The Roots of the Crisis in Ukraine

To make peace, to end the war, it is important to know what, how, and who started and caused it, so as to find the real solution that addresses the root causes

May 13, 2025

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

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.

To kick things off with a bit of funny😊:

A historian, a political scientist, and a mystic are stranded on the Snake island when a bottle washes up on the shore. When they uncork the bottle, a genie appears and offers three wishes.
The historian wishes for a single, definitive document explaining the true origin of the conflict. The genie snaps his fingers, and poof! A thousand-volume archive appears, each contradicting the other.
The political scientist wishes for a perfectly rational actor to emerge and de-escalate the situation. Poof! A charismatic mediator appears, proposing a brilliant solution involving… even more sanctions and a trade deal (rather than a peace deal) that satisfies no one really (yet he calls it historical).
The mystic sighs and wishes for a simple, universally accepted reason for the crisis. Poof! The Ghost of Kyiv suddenly flew his fighter jet across the sky, leaving a smoky trail that spells out: "IT'S COMPLICATED."

The rule of thumb is, whenever there is a major geopolitical conflict or war, there is more than meets the eye or ear, nothing is as it seems, and there are two sides to every story. There are clandestine forces^[*^] at play, of which the public is made unaware through manipulative deception techniques blaming the rival as the culprit. Based on that rule, when Putin^[+] and his alleged imperialistic agenda are propagated as the root of the conflict and crisis, then we can be sure, this cannot be true as truth is not the same as propaganda. Even the allegations of NATO causing the war are just a superficial justification laid bare only to conceal the underlying cause and culprits. But we will verify this general rule of geopolitical conflicts with concrete facts, so bear with us. Most of all, we will expose the clandestine force behind all the alleged culprits (Putin, neocons, globalists, MIC1…).

Many analysts point to NATO expansion, while others highlight internal Ukrainian politics, historical grievances, or economic factors. Unraveling the precise starting point is a complex endeavor. Trying to find the single root cause of this crisis is like trying to find just one reason why you never achieve your New Year's resolutions😊. There are... layers. Like a Russian Matryoshka doll. But above all, the fault is in the stars – the planets were clearly aligned for everyone to discover their inner armchair warrior and for an un-precedented outpouring of blue and yellow emojis. If only geopolitical conflicts could be resolved through widespread adoption of a color scheme. Surely, a united front of avatars could withstand tanks. Hm, live and learn. Clearly, all that virtue signaling or changing profile picture were a game-changer. Or not. Some geniuses assumed that global profile picture alignment would usher in world peace. They were dead wrong. Again. The internet's collective heart was in the right place. Its strategic impact? Less so. We were told that raising awareness was half the battle. Turns out, the other half involves ensuring the aid money doesn't vanish into offshore accounts😊.

Like with all neighbors, the disagreements between these peoples and states are not new; they stretch back centuries, with shifting borders, alliances, and cultural influences shaping the modern landscape. There is never one cause of anything and a causal relationship is not just a linear sequence. Causality is simultaneous rather than sequential, with causes and effects being intertwined in self-reinforcing loops. That said, when we talk about the roots of a crisis or conflict, just like literal roots that are composed of many small branching, fibrous tissues, the allegoric roots in this case are made up of numerous threadlike issues that feed off each other. The roots of this crisis go so deep, archaeologists are considering applying for excavation permits😊.

In all peace talks and considerations, Russia talks about seeking to eliminate the root causes rather than just freeze the conflict with a mere temporary ceasefire, which Ukraine and NATO started to demand since April 2025, when it became clear that Ukraine couldn’t stop Russia winning and wanted to fool Putin again (like with 2014 and 2015 Minsk agreements) into buying time to rearm and regroup.

“Our task is to achieve long-term peace by eliminating the root causes of the conflict”^[»] - Medinsky, head of the Russian negotiations delegation in May 2025

According to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov^[+], the “root causes” that led to the “crisis” in Europe and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine are the threat posed by the West to Russia’s security, the global and regional disbalance of power (the US hegemony or monopoly in the currency regulation, trade and technologies vs multipolar world), injustices in the world economy, and sanctions against Russia. Evidently, Russia blames the West, not Ukraine, for causing the war.

Ukrainians chose the military rather than a diplomatic option to resolve the conflict with Russia. They had several opportunities to prevent the war and escalation with peace negotiations during which Russia conceded to a ceasefire and withdrawal without annexing any parts of Ukraine (not counting Crimea) but they violated all the Minsk agreements^[+]^[+] and rejected all peace proposals. With the backing of the NATO bloc, Ukrainians or their armchair General Zelensky refused to make any concessions whatsoever and chose to fight.

