Ukraine conflict poses long-term political risks
It has been one year since the conflict in Ukraine began and little progress has been made in the Eastern European country. Peace negotiations between the leaders of Germany, France, Russia and Ukraine left all parties involved with a bitter taste in their mouths, as they agreed to a 15- to 45-mile buffer zone but failed to touch base on when to pull out weapons. Violence still prevails despite a cease-fire.
A year ago, Ukraine was a stable constitutional republic, slated to host the 2015 FIBA EuroBasket basketball tournament and boasting one of the world’s largest exportation of grain. Today, civil unrest in the country is widespread and Russia continues to wage a belligerent campaign to retrieve some of its former Soviet Union land, with the territory of Crimea already annexed. The conflict underscores the glaring remnants of a post-Cold War narrative that continues to seep its 20th century roots into the 21st century geo-political discourse. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia has struggled to maintain its sphere of influence in Eastern Europe, which is mostly comprised of its former satellite countries and territories. With waves of democratization and implementation of neo-liberalist policies throughout the end of the 20th century, countries like Ukraine began to become more European, looking to the West for nation-building and economic support.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly demonstrated his desire to make his country the world power it was decades ago. With Crimea under his belt and violence raging in Ukraine, Putin’s Russia is built around antiquated parameters of annexation and imperialism that pose grave dangers to the international community. Recently, he has looked to both traditional and non-traditional allies to bolster his seat on the world stage. He met with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi to reclaim a relationship with the North African country stemming from post-Cold War dialogue. Additionally, increasing economic and diplomatic ties with China has presented both parties with an opportunity to accelerate growth. Russia, a country rich in natural sources such as oil, looks to benefit from China’s markets, capital and investments. Through this symbiotic relationship that could have long-lasting political ramifications and heavily alter the balance of power in international supremacy, Putin looks to parlay his diplomatic repertoire into a critical victory in Ukraine.
The current crisis requires a swift and decisive resolution. As long as artillery continues to fire across opposition lines, the borders continue to blur; parties involved disagreed on responsibility for the conflict and no one stands to gain, politically or diplomatically.
The issue at hand for peace brokers should center not on pointing out who the aggressor is. Rather, the stasis of negotiations should center on instituting lasting peace, creating an effective cease-fire, building a strong and united coalition, as well as respecting the autonomy of Ukraine as an independent nation.
The situation in Ukraine is a model for the perils and dangers that come with diplomacy and international relations. Thousands have died in Ukraine’s violent protests, which in turn have spawned this seemingly interminable series of bloodshed and chaos. This is no time for international politics — which is to say, the gamesmanship seasoned politicians are accustomed to has no place on the negotiating table in Paris.
The chaos in Ukraine persists, and as the scene of violence continues to play out on the world stage, the major actors must do something proactive lest the entire theater begin to break down.
Athanasius Georgy is a sophomore majoring in economics. His column, “On the World Stage,” runs Thursdays.