It actually did consider joining the EU, and even NATO at one point, but it wasn't taken seriously by either. The NATO intervention in Kosovo was also a major stumbling block.
Internally, democratic reforms in the 90s became associated with 1) corruption far worse than Soviets had, and 2) right-wing economic measures ("liberalization") that messed up the economy and created a lot of hardship for the population at the time. The very words "democrat" and "liberal" became profanities for some.
So when Putin appeared, the popular sentiment in the country already in favor of a "strong hand" for a while. He only needed to fit the image, which he did quite easily with his KGB background. After that, he gradually deconstructed the civil society, starting with free press.
Russia could have been Germany-fied with a friendlier and supportive hand. Instead it was handed over to evangelical neoliberals, whose imposed economics guaranteed that only the most feral opportunists and violent gangsters would thrive.
Russia could have become a modern social democracy, but now it's a crumbling militaristic dictatorship state run by a raging senile paranoiac with delusions of empire.
It's one of the worst foreign policy failures in all of history.
Ukraine will not be the end of it. If the invasion succeeds Russia will demand a slice of Lithuania to reunite Kalingrad with Belarus. That has huge implications for all Baltic-adjacent states.
But worse, Putin has claimed the RF has a number of nuclear superweapons, including a strategic nuclear-tipped torpedo and smart hypersonic warhead delivery systems. He also completely renovated Moscow's civil defences.
The US has failed to keep pace, and its weapons systems are either old and outdated or over-designed, high maintenance, and relatively fragile.
Putin also been running a very successful program of subversion and political interference. And building up cyberwarfare capabilities.
Even allowing for hyperbole the worry is that Russia is capable of a zero-warning decapitation strike, combined with remote mass infrastructure attacks and internal terrorism. Any response would be relatively ineffective.
This completely undermines MAD as a doctrine.
No mistake - the US is in very, very serious danger now, from both internal and external threats.
> Even allowing for hyperbole the worry is that Russia is capable of a zero-warning decapitation strike, combined with remote mass infrastructure attacks and internal terrorism. Any response would be relatively ineffective.
Does this hypothetical Tom Clancy scenario also plan how to deal with all the silo's the US has with missiles in them and the ballistic missile submarines which exist exactly as a hedge against these kinds of wild scenario's.
Internally, democratic reforms in the 90s became associated with 1) corruption far worse than Soviets had, and 2) right-wing economic measures ("liberalization") that messed up the economy and created a lot of hardship for the population at the time. The very words "democrat" and "liberal" became profanities for some.
So when Putin appeared, the popular sentiment in the country already in favor of a "strong hand" for a while. He only needed to fit the image, which he did quite easily with his KGB background. After that, he gradually deconstructed the civil society, starting with free press.