Let me clarify then, because I think people want to look at rhetorical signifiers more then actual history.

The collapse of Socialism in Eastern Europe produced an immense amount of material suffering. Angst about that suffering, in the wake of a both Socialism and Capitalism being seen as failures, has produced a political millieu that hinges very heavily on various nascent fascisms and ethnic nationalisms.

In Ukraine, tensions between ethnic Ukrainians in the west, and ethnic Russians in the east simmered for long time, and one of the things that caused tensions to rise was a law very similar to this Latvian one, which clamped down on the language rights of Russian speakers in the east.

Ukrainian parliamentary representatives got into whole ass brawls about it, Russian separatist movements began brewing, and the west, seeing an opportunity to influence a country on Russia’s borders, helped give a considerable push to the Maidan in 2014.

Russia, in turn, backed the Russian separatists in the Donbas, citing the protection of ethnic Russians, among other things.

The internal contradictions within Ukraine, stoked by the west, escalated external tensions with Russia such that Russia saw the need to invade, and create a buffer between themselves and NATO.

The Baltic States love nothing more then to screech about Russian oppression, but they’re proceeding to reproduce the same internal contradictions that spiraled out and led to war in Ukraine.

My question “are they stupid?” Is rhetorical

Tl;dr - Capitalism is incapable of solving the national question