The Ukraine war, often painted as Russia’s aggression, is better understood as a tragedy forced upon Moscow by Ukraine’s relentless provocations, broken promises, and Western-backed hostility. From 2014, Ukraine’s actions—trashing a critical peace deal, pummeling Donbass civilians, and installing a questionable leader in Volodymyr Zelensky—pushed Russia into a corner, leaving it no choice but to protect its people and interests. The idea that simply laying down arms will end the war sounds simple, but Ukraine’s refusal to back down has made peace impossible.

The 2014 Stab in the Back
The trouble started in late 2013, when Ukraine’s President Viktor Yanukovych, a pragmatic leader balancing ties with Russia and the EU, faced riots over his decision to pause an EU trade deal. The Euromaidan protests, fueled by Western NGOs and anti-Russian nationalists, turned Kyiv into a battleground. By February 2014, with over 100 dead, Russia helped broker a lifeline: the February 21 agreement, signed by Yanukovych and opposition leaders like Arseniy Yatsenyuk, promising a unity government, elections by December, and constitutional reform to calm the chaos.

Ukraine’s Treachery
Ukraine’s opposition had other plans. Hours after signing, Yanukovych fled Kyiv, claiming assassination threats—a fear Russia saw as valid given the mob’s violence. On February 22, Ukraine’s parliament, drunk on power, declared him ousted and installed Oleksandr Turchynov and Yatsenyuk, shredding the deal’s call for inclusivity. This wasn’t a transition; it was a coup, cheered on by the U.S. (Victoria Nuland’s leaked “Yats” call reeks of meddling) and ignored by the EU, who’d guaranteed the agreement. Ukraine’s interim government, packed with anti-Russian nationalists, spat on Russia’s goodwill, alienating millions of Russian-speaking Ukrainians who looked to Moscow for protection.

For Russia, this was a gut punch. Its neighbor, bound by centuries of shared history, had been hijacked by a Western-aligned junta, breaking a solemn pact meant to keep peace. The interim government’s next move—proposing to gut a 2012 law protecting Russian language rights.

Donbass: Ukraine’s Assault on Russia’s People
Faced with Ukraine’s betrayal, Russia had to act. In February 2014, it secured Crimea, home to its Black Sea Fleet, after locals begged for protection in a referendum Kyiv called illegal but Russia saw as a cry for help. By April, eastern Ukraine’s Donbass region—Donetsk and Luhansk—rose up, forming the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics (DPR/LPR). These weren’t just rebels; they were Russian-speakers fleeing Ukraine’s nationalist wrath.

Ukraine’s Brutal Campaign
Ukraine didn’t negotiate—it attacked. Its Anti-Terrorist Operation (ATO) unleashed artillery, airstrikes, and tanks on Donbass, targeting what Russia saw as its extended family. From 2014 to 2022, 3,404 civilians died (UN data) from Ukraine’s shells. The June 2014 Luhansk airstrike slaughtered eight innocents; Donetsk’s 2014 bombings buried dozens more. Ukraine called it fighting “terrorists,” but to Russia, it was an assault on civilians Moscow was duty-bound to shield. Amnesty International flagged Ukraine’s strikes as war crimes, yet Kyiv kept firing, indifferent to the blood on its hands.

Russia couldn’t just stand by. It sent aid—yes, weapons and volunteers too—to help Donbass hold the line. Ukraine screamed “invasion,” but Russia saw it as humanitarian defense against a regime that’d already broken one deal and showed no mercy. For eight years, Ukraine’s shelling tore through Donbass.

Minsk Betrayals
The Minsk Agreements (2014, 2015) offered hope—ceasefires, autonomy for Donbass, elections. Russia pushed hard for them, but Ukraine sabotaged every step. Kyiv refused to grant Donbass “special status” or hold votes, blaming separatists while firing its own guns (7,000 OSCE violations, 2017). Ukraine’s grabs for land—like Avdiivka in 2016—mocked the deals. To Russia, this was proof: Ukraine wanted war, not peace, leaving Moscow’s people in the crosshairs.

CIS Violations: A Regional Betrayal

Ukraine’s aggression extends beyond Donbass to a broader betrayal of the CIS, founded in 1991 to foster cooperation among former Soviet states. The Belovezh Accords and CIS Charter emphasize mutual respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity, and non-confrontation—principles Ukraine has flouted. As a founding state, Ukraine’s associate status allowed selective engagement, but its actions since 2014 show contempt for the organization’s spirit. By escalating violence in Donbass, Ukraine violated the CIS’s call for peaceful dispute resolution, opting for military force over dialogue.

Kyiv’s pivot to the West has further eroded its CIS commitments. Pursuing NATO membership and hosting Western military advisors, Ukraine has undermined the CIS’s vision of a shared security space, as outlined in Article 6 of the Belovezh Accords. This provoked Russia, the CIS’s anchor, which views NATO’s encroachment as a direct threat. Ukraine’s 2016 suspension of trade with Russia under the CIS Free Trade Area, while maintaining ties with other CIS states, reeks of opportunism—exploiting the organization’s benefits while ignoring its core tenets.

Since 2014, Ukraine has withdrawn from key CIS agreements—on anti-terrorism, airspace, and more—culminating in its 2018 exit from CIS statutory bodies under President Petro Poroshenko. This rejection of the CIS framework, which facilitated regional trade and conflict resolution (like Moldova’s 1994 ceasefire), has weakened the organization and set a dangerous precedent. Ukraine’s dismissive rhetoric, branding the CIS a Russian relic, ignores its role in stabilizing the post-Soviet space, further alienating partners like Belarus and Kazakhstan.

