Why Mearsheimer is wrong about Russia and the war in Ukraine. Five arguments from Alexander Stubb.

Introduction

• Speaker: Alexander Stubb, former PM, Finance Minister, and Foreign Minister of Finland, currently a professor at the European University Institute.

• Topic: A theoretical perspective on the war in Ukraine, responding to claims by Professor John Mearsheimer.

• Aims to address Mearsheimer's viewpoint and provide counterarguments.

Overview of Mearsheimer's Argument

• Mearsheimer argues Russia's aggression stems from NATO expansion and the West's influence on Eastern European states.

• His stance is based on offensive realism, suggesting Russia had no choice but to act defensively.

• Stubb disagrees fundamentally with this thesis and asserts that Russia, under Putin, acted out of imperialistic motives.

Argument Against Mearsheimer's Claim

1. Russia’s Nature

• Imperialist and Aggressive State: Russia has a history of expansionism rooted in feeling threatened by external powers.

• Historical Context: From Mongol invasions to contemporary geopolitics, Russia’s self-perception influences its foreign policy.

• Nostalgia for Greatness: Russia’s narrative of being a declining superpower shapes its aggressive actions; belief in historical destiny.

2. Putin's Decision-Making

• Rationality of Choices: Stubb contests that Putin made tactically and strategically flawed decisions by attacking Ukraine.

• Outcomes of Actions: Putin aimed for increased respect and regional dominance but instead catalyzed NATO expansion and unity among European nations.

• Influence of Historical Figures: Putin aspires to emulate leaders like Peter the Great, Catherine the Great, and Stalin in restoring Russia’s power.

3. Ukraine’s Sovereignty

• Independent Nationhood: Ukraine's right to determine its future is non-negotiable.

• Against Finlandization: Compromise on sovereignty and values is unacceptable; Ukraine deserves the freedom to pursue NATO/EU membership without coercion.

• Power Dynamics: Russia’s aggression highlights the importance of agency for smaller nations in the face of larger powers.

4. NATO Expansion

• Misinformation Regarding Membership: Claims of a promised NATO path for Ukraine and Georgia at the 2008 Bucharest summit are misleading.

• NATO's Purpose Evolution: Originally a deterrent, NATO transitioned to peacekeeping roles, emphasizing cooperation rather than aggression.

• Russia's Actions as Revisionist: Russia’s military actions predated NATO expansion as an underlying motive; demonstrates aggressive revisionism.

5. Role of the U.S. and EU

• Misunderstood Power Dynamics: Stubb challenges Mearsheimer's claim about American and European efforts to project power towards Russia.

• EU’s Idealism vs. Realism: The EU aimed to engage Russia through cooperation, highlighting energy dependencies.

• Responses to Conflict: U.S. reactions to previous conflicts suggest a lack of alignment with Mearsheimer's interpretations of motives.

Conclusion

• Call for Open Debate: Emphasizes the importance of academic freedom while being cautious about misleading claims.

• Critique of Mearsheimer’s Views: Reiterates disagreement with Mearsheimer on multiple counts, recalling personal experiences and observations from diplomatic engagements.

• Real Reasons for the War: Attributed to Russia's imperialist aspirations, disdain for liberal democracy, and domestic stability concerns.

Recommendations

• Reading Suggestions:

  • Veronica Angle and Dietland Stoller’s rebuttal of Mearsheimer.

  • Eric Jones’ forthcoming article countering Mearsheimer.

• Watching Suggestion: Mearsheimer’s own lecture to grasp his perspective, followed by critical examination.