Abstract
Ukraine has been an important center of East Slavic Culture since the foundation of the Principality of Kyiv. Ukraine is a country caught between the policies of Poland and Russia in previous years. Despite the establishment of the Ukrainian People's Republic in 1917, it became a country that came under the control of the USSR after the Second World War. Despite the declaration of independence in 1991 with the collapse of the USSR, Russia's hegemony has always been over Ukraine. Ukraine is shown as Russia's backyard. Poland's entry into the EU in 2004 Ukraine has been a victim of policies between the EU and Russia. Ukraine has been a balancing stone between the EU and Russia, so it has always preferred to remain neutral. However, the orange revolution in 2004 proved that Ukraine supports the EU and bells started to ring in Ukraine. However, this situation covers a much larger dimension than the conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Besides, Ukraine and Russia, many actors took part in the events in Ukraine. This shows that you have a much bigger plan when people think about it. This article will analyze to determine whether this situation is between Russia and Ukraine, or between Ukraine, which is a victim of a conflict between the USA and Russia. In this event, we will also examine the impact of NATO, the EU, and Turkey.
Keywords: Conflict in Ukraine, Relations USA-Russia, EU Attitude, Turkey
Introduction
The new states formed with the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 led to the formation of new policies in the world. Ukraine, one of these countries, is one of the cornerstones of important projects. The enlargement policies of the European Union in 2004 turned Ukraine into a war zone between the EU and Russia. Although this situation was seen as a region that cannot be shared between the EU and Russia, it later became a place where world interests clashed. The government of Vladimir Putin, who came to power in Russia after the government of Boris Yeltsin, wants to restore Russia to its former power. For this reason, it tends to protect its back and front gardens. Because, according to Putin, even if the Soviet Union disintegrates, newly established states cannot get out of Russia's control. EU and USA do not accept this situation. They want to see Gorbachev's fate in Vladimir Putin. However, Putin has no intention of making this happen. There have been two other actors who have been affected by this situation and found themselves in this game, including the Ukrainian situation, the EU, and the US, which we see facing Russia. One of them is Turkey, and the other is the state of Belarus.
The fact that the Republic of Turkey is both a Nato member and a neighbor of Ukraine on the Black Sea caused it to automatically find itself in the game. However, it is not clear what the role is. Is Turkey really neutral? Or is it under the control of another power? Is there a plan B for Turkey without looking at the other side of the table? However, Belarus has determined its side. It is debatable whether it is a democratic and independent country. However, in this case, it shows that it is against the policies of the EU. The first enemy for him is the USA or the EU. In particular, he has enmity with Poland. The purpose of this article is to examine the causes of the war between Russia and Ukraine, to understand the US plans for Ukraine and its relations with Russia, to understand NATO's role in Ukraine and to understand whether the EU has any expectations from the EU. . To explain the roles of Ukraine and Turkey in the region.
- CAUSES OF THE WAR WITH RUSSIA AND UKRAINE
The world is facing the biggest crisis since the cold war. Ukraine is of great importance due to its geopolitical location. It acts as a bridge between the West and Russia. Ukraine has become a conflict area of political events between Western countries and Russia. While the people of Russian origin living in the east of Ukraine wanted to live under the rule of Russia, the nationalist Ukrainians living in the west of Ukraine demanded to live under the control of the EU and NATO. Leonid Kuchma's victory in the 1994 elections in Ukraine clearly shows the division on the map of Ukraine. The agreements signed with Russia during the Kuchma period guaranteed Russia's navy in the Black Sea. This situation shows that Kuchma followed a pro-Russian policy. Ukrainian nationalists opposed this situation. Without Kuchma, they said they wanted a Ukraine. As a result of the protests across the country, a new election period took place. In these elections, Victor YANKOVIC and Victor YUSCENKO faced each other. Although it is said that Yankovic won the first elections, there were allegations that the election was rigged. With the Orange Revolution, power passed to Yushchenko. The 2004 elections in Ukraine show a divided Ukraine on the map. Yushchenko followed a completely pro-Western policy. Being a leader seeking EU and NATO membership was beyond Moscow's borders. Yankovic came to power in the elections held as a result of the economic crisis in Ukraine in 2010. Yanukovich was a statesman who followed the opposite of Yushchenko's policies. The pending EU rejected the partnership agreement and instead opted for Russia's credit bailout and renewing relations with Russia. What happened in Ukraine was in favor of Russia, but the demonstrations of Ukrainian nationalists in the Independence Square