Invasion in Ukraine: A sudden outburst of Russia or a predicted occurrence?
A brief explanation of Ukraine's history
Ukraine’s history consists of long periods of successive domination by Poland-Lithuania, Russia, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (U.S.S.R.).
From the 14th century up until the 20th century when a fully independent Ukraine emerged only. On January 22, 1918, Ukraine declared its independence, although it lasted only for 3 years when in 1921 the Soviet Union took over.
In 1954 Nikita Khrushchev, the leader of the Soviet Union, transferred the Crimean peninsula to Ukraine. When the Soviet Union began to unravel in 1990–91, the legislature of the Ukrainian S.S.R. declared sovereignty and then outright independence (August 24, 1991), a move that was confirmed by popular approval in a plebiscite (December 1, 1991). That same year the first relatively free parliamentary elections took place.
The current state of events
With the current invasion of Russia into Ukraine, we take a deep look at the situation as it stands, what Henry Kissinger mentioned about the issue and the history of Ukraine.
For months, President Putin has continuously refused that he would invade Ukraine — however, in the early hours of Thursday, he announced a “special military operation”, sending troops across the border into northern, eastern, and southern Ukraine.
His goal was ostensibly to oust the Azov Battalion Order, a neo-Nazi organization that commits acts of violence against minorities in Ukraine, including its Russian-speaking inhabitants — whom Putin supposedly seeks to defend.
It is well known, however, that his invasion is only a response to the increasingly aggressive, according to Putin, expansion of NATO member countries, towards Eastern Europe, a tactic that threatens Russia’s borders and allows the US, Russia’s great adversary, to attack effectively if it so decides. According to President Putin, this plan of upcoming attack became apparent when talks of Georgia and Ukraine becoming NATO members began again.
The acquisition of even part of Ukraine would help defend Russia in the event of a US attack and would send a loud and clear message to its opponents to stop their expansion while they still can, according to the Russian president
As the death toll of his “operation” rises, Putin is being accused by NATO countries of endangering world peace by forcing them to pick a side and join a new world war. President Putin has also stated that any country rushing to the aid of Ukraine will suffer consequences from Russia that “they have never seen before.”
NATO countries, in an attempt to stifle this war, are imposing increasingly harsh sanctions on Russia, hoping to completely exclude Russia from international trade and its development. Several banks have already excluded Russia from using their systems, the countries that buy their oil and gas from Russia are gradually stopping these transactions and are looking for new suppliers, Russia is not supplied with foreign technologies and is cut off from the use of numerous websites, Russian oligarchs are barred from using their so-called “golden passports” and thus from entering NATO countries as they please, and even universities and various cultural institutions are barring Russians from their functions. But what does all of this mean for the European Union in 2022?
Consequences of supporting Ukraine for Greece
In the event of a Turkish invasion in Greece, Russia will most probably help Turkey in return for its favor of staying neutral, instead of aiding Ukraine, as the countries of the EU & NATO have.
A wave of refugees is expected, first in the Baltic and Balkan countries, which are also in the worst economic situation amongst NATO countries. We already know from the refugee wave that Greece has had to deal with so far, that no NATO country will substantially help these countries to handle this issue in terms of structures and financial support. The economic collapse of countries that will receive this wave of refugees is also, as it seems, inevitable.
A major wave of economic crisis and reorganization of all European countries and NATO member America is also on the way. These countries will be forced to quickly and effectively ensure their independence from Russian oil and gas as well as the grain supply of the countries involved in this war, find new suppliers, ensure safe passages for transnational trade during the war, and effectively handle the inflation expected with the devaluation of the dollar.
These NATO-imposed sanctions on Russia, which exclude the country from all these common areas of action, will affect us all as a result, with the lowest income civilians ending up the most affected.
As a result of the refugee waves and the economic crises in various countries, a new wave of racist hate crimes is expected to hit these host countries. So, “new fronts” are expected to open, perhaps this time between NATO countries, in which case no one will be happy to ally with anyone.
The US will have no incentive, if the eastern NATO countries they need are weakened, to stay “in”, Germans are certainly not behaving as if they are “down”, and Russians are no longer “out”. Hence, we are facing the possibility of a NATO collapse, which would lead to the most vulnerable countries facing neighboring invasions alone, without the control of a common institution keeping everybody in check. The idea of a European Union as a whole will be challenged.
Last but not least, the spreading of propaganda and misinformation in countries that due to war activity will not be able to control their sources is another epidemic that will affect everybody involved. Misinformation in times of war is a dangerous path, the “hybrid war” phenomenon, as it is called — and it is one we yet have managed to fully take under control even in times of peace.
Henry Kissinger: To settle the Ukraine crisis, start at the end, Washington Post
The former US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, expressed his views and predictions on the Ukrainian issue in his article, “To settle the Ukraine crisis, start at the end”, on March 5, 2014.
“Far too often the Ukrainian issue is posed as a showdown: whether Ukraine joins the East or the West. But if Ukraine is to survive and thrive, it must not be either side’s outpost against the other — it should function as a bridge between them”.
Kissinger placed importance on the necessity of compromising from both sides.
Russia must accept that trying to force Ukraine into a satellite status, and thereby move Russia’s borders again, would doom Moscow to repeat its history of self-fulfilling cycles of reciprocal pressures with Europe and the United States.
The West must understand that, to Russia, Ukraine can never be just a foreign country. Russian history began in what was called Kievan-Rus. Ukraine has been part of Russia for centuries, and their histories were intertwined before then. With that in mind, Ukraine is culturally and historically invaluable to Russia.
“Each has made the situation worse. Russia would not be able to impose a military solution without isolating itself at a time when many of its borders are already precarious. For the West, the demonization of Vladimir Putin is not a policy; it is an alibi for the absence of one”.
Both sides need to examine the consequences of the rivalry and not encourage or partake in it.
Kissinger’s suggested solution that accommodates both sides:
- Ukraine should choose its economic and political associations freely
- Ukraine should not join NATO, as this would create tensions between Russia and Western Europe and escalate into armed conflict
- Ukraine must appoint a government compatible with the expressed will of its people. A government with wise political leaders would then choose a policy of reconciliation between the various regions of their country. From an international perspective, a stance similar to that of Finland should be followed — There should be no doubt about the independence of the state and it should cooperate with the West in most areas, but should carefully avoid institutional hostility towards Russia.
- Ukraine should strengthen Crimea’s autonomy in the elections held in presence of international observers, and Russia should recognize Ukraine’s sovereignty over Crimea.
By team Aligned: Agelos Latsi, Elena Alid, Ιωάννα Ταμβάκη
