Russia Should Never Have Invaded Ukraine On February 24, 2022, Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, a sovereign nation. This act of aggression has had devastating consequences, not only for Ukraine but for the world. The invasion was unjustifiable from political, legal, moral, and strategic perspectives. Russia Should Never Have Invaded Ukraine Because of: 1. Violation of International Law Russia’s invasion was a clear violation of international law, particularly the United Nations Charter, which prohibits the use of force against the territorial integrity and sovereignty of another state. Ukraine is a recognized independent nation, and its borders were guaranteed by agreements such as the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, in which Russia pledged to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty in exchange for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons. By invading, Russia shattered these commitments and set a dangerous precedent for global security. 2. Humanitarian Catastrophe The war has caused immense human suffering. Millions of Ukrainians have been displaced, and thousands of civilians, including children, have been killed. Cities like Mariupol, Bakhmut, and Kharkiv have faced destruction comparable to some of the worst conflicts in history. The invasion has led to war crimes, including targeted attacks on civilian infrastructure, mass executions, and the forced deportation of Ukrainian children to Russia. These atrocities have drawn global condemnation and strengthened Ukraine’s resolve to resist. 3. Strengthening NATO Instead of Weakening It One of Russia’s stated reasons for invading Ukraine was to prevent NATO expansion. Ironically, the war has had the opposite effect. Before 2022, Ukraine was not close to NATO membership, and many European nations hesitated to support further expansion. However, Russia’s aggression convinced Finland and Sweden—previously neutral countries—to join NATO, expanding the alliance’s presence along Russia’s borders. Instead of weakening NATO, Russia’s actions have strengthened it. 4. Economic Devastation for Russia The invasion has triggered severe economic consequences for Russia. Western nations imposed sweeping sanctions, cutting Russia off from global financial systems, restricting its oil and gas exports, and freezing Russian assets. Foreign businesses have left the country, and the Russian economy has suffered from brain drain as educated professionals flee. The war has also drained Russia’s military resources, forcing it to rely on rogue states like North Korea and Iran for weapons. 5. Resistance and Ukrainian National Identity Before 2014, Ukraine had significant political and cultural ties with Russia. However, Russia’s aggression—starting with the illegal annexation of Crimea—has only strengthened Ukrainian nationalism. The full-scale invasion in 2022 solidified Ukraine’s European aspirations and reinforced its determination to break free from Russian influence. The Ukrainian people, led by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, have demonstrated extraordinary resilience, proving that they will never accept Russian occupation. 6. Global Food and Energy Crises Russia’s blockade of Ukrainian grain exports has contributed to global food shortages, particularly in Africa and the Middle East. Ukraine is one of the world’s largest grain producers, and the war has disrupted agricultural exports, causing price spikes. Additionally, the war has led to an energy crisis as European countries scrambled to reduce their dependence on Russian oil and gas. These disruptions have hurt economies worldwide and increased instability in developing nations. 7. No Justification Holds Up Russia has offered multiple justifications for the invasion—claiming it was about “denazification,” protecting Russian speakers, or preventing NATO expansion. However, none of these arguments hold up under scrutiny. Ukraine is a democracy with no significant “Nazi” influence. Russian-speaking Ukrainians, especially in eastern regions, have suffered the most from Russia’s attacks. And NATO did not pose a direct military threat to Russia. The invasion was ultimately about Putin’s imperial ambitions, not legitimate security concerns. 8. Russia’s Own Future Is at Risk By invading Ukraine, Russia has isolated itself from much of the world, turning it into a pariah state. The war has also exposed deep flaws in its military, with enormous casualties and equipment losses. The longer the war drags on, the more damage it does to Russia’s stability, economy, and future. Even within Russia, opposition to the war is growing, despite government crackdowns on dissent. Conclusion This article does not intend to analyze current peace initiatives from the U.S. or the European Union, but rather to explain why Russia should never have invaded Ukraine. The war has brought immense suffering, economic ruin, and global instability while failing to achieve its objectives. Ukraine has shown that it will not surrender, and the world has largely united in support of its fight for freedom. Instead of pursuing war and imperialism, Russia should seek a path of peace, diplomacy, and cooperation. The sooner Russia ends this unjust war, the better it will be for Ukraine, Russia, and the world. Russia is no longer the second superpower. Ukraine is not winning the war, but has Russia won? Was Russia truly the superpower everyone thought? Russia has caused immense suffering—not only to Ukrainians but also to its own people—losing nearly one million soldiers. The entire world has suffered the consequences. The failure of the Obama administration to act when Russia annexed Crimea, as well as Angela Merkel’s handling of the situation, contributed to this crisis. Slava Ukraini! Luis Angel Montenegro Padilla

