Ukraine, Russia, and The U.S.

The current Crisis in Ukraine can be explained in many ways. It can be seen as a potential conflict over material values demonstrating that the strong do what they will while the weak suffer what they must. Simultaneously it could be argued that the conflict is stoked by the flames of institutions. NATO being the main institution in question. NATO’s very presence in the Ukraine is causing a major upheaval in the peace in Europe. Russia being outside and opposed to this institution (NATO) is outside the realm of institutional moderation, showing how international institutions are key in maintaining peace but can also be the catalyst of conflict.

Constructivism allows us another interesting explanation that takes the systems of realism and institutionalism and paints them within the canvas of interactions which inform the possible options.

Constructivism

Explaining the tension in Ukraine then requires us to start from a different understanding of an anarchic international system. An anarchy which in realism and institutionalism is a fact of nature and the human experience. The back drop which allows for all decision making to take place. Contructivism on the other hand contends that this anarchy is itself a structure of interaction built up by ideas that countries have of each other. That is to say that in constructivism Anarchy is a macro structure of IR created and upheld by the IR community.

Following this logic Russia, the Ukraine, and Western powers are being motivated to this conflict by ideology and shared identities that go on to shape foreign policy decisions. The difference being that Russia and the west (NATO) do not share the same ideas about how the world works. This chasm in understanding comes from a “Collective memory": The myths, narratives, and traditions that constitute who a group is and how it relates to others.

The history of the cold war being an interaction structure which now informs how countries see each-other regardless of material or institutional conditions. As Wendt would put it “Structures of collective knowledge depend on actors that believe in something that induces them to engage in practices that reproduce those structures” (Wendt 162). All that is needed is a group which shares an idea of the way the world works to create a system that defines the world in that way.

This is why even though no one wants to materially go to war they may go to war for the idea of the country or the idea of the west vs the east. Tension not built on institutions or military power but on age old cultural and societal lines informed by and acted out in order to uphold each respective world view. Wendt communicates this idea perfectly when he points out that “We can ascribe beliefs to a group that are not personally held by any of its members, as long as members accept the legitimacy of the group's decision and obligation to act in accordance it its results” (Wendt 162). If war breaks out it is not because any individual desires it but instead because the idea of national requires it.

Unfortunately to the Russian state mythology it is doing nothing wrong and sees the west as the aggressor. In the constructivist perspective “Without ideas there are not interests, without interests there are no meaningful material conditions, without material conditions there is no reality at all” (Wendt 139). Starting from ideas lets us imagine the world with different approaches of how the world itself works which informs how we interact with each-other regardless of other factors like material conditions.

Conclusion

Realists and institutionalists miss the very thing that orders their material and institutional conditions: ideas and culture. They instead assume an IR system in anarchy defined by self-help but, do not see the system itself as a manifestation of interactions. It is safe to say that if it were a western state in Ukraine and not Russia the response would vary greatly. The current conflict is motivated by past interactions. The very need for Russia to extend its power, oppose NATO, and share a cultural link with parts of Ukraine is based on the structure of IR culture.

Works Cited

Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social theory of international politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.