Written by: Muhammad Rayhansyah Jasin
Edited by: Ahmed Labib Daiyan
In the dawn of February 24th, Russia began striking missiles and launched forces towards Ukrainian territory, marking the largest full-blown invasion of a sovereign country towards another in Europe since World War II. Russian forces along with its artilleries and heavy equipment crossed the international boundary of Ukraine and Russia from Belarus in the north, the city of Belgorod in the northwest, the city of Shakhty in the east, and from the Crimean Peninsula, annexed by Russia in 2014, encircling the entire Ukrainian territory.
Soon following the attacks, President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine announced martial law in a speech that also asked people to remain calm while declaring the government and military readiness in defending the country. Zelensky also mentioned the backing of NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization; a military alliance between the US, Canada, and 28 European states, in which military equipment and financial aid had been agreed upon through his phone call with the US President, Joe Biden.
World leaders have condemned President Vladimir Putin’s invasion with European Commissioner Ursula Von Der Leyen labeled it as “barbaric” and President Biden described it as a “premeditated and unprovoked” assault of Russian forces. Unprecedented international sanction has been imposed on the Kremlin ranging from the expulsion of Russian Banks from SWIFT, the global channel of the transnational finance system, as well as closed airspace for Russian aircrafts in the EU and the US, and the freezing of Russian Central Bank assets and Russian officials’ foreign wealth stored abroad. Countless international bodies and organizations from various fields have suspended, terminated, severed, and or broken ties with Russia.
The United Nations adopted a resolution demanding Russia to “immediately, completely, and unconditionally withdraw its military forces from Ukraine,” in a rare emergency session of the General Assembly with 141 voted in favor. Although, there were also nations that explicitly supported Putin, notably Venezuela and North Korea by opposing the resolution, and the silent voices of India, Pakistan, and China in condemning Russia instead of increasing their wheat trade significantly. Other nations have also largely stayed quiet and do not want to get involved in the discourse, fearing Putin's outrage for their countries’ economic ties.
With this in mind, this article will give an analysis of this conflict from the academic viewpoint supported by one of Ritsumeikan APU’s own IR lecturers, Associate Professor Utpal Vyas, and a personal observation of an APU student from Ukraine. They have agreed to be published in this article anonymously.
The Pretext of The War
The APU student comes from the town of Sloviansk in the Donbas region, less than a couple hours away from downtown Donetsk in the eastern part of Ukraine. “Basically, all of my family members and the people in my neighborhood are ethnically Russian, and we mostly speak the Russian language. My mother tongue is also Russian,” they explained regarding their hometown. “Same could be said of the people in Crimea.”
In February 2014, Russia annexed the Crimean Peninsula, following the overthrowing of Pro-Russia President Victor Yanukovych's through the Maidan Revolution 2014. That conflict brought widespread condemnation from the international community resulting in the expulsion of Russia from the G-8 alliance. “But don’t be confused, people in Crimea actually supported the move because deep down they are culturally Russian, so they welcomed the Russian troops,” the student remarked about this history.
Most countries had opposed the Russian claim of Crimea, with the UN General Assembly declaring the move as ‘temporary occupation of part of Ukraine’ in 2015. A referendum held in March 2014, which resulted in the creation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the Federal City of Sevastopol, was rejected by Ukraine and deemed illegitimate by the international community. It was also followed by the creation of the Luhansk and Donetsk People’s Republic in April 2014 that Putin had recognized shortly before the invasion.
“People in the Donbas region as well as in Crimea, we all celebrated the accession of our land to Russia because we don’t feel like belonging in Ukraine,” says the APU student. Since then, the people of Crimea and the Donbas region have been using the Russian currency Ruble in their daily lives, having economic ties with the Russian economy, and was essentially incorporated as the far west territory of Russia. “My grandparents, as well as most people there, generally like Russia more and have aspired to become Russian as they have been observing Ukrainian leadership as corrupt regimes. Especially that President, Mr. Poroshenko,” referring to the Ukrainian President who superseded President Zelensky.
