Normalization of Russia-Ukraine relations unlikely in near future

KB Usha, JLU Professor, tells in an exclusive interview with ILNA news agency that If the war in Ukraine continues it has grave geopolitical, economic, and human security implications at the regional and global levels as it has the potential to turn into a Third World War scenario and a nuclear war of destruction at a planetary scale.

You can read the full interview with ILNA news agency as follows:

Q. 1: During the past few weeks we have been witnessing a conflict between Russia and Ukraine. How do you evaluate the short-term and long-term developments regarding this conflict?  Do you think the current conflict will lead to a war of attrition?

Yes, over a month long Ukraine-Russia conflict, the peace efforts are still underway without reaching a solution. The war has been widely condemned worldwide. Majority of countries in the international system suggest that de-escalation and negotiations are better ways to make an exit from the conflict. The whole world is closely watching the turns and twists of the conflict. The conflict has short and long term causes and consequences. If the war continues it has grave geopolitical, economic and human security implications at the regional and global levels as it has the potential to turn into a Third World War scenario and a nuclear war of destruction at a planetary scale.

An important difficulty for a comprehensive/balanced analysis is that we have a very limited picture of what is really happening in the battleground, because of the ban of Russian related media, Facebook, twitter, Instagram etc. Also the platforms like YouTube block any sort of reporting by neutral countries criticizing the US and allies. The western mainstream media consensus, therefore, cannot be trusted due to politically motivated news coverage. A strong hatred towards everything and anything related to Russia and President Putin is obviously reflected mostly in the western mainstream media reporting. Since the Russian media is banned in the name of fake news, disinformation and propaganda the one-sided information available will not help a balanced analysis knowing the two sides better. The US led-West is in a hybrid war on Russia.

It is not that the current conflict between Ukraine and Russia happened all of a sudden. My view is that it is a highly complex and contradictory kind of confrontation with deep historical and geopolitical roots. It has both short and long term causes. The short term development regarding the current conflict can be traced back to the days of Orange revolution i.e., democracy promotion in 2004 and the Euromaidan coup in 2014, i.e., regime change orchestrated with US assistance that toppled the then the democratically elected President Victor Yanukovich for not leading Ukraine towards US-West orbit. Far Right parties with neo-Nazi ideologies and racial purity, white supremacy like Svoboda, Right Sector, etc. came to power in the interim government. Their militant group Azov Battalion eventually became strong presence in the National Guard with the support and training from NATO and CIA.

The previous president Petro Poroshenko incorporated Ukraine’s decision to join NATO in the constitution. The current President Volodymyr Zelenskyy also continues plan to join NATO and EU, rejecting Russia’s concerns. That means, the tension was in the making of more than eight years now.

Ukraine is culturally divided as west and east. East is Russian minority and west is Ukrainian ethnic groups. Ukrainians consider themselves as superior than Russian ethnic groups. The west is agrarian and east is industrial regions. Ukraine is rich in mineral resources, black soil, uranium, and is known as Europe’s food basket.

When the Far Right pro-US-western government came to power, they banned Russian language. The two eastern republics, Donetsk and Luhansk, in the ethnic Russian majority eastern region Donbass, could not recognize the pro-Western leadership. They declared independence. The fighting between the Ukrainian army and the Russian separatists since 2014 Euromaidan takes over created a civil war like situation. Neo-Nazi Azov battalion and militia groups aligned to them continued shelling eastern Russian dominated areas that killed large number of civilians. Although many human rights organizations reported human rights violations in east Ukraine nobody paid adequate attention.

The government in Ukraine is run by oligarchies and they balance foreign policies towards Russia and West for their political gain. Oligarchs, besides controlling businesses, are involved in money laundering type of illegal activities. They fund political parties, own media and political parties and become ministers, parliament members, etc. Ukraine is one of the highly corrupt countries in the world and corruption is normal practice there. State capturing by oligarchy has already happened and therefore people are suffering from poverty, unemployment, disease, etc. The ongoing war is the escalation of the 2013-2014 Euromaidan coup.

The long term development and the root cause of this conflict are related to the US led west’s three pronged strategy to occupy post-Soviet space at Russia’s geopolitical backyard: NATO expansion, EU enlargement and democracy promotion, i.e., color revolution. These flawed policies of triumphalist US-led west ended up in today’s war in Ukraine. Russia always opposed a US-NATO expansion plan since 1995 to move towards former Soviet space. The main objective of post-cold war Euro-Atlantic geopolitical great game is to focus on the Eurasian landmass, encirclement and containment of Russia.

