Do Russians Rally Round the Flag? Support for Russia’s Full-Scale Invasion of Ukraine Among Russian Citizens

Marvin Kalb, former CBS Moscow bureau chief, traces how the Crimea of Catherine the Great became a global tinder box. The world was stunned when Vladimir Putin invaded and seized the seaport region of Crimea in March 2014. In the weeks that followed, separatist rebels aided by Russia took over territory in the area surrounding Crimea in eastern Ukraine. The United States and its Western allies immediately imposed strict sanctions on Russia and have continued to tighten those sanctions. This sharp deterioration in East-West relations has raised basic questions about the policies of Vladimir Putin and the future of Russia. Marvin Kalb, who reported from Russia in the 1950s for Edward R. Murrow and served as the CBS Moscow bureau chief in the early 1960s, argues that, contrary to conventional wisdom, Putin did not suddenly decide to invade Crimea and then instigate a pro-Russian rebellion in eastern Ukraine. He had been waiting for the right moment in the months after Ukrainians rose up in bloody protests against the pro-Russian president in Kiev's Maidan Square. Those demonstrations had led Putin to the conclusion that Ukraine's opposition constituted an existential threat to Russia. Imperial Gamble examines how Putin reached that conclusion by taking a critical look at the recent political history of post-Soviet Russia. It also journeys deeper into the Russian past to more fully explain the roots of Russian nationalism that drives both Putin and the Russian people who support his actions in Ukraine. Kalb argues that the post-cold war world today hangs on the resolution of the Ukraine crisis. So long as it is treated as a problem to be resolved by Russia, on the one side, and the United States and Europe, on the other, it will remain a danger zone with global consequences. The only sensible solution lies in both Russia and Ukraine recognizing that their futures are irrevocably linked by the geography, power, politics, and history that Kalb brings to life in Imperial Gamble.

Hybrid warfare is perhaps the most frequently used concept in seeking to explain and define Russia‘s military actions in Ukraine. This article thoroughly analyses the development of the theory of hybrid warfare and circumstances of its formation, draws a line between hybrid warfare and hybrid threats, and discusses the perception of hybrid warfare in the armies of Western states and Russia. Actions of the Russian army in Crimea are analysed on the grounds of the provisions of the theory of hybrid warfare formulated by Frank Hoffman through revealing the impact on a military operation not only of the changing warfare tendencies but also of political, cultural, demographic and military conditions that existed on the Crimean peninsula. The article ends with an assessment of the capability of the hybrid warfare theory, as an analytical category, to explain Russia’s military actions in Crimea.

The article examines the impact of stress and psychological disorders in the context of military actions in Ukraine on the human muscular system, as well as their effect on the physical condition of patients with injuries and disorders of the musculoskeletal system. It also explores how stress and psychological disorders in wartime conditions contribute to the spread of pathological pain sensations and the occurrence of muscle spasms. A brief historical overview is provided, and scientific publications on the use of various methods in treating different pathologies, including pain syndromes caused by musculoskeletal muscle spasms, are analyzed. The article discusses types of somatic muscle spasms and pain syndromes, as well as mechanisms of local physiological influences and methods of psychological correction for conditions that cause pain and spasms in muscles, fascia, and joints. The positive impact of physiological procedures combined with psychological correction on pain associated with stressful situations and psychological disorders in people who have experienced moral humiliation and physical abuse during wartime and occupation is demonstrated. Various manifestations of stress and their effects on the functioning of muscles, fascia, and joints in individuals who are currently experiencing or have experienced military actions are described. Additionally, the article examines how psychological disorders resulting from military actions in Ukraine affect patients with musculoskeletal injuries. Methods proposed by modern rehabilitation therapy to alleviate and improve the condition of such patients are presented. These methods, such as various types of massage, heat treatments, taping, and psychological correction, are considered techniques for relieving pain that can be used both simultaneously and sequentially, without causing negative side effects during therapy and requiring minimal effort. It is established that the consequences of chronic stress and prolonged experiences of anxiety, nervousness, and panic attacks cause significant harm to the health of adults and children. The accumulated stress over the long period of war causes varying degrees of harm to each individual, with chronic forms of internal organ diseases and inflammatory processes becoming more pronounced. However, the primary target of chronic stress is the muscles. Only a comprehensive approach to this problem is an important factor in overcoming the consequences. Key words: stress, psychological disorders, human muscular system, musculoskeletal system, military actions

