The attitude of the United States towards the annexation of Crimea by Russia and the war in Donbass in the post-Cold War era perspective - conflict of values in the background of a conflict of interests
Abstract
The subject of the analysis is the attitude of the United States towards the annexation of Crimea by Russia and the war in Donbass in the post-Cold War era perspective regarding the conflict of values and interests. The article consists of two main parts. The first of these discusses the policy of the United States towards Ukraine and Russia after the Cold War. During the analysis, considerable attention was paid to the interests that the United States had towards the region of Eastern Europe, as well as the values of peace, stability and democracy promoted there. The second part of the article is devoted to the US reaction to Russia’s unlawful actions in the Crimea and Donbass, undermining the core values and principles of the international community, i.e. independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of states. It analyzed the strategy of the United States’ response to the crisis in Ukraine, including its activities in the political, economic and military spheres. The analysis was to enable the answer to two basic research questions. First of all, were the principles of the international community violated by Russia and also the interests of the United States in Eastern Europe and the democratic values promoted in the region sufficient reason for Washington to take decisive action in defense of Ukraine? Secondly, are the actions taken by the US in cooperation with the international community enough to force Russia to change its policy towards Ukraine? The answer to both of the questions is negative. Russia’s actions in Ukraine did not undermine the vital interests of the United States, which is why it did not decide to resort to military solutions. The values promoted by Americans also were not a sufficient reason to use more decisive means of response. Washington’s moderate actions have negative consequences for Russia, but they are unable to force it to change its policy towards Ukraine. This is due to the importance of Moscow’s interests in Ukraine, which are particularly important in the context of rebuilding Russia’s superpower status and ensuring a safe and friendly neighborhood. Although the United States does not want to escalate the conflict excessively, its actions have deepened the negative trend in the development of relations between Moscow and Washington observed for almost two decades.
Keywords:
United States, Russia, Ukraine, annexation of Crimea, war in Donbass, conflict of values, conflict of interestsReferences
Adamsky D., Change and continuity in Russian perceptions of the United States, w: US Foreign Policy and Global Standing in the 21st Century. Realities and Perceptions, red. E. Inbar, J. Rynhold, London-New York 2016, s. 129.
Apeldoorn van B., Graaff de N., American Grand Strategy and Corporate Elite Networks. The Open Door since the End of the Cold War, London-New York 2016, s. 128, 179.
Bandeira L.A., The Second Cold War. Geopolitics and Strategic Dimensions of the USA, New York 2017, s. 45.
Bindi F., Transatlantic Foreign Policy Cooperation in the Obama Era, w: The New and Changing Transatlanticism. Politics and policy perspectives, red. L. Buonanno, N. Cugleșan, K. Henderson, London-New York 2015, s. 57.
Bouchet N., Bill Clinton, w: US Foreign Policy and Democracy Promotion. From Theodore Roosevelt to Barack Obama, red. M. Cox, T.J. Lynch, N. Bouchet, London-New York 2013, s. 168.
Bouchet N., Democracy Promotion as US Foreign Policy. Bill Clinton and democratic enlargement, London-New York 2015, s. 92.
Buonanno L., Nugent N., Cuglesan N., Transatlantic Governance, w: US Foreign Policy and Global Standing in the 21st Century. Realities and Perceptions, red. E. Inbar, J. Rynhold, London-New York 2016, s. 97-98.
Callahan J.M., The moral, physical, and technological: Communication and the wars of the 21st century, w: The Future of US Warfare, red. S.N. Romaniuk, F. Grice, London-New York 2017, s. 88.
Cameron F., US Foreign Policy after the Cold War. Global hegemon or reluctant sheriff? Second edition, London-New York 2005, s. 167.
Chapman R., US special warfare units overseas, w: The Future of US Warfare, red. S.N. Romaniuk, F. Grice, London-New York 2017, s. 120.
David M., US–Russia relations in Obama’s second term: a damage limitation exercise, w: The Obama Doctrine. A legacy of continuity in US foreign policy?, red. M. Bentley, J. Holland, London-New York 2017, s. 171.
David S., Obama: the reluctant realist, w: US Foreign Policy and Global Standing in the 21st Century. Realities and Perceptions, red. E. Inbar, J. Rynhold, London-New York 2016, s. 49.
