The Ukraine Crisis and its Consequences

             Europe has made significant investments over many years in creating a framework of laws, practices, and organizations for conflict avoidance and crisis management. 2014's swift transition in Ukraine from political turmoil to armed conflict served as proof that the current procedures are still unable to meet the task. The European security order was seriously threatened by Russia's annexation of Crimea without the permission of the Ukrainian government.

 

According to conservative estimates, at least 4364 people had died in the fighting by the end of 2014, and there were over 500 000 internally displaced people in Ukraine. There were still no signs of a permanent resolution to the dispute at the start of 2015.

 

Face-to-face interactions between important parties were encouraged by diplomatic efforts, including discussions between Russia and Ukraine and between the Ukrainian government and representatives of armed groups operating in the country's east. The main goal of diplomatic efforts was to establish a ceasefire and lay the groundwork for more long-lasting peace.

 

 

 

Information on activities taking place on the ground was improved in terms of quantity and quality thanks to confidence- and security-building measures (CSBMs). CSBMs' ineffectiveness lack easing tension in the eastern region of Ukraine, however, raises concerns about how well they work in crisis and conflict settings.

 

The EU and NATO, two European security organizations, have decided to take action to assist Ukraine in enhancing its security. The joint aid packages in 2014, however, did not go so far as to directly support the Ukrainian military forces in their effort to retake the country's east. However, individual states did offer this support on a national level, and internal discussions regarding the type of support to come were still ongoing at the end of the year.

 

A rise in military spending in Europe could be sparked by the war in Ukraine. Real military spending in Russia has been rising for several years, and this trend is expected to continue. The effects of the conflict are already being felt in Ukraine, which has dramatically increased its military budget. As a direct reaction to the situation, several of Russia's Central and Northern European neighbors have also declared increases in their military budgets. However, the majority of West European nations show little evidence of such a response. The initial 2015 military budgets for NATO member states were established before the respective heads of state and government gathering at the 2014 NATO summit in Newport, Wales; nevertheless, the commitment to increased defense spending made at that gathering may result in increases starting in 2016.

 

Different aspects of the Ukraine conflict had an impact on the arms trade in 2014. The Ukrainian Government and the separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine were the main combatants in the armed conflict, and they engaged in a protracted conventional battle using a massive arsenal of weapons, including heavy weapons. Before the conflict began, the majority of the weaponry used by both sides was in the Ukrainian arsenal.

 

Ukraine requested weaponry from Western nations. Despite strong demand from the US Congress to aid Ukraine, European governments were hesitant to provide armaments, as was the US government. On the other side, Russia did provide the rebel fighters with arms. The conflict also had an impact on Russian-Ukrainian arms trade relations, which were severed by the end of 2014 after some hesitancy on the part of Ukraine. This caused considerable issues for Russia, which depends on Ukraine for several essential weapon components. Additionally banned were Russia's burgeoning arms trade ties with Western nations. Both sets of severed ties are likely to have an impact on Russia's already overburdened economy and military modernization aspirations.