Abstract.The focus is placed on the necessity of classifying lands and land parcels affected by military actions in Ukraine and establishing restrictions on their use. The study identifies the fragmented nature of legal regulation and the absence of a comprehensive approach to determining the legal regime of lands impacted by warfare. A synthesis of scientific literature on land classification has served as the foundation for developing the theoretical framework of a classifier for war-affected lands.The historical experience of managing war-affected lands is analyzed through the examples of the French Republic and the Federal Republic of Germany, which rely on scientific approaches to classifying damaged territories and guiding their recovery. The importance of establishing a classification system for lands affected by military actions is emphasized as a critical component in designing effective strategies for their rehabilitation.A classification system for war-affected lands is proposed, comprising five main categories: physically disturbed lands, littered lands, contaminated lands, mined lands, and lands with mixed contamination and debris. A detailed structure of the classifier is presented, describing the types and subtypes of affected lands, classification levels based on damage severity, the complexity of reclamation, and restrictions on future land use. The proposed classifier structure takes into account all relevant criteria and contributes to the development of effective measures for land restoration.

The article analyses the impact of present-day Russian internal structural factors, searching national ideology and shaping “Russian conservatism” line formation marked the links between this ideology and Russian foreign policy. The main focus is designated to Russia’s politics after the Russia-Georgia conflict in 2008, highlighting the response of Vladimir Putin’s regime to several domestic policy tensions related with: 1) the structure of the Russian regime and the domination of siloviki group in the power structures; 2) the etno-federalist structure of Russia and the growing nationalism; and 3) the competition of several ideologies, which increasingly turns to the support of Eurasianist ideology line and its transformation into “Russian conservatism”. Theoretically, this analysis is based on the internal and external factors that have an impact on the state’s policies (e.g. Walter Carlsnaes concepts), as well as on the theories analysing Russian etno-federalism and informal networks/relations. This article argues that Russian internal structural factors strongly support the Russian Eurasianist direction as the dominant policy doctrine, and this doctrine defines the Russian foreign policy, limits its balancing and influences the dynamics of foreign policy. It shows how, during the recent years, Russia’s assertive foreign policy has become influenced by neo-imperialist vision of a strong, conservative, and alternative Russia, which actively uses the “Russian conservatism” as an ideological justification, supports active protection of Russia’s interest in the post-Soviet region (e.g., war with Ukraine) increasing the use of foreign policy in the post-Soviet region (e.g., war with Ukraine) or raising the question about the multipolar world order. Other competing ideological lines (pro-Western liberalism and Slavic nationalisms) are still included in the balancing if there is demand, however, it remains non-typical forms of current Russia’s ideological framework. Since the Russia-Georgia war in 2008, the aggressive Russian foreign policy depends not only on the external factors, but it also increasingly reacts to internal factors, especially to Putin’s interest to maintain the vertical power and ensure further legitimacy of the regime. Russia’s “electoral authoritarianism”, which actively used the concept of “sovereign democracy” last decade, faced serious challenges in 2011– 2012. After public protests for electoral fraud, Putin’s circles have perceived that Russia’s ruling elites need to initiate a new turn for the country, either to a wider democracy development or to find other resources to mobilise society. By reacting to the interest of siloviki group and seeing the confrontation between Russian ethnic and minorities’ nationalism manifestations, Putin’s regime strengthened its orientation towards the new Eurasianism, which emphasized the special path of Russia’s civilization: being alternative to the Western world, adjusting only “appropriate for Russia” democracy standards, opposing human rights development, and seeing it as a harmful foreign influence. State patriotism was framed under the new “Russian conservatism” line, which emphasized strong authority of central power, Russian imperial identity, Russia’s interest in Eurasian regions, support for multipolar world, and the spread of conservative values as opposition to Western cosmopolitism. It helped to mobilise Russian society, integrate the great old and the new military victories of Russia’s state and received a new support and greater legitimacy for Putin’s regime. This ideology leaves room for integration of separate narratives from various ideological lines (from the Soviet nostalgia and technocratic modernisation to “old Russia” traditionalism). Military actions in Ukraine in 2014–2015 have illustrated that imperial approach effectively mobilises not only the Russian society but a certain part of the other post- Soviet societies (e.g., the idea of the Russian world). This “Russian conservatism” also attempts to respond to other internal tensions, such as ethnic conflicts, by promoting a more intensive Russian state identity instead of an ethnic identity. The situation, when various ethnic minorities and their leaders (e.g., R. Kadyrov) actively supported Russia’s actions in Ukraine and the new Putin’s activism, revealed that under this ideological umbrella, such local actors as in Putin’s circle, leaders of ethnic regions, Orthodox church, and media authorities find themselves in the state’s ongoing narratives. Under this situation, Putin’s regime effectively marginalises their opponents. Non-systemic liberal-democrats are presented as acting against Russia’s interests. The discourse for keeping the relationship with Western partners, which emphasizes the modernisation or stresses the importance of economic developments, is still valid, and it is still used for balancing, but current ideological trend has clearly prioritised the imperial identity over democracy development.

