Establishment
Abstract
In the fall of 2013, the Government of Ukraine had announced the suspension to continue the process of European integration, which resulted in mass protests on the Independence Square. In late December, Russia expressed its readiness to give Ukraine a credit of 15 billion dollars. In January, former president Viktor Yanukovych signed the ‘repressive’ laws, which almost immediately were forced to cancel. 21 February, the President of Ukraine signed an agreement with the opposition, and three EU Foreign Ministers. Yanukovich flew to Donetsk, actually losing control on events in Kiev, then he disappeared and was found in Rostov-on-Don, in Russia. Parliament turned back to the democratic Constitution from 2004, released from prison Yulia Tymoshenko, and nominated Arseniy Yatseniuk to be a Prime Minister. Having used the instable situation, Putin occupied a part of its territories.
Key words: Ukraine crisis, Russian-Ukrainian War, conflict, national identity, Putin.
Now the world’s press uses different names to call the events that took place in Ukraine at the end of February 2014. Russia calls them the constitutional coup, a coup d'état, insurrection, rebellion. European countries call them revolution. Let's try to understand what happened in Kiev and investigate the world’s response to the events of the Ukrainian crisis.
Today Ukraine is experiencing a crisis of national identity in that sense that it became the object of external aggression for the first time in the history of its independence. The country has lost Crimea after the events in Odessa, Mariupol, Donbas and instability in the South of the state. With the first shots from the Russian border, Ukrainians began quickly to approach the ‘point of no return’ in the war that peaceful Ukraine do not want to continue, but has to, due to the Russian military aggression.
The origins of the war between Ukraine and Russia are multi-faceted and patchy. Relations between Russia and Ukraine were always called strategic. However, they never composed easily. Russia, from a position of ‘elder brother’, had been always trying to control democratic changes in Ukraine (Pifer, 2009, p. 30). Despite a slow and prolonged Europeanization of the country, Russia had been certain before that it had enough tools to prevent Ukraine from the European choice. The dynamics of good neighborly relations were slowly going down, in a straight proportion with the decrease of the dependence of countries from the former Soviet Union in the face of Russia (Pifer, 2009, p. 32). However, Ukraine and Russia avoided major crises for a long time till “EU-Ukraine relations have been on a downward trajectory since the Orange Revolution” (Feklyunina, 2013, p. 193).
Ukraine carries out a massive external pressure: informational, which is Russian propaganda, economic, military and political. The last events, testified absolute unpreparedness of public institutions to countering internal and external challenges in the world, because of marginal effectiveness of methods and ensuring international security. The institutions of the global collective security system that were formed during the cold war, in modern conditions proved to be incompetent. Gideon Rose asserted that “The Ukrainian revolution is particularly troublesome for Putin, because it comes at a time of growing concern about the fragility of the Russian political and economic system” (Rose, 2014, p. 95). In particular, Putin was afraid that democratic changes in Ukraine would lead to the collapse of a “regime” in Russia (Rose, 2014, p. 95).
Ukraine has proved to be incapable to give an adequate response to external assaults. One of the reasons is the mental gap in a society, its civil immaturity. The events in the square have given impetus to overcome these problems. Ukraine and the world met the aggression of a new type – a military aggression. The main forces of aggression have become ‘humanitarian’ intervention, the active involvement of the ‘fifth column’, Russia's dominance in the information sphere (Rose, 2014, p. 97). Moreover, the political elite in Ukraine proved to be unable to reach compromise and create the new formats of dialogue. Instead, the crisis of confidence between the central government and its representatives in the regions went deeper. Obviously, attempts of one political force to monopolize power led to national reconciliation. As a result, the Ukrainian society remains fragmented and disoriented against the foreign aggression and hostile outreach impacts. Now the defense and security sector is a mirror of the political and economic problems of the state. Its effective functioning would be securing the existence of Ukraine, and its sovereignty. But the system is corrupt. It is based on post-soviet values and management framework. Today's ‘hybrid war’, conducted by Russia, threats the whole world with its irregular armed formations and anonymous military units in the East of Ukraine. This war of the modern era was a brutal challenge for political and military command. The lack of an open confrontation, with new tactics, misinformation, creation of the atmosphere of panic and threats, the use of a living shield of civilians demonstrated the helplessness of the unprepared Ukrainian army in the war of the new type (Rose, 2014, p. 97-100).
The most vulnerable in the crisis was the economic sector. Weak diversification of markets of Ukrainian products, attachment to the Russian market of important sectors of the domestic economy, the lack of alternative sources of supply resources, all this has become an issue of national security even few years before (Pifer, 2009, p. 16). Industrial infrastructure remains inefficient and ineffective. Active use of Russia's levers of economic pressure leads to an outflow of capital, unemployment, growth of public utility rates.
The lack of adequate information and cultural policy caused a cultural occupation in the consciousness of Ukrainian citizens. The efforts of propaganda imposed artificial problem of discrimination against the Russian - speaking population. The world under the influence of the Russian interpretation of reality could not immediately react to the conflict and woke up only when Russia annexed the Crimea. The world’s bureaucratic machine and highly developed democracies proved to be impotent before the military attack. Annexation of the Crimea became possible only in conditions of the helplessness of international security institutions and weak regulatory functions of international law. The Ukrainian question once again showed how ‘the power of law’ lost in front of military power. And, unfortunately, it remains unpunished. The whole base of the bilateral Ukrainian-Russian agreements turned to be worthless. All reciprocal obligations, guarantees and assurances in respect to the sovereignty and territorial integrity were easily thwarted.
The situation in Ukraine and in the East of the country remains serious. The international community calls on the parties to the truce.
On 26 October, 2014, Ukrainian Parliament had special elections. It is important for the country to update and improve state policy in the field of national security, taking into account the lessons of the current crisis. The new Parliament has to adopt the reform of law enforcement agencies, special services, and develop effective armed forces. Transparency of procedures, the maximum intolerance to corruption should become the ideology of the state.
In the background of the Ukrainian crisis, the issue of reforms in the UN Security Council became crucial. The current model of the Security Council, obviously, does not take into account the entire complex of world changes. Therefore, in my opinion the new countries like India, Brazil, and Germany should become permanent members of the Security Council. At the same time we must admit that veto preserved for permanent members of the Security Council, today ceased to perform their stabilizing function.
A peaceful settlement of the current crisis today has a priority. Only peace and consolidation of society will open the path to a return to stability in the region and would resolve its political, economic and social problems. Ukraine should contribute to the building of the new security architecture in Europe and in the whole world. Today, dramatic lessons of the Ukrainian crisis are important for all nations of the world. Ensure the right of each country to the free choice of civilization development, appropriate strategies have become imperative for building a new international system of a collective security.
References
Feklyunina, V. (2013). The international economic crisis and the post-Soviet states. London: Routledge.
Pifer, S. (2009). Averting crisis in Ukraine. New York: Council on Foreign Relations, Center for Preventive Action.
Rose, G. (2014). Crisis in Ukraine. Foreign Affairs.