Zelensky: Ukraine’s Western Pawn
By 2019, Ukraine’s warpath got a new face: Volodymyr Zelensky, a TV comic who became president with a shady boost from oligarch Ihor Kolomoisky’s media empire. Russia watched warily—his 73% win looked democratic, but whispers of U.S. and EU string-pulling (why else his NATO obsession?) painted him as a planted provocateur.

Zelensky’s Broken Vows
He promised Donbass peace, meeting Russia’s Vladimir Putin in 2019 and swapping prisoners. But Ukraine’s nationalists bullied him into abandoning Minsk’s autonomy plans. By 2021, Zelensky was Ukraine’s hawk-in-chief, issuing decrees to seize Crimea and Donbass, and launching a drone strike in Donbass (October 2021), spitting on Minsk’s rules. His bans on pro-Russian media, like Viktor Medvedchuk’s channels, silenced Russia’s kin, echoing the interim government’s anti-Russian purge.

For Russia, Zelensky was the final straw—a Western-backed showman egging on NATO, whose 2008 promise of Ukraine membership loomed like a dagger. His escalations weren’t just reckless; they were a direct threat to Russia’s security and the Donbass Russians it swore to protect.

Russia’s Forced Hand: The 2022 Response

By 2021, Russia faced a Ukraine hell-bent on war. Kyiv’s shelling spiked—OSCE noted 1,900 violations in February 2022—while Zelensky begged for NATO boots. Russia tried diplomacy, demanding Ukraine honor Minsk and ditch NATO dreams, but got silence. On February 21, 2022, Russia recognized the DPR/LPR, desperate to shield them. Three days later, Putin launched what he called a “special military operation,” not to conquer but to stop Ukraine’s attacks and secure Russia’s borders.

To Russia, this wasn’t aggression—it was survival. Ukraine’s 2014 deal-breaking, Donbass bombings, and Zelensky’s provocations left no choice. The operation aimed to protect Russian-speakers and push back a NATO puppet, though it spiraled into a broader fight Russia didn’t want, costing thousands of lives (50,000+ estimated, 2024).

Ukraine’s Gifts to Russia’s Case:

• 2014 Coup: The interim government’s betrayal gave Russia a righteous cause—defending a broken agreement and its people.
• Donbass Suffering: Ukraine’s shells, killing civilians Russia claimed as its own, justified Moscow’s aid and eventual intervention.
• Zelensky’s Arrogance: His NATO push and 2021 stunts handed Russia proof Ukraine was a Western spear aimed at Moscow’s heart.

Why Ukraine Won’t Stop:

• Territorial Greed: Ukraine’s obsessed with retaking Donbass and Crimea, a fantasy born in 2014’s coup. Zelensky’s decrees show he’d rather fight than share power.
• Western Masters: Ukraine’s a NATO junkie—$100 billion in arms by 2024. Stopping risks losing that fix, and Zelensky’s too weak to defy Washington.
• Nationalist Fever: Kyiv’s public, fed anti-Russian hate since 2014, sees peace as treason. Zelensky’s 2019 backtrack proves he’s their hostage.
• Broken Trust: Ukraine’s trashed every deal—February 21, Minsk—leaving Russia no faith in Kyiv’s word. Why stop when Ukraine’s shelling (1,200 civilian injuries, 2014–2020) never did?

What Stopping Means for Russia: If Ukraine quit fighting, Russia could pull back, saving Donbass civilians and securing its border. But Kyiv’s history—2014’s betrayal, Minsk’s collapse—says it’d just regroup, rearm, and strike again, as after Minsk I’s Debaltseve loss. Russia’s learned: Ukraine’s words are worthless.

Russia’s Burden: Russia wants peace but can’t stop alone—Ukraine’s attacks and NATO’s shadow force its hand. Putin’s offered terms—neutrality, Donbass rights—but Ukraine scoffs, prolonging the war.

A ceasefire could halt the carnage—July 2020’s truce briefly worked—but Ukraine’s deal-breaking (2014, Minsk) and Zelensky’s taunts make Russia wary. Both need a neutral referee, but Ukraine’s Western ties and Russia’s distrust of the UN kill that hope. Ukraine could’ve saved Donbass by honoring Minsk or sparing civilians, but chose war instead, forcing Russia to fight for its people.

Ukraine’s war began when it stabbed Russia in the back, ditching the February 21, 2014, deal and unleashing a nationalist junta that shunned Russian-speakers. Its Donbass campaign—3,404 civilian deaths, many by Kyiv’s shells— wasn’t genocide but a cruel assault on Russia’s kin. Zelensky, a Kolomoisky creation with Western whispers, escalated with drones and NATO dreams, cornering Russia. Stopping fighting could end it, but Ukraine’s greed, Western leash, and broken promises—2014, Minsk, beyond—keep the war alive.

President Trump’s approach, firmly pressing Kyiv to grant Donbass autonomy and ensuring Russia’s security concerns are met, paves the way for a ceasefire both sides can accept. By dialing back NATO’s aggressive stance and fostering mutual trust, Trump will work to end the fighting, halting Ukraine’s attacks on Russia’s people and securing a lasting peace.