By Nandita Chennakrishnan, Yashas Ramakrishnan and Others

Hello there! We’re back with another edition for the month of March where we’ll be exploring the theme “War and Peace”. For this article, we thought that it would be apt to ask our peers their opinions on our ever-changing geopolitical climate and see what they have to say in regards to prominent current affairs. We hope that this edition is insightful to you and encourages you to read further about the events that affect millions of lives around the world. 

Can emotion, reasoning and politics interfere with each other in situations like this? Should they interfere?

Student 1: Yes and No. I believe that while emotion definitely has a role to play in any sort of interaction, its impact on the Russo-Ukrainian crisis is limited. We have seen vast swathes of Russian people campaigning to request Putin cease his warmongering actions and also those Ukrainians begging for international military intervention. Neither has worked and as for the latter, it’s questionable whether that would even be the best long-term solution. 

Reason too is a complicated matter. For Putin, it’s justifiable to commence a war seeing NATO’s expansion toward Russian borders and plans to construct missile silos in Ukraine. While war is never justified, perspectives do differ, so reason can be thrown out of the window depending on the international situation. furthermore, what reason can be applied to the claims of the denazification of Ukraine when the country is helmed by the grandson of a Holocaust survivor?

As for politics, you’re facing a pseudo-dictator who extended his electoral term well beyond the limit to 2036 and on the other side, the West is surprisingly uniform in its opinions of the Russo-Ukrainian crisis, military aid is the limit, with no actions that can provoke a WW3 like sending actual soldiers to Ukraine – something the Pentagon has stressed numerous times.

Student 2: Yes, they can definitely interfere. Often, emotion clouds our ability to reason clearly. We see leaders like Putin making outrageous claims on the basis of little to no facts on the basis of nationalism (such as all Ukrainians being Nazis). Ideally, emotion shouldn’t interfere with our ability to reason, especially as leaders wielding political power, because it may result in flawed or biased decision making. However, emotions also allow leaders to make decisions keeping in mind the interests of humanity and their people, thus making their decisions more effective. A balance must be struck.

Student 3: Emotion, absolutely not. Emotion is the last thing that should interfere in these types of situations and more logical thinking. When emotion interferes, certain actions might affect the future outcome of the problem. Factual reasoning is the main thing that should ever come and maybe a mix of politics when in negotiations. But in a war, none of this helps because in the end, it’s a military conflict and emotions and reasoning and politics don’t even get considered unless you go to the negotiation table. But until then, this does not work.

How has economic global interdependence been affected in regards to the Ukraine-Russia crisis?

Student 1: The global economy has been highly hit, especially on the Gas and petrol part. 25% of the world’s oil and natural gas come from Russia and with sanctions against Russia, fuel prices have taken a massive rise. Moreover, now global economic interdependence is restricted as anyone who is seen supporting or trading with Russia is deemed as “Traitors” amongst other terms and even trading with other countries supporting Russia. Hence, Countries are forced to look for alternatives that can be more expensive than usual which can, in the end, lead to higher prices of the Goods and Services being provided. Russia is also a major producer of several base metals (aluminium, titanium, palladium and nickel), all of which will register price jumps. This will be a big loss to the tech industry as the chip shortage continues, Titanium is one of the key elements in making these chips and hence, production will slow down and affect tech Giants like Apple and Microsoft who rely on the metal for their new M1 chips and laptop components.

Student 2: Russia has always been a large supplier of energy to EU nations who have now realised that they should not be getting this much of such a vital resource from a country that they are not politically aligned with. Putin’s confidence that the EU would not be able to impose sanctions on Russian energy paid off and these sanctions could have ended the war far before. I think that nations are starting to come to terms with the fact that there is still a divide between Eastern and Western Europe, and that economic cooperation within their own allies is incredibly crucial at this moment. The weakness of the West in this situation has made it easier for Russia to now rely on “allies” such as China and India, who have made the west their common enemy and are far too indebted to Russia economically respectively. Russia is a huge force, geopolitically, in Europe. While its own economy has not been doing well, its ownership of valuable natural resources has led to soaring prices of agricultural commodities, metals, and energy. I believe that this will lead some countries to re-evaluate the sources from which they import such valuable resources. It might lead to the tightening of closed circles within the EU and inhibit future international trade between nations with opposing political ideologies.

How has political stability in South East Asia been affected?

