Tres perspectivas de un conflicto: Las Teorías de las Relaciones Internacionales y la

invasión de Rusia a Ucrania

La guerra que se libra actualmente entre Rusia y Ucrania ha conmocionado e impactado

a cada región del planeta, sin embargo, para muchos expertos no ha sido una sorpresa.

El operativo militar especial iniciado por el gobierno ruso el 24 de febrero de 2022,

ha sido catalogado como una invasión unilateral e injustificada por la mayoría de los

países Occidentales y ha puesto en riesgo la estabilidad económica y política tanto de

Europa como del resto del mundo. En el presente ensayo presentaremos un esbozo de

las premisas fundamentales de estas perspectivas, y aproximarnos a una perspectiva

conflicto ruso-ucraniano desde cada una de esas teorías.

El Realismo es una de las principales teorías de las Relaciones internacionales, y se

fundamenta en la idea que los Estados son el actor principal en la guerra y la política, y

pueden actuar razonablemente. (Mingst y McKibben

En este sentido, Mingst y McKibben afirman que “For most realists, states are unitary

actors that rationally pursue their own national interests when they act within an

anarchic international system”. (71) en otras palabras cada estado es responsable de

velar por su propia seguridad e intereses bajo un ambiente altamente competitivo en

constante rivalidad con otros estados. Mingst y McKibben, afirman también que los

realistas consideran que in the international system there exists no hierarchically

superior, coercive authority that can créate laws, resolve disputes, or enforce law and

order. (71) Al margen de las instituciones y tratados establecidos, estos pueden ser y son

a menudo ignorados por los Estados si se interponen o afectan directamente sus

intereses. En este mismo sentido Joseph S. Nye, Jr afirma que un realista debe
considerar no solo la fuerza sino tambien todos los aspectos del poder para alcanzar los

objetivos planteados “There are three ways to get others to do what you want: coercion

(sticks), payment (carrots), and attraction (soft power). A full understanding of power

encompasses all three aspects” ()

Bajo esta perspectiva la recién invasión entre Rusia y Ucrania puede considerarse como

una respuesta de Rusia ante la amenaza que supone la expansión de las fronteras

orientales de la OTAN. Al respecto Mingst y McKibben comentan que “In 1999 and in

2004, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) expanded east, moving ever

closer to Russia’s border and bringing in states that had previously been part of the

Soviet Union’s sphere of influence. Russia opposed these NATO expansions from the

start but was in a weak position to stop” (95)

Otro argumento dado desde la perspectiva realista es la ruptura del External Balancing

and Internal Balancing debido a la recién cercanía de Ucrania a los países e

instituciones occidentales. Mingst y McKibben explican que External balancing refers

to allying with other states to offset the power of more powerful states. In both cases,

the objective is to ensure the ability to fend off an attack from more powerful states,

with the goal of deterring such attacks in the first place.(74) Sin embargo tal como

afirma Joseph S. Nye, Jr Realism is thus a necessary but insufficient basis for foreign

policy por tanto exploraremos a continuación los otros dos enfoques restantes.

El Liberalismo de igual forma que el realismo considera el papel vital que cumplen los

estados como actores principales en la política internacional. Sin embargo difiere del

realismo al considerar la cooperación como una condición necesaria entre todos los

países para alcanzar sus metas e intereses. Otra diferencia considerable frente al

realismo, afirma Mingst y McKibben es que los liberals consideran que el Power does

not rest solely on military might, es decir el Economic and social power also matter.
(81) esto significa que las relaciones de cooperación establecidas en estas áreas por

parte de los Estados, mediante las instituciones y los tratados pueden afianzar las

interacciones a largo plazo obteniendo así beneficios mutuos. Al considerar la guerra

entre Rusia y Ucrania desde una perspectiva liberal, según Mingst y McKibben el

análisis would focus on characteristics of the states and the domestic politics at work

within them, as well as the role that international institutions have played in influencing

the conflicto (98). Es decir, habría que considerar detalladamente el papel asumido por

la UE y la OTAN en la provocación y avivamiento de las tensiones. En efecto según

Stephen M. Walt, a columnist at Foreign Policy and the Robert and Renée Belfer

professor of international relations at Harvard University “the great tragedy is this entire

affair was avoidable. Had the United States and its European allies not succumbed to

hubris, wishful thinking, and liberal idealism and relied instead on realism’s core

insights, the present crisis would not have occurred.”

