Wie der Westen den Krieg in die Ukraine Brachte: Die Rolle der USA und der NATO im Ukraine-Konflikt
- Downloads：5876
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2023-01-23 04:16:47
- Update Date：2025-09-24
- Status：finish
- Author：Benjamin Abelow
- ISBN：0991076737
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
According to the Western narrative， Vladimir Putin is an insatiable， Hitler-like expansionist who invaded Ukraine in an unprovoked land grab。 That story is incorrect。 In reality， the United States and NATO bear significant responsibility for the Ukraine crisis。 Through a series of misguided policies， Washington and its European allies placed Russia in an untenable situation for which war seemed， to Mr。 Putin and his military staff， the only workable solution。 This brief book lays out the relevant history and explains how the West needlessly created conflict and now labors under an existential threat of its own making。
EXPERT ENDORSEMENTS
"Very well-done。。。。 Reviews material that should be much better known。"
— Noam Chomsky
"A brilliant， remarkably concise explanation。。。。 Needs to be read and pondered by every citizen capable of thinking rationally and responsibly about American and European security。"
— Jack F。 Matlock， Jr。， U。S。 Ambassador to the Soviet Union， 1987-1991
"This is a splendid little book， taughtly written， logically organized， easy to read and persuasive but appropriately caveated。 It is an invaluable primer on the trends and events that produced the escalating warfare in Ukraine。"
— Chas Freeman， previously Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs
"For anyone interested in understanding the true causes of the disaster in Ukraine， How the West Brought War to Ukraine is required reading。"
— John J。 Mearsheimer， the R。 Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago
"For those concerned about U。S。 national security and the peace of Europe， this book is essential reading。"
— Douglas Macgregor， Colonel （Retired）， U。S。 Army， served as Director of NATO's Joint Operations Center at SHAPE （Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe）
"In the Ukraine proxy war between the United States/NATO and Russia， we face a threat of nuclear escalation that could end human civilization。 Abelow's book is essential reading for all who wish to understand this threat and why， 30 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union， it has re-emerged。"
— Gilbert Doctorow， is an historian and independent Russia specialist based in Brussels
"A concise yet comprehensive and accessible overview。 Invaluable for understanding how war once again came to Europe。 Benjamin Abelow demonstrates that the crisis in Ukraine was predictable， predicted—and avoidable。"
— Richard Sakwa， Professor of Russian and European Politics， University of Kent
"Ben Abelow takes us beyond the false narratives and into the truth of the Ukraine crisis。"
— Krishen Mehta， Senior Global Justice Fellow， Yale University， and Director， American Committee for US-Russia Accord
PUBLISHED REVIEWS
Midwest Book Review
"Any thinking reader who would better understand the myriad of influences on the Ukraine situation needs to read this book。"
-- Reviewed by D。 Donovan， Senior Reviewer， Midwest Book Review （In Press， Oct。 2022）
Foreword Clarion Reviews
"Abelow builds a solid argument that the US， Europe， and NATO are complicit in the current violence affecting Ukraine。。。。 How the West Brought War to Ukraine is a succinct， accessible introduction to an often overlooked aspect of the 2022 war in Ukraine。"
-- Reviewed by Eileen Gonzalez， September 8， 2022
Acura Viewpoint
"How the West Brought War to Ukraine will serve as an invaluable primer。"
-- Reviewed by David Speedie， former chair of the program on cooperative security， Carnegie Corporation of New York， September 1， 2022
Mises Wire
"It would be a serious mistake to discount Abelow as unduly pro-Russian in his sympathies。 The efforts he supports to secure a peaceful settlement by making concessions to Russia are in the best interests of the Ukrainians themselves， even those hostile to Russia。"
-- Reviewed by David Gordon， Ph。D。， August 26， 2022
EXPERT ENDORSEMENTS
"Very well-done。。。。 Reviews material that should be much better known。"
— Noam Chomsky
"A brilliant， remarkably concise explanation。。。。 Needs to be read and pondered by every citizen capable of thinking rationally and responsibly about American and European security。"
— Jack F。 Matlock， Jr。， U。S。 Ambassador to the Soviet Union， 1987-1991
"This is a splendid little book， taughtly written， logically organized， easy to read and persuasive but appropriately caveated。 It is an invaluable primer on the trends and events that produced the escalating warfare in Ukraine。"
— Chas Freeman， previously Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs
"For anyone interested in understanding the true causes of the disaster in Ukraine， How the West Brought War to Ukraine is required reading。"
— John J。 Mearsheimer， the R。 Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago
"For those concerned about U。S。 national security and the peace of Europe， this book is essential reading。"
— Douglas Macgregor， Colonel （Retired）， U。S。 Army， served as Director of NATO's Joint Operations Center at SHAPE （Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe）
"In the Ukraine proxy war between the United States/NATO and Russia， we face a threat of nuclear escalation that could end human civilization。 Abelow's book is essential reading for all who wish to understand this threat and why， 30 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union， it has re-emerged。"
— Gilbert Doctorow， is an historian and independent Russia specialist based in Brussels
"A concise yet comprehensive and accessible overview。 Invaluable for understanding how war once again came to Europe。 Benjamin Abelow demonstrates that the crisis in Ukraine was predictable， predicted—and avoidable。"
— Richard Sakwa， Professor of Russian and European Politics， University of Kent
"Ben Abelow takes us beyond the false narratives and into the truth of the Ukraine crisis。"
— Krishen Mehta， Senior Global Justice Fellow， Yale University， and Director， American Committee for US-Russia Accord
PUBLISHED REVIEWS
Midwest Book Review
"Any thinking reader who would better understand the myriad of influences on the Ukraine situation needs to read this book。"
-- Reviewed by D。 Donovan， Senior Reviewer， Midwest Book Review （In Press， Oct。 2022）
Foreword Clarion Reviews
"Abelow builds a solid argument that the US， Europe， and NATO are complicit in the current violence affecting Ukraine。。。。 How the West Brought War to Ukraine is a succinct， accessible introduction to an often overlooked aspect of the 2022 war in Ukraine。"
-- Reviewed by Eileen Gonzalez， September 8， 2022
Acura Viewpoint
"How the West Brought War to Ukraine will serve as an invaluable primer。"
-- Reviewed by David Speedie， former chair of the program on cooperative security， Carnegie Corporation of New York， September 1， 2022
Mises Wire
"It would be a serious mistake to discount Abelow as unduly pro-Russian in his sympathies。 The efforts he supports to secure a peaceful settlement by making concessions to Russia are in the best interests of the Ukrainians themselves， even those hostile to Russia。"
-- Reviewed by David Gordon， Ph。D。， August 26， 2022
Reviews
Loudon McAndrew
，
Scary stuff - the Cuban crisis in reverse ！
Æ
，
