Crisis in Ukraine: A New US/Russia Cold War - Coursework Example

Crisis in Ukraine: A New US/Russia Cold War? Introduction The Ukraine crisis started in the year This crisis began as a protest against the then government led by president 21 November 2013 when the president Viktor Yanukovych suspended the bid for the implementation of Ukraine to join the European Union. The protest led to Viktor Yanukovych being ousted out of power as well as him being exiled from the Ukraine’s capital city. This led to a political reaction with regard to the reaction between the US and Russia because these two nations have two different ideological differences. To some political analysts, this amounts to a new cold war that has been referred to as the Cold war II. However, others think that this does not amount to another cold war, but just another difference in ideological ideas between two sovereign states. What made the situation worse in Ukraine is that the US was able to help Ukraine to install a pro western government while Russia was busy trying restoring the old regime. Others argue that the cold war is not on because Russia is not as powerful as it was during the cold war that arose after the Second World War. Today, Russia is nothing close to its former self and although it is a regional super power, it has its own numerous problems as was the US. Others have argued that the world today is no longer a bipolar world where only two nations (the US and Russia) have power. This means that their differences in terms of the nature of government must not be seen as a dangerous factor with regard to how these nations will relate in the future and the effect of this in the reset of the world. At the same time, unlike in the earlier days when the political destiny of a nation is determined by its leaders, today’s citizens are more powerful and determine the political agenda of a nation, as can be seen in the Ukraine situation. The problems in Ukraine started when the president of the nations refused to sign an agreement that would help Ukraine to join the European Union on November 21st 2013. In Ukraine, there is a political movement and it led the demand for closer relations with the European Union (Moore, 56-59). The chaos that followed saw president Yanukovych being unseated out of power. Even before, this, there was still some high level of unrest in Ukraine and this was just a culmination of the events that were already happening in Ukraine. Several civil wars have been erupting in the nations and this has caused unrest in the nation. Additionally, there have been many elections that have been held in the nation since the ousting of the president. Most of these elections were held in compromising situations and amid political unrest as well as high levels of insecurity. Because of this, voting was severely affected as many polling stations, as much as 80% remained closed even during a presidential election. The crisis has also been seen to divide the nation into two groups. One group is pro Russian and wants things to remain the way they were while the other group is pro European Union. The conflict between these two sides is what has been able to create some unrest in the nations. The sense of cold war has been detested because to the fact that the western political hemisphere led by the USA played a major role in supporting the pro European side in Ukraine to form the government. This was done even as Russia was keen to avoid this. As a result, this misunderstanding has been seen to cause a standoff between these two world super powers. Analysis have argued that this is the return of the cold war and that there is a likelihood of this war warming up and misunderstanding come a real war, thus causing he third world war. Russia has been blamed for causing the crisis in so many ways including the spread of propaganda. It is obvious that Russia has vested interests in Ukraine and may like to see the nation being separated. News about Russia arming the rebels in various parts of the nation has been spreading. This has been so much that even there have been protests in Russia to protest against the government for being too involved in Ukraine. This has caused several issues in the regions, with the US intervening and also Russian doing its part. Whether this will lead to a cold war will depend on a number of issues that can be seen in the modern political environment. This can be enclosed using the political theories. System level theories According to the system theories about political, it is argued that generally, political systems are system with clear bounders and that are fluid within themselves (Peterson, 165). Political actors act depending on the demands and expectations of the public. These expectations of the public are driven by a number of issues including policy development, policy development and even political completion within the system and with other political systems. Following this kid of argument, it can be said that the issues in Ukraine will not be able to create another cold war because the political environment in which the political actors of today operate are quite different from these of the first time that the first cold war was on. The political actors of today have to take into consideration of the expectations of the masses. Unlike in the 1960s when people were not informed, today’s people are well informed and have too much information in their hands. Not only do they have too much information in their hands, they also have political power to drive public policy. During the World War II as well as the cold war that ensued, the political actors had too much power and that the masses did not have the political know how. This can be seen in what has followed after it was clear that Russia was behind most of the unrest in Ukraine. Civilians in Russia have demonstrated in mass demonstrations in Russia. Base on political systems theories, it can be assumed that the intervention of the masses in Ukraine will affect the way in which the government acts. The same can be said of USA because the people in the