Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
123
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 232 2 - 6 3 0 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2024.77.05.9
How to Cite:
Derviş, L. (2024). Analysis of the dynamics of the modern Russian-Ukrainian war: historical roots of geopolitical
ambitions. Amazonia Investiga, 13(77), 123-134. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2024.77.05.9
Analysis of the dynamics of the modern Russian-Ukrainian war:
historical roots of geopolitical ambitions
Modern Rusya-Ukrayna Savaşının Dinamiklerinin Analizi: Jeopolitik Hırsların Tarihsel Kökleri
Received: April 21, 2024 Accepted: May 26, 2024
Written by:
Leyla Derviş1
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9396-9018
Abstract
Given the protracted Russian-Ukrainian war, an
urgent task is to highlight the preconditions and
historical roots of this confrontation. Therefore, the
paper aims to highlight the historical basis of
Russian-Ukrainian war. The methodology for the
paper involves a multi-faceted approach combining
historical analysis, geopolitical examination, and
comparative studies The systematic method and
content analysis of the literature were used to
implement the research objective. In results parallels
are drawn between historical tactics and recent
events, suggesting continuity in strategies during the
Russian annexation of Crimea and the 2014 war. The
ongoing war between Ukraine and Russia is not
merely a territorial dispute; it represents a complex
interplay of historical grievances and geopolitical
ambitions. By uncovering historical antecedents, the
work contributes to fostering dialogue between
involved parties and external actors. In the history of
Ukraine, the geopolitical aspirations of the Russian
authorities have manifested themselves with such
intensity that they have extended to the introduction
of language restrictions. Understanding the historical
context is crucial for developing strategies aimed at
peaceful conflict resolution. These historical
narratives highlight the enduring tensions and
consequences of geopolitical forces in shaping
Ukraine's trajectory. In conclusion, the paper offers
insights into enduring geopolitical ambitions shaping
the contemporary conflict in the region.
Keywords: historical roots, political ambitions,
international relations, Russian politics, Russian-
Ukrainian war.
1
PhD in History, Associate Professor of the Faculty of Letters of the Department of History of Akdeniz University, Antalya, Turkey.
WoS Researcher ID: J-3187-2017
124
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 23 22 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
Introduction
Research problem
The ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine is not merely a contemporary geopolitical struggle; it is a
complex narrative woven with historical threads that extend deep into the annals of time. Amidst the modern
dynamics of this war, a peculiar dimension surfaces – Russia's deliberate ascription of certain narratives
from Ukrainian history, particularly those rooted in the ancient past. This strategic incorporation of
historical narratives adds a layer of complexity to the conflict, highlighting the interplay between history,
geopolitics, and national identity. Therefore, the modern Russian-Ukrainian war is not merely a clash of
military forces on the battlefield; it is a manifestation of historical grievances, territorial disputes, and
competing geopolitical ambitions. The relevance of analyzing this conflict extends far beyond its regional
impact, as it holds the potential to reshape the geopolitical landscape and influence international relations.
This ongoing war has prompted an increased scholarly focus on analyzing its multifaceted dimensions,
seeking to provide insights into the evolving dynamics and contributing factors. In particular, the modern
research a novel conceptual trajectory within the realm of war studies, seeking to carve out a distinctive
niche in international studies terminology without negating the established meaning of an existing term –
proxy war (Kappeler, 2014; Dervı ş, 2023). It is essential to note that errand war does not vie for precedence
with proxy war; rather, it emerges as a derivative construct stemming from a leader's message, artfully
framed and presented with an air of arrogant self-importance to the political leadership of an assumed
'subservient' state. Proxy war, in this context, retains its intrinsic definition. The paper by Dapo (2023)
introduces an array of glittering elements drawn from warfare and strategic studies, incorporating aspects
such as propaganda psychology, tactical mobilization, collective strategization, the politicization of
intelligence, and the syndication of multilateral armament.
Research focus
In view of numerous studies of the current events of the Russian-Ukrainian war, it is important to
characterize the main reasons and historical roots of the confrontation between Russians and Ukrainians.
Therefore, there are not many works in historiography that would be devoted to the prerequisites and origins
of this war. This research will try to solve this problem. Hence, the main focus of this study will be directed
to the analysis of the main origins of this confrontation through the prism of history and political science.
Research aim and research questions
Therefore, the purpose of this article is to examine in detail the historical origins of the Russian-Ukrainian
war through the prism of the scrupulous historical relations of these states. Accordingly, the main tasks of
the article include:
1. Study of historical relations between Russia and Ukraine
2. Analysis of Russia's policy towards Ukrainian lands
3. Tracing the origins of the geopolitical ambitions of Russia and Ukraine through the centuries against
the background of military confrontation.
Hence, the specific, measurable objectives of this analysis are to:
1. Identify the historical events that have shaped the geopolitical landscape between Russia and
Ukraine.
2. Describe the historical relations between Russia and Ukraine
3. Examine the strategic objectives and motivations of the involved parties, particularly Russia's
ambitions and Ukraine's responses.
By achieving these objectives, this research will provide a understanding of the ongoing war and its broader
implications for global stability.
The structure of this article is organized as follows: The first section will explore the historical significance
of Kyivan Rus and how it has been used to justify contemporary Russian claims over Ukraine. The second
section, will examine the imperial policies and ideological constructs of the Romanov dynasty that have
influenced Russia's longstanding ambitions toward Ukraine. The third section, “Soviet and modern Russian
Derviş, L. / Volume 13 - Issue 77: 123-134 / May, 2024
Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
125
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 232 2 - 6 3 0 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
stereotypes about Ukraine as a basis for the Russian-Ukrainian war”, will analyze the stereotypes and
perceptions propagated during the Soviet era. The fourth section, “The global response to the Russian-
Ukrainian war”, will assess the international community's reactions, including diplomatic efforts, and
military support, and their impact on the war.
