Why Ukraine Matters in Russia’s Strategic Imagination
Russia’s long-term strategy in its near abroad has often been rooted in the belief that security is achieved not by cooperation with Western actors but by keeping them at a distance. A stable geopolitical environment, from Moscow’s perspective, emerges when neighbouring states remain within its orbit or, at minimum, do not fall under Western influence. Buffer regions are seen not as artificial constructs but as necessary layers of protection. This thinking is not new, yet after the rise of neo-Eurasianist ideology within segments of the Russian elite, it became more pronounced and more explicitly framed as a civilizational imperative.
In December 2015, while I was in Moscow, I visited big book shops (by the way, Moscow still carries the soul of both Tsarist Russia and Soviets, as I observed in the streets, cafes, and even book shops), and one of them I purchased Aleksandr Dugin’s Foundations of Geopolitics and read it with curiosity. Dugin is a remarkable author who can be seen an ideology-shaper in contemporary Russia. The book clarified why Ukraine occupies such a central position in Eurasianist thought. Dugin does not treat Ukraine as an ordinary post-Soviet state. He portrays it as the hinge upon which Russia either restores its historic weight or slips into strategic irrelevance. For him, the very idea of an independent Ukraine aligned with the West fractures the cultural and geopolitical continuity of Eurasia. No stable continental order can, in his view, exist until the “Ukrainian question” is resolved. Such reasoning transforms geopolitics into destiny. If Ukraine represents the key to Russia’s future, then compromise becomes not a diplomatic choice but a threat to national purpose.
This is why the conflict is so difficult to settle. When a war is framed internally as an existential struggle, diplomatic proposals appear insufficient. Temporary arrangements may be possible. Negotiators like Utkoff or others could facilitate pauses in fighting or humanitarian agreements, yet these would most likely resemble breathing spaces rather than conclusions. Peace becomes fragile when one side believes that concessions undermine its historical mission. The hope for a comprehensive settlement, one that satisfies both Ukraine’s sovereignty and Russia’s ideological expectations, therefore remains uncertain.
It is true that the war has weakened parts of the Russian economy and stretched resources that might otherwise fuel development. However, the conflict has also given the Russian military extensive operational experience. A state that gains confidence through combat does not necessarily scale back its ambitions simply because its economy contracts. From a European perspective, this combination is unsettling. Russia may be financially constrained, but it has not been strategically humbled. A battle-tested military backed by ideological certainty remains a serious factor in continental security.
Meanwhile, global dynamics are shifting. Western policies have not always been consistent, and strategic hesitation at key moments has sometimes widened the space in which Russia can maneuver. The rise of China and the redistribution of power across Eurasia further complicate calculations. Moscow might believe that time, rather than working against it, is slowly reshaping the balance in its favour. If the Kremlin concludes that persistence is a form of strategy, then the conflict may endure not only on the battlefield but also in the deeper structures of international politics.
The possibility of peace should not be dismissed, yet neither should it be romanticized. Ukraine’s future is entangled with more than negotiations or territorial control. It is bound to Russia’s conception of itself, to a story that stretches backward through empire and forward through the idea of Eurasian unity. As long as Ukraine symbolises the meeting point of two incompatible visions, one oriented toward Europe and one rooted in Eurasian revival, the war may pause, but its underlying logic continues to breathe beneath the surface.
