Will the war between Russia and Ukraine be short-term or long-term?
Abstract
This research undertakes a thorough examination of the duration of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, aiming to ascertain whether the nature of the ongoing war will be brief or protracted. The introduction sets the stage by emphasizing the profound impact that the duration of wars can have on various facets of society, the economy, and geopolitics. It underscores the need to explore the factors influencing the length of the conflict, with a particular focus on geopolitical, historical, and informational dimensions.
The research methodology employed in this study encompasses a multifaceted analysis. It involves scrutinizing historical events, evaluating geopolitical factors, and delving into the realm of information warfare. This comprehensive approach is designed to uncover the intricacies of the conflict and shed light on the contributing elements shaping its duration.
The main findings and analysis of the research illuminate the complexity inherent in the conflict. This complexity is driven by historical tensions rooted in the past, current political disagreements, and the pervasive impact of information warfare. The conclusions drawn from the research underscore the inherent unpredictability in resolving the conflict in the immediate future, hinging on the interplay of both internal and global dynamics.
The scientific and practical significance of this research is twofold. On the scientific front, the study offers a nuanced and comprehensive analysis of the factors influencing the duration of the war. It contributes valuable insights for researchers and academics seeking a deeper understanding of the complexities surrounding contemporary conflicts. On the practical side, the research lays the foundation for the development of long-term strategies aimed at conflict resolution. Moreover, it provides valuable perspectives for policymakers grappling with the challenge of maintaining global stability amidst ongoing geopolitical tensions.
Key words: Russian-Ukrainian war, war duration, geopolitics, historical tensions, information warfare, international relations.
Problem Statement
The duration of wars plays a pivotal role in shaping their outcomes and exerting profound consequences on various levels, ranging from the microcosm of individual lives to the macrocosm of global geopolitics. Understanding the significance of war duration is essential as it directly affects the social fabric of nations, causing long-lasting trauma and upheaval, impacting economic stability, and challenging governmental structures. Extended conflicts place immense pressure on resources, lead to societal disarray, and challenge the endurance of nations. Moreover, the duration of a war can exert extensive influence on the realm of international relations, potentially involving external stakeholders and altering the dynamics of global power. Hence, comprehending the multifaceted importance of war duration is vital for both scholars and policymakers seeking to address conflict prevention, resolution, and post-conflict reconstruction on a global scale.
This investigation into the duration of the Russian-Ukrainian war will present critical information to address a question of global significance.
Key Points
In order to grasp the central question, it is essential to comprehend the distinctions between short-term and long-term wars. A short-term war is typically characterized as a conflict that transpires over a relatively brief duration, often defined as lasting five years or less. Conversely, a long-term war persists for a period exceeding five years. The duration of any large-scale war is of great importance in international relations, since it has various significant consequences both for the countries participating in the war and for other countries that are active players in the international arena. Protracted or long-term wars can destabilize regions, provoke humanitarian crises, destroy the economy, change the structure of alliances, deplete resources, cause problems in the field of law and human rights, affect global security and influence public opinion, which makes them the object of international attention and certain actions necessary to shorten the duration of the war or its complete termination.
The Starting Point
The world was left in shock in February 2022 when it was revealed that Russia had initiated what it referred to as a ‘special military operation’ within Ukraine. Debates on this subject continue unabated, even two years after it started. However, the primary concern today revolves around the enduring length of this violent conflict among formerly allied nations. The world is divided into two poles: pro-Ukrainian and pro-Russian states. Both have different political views on this issue, as well as various assumptions about the end date of the confrontation between the two states. The ongoing conflict has been a subject of international concern for several years now, initiating prior to the official commencement of the military operation. As we delve into the contemporary information surrounding this issue, it becomes crucial to analyze the factors that may influence the duration of this war. While predicting the future of any conflict is inherently challenging, it is clear that quick resolution of the current situation is improbable.
Commencing the exploration of armed conflicts between nations, it’s imperative to delve into the historical backdrop of the underlying sources of tension between the involved countries, such as the case of Russia and Ukraine. The armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine has intricate origins, stemming from multiple contributing factors.
