The contrary in and me wants to challenge it immediately, because after all, it was russia that launched this military operation on the ukrainian soil. And this is something that both Decision Makers and opinion shapers in the west. Theyre trying to frame as, as an act of aggression, that totally unprovoked act of aggression that goes against international law. And i have to say that there is some validity to this argument. Why do you think it was the was that was the Main Driving Force behind this conflict . One of the points i make in the book is to try to distinguish between what are referred to as proximal causes. The causes that immediately proceeded to war. And the deeper causes it can extend back in history for there is no natural starting point for 1. 1 tries to establish a sequence of events. So that while i make clear that the immediate cause of the war was mr. Brewton decided to launch the war. He and his military staff, or whoever else in the kremlin, was intimately involve
the causes that extend further back in time that are now kind of hidden from sight . that may have been on the newspaper papers, you know, the newspaper on the pages of the newspapers years ago and have been forgotten, or they may never been on the pages of the papers at all. so it s, i m focusing mostly on the distal causes and the causes leading up to the current moment. and you know, in your book i remind me reminded me a bit. 6 that just 1012 best seller by christopher clark on the origins of the 1st world war, this leap walkers and one of the reasons that book was so popular is because he tried to break the old paradigm of assigning a culprit and focusing on the who in the why, and instead he was more interested in the structural dynamics of swelling, animosity when you observe on the way the, the ones develop on both sides of that line to do you think decision makers are cognizant of how dangerous it could be? and perhaps of the historic lessons of the previous conflict