In almost all conflicts involving significantly more than two persons there will be different narratives, and what matters is mostly whom you trust to tell the correct narrative. We saw it in the "bitcoin schism" where the "big blockers" were arguing against the "small blockers", and we certainly see it again in this war - there is lots of propaganda at both sides. My father-in-law has been watching the TV news in Russia for decades, his brother has been watching the TV news in Kyiv for decades, and since 2014 they almost haven't been able to speak together.

In the narrative that I subscribe to, the NATO expansion is just one out of several cover motives, used in the prelude of the war to gain support and sympathy from their own population as well as among people and states considering the USA to be a "bad ass". The real reason for the war is pure old-fashioned imperialism and that one bigger party is willing to use violence against a smaller party. Within this narrative, staying "neutral" is not really an option. Collective security is the only option available to avoid being eaten by an aggressive neighbour.

Now of course there are other narratives, and I cannot be completely sure that my interpretation is correct. "Russia decided to invade Ukraine to prevent them becoming member of the evil NATO alliance" is another one. When Putin held his speech some days before the invasion it became very obvious to me both that there would be a war and that the NATO-thing was nothing but a cover motive. By now the most important cover motive is not to "prevent Ukraine joining NATO", but to "protect civilians in Donbas".

Could Zelenskyy have done more to avoid the war? Maybe, probably - just like a rape victim quite often could have done more to prevent becoming a rape victim.

Does Zelenskyy have anything to grain from the war? I wrote about it earlier, for sure, he's personal popularity has grown a lot, and he has gone from being a local celebrity to a world celebrity. Of course it could be that he actually wanted this war - but I believe not.

Regarding Ukraine wanting to join NATO - that's not something Zelenskyy decided, that's actually written in the constitution.

As far as I know, from a formal point of view, there are only two things that are needed to become a NATO-member, it should be approved by all member states of NATO plus the new potential member. From a realistic point of view, Ukraine had no chance of becoming a NATO-member as long as they were in a state of war over Donbas and with the Crimean question not settled. Russia could de-facto easily block the Ukrainian membership for an indefinite amount of time without going to war over it. There were no immediate threat of Ukraine joining the NATO.