President Petro Poroshenko was elected in 2014 following the Maidan Revolution, a civil protest that had ousted the Pro-Russian President Victor Yanukovych in regard to his backtracking of a Ukraine-EU deal instead of opting for stronger ties with Russia. In general, Yanukovych’s removal and Poroshenko’s positive sentiment towards the EU portrayed the shifting alliance of Ukraine’s favorability away from Russia. VOX media noted that these factors triggered Putin’s aggression towards Crimea.
“Well, on the contrary, as part of the former Soviet Republic, Ukraine did not try to prioritize one party, they were just trying to rebuild their economy after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, hence the need to balance between Europe and Russia’s influence,” says Professor Vyas. Ukraine has a large population of 44,13 million people and the second biggest land area in Europe just after Russia and needs to maintain an economic partnership with everyone. “However, it seems clear that the democratization of Ukraine and gradual orientation towards the West was the desire of the majority of Ukrainian people, and they were just trying to develop a secure and prosperous society,” Professor Vyas remarks on Ukraine’s relations.
“About President Poroshenko, during the Soviet period he had a very famous chocolate company in Eastern Europe and Russia. I grew up eating his chocolates,” explains the APU student about Poroshenko’s financial background before entering politics. “People in my neighborhood feel that he used his lucrative wealth to buy the presidency and make way for the Ukrainians’ inclination towards Europe. He had been pro-EU all along.” These allegations became headlines during the 2014 Presidential election when he vowed to sell his chocolate company, Roshen, if he won the contest. Later in 2019, Poroshenko would be defeated by Zelensky in the election with a wide margin citing his nepotism over the appointment of government officials. The Atlantic Council wrote, “Poroshenko’s main failure has been to appoint too many political cronies to key positions of state administration.”
Regarding the alleged widespread corruption in Ukraine, Professor Vyas cited the term ‘transition state’ to describe the situation inside Ukraine. “In general, post-communist countries like Ukraine have been transitioning from a very centralized government towards an early democracy, so the nation is still dealing with political issues, economic consequences, and social changes. But eventually, these problems could have been dealt with by the people as they transition to a more institutionalized democracy.” The World Bank reported in 2020 that since 2014, Ukraine had undertaken vital reforms such as significant fiscal consolidation, transforming into a flexible exchange rate, stabilizing the financial sector, and establishing anti-corruption agencies.
The APU student mentioned that the increasing tendency towards EU and NATO membership has antagonized Russia and caused more divide in the Donbas Region. “Ukraine and Russia are brothers and sisters, so pushing Ukraine towards the EU and NATO would make Russia uneasy especially with the possibilities of American military bases so close to Russian territory.” NATO’s open-door policy, the fundamental principle to allow any qualified European country to join the alliance, has been the primary focus behind this debate. Speaking for Vox Media, Steve Pifer, US ambassador to Ukraine from 1998 to 2000, said that this policy has made Russia go ‘mad’ with the possibility of Ukraine and Georgia joining the alliance. The student remarked, “I believe that putting NATO troops in Ukraine would just make Ukrainian and Russian people going against one another as an American Proxy war.”
“NATO has never forced any one country to join its alliance; Ukraine has tried to apply for the membership based on popular support,” states Professor Vyas in addressing the NATO issue. He added that the 2014 Election resulted in President Poroshenko's victory and President Zelensky in 2019, both highly pro-EU and NATO candidates, showing that the majority of Ukrainian approved this proposition. “Having Ukraine aligned with NATO does not necessarily mean it wanted to upset Putin. We must remember that Ukraine received substantial income from the transit fees of Russian gas pipelines, and that many Ukranians felt a strong kinship with Russia.” Reuters wrote that Ukraine received $2 billion in 2020 from these fees. “As a sovereign nation, in principle Ukraine has the right to choose whichever alliance it would like to join and establish international agreements with whichever country it sees as beneficial. Accepting Ukraine to NATO actually would likely be a burden to the alliance compared to the benefits it would get from Ukraine membership.”