What alternative did or does Ukraine have to military action?

Sanctions didn't work. Politics and diplomacy either. What else is there?

Raising consciousness^[+].

What's that and how to do it is the main part of this peace initiative but this is a solution. So, before moving on to the solution, we need to determine what the real problem is. Like at the doctor's office – we need to do an examination, then make a diagnosis to be able to propose a remedy.

The problem here is that most people just look at the symptoms, and in their superficial frame of mind, they take them as the real cause of the war.

Like with diseases, by tackling just the symptoms, the problem will not go away – it will resurface over and over until the root cause of the problem is dealt with. In medicine, this recurrence of the ill condition is called relapse or recidivism. Therefore, there is not much use in symptomatic treatment or measures, especially when there is a cure for the root cause of the war.

This applies to the war in Ukraine. Most people just take the Russian invasion at its face value and without a second thought or a deeper look hotheadedly conclude that Russia is the cause of the problem, when in fact, Russian aggression is only a symptom. They say, Russia started the war, which is arguable, but Ukraine caused it. We may also point fingers at the US and other NATO states but they wouldn't have any impact if Ukraine hadn't let them influence it due to manipulability, corruption, poverty, and other weaknesses.

Drawing parallels often helps to find a solution. We may compare war to a disease. Like most if not all chronic diseases, a long conflict and war are psychosomatic too. They sprout from the mind. It takes two to tango; as well as enter into a conflict and war, thus the minds of both belligerents contributed to the war. Misfortune in Ukraine may be traced back to all sorts of faulty collective modes of consciousness2 such as victim mentality, blame, corrupt culture, extreme nationalism, discrimination, and then some.

Like with cancer, if we just treat the “aggressive malignancy” by, say, aggressively shrinking, removing, or liquidating it, it may come back, as it often does (cancer recurrence). This is not a satisfying solution; thus, our peace initiative digs deeper to address the root cause(s).

⚠️ As we use the analogy of cancer, we are by no means suggesting Russia or anyone else is cancer but using it only because many people view Russia and the Russian ethnic minority in Ukraine as such. We meet you where you are in your head rather than expecting you to see things as we see them.

So, following this narrative, it must be noted that there is no such thing as a cure for cancer. There is just cancer treatment (like this newly-developed Russian therapeutic mRNA vaccine^[+]^[+]^[+]). There will never be a cure for cancer itself because cancer is just a symptom. What needs to be cured is the root cause, not the symptom, otherwise the cancer will reappear. The same applies to ending the war in which Russians are seen as a malignant growth spreading through Ukraine. Rather than trying to eradicate or deal with Russians, Ukrainians need to look into the cause of Russian aggression, which is, like with cancer, psychosomatic or metaphysical (mental in origin). Russians didn't just wake up one day and said to themselves “Today, we will attack Ukraine for no reason because we can”. Something revolting in Ukraine made them attack. Both cause and effect are equally wrong. We won't mention that we all reap what we sow, as this only irritates those who deny their responsibility for the bad events of their life (but are keen to take responsibility and credit only for the good outcomes) but we need to point out how untruthful the claim that the “Russian invasion was unprovoked” is.

Just like cancer, invasions are (unconsciously) caused (by the victims). Maybe not always, but in this case, looking at all that led to this war, it is undeniably so. Both sides are culpable. We may sympathize with victims but should not forget that the invaders are also victims (are hurt and suffering losses) nor disregard the facts.

When people get a cancer diagnosis or any other fatal disease, most commonly, they ask “why me?” Finding the answer helps to heal it forever by taking care of the cause (which in most cases is holding on to resentment towards a family member or someone else) rather than mere symptoms. Likewise, Ukrainians should ask themselves, why Ukraine? Why didn't Russia attack any other country? It serves no purpose to blame it all on Russians being “evil imperialists”. As long as Ukrainians deny their responsibility in the conflict, there will be no possibility of “curing” the situation. Not just war but also the underlying hostility needs to be eradicated. How to do that will be explained in this peace initiative. It goes much deeper than asking mere forgiveness or blaming it on NATO's “divide and conquer” scheme. It comes down to raising consciousness^[+] (and awareness). Consciousness is not meant as awareness or wakefulness but as a primordial cause and fundamental force or source of creation.

Like with anticancer therapy that has the goal to stop cancer from spreading further, all that the Ukrainian army is doing is just that. But this is not a real, lasting solution.

