Why Did Russia Invade Ukraine?
Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly made clear that he considers Ukraine's place to be under Russia's thumb. That was its position from the days of the Russian Empire under Catherine the Great in the 18th century through the nations' shared history in the Soviet Union. After the Soviet collapse, successive Ukrainian governments forged closer ties with the European Union and NATO, then sidled back toward Russia, and edged away again. With war, Putin's intention has been to settle the direction of Ukraine's future by force.
They share a long common past, dating back more than a millennium to the establishment of the first Slavic state, Kyivan Rus, in parts of what are today Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. Most of the territory of contemporary Ukraine became part of the Russian empire in the late 1700s after periods of rule under the Mongols or Tatars, the Poles and Lithuanians. In 1918, a year after Russia's communist revolution, Ukraine declared independence, but in 1921, the Red Army conquered most of it and Ukraine became a republic within the Soviet Union.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
19 minutes ago
- UPI
EU targets Russia with sanctions, lower oil price cap
EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen (R) and High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas briefed the press Monday on the 18th package of sanctions against Russia, in Brussels, Belgium. Photo by Olivier Matthys/EPA-EFE June 10 (UPI) -- The European Commission on Tuesday unveiled its latest in a series of sanctions against Russia targeting energy exports, infrastructure and finances. "Oil exports still represent one-third of Russia's government revenues," European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said at a news conference in Brussels, Belgium. "We need to cut this source of revenues," she added. The measures aimed to put pressure on Moscow to end Russia's war in Ukraine include a proposal to lower the current $60 oil price cap to $45 per barrel and bans use of the Nord Stream pipelines between Germany and Russia. At least nine individuals and 33 companies will be slapped with asset freezes. And the EU will consider adding another 77 boats part of Russia's "shadow fleet" banned in European ports of entry, part of at least 300 other barred Russian vessels. In addition, at least 22 Russian banks will be cut off from the SWIFT international banking system and the Russian Direct Investment Fund. Von der Leyen called the sanctions "robust" and "hard-biting" and added that Russia's economy has already been bowing to past pressure. "Russia continues to bring death and destruction to Ukraine," she said Monday at the press conference with Kaja Kallas, the EU's top diplomat. "Our message is clear: This war must end." Kallas called Russia's military invasion of Ukraine "outright illegal." She said it was "clear that Russia does not want peace," adding it is "cruel, aggressive and a danger to us all." It arrived ahead of this weekend's G7 summit in Alberta, Canada where the new oil price caps will be discussed. "With this package, we step up pressure on Russia," stated von der Leyen. "Our objective is very clear: We are reiterating the call for a full, unconditional ceasefire of at least 30 days," she said.
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
In African universities, Russia's war against Ukraine finds new supporters
The halls of academia have long been considered sanctuaries of critical thinking, intellectual discourse, and the pursuit of truth. Universities across the globe pride themselves on fostering environments where diverse perspectives can be examined, debated, and understood through the lens of scholarly rigor. However, the Russian invasion of Ukraine has exposed a troubling trend within certain African academic institutions: a marked bias toward Russian narratives that undermines the very principles of academic integrity and intellectual honesty that universities claim to uphold. This bias is not merely an abstract concern about geopolitical alignment; it represents a fundamental betrayal of the educational mission that universities exist to fulfill. When academic institutions abandon objectivity in favor of political positioning, they fail their students, their communities, and the broader pursuit of knowledge that defines higher education. The stakes could not be higher as universities shape the minds of future leaders, policymakers, and citizens who will navigate an increasingly complex global landscape. When African academics present papers at international conferences that uncritically repeat Russian talking points, they undermine their own credibility and that of their institutions. Across various African universities, a concerning pattern has emerged since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Rather than maintaining the scholarly distance necessary for objective analysis, numerous institutions have embraced narratives that closely align with Russian state propaganda. This manifests in multiple ways: academic conferences that present one-sided perspectives on the conflict, research publications that uncritically amplify Moscow's justifications for the war, and classroom discussions that frame the invasion through the lens of Western imperialism