On March 18 of this year, Russian President Vladimir Putin declared that the former Ukrainian region of Crimea officially belonged to Russia. The safety and independence of Russian-speaking Ukrainians has been cited as the reason for the decision to reunite with Russia. In 1994, the Budapest Memorandum was signed by the United States of America, the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland and the Russian Federation.
According to the Kremlin, the Russian government did not violate the memorandum. Crimea held a referendum for independence on two days prior to Putin’s declaration; since a referendum is submitted by the people, regardless of how it originated, the Kremlin would be correct in saying Russia did not violate the first obligation of the memorandum.
The first obligation of the memorandum actually supports the union between Crimea with Russia. The people of Crimea acted in an independent and sovereign manner.
The second obligation of the memorandum is subjective, specifically speaking, “their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine.” The naval blockade of Ukrainian vessels that was executed earlier this year is in fact a threat and a use of force. Putin has been extremely strategic throughout every decision making process of this conflict. He has showcased his strength and political wit to the world.
As the Ukrainian government attempts to strengthen national security and end the conflict in eastern Ukraine, its president, Petro Poroshenko, requested lethal assistance from the United States. This request was denied. Officials within the Obama administration have stated “the president does not believe that sending lethal arms to the Ukrainian military is an effective way to end the conflict.” The Obama administration responded to Poroshenko’s request for aid with a nonlethal military assistance package. The aid will cost the United States $53 million.
Although $53 million is more than the U.S. can afford when considering the absurd deficit, I believe the Obama administration has made the right decision. America is still suffering from the costs (American lives, time and money) of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and is now facing another conflict within the borders of Iraq, this time concerning ISIS. The crisis in Ukraine is one that the United States simply cannot afford to become directly involved in.
Although it would be wise to remain absent from military presence in Ukraine, America cannot afford to ignore international affairs or warnings. As early as 2008, Republican officials, such as governors Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney, warned of a potential crisis in Ukraine. Their warnings were met with scoffs, and essentially mockery, from Obama. The international attitude towards the Anschluss (German annexation of Austria) was one of apathy, this ultimately resulted in the expansion of Nazi Germany.
The international community should not allow even the slightest possibility of a similar occurrence. It is extremely important for the international community to respond to such actions in a firm, yet appropriate manner.
I commend the economic sanctions against Russia. It should be considered a step in the right direction. I would agree with those who believe that America should focus on the issues that occur within its own borders.
Yet, it is still important to remember that ignoring international affairs can have lasting negative effects.
Brice Ashford is a junior marketing major from Ridgeland.