Finalmente el contructivismo centra su atención en elementos relacionados con la

cultura, la historia los Estados, en este mismo sentido Mingst y McKibben explican que

For constructivists, the objects of study in international relations should be the identities

of actors, and the norms and practices of individuals and groups that stem from those

identities. (83) En otras palabras, para el análisis de las relaciones políticas

internacionales los constructivistas valoran incluso la personalidad de los líderes de los

Estados. En este mismo sentido también afirman que States’ identities can be

convergent, meaning that those states share similar characteristics and ideals, or they

can be divergent, meaning that they do not share similar characteristics. and ideals. (83)

Bajo esta perspectiva hay que considerar al trasfondo histórico existente entre Rusia y

Ucrania, la cual contempla grandes diferencia de identidad, dentro de Ucrania existe una
fuerte facción nacionalista quienes son pro.occidentales y actualmente están al poder, y

cercano a la frontera de Rusia la mayoría de la población es Pro-rusa y son quienes han

iniciado el movimiento independentista que han creado las regiones de Donetsk y

Luganks. Un elemento clave seria el argumento dado por el Presidente Putin en su

discurso al inicio de las operaciones militares al asegurar que su objetivo es la

desmilitarización y la desnazificación de Ucrania, aludiendo acontecimientos ocurridos

durante la WWII. Este discurso constituye un sesgo histórico tal como lo plantea Katya

Cengel que deslegitimar el derecho a la soberanía ucraniana aludiendo a un proceso

independentista inexistente y manchado por la cooperación con los nazis.

En el mundo moderno es indispensable el uso de las teorías de las relaciones

internacionales para comprender los grandes procesos políticos e históricos. La

complejidad de estos acontecimientos viene marcada por una proximidad otorgada por

los procesos de globalización donde cada suceso o conflicto termina afectando tarde o

temprano a todo el sistema internacional. El conflicto entre Rusia y ucrania no es la

excepción y su desenlace, aún por verse dependerá en gran medida no solo de los

actores directamente involucrados, sino por las acciones a emprender por otros entes

tales como la OTAN y la UE:

Referencias

Karen Mingst, Heather McKibben Essentials of International Relations NINTH

EDITION

Walt-Steve Robert and Renée Belfer Liberal Illusions Caused the Ukraine Crisis
foreignpolicy.com https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/01/19/ukraine-russia-nato-crisis-
liberal-illusions/ consultado el 24/03/22

JOSEPH S. NYE, JR. Feb 2, 2022 Realism About Foreign-Policy Realism

www.project-syndicate.org tomado de
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/ukraine-and-limits-of-foreign-policy-
realism-by-joseph-s-nye-2022-02

Katya Cengel The 20th-Century History Behind Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine

MARCH 4, 2022 www.smithsonianmag.com tomado de
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-20th-century-history-behind-russias-
invasion-of-ukraine-180979672/

Three Perspectives of a Conflict: International Relations Theories and Russia's Invasion

of Ukraine

The war currently raging between Russia and Ukraine has shocked and shocked every
region of the planet, yet for many experts it has not come as a surprise. The special
military operation initiated by the Russian government on February 24, 2022, has been
labeled as a unilateral and unjustified invasion by most Western countries and has put at
risk the economic and political stability of both Europe and the rest of the world. In this
essay we will outline the fundamental premises of these perspectives, and approach a
Russian-Ukrainian conflict perspective from each of these theories.

Realism is one of the main theories of International Relations, and it is based on the idea
that states are the main actor in war and politics, and can act reasonably. (Mingst and
McKibben

In this sense, Mingst and McKibben state that "For most realists, states are unitary
actors that rationally pursue their own national interests when they act within an
anarchic international system." (71) In other words, each state is responsible for looking
after its own security and interests in a highly competitive environment in constant
rivalry with other states. Mingst and McKibben also state that realists consider that in
the international system there exists no hierarchically superior, coercive authority that
can create laws, resolve disputes, or enforce law and order. (71) Regardless of
established institutions and treaties, these can be and often are ignored by States if they
stand in the way of or directly affect their interests. In the same vein, Joseph S. Nye, Jr.
states that a realist must consider not only force but also all aspects of power to achieve
the stated objectives "There are three ways to get others to do what you want: coercion
(sticks), payment (carrots), and attraction (soft power). A full understanding of power
encompasses all three aspects" ().

