Dangerous Russia-Ukraine standoff

The conflict between Russia and Ukraine started as early as the 9^th century AD when Russia evolved from Kiev (now Kyiv), the capital of Ukraine. During the 13^th century, Kiev was occupied by the Mongols and then by Poland and Lithuania until the reign of Catherine the Great when Russia regained Ukraine.

It is not just President Vladimir Putin but the Russian mindset, overall, which is unable to comprehend that Ukraine has been an independent country since 1991. For an ordinary Russian, Ukraine still belongs to Russia because Russia evolved from ‘Kievan Rus’ and for centuries it was part of Russia.

During the Soviet era, Ukraine was called the country’s breadbasket because of its fertile soil and enormous agricultural production. In 2014, the Russian-Ukrainian crisis was triggered because Moscow occupied Crimea and established its tutelage. Although Crimea was a legitimate part of Ukraine, Russian reasoning for the occupation was that majority of the population of Crimea is ethnically Russian and Khrushchev’s gift of Crimea to Ukraine in 1954 cannot be endorsed. The US and other Western countries condemned the occupation of Crimea and imposed sanctions on Moscow. Later, Moscow patronised pro-Russian elements and established control over the Luhansk and Donetsk regions of eastern Ukraine.

Recent reports of Russian mobilisation along Ukrainian borders and the US sending forces to eastern Europe borders reflect a dangerous crisis that needs to be managed. Otherwise, it can escalate and trigger an all-out war in the region. Is Russia planning to attack and occupy Ukraine? Can Ukraine withstand the Russian invasion? What will be the price of the Russian invasion of Ukraine? Can diplomatic options prevent war in the region? These are the questions that are raised in the current Russian-Ukraine standoff scenario. The US/NATO has contingency plans to counter the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

According to American satellite reports, Russia has mobilised more than 100,000 forces along its borders with Ukraine and is also in the process of shifting heavy weapons to create ground for an all-out invasion. However, there is no hardcore evidence to prove that President Putin will play such a big gamble and put his country in jeopardy. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has stated that he is not expecting any Russian attack. However, if his country is invaded then the response will be swift and repulsive. The people of Ukraine will defend their motherland with full force and prevent a Russian invasion at all costs.

Whatever the scenario, one needs to consider three major possibilities in the Russian-Ukrainian standoff.

First, Russia thinks that Ukraine will be a soft target because in 2014 it managed to occupy Crimea and instigated pro-Russian groups in Eastern Ukraine. Within Russia there is a debate about the ramifications of Moscow’s possible invasion of Ukraine particularly when there will be heavy casualties from both sides and the Russian economy will be shattered. The US/Western response in the wake of the Russian attack and invasion will not be able to prevent the possible occupation of its larger neighbour. It has been estimated that within a week’s time Ukraine will lose the war leading to the fall of Kyiv.

Full-scale psychological warfare is further deepening the Russo-Ukrainian crisis. The Economist (London) suggested that “perhaps Mr. Putin is planning a full-scale invasion, with Russian forces thrusting deep into Ukraine to seize the capital, Kyiv, and overthrow the government. Or he may seek to annex more territory in eastern Ukraine, carving out a corridor linking Russia with Crimea. Then again, he may want a small war, in which Russia saves Kremlin-backed separatists in Donbas, an eastern region of Ukraine, from supposed Ukrainian atrocities and, at the same time, degrades Ukraine’s armed forces.”

Second, a dangerous scenario is depicted if a full-scale war breaks out between Ukraine and Russia. Not only Russia’s gas supply to Germany, Hungary and other European countries will be cut off but Moscow will face serious economic consequences. As argued by The Economist, “A full-scale Russian invasion would be Europe’s biggest war since the 1940s, and the first toppling of a democratically elected European government by a foreign invader since then. Russians would not only suffer casualties, especially during a long-run insurgency but would also suffer heavy sanctions. Russian banks will be deprived of crucial American high-tech components.”

With the easing of winter, we have yet to see whether Russian leadership will consider launching a full-scale war or a limited strike against Ukraine. In both cases, Russia will not encounter a win-win situation. In recent years, there has been a surge in Russian nationalism and many Russians hold regressive views about an independent Ukraine. Russia has a history of expansionism under its policy of ‘Russification’ particularly since the 18^th century onwards when it established its control over the Trans Caucasian region, Central Asia, and Siberia to the extent of reaching far eastern Pacific regions of Vladivostok and Alaska. Now, with Belarus, Moscow has crafted a plan to bleed Ukraine and ultimately cease its identity as a nation.

One may call wishful thinking or a utopian idea to restore the former Soviet Union in the form of greater Russia, but certainly, Putin’s mindset along with his many fellow Russians is no different. Russia’s stronghold in Central Asia became apparent during the recent crisis in Kazakhstan when Moscow sent forces to restore the writ of the Kazakh government that was threatened internally. This demonstrates that Russia avails all opportunities to intervene in its backyard.

Third, the Ukraine-Russian standoff is a glaring example of friction and instability in the prevailing world order. To garner support, Putin visited Beijing to utilise the growing Russo-Chinese strategic partnership to ease off the pressure from growing Western concern over Ukraine. The US and the West are also wary of the improving Sino-Russian understanding as both countries have veto power in the United Nations Security Council and can block a critical resolution against Moscow on Ukraine.

From any standpoint, a diplomatic solution to the Russian-Ukrainian crisis is the only viable option to prevent an all-out war in the region provided there is political will and determination on the part of major stakeholders to avert a dangerous scenario.

Published in The Express Tribune, February 13^th, 2022.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.