Russian ‘motivation’ to fight the Ukraine war

Andrey V Fedorov, the Russian Consul General in Karachi, arranged a press briefing on at the Russian Consulate this past Thursday that I happened to attend. There was much that Mr Fedorov spoke about; but for me, three things stood out as my takeaway from that briefing.

One, the consul general communicated the Russian willingness to continue to have friendly and warm relations with Pakistan. In fact, he explicitly mentioned that the way Pakistan has taken a position in the Ukrainian crisis has proved that Pakistan is a dear friend of Russia. Two, he clearly communicated the Russian desire to supply Pakistan with cheap oil and gas, given Pakistan makes such a request. Three, he spoke with great passion about the Russian war with Ukraine which he elaborated was imposed on Russia. He explained that Russia had been warning America and the Western world since 2015 not to meddle in the Russian sphere of influence. What West terms Russian military aggression against Ukraine, Mr Fedorov called the special Russian military operations to protect the Russian population in the Ukrainian breakaway republics.

The thrust of the audience’s questions was towards the Ukrainian crisis and the Consul General who had earlier explained that he was not a politician and only a diplomat remained very calm, composed and candid in answering all the queries. The focus of his entire explanation on the questions asked on the crisis in Ukraine was for the people of Pakistan not to take a one-sided view of the conflict and desist from falling prey to Western propaganda. I also asked a couple of questions but having come back from a very enlightening discussion on the issue of war in Ukraine, as a student of international relations I want to pen down some of the ideas that are cluttered in my mind and which I would like to share with the readers so that we are more familiar and clearer with the type of choices that Russians or the world at large is likely to make while dealing with war in Ukraine and the future of this former republic. So, what comes to my mind when I think of war in Ukraine?

War in Ukraine brings to my mind not how just two countries Russia and Ukraine fight this war but also how today the entire world acts as one big battlefield. The ramifications of this 21^st Century’s Russian-Ukraine model conflict are not domestic, regional or continental, they are global; and the rise in the prices of oil and gas as well as food insecurity are two of its byproducts that are affecting the entire globe. As a student of international relations, I think the word ‘globe’ is more climatic and environmental in its usage but what war in Ukraine demonstrates in its specificity is the relationship between the earth and the world — geography and politics the interplay of which is the conversion of earth into a world and which we call geopolitics. Put simply, geopolitics today is not the conversion of earth into a world but a world that is livable or non-livable. As a student of geopolitics, nothing comes closer, but through this war in Ukraine to subtly understand the interplay between geography and politics and reading and analysing it one can take home some of the best geopolitical lessons this ongoing war offers.

Militarily the war is being fought in the geographical space of former Soviet republics and particularly in areas of Donbas, Luhansk, Donetsk, Kherson, Mykolaiv, Kharkiv or Kyiv. But history tells us that wars were fought on these lands earlier as well. Napoleon came and went back unsuccessful as he fell victim to both the largeness of the Russian land as well as the factor of time and space. Besides him, the Germans tried it twice but both times they also met the fate of Napoleon.

There is this geographical dimension of this war and it clearly has a precedent. If Russia did not budge under an all-out military assault against its sovereignty and territorial integrity when it was militarily invaded thrice in the last 200 years or so, what tells the Western world that under the pressure of much lesser military setbacks and under the burden of less popular sanctions Russia will submit and moderate its military and political objectives or even agree to a negotiated settlement? Yes, the Soviet Empire disintegrated but that was the result of the ideological dimension of war under which the communist world remained no more sustainable and the world saw the birth of 15 former Soviet Republics.

Under the human (political) dimension of the war, President Obama made a prediction when in 2015 Russia came for military assistance to the Syrians. Obama claimed that Syria would become a quagmire for Russia and Russian President Putin. On the contrary, the Russian interference succeeded. Russia not only changed the course of the war but also converted its military success into diplomatic leverage and developed good political and diplomatic relations not only with Turkey and Iran but the regional clout that it amassed made it a leading actor and influencer in how politics will take shape in the Middle East from Libya to Israel.

Back to the Ukraine war. Voices are increasingly been heard of a diplomatic push to end this war. The sanest of all Americans and now an old man, Henry Kissinger, even spoke of ‘ceding territory to Russia’ in a land for peace exchange. President Macron of France is of the opinion that humiliating a great power like Russia through sanctions will not serve any purpose. Italy has also spoken in favour of extending sanctions relief to the Russians. Germany, today’s leading power in European Union, is finding it difficult to sustain its post-war political identity of ‘rejection of war’ and despite sending only helmets as military aid to Ukraine are currently being pushed to do more and rethink its current political identity. Considering also the huge European dependence on Russian oil and gas it is evident that Europe over the surface may sound like one political unit but subsurface it is divided in how it should or should not respond to conflict in Ukraine.

The mind of the outside world on the Russian-Ukraine conflict has largely been shaped by Western propaganda and the only question that I ask today is: how will the Western world sell any diplomatic push to achieve a negotiated settlement with Russia when all West has done is promote Russia as a military aggressor in Ukraine? Would the Americans set a new precedence for rewarding countries that undertake military aggression?

Therefore, the choice with America and its Western allies is pretty clear: either they agree with what has been Russia’s declared vulnerabilities and the red lines that they crossed and then negotiate for a settlement; or continue a protracted military engagement from which Russia has no reasons to back off. The world may further witness not only the militarisation of the Black Sea and Eastern Mediterranean but if Sweden and Finland also get their desire of a commitment to Article 5 to join NATO then this may further destabilise the region. Lastly, Russia knows it will never get on the negotiating table what it can win on the battlefield, and that is too good a motivation for a great power to continue with its military engagement.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 11^th, 2022.

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