Ian, I think the US has shown two management styles since the end of the Cold War: one is military intervention under Bush 41 and Bush 43 with the injustifiable wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the other management style is color revolutions, the use of social media and Wikileaks, drones, spec ops, and everything except "boots on the ground". I don't see the US distancing itself at all from wrongly and aggressively interfering in the internal affairs of a long list of countries, and that has been the case for about a hundred years.
The US foreign policy since the war with Spain has been aggressive. Certainly not in all cases, but in too many. I think the history is undeniable, especially since Pres. Wilson. If that's not perfectly obvious, examine since WW2. Completely aggressive, illegal, immoral, etc.
I don't have very much to go on about Putin's intentions for Ukraine, but I think it's likely the same as his intentions for the people of Russia, and I think those intentions are more benevolent than the intentions of the Anglo-American Establishment. Emphasis on "more benevolent" as a relative term. This doesn't make Putin a good guy; they're all pretty bad, but it was Putin and his Foreign Minister Lavrov who recently prevented an escalation of the war in Syria despite US Sec. of State Kerry's obvious desire to increase hostilities there on any pretext imaginable.
Do you really think the people of Ukraine prefer taking loans from the IMF instead of the Kremlin? The IMF is the #1 global institution for austerity and its accompany misery and suffering plaguing the world. They are demanding an end to natural gas subsidies as one of the first conditions of the loans. Who offered a better deal there, Kremlin or IMF? If you are not familiar with IMF loans, they are the architects of austerity in Greece, Argentina, and many other countries. See
Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins and
Best Democracy Money Can Buy US edition, by Greg Palast. They explain the 100+ conditionalities of an IMF loan as well as the scheme of economic takeover that goes along with it.
It surprises me that anyone would somehow interpret this situation as the Russians being at fault and that the US is in a more correct position to determine the outcome. Ukraine is Russia's neighbor and its NATO that's been expanding into Eastern Europe for the past 20 years. Now Russia doesn't want an Anglo-American color revolution and they're at fault?
BTW, I ♥ Putin. lol