Formal relations between Ukraine and NATO have been established since 1992, one year after Ukraine’s independence. It was followed by the 1994 Partnership for Peace initiative to support Central and Eastern European states to become a part of NATO. During the 2008 Bucharest Summit, NATO decided not to offer Ukraine and Georgia membership. However, De Hoop Scheffer, the Secretary-General, confirmed that “eventually” both countries will be a part of the alliance. The movement stalled briefly during President Yanukovych's administration. It was continued following the Maidan Revolution, amending Ukraine’s constitution to mention the NATO and EU membership as an integral part of the preamble of its Basic Law. Still, without membership at the beginning of 2022, the New York Times wrote that NATO couldn’t accept Ukraine due to its lacking political and legal systems, the flip flop stance of Ukrainian leadership, and fear of the US over Russian hostility. “Notably regarding Germany, they have always been cool on Ukraine’s application towards NATO due to their reliance on Russian gas supply, fearing that Ukrainian membership would antagonize Russia,” explains Professor Vyas.
“Ukrainians are divided on issues like NATO’s Membership, inclusion towards the EU, and just liberal values that are growing even more in Ukraine, notably in the western side and in Kyiv. The government has never given any attention towards Eastern Ukraine and the people’s aspirations,” the APU student explains about the growing division across Ukraine’s people. “Ukraine’s economy is still weak, and it’s logical for people to search for better jobs from Europe, hence the increasing favorability towards the EU. But that doesn’t mean Russia is not an option for better jobs, and they have a big economy too.” The student describes that many people are trying to move away from Ukraine due to the frustration of the economic crisis. Specifically, in the Donbas Region, the student said that there had been increasing violence and looting from random people just trying to support their daily lives. “This was all due to the lack of attention given by the corrupt leadership in Kyiv towards people who don’t agree with their relations with NATO and the EU.”
The War Itself, Explained.
On February 24th, Russia began to attack Ukrainian cities with artilleries moving forward from different regions, including Donetsk and Luhansk, the breakaway states that Russia-backed separatists have controlled since 2014. “Contrary to what you saw in the mainstream media, the Russian forces have been welcomed greatly with people there. My grandma said that the Russian forces did not commit any violence while in Slovyansk.” The APU student added that viral videos about troops harming people were actually Ukrainian forces trying to attack the separatist forces. “I had seen more damage from the Ukrainian army in 2014 when the Ukrainian forces bombed my family’s apartment in retaliation towards separatists, and yet no media ever gave any proper coverage about that event.”
“It seems that the people in the Donbas Region and the Crimean Peninsula were supporting the movement of the Russian forces. The military forces could advance quickly due to the welcoming attitude from the residents there,” Professor Vyas noted about Eastern Ukrainian support towards the Russian movement. He also noted that since 2014, it is apparent that the majority of people in the occupied regions of Donbas and Crimea have been acquiescent about having Russia as their protector.
“However, the support of a population for cultural or economic reasons cannot justify the crossing of international borders by an army of one sovereign country invading another. Under the UN Charter there can be no justification for an aggressive war,” remarks Professor Vyas in regard to Putin’s claim over Ukraine as Russia’s “integral part.” In his televised address in February 2021, Putin declared that Russia would recognize the sovereignty of Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics while claiming that eastern Ukraine was ‘Russia’s ancient lands’. In the following speech on the 24th, Putin declares his intention to ‘demilitarize and denazify’ Ukraine over his claim that Russia has an obligation to protect ethnic Russians from genocide perpetrated by the corrupt regime in Kyiv. He also suggested that the communist USSR was entirely responsible for creating Ukraine. With this speech, Putin ordered the ‘Special Military Operation,’ marking the beginning of the invasion.
Mainstream media have largely attacked Putin’s historical claims over Ukraine, with Vox Media labeling the speech as “demonstrably false” and Time Magazine saying that 'Putin is not only a very bad pupil of history, but he also thinks he is its master.' The capital city of modern Ukraine, Kyiv, was established as the center of the Kievan Rus people. This tribe comprises many Slavic states, including Russia and Ukraine in the 9th century. The New York Times wrote that Kyiv, which predated Moscow by hundreds of years, was claimed as the birthplace of the Slavic cultures, religion, and language. The Times also added that instead of Ukraine historically being consumed by Russian culture, it was actually a forced impropriation by Lenin that banned the Ukrainian language from being taught by schools during the Soviet era. Furthermore, Time Magazine also stated that modern Ukraine was established as a part of an organized end by the Gorbachev administration during the end of the Soviet Union, debunking Putin’s claim that the fall was the greatest catastrophe of the 20th century.
