A current affairs discussion

Russia–Ukraine War and Global Geopolitics: A Current Affairs Discussion

The Russia–Ukraine conflict continues to dominate international political discourse, raising questions not only about sovereignty and security but also about the evolving dynamics of global alliances and media influence. In a recent discussion, several perspectives emerged on the ongoing war, the historical backdrop, and the broader implications for global politics.

---

Sanjo’s Perspective: Peace Demands and Diplomatic Realities

Sanjo highlighted the ongoing negotiations and diplomatic challenges surrounding Ukraine. Russia’s insistence on demilitarizing Crimea, NATO membership debates, and China’s cautious stance all reflect the complex web of international interests. The U.S. position, influenced by domestic politics including figures like Donald Trump, adds further unpredictability.

The recent Alaska summit, where Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was notably not invited, also signaled shifting power dynamics. Sanjo pointed out that Russia has presented 10 demands for peace, but the pressing question remains: Is peace truly attainable in the near future, or will the conflict persist as a frozen war?

---

Historical Backdrop: The Ukrainian Revolution

To understand the present, it is essential to revisit the Ukrainian revolution. The former Ukrainian president, strongly backed by Russia, faced mass protests after refusing to sign a free trade agreement with the European Union. His eventual exile triggered counter-revolutions among pro-Russian populations, especially in regions with significant Russian-speaking communities—around 8.3 million in total.

This unrest culminated in Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and the outbreak of the Donbas conflict, marking the first major escalation that set the stage for today’s war.

---

Professor Joshua’s Perspective: From USSR Dissolution to NATO Escalations

Professor Joshua reminded us of the deeper historical roots, particularly the dissolution of the USSR. At the time, Ukraine held significant military capacity, including nuclear weapons. Under international pressure, Ukraine relinquished these weapons in exchange for assurances of sovereignty—assurances many argue have been violated by Russia’s actions.

He also stressed the role of NATO’s eastward expansion, Russia’s persistent narrative of encirclement, and how media depictions and confirmation bias shape public opinion on both sides of the conflict.

---

Sethu Parvathy’s Perspective: Media and Propaganda

Sethu Parvathy emphasized the influence of media on geopolitical perceptions, especially among the younger generation. From news outlets to propaganda films, narratives are carefully curated to sway opinions and legitimize state actions. In conflicts like Ukraine, media often becomes as powerful a weapon as military hardware.

---

Gayathri’s Perspective: Indian Parliamentary Discourse

Turning to India, Gayathri shifted focus to the monsoon session of Parliament. This session addressed critical national issues, including discussions on Operation Sindoor, the Pahalgam terror attack, and the introduction of several key bills. The debates highlighted how domestic governance continues amid the backdrop of international conflicts, underscoring the interconnectedness of security, policy, and global awareness.

---

Professor Joshua’s Perspective: Democratic Effectiveness

Professor Joshua raised concerns about the effectiveness of parliamentary democracy in its current form. With 59% of legislative changes being passed without adequate debate, he questioned whether politics is prioritizing electoral gains over sound policy-making. He also critiqued the Election Commission’s neutrality, noting that rational judgment is often overshadowed by partisan politics. His remarks invoked the role of leaders like Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar in shaping the democratic process.

Mr Johan gave his strong opinion on the same.

---

Conclusion: The Search for Peace Amid Shifting Powers

The Russia–Ukraine war remains a defining conflict of our times, blending military aggression, historical grievances, and geopolitical maneuvering. While peace proposals are on the table, the road to resolution appears uncertain. The discussion underscored not only the war’s immediate consequences but also the broader lessons for democracy, media responsibility, and global governance.

In the end, the conflict is not just about Ukraine and Russia—it is about the future of international order, the balance between power and principle, and the voices that shape how generations perceive war and peace.