In an episode of the classic 1990s sitcom “Seinfeld,” two of the show’s characters, Kramer and Newman, find themselves playing Risk on a New York City subway car. As they clutch the board to keep the passengers around them from overturning their armies of plastic men, Kramer gleefully informs Newman that his friend’s last stronghold – Ukraine – is about to be crushed.
New York being a multicultural place, one of their fellow passengers – a Ukrainian – overhears Kramer’s boast that, “the Ukraine is weak!” Demanding an explanation for this insult to his national honor, the Ukrainian man ends Kramer and Newman’s absurd simulation of geopolitics after they explain they are merely playing a game. Bellowing like an injured moose, the ushanka-clad man smashes the board while indignantly yelling, “Ukraine is game for you!?”
On television, hilarity ensures. In the real world, however, the situation in Ukraine is much more deadly and complex than a game of Risk. For the past several weeks protesters angry at the government of President Viktor F. Yanukovych have waged pitched battles with government security forces over Yanukovych’s decision to not sign a comprehensive free trade and political agreement with the European Union – which would have placed Ukraine on the path to possible EU membership.
Instead, the Ukrainian president turned to his long-time ally, Vladimir Putin, in order to secure a $15 billion aid package from Russia. Capitalizing on this victory, the country’s parliament then moved to place restrictions on public protests – effectively banning dissent. In response, pro-Western elements in the Ukrainian capital of Kiev, and in the country’s generally Western-oriented north and west took to the streets demanding a renunciation of the Russian aid and a return to the deal struck with Brussels.
Police and protesters have been battling ever since, and protests have been picking up steam, growing more organized and as a result more intense and dangerous. So-called People’s Councils have even been set up in parts of Ukraine controlled by the opposition, some of which have outlawed the country’s nominal ruling party. And this past week, protesters seized government buildings in the capital – only to be forced out by security forces loyal to the president.
What’s more, several police and protesters have been killed in the fighting, and protests have also spread to the country’s south and east – seen as centers of support for the embattled Ukrainian president. In a bid to ease dissent and to restore some sense of order, Yanukovych sacked his government this past Monday, and the laws passed by parliament cracking down on dissent have been scrapped. Whether this is enough to end the crisis, however, remains to be seen, but for the moment a revolution in Ukraine – the second in 10 years – could be about to occur.
For those who have been paying attention, the drama in Kiev looks very much like what took place in the Arab world during the heady days of the Arab Spring. In Kiev, as in Cairo, huge numbers took to the streets to confront what many believed to be an authoritarian regime bent on maintaining power by hook or by crook, while members of the opposition tout their pro-Western, liberal bona fides and use social media and the Internet to get the word out to comrades and fellow travelers both home and abroad. There is even a deep-seated social cleavage in Ukraine that mirrors the secular-Islamist split in the Arab world that pits the country’s Western-oriented, west-central regions against the Russian-orientated southeast.
There, however, the similarity ends. Unlike Egypt, where U.S. influence has been paramount for decades, Ukraine lies at the heart of Russia’s traditional sphere of influence, and there are deep cultural ties between the two countries that stretch back over centuries. Indeed, Ukraine has historically been part of the Russian empire for much of its history, and Kiev was once home to the first organized, indigenous Russian state. Christianity was also first introduced to Russians via Kiev and Ukraine, and while language differences between Russia and Ukraine persist, Russian and Ukrainian are nonetheless linguistically close to one another.
It is not inaccurate to say then that Ukrainians and Russians are, if not exactly the same people, then blood brothers of a type rarely seen in history. Their relationship is in fact similar to that which you might find between the English and the Scots or between U.S. citizens hailing from the northern and southern parts of the United States, so close is their shared history. As one might expect from these comparisons though, being blood brothers does not necessarily entail being part of a happy family – as the protests currently rocking Kiev perfectly demonstrate.
Russia being the dominant member of this family has long tried to strong-arm Ukraine and has a history of cracking down on Ukrainian nationalism in whatever form it might manifest.
During czarist times, for instance, Catherine the Great smashed Ukraine’s independent-minded Cossacks while simultaneously crushing the rebellions of its peasantry. Fast forward to the 20th century, and Ukraine’s rich peasants – known as the Kulaks – were so ground under by Soviet collectivism that when the Nazis rolled through on their way to Moscow they found a number Ukrainians who were more than willing to work with the Third Reich if that meant they could stick it to Uncle Joe.