Some other cancer treatments focus on reducing the side effects and providing patients relief from pain and other symptoms. This is called palliative care. Palliative care is usually offered in cases of terminal illness but also if cancer is treatable (not curable). This is what Ukrainian allies are doing (besides adding fuel to the fire).

Btw, while on the topic of cancer, Russians recently invented a vaccine/cure for cancer^[+]^[+]^[+], which they generously give to the mankind for free.

Let's see how this analogy helps us to find a “cure” for war with no adverse side effects. It is all about finding the root of the problem and treating that rather than just symptoms. As it is pointless and ludicrous to call cancer “evil” and spread the news of the evilness of cancer since this surely won't make it gone, the same applies to doing that for the analogous enemy.

Like cancer, wars can be prevented and nipped in the bud. Ukrainian Presidents, parliamentarians, and the army (with the neo-Nazi Azov Regiment^[+]) did everything but that. Since 2014, Russia has negotiated with Ukraine about the protection of the Russian ethnic minority but Ukraine has not kept its word given by the Minsk agreements^[+]^[+] and even inflated the conflict with military attacks on Donbas residents3^[+] and new anti-Russian legislatures, so the war was provoked.

When people don't prevent cancer or war, they need to deal with the consequences.

Common medical cancer treatments^[+] are surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, hormone therapy, immunotherapy, and stem cell transplant.

Translated into common war strategies, these are military defeat, biological weapons, cyber warfare‎ (and psychological warfare)‎ – deception, economic warfare‎ – sanctions, military aid, and residents’ deportation.

Just like medical workers, war strategists make do with such procedures that focus on effects rather than causes. Bless their heart. They mean well. But let's not forget that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Hell is surely the word we would use to describe the situation in Ukraine, which came about as a result of all the good intentions of its perpetrators on both sides.

When cancer or any other disease occurs, then victims need to treat both external symptoms and the internal root cause(s). In a war situation is the same.

Since Ukrainians didn't prevent the war, to end it, now they need to do both, meet the demands of Russia (deal with the symptoms) to some extent and raise consciousness (treat the root cause) so that the whole problem doesn't happen again. For each of these two procedures, we dedicated a separate article, so make sure to look at that.

If you skip any parts, you might miss the key points and misunderstand many other points, which is why we urge you to read them thoroughly. Superficial people tend to skim things through and so end up misunderstanding and condemning this or that. We don't have to agree on everything but at least hear us out before you judge anything. War issues are extremely sensitive and with two opposing camps, we cannot avoid antagonizing those who want us to only serve them, without any consideration for the other camp.

The Ukrainians (especially those who see Russians as cancer) are advised to end this war peacefully by raising consciousness^[+] or using the Louise Hay4 method of healing (cancer or anything else) as she has been one of the most famous teachers in the realm of self-help healing cancer and life in general. Her advice would be to take at least partial responsibility for both the cause and effect of the problem by letting go of the underlying grief and long-standing resentment towards Russians with a new thought pattern: “I lovingly forgive and release (let go) all of the past. I choose to fill my life with joy. I love and approve of myself.”

We know, for most people this is a stretch, impossible, ridiculous, or even inappropriate to suggest, which is why we only mention it briefly as a bonus recommendation for those few advanced individuals, who may find it in their hearts to forgive both the aggressors and provocateurs. For all others, another solution is coming up.

For all who wish to know, since we mentioned her, Louise Hay^[+] was diagnosed with "incurable" vaginal cancer but through practicing Religious Science, she discovered the cause of it – her holding on to her resentment for her childhood abuse and rape by a neighbor. She then healed the cause of her own cancer with a regime of forgiveness and spoken affirmations coupled with immune systems therapy, nutrition, reflexology, and occasional colonic enemas – this is how she got rid herself of her cancer. She then developed an intensive program of affirmations, visualization, nutritional cleansing, and psychotherapy for others to heal of anything, too, which has been so effective that she was dubbed the queen of the new age and the queen of affirmations. She is most known for her best-seller book “You Can Heal Your Life” which was also made into a documentary film^[+].
Her teachings are based on the notion that all diseases and other problems are mental in origin and therefore constructive thinking has a healing effect. Critical or negative thinking only increases the problem. While in the New Age and New Thought^[+] teachings, it is taught that thinking creates reality, we believe that consciousness creates reality, thereby we recommend raising consciousness^[+] but positive thinking or attitude may often suffice too. Mental practices may not be always effective alone and should be undertaken in conjunction with medical therapies (which are also ineffective on their own and should be undertaken in conjunction with mental practices) and inspired action. Only in those people whose immune system is weakened by psychological factors, abnormalities in genes and cell growth may cause cancer, as well as viruses, bacteria, and fungi may cause infections, and environmental toxins may damage their organ systems. All the cancerogenic and malignant influences have no major impact on people with a healthy mind, as proven by those who tested positive for coronavirus but had no COVID-19, those who walk on ceremonial fire, those who deliberately consume poison to prove their faith, etc. It has been empirically supported that the psychological and social health of a person can influence their susceptibility to disease (e.g., stress can suppress immune function, which increases the risk of infection^[+]).

