Ukraine crisis briefing paper

Throughout its long history, Russia has been trapped in a continuous cycle of authoritarian regimes; only interrupted briefly with periods of tumultuous democratic transitions that were plagued by poor bureaucracy and weak institutions. Therefore, time and time again, Russia has turned towards authoritarianism. In the late 1900’s to early 2000’s, Russia again saw the fall of democracy coincide with the rise of a competitive authoritarian regime. This rise of competitive authoritarianism in Russia in the late 1900’s to early 2000’s was largely the result of the resource curse which granted Putin’s Administration false economic performance legitimacy. This in turn reinvigorated past strongman ideals, while at the same time solidified negative

To modify Winston Churchill’s quote on Russia Putin “…is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.” We can unwrap this mystery by analyzing Putin’s foreign policy through the eyes Morgenthau which will be the basis of this paper. By understanding the mystery we can say that Putin is following a Realist perspective and not the liberalist perspective especially with the Crimean Conflict.

Russia is the largest threat facing the United States [25]. The threat from Russia specifically comes from not only their supply of nuclear weapons and their advanced military, but their “intent” behind the use of their military power. The state’s recent aggression against surrounding countries shows the attempt to reclaim international influence [25]. Their “behavior”’ in “Crimea, Georgia, and Ukraine,” has prompted the global community to rethink security in Europe. [25] Russian nationalism, and a desire to recoup their prestige from the cold war is an invitation for confrontation [25].

Yet the election was not like the ones that preceded it- there were large scale demonstrations on the streets of Moscow and other metropolitan areas that were against (and some in support) of Putin. These large scale protests as Elkin notes while certainly disruptive and cast a negative light on Russia globally forced Putin to reaffirm his power when he won the election in 2012. Putin was as discussed by Moskowitz and others in class able to use the media to effectively convey his agenda. But Elkin also notes that the resurgence in popularity for Putin was not simply due to a stymied media presence. Putin strategically allowed Medvedev to become the nation’s prime minister, where he was relegated to a position where he could quietly work on making the changes he set during his presidency. Putin set about “restoring” national prestige by being firm on dealings with the west. In particular, during the crisis in Syria, he averted crisis by securing a deal that allowed Syria to dispose of the chemical weapons while also preventing U.S aggression. Elkin notes how Putin would frequently play on populism and patriotism in justifying his action- a formula which combined would ensure that in the crisis to come regarding the annexation of Crimea that he would have the support of the Russian people.

It was interesting to read about the six points of totalitarianism; an official ideology, a single, disciplined party, terroristic police control, party monopoly of the mass media, party control of the armed forces, and central direction of the economy (Roskin 255). Russia shows these characteristics in a few distinct ways. The population cannot criticize Putin on his militaristic choices, as well his Syrian adventure. Russia also shows authoritarian characteristics, which consists of a dictator monopolizes politics (Roskin 255). Putin shows authoritarian characteristics as well, with most of the media supporting Putin and the citizens not being able to criticize Putin for his militaristic moods.

Putin is former KGB and he has deep Soviet ties as well as ideology. Russia is a one party dominant state. Putin utilizes his power in order to keep his people in check and assert his dominance. The annexation of Crimea in 2014 was a great show of his power to everyone in the world. Russia occupies Crimea but they have vitrually no power, this is another example of Russia assymetrical federalism. Putin and the Kremlin have been known to take out most people who oppose them. For example Anna Politkovskaya a journalist who was suddenly killed because she was speaking out against the government. Another example is Alexey Navalny who is a political activist and he often times gets arrested right before an organized protest takes place. Vedzhie Kashka is just another example of the tyrant that Vladimir Putin

Within Goldsteins book on the political history of the party, the reasoning behond the controlling regimeis given. It is merely a ploy to remain in power for the purpose of powe. This is done by manipulsting the fears of citizens during wartime in which “…the consciousness of being at war, and therefiore ij danger, makes the handing over of pwer to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival”(Pg.192). This form of control utilizes fear and the gloryb of warfare to maintain complete control and earn the trust, loyalty and admiration of its citizenry. Likewise, Putin utilizes terrorist hysteria in order to aid thr Russian rise in power and earn respect from surrounding countries. Although just as the party hides their need for power behind the idea that they are doing ot for the people, Putin hides his ambitions behind anti-terrorist war rcrys. Even going as far as to say“It is not the matter of Russia’s ambitions but the recognition of the fact that we can no longer tolerate the current state of affairs in the world”. The constant barrage of fighting paints the former Russian superpower as an unwavering hero against the forces of terrorism. Putin’s desire for power parreles the partyes desire for power, while thie hiding of motives behind warfare are also

Machiavelli makes a point that to be a successful leader one must both be feared and loved by his people. One must instill enough fear so that they do not rebel against him. However, one has to present himself in such a way that his people overlook the bad because all they remember is the good. Putin’s military capability instills the fear that prevents actions such as rebellions, revolts, or uprisings.

