The State Dept. official Victoria (“F*ck EU”) Nuland personally directed the Kiev coup; she handpicked the government and the president of the new American colony on the Dnieper River. Her husband, Robert Kagan, is a founder of FPI, the successor of infamous PNAC, the extremist Zionist think tank which promoted wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and pushed for a war with Iran. Now they attack Russia.

"We have invested more than 5 billion dollars to help Ukraine to promote Ukraine to the future it deserves." she boasted to a group of oligarchs in Washington before the coup.
Now we see what our tax dollars bought... Mass murder.

Professor Measheimer being a co-author of

"The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" most certainly knows who Nuland and Kagan are and must also know the degree of Russiaphobe Neocon involvement in this coup. For whatever reason, he never mentioned it. My take when reading the article was he was playing diplomat and proposing an easy way for the criminals responsible for what has now turned into widespread mass murder against the people of Donbass. Professor Mearsheimer also failed to mention the mass murder AND Kiev's downing of MH17. Remember that? The lapdog media and their masters would prefer that you don't because after failing to pin their false flag on Russia and the resistance, it's as though it never happened and the story has completely evaporated. Kiev confiscated the air traffic control data. The UK has the black boxes. The US has (real) satellite and radar data. NONE of it has been released. It's all being covered up because KIEV DID IT. The only ones who released real data, satellite and radar, were the Russians and all evidence points straight at Kiev. Kiev MUST pay for this terrible crime along with the war crimes in Donbass. Be vocal about MH17 and demand the data. We cannot let this outrageous crime be swept under the rug.

Absolutely agree. The FA Journal has a piece here asking why the US is so dysfunctional... It almost sounds like a joke. Start with telling the truth about MH17 and retracting all those articles from less than a month ago that assured us Russia had blood on its hands. We now know better, but then we knew better then, didn't we? It's time to do some major housecleaning in the circles of power in Washington DC. It's time to begin to insist that people in positions of power who do and say stupid things (and the stupid is meant to mollify because the facts suggest something much worse) take responsibility for their actions and their words.

He didn't mention Nuland because she is unworthy of mention.

A cog in the machine.

Have you seen this article?
Results of MH17 Investigation to Remain ‘Classified’
http://21stcenturywire.com/...

"Now we see what our tax dollars bought... Mass murder."
1)CIA, FBI Agents Dying for Illegal Junta in Ukraine http://www.globalresearch.c...
2)Extensive War Crimes in East Ukraine: Donbass. Chronicle of Genocide. Banned on Mainstream TV http://www.globalresearch.c...

The five billion dollars was over a period of almost 20 years, and it was in the form of development aid.

George Soros's "Open Society" fund provided roughly the same amount to promote democracy, as I recall.

Of course, your claim makes a better story, even if it is not true.

Prove it... I can see what we've bought every day for the past two years on th we news. Show me the. "development" that 5 billion yielded.

What, you can't do your own research?

Here's from PolitiFact:

Since 1992, the government has spent about $5.1 billion to support democracy-building programs in Ukraine, Thompson said, with money flowing mostly from the Department of State via U.S. Agency for International Development, as well as the departments of Defense, Energy, Agriculture and others. The United States does this with hundreds of other countries.

About $2.4 billion went to programs promoting peace and security, which could include military assistance, border security, human trafficking issues, international narcotics abatement and law enforcement interdiction, Thompson said. More money went to categories with the objectives of "governing justly and democratically" ($800 million), "investing in people" ($400 million), economic growth ($1.1 billion), and humanitarian assistance ($300 million).

http://www.politifact.com/p...

So we spend billions of dollars apiece in hundreds of other countries,but cry we're broke, can't pay for food stamps, fix bridges, educate students instead of saddling them with massive debts, and so forth.

Look better sources for your info

Of course Thomson would say that, she's a State Dept. shill...
I noticed the article from Politifacts also states that her claims are vague and admits it wouldn't be unreasonable to suspect a clandestine purpose. It also says attempts to "drill down and verify the expenditures independently but found that a difficult task". The spokesperson from the group concerned with transparency said that to find a figure is " nearly impossible".
Just a fraction of that $5 billion going to wrong ( Sector Right) people can cause a lot of mayhem - the proof is in the pudding..

