Absolutely not, Russia is a nuclear power and they have a sphere of influence, Russia would not accept this deal nor should they.
The cool and leftist thing to do is support nuclear powers having spheres of influence.
That's the world we live in. I'm not a liberal internationalist, I'm a realist. The fact of the matter is that nuclear powers do have spheres of influence (the USA's apparently extends to the whole world) and they would not tolerate such a threat to their national security and a NATO-aligned Ukraine leaves Russia with no buffer zone in Eastern Europe.
If you were actually a realist, you wouldn’t oppose NATO.
I oppose NATO expansion on realist grounds. I am in principle opposed to all military alliances, but NATO is protected under international law and isn't going anywhere. Therefore my efforts are on containing NATO to its present sphere, and Russia their sphere, in order to preserve the balance of power.
There is no opposition to NATO expansion that operates under a realist philosophy, unless your allegiance is to Russia.
Not really. The basic idea of realism is that nations will act in their self-interest above all else.
It is in the self-interest of most nations to join NATO, since its existence serves as a deterrent against non-members attacking member states.
That is unless you don't want to get pulled into a war similar to how WW1 started.
The larger NATO becomes, the less likely a World War is.
The less likely a war will occur but it is more likely any such war will be a world war.
Poll
