I haven't read this book and therefore have no idea what happened in it. So can you please explain how Russia randomly conquered the Baltics without annexing Belarus (atleast they were kinda positive toward unification at one point). I can see the above happening because of Propaganda authors not being very good at writing but how is Kaliningrad independent? Seriously how? I can sorta buy someone writing Russia randomly invading the Baltics but having actual Russian territory independent at the same time?.. I don't get ideologically charged books I suppose.Now this map's a bit small, but I don't have a present-day QBAM with a good enough color code so sorry.
This here shows the situation in Eastern Europe at the climax of the NATO propaganda novel 2017: War with Russia. Now I've read a lot of repugnant books from some very dark ideologies (most recently The Turner Diaries, which almost gave me nightmares), and while this certainly isn't the most awful one it's certainly up there. Basically, 2017 is the most extreme manifestation of the "Putin bad, Russia bad, America good, NATO good" narrative, taken as far as possible. And the best part? It's repeatedly implied that nuclear warfare is a preferable outcome compared to... well, any solution that doesn't involve ruining things for Russia. Diplomacy doesn't exist, negotiations don't exist, accepting the loss of three tiny puppet states is unthinkable... and don't even get me started on why Russia just randomly conquers the Baltics. A lot of it is basically the author attempting to translate the situation in Crimea up into the Baltics, and failing hilariously.
Oh, and the novel endorses what is effectively a terrorist organization, although I don't know if that's how they acted in real life (they were apparently a real thing).