USA are also likely to protest if they felt hat the government is interfering too much with the Ukraine issues. America has suffered a lot in the last few decades due to its involvement in the Middle East. This has happened so much that even the public was getting tired of the government sending American troops to the Middle East. Popular news has indicated that the reason that USA had been in trouble with terrorism is because of its interferance in the Middle East. The fact that the US army has been in the Middle East has been seen as what placed America in the wrong side of the terrorist groups. As a result, what the American public does not want is anything that will increase their status as the target by Middle Eastern terrorist groups. Because of this, the American government has to be very careful with regard to its activities in the Middle East. The government definitely does not have a free reign with regard to how it behaves in the Middle East and how it forms intentional relations with any other nations, Ukraine and Russia included. These factors will definitely affect the way in which the nation will react with regard to such issues. Those who see the situation in Ukraine as a repeat of the cold war seem to focus too much on the situation and as a result over simply the cause and effect nature of political disagreements. They tend to argue that just because the two nations have differing ideological outlooks that this will amount to a cold war. Yet, this is not necessarily true. They also seem to think that at the moment the biggest problem for American or Russia in the situation in Ukraine. Again, this if defiantly not true and it is wrong in so many respects. These two nations have bigger issues to deal with as opposed to starting a cold war because of a single war in the Middle East. At the same time, those who argue that the Ukraine situation will lead to, or is already a cold war, seem to ignore the fact that the nation is actually a sovereign nation with its own political system. Within this system, there are some processes that make it impossible for the nations to be able to able to interfere too much. Again, this is based on the political systems theory, what the other nations such as US and Russia can input into the Ukrainian political system is informed by the expectations of the masses as well as the public agenda. It is necessary to know that before these nations invest too many resources into such a system, they have to know what the costs and benefits are with regard to what is expected into the system and the eventual outcome (Moses, 89). There are ea number of issues that must then be considered especially with regard to the cost and benefit analysis that these two nations have to do before going into a cold war. For instance, USA is not as financially sound as it was during the other cold war. Today however, America has got its fair share of economic issues including a wavering economy and stubborn unemployment numbers that won’t come down. In this regard, USA does not have the economic resources to go to a full scale economic war with Russia. Its answer to the problems in Ukraine and its mild assistance of the government in Ukraine can only be seen as pro forma actions which it has to fulfill as a world political leader. Whether that should be interpreted as the beginning of a cold war is debatable. This will depend on whether these two nations have bigger interests than just Ukraine. As it is now, the economic cost that such a nation like the US could have to incur to go into a cold war with Russian just because of Ukraine would have to be justifiable and would also not be desirable to the political actors. As a result, the likelihood of a full scale cold war is not likely to come up with regard to the Ukrainian situation. It is not only US that is having economic problems. Russia, even with its oil exports cannot boast to have a very good economy. At the moment, these two nations have bigger problems to deal with as opposed to starting a cold war. However, this has to be understood from each of the two sides. From the Russian side, Russian would palpably like to restore a cold war, not only to have a chance to restore its old glory as a super power that was taken away by America, but also because it knows that if such a cold war was to warm up and become a real war, it now has a better chance against the US. Things were not like this in the past cold war. Apart from these factors, there is also the issue that the democratic space in Russia is not as advanced in the USA and so there is a higher chance that the public agenda may not be strong enough to restraint he government from acting in the way they want to act. Those who also seen the relation between Russia and US as leading to a cold war also seem to regard Russia as an evil empire. As President Obama has said in recent press releases, Russia is not the evil empire it has been regarded to be. The chance that Russia is going to start a full blaze cold war and to likely be willing to start a war is not that high. As Obama has been heard to say in the past, only a completely foolish leader would challenge a nation that is known to have nuclear power to a war. In this kind of statement, Obama can be seen as arguing that US cannot be foolish enough to put itself in a position when it can start a nuclear war with Russia. It can also be seen as meaning that Russia would not be foolish enough to challenge the US for a nuclear war. So Obama hopes that even as he and his government is rational enough to know how devastating a nuclear war with Russia would be, he also hopes that Putin and his government is also as rational and that he wouldn’t dare start a situation where the nation would be forced to have such a choice to go to war. Needless to say, a cold war is a recipe for a real war and these two nations know that this is the least thing they want for their nations. Not only are the leaders concerned with this issue, but even the people they lead also know the dangers of such a cold war. The other problem with those who see the current