How did the West bring war to Ukraine？ The answer may surprise you……it’s NATO expansion。 It’s always been NATO expansion。 This is more of an extended article than a book。 The audiobook is only an hour long。 So very easy to consume if you’re interested in the subject。 I think it was really detailed while still being brief。 Here’s my book report…Let me make something perfectly clear from the jump。 Regarding this conflict， • I do not support the government of Russia，• I do not support NATO or the U How did the West bring war to Ukraine？ The answer may surprise you……it’s NATO expansion。 It’s always been NATO expansion。 This is more of an extended article than a book。 The audiobook is only an hour long。 So very easy to consume if you’re interested in the subject。 I think it was really detailed while still being brief。 Here’s my book report…Let me make something perfectly clear from the jump。 Regarding this conflict， • I do not support the government of Russia，• I do not support NATO or the US Government， • I do not support the government of Ukraine。The US populace has never been known as a people who knows their history， or having a basic understanding of the actions of their government。 But let’s break this down as simply as possible• WW2 is won on the backs of millions of Soviet soldiers overwhelming and defeating the Germans。 • Stalin expects to be folded into the new world order alongside its fellow superpower， the US Empire。• The US Empire is ruled by Capitalists who would rather betray their allies than dare surrender another dime of profits to the working class。 Normalizing relations with the USSR would normalize the concept of worker-controlled enterprise。 Cue the Cold War。• NATO is created， does a lot of coups around the world。• 1962， NATO installs missiles in Turkey， right at the Soviet front door。 The USSR， in kind， installs missiles in Cuba。 The US comes minutes away from nuclear Armageddon。 Then every makes a deal to withdraw the Cuban missiles in exchange for the Turkey missiles。 Crisis averted。 • Yada Yada Yada• 1990， The Soviet Union collapses。 US & European enterprise pick to the bone all social programs in the former soviet states， resulting in a crashing of life expectancy and other health indicators。 For some strange reason， a large % of people surveyed in these countries wished it never collapsed。 Huh。 Weird。• The Russian Government， AFTER losing the Cold War， thinks it’ll FINALLY be folded into the now unipolar world order。 • Instead， the US and NATO continue to provoke Russia with NATO expansion。 The purpose of NATO has always been to fight Russia。 Always。 Its expansion is a clear and present danger for the existence of the Russian state。 The Russian government understands this clearly。 • “According to an analysis by the National Security Archive of George Washington University， where relevant declassified documents are posted， ‘a cascade of assurances about Soviet security [were] given by Western leaders to Gorbachev and other Soviet officials throughout the process of German unification in 1990 and on into 1991。’ These assurances pertained not only to the question of NATO’s expansion into East Germany， as is sometimes asserted， but also to the expansion of NATO into the countries of Eastern Europe。 Nonetheless， within a few years， NATO began to expand toward Russia’s border。 Although the assurances had not been instantiated in formal treaties， ‘subsequent Soviet and Russian complaints about being misled about NATO expansion’ were not simply Russian propaganda but， rather， were ‘founded in written contemporaneous [memoranda] at the highest levels’ of Western governments。• So we lied to them saying that their existence was secured since NATO would not expand。 But NATO expanded anyway。 Golly I wonder why Russia doesn’t trust us。 Putin must be paranoid， that’s it。 Only logical explanation。 • 1999 NATO brings in Poland among other countries。 “In a recent interview， Army Colonel （retired） Douglas Macgregor， Ph。D。， a storied Iraq commander who helped develop U。S。 war plans for Europe， commented on the admission of one of these countries: ‘[W]hen we decided in 1999 to bring in Poland…[t]he Russians were very worried—not so much because NATO was hostile at the time but because they knew that Poland was。 Poland has a long history of hostility toward Russia。… Poland is， if anything， at this point in time， a potential catalyst for war with Russia。’”• 2001， GWBush withdraws the US from the Antiballistic Missle Treaty with Russia。 This is seen as yet another western provocation。 Treaties help prevent war。 Withdrawing from them helps antagonize and goad toward war。 • 2004， “NATO admitted additional East European countries， including Romania and Estonia， the latter of which borders on Russia。 By this point， NATO had expanded close to a thousand miles toward Russia。” This is more provocation。 • 2008， at a NATO summit， NATO announced its intentions to admit Ukraine and Georgia as members。 Both countries border Russia。 “Although European members of NATO had serious reservations， the administration of President George W。 Bush used the position of the United States as senior member of the alliance to push the issue， and the following unequivocal statement was included in the memorandum: ‘We agreed today that these countries [Ukraine and Georgia] will become members of NATO。’”George W。 Bush is one of the key players at fault for the war in Ukraine。 This is a red line for Russia。 an unacceptable scenario for the very existence and autonomy of their country。 • 2008， In an official cable from the then-U。S。 ambassador to Russia （William J。 Burns headlined “Nyet Means Nyet [No Means No]: Russia’s NATO Enlargement Redlines。” and read: “Not only does Russia perceive encirclement， and efforts to undermine Russia’s influence in the region， but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests。”• 2008， Georgia t• “United States led a 2，000-man military exercise inside Georgia。”t• Days later， Georgia “launched a massive， fourteen-hour artillery and rocket assault on a semi-autonomous Georgian district （South Ossetia）。 That district borders on Russia and has close ties to it。” t• In response， Russia invades Georgia， fighting against soldiers armed and trained by the US。 t• The US Media called it “an unprovoked invasion。” Did i say “media”？ I meant “consent manufacturers”t• Colonel Macgregor explains: “The Russians ultimately intervened in Georgia， and the whole purpose of that intervention was to signal to us [the United States] that they would not tolerate a NATO member on their borders， particularly a member that was hostile to them， as at the time the Georgian Government was。 So， I think what we’re dealing with now [the war in Ukraine] is exactly the outcome that Ambassador Burns feared when he said ‘no means no。’”• In 2014， the US government backed a coup in Ukraine。 Why？ The same reason why the US has been backing coups for 100+ years: more money for investors。 Open the markets to more effectively drain the wealth of the target country。 The US succeeded in installing a pro-west government in a country that borders Russia。 • In response to the 2014 US-backed coup， Russia annexed Crimea to prevent Ukraine from blocking access to “its vital warm-water naval base in Sevastopol， Crimea—access to which Russia had previously negotiated…。”• After the annexation of Crimea， “the U。S。 began a massive program of military aid to Ukraine。 According to the U。S。 Congressional Research Service， a partial accounting since 2014， not including most of the military aid initiated since the 2022 war began， amounts to over four billion dollars， most coming through the State Department and Department of Defense。”This was essentially a way to unofficially bring Ukraine into NATO。 They wanted to “improve interoperability with NATO” even though Ukraine wasn’t in NATO （yet）。 • 2016， The US installs a an anti-ballistic missile [ABM] system in Romania。 “Though ostensibly defensive， the ABM system uses the Mark-41 ‘Aegis’ missile launchers， which can accommodate a variety of missile types: not just ABMs， designed to shoot down incoming ballistic missiles， but also—crucially—nuclear-tipped offensive weapons like the Tomahawk cruise missile。” Wow。 Missile sites at the Russian border。 Where have I heard this before？？ Surely this won’t be seen as provocative， right？？？“The American response to Mr。 Putin’s concerns about the ABM sites has been to assert that the United States does not intend to configure the launchers for offensive use。 But this response requires the Russians to trust America’s stated intentions， even in a crisis， rather than to judge the threat by the potential of the systems”• 2017， The US begins selling lethal weapons to Ukraine， a change to a 2014 policy that only non-lethal items were sold （like body armor）。• 2019， “the United States unilaterally withdrew from the 1987 treaty on intermediate-range nuclear weapons。” They claimed the Russians were cheating， but “the key point is that the United States withdrew unilaterally rather than aggressively seeking to resolve the issues。 In deciding to do so， the Americans may have sensed a military advantage， because the missiles in question would be placed in Europe， close to Russia， whereas Russia did not have plans to place weapons at equivalent distances from the United States”• 2021， “Ukraine and America co-hosted a major naval exercise in the Black Sea region involving navies from 32 countries。 