Literature Review
Given the escalation of the Russo-Ukrainian war since 2022, contemporary scholars have endeavored to
comprehend various aspects of its progression. According to Bila and Hrytsenko (2022) the Russian
Federation had set in motion its hybrid war against Ukraine long before 2014, with its roots tracing back to
the 1990s. The implementation of the hybrid warfare plan began actively as early as August 14, 2013, when
Russia systematically and massively discriminated against Ukrainian exports to the Russian Federation,
causing economic damage. The objective was to prevent the signing of the Association Agreement with the
European Union (EU) and pull Ukraine into the Customs Union (Bila & Hrytsenko, 2022).
In current literature it was noted that, Russia's geopolitical ambitions towards Ukraine have deep historical
roots and are shaped by a combination of factors. Understanding these ambitions requires studying
historical, cultural, economic, and strategic considerations. The intricate of Russo-Ukrainian relations is
woven with historical events, cultural complexities, economic interests, and strategic imperatives that have
evolved over centuries. 1. Strategic Importance: Ukraine holds significant strategic importance for Russia.
The country serves as a buffer zone between Russia and the European Union and NATO. Russia has
historically sought to maintain influence in Ukraine to prevent its alignment with Western institutions,
viewing such alignment as a threat to its own security (Knott, 2017). 2. Economic Interests: Economic
considerations play a role in Russia's ambitions. Ukraine has valuable natural resources, including fertile
agricultural land and access to the Black Sea. Controlling these resources has economic implications for
Russia, influencing its agricultural and energy sectors. 3. Geostrategic Positioning: Russia views Ukraine
as part of its historical sphere of influence and an essential component of its broader geopolitical strategy
(Todorov, 2015). A Ukraine aligned with the West is seen as diminishing Russia's regional dominance and
challenging its aspirations for a sphere of influence in the post-Soviet space. Cultural studies also
characterize the role of relations between Russia and Ukraine and their impact on the mentality of the
Ukrainian population.
At the same time, the paper by Latysh (2023) focuses on the securitization of historical memory in the
context of the Russian-Ukrainian war. This scholar explored how historical narratives are utilized as tools
for securitization during the conflict. The work contributes to a nuanced understanding of the war's impact
on historical narratives and memory, shedding light on the broader implications for security. Attempts to
revise the Soviet-Russian narrative were inevitably perceived in the Kremlin as “encroachments on Russia's
sovereignty and intentions to strip it of the title of a victorious state” (Latysh, 2023, p. 182). Similarly,
painful were the claims of East Slavic nations to the heritage of Kyivan Rus, as well as attempts to separate
national historical narratives from the overarching imperial or pan-Soviet narrative (Kuzio, 2022). These
works are important for understanding the complex relationship between Russia and Ukraine. Thus, a
dilemma of mnemonic security emerged in Russian-Ukrainian relations – a historical narrative used to
legitimize the Ukrainian state and unite the people was systematically denied by Russia. The collective of
authors led by B. Lawson has depicted the humanitarian aspects of the Russian-Ukrainian war, with a
particular focus on the utilization and interpretation of numbers in the humanitarian context (Lawson,
Glasman & Mützelburg, 2023). The collaborative work headed by Lehkodukh et al. (2023) delved into
various historical roots and civilizational factors contributing to the Russian-Ukrainian war during the
period of 2014-2022. These authors described the complex historical and cultural aspects that could have
influenced the course of the conflict. Importantly, their work provides a historical context for the war,
offering a deeper understanding of long-term factors that may have fueled the tensions. Dervı ş (2023)
described social and political circumstances of Russian-Ukrainian war. This research is important in terms
of the geopolitical component and is of high value for this study, particularly in the context of Ukraine-
Russia relations and their impact on geopolitical alignments.
Furthermore, the insights gained from these comprehensive analyses pave the way for a nuanced
exploration of the intricate dynamics between Russia and Ukraine during the specified timeframe. By
delving into the complexities of nationalism, historical narratives, humanitarian considerations,
civilizational influences, and global repercussions, these works offer a holistic framework for examining
126
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 23 22 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
the multifaceted nature of the conflict. As this study seeks to delve deeper into the historical and geopolitical
dimensions of the Russian-Ukrainian war, it draws upon the methodological groundwork laid by the
aforementioned works to provide a thorough and well-informed analysis.
Methodology
The methodological foundation of scientific intelligence primarily rests on the broader scientific-historical
cluster. Employing these methods, the aim is to organize and structure the geopolitical aspect of the
Russian-Ukrainian war. That is, the research is based on a qualitative approach, this approach is the most
appropriate for the coverage of this topic, since only the analysis of available materials and scientific
literature can trace the complex relations between Ukraine and Russia. The selection of the scientific and
historical cluster as a research design for studying the geopolitical aspects of the Russian-Ukrainian war is
due to the complexity and historical depth of the topic. This design allows for the structural organisation of
historical and global data, which will promote a comprehensive understanding of the roots of the conflict
and its evolution. The qualitative approach is particularly appropriate as it prioritises in-depth analysis of
historical narratives, cultural shifts and geopolitical strategies that are important for understanding the
multifaceted nature of Russian-Ukrainian affairs.
