Russia’s 30 year War on Ukraine

The ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine has deep historical roots, tracing back to Moscow’s strategic interference in Ukraine’s political landscape and its desire to maintain a sphere of influence over former Soviet territories. While tensions have existed since Ukraine gained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, Russia’s overt interference ramped up dramatically in the 2000s, culminating in the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. From influencing elections and sabotaging Ukraine’s European aspirations to the annexation of Crimea and the current war, Moscow’s actions have reshaped Eastern Europe.

The Budapest Memorandum and Ukraine’s Nuclear Disarmament

Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, Ukraine inherited a significant nuclear arsenal, holding the third-largest stockpile in the world, including intercontinental ballistic missiles and nuclear warheads. This arsenal, however, became a complex issue; although located in Ukraine, the control codes for these weapons remained with Russia, and the international community was eager to prevent nuclear proliferation.

In 1994, Ukraine, along with the United States, Russia, and the United Kingdom, signed the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances. This agreement outlined the conditions under which Ukraine would relinquish its nuclear weapons in exchange for assurances regarding its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Under the Memorandum’s terms, Ukraine agreed to accede to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) as a non-nuclear-weapon state, which it formally did in 1994. The signatories, including Russia, committed to respecting Ukraine’s borders and refraining from the use of force against the country.

The main commitments of the Budapest Memorandum from each signatory included:

1. Respect for Ukrainian Sovereignty: Each signatory pledged to respect Ukraine’s independence and existing borders.
2. Refrain from Threats or Use of Force: The signatories agreed not to use or threaten to use military force against Ukraine’s territorial integrity or political independence.
3. Avoid Economic Coercion: The signatories committed not to impose economic pressure intended to influence Ukraine’s internal or foreign policy in a way that would benefit the signatories at Ukraine’s expense.
4. Assistance if Under Threat: The memorandum contained a clause stating that if Ukraine were to face a situation where its security guarantees were breached, the signatories would seek immediate action from the United Nations Security Council to assist Ukraine.

In return, Ukraine began dismantling its nuclear weapons, completing the process by 1996.

The Budapest Memorandum has since been a key point in Ukraine’s appeals for international support, underscoring the failure of the security assurances to prevent Russia’s aggression and raising questions about the reliability of non-proliferation agreements when security guarantees fall through.

Under the Budapest Memorandum, the United Kingdom and the United States had specific obligations toward Ukraine in exchange for its commitment to nuclear disarmament. While the memorandum did not constitute a formal defense treaty with binding requirements, it outlined strong security assurances from the UK, US, and Russia, emphasizing Ukraine’s sovereignty and protection against aggression. Here’s a breakdown of these commitments:

UK and US Key Obligations Under the Budapest Memorandum

1. Respect for Ukraine’s Sovereignty and Borders
   The UK and the US, alongside Russia, committed to respecting Ukraine’s independence and its then-existing borders. This assured Ukraine that its decision to relinquish nuclear arms would not lead to external threats to its territorial integrity.
2. Refraining from the Use of Force
   Both countries agreed not to use or threaten military force against Ukraine. This assurance was meant to prevent coercive actions and foster a peaceful environment for Ukraine to navigate post-Soviet independence.
3. Assistance Against Aggression
   In the event of a threat or violation of Ukraine’s territorial integrity, the UK and US pledged to seek “immediate action” from the United Nations Security Council to provide assistance to Ukraine. While this did not mandate automatic military intervention, it obligated both countries to use their influence within the UN to deter aggressions against Ukraine’s sovereignty. This clause emphasized the expectation of multilateral diplomatic and potentially peacekeeping efforts if Ukraine’s security were endangered.
4. Protection Against Economic Coercion
   The memorandum also included an obligation to avoid using economic or political pressure to influence Ukraine’s decisions in a way that would infringe upon its sovereignty. This was intended to safeguard Ukraine’s autonomy in its economic and foreign policy choices, particularly as it considered aligning with the European Union and other Western organizations.