Student 1: The impact is very difficult to see. I mean, there are definitely some shifting alliances in the old ASEAN boardroom, but as a citizen, I haven’t really felt the impact of the conflict in my everyday affairs, besides the increased discussion of the matter. Singapore itself wavered in its political decisions I believe, at first forbidding anyone signing up to fight for Ukraine in an attempt to avoid being on Russia’s blacklist, then summarily getting onto it anyway as tensions escalated. I also find it interesting that the Rohingya crisis has been shelved because something more interesting has come to light, with Ukrainian refugees being the new, main crisis on the block.

Student 2: Countries were forced to pick a side and that does still have resounding impacts worldwide. South-East Asia has particularly been affected considerably due to more authoritarian countries such as the Burmese junta siding with Russia or the Chinese abstaining from voting in regards to the conflict which echoes dramatically throughout all of South-East Asia and does threaten its geopolitical standing as of now.

Student 3: South East Asia is a region that has recently been working towards recovering from the COVID pandemic and resuming with a “new normal.” This area has been one looked on with strategic interest by the West, with the US trying to mount pressure against China by taking advantage of disputes in the South China Sea to establish good relations with South-East Asian countries. China has declared itself an ally of Russia, and China has always had a strong presence in this region, especially in countries like Singapore with a large Chinese population. This has led to some nations being in the crosshairs between China and the US, who have taken starkly opposing sides in this conflict. Morgan Stanley created revised growth projections for Singapore and the Philippines which have both backed the West and imposed sanctions against Russia. Some nations in Southeast Asia have been politically troubled, and an extension of an olive branch from either side could convince them to side with them. South-East Asia finds itself divided over Russia, with some countries too economically weak or even politically unwilling to take a stance against Russia, while others balance the fine line between trying not to anger China and their ally Russia while improving relations with the economically prosperous Western democracies.

What sources do you currently use for information and updates on the international situation? 

Common answers included New York Times, BBC, Al Jazeera, The Economist, CNA, Bloomberg and the Wall Street Journal. 

How far do you believe that these sources can be trusted to be true and unbiased in giving information?

Student 1: For the most part, I believe that most of these sources are rather biased except probably CNA. CNN and BBC news are American and British news companies respectively. Looking at the geopolitical stage, both America and Britain stand firmly against Russia and offer a lot of support to Ukraine, this can even be traced down historically as America and Britain were staunch allies against the now-defunct Soviet Union which would only make sense for both countries to spread a lot of negative news against Russia to entice audiences to stand against Russia. CNA is a neutral source of information mostly due to how as of now, Singapore, which hosts the broadcasting network is much less affected and more inclined on giving a neutral standpoint on the situation.

Student 2: All of these news sources are reputable for excellent journalism. The Economist and WSJ give opinions that might be slightly biased, but the information they give is analytical and of high quality, and I evaluate these sources before forming my own opinions based on fact and analysis.

Student 3: Every news source comes with biases in ideology and political motivations. There is no source that is immune to such biases. This is why it is important to expose oneself to a variety of news sources.

How do you think the situation is going to unfold in the foreseeable future? 

Student 1: Luckily, Russia won’t use nukes at all and has said unless their sovereignty is violated it won’t be used. However, the economic impacts will continue for millions of Ukrainians displaced by the war, millions in Russia and millions in Europe along with social and other impacts of the war. Damaged Infrastructure will affect the Ukrainian and Russian Economies and Putin will still spew propaganda to its people.  However, this action taken by Putin will have considerable consequences for the world, undoing almost 40 years of economic progress in a single week.

Student 2: I anticipate no western military action, only aid, considering China’s ambiguous position in this conflict and how the United States intends on keeping a tacit status quo in regards to the unstable nuclear peace between the East and the West. My main concerns revolve around future actions taken referencing the Russo-Ukrainian War, like China overstepping its boundaries with Taiwan, Hong Kong or the Indian border, which still rests in conflict.

Student 3: The future is highly unpredictable and cloudy for most but from what I observe, I believe that this war will take two paths. The first is a possible ceasefire due to the poor performance of the Russian military as well as the growing calls for the war to end worldwide which is as of now, the best possible dialogue that we can have. The second option is, well,  a more depressing option which would mean that this war would only be one of many wars which will unfold due to the instability created by the declaration of war against Ukraine. As I said before, the situation is nevertheless highly unpredictable and could take a turn for the worst or best any time soon.

Student 4: I don’t expect any considerable military action from the USA or other western nations but I suppose more economic sanctions and repercussions for Russia are to follow. We can only hope that organisations like the UN and smaller regional councils succeed in peace talks to prevent further repetition of history.

We hope that this wide range of student opinions regarding this pressing matter presented you with interesting new opinions and perspectives to consider while you continue to grasp the ever-changing situation. 

Farewell!