Most of the world watched in horror and outrage as Russian guns turned on neighboring Ukraine in a seemingly unprovoked bloody conquest in February, but inside Russia’s borders, millions are buying the Kremlin’s claims of Western aggression.
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s approval rating within his country spiked from 69% in January to 83% in late March amid the war and economy-crushing sanctions, a poll released last week from independent pollster Levada found. The soaring approval among his people draws a stark contrast with the dismal approval rating of Russia abroad, particularly in the West, where Putin’s arguments for invading Ukraine have been roundly rejected.
RUSSIAN MISSILE ATTACK KILLS DOZENS AT TRAIN STATION IN EASTERN UKRAINE
The gap between Russia and the West has ostensibly been amplified by information silos. Moscow has aggressively ramped up internal censorship of dissenting views, while Western media has largely dismissed defenders of Russia’s actions as propagandists. To the West, Putin is a bloodthirsty madman hellbent on restoring former Russian glory. But to many Russians, the war was an act of last resort and a consequence of NATO and Ukraine disregarding yearslong pleas from the Kremlin.
Here are Russia’s heavily disputed top public justifications for unleashing its military might on Ukraine.
Dubious claims of genocide in the Donbas region
Perhaps the most immediate justification the Kremlin gave for the war is a heavily disputed argument that Ukrainian activity has increased in the Donbas region. Two rebel territories in the region, Donetsk and Luhansk, have been subject to intense fighting since the 2014 Revolution of Dignity ousted pro-Russia Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and replaced him with a pro-Western president.
Approximately 14,000 people died in the conflict between 2014 and the start of 2021, according to the United Nations. A ceasefire had been reached last year, and most of the heavy fighting had stopped, albeit with occasional shellings. But Putin threw out the agreement when he launched the attack in February.
Putin has labeled the conflict a genocide against ethnic Russians and vowed to “end the nightmare.”
“As I said in my previous address, you cannot look without compassion at what is happening there. It became impossible to tolerate it. We had to stop that atrocity, that genocide of the millions of people who live there and who pinned their hopes on Russia, on all of us,” Putin declared in a speech before the conflict commenced.
Days before the invasion, Russia and the Donbas territories alleged that Ukraine was gearing up for a massive escalation in the disputed region. The separatists called for an evacuation on Feb. 18.
The escalation never took place, and Western officials alleged it was merely a false pretext to justify Russia’s invasion. Western nations such as the United States also roundly rejected allegations of genocide against Russians in the Donbas.
Unsubstantiated allegations Ukraine wants a nuke
Russia has claimed without evidence to have intelligence that Ukraine was pursuing a nuclear bomb.
“The showdown between Russia and these forces cannot be avoided. They are getting ready and waiting for the right moment. Moreover, they went as far as to aspire to acquire nuclear weapons. We will not let this happen,” Putin claimed during his speech before the invasion.
Scott Ritter, a former U.N. weapons inspector, told the Washington Examiner that the nuclear allegations were largely “more propaganda than reality.”
“All things being said, I don’t think Russia would have used this alone to justify military intervention,” he said.
Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which has inspection power in Ukraine, cast doubt on Russian claims and emphasized the agency found no evidence to support the Kremlin’s allegations.
RUSSIAN MILITARY STILL AT BETWEEN ‘80% AND 85%’ CAPABILITIES, PENTAGON ASSESSES
NATO’s eastward expansion
Moscow has been railing against NATO’s eastward expansion for years. Last December, Putin demanded that NATO scale down troop and weapons deployment in countries that entered the trans-Atlantic partnership after 1997. He also called for NATO to rule out allowing admittance of Ukraine into the alliance, effectively ending its open-door policy.
NATO rejected these demands, saying they violated a core principle of the 1949 North Atlantic Treaty that founded the alliance.
The Kremlin feels that NATO expansion toward its eastern borders poses major national security concerns and has repeatedly maintained that Ukraine’s admittance into the alliance would be a red line.
But it was Russia’s aggressive actions in the region, such as its attack on Georgia in 2008 and annexation of Crimea in 2014, that have pushed eastern countries toward NATO.
“The idea that NATO is an aggressive expansionist power that, in some way, threatens Russia is frankly absurd,” Dr. Ian Garner, a historian and a Russian propaganda watcher, told the Washington Examiner. “There is only one power invading neighboring countries.”
False claims the 2014 change in power in Ukraine was a coup
Russia has maintained that the 2014 Revolution of Dignity was a “coup” and that the succeeding governments have been illegitimate. Moscow further alleges the CIA and other Western intelligence groups propped up the protests to overthrow Yanukovych.
“Russia claims it has intercepted conversations, some of those have been leaked where we have Victoria Nuland speaking in a manner which suggests if the United States was handpicking, future post-Yanukovych Ukrainian government members,” Ritter said. “They had all the trappings of a Western-sponsored coup d’etat against the democratically duly elected President of Ukraine to replace him with a new government that was inherently undesirable by Russia.”
Massive protests had formed in Ukraine at the time over Yanukovych’s decision not to sign a free trade agreement with the EU. Demonstrators accused him of rampant corruption and serving as a puppet for Putin. In February 2014, police began opening fire on the protesters, including with live rounds. Violence quickly escalated, and demonstrators occupied government buildings.
Shortly afterward, Yanukovych signed an agreement with his opposition in the parliament to establish an interim government, but the next day, protesters seized control of Kyiv, and the Ukrainian Parliament voted to boot him from office.
Yanukovych was replaced with pro-European Petro Poroshenko in an election that took place the following May.
“They can’t possibly argue this is an undemocratic country when free and fair elections are happening, and power has been transitioned peacefully,” Garner said. “So when it comes to this, it’s another example of a specter that’s been cooked up.”
Diplomacy fell through
Putin contends he exhausted his diplomatic options before resorting to military violence.
“For eight years, for eight endless years, we have been doing everything possible to settle the situation by peaceful political means. Everything was in vain,” he said.
However, to the West, Putin’s version of diplomacy felt more akin to a bad actor trying to extort a ransom when he dispatched thousands of troops to the border of Ukraine and began demanding concessions from NATO last year.
The U.S. and other Western nations dismissed Putin’s demands that NATO withdraw support from newer member states and oppose Ukraine joining the alliance. While the West expressed openness to negotiations on nuclear restraints, the few areas of consensus were not enough to prevent conflict.
It is unclear whether Putin made any demands on the Donbas situation during that time.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Ultimately, many experts in the West cite evidence the war is transpiring for reasons that differ from Russia’s stated justifications, with Garner pointing to Russia’s history for the true motive.
“The war is a war of colonial aggression,” he said. “Putin believes, and many Russians believe, that Ukraine is simply historically fated and ethnically fated to belong to Moscow in some way.”
Russia has a history of lying, with Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Anatoly Antonov telling CBS that Russia had “no plans for invasion” just four days before the country’s troops entered Ukraine.
Despite Putin’s claim that Russia was intent on addressing the situation in Donbas and did not plan to “occupy the Ukrainian territory” or “impose anything on anyone by force,” Russian forces moved into Ukraine on Feb. 24 and quickly attempted to seize Kyiv in an apparent bid to overthrow the government.