Deychakiwsky O., Analysis: U.S. Assistance to Ukraine, 28 February 2018, https://www.usukraine.org/analysis-u-s-assistance-ukraine/ (dostęp: 18.08.2018).
Douglas J., Futter A., Plus ça change? Reflecting on Obama’s nuclear agenda and legacy, w: The Obama Doctrine. A legacy of continuity in US foreign policy?, red. M. Bentley, J. Holland, London-New York 2017, s. 122.
Dumbrell J., Clinton’s Foreign Policy. Between the Bushes, 1992-2000, London-New York 2009, s. 103.
Dunay P., NATO enlargement: close to the end?, w: Understanding NATO in the 21st Century. Alliance strategies, security and global governance, red. G.P. Herd, J. Kriendler, London-New York 2013, s. 59-60.
Dunne T., Schmidt B.C., Realizm (tł. M. Filary), w: Globalizacja polityki światowej. Wprowadzenie do stosunków międzynarodowych, red. J. Baylis, S. Smith, Kraków 2008, s. 213.
Gardner H., American Global Strategy and the “War on Terrorism”, London-New York 2005, s. 104.
Handley P., Shylenko O., US pledges to strengthen Ukraine army, Russia sanctions to stay, “Business Insider”, 24 August 2017, https://www.businessinsider.com/afp-us-pledges-to-strengthen-ukraine-army-russia-sanctions-to-stay-2017-8?IR=T (dostęp: 16.08.2018).
Hansen B., Toft P., Wivel A., Security Strategies and American World Order. Lost Power, London-New York 2009, s. 56.
Herszenhorn D.M., NATO cheers Trump’s military budget, “Politico”, 24 May 2017, https://www.politico.eu/article/nato-donald-trump-military-spending-cheers-military-budget-jens-stoltenberg/ (dostęp: 20.08.2018).
Kitchen N., Ending ‘permanent war’: security and economy under Obama, w: The Obama Doctrine. A legacy of continuity in US foreign policy?, red. M. Bentley, J. Holland, London-New York 2017, s. 35.
Larsen J.A., NATO’s responses to Russian belligerence: an overview, w: NATO and Collective Defence in the 21st Century. An Assessment of the Warsaw Summit, red. K. Friis, London-New York 2017, s. 12.
MacFarlane S.N., Russia, NATO enlargement and the strengthening of democracy in the European space, w: NATO-Russia Relations in the Twenty-First Century, red. A. Braun, London-New York 2008, s. 40.
Marshall A., Rofe J.S., An aborted special relationship: US–Russia relations in the post-Cold War world: 1989–2007, w: America’s ‘Special Relationships’. Foreign and domestic aspects of the politics of alliance, red. J. Dumbrell, A.R. Schäfer, London-New York 2009, s. 137.
McArdle M., U. S. Releases $200 Million in Security Aid to Ukraine, “National Reviev”, 20 July 2018, https://www.nationalreview.com/news/united-states-releases-200-million-security-aid-to-ukraine/ (dostęp: 20.08.2018).
Mearsheimer J.J., The Case for a Ukrainian Nuclear Deterrent, “Foreign Affairs” 1993, Vol. 72, No. 3, Summer, s. 50.
Memorandum on Security Assurances in connection with Ukraine’s accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, Budapest, 5 December 1994, http://www.pircenter.org/media/content/files/12/13943175580.pdf (dostęp: 16.08.2018).
NATO, Bucharest Summit Declaration Issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Bucharest on 3 April 2008, Bucharest, 3 April 2008, https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_8443.htm (dostęp: 16.08.2018).
Pifer S., Why should the United States be interested in Ukraine?, 12 April 2017, https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2017/04/12/why-should-the-united-states-be-interested-in-ukraine/ (dostęp: 18.08.2018)..
Ringsmose J., Rynning S., Can NATO’s new Very High Readiness Joint Task Force deter?, w: NATO and Collective Defence in the 21st Century. An Assessment of the Warsaw Summit, red. K. Friis, London-New York 2017, s. 16.
Steff R., Strategic Thinking, Deterrence and the US Ballistic Missile Defense Project. From Truman to Obama, London-New York 2013, s. 120.
Strange H., Oliphant R., Ukraine revolution: 150,000 Russian troops on alert as US warns Putin, “The Telegraph”, 26 February 2014, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10662187/Ukraine-revolution-Protesters-in-stand-off-in-pro-Russian-Crimea.html (dostęp: 18.08.2018). .