First and foremost, the historical animosities between Russia and Ukraine span centuries, as both nations share a complex past. Ukraine was historically part of the Russian Empire and subsequently the Soviet Union, but it achieved independence in 1991 following the dissolution of the USSR. Nevertheless, Russia still regards Ukraine as within its sphere of influence. Furthermore, Russia considers Ukraine a pivotal buffer zone and a strategically significant territory. It is apprehensive about Ukraine’s inclination toward Western political alliances, particularly NATO and the European Union, viewing this as a threat to its own security. Consequently, Russia seeks to maintain control over Ukraine’s decision-making processes.
Secondly, Ukraine boasts a diverse populace with notable ethnic and linguistic divisions. Regions predominantly Russian speaking in eastern and southern Ukraine have historically maintained closer ties with the Russian Federation. This has led to conflicts between between the armed forces of Ukraine, other security forces and irregular volunteer formations on the one hand and the pro-Russian armed formations of the self-proclaimed DNR and LNR on the other, culminating in the conflict in eastern Ukraine. Additionally, in 2014, Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine following a disputed referendum. This move met international condemnation and heightened tensions between the two nations, further stoking separatist sentiments in eastern Ukraine and sparking the armed conflict.
Thirdly, Ukraine serves as a crucial transit nation for Russian natural gas exports to Europe. Russia has employed its energy resources as a tool for political leverage, often manipulating gas prices or interrupting supplies to exert pressure on Ukraine. Economic disputes and disagreements over energy resources have exacerbated tensions between the two countries.
Lastly, Ukraine’s aspirations to establish a distinct national identity and sovereignty have collided with Russia’s ambitions to retain influence over its neighboring state. Ukraine’s pursuit of closer ties with Western institutions and its ambition to join NATO have been perceived as challenges to Russia’s regional dominance. Both Russia and Ukraine have engaged in propaganda and disinformation campaigns, further inflaming tensions and shaping public opinion. These campaigns have amplified nationalist sentiments and deepened divisions between the two nations.
Current State of Affairs
In the context of contemporary analysis, geopolitical factors play a pivotal role in shaping the duration of the conflict. Russia’s keen interest in maintaining influence over Ukraine, driven by geographic proximity and historical connections, suggests that the dispute may persist over the long term. Moreover, Ukraine’s desire to align with the West and join NATO complicates efforts to find a resolution. External actors can either extend or expedite conflict resolutions, and in the case of Russia and Ukraine, international mediation efforts have been ongoing, but a lasting solution remains elusive. The level of commitment from major global powers to resolving the crisis will determine whether it ends quickly or endures. Economic considerations are also influential, with energy supplies and trade ties between Russia and Ukraine serving as both peace enablers and sources of tension. These economic factors affect the willingness of both sides to engage in a protracted conflict due to mounting costs. Additionally, internal dynamics within Russia and Ukraine are key determinants of the conflict’s duration. In Russia, President Vladimir Putin’s popularity benefits from his strong stance on Ukraine, making a swift resolution less likely. Similarly, internal divisions within Ukraine, especially between pro-Russian and pro-European factions, add complexity to achieving lasting peace.
The potential for a protracted conflict between Russia and Ukraine is rooted in their historical and cultural connections. These two nations share a deep history of common culture, language, and economic interdependence, making it challenging to completely sever ties and reach a mutually agreeable resolution. Moreover, territorial disputes, notably concerning Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine, are deeply ingrained and evoke strong nationalist sentiments on both sides, adding to the difficulty of finding a resolution.
The conflict also holds broader geopolitical significance. Russia regards Ukraine as part of its sphere of influence and aims to maintain control over strategic assets like the Crimean Peninsula and access to the Black Sea. In contrast, Ukraine seeks to align itself with Western nations and regain control over disputed territories. Additionally, the use of proxy forces in the military operation, with Russia supporting separatist movements in eastern Ukraine, enables Russia to exert influence without direct military involvement, thereby extending the conflict.
Furthermore, the ongoing state of affairs between these nations remains highly strained because of the ongoing information conflict that erupted in the online sphere. The Russian Federation and Ukraine are both engaged in intense information warfare, promoting their own agendas, thereby exacerbating the situation and fostering unease among their respective populations. During an interview, the Ukrainian military highlights that the assertive nature of Russian propaganda, both within and beyond their borders, significantly influences both civilians and enlisted individuals. This has a profound effect on the Ukrainian military’s counteroffensive, as they point out that Russian soldiers are reluctant to surrender even when faced with dire circumstances.
