Reason Behind Russia-Ukraine War

Why Did the Conflict Between Russia and Ukraine Rise?

You probably already know that the Ukrainian problem has something to do with Russia's displeasure with Ukraine's desire to join NATO if you have been following the situation. But first, let's discuss a mechanism that probably had a role in Russia's choice to launch the conflict, as well as what has been done in the past to counteract that temptation. The power balance is shifted in favor of the group and away from the group's rivals as a result of alliances, which is the first thing to know about them. Here are only a few of the many causes behind this.

To begin with, in the case of a battle, the alliance may coordinate the precise placement of its soldiers. Because they do not have to devise their strategy on the spot, this is an improvement over coalitions that emerge amid a conflict. They can also specialize in their area of responsibility. For instance, in the 1980s, the US did not produce any minesweepers. Instead, that load was placed on Belgium and the Netherlands. Similar to Canada, the US only possesses two icebreakers capable of operating in the Arctic since it can rely on Canada's nine. Specialization enables the production of more military goods, increasing the alliance's might. The drawback is that it may take some time to reap the rewards of an alliance.

It should be evident that you cannot simply pick up tanks off of trees while building specialized weaponry. But it also holds true for coordinating attack plans. For instance, it took three and a half years to finalize the Franco-Russian alliance in 1894. We can understand how this might encourage Russia in the modern world to start a conflict. Let's say that in a conflict, Russia may anticipate capturing this area of Ukrainian land given the existing balance of forces. Everything to the right moves to Russia, while everything to the left remains in Ukraine.

We may leave the precise location of this line up to the military strategists. The idea is that since Ukraine is by itself, it is comparatively in Russia's favor. However, fighting has a price. We may use this red line to include the expense of Russia in this. The space in between the lines reflects the cost in square miles of the lives and wealth lost.

Consider what would occur if Ukraine joined NATO. Ukraine would hope to gain more with the alliance's increased power. With this yellow line, we may illustrate Ukraine's potential war expenses. And with that, you might be able to identify the issue. Russia aims to secure up to here, net, by fighting now, before an alliance can develop. Looking forward, we can see that we are in trouble. Then, the greatest potential solution Russia could wring from NATO-backed Ukraine must still provide Ukraine with at least this much. However, these requirements are incompatible.

Russia would rather be at war right now. When one state starts a battle to thwart a change in power, the conflict is referred to as a preventative war. It is as old as Ancient Greece and the Peloponnesian War as a justification for conflict. But battles have also frequently occurred in the background of this kind of alliance creation throughout world history. Remember the American Civil War? The fight over Fort Sumter on April 12, 1861, is considered to be the official beginning of this conflict. At that point, secession resolutions had been approved in South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas. However, no one was killed during the conflict. And Lincoln's next action was to slow down the war to reach an agreement. The Union established a blockade on the Confederacy in an attempt to deplete its economy and supplies. But Lincoln did not confine the Union to the blockade indefinitely.

The invasion began three months later, on July 21, with the Battle of Bull Run. What shifted Union policy? Cotton was a major worry that prompted the policy change. The industrial industry in the United Kingdom was heavily reliant on southern cotton, with 79% of its imports coming from across the Atlantic. Because of this economic interest, British Foreign Secretary—and later Prime Minister—John Russell warned the Union that he was "in no hurry to recognize the separation as complete and final," but that "Great Britain must hold herself free to act according to the progress of events as circumstances might require."

On June 3, Seward stated that "the primary risk in the current insurgency... was that of foreign interference, help, or sympathy; and especially of such intervention, aid, or sympathy on the part of the government of Great Britain." Bull Run was a means of preventing this. In 2008, Russia and Georgia engaged in another apparent preventative war. The narrative begins in April in Bucharest, Romania, where NATO had its annual summit. Georgia has pursued membership in NATO since the 2003 Rose Revolution.

In 2004, NATO issued Georgia an Individual Partnership Action Plan, which outlined the criteria and requirements for joining the alliance. The most historically significant of them was Georgia's resolution of two separatist claims within its borders. President George W. Bush sought to provide Georgia a Membership Action Plan—-the procedure that would allow them to join the alliance—-by the time of the 2008 gathering. NATO has decided to include this on the agenda for its December conference. Vladimir Putin was not pleased. Russia extended diplomatic relations with the two separatist Regions two days after the meeting finished. This directly contradicted the 2004 mandate that Georgia address its separatist claims. By August, a conflict had begun.

There are a few strategies to prevent conflict, which is excellent news. One strategy is to just pay the opposition to accept the partnership. This is what took place after the Berlin Wall fell. The Soviet Union was concerned about the effects of NATO moving its initial base of operations east as Germany strove to reunite. Throwing money at the issue was the straightforward remedy the West had. Armed with what seemed like an infinite supply of Deutschmarks, Helmut Kohl offered the Soviet Union enormous sums. Gorbachev was left with little choice but to accept because of the state of the Soviet Union. NATO now included the former East German territories.

Limiting the scope of the partnership advantages is a different tactic. This is one of the reasons the Sino-American Mutual Defense Treaty did not push the People's Republic of China to start a preemptive conflict. Although the deal addressed Taiwan's defense, it purposefully left out Taiwan's island territories close to the coast of the mainland. It to the Second Taiwan Strait Crisis later on.

Naturally, we now see that none of these tactics were successful. Even though there has been significant work put into developing international law, there is currently no global enforcement agency. Given that, it's plausible that Russia simply decided to start a conflict after seeing that this is how the world operates.

Thank you for reading till the end. Let us know, what do you think about the Ukraine-Russia war?