Taylor W.A., US national security strategy and threats, w: The Future of US Warfare, red. S.N. Romaniuk, F. Grice, London-New York 2017, s. 37.
The White House, National Security Strategy, Washington D.C., February 2015, s. 10, http://nssarchive.us/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2015.pdf (dostęp: 16.08.2018).
The White House, National Security Strategy of the United States of America, Washington D.C., December 2017, s. 2, 25, 47, http://nssarchive.us/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/2017.pdf (dostęp: 16.08.2018).
The White House, Vice President’s Remarks at the 2006 Vilnius Conference, Vilnius, 4 May 2006, https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/05/20060504-1.html (dostęp: 18.08.2018).
Toje A., America, the EU and Strategic Culture. Renegotiating the transatlantic bargain, London-New York 2008, s. 93.
Treverton G.F., A Post-Modern Transatlantic Alliance, w: Hard Power, Soft Power and the Future of Transatlantic Relations, red. T.L. Ilgen, London-New York 2016, s. 53.
USAID, U.S. Foreign Aid by Country. Russia, https://explorer.usaid.gov/cd/RUS?fiscal_year=2007&measure=Obligations (dostęp: 18.08.2018)
USAID, U.S. Foreign Aid by Country. Ukraine, https://explorer.usaid.gov/cd/UKR?fiscal_year=2016&measure=Obligations (dostęp: 18.08.2018).
Wang Ch., Obama’s Challenge to China. The Pivot to Asia, London-New York 2015, s. 212.
Weisman J., Joachim D.S., Congress Approves Aid of $1 Billion for Ukraine, “The New York Tomes”, 27 March 2014, https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/28/world/europe/senate-approves-1-billion-in-aid-for-ukraine.html (dostęp: 20.08.2018).
Widmaier W.W., Presidential Rhetoric from Wilson to Obama. Constructing crises, fast and slow, London-New York 2015, s. 122.
Zakaria F., The rise of the rest, w: Debating a Post-American World. What lies ahead?, red. S. Clark, S. Hoque, London-New York 2012, s. 18.
Zygar M., The Russian Reset that Never Was, “Foreign Policy”, 9 December 2016, https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/12/09/the-russian-reset-that-never-was-putin-obama-medvedev-libya-mikhail-zygar-all-the-kremlin-men/ (dostęp: 18.08.2018).
Kazimierz Wielki University
Dr hab. Łukasz Jureńczyk – ur. w 1981 r. w Bydgoszczy. Absolwent Uniwersytetu Wiedeńskiego, Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego i Uniwersytetu Kazimierza Wielkiego na kierunkach Politologia, Europeistyka oraz Administracja. Stypendysta Central European Exchange Program for University Studies. W 2009 r. uzyskał tytuł doktora nauk humanistycznych w zakresie nauki o polityce w Instytucie Nauk Politycznych i Stosunków Międzynarodowych Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, a w 2018 r. stopień doktora habilitowanego nauk społecznych w zakresie nauki o polityce na Wydziale Studiów Międzynarodowych i Politycznych UJ. Od 2008 roku pracuje jako adiunkt w Instytucie Nauk Politycznych Uniwersytetu Kazimierza Wielkiego. W latach 2009-2014 pracował również jako adiunkt na Wydziale Ekonomiczno-Społecznym Kujawsko-Pomorskiej Szkoły Wyższej w Bydgoszczy. Specjalizuje się w międzynarodowych stosunkach politycznych i polityce bezpieczeństwa. Jest autorem monografii pt. Polska misja w Iraku. Implikacje dla Iraku i Polski (2010), Wojna z talibami i Al-Kaidą. Afganistan w latach 1994-2012 (2013), Polska misja w Afganistanie. Wojsko Polskie w operacji reagowania kryzysowego NATO (2016) i Polska w Sojuszu Północnoatlantyckim. Wojsko Polskie w operacjach reagowania kryzysowego NATO (2016), współredaktorem pięciu monografii zbiorowych oraz autorem licznych artykułów naukowych.
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1149-925XLicense
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
This is an open access journal.
Beginning with Issue 1/2024, all texts published under a Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0 licence.
The texts in Issues from 3/2018 to 4/2023 are published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 licence.
For aricles till 2/2018 your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation – see: Ustawa z dnia 4 lutego 1994 r. o prawie autorskim i prawach pokrewnych.
