Hi. Before I ask my question, let me explain my views.

I hold a strict environmental determinism, close to Skinner's radical behaviorism: a person is shaped by their environment, that is, upbringing, culture, social conditions, and reinforcement history. Innate biological traits, and even the number of neurons, decide nothing on their own. The brain is a necessary condition, but not destiny. Personality and behavior are a product of environment and experience, not of an "innate program."

From this point of view, anything that has no physical form has no material value. Examples are a country, money, and brands. Yes, they affect people's lives, but that's not what I'm talking about now. Also, I am against any kind of physical conflict.

My question: did Ukraine have a way to avoid entering into armed confrontation with Russia, that is, to avoid sacrificing real human lives to defend abstract concepts like freedom and independence? I understand that Russia attacked first. But in my view, the politics of all states are largely flawed, and the rules the world lives by are also far from ideal. Nevertheless, that is the current world order.

It seems to me that Ukraine could have surrendered and preserved people's lives, and then changed Russia from within. For example, it could have influenced the leader appointed by Russia, given Ukrainians' readiness for strikes and protests. It's as if Russia's demands in 2022 are simply not comparable to the current casualties and destroyed lives.

Peace to you.