Operation Sea Breeze almost provoked Russia to fire at a British naval destroyer that deliberately entered what Russia considers its territorial waters。”That’s it。 That’s the road to war。 Was it all “Russian Aggression？” is “Putin crazy？” And “as bad as Hitler？” I don’t think so。 I think if you back someone into a corner， they lash out。 You back Russia into a corner， they lash out。 Do I support this war？ No。 Do I support Russia？ No。 But I can see where they’re coming from。 Imagine if you will if the shoe were on the other foot。 What if the USSR overthrew the government of Canada or Mexico to install a puppet government for them to control？ Would the US sit idly by？ Of course not， they’d invade immediately。 Would the media frame this as “unprovoked US aggression？” Of course not。 It’d be called “liberating the people from the new tyrannical government” or the US media would be completely silent on the matter。 And yet somehow “freethinking bleeding heart dove liberals” don’t seem to grasp what’s happening here。 They immediately fall into the same trap every time: “US good。 US enemies bad”。 The key takeaway is that we need to understand our history or else we’ll keep getting dragged into one bullshit conflict after another。 What’s the resolution here？• Ukraine is in NATO， their economy gets destroyed by more corporate ghouls as well as the US wanting to get some of the money back that it lent to em。 （Most probable）• Russia takes over all of Ukraine and absorbs it into Russia or some new confederation （least probable）• Ukraine and the US sue for peace and sign a treaty saying Ukraine will NOT join NATO ever。 （2nd-least probable but what I think would be most ideal） 。。。more
Karol
，
Since I'm following the Ukraine conflict closely for some time， I stumbled upon this new book。 The hypothesis itself is not new， and quite popular here in Germany。 It's a well structured read with some historic context。 Most analysts do not so easily agree with this interpretation though。 While "the West" didn't act wisely， selfish and short sighted， my impression is that Russia is being portrayed too much of a victim here。 Since I'm following the Ukraine conflict closely for some time， I stumbled upon this new book。 The hypothesis itself is not new， and quite popular here in Germany。 It's a well structured read with some historic context。 Most analysts do not so easily agree with this interpretation though。 While "the West" didn't act wisely， selfish and short sighted， my impression is that Russia is being portrayed too much of a victim here。 。。。more
Zare
，
There is something that makes a nation or group of nations sharing the same ancestry or worldview extremely dangerous。 And that is messianic syndrome。 And this is something entire West is suffering from at the moment， although they self flagellate for oh， so horrible， so horrible， errors of the past （ad nauseam if I might add）。And yet these same nations continue to carry the "burden of the civilized humanity" in bringing light to "those primitives"。 And they do think of others as primitives， unf There is something that makes a nation or group of nations sharing the same ancestry or worldview extremely dangerous。 And that is messianic syndrome。 And this is something entire West is suffering from at the moment， although they self flagellate for oh， so horrible， so horrible， errors of the past （ad nauseam if I might add）。And yet these same nations continue to carry the "burden of the civilized humanity" in bringing light to "those primitives"。 And they do think of others as primitives， unfortunately they think of their own people when not agreeing not just as primitives but as dangerous and something to extinguish。 How can they then treat other nations as worthy if they do not share their own views of the world。Because they are the only ones who can start the conflicts because they only start just wars， of course。 They will cruise on tanks all over Africa carrying French flags but it is for the benefit of that same Africa。 Say， move half a world under Union Jack to the West to wage war around the islands so remote from the country claiming it that it took them weeks to get to the bloody place but they fought it because they are on the right side of the Good and Virtue。 They blew away country continent and a half away， under stars and stripes and compass flag， because it made chemical weapons and made total ruin of it， no weapons found。 Oh they did mea culpa， made critical motion pictures， lots of book written how bad， bad politicians were。。。。。 but mentioned country went kaboom and never came back and never will。 Another country in north of Africa was also blown to smithereens， and just left to die out in interwar of truly "democratic" forces。 Another country in area of Levant was also almost broken down but somehow still resists the democratic movements riding half-trucks with guns and spraying everyone with high caliber bullets。 Country （also on the other side of the world from Angels） looking like SF scenery with deserts and humongous mountains covered with hard rocks and snow was also liberated and turned into continuous battlefield for almost two decades （whole generation mind you） only to be returned back （after hundreds of thousands of deaths of all - military， civilians， you name it） to the very same group of people that were cause for liberation。All of the above are justified actions by this Angels on Earth， carriers of such good will and love that I think most people （those uncivilized of course） on planet Earth pray they do not turn their gaze towards them for this or that reason because they might get liberated and they have feeling they would not like it。 All of these justified actions - not always wars， but actions lasting for decades and including hundreds of thousands of soldiers （on rotation or directly deployed） - were always in a very very remote areas。 One might even say they were not an immediate threat but they were challenging strategic goals of the Angels。 Did people， civilians， die here？ Of course， but people were spared and again it was very very far away， average Angel could not see at that distance。 But Angels did their mea culpa because it is right thing to do。 After couple of years （when things could not change for an iota） there were again books and motion pictures and notes how it was not thought out well， how they were mistakes， but Angels will help， because they always help， and these are not wars， no， but police actions that bring liberty and progress （especially in that desert/mountain country I mentioned above） （anybody not involved and observing this would be really fooled about this mind you）。And so Angels started approaching this country， covered in mist and mystery in the East。 And for Angels it was their Anathema， bad meaning people would even say raison d'etre for the Angels union。 And they started building bases on the very border with this country， executing large scale military exercises simulating war with given country， creating political turmoil around this country and finally got so close that Angel's missiles got under thousand miles from the heart of this country。 And this country， strange strange country， containing tremendous potential to blow up planet several times over， this country Angels scorned and dehumanized as backwater， for at least 15 years asked the Angels to stop， stop with massive military exercises， stop with putting launchers so close， but Angels said why worry this is all benign， we are training to fight you but only if you attack us （not that any war started after "mass exercises"， it is not the same 。。。。 khm）， don't worry。 And they laughed， and with them all the others laughed， because this strange， strange country was acting truly strangely。 Why all that military might is there just for the defense against that very country - and they are worried， ha！ Worried were the Angels， nobody else had the rights to worry。Then for last 8 years this country， strange， strange country signed sh*tload of treaties with Angels and Angels were selected to guarantee for the same， and this country asked please dont escalate， we need to de-escalate。 And Angels said OK， but looked at this strange， strange country with sad eyes and wandered how backwater they are because they do not even understand that all these treaties are not worth paper they are written on， because they， Angels， are always right and they see justice， goodness and right to do what they do。And so 8 years pass and finally pushed to the wall （since this strange， strange country had a capitol not 400 miles now from the Angels position on its border） started a war。 