Ukraine War Spotlights Changing Global Power Structure

The Russian invasion of Ukraine is entering its sixth day of operations and it is still too early to say whether their goal to topple the Ukrainian Government will be a success. However, the conflict has forced the world to recognise a harsh reality which may prove decisive in the months and years to come. Leadership in Europe is waning, with the key players found to be behind the eight ball thus far.

In the early hours of Thursday (24) morning, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced his intent to invade Ukraine, under the guise of a “military operation”. This was followed almost immediately by a barrage of missile strikes on the key cities across the Ukrainian state. The country was in an unenviable position, along their Eastern front over 100,000 Russia troops were crossing the border, to the North 30,000 Russian troops were stationed in Belarus participating in “war games”, while to the South the Black Sea was playing host to a contingent of Russian warships.

With the odds stacked against Ukraine it should have been Western Europe, and not their President, and former comedic actor, Volodymyr Zelensky, who would rally those opposed to the war.

However, Ukraine’s allies had drawn a line in the sand in regards their support for the country. It was left to Zelensky to adopt a role many would not have expected to see him in. As the Russian armed forces slowly advanced into Ukrainian territory, the President took to mainstream (and then social) media to galvanise his people. Discarding his suit for army fatigue, he was strategically positioned as leading the fightback by his nation.

For us 90’s kids, there are striking similarities between Zelensky’s role and that of fictional U.S. President Thomas J. Witmore from the film Independence Day. Faced with an alien invasion of earth, the U.S. President resorted to leading what was left of America’s military forces in a desperate bid to repel the alien invaders. Speaking to his General before heading off into battle Whitmore tells him, “I’m a combat pilot, Will. I belong in the air”.

Switching back to reality, mainstream media and social media have been flooded, in recent days, with reports of Zelensky allegedly refusing the U.S’ offer to evacuate him from Ukraine, saying “the fight is here, I need ammunition not a ride”.

Not only did this make for great television but also provided a much-needed morale boost for the Ukrainians fighting on the front lines. With the U.S. and Western Europe having displayed a limitation to their involvement in the conflict, the Ukrainians desperately required a figure who they could get behind. It if of course, no coincidence, that the media build-up of Zelensky is as much supported by the Ukrainian public as it is by his Western allies.

In the leadup to the war, Zelensky was side-lined by Western Europe and the U.S. who attempted to wrest control from Russia (and one another). Once the war commenced, however, the President was left to fend for himself. The heroic portrayal of Zelensky has as much emboldened the Ukrainian people as has covered up the absence of those nations which have in the past shown themselves willing to engage in foreign conflicts (see wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen).

Putin’s assault on Ukraine has been described as an attempt to facilitate a resurgence of the USSR. However, whether intentionally or not, it has also widened the divide between Asia and Europe through highlighting the absence of leadership in the European Continent.

When signs first emerged of a potential conflict between Russia and Ukraine, the key global players scrambled for prominence. The Western European bloc took upon itself the role of intermediary between the two factions. While the U.S. adopted the character of enforcer, exerting pressure on Russia with the threat of retaliation.

However, the failure to dissuade Putin from his path of war speaks volumes for the absence of leadership. The recent retirement of long-time European political juggernaut, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, has left a political vacuum at the top.

French President Emmanuel Macron, hoping that this would be his and France’s opportunity to take the lead in Continent, was unable to talk Putin down despite holding face-to-face discussions. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz was just getting his feet wet in the new job when he was pushed into the deep end. Unfortunately, he was uncertain which way to turn once the war of words began. U.K. Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, never was going to be any match for Putin. Instead, he tried to use the rising tensions as a distraction against the growing number of political scandals back home involving late night parties and birthday cake in the cabinet office.

While the European gang was faltering, attention was also on American President Joe Biden. Still reeling from his debacle in Afghanistan, the public was keen to see whether he would be able to counter America’s old-time nemesis in Russia. Unfortunately for Biden, the hackneyed American approach of intimidation held no sway with Putin. In fact, the Russian President took the opportunity to embarrass the U.S. While refusing to confirm a meeting with Biden, Putin had relegated discussions to U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. This meeting was subsequently postponed; ironically the day of the proposed summit was the day Russia invaded Ukraine.

While the Western leaders have failed to make an impact on Putin, there is a deafening silence on the other side of the world. Over in Asia, China and India have remained neutral in the matter, choosing to abstain from any UN Security Council votes in regards the conflict. While both nations have released watered down remarks calling for a cessation of hostilities, neither country has publicly condemned the actions of Russia.

In fact, several weeks prior to the invasion of Ukraine, China and Russia released a joint statement following a meeting between their two leaders. The 5,000-word joint statement clearly highlights that the two countries have seen a significant shift closer to one another in diplomatic, economic, and military ties. While discussing the need for a re-evaluation of the approach to global security, the statement makes pointed reference to their opposition to “further enlargement of NATO”. It is of course the perceived expansion of NATO to include Ukraine which led to Russia’s invasion of the country.

While geographically located in Asia, the 20th Century Cold War between the USSR and Europe saw the former Communist stronghold turn its attentions away from Asia. However, since 2005, Russia has been increasing its engagement with the Asian bloc. This latest move undertaken by Putin suggests that the gradual re-alignment of Russia towards a more Asia centric policy is nearing completion.

With the decline in European leadership, and growing divisions between European nations as demonstrated by BREXIT, the post-COVID recovery period seems the most opportune moment for Russia to cement its presence in the new global power structure.