Background: an assessment of the environmental consequences of military actions was carried out from the perspective of the challenge to the peace formula. Methods: the information base of the research was the official resource of the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Natural Resources of Ukraine “EkoZahroza” and the materials of the State Environmental Inspectorate of the Polissia District regarding the calculations of the amount of damage caused by military actions. Results: it was determined that as of the 526th day of the military invasion (September 3, 2023), 34,119 units of Russian equipment caused the emission of 61,417 tons of pollutants into the atmosphere, the generation of 596,316 tons of waste, the spillage of oil products - 1,241 tons into the soil and 7 tons into the water. caused damage to the environment in the amount of 260.77 million UAH. The conducted surveys established that 93.8% of the surveyed schoolchildren and 100% of higher education students consider military actions on the territory of our state to be environmental crimes, among the components of the environment that suffer the most from military actions are soil and land resources and forest ecosystems. Conclusions: compared to the 127th day of the military invasion, the amount of destroyed military equipment increased by 6.9 times, emissions by 3.8 times, and waste by 6 times; losses - 3.8 times. There is an obvious need to assess all environmental risks caused by military actions, to apply an effective mechanism for compensation for damages and restoration of ecosystems. The optimistic attitude of the younger generation and youth regarding the possibility of improving the environmental situation in Ukraine after the end of military actions was noted. Measures to improve the state of the environment that were proposed by students testify to their environmental awareness and interest in environmental restoration, as well as the qualified training of ecologists by scientific and pedagogical workers.

The article considers the issues of sustainable development of agroecosystems aimed at the efficient use of natural resources, biodiversity conservation, and increased agricultural productivity. In the context of global warming and the impact of military actions in Ukraine, it is important to implement innovative methods of agroforestry and oilseed farming. The article analyzes current research on the rational use of soil resources, water-saving technologies, biodiversity conservation, and reducing of chemical loads. The role of innovative technologies, such as GIS technologies, drones, satellite monitoring, biotechnology, and agroecological approaches is considered. The article also highlights the socio-economic aspects of sustainable development of agroecosystems, including rural community development, food security, and the creation of «green jobs». Mixed planting schemes of tree crops and medicinal plants, such as linden and lavender, paulownia and lavender, and other possible mixed planting options are proposed. The main goal of the article is to show the prospects of agroforestry innovative methods and oilseed farming using to ensure sustainable development of agroecosystems in Ukraine, contributing to environmental conservation, increased economic efficiency, and improved quality of life for rural communities. It has been shown that the impact of global warming and military actions in Ukraine pose additional challenges to agroecosystems. To overcome them it is important to implement innovative methods such as use of drones, satellite monitoring, biotechnological methods, and agroecological approaches. The implementation of innovative methods of agroforestry and oilseed farming can ensure sustainable development of agroecosystems in Ukraine, contributing to environmental conservation, increasing economic efficiency, and improving life quality of rural communities. Key words: agroforestry, sustainable development, agroecosystems, tree species, medicinal plants, oilseed farming, biodiversity.

In Ukraine, the issue of assessing losses as a result of military aggression became relevant in 2014 after the annexation of part of the country's territory by the Russian Federation. Until 2022, Ukraine's state structures developed several regulatory documents regulating these issues. However, the problems of methodology and techniques for assessing damage and losses as a result of military actions in Ukraine have again come into the focus of academics and expert practitioners after the full-scale and extremely destructive aggression that began on February 24, 2022. It became clear that it would be impossible to assess the volume and variety of damage and losses caused to Ukraine based on previous approaches and methods. The purpose of the article is to substantiate the need and ways of developing the methodology for assessing damage and losses of enterprises as a result of the war, to determine the possibilities of mutual enrichment of the methodology of expert and accounting evaluation for their combined application when calculating losses from military actions in Ukraine. The work reveals the economic and regulatory essence of the approaches to assessing the damage and losses of enterprises from the war applied in Ukraine: the World Bank's rapid assessment methodology; methods of property-by-object assessment of the State Property Fund of Ukraine; methodology based on the accounting assessment methodology of the National Academy of Agrarian Sciences of Ukraine. The authors critically analysed their potential and opportunities to achieve the goals set by the Ukrainian authorities for conducting a mass and operational assessment of economic losses from the war and ensuring a transparent and fair compensation policy. The main criteria for evaluating efficiency when choosing and using one or another approach for assessing enterprises' losses from the war were determined. The essence of the assessment methodology was revealed, and the methodological features of expert and accounting approaches to determining the damage and losses of enterprises from the war were defined. Reasoned possibility of mutual enrichment of the methodological bases of expert and accounting assessment through reciprocal borrowing of methods, procedures, techniques and methods. The practicality of both individual and combined application of expert and accounting approaches to assessing damage and losses to achieve the goals set by the Government of Ukraine has been proven.