And Angels were astounded because this strange， strange country decided to fight the war， for their own national purposes and goals （how dare they！ only Angels have right to start and end the wars and this war is not approved by the Angels; and national goals， why only Angels have national goals or can grant others license to fight for their national goals）。 And now Angels and this country， strange strange country are at war （although Angels so far say they are not， because they never start wars or conflicts， oh no， never， they are just helping their friends）。 Weirdly Angels are not so united， because for some Angels this is happening oh so very near， even one single nation between them and this strange， strange country， but for those important Angels it could as well be on a different planet so they are not that worried and they say let us continue。And so here we are， Angels， those virtues， regal and proud， led by your average clerks as politicians， raising stakes every day。 For the rest of the world， not living in Angel countries hope remains that there will be tomorrow but with Angels you never know， their wisdom is unparalleled and they fight for every civilian in the war zone like they did in Africa， Middle East and wherever justice had to be served。This book proves that （same as War is a Racket） facts dont need hundreds of pages。 Author is very blunt and says things as they are。 Actions cause reactions - whether intended or not （we will have to wait for those mea culpa books and movies in couple of decades， if ever） - but party prodded to act by striking first is not always the one to point the finger at （for those talking about diplomacy I think that recent statements from Germany and France said enough about those diplomatic missions and how they were viewed - on the other hand Angels from the above could have solved lots of their conflicts politically and not through deadly and nation extinguishing blockades or through force of arms - but they never need to justify themselves dont they）。 Condescension and unwillingness to communicate are death to personal relationships let alone when it comes to nations and their survival。 And in here deadly play is in progress， one that could ensure that for next few millennia we wont have to worry about lack of Internet and make us go back to the roots （literary）。 Most disturbing book I read。 。。。more
Arevik Heboyan
，
This is a very hard work to rate， but I applause to the author and publisher for stating facts。War is terrible， it brings chaos for decades to come， brings deaths and humanitarian disaster， it is also a cash grab for many parties， who are not directly involved in the conflict。。。。I am sure this work will be wildly criticized and author demonized， with the overall narrative that US has regarding this war。。。 but these are the facts that Russian and pro-russian parties were stating since the beginni This is a very hard work to rate， but I applause to the author and publisher for stating facts。War is terrible， it brings chaos for decades to come， brings deaths and humanitarian disaster， it is also a cash grab for many parties， who are not directly involved in the conflict。。。。I am sure this work will be wildly criticized and author demonized， with the overall narrative that US has regarding this war。。。 but these are the facts that Russian and pro-russian parties were stating since the beginning。。。 Ukraine， people of Ukraine became a tool， how terrible to say so， but this is the climax of 30 years of provocative from NATO。。。 everything was done to provoke and have Russia announce the "war"， everything。。。Russia is demonized， rightly so， this war ， brotherly war is inhuman， but yet NATO did everything for it to happen。。。 and who gets to take all the burden， the people of Ukraine， soldiers from both countries。。。 This is a terrible situation， just thanks to author for bringing facts to light。。。 And if US and NATO was so interested in peace and democracy， maybe it would have said a word when war is emerging miles away from Ukraine in Armenia and Artsakh。。。 but since no way to demonize Russia， why bother to even talk about it。。。 Populism won。。。 death continues。。。Anyway， peace to all of us ， hope this black wave ends soon。。。 nothing is more valuable than human life。。。。 。。。more
Celine Dion
，
“Russophobia”Bit too much “what if” for my liking， but short and solid。
Randall Wallace
，
The US refuses to negotiate with Russia or compromise。 Yet we remember well the nuclear war threat of the Cuban Missile Crisis was ended by compromise。 Evidently real bullies don’t compromise， like actors in a bad Steven Seagal movie they act like they are “Above the Law”。 One month before the Russian invasion of Ukraine， “Russia demanded a written guarantee that Ukraine would never become part of NATO and that the alliance remove the military assets it had deployed in East Europe since 1997。” U The US refuses to negotiate with Russia or compromise。 Yet we remember well the nuclear war threat of the Cuban Missile Crisis was ended by compromise。 Evidently real bullies don’t compromise， like actors in a bad Steven Seagal movie they act like they are “Above the Law”。 One month before the Russian invasion of Ukraine， “Russia demanded a written guarantee that Ukraine would never become part of NATO and that the alliance remove the military assets it had deployed in East Europe since 1997。” US Secretary of State Blinken responded by saying， “There is no change。 There will be no change。” One month later comes Putin’s military reply to Blinken’s rigid response。 After Putin’s invasion of Ukraine， “the US military raised its alert status to Defcon 3 for the first time since the 2001 attack on the World Trade Towers。” The US chose to first respond to Russia by moving towards nuclear war， than to logically negotiate， mediate or ameliorate。 A top Brussels political analyst said， “Russia has more nuclear weapons than the Unites States。 Russia has more modern weapons than the Unites States。 Russia can level to the ground the United States in 30 minutes。” He thought US response to be “almost suicidal。” This book has no interest in justifying the invasion but argues that the US has a thirty-year history of provocations directed at Russia。 Like most books on Ukraine this book agrees about the huge provocation of Clinton and NATO expanding NATO up the borders of Russia。 The author writes， “I simply want to note that the West acted in a way calculated to deceive Moscow” and that led to Russia no longer trusting neither NATO nor the US。 Clinton brought Poland into NATO in 1999 knowing full well how hostile Poland was towards Russia。 In 2001， Bush Jr withdraws the US from the ABM treaty （a huge fuck you to Russia） and in 2004 added more NATO countries to encircle Russia。 As you see， the US intentionally denied Russia its own Monroe Doctrine。 Did you ever wonder why only the US has a “Monroe Doctrine” and if any other large country like Russia wants their own safe zone like the Monroe Doctrine offers， US media says they are crazy and unrealistic？ The US demands North， South and Central America all to itself， no Russian or Chinese military forces， but if Russia wants the same buffer around itself， it must be only deeply delusional or paranoid？ After the US led Ukraine Coup of 2014， Ukraine clearly became hostile to Russia （with “four high-ranking members who be legitimately labeled neofascists”）。 Hypocrisy Alert: imagine if Russia financed a successful Coup in Mexico which became openly hostile to the US – imagine Russia using “rocket installations in Mexico to conduct live-fire training exercises to practice destroying military targets inside America？” Would the US have any legitimate reason to feel provoked？ Of course， the US would demand those installations be removed。 Simple。 No country can install missiles on our hemisphere， but we can put them wherever we want？ This is high-school bully justice， or American foreign policy style。 As Putin said in 2021， “Are we putting our rockets on the borders of the United states？ No， we’re not。 It’s the US with its rockets coming to our doorstep。” US Tomahawks are presently positioned to easily reach Moscow and these puppies provide up to ten times the yield of the Hiroshima bomb。 Poland， which hates Russia happily just got an Aegis site that accommodates 24 of these love missiles， Romania has a site as well – that means 48 missiles waiting to be launched at Russia to create World War III。 