in Kyiv began to reverse the situation. Protests spread to western and central Ukraine. These events continued until February 23, 2013. Yanukovych was forced to flee to Russia. After these situations, some notices began to come from Moscow. According to Putin, the rights of people of Russian origin are violated and pro-Russian journalists are arrested. This situation was against the interests of the great and powerful Russia. Crimea, which was safe under Kuchma and Yankovic, was no longer safe for Russia. After Yankovic's resignation, 400 supporters in Crimea put pressure on the Crimean parliament and demanded a referendum. Later, Crimea was annexed by Russia. On March 18, 2014, Putin declared that Crimea is part of Russia. After the annexation of Crimea, uprisings began to be seen in the Donbas region. Protesters captured the governorates in the Donekts and Lugansk regions during the uprisings, with the unification of these protesters, they formed the republic of NOWOROSSIYA. Russia was supplying the Donbas region with weapons to a large extent. Meanwhile, Poroshenko won the election in Ukraine. Poroshenko's first act was to declare mobilization in the country. As Ukraine began to advance successfully in the war in the Donbas region, Russia's military intervention turned things around. As a result, a ceasefire was signed in September 2014. However, the status has always remained active. Volodymyr Zelensky came to power in Ukraine in 2019. Both sides continued to increase their strength. While Zelensky continued to receive help from the West, Russia began to envelop Ukraine. State Spokesman of Russia Dmitry Peskov explained this situation with the following words: The Russian Federation moves its Armed forces on its own territory at its discretion. This shouldn't bother anyone, it doesn't pose a threat to anyone. In 2021, Zelensky asked for help from the West and NATO openly. They continued to accuse each other until 2022. Putin stated that Ukraine cannot become a member of NATO. Putin sees the admission of Ukraine to NATO as a reason for war.
- THE ROLE OF THE USA IN UKRAINE
Russia's involvement in the US's Mediterranean and Middle East policies is against the interests of American foreign policy. Russia's establishment of military bases in Tartus and Latakia in Syria and the fact that it is on the borders of the USA in Northern Syria threatens the US foreign policy. In the face of this situation, the USA wants to prevent Russia from descending into the warm seas. On the other hand, it wants to establish a military base in the Black Sea. One leg of this plan is in Romania and the other leg is in Ukraine. In these events that took place in Ukraine, US defense spokesman John Kirby had said that they are negotiating with our NATO allies regarding the regional tension. The US accuses Russia of increasing regional tensions. Subsequently, White House Spokesperson Jen Psaki had said that Russia can attack Ukraine at any time. This was the US plan A in the Black Sea.
2.1 NATO and EU Reactions to the Ukraine War
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) tends to take a strong lead in the Ukraine war. Before the Ukraine war, NATO tended to expand its borders in Georgia in 2007. Putin expressed his dissatisfaction with this situation and said that they would not allow this situation. Russia saw that America was intent on oppressing them. In 2008, he entered Georgia during the South Ossetian war and bombarded the Georgian army. Following a pro-Western policy, the Russians approached 40 km from Tbilisi and gave the necessary message to NATO. Danger bells began to ring for Ukraine, which wants to join NATO. NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg said that the NATO alliance supports Ukraine's sovereignty and Ukraine's territorial integrity. During this period, NATO troops were deployed in Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Poland. Britain is increasing its aid to Ukraine.
While the EU aims to enable the EU to use soft power elements by making the EU effective in these states, the EU aims at the democratic and economic Europeanization of these states within itself and has demonstrated it with some criteria. For states in the process of membership, they are the norms and values that states expect to abide by. In addition, it is foreseen that the common interests created will bring the states closer to each other in terms of security and stay away from conflict.
Before and during the Ukraine crisis, the pro-EU attitude of Ukraine in its relations with the EU, its willingness, and will for full membership were evaluated as the benefit maximization offered by this institutionalization itself. Ukrainian people have largely analyzed the cost of being with the EU as more than the benefit. At this point, the EU, as the rational choice theory reveals; aimed to see Ukraine as a neighboring country by subjecting its relations with Ukraine to a cost-benefit analysis.
However, this neighboring country forms the buffer zone between the EU and Russia. Here, we see the breakthroughs of the EU as soft power. Nye divides the sources of a country's soft power into three. These; that country; What is attractive to other countries is their culture, their political values in domestic or foreign policy, and finally, their foreign policy created by a legitimate and moral authority (Nye, 2008, p. 94). Therefore, the EU sees Ukraine's security as its own security.