The methodology for the paper involves a multi-faceted approach combining historical analysis,
geopolitical examination, and comparative studies. The research draws on primary and secondary sources
to construct a comprehensive historical narrative of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. Scholarly articles and
analytic studies formed the basis for understanding the evolution of geopolitical ambitions and historical
roots.
Data collection
The selection of sources was based on the following criteria:
1. The work describes the course of the Russian-Ukrainian war.
2. The study outlines the causes of the war.
3. The work describes the complex relations between Russia and Ukraine since ancient times.
4. The history of these countries is described in the study.
The historical analysis employs a chronological framework to trace linguistic restrictions, Russification
policies, and cultural assimilation during the Russian Empire. Hence, the historical analysis spans from the
era of the Russian Empire to the present, focusing on key periods of linguistic and cultural policy
enforcement. The examination extends to the strategic implications of industrial development, focusing on
the importation of Russian-speaking workers and the subsequent displacement of the Ukrainian language.
Comparative studies are employed to draw parallels between historical events and contemporary
developments. This includes analyzing past Soviet tactics during annexations and conflicts, such as Crimea,
and drawing connections to similar strategies observed in the initiation of the 2014 Russian-Ukrainian war.
The methodology also incorporates a diplomatic perspective, studying the challenges faced by the
Ukrainian Central Rada during World War I and the consequences of perceived collaboration with the
Bolshevik government.
Results and Discussion
Kyivan Rus as the “cradle of three fraternal nations”: the medieval origins of modern Russian aspirations.
The geopolitical ambitions of Russia towards Ukraine have deep historical roots and are shaped by a
combination of factors. Understanding these ambitions requires examining historical, cultural, economic,
and strategic considerations. Russia and Ukraine share a long and intertwined history, with Kyivan Rus
serving as a common historical precursor. This sentiment is echoed by Zalizniak (2016) who emphasizes
the profound influence of Asian despotism on the traditional culture and mentality of the Russian people,
distinct from their Ukrainian counterparts. While the Ukrainian people are characterized as a Western
people with a rich blend of southern and eastern influences, the Great Russian people, despite
Europeanization, remain entrenched in Eastern spirit and culture. The clash of mentalities is underscored
by the Russian populace's resistance to European values, as demonstrated through their hostility towards
Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
127
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 232 2 - 6 3 0 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
Ukrainians, who consistently manifest Eurocentric priorities, notably during the Maidans of 2004 and 2014
(Tolstov, 2022). In essence, the historical narratives intertwining Ukrainian and Russian identities not only
shape the contemporary conflict but also lay bare the deep-seated cultural and ideological chasm that
defines this complex geopolitical struggle (Zalizniak, 2016). The assertion regarding the primordial
Eurasian identity of Ukrainians, as propagated by Russian geopoliticians, is far from unequivocal and
encounters significant contradictions when subjected to an impartial historical analysis. Rather than a
simplistic Eurasian origin, a nuanced examination reveals the ancient and organic ties that connect Ukraine
with Europe (Kappeler, 2014). These ties find their roots in the Greco-Roman influences that permeated
the Ukrainian territory, a legacy initiated during the Greek era's colonization of the Northern Black Sea in
the 7th century. Kyivan Rus emerged along a vital trade route connecting the Baltic to the Mediterranean,
representing the eastern segment of the pan-European trade network. Within the ancient Ukrainian territory,
European silver coins coexisted with dinars, offering compelling evidence of prevailing trade and economic
links oriented towards the west (Zalizniak, 2016). Dynastic marriages of Kyiv princes further underscored
the political connections towards the west. The adoption of pan-European Christianity served as a spiritual
conduit, assimilating Kyivan Rus into the broader European spiritual community. Contrary to the emphasis
placed by Eurasianists on profound confessional differences between Rus and the West, the Christian
identity of Kyivan Rus during the era of St. Volodymyr was not Orthodox in the modern sense.
The introduction of Asian methods of production and a despotic state system to Rus in the 13th century
originated from China through Mongol influence. The Golden Horde variant of Eastern despotism was
actively propagated in Russia, fueled by the influential figure in Russian history, Alexander Nevsky. It is
crucial to recognize that the historical narrative of Ukraine's ties with Europe is multifaceted, shaped by
diverse influences, and transcends the simplistic notion of a primordial Eurasian identity claimed by some
Russian geopoliticians. In the historical narrative, the significance of Alexander Nevsky’s victories over
the Swedish and German knights in 1240 and 1242 extends beyond mere military triumphs. These victories
are argued to have defended the right of North-Eastern Russia to pursue an Asian path of development
(Zalizniak, 2016), as asserted by historical sources. A crucial turning point in this trajectory is marked by
the initiation of the 300-year Tatar slavery in North-Eastern Russia. In the aftermath of these events,
Alexander Nevsky is credited with making a fateful choice that favored the East over the West. The
successes of Ukrainian princes were also interpreted in a similar way. For example, in the 1230s, Prince
Danylo (known in historiography as Prince of Galicia and Volhynia, or Danylo Romanovych, King of Rus
from 1253) defeated the German knights near Dorogochyn. In the textbooks of the times of the USSR, this
battle was presented as an element of the anti-German activities of this ruler, which seemed to relate him
to Prince Alexander Nevsky. However, this myth about Prince Danylo has been revised: it was about a
relatively minor skirmish that was not intended to destroy his alliance with the Teutonic Order. Due to such
a policy, textbooks formed a false idea of the history of medieval Ukraine, whose interests were made
dependent on the interests of Moscow. The subsequent phase in the evolution of Asian despotism is
intricately linked to the figure of Ivan Kalita (1325–1340). Leading a formidable 50,000-strong Tatar army,
Kalita gained notoriety for orchestrating bloody pogroms against rebels in Tver, Torzhka, and Kashin.