situation in Ukraine as a cold war also seem to assume that the balance of power between the US and Russia are the same. This is also wrong. They also seem to assume that the things at state in the US Russia standoff today can be matched with the standoff of the 1970s. In the first cold war, the issues that were at stake were too much and both nations had to do everything to try and protect their interests. Today, things are different and in fact the things at stake in today’s standoff between the US and Russia are different. What were at stake in the first cold war was globalization and the issue of communism versus capitalization. In today’s standoff between Russia and the US, the problems that are at stake are not global issues and so the need for a cold war or even a full war is not imminent. As some analysts have pointed out, the standoff in today’s time between the US and Russia is not necessarily an ideological issue. In the first cold war, Russia was trying to defend and install communism in Eastern Europe as well as maintain a communism in Russia. In today’s conflict between the US and Russia, this is not necessarily the case and so there is almost no need to for a fully scale war. In this regard alone, it is necessary to understand that the issues that are at stake are too small for these nations to be willing to go into a cold war and risk as real war. Energy politics At the moment, Russia has an advantage of having some of the biggest untapped oil reserves and this provides Russia with a lot of power in the world arena. This will also have a major role in determining the kind of relations that the US will have with regard to the Middle East. Oil is definitely an important commodity and there are even conspiracy theories about oil and the US being said to have hidden motives with regard to sending its troops in the Middle East. These conspiracy theories seems to suggest that while the US sends its troops to the middle east to restore peace and order, the true motive for occupying this region is in order to have easy unrestrained access to the oil. While these conspiracy theories may not necessary realistic, they do have some substance within them. It is therefore necessary for this to be considered and how it will affect the outcome of the situation of the relation between the US and Russia. Political System theory The system theory that can be used to describe the situation in Ukraine and how this has led to a developing cold war between US and Russia is the political realism, or political realisms theory. In this theory, there are three major tenets, each of which can be seen as acting in the relations between the United States and Russia. Statism Statism is where it is believed that states are the main factors in international politics. This can be seen in the US-Russia situation in that in this situation both the nation have been careful in dealing with the situation. Instead of individuals such as President Obama and Putin making the main decisions, these decisions are made through consultation and through observing the public opinion with regard to what must be done. Survival Survival refers to that there are no structured internal systems to govern nations and so each nation has to operate in a world where there are no clear laws to govern how they act. Because of this, it is obvious that the two nations, that is, the US and Russia, operate in a situation where there are no clear rules to determine how they can interfere with the political of another sovereign nations. Because there is n clear structure to govern how such nations can interfere with the political activities of another nation, they have been to invade the nation with regard to its political activities, without necessarily following a protocol. This has introduced a standoff between the two nations. If there were clear protocols as to how a nation should interfere with the affairs of another nation, this kind of standoff between the US and Russia could have been avoided. Within poetical systems such as nation, there are standards ways of dealing with issues. However, the interaction between and among these systems is not governed with proper rules. Even though there are many laws, treaties and international systems that try to sustain order in the way states relate, there are still no enough systems to make it possible for a proper way to determine how these relations can be managed. This gives political systems a lee way with regard to how they deal with other. In this regard, this is what is happening in the Middle East, especially in Ukraine. Self help With regard to realism as a political theory, self help refers to that no nations can depend on the other nations for its own farewell. Each nation has to look and protect its interests on itself without hoping that another nation will look after it. In this regard, even as both US and Russia seek to give a helping hand to Ukraine, they are not necessarily looking on how to help the nation but are looking on how to they can protect their own interests. If they were both genuinely interested in helping Ukraine, they would not need to find themselves in a standoff between each other. Both US and Russia have vested interest in the model east. For Russia, it is probably the desire to return its old glory of the Soviet Union. For the US, it is probably the oil reserves in the region, or it may be the need to continue advancing capitalism to as many Middle Eastern nations possible. As a result, it can be said that the reason why Russia and US seem to be disagreeing over Ukraine is a manifestation of the realism theory especially its third tenet which talks about self help with regard to the nation only seeking to help themselves and not hoping to b helped out by other people. Works Cited Moore, Patrick. "The New Cold War: Understandi Ukraiines Crisis." Journal of Politicla Science (2014): pp. 56-59. Moses, Weston. Understading Politicla Theory: Modern Political Systems . New Yorkl, NY: Pearson Books, 2011. Peterson, Idris. Political Systems Theory. London, UK: Cengene Books, 2013. Read More