Russia’s Core Obligations Under the Budapest Memorandum

1. Respect for Ukraine’s Borders and Sovereignty
   Russia, along with the UK and the US, pledged to recognize and respect Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty, and existing borders as established following the dissolution of the Soviet Union. This was foundational to Ukraine’s agreement to disarm, as it counted on Russia’s acknowledgment of its post-Soviet boundaries.
2. Refraining from Use or Threat of Force
   Russia committed not to use or threaten military force against Ukraine, promising that its territory would remain inviolable and free from any Russian encroachment. This was critical, as it assured Ukraine that it would not face Russian military aggression after relinquishing its nuclear weapons.
3. Avoiding Economic Coercion
   Russia agreed not to use economic pressure or coercive tactics to control Ukraine’s policies or interfere with its political independence. This clause intended to protect Ukraine from forced realignment or political interference by leveraging its economy.
4. Seeking UN Action for Ukraine’s Protection
   In the event that Ukraine faced threats to its security or sovereignty, Russia, like the UK and US, agreed to seek immediate action from the United Nations Security Council to provide assistance. This commitment was to ensure that any violation of Ukraine’s territorial integrity would be addressed through international mechanisms and deter aggressive actions against Ukraine.

Russia’s Influence in the 2004 Ukrainian Presidential Election

Russia’s attempts to control Ukraine’s political direction became most visible during the 2004 Ukrainian presidential election, where Moscow backed Viktor Yanukovych, a pro-Russian candidate. Yanukovych’s opponent, Viktor Yushchenko, favored closer ties with the West, particularly with the European Union and NATO. In the months leading up to the election, Russia provided financial backing, political advisors, and even disinformation campaigns to support Yanukovych. Moscow viewed Ukraine as a crucial buffer state and sought to keep it aligned within Russia’s orbit.

The election was marred by widespread accusations of fraud, including the manipulation of voter lists and ballot stuffing. Despite initial results declaring Yanukovych the winner, massive protests erupted across Ukraine, eventually leading to the Orange Revolution. The Ukrainian Supreme Court ordered a revote, and Yushchenko emerged victorious. This marked a temporary setback for Russia’s influence but also set the stage for more aggressive interventions later.

Sabotaging Ukraine’s EU Accession and the 2013-2014 Euromaidan Protests

Ukraine’s aspirations for EU integration remained a major point of contention between pro-Western factions and those favoring closer ties with Russia. Yanukovych made a political comeback in 2010, winning the presidency in what was seen as a more legitimate election. Under his leadership, Ukraine negotiated an Association Agreement with the European Union, a step seen as crucial for Ukraine’s integration into the European political and economic sphere. However, under immense pressure from Moscow, Yanukovych abruptly abandoned the deal in November 2013, opting instead to pursue closer ties with Russia.

This decision ignited the Euromaidan protests in Kyiv, with demonstrators demanding Yanukovych’s resignation and a return to the path of European integration. The protests soon escalated into a broader movement against corruption, authoritarianism, and Russian influence in Ukraine’s politics. By February 2014, the situation had spiraled into violence, with over a hundred protesters killed. Yanukovych fled to Russia, and a pro-Western government was installed in Kyiv. This loss of influence in Ukraine was a major blow to Russia, setting the stage for a more forceful response.

Russia’s Annexation of Crimea and the War in Donbas in 2014

Within days of Yanukovych’s ousting, Russia responded by seizing Crimea. Using a combination of military forces (often referred to as “little green men,” Russian soldiers without insignias), local pro-Russian militias, and a hastily organized and highly disputed referendum, Russia annexed Crimea in March 2014. The annexation was condemned by the international community as a violation of Ukraine’s territorial integrity, but Russia justified it by claiming to protect ethnic Russians in Crimea and the peninsula’s historical ties to Russia.

Simultaneously, Russia began supporting separatist movements in Ukraine’s eastern regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, collectively known as the Donbas. These regions declared independence from Ukraine, and a war between Ukrainian forces and Russian-backed separatists ensued. Russia denied direct military involvement, but evidence of its military support, arms shipments, and even Russian troops in eastern Ukraine became undeniable.

The war in Donbas settled into a bloody stalemate, with over 13,000 people killed between 2014 and 2021, despite multiple ceasefires and attempts at peace negotiations, such as the Minsk Agreements. Meanwhile, Russia faced international sanctions, including economic restrictions imposed by the United States, the European Union, and other Western allies.