The Euro-American imperialist roadmap of dividing and destabilizing Ukraine for trapping and containment of Russia for attaining American global primacy was planned by Zbigniew Brzezinski, former US National Security Advisor, way back in 1997. He targeted Ukraine as an object of American geopolitics to make Russia militarily weakened and intimidated. The very existence of Russia itself could be a threat according to the US strategic thinking, therefore, has to be contained. Robert Gates, former US Defense Secretary in his memoirs, Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War, wrote referring to Dick Cheney, former US Defense Secretary and Vice President, “When the Soviet Union was collapsing in late 1991, Dick wanted to see the dismantlement not only of the Soviet Union and the Russian empire but of Russia itself, so it could never again be a threat to the rest of the world.”

Further, the Rand Corporation’s “Overextending and Unbalacing Russia report” of 2019 looks like a careful US masterplan to destroy Russia by exploiting its vulnerabilities without causing high risks to the US. It is a long term strategy involving to provoke the adversary, bring down and destroy. As one of the important geopolitical cost-imposing measures the Rand Corporation’s 2019 plan suggests “providing lethal aid to Ukraine would exploit Russia’s greatest point of external vulnerability, but any increase in the US-provided weapons and military advice to Ukraine would have to be carefully calibrated to increase costs to Russia without provoking a much larger conflict in which Russia, because of proximity, would have significant advantages.” The world is watching now in Ukraine this strategy that has been planned in 2019 and materialized now into action.

The current the conflict assumes the nature of a US-led west’s proxy war on Russia on many fronts, economic war, hybrid war, culture war, etc., using Ukraine as a geopolitical pivot. The aims, views and opinions expressed by the three parties involved in the conflict, US-led west, Ukraine and Russia, reveal it very clearly. Biden is calling for a regime change and removal of Putin, Zelenskyy is acting as a gambler and Putin is fighting for his country’s survival, territorial integrity, regime preservation and his people’s security. Russia has a history of defeating invading powers, and internal strife leading to state collapse during times of Tsarist Empire and Soviet Union. Therefore, Russia is very careful about the US policies towards it.

Now, US president Joe Biden and his fellow administrators present before the world their narrow, undemocratic and provocative position that this conflict as a “premeditated, unprovocative and unjust” war. The US-led west’s account that Russia launched the war is not fully correct, but the war, so to say, is forced upon Russia through long term provocation. Therefore, regarding the long term developments a retrospective look at the US foreign policies since 1991helps sound understanding. Since the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the changes in the world order, anti-Russian interest (Russophobia) remains a major factor in the US foreign policy.

Many US diplomats, strategic thinkers and academics like George Kennan, John Mearsheimer, Stephen F. Cohen, and many others warned about the fatal effects of NATO’s expansion to former Soviet space in the absence of any threat from Russia. However, US presidents listened only to Zbigniew Brzezinski, Francis Fukuyama, Samuel Huntington type advisors. As a result, the NATO invasions from Yugoslavia to Afghanistan to Iraq to Libya to Syria showed a particular pattern in the US strategy against targeted countries: campaigning by using democracy, freedom and human rights, othering and enemy imaging, propagation of concepts like “rogue state”, “lies” and “evil”, narrative construction and dissemination, media manipulation, disinformation campaign, covert economic and military assistance to proxies, overt humanitarian financial assistance, provoke invasion, regime change, eliminate state structure, and divide and wreck the country and control it with a pro-American puppet leader.

It is to be noted the way Biden extends personal insults to Putin beyond the decency of an American president, calling him “killer”, “war criminal”, “rogue”, “barbaric”, “pure thug”, “murderous dictator”, “megalomaniac”, “irrational”, “a cynical liar”, “butcher”, “For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power.” Some of the statements by Joe Biden give the impression that he is highly obsessed with Russophobia and Putin hatred. He shows more hatred than Reagan had for the Soviet Union. The US use of absurd terminologies against many leaders who challenged US domination is hinting clearly their regime change strategy in Russia. The US-led west represented the current war between Ukraine and Russia as a kind of universal good and evil, democracy and authoritarianism. Instead of de-escalation efforts war mongering, arming Ukraine, and fuelling the conflict are the actions of the US-led West. If the US can have a “Monroe Doctrine” to prevent other nations to advance towards the western hemisphere, why not Russia can pursue a “Putin Doctrine” to deter NATO’s advance towards its borders and the eastern hemisphere. Given the US pressure on China, India and other states for their independent positions is actually a threat to sovereignty. NATO’s onward eastern march is a long-term threat to nations in the Eurasian region.

