On February 27, 2025, we analyzed Russia’s three main justifications for its invasion of Ukraine: halting NATO’s eastward expansion, denazification, and demilitarization. While these arguments contain elements of genuine concern, they do not justify a full-scale invasion. This prompts a critical question: What are Russia’s actual intentions in Ukraine?
Following our analysis, a significant meeting took place between Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky and Donald Trump at the White House. Instead of finalizing a proposed deal, Trump, alongside Vice President JD Vance, criticized Zelensky for demanding a security guarantee from the U.S. rather than agreeing to a deal that would have granted the U.S. over $500 billion in rights to Ukrainian mineral resources.
This encounter highlighted an important aspect of Zelensky’s approach to security: it transcends mere military aid; it aims to protect Ukraine from future aggression. His insistence on security guarantees reflects a profound concern that Ukraine remains vulnerable to Russian domination.
Understanding Russia’s objectives in Ukraine reveals a darker motive—keeping Ukraine weak and subservient, incapable of challenging Russian influence. By obstructing Ukraine’s NATO ambitions, Russia limits its defensive capabilities. The portrayal of Ukraine as a hub of Nazism serves to undermine its national identity and delegitimize its government. Additionally, Russia’s call for demilitarization seeks to diminish Ukraine’s ability to defend itself. This conflict represents Putin’s strategic choice: it’s not just about security for Russia but about ensuring that Ukraine cannot determine its own future.
The implications of Russia’s strategy extend globally. Surprisingly, the response within Africa has been mixed. While initial public opinion showed support for Ukraine, practical assistance from African nations has been lacking, with some intellectuals alignment with Russian narratives. This complicity raises questions about why they would advocate for security guarantees amid such risks.
Zelensky’s pursuit of security guarantees stems from a genuine apprehension regarding Russian hostility. Ukraine’s past experience—including the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, which failed to protect its sovereignty after surrendering its nuclear arsenal—has fostered a need for more concrete assurances. To deter further aggression, Ukraine seeks binding security commitments similar to the U.S.-Israel relationship, which provides both military assistance and political stability.
Moreover, neighboring countries are increasingly seeking to distance themselves from Moscow’s influence. NATO’s expansion, which now includes 32 nations, highlights this trend away from Russian alignment. Despite having significant military capacity, Russia continues to lose allies, leading to questions about its own standing.
In discussions with a retired Tanzanian general about these dynamics, it became clear that many around Russia would prefer Western alliances over remaining in Moscow’s sphere. Since 1991, Russia has invaded several former Soviet states, revealing a reliance on the threat of violence to maintain control. This behavior has only strengthened Ukrainian resistance.
The stark contrast between the values offered by Ukraine and Russia cannot be overstated: one side advocates for democratic ideals, while the other promotes autocracy. Thus, Ukraine’s fight is not simply against an external force but an assertion of its right to pursue a future rooted in progress, free from coercion and historical distortion.
Putin’s strategic gamble in Ukraine could reshape geopolitics in Eurasia indefinitely. A successful invasion may herald a return to a world defined by coercion and subjugation.
The ongoing questions surrounding Russia’s intentions remain pressing. Discussions on why each Russian intervention leads to territorial losses for surrounding nations—such as in Finland, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, Poland, and the Baltic states—are critical to understanding the broader implications of Russian aggression.
In upcoming articles, we will delve deeper into the strategic motivations behind Russia’s actions. A comprehensive understanding of Russia’s ambitions is essential for formulating a meaningful response to one of today’s most significant geopolitical challenges.
