I almost agree with your opinion, although it's challenging to achieve, given the intricacies involved. Based on my study of the scenario, I believe Vladimir Putin would never agree to NATO's establishment in Ukraine. He perceives NATO as spies infiltrating the country, which is why he's seemingly against it.
In my view, Ukraine should refrain from arming itself and realize that international support, even from NATO members, may wane, leaving each country to fend for itself. The countries involved in the conflict have their own national interests at heart, rather than a genuine concern for Ukraine's peace.
Therefore, Ukraine must make diplomatic decisions and avoid escalating tensions, as resorting to arms will only worsen the situation. Ukraine being able to win over Russia would be akin to the David and Goliath story.
Why should Ukraine, when choosing its foreign policy course and global security system, take into account the opinion of Putin or another ruler of Russia? Ukraine's mistake was that it was too trusting. Under guarantees from Russia and other countries of non-aggression and assistance, Ukraine abandoned the world's third most powerful nuclear weapon, and even transferred its military aircraft, missiles and other weapons to the same Russia. The production capacity in Ukraine is sufficient to produce any weapons ourselves and not ask for them from others, as now, when Ukraine was deceived by the same Russia.
To refrain from resisting with weapons means complete capitulation and the cessation of existence as an independent state and Ukrainians as a nation. And this also means harsh terror in the occupied territories with further massive and constant killings of Ukrainians using various methods. No thanks. Ukraine will continue to resist with or without the help of the United States and other states.