-Analysis-
STOCKHOLM — It’s now been a decade-long conflict in Ukraine, which began with Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea — and we can agree that Moscow’s actions against its supposed “brotherly” neighbors have yielded decidedly mixed results.
Russia suffered significant damage to its reputation as a military powerhouse due to the 2022 war, which was widely condemned internationally, tarnishing the image of the Kremlin leadership, military generals, and defense sector. The Ukrainian campaign also led to severe repercussions, including the loss of Western trading partners, markets, and investors, with potential far-reaching consequences for Russia across regional, geopolitical, economic, and possibly domestic political spheres.
[shortcode-Subscribe-to-Ukraine-daily-box]
And yet even amidst these evident failures for Moscow, there are certain outcomes of Russian aggression against Ukraine that have weakened the international order and the West, two longstanding objectives of Vladimir Putin.
The large-scale invasion by Russia on February 24, 2022, did prompt an immediate move toward unity among Western nations. NATO and the European Union drew closer in response to Russian escalation. In addition, Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia advanced significantly toward Western integration, now designated as candidates for future EU membership.
Still, the repercussions of the Russian conflict in Eastern Europe have led to significant global political damage. And even while this may not have been Moscow’s primary intention, these collateral effects align directly with Russia’s interests.
Various current and potential future actors seeking revisionist changes to the balance of power benefit from Russia’s disruption of international laws and norms. Russia’s assault on the global security framework not only weakens the West and international institutions but, according to Moscow’s zero-sum calculations, thus also strengthens itself, its anti-Western allies, and other revisionist players worldwide.
Aside from the devastation inflicted upon Ukraine, Russia’s actions represent the most significant threat to global stability since the end of World War II.
While there have been numerous tragic wars worldwide since 1945, Russia’s war against Ukraine since 2014, escalating in 2022, possesses distinct characteristics that mark it as a uniquely dangerous force of destabilization.
To understand better what we’re witnessing, consider the following five key areas that highlight Russia’s impact on the global order:
Russia-NATO borders
Firstly, in 2014, Russia initiated an attack on a peaceful country without any provocation. The narrative pushed by Russia and its supporters regarding Ukraine’s domestic and foreign policy shift in 2014 is overstated. The EU-Ukraine association agreement at that time did not clash with the existing free trade pact between Russia and Ukraine.
Ukraine’s approach towards ethnic Russian minorities remained tolerant post-Euromaidan and only became more stringent due to the ensuing conflict. Contrary to claims, Ukrainian right-wing extremism was and remains relatively weak compared to European standards.
Moscow would have been expected to attack Finland following its application to join NATO in 2022.
The anticipated inclusion of Ukraine into NATO hadn’t materialized in 2014 and, given the complexities highlighted by Sweden’s accession challenges, indeed remains a distant prospect to this day.
By the logic often used to justify Putin’s actions, Russia should have withdrawn its troops from the Republic of Moldova long ago. Moldova has been officially designated as a non-aligned country since 1994. Despite this, Moscow has actively supported an unrecognized Transnistrian entity on Moldovan soil for three decades, both militarily and economically.
Based on the reasoning of those who justify Russian military actions, Moscow would have been expected to attack Finland following its application to join NATO in 2022. Once Helsinki expressed its intention, it became apparent that NATO would likely approve Finland’s request far sooner than Ukraine’s simultaneous bid for membership. Although the Russian-Finnish border is shorter than the Russian-Ukrainian one, it still significantly extends the overall border between Russia and NATO in 2022.
Furthermore, Finland’s potential NATO membership posed a particular concern for Russia due to the precarious positioning of Putin’s hometown, St. Petersburg. This city, often regarded as the second Russian capital, finds itself in close proximity to NATO, both from Estonia in the west and from Finland in the northeast. This shift in St. Petersburg’s geopolitical context made Finland’s potential NATO accession a more strategically concerning issue for Russia compared to Ukraine’s desire to join.
Still, despite these circumstances, Russia’s reaction to Finland’s statement and its accession to NATO was relatively muted. In fact, over the past couple of years, Russia has withdrawn its troops from the Northern Military District along the Russian-Finnish border, despite Finland’s pursuit of membership in the North Atlantic alliance.
Annexation
2. Both the 2014 and 2022 Russian invasions aimed not only for temporary occupation, but also resulted in what Russia perceives as a final and complete annexation. Initially, Crimea was annexed from Ukraine, followed by the incorporation of four more regions in southeastern mainland Ukraine.
Such blatant territorial expansion at the expense of a recognized neighboring country is not unprecedented, but it stands out as an extraordinary foreign endeavor since 1945.
Genocidal destruction
3. The 2022 Russian invasion is not solely about territorial expansion; it’s also a campaign of destruction. The objective appears to be the obliteration of Ukraine as an independent state and the suppression of the Ukrainian cultural identity separate from Russia.
Moscow’s intentions of genocide are evident not only through verbal declarations, but also through numerous terrorist actions, including:
- The killing of hundreds of civilians and prisoners of war.
- Mass deportation of tens of thousands of accompanied and unaccompanied children.
- Deliberate bombing of civilian infrastructure.
- Targeted destruction of Ukrainian cultural establishments like churches and libraries.