If you read all the way to the bottom of the article, you'll notice he rates your story "Pants on Fire," you know, Liar, liar pants on fire.

Yeah, real mature.

Consider the source of your info.
1)http://www.globalresearch.c...
2)Provocations as Pretexts for Imperial War: From Pearl Harbor to 9/11
http://www.globalresearch.c...

Washington`s role in Ukrainian coup......http://scgnews.com/washingtons-rol...

Wow!.. 95 and counting. Thanks for the vote of confidence, folks. Its very encouraging.

One mistake in the article: Mearsheimer writes: "One Russian newspaper reported that Putin, while speaking with Bush, 'very transparently hinted that if Ukraine was accepted into NATO, it would cease to exist'." In fact, Kommersant was quoting an unidentified source, "a member of a delegation from a NATO country," who was in attendance. This is also the same unidentified source who reported that Putin said to Bush that 'Ukraine is not even a state.' A dubious source, especially if it came from the Polish, Latvian, Lithuanian, or Estonian delegation.

well, not exactly, if it was Fogh Rasmussen, he probably had a tape-recorder hidden in his pocket. A swell, classy guy!

President Putin has shown remarkable restraint. He should have ordered Russian troops to invade Ukraine weeks ago, and arrested the poodle Poroshenko, driven out Western spies & agitators, then cleaned house in Kiev.

Nice sentiments,
Unfortunately, it is exactly what the Miltary/Industrial/Congressional Mafia wants.
The Mafia **wants**, hopes and desires that Russia crosses the border in force.
It would be good for the war economy, good for NATO, good for tightening our grip on Europe, good for blaming all the ills of the Ukrainian economy on Russia. Good for making Russia into a Super Boogeyman again. Good for McCarthyism. Good for the Security State...
Be careful what you wish for.

Only the West is allowed to do that! They can manufacture their own boogeymen (ISIS) so they can unilaterally drop bombs on a poor, devastated country.

And good for ignoring the collapse of our middle class. As Goebbels pointed out, if you want people to follow blindly, just start a war.

Old style NKVD vocabulary :-(

Having read over the comments below now, I'm amazed at how little comprehension the posters have of the situation and how much hysterical anti-Russian phobia there is.

I suppose I should not be surprised...This is Foreign Affairs, after all, where reality is usually missing and American "Exceptionalism" is always on full display.

Personally I think Putin should declare a no-fly zone over the Eastern militia positions, wipe the Ukrainian Air Force from the skies, bomb the crap out of the Ukrainian military positions in the East, then inform the neo-Nazi junta that Kiev will be the next target if they don't back off their war crimes in the East.

After all, if that process is good enough for Obama in Libya (and what a "success" that was, eh?), it's good enough for Putin.

I think Mearsheimer is wrong when he thinks Russia's military cannot handle the Ukraine. Russia doesn't have to occupy it - just destroy the Ukraine military and then leave, subsequently demanding new elections that encompass both West and East.

Simultaneously Putin should inform the US and NATO that any attempt to put any significant amount of foreign military forces into Ukrain will result in the immediate invasion of Ukraine. Putin doesn't have to annex Ukraine or stay in Ukraine - just make it crystal clear that the Ukraine is NOT going to be in NATO - ever. There's no way NATO can move faster than Russia in Ukraine, so NATO had better just back off.

Putin has been strenuously avoiding these moves for months now, contrary to the hysterics in the comments below, due to the negative geopolitical consequences. But I suspect his patience is wearing thin. I've seen interviews with some of his advisers which make it clear they understand that this is a deliberate attack by the US and NATO - mostly the US - on Russia with the ultimate goal of regime change in Russia. And this is undoubtedly what they are telling Putin - correctly, in my opinion.

The US and NATO will not stop this idiocy until Putin forces them to.

So I wouldn't count on Putin having such forbearance in the future. At this point, he appears to be waiting for winter, at which point the neo-Nazi junta in Kiev will implode when the people realize there is no gas to be had. The numerous demonstrations against the war by the parents of the Ukraine conscripts being forced to the front under threat of 15 years in prison will also have an effect once the current offensive on Donetsk and Luhansk fail - as they are likely to.