The article is devoted to the analysis of the nominative and axiological paradigm of the denotation “military actions in Ukraine: 2014 – 2023”. On the basis of the linguistic concept of the lexical-semantic dimension of the linguistic picture of the world, based on the doctrine of the mental and lingual essence of language, its objective and subjective content, official and unofficial names of the event are distinguished. The official names of the military actions in Ukraine in 2022-2023, which include the adjective full-scale and the nouns invasion and war, were chosen as the object of the study. Their specific characteristics are distinguished, systematic functional-temporal correlative relations between them are established, lexical-semantic, actually semantic correlative relations of the researched units with those in which the constructive position is filled by the nouns of confrontation, conflict, attack are clarified against the axiological background of pejorativeness, aggression. Due regard is paid to the syntactic structures with the grammatically dominant component war, which, despite the official status of the syntactic structures full-scale invasion, full-scale war, have a high degree of productivity and claim to occupy a space as an alternative, universally accepted name of the event under study. Specific representatives of constructions with a deterministic invasion constituent are characterized in detail in the form of simple submodels (“full-scale invasion” / “driving force”, “full-scale invasion” / “event location”, “full-scale invasion” / “event time”) or complex (“full-scale invasion” / “driving force” / “event location”, “full-scale invasion” / “driving force” / “event time”, “full-scale invasion” / “driving force” / “event location” / “event time”). These models are identified by the type of semantic reference of pre-substantive concretizes with integrative schemas “participant(s) of the event”, “place of the event”, “time of the event”.

The three fundamental pillars that uphold the foundation for preserving and enhancing global nuclear security are: nuclear disarmament, the prevention of further nuclear weapon proliferation, and international cooperation to safeguard nuclear materials and strengthen international nuclear security culture. However, experts argue that when Russian president Vladimir Putin cut cooperative efforts to safeguard nuclear materials, he endangered the future of all international efforts for promoting global nuclear security. We argue that Putin’s decision not only detrimentally erodes the third pillar of nuclear security, but Russia’s recent actions in Ukraine also bring to bear more threatening ramifications. Russia’s aggression in Ukraine and the international community’s lack of willingness to exert sufficient pressure on Russia to honor the promises made to Ukraine (in exchange for giving up nuclear weapons in the 1990s [1]) work against nonproliferation objectives and reach far beyond the geographic boundaries of the current conflict. In addition, they may disrupt both further nuclear disarmament and stimulate proliferation of nuclear weapons. The inaction and/or inability of the international community to resist or reverse Russia’s illegal actions must alarm the government of any country who—acting on their trust in the international agreements—resists the push toward nuclearization. If binding diplomatic agreements are seen to only bind one party— the weaker party—that party will understandably hesitate to entrust any diplomatic document short of a binding treaty with clear and required enforcement mechanisms. This is especially true when a country’s national security and ultimately its sovereignty is at stake. If any one of these nations move toward nuclear status, the atomic dominos will surely begin to tumble, and the 1 Manaeva Rice et al.: Ukraine At The Fulcrum Published by Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange, 2015 delicate nuclear equilibrium, a cooperative balance that defines today’s global nuclear security landscape, will be lost.

The post-war reconstruction of Ukraine requires the introduction of low-carbon technologies in the construction sector and adaptation measures to climate change, taking into account greenhouse gas emissions caused by military actions in Ukraine. In this study, based on existing domestic and global regulatory documents on determining climate risks, chains of influence on climate risk are presented within the framework of assessing climatic factors that affect the calculated energy consumption data of a building at the project stage in the winter and summer periods. Preliminary calculations of the dynamics of changes in energy consumption for heating in the winter period for the city of Kyiv showed a decrease in energy consumption in two winter months by almost 16%, starting from 1942 for a conventional panel house with a wall area of 200 m2. While energy consumption for cooling in the hot period has been gradually increasing over the last decade. The forecast dynamics of the average monthly temperature according to the usual and wet bulb thermometer in July in 2050 is 26.371⁰С and 28.918⁰С, respectively. Modeling the dynamics of temperature increase for the city of Kyiv was carried out on the basis of climate databases: ECA&, Copernicus and the Central Geophysical Observatory named after B. Sreznevsky, as well as assessment reports on global climate change. The category of intermediate impacts included the impact of military actions on the urban environment and population, such as: an increase in the heat dome over the urbanized area, an increase in the heat index for public health, an increase in atmospheric air pollution. Possible adaptation measures should be taken depending on the specific reconstruction project throughout the life cycle of the facility, taking into account innovative low-carbon technologies, including the production of building materials. These studies may be promising in the future for finding ways to compensate for the mitigation of climate damage caused by Russia's military actions and neutralize this impact in modern buildings and structures.

