proposed ulterior motives border on craziness with the obvious ulterior motive to demonize Putin and Russia. That said, there might be some truth in Russia having also some economic concerns as one of the motives in securing its influence on Ukraine.

In regards to that, we should mention the newly discovered massive shale gas fields in Eastern Ukraine’s Yuzivska shale bloc (Donbas region) as well as Western Ukraine’s Olesska shale block. Ukraine’s gas exports, if developed, were expected to undermine Moscow’s economic interests in Europe and also the political influence Russia’s gas monopoly grants the Kremlin there. Heavily dependent on the export of its energy resources, Russia is alleged to preserve its influence and income in Europe by taking Ukraine’s gas prospects out of the equation.

However, that theory of Russian motive for this war can be now thrown out of the window as it is more than evident by now that Russia doesn’t need influence in and income from Europe at all since its economy thrives^[ꚛ]^[+]^[ꚛ] even in war conditions with Russia selling its gas elsewhere. In other words, Russia has no need at all to lose thousands of precious lives and tens of billions in military spending over the gas monopoly in Europe, so anyone suggesting that is just ignorant or malevolent.

That said, Russia might take advantage of the developments during this war to gain access to those shale gas fields rather than leaving it to American, British, and Polish companies to exploit those Ukrainian natural resources. British and American oil companies (Shell, Chevron, and Exxon) already got their hands on it and no wonder Poland has designs on seizing Western Ukraine with its Olesska shale gas block, which we doubt that Russia and Belarus would allow (hence they put nukes on Polish borders). To be fair, if anyone other than Ukrainians has the right to exploit Ukrainian natural resources, then it is Russia. The US and UK have no right to exploit Slavic lands and resources. Surely all Africans, Asians, Arabs, and Latin Americans would agree. If Ukrainians are not smart enough to extract and sell their natural resources, then they should let their fellow Slavs do it, rather than foreign predators. The only reason Ukrainian corrupt authorities are selling off their nation's agricultural lands and other natural resources to Americans is that Americans bribed them, just like they have been doing in Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, and elsewhere. Americans are notorious for bribing national leaders and orchestrating regime changes^[+] where government policymakers are not willing to take their bribes.

Furthermore, when discussing Russian motives to launch their SMO, we need to address their two other drives: history and multipolarity.

When it comes to history, it is not about aiming to restore the Soviet Union or Russian Empire at all, as NATO leaders want us to believe. Putin said “Anyone who doesn’t regret the passing of the Soviet Union has no heart. Anyone who wants it restored has no brains.” So, no, Putin does not want to turn back the clock. Also, the Communist Party in Russia does not have much power or supporters in Russia^[+], meaning to say, restoring the Soviet Union has never been in the cards for most Russians.

When we talk about history as a motive here, we mean not that Russia wants to restore its historical borders but that Russia has a history of foreign armed forces wanting to defeat Russia, especially NATO states, which is why Russians have grown very cautious about any threats. Unlike NATO states, where Russophobia^[+] is rampant, Russia has no phobia of any nation but is only taking defensive measures to ensure its security.

Wars may have different specific causes, but in any war, the basic weaponry consists of discrepancies in people's beliefs. Just like Russophobes in the West, many Russians are so absorbed in their conviction that some Western force is out to get them that they are in a panic mode and fully in the ‘attacking to defend’ modus operandi, therefore interpreting and exaggerating all events as means to destroy their grand motherland and its people, culminating with the genocide allegations. NATO’s expansion up to Russia’s borders and Ukraine's betrayal (embracing pro-Western rather than pro-Russian ideas, applying to join NATO) triggered Putin’s darkest side and the historical paranoia of old Russia’s rulers, who countered threats and foreign age-old ‘divide and rule’ tactics with the old-fashioned policy known as ‘offense is the best defense’. The Military Doctrine of Russia^[+] centers on the protection of Russia, not the expansion of Russia.

First Czar Ivan Grozny (a.k.a. Ivan the Terrible, ruled from 1547-1584, the title tsar was derived from the Latin title Caesar and meant “emperor”) began the process of attacking to defend itself (from the Tatars then), the policy of expansion for survival. He had two main goals: to resist the Mongol Golden Horde and to gain access to the Baltic Sea.