- Establishment of “filtration camps,” Russification efforts in occupied territories and re-education camps for Ukrainian minors and adults.
While this genocidal approach isn’t unprecedented post-1945, it has never been practiced in this manner by any permanent member of the UN Security Council outside its own territory.
Manipulating the UN Security Council
4. Another key aspect of the war involves Russia purposefully leveraging its seat on the UN Security Council to garner diplomatic support for its aggressive war and political backing for territorial expansion.
Since 2014, Russia has essentially flipped the original purpose of the UN on its head. The United Nations, initially established to uphold international law and safeguard state borders, integrity, and sovereignty, has, in Russia’s hands, become a tool for expansionist agendas.
Interestingly, Ukraine, a former Soviet republic, was among the founders of the UN in 1945, while the precursor to present-day Russia, the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (RSFSR), was not. However, the Russian Federation, which succeeded the RSFSR and joined the UN at the end of 1991, currently officially includes five forcibly annexed regions from one of the UN’s founding republics.
In a stark illustration of this situation, Russia bombed Kyiv in late April 2022 while UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres was in the city. Guterres had to seek refuge in a Kyiv bomb shelter from missiles fired by a permanent member of the UN Security Council.
Nuclear weapons
5. The most profound and dangerous implications of Moscow’s actions on the global security system revolve around the fifth aspect – the nuclear dimension of Russia’s expansionist war against Ukraine.
The actions of all involved in this conflict are influenced by Russia’s possession of nuclear arms and Ukraine’s lack thereof, including other forms of weapons of mass destruction. Ukraine, as well as Western nations and the broader global community, gauge their responses and signals based on Moscow’s explicit threats to employ nuclear weapons, coupled with Kyiv’s incapacity to retaliate in kind.
Ukraine briefly possessed the third-largest nuclear arsenal worldwide after Russia and the United States.
A glaringly contentious aspect of this situation is rooted in the Non-Proliferation Treaty of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), active since 1970. This treaty allows Russia to maintain nuclear arms but prohibits Ukraine from acquiring or developing them.
Similar to the paradoxical impact of Russia’s position on the UN Security Council, Moscow has subverted the essence of the NPT. Initially conceived as a means to maintain peace, the NPT’s consistent implementation in light of Russia’s conduct toward a non-nuclear state essentially enables an expansionist war by a nuclear power.
Following its independence in 1991, Ukraine briefly possessed the third-largest nuclear arsenal worldwide after Russia and the United States. At that time, Ukraine had more nuclear warheads than the combined arsenal of the three other recognized nuclear powers: Britain, France and China.
In the mid-1990s, Kyiv not only agreed to dismantle its non-functional intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) but, as part of the controversial Budapest Memorandum in 1994, Ukraine was also convinced to eliminate or transfer all its military-oriented nuclear stockpiles, radioactive materials, nuclear technology, and associated delivery mechanisms to Russia.
A particularly tragicomic aspect of this narrative emerged in 2022. Russia, using some of the delivery systems obtained from Ukraine under the 1994 Budapest Agreement, destroyed Ukrainian cities.
The broader international system
Russia’s war against Ukraine, which began in 2014 and escalated in 2022, has not only disrupted the liberal world order but also severely challenged the broader international system.
The supply of arms from the West to Ukraine remains hesitant, limited, and slow, lacking certain crucial types of weaponry.
The attack by Russia isn’t solely aimed at undermining Ukrainian democracy, but also targets its statehood, identity, and overall integrity. The subversive impact of such actions by a permanent member of the UN Security Council, possessing nuclear weapons in line with the NPT, is compounded by the tepid or ineffectual response from other Security Council members, nuclear-armed nations, and several influential Western countries, notably Germany.
Despite significant Western sanctions imposed on Moscow since 2022, which have hindered Russia’s military operations and weakened its economy, they have not fundamentally deterred Russia or brought an end to the conflict. The supply of arms from the West to Ukraine remains hesitant, limited, and slow, lacking certain crucial types of weaponry.
Russia’s war has indirectly, and at times directly, affected the security interests of European and other states, beyond Ukraine itself. Instances such as Russian missiles flying near Ukrainian nuclear power plants, targeting the embassy quarter in Kyiv, or destroying Ukrainian grain warehouses have raised concerns. However, even militarily robust European nations facing threats due to Russian military actions have largely relied on the Ukrainian Armed Forces to safeguard their national interests within Ukrainian territory.
The Kremlin has been remarkably successful in dismantling the global order that had been taking shape for the previous 30 years.
International assistance in providing non-military aid to Ukraine has remained notably inadequate.
Some in the West are now pushing for the release of frozen funds held by Moscow to be transferred to Kyiv, the imposition of penalties on Russia for extensive human rights violations in the occupied Ukrainian regions, and the repatriation of tens of thousands of deported Ukrainian children from Russia to their homeland.
Despite these noble intentions being widely discussed, there have been few tangible actions taken to achieve these goals. Instead, there seems to be a widening disparity between public declarations and actual political measures, creating the impression that the envisioned liberal world order is more of an illusion.
While it’s evident that Russia, as a revived empire, is heading towards a dead-end path and will eventually emerge defeated from the conflict, the Kremlin has been remarkably successful in dismantling the global order that had been taking shape for the previous 30 years.
