Ukrainian Crisis: The Crisis Causes and Parties Responsible

Ukrainian Crisis
Institution
Date
Introduction to the Problem
Various events usually take place on the international platform, which play a big role in international relations. A number of events play out among nations, to help shape up the geopolitical landscape of the world. Currently for example, there are a number of these events all around the world. There is for instance the issues surrounding Greece and its economy, the war in the Middle East, such as in Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan, There is also the ongoing diplomatic row between North and South Korea, and so forth. Global events are just too many and seem to be never-ending.
Nations usually go into war, or invade other nations as a result of selfish ambitions. They do so in pursuit of their interests. Iraq invaded Kuwait due to their diplomatic row surrounding oil, the same can be said to be the reason for the invasion of Iraq by the United States. It all goes down to the benefit they get from the whole event of invasion.
Ever since November 2013, Ukraine has been in turmoil, with protests building over presidents Viktor Yanukovych’s decision to abandon a European association agreement that would alienate it from its Soviet ties and bring European allies closer. The events that followed the protests have been a crisis in the volatile area known as Crimea. It should be noted that Crimea was strategically located, and therefore played an integral role when it came to the transport of oil between Russia and other territories. This paper analyzes the Ukrainian crisis also known as the Crimean crisis, from its inception to date. The paper will focus on the historical influence and the buildup of tension that led to the conflict. The paper will categorically analyze the relationship between the United States and Russia within the context of the Ukraine crisis. It will also look at how power play has contributed to the deterioration of the crisis and finalize by suggestions on resolution and personal recommendation.
The crisis causes and parties responsible.
The Ukrainian crisis is a prolonged protest that started when President Viktor Yanukovych failed to sign an association agreement with the European Union. The decision attracted mass protests by the supporters of the agreement giving rise to a group known as Euromaidan. Civil unrests and protests that followed the decision to abort the agreement plan with the European Union became known as the Euromaidan. As the protest progressed, the Ukrainian government came up with anti-protest laws which would later be annulled due to pressure. When the Ukrainian prime minister resigned, he triggered a domino effect where various government officials followed in resignation. The crisis pits Ukraine against Russia.
Due to pressure, President Yanukovych fled the capital city Kiev and was impeached by the parliament triggering further unrest in the eastern and southern regions regarded as his strongholds. Following the ousting of President Yanukovych, a new interim government was formed which most observers viewed as pro-western.
The problem culminated in Russia seizing six Ukrainian tanks and intrusion into Crimea. On February 2014, opposition and pro-Russian militias took over Crimea and seized government building. At the same time, the parliament voted to have a referendum on the status of Crimea on the same day as that of the presidential election.
In March, Russian-allied militia forces took control over key infrastructure and buildings including airports. The interim government declared the invasion a Russian attack, an accusation that Russia denied. The forces gained full control of Crimean peninsula and all the military bases of the Ukrainian army that survived the protests were blocked. As the situation continue to deteriorate, Crimean government put in place plans to hold a referendum on the potential of joining Russia in March. The poll was declared a ratification of Crimean parliament decision to accede to the Russian Federation by the Crimean deputy prime minister.
Following the Crimean occupation, the United States, and the European Union responded by imposing sanctions on Russian officials considered to have taken part in the Crimean invasion. As a sign of discontentment, Russia started engaging in the military exercise along the border with Ukraine. This was in form of what is known as stealth invasion, where Russia slowly and silently invaded Ukraine through a methodic and procedural transportation of weapons across the border in the name of humanitarian aid. It mobilized armored trucks and military jets, an act that triggered the United States to send its fighter jets to Poland as a show of solidarity with Eastern members of NATO.
Crimean residents went into a referendum on March 16th and voted overwhelmingly to join the Russian Federation; ninety-five percent of the population favored the decision to join Russian Federation (The Associated Press, 2014). The Crimean government asked to join Russia officially on 17th March and 18th March, Russian Vladimir Putin and the Republic of Crimea leaders signed deal incorporating the Crimean republic into Russian Federation.
On another front, the crisis is believed to be a meddling game where western leaders funded and armed a pro-western opposition to take over the government to propagate western ideologies. It cannot go without saying, as initially stated, that these wars are usually caused by selfish ambitions especially by the so-called ‘Big Boys.’ At the center of this argument is the fact that both the United States and the European Union were interested in the alienating Ukraine and obliterating it from Russian radar. To achieve this, the United States was to use the European Union and NATO, to expand into the Soviet territory.
Different factions blame both Russia and United States for the crisis in Ukraine. Ukraine is at the center of diplomatic, cold war-like tensions between the United States and Russia. According to (Mearsheimer, 2014), the crisis stemmed from the United States larger plan to turn important Soviet members into western allies. He claims that the constant enlargement of NATO, against the will of Russia and previous support for pro-democracy movement in Ukraine all, played a part in the crisis. The United States oversaw an illegal coup on a democratically elected leader, thereby threatening Russian core interests and the Putin-led Russian government was not going to sit back and get pushed by the West (Trenin, 2014). Putin replied to overthrowing of Ukrainian president by annexing Crimea peninsula which according to Russia is very strategic and is at the core of its interests.