2.2 The Effects of the Ukraine War on Turkey
Russia's increasing military presence in the region stretching from the Black Sea to the Caucasus, from the Middle East to the Eastern Mediterranean is seen as a development that worries Turkey. Russia, which seized Ukraine's port infrastructure and navy ships with the annexation of Crimea, had already managed to change the balance in the Black Sea in its favor. Ankara is worried that with a new conflict, Russia will consolidate its dominance in the Black Sea via Ukraine. However, as in Syria and Libya, Ankara, which has to maintain a close dialogue with Russia despite being on opposing sides in important conflict areas, also avoids attitudes that might turn Moscow against it. For example, the risk of Syrian refugee influx from Idlib to Turkey if Russia launches a military operation force, Erdogan does not want to anger Putin too much.
However, Russia's war with Ukraine and the Western countries' response to this with harsh sanctions forces Erdogan to make a choice. With the rise of tension in Ukraine, it is noteworthy that Erdogan did not take part in the intense diplomatic traffic between Western countries at the level of leaders. US President Joe Biden did not include Erdogan in his video conference call with the leaders of Germany, France, England, Italy, and Poland to discuss the Ukraine crisis, as he had done in similar meetings before. It is noteworthy that Turkey, which has one of the largest armies in NATO, has a coast on the Black Sea, and is one of the countries most affected by the developments, was not invited to this meeting.
It is stated that Erdogan's close dialogue with Putin in recent years, cooperation with Russia in the field of the defense industry, crises with Western countries, and controversial foreign policy moves are effective in this. While Western observers state that the US administration and its allies are skeptical of the close dialogue between Erdogan and Putin, they say that this brings with it a distant attitude towards Turkey.
Although Turkey and Russia compete in many conflict zones from Libya to Syria and the Caucasus, they often seek reconciliation and try to maintain their influence, especially trying to prevent the USA and other western countries from having an influence in these geographies. It is emphasized that both Putin and Erdogan's anti-Western rhetoric are similar, and the way they govern their countries conflict with the liberal democratic principles of the West.
It is stated that the increasing anti-democratic practices in Turkey and the increasing similarity of Erdoğan's management approach to Putin's are also effective in the distance of the US administration from Erdoğan. On the other hand, he hopes to weaken NATO in this way, where Russian President Putin is pleased that Turkey is having problems with its Western allies, and he is careful not to break his dialogue with Erdogan despite the tensions experienced from time to time on the Moscow-Ankara line.
- CONCLUSION
In this study, the analysis of the Ukraine war is evaluated. The visible and invisible causes of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine are examined. In this case, the effects of NATO and the EU on Ukraine and the importance of Ukraine to the EU are stated. In addition, the role of the USA in the Ukraine incident and the expectation and importance of the USA from Ukraine were stated. On the other hand, it has been analyzed where Turkey is in this war, whether Turkey has an effect on the war or not, and how Turkey will be affected in this war.
In the Ukraine crisis, Russia's military intervention against the EU caused the EU to be the loser of the crisis along with Ukraine. Since Ukraine's membership in the EU or NATO would endanger Russia's security, Russia does not accept any sanctions on this issue. At the NATO summit held in Brussels in 2008, the issue of the inclusion of Ukraine and Georgia in NATO came to the fore, and Russia reacted to the possibility of NATO's entry into the South Caucasus. This reveals the first steps of the current tensions. The US response to the Ukraine crisis is based on different causes and reactions. Although the USA sees itself as having full authority in shaping the international system, the basis of the geopolitical differences between the two countries is Russia's envisioning a system based on the balance of power.
The US Black Sea plan is not a surprise. Moscow has been watching the Black Sea, Montreux, and, in this context, Channel Istanbul discussions carefully for a long time. Turkey is important because of its position in the Black Sea, its place in the US-Russian rivalry, and being a balancing factor between Ukraine and Russia.
Until 2014, Turkey's main concern was the deterioration of stability and peace in the Black Sea basin and the possibility of conflict in the region. Although Turkey supported the NATO membership of Bulgaria and Romania, it objected to an outside NATO force in the Black Sea. He based his objection on the Montreux Convention. As a matter of fact, in the 2008 Russia-Georgia War, the USA did not allow the passage of high-tonnage warships. He did this not because he sided with Russia, but because the presence of the US Navy in the Black Sea could endanger Turkey's interests as well.
As a result, the Ukraine war will determine one of the bases of the next world war. Moreover, the power of Russia will be determined as a result of this war. However, if Russia cannot win this war, far worse years will be waiting for Russia than the Gorbachev era, let alone living in the former Soviet glory.
