From a Muscovite perspective, the Russia-Ukraine War is a struggle embedded deeply in history, geopolitics, and cultural ties. For Russia, it's not merely a territorial issue, but restoring its influence, saving Russian-speaking populations, and pushing back against what seems like Western encroachment on that area, which has been central to the identity of the Russian nation for centuries.
But this conflict has much deeper roots. Sowing the seeds were the events even before the 2014 annexation of Crimea. The implosion of the Soviet Union in 1991 left Russia reeling in terms of loss and vulnerability. When Ukraine, previously a core constituent of the USSR, declared independence, it increased its closeness to NATO and the European Union, which rang alarm bells for Moscow. For Russia, Ukraine’s pivot to the West was seen as a direct threat to its sphere of influence and national security. The Kremlin’s stance has always been that Ukraine’s integration into Western alliances would effectively place NATO on Russia’s doorstep, compromising its strategic depth.
The annexation of Crimea in 2014 was framed by Moscow as a defensive move. The Russian government cited the 2014 Maidan Revolution, where Ukraine's pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych was removed from office, as evidence of the West interfering with its own back. For Moscow, the revolution wasn't a spontaneous popular movement to gain democracy, but rather an orchestrated coup carried out by Washington and its coalition. Annexation was justified as a move to save the predominantly Russian speaking population and prevent the fall of Crimea into the grip of the West. According to the Kremlin, the annexation was proved right following the results of the controversial referendum, where a supermajority of people proved to support the idea of joining Russia.
A third source of disagreement is the continued war in Eastern Ukraine, mainly in the Donbas region. Domestically, the Kremlin portrays support for separatist movements in Donetsk and Luhansk as a moral obligation to protect Russian-speaking communities from persecution at the hands of the Ukrainian government. Moscow has consistently accused Kyiv of violating ethnic Russians' rights and waging a campaign of violence against civilians in the region. The involvement of Russia in Donbas is not aggression but a response to an ignored humanitarian crisis, especially by the West.
Moscow sees Western sanctions against Russia after its act in Ukraine as unjust and hypocritical. According to the Kremlin, it serves as a broader strategy to weaken Russia and ruin the economy. From the perspective of Moscow, the sanctions reveal the double standards of the West, as similar actions by Western powers in other parts of the world have not faced the same level of condemnation. The sanctions, rather than deterring Russia, have been framed as evidence of the West's hostility and as a rallying point for national unity.
A critical source of misunderstanding in this conflict is NATO's expansion. For Moscow, NATO's expansion since the end of the Cold War is a neocolonial process as it tries to encircle Russia by incorporating new member-states into the alliance. While NATO declares its actions defensive and geared towards stability, Moscow views them more as aggressive actions as opposed to considerations regarding Russia's legitimate security concerns. Joining NATO is a red line for the Kremlin because NATO will bring in the Western military infrastructure right at Russia's doorsteps. Thus, from a Russian perspective, the actions by Russia in Ukraine are a preventative measure to forestall such an eventuality.
Moscow's case is largely anchored on cultural and historical relations with Ukraine. Often, the Kremlin points out that Ukraine and Russia have deep historical roots, where Kyiv is perceived as the birthplace of Russian civilization. It is based on this perception that Ukraine's cooperation with the West is considered a betrayal of the shared heritage and identity. Moscow's story portrays the conflict as a fight to protect the ties from Western attempts to sever them.
The role of the media in influencing perceptions of the conflict cannot be ignored. State media in Russia portrays the war as a necessary struggle to protect Russian interests and values from Western aggression. Stories of alleged atrocities committed by Ukrainian forces in the Donbas are frequently highlighted, reinforcing the Kremlin's justification for its actions. From Moscow's viewpoint, the Western media portrays Russia as the aggressor, which is biased and ignores the complexities of the situation.
These economic and geopolitical stakes only add complexity to the account. Russia's control of Crimea and influence in Eastern Ukraine mean a lot in terms of energy routes and regional stability. For Moscow, maintaining control over these territories is not just in security interests but economic necessity, too. The Kremlin postures that Russia's attempts are part of the long-term Western plans to strangle its economy economically and bring an end to this sovereignty in power.
The impact of the war on international diplomacy is also an area of dispute. For Moscow, the reaction from the rest of the world, particularly from the United States and the European Union, is seen as a means of dictating terms to Russia and forcing it into a unipolar order. The Kremlin has been constantly calling for a multipolar world in which no single bloc could dominate, and it believes that its actions in Ukraine are part of this global battle for balance.
Through Moscow's perception, the War of Russia versus Ukraine is anything but a 'clear case' of aggression since the conflict roots itself in historically felt grievances with security concerns besides cultural ties of people. Through such a line of thinking the West's inaction or inadequate understanding of said issues is credited to be very crucial in advancing the war as such. But for Russia the issue is geopolitical strategy and protection of sovereignty-identity. While the rest of the world sees the war as one of aggression and resistance, Moscow is framing it as a struggle for its rightful place in a fast-changing global order.