UKRAINE: Debunking War Myths

-

In this week's post, let's have a look at some of the arguments that have been thrown around since Russia invaded Ukraine, on February 25th, 2022. Much banter has been thrown about the reason as to why Russia invaded, to why the West should stop funding weapons and providing money to Ukraine. 

Let's debunk some of the most popular ones! 

WHY DOESN'T UKRAINE JUST NEGOTIATE? IT WILL SAVE LIVES!

Negotiating with Russia is a complex endeavor, underscored by their actions dating back to 2014, when they illegally occupied Crimea and participated in the Donbas War, and sought peace through the Minsk Agreements. Achieving a successful negotiation amid the ongoing conflict necessitates Russia's complete military withdrawal and the return of all Ukrainian territories, notably Crimea. Failing to meet these conditions raises several critical concerns:

  1. Humanitarian Concerns: Surrendering land without a full Russian withdrawal risks abandoning Ukrainian citizens in temporarily occupied territories. These individuals often endure forced conscription, with children subjected to propaganda and indoctrination into the Russian agenda. The population at large faces persecution for maintaining their Ukrainian identity.
  2. Security Risks: Allowing Russian forces to remain on Ukrainian soil during negotiations carries the risk of Russia using the peace period to regroup, rearm, and prepare for future military offensives. This threat underscores the urgency of complete Russian withdrawal.
  3. Responsibility for Aggression: It is essential to recognize that Ukraine did not initiate hostilities but, instead, is defending its peaceful and democratic nation against an aggressive neighboring state. In this context, the onus for resolution falls squarely on the aggressor to withdraw their forces. Ukraine's primary goal is to protect its people and its sovereignty, not to initiate conflict.
Ukraine's foreign minister, Dmytro Kuleba said in a recent interview, with NHK World Japan, that Putin "cannot be trusted because even if he gives you his word, there is not a single guarantee that he will not break it." He went further on to emphasize that Putin is not someone you can seriously negotiate with and, "...if you believe that you successfully negotiated with him, then you expose yourself to his attack."

It is also important to note that Russia, in conjunction with the United States and United Kingdom, provided security assurances in 1994 to Ukraine if they would surrender its nuclear weapons. This agreement was the Budapest Memorandum. 

IT'S ALL NATO'S FAULT! OR IS IT?

In the early stages of the conflict, Vladimir Putin pointed to NATO's expansion as a key factor contributing to the growing tensions between Russia and the West, with Ukraine caught in the middle. He argued for a return to NATO's 1997 borders, emphasizing the need for a reassessment of the alliance's reach.

It is important to understand that NATO membership is a voluntary and deliberative process. Prospective member countries typically hold referendums or submit formal applications, after which existing NATO member states carefully evaluate their suitability. This evaluation process ensures that aspiring members align with the alliance's values and commitments. Furthermore, unanimous agreement among all member states is required for an application to be accepted, highlighting the cooperative nature of the organization.

Interestingly, the conflict in Ukraine had an unexpected consequence: it led Sweden and Finland, traditionally non-aligned nations, to pursue NATO membership. Finland's application was completed in April 2023, while Sweden's bid remains pending as of the time of this writing. This development has effectively brought NATO closer to Russia's borders, particularly in the case of Finland with its 1340kms shared border with Russia, thereby altering the regional security dynamics.

Another crucial point to consider is the stabilizing role that NATO has played in Eastern Europe. Countries such as Poland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have benefited from NATO's security umbrella, which has helped them maintain their autonomy and safeguarded their borders. Vladimir Putin is undoubtedly aware that any military aggression against one of these Baltic nations would trigger a collective defense response from all 31 NATO member states, including the formidable military might of the United States.

In light of these complexities, blaming NATO for the conflict in Ukraine appears to be a simplistic and inadequate explanation. It obscures the deeper geopolitical factors at play and the intricate web of alliances and security concerns in the region. The situation underscores the need for a more nuanced analysis to truly understand the roots of the ongoing conflict.

UKRAINE TERRORISED THE DONBASS FOR 9 YEARS

This assertion is incorrect. Ukraine has been attempting to defend these areas for the past nine years, dating back to Russia's incursion into Crimea with "little green men", on 20th February 2014. After the annexation of Crimea, there was a spillover effect into the southern and eastern regions of Ukraine, known as the Donbass. 

This small-scale war had resulted in about 16,000 deaths and 2 million displaced refugees. To resolve this, two agreements were made, called Minsk I and Minsk II. One of the stipulations of these treaties was that Russia should maintain a ceasefire in the Donbass region, a commitment they failed to fulfill, maintaining their prior activities.

This represents yet another pretext employed by the Russian propaganda apparatus to rationalize the unlawful invasion of Ukraine. The primary argument put forth by the Kremlin was the need to protect the residents of the Donetsk People's Republic and Luhansk People's Republic (DNR and LNR) (territories unrecognized by most nations) who had purportedly requested Russia's assistance, citing their Russian citizenship. Such a rationale could potentially be exploited to justify an incursion into any country with a significant population of Russian speakers.

In essence, this narrative oversimplifies the situation and obscures the broader geopolitical context surrounding Russia's actions in Ukraine.

THE WEST IS THROWING TOO MUCH MONEY AT UKRAINE!

Western countries are giving a significant amount of financial aid to Ukraine. This money is meant for buying weapons, providing humanitarian assistance, and supporting the Ukrainian military. However, some people feel that Ukraine isn't getting enough weapons and ammunition, and there have been delays in delivering fighter jets.

