OP-ED

By: Daneswara Reksohadiprodjo

During one of Tokyo International University’s Global Dialogue (GD) series, a panel of academics convened to discuss their perspectives and projections on the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine. These academics with prestigious backgrounds are invited to speak in the GD session to provide a holistic view of Russia’s invasion on Ukraine with their differing areas of study. The panelists consist of Dr. James Brown from Temple University Japan, Dr. Kyoko Hatakeyama from Niigata Prefecture University, Dr. Paul Midford from Meiji Gakuin University, and Maya Sobchuk from The University of Tokyo, with Dr. Christopher Lamont as the moderator of the whole session.

The panelists argued that defending its currently held territories would be more sustainable for Ukraine than committing to a counteroffensive, believing that the aid provided by Ukrainian allies would sustain the state in the long run. However, a key takeaway from this GD session was that the war is motivated by imperialism, especially highlighted by Panelist Maya.
In the case of Russia, imperialism is not the expansion of economic influence, but instead the domination of another territory and colonialism. This imperialist motivation dates back to when Ukraine was a part of the Soviet Union from 1922 until its collapse in 1991. During this era, Ukraine underwent a significant period of Russification under Russian rule that was evident through the policies implemented by Joseph Stalin, which had “Russified” many Ukrainians.

Imperialist motivation as a driving force of the invasion of Ukraine is hard to ignore, as it is reflected in the statements of Russian officials, justifying their invasion of Ukraine by saying that they are “reclaiming a territory.” In a presidential speech, President Putin emphasized their “lost imperial glory”, referring to the old era of Romanov Tsars when Ukraine was a tributary to the Russian empire. Through his logic, Putin emphasized that the State of Ukraine has long been a part of the Russian sphere of influence and that the two states have a “shared origin” despite Ukraine’s true multi-ethnic history.

However, this invasion is not necessarily the will of the Russian population; Russian media outlets could very well have formulated a particular narrative and influenced the degree of support from the people for the continuation of the invasion, a key point from the panelists that did not receive much exposure during the GD session. It was further argued that Russia’s media manipulation extended beyond its national borders and was projected to reach the Global South states. This argument was mainly brought forth by comparing Ukrainian media influence with Russia’s news outlets. Despite Russian media having much influence on the Global South, the scope is limited to Russian allies.

Global south states in Southeast Asia, for example, are less likely to be affected by Russian media. For instance, Indonesia is a state that has demonstrated its will to advocate anti-colonialism and anti-imperialism, thus indirectly denouncing Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – the exact action that Indonesia wishes to prevent from happening in the modern world. Therefore, it can be argued that Russia’s media outlets will have the most substantial influence within their national borders. Arguably, the Russian media would then portray Ukraine as “Little Russians” who had been influenced by the Western states, explaining why there is minimal backlash from Putin’s decision to start the invasion and even earning support from his people. However, it should be understood that even with the information power of Russia, Ukraine’s allies will also project their own media influence, weakening the influence of Russian media that stands alone.

It can be concluded that imperialist motivations could be a factor in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but it is still essential to take into account other variables. Imperialist motivation itself is difficult to measure due to its intangible nature, and it could only be found through statements made by Russian officials, as well as their media. The panelists concluded that the media, which involves imperialist elements, might affect the development of the war nationally for both states. However, it is assumed that Ukraine would still stand firm against Russia’s invasion. The GD session itself concluded by stating that more Ukrainian allies will maintain their support against Russia’s invasion as it could affect Europe’s security as a whole. The degree of importance of supporting Ukraine will also increase as the invasion progresses.

Looking forward, the panelists argued that Ukraine can expect constant support, especially from the state’s European allies and the US.