Thanks, as before. I hadn't yet seen her FT magazine article -- always a day behind' I will iink it in the final edition of EP on the wen, and add a sentence or two. Her stance today is different from the way I read her book, which appeared before the invasion.
Sarotte writes today, "The decision [to attack] has been catastrophic for both invader and invaded." The implicit assumption is that attempted extension of NATO membership to Ukraine has been a triumph for the US.
I doubt that most historians of the future will view it that way.
The way you cite Sarotte suggests that she supports Mearsheimer’s views. The opposite is true: ‘Not one inch’: unpicking Putin’s deadly obsession with the details of historyhttps://on.ft.com/3lLrMUv
Thanks, as before. I hadn't yet seen her FT magazine article -- always a day behind' I will iink it in the final edition of EP on the wen, and add a sentence or two. Her stance today is different from the way I read her book, which appeared before the invasion.
Sarotte writes today, "The decision [to attack] has been catastrophic for both invader and invaded." The implicit assumption is that attempted extension of NATO membership to Ukraine has been a triumph for the US.
I doubt that most historians of the future will view it that way.
The way you cite Sarotte suggests that she supports Mearsheimer’s views. The opposite is true: ‘Not one inch’: unpicking Putin’s deadly obsession with the details of historyhttps://on.ft.com/3lLrMUv