The likelihood of the Russian army making deeper incursions into Ukrainian territory seems remote, primarily because over the past two years the Russian military has encountered difficulties in advancing further. While the Ukrainian military’s counteroffensive has been slower than what Western politicians initially anticipated, it has proven to be fairly effective. Ukrainian military forces have successfully reclaimed several villages, which served as crucial supply points for the Russian army, further complicating their circumstances. Furthermore, a significant portion of the Russian Federation’s military forces is currently focused on countering Ukraine’s offensive, preventing them from advancing any farther.
Nuclear Weapons
As of now, a substantial portion of the global population maintains a keen interest and a deep-seated apprehension regarding the potential utilization of nuclear arms by the Russian Federation in the context of Ukraine. However, given the following factors, concern about this issue is completely unnecessary. There are several reasons why it is highly unlikely that Russia would use nuclear weapons against Ukraine. First and foremost, the use of nuclear weapons is considered a last resort due to its catastrophic humanitarian and environmental consequences. It would not only result in immediate loss of innocent lives but also lead to long-term, global repercussions, including diplomatic isolation and retaliation. Moreover, both Russia and Ukraine are signatories to international agreements, such as the NPT, which commit them to not using nuclear weapons offensively. This adherence to international norms and agreements promotes stability and deters the use of nuclear weapons in regional conflicts. Furthermore, the far-reaching consequences in terms of geopolitics and the economy resulting from a nuclear attack would be of such magnitude that it would discourage any reasonable decision-maker from embarking on such a path. Given these factors and the wider international backdrop, it is clearly in the best interests of all stakeholders to actively pursue peaceful and diplomatic methods to resolve regional conflicts.
Information War
In the contemporary world, information warfare has become an inherent component of any ongoing conflict. Propaganda, manipulation, and the reinterpretation of historical events are all direct outcomes of engaging in information warfare. The Russian-Ukrainian information war involves a persistent battle through media and digital platforms, marked by propaganda, disinformation, and cyber operations. Both sides aim to shape narratives and influence public opinion, using tactics such as spreading misleading information and cyberattacks. This digital conflict adds complexity to the ongoing geopolitical tensions between Russia and Ukraine. This is especially noticeable when viewing both Russian and Ukrainian news, which not only differ greatly in terms of information, but also spread completely opposite ideas among the population of their countries. The main purpose of conducting an active information war on a par with physical war is the fact that by distributing certain information to the masses, it is possible to control human minds, influence their worldview, build their thinking and exert pressure during the choice of the side of the conflict. Considering the most relevant information, it is worth noting separately the speeches of government officials of the Russian Federation, especially the last interview of Dmitry Peskov, in which he said: “It’s high time for Kiev and Washington to understand that Russia cannot be defeated on the battlefield”. However, statistics of Russian army losses in Ukraine paints a different picture. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict can also be called one of the aspects of the Russian-Ukrainian information war. Today, most of the news portals direct their attention and, accordingly, the attention of the public to the conflict in the Middle East. Thus, information about the Russian-Ukrainian conflict is not a priority right now, which makes a certain part of society forget about the military operations taking place on the territory of Ukraine. In addition, due to Russia’s open and active support for Palestine, which is now supported by the absolute majority, the Russian Federation is becoming more trustworthy in the eyes of the public and asserting its position in the international arena, thereby undermining the position of Ukraine, which, due to the conflict taking place on its territories, cannot openly support any of the sides. This move served to enhance his perceived stability on the global stage, shift attention away from the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, and attract supporters of Palestine. In doing so, he undermined Ukraine’s position, which, due to its conflict with Russia, couldn’t openly align with the Palestinian cause.
Theories of International Relations used by Russia and Ukraine
Russia justifies its intervention and military operations in Ukraine through a combination of international relations theories. These justifications include elements of realism, emphasizing the protection of Russian national security interests, and the prevention of perceived threats stemming from NATO expansion. Russia has also appealed to nationalist sentiment, particularly in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, citing the need to protect the rights of ethnic Russians and Russian-speaking populations. Constructivist elements are evident in its arguments, highlighting the protection of cultural and linguistic identity among Russian-speaking populations in Ukraine. Additionally, Russia has invoked the principles of state sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of other states as it seeks to safeguard what it views as Ukrainian-Russian cultural and political ties. These justifications are often criticized by the international community and have led to tensions and conflicts between Russia and Western nations.