Ukrainians have been victims of the Western “divide and rule” ploy, nurturing their toxic resentment toward Russians ever since the 2004 Orange Revolution^[*^]^[+]or before, which is how they caused the war. Whether this resentment was justified or devised by a Western “divide and conquer” plot may be important but irrelevant in this context. This poisonous resentment has made Ukrainians (unconsciously) act highly inappropriately toward the Russian ethnic minority in the east and south of Ukraine since 2014. Like Louise Hay and millions of others who healed their life using her advice, by removing this harmful resentment, Ukrainians would be able to approach and treat Russians better for a change and make amends to end this war peacefully.

It may be worth inquiring where this resentment comes from – what did Russians do to Ukrainians in the early 2000s that caused Ukrainians to be hostile towards the Russian ethnic minority and violate^[*^] treaties with Russia by applying to join NATO in 2008 although there was no threat from Russia or any other country? In the period from 1991 to 2013, Russia provided subsidized loans to Ukraine along with economic and trade preferences with the overall benefit for the Ukrainian budget amounting to a whopping $250 billion plus Russia offered $15 billion in bailout in 2013. One would think Ukrainians would have appreciated Russia for all that but no. It is far more than what their alliance with the West has gotten them (the US has given $5 billion to Ukraine in the same time frame^[+]; the EU helped Ukraine gain around $5 billion a year in trade balance with the EU but made them lose more than $50 billion a year in fewer export earnings, extra import costs, and lower transit fees^[+]) plus they became totally dependent on the West. It is obvious why Ukrainians resent the Russians now and ever since they lost Crimea in 2014 but it is obscure what prompted them to turn their back on Russia by applying to join its rival NATO in 2008 and so violate the treaties with Russia that assured them territorial integrity (as long as Ukraine holds on to the agreements such as that one about not joining NATO^[+]). Our thorough investigation didn't find an answer to that, which leaves us with the only conclusion left: the corrupt, unscrupulous Ukrainian politicians, including then-President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko, were driven by the US to seek NATO membership because the US would be then allowed to set its military bases in places near Russian borders and Crimea to take control of Black Sea region away from Russians. Or, the US wanted to “divide and conquer” the region.

Legendary Australian journalist John Pilger^[+]5wrote about NATO's cynical manipulation of Ukraine against Russia and US-orchestrated attacks on ethnic Russians in Ukraine^[+].

Ukrainian radicals and nationalists might have pushed for Ukraine to get out of the Russian influence sphere but why would they then want to get into the Western influence sphere and be totally dependent on the US, EU, and UK? There is nothing nationalistic about serving the interests of the West and becoming dependent on the West, so the only conclusion is that Western leaders have bribed or blackmailed them.

Newly declassified files reveal how the US authorities instruct special agents in the art of bribery and blackmail to achieve major covert objectives^[+]^[+]. As CIA's Morale Operations Field Manual^[+]^[+] explains, the US secret service uses bribery and blackmail to destroy and influence people. Its suggestions include using bribes and blackmail to start riots and trigger coups, as well as getting individuals hooked on drugs in order to bribe them with more and establishing "philanthropic" organizations as fronts. The secret service manual describes employing the following implements^[+] for the accomplishment of objectives: “contacts with and manipulation of individuals and underground groups; agent provocateurs; bribery and blackmail; rumors; forgery, including the writing of poison pen letters, forging intelligence documents, falsification of documents and periodicals, printing of false orders, regulations, and proclamations; false leaflets, pamphlets, and graphics, to be used for subversive deception; ‘freedom stations’ masquerading as the voice of resistant groups…," all of which the US vividly employed during both the Orange and Maidan revolutions that led to this war.

The manual suggests bribery of local opposition leaders and professional groups could convince them to become subversives, who would serve US objectives. Once the initial bribe has been accepted, and evidence of such bribery has been obtained, the demands can become successively greater through blackmail (doing extra favors out of fear of corruption exposure). That secret service manual even suggests bribing officials and then revealing the bribes to authorities as a way of eliminating disobedient individuals – this is exactly what happened to many Ukrainian politicians

Saying Ukraine is corrupt is like saying water is wet.