Don’t piss us off！ Such nuclear war would mean World War IV will definitely have to be fought with either sticks and stones， or toothless verbal taunts。 In 2017， John Mearsheimer wrote how offensive it looked to Moscow that Trump had just starting selling lethal weapons to Ukraine then， changing US policy （in place from 2014-2017）。 Then in 2021， Britain deliberately entered Russia’s Black sea territorial waters during a naval exercise。 It was part of a Ukraine and US co-hosted naval exercise bringing in navies from 32 countries。 Did you also know that in December 2021 the Russian ambassador wrote in Foreign Policy Journal that NATO was carrying out “roughly 40 large training exercises annually near Russia。 The situation is extremely dangerous。” How could Russia not find ANY of this a deliberate provocation？ Famed diplomat George Kennan couldn’t believe we’ve ended up with Russia where we’ve ended up。 He said our differences were not with Russia， but with the Soviet Union， “and now we are turning our backs on the very people who mounted the greatest bloodless revolution in history to remove that Soviet regime。” Two Secretaries of Defense， Robert McNamara， Paul Nitze， and famed commie hater Richard Pipes， Robert Gates， Jack F。 Matlock and John Mearsheimer all agree with Kennan。 NATO’s ill-advised enlargement itself increased its security concerns – so， intentionally decreasing security for Russia has thus led to decreasing security for NATO。 Russia hawk Fiona Hill admits that in 2007， Putin the world on notice “that Moscow would not accept the further expansion of NATO”。 “Then within a year in 2008 NATO gave an open door to Georgia and Ukraine。” “Russia took no action in Ukraine in 2008 because the Ukrainian government pulled back from seeking NATO membership。” Hill goes on to say US intelligence knew than NATO expansion might well risk Russia’s annexation of Crimea。 When Russia annexed Crimea， it was no surprise but expected， and so feigned anger was only a PR fueled indignance。 Hill thinks the worst Putin is up to is to divide up Ukraine， not to occupy it。 Zelensky ran on a peace platform in in 2019。 The German Chancellor told Zelensky to renounce NATO aspirations and Biden and Putin would sign it。 Had Zelensky signed it， there would have been no Russian invasion。 “Richard Sakwa suggested Mr。 Zelensky could have made peace with Russia by speaking just five words， Ukraine will not join NATO。” He said， If you think Putin is bluffing， call his bluff。 Austria and Finland clearly benefited from neutrality with the Soviet Union。 It can be done。 When Zelensky was elected in 2019， Russia expert Stephen F。 Cohen said that Zelensky will be under great pressure from the Ukraine far right now and they have already said they would kill him if he seriously negotiates with Putin。 Stephen said that Zelensky would naturally roll rightward unless the US instead encouraged diplomacy with Putin， and that’s what happened， Zelensky rolled to the right。 “What sane person could believe that putting a Western arsenal on Russia’s border would not produce a powerful response？” In 2008， the US ambassador to Moscow （who now heads the CIA） said that for Russia， Ukraine was the “reddist of red lines，” “Ukraine is not， by any stretch of the imagination， a vital security interest of the United States。” Unrelieved pressure for Ukraine to join NATO in Ukraine in the end will destroy Ukraine。 Is pushing the one issue and risking nuclear war worth it？ Will Ukraine follow Nancy Reagan’s advice and “Just Say No”？ In conclusion: Americans must note that unlike the US， Moscow doesn’t have two oceans to protect itself， it has no mountains to protect itself， nor rivers， nor even defensible borders。 It obviously learned from the demo （Napoleon’s and Hitlers brutal invasions） to be a little wary of invasion or simply adjacent provocation。 Disregarding Russia’s security concerns about being intentionally encircled just because you insist on being a douchebag exceptionalist diva rogue state just won’t cut it anymore。 Countries that think they are threatened tend to get some authoritarian aspects: look at Lincoln suspending the writ of habeas corpus in 1861， or Woodrow Wilson’s draconian bullshit against the anti-war crowd in WWI。 George Kennan predicted in 1998 that NATO expansion would “have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy。” The US has for decades been pushing Russia， provoking it into a response。 We are taught by media omission to see only the Russian response in Ukraine and not the decades of intentional provocation leading up it。 Gilbert Doctorow wrote that to strongly decrease the threat of nuclear war today， “the escape from this is in front of everybody’s nose: it’s to do a deal with Mr。 Putin。” Great book， super glad I read it。 Noam himself says of this book， “Very well done。” 。。。more
Tom Walsh
，
A Powerful one-sided argument。 In this brief paper Abelow has provided a valuable perspective on the policies of the US and NATO that form part of the backstory of the War in Ukraine。 We in America don’t hear or understand much about the role those actions may have played in the leadup to Russia’s invasion。 To us Putin’s actions seemed to have arisen out of thin air， from his desire to rebuild the Soviet Union or the Russia of Peter the Great。 It is helpful to get an insight into the situation a A Powerful one-sided argument。 In this brief paper Abelow has provided a valuable perspective on the policies of the US and NATO that form part of the backstory of the War in Ukraine。 We in America don’t hear or understand much about the role those actions may have played in the leadup to Russia’s invasion。 To us Putin’s actions seemed to have arisen out of thin air， from his desire to rebuild the Soviet Union or the Russia of Peter the Great。 It is helpful to get an insight into the situation as Putin sees it。 Whether we agree with it or not。 Having said all that， while I respect the case that the author makes， I think that he dismisses some important elements of the issue。 Putin’s history with Georgia， Crimea， and the Donbas lends credence to the paranoia The West and NATO feels toward Russia’s motives。 Also， in his Counterfactual， Abelow’s solution presumes that Ukraine’s partner across the negotiating table would be trustworthy。 Even discounting Washington’s traditional demonization of Putin， there is no evidence that he would respect any Peace agreement。 His behavior in the War so far belies that possibility。 More than fear of NATO expansion is driving his destruction of a Country and Culture he believes should not exist。 Lastly， the proposed solution glibly ignores the National Pride of the Ukranian People。 No backing any American President or Congress could give would convince those Citizens to overlook the War Crimes， Death and Destruction the Russian Army has inflicted on them。 They do not want to cede any of their Land to Putin。 And they do not want to be part of the Greater Russia of Putin’s dreams。 I sympathize with the book’s dream of a peaceful solution to the conflict， but I don’t agree that its causes can be totally laid at the feet of latent American Cold War fears or any secret NATO plan to destroy the Russian Army。 Zelenskyy and his People crave Sovereignty and Independence and have shown that they are willing die for it。 I fervently hope that no more of them will have to。 Still， “How the West” was a worthwhile read。 Four Stars。 **** 。。。more
Ian Laurie
，
Verifying what I've always believed。What is written here is verifiable and more over follows a very logical path。 We know that Mr Putin is no saint but when you read here， what you know already， you'll see that the real culprit here is not just A man， it's the desire for USA to weaken Russia's military capacity。 Verifying what I've always believed。What is written here is verifiable and more over follows a very logical path。 We know that Mr Putin is no saint but when you read here， what you know already， you'll see that the real culprit here is not just A man， it's the desire for USA to weaken Russia's military capacity。 。。。more
Σταμάτης Καρασαββίδης
，
The author is most times stating the obvious that everyone in the entire world knows and still westerners are seething in the reviews。 Love to see it。 Great and easy read nonetheless！5/5
no one
，
