The Russia Ukraine War and the Rest of us
Samuel Enyi Otsapa
Samuelotsapa@gmail.com
The fastest, and perhaps easiest, way to understand the Russian invasion of Ukraine and why almost everyone is against it is to picture a 40 year old man in a fight with a 10 year old boy. With an area of 17,125,191 square kilometres, Russia is the largest country in the world, one of the richest with a GDP of $4.328 trillion (6th in the world), a per capita income of $29,485 and with its 145 milllion people, it is the most populous country in Europe. On the other hand, Ukraine is a country of 44 million people, the second largest in area in Europe, a GDP of $584 billion (48th in the world), a per capita income of $14.150 and according to the World Bank, is the poorest country in that continent. Thus, many of those against President Vladimir Putin’s aggression in Ukraine do so from the departure point that Ukraine is no match for Russia, even though Ukraine has the backing of the USA and NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization); a country and an international organization that Russia and President Putin see as threats to Russian interests in Eastern Europe, particularly its interests in Ukraine, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia and Moldova; countries that NATO considers as aspiring members.
Thus, one of the reasons for attacking Ukraine is to prevent the country from aligning with NATO – because for President Vladimir Putin, the stationing of a NATO base in Ukraine would make it easier for America and NATO to attack his country and he would not allow Ukraine to be used as the ‘conduit pipe’ for Russia’s destruction.
For many weeks leading to the morning of 24th February 2022 when Russia sent troops, tanks and airstrikes into Ukraine, President Putin kept assuring the world that he is not interested in going to war with Ukraine. Unfortunately, many of us believed him because for the rest of us and majority of Ukrainians, this kind of war cannot happen in the 21st century. Our denial of the issues and resultant unbelief was so deep such that even when President Putin, in December last year, began sending troops and tanks to its border with Ukraine and through Belarus (30,000 Russian troops entered Ukraine through Belarus); Russia’s biggest ally in this war, the rest of the world never really believed war would break out until we woke up to the reality that Russia has invaded Ukraine, another independent and sovereign nation. And today, and whether we accept it or not, we are all confronted with the impacts of our individual and collective unbelief and ineptitude.
Since the Russia versus Ukraine conflict began, there has been many accusations, counter accusations, opinions and counter opinions on the morality, legality and rationality of the conflict, or war if you may. Thus different experts, analysts, scholars and even those who do not understand the ‘undercurrents’ of the issues are eloquently pontificating. While some support Russia and Putin (and Belarus), others are against their action. And from personal observations from commentaries in the public domain, the individuals, groups, companies, international organizations and countries opposed to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine are more than those who supports it. The USA, France, Germany, Canada, United Kingdom and other members of NATO are opposed to Russia and they have gone ahead to impose sanctions on Russia and on the businesses of known associates of President Vladimir Putin. But President Putin is unfazed and is bent on challenging the existing world order which he believes is not in Russia’s advantage, as it is the single biggest side during the Cold War era, with the other being the USA. President Putin’s believe that Ukraine’s dealings with NATO opens the door for the alliance to set up a post within its territory interpreted as a direct threat to Russia. President Putin and the government he heads is convinced that with NATO’s presence in Ukraine, Russia and Russians would not be safe. On the other hand, Ukraine and its government argue that it is an independent and sovereign country so it has the right to enter into any form of relationship, coalition or entente with any country, group of countries or association when and however to promote and safeguard its national interests.
Ukraine declared itself independent from the Russian Federation on 24th August 1991 when it stated that the territory would no longer be governed by Russian laws. The current war between Russia and Ukraine has its foundation in February and March of 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine and establised two federal subjects; Federal City of Sevastopol and Republic of Crimea, there. When Russia did this, the international community condemned it and continued to recognise Crimea as part of Ukraine. Ukraine is an emerging economy and has huge prospects for growth with abundant reserves of coal, sulfur, natural gas, titanium, salt, manganese, iron ore, nickel, timber and mercury. As started earlier, though the war between the two countries can be traced to 2014, Russia and Ukraine are still engaged in business. In 2019, 2020 and 2021, the two countries traded in mineral exports, machines and chemical products, to the tune of billions of dollars. This arrangement re-enforces our argument that in today’s world, the international system is not as chaotic as it once was owing to the present reality that the parts that make up the whole are now more interconnected and interdependent than in the past. It is for this reason some of us have counselled that this conflict do not have the potential to lead to a third world war, unlike the events leading to the first world war (1914 – 1918) and the second (1939 – 1945). In today’s world, two countries may be in active conflict or war but would still be involved in mutually benefitimg trading of goods and services.
