The rationale and justification for UKR/RU war has been so obvious that strategic thinkers from Kennan to Kissinger to Mearsheimer and host of other relevant ex

The rationale and justification for UKR/RU war has been so obvious that strategic thinkers from Kennan to Kissinger to Mearsheimer and host of other relevant experts like Clinton defense secretary Perry or US ambassador to USSR Matlock has been warning about it for years. Some decades. RU/UKR is about immediate short/medium/long term interests executed before RU leverage in terms of demographics and economics is projected decline for generations. NATO friendly UKR was positioned to replace RU as gas station of EU post reserve discovery while relegating west RU (the heart) to geographic vulnerability forever. Even if you think Putin has lost his marbles now, it's important to remember he's come to the same calculations as other western thinkers 10/20 years ago. He won Chechnya, Georgia, Crimea, Syria and improved RU position each time. UKR might have been a stretch goal, but also always on the chopping block if NATO/UKR upset balance of power enough to undermine RU interests. More so when NATO became an offensive alliance for US interests after Kosovo. In absence of guaranteeing RU security interests via treaty, which RU asked for, NATO/EU simply cannot be trusted medium long term. His assessment and actions is about as geopolitically coherent as it gets. Execution might be shit, the entire venture might even be an existential gamble, but it's fundamentally rational.