Fantastic book。 Happy to support an author who is challenging the narrative that the USA has spun since the early 20th centuries。 Other， poor， reviews are perfect examples of western indoctrination and the poor education system while does not allow dissent or critical thought。 The USA has manipulated NATO states into not only doing their dirty work but allowing their citizens and their economies to suffer under the guise that Russia is always one step away from triggering a nuclear Holocaust。 Al Fantastic book。 Happy to support an author who is challenging the narrative that the USA has spun since the early 20th centuries。 Other， poor， reviews are perfect examples of western indoctrination and the poor education system while does not allow dissent or critical thought。 The USA has manipulated NATO states into not only doing their dirty work but allowing their citizens and their economies to suffer under the guise that Russia is always one step away from triggering a nuclear Holocaust。 All of this while casually looking away at the terror the USA has caused around the world。 I am grateful to Benjamin Abelow for putting this into print。 。。。more
Robert Burns
，
Yet more USA destabilization of the World。A concise assessment on the build up and subsequent war in Ukraine。 A must read for those wanting the facts and some balance in the face of intense Western propaganda and groupthink， that is endangering the World。 Meanwhile people are dying and the Ukraine destroyed needlessly while the world heads for nuclear Armageddon。 People need to wake-up to the reality before it's too late。 Yet more USA destabilization of the World。A concise assessment on the build up and subsequent war in Ukraine。 A must read for those wanting the facts and some balance in the face of intense Western propaganda and groupthink， that is endangering the World。 Meanwhile people are dying and the Ukraine destroyed needlessly while the world heads for nuclear Armageddon。 People need to wake-up to the reality before it's too late。 。。。more
Max
，
Russian propaganda that falls perfectly in Russia’s narrative。 Utter rubbish coming from someone who either has no grasp on the issue or is working for a bonus from RT。 Don’t waste your time and don’t get mislead。
Bernardo
，
A much needed， succinct， and well-sourced corrective to the predominant narrative of the conflict。
Mika Auramo
，
Media on tulvillaan vuonna 2022 hyvinkin puolueellista uutisvirtaa koskien Ukrainan tapahtumia。 Länsimainen valtavirtajournalismi rummuttaa ankaraa Venäjän-vastaista sotapropagandaa， ja harva kuluttaja tohtii pohtia， onko tämä Putinia ja venäläisiä demonisoiva narratiivi sittenkään totta。 Suomessakin koronavuosien jälkeen median korona-aiheinen pelkoporno on korvattu ilmastohätätilalla ja Venäjän oletetuilla laajentumispyrkimyksillä ja terrorimaisilla pommituksilla。Niin kuin vastaavanlaisissa ps Media on tulvillaan vuonna 2022 hyvinkin puolueellista uutisvirtaa koskien Ukrainan tapahtumia。 Länsimainen valtavirtajournalismi rummuttaa ankaraa Venäjän-vastaista sotapropagandaa， ja harva kuluttaja tohtii pohtia， onko tämä Putinia ja venäläisiä demonisoiva narratiivi sittenkään totta。 Suomessakin koronavuosien jälkeen median korona-aiheinen pelkoporno on korvattu ilmastohätätilalla ja Venäjän oletetuilla laajentumispyrkimyksillä ja terrorimaisilla pommituksilla。Niin kuin vastaavanlaisissa psykologisissa operaatioissa pyritään vaikuttamaan ihmismassoihin ja näiden käyttäytymiseen toivotulla tavalla， nykyään misinformaatio määritellään valtaapitävien toimesta， ja lisäksi kaasuvalottamalla saadaan ihmiset toimimaan vainoharhaisesti， niin kuin nähtiin maski- ja rokotuskampanjoissa。 Tässä narratiivissa jokainen venäläinen on potentiaalinen vihollinen， sillä onhan tämä diktaattorisen Putinin alamainen。 Tällä verukkeella on viety tavalliselta kansalaiselta luottokortit ja varakkaammalta porukalta pankkisäästöt， kiinteistöt ja luksusjahdit eri puolilta maailmaa。 Benjamin Abelow keskittyy teoksessaan Ukrainan sotaan ja siihen johtaneisiin historiallisiin syihin ja korostaa länsimaisen narratiivin pohjautuvan virheellisiin premisseihin。 Hän ei juurikaan käsittele idän ja lännen välistä kamppailua maailman herruudesta ja eri rintamalinjojen ja allianssien syntymistä ja Venäjän， Iranin， Intian ja Kiinan välistä sotilaallista ja taloudellista yhteistyötä。 Abelow siteeraa pitkiä pätkiä mm。 Douglas Macregorin， John Maersheimerin， George Kennanin ja Robert McNamaran ajatuksia ja teorioita sotastrategiasta ja uudesta kylmästä sodasta。Harva ehkä enää muistaa， että Yhdysvallat ylläpitää edelleen Monroen doktriinia vuodelta 1823， jonka mukaisesti on nähty lukuisia vallankaappauksia ja kumouksia läntisellä pallonpuoliskolla。 Yhdysvallat ja länsimaat tuntuvat myös unohtaneen aikanaan Venäjälle antamassa lupaukset Naton laajentumispyrkimysten kuoppaamiseksi。 Siitä huolimatta länsimaat Naton johdolla pyrkivät entistä voimallisemmin eristämään Venäjää ja sen liittolaisia muusta maailmasta， niin kuin nyt on nähty erilaisin pakotekampanjoin。 Vuonna 2008 Nato-konferenssissa Bukarestissa asetettiin tavoitteeksi Ukrainan ja Georgian liittyminen natoon， ja tätä lähdettiin voimallisesti toteuttamaan。 Vuonna 2013 lopussa saatiin aikaiseksi operaatio， joka johti vallankaappaukseen Ukrainassa erinäisten vaiheiden jälkeen， valtaan ujutettiin länsimainen johto mafiataustoineen。 Siitä lähtien Nato on osallistunut erittäin suunnitelmallisesti maan sotakoneiston synkronointiin ja kouluttamiseen Natoa silmällä pitäen。 Nyt ollaan ikään kuin tulossa vastaavanlaiseen tilanteeseen kuin vuonna 1962， jolloin Yhdysvallat joutui poistamaan Turkista vetypomminsa， kun Neuvostoliitto oli tuomassa vastaavanlaisen arsenaalin Kuubaan。 Jo nyt on itäisessä Euroopassa valmiit laukaisualustat Naton ydinpommeille。 Täytyy kuitenkin muistaa， että nyt on punainen linja viimeistään ylitetty， kun Venäjä kokee eksistentiaaliseksi uhaksi Nato-joukot ja ydinaseet noin 400 kilometrin päässä pääkaupungistaan。 Yhtä hyvin voisi pohtia， mitähän Yhdysvallat tekisi， jos Venäjä kouluttaisi Meksikon pohjoisosissa armeijakuntia sekä omia joukkoja ja varustaisi ne ballistisilla ohjuksilla。On jotenkin kummallista lukea poliitikoiden maanista propagandaa， vihollisten määrittelyitä， kohosteisia sananvalintoja terrorismiväitteineen。 Ikään kuin ei tunnusteta lainkaan tosiasioita ja tarkastellaan konfliktia täysin puolueellisesti ja historiattomasti。 On lisäksi helppo unohtaa Naton Jugoslavian pommitukset vuonna 1999， kun hiilivoimalat raunioitettiin täsmäpommituksin ja Yhdysvaltojen Japanin raunioittaminen， joissa pantiin miljoonakaupunkeja maan tasalle toisessa maailmansodassa。Siinä mielessä Abelowin kirja antaa pohdittavaa ja perspektiiviä ymmärtää länsimaiden propagandaa ja provokaatioita vuodesta 1990 lähtien tähän päivään saakka。 Russofobisista näkemyksistä ja hokemista on tullut ikään kuin tyhjää profetointia poliittisessa teatterissa， että sota nykyajan Pietari Suureksi kuviteltua Vladimir Putinia vastaan on voitettava keinolla millä hyvällä。 Nyt loppuvuodesta 2022 sodan laajeneminen vaikuttaa entistä todennäköisemmältä， ja Kennanit ja muut puhuvat jopa ydinsodan mahdollisuudesta。 Nähtäväksi jää， tuleeko sellaista tai miten se olisi rajoittunutta。 。。。more
Jose Miguel
，
A short book that did not tell me anything I did not know already but that did reaffirm with data and quotes what I have been arguing myself for years… a book that should be read in every western press office and parliament but that will most likely be labelled as “Putin propaganda” by warmongering rusophobic fanatics “Policy makers in Washington and the European capitals - along with the captured， craven media that uncritically amplify their nonsense - are now standing up to their hips in a bar A short book that did not tell me anything I did not know already but that did reaffirm with data and quotes what I have been arguing myself for years… a book that should be read in every western press office and parliament but that will most likely be labelled as “Putin propaganda” by warmongering rusophobic fanatics “Policy makers in Washington and the European capitals - along with the captured， craven media that uncritically amplify their nonsense - are now standing up to their hips in a barrel of viscous mud。 How those who were foolish enough to step into that barrel will find the wisdom to extricate themselves before they tip the barrel and take the rest of us down with them is hard to imagine” 。。。more
GreyAtlas
，
