I think folks wanted to maintain that wise policy. Even in the days leading up to the war Ukraine dismissed the fact that Russia would attack as fear mongering. The problem is that Russia has now proven themselves an untrustable party. "Keep the status quo and we won't attack," they say but now they are attacking Ukraine anyways.
What do you do if you are Finland? You want to make peace, you want to maintain nonaggression and neutrality but another neutral party doing the same meets devastation before your very eyes. Seems better in this situation to get whatever protection you can.
> "Keep the status quo and we won't attack," they say but now they are attacking Ukraine anyways.
This does not fit my understanding. In my understanding, Ukraine doubles down on NATO membership, and Russia attacks. Am I missing something? Somewhere between 2014 and 2022 Ukraine denounced its NATO aspirations?
In no way I condone the Russian attack, but I also can't see how they're "untrustable".
Ukraine has done joint "war games" with NATO ships in 2020 and 2021 (see HMS Dragon and HMS Defender for example). On November 11, 2021 Russian jets were scrambled to intercept "British spy plane". On November 29, 2021, a NATO summit was held in Riga, where the commitment to admitting Georgia and Ukraine was repeated, and the idea of sending NATO soldiers to Ukraine was discussed. Zelenskyy was quoted repeatedly saying that "NATO is the only way to end the war in Donbas".
Now, if the elevated rhetoric and the calls for sending NATO soldiers do not sound like "doubling down", joint war games should certainly do.
What do you think Russia did during that period? Did they stand still and let Ukraine alone? No, they bullied, harassed, raised the rhetoric against Ukraine. Putin questioned the validity of Ukraine. They fought the proxy war in Donbas. Is that your idea of being provoked?
It sounds like Ukraine training their army. Lets be honest, theybwere post soviet sucky army and they are capable now because of learning from west armies. Nato soldiers in Ukraine would be good idea,the peacekeeping mission might have prevented genocide.
I might agree, but in the end, what I think — or what you think — does not matter. The only thing that matters is what Russians think. What do you think they think this sounds like?
> Nato soldiers in Ukraine would be good idea
Well.
The NATO forces in Poland numbered about 1,000 (before this thing blew up). The whole Polish army (Wojsko Polskie) number about 144,000. What do you think is the exact mission of these NATO forces, amounting to about 0.66% of the total? (Hint: it's not a symbolic gesture.)
What do you do if you are Finland? You want to make peace, you want to maintain nonaggression and neutrality but another neutral party doing the same meets devastation before your very eyes. Seems better in this situation to get whatever protection you can.