There is a bit of a paradox that happens in the life of a political scientist whenever there is a world event that puts us on edge.
We are both citizens and teachers and so while we have uncertainty about the events unfolding around us we are obliged to try to explain the situation and make sense of sometimes nonsensical actions.
The current situation unfolding in the Ukraine is one such time. So here are some things to watch for:
1. The story of Crimea, as my colleague helped me to understand, is extraordinarily complex and therefore requires some careful research.
In brief, Crimea has shifted rule over many years. It was first part of the Ottoman Empire then part of the Russian Empire. It was the site of the Crimean War from 1853 to 1856 and although Britain and France won the war, Russia was still dominant in the region.
In 1954 during the Soviet period Crimea was transferred from Russia to Ukraine to celebrate the 300th year anniversary of Ukraines incorporation into the Russian Empire. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Crimea remained a part of Ukraine. Although, Russia still has a strong presence in Crimea as they have a naval base at the port of Sevastopol, Crimea is part of Ukraine. So, regardless of this complicated history, any invasion of Russian troops is a violation of Ukraines sovereignty.
2. Be skeptical when you hear that there is overwhelming support for the Russian occupation by the people of Crimea.
On group that has gotten very little attention in this story is the Crimean Tatars. At least 12 percent of the population is Tatar and they were forcibly expelled from Crimea in 1944 by Stalin.
According to The Crimean Tatar exile in Central Asia: A case study in group destruction and survival by Brian Glyn Williams: [o]n the night of 18 May 1944, less than a week after the bloody Nazi retreat from the Crimea, NKVD (predecessor to the KGB) motorized infantry units surrounded all the Crimean Tatar villages and suburbs in the Crimea and herded the startled inhabitants to several designated trans-shipment spots. The shocked Tatars were given less than five minutes to gather a few belongings and then they were transported at gun point to major rail centres. The key message here is that when anyone says that the majority of people are supportive of an initiative we need to be mindful of the feelings and concerns of ethnic minorities.
3. Watch for the anti-Ukrainian rhetoric of the Russian media spilling over into Western media.
Christiane Amanpour took her CNN colleague to task for repeating the words of the Russian Ambassador who told the UN Security Council that pro-European Ukraines were anti-Semites and fascists. She was quick to denounce those words as a Russian characterization and was critical of Wolf Blitzer for repeating the words of the Ambassador as though they were fact.
Blitzer defended his actions by saying that he was only repeating what the Ambassador had said. Amanpour did not let him off the hook. She wanted viewers to be aware that statements of this nature are Russian characterizations of the people of Crimea and the Ukraine and such statements are dangerous sweeping generalizations.
The point is that we have to listen carefully to the way these stories are reported. Often the media will present two sides as though there is such thing as balance in every story. Again, it is our duty as citizens to listen carefully to how the media characterizes and generalizes the attitudes, opinions and biases of a whole nation of people.
4. Watch to see the debate about whether or not this is a new Cold War.
If you Google the question, Is this another Cold War? you will see that there are differing opinions about the nature of this stand-off. One analysis by Rick Noack in his article, Why the Crimean Conflict is Not a New Cold War, points out that this fight is not really ideological; that most contemporary conflicts require co-operation; and (and this is the most important point) that neither Russia nor the United States are as powerful as they once were.
The fact is that every political event is extraordinarily complex and has many layers. Our understanding and opinions about such events must be grounded in a critical reflection of history, international law, human rights and political rhetoric.
