Against the New Czar | Marcos Bosschart Martínez
Europe is facing one of its darkest hours since the end of World War II. On 24th February, the Russian army initiated the invasion of Ukraine under the orders of President Putin. What Russia calls a “special military operation” changed the European security space that ruled international relations since the fall of the USSR in one second.
On the first days of February, the USA warned Europe about the possibility of the invasion of Ukraine – this was not taken seriously as an option. The European Union tried preventive diplomacy to avoid an escalation of the conflict which finally happened. Far away from reality, some thought that Putin was a rational leader that wouldn’t lead their country to a senseless war. This miscalculation was part of the disaster that Ukrainians are living in right now, this war fits perfectly with the Russian long-term foreign policy plans.
Russia is a wounded bear. The biggest country by territory in the whole world has always had global power aspirations - being relegated as a ‘second-class nation’ in the international order did not sit well in Moscow. Since the arrival of Putin to the Kremlin, rebuilding the influence space and the projection of Russia in the world were the two main objectives of the executive. To reach those objectives, bilateral relations with the ancient Soviet republics were intensified while a new form of nationalism was in process of construction.
This new way of understanding Russia means going back to the concepts seen in the Czars era. Becoming great again through the idea of a strong country that protects not only in their interest but also the Slavic population living all around the continent. Ukraine is the birthplace of Russian mythology. The Rus of Kyiv was the first great political entity of the Slavic people and the origin of the culture and the language that they share. Identity´s an important variable always and it plays a main role in this conflict.
Putin identifies Ukraine as part of Russia as was the case in Soviet times. Ukraine is a deeply divided nation – half of the country is nearer to Russia than Europe and the opposite of the other side. The revolution of Euromaidan broke the stability of the country. Kicking out the Pro-Russian president and establishing an ultranationalist government, making certain parts of the nation feel discriminated against or not heard. The regions of Luhansk and Donetsk declared their independence and the civil war began. With that situation, the peninsula of Crimea was annexed in 2014 by Russia. Non-identified forces - presumably Russian - took the power and organised a doubtfully legal referendum. With that movement, Moscow ensured a hot water port at the Black Sea, a military and commercial obsession for the geopolitical plans.
As we can see, there was already a large military threat in the country way before the current invasion that - justified by the same reasons as nowadays. Culture is part of the war. So, talking about the Russian-Ukrainian war is to talk about a civil war based on identity.
The other casus belli is security geopolitics. Since the times of the Cold War, the West and the ancient Soviet Union had their spheres of influence. When the Russian Federation arrived, there were expectations about reordering the European security space so the old continent would be a unipolar place for the first time. As history has demonstrated, that was impossible.
The division of the European Union at the hour of making strategic decisions fed the imperialistic dream of Vladimir Putin day by day. NATO and the promises from the US government to Ukraine about the possibility of becoming part of the military organisation were a red line that Moscow was not able to tolerate. From those two points, we can find out the main reasons that led to the conflict seen today.
After reviewing the roots of the war, everybody has the same question, what´s going to happen? Answering that question is a mistake. Nobody knows how the war works, you can predict the results, but never the process. The Russia-Ukraine conflict is complex and has a large background to keep in mind. The economic sanctions from the West will have consequences, short and long term. Russia will struggle but Europe will have to accelerate the energy transition and look to other gas and oil suppliers, probably more expensive than Russia and also with unsavoury regimes. Breaking this bidirectional relationship is going to cost the citizens more than the government expects. Facing an inflectional crisis after a health one will increase inequality, even more, a social emergency is more than expected.
The only conclusion that as a specialist I can reach is that this war is a key moment in the international community. The understanding of the interaction between the states will change. The perception of Russia as a tyrannical regime forces the EU to reassume concepts of the past in the present. Sanctions are the best weapon of the most powerful commercial zone in the world. Banning the use of the Swift system to the Russian banks is probably the most painful one for Moscow at the same time that allies such as China are sceptical about the recent developments. Attacking the financial structure has impacts that are sometimes more than a soldier can do but as normal citizens are those most affected in Ukraine, working-class Russian people will also pay a price for their government’s actions. Ultimately, unity against the new Czar is mandatory for liberal democracies because of what it represents, liberty vs totalitarianism.
Images taken at a protest in Madrid by Diego Leon
About Marcos
He/him
Marcos Bosschart Martínez is a 22-year-old student based in Sevilla la Nueva, Madrid, Spain. He has graduated with a degree in International Affairs from Universidad Complutense de Madrid with special interests in security and defence topics.
Twitter: Marc_Bosschart
