image

The current crisis in Ukraine has once again revived the concept of great power competition and its impact on international security. The escalating situation intensified after the deployment of Russian forces on its border with Ukraine and military developments in its neighbouring countries. As per some international media reports, which have quoted US President Biden, Russia has deployed almost one hundred fifty thousand troops on its borders with Ukraine. In the same vein, the US has sent additional troops and military equipment to Poland, Romania, and Germany as part of its security commitment towards her European allies.

As tensions continue to mount between Russia and Ukraine, many fear and argue that this could worsen ties between Moscow and Washington. While both world powers are careful not to engage in direct confrontation, the crisis over Ukraine will have long-lasting implications for international security and great power competition.

However, it needs to be pointed out that the recent escalation has its roots in 2014 when war broke out between anti- and pro-Russian forces in the east which resulted in the political and military annexation of Crimea. In subsequent years, skirmishes and shelling occasionally also occurred. However, 2021 saw a gradual increase in violence particularly in the eastern part of Ukraine. In October 2021, Russia began to deploy its forces and military equipment near the Ukrainian border. According to satellite imagery, by November and December 2021, Russia had already deployed missiles and other heavy weapons near its border with Ukraine. Moreover, in February 2022, President Biden warned that Russia was planning to invade Ukraine after a false flag operation within days. However, Russian officials rejected this claim and termed it ‘hysteria’. Regardless of their credibility, the Ukraine crisis has emerged as one of the most intense crises involving the US and Russia particularly based on their security interests, commitments, and doctrines.

It is worth mentioning here that one of the most important determinants of the current crisis is Kyiv’s prospective inclusion in the US-led ‘North Atlantic Treaty Organization’ (NATO) alliance. Russia maintains that the US is paving the way for Ukraine to join NATO which Washington denies. This is perhaps one of the primary reasons for Russia to deploy its forces on its border with Ukraine. In this regard, in December 2021, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a set of demands, including keeping Ukraine out of NATO was one of the key ones. Furthermore, Russian President Vladimir Putin offered that if NATO reduced its troops and military equipment in Eastern Europe, he would withdraw Russian forces. However, the US and other NATO countries rejected these demands and warned Russia of retaliation if it invaded Ukraine. While Russian troops have now allegedly reached the capital city and the European Union has initiated several sets of sanctions against Moscow, no boots on the ground from NATO seem to be forthcoming.

Ukraine, despite fighting it out with Russia on ground by itself, has still not categorically moved away from seeking membership in NATO which is Russia’s main security concern. The US, on the other hand, is also reluctant to guarantee that Ukraine will not be made part of NATO. Russia, as it appears is also suspicious in this regard and maintains that Ukraine becoming part of NATO would undermine its national security. This clearly shows that there has been a continuous lack of trust between the two great powers over the Ukraine crisis which is likely to deepen in the coming days.

Hence, the rapidly unfolding events in Ukraine have further complicated global politics and great power contestation. Unless and until there is lasting settlement, the antagonism between Russia and the West would likely increase. The new wave of hostilities between the EU, USA and Russia could also affect other important issues such as arms control, non-proliferation and European security.

Haris Bilal Malik is a researcher at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. He can be reached at [email protected].

Image Source: Michael Lee 2022. ” Biden makes direct appeal to citizens of Russia, warns against ‘bloody destructive war” Fox News, 15 Feb 2022. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-direct-appeal-russia-destructive-war


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »