From Whence Come Wars?
A Chinese-Russian Hegemon in a Multipolar World
The goal of International Relations is 1) to understand why global events happen and the bigger-picture context in which they happen, 2) to predict what will happen next, and 3) to draw out lessons in order to offer solutions.
The invasion of Ukraine was many years coming and probably could’ve been avoided if the West actively worked to gain the trust of Russia and minimize its security concerns. But — with the exception of Trump who engaged with Russia, sidelined NATO, and got tough on China — instead of isolating China and pulling Russia closer to the West, the West seemed to have helped pushed Russia into the open arms of China.
How Did We Get Here?
Numerous academics and researchers have pointed out for years that the West has been engaging in a policy of encirclement/containment to some degree or another in relation to Russia (and China) for the purpose of inhibiting their geographical or political expansion, and that this behavior would likely bring on a security dilemma that could erupt into war. This really isn’t controversial. The controversy is over whether or not the recent invasion of Ukraine is due to NATO antagonism or Russian expansionism. I think most scholars would say both. The US and NATO has long employed an encirclement/containment policy in regards to Russia, as the US has with China. The Russian position is that they have been responding to containment efforts (rather than empire building). The US position is that it has to contain Chinese and Russian expansionism (rather than because they’re trying to cripple the Russian or Chinese state or cause a revolution).
We have somewhat of a catch-22 here. In the case of China and Taiwan, if the US did not put Taiwan under its umbrella, it’s possible China would’ve taken it over by now. Yet if the US wasn’t encircling Asia, China might not feel compelled to take over Taiwan. This is similar with Russia, and why most objective scholars would likely look to both NATO and Putin for the impetus for this invasion. A Ukraine in the fold of NATO would’ve been unacceptable for Russia. Economic factors such as oil and other other natural resources in Ukraine likely also weighed in. Expansionism isn’t enough to explain this situation (if it was just territory expansion, Russia could’ve busied itself with annexing the rest of Georgia). Ukraine is tied up with NATO and European considerations.
The Bigger Picture
The Ukrainian invasion is taking place against a larger backdrop of a global struggle for a new balance of power and a renegotiating of the world order. The unipolar world of western hegemony is being challenged. Now we have a bunch of other countries seizing the opportunity to negotiate a better deal. 40 countries either abstained or voted against condemning Russia. India — the great Asian nuclear democracy — is no longer playing to same tune (and then buying Russian oil in Rubles), Saudi Arabia is trying to get off the Dollar for the Yuan, and China of course will likely deepen its ties with Russia. Some have said that a multipolar world is a safer world, but a transition to a multipolar world ought to be very concerning, especially for those who espouse Western views. China thinks time and the march of history is on its side.
For all the flaws of the West, it’s still the best-worse thing we’ve got. Those who naively parrot either western or non-western media, fail to understand the bigger picture. Russia does not actually provide an alternative to the global order, but China does. If China can succeed in erecting a competing world order with Russia and perhaps other counties like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, and maybe even India, they will become the largest, most powerful, and most populous hegemon in the world.
To avoid a disastrous global realignment, the US needs some decisive victory against Russia in order to keep the rest of the world in line (this is what Biden attempted to do in asking Xi to turn on Russia, but this was already highly unlikely given the newly inked relationship between China and Russia). But there is still time to find a diplomatic solution (though it is not totally clear if that is indeed what the West wants). Eventually — if China continues its ascent and does not become democratic — it is almost inevitable that there will be a great powers conflict between the West and China. The West needs Russia on its side.
𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐛𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐨𝐮𝐭𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐯𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧?
A reasonable prediction seems to be that Putin will be satisfied with the invasion ending with the annexing of half of Ukraine probably along the Dnieper River, along with a land bridge to Transnistria. (Either that or the installation of a pro-Russian government). Something like this will probably be able to be stomached by the West. (If the West had the capability, it is not unreasonable to think it would attempting to instigate a coup or the assassination of Putin, though the blowback of that would be to further the resolve of would-be non-compliers of Western hegemony). A much worse alternative is a global war.
To the politician, war is a game. To the solider, war is hell.