Simultaneously, he assumed a pivotal role in the administration of the Golden Horde along the Upper
Volga. Kalita's loyalty to the Khan, demonstrated through the suppression of anti-Tatar rebellions and
effective tax collection, earned him the right to incorporate neighboring Moscow principalities into his
domain. It was under the patronage of the Tatars that Moscow began the strategic process of “collecting”
the cavalry and Rus'lands, establishing a symbiotic relationship with the Golden Horde.
Moscow’s imperial ambitions for possession of Ukraine: historical and ideological constructions of
the Romanov dynasty
Later, the process intensified during the Romanov dynasty, which from the 17th century. began to annex
Ukrainian lands. The Pereyaslav Council of 1654 and Hetman Bohdan Khmelnytskyi’s decision regarding
Moscow's tsarist suzerainty over the Cossack lands led to the fact that the autonomy of Ukrainian lands was
reduced with each subsequent treaty between the Cossack hetmans and the Moscow side. Since then, in the
imagination of many Russian ideologues, Ukraine has become an integral part of Muscovy. However, only
in 1783, by order of Empress Catherine II, the autonomy of the Hetmanate was abolished, which meant the
actual annexation of Ukrainian lands. Until that time, Ukrainian hetmans managed Ukrainian lands
relatively independently. Their diplomatic activity was active: Hetman Ivan Vyhovsky returned to the union
with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, hetman Dmytro Doroshenko united the scattered possessions
under the sovereignty of the Ottoman Empire, hetman Ivan Mazepa became close to the Swedish king
128
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 23 22 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
Charles XII during the Northern War. As the vectors of their activities show, they sought political alliances
with European states and powerful Turkey (Plokhy, 2018). The Russian policy of collecting “Rus’
heritage” continued after the division of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in 1772, 1793, and 1795.
The name of Ukraine in official usage was replaced by Malorossiya. The southern Ukrainian lands and
Crimea captured from the Crimean Khanate (a vassal of the Ottoman Empire) were called Novorossia and
the Tavria Region. In the right-wing (imperial) discourse of modern Russian elites, they still appeal to this
fact to emphasize the special status of these lands, considering them separate parts of Russia (Kappeler,
2014). The annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the deployment of Russian troops in Eastern Ukraine were
partly explained by these historical contexts. In recent statements, the Russian president explained his
ambitions to conquer the modern south of Ukraine by the fact that the Sea of Azov has long been the
“internal sea” of the Russian Empire (Sirko, 2022). This maritime perspective not only invokes historical
claims but also aligns with broader geopolitical strategies, echoing past aspirations seen in the historical
evolution of Russian governance. The Sea of Azov, considered by the Russian leadership as an integral part
of its historical sphere of influence, adds a maritime dimension to contemporary geopolitical dynamics,
shaping the motivations behind the actions in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine.
The geopolitical aspirations of the Russian authorities were manifested with such intensity that they
extended to the imposition of linguistic restrictions, including the prohibition of the Ukrainian language in
printed materials, official communication, and various spheres. It is noteworthy that the policy of
Russification, initially instigated by the Romanovs, persisted even beyond the collapse of the Russian
Empire. The imperial administration, in its pursuit of Russification, laid the groundwork for the cultural
and linguistic assimilation of urban centers in Ukraine. The other instrument of Russification was Russian
Orthodox Church (Hovorun, 2023)2.
The imperative for industrial development necessitated an influx of labor, leading to the importation of
workers from Russian territories. Consequently, the gradual displacement of the Ukrainian language from
urban domains transpired. While scholarly assessments may be deemed as potentially hyperbolic, the
prioritization of Russian-speaking workers within the enterprises situated in the central and eastern regions
of Ukraine became an integral component of the Russian imperial discourse.
The demise of the Romanov dynasty ushered in only a brief resurgence of statehood for Ukraine. In 1917,
the Ukrainian Central Rada in Kyiv emerged as the principal representative body for the Ukrainian
population formerly under the Russian Empire. Over time, the nascent Ukrainian government sought
alignment with the German Empire, a diplomatic move that proved disadvantageous in the context of the
ongoing First World War (Plokhy, 2018). The Entente nations perceived Ukrainian officials as
collaborators who, in collaboration with the Bolshevik government, entered into a separate peace agreement
in 1918 at Brest. This political impasse significantly hindered the diplomatic prospects of the revitalized
Ukrainian state.
Therefore, the ambitions of the Russian authorities regarding Ukrainian lands were based on the principles
of assimilation of local elites, incorporation of lands and cultural restrictions for the development of
Ukrainian life (See Figure 1).
2 The policy of glorifying Russian heroes, conducting sermons and prayers exclusively in Russian has also had a significant impact
on Ukrainian society, some of whom are members of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, a kind of "branch"
of Russian Orthodoxy in Ukraine. Narratives and theses about the peace that must be maintained during the Russian aggression have
become the subject of debate at the level of the Ukrainian legislature and may lead to a ban on the activities of Russian and pro-
Russian activists in Ukraine.
Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
129
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 232 2 - 6 3 0 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
Figure 1. A model of Romanov politics in relation to Ukrainian lands.
Source: author’s development.