Ukraine has been the most corrupt country^[+] in Europe (according to Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index^[+]and The Guardian^[+]) and the third most corrupt in the whole world (in 2012 according to Ernst & Young survey), so, this conclusion is realistic and reasonable. The radicals and nationalists were constantly part of the opposition, so they were easy targets to bribe as they had no other gains and were power-hungry.

In other words, the resentment towards Russia had nothing to do with Russian wrongdoing. Surely, there were some disagreements here and there, which are normal even among family members and friends but nothing so grave that would escalate to war. The corrupt, unscrupulous opposition leaders became American pawns and with their funding took control of the government through two revolutions (2005. and 2014.) and led the country to the edge of the abyss.

According to the prevailing perception in the West6, the Ukraine crisis can be blamed almost entirely on Russian aggression. Russia’s President Vladimir Putin^[+], the argument goes, annexed Crimea and other parts of Ukraine out of a long-standing desire to resuscitate the Soviet empire, and he may eventually go after the rest of the former Soviet republics as well as other eastern European countries. But this narrative is wrong: the US and its European allies share most of the responsibility for the crisis. The root of the problem is NATO’s expansion to Russian borders, part of a larger strategy to move Ukraine out of Russia’s orbit of influence and integrate it into the West.

Russian leaders have adamantly opposed NATO’s expansion and made it clear that they would not stand by while their strategically important neighbor turned into a Western bastion of liberal values that are contrary to the conservative Slavic values that Russia stands for. For them, the illegal overthrow of Ukraine’s democratically elected and pro-Russian president Yanukovych in 2014 was the final straw. They responded by taking Crimea, a peninsula they feared would host a NATO naval base, which belonged to Russia for centuries. Russia’s pushback should have come as no surprise. After all, the West had been moving into Russia’s backyard and deliberately threatening its core strategic interests.

This notion that the Ukraine crisis is the West’s fault is shared by many Western scholars and political scientists, such as John Mearsheimer^[+]^[+] (American political scientist and international relations scholar, Professor at the University of Chicago). However, one should not neglect the responsibilities of both Kyiv and the Kremlin.

The Kyiv authorities are blaming everyone else except themselves. They blame even the West so that it would give them the right to demand more money and other aid.

Zelensky’s top adviser Mikhail Podoliak tweeted^[+]blaming the US and other Western countries for the war in Ukraine which is true but false is his argument: because the Western leaders encouraged Ukraine to return nuclear and other weapons to Russia, which was in his opinion a wrong policy that led to this war. At what level of intelligence one must be to come up with such conclusion or nonsense? Once again, Kyiv regime is shifting blame to avoid taking responsibility for this war but blaming Budapest Memorandum^[+]^[+] (on nuclear disarmament of Ukraine) for this war perhaps tops it all, especially knowing that Ukraine never had the launch codes needed to use the nuclear arms that was never their property but only stationed on their territory since the times of USSR. And as if Ukraine could not have said “no” to selling it all to Russia, so it was ultimately their choice. They gladly took the money from Russia for it and now they have the nerve to blame others for it!

Just like Podoliak, Zelensky has also used that argument that refers to 1994 the Budapest Memorandum^[+]^[+] (on nuclear disarmament of Ukraine) but it seems that the dilettante Kyiv authorities have not read the 1991 Ukrainian Declaration of Independence^[+] which implements the Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine^[+]^[+] where Ukraine promised to become nuclear-free!!! In other words, getting rid of its nuclear arsenal was already enshrined in Ukraine's Declarations of Independence and Sovereignty in 1991, which they then followed through with it in 1994 whereby they profited from it by selling it all (some 1.900 strategic nuclear warheads) back to Russia. So, the whole issue with that could end right here. Ukraine should stop blaming others for adhering to its own Declaration and should not expect other nations to provide it with security for following through with what is written in its Declaration!

People need to stop repeating the nonsense that Ukraine had any nuclear capabilities that it had to give up – just because someone parks a car in your driveway doesn't mean you own the car or have the keys. The nukes were never Ukrainian property but only stationed on their territory, so they never had the launch codes to use them – it was Russian property as, upon the Soviet Union dissolution, Russia inherited Soviet property, including debt, as it is the legal successor of the Soviet Union. However, Kyiv regime apparently wanted the Soviet assets but not its liabilities, appropriating the USSR nukes but not its debt that Russia alone took on and paid off! Also, these people look way more unhinged than Putin, which is why, thank God, the world superpowers made sure in 1994 that Russians gets them.