The two countries, Russia and Ukraine, had different reactions towards the armed violence and impeachment of the Ukrainian president. Although the majority of the Ukrainians opposed Viktor’s decision to procrastinate the signing the EU-Ukraine integration agreement, all the ex-presidents accused for its interference with the affairs of Crimean. The former presidents of Ukraine, including Leonid Kravchuk and Leonid Kuchma described the present crisis as Russia’s political interventions designed to interfere with the internal affairs of Ukraine and its relationship with the European Union (Hanschke 1). The people of Crimea have not been seeking for secession from Ukraine, but their interest is to have extended autonomy and rights to govern the Crimean affairs with minimum involvement of the government of Ukraine. Russia, on the other hand, have dismissed the accusation and stated that it is pursuing the interest of the people of Crimea to join the Federation of Russia. Russia holds that the people of Crimea have the power to decide the future of their territory and Russia will be ready to respect their decision. Study shows that about 90

In Putin’s Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia?, Karen Dawisha relates Russian President Vladmir Putin’s rise to power. She overarchingly claims that Putin is an authoritarian leader who has obstructed and even reverted Russia’s path of democratization, citing, amongst many factors that enabled his ascension, his “interlocking web of personal connections in which he was the linchpin” (100), money-laundering to tax havens and personal projects, and the complicity of the West. With copious research, journalistic interviews, legal documents, and even sporadic informational diagrams, it is evident why her book is so popular amongst scholars and history enthusiasts. Unfortunately however, in spite of the grand yet oftentimes substantiated claims she generates, a more subtle yet noteworthy assumption is made: that the state is a protector, as Olson proffered. She employs this theoretical underpinning from the beginning, though is not representative of Putin’s actual authoritarian regime.

While the Crimean question remained subdued for a long time, in September 2008 it was brought back into the forefront of global politics when the Ukrainian Foreign Minister Volodymyr Ohryzko accused Russia of giving out Russian passports to the population in the Crimea and described it as a "real problem" given Russia's declared policy of military intervention abroad to protect Russian citizens.

First of all, Putin had a very unique background. Masha Gessen, Russian and American journalist, author, translator and activist who has been an outspoken critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin, claims that ¨Putinś leadership resulted from his experience as a street thug¨ (Gessen 1). Putin was not interested in school or the idea of success. When he was growing up, he always found himself in fistfights. He would fight anyone who disrespected him in any way shape or form, such as scratching them, biting them, and even ripping their hair off. Putin began looking for a place where he could learn skills to complete his will to fight. He found Sambo, which is a Soviet martial art. Sambo had changed his life from a

The conflict between the Ukraine and Russia is the Ukraine's most long-standing and deadly crisis; since its post-Soviet independence began as a protest against the government dropping plans to forge closer trade ties with the European Union. The conflict between Russia and the Ukraine stems from more than twenty years of weak governance, the government’s inability to promote a coherent executive branch policy, an economy dominated by oligarchs and rife with corruption, heavy reliance on Russia, and distinct differences between Ukraine's population from both Eastern and Western regions in terms of linguistics, religion and ethnicity (Lucas 2009).

In early 2014, Russia made the decision to conduct an illegal military intervention into Ukraine. It all began when there was a dispute over whether Ukraine should accept financial help from Russia or Europe, which then ascended into the ousting of the Ukrainian president and then invasion of Ukraine. More specifically, Russia began to taking over the Ukraine territory of the Crimean Peninsula through illegal use of force (Global Security, 2016). During that time, the Russian government voted to place Crimean’s into the Russian Federation, which had been rapidly accepted by the President of Russia himself, Vladimir Putin. Most of the Crimean population is ethnic Russians, although there are also the pro-Ukraine Tatar minorities that make

Furthermore, Ukraine’s economic incentives are numerous. The EU is by far its largest trading partner, with approxi-mately 90% of imports and exports. The EU is also the largest foreign investor in the country, with 70%. While Ukraine’s economy was particularly hard-hit during the global financial crisis, requiring a $16.5 billion IMF loan, it gave a