Russia-Ukraine Crisis Through the Prism of Realism

By Aqeel Ahmad Gichki and Adeel  Ahmed Gichki 

First published on World Geostrategic Insight on 15/03/2022

       

Impractical threats from the US are undermining its hegemonic role.  The West Policies to counter Russia in response to its invasion of Ukraine are putting the entire so-called liberal institutionalist and democratic world at risk. 

The world’s attention was focused on the West, particularly the United States to see what type of punitive actions they would take as they claimed against Russia and what penalties Russia would suffer if it invaded Ukraine. Russia has now taken the action and begun a full-fledged invasion of Ukraine. Still, the world has not seen any concrete steps taken by the NATO countries to contain the Russian aggression.

So, what do these incidents tell the scholars of International Relations (IR)?

The situation is once again forcing to observe the world realistically. As John J. Mearsheimer says in his offensive realism:

    There is anarchy in the international system.

If you want to survive, you must advance and strengthen your military capabilities because there is no supreme or central authority that can ensure limitations on state behavior and punish the aggressor. When one looks at the example of Ukraine, one may observe that it is still based on self-help system informed best by the realist paradigm. Because no one would give up its resources to protect another state, until their own security is under threat. Sanctions imposed by the US on Russia may not stop the invasion, and the moral support for Ukraine from other countries could be ineffective. As the country’s president stated that his country has been left alone to fight Russia. One can also see the policy of NATO, which also ruled out intervention in Ukraine. It will be beneficial (as it is not in the national interests of others), and this is what the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy is requesting by arguing that “I don’t require evacuation assistance, but I do require ammunition”.

But is Ukraine receiving assistance from the West, or are they simply attempting to turn Ukraine into another Afghanistan for Russia by sending weapons? No country would assist another country unless they have a vested security interest in doing so or the invaded country has some strategic value in the international system. None of these will go against a nuclear power militarily and sanctions may not harm the Russian economy. The question is: will Putin and his entourage, at least the political and security people who have never bowed to the logic of sanctions, bow and step back from the Ukrainian quest? If there is anarchy and the Russian security is threatened by Ukraine, then it might be wise to say that Russia will do whatever it takes to make sure its borders are secure.

Leaders and political interests

According to Mearsheimer, “talk is cheap, and leaders have been known to deceive foreign audiences.” It is apparent from Putin’s earlier comments about his huge military deployment along the Ukrainian border that he was claiming it was basically a military drill, but we can now see his true goals behind it, and he is still justifying his actions by calling it a special military operation to safeguard Russian speakers and nationals, as well as those who have been harassed and subjected to genocide by the Kyiv regime. Though Mr. Putin might have lied about the deployment, one may not forget the lies that the US has been telling the world about Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) and Afghanistan.

International politics and state priority

When it comes to determining the rudimentary factors of Russian aggression, the prospect of NATO expansion in Eastern Europe comes first. Because no country would permit the growth of any form of military alliance within its corridor, the US also plays a significant role in Ukraine’s domestic affairs, including the establishment of Zelensky’s administration. After several warnings to the US to stop its operations in Ukraine, the US ignored the warnings while prompting Russia to invade Ukraine. As Vladimir Putin said, “he had to take this step to protect Russia’s territorial integrity and to protect his people.” Russia finds it hard that its neighboring state is being taken over by NATO after clearly calling it an unnecessary move. The Russians made it unequivocally clear at the time that they viewed this as an existential threat, and they drew a line in the sand. There is no 911 for states to call for help when their survivability is at stake, as they live in an anarchic international system. Russia’s foremost demand was a pledge that NATO would take no additional members, specifically not Ukraine or Georgia. Clearly, there would have been calamity if there had been no enlargement of the alliance subsequent to the end of the Cold War, or if the growth had befallen in harmony with the construction of a security structure in Europe that included Russia.

International Politics and the Logic of Uncertainty    

According to Mearsheimer, one will never know what the intentions of other states are. All states have some kind of offensive military capability, but you will never know when they will use it offensively against the other. There is no supreme authority that can limit the behavior of other states. States have no choice, but to fear each other in the international system. For example, NATO was created to contain the Soviet Union, and now it is being used to contain Russia by expanding its borders close to Russia. How certain can a state be about the intentions of its rivals? How does a state react in a situation like this which is determined by the threat posed by an alien military alliance close to its borders? How certain is the world that if Ukraine joins NATO, the E.U will not expand as well?

Justification of Russian Invasion 

The cold war 2.0 has begun, with two blocs having formed. Countries that support the US in its efforts to limit China are classified as being in the US bloc, while those that support China are classified as being in the Chinese bloc. Numerous states have preserved or attempted to maintain their country’ neutral status. However, it is important to know how long countries such as Ukraine can maintain their neutrality? Though states seek alliances when their security is threatened by a larger adversary, it is also imperative to question if Ukraine’s decision to join NATO is natural or if it is being influenced by the US. If the US is influencing it why should not a regional power ensure its security through military invasion (step for security)? It is commonly observed that the US has demonstrated that when it comes to their security and survival, they are willing to slaughter millions in Iraq, violate international law, human rights, and overthrow governments.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine is merely based on security concerns. Russia may not have the desire of re-creating the Russian Empire or trying to create a greater Russia, and intention of subduing and assimilating the whole of Ukraine into Russia. It is important to comprehend that the West created the narrative that Putin is highly aggressive and is entirely to blame for the Ukrainian crisis. The United States foreign-policy establishment, and the West more broadly, has developed the argument that he is interested in creating a greater Russia or reincarnating the former Soviet Union. Some believe that once he has conquered Ukraine, he will turn his attention to the Baltic states. However, it seems unwise to attack countries that are already part of NATO. While unpacking the major pillars of realism, it can be argued that any state in the realist world would do the same as the Russians are doing, even the great democracies have overthrown other democracies. They have waged wars to secure their interests and assure their security.

Modus vivendi

By adjusting its and NATO’s policies, the United States can play a positive role in keeping Europe from descending into a major war. Some argue that even in a realist world, there is room for cooperation and peace, and that the US and the West should recognize the Russian security demands. Ukrainians have an incentive to pay very close attention to what the Russians expect from them. They face serious penalties if they fundamentally alienate the Russians. If Russia believes that Ukraine poses an existential risk to Russia because of its alliance with the US and its West European allies, Ukraine may suffer greatly. It would be a wise strategic move for Ukraine to cut ties with the West, particularly the US, and try to accommodate the Russians. There cannot be two rules for a single world. Therefore, it can be noted that either the West abandons its dual policies and allows peace to reign throughout the world, or it will face invasions like the one in Ukraine.