The fall of the Russian Empire did not lead to the national liberation of Ukraine, which was part of the
Soviet Union. In many aspects, the Bolsheviks acted as the continuation of the Romanov policies. First and
foremost, it was about foreign policy, but while the Romanov Empire sought to establish control over the
Black Sea straits and capture Istanbul (Constantinople) (Plokhy, 2018), the Bolsheviks' goal was to support
the world revolution, which quickly grew into a tendency to understand Moscow not as the “Third Rome”
but as the capital of the communist international. Although these regimes were not too similar in
appearance, they relied primarily on force to achieve their foreign policy goals.
Soviet and modern Russian stereotypes about Ukraine as a basis for the Russian-Ukrainian war
The deconstruction of Ukrainian consciousness during the time of the Russian Empire became a strong
basis for the establishment of Soviet power. Flirting with communist ideology led to the erosion of the
national foundations of the revived Ukraine: issues of socialist development became more important for
the political elites of that time than state security. For this reason, the offensive of the Red Army on Kyiv
and other cities was quite successful, since the supporters of the independent development of Ukraine could
not organize a reliable military defense (Kyrydon & Troyan, 2022). The Bolsheviks acted by making broad
promises that they did not intend to fulfill (for example, the transfer of land to peasants in their ownership).
They also formed a puppet pro-Soviet government in Kharkiv - formally, it was he who fought with
Ukrainian forces, inviting the Russian Red Army to join them. Similar steps can be seen during the
unfolding of the Russian annexation of Crimea and the beginning of the Russian-Ukrainian war in 2014.
There is talk of promises of broad material benefits and economic prosperity for the pro-Russian residents
of Crimea, the creation of separate paramilitary formations in the East of Ukraine, which have declared
themselves independent republics (Khomyakov, 2020). Copying old Soviet “projects” made it possible to
divert suspicion from the Russian authorities before the start of an open invasion in 2022.
The Soviet authorities reacted to the "Ukrainian question" much more acutely. Suspicion of “Ukrainian
nationalism” became a terrible accusation, for which they could be sentenced to death or long imprisonment
in the camps. Many books (especially historical ones) were banned; the history of Ukraine was reduced to
a constant desire to “unite” with Russia. Russification intensified, as the Ukrainian language began to be
pushed out of official use since the 1930s. In addition, the terrible Holodomor of 1932–1933 led to huge
human losses among the Ukrainian peasantry. Instead, immigrants from Russian territories began to be
brought to Ukrainian towns and villages. Especially many such immigrants ended up in the Crimea and in
the East of Ukraine, in the large industrial centers of the central regions. Even in the western Ukrainian
lands, after their accession to the Ukrainian SSR, leadership roles belonged to people who did not come
from the local communist elites. Fear of Ukrainian “nationalism” led to the fact that only verified personnel
with verified biographies were admitted to the administration.
The elimination of those
who disagree with the
policy of the tsar, the
elimination of national
privileges and autonomy
Assimilation of Ukrainian
elities
Annexation of Ukrainian
lands contrary to previous
agreements
Incorporation of lands
Restrictions on the use of
the Ukrainian language
Cultural restrictions
130
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 23 22 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
The developed economic system connected Ukrainian enterprises with Russian ones. This combination
contributed to the assimilation of the Ukrainian economy and made its development impossible without
Russian markets. Even after the collapse of the USSR in 1991, these ties enabled the Russian political elite
to talk about Ukraine as a failed state that is unable to develop independently. Similar views were instilled
in Russian society through propaganda and actualization of established stereotypes. First of all, it is said
that the largest industrial centres of Ukraine were subjected to severe Russification, which pushed
Ukrainian out of communication and replaced it with Russian. The belief that Ukrainian was a rural
language began to take hold, while in the cities, which embodied Soviet progress, (Plokhy, 2018) it was
customary to speak Russian. This vision of the linguistic picture of the world persisted even after 1991 and
was partly fuelled by pro-Russian political and civic organisations.
The current shape of Russian society is largely molded by the tumultuous transformations of the 1990s,
marked by widespread neoliberal atomization through consumerism and profound depoliticization. This
environment naturally provided fertile ground for the state’s “post-truth” propaganda (Datsiuk et al., 2023).
Together, these factors have given rise to an exceptionally cynical society, now incapable of meaningful
political engagement. The collapse of the Soviet Union instilled a general skepticism toward any ideology
and, in fact, any morality-driven politics.
In the political landscape of 1990s Russia, two prominent movements were discernible. One was led by the
so-called “people of the sixties,” motivated by anti-Stalinist and anti-dictatorship sentiments, supporting
value politics grounded in demanding moral principles. The other movement, however, represented a more
'realist,' extremely cynical, semi-criminal, and highly securitized understanding of communal life. The
former was exemplified by the towering figure of academician Andrey Sakharov, while the latter found
representation in various former KGB officers.
By this point, Russian society had become accustomed to leading a dual life-paying lip service to
communist ideals expressed in the grandiloquent “moral codex of the builder of communism,” while
privately embracing values of consumerism and a pursuit of material prosperity. The shared experience
taught late Soviet citizens that morality was ultimately a tool of manipulation serving the interests of the
ruling group. Consequently, the swift collapse of communist ideology resulted in the establishment of an
exceedingly cynical and amoral society. It's not that the society completely lost its ability to discern morally
right and wrong actions; it simply ceased to care. Naturally, truth itself perished alongside morality
(Khomyakov, 2023). As a consequence, Sakharov’s noble cause met an inevitable demise. Putin's
administration has actively worked to cultivate this mindset (Todorov, 2015). Despite the assertions of
various contemporary commentators, regarding the supposed essentialist understanding of the Russian
nation, a novel self-perception has emerged, shaped primarily by a profoundly neoliberal approach to
governance.
