History you didn’t learn: the role of the U.S. in the Russo-Ukrainian war
Written by Lakshmi Adiga and Katelin Ling Cooper
Julian Batchinsky / University of California Libraries
The events unfolding in Ukraine over the past week have plastered the news. The advancement of the Russian military brought an assault on land, air and sea, causing millions of Ukrainians to flee the violence at their doorsteps. Many thought the era of empire, invasion and violent annexation was over, that the high death tolls, trauma and sacrifices proved war just wasn’t worth it. Now Vladimir Putin is fighting against that idea, claiming the goal of this war is for “demilitarization and de-Nazification” of Ukraine.
But how much is this really true? What are the real catalysts for this war? As updates on the state of Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital, continue to flood in, here’s the 101 on the Russian invasion.
The root of Russian expansion
Putin’s motives for invading Ukraine had been established around summer of 2021. In his essay “On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians,” Putin argues that Russians and Ukrainians are one people and that the creation of Ukraine was part of the aftermath of Lenin and the Soviet Union. His reasoning opposes the evidence of Ukraine’s distinct cultural history long before that and Ukraine’s sovereign status today. Putin’s denial of Ukraine’s sovereignty and twisted historical narrative is another example of national propaganda in pursuit of supporting his goal for Russian expansion and a “unification of Slavic peoples” — a restoration of the Russian empire created during the time of the Soviet Union.
This expansion agenda doesn’t stem from sudden Russian philanthropy toward saving Ukraine from the supposed “Nazi-ification” entrenched in the government, which Ukraine’s Jewish president and prime minister pushes back against. Instead, the invasion mostly likely stems from Russia’s fear of being politically and geographically surrounded by democratic countries. Putin declared on Feb. 24, 2022 that Russia cannot be “safe, develop or exist” by the “threat” that is modern Ukraine. Of course, tension has been building for a long time, with the rise of pro-democracy protests in Russia after the rigged re-election of Putin in 2011 having been a direct threat to Putin’s dictatorship. Even more startling was the overthrow of the corrupt, pro-Russian Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014, which was a result of Ukrainian pro-democracy protests, a public expression of mass movement similar to the anti-war protests cropping up in Russia today.
It is important to note the role of the United States in Ukraine’s 2014 Maidan popular uprising and coup. The pro-democracy protests in Ukraine at the time of the president’s ousting was not actually driven by majority support, and in spite of many well-meaning revolutionaries, a large portion of protestors were members of the far right and neo-Nazis leading the charge: “What was meant to be a revolution for democracy and liberal values ended up featuring ultranationalist chants from the 1930s and prominent displays of fascist and white supremacist symbols, including the American Confederate flag … The tragedy is that [the coup] served largely to empower literal neo-Nazis while enacting only the goals of the Western powers that opportunistically lent their support — among which was the geopolitical equivalent of a predatory payday loan.”
In a statement published by the International League of People’s Struggle (ILPS) analyzing the political situation after the coup, ILPS discusses how the U.S. has maintained a key position in escalating tension between Ukraine and Russia, and this goes back farther than 2014. “Since 1991, the U.S. has spent USD 5 billion for the so-called democratization of Ukraine. It has fielded intelligence and political operatives to cultivate intellectual and political agents to become pro-U.S. and anti-Russia. It has funded anti-Russia and Russophobic NGOs, student and professional groups, and even hooligans. In the current political turmoil, the U.S. has been pushing the EU to proclaim and undertake sanctions against Ukraine in order to inflame anti-Russia sentiments.”
Ukrainian defense and NATO response
NATO (the North Atlantic Treaty Organization) is a political and military alliance that formed in 1949, consisting of a majority of democratic European countries along with the USA and Canada, who pledge to defend member countries against external threats. Historically speaking, NATO was developed post World War II primarily to counter any military power that is not capitalist; thus, U.S.-led NATO was created in direct opposition to Soviet powers and, to this day, remains staunchly anti-communist and anti-Russia. NATO’s ultimate goal is to strategically protect its financial interests through military alliance, and it uses its defense pacts to bring other nations into conflict. As political writer Branko Marcetic writes, “For decades, Washington and allied governments have pursued their strategic and economic interests under the cover of promoting democracy and liberal values abroad.”