ABSTRACTArctic cooperation is increasingly being questioned in the wake of Russia’s 2022 military actions in Ukraine. Accordingly, many international scholars have declared the narrative of ‘Arctic exceptionalism’ dead or corrupted. Through an analysis of political rhetoric, this paper re-evaluates the construction of Arctic exceptionalism, popularly connected to Mikhail Gorbachev’s 1987 Murmansk speech calling for an Arctic ‘zone of peace’. It is argued that a full picture of this narrative is incomplete without consideration of the developments in Arctic cooperation and conflict in the context of Dmitry Medvedev’s modernisation and multilateralism initiatives as well as Vladimir Putin’s enduring commitment to a defensive and nationalistic foreign policy. Moreover, Medvedev and Putin diverged from Gorbachev’s Arctic exceptionalism due to disparate ideologies and views on militarisation, as well as the global context of interstate mistrust. These insights allow for a new understanding of the dilemma of cooperation and conflict in the Arctic, a microcosm of the Russia-West relationship.

The article analyzes the causes, preconditions, geopolitical and geohistorical goals of Russia's aggression against Ukraine. The reaction of the West to the Russian geostrategy of revenge has been clarified. It has been proven that the hybrid war which has been going on since February 2014 has created a deep crisis in the global security system. The Russian Federation, having violated the norms and principles of international law, bilateral and large-scale agreements, annexed the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol. Russia attacked Ukraine without declaring war and again called into question the international order in Europe on February 24, 2022, when the Russian leader announced the launch of a "special military operation" against Ukraine. He called its goal the "demilitarization" of the country. The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation began shelling the cities of Ukraine and its military and civilian infrastructure. The recognition of the independence of the Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics by Russian President Vladimir Putin preceded this madness on February 21, 2022. However, the Russian-Ukrainian confrontation has deep historical roots. The absorption of Ukraine and its human resources is one of the key tasks in the development of the project of Russian imperialism. The current process of formation and development of Putin's Russia has always been accompanied by war with Ukraine. Russia aimed to destroy our young state. The history of relations between the Ukrainian and Russian peoples is a chronicle of wars, the liberation struggles of Ukrainians, and a consistent policy of Russification and assimilation of our people.

On February 24, 2022, a significant international event transpired as Russian military forces crossed into Ukraine, initiating a full-scale conflict under the assertion of Anticipatory Self-defense. This development has sparked renewed discussions and inquiries into the legal and practical dimensions of Anticipatory Self-defense as a pretext for military actions. Notably, Anticipatory Self-defense has been invoked in the past, most notably by the Bush administration during the Iraq War and currently by the Israeli government in various contexts. In a similar vein, President Vladimir Putin employed the doctrine of Anticipatory Self-defense to legitimize and provide a legal basis for the Russian military's actions in Ukraine. This research paper seeks to undertake a thorough and systematic exploration of the essentials and legal aspects of Anticipatory Self-defense as a concept, examining its application and relevance in contemporary international relations. The primary objective is to shed light on the justifiability and legality of utilizing Anticipatory Self-defense as a rationale for military intervention, with a specific focus on the recent events in Ukraine. In addition to an overarching discussion on the principles and nuances of Anticipatory Self-defense, this paper will delve into select case studies from recent history, drawing upon experiences and actions taken by various countries, including the United States and Israel. Through a comprehensive analysis that combines legal, historical, and political perspectives, this research endeavor aims to provide a nuanced understanding of Anticipatory Self-defense, its utilization by different nations, and whether it can serve as a valid legal basis for military actions.Top of FormBottom of Form

Subject Prospects for Russian economy in 2016. Significance Russia's economy in 2015 has continued to be plagued by low oil prices that hovered under 50 dollars per barrel, and Western sanctions over Moscow's actions in Ukraine. As the Syrian intervention has shown, President Vladimir Putin is still intent on using Russia's military power to influence global events and also possibly to deflect domestic attention from Russia's economic plight.