“Ukraine got their independence (in 1991), and the world, including Russia, acknowledged its sovereignty; hence there should be no coerced interference coming from outside powers over domestic issues,” Professor Vyas added that Russia cannot intervene in the division inside Ukraine’s population over politics and economics. “The people of Austria in fact welcomed Hitler due to their shared Germanic history, but that does not mean that the Nazi annexation of Austria was legitimate under the principles of the international system.”
Professor Vyas notes that there is a United Nations resolution that allows the international community to use appropriate action in a sovereign country under specific conditions. Still, that action could only be done if there is a proven situation where the government and the state fail to protect its populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. This is what the United Nations called the “Responsibility to Protect Principle” that was adopted in the General Assembly of 2005 following tumultuous decades of war crimes in Rwanda (The Hutu Massacre) and Bosnia-Herzegovina (The Srebrenica Genocide).
“Even if there is a potential genocide in a country, the international community needs to address the issue with humanitarian and peaceful means with the usage of force being the last resort. Now, Putin has claimed that there is some degree of ethnic Russian genocide being committed by the Ukrainian government; however there has been no evidence shown to support this claim,” explains Professor Vyas on why Putin’s argument of 'protecting Russians' is false in trying to justify his action in Ukraine. Western Media has labeled that these are all disinformation spread by Putin with the Deutsche Welle claiming that Russia started the war and no evidence was found of mass targeted killings by Ukrainian forces towards ethnic Russians. Reuters reported that Ukraine has rejected Russia’s genocide claim and filed a suit against Russia at the International Court of Justice.
“Still, I couldn’t help but notice that the western media gave a lengthy coverage of Kyiv under attack or Lviv under assault by Russian forces without ever mentioning the atrocities that were also done by Ukrainian forces in my village,” the APU student demands equal and fair attention from the media's portrayal. They claim that in 2014, the family’s apartment in Slovyansk was heavily damaged by the battles between the separatist militias and the Ukrainian army. “The walls were full of holes caused by these machine guns, and my grandparents were terrified of the horrors at that time.” They also mentioned that the media portrayals of Kyiv residents as very brave and valor is exaggerated and only a part of the western narrative.Western media's angle of coverage in Ukraine has also been criticized by another network. Mehdi Hassan from MSNBC says that the media has given a false narrative about caring for Ukrainians more because of them being ‘white Europeans.' Furthermore, the APU student argues that the western world has also committed severe crimes in invading Iraq, tearing apart Syria, and neglecting the Palestinian and Israeli conflict. “In reality, none of my family or anyone in Donbas were hurt by the Russian forces. Their main goal is to go to Kyiv and demand more equal rights for us.”
“There is indeed often a subconscious racism on the part of global media in delivering news about global conflicts,” states Professor Vyas. However, Professor Vyas explains, the full-blown invasion of Russia shocked not just Ukraine but the entire world due to the clear-cut case of violation of national sovereignty. Professor Vyas continues that while it is true that there should have been no favorability in covering some international conflicts over others, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is so shocking to Western audiences because of their perception that a huge, nuclear power has invaded a relatively small, weak and democratizing, sovereign nation. In Western countries, many people are also shocked that such a conflict could happen in Europe in the 21st century. He also notes that the ramifications of such a shift in perceptions about international conflict could impact the whole world.
The APU student says that Putin might march on until Kyiv and demands the regime to give more autonomy to eastern Ukraine. “It’s better for Ukraine (Kyiv, the central government) to just let Mariupol, Donetsk, Luhansk, and Crimea go to Russia and the western people (of Ukraine) could be together with their European Union supporters.” Japan Times reported that it’s on Putin’s agenda to make a land bridge all the way to Moldova by taking the Donbas region, Southern Ukraine, and Transnistria, a breakaway state from Moldova, even mentioning the possibility of taking the whole of Ukraine. “Still, even if East Ukraine has seceded to Russia, it would not stop the regime in Kyiv from joining NATO and subsequently having American troops right in front of Russia’s doorstep,” the APU student continues with the worries about a prolonged conflict.