Germany is set to vote in the General Elections this coming Sunday, February 23, 2025. The Christian Democratic Union (CDU), alongside its Bavarian counterpart, the Christian Social Union (CSU), seems to have the upper hand. However, the presence of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) adds an intriguing dynamic to the electoral landscape. AfD has not only experienced organic growth within Germany, particularly in the former German Democratic Republic—essentially, Communist East Germany—but has also received significant support from abroad. Among its notable supporters are various European leaders and, more recently, and perhaps most influentially, Elon Musk, who has openly endorsed AfD as the only viable path to restoring Western values and free speech in Germany. AfD has been labeled a far-right party, but such claims lack solid reasoning. In my view, it all comes down to the question of where the political center lies and who sets the yardstick. Am I forgetting Chancellor Olaf Scholz and the SPD, or the Green Party and others? No, I have not. However, many smaller parties may fail to secure a seat in the Bundestag (the German Parliament), and Scholz’s SPD will barely manage to finish in third place—I take this for granted. We will find out for sure this coming Sunday. Economic Woes, Policy Promises, and Paradox The German economy has been struggling, facing two consecutive years of contraction. The CDU has leveraged this situation by advocating for major economic reforms, including tax reductions, cuts to welfare spending, and stricter immigration policies. These promises resonate with voters anxious about economic recovery, particularly in industrial regions, which have been hardest hit by the downturn. While the CDU is capitalizing on this discontent, it’s important to remember that the party itself, under Angela Merkel’s 16-year leadership, is largely responsible for Germany’s current economic and societal challenges. Merkel’s legacy includes: Near-total dependency on Russian gas The shutdown of nuclear power plants Her open-border immigration policy It is a political paradox that the CDU is now benefiting from the consequences of its own past decisions. Yet, political memory seems to be short-lived everywhere. Leadership and Stability Friedrich Merz, leading the CDU, embodies a return to conservative stability. His campaign slogan, “A Germany we can be proud of again,” resonates with voters disenchanted by recent political turbulence. His proposals, particularly on economic revitalization, contrast with the perceived ineffectiveness of the previous coalition government. In addition, some people lack charisma, and Scholz is definitely one of them. However, this remains paradoxical: while Scholz failed to reverse course, the bus was already headed in this direction for 16 years before he took office. Again, Angela Merkel and the CDU were the bus drivers. Public Sentiment and Political Landscape Polls indicate the CDU/CSU leading with around 30% support—a significant advantage. However, the rise of AfD, polling up to 20%, complicates the scenario. AfD has capitalized on anti-immigration sentiment and growing dissatisfaction with EU policies, particularly in eastern Germany. The CDU has explicitly ruled out any coalition with AfD, a stance that helps maintain its appeal to moderate voters while still addressing immigration concerns. However, this decision may force the CDU into less favorable coalition scenarios if AfD secures a substantial parliamentary presence. Coalition Dynamics The CDU’s coalition options are limited by AfD’s strong performance. A “grand coalition” with the SPD appears the most likely outcome, given the struggles of smaller parties like the Greens and FDP to secure enough seats. However, after the failures of the previous coalition, such a partnership would be uneasy at best. AfD’s influence may push the CDU toward a minority government or force negotiations with smaller parties, potentially diluting its policy agenda. Voter Discontent with the Opposition The SPD’s dismal approval ratings and the fallout from the previous government’s failures have driven voter support toward the CDU. However, AfD’s surge reflects a growing protest vote against the establishment, attracting disillusioned voters frustrated with mainstream politics. This trend underscores broader dissatisfaction with Germany’s political direction, where economic concerns and immigration dominate the national discourse. The AfD’s Impact While AfD will not win the elections and is unlikely to govern due to the CDU’s refusal to partner with them, their growing support will lead to a more polarized Bundestag. This polarization will inevitably force the CDU to adopt some of AfD’s hardline positions on immigration and EU policies—whether to retain voter support or counter the opposition’s rhetoric. Moreover, AfD’s presence will likely intensify political debate, further sharpening the contrast between the CDU’s traditional conservatism and its rivals’ progressive policies. Conclusion Angela Merkel and the CDU’s 16-year legacy is more of a left-wing disaster than a conservative one. Let’s hope this time the CDU will make amends! In my opinion, AfD will not win the election. The CDU and its allies will undoubtedly win Sunday’s General Elections—that is not even a question at this point. However, in Germany’s parliamentary system, winning is just the beginning of forming a government. The AfD’s significant role in this election cycle introduces complexities in coalition-building and policymaking.  The coming weeks will reveal how the CDU navigates this landscape, potentially shaping Germany’s political direction for the next term. Whether the CDU can fulfill its economic and immigration policy promises in a politically fragmented Bundestag remains the key question for voters. AfD will influence Germany’s political agenda in the next legislative term, for sure. The return of the CDU is a real political paradox! Luis Angel Montenegro