By Andrew Chakhoyan
New York Post
When 100,000 Russian troops stormed into Ukraine on February 24, 2022, the world rushed to pin it all on one man: Vladimir Putin. We labeled him the villain, the dictator, the madman.
A year later, the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant; and Mr. Putin is now, deservingly, a wanted war criminal. But this war is not just his. It’s Russia’s war — rooted in a centuries-old obsession with conquest and domination.
Russia may look like a country, but it was born an aggressive empire and never built a true civic nation. It cannot help but invade.
Driven by empathy and a desire to spare the common folks, we concentrate our wrath on Putin and his cronies. But that comes at a cost, stripping the Russian people of their agency.
Ironically, this is the very social contract that has kept the Kremlin’s power intact for generations. If Russians aren’t responsible for the actions of their government, for the war crimes of their military, for the stolen Ukrainian children, it begs the question, who is?
In an authoritarian system, true objectivity in polling is elusive, but insights from Russia’s nongovernmental Levada Center are among the most reliable. The latest findings show that even if Putin were to endorse returning Ukrainian land captured since 2022 in exchange for peace, 60% of the Russian population would reject it.
An overwhelming 75% of Russians consider giving back Ukrainian regions like Luhansk and Donetsk — occupied since 2014 — unacceptable.
These figures reveal more than a current sentiment — they expose a mindset in which aggression and conquest are seen as parts of Russia’s destiny. For many Russians, the polling data suggest, invading another country to seize land and subjugate its people doesn’t even register as problematic.
Moscow clings to an “anti-colonial” myth, branding itself as a defender against enemies foreign or domestic. We, in the West, often buy into this notion that colonialism only happens overseas.
However, Russia is a colonial empire in every sense, with a power structure designed to extract resources from distant regions for the benefit of Moscow.
Unlike other empires, this one didn’t exploit its subjects based on race. Instead, it enforced the brutal “idea of sameness,” demanding that the colonized erase their own identities and adopt Russian ones.
Ukrainian philosopher Volodymyr Yermolenko points out that this “sameness” is just as violent as racial exclusion, though it’s harder to see from the outside.
Drowning in lies, Russia kills to “save lives,” occupies to “liberate,” and claims to end imperialism through its own colonization. This isn’t a broken system — it is the system.
While Moscow sells dreams of “greatness” to the inhabitants of its “Federation,” it robs people blind, especially ethnic minorities in resource-rich regions like the Caucasus and Siberia.
The Kremlin has long mastered the art of claiming victimhood, painting itself as the “defender” against foreign threats. Yet time and again, it’s Russia that has acted as the aggressor — in Georgia, Syria, and now Ukraine. In fact, Moscow has invaded or attacked nearly every neighbor at least once over the past century.
Words matter when it comes to Russia’s criminal war on Ukraine. Reducing it to just ‘Putin’s war’ dangerously oversimplifies the issue. If we think removing Putin would change Russia’s behavior, we’re mistaken.
Russia has pursued its imperial ambitions through force for centuries, no matter who was in charge. Until and unless Russia and its people confront their history, the cycle of violence will continue.
The stakes go beyond Ukraine’s independence. This war represents a turning point for global security. If Russia’s invasion succeeds, it sets a dangerous precedent that other authoritarian regimes will view as a green light. China and Iran are watching closely to see if the West has the resolve to punish aggression and restore deterrence.
As Jason Smart and Ivana Stradner argued in The Post, Moscow has designs to sow chaos in the Balkans and “protect” former colonies like Moldova, Georgia, or the Baltic States. The Kremlin is sending signal after signal that it won’t stop with Ukraine.
Ukraine is fighting for its survival with limited resources, while Russia still has the economic means and firepower to sustain this war. If we truly want peace, we must give Ukraine what it needs to win. Half measures only prolong this conflict and embolden Russia’s belief that it can succeed.
Putin has made nuclear threats in a bid to intimidate the West into backing down. But a world where nuclear blackmail works is infinitely more dangerous than one where it doesn’t. When the US and its allies stand firm, authoritarian regimes are less likely to test boundaries.
President-elect Donald Trump pledged: “Together, we will secure peace through strength and make America, and the world, safe again!”
He must deliver on this promise for our sake, not just for Ukraine’s. For America’s long-term security and the stable global order underpinning our prosperity, Ukraine must win.
If we fail to stop Moscow, we’re giving every would-be conqueror permission to pursue their own imperial delusions, and it’s only a matter of time before that reaches our shores.
Andrew Chakhoyan is an academic director at the University of Amsterdam and previously served in the US Government at the Millennium Challenge Corporation
