Ukraine: military (Aug '14 to mid-June '15) closed

[AmericanPride]

Then if "realpolitik" then there is no need to negotiate if I recall---as we know the end state---right?

Whoever said that realpolitik does not include negotiations when negotiations achieve the interests of the state?

"Realpolitik" if you are referring to the German term as it was used by Brandt--entails a totally different meaning that just plain being stupid as a foreign policy.

If Russia has material interests, and if its actions achieve those material interests, then how is its foreign policy "stupid"?

1. Putin will have to take care of the south-east region for months to come---meaning food, water, jobs and get the electricity and water flowing much like he had to do in the Crimea but now cannot do

I'm fairly confident the Russians have already considered this; hence their reluctance to outright occupy or annex the region in the first place. And since the region is still de jure a part of Ukraine, it will legally be Kiev's responsibility to manage the problem, and the Russians I'm sure won't have any issues in offering their aid and advice.

2. he has to get the economy going when he is having problems with that in the Crimea otherwise the locals will truly doubt it was worth it--plus the looting, robbing, killing and torturing by the separatists not the Ukrainian Army

Why do you assume that the local population will blame Moscow and not Kiev for their problems?

3. if literally driving the Ukraine out of it's non aligned status and fully into the EU---great goal there

That remains to be seen - there's a wide gulf between potential and performance. Ukraine is not in the political or security situation to join EU or NATO without serious internal turmoil. And if a third of the country is occupied by the Russian army, NATO won't be inclined to invite Ukraine into the organization.

4. if finally awakening NATO and fully focusing NATO on the from Russian out loud spoken nuclear threats---great move there as well

Russia wants to be recognized as a great power, so how is that a criticism?

5. if convincing most Europeans that Russia cannot be trusted on anything--well another great move

What does trust have to do with realpolitik? The fundamental problem in international security is that there is no trust, and that the actions and statements of other states cannot be validated. And this is clearly evident in Russia's consistent distrust in the intentions of NATO since the collapse of the USSR.

So again what do you mean by "realpolitik"? As I see nothing of that in the Russian current strategy.

Of course you don't - you've been on an anti-Russian screed since the start of the crisis. Sure - Russia's behavior is not in the best interest of the U.S., but that does not mean that Russian leaders are living in an "altered state of reality" or that they are "irrational". Ignoring the facts that Russian elites do have goals, and have tied specific strategies and resources to these goals, is an "altered state of reality" that serves no useful purpose.