The Clarion will continue to provide updated coverage as the situation Ukraine evolves.

A nation riddled with immense corruption, civil strife and a complicated past, Ukraine is facing down Vladimir Putin’s Russia and his military inundating their border, one that could be used to reunite the two countries for the first time since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991.

In March 2021, U.S. European Command warned of a “potential imminent crisis” in response to Russia amassing over 100,000 troops along the Ukrainian border. This deployment, which included a muster of naval forces in the Sea of Azov, prompted a June 2021 summit between President Biden and Putin in Geneva, Switzerland. Today, Russia has amassed an estimated 130,000 troops along the border, adding thousands as weeks pass. Through multiple summits with Russia’s president, Biden and the U.S. are convinced that Putin has decided to invade Ukraine, expecting an imminent attack.

This effort is the highly anticipated culmination of a myriad of political, civil and diplomatic crises that have tormented the region. Ukraine, founded in August of 1991, is a developing country and Europe’s poorest, ranking 74th in the Human Development Index. Since its birth, the nation has experienced a deluge of severe political corruption, precursors to several transformational social movements and civil conflicts.

The first prominent movement was the Orange Revolution, a peaceful protest of the 2004 presidential election of then Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, which the Supreme Court of Ukraine later deemed to have been largely rigged, the suspected Russian poisoning of candidate Viktor Yushchenko and Russian electoral interference. The movement had been heavily funded, trained and supported by western pollsters and consultants, as well as government agencies, including the U.S. State Department. Eventually, Viktor Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko were instilled into power, casting Yanukovych into the opposition.

However, Yanukovych was elected president in 2010 with 48% of votes, ushering in a pro-Russian administration. In 2013, the Yanukovych government distanced itself from an association agreement with the European Union, instead strengthening ties with the Eurasion Economic Union and the Russian Federation. The result was the conception of the Euromaidan movement, which led to mass demonstrations and civil unrest throughout the country, protesting the government’s decision to suspend the European Union-Ukraine Association Agreement.

The Euromaidan movement escalated into the 2014 Ukrainian Revolution, otherwise known as the Revolution of Dignity, which ousted Yanukovych but eventually gave rise to the Russian annexation of Crimea in March of 2014 and the eruption of the War in Donbas in April of 2014.

With the ongoing War in Donbas, which is an armed conflict between Ukraine and Russian-backed separatists, as well as the aftermath of the annexation of the Crimean peninsula, the Russian invasion of Ukraine has already commenced in theory. Suffice to say, upon assuming office in May of 2019, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky certainly had his work cut out for him. A former actor and entertainer, Zelensky has been widely criticized for his lack of political experience, a paucity that raises questions of his preparedness to handle this current diplomatic crisis. The same questions are raised about Ukraine’s military strength and if they are adequately equipped to fend off a potential Russian incursion.

“I don’t think anyone expects Ukraine to prevent an attack or invasion,” said Dr. Lisa Conant, a political science professor at the University of Denver who specializes in the European Union and European politics.

Conant points to the immense strengthening of the Russian military since 2014 and highlights the major discrepancies and Russian superiority in active military personnel, equipment and technology. Thus through comparison, with the absence of a viable military defense, it is unlikely Ukraine would be able to prevent a potential Russian invasion.

For this reason, Ukraine has been heavily reliant on the support of allies and western powers in dissuading Russian aggression. When asked about the extent of foreign involvement should Russia commence an invasion of Ukraine, Dr. Rachel Epstein, a political science professor at DU who specializes in economy, security and international organizations, said that the “EU would come together with the United States and NATO for vigorous sanctions” to be imposed on Russia.

She believes that there would be a decisive effort to divert energy resources away from Russia, and that western forces would supply Ukrainian resistance yet avoid direct combat roles.

However, Germany holds reservations and concerns on behalf of their own economic interests.

In discussing the various organizational and diplomatic players in the Russian/Ukrainian crisis, it is important to recognize the impact of Nord Stream 2 (NS2), an underwater pipeline that transports natural gas from St. Petersburg, Russia to Lubmin, Germany. The pipeline, which runs through the Baltic Sea, is believed to have the ability to fuel more than 26 million households, a likely explanation for why Putin is using it as a geopolitical weapon.

“Germany is not being forthcoming, and is reluctant to be hotly critical of the Russian regime,” Dr. Epstein said. She says they are essentially muted in their criticism, and are not selling armaments to Ukraine, unlike Poland and the U.S., believing that Germany’s economic interests and dependence on Russia are taking precedence in their approach to this diplomatic crisis.

However, as Dr. Conant notes, President Biden and German Chancellor Scholz are “on the same-page” of halting the NS2 pipeline should Russia invade Ukraine, despite Sholz’s perceived reluctance. In stating that the point of the pipeline was to completely bypass Ukraine, Dr. Conant emphasized the U.S.’s opposition to the pipeline, noting how the U.S. “thinks it increases German and western European dependence on Russian oil.” She also cites the recent departure of former Chancellor Angela Merkel, the ascension of Scholz and the recent transformation of German politics as having an impact on their diplomatic approach.