Therefore, when we speak of the world as a system of interconnected and interdependent parts or as a global village, the ongoing Russia versus Ukraine war perfectly explains this reality/argument. While the war is been fought in the eastern part of Europe, its reverberatons are felt in Western and Central Europe, Africa, Asia and other parts of the world in many ways than one; both directly and indirectly. As at today, the United Nations is reporting that more than 2 million people; Ukrainians and nationals of other countries, have been displaced into neigboring countries (the biggest displacement by a single war since the end of the second world war) like Mondolva, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Hungary – and there are direct and indirect implications and impacts of this mass displacement and dislocation on the socioeconomic and security structures of the hosting countries.
Sanctions against Russia and Russian interests are coming in thick and fast and some days ago, US President, Joe Biden, imposed a ban on the importation of Russian oil and natural gas into his country. As with countries, many international brands and businesses have also imposed sanctions on Russia. Currently, McDonalds; which has been in Russia since 1980, has shutdown its 850 outlets that employs over 62,000 people who are of different nationalities, including Russians (some of whom do not support their president’s action in Ukraine. One Russian-American enterpreneur has placed a $1 million bounty for the assassination of President Putin). Today, Star Bucks, Coca-Cola, Unilever, Pepsi, Heineken and Rui Tinto have also closed their businesses in Russia and in the coming days, many more would follow suit, leading to tens of thousands of job losses. A few days ago, the United Kingdom announced new sanctions against Russia. Some of them are: detain Russian aircraft and remove aircraft belonging to designated Russian individuals and entities from the UK register, ban on the export of aviation and space-related goods and technology, including technical assistance and ban on UK companies providing insurance and re-insurance services in relation to these goods and technology. Germany, Canada and France have also placed sanctions on Russia but one area that America and Ukraine on one hand and other countries in Europe on the other do not agree on is the call by the former for a ban on Russian oil/energy.
In his stance against banning Russian oil, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, is quoted by Politico as saying that: “Europe has deliberately exempted energy supplies from Russia from sanctions (because) at this moment, Europe’s supply of energy for heat generation, mobility, power supply and industry cannot be secured in any other way. It is therefore of essential importance for the provision of public services and the daily lives of our citizens”. The German Chancellor further explained that European partners “have been working hard for months” to develop alternatives to Russian energy supplies but “this cannot be done overnight”. It is because of this singular reason that a third world war cannot break out, at least not with this war, since countries of the world, much more than ever, are more interconnected and interdependent on one another. With its oil advantage, Russia can hold Europe to ransom if it refuses to sell its oil/energy to them even if they want to buy, a move that is likely to make European countries soften and/or loosen their sanctions on the country and President Vladimir Putin.
These sanctions on Russia are not affecting only Russians at home and abroad as there are non-Russians and citizens of other countries working in Russia and for Russian owned companies outside of Russia that are now being affected. Thus, these sanctions on Russia reverberates across many other countries, particularly African and Latin American countries, whose citizens in the diaspora are known to send money to dependants back home. The multiplier impact of this is that the survival of these dependants in much of Africa and Latin America is threatened since their benefactors are now out of jobs/unemployed. At the last count, more than 700 Nigerian students (mainly studying medicine) have been evacuated from Ukraine (although some have refused to return because for them, living under Russian shellings is better than surviving the harsh economic, social, political and security malfeasances in their home country). Good thing these students have returned to Nigeria but let us not kid ourselves, some of these forced returnees would, owing to the abrupt and unplanned dislocation and obvious idleness while in Nigeria, certainly delve into negative vices such as drug abuse, prostitution, crime and political thuggery (Nigeria draws closer to a general election next year), to fill in the void their relocation has created. We usually say “an idle man is the devil’s workshop” but in this case, it is “the devil tempts everyone but an idle man tempts the devil” that applies. Following their forced and unplanned relocation back home, and with nothing to do, most of these young men and women are now idle and in their idleness, they are tempting the devil to use them. For those that would give in, they shall be increasing the numbers of the army of the disturbers of the peace that Nigeria is currently battling (with pretentious policies and kid gloves).
