i only place i see us disagreeing is whether or not all ukrainians wants to switch hegemonies (those who don’t want to were disenfranchised by popular manufactured consent and it doesn’t matter at this stage anymore); everything else you’ve described appears to be in alignment with what i described earlier.
But why call it a hegemony when it’s not? It’s Ukraine trying to join NATO because they’ve had bad history with Russia and CIS and want something different? Russia has proven that they keep what they want under their thumb while the US has only expressed they want to give Ukraine the ability to protect it’s sovereignty.
Hegemony is the right word; it means one group dominates.
The russian hegemony keeps you under their thumb w guns; the US & NATO hegemony does it with bondage of many forms.
The US literally armed and funded political violence to ensure the governments we got in the EU and they’re the Jr partners of NATO; Ukraine will have to give up a lot for the same privilege in its future proxy wars w Russia funded by China.
Joining NATO now may look nice on the surface because our standard of living looks impressive; but this empire already started crumbling decades ago and you’re hoping that Ukraine joins the side of the future world’s second biggest world power just as this Roman empire has started to decline.