Political Awareness

Note: Political Awareness never authorizes any candidate or their committees to publish its communication.

Russia and Ukraine’s perpetual war

A chronological combat narrative of the controversy

• 1991 – Ukraine gained their independence from the Soviet Union after a long-lasting authoritative Rule. Despite the election of the first president and the creation of a parliament. Implementing nationalism was a complicated process as it is not the same as it is in Europe. There has been hesitancy and resilience in how to enforce democracy. As the shift was not easy and approved by all.

• 2004 (Orange Revolution) – The Orange Revolution testifies as a major event that combined multiple protests led by the people. Bounded by the need of a just general elections that would unite people under Ukrainian nationalism. Instead of the domestic division that held its place between Pro-Russian and Pro-Western. The aforesaid divide opens the path for Russian occupation. As it was seen as a domestic unsatisfactory of Ukrainian independence and the need to go back to the previous ruling system.

• 2014 (Annexation of Crimea) – marks the building block of the beginning of an ever-lasting Russo-Ukrainian dispute. That set it roots to protect Russian ethnics. Which escalated to further geopolitical and socio-political demands and justifications.

• 2022 – Present – Russia officiated a direct war with Ukraine through ground and air-attacks that changed the dilemma of war. The continuation of the attacks reached its peak that world powers are intervening to reach a peaceful settlement for both of the involved.

Russia’s geopolitical transgression

Military confrontation between the Russian and Ukrainian forces started as early as the first violation of the Ukrainian borderline back in 2014 with the invasion of Crimea. The reasons and justifications vary, especially when both neighboring countries are separated geographically, and not domestically. As both borders are interconnected and shared, the cultural aspects of both countries are similar and identical, and that led to an empowering comprehensive of an extended dispute that resulted in a never-ending claim of ownership and sovereignty over the lands.

2022 had a brutal beginning in the world of geopolitical settlments that started with Russia’s annexation of Crimea that generated the rise of a division among Ukrainians who were in favor and voted for the Crimean Peninsula to join the EU, and others who condemned the act and defended the right of the Ukrainian sovereignty over the Peninsula. In a televised statement, President Putin declared and officiated war on Ukraine where he explicitly announced the ‘special military operation’ as a way to protect Russian in Ukrainian provinces. That has resulted in doubling the Russian troops’ deployment and enforcement on the Ukrainian borders and provinces that Russia shares with.

The plan was to defeat Ukraine in 10 days through dynamic militarized tactics that would exterminate and eliminate the present administration. And that led to extensive airstrikes on Kyiv, Crimea, Donbas, and Kharkiv. The assault was condemned by the EU and other major international organizations and courts, as the attacks were being targeted on domestic areas that included unarmed citizens and children. Which was then referred to as crimes of war, especially that the tactical attacks have varied and expanded to further regions with everyone being a target.

President Trump’s Peace Agreement.

Amid the continuous attacks from the Russian side, Ukraine gained the full support from the U.S. and the EU. Both financial and military aid were provided throughout the time period that continues until this day. However, military budget expenses for international causes have a limit to them, a period where a comprehensive settlement and a joint peace agreement shall take place. As a result, a 28-point draft has been issued as a first towards an equal settlement between both Russia and Ukraine. The 28-point peace deal was seen to be a draft direct demands made by the Kremlin. An exclusion of Ukraine’s part in the settlement. Where they are directed to give in to the demands by enforcing harsh consequences. Although President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have not officially declined the proposition, he addressed the nation in a televised statement about the deal where he said, ‘I will not betray Ukraine’.

A short summary of the ‘The 28-Point Peace Deal’

The peace deal revolved around full submission of Ukraine’s sovereignty and handing it into the care of the European Union. All to ensure a secured borderline and prevent the escalation of the war. The deal emphasized on the importance of development and reconstructing the infrastructure that has been damaged along the period of the war. Not only that, but it also guaranteed Ukraine’s sovereignty and security. From any additional attacks by having European forces stationed in Poland. Not to forget the financial support that the World Bank will be providing through special packages designed to assist the fluid motion of the settlement. However, if Ukraine breaches any of the points that are regarded as the solid foundation. Then all the benefits would be taken away from them. That includes the financial benefits, infrastructure development. Plus, most importantly security guarantees of further attacks.

But on the other side of the spectrum. There’s the groundline of full compliance and submission in the form of a settlement that deals with giving up the majority of the rich resourceful lands of Ukraine. As well as dissecting Ukraine’s frozen funds and dividing them among international investments which also includes the US. In addition to that, there would be a joint American Russian task force to ensure the passivity of borderline security and certify the deal’s smooth operation with no violations from both sides.

EU’s ratified ‘Peace Deal’

The EU’s disagreement amid President Trump’s 28-point peace deal came in as a response for Ukraine’s sovereignty and full authority of their lands and rule which is seen to be losing its validity with the aforesaid peace agreement.

Ursula Von Der Leyen stated that no decision can ever be made without the presence and consent of the other party involved as she said “Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine. Nothing about Europe without Europe. Nothing about Nato without Nato,” . And with that came in the response for the 28-point peace deal that was made without Ukraine and they are as follows.

• • Ukraine would have the freedom to join the EU.

  • There can be no change of borders and handing over  major Ukrainian lands to Russia, such as Crimea.

  • There shall be long-term propositions and solid guarantees of Ukraine’s security  against future attacks.

  • Frozen Russian assets of 140Billion Euros will be used and given to Ukraine as a loan to rebuild.

Latest developments and subsequent actions

• • A meeting between Ukraine and U.S. delegates was held in Florida following the diplomatic tension after the 28-point peace agreement was issued. The meeting was productive and pressing concerns were addressed throughout. But despite the efforts, a crucial time awaits as leaders await responses from both sides. As Secretary of State marc Rubio stated “Much work remains. But today was, again, a very productive and useful session where I think additional progress was made,’’.

  • The Kremlin has shown some flexibility in their demands. As the administration confirmed that after a 5-hour talk with US envoys. Russia confirmed that they did not accept of all the elements provided in the agreement. That caused some push and pull from both sides. However, it did not mean that flexibility was the norm Russia is following.

  • President Putin have warned of an upcoming Third World War if Europe fully supports Ukraine against them. Which have also been confirmed by Russian Ambassador of the United Kingdom, Andrei Kelin. That there is a possibility of an escalation of a wat between Russia and Europe which will extend geographically.

  • Official responses varied from world leaders. As President Trump’s efforts of peace talks have been seen to go roughly. The President showed his frustration by enforcing additional agendas that would lead to final settlements. Even though it would take a lot more effort, as stated by the American delegates following the Florida meeting.

Conclusion

• The final speculations of the context all illustrate that an inevitable long-term warfare is on the horizon. Prevention could be a starting point. But when both involved parties are enforcing their own demands on their own political agendas. Then peace settlements would be a complicated matter to implement and take action towards. That leaves the global community with one final course of actions, and its war.