Literally thousands of Ukraine troops have died trying to defeat the militia, requiring Ukraine to decree THREE mobilizations, the last one being everyone from 19 to 55. Contrary to the MSM, the war is NOT going well. And if Russia is pushed any more, it will go disastrously badly for the Ukraine junta, NATO and Obama.

Agree. I think Mearsheimer is talking about Russia's occupation of portion of eastern Ukraine.

If I were Putin, I would simply arm the separatists to ensure a civil war to last in Ukraine for many years to come. It will impose tremendous cost for EU and NATO for fighting such a civil war.

Once a long civil war in Ukraine starts, we have to enlist Russia's help to end it.

Ukraine will never be able to sustain a long civil war without massive outside support, the country is nearly bankrupt as it is. In fact, even without any insurgency in the East a mere economic blockade by Russia would finish off the Ukrainian economy in a very short order. Putin is just waiting for (and a bit hastening) that inevitable collapse, so that Ukrainian population be more accepting of Russian intervention and geopolitical reorientation of their country.

True. What puzzles me is that western Ukrainians firmly believe EU and the US will come to their rescue regardless of the cost to EU and the US and of grave consequences of a prolonged conflict between the West and Russia.

I think some in the West camp are promoting the false promise that we will do whatever we can to help Kiev rid of Russian influence. Victoria Nuland may be part of the problem, instead of a solution.

Then, Obama seems to have no bright idea either. 3 rounds of sanction produced little effects. There is no indication he might try something different or modify his approach. Not even a fresh face or voice in his team.

"more accepting of Russian intervention and geopolitical reorientation of their country"
you simply dont understand. it isnt happening - we would rather DIE all than become "more accepting" toward Russian rule.

People I know, love, and visit regularly in the east and south will never accept Kiev. Crimea is gone, and so is the rest of east and south.

Odessa is with Crimea and Donbass! It is waiting.

That is very doubtful that most Ukrainians share this crazy outlook with few deranged nazis like yourself. They are not insane.

By all means. Don't drag us into it.

Very well... the Army of Novorossia will grant your wish....

"Putin has been strenuously avoiding these moves for months now""
he has the desire to do it, but "restrains" himself, showing how "patient" and "cool-headed" and "generous" Russia is, for not going into full-blown war. yeah, great. how can he resist the temptation?
about "never letting Ukraine to join the West", US working with Russia to create a "neutral Ukraine" - how about ask Ukrainians themselves - do THEY want it, huh? havent crossed your mind, no? or maybe it doesnt matter what some Ukrainians might want? who cares what they might want there - its us, the "big" guys, who decide between ourselves

You are at least half right. My country, the U.S, doesn't care what the Ukrainians want. Hell they don't ever care what we "Americans" want. Though our EU puppets and with the help of the IMF will eventually "privatize" everything in the Ukraine that isn't already privatized.

Then your former wealth will be up for grabs to the corporate Neo-Liberal elite. We will foreclose on your land for our corporate agribusiness and make you into share croppers (serfs), we will seize your gas, coal and oil for our energy sector, and foreclose on what is left of your infrastructure and housing for unpaid debts. And then we will rent back to you. It’s called a rentier society. In the U.S. we are almost there, just a few “bubbles” short. You may join us if you like.

Or, you can dump your U.S. sponsored Coup government and the IMF take Putin’s much better offer.

There you have a choice.

no "full-0blown out war" ...see Crimea? Nice and easy. Ukrainian army is..well, really bad, and if Russia moved, it would be into Donbass, Nikolaev, Odessa: welcomed with flowers.

Not one person on this forum has talked about what the Ukrainians want. And someone please explain to me how the Chocolate President is a Neo-Fascist? Pure Russian propaganda right there, it is sad. And it is a fallacy to think that the East, South and Odessa are going to follow the rebels; just because they speak Russian doesn't mean they want to be part of Russia. Even If that were the case, then why do the rebels only have support from Russia and a very small portion of the Donbass? Never in Ukraine's history has any super power asked the Ukrainians what they wanted for their own future.

I think the reason for Putin's patience is that he expects Ukraine to implode on its own, saving him the cost of an invasion. He need not have even created trouble in Eastern Ukraine. IMF is quite capable of ruining Ukraine's economy without Russian help. I think this conflict will end up affecting Russia and Western Europe and lead to the rise of Asia. US, of course, can ally with Asia and emerge unscathed, especially once we get a president who is not an absolute idiot.

