International Relations

C05(b) - The Global Politics of the Russia-Ukraine War

Date: Jun 3 | Time: 03:30pm to 05:00pm | Location:

Chair/Président/Présidente : Micha Fiedlschuster (York University)

Discussant/Commentateur/Commentatrice : Christopher David LaRoche (Central European University)

Beyond Historical Unity: Narrative, Power, and the Russo-Ukrainian War Mitchell Tam, York University Canada on Russian Screens: Key Insights into Domestic Television Narratives Roman Kalytchak The WPS Agenda in Ukraine: Challenges, Opportunities, and Risks Tanya Narozhna, University of Winnipeg Veronica Kitchen, University of Waterloo

Experiences May Vary: Military Implementation of WPS across International Organizations: Yerin Chung (Queen's University), Stéfanie von Hlatky (Queen's University)
Abstract: Despite the overarching goals of the United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1325 and broader WPS Agenda, international and regional organizations (IOs) have implemented these norms on gender and conflict in distinct ways. In this article, we investigate the different WPS narratives and practices that pertain to military stakeholders, by comparing the UN, NATO and the EU. We draw from the literature on norms, international organizations and alliance politics to explain why these differences exist across those organizations and why (and how) that is having an impact on the implementation of the WPS agenda on the ground, through missions and operations. This article will first identify the variation in WPS narratives across the UN, the EU, and NATO with a specific focus on the documents developed by and for the military. We find that despite convergence in the decision to adapt the objectives of UNSCR 1325, significant and important differences exist in terms of how IOs incorporate the WPS Agenda, which contributes to the empirical record of WPS implementation in different regional settings.

Beyond historical unity: narrative, power, and the russo-ukrainian War: Mitchell Tam (York University)
Abstract: This paper challenges the established offensive neorealist interpretation of the causes of the ongoing war in Ukraine. In particular this paper seeks to argue against Dr. Mearsheimer’s interpretation of the war, which posits that post-cold war expansion of Western institutions such as NATO and the EU into the former Eastern bloc is the driving cause of the conflict. Further, Mearsheimer suggests that only by restoring Russia’s “historic” sphere of influence can the conflict be ended. Instead, this paper holds that the war in Ukraine is a conflict that is driven in part by the desires of Russian leadership to maintain a key pillar of their historical identity that casts Russia as the modern successor of the Kyivan Rus. To prove this claim, the paper draws on an essay attributed to Putin titled On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians, and analyzes its key claims against existing historiographical scholarship in the region. This paper then highlights how the discourses that involve the successor states of the Kyivan Rus form one of the historic pillars of Russia’s identity as an empire that have come under increasing strain following the collapse of the Soviet Union. With its imperial identity under increasing pressure, this paper suggests that going to war in Ukraine represented the most economic route to reinforcing a pillar of Russia’s imperial identity. The implications of identity highlighted in this paper are vital to both understanding how the conflict began and what challenges exist in ending the war.