When the Second World War ended, those same nationalists found themselves on the wrong side of history – and the Iron curtain – and fought a long, though ultimately doomed guerilla campaign against the reassertion of Soviet control over their homeland. Ukraine was then reintegrated into the Soviet system and remained a vital, integral part of the USSR until that country’s collapse in December 1991. The country was in fact so integrated into the Soviet Union’s military establishment that, for instance, Ukraine inherited a huge nuclear arsenal when the Soviet Union collapsed – briefly making it the fifth-largest nuclear power on Earth – and found itself in the sudden possession of the defunct Soviet Union’s entire Black Sea fleet.
Since then, a now independent Ukraine has struggled to find a place in the modern world. It gave up its nuclear weapons, gave over most the fleet to Russia, and has attempted to modernize along Western lines in the same way that Poland, Hungary and the Baltic Republics have successfully done. Unlike these countries, however, Ukraine was simply too close to Russia – geographically and culturally – and much too big for the countries of Western Europe to safely bring into the fold through an active program of mentorship and assistance during the early days of Post-Soviet independence. This gave Moscow and pro-Russian Ukrainians the opportunity to halt the advance of the West any deeper into Russian territory for over two decades.
This breathing room for Russia, however, has ended and the West – or at least its ideas on how society should be governed – is once more on the march in the lands traditionally controlled by Russia.
Eastern Europe, once part of the Soviet Empire, is now safely ensconced in both NATO and the EU, and many in Ukraine look upon those countries as Eastern Europeans must have once looked upon Western Europe back during the Cold War – as an example of what they, too could be if only their current oppressors would get out of the way.
With some Western assistance these hopeful Ukrainians organized and were able to, briefly, drive a wedge between Moscow and Kiev via the Orange Revolution in January 2005. The corrupt, pro-Russian autocrat running the country, Leonid Kuchma, was thrown out and pro-Western reformers installed into power. Unfortunately the global financial crisis and increasing animosity between the Orange Revolution’s two main leaders – Viktor Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko – created an opening for the pro-Russia faction to return to power in 2010, when Yanukovych, who had been Kuchma’s vice president, won the presidency.
With Yanukovych flailing and increasingly looking like he might go the way of his one-time boss Kuchma, the stage is potentially set for the West to once again advance deeper into the heart of territory Russia considers its own.
This is dangerous for a number of reasons. First, and most obviously, Ukraine could slide into civil war as the pro-Russian southeast turns against the ousting of whom it perceives to be ‘its’ president. While unlikely, this would be a catastrophe, as it would put an active armed conflict on the borders of both NATO and Russia, one in which both sides would be sorely tempted to intervene in.
If civil war were avoided, on the other hand, tensions between Russia and the West would still be raised as Moscow would see the West’s advance into Ukraine as deeply threatening on an existential level. This would make Moscow even less likely to compromise or otherwise assist the U.S. in other areas – such as in any negotiations with Iran or in containing a rising China in East Asia.
Indeed, the addition of Ukraine as a solid member of the Western camp would spur Russia to assist the West’s enemies and could even return Europe to a form of militarized competition between East and West last seen during the Cold War.
Finally, a successful, pro-Western Ukraine couldn’t help but have the same effect on Russia that a successful, pro-Western Eastern Europe has had on Ukraine. Ukraine will be a living, breathing example of what can be done in terms of reforming Russian society. Russian dissidents would flock to a free Ukraine not dominated by Russia and use that country as a base from which to organize for democratic reform – or revolution – in Russia itself. This could eventually put immense pressure on the autocratic regime created by Vladimir Putin and create on the streets of Moscow the violence and chaos that we are now seeing playing out in Kiev.
So goes Kiev, one might say, and Moscow will inevitably follow. If true, this dramatically raises the stakes for those in Russia seeking to keep the current, authoritarian status quo firmly in place. Faced with tens-of-thousands of protesters in Red Square, would they meekly give in, or would they order police and troops to fire upon the demonstrators?
What happens then, or what happens if only some of those troops obey those orders? Could the country split, as the Ukraine might possibly be doing now? Given that Russia has thousands of nuclear weapons at its disposal, let’s hope we don’t have to find out.
So keep an eye on Ukraine. It’s a geopolitical door into Russia that Moscow wants to keep firmly shut but looks set to cave in anyway. While our first impulse here in America might be to walk on through and make ourselves at home, it may be much wiser to wait and see what happens. Otherwise, like Kramer and Newman, we might find an angry, ushanka-clad Russian nationalism just waiting just beyond the entryway to make things miserable for us.