rather than examining it as a clear violation of international law. Read also: Ukraine must look beyond the EU for its agricultural future The roots of this bias are complex and multifaceted. Historical ties between the Soviet Union and various African nations during the Cold War era have created lingering sympathies that some academics appear unable to separate from contemporary realities. Additionally, legitimate grievances about Western colonial history and ongoing concerns about neocolonialism have been exploited to create false equivalencies between Russian aggression and Western influence. Some academics have conflated criticism of Western policies with support for Russian actions, creating a dangerous intellectual blind spot. Economic factors also play a role. Russian investment in African educational infrastructure, scholarship programs, and research partnerships have created institutional relationships that some universities appear reluctant to jeopardize through objective analysis of Russian actions. This economic dependence has compromised academic freedom, creating situations where financial considerations override scholarly integrity. The influence of Russian state media and disinformation campaigns cannot be overlooked. RT (formerly Russia Today) and Sputnik have specifically targeted African audiences with sophisticated propaganda operations designed to shape public opinion. Unfortunately, some academics have proven susceptible to these narratives, either through genuine belief or through a misguided sense that amplifying Russian perspectives represents intellectual diversity. When universities abandon objectivity, the consequences extend far beyond the ivory tower. Students who receive biased education are ill-equipped to understand complex global issues, make informed decisions as citizens, or contribute meaningfully to policy discussions. They graduate with skewed worldviews that may influence their professional and personal choices for decades to come. The credibility of African scholarship suffers when institutions are perceived as politically motivated rather than academically rigorous. This damages the reputation of African universities in international academic circles, potentially limiting collaboration opportunities, research partnerships, and the mobility of African scholars. When African academics present papers at international conferences that uncritically repeat Russian talking points, they undermine their own credibility and that of their institutions. True intellectual independence requires the courage to analyze situations objectively, regardless of political pressures or historical sympathies. Perhaps most importantly, bias in academia contributes to the broader information warfare that authoritarian regimes wage against democratic values and international law. Universities that should serve as bastions of critical thinking instead become unwitting participants in propaganda campaigns designed to undermine global stability and human rights. The situation becomes particularly problematic when considering the humanitarian dimensions of Russia's war against Ukraine. Hospitals, schools, and civilian infrastructure have been deliberately targeted by Russian forces, creating a refugee crisis that has displaced millions of people. When universities fail to acknowledge these realities or attempt to justify them through geopolitical frameworks, they implicitly endorse violence against civilians and violations of international humanitarian law. African universities must recommit to their fundamental mission of pursuing truth through rigorous scholarship rather than serving as vehicles for political propaganda. This transformation requires several concrete steps. First, universities must establish clear guidelines for faculty regarding the difference between legitimate academic analysis and political advocacy. While scholars should be free to examine controversial topics from multiple perspectives, they must do so within frameworks that respect evidence, logic, and established principles of international law. Second, African universities must diversify their funding sources and partnership arrangements to reduce dependence on any single country or ideological bloc. The current situation, where some institutions appear reluctant to criticize Russian actions due to financial relationships, represents an unacceptable compromise of academic independence. Read also: Hiding in plain sight — how Russia's cultural centers continue to operate in US, Europe despite espionage claims Third, universities must invest in media literacy and critical thinking education for both faculty and students. The susceptibility of some academics to Russian disinformation campaigns reveals significant gaps in the ability to evaluate sources, identify propaganda techniques, and distinguish between credible and manipulated information. Fourth, African universities must strengthen their commitment to international academic standards and peer review processes. When scholars publish work that fails to meet basic standards of evidence and argumentation, it reflects poorly on the entire African academic community. Rigorous peer review can help ensure that African scholarship maintains the quality necessary for international respect and collaboration. The pro-Russian bias evident in some African