Countering the realists on Russia and Ukraine

The challenge for any new study of the conflict is to bring a fresh perspective and avoid the worn-out arguments that dominate public attention. Thankfully, The Sources of Russia’s Great Power Politics: Ukraine and the Challenge to the European Order, by Taras Kuzio and Paul D’Anieri, successfully meets this challenge. The authors’ principal motive in writing this book is to counter the realist arguments, made by academics such as John Mearsheimer, who claim that it is the West that ought to be held responsible for Russian military aggression in Ukraine. To do this, the authors put forward many arguments that are either novel or overlooked by analyses in the media and academia discussion. One key counter-response to the realists is to demonstrate that Russia has never recognised an independent Ukraine. Another powerful response is to show that hybrid warfare is not the new and cutting-edge phenomena it is normally portrayed to be, but is deeply rooted in the Soviet past; Russia is not simply reacting to the West in its employment of such techniques.

A dissection of arguments

The Sources of Russia’s Great Power Politics is divided into seven sections: an introduction; an assessment of the debate and theories regarding the conflict; Soviet origins of hybrid warfare and Russian-Ukrainian relations; relations with the West between 1991-2013; Crimea’s annexation and the war in Donbas; international ramifications; and the conclusion. Kuzio and D’Anieri first look at five of the major theories regarding the recent armed conflict and point out their flaws. The most popular arguments put either the blame squarely on the West for ignoring history and Russian interests, or else hold Russia entirely responsible and emphasise its expansionism and domestic problems. Naturally, these theories are deemed overly simplistic.

The next chapter, in which Kuzio and D’Anieri illustrate how hybrid warfare is not a novel tool, is highly original and illuminating. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union employed hybrid techniques very similar to those used by Putin in Ukraine to project its power around the globe, mainly by funding and arming radical left-wing parties and organisations in the West, Latin America, and East Asia. These techniques were further developed and utilised by the Russian Federation well before 2014, notably in Estonia, Georgia and Ukraine.

We then get a detailed analysis of events between 1991 and 2013, which Kuzio and D’Anieri present as the crucial period for understanding the present conflict. They convincingly show that politicians and leaders in Russia never truly recognised Ukraine as independent. They highlight five key events which, taken together, provide near conclusive evidence against the realist view that the conflict was a knee-jerk response to the West encroaching on Russia’s sphere of influence in the early 2010s.

The Sources of Russia’s Great Power Politics goes on to detail the events of the annexation of Crimea, the invasion of Ukraine’s east by Russian forces, and the Minsk peace talks. It zooms in on key events and attitudes in the run-up to the conflict, the turning points of the conflict itself, and the failed peace process that was supposed to bring the fighting to an end. Kuzio and D’Anieri raise two points that are particularly noteworthy. The first is how to define the conflict: is it an inter-state war or an intra-state civil conflict? The second is the mistake of allowing Russia a seat on the ceasefire negotiation process.

The final part of the argument goes through the implications of the conflict on Europe and the world at large, including detailed accounts of the ways in which prominent actors such as the EU and NATO have responded. Part of this involves scrutinising the increasingly popular view that current Russo-western relations constitute a new Cold War; the authors come to the conclusion that the term is indeed appropriate, though, admittedly, this is not one of their most convincing arguments. But they do not shy away from making their opinions known, and lament the fact that Russia is part of the peace process at all.

Origins of the conflict

The Sources of Russia’s Great Power Politics is not only a great addition for anyone interested in both the war in Ukraine and current relations with Russia, but also for those new to the field. The writing is clear and the arguments are presented in a linear and comprehensive fashion, and the reader is spared any unnecessarily complicated jargon. Another strong point is that it genuinely sheds new light on the debate surrounding the origins of the conflict and on the concept of hybrid warfare more generally. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, it is a highly entertaining read. By avoiding dry statistics and rehashing well known opinions of experts, it reads more like a novel with a compelling narrative and vivid detail. Even those who are not well-versed in the subject will be drawn in to the drama.

Yet the book is not without flaws. One issue is the way Kuzio and D’Anieri use the term of Eurasianism without properly clarifying their understanding of it. The term is alluded to throughout the book, but is only directly discussed a few times. Given that it serves as a major pillar in their argument, more attention should have been devoted to the origins and evolution of Eurasianism over the 20th and 21st centuries and the major effects it has on Russian political discourse. It would help the uninitiated reader understand the origins of the Russkiy Mir phenomenon which comes up repeatedly. Another weak point is the characterisation of the current relations between Russia and the West as a new Cold War. While there are similarities that the authors point to in order to make the comparison, their evidence is selective, and it ignores the many of the key differences that exist between the cold war and the current situation. For one, there is no real ideological competition, as all sides accept capitalism in one form or another. And Russia today is a power in undeniable decline. The world is becoming more multi-polar, and the key challenger to western hegemony is China, which has the economic might to exert real leverage over the West in ways Russia can only dream of.

Aside from these points, the book remains a great addition to the literature. The Sources of Russia’s Great Power Politics is intelligently put together, brimming with insight into new ways of understanding a conflict that has become a defining feature of the moment of history we are living through. It is an essential work for any scholar interested in this conflict, and will likely be referred to many times in years to come.

Daniel Jarosak is a former editing researcher for New Eastern Europe and is currently a Master’s student in a dual degree programme between Tartu University and Jagiellonian University. His main fields of study are East-Central Europe and the Baltic Sea Region.

Book review, Paul D'Anieri, Taras Kuzio, Ukraine conflict