Taylor’s University American Degree Transfer Programme

ENGL102 English Composition II (Fall 2022 Semester)

Submitted on 16th November 2022

Critical Review
Ukraine and Russia Conflict: A Proposal to Bring Stability

Ching Zheng Xue 0349678

Lee Yi Cheng 0348211
Raja Darshini Rajamani 0347465
Tang Ming Qian 0349361
 It has been approximately a year since the fateful day when Russia infamously launched a

“special military operation”, or more accurately, an invasion into Ukrainian soil. Despite many

attempts by the United Nations to facilitate peace talks, there seems to be no end in sight as both

Russian and Ukrainian leaders are unwilling to compromise with their demands. To understand

how the situation escalated into what we are currently facing, we need to analyze the relationship

from before Ukraine was an independent state.

Ukraine and Russia Conflict: A Proposal to Bring Stability is an article contained in the

2nd edition of the Journal of Peace and War Studies (JPWS). Authored by Shayla Moya, Kathryn

Preul, and Faith Privett; this paper primarily focuses on qualitative analysis to assess Ukrainian

history, Russian involvement, and Western concerns over the disputes between Ukraine and Russia.

Policy recommendations were presented to help resolve the dispute, with the focal point of the

proposed idea being: making Ukraine a stronger, more independent nation, alleviating its

economic dependency on Russia, and establishing a greater reliance on Western Europe.

With Russia’s growing influence on Ukraine’s economy, it is increasingly difficult for

Ukraine to develop as an independent country. A stalemate between Ukraine and Russia in 2009

prompted an unbalanced agreement between the two that allows Russia to leverage Ukraine’s

reliance on its natural resources to develop a stronger dominance over Ukraine (p. 119). In 2010,

Russia took advantage of Ukraine’s political instability and annexed Ukrainian-held Crimea within

2 weeks (p. 120). As a culturally and historically connected land, Ukraine is considered a failed

state of Putin’s “Euroasian Union” concept. This perception has prompted Russia to violate the

Convention for Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism in an attempt to annex Donbas. The
civil conflict in Eastern Ukraine was further exacerbated by diplomatic conflicts in 2014 as the

Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was shot down over the occupied territory (p. 121). In 2015, Kremlin

rejected Ukraine’s cease-fire agreement as they were convinced that the latter will continue its

interests toward alignment with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), instead of

Moscow, increasing the tension between them and the West (p. 122). However, Russia’s hostility

towards the West did not begin until NATO’s effort to expand into the former Soviet Union

territories of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania started to take place. Being cautious of NATO’s

economic and military strength, Russia resorted to nonlinear warfare in retaliation of the NATO

and EU expansion (p. 122). By creating frozen conflict zones in Ukraine and Georgia, Russia made

sure that the two nations are constantly in a state of conflict, hindering their desire of joining NATO

to obtain protection since both nations fail to acquire internal stability (p. 123).

In this paper, the researchers suggested that Ukraine would gain political stability by

reintegrating the rebel groups in the Ukrainian regions and setting up cease-fire zones under the

supervision of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). However,

Ukraine would have to make compromises as the cease-fire would not guarantee the reintegration

of states such as Luhansk, Donetsk, and Donbas which are still heavily influenced by Russia (p.

124). This paper also proposed that the Ukrainian economy will be more self-sustainable by

developing a more diversified income stream for both the citizens and the government. The

researchers argue that bringing in foreign direct investments (FDI) would enable Ukraine to

diversify its industries, reducing its economic reliance on Russian oil and increasing employment

rates (p. 125). Consequently, the increase in corporate and income taxes collected would allow

Ukraine to pay off some of its debts to Russia, reducing Russia’s overwhelming control on their
territory (p. 126). Though bringing peace and stability remains as the main objective of this

research paper, the military policy proposal will serve as a last resort if both political and economic

policy proposals fail to solve the dispute between Russia and Ukraine. In this paper, it was

proposed that the EU Training Mission (EUTM) and EU Border Assistance Mission (EUBAM)

should be set up to support Ukrainian troops moving into the conflict zones. This will effectively

help train the Ukrainian Armed Forces, creating military stability in Ukraine and preventing the

expansion of war zones (p. 127).

This research paper is written after a qualitative analysis of the relationship between Russia

and Ukraine. Sourcing from mainly secondary sources, the researchers thoroughly analyzed the

history and foreign policies of Russia and Ukraine towards one another, and aims to give proposals

that are intended to resolve the disputes that are now occurring. Besides that, the proposals also

aim to build Ukraine toward the future as a stronger, more independent nation that is free from

Russian interference. Mutually inclusive policies from the economic, political, and military aspects

were proposed to minimize damage and mitigate future conflicts. The researchers are convinced

that the proposals will bring political and economic advantages to the region, developing internal

stability that will help increase the security of Ukraine and its neighboring countries.

The article is very well structured from head to toe, with proper heading for each section

of information that allows readers to easily navigate through. There is a clear connection between

sentences and paragraphs and the researchers use simple language whenever possible for easy

understanding. It is notably written with an organization of details from past, present to future. For

example, the researchers begin the article by stating the initial cause of war between Ukraine and
Russia. The researchers have considered all the parties involved (Russia, Ukraine, and the Western)

and justified their actions from each perspective when looking into the issue(p. 119). The

involvement of the parties was all written based on detailed facts backed up with sources. The

article also justifies the statements made with opinions of their own as reasoning. For example, in

the proposal section of the article, the researchers not only suggest solutions to independentize

Ukraine but also gives reason as to why Russia would not retaliate in the process of doing so.