The global response to the Russian-Ukrainian war
According to structural realists, the conflict is seen as a preventive war, strategically motivated by NATO's
eastward expansion. However, many scholars argue that Putin's decision-making is characterized by
irrationalities that are better understood as overbalancing and hubris in classical realism. Putin's
overbalancing can be explained by applying the concept of self-deception from evolutionary psychology,
providing a scientific basis for hubris in classical realism (Ito, 2023). The global reaction to the Russian-
Ukrainian conflict has caused sharp condemnations and caused indignation in many countries of the world.
Russia has become an object of international condemnation for violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and
international law. Attempts to resolve the conflict include a wide range of sanctions and restrictions on
pressure on the Russian regime (Mustafazadeh, 2022). The international community actively expresses
indignation and demands that aggression from Russia. War and deployment of Russian troops in the
territory of Ukraine are condemned. The countries have introduced various economic, political and
diplomatic sanctions aimed at restoring the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine.
Germany has emerged as a significant player in the global response to the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. The
German government has taken a firm stance against Russia's actions, emphasizing the importance of
upholding international law and condemning the violation of Ukraine's sovereignty. Germany has actively
participated in diplomatic efforts and has contributed to shaping the collective European response to the
crisis. The country's economic influence and diplomatic weight add a crucial dimension to the international
community's efforts to address the conflict. Meanwhile, the United States has been a vocal critic of Russia's
Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
131
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 232 2 - 6 3 0 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
aggression in Ukraine. The U.S. government has swiftly condemned the violation of Ukraine's sovereignty,
labeling it as a threat to regional stability. The United States has played a pivotal role in coordinating
responses within the NATO framework, emphasizing the alliance's commitment to collective defense. The
imposition of targeted sanctions by the U.S. underscores its determination to hold Russia accountable for
its actions. Although the war is still far from being resolved and hostilities ceased, the search for historical
foundations makes it clear how sudden relapses of the imperial past can be even in the twenty-first century.
On this basis, it can be determined that claims need to be grounded before they can be realised. One of the
most promising ways to abandon violence is to reject the imperial notion of history, where reality is
measured by colonial possessions or a single “world”.
Discussion
The obtained results indicate that throughout the centuries, Russia sought to subjugate Ukrainian lands
using a diverse arsenal: military, ideological, and coercive-cultural. In particular, the data reveals a
centuries-long coercive Russification of the Ukrainian population and the influx of large masses of ethnic
Russians, primarily for employment in urban enterprises. It is shown, that the intense geopolitical
aspirations of Russian authorities, exemplified by linguistic restrictions and the prohibition of the Ukrainian
language, continuing the policy of Russification initiated by the Romanovs. This extended beyond the
collapse of the Russian Empire, with a focus on assimilating urban centers in Ukraine (Dolzhenko, 2022).
The imperative for industrial development led to the importation of Russian-speaking workers, contributing
to the displacement of the Ukrainian language in central and eastern Ukrainian regions. This linguistic shift
became integral to the Russian imperial discourse. This result is proven by Plokhy (2018), who emphasized
the importance of the industrial development of Ukrainian cities for the Russification of the local
population. Other aspects of this problem are also proved by Zalizniak (2016) and Kögler (2023).
Mentioning Russia’s geopolitical ambitions and Ukraine, it is very crucial to mention how current Russian
administration considers “the ethnic Russians”, which formed base for the annexation of Crimea and the
start for the Russia-Ukraine War. From the other hand, there are other points of view. For example, Dunford
(2023) wrote, that the military conflict involving Russia, Ukraine, the United States, and NATO is primarily
driven by some factors. Firstly, Russia perceives NATO’s expansion as a threat to its security, which it
views as a violation of prior agreements made during Germany’s reunification and the principle of
indivisible security (Dunford, 2023). The same point of view has Lippert (2024). He thought that there is a
big confrontation between Russia and NATO. This article applies a mixed methodology to examine the
Russo-Ukraine War as a case study of war causation, focusing on the failure of Conventional Arms Control
(CAC) agreements (Çalışkan, 2022). It argues that the erosion of security and deterrence for Russia against
NATO led to the conflict. The study suggests that the failure of CAC agreements can lead to war,
highlighting the need for a comprehensive CAC agreement in Europe to establish and preserve a military
balance. His paper contributes to causes of war theory-building by showing how Putin's concerns over
Russia's declining military power and standing, combined with NATO's increasing capability and forces in
eastern Europe, contributed to the conflict. The failure of these agreements led to Russia's invasion of
Ukraine to shift the military balance (Lippert, 2024). While both classical and neoclassical realism have
their limitations, they show that realism can provide explanations beyond international power structures.
These approaches offer multifaceted accounts of why states, such as Russia, choose to take actions like
invading Ukraine (Smith & Dawson, 2022). At the same time, the results of the paper underscore the
intentional cultivation of a specific mindset by Putin's administration, which diverges from traditional
notions of the Russian nation. The war between Russia and Ukraine can be attributed to several key factors.
