Wednesday, June 15, 2022

The Ukraine-Russia War: Background, Causes and Implications

Hello World, 



There is so much discussion going on about the Ukraine war but none of those discussions seems to look into the facts from the past to better understand the background of the conflict. Here is a compilation of some facts and discussion around those for a better perspective of the issue. 

With the Ukraine conflict persisting and western sanctions against Russia being announced and implemented the global markets are beginning to face the impact. Since access to international products and services in Russia suddenly vaporized (as businesses shut down their Russian operations), the Russian economy is set to face significant shrinkage in the short term. However, international markets dependent on imports from Russia, are also facing the risk of sourcing their supply from other corners of the world. While some can manage in short term, everyone dependent on imports from Russia are ready to face tougher circumstances as they battle short term inflation while also anticipating a sudden lack of supply over the mid and long terms. Also, not every economy dependent on imports from Russia might be fit enough to handle inflation as Russian supply is getting boycotted at a global scale. All this happening just when the markets are trying to recover from the impact of Covid-19 indicates the importance of estimating the short term challenges for everyone across the globe.

Irrespective of how the Ukraine conflict is impacting global markets, the conflict serves as a great lesson for everyone, mostly teaching what not to do from a political perspective. For some reason, the root cause of the conflict is kept out of discussions across all platforms. No doubt that what is happening with Ukraine is unfortunate and negative. However, what is the point in not looking over the root cause of the conflict?

I wish to bring to your notice a few snippets of information along with the sources which shed light on the background of the Ukraine conflict, specifically the pieces of information not being discussed in public domain. I do not want you to think like me or even accept what I write here. However I request you to go over these facts (look up the references if need be) and take some time to think in your own way.

Source: https://www.csce.gov/sites/helsinkicommission.house.gov/files/120191UkraineReferendum.pdf

(A Report Prepared by the Staff of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, 1992)

On October 29, these two largest former Soviet republics signed a protocol in which Russia blessed Ukraine’s drive for independence in exchange for guarantees of the rights of the large Russian minority in Ukraine.

A critical variable in this delicate equation will be how newly independent Ukraine treats questions of language. The Ukrainian press, including the official paper of the Lviv Oblast Council and Pravda Ukraina, the successor to the Communist Party organ, printed letters from non-Ukrainians who voiced support for Ukrainian independence but urged a slow, circumspect approach to a linguistic reform that eschewed even the appearance of compulsion. A representative of the Polish national cultural society added that national minorities would be greatly reassured by the passage of a law guaranteeing their rights (Ukraine’s Supreme Soviet has yet to pass such legislation).

The concern of equal treatment of all languages within an independent Ukraine had remained a point of contention so much that it had attracted international intervention. A certain commitment was given from the Ukraine side with respect to equal treatment of ethnic minorities who speak non-Ukrainian (Russian) languages natively.

(Language Politics in Independent Ukraine: Towards One or Two State Languages?, Cambridge University Press, 2018)

Ukraine, like all the others, passed an exclusionary language law in 1989, making Ukrainian the sole state language. This stillness may have led some to believe that language was not destined to become a salient political issue in independent Ukraine. However, in early 1994, approximately 90% of the electors in the key industrial provinces of the Donbas voted in an illegal referendum for the proclamation of Russian as a second state language; this demonstrated quite vividly that language is indeed a very politically charged reality in Ukraine.

Since independence, the language of documentation in central state organs has largely switched from Russian to Ukrainian, although Russian is probably still widely used in industrial ministries." When interviewed by the author in the summer of 1993, a number of entrepreneurs all said that they are conducting their correspondence with the state in Ukrainian, since official papers registration, tax forms, etc.) are now issued in Ukrainian only. Official acts emanating from the presidential office, the Cabinet of Ministers or the parliament, such as decrees and laws, are also often published exclusively in Ukrainian, which is contrary to an article of the language law specifying that such documents must, as a rule, be made available in Russian.

The policy over public signs illustrates these diverging trends. In L'viv, the regional capital of western Ukraine, all Russian signs have been removed. In Kiev, located in central Ukraine, most new signs are in Ukrainian only, although some are in Ukrainian and Russian.