[LYC1] Additionally, the article is also written descriptively so that even a non-specialist could

easily understand the presented information. For example, whenever the researchers introduce a

new party such as the OSCE and the Carter Center, they also state the general purpose of the

organization clearly and how it plays a role in the Russia-Ukraine conflict (p. 123). Overall, the

article provides sufficient and well-organized information that keeps the readers engaged

throughout the paper.

The basis for the proposal by the research paper to diversify Ukraine’s economy through

foreign investment and enterprising is good as it encourages Ukraine’s economy to become more

robust and independent of external variables. Ukraine is in dire need of diversification as its

economy at its current state is heavily dependent on natural resources and is highly susceptible to

instability. In addition to that, the repayment of debts incurred by Ukraine after the 2008 financial

crisis puts heavy pressure on Ukraine’s economy. It is in Ukraine’s interest to develop a healthy

and diversified economy to repay its debts, a majority of which is owed to Russia. A more

developed economy will be the first step for Ukraine to move into the status of a developed and

high-income nation, increasing the quality of life among its people. However, the researchers

failed to adequately consider Russia’s stance on the matter. It assumes that Russia will not retaliate
against Ukraine after the proposed policies, which can be interpreted as hostile against Russia, are

implemented as Ukraine’s formal economic policy. Despite that, the over-reliance on Russian gas

and oil is an issue that should be addressed with haste. At the current state, Ukraine, and the

European Union by extension, is overly dependent on Russian oil. Over-reliance on Russian oil

allows Russia to hold Ukraine’s economy hostage due to the importance of gas and oil in Ukraine’s

energy and industrial sectors. Because of the threat, this poses to Ukraine’s sovereignty,

researchers must be more sensitive to the situation and propose policies that do not alienate Russia

from Ukraine’s economy and instead give one that is nonpartisan while helping to shift its

economy to become more mature and independent from foreign influence.

While the first half of the article remains unbiased, the proposal section begins to stray

away from its objective of achieving stability in Ukraine and Russia. Throughout this section, only

the betterment of Ukraine and Western was focused on instead of Russia. The policies were

proposed in a way that only benefits Ukraine while the well-being of Russia is completely ignored.

For example, the article talks about individualizing Ukraine with the support of the West while the

only time Russia is mentioned is when a certain control, limitation, or disadvantage is placed on

them (p. 125). It only mentions imposing sanctions on Russia or fining Russia instead of the

benefits they could receive from the recommended policies. Moreover, the article is heavily biased

such that the proposals suggested only emphasizes on reducing Ukraine’s dependency on Russia

whilst still increasing reliance on the EU. One such example is the political policy proposal where

the article proposes the idea of using the OSCE as a tool to incorporate a ceasefire zone in the

region of Ukraine to reduce Russian influence. (p. 128) In a way, the authors are just proposing a

shift of Ukraine’s dependencies from one major power to another, while ignoring the underlying
issue that Ukraine struggles with, which is the mishandling of domestic issues faced by the

countries without external influence. It was also proposed that the EUTM and EUBAM should be

set up to support Ukrainian troops moving into the conflict zones, again creating dependency on

the EU (p. 128). If the proposals were to go through, Ukraine would be cleared of Russian threat

just to fall right into the EU’s hands, which then gives leverage to the EU to dictate policies in

Ukraine for years to come.

While the article does contain its fair share of modern contemporary ideas, few ideas share

the same key weakness of being overly idealistic as it is heavily dependent on support by the

European Union while Ukraine has little to nothing to offer in return. Additionally, it is not a given

that the political will is present among leaders of the European Union to lend support of this degree

to Ukraine out of goodwill. It is also seemingly unmentioned that most proposals go against

Russia’s foreign policy towards Ukraine, making it incredibly difficult to implement effectively

on a national scale. For instance, plans to reintegrate pro-Russian rebel forces in the north-eastern

region (p. 124) is difficult because limiting only their reliance to Russia does not address the source

of concern experienced by the pro-Russian population, the proposal only works on the assumption

that the response by the rebels will be reasonable and open to changes. Furthermore, the border

fortifying proposal can also be regarded as an unrealistic approach due to the surplus of

uncertainties present in the plan itself and the major reliance on the assistance of the EU’s military

forces in backing them up against invading Russian forces (p. 128). Not to mention, the seemingly

visionary approach of implementing rigorous product inspections and a cease-fire agreement (p.

128) with Russia’s agreement is highly dependent on the cooperation of the aggressor nation,

making the reach of a common consensus among the two highly difficult, and even harder to
maintain. The breaching of such an agreement is highly possible, as can be seen previously from

the Minsk agreement in failing to subdue the conflict between the two nations.

In conclusion, it is obvious that more compromises must be made by all parties to bring

stability to the eastern Ukrainian region. Although the background history of the topic was well

researched and the ideas brought out to achieve stability were comprehensive and are able to tackle

conflicts from multiple perspectives, the proposals made were not well thought out. Overly

idealistic political and military proposals were also presented, all made on the assumption that

support will be provided by the EU and the West. Besides, biasness can be clearly seen throughout

the paper as none of the proposals were made with the interests of Russian citizens’ wellbeing in

mind, even though they will be the ones impacted the most if the proposals mentioned were to be

accepted. This ultimately defeats the purpose of the journal that focuses on bringing stability as

most wars stem from discrimination and unjust treatment towards the people.
References

Moya, S., Pruel, K., & Privett, F. (2020). Ukraine and Russia Conflict: A Proposal to Bring

Stability. Journal of Peace and War Studies, ISSN 2641-8428, 118–132.