Did Nato Actually Force Putin To Invade Ukraine?

Global Stability Is On The Brink

In todays video Austin Smith and Michael Muir discuss Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, touching on NATO expansion as a perceived threat by Russia. They consider how this has been used as a justification for the invasion, alongside long-term historical factors. While many reasons and factors have been given, none seem to be the singular cause.

Investors Have to Plan For What’s Ahead

With so much turmoil and uncertainty, it’s easy to forget that there are mega trends brewing that could make investors fabulously rich. The few who are looking ahead to the future are placing their bets, and the most promising opportunity by far is AI. That’s why we penned a 38 page research report titled ‘the next Nvidia’ revealing our top three AI picks for the years ahead. For a limited time you can access the report, completely free, simply by clicking here.

Transcript:

One that I’d love to talk about jumping off of that last point on the nuclear deal in ’94 is NATO expansion.

One of the current talking points is that it was Russia’s perceived threat from a NATO expansion that led to this invasion of Ukraine.

Can you talk a little bit about that and how much credibility do we give that?

Or is that just a current argument that is acting as an armor for these other five contributing factors we just discussed?

Sure.

Well, those five were the long term factors, but that’s always been the case that any even perceived expansion of NATO would be met with force.

That goes way back to Putin’s earliest days, and he’s always been very consistent in his desire to expand Russian influence in Eastern Europe and has always described the collapse of the Soviet Union as geopolitical travesty that he wants to put right.

So I think that expansion of NATO and Ukraine’s possible entry into that alliance is just really kind of a justification for something he’d already planned to do.