Russia’s Breach of the Budapest Memorandum

Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the subsequent war in eastern Ukraine, followed by the 2022 full-scale invasion, are widely seen as direct violations of these commitments. The annexation of Crimea broke Russia’s promise to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity, and the invasion of Donbas further disregarded Ukraine’s sovereignty. These actions marked a clear departure from the commitments Russia made in the Budapest Memorandum, effectively nullifying the security assurances that had been the foundation of Ukraine’s nuclear disarmament.

While Russia has justified its actions by citing alleged threats to ethnic Russians and Russian speakers in Ukraine, the international community largely views these claims as pretexts for territorial ambitions. By breaching the Budapest Memorandum, Russia undermined not only Ukraine’s sovereignty but also the trust in international agreements intended to ensure security for non-nuclear states, casting doubt on the reliability of such assurances in the face of aggressive nuclear-armed states.

Consequences of Russia’s Breach

Russia’s actions have spurred severe diplomatic, economic, and security repercussions, including:

• Sanctions and Isolation: Russia has faced rounds of international sanctions and isolation, targeting its economy, exports, and leadership, with significant global opposition from Western nations.
• Loss of Trust in Security Assurances: Russia’s disregard for the Budapest Memorandum has fueled skepticism around international security assurances, particularly for countries considering nuclear disarmament or non-nuclear status.
• Intensified Ukraine-West Relations: Paradoxically, Russia’s actions drove Ukraine closer to Western alliances, fostering closer relationships with NATO, the EU, and other allies to bolster its defense and ensure its survival against further aggression.

Russia’s breach of the Budapest Memorandum is not only a betrayal of its agreement with Ukraine but also a destabilizing factor in global nuclear non-proliferation efforts, revealing how non-binding assurances can fall short in preventing aggression by nuclear powers.

The 2022 Full-Scale Invasion of Ukraine

By 2021, relations between Russia and Ukraine had deteriorated to a breaking point. Ukraine, under President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, had continued to pursue closer ties with NATO and the EU, alarming Moscow. Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has consistently viewed Ukraine’s Western alignment as a threat to Russia’s geopolitical standing, began massing troops on Ukraine’s borders in late 2021. Diplomatic efforts to de-escalate the situation failed, and on February 24, 2022, Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Putin’s stated goals were to “demilitarize” and “denazify” Ukraine, but these justifications were widely seen as pretexts for reasserting Russian dominance over the country. The invasion was met with fierce resistance from Ukraine, which received substantial military and financial aid from the West. What the Kremlin likely anticipated would be a quick victory turned into a prolonged and brutal war. Ukraine successfully defended its capital, Kyiv, and pushed back Russian forces in several key regions. The conflict has resulted in widespread destruction, displacement of millions, and tens of thousands of military and civilian casualties on both sides.

Russia’s Endgame and the Current Situation

As of 2024, the war in Ukraine continues with no clear resolution in sight. The conflict has evolved into a war of attrition, with both sides digging in for a long fight. Ukraine has reclaimed significant portions of territory, including parts of the Donbas, while Russia still controls Crimea and some regions in the east and south of Ukraine. The war has become a symbol of Ukraine’s determination to preserve its sovereignty and its European aspirations, while Russia remains entrenched in its belief that Ukraine should remain within its sphere of influence.

The war has also reshaped global geopolitics, leading to a realignment of alliances. NATO has expanded its presence in Eastern Europe, and Sweden and Finland have joined the alliance in direct response to Russian aggression. Meanwhile, Russia has faced economic strain due to sanctions, but has managed to maintain support from countries like China, India, and several nations in Africa and Latin America, keeping the global community divided on the conflict.

From meddling in Ukrainian elections and sabotaging its EU accession to invading and annexing its territory, Russia has systematically sought to exert control over Ukraine. However, Ukraine’s resistance, both politically and militarily, has only strengthened its resolve to break free from Russian influence and integrate more fully with the West. The 2022 invasion, intended to crush Ukrainian independence, has instead solidified Ukraine’s national identity and accelerated its Western alignment. The outcome of this war will have lasting implications not only for Ukraine and Russia but for the entire international order.