Ukraine’s response to Russian intervention draws from a variety of international relations theories. The country’s stance aligns with realist principles as it seeks support from powerful allies and emphasizes its sovereignty and territorial integrity in the face of external aggression. Ukraine also invokes liberal ideals by seeking international cooperation and adherence to norms and principles of territorial integrity, multilateralism, and the rule of law. Nationalism plays a significant role, unifying Ukrainians and highlighting the importance of Ukrainian identity, culture, and sovereignty. Moreover, Ukraine frames its struggle as a defense of democratic values and human rights, reflecting constructivist perspectives that emphasize the role of norms and ideas in international relations. These justifications collectively illustrate Ukraine’s determination to defend its national interests, democratic institutions, and the rights of its people in the context of the ongoing conflict with Russia.
Given the fact that liberalism is particularly popular among most developed and developing countries today, as it promotes democracy and is a more individually oriented theory of international relations, it can be concluded that the theory of liberalism used by Ukraine to protect the interests of its population is much more respected in the international arena. Nevertheless, the theory of realism is not as far from liberalism as it seems, besides, this theory is used by several states that actively support the Russian Federation and the Kremlin’s actions in armed conflict. Accordingly, since both theories of international relations are quite popular and widely used, it is impossible to accurately determine which of these theories will become more significant in resolving the current conflict.
Survey
On the topic of the duration of the Russian-Ukrainian war, a survey was conducted among the population, including various age groups with different social status and different levels of knowledge regarding this conflict. Based on the answers, several main conclusions were highlighted, which show how the answers to the questions in the survey depend on the level of awareness, age and nationality of the people who took part in this survey.
Most of the participants claim that they are sufficiently aware of the causes of this conflict. Most of them, however, noted that they do not often read the news about the war. Most of the participants considered knowledge of the approximate duration of the war to be politically important, but some were not so sure about this statement. Among the main aspects that are important for determining the duration of an armed conflict, the political and economic aspects received the most votes, which is a well-founded answer. Some of the participants also noted the importance of social and historical spheres.
The results of the answers to the most important question, in turn, became very unexpected. The overwhelming majority (70% of respondents) believed that the Russian-Ukrainian war would be short-term, that is, it would last less than five years. The remaining 30%, on the contrary, concluded that the conflict would last for more than five years. Based on the responses of the population regarding the reasons why they gave this or that answer, it can be understood that most participants believe that the war will be short-term not based on the facts and aspects of the armed conflict but based on their own hopes and expectations. However, extremely informative answers were also given, the originals and translations of which are presented below.
Among other things, it is worth noting that the informative nature of the answers and their completeness were practically unrelated to age and social status. Among the most informative and fact-based responses were both those of working people in the adult age group and those of teenagers from 15 to 19 years old. Similarly, among the answers based solely on people’s own feelings and expectations, there were answers from both adults and teenagers. This allows us to come to an understanding that the level of political awareness and the possibility of studying the factors and cause-and-effect relationships related to armed conflict does not depend on either the age or the social status of a person.
Summary
The duration of the Russian-Ukrainian war, characterized by its complex historical, cultural, and geopolitical factors, holds global significance and challenges swift resolution. Considering the information at hand, making a definitive forecast about whether the conflict will be brief or protracted presents a formidable challenge. The intricate interplay of geopolitical elements, global engagement, economic consequences, and domestic dynamics adds layers of complexity to this scenario. Nevertheless, it is apparent that a quick resolution is improbable, largely owing to entrenched historical hostilities and current strategic priorities. The conflict’s ongoing information warfare exacerbates the situation, affecting both civilians and military personnel, and despite difficulties in advancing further into Ukrainian territory, the Russian military’s involvement remains a destabilizing element in the region. Concerns about the use of nuclear weapons persist, but international agreements and the catastrophic consequences make it highly unlikely. Both Russia and Ukraine draw upon various international relations theories to justify their actions, further illustrating the conflict’s complexity. The conflict underscores the challenges of resolving protracted conflicts in an interconnected world, demanding a combination of diplomatic efforts and international cooperation for a lasting solution. Taking all these aspects into account, it strongly suggests that the conflict is poised to endure over the long term unless sustained diplomatic initiatives, international collaboration, and mutual willingness to compromise from both parties come into play.