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky’s address^[+]^[»] to the UN General Assembly in September 2023 proves that his government would have led the world to a nuclear disaster if his country had been left with nuclear weapons^[+]. Without the Budapest memorandum and Kyiv’s handover of nuclear weapons to Russia, the world would have found itself at the brink of a nuclear disaster or would have already had to face its consequences. In his words, the desperate Ukrainian leader’s speech left no doubts about his readiness to use nuclear weapons.

Some Ukrainian politicians believe that having nuclear weapons would make them immune to being attacked or that not having them makes them vulnerable to attacks, which is a misconception.

Countless countries don't have nuclear weapons still no one is attacking them. Likewise, those who have nuclear weapons^[+], such as Russia, still get attacked anyway!

Also, most importantly, if Ukraine still had all those nuclear weapons, Russia would still be able to attack them because Ukraine would not be able to use it or threaten anyone with it as Ukraine was never in possession of launch codes. Only the Russians had the launch codes. The nuclear arsenal wasn’t Ukraine’s to begin with but belonged to the Soviet Union, of which Russia was recognized as the sole heir (e.g., paid all its debt), thus it was by law that Ukraine had to return what it didn't belong to it.

So, this whole argument is a desperate and rather pathetic attempt to drag others into defending them, whereby they only prove how incapable and weak they are to fend for themselves. They thought they could poke a bear and get away with it and that the bear should have then even protected them from itself! How insane!

The West pushed Ukraine to give it all up because it had more trust in Russia than in Ukraine at that time, in 1994. Knowing how notoriously corrupt Ukrainians are, the West wanted this so that nuclear material (from opened warheads) would not appear on the black market. That and the prospect of Ukraine’s neo-Nazis getting hold of nukes. In any case, Ukraine could have refused giving it up, so, no point in blaming others. But it seems to be in the character of Ukrainians to always blame others for everything and never take any responsibility for anything (other than the good things).

The non-binding Budapest Memorandum^[+]^[+] didn't guarantee Ukraine's security (in exchange for returning the Soviet nukes to Russia) in perpetuity no matter what, anyway. Obviously, if Ukraine's government turns hostile to Russia (or the US for that matter), then the agreement obviously becomes void. If you bite the hand that feeds you, then you shouldn't complain when you get a serious kick in the rear!

Dilettante Zelensky and his equally dilettante inner circle falsely assume that the Budapest Memorandum meant that others need to unconditionally forever and ever defend Ukraine for millennia to come regardless of Ukrainian violating treaties and agreements with other countries and regardless of Ukraine violating human rights and slaughtering, terrorizing, discriminating against, and expulsing its ethnic minorities. In his twisted sense of politics, Zelensky has by no means prudence of a stateman but like kid keeps on demanding everyone to oblige to that memorandum (not even a treaty) while Ukraine is violating all agreements with its neighbors.

Kyiv and its allies claim that Russia violated the Budapest memorandum in 2014 by “occupying” Crimea but they omit to mention that it was Ukraine that made it void as soon as it violated all treaties with Russia and applied to join NATO in 2008 as well as continued and escalated its violations in first couple months of 2014, which was why Crimeans themselves asked Russia to protect and annex them.

And the US and its NATO allies were the first party to be in breach of it when they started sanctioning Belarus and Ukraine under the Yanukovych government. As part of the Budapest Memorandum, all signatories were supposed to “Refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine, the Republic of Belarus and Kazakhstan of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.” The EU coerced Yanukovych government to stop trading with Russia and Belarus, which he rejected and therefore NATO orchestrated a regime change operation in 2013-2014 and called it “Maidan revolution”.

We wonder about mental health and suspect cognitive dysfunction by anyone who thinks that Russia should have continue giving Ukraine security assurances after Ukraine violated all treaties with Russia and applied to join NATO in 2008!!! As if that in itself was not enough of a legal reason (principle of reciprocity) for Russia to back off from it, then surely Russia owed nothing to the anti-Russian regime that on its first day voted for banning Russian language in a country with around 8 million ethnic Russians. When Russia agreed on the Budapest memorandum, it gave its security assurances to another friendly government and not to the anti-Russian one that came to power by violence and violated all treaties with Russia and discriminates against Russians!