Later, from Peter the Great (reigning from 1696–1725) onwards, Russian emperors (most of them of non-Slavic, mostly German bloodline) embraced the same policy of expansion for defense, creating buffer zones.

It would be false to judge Russians’ motives for their preemptive SMO^[+] (attacking to defend) without considering historical realities that contributed to their customary proactive stance towards foreign threats. Not taking Ukrainian aggression towards Russian ethnic minorities in Donbas since 2014 into account, the most recent devastating historic event, which serves as a key history lesson for all Russian patriots, absorbed with mother's milk, is the catastrophic Russian casualties by Nazi Germany and their fascist allies in WWII costing Russia 14 million of precious lives^[+] (26.6 million Soviets died^[+]^[+]), not to mention even more millions of maimed or wounded Russians as well as those who lost homes and were displaced. In addition to horrific genocide, millions more were forced into slave labor to serve the German war economy. There is no nation on the planet that suffered so much under the Nazis as Russia did. So, we forgive them for being more sensitive to the issue of neo-Nazis and fascists in Ukraine than others.

In the Russian government’s view, Ukraine is supposed to stay neutral – a buffer zone between NATO and Russia. With the possibility of losing a buffer, the Kremlin calculated that the cost of inaction is greater than the cost of action and that sanctions in the short term are acceptable for long-term survival. These calculations are based on the existential threat Russians feel from the alliance that has been trying to change the regime in Russia, Belarus, and many other countries, providing weapons to known neo-Nazis in Ukraine to kill Russian ethnic minorities in Donbas, and invading or bombarding many countries violating UN Charter.

This ‘attacking to defend’ policy has never meant to occupy foreign territory but to prevent the occupation of Russia, which is in contrast with all other former colonialist and imperialist nations that now blame Russia for being the same.

We provide concrete proof for Russian and Slavic non-imperialistic politics in the Appendix on Historical Evidence That Slavs, Including Russians, Never Waged Wars To Conquer^[*^], so make sure to read it if you are falsely led to believe that Putin and Russians have imperialist motives. Although there are some historical cases (Baltic and Crimean conquests) of Russians also forcing an exit to the sea, a traditional concern of landlocked Russia was not to conquer another nation but to have free passage to the sea and to open up blocked trade routes. This is also now the case with the annexation of pro-Russian Crimea and Donbas regions, giving Russia the exit to the Black Sea and opening up blocked goods delivery, trade, and water routes to Crimea.

When it comes to multipolarity as a motive, Russian political philosopher Alexandr Dugin^[+] said it best^[»]: Russia is not fighting against the West but against the Western hegemony, particularly the pretention of the West to be the measure of things. Russia is fighting against the refusal of the West to consider that Russian culture, political system, and society can be built on totally other principles. The West doesn't accept any alternative to its principles and uses all kinds of means to stage regime changes in all significant countries that do not obey Western rules and values. Russia has had enough of Western hegemony and intimidation after the Western powers began an intense smear campaign against Russia and its President and tried to change regimes in Russia and its neighbors (the West had installed its puppet regimes on Russian borders through media and electorate manipulations). The West has tried to replace Putin with its puppet Navalny^[+]^[+]^[»]^[»]^[+]^[»]^[+]^[+]^[»] (Putin’s weakest political opponent13, Russians gave him nickname Analny for his bending over backwards to please the West) and founded NGOs in Russia that promote Western neoliberal values, which encroach on Russia's conservative culture, religion, and political system.

Thank you for reading this article and participating in this peace initiative by raising your awareness and, hopefully, your consciousness and spirit. To properly grasp everything, we^[*^]recommend reading the articles of this peace initiative for Ukraine in the proper order, which is listed in the Contents. So if you haven’t read the previous articles, we recommend that you do. When you are ready, please proceed to the next article in this “The Roots of the Crisis in Ukraine” segment: How Did Ukrainians Cause the War

Ukraine Peace Initiative Substack

Discussion about this post