As the Russian Ukrainian war rages on, it is important we understand that many Nigerians and Africans supporting Russia and President Putin do so because they have a hatred and deep seated disdain for the USA (and its use of NATO) expantionist and medding-in-the-businesses-of-other-countries foreign policy. So for this group of people, President Putin’s “special military operation” (Putin has refused to call it a war) into Ukraine is justified to the extent that America has been doing the same for many years unchallenged and they are quick to cite America’s invasion of and intrusion into Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Syria, etc, as examples. For them, the USA and NATO member countries; France, United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, Italy, etc, do not have the moral standing to challenge Russia’s invasion of Ukraine because they are guilty of the same atrocity. While this argument is true in one breathe, it does not, in any way wholly justify the actions of President Putin and Russia, because in the cases where the USA had invaded other countries, it is in answering to the cries of the citizens of those countries by invoking the principle of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). The R2P is a 2005 United Nations principle that allows a country or an international organization to enter into an independent country to rescue the people if they are been persecuted by their own government, individual or group considered as genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.
In the case of Libya, the USA and NATO only sent supports to Libyan rebels who were fighting the over 40 years oppressive, repressive and authoritarian government of Colonel Mu’ammar Al-Qadhdhafi (Gaddafi) when he started killing his own people after they began protesting following the Arab Spring/Uprising that begun in Tunisia when a certain 26 year old Ahmed Bouzizi dosed himself with fuel following unsuccessful attempts to retrieve his goods seized by a policewoman. The Arab Spring, involving massive protests by citizens of the MENA region, began in Tunisia where the over 30 years government of President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali was sacked. Egyptians caught the bug and their protests led to the removal of the 30 years government of President Hosni Mubarak. Seeing this happening around him, Colonel Gaddafi; an autocratic leader, believing he has Libyans in his pocket, publicly boasted that what happened in Tunisia and Egypt cannot happen in his Libya, To prove him wrong, the longsuffering and hitherto ‘zombie’ citizens of Libya took to the streets and began their own version of the protests. To stop them, Gaddafi began shooting, killing and arresting protesters. It was at this point that the USA and NATO stepped in. And what did they do? They did not send in troops into Libya but empowered the protesting citizens of Libya, who had formed themselves into rebel groups, to confront Gaddafi. Gaddafi’s regime collapsed when he was shot dead by his own people and there were wild jubilations across Libya when news of his death filtered in.
Can we then, in all honesty, compare the above empirical narrative with what President Putin and Russia is doing in Ukraine? Did the people of Ukraine protest against the government of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy? Did Ukrainians seek for intervention from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity by their own government from Russia? It is for this reason that the invasion of Ukraine by Russia does not enjoy supports from most quarters. While we may rightly oppose, begrudge and fault America’s ‘over sabi-sabi’ and sometimes unsolicited intrusion into the affairs of other nations by employing itself as the conscience and policeman of the world, it always uses sensible, rational and justifiable reasons, or alibi if you may, to intervene in the affairs of another nation that stands against its national interests, even if disguised as R2P. And to my mind, it is this lack of a good reason for the invasion of Ukraine that China, who everyone had expected would fully support and back Russia in this conflict is somewhat ‘non-aligned’ in its approach to this war and has sent humanitarian aid to Ukraine. According to the Business Standard, while China is sending food and daily necessities worth 5 million yuan (USD 791,000) to Ukraine, it also opposes the sanctions against Russia saying that it would continue to do business with Russia in the spirit of mutual respect, equality and mutual benefit. In an ideal situation, China would have used this opportunity to work against USA and NATO interests but because it understands that Russia and President Vladimir Putin do not have an undefendable case, President Xi Jinping is not cashing in on the war but as expected, China blames the USA for instigating the conflict because President Joe Biden failed to adequately consider Russia’s legitimate concerns over the security threats NATO’s presence in Ukraine would cause.
In the final analysis, it is for this reason and others that researchers and scholars of conflict continue to drum awareness to the internationality of every dispute, no matter how local to a community or country it may initially seem. For example: a communal conflict in rural igumale, Benue State, Nigeria has the potential of spreading into Adelaide in Australia, or Accra in Ghana – if not nibbed in the bud early. For now, and as Putin’s “special military operation” continues in Ukraine, it affects all of us; Russians, Ukrainians, Americans, Canadians – and the rest of us.
Interesting article.