BLOG | Ukraine at war - Geopolitical Fault Lines: The West’s Role in the Ukraine Crisis

Ukraine Crisis: The West’s Fault?

"The most dangerous moment comes with victory." — Napoleon Bonaparte

Abstract

This article analyzes the Ukraine crisis by examining its deep-rooted causes and the geopolitical tensions shaping Europe. Using a desk study approach, the research relies on historical records and contemporary news sources to present a fact-based analysis. It explores the behavioral patterns of the two superpowers—Russia and the United States—highlighting their conflicting foreign policies and ideological differences. In international politics, power is the primary currency that nations use to pursue their national interests. As both the United States and Russia strive to maintain their global influence, their competing ambitions have fueled the ongoing crisis.

Introduction

The West’s core strategic interests lie in Europe, Northeast Asia, and the Persian Gulf. A nation’s foreign policy is always shaped by its power and influence in the geopolitical arena. Ukraine’s geopolitical landscape is particularly complex, as it is a deeply divided country. The eastern part of Ukraine is predominantly Slavic and leans toward Russia due to cultural and historical affinities.

According to the prevailing Western narrative, President Vladimir Putin is the primary cause of the crisis, and Russia’s aggression toward Ukraine stems from a long-standing desire to revive the Soviet Empire. However, in reality, the West has been expanding into what Russia considers its sphere of influence, thereby threatening its core strategic interests.

The United States and its allies frequently intervene in global affairs, often seeking to replace existing regimes with democratically elected governments. While democracy is widely regarded as the best form of governance, the U.S. approach to democracy promotion often involves regime change, based on the assumption that newly elected governments will align with Western interests. The Orange Revolution in Ukraine serves as a prime example of the West’s efforts to sway public opinion and gain influence in the region.

Like all nation-states, the United States pursues its strategic interests when engaging with other countries. The U.S. seeks to maintain its hegemony, particularly in Northeast Asia, due to China’s rise as an emerging superpower, and in the Persian Gulf, due to its central role in global oil supply. Meanwhile, many Eastern European nations, as well as historically significant countries like Germany, are heavily dependent on Russian natural gas. This energy reliance grants Russia significant political leverage in the crisis, making it difficult for the West to impose effective deterrence against Russian aggression.

Creation of the Crisis: The Blame Game

The foremost cause of the upheaval is the West’s desire for eastward expansion, both militarily and economically. The main aim of the United States and its European allies is to peel Ukraine away from the Soviet orbit and incorporate it into the West. The West is principally responsible for this crisis, not the Russians; they desire to make Ukraine a Western bulwark on Russia’s border. Although this perspective is not the conventional wisdom in the United States, the facts speak for themselves.

The most common policies adopted by the United States and its allies include NATO expansion eastward, European Union enlargement, and fostering democracy worldwide. Since the end of the Cold War, beginning with the Clinton administration, the United States has been moving NATO eastward toward Russia’s border. Moreover, the invitation to Ukraine to join the European Union rather than the customs union of Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan was aimed at integrating Ukraine economically into the West.

The pivotal moment in this expansion was NATO’s 2008 Bucharest Summit, where it was declared: “NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO.” Moscow heavily condemned this declaration and declared that Georgia and Ukraine’s incorporation into NATO would be considered a direct threat to Russia. This event marked the point where the blame game intensified, prompting Russia to defend its sphere of influence.

The West’s preferred method of expanding influence is fostering democracy in authoritarian regimes, assuming that new governments will align with Western interests. This form of indirect political control is often labeled neo-imperialism. As two superpowers, the United States and Russia shape international relations, and any discord between them can escalate into direct or indirect conflict. The Russian response to the West’s interference in Ukraine and Georgia was the annexation of Crimea in March 2014, an eastern Ukrainian region with over 60% Slavic population. This move indicated that Russia would not tolerate Ukraine shifting into the Western sphere and was willing to take decisive action.

Anarchism and Global Politics

Nation-states exist in a state of anarchism, where no central authority governs their relations. Anarchy, in the realist context, refers to the absence of hierarchy, meaning no higher authority can resolve disputes between states. Thomas Hobbes, in his book Leviathan, wrote, “Individuals compete with each other for power because in the state of nature there is anarchy, and life in the state of nature is solitary, nasty, brutish, and short.” Similarly, in international politics, there is no global authority, forcing nations to compete for power, thereby maintaining balance-of-power politics.

Geopolitical Setup of Europe: Post-Crisis

Currently, the West has its eyes on Gotland Island, a Swedish island strategically located at the center of the Baltic Sea. If Sweden and Finland join NATO, Gotland could serve as the European frontline against Russia, controlling Russia’s only direct waterway access to the West.

On February 21, 2022, Moscow recognized the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, collectively known as Donbas, as independent territories. Putin argues that Ukraine is not merely a neighboring country but an integral part of Russia’s history, culture, and spiritual continuum, justifying Russia’s intervention. However, Western leaders reject this view, arguing that Russia’s actions violate international law.

Russia, as a great power, is unwilling to allow the United States and its allies to claim a significant portion of strategic land on its western border. This mirrors the Monroe Doctrine, under which the U.S. has long rejected foreign military presence in the Western Hemisphere. The United States itself reacted strongly when the Soviet Union placed military forces in Cuba. Hence, the West’s justification for NATO expansion into Eastern Europe remains a contentious issue.

Conclusion

The Ukraine crisis is a multifaceted geopolitical conflict rooted in historical tensions, strategic interests, and the broader struggle for influence between Russia and the West. While mainstream Western discourse attributes the crisis to Russian aggression, a more nuanced analysis reveals it stems from long-standing geopolitical rivalries. The expansion of NATO and the European Union into Eastern Europe is perceived by Russia as a direct encroachment on its sphere of influence, prompting countermeasures such as the annexation of Crimea and support for separatist movements in Donbas.

From a theoretical perspective, the Ukraine crisis exemplifies realism in international relations, where states act primarily in pursuit of power and security. While the U.S. and its allies advocate democratic expansion, Russia perceives this as a threat to its stability. This divergence in geopolitical outlooks has escalated the conflict, reducing the chances of a peaceful resolution.

A sustainable resolution requires acknowledging the security concerns of all parties involved. Western policymakers must recognize that continued expansion into Russia’s sphere of influence risks further destabilization, while Russia must respect Ukraine’s sovereignty. Diplomatic negotiations prioritizing security guarantees, balance-of-power politics, and regional stability are essential to preventing further escalation. Without such an approach, the crisis will persist, impacting global security and international order.

Author's Details

Adv. Yuvraj Singh

Advocate at High Court of Judicature At Allahabad

Email: yuvrajsingh1406k@gmail.com

Ukraine at war - Geopolitical Fault Lines: The West’s Role in the Ukraine Crisis

Disclaimer: The blog mentioned above has been prepared by the author as part of their internship at Legitimate Scrutiny. The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Legitimate Scrutiny. While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, Legitimate Scrutiny assumes no responsibility for any copyright infringement or legal implications arising from this content. Readers are advised to verify information independently and seek professional advice if required.