Also, what kind of a pathetic state relies on others to provide it with security while claiming superiority and independence at the same time? Where is independence in that? If you claim to be an independent, sovereign state, quit depending on others so much and quit being so needy? But most of all, be nice. If Ukrainians were nice to their ethnic minorities, none of this would happen!

The question of whether Russia provided security "guarantees" to Ukraine is a complicated matter and it was a source of much discussion and argument even during the original multilateral negotiations. In the English version of the Memorandum, Ukraine was given no "security guarantee" but "security assurance" that entails no military response by the co-signatory countries if one of the sides were to violate the agreement but instead it simply specifies the non-violation of these parties' territorial integrity. Also, in that Memorandum, there is no reference to any recourse action or enforcement mechanism which would be triggered if one of the parties broke the deal. The Memorandum offered no guarantee of intervention. Ukraine signed to that and therefore should not expect or demand anyone to intervene.
The play of words or ambiguity of the Memorandum leaves much to interpretation. It left some wiggle room for an American and British response to potential aggression from Moscow. Also, Russians got some wiggle room, as well, so they, too, may interpret some points to their liking. On 4 March 2014, shortly after annexation of Crimea, Russian President Vladimir Putin replied^[»] to a question on the violation of the Budapest Memorandum that in 2014 a new anti-Russian state arose “but with this state and in respect to this state, we have not signed any obligatory documents". In other words, Russia was under no obligation to provide security assurances to the anti-Russian regime that came to power by violence rather than democratic means (elections do not count when they banned the opposition).
Also, Russia stated that it had never been under obligation to "force any part of Ukraine's civilian population to stay in Ukraine against its will". Crimea and other former Ukrainian regions declared independence first and only then Russia recognized them and annexed that by the will of the people and their right to self-determination.
Also, Russia suggested that the US was in violation of the Budapest Memorandum and described the Euromaidan as a US-instigated coup^[*^] – the US backed and funded the so-called revolution to overthrew democratically elected Ukrainian government and install a US-puppet regime.
It was Crimea's and Donbas’ residents, not Russians, who challenged the territorial integrity of Ukraine when they voted to secede from Ukraine and declared independence. So, Ukrainians should blame only them but instead they claim to want to liberate them from the Russians, which is laughable. They do not want to be liberated as they feel being liberated^[»] by Russia. The most absurd thing in all this is that Ukraine wants all those five regions back but it does not want the inhabitants of those regions, who are mostly ethnic Russians and hate Ukrainians. Retaking those territories would be like swallowing a porcupine – the unfriendly residents would constantly make troubles to Kyiv. They would also have their representatives in parliament like before and would vote against all the pro-Western laws and policies and would push for pro-Russian agenda.
As we already pinpointed before, Russia never invaded Crimea, never used its military to force Ukrainians in Crimea (ethnic Russians) to secede from Ukraine and join Russia but it was the other way around. People from Crimea first voted in a referendum and then pleaded Russia to protect them and annex them. Under the dire circumstances in which ethnic Russians have found themselves in previous months, especially after their representatives (such as the Ukrainian President, Prime Minister, and many more) were violently ousted from their offices and forced into exile in February 2014 and after the same month, Kyiv proposed a bill to prohibit the use of their native Russian language, Russia had no choice but to protect its diaspora, which is surely something any other nation would do if their folk would be threatened and discriminated against.
This decision to annex Crimea turned out to be a very wise decision because it spared the locals from the same destiny that Donbas people suffered for many years under Kyiv’s yoke because Putin refused them the same recognition and protection.
Besides, it is important to point out that Ukrainians are expecting everyone to oblige to the agreements that suits them while they themselves do not honor their agreements and treaties they had with Russia, as well as its own Declarations of Independence and Sovereignty. As a matter of fact, it was Ukraine that was the first that violated^[*^] several provisions of The Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation, and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation^[+]^[+] (signed in 1997), when in 2008, Ukraine applied to join NATO7, and in 2013 opted for the European Union–Ukraine Association Agreement8, as well as when in February 2014, Ukraine violated also Article 12 of the Treaty by proposing the bill to ban Russian language in many spheres of life whereby violating the protection of the ethnic, cultural, linguistic, and religious originality of national minorities on their territory, just to name a few. Both these points about neutrality and respect for ethnic minorities (the free use of their languages), are enshrined in the Declarations of Independence and Sovereignty of Ukraine, so Kyiv regime9 violated that as well.

Moving on.

