'US commitment to Ukraine is very low': Interview with JNU academic Rajan Kumar

UKRAINE-CRISIS
Tanks move into the city, after Russian President Vladimir Putin authorized a military operation in eastern Ukraine, in Mariupol, February 24, 2022. REUTERS/Carlos Barria

On Thursday, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced his country’s invasion of Ukraine. He said the “aim of the special military operation was to protect Russia and demilitarise Ukraine”. The invasion has already become a global crisis with many countries condemning Russia’s action.

In this context, Dr Rajan Kumar, Associate Professor at the School of International Studies in Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, tells Malayala Manorama that the current situation is very tense and volatile. “People involved from all sides are alarmed, anxious and extremely cautious. We know that many of the conflicts in the past have escalated with minor provocations,” he said.

Edited excerpts from the interview:

What are the issues at stake?

Europe is witnessing an unprecedented security crisis. There are multiple parties involved, and identifying their motives is key to understanding the crisis in Ukraine. The critical issues are: NATO’s eastward expansion; Ukraine’s sovereignty and integrity; Russia’s national interests in Ukraine, and; the broader security of Europe.

Washington is pushing NATO to sign an agreement with Ukraine. Ukraine’s government is eager to join NATO, but many other members of the organisation are not keen on including Ukraine. Germany and France are opposed to the idea of membership to Ukraine. They fear that European security will come under threat if NATO forces encounter Russian forces on Ukraine’s borders. Chances of miscalculation and hostility will multiply if two powerful armies face each other. The Biden administration is also not keen on making Ukraine a NATO member. The US commitment to Ukraine appears very low. It is willing to provide financial and military aid to Ukraine, but does not want to send its forces in conflict.

Moscow has mobilised massive forces near its borders with Ukraine to ensure three things in particular: first, NATO should drop the idea of incorporating Ukraine; second, Russia should become a part of the broader European security architecture; and finally, Ukraine’s government should drop the plan of sending the military to the Donbas region to suppress Russian secessionist forces. Russia has partly succeeded in sending the message to Europe and the US. President Putin has become the centre of global attention. He has ensured that the West cannot ignore Russia at will. He seems to be least concerned about his image in the West.

The Biden administration is unlikely to succeed against Putin's game plan due to the following reasons: NATO is not united, and its prominent members such as Germany, France and Hungary are not in favour of escalating the conflict; NATO loathes the idea of sending troops to counter Russia; and finally, Putin is a master strategist who knows how to threaten, when to intervene and when to withdraw in a conflict. Putin has demonstrated that skill in Georgia, Ukraine, Syria, and Kazakhstan. Contrast that with the US withdrawal in Afghanistan, which was catastrophic.

What about the global power equations?

This conflict will have repercussions on future global security: the proximity between Russia and China will increase further. These two states are not part of any military alliance, but that cannot be ruled out in the future. Second, ongoing nuclear negotiations with Iran will come under threat as Moscow has a direct influence on Tehran. Further, agreements on Afghanistan, North Korea, Syria and Yemen would become difficult as the two sides will take opposite and rigid stances. New Delhi will find it difficult to manage its policy of multi-alignment wherein it sought to strike a delicate balance with the United States and Russia.

How will this war affect the people of Russia and Ukraine?

Dr Rajan Kumar
Dr Rajan Kumar is Associate Professor at the School of International Studies in Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.

Most of the people in Russia and Ukraine resent the idea of war. They feel that this war is unnecessary, avoidable and is being thrust upon them. Neither Russians nor Ukrainians want a war. The war between Ukraine and Russia would be a fratricidal one- a morally repugnant one which the logic of shifting geopolitics cannot justify.

Despite all the propaganda and hyperbole, the fact remains that none of the parties is prepared for war. War is an expensive exercise that entails massive material and human losses. Two states are not in a position to divert their scant resources for war mobilisations. And even if a war happens, there is no guarantee that a 'new balance' will be created in favour of Russia. States go for wars when they are convinced of some ‘gains’ in the process.

Russia will not gain anything if it goes to war. First, its security will become more vulnerable as it will come closer to NATO forces. Second, the Western countries will impose harsh sanctions on Russia, which will severely damage its economy in the short term. And third, the ethnic Ukrainian population will turn hostile to Russia for a long-term period. Therefore, Russia will lose much more than what it can expect to gain from a war. Its leadership is aware of this predicament, and that's precisely the reason why it has avoided confrontation until now.

They share a common history, culture and togetherness. Russians consider Ukraine as their own- ‘Little Russia’. In good times, Ukrainians would respond positively to such an idea, but during tension, they would advance the notion of a distinct identity, culture and destiny.

It must be remembered that Ukraine is not a homogenous society, and people identify themselves with various ethnicities. Ethnic identities are also not exclusive, and there are cross-cutting influences among the communities. Historically, each region in Ukraine was subject to opposing influences from the East and the West. Eastern and southern parts were under Russian influence, and the Western part switched between Poland, Austria, and Lithuania. The origin of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus is traced to the East Slavic state Kyivan Rus, founded in 862c by Varangian Rurik.

People in the western part of Ukraine favour the EU and NATO. They vote for nationalist parties such as Rukh and Our Ukraine. They speak the Ukrainian language. In the eastern part of Ukraine, people vote for left-wing political parties (the Communist Party or the Socialist Party) and favour closer ties with Russia. The division between East and West Ukraine resurfaces when Ukraine chooses between Europe and Russia.

Russia supports the implementation of the Minsk-II agreement, which has the provision of autonomous status for the Donbas region. The Ukrainian government is not in favour of implementing the Minsk agreement. It wants a unitary status in that region.

The comments posted here/below/in the given space are not on behalf of Onmanorama. The person posting the comment will be in sole ownership of its responsibility. According to the central government's IT rules, obscene or offensive statement made against a person, religion, community or nation is a punishable offense, and legal action would be taken against people who indulge in such activities.