Ukraine

A few years ago on my old walking route, I came across a woman often see working in her front yard, usually tending the flowers she planted along the edge of her driveway. After a few varied small conversations, I asked her, due to her strong accent, if she was Eastern Europe. She said, yes she was from the Ukraine. I come to find out that she moved to the US with her husband a few years earlier, after the Russian "annexation" of the Crimean Peninsula. Her husband had relatives already in the US. The Russia-Ukraine crisis has me thinking of her and the family members she said she still had living there. Let me just say, she is not a big fan of Vladimir Putin, the Russian president. Every morning the news begins with the situation in Ukraine. There are over a 1,000 of years of history involved in culture and ethnography and how these interacted to create settlements, and later states. Yet, there is a more recent thirty year history behind the story of Ukraine today. 

Ukraine Protest

On 1 December 1991 the people of Ukraine, with over 90% concurring, agreed to separate from the Soviet Union. Ukraine, being in the western part of the former Soviet Union at the time of its creation, had the third largest stockpile of nuclear weapons on the planet.  Most of them aimed at Westerrn Europe. The administration of George H. W. Bush, was concerned about this large amount of nuclear weapons and that it would (1) lead to more nuclear states in the world, (2) that peaceful transitions could not be counted on, and (3) that a violent breakup of the Soviet Union may lead to a catastrophic event. The Clinton Administration concurred with the policy establish by the Bush Administration. Hence, both administrations pursued a deal that would have Ukraine give up its nuclear weapons. This ended in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, that was signed by the United States, Great Britain, Russia and two other former Soviet Republics.

Major players in the current situation

For giving up its nuclear weapons, even though many viewed them as a key deterrent to possible future Russian aggression, Ukraine requested three things. First, compensation for the enriched uranium; second, the cost of decommissioning the nuclear arsenal be born by others, in this case the United States covered the cost; finally, it wanted guarantees, or assurances that its people, and territory would be respected. This last point was the key to the agreement. 

Because Ukraine was not then, nor today a member of NATO, there has always been a question of the use of US military force, although the US has made some supplies of military equipment. Boris Yeltsin, who signed the agreement for Russia, accepted Ukrainian sovereignty, Vlad Putin does not. In early 2014 Russia illegally annexed Crimea from Ukraine, and following that Russia has had proxies, the separatists in two the two regions Russia recently claimed as independent fight for them, claiming about 13,000 lives and creating two million refugees. That was proceeded by an incursion into the Republic of Georgia in 2008 which went quickly and with little reaction. Russia was successful in getting a country that was more amenable to its own wishes.

Hitler greeting Chamberlain, Sept 1938

Has the west enabled Russian militarization? Some seem to think so.  This article in The Atlantic Council in August of 2021 certainly argues that position by noting in part:

The international reaction to Russia’s military campaign in Georgia was to prove remarkably muted, with Moscow suffering few negative consequences. On the contrary, EU leaders led calls for a ceasefire that appeared to favor Russian interests, while the US under the new Obama administration was soon calling for a reset in relations with the Kremlin.

Understandably, many in Moscow interpreted this accommodating approach as an informal invitation for further acts of aggression in Russia’s traditional sphere of influence. Six years after the Russo-Georgian War, Russia embarked on a far more comprehensive military campaign against Ukraine, where Moscow continues to occupy Crimea and large swathes of eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region.

Of course, in 2022 the Moscow movement to Ukraine is much greater than six months ago. In 1993 University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer, wrote that without a nuclear deterrent Ukraine would be subject to Russian aggression. Ukraine did the right thing by giving up its nuclear arsenal, but 19 years later is Mearsheimer's prediction coming true? In 1994 the United States told Ukraine that any Russian incursion would entail a strong US response. What the US meant by a response may vary in opinion, and who is in NATO. 

A mutual aid pact, NATO members will go to the military aid of other NATO members. Ukraine is not a member of NATO. There are former Soviet Republics that are members of NATO, the three Baltic states come to mind. Russia wants assurances that NATO will not allow Ukraine as a member. Why Ukraine and not the Baltic states? This may have to do more with the resources of Ukraine than the cultural make up of the Ukraine. 

Munich Accord Summit, Sept. 1938

This past weekend, varied officials were involved in meetings in Munich, which included the President of Ukraine and US Vice President Harris. Interestingly, it was also in Munich that world leaders met with Hitler and gave away the Sudetenland of then Czechoslovakia to Germany. Germany claimed the Sudetenland was culturally part of its country. Germans, in the 13th century, were invited to settle parts of what became Czechoslovakia in 1918, and these areas became known as the Sudetenland. Putin said the same thing about Crimea, has said the same message about at least two regions of the Ukraine (which he claims are now independent), and basically now the same message about all of Ukraine. As any student of history well knows, the world did not long get "peace in our time" following the 1938 Munich Accords. Although it did get it for about one year. Showing that military aid pacts mean very little, Czechoslovakia, which had such a pact with France, was left alone to face Germany if it wished, and was not even invited to the Munich pact discussions in September 1938. Czechs refer to this agreement as the Munich Betrayal. At least this past weekend, the Ukrainian president was at the meeting. 

Do pacts matter? I suppose that Ukraine thinks of aid through the Budapest agreement as more than viewed by the US. But, Ukraine matters not simply because of British and US commitments through the Budapest Memorandum. It is a country being bullied. It matters because of its mineral wealth, it has significant deposits of coal, iron ore, natural gas, manganese, salt, oil, graphite, sulfur, kaolin, titanium, nickel, magnesium, timber, and mercury.  Think of the importance of just titanium in aerospace, sports and medicine, to name a few areas. Most replacement joints are titanium. China has been very aggressive at purchasing mineral rights around the world, realizing that who holds the key to mineral wealth holds the key to economic power. That is why China has been acquiring mineral rights for those rare earth minerals used to make high technology equipment and Prius automobiles.

I don't know that any talking head can accurately predict what Russia's endgame is in the Ukraine situation. Of course, there are enough views out there that one person will be correct, and like the false fact checkers no one will let them know they were wrong. I tend to think Russia wishes to make Ukraine more subservient to Russian rule--essentially be a puppet. I suppose there are ways to do this without all out war. Cyber attacks are now going on. Russia has also indicated it will provide a response to US and European sanctions. In the meantime, the US and Europe are holding back some sanctions that will be imposed if Russia moves further into the Ukraine. President Biden, last May allowed the Nordstream 2 pipeline to proceed with construction by removing sanctions imposed by President Trump in 2019.  On February 23, Biden reimposed sanctions on Nordstream 2. Nordstream 2 allows Russian fossil fuels to flow Germany and other European countries, and bypass pipelines through Ukraine. The Trump administration, per a BBC report, thought the line a security risk. 

Looking at history there is one thing I do know--events and actions are intractable. Unknown consequences will result, different roads will be taken and events and actions will change over time. They can take on a life of their own. This gets us back to the Budapest Memorandum where Russia has done its job by breaking its agreements, and time will tell if US and European sanctions can revert some of the damage that has been done. Although there is no way 13,000 plus lives are coming back--those already lost by separatist actions (in those two regions Russia now claims are independent from Ukraine), over the past eight years. I do know that that resident I used to talk to on my walking route is lucky to be out of that country, and given what she said in the past she is well aware of how fortunate she