Russophones in eastern and southern Ukraine fear the "Ukrainization" of their region and increasingly reject the unitary nature of the Ukrainian state reflected in the language law. They argue that in order to preserve their "historic" distinctness, regions should be granted a certain degree of autonomy, within a federalized Ukraine. Federalism, here, would mean first and foremost regional control over language policy…

Russophones in the Donbas want Russian as a "second state language" not because they are already losing their jobs due to their poor command of Ukrainian, but because they fear they may be losing their jobs in the future if Ukrainian is indeed introduced as a prerequisite. The politics of anxiety among Russophones is colliding with the politics of identity among nationally-conscious Ukrainians, for whom it is a question of principle that Ukrainian be used in public offices in all regions of Ukraine. This is the central issue that can no longer be ignored in Ukrainian politics.

Ukrainian being made the sole state language, language of documentation in government agencies migrating from Russian to Ukrainian and the removal of Russian signs does not indicate anything positive to begin with. In fact it only indicates an administrative approach to linguistic oppression violating promises made at the political front. Having multiple languages deployed in the government machinery might add convenience and create a sense of inclusion but replacing one language with another does not indicate democratic behavior.

Here's what happened next:

Source:https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-parliament-language-idUSKCN1S111N

(Reuters, April, 25, 2019)

Ukraine’s parliament approved a law on Thursday that grants special status to the Ukrainian language and makes it mandatory for public sector workers, a move Russia described as divisive and said discriminated against Russian-speakers.

The law, which obliges all citizens to know the Ukrainian language and makes it a mandatory requirement for civil servants, soldiers, doctors, and teachers, was championed by outgoing President Petro Poroshenko.

Language has become a much more sensitive issue since 2014, when a pro-Russian president was toppled in a popular revolt and Russia responded by annexing the Crimea region and backing a pro-Russian separatist uprising in the east.

Mandating a certain linguistic proficiency for government jobs indicates the risk of losing eligibility for the same amongst the citizens who speak other languages natively. How is this democratic in any angle? Mandating multi-lingual proficiency for government officials would make some sense as that could be substantiated with the reasoning that the government expects the officials to operate in the local/regional language wherever they are deployed such that the citizens in those regions find it easy to interact with their respective officials. However, that is not the case. Care to think why and what this could’ve caused in the minds of those Ukrainian citizens who do not have Ukrainian as their native language?

Previous international intervention:

Source: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2019)032-e 

(EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW, December, 2019)

From information received by the delegation of the Venice Commission during its visit to Kyiv, it appears that representatives of the national minorities were not adequately consulted in the process of the preparation and adoption of the State Language Law.

The international intervention now accusing Russian involvement in Ukraine had identified faults on the Ukrainian administration 3 years ago. However, what actions were taken (besides recommendations) to coerce fair administration in Ukraine seems to be of less interest. To be fair, the international assessment of the situation in Ukraine was fair and it did capture the problem. Democratic processes when not being inclusive cease to substantiate democratic approach to administration.

History of the problem:

Source: https://www.refworld.org/docid/469f38ed5.html

(Minorities at Risk, Chronology for Russians in Ukraine, 2004)

Feb 1994

Representatives of the coal mining collectives in the Donbas region threaten a hunger strike over the failure of the government in Kiev to pay them since December of 1993. Kravchuk placates the protesters by vowing to formulate a program and way out of the problem. The problem is not isolated to eastern Ukraine only, but the situation is more tense given the ethnic breakdown and importance of the region economically for Ukraine. In general, ethnic Russians in the Donbas region are becoming more assertive for their "ethnic rights." Many Russian leaders complain that 70 to 80% of the revenues from the heavy industry in eastern Ukraine are allocated by Kiev, but little of that makes its way back into the eastern oblasts. They charge that the eastern oblasts are barely able to maintain their social programs as a result. They have begun to call for more political and economic autonomy from Kiev and closer economic ties to Russia and the CIS. There are also growing complaints concerning the increased use of Ukrainian in schools and the media as Russian (and, in general, Russian-speaking) parents claim their children are now at a disadvantage on entrance exams (due to the language laws designating Ukrainian as the only state language).

While this does not conclude anything concrete, I think, this does indicate that over time, the perception of economic disparity in Ukraine got correlated with the persisting linguistic bias that has been percolating the Ukrainian administrative infrastructure. Why did the effort recognize Russian-speaking Ukrainian citizens under ‘Minorities at Risk’?