Although quite extreme, Professor Vyas explains that the division inside Ukrainian people are cultural or religion-based differences that have occurred in many other places for a long time. “Conflicts of interest and power struggles between majority and minority peoples have been common throughout human history, but that doesn’t mean they need to be settled through armed conflict or a civil war.” Peace Research Institute Oslo published a report in 2018 concluding that armed conflict has been trending downward since the end of the Cold War. “Minorities in Ukraine, like in other democracies, need to voice their concerns through protest, demonstration, public discourse, or through any other peaceful means to solve their disagreements, but certainly an external power should not intervene in an internal issue inside a sovereign state.” An op-ed released by Japan Times quotes that Putin’s justification for an attack on Ukraine mimics Hitler's rhetoric when invading Czechoslovakia.
The Impact of The War Predicted
Since the war started, global oil and gas prices have soared as Russia is the second-largest oil producer in the world. BBC reported that on 2nd March, the Brent Crude, the international benchmark for oil prices, jumped to a new record of $113 a barrel, the highest since June 2014, even with the US and the 30 other member countries of the International Energy Agency (IEA) agreeing to release 60 million barrels of oil from reserves. Oil-producing countries that comprised the OPEC+, including Saudi Arabia and Russia, have also refused the IEA's request to boost oil production, further increasing the energy price uncertainty. A US congressman wrote in the Hill that ramping up oil production could balance the price hikes and it could be done by ‘flipping the switch'. However, Vox reported that many oil companies generally oppose speeding up production and opt just to be benefitted from the profits.
"OPEC is driven more by its strategic priorities, that is controlling the supply of oil and the oil price, and so their members do not worry about political issues which do not affect their own interests," suggests Professor Vyas about the oil hikes. "However, since the 1970s, OPEC has become a lot less influential in oil pricing, especially with the increasing production of oil in countries such as the US, Canada, and Norway, which are not members of OPEC." Forbes wrote OPEC had lost its control of the oil market because the US was both the most significant oil consumer and producer while China, one of the biggest OPEC trading partners, reduced its oil consumption over sustainable energy. The US recently declared it would stop importing oil and natural gas from Russia, though the EU and other countries have not followed suit.
Talking about the possibility of the war escalating into an all-out nuclear Armageddon, Professor Vyas remarks, "We would hope that countries which have gained great power, especially those which possess nuclear weapons, would also exercise great responsibility - this is the premise of the UN Security Council structure." Vox wrote about the illustration of having the 'stability-instability paradox,' a theory that says as the chance of nuclear conflict declines, the risk of conventional war increases and vice versa. "It's a well-studied phenomenon that countries hope to increase their security by producing, buying and deploying more weapons, including nuclear weapons. However, if all countries do this the overall chance of miscalculation and armed conflict increases, and so all countries’ security is negatively impacted.”
Furthermore, Professor Vyas also gave statements regarding the right-wing nationalism trend in many countries impacted by this conflict. "Ethnocentrism will not go away soon, but still the Russian invasion towards Ukraine makes right-wingers in many countries uneasy." Marion Anne Le Pen, a prominent French right-wing politician, stated that Russia made a mistake imposing itself on other democracies. Professor Vyas continues that the movements will persist but might lose influence after politicians begin to distance themselves from the Russian invasion, and if they lose access to Russian funding.
Lastly, discussing sanctions that western countries have imposed on Russia, Professor Vyas states that all sides have received unexpected responses. "Sanctions may not have an immediate impact in solving the conflict, but the extent of the measures have surprised Russia." This would only create more extensive uncertainty and a looming repercussion in the global network. Financial Times reported that the western sanctions, sometimes dismissed simply as token gestures, have done real damage and could trigger a recession in Russia's economy. However, the sanctions could also damage the West as Forbes wrote that just from the expulsion of Russian banks from SWIFT, the US and its allies are walking in a tightrope in punishing Putin without hurting themselves. "These sanctions will impact everyone in one way or another, and they could affect the globalization process itself in the long term," says Professor Vyas.
APU Times would like to express highest gratitude and sincere appreciation towards Professor Utpal Vyas and the student from Ukraine. Their contributions to this article have been tremendous and we will continue to cooperate with them in the future.
Comments