8. The West's 2014 Appeasement: The Failure to Respond to Crimean Annexation. Serhii Plokhy (Professor of Ukrainian History at Harvard University) focuses on the annexation of Crimea in 2014 via "brute force" and the Western response. Professor Plokhy suggests that if NATO's reaction to Crimea had been commensurate with its response to the 2022 invasion, the current large-scale war might have been avoided. Instead, the West treated the annexation as an exception, comparing it to the 1930s Anschluss of Austria, believing Putin would cease aggression after securing the Russian-majority region. This thinking was a mistake; for example, Germany continued pursuing Nord Stream 2, based on the failed premise that economic ties guaranteed peace. NATO's overall policy was designed to pacify Russia and avoid placing military units near its borders, resulting in NATO having "very little to respond with" when the annexation occurred. Russia quickly moved beyond Crimea, concocting uprisings in Donbas, leading to a massive Russian counterattack against Ukrainian forces in the summer of 2014. This led to the Minsk II agreements, which NATO backed. However, Russia exploited Minsk II by insisting on holding elections first under its military control—a plan intended to insert a "Trojan horse" into Ukraine's political body to destabilize it and block its Euro-Atlantic integration. This resembled the policies of appeasement seen in the 1930s.
1855 BRITISH ARMY CRIMEA