Diya Shrivastava

February 2022

The politics: what is multipolar? 

After the USSR’s decline, the world faced a Polarity complex (Josef Borell,202), which is mentioned in many texts, this meant that there was a dilemma after the decline of one power as it become difficult to understand the polarity of the time is it ‘multipolar’ or ‘unipolar’. Josef Borrell refers to it as Complex Polarity, from 1989 till 2008. Today, many scholars have argued that increasing dependence on the economy through China has clarified the multipolar nature of world politics. Today we are witnessing two emerging Asian powers on the economic front – China and India. This multipolar regency has opened the doors to new and more diverse ways of understanding the world. Polarization has, over the years, helped us understand the systems and their power dynamics. The existence of the bipolar world was prominent after the Second World War, which resulted in increased competition between the US and USSR. The survival of a state depended on which side; the state was on.  After the decline of the USSR, the world became, as many say, unipolar, with the dominance of one state, that is the US. But some traced a complex polarity in the new order that emerged after the collapse of the USSR. The essence of multipolar is that multiple states are centers of power. The reason for highlighting this topic is basically, to understand how the multi polar order led to wars and why the invasion appeared on Ukrainian soil. We also examine the economic and geopolitical effects of the war.

The Invasion: Russia V/s Ukraine: The ‘might-be left’ consequences.

Russia and Ukraine; In the year 2022, a conflict broke out between the two nation-states that were together in the revolution and were encapsulated within the territories of the USSR.  One of the two entities broke free during the collapse of the USSR and announced itself as an independent nation-state. If we go back to the historical analysis of Russia – Ukraine relations,  we will see a certain tie between the two nation-states. Although Russia saw Ukraine as its integral part during the period of 1917-1991, there were many events that shook the foundation of this fraternity. The Chernobyl nuclear explosion was seen because of Russian dominance and their negligence. Ukraine and Russia signed the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation, and Partnership (1997), which recognized Ukraine’s territorial sovereignty and existing borders (including Crimea) and regularized relations to some degree.

On February 24th, as dawn broke over Ukraine, Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, took to television to declare war on Ukraine in the form of a “special military operation” to “denazify” the country. Shattering European security, Crimea has been the most disputed part between Russia and Ukraine since the disintegration and independence of Ukraine in 1991. Today, it is 416 days since the invasion. Russia is still bombing cities and innocents, increasing the humanitarian crisis. It has turned out to be a  long battle. The ‘Special military action’ over the annexed area of Crimea, and four more cities, Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia was carried out in September 2022, leading to more humanitarian crises within Ukraine by Russia. But as the European nations stand in solidarity NATO faces challenges.  Since the invasion, NATO and the European Union have joined hands in solidarity to support Ukraine. Yet, it is militarily hard to support Ukraine as it may lead to a direct confrontation with Russia, which, in turn, will lead to grave global consequences.

The political crisis: NATO’s role:

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation is an important organization that deals with the Western states in alliance with the US. It brought out the security question and economic liberty question after World War 2. Basically all the states that got military support from America were a part of NATO. During the bipolar regime, the US and USSR were poles apart, which led to a major confrontation in the Afghanistan war; as at a later part, middle-east Soviet influences were also under the radar. After the independence of Ukraine in 1991, the state wished to join as a member state in NATO, but as history tells, Ukraine was a nuclear powerhouse until it gave off, After the Chernobyl blasts, Ukraine signed the Lisbon protocol and joined START- I and perceived the notion of disarmament and had demanded financial aid for the transportation of the weapons. The Western states were worried by this decision.

NATO has always supported Ukraine in its stance. Though Ukraine is a partner country, it does not come under the umbrella of security. Yet throughout the conflict, Ukraine was provided with ammunition by the member states and was given humanitarian aid for the civilians. We can say that throughout the leadership of Zelensky, there was always moral support given. (Ramstein, 2023)

Throughout the conflict, it was felt that there is a heavy dependence on Russian goods, the Natural Gas that was bought via Russia by the European regime was cut and there were energy shortages in most western European countries, due to which major economies were hit hard. The last section deals with geopolitical and economic disadvantages and what went wrong in the calculations. Russia is yet to withdraw its claims on territories. Is the economic standpoint really justified?

Economic and Geopolitical effects: 

The world suffered economic consequences as there was a global recession and high inflation in the affected countries. There is a global energy crisis around the world. There is a high chance of geopolitical risk to equity, more to the countries in close proximity to the conflicted zones in Europe. The invasion shows a negative geopolitical risk premium. Due to armed escalation in the country, there is also an increase in refugee flow and military spillovers, putting a strain on economic activities, and hence associated stock market performance.

The sanctions on Russia have proved temporary, this means that the country will lack the knowledge of the potential help for future technology. This will harm the industries and will become difficult for the country. In addition to this, trade linkages with the country are disseminated. Yet the country’s economy goes unaffected for the time being, which means that the efforts might be lethal for those countries who economically depend on both states.

Conclusion 

The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has led to a very different understanding of geopolitics in today’s context. It has given a new meaning to the crisis of war and conflict with the states; this clearly indicates the importance of ‘self-help’ as mentioned in the theories of International Politics. But as we advance with the understanding of wars in the 21st century we look at what went wrong in the past that led to the conflict. The multipolarity that is China in its place is playing a major role, its support to Russia is proof of the “left” essence in politics. The unrealistic support of NATO and its alliances has led to questions and a rethink on the relevance of the organization of the states. Also, increasing humanitarian crises and human rights violations, has led to rethink of the veto at the security level. Through this paper we have tried to answer the above-mentioned questions in a very different way, one way to look at it as a matter of security of the state, and another as the response of the global powers. The conflict in the region has increased the possibility of “hard” politics and has also questioned the way we perceive new technology. As understood, I have tried to incorporate the loopholes in the international system. These loopholes have created a very different perspective for the world, the paper has explored the consequences of multipolarity in its essence. To conclude, multipolarity has advanced and influenced politics, this further can contribute to escalating a conflict.

References

Posen, B. R. (2009). Emerging multipolarity: Why should we care? Current History, 108(721), 347–352. https://doi.org/10.1525/curh.2009.108.721.347

Wagdy, A. (2023, March 6). A “Multipolar world”: A transformation in the global system. Modern Diplomacy. Retrieved April 27, 2023, from https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2022/10/17/a-multipolar-world-a-transformation-in-the-global-system/

Chiţu, L., Eichler, E., McQuade, P., & Ferrari Minesso, M. (2022, September 28). How do markets respond to war and geopolitics? European Central Bank. Retrieved April 27, 2023, from https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/blog/date/2022/html/ecb.blog220928~a4845ecd8c.en.html

Peters, M. A. (2022). The Emerging Multipolar World Order: A Preliminary Analysis. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2022.2151896

Guardian News and Media. (2023, April 15). Russia-ukraine war at a glance: What we know on day 416 of the invasion. The Guardian. Retrieved April 27, 2023, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/15/russia-ukraine-war-at-a-glance-what-we-know-on-day-416-of-the-invasion