Ukraine and the cold war dynamics

S P SETH

Ukraine’s internal crisis has now become international, with Russia sending its troops in eastern and southern parts of the country in support of its majority Russian-speaking people. The question is: how has all this come about? To answer this: we need to go back to the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, of which Ukraine was a constituent part. Which made Ukraine an independent country. The Soviet Union lost the Cold War, but its legacy is now being played out in Ukraine between the US/Europe and Russia. The trigger for the crisis in Ukraine arose when President Viktor Yanukovych baulked at signing a deal for association with the European Union (EU). And he didn’t partly because the proposed association was only part of a process for formal membership over time, with no concrete immediate relief for the Ukrainian economy. Ukraine’s economy is in free fall with some of its debts needing immediate servicing. Ukraine is said to need a cash injection of $35 billion just to survive. The EU integration proposal didn’t have any financial teeth. The most Ukraine could hope for was an International Monetary Fund/EU economic restructuring package requiring a severe austerity regime.

However, for many people in Ukraine the very idea of integrating with Europe was rejuvenating and they didn’t want to go into the nitty-gritty of it. President Yanukovych, though, needed instant cash to stop the forthcoming economic crash. And Russia was more than willing to help. It offered a credit line of $15 billion and went ahead to buy $3 billion worth of Ukrainian bonds. Russian deal also included subsidized gas prices. All in all, it amounted to about $30 billion aid package. But many Ukrainians, particularly in the country’s western region, hated Russia as part of their collective memory of having been part of the Soviet Union. They simply wanted their government to integrate with the European Union and become part of the European experience and its imagined prosperity. The EU and the United States only fed this image and supported Ukraine on this path, with large-scale protests in the capital, Kiev, and some other places. Which, in turn, fed Russian paranoia of European/US machination that was not entirely unfounded.

Putin had called the collapse of the Soviet Union as the biggest geopolitical tragedy of the 20^th century. In its immediate aftermath, Russia lay helpless while the west continued to expand its geopolitical gains. For instance, while the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) expanded as the premium defence organization for the west, its Soviet counterpart, Warsaw Pact, of the Cold War era collapsed with the Soviet Union. Besides, some of the eastern European countries, that were once part of the Soviet communist bloc, like Poland and Czech Republic, were admitted into NATO. They also became sites for the United States’ missile defense system, supposedly against a future threat from Iran. But Russia views it as a direct security threat, and the US is trying to fine-tune it but without much success. The developments in Ukraine, with the overthrow of President Yanukovych, is also viewed in Russia as a western-inspired threat to that country.

At the height of the internal crisis in Ukraine, Russia was involved with the EU to create a transitional system of government until new presidential elections in December. Moscow, though, was not keen to put its signature to that arrangement. In any case, the proposed interim system became a casualty of the Ukraine’s parliament taking over the country’s affairs; proceeding to appoint an interim president and dismissing Viktor Yanukovych.  He was to be hunted down for murder of over 80 protestors by his security services and referred to the International Criminal Court for trial. Yanukovych, though, still claims to be the legitimate president of Ukraine, forced to take asylum in Russia fearing threat to his life from the ‘fascist’ coup. Ukraine is now polarized along regional and ethnic lines; its largely Russian-speaking eastern and southern parts, including Crimea with a large Russian naval base, eager to join Russia. And Moscow has made it clear that it will protect the Russian-speaking population. Indeed, Russian parliament has authorized the use of its armed forces in Ukraine to protect Russian interests.  In other words, the mandate is quite sweeping.

Russian intervention was expected. For instance, only a few days ago Russian Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev had reportedly questioned the legitimacy of a government in Ukraine created by an “armed mutiny”. He added, “If you consider Kalashnikov-toting people in black masks who are roaming Kiev to be the government, then it will be hard for us to deal with that government.” Earlier, he had said that the turmoil in Ukraine posed “a real threat to our interests and to our citizens’ lives and health.”

Here, it is necessary to put things in perspective. It was not long ago, in 2004 in fact, that the country went through the Orange Revolution, that brought down Viktor Yanukovych’s then-government on charges of election fraud and corruption. The Orange Revolution, that carried the hopes and aspirations of people for a new Ukraine, was a popular movement enjoying western support. Unfortunately, those hopes never materialized as the country hurtled into disunity and political infighting. There were similar stories at that time of large-scale corruption among the new leaders, causing popular revulsion at the state of affairs from a failed revolution. Which enabled Viktor Yanukovych, who was a political casualty of the Orange Revolution, to win back the country’s presidency in 2010 election.

The situation now, with Yanukvych deposed, replaced by an interim political order dominated by Ukraine’s western region, is ominous for reinforcing he country’s polarization between its Ukranian-speaking western region and Russian-speaking eastern and southern parts. With Russian troops already in Crimea and many of the Russian-speaking people in these regions wanting closer ties with Russia, at the very least, the country is in real danger of splitting up. In some ways, it has the makings of what happened in Georgia in 2008 when its government sent troops to occupy the separatist region of South Ossetia. Russia took matters into its own hands, deploying troops and making South Ossetia into its virtual protectorate. Georgia had high hopes of American and European intervention but that didn’t eventuate.

President Obama has warned Russia that its military intervention in Ukraine would have “costs”. And there is talk of some sorts of sanctions against Russia. The US and Europe are putting into motion all the wheels of international diplomacy, like the summoning of UN Security Council, but Russia is likely to get away with it. And Ukraine might end up being the new frontier of an old Cold War, that has simmered on in one form or the other.

Note: This article was first published in the Daily Times.

Contact: sushilpseth@yahoo.com.au