universities represents more than just a misguided political position; it constitutes a surrender of intellectual independence to foreign propaganda. This is particularly ironic given that many of these same institutions pride themselves on their commitment to African independence and self-determination. True intellectual independence requires the courage to analyze situations objectively, regardless of political pressures or historical sympathies. It means acknowledging uncomfortable truths about allies while maintaining the ability to critique opponents fairly. Most importantly, it means refusing to sacrifice scholarly integrity for political convenience. African universities have a proud tradition of intellectual leadership, from their role in anti-colonial movements to their contributions to post-independence development. This legacy is endangered when institutions abandon their commitment to truth in favor of political positioning. The current moment represents a critical test of whether African higher education will live up to its historical role as a force for enlightenment and progress. The stakes extend beyond the immediate question of how to analyze Russia's war against Ukraine. Universities that compromise their integrity on this issue signal their willingness to subordinate academic standards to political considerations more broadly. This has implications for everything from scientific research to economic analysis to social policy development. African universities stand at a crossroads. They can continue down the path of political bias, sacrificing their integrity for short-term political or economic gains, or they can lead by example by recommitting to the principles of scholarly objectivity and intellectual honesty that define higher education at its best. The choice is not merely about how to analyze one particular conflict; it is about the fundamental purpose and character of African higher education. Universities that choose bias over objectivity risk becoming irrelevant to serious academic discourse and ineffective in their mission to educate future leaders. The world needs African universities that can contribute meaningfully to global conversations about complex issues. This requires institutions that maintain high scholarly standards, resist political pressure, and commit themselves to the pursuit of truth regardless of where it leads. Read also: Can South Africa lead the charge for nuclear safety in Ukraine? Submit an Opinion Editor's Note: The opinions expressed in the op-ed section are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Kyiv Independent. We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
Business Insider
43 minutes ago
- Business Insider
6 youngest NATO countries as of 2025
NATO is one of the most important security partnerships in modern history. The group standa as more than just a military alliance; it is a collective security guarantee in an unstable global context. Business Insider Africa presents the youngest NATO countries. This list is courtesy of Global Firepower. Sweden is the latest country to join the 76-year-old coalition. Article 5, a collective self-defense clause, is important to the alliance because it specifies that an attack on one member is considered an attack on all. This strong commitment deters aggression and reassures weaker nations under NATO's cover. In a period of rising geopolitical tensions, cyber threats, terrorism, and assertive military actions by powers like as Russia and China, NATO offers its members strategic depth. Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine, albeit targeting a non-NATO state, demonstrated to member nations how important NATO's security structure is. The eastern flank countries, including Poland, the Baltic States, and Romania, feel more confident knowing they are not alone in the issue. NATO also facilitates joint military training, intelligence sharing, and rapid response by coordinating defense plans. For smaller governments with limited defense expenditures, NATO membership provides access to advanced capabilities, technology, and logistics that would otherwise be prohibitively expensive. Beyond defense, NATO aims to promote unity among democratic states. It represents a shared commitment to stability, the rule of law, and peace. As the world evolves, NATO's ability to adapt by addressing hybrid warfare, cybersecurity, and space security shows its continued relevance. For its members, NATO represents solidarity, protection, and influence in global security issues. Its significance today is not only military, but also political: guaranteeing that democratic states stand together in the face of common difficulties. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was formed on April 4, 1949, in the aftermath of World War II. Its founding was a watershed moment in international relations, establishing a military alliance dedicated to safeguarding peace, stability, and collective security in a rapidly divided world. With that said, here's a list of the oldest NATO countries according to data from Global Firepower. 6 youngest NATO countries as of 2025 Rank Country Date joined Years as a member state 1. Sweden March 7, 2024 1 2. Finland April, 4, 2023 2 3. North Macedonia March, 27, 2020 5 4. Montenegro June, 5, 2017 8 5. Albania April, 1, 2009 16 6. Croatia April, 1, 2009 16