In this perspective the recent invasion between Russia and Ukraine can be seen as a
Russian response to the threat posed by the expansion of NATO's eastern borders. In
this regard Mingst and McKibben comment that "In 1999 and in 2004, the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) expanded east, moving ever closer to Russia's
border and bringing in states that had previously been part of the Soviet Union's sphere
of influence. Russia opposed these NATO expansions from the start but was in a weak
position to stop" (95).
Another argument given from the realist perspective is the breakdown of External
Balancing and Internal Balancing due to Ukraine's newfound closeness to Western
countries and institutions. Mingst and McKibben explain that External balancing refers
to allying with other states to offset the power of more powerful states. In both cases,
the objective is to ensure the ability to fend off an attack from more powerful states,
with the goal of deterring such attacks in the first place.(74) However as Joseph S. Nye,
Jr. states Realism is thus a necessary but insufficient basis for foreign policy so we will
now explore the other two remaining approaches.

Liberalism, like realism, considers the vital role of states as the main actors in
international politics. However, it differs from realism in considering cooperation as a
necessary condition among all countries to achieve their goals and interests. Another
considerable difference from realism, say Mingst and McKibben, is that liberals
consider that power does not rest solely on military might, i.e. economic and social
power also matter. (81) This means that cooperative relations established in these areas
by states, through institutions and treaties, can strengthen long-term interactions for
mutual benefit. When considering the Russia-Ukraine war from a liberal perspective,
according to Mingst and McKibben the analysis would focus on characteristics of the
states and the domestic politics at work within them, as well as the role that
international institutions have played in influencing the conflict (98). In other words, it
would be necessary to consider in detail the role assumed by the EU and NATO in
provoking and stoking tensions. Indeed according to Stephen M. Walt, a columnist at
Foreign Policy and the Robert and Renée Belfer professor of international relations at
Harvard University "the great tragedy is this entire affair was avoidable. Had the United
States and its European allies not succumbed to hubris, wishful thinking, and liberal
idealism and relied instead on realism's core insights, the present crisis would not have
occurred."

Finally, constructivism focuses its attention on elements related to culture, history and
states. In this sense, Mingst and McKibben explain that "For constructivists, the objects
of study in international relations should be the identities of actors, and the norms and
practices of individuals and groups that stem from those identities. (83) In other words,
for the analysis of international political relations, constructivists value even the
personality of state leaders. In the same sense, they also affirm that States' identities can
be convergent, meaning that those states share similar characteristics and ideals, or they
can be divergent, meaning that they do not share similar characteristics and ideals. (83)
Under this perspective it is necessary to consider the historical background existing
between Russia and Ukraine, which contemplates great differences of identity, within
Ukraine there is a strong nationalist faction who are pro-Western and are currently in
power, and close to the Russian border the majority of the population is pro-Russian and
are the ones who have initiated the independence movement that have created the
regions of Donetsk and Luganks. A key element would be the argument given by
President Putin in his speech at the beginning of the military operations when he
assured that his objective is the demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine, alluding
to events that occurred during WWII. This speech constitutes a historical bias as Katya
Cengel puts it, which delegitimizes the right to Ukrainian sovereignty by alluding to a
non-existent independence process tainted by cooperation with the Nazis.
In the modern world it is indispensable to use the theories of international relations to
understand the great political and historical processes. The complexity of these events is
marked by a proximity given by the processes of globalization where every event or
conflict sooner or later ends up affecting the whole international system. The conflict
between Russia and Ukraine is no exception and its outcome, yet to be seen, will
depend to a great extent not only on the actors directly involved, but also on the actions
to be taken by other entities such as NATO and the EU:

References

Karen Mingst, Heather McKibben Essentials of International Relations NINTH

EDITION

Walt-Steve Robert and Renée Belfer Liberal Illusions Caused the Ukraine Crisis
foreignpolicy.com https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/01/19/ukraine-russia-nato-crisis-
liberal-illusions/

JOSEPH S. NYE, JR. Feb 2, 2022 Realism About Foreign-Policy Realism

www.project-syndicate.org tomado de
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/ukraine-and-limits-of-foreign-policy-
realism-by-joseph-s-nye-2022-02

Katya Cengel The 20th-Century History Behind Russia's Invasion of Ukraine MARCH
4, 2022 www.smithsonianmag.com retrieved from
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-20th-century-history-behind-russias-
invasion-of-ukraine-180979672/