Suspects in Moscow mass shooting brought to Russian Investigation Committee headquarters

The Russian invasion of Ukraine in early 2022 has galvanized the world as many to their dismay,
witnessed the Russian leader Vladimir Putin openly ordering military actions against Ukraine, its
leadership and its citizens. This essay will seek to make sense of this event from the theoretical
perspective of international relations and by doing so, it will employ the main theories of
realism, liberalism and constructivism respectively. The first part will explain Russia’s invasion
of Ukraine, using the realism and constructivism theories while the second part, which focuses
on explaining the response made by western countries, uses the liberalism and realism theories
respectively.
In explaining Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, there are two international relations theories that can
be used. The first of these two schools of thought is known as realism. According to Antunes and
Camisao (2018), realism entails that the main actor is the state. It views the world as anarchic
with no international authority to which all countries come under and as a result, nations are left
to defend and attend to their own interests, using the material power they have in the forms of
their military or economy as the means of action. Given this constant clash over the protection
and advancement of respective national interests, realists also view that the occurrence of
military conflicts between states is inevitable and as such, it is seen as the primary method to
which political change takes place (Wivel, 2018). Moreover, a factor that contributes to this is
the egotistical character of those governing the state, otherwise known to proponents of this
theory as human nature realism. Past wars have shown that leaders who were aggressive and
power hungry, tend to exploit economic, religious, ethnic and political factors as a means to
wage war, and that such factors could have occurred in that moment or was a historical event that
left unresolved tensions (Howarth, 1916; Jackson and Morelli, 2009; Oldemeinen, 2010). When
considering these elements, it can be said that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was bound to
happen, given that both states were once part of the Soviet Union and that developments from
the past contributed to the current crisis. In June of 1954, then leader of the Soviet Union Nikita
Khrushchev, decreed that Crimea, which has a majority ethnic Russian population, be transferred
from the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic
(Simonsen, 2000). This territorial transfer saw more Russians added to an already existing
community in Ukraine, which went on to grow even further. From 1959 to 1989, the ethnic
Russian population grew annually by 9.1 percent, going on to make up 22% of Ukraine’s
population and by 2001, ethnic Russians numbered at about 3 million people (Rapawy, 1997;
2
Shkolnikov, 2012; UCIPR, 2017). While it seemed insignificant during the Soviet era, it
nonetheless laid the foundations for what would happen up years later. In the aftermath of the
Soviet Union’s dissolution, the two constituent entities of Russia and Ukraine became sovereign
states and questions were raised on the subject of Crimea’s status and the position of the ethnic
Russian community in Ukraine (Bebler, 2015). This began to escalate in 2014 when Ukrainian
President Viktor Yanukovych and his pro-Russian administration were overthrown through a
popular uprising. In the subsequent unrest that followed, ethnic Russians began to revolt and
form separatists movements, resulting in Crimea’s unilateral detachment from Ukraine while the
eastern territories of Luhansk and Donetsk in the Donbas region, armed conflicts erupted
between pro-Russian rebel groups and Ukrainian forces, leading to the armed groups taking
control of the territory and also declaring independence from Ukraine (Zafar, 2015; Fischer,
2019; Mirovalev, 2022). The Russian government supported these separatist movements, even to
the point of sending its forces there, under the reasoning of protecting the security and rights of
ethnic Russians. Many speculate that Putin’s motive to increase his influence could be a driving
factor for their gradual involvement into the Ukrainian crisis (Young, 2022). When taking into
account everything mentioned in this section, Russia’s war with Ukraine was inevitable. The
agitation of the ethnic Russian community provided the racial and political factor which
Vladimir Putin was able to exploit for his own political ambition of an expansionist Russia that
asserts influence over Ukraine. Under the pretence of defending ethnic Russians, Putin sent his
troops to Crimea and the Donbas, setting the stage for the eventual invasion of Ukraine with the
plausible aim of installing a pro-Russian regime to which he can have political influence over, a
clear display of human nature realism.
Staying on the quest to explain the Russian invasion from a realist perspective, one other angle is
the concern by the Russians over the threat to their security. This can be understood from the
defensive realist position, which is one variation of the realism theory. Specifically, defensive
realist notes that a state will take action because of their discontent with the international
political status quo and would do so to maintain a balance of power between them and other
states (Feng and Ruizhuang, 2006). In relating this to Russia’s actions, it can be said that the
Russian leadership resented the international system, particularly with the recent advancements
made by the military alliance known as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization or NATO. Since
the end of the cold war, NATO had expanded eastwards, recruiting fourteen countries to become
3
members and in recent times there was a flirtation over the idea of Ukraine also joining (Kirby,
2022). For Russia, they find it essential to maintain a sphere of influence in the post-Soviet era,
where they would maintain close economic and political ties to their former communist
constituents, however NATO’s expansion has lessened the likelihood of that coming to fruition.
Given that much of the former eastern bloc states have already joined the alliance, Russia finds
itself less capable of asserting any influence over them and they see Ukraine as the red line to
which NATO should not cross as that would be treated as a direct threat to them (Sauvage, 2022;
Saranya, 2022). As such, NATO’s expansion in the eyes of the Russian leadership would make
them not only more vulnerable, but also less powerful and in order to stop that, they saw a need
to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO and war was the best way to ensure this. The move has
somewhat worked as since the invasion, NATO has become apprehensive about Ukrainian
membership with the President of that country Volodymyr Zelensky even admitting that Ukraine
will no longer seek membership into the organization (Wong and Jakes, 2022; Koshiw, 2022).
This is because if Ukraine is allowed to join while the conflict is ongoing, then by virtue of its
membership, NATO would have to defend Ukraine and upon doing so, come into direct conflict
with Russia, which something they don’t want. Thus for Russia, taking this chance to invade
Ukraine was their best path to stall NATO’s expansion and maintain the balance of power, which
is a reflection of defensive realism.
The third viewpoint relevant to explaining Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is from constructivism.
This concept is different from the previous two in terms of its origins. Stemming from the
aftermath of the cold war, constructivism is a social theory that was pulled into the field of
international relations and it describes the world as socially constructed, meaning it is never
fixed but rather it is constantly changing based on an actor’s beliefs and views, things that
ultimately reflects on how the state to which they lead, interacts with other states (Theys, 2018).
When applying this to the crisis, it can be said that Russian President Vladimir Putin does have
some constructed views about his country and Ukraine. In particular, he views that the Ukrainian
people are one in the same as the Russians in terms of ethnic relation, cultural history and
language (Globe, 2015; Mankoff, 2022). This argument he makes goes as far as to denouncing
the legitimacy of the Ukrainian state. Putin adds that Ukraine is not a real country and that it only
came into existence after the fall of the Soviet Union, meaning that before that it was always part
of Russia (Yekelchyk, 2022). The picture Putin is painting pertains to the idea that both countries
4