Another school of thought believes that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s appetite and long-standing desire to resuscitate the Soviet empire is to blame for annexing Crimea (Lazar, 2014). It is believed that because Ukraine shares a lot of characteristics with Crimea, it would be the next target for Russia, larger parts of Ukraine, starting from the east, which votes pro-Russian candidates and speak mostly Russian, would make Ukraine a prime candidate for addition to the Russian Federation. It is believed that Putin had long been waiting to seize Ukraine, and when President Viktor Yanukovych was ousted in February 2014, he gladly took the opportunity to annex Crimea.
Many observers see Vladimir Putin's personality and his world view at the center of the crisis. That his reckless pursuits of Eurasian dreams coupled with conservatives are the major fuelling factors to the crisis. It is argued that Putin looks at the geographical positioning of Ukraine near Russia’s Volga region as a key element that is driving the fight for Ukraine.
Most analyses of the crises points as Putin aggressive nature as the cause of the crises, but a precise analysis of the crisis using "balancing of threat" theory by Stephen Walt (2014) shows that the Russian president Vladimir Putin is not really aggressive but is only reacting to perceived threats to the nationality and alliances. Unlike balance of power theory, the balance of risk theory argues that state will behave in a manner determined by perceived threat by other states of allies.
On this background, a neutral analyst will look at NATO’s increased westernization of Russian allies and aggressive stance the United States took in an attempt to demarcate Ukraine from Soviet links to more western and orientation. Vladimir Putin and the Russian republic have a specific interest in Crimea and Ukraine, taking control of Ukraine Crimea’s vital ports by NATO forces would pose a threat to Russia, therefore, the reaction by Putin to annex Crimea and stop Ukrainian attempt to sign the European Union Association Agreement. The whole thing was a classic game of international politics. Political cards were being played by the major players, with everyone holding his, close to their hearts. One thing was however becoming very clear; that Russia was bullying its way into Ukraine territory and tried manipulating all the systems in its support.
The European Union is thought to be responsible for the Ukrainian crisis. Since 2009, the number of Ukrainians who favored European integration increased and the European Union became the most attractive model for Ukrainians over Russia. European Union’s contribution to the crisis started the moment it agreed to sign an association agreement, by undermining the anti-European Russian authority and overestimating the Ukrainian government's European aspiration. Whereas the agreement is seen as the detonator that triggered anti-Yanukovych protests, the system was already corrupt and was a ticking time bomb.
The Role of History in Understanding the Problem
The relationship between Russia and Ukraine is a complex one that requires clear understanding to be able to comprehend the current crisis correctly. Of great importance to Russia is the strategic positioning of the Crimean peninsula which is seen as the focal point of controlling the black sea both economically and militarily. The Crimean peninsula is also a focal point for control of natural gas and energy for Eastern Europe. Historically, Crimean has always been a field of conflict, both multilaterally and bilaterally. The Russian naval base for the "black sea fleet" has always used its port of Sevastopol, which was founded by 1783 by Catherine the great.
The Crimean Peninsula is crucial for Russian military as it offers nostalgic glory for the army during the Crimean War and Second World War. During his reign, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev acting on friendship, transferred a rather part of Russia to Ukraine. That’s how Crimea ended up on the Ukrainian borders (Buba, 2010). During the USSR era, the relationship between the two countries deteriorated and became problematic. Stalin’s actions during the decade of terror worsened the situation for the two nations. Stalin declared Ukraine part of Russia and denied its existence eliminating anyone who disrespected the set boundaries.
Ukraine is in itself a former member of the now defunct Soviet Union, but it attained its independence from the soviet union more than twenty years ago, in 1991, when the soviet was under the leadership of Boris Yeltsin. Its independence was hailed as a milestone. The two countries were thus to enjoy democracy and follow the footsteps of other European states that were enjoying democracy. They envisaged peaceful transformation.
The Role of Communication Practices, Cultural Values, and Power in Understanding the Problem
Cultural practices, social strata, and power play are at the center of the crisis. Ukraine is made up of both native Ukrainian and Russian nationals, the later making seventeen percent of the population. Russia deliberately gave citizenship and financial aid to Russian-speaking Ukrainians in a bid to stall nation building process in Ukraine, a concept that has worked very well for the last twenty years (Bloomfield, 2008). Using the superior number of many Russian-speaking Ukrainian citizens and other sympathetic Ukrainian citizens, Russia has managed to leverage its power over Ukraine, especially in Crimea.
Russian and Ukrainian cultural difference can be traced to history and their independence dates while Russians became fully independent as early as 1480; the first Ukrainian independent state was in the twentieth century. For a long time, the Ukrainian territory was a playfield for various colonies while Russians were exercising dominance over the region, controlling Baltic Sea, Pacific Ocean, and the North Sea. For quite a long time now, Ukraine has struggled in its efforts to alleviate poverty, and had to implement the accommodation strategy as a method of soliciting for financial aid. On the other hand, Russian national identity has been independent and rebellious. It has always had the upper hand on Ukrainian affairs controlling various aspects of the nation.
Owing to such a complicated relationship between the two nations, there can only be two ways of co-existing. One the two can form a partnership and cooperate and work on a similar front or they can be in a conflict oriented relationship which is characterized by crises like the one currently witnessed. Whenever the two nations are at crossroads, scholars and observers are always quick to point at the imperialistic nature of the Russian government and foreign propaganda fanned by the ...