I do not understand how or why this was even published， aside from that it contributes to a pushed narrative。 It is too short to be a book， and its chapters are of less substance than even a low rated political article。 Abelow writes offensive， subjective opinions such as "ukraine is irrelevant to the USA"。 He also dissected， irrelevantly， words of respected Russia analyst Fiona Hill by just regurgitating what she said in new words。 How is that worthy of publication？ I also caught a grammar erro I do not understand how or why this was even published， aside from that it contributes to a pushed narrative。 It is too short to be a book， and its chapters are of less substance than even a low rated political article。 Abelow writes offensive， subjective opinions such as "ukraine is irrelevant to the USA"。 He also dissected， irrelevantly， words of respected Russia analyst Fiona Hill by just regurgitating what she said in new words。 How is that worthy of publication？ I also caught a grammar error on page 44 where it said "the provocations that the united state and its allies"， like， come on that is very glaring。 Overall， I cannot recommend this short， attention seeking essay format of a publication from someone that appears to hold NO expertise in the subject and has two other books on something called "acid-base"。。。 whut？？？ An advanced copy was kindly provided by the publisher on request via Netgalley。com 。。。more
Jonathan
，
A nicely succinct book that provides the counter-narrative to MSM。 Essential reading for anyone inclined to comment on the conflict in Ukraine。
Gavin
，
A Decent Summary A decent summary of the causes of the Ukraine conflict but nothing anyone with any sense did not know or should not have known。
Janalyn Prude
，
From NATO expansion to America’s broken promises it seems like it’s the same old story。 Since the 1940s legitimate informed people have been warning America to steer clear of Russia but it seems true to history the people who are supposed to be the smartest and are supposed to keep us safe do not listen。 To put it plainly since the beginning of America it seems we do wrong and make it look like the other person is crazy。 Don’t get me wrong I love America and wouldn’t want to live anywhere else b From NATO expansion to America’s broken promises it seems like it’s the same old story。 Since the 1940s legitimate informed people have been warning America to steer clear of Russia but it seems true to history the people who are supposed to be the smartest and are supposed to keep us safe do not listen。 To put it plainly since the beginning of America it seems we do wrong and make it look like the other person is crazy。 Don’t get me wrong I love America and wouldn’t want to live anywhere else but come on guys！ You cannot keep getting uncomfortably close with your missiles and then act like he started it。 I wish I was smarter and could put it in more eloquent words and write a more well thought out review but essentially we have a bunch of jerks running the country and they keep getting us into trouble and then will blame the other person。 I know Russia isn’t without fault but we had a very long grace period before they decided to make the Ukraine nonessential。 I am still happy to be an American and because I am one I can ask such questions and make these statements。 I totally enjoyed this book I love eye-opening dialogue and learning something I didn’t already know that is exactly what happened with this book。 I do want to say I think the people in the Ukraine are totally innocent in without fault and have put up a mighty fight and good luck to them but I think because America was essentially the catalyst maybe they could help the Ukraine out more！ If I was smarter I would have better answers but I am just a reviewer and I think this book is a good one and I highly recommend it。 I received it from NetGalley and a publisher but I am leaving this review voluntarily please forgive any mistakes as I am blind and dictate my review。gg 。。。more
Jessica
，
Thank you， NetGalley， for providing me with a free copy of this book in exchange for an honest review。To call How the West Brought War to Ukraine a book is a bit generous。 Coming in well under one-hundred pages， this essay is somewhat hindered by using a book format， as the rather ponderous prologue may turn off some readers。 If you stick around for the rest， however， you'll find a clear and concise explanation--and no， not an excuse， despite what critics claim--for how the Russian invasion of U Thank you， NetGalley， for providing me with a free copy of this book in exchange for an honest review。To call How the West Brought War to Ukraine a book is a bit generous。 Coming in well under one-hundred pages， this essay is somewhat hindered by using a book format， as the rather ponderous prologue may turn off some readers。 If you stick around for the rest， however， you'll find a clear and concise explanation--and no， not an excuse， despite what critics claim--for how the Russian invasion of Ukraine came to pass， and the numerous policy blunders that could have prevented it。 Abelow's argument is one that many readers will likely come in wanting to refute， but the best defense he provides is the trove of direct quotes from numerous foreign policy experts who warned against something like this happening for decades。 Abelow shows no preference to either Biden or Trump， placing blame on both of them for escalating tensions with Russia。 If I had one major critique of How the West Brought War to Ukraine， it's that one could learn just as much from listening to an interview with any of the experts cited here。 Nevertheless， this is an essay worth reading， even if one does not ultimately find it convincing。 。。。more
Corey Keast
，
Quick and to the pointAppreciate his perspective and getting to the point。 Don't escalate a situation and then be shocked when a confrontation occurs。 We need more diplomatic individuals who work towards peace than warmongers who are fine with the destruction of whole societies。 Quick and to the pointAppreciate his perspective and getting to the point。 Don't escalate a situation and then be shocked when a confrontation occurs。 We need more diplomatic individuals who work towards peace than warmongers who are fine with the destruction of whole societies。 。。。more
Kristie Davidson
，
Clearly told！！！！！Very in lightning， I'm sure that the average person in the US does not know these simple facts。 This is a book everyone should read！！！ Clearly told！！！！！Very in lightning， I'm sure that the average person in the US does not know these simple facts。 This is a book everyone should read！！！ 。。。more
Charles Francis
，
Thank you NetGalley for another great book provided in advance of full publication。 Like most， I was shocked at Russia's invasion of Ukraine and like many viewed Putin as another Hitler like demagogue bent on world domination， scooping up territory to enlarge the empire。 Another egotistical narcissist maniac that the world has unfortunately seen too many of and continue to see。 My opinion has not changed。 What has changed based on the reading of this taught timely little book is how the world ha Thank you NetGalley for another great book provided in advance of full publication。 Like most， I was shocked at Russia's invasion of Ukraine and like many viewed Putin as another Hitler like demagogue bent on world domination， scooping up territory to enlarge the empire。 Another egotistical narcissist maniac that the world has unfortunately seen too many of and continue to see。 My opinion has not changed。 What has changed based on the reading of this taught timely little book is how the world has gotten to where we are， on the verge of nuclear armageddon and the United States' role in the journey。 In Benjamin Abelow's view， the West was complicit in starting the Ukraine crisis and bears a significant responsibility in where we are today。 He pulls back the curtain and exposes how the United States and our allies over the past several decades set the stage for a Russian invasion of Ukraine。 How we teased and taunted Putin to do what he has done。 In 1832 President Jame Monroe articulated what later became the "Monroe Doctrine，" which in essence states that any efforts by European powers to control or influence sovereign states in the western region would be viewed as a threat to United States' security。 The doctrine also stated that the U。S。 would not become embroiled， interfere， or put its fingers （my words） in the internal affairs of European nations。 In a sense， it spelled out a position of nonintervention by the United States in affairs outside its territories。 