One reason for this caution is the effective propaganda machine run by the Kremlin (the Russian government). The Kremlin has been good at sending a clear message that any actions it sees as provocative will lead to serious consequences. This makes Western countries hesitant to take stronger actions and adds to their worries about making the situation worse.

One big concern is the possibility of Russia using nuclear weapons or smaller tactical nuclear devices. These weapons could cause significant damage while trying to keep things under control, and that adds an extra layer of fear and uncertainty to the situation.

Besides propaganda and fear, the complicated world of international diplomacy and politics also plays a role in how Western countries provide support to Ukraine. Alliances, relationships between countries, and worries about making things worse in the region affect how and when Western countries help Ukraine.

In short, Ukraine's situation is complex, and the Kremlin's propaganda, the fear of unconventional military tactics, and diplomatic factors make it challenging for Western countries to decide how best to support Ukraine while keeping the region stable.

THEY ARE LOSING THE WAR ANYWAY, SO WHY BOTHER?

While it's true that Ukraine's progress this summer has been somewhat slower than anticipated, it's crucial to acknowledge that they are consistently making incremental advances, particularly in breaching the initial lines of Russian defenses. To support Ukraine's efforts in winning the war, Western nations must consider increasing the provision of weapon systems and artillery.

The path to victory in this conflict hinges on a combination of superior manpower and weaponry. Outmaneuvering and outgunning the adversary are key strategies, necessitating a robust production capacity and a larger arsenal than the aggressor possesses.

Ukraine's reliance on Western-supplied weapons is underscored by the fact that their own military equipment is either damaged, antiquated, obsolete, or rapidly depleting due to the protracted nature of the conflict. Abandoning the supply of arms to Ukraine would almost certainly result in their defeat. Conversely, by promptly furnishing the necessary resources, there exists a viable path for Ukraine to secure victory in this protracted war. 

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the ongoing conflict in Ukraine is a multifaceted and complex issue that demands careful consideration. While Ukraine has made steady, albeit gradual, progress in confronting Russian aggression, the importance of Western support cannot be overstated.

Providing Ukraine with the necessary weapon systems and artillery is not just a matter of military aid; it is a strategic imperative. The equation for success in this conflict involves a combination of superior resources and resolve. To ensure Ukraine's ability to counter the aggression effectively, Western nations must uphold their commitment to supplying the requisite weaponry.

Moreover, recognizing the influence of Kremlin propaganda and the potential for unconventional tactics underscores the need for a comprehensive approach. It is crucial to navigate the intricate web of international diplomacy and political considerations while keeping the ultimate goal of a stable, secure Ukraine at the forefront.

By maintaining steadfast support and furnishing Ukraine with the resources it needs in a timely manner, there is a path to victory in this protracted conflict. Abandoning this commitment would risk undermining the security and stability of the region.

In the face of these challenges, it is clear that the Western nations' role in supporting Ukraine is pivotal. By doing so, they not only stand alongside a partner in need but also contribute to the preservation of regional stability and the advancement of shared democratic values.

Resources: 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

MISINFORMATION AND DISINFORMATION

-
Image
Disinformation and misinformation are two related concepts that refer to false or misleading information. WHAT IS DISINFORMATION AND MISINFORMATION? Disinformation refers to false or misleading information that is intentionally spread with the goal of deceiving people or manipulating their beliefs or opinions. It is often spread by individuals or organizations with specific agendas, such as governments, political campaigns, or special interest groups. Disinformation can be distributed through a variety of channels, including social media, news media, and propaganda. Misinformation, on the other hand, refers to false or misleading information that is spread without the intention of deceiving people or manipulating their beliefs or opinions. Misinformation can be shared unintentionally through inaccurate reporting or through the sharing of rumors or urban legends. It can also be spread intentionally by people who are not aware that the information they are sharing is false or misleading.
Read more

PART 1: DISINFORMATION

-
Image
This is the first part of a series on Disinformation, Misinformation, and Malinformation. The purpose of these guides is to provide an in-depth look at each of these elements that are part of information operations used by countries as a strategy in hybrid warfare. This week, we focus on disinformation. We will break down what disinformation is, what forms it takes, and the purposes of disinformation campaigns. Then, we will examine several clear examples of how aggressive states such as Russia and China use disinformation campaigns as a cost-effective tool in waging hybrid warfare on Western societies. WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF DISINFORMATION? Disinformation refers to false or misleading information that is deliberately spread. The intent is to deceive and manipulate others with this fake information. It's different from misinformation because misinformation is spread unintentionally or due to some misunderstanding. Disinformation is crafted deliberately in a false manner to achie
Read more

Hauntings in Finland: Ghosts of Helsinki

-
Image
Helsinki, the capital of the Happiest Country on Earth, has a dark and gory past that is often overlooked. The city centre, with its beautiful Jugend and Art Deco architecture, hides a ghost in almost every place possible. Read on to find out 5 haunted places of Helsinki where you could meet with a other-wordly spectre.  1.FINNISH NATIONAL THEATRE / KANSALLISTEATTERI The Finnish National Theatre is a grey, imposing building that can be found next to the Helsinki Railway Station. The theatre company was established in 1872, and it is the oldest speaking theatre in Finland. The building was erected in 1902 and it was designed by architect Onni Tarjanne. It is built in the National Romantic style, which was quite popular at the time.  Finnish National Theatre  The theatre building is said to be haunted by three ghosts. The most prominent being the ghost of actor Urho Somersalmi. He was a very popular actor of his time. He worked in the Finnish National Theatre from 1908 to 1958.
Read more