One significant factor is the radicalization of the Putin regime, leading to increased autocracy and a growing
disconnect from the West. Concurrently, Ukraine has been undergoing a process of democratization and
aligning more closely with Western values and institutions. These contrasting trajectories have heightened
tensions between the two countries, making the outbreak of war more likely. Additionally, these factors
continue to influence the dynamics of warfare in the region (Sasse, 2022). Therefore, the investigation of
the complex historical causes and geopolitical goals that underlie the current confrontation between Russia
and Ukraine constitutes the scientific uniqueness of this work. Understanding the fundamental reasons of
the conflict is one of the many elements of practical significance. The study, in particular, contributes to
our understanding and illumination of the historical processes that gave rise to the war between Russia and
Ukraine. This can therefore pave the way for novel approaches to current problems and aid in the
comprehension of the underlying causes of conflict.
132
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 23 22 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
However, this study also has a low limitation. Since it is built on the analysis of works available on the
Internet. It is possible to neglect those historical works that are not available online. Another limitation is
the possible subjectivism present in scientific works. This is a limitation of the author's attempt to verify by
validating and comparing the various works and available sources. At the same time, the scientific novelty
of this research also lies in promoting dialogue and conflict resolution. By uncovering historical
antecedents, the work contributes to fostering dialogue between involved parties and external actors. The
main limitation of this study is the consideration of literature written primarily in English. Special attention
is paid to works in Ukrainian and Turkish. However, works written in other languages were completely
ignored. Another limitation of this work is the emphasis on publications by contemporary authors.
Conclusions
The paper showed the historical origins of the Russian-Ukrainian war through the prism of the scrupulous
historical relations of these states. It is shown that the geopolitical ambitions of Russia towards Ukraine
have deep historical roots, encompassing a complex interplay of historical, cultural, economic, and strategic
factors:
1. The ongoing war is characterized as a significant confrontation with far-reaching implications,
extending beyond territorial disputes and reshaping the geopolitical equilibrium.
2. The deep-seated cultural and ideological differences between Ukrainian and Russian identities,
explored through historical narratives, underscore the complexity of this geopolitical struggle. It
highlights the ancient ties connecting Ukraine with Europe, rooted in Greco-Roman influences, trade
networks, dynastic marriages, and the adoption of pan-European Christianity during the era of Kyivan
Rus. The Russian strategic collaboration with the Golden Horde shaped the governance structures of
Moscow, solidifying the trajectory of Eastern-style despotism in the region.
3. The deconstruction of Ukrainian consciousness during the Russian Empire laid the groundwork for the
establishment of Soviet power. The Bolsheviks employed tactics such as unfulfilled promises and the
establishment of a puppet pro-Soviet government in Kharkiv, creating a façade of internal conflict
while inviting the Russian Red Army to intervene. Similar strategies were observed during the Russian
annexation of Crimea and the start of the Russian-Ukrainian war in 2014, involving promises of
material benefits, economic prosperity, and the creation of paramilitary formations in Eastern Ukraine.
This echoes past Soviet practices, serving to deflect suspicion from Russian authorities before the open
invasion in 2022.
Together, these historical accounts draw attention to the ongoing conflicts and effects of linguistic, political,
and geopolitical factors on Ukraine's development. Russification and geopolitical alignments have left a
lasting impact on the geopolitical landscape of the modern region, highlighting the complex and long-
lasting effects of historical developments on Ukraine's political and cultural scene. All things considered,
the Russian-Ukrainian war offers a fertile ground for multidisciplinary study, providing chances to delve
further into the aspects of history, geopolitics, sociology, economics, and law. Scholars have the chance to
offer insightful opinions as the conflict develops, which can influence international discourse, shape policy,
and advance a more sophisticated comprehension of the intricate problems at hand. However, this study
opened up new perspectives for research. In particular, it is worth characterizing in more detail the impact
of the indigenization policy on the Ukrainian people, since different researchers have different attitudes to
this complex issue. Further research should also be devoted to the more detailed origin of Russia and to
characterize the role of the Moscow principality in the Middle Ages and its relationship with the Kyiv
principality. The author believes that these areas are debatable and will obviously require more research in
the future.
The practical implications are quite broad. The study will provide policy makers and diplomats with a
deeper understanding of the historical and geopolitical causes of the war, which will help them to make
more informed decisions about strategy and tactics in relations with Russia and Ukraine. The results can
also help the international community to build support for Ukraine by providing historical evidence of
Russia's aggressive actions and their impact on Ukrainian culture and sovereignty.
Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
133
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 232 2 - 6 3 0 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
Bibliographic References
Bader, A., Zhurba, I., Kladko, A., Demchenko, V., & Rusanova, M. (2023). War in the practice of
functioning of different types of political systems. Amazonia Investiga, 12(64), 331-339.
https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.64.04.35
Bila, S. Y., & Hrytsenko, H. Z. (2022). Russian-Ukrainian war: Historical concepts. In The Russian-
Ukrainian war (2014–2022): Historical, political, cultural-educational, religious, economic, and legal
aspects (p. 434–443). Publishing house "Baltija Publishing". https://doi.org/10.30525/978-9934-26-
223-4-53
Çalışkan, F. (2022). Step by Step: Russia-Ukraine War and the Effect of Third Parties on the Process.