The doctrine continues to be the established policy of the United States since its adoption which we saw in action during the Kennedy administration in the Cuban Missile crisis with Russian。 The author draws a parallel between the U。S。 position vis a vis the Monroe Doctrine and its total ignoring of said doctrine with its activities in Eastern Europe。 He asserts that the United States and its NATO allies are at the heart of the Ukraine crisis and through failed policies that transcend both parties who have controlled the White House since the collapse of the Soviet Union。 He argues that with the expansion of NATO Russia was put in an untenable situation for which Mr。 Putin could not turn away from。 A position of having potential hostile nations， backed by the West on its borders， for example Poland。 Russia is no stranger to invasions by other countries think Napoleon and Hitler。 What does a bear do when threatened， it attacks。 What would the United States' position be if Russia or China armed Brazil， Argentina or even Mexico， similar to what we have done with Poland and Ukraine （pre-war）。 We would evoke the Monroe Doctrine and war would very well be on the table。 As the author states， is this no different？ There is no mistake that this war was caused and started by Vladimir Putin and he is fully accountable for the horror it has wrecked on the Ukrainian people。 That said， most wars are not started in a vacuum， there are elements that pave the way and this book clearly points out how the U。S。 government and NATO hastened and facilitated the paving。If you want a new perspective on the causes of the Ukraine war and what might come next， then pick up this book。 。。。more
Ruth
，
I believe that anyone will benefit from reading this book。 The information is clearly presented， and the book is easy to read。 I think the reader will learn information that wasn't known。 I read an electronic copy courtesy of Net Galley。 I believe that anyone will benefit from reading this book。 The information is clearly presented， and the book is easy to read。 I think the reader will learn information that wasn't known。 I read an electronic copy courtesy of Net Galley。 。。。more
Jamie
，
His ebook was provided to me by NetGalley and my review is my honest opinion。This was a short， incisive read。 Abelow lays out the reasoning behind his argument that the West--and， specifically， the US--has played an influential part in the current war in Ukraine and what consequences might lay ahead if something isn't done。 I highly recommend this; it's not often a quick read， but it is needed。 His ebook was provided to me by NetGalley and my review is my honest opinion。This was a short， incisive read。 Abelow lays out the reasoning behind his argument that the West--and， specifically， the US--has played an influential part in the current war in Ukraine and what consequences might lay ahead if something isn't done。 I highly recommend this; it's not often a quick read， but it is needed。 。。。more
Doreen Prentiss Gabriellini
，
How The West Brought War to Ukraine: Understanding How US and NATO Policies Led to Crisis， war and the Risk of Nuclear Catastrophe By Benjamin Abelow is the biggest propaganda piece I have read since the Cold War。 The publishing company has no website and after investing Mr。 Abelow you will find he has a Bachelor’s Degree in European History and is a You Tuber。The main idea of the ‘pamphlet’ （only 88 pages） is that the Countries on the boundaries of Russia should not have the power of sovereignt How The West Brought War to Ukraine: Understanding How US and NATO Policies Led to Crisis， war and the Risk of Nuclear Catastrophe By Benjamin Abelow is the biggest propaganda piece I have read since the Cold War。 The publishing company has no website and after investing Mr。 Abelow you will find he has a Bachelor’s Degree in European History and is a You Tuber。The main idea of the ‘pamphlet’ （only 88 pages） is that the Countries on the boundaries of Russia should not have the power of sovereignty。 They should not have any determination over their own Country。 The feeling one gets while reading this is that the author is a fan of Putin。 The essence is that NATO started the war by encroaching on Countries that Russia considers within their influence。 There is absolutely no acknowledgment that Putin is a bully， that he has broken promises to many。 Apparently the citizens of Ukraine should avoid conflict with Russia at all cost and bend to Russia’s will。 Whether or not Russia “likes” what their border Countries are doing is not relevant。 Whether Russia likes their former “states” becoming part of NATO， they have no right to make those demands。 Ukraine is responsible for their own treaties and defense strategies。 To be truthful it comes across as justification of Russia invading Ukraine。Thanks to the Publisher， Author and NetGalley for the ARC in exchange for an honest review。 。。。more
Ronald Gruner
，
This is a short book which clearly discusses what， in the author's opinion， precipitated Russia's attack on Ukraine。 Nothing can justify Russia's attack， but Abelow's book describes what helped propel Putin's rise， his estrangement with the West， efforts to expand Russia's influence -- and later control -- over former Soviet territories， and finally invasion of Ukraine on February 24， 2022。The book opens with a discussion of how the Monroe Doctrine in 1823 drew a redline for any foreign power th This is a short book which clearly discusses what， in the author's opinion， precipitated Russia's attack on Ukraine。 Nothing can justify Russia's attack， but Abelow's book describes what helped propel Putin's rise， his estrangement with the West， efforts to expand Russia's influence -- and later control -- over former Soviet territories， and finally invasion of Ukraine on February 24， 2022。The book opens with a discussion of how the Monroe Doctrine in 1823 drew a redline for any foreign power that attempts to establish a military or political presence in the Western Hemisphere。 "Yet when it comes to Russia， the United States and its NATO allies have acted for decades in disregard of this same principle，" the author writes。In Chapter 8， one succinct paragraph summarizes why Russia has become a rogue country intent on expanding its borders。 "Had the United States not pushed NATO to the borders of Russia; not deployed nuclear-capable missile launch systems in Romania。。。。the war in Ukraine probably would not have taken place。。。。"Many readers may disagree with Abelow， but one fact seems certain。 After World War II， America's enlightened policies turned its former enemies， Germany and Japan， into two of its strongest allies。 But， unfortunately， after the collapse of the Soviet Union thirty years ago， U。S。 foreign policies failed to accomplish the same。 。。。more
Natalie
，
How the West Brought War to UkraineBy Benjamin AbelowThis book is a real eye opener， with regard to how easily powerful government forces and media can convince citizens of the rightness of their actions while withholding large amounts of information prejudicial to their plans and ideas。 It is short – only 152 pages – but is a damning indictment of the role the West has played to bring about this war， when it could so easily been avoided。While the author does not exonerate Mr。 Putin， he provides How the West Brought War to UkraineBy Benjamin AbelowThis book is a real eye opener， with regard to how easily powerful government forces and media can convince citizens of the rightness of their actions while withholding large amounts of information prejudicial to their plans and ideas。 It is short – only 152 pages – but is a damning indictment of the role the West has played to bring about this war， when it could so easily been avoided。While the author does not exonerate Mr。 Putin， he provides proven information which implicates the United States government and its NATO allies for not acting responsibly in what would be in global best interests， and in failing to factor in well known "red lines" expressed by the Russian government。 Mr。 Abelow clearly shows areas where our government patently chose to disregard what was bound to happen in reaction to NATO expansion toward the Russian border。That our government has been operating with blinders firmly in place in regard to geopolitics is creating a scary situation for the future。 This book should be a must-read for every thinking person who understands that our very lives may be hanging in the balance。 。。。more
Akeel King
，