At the root of all human suffering is that we believe our thoughts. Sure, there are also other root causes, including human ego, flaws/weaknesses, illusions, and whatnot but we turn the spotlight on beliefs in this context to bring to light an insight that might change and save lives. A light bulb moment: discovering that when we believe our thoughts, we suffer, but when we don't believe them, we don't suffer. We suffer only when we want things to be different from what they are. Byron Katie^[+] teaches that nothing external can make us suffer and that we move totally away from reality when we believe that there is a legitimate reason to suffer. Toxic thoughts keep people locked in an imaginary narrative that has nothing to do with reality. As a result, they cloud our judgment and prevent us from clearly perceiving, interpreting, and responding to the situation as it is. With a little bit of self-inquiry, we realize that there is something positive in all our experiences, including negative ones, such as lessons, morals, opportunities, changes, etc.

Both Russians and Ukrainians, as well as their allies believe certain things about each other that are not true. Or not the whole truth. Both Russians and Ukrainians indeed have many flaws but they also have many virtues, as all human beings have positive and negative traits, which is set by the law of polarity. Often things escalate just because people are too weak or blind to perceive or understand the other side (the whole picture) and distinguish truth from lies, or right from wrong. Human errors of judgment that cause conflicts and wars derive from false beliefs.

Since most people don't use their innate ability to detect lies, they base their judgments of truth and lies on how the information presented to them fits their world outlook and frame of reference. They call it either facts or propaganda, depending on how the content fits into their belief system or agenda. In our thorough investigation and research, besides looking at data, facts, and information, in our neutral and objective state of mind, we use our logical reasoning, sixth sense, gut feeling or intuition, as well as certain lie-detector muscles (truth = strong muscles, lie = weak muscles) to distinguish truth from lies based on the notion that humans, when pure or purified, are able to sense lies – but we don't expect anyone to believe our ability. Instead, by making a case for each point of our peace initiative, we will present the facts and evidence that could be seen on the links we provide (looking like this:^[*^{][»][ꚛ][+][?]}) – we give you extensive data so that you can take a step back for a minute to think about what that means and draw your own conclusions instead of jumping to conclusions based on partial, one-sided, or biased reports pushed by the mainstream media and trolls.

We also use the logic method10 that we recommend to everyone in cases when it is impossible to get evidence, verify the facts, or discover the truth from a source. To uncover the truth, it is often enough to use a mere logical line of reasoning or analytical thinking, so we do a lot of that whenever solid proofs are unavailable. “If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it is a duck!” kind of thing, or reading between the lines, connecting the dots, following the clues, zooming in, investigating if there's fire underneath the smoke, whether some are wolves in sheep's clothing, engaging in thought-provoking discussions, and similar methods using the virtue of rationality.

As expected, many arguments we use will be dismissed as propaganda from either Russia, Ukraine, or the West, which is why we will appeal to logical reasoning to support the arguments for our suggestions that have only one aim: to make it easier for all stakeholders to accept this peace initiative and so end this war to prevent further casualties. This is not a political treatise but a peace initiative with its terms and specifications, nonetheless, we will somewhat review all key topics to justify all provisions.

The stated reasons for the war are usually never the real reasons, which is why no resolution can be achieved by addressing only the assumed issues.

There are so many behind-the-scenes schemes and intrigues that no political strategist can ever know and take into account, which is why politics couldn't end this war. History lessons tell us that politics may prevent wars but not end them, as wars are usually ended on a military front when belligerents have exhausted their resources and finally figured out where they stand, which usually takes years. Even though wars end with a peace agreement at a negotiating table, it usually takes years of military clashes to come to that. This is not an acceptable option in the 21^st century or the third millennium for those of us who’d like to believe we live in a civilized world and that violence has no place in civilized societies, especially wars when there are other means to solve any territorial disputes or human rights abuses.

We're no fools – we know that the backroom boys (rather than the major players on the front pages) pull all the strings in every major political event, particularly those who are in a position to manipulate public opinion and voting. The backroom boys (no household names, clandestine puppet masters) have decided too many things in the past but their days are over, as more and more people engage and take matters into their own hands. Thanks to the peace activists, the gap between public opinion and published opinion increases, which increases the chances to end the war as well because the support for it decreases. Civil disobedience might just as well end this war.

Let us put aside all the information that might be disinformation and instead use logical reasoning (e.g., drawing conclusions from evidence-based premises) right now to answer:
· Who Is Behind the Conflict in Ukraine?
· What Really Broke Ukraine?
· Why Did Russia Really Attack Ukraine?
· How Did Ukrainians Cause the War?
· Trigger Events

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: Behind-The-Scenes Powerbrokers

Ukraine Peace Initiative Substack

Discussion about this post