ESSAY