Take note Murca, UKgay, snail eater

"Remember... No Russian"

Adidas ha de estar feliz de ver a esos terroristas vestidos con sus productos 😬

Even the russia knows that CIA is behind those attacks !!

Bilerek buyuk askerleri secmisler

Terrorist: “DAMN IT! I forgot that it’s Russia not USA or UK!

Russian federation

کوسکش اون که دیگه دستاش بسته

So ISIS did it that means Isreal special intelligences services

जिहादी यमदूतो के हत्थे चढ़ गए 😂

Клоуны это не для них,без чести без совести вотето по их теме.

The terrorist attack did not take place in Moscow, but in a suburb of Moscow in the city of Krasnogorsk.

Poor fellows! Don't be unkind to them!

Они не УСЛЫШАЛИ Ламброу "Сломанное Сердце" 👂☦️💔🙏❤️‍🔥☦️ и тараканам ОТРЕЗАЛИ УШИ ☦️❤️‍🔥☦️🐲🦖🦵🦵🦶🪄. . 🪳🪳🇹🇷🇮🇷🪳☪️🪳🪳

Всички загинали имат роднини. Дори и надзирателят в затворът да пази терориста, ще Го изядат жив.

❤.

Why did they hide the attackers faces? More fake news, everyone knows: the FSB did it, the terrorist shown were abducted prior to the attack.

Au moins ils sont bien traités les terroristes dans ce pays comme usa

is "The The Telegraph" bought-out by Ruzzians??

Its the price u pay welcoming Muslim refugee

I'm half Russian and I LOATH the spineless criminal justice system of the 🇺🇸 USA. They coddle the criminal and don't give a damn about the victims! We need a little Russian justice here!

Are those buff guys are the FSB? Oh God...

اینها از طرف موساد وآمریکا مأمور ترور در روسیه بودند با جانی باید همین رفتار داشت

Bros got to see Allah on Earth

Slava Ukraina.

Putin will handle the situation properly.

What was the motive behind the attacks? Are they they the real culprits? If their acts are on camera and tgey are identified through video evidence of the shootout then what's the purpose of court trial? Why has Russian govt machinery tortured the convicts convicts before trial?

They look like Indians, changed their real names into Islamic names to blame Islam. Everything is preplanned

this is how they're going to bring Putin to trial in The Hague

именно так они собираются предать Путина суду в Гааге

takhle jednou povedou Putina k soudu va Haagu

If our countries treated Terrorists the same way President Vladimir Putin and Russia does, there would be less terrorism and terrorists. Our Countries need to stop tip toeing around with so called Human rights and take a page from President Vladimir Putin's Office. Hence why i have Alway's had Respect for this great Gentleman, great Leader President Vladimir Putin and Russia. Once President Trump gets back his Rightful position as President of the United States of America back 2nd. As for p.m Albanese weak as water a shameful disgrace to Australia and Australian's.

He's wearing adidas

التمثيل ....و الكذوب على الدين و على الإسلام.......

ТАК БУДЕТ С КАЖДЫМ!!!

Whoever thinks that this attack was done by ISIS has crossed the highest level of foolishness

देखो भारत और रूस के सैनिको मे अन्तर यहा हाथ पकड़कर सभालते हुए शैतानो को पेश करते है।

Зеля красава,постарався

Can someone tell me how good russian prisons are ? 😢

Sweet Russia -mother India 🤝

Juste un petit aperçu de ce qui les attend

My finger nails and toe nails hurt just watching this...m

Diese Islamisten haben sich das falsche Land für ihren feigen Terroranschlag ausgesucht!

They are probably innocent. Anything to do with Putin is just smoke and mirrors.

They where very lucky they still breeding

"Remember, no russians" but we get the bad (good) ending

Indian congress given five star treatment to azmal kasab.😏

Israil is Great