They did what they did, so the decisions that are being done now need to be done with the current state of reality in mind.
Russia is responsible for it's own action. It's not a weird state machine reacting to "western" actions and applying appropriate response.
Russia was given everything they possibly could be given to become part of "the west" - growing, democratic nation, like many of the nation they formerly occupied. Instead they choose kleptocracy, mafia state ruled by the guy who bombed apartment buildings in his own country to become president - and it only went downhill from there.
And many challenges they do have: China made a huge progress on industrialization, put some checks on corruption and conquered widespread hunger, but it is still a mostly poor, agrarian country with a rapidly aging population. They, absolutely rationally, jump at the option of cheaper energy import, but I would not read that as a long-term support of the Russian view of the world (which, I heard from several folks, they often despise). They pursue their own agenda. My 2c.
Or maybe that's not enough and return to 1997 NATO borders would be necessary?
Or perhaps that would not be enough and return to the 1988 geopolitical situation would be necessary to make Putin a friend of the West?
What if even that wouldn't make Putin a western ally? Wouldn't we be just be letting our geopolitical enemy get stronger?
I don't know who are the "they" that are trying to destroy any kind of agreement, but there hasn't been any type of close agreement as Ukraine made it very clear that they don't want anything else beside Russia leaving their territory. Any type of territory concession is a non-starter for any agreement on Ukraine side.
I'm just going to assume that you are American. If Russia invaded Alaska.. would you advocate for a "ceasefire" and tell people they should negotiate an agreement... that would keep Russia on the sovereign territory of the US? I'm assuming no. Then why are you advocating for this?