Due to the nature of its founding, NATO embodies what Putin fears the most: the lethal spread of democracy. And it's at his front door, with much of Eastern Europe (namely Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania) already as established members. However, Ukraine is not a member; therefore, NATO will not be actively setting foot on the ground to defend Ukraine. On March 18th, the White House press secretary Jen Psaki reported that the U.S. has pledged “an additional $800 million in security assistance to Ukraine, bringing the total U.S. security assistance committed to Ukraine to $1 billion in just the past week.” Accordingly, the one billion dollars-worth of military equipment sent to Ukraine includes “100 grenade launchers, 5,000 rifles, 1000 pistols, 400 machine guns and 400 shotguns,” which seems hardly passive in nature; nevertheless, NATO remains uninvolved on the ground.
If NATO members, led by U.S. forces, were to enter into lethal military conflict, then the scale would dramatically increase: Russia as one of the biggest nuclear powerhouses in the world being pit against the largest cohesive military alliance surely will result in full-blown nuclear war, given that “between [NATO and Russia] they have a total of 12,000 nuclear weapons.”
However, current Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy sees NATO’s passivity as a green light for Russia to continue their airstrikes on Ukraine, condemning the NATO summit as confused and weak as they refuse to enact a no-fly zone in Ukrainian airspace. President Zelenskyy continues to condemn Russian actions and ensure that Ukraine will not surrender to this violence, highlighted in his speech to the European Union:
“Nobody is going to break us. We are fighting for our freedoms, for our lives, and now, for our survival … Prove that you are with us. And then life will win over death.”
In an effort to support Ukraine without increasing the scale and toll of the war, many members of NATO and the EU are striking Russia with economic sanctions. In an effort to “asphyxiate Russia’s economy,” as said by the French foreign minister Jean-Yves Le Drian, they have placed sanctions on oil refining technology, TV networks and natural material imports. However, implementing heavy sanctions does nothing to support the working class peoples of Russia or Ukraine, but rather continues to hurt the populations who are most directly impacted by this war.
The capital Kyiv continues to suffer from airstrikes, and violence routinely escalates with civilian related attacks in their second largest city Kharkiv. Given that the violence continues with no sign of surrender, countries are needing to face consequences larger than just witnessing the events of the war, but must figure out how to come to terms with the Ukrainian people who are fleeing from it.
The Russian attack and Ukrainian refugees
The assault on the capitol Kyiv has been the main axis of attack which has garnered the most attention, as well as produced the most refugees as Russian airstrikes have begun to target civilians. Kharkiv has also become a second axis of attack, along with Chernihiv and Mariupol, showing how despite the Russian army advance’s slow progress, the violence Russia has inflicted on Ukraine has not ceased in the slightest. The most reckless attack so far has been Russia’s seizure of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant on March 4th, with fears of a potential nuclear disaster causing panic across world capitals.
In an attempt to escape this violence as well as the looming 40-mile-long Russian military convoy approaching Kiev, many Ukrainians have turned to neighboring countries and allies to seek shelter. Poland has warmly welcomed Ukrainian refugees, citing the historic and cultural ties between the two countries as well as their “European-ness,” in contrast to many European nations’ behavior toward accepting nonwhite refugees.
The Russian invasion in Ukraine has proven to be a one-man decision headed by Russia’s tyrannical dictator, with not only world condemnation but Russian citizen condemnation as citizen protests continue to crop up in the country. To stand with Ukraine, many large corporations such as Exxon Mobil, Disney and Apple have pulled their businesses out of Russia. Of course, this remains a hypocritical action given that U.S. corporations continue to actively support other countries’ imperialist pursuits, namely that of the U.S. (can you think of any U.S. corporation who denounced the invasions in Iraq and Afghanistan? Didn’t think so.) and Israel. Nevertheless, many individuals have gone online to express their support for Ukraine on social media with the hashtag #StandForUkraine, as well as donating to ensure the safety of fleeing Ukrainian citizens.
As the Russian invasion continues, it is vital for us to understand the global connection between sovereign nations fighting imperialism and colonization, and to remain critical about why global attention does not apply the same vigor when it comes to Palestinian sovereignty or bombings in Yemen. To fight violence and oppression globally as well as within the U.S., it is vital for us to implement a class-based analysis in our calls to denounce war and resist NATO aggression in order to stand in solidarity with the people of Ukraine and to fight authoritarian imperialist regimes on all fronts.
