Ukraine crisis needs world attention to avoid Global consequences

By Shabbir Hussain

There is no justification for the February 24 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Of course there is a history behind it but history does not justify its wrongdoing.

The whole world including Members of EU States, United States of America only hoping that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine will end soon after their few initiatives, but it looks more horrible If a conflict does not end soon, it can have devastating consequences not only for Ukraine’s but also whole world.

The whole episode of this unintentional war crisis is because of  the mistakes of February 1990. This was the time when German unity was being discussed. The then-Russian leader Mikhail Gorbachev was determined to end the decades-long Cold War. But US President George HW Bush saw it as Russia’s weakness when it was not. Henry Kissinger quoted US leaders as saying, “We have won the Cold War.”

The US President felt that the United States had won as the leader of the Western powers. Gorbachev was apparently assured that NATO would not move east, but he was deceived by President HW Bush.

It is quite obvious that this is one of the core background reasons behind the current crisis. But it does not mean we should accept the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The effects and bitter results of this Russian attack will be felt for a long time to come.

Joshua R. Itzkowitz Shifrinson, a professor at Texas A&M University, has carefully studied the record of the 1990 conversation between Gorbachev and HW Bush. According to him, a study of diplomatic records shows that the Soviet Union had been repeatedly assured that NATO would not move towards Eastern Europe.

Negotiations with the Soviet Union led to the unification of Germany, the formation of an agreement, and the signing of an agreement by the Soviet Union in September 1990. Diplomatic matters moved forward, and these promises remained the focus of negotiations.

There is also strong evidence that the United States misled the Soviet Union in the 1990 negotiations. US policymakers have been talking to the Soviet Union about limiting NATO since the end of the Cold War, while privately planning a new US-dominated system after the Cold War and taking steps to that end.

In 1990, US policymakers assured the Soviet Union that NATO would not be expanded. He promised that the Soviet Union would not be strategically isolated in post-Cold War Europe, that NATO would not take advantage of the Soviet Union’s weaknesses, and that the post-Cold War Europe security structure would be shared.

The resulting bargaining was based on discussions on the future of European security in order to clarify the Non-Proliferation Treaty, highlighting the role of NATO in the post-Cold War period and the limits of US dominance.

On February 9, 1990, US Secretary of State James Baker briefed Gorbachev on the US position on the situation. The key points were:

First point: the process of bringing East and West Germany closer together is faster than expected. The forces that would have insisted on the fastest possible alliance of German states would have won the Volkskammer election. German-German talks will begin immediately after this goal is achieved.

The second point is that the “procedure for dealing with the external aspects of this alliance” will be formulated only when the German states begin negotiations on internal affairs. It should be a ‘2 plus 4’ mechanism (ie 2 German states will talk to each other on all issues while 4 winning countries will join if needed).

Third point: The Western-backed United States objected to Germany’s neutrality. The United States did not want to withdraw from Europe, which meant its troops would remain on German soil.

Fourth point: If United Germany remains a part of NATO, “there will be no increase in NATO’s presence and forces in the East.”

James Baker added that “we believe that consultations and negotiations within the framework of the ‘2 plus 4’ mechanism should guarantee that Germany’s alliance with NATO will expand towards the East.” It will not be the cause.

After Bush, US President Bill Clinton sought to expand NATO. Richard Ann Haas told Raqam that there was not much discussion before the decision. George F. Cannon opposed it. It was foolish to have long-term effects.

President Vladimir Putin’s current behavior is rooted in the massive protests in Ukraine in 2014 that led to the ouster of pro-Russian leader Viktor Yanukovych and Ukraine’s subsequent rapprochement with the European Union and NATO. It was growing. However, this does not justify a Russian invasion.

Now the crisis has intensified and world peace is in grave danger. This crisis will not be easy to solve. But a quick fix is ​​inevitable because over time it will become more and more difficult to solve.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here