The possibility of conflict turning into a war of attrition cannot be ruled out. Given the nature of war and the US-NATO arming of Ukraine, if both sides find it difficult to reach an agreement to end the war on mutual terms, there is a possibility of conflict going into a condition of stalemate. The most important irritants in peace negotiation between Ukraine and Russia will be the issue of the recognition of Crimea’s rejoining to Russia and the independence of the Donetsk and Luhansk republics of the Donbas region by Ukraine. Any improvement in Ukraine’s position on Russia depends on the state of US-Russia relations. Therefore, the prospect of developing normalcy in the relations between Ukraine and Russia in the near future is difficult to be seen now. The Anglo-Saxon policies show that they want to keep the war prolonged by arming Ukraine with weapons, intelligence support, and financial help to bleed Putin and his country. Russia will not leave the conflict easily, as it is fighting against an existential threat from NATO. It will fight just as it fought against Napoleon and Hitler in the past, till it gains the victory. In such a situation, if the conflict continues without reaching a negotiated settlement it can become a protracted conflict turning into a war of attrition.

         Q. 2: There are concerns regarding the condition of the Chernobyl nuclear plant. Is it possible that Russia uses the security of this nuclear plant as a means to advance its own goals?

         Chernobyl is a defunct nuclear power plant after the accident in 1986 and high radiation is the main concern. Since the location of Chernobyl is on the shortest route from Belarus to Kiev, it could be part of Russia’s plan as entry point to conquer main Ukrainian cities like Kyiv, Kharkiv, Kherson, etc. Many analysts view the main advantage for Russia by seizing this territory is that it helps the Russian military in Belarus get the fastest route to enter Kyiv to conquer the Ukrainian government.

         Q. 3: How do you evaluate the prospects of Moscow and Minsk’s relations following the current conflicts? What would Belarus and in particular Lukashenko demand from Putin in exchange for supporting him in his struggle with the international community?

Russia and Belarus keep very close relations based on their union state agreement. Russia helped prevent a color revolution sort of protest and regime change in Belarus and saved Lukashenko’s presidency recently. The landlocked position of Belarus in the region forces them to be dependent on Russia for economic assistance and military cooperation. Russian is the official language in Belarus. Lukashenko has Putin’s assurance that an attack on Belarus will be considered an attack on Russia. Lukashenko’s closeness with Putin is not liked by liberal circles that view over-dependency as a threat to the independence of Belarus.        

      Q. 4: In light of the current war, how do you predict the Putin’s political future?

After the war began Putin’s popular approval rating is soaring. According to Levada Center survey in February, around 70% of people support his action. Tass reported Putin’s public confidence increased to 80% in a survey conducted between March 7 and 13. What America is stage-managing is to trap Putin just like they trapped Saddam, Gaddafi, etc. First construct the enemy image, then rogue, then terrorist, then killer, crime against humanity, war criminal, and then assassinate. Narrative construction of this sort can be seen in social media platforms like Facebook, which allows hate speech against Russia and Putin. Putin is the choice of the people of Russia. The sovereign right to change leadership rests solely with Russian people. The NATO tactic is to provoke Russia into war and topple him and regime change with a Pro-US puppet in Russia. This is the motive when Joe Biden says Putin “cannot remain in power” and Boris Johnson accuses Putin of using “barbaric and indiscriminate tactics against innocent civilians” in Ukraine. It is doubtful if the US-western leaders’ wishful thinking will easily work on Putin and Russia as they have done in the case of Saddam and Gaddafi.

Q. 5: What will be the effect of Russia and Ukraine war on global energy equations?

I believe the conflict between Ukraine and Russia will have serious implications for the global energy market and energy security as Russia is one of the largest producer and exporter of oil and gas. Already the International Energy Agency (IEA) warned a global energy crisis looming and advised nations to take adequate measures to reduce energy consumption. According to IEA estimates Russia remains the world’s third largest oil producer after the United States and Saudi Arabia. Likewise, Russia is the world’s largest exporter of oil to global markets and the second largest crude oil exporter after Saudi Arabia. The EU and UK’s energy security is depending on Russian gas supplies. Now the US-led west has imposed a ban on the Russian energy sector. The EU which relies on 40% of Russian energy will have to find alternative sources failing which the region will face high prices, inflation, and popular protests. The war, unprecedented sanctions on Russia, and closure of the western energy market and banks for Russia will hit Europe’s energy security, given the dependency on Russian oil and gas. Many countries within the EU will have to rethink their energy security.

But the war could be an opportunity for countries like, China, India, Iran, etc to trade in local currencies with the Ruble. The US has approached even adversaries like Venezuela and Iran for oil supply. China, India, and Saudi Arabia have already agreed on the process of trading in national currencies with Ruble terms. If countries in West Asia can make this crisis an opportunity for a Eurasian energy system that ensures energy security by providing environmentally less damaging uninterrupted supply at an affordable price in the Eurasian market, it has the potential to change the energy equation leading to the rise of a new energy order. The Russian experience may also prompt many non-western countries to rethink neoliberal policies, their harmful outcomes for different countries and regions, and freezing of a given country’s foreign investment in assets and money leading to the end of globalization and US-western dominance. Because such actions are as if sort of a new form of colonization and resource grab by dominant powers.