Looking east, we find a familiar foe in China, who is aiding Russia in their pursuit of conquest. According to Dr. Jing Sun, a political science and Asian studies professor at DU, “China is an important component of the entire story.” He cites Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jingping’s signed statement attesting limitless cooperation between the two nations, as well as pointing to each country’s federal banks striking deals with one another.

Dr. Sun says that despite the threat of extremely devastating sanctions, Russia has been preparing for this, and that China has essentially agreed to help provide economic and political aid to Russia should it face an imposition of sanctions as the result of invading Ukraine. More importantly, however, Dr. Sun believes China is using this diplomatic crisis to assess the U.S.’s approach and ultimately determine how the Biden administration would respond to a potential Chinese invasion of Taiwan, yet another diplomatic headache looming.

The Biden administration has affirmed that the U.S. will not utilize direct military intervention if Russia were to invade Ukraine. When asked how the U.S.’s response to this particular diplomatic crisis compares/contrasts with that of Crimea in 2014, Dr. Sun said that the Biden administration is trying to learn its lessons from the Obama administration’s handling of Crimea. Sun believed that the sanctions imposed on Russia as a result of annexing the peninsula in 2014 were essentially a “slap on the wrist” and not nearly stringent nor effective enough.

It is also expected that European allies, as well as international organizations such as the EU and NATO, will not utilize direct military intervention as they are not treaty bound to do so.

Now, what could an incursion of Ukraine and its aftermath look like? “If a Russian attack on Ukraine proceeds, it is likely to begin with aerial bombing and missile attacks that could obviously kill civilians without regard to their nationality,” said U.S. national security advisor Jake Sullivan, in emphasizing the importance and urgency for Americans to evacuate the country.

In acknowledging the difficulty of anticipating what the scope of the invasion could be, Dr. Epstein speculated that in the event of an invasion, Russian forces would apply a greater focus on the eastern industrial region, which creates a land mass that connects Russia, eastern Ukraine and Crimea.

Citing British intelligence, she suggested that Russia might militarily seize Kyiv, remove Zelensky and install a puppet regime to support and further Russian interests. Dr. Conant cited several examples of Russian-controlled Ukrainian regions showing unpromising signs of what future Russian control of Ukraine could look like, asserting that a Russian occupation of the country would be an exploitive one and would be met with ongoing resistance. The irony, she points out, is that “in Ukraine, unlike the Baltic States, Russians have been treated well as a minority and not discriminated against.”

What is expected to be a tough, rigid and resilient resistance under potential Russian occupation is of Putin’s own conception. Dr. Conant asserts that Putin postured Russia as a domineering, threatening and menacing power, subsequently cultivating an incredibly pro-western, nationalist sentiment within Ukrainian politics and society. Dr. Sun states that Putin is acting now because of the Ukrainian election of pro-NATO candidate and now-President Zelensky, who, as Dr. Sun points out, also strives to “greater assimilate Ukraine into the EU process.”

Putin recognizes that should these objectives be accomplished by a free, democratic Ukraine, he would miss a viable window of opportunity to invade the country and escape with only detrimental economic sanctions and a further tarnished reputation.

It is important to recognize the implications a Russian invasion of Ukraine could also have on bordering nations such as Belarus and the Baltic States. According to Dr. Epstein, “Belarus is basically already invaded and in a terrible situation.” She cites the democratic protests and movements that have essentially been quashed under the rule of Alexander Lukashenko, who some consider “Europe’s last dictator,” as well as crediting Russia’s military threats for pushing Belarus’s “democratic movements to the margins.”

As for the Baltic States, she says that if Russia were to successfully invade Ukraine, it would establish a “land bridge” directly connecting Russia to western Europe, isolating the Baltic States from NATO, subsequently becoming more vulnerable to Russian influence and aggression.

As Americans flee Ukraine, the U.S. embassy in Kyiv closed with the evacuation of diplomats and the destruction of important documents and items. This image casts America’s position clearly, that the only pertinent option is to leave and support an endangered Ukraine from afar.

As of Feb. 21, Putin signed a decree recognizing the independence of the Donetsk People’s Republic and the Luhansk People’s Republic, two separatist-held regions within eastern Ukraine. “I consider it necessary to take a long-overdue decision: To immediately recognize the independence and sovereignty of Donetsk People’s Republic and Luhansk People’s Republic,” Putin said. With the decree, Russia now has the right to develop military bases and perform military functions within these separatist regions. Moscow has ordered Russian troops to advance into and breakaway these separatist regions from Ukraine.

This only strengthens the U.S.’s and European allies’ belief that Putin fully intends to use his troops along the Ukrainian border to finish what he started years ago.