Who is actually the root cause for the russo-ukrainian war?
Executive summary
The available sources identify Russia — and specifically President Vladimir Putin’s Kremlin — as the primary initiator and continuing principal actor driving the war that escalated with the full‑scale invasion in February 2022 and traces to earlier Russian actions since 2014 (including Crimea and Donbas) [1] [2]. Analysts and Western institutions characterise Moscow’s goals as forcing Ukrainian neutrality, regime change, and protecting “Russian” populations and institutions — explicit Kremlin war aims repeatedly cited by Putin and senior officials [3] [2].
1. Russia launched the 2022 escalation; the conflict’s roots extend to 2014
The mainstream chronicle in these sources locates the decisive rupture in February 2022 when Russia attacked Ukraine in a full‑scale invasion; that offensive is described as a major escalation of a conflict that began with Russia’s 2014 seizure of Crimea and fighting in Donbas [1]. Multiple think tanks and journals treat the 2014 actions and 2022 invasion as consecutive phases of the same Russian campaign against Ukrainian sovereignty [2].
2. Kremlin statements reveal political aims: regime change and Ukrainian neutrality
Contemporary reporting and analysis emphasise Kremlin objectives. Putin and other senior Russian officials have publicly framed their demands as protecting ethnic Russians, the Russian language, and the Russian Orthodox Church inside Ukraine while insisting Ukraine must be neutral and accept political changes — objectives framed as “root causes” by Moscow itself [3] [2]. ISW and CSIS trace these political aims to Putin’s own statements and to official Kremlin messaging [3] [2].
3. Moscow’s narratives mix security claims and ideological framing
The Kremlin advances narratives of “denazification” and alleged threats to Russian‑speaking populations as part of its justification for military action; reporting notes these claims lack corroboration from international bodies and have been used to justify maximalist demands, including Ukraine’s demilitarisation and political replacement [4] [3]. Independent outlets and analysts treat these narratives as cognitive‑warfare tools deployed alongside battlefield operations [3].
4. Western analyses place operational responsibility squarely on Russian decisions
Multiple Western institutions and analysts identify Russian operational choices — including mobilisations, campaign planning, and refusal of certain peace proposals — as the proximate drivers of continued fighting. ISW documents Kremlin insistence on absolutist demands and behaviour consistent with pursuing military solutions to its political aims [3] [5]. CSIS similarly interprets Putin’s repeated invocation of “root causes” as a euphemism for regime change and forced neutrality [2].
5. Some reports highlight complex contributing factors — but still point to Russian aggression
Analyses that discuss broader influences — logistics, Western support rates, and battlefield dynamics — treat them as factors shaping the war’s course rather than as primary causes of the invasion. Sources note Western aid, Ukrainian mobilization shortfalls, and Russia’s operational shifts affect duration and intensity, but they do not recast who initiated the war; instead, they frame these as elements that influence outcomes once Moscow chose aggression [6] [7].
6. Peace plans, diplomacy and competing narratives complicate attribution in public discourse
Recent reporting shows the peace negotiation landscape is contested: Russia has submitted documents outlining its conditions, the US produced plans partly informed by Russian drafts, and Moscow publicly characterises its demands as addressing “root causes” — a formulation that can confuse public narratives about blame versus bargaining positions [8] [4]. ISW warns that Kremlin public messaging sometimes obscures its rejection of compromise even when diplomacy is underway [3].
7. What the sources do not settle: personal motives, long‑term historical blame and alternative origin stories
Provided sources document Moscow’s actions and aims, but they do not present a definitive single‑sentence accounting of every long‑term historical cause (e.g., imperial legacies, NATO enlargement debates, or individual psychological motives). For questions like “who bears moral culpability before 2014” or deep archival causal chains, available sources do not mention exhaustive attribution beyond the documented role of Russian state decisions and policy since 2014 [1] [2].
Conclusion — who is “actually” the root cause?
Based on the provided reporting and expert analysis, the proximate and continuing root cause of the present war is Russian state policy and the Kremlin’s decision to resort to large‑scale military force — an approach justified publicly by Putin and other officials with political aims of regime change and enforced Ukrainian neutrality [1] [3] [2]. Sources also show competing narratives and diplomatic manoeuvres that complicate public claims, but none of the supplied materials relocate primary responsibility away from Moscow’s choices [3] [8].