EURO Policy, (14), 35-47. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/europ/issue/73788/1217555
Dapo, T. (2023). Errand War: An Observer’s Perspective on Russian-Ukrainian War. The International
Journal of Humanities & Social Studies, 11(6), 123-131.
https://www.internationaljournalcorner.com/index.php/theijhss/article/view/173173)
Datsiuk, T., Kutska, O., Plazova, T., Hulyma, O., & Golyk, M. (2023). The historical policy plan as it
relates to the progression of the Russian-Ukrainian war. Amazonia Investiga, 12(64), 306-314.
https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.64.04.32
Dervı ş, L. (2023). Transformation of Geopolitical Perceptions in the Russian-Ukrainian War: Impact on
Regional Relations in the Future. Futurity of Social Sciences, 1(1), 21-34.
https://doi.org/10.57125/fs.2023.03.20.02
Dolzhenko, A. (2022). Ukrainian-russian dimension of hybrid war: Prerequisites and features. European
Political and Law Discourse, 9(6), 81-88. https://doi.org/10.46340/eppd.2022.9.6.5
Dunford, M. (2023). Causes of the Crisis in Ukraine. International Critical Thought, 13(1), 89-125
https://doi.org/10.1080/21598282.2022.2163417
Horska, K., Dosenko, A., Iuksel, G., Yuldasheva, L., & Solomatova, V. (2023). Plataformas de Internet
como fuentes alternativas de información durante la guerra ruso-ucraniana. Amazonia Investiga, 12(62),
353-360. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.62.02.36
Hovorun, C. (2023). Russian Church and Ukrainian War. Theological Reflections: Eastern European
Journal of Theology, 20(2), 37-44. https://www.diva-
portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1736147&dswid=-8255
Ito, R. (2023). Hubris balancing: classical realism, self-deception and Putin's war against Ukraine.
International Affairs, 99(5), 2037–2055. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiad180
Kappeler, A. (2014). Ukraine and Russia: Legacies of the Imperial past and Competing Memories. Journal
of Eurasian Studies, 5(2), 107-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euras.2014.05.005
Khomyakov, M. (2020). Russia: Colonial, anticolonial, postcolonial Empire? Social Science Information,
59(2), 225-263. https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018420929804
Khomyakov, M. (2023). Thinking of war, facing the catastrophe: The Russian-Ukrainian War. European
Journal of Social Theory, 26(4), 136843102311725. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684310231172599
Knott, E. (2017). Quasi-citizenship as a category of practice: analyzing engagement with Russia’s
Compatriot policy in Crimea. Citizenship Studies, 21(1), 116-135.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2016.1252714
Kögler, H.-H. (2023). Democracy or dictatorship? The moral call to defend Ukraine. European Journal of
Social Theory, 26(4), 450-478. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684310231158727
Kuzio, T. (2022). Russian nationalism and Ukraine. In Russian Nationalism and the Russian-Ukrainian
War (p. 99-128). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003191438-4
Kyrydon, A., & Troyan, S. (2022). The russian-ukrainian war (2014-2022):Basic preconditions and causes.
Balkan Social Science Review, (20), 157-179. https://doi.org/10.46763/bssr2220157k
Latysh, Y. (2023). Securitization of historical memory during the Russian-Ukrainian War. Scientific Papers
of the Kamianets-Podilskyi National Ivan Ohiienko University. History, (38), 178-188.
https://doi.org/10.32626/2309-2254.2022-38.178-188
Lawson, B., Glasman, J., & Mützelburg, I. (2023). Humanitarian Numbers in the Russian–Ukrainian War.
Journal of Humanitarian Affairs, 5(1), 52-61. https://doi.org/10.7227/jha.102
Lehkodukh, V., Horielov, V., Marchenko, S., Khromova, O. I., & Shchyhelska, H. (2023). On the issue of
historical origins and civilizational preconditions of the Russian-Ukrainian war of 2014-2022: attempts
of scientific reflection. Cuestiones Políticas, 41(76), 753-768.
https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.4176.44
Lippert, W. E. (2024). How conventional arms control failures caused the Russo-Ukraine War. Defense &
Security Analysis, 40(1), 138-160. https://doi.org/10.1080/14751798.2024.2300889
134
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 23 22 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
Mustafazadeh, P. T. (2022). Azerbaijan’s position in the russian-ukrainian war. In The russian-ukrainian
war (2014-2022): Historical, political, cultural-educational, religious, economic, and legal aspects
(p. 1006–1009). Izdevnieciba “Baltija Publishing”. https://doi.org/10.30525/978-9934-26-223-4-125
Plokhy, S. (2018). The Return of the Empire: The Ukraine Crisis in the Historical Perspective. South
Central Review, 35(1), 111-126. https://doi.org/10.1353/scr.2018.0006
Sasse, G. (2022). Russia's war against Ukraine. Eastern Europe, 72(6-8), 167. https://doi.org/10.35998/oe-
2022-0151
Sirko, V. S. (2022). Disinformation during the Russian-Ukrainian War. South Ukrainian Law Journal, 3(4),
235-237. https://doi.org/10.32850/sulj.2022.4.3.39
Smith, N. R., & Dawson, G. (2022). Mearsheimer, Realism, and the Ukraine War. Analysis & Criticism,
44(2), 175-200. https://doi.org/10.1515/auk-2022-2023
Todorov, I. (2015). Modern Ukrainian-Russian war: background and geopolitical dimension. East, 3(135).
https://doi.org/10.21847/1728-9343.2015.3(135).46589
Tolstov, S. V. (2022). The existential meaning of the russian-ukrainian war. In The Russian-Ukrainian war
(2014–2022): Historical, political, cultural-educational, religious, economic, and legal aspects
(p. 671–677). Publishing house “Baltija Publishing”. https://doi.org/10.30525/978-9934-26-223-4-80
Zalizniak, L. (2016). Historical Origins and Civilizational Preconditions of Russian-Ukrainian War of
2014-2016. Ukrainian Studies, 3(60), 26-39. https://doi.org/10.30840/2413-7065.3(60).2016.141199