Source: https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/44a280124.pdf

(CONSTITUTION OF UKRAINE)

Article 10 of the Constitution of Ukraine

In Ukraine, the free development, use and protection of Russian, and other languages of national minorities of Ukraine, is guaranteed.

Article 53 of the Constitution of Ukraine

Citizens who belong to national minorities are guaranteed the right to receive instruction in their native language, or to study their native language in state and communal educational establishments and through national cultural societies in accordance with the law.

Article 103 of the Constitution of Ukraine

A citizen of Ukraine who has attained the age of thirty-five, has the right to vote, has resided in Ukraine for the past ten years prior to the day of elections, and has command of the state language, may be elected as the President of Ukraine.

While most of the statements above seem fair and inclusive, ‘and has a command of the state language’ throws in a caveat. It really doesn’t break anything. All that is required is to publish a list of state languages with all the languages spoken by Ukrainian citizens. However, history has it that more than commission, omission has caused disparity and discontent amongst citizens.

The Recent Past:

Source:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28858542

(August, 2014)

Tens of thousands of civilians have fled in recent weeks as Ukrainian government forces have advanced on Luhansk. The city is suffering acute shortages of water, food and electricity.

An aide to Ukraine's interior ministry, Anton Gerashenko, said that 14 Russian TV channels had been banned from cable networks in Ukraine.

In a separate move, the Council of Europe, to which Ukraine and Russia both belong, urged member states on Tuesday to "step up humanitarian aid" in eastern Ukraine, saying that the number of displaced people and refugees was "increasing rapidly".

I am not sure why we are surprised about the consequences now and more importantly why the world did not consider the same humanitarian grounds when Ukrainian citizens were facing oppression from their own government. For some reason, we have been desensitized to accept military action by any government on its own citizens as normal. On the other hand, foreign intervention is not in the best interest of any country which we all tend to agree with the clear knowledge of similar foreign interventions in other countries that we never questioned. Some of those interventions spanned over a decade resulting in thousands of dead civilians and soldiers.

We can claim any place on the political spectrum and we might also choose any stance with the ongoing Ukrainian conflict which clearly is impacting all of us in one way or the other. What we should learn from this conflict is that a ‘one-solution-for-all’ approach to politics and associated administrative procedures will only result in catastrophic consequences for everyone. Forcing one language on others will only create more contempt and hatred, resulting in a never-ending loop of political retaliation. As long as the retaliation remains in the hearts and minds of the disadvantaged citizens, it remains a mere ‘controversy’ we can comfortably ignore under the guise of ‘neutral’, ‘positive’ and ‘no comments’. However, there is a tipping point to everything beyond which things reach a point of no-return eventually resulting in a conflict that ultimately ends up disturbing everyone irrespective of their direct involvement in that issue.

Embracing diversity is always beneficial but implementing inclusive approaches is the only means to it. Most of Europe has a certain faith being followed by the citizens but a close look at most of the names of the European countries indicates their roots to a language, spoken by their citizens. However, the relative peace and progress they have achieved is the evidence of their inclusive approach to embracing diversity. Of course, every democracy is a process that needs constant input and efforts to maintain its sanctity. Being at it is critical and that’s what makes democracy a self-sustainable and most widely accepted format of political frameworks adopted across the globe. Yes, there are disparities and yes we might not meet eye-to-eye on certain topics. This is common for all democracies. However, that can never be a reason to release our hold of the fundamental democratic principles that keep our societies civil and peaceful. The day we submit our sense of logic to populistic political propagandas, we subscribe to a crisis which will take a long time to brew and will not let us unsubscribe until we’ve paid our dues for the same.

Given the times we live in, it is of limited value in identifying who went wrong compared to what went wrong and most importantly how that can be rectified democratically. Be it avoiding conflicts, saving democracies or creating inclusive systems, organizations around the world have so much to learn from the ongoing Ukrainian conflict. All plans, approaches, benefits and advantages become useless the moment the greater good starts being the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of citizens within a democracy. Protection of anyone lies in the protection of everyone. Ignoring the latter will always put the former at risk. It doesn’t matter who started it. Within a democracy, we live or die together and as democracies, we are always connected to each other irrespective of our political stances and sanctions.

At what point do we admit?

#ukrainecrisis #ukrainewar #ukrainerussiawar #ukraineconflict #ukrainerussiaconflict #russiasanctions #russiaukrainewar



 Regards,