After he rejected EU under pressure from Russia, by his own words. Against what quite a lot of Ukraniens wanted, voted for and worked for for a long time. You can't ignore preceeding pressure and meddling from Russia in this story.
And despite all the effort to engineer pro Russia sentiment in Ukraine, it never worked, because it is not actually that easy to create large scale support for anything from outside.
> Against what quite a lot of Ukraniens wanted, voted for and worked for for a long time.
But in accordance with what quite a lot of other Ukranians wanted, voted for and worked for for a long time.
Ukraine is a badly-divided country that has been long in a business of imposing the will of some of their people on all of their people. What will of some was imposed on all changed with time; the fact did not.
In similar situation, some of Swiss people wanted more association with Germany while some wanted more association with France or Italy; they wisely decided on neutrality and have been living with that peacefully for hundreds of years, staying out of many wars involving some or all of their neighbors.
> But in accordance with what quite a lot of other Ukranians wanted, voted for and worked for for a long time.
Nope, the rejection of Eu did not had that much support. Trying to frame these two groups as equivalent in standing is a lie. And also, Americans did not made 10000 people to protest either.
> they wisely decided on neutrality and have been living with that peacefully for hundreds of years, staying out of many wars involving some or all of their neighbors.
This is nonsense. Neutrality means exactly what is happening now - large scale invasion from Russia. Anti-Ukrainien sentiment was there for being actively build up in Russia for years. Russia don't want to Ukrainien neutrality. They want to eliminate Ukraine all together. And there is no way you dont know it at this point.
And the debate here is about EU not even nato.
Also, real neutrality would required that there is no meddling from Russia either, that Russia wont try to impose own will on Ukraine. Wont try to put own puppets into government. Wont try to turn Ukraine into autocracy like Belarus. It would also required Russia to abandon imperialistic ideology, abandon the "we will suppress Ukrainian language and identity again" plans too.
This war is not about west. This war is about Russia.
----------------
For that matter, Finland seems to be rethinking neutrality too now. Just one more data point about how "neutrality" is not looking "wise" now. It is either "naive", "attempt at dishonest framing" or "I want Russia to annex Ukraine, actually".
The Swiss can be more relaxed now, because their mixed national composition has been stable for many hundreds of years and if they had once some grudges against each other, the reasons are forgotten by now.
Not so in the territories that are now included in Ukraine. The proportion of the nationalities and their relative wealth has been drastically altered during the last century by Stalin, who moved out many "inferior races", confiscating all their valuable belongings and sending them to much worse places (when not just murdering them), while bringing in Russians to replace them.
The Russians colonists have been privileged in comparison with the natives since the beginning, when many have been installed directly in the houses and on the lands from which the former inhabitants had been evicted.
Not enough time has passed since then, so there are still living people who remember how it was before any Russian was around.
This "badly-divided country" has been created by Stalin less than a century ago. The division is the same as in all the other former parts of the Soviet Union, between the earlier inhabitants of those countries and the Russian colonists who have lost their privileges after the break-up of the Soviet Union.
Hopefully, after some more time, the people could become wiser and reach a model of cohabitation like the Swiss, but as long as not only the Russians have never apologized for their former acts, but they also continue with attempts of military invasions of their neighbors at any opportunity, like they have continuously done for many hundreds of years, the Swiss model remains an illusion for the former Soviet republics.
Stalin never bothered with races at all. Nazis did.
> This "badly-divided country" has been created by Stalin less than a century ago.
Now you're just repeating Putin's own words — "Ukraine was created by Soviet Russia".
> colonists have been privileged in comparison with the natives
The relations between Russians and Ukrainians are not of "colonists" and "natives" — it's fundamentally different from Brits/Hindus, or French/Algerians, or Italians/Ethiopians. They are two branches of the same group of people. The modern Russian state, and its church, both trace themselves to Kiev.
Your understanding of Ukraine's history is so factually incorrect, to the point that I don't see a reason to continue this conversation.
Unlike Hitler, Stalin did not use the word "race", but he acted identically against various population groups distinguished by their nationality, which is why I have used the word "race", to emphasize their identical behavior.
Just a couple of examples of the nationalities which were removed from the territories now in Ukraine, sent to remote areas, e.g. in Siberia or Uzbekistan, and replaced with Russians are the Tatars and the Romanians.
> Now you're just repeating Putin's own words — "Ukraine was created by Soviet Russia".
You have either misunderstood or you pretend to have misunderstood what I have said. You said that Ukraine is divided now, I said that this division mentioned by you was created by Stalin, not so long ago.
I have used the word "natives", because the natives are mostly Ukrainians but also many other minorities.
> They are two branches of the same group of people
The fact that one millennium ago their ancestors were a single people means nothing when today they do not treat each other as equals.
During the Soviet Union, those belonging to a minority, either Ukrainian or any other minority, could indeed have similar career advancement opportunities like the Russians, but only with the following conditions: master the official Russian language, never express any doubt about the bullshit history that was taught in the Soviet Union, according to which everything good in the world, in any art, science, technology and even sports, has been discovered or invented by some unknown great Russian, even if the Imperialists claim otherwise (at least this was the version of history that I have seen in the Russian manuals used prior to 1970, I do not know if the later manuals became less fantastic), never say anything that would show lack of agreement with the idea that even if the Soviet Union had a very large number of nationalities, all with equal rights, the Russians deserve to be much more equal and they must always be imitated in everything, as they know better, from political and economical organization to science and technology and even in minor aspects, e.g. the names of the soccer teams.
Basically, in the Soviet Union anyone belonging to a minority could indeed have the same success like a Russian, but by becoming a Russian.
Regarding my understanding of Ukraine's history I can assure you that I know much more correct facts than you presume, and not from secondary sources, but from direct sources, because my mother had many relatives who were deported to Siberia, robbed or murdered by Russians, in territories of the present Ukraine.
Also, I understand very well Russian so I form my opinion about the actions of Russia mainly by looking at what they themselves say, and not by what others say about Russia.
> master the official Russian language, never express any doubt about the bullshit history that was taught in the Soviet Union
Isn't it the same in the modern USA? Implicit agreement with official narrative can get you anywhere, whereas explicit disagreement with it will get you cancelled.
In fact, both in the Soviet Union and the USA it would be easier to advance if you declare yourself a minority, even if the basis for such claim is weak.
This has been the Empire building-101 for ages: if you respect the state authority (emperor/czar/rule-of-law), state ideas (christianity/communism/democracy) and speak the state language, you can make it to the top — regardless of your ethnicity.
Even the Roman Empire had an Emperor who was Arab (historians agree he was really ethnic arab) and another one who was African (historians disagree just how black he was, but definitely agree he was unusually black). Salah-ad-Din (Saladin) was Kurdish. Russian Empire had tons of Germans/French/Swedes at their service. Of the famous Nazis, Otto Scorzeny was Polish (Skozheny would be a better rendition of his name) and Odilo Globochnik, Slovakian. Etc. etc. etc.
The idea that Ukrainians were somehow a "minority" in either Russian Empire or USSR is laughable to no end. Ukrainians, Russians, Belarusians were a majority, and there would be no way to tell between them, unless you would study their personnel files. It's as laughable as suggesting that Austrian nazis were somehow treated badly by German nazis.
> Unlike Hitler, Stalin did not use the word "race", but he acted identically against various population groups distinguished by their nationality, which is why I have used the word "race", to emphasize their identical behavior.
I don't have particular bones to pick with your history, but you're misusing quotation marks.
And despite all the effort to engineer pro Russia sentiment in Ukraine, it never worked, because it is not actually that easy to create large scale support for anything from outside.