A great article. Exceptionally well thought out and written

The real question is will the governmediament take the hint, or continue on their mad, lying course to war, economic or otherwise. Poking a bear is not a good idea.

I agree with you, but I'm not sure I agree with Mearsheimer, entirely.

The one place where this article goes wrong is Mearsheimer's assumption that the US actions are the result of Obama and his advisers not understanding realist foreign policy, and that therefore this is all some big mistake.

Bullcrap. Obama and his masters in the military-industrial complex know exactly what they are doing and what would happen. They can read articles like this and many others written before the events that predicted exactly this situation. This is a deliberate policy by the US military-industrial complex to restart the Cold War for PROFIT. Afghanistan is winding down and they want to continue that $100 billion a year windfall that Iraq and Afghanistan have provided for the last ten years. Which is also why they wanted a war with Iran, starting with Syria.

Obama is also a "stunning narcissist", as Normal Finkelstein has described him, and he was incensed when his plans to attack Syria were derailed by Putin's diplomacy with Syria over removing Syrian chemical weapons, Obama's BS excuse for starting another war in the Middle East for the benefit of his "Israel First" masters in Chicago. So the Ukraine crisis is basically Obama enjoying a "temper tantrum" in retaliation courtesy of those same Masters in the military-industrial complex.

Although the saying goes, "Never attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence", the reverse is also true much more frequently than is generally acknowledged by Very Serious People.

Obama should be grateful that Putin got him off a hook to fight in Syria. The mess of Syria civil war is spilling into Iraq. Obama has not figured out what to do with Libya where a civil war is developing fast.

Eisenhower warned us about the hijacking of US policy by military-industrial complex. Do you know anyone who has written about it and provided concrete evidences? I have heard it so many times but where is proof?

Aah. Yes. Agree. These are NOT naive, pink-glasses liberals. These are crooks. They use liberal language. But if Mearsheimer wrote that, FA would NOT publish him. They'd never allow it.

The author echoes almost everything I have said. The amazing thing is that this point of view has suddenly been allowed to appear in a semi-mainstream pub. I guess some are starting to come around to our position, Dr Mearsheimer.

Mearsheimer's focus is properly on Washington, though I don't think he provided an adequate account of the dynamics in play.

For one thing, the reckless and aggressive policy in Ukraine and with Russia in general is hardly a liberal franchise. Yes, Clinton (the President) and Clinton (the Secretary of State) were driving figures to the dangerous conundrum being played out. But Hillary recruited the neo-Con faction in the person of Victoria Nuland, famously married into the Kagan clan. The neo-Cons are even more aggressive than the liberal "democracy" forces in confronting the Russians.

In any case, Obama-Clinton forged a new Washington Consensus regarding Russia and East Europe.

But let's add context. At the moment Ukraine is only one of at least three powder kegs set to ignite WW III, the others being, first, the Middle East, now little more than a pile of rubble presided over by Gulf States financed Islamist war lords. The second, of course, is the infamous Asian Pivot.

It seems that the new Washington Consensus amounts to doubling down on full spectrum dominance and eradication of all potential rival blocs that might challenge American hegemony, the George W. Bush National Security Strategy referred to as "The Big Enchilada". Amid crumbling economic and financial prospects the Consensus is willing to risk nuclear confrontation with Russia to remain the sole SuperPower, right to the bitter end.

The great danger is the brinksmanship this entails introduces accidental or miscalculated events that escalate to thermonuclear war.

...miscalculated events that escalate to thermonuclear war?

Ya, maybe, but, but,

but first think of all the Fracked US natural gas we can sell to the EU and Ukraine after pissing of the Russian's and getting them to cut off their natural gas supplies.

Well, terminals, tankers and other facilities will have to be built first. So any payoffs from nefarious maneuvers will be years off. Dangers of military confrontation are far more immediate. Many of the engineered crisis gambits can easily spin out of control in unpredictable ways.

So far Putin has been masterful in thwarting these parries... but this won't last forever.

Mearsheimer is getting almost as much flack on this from the sycophants of the Empire than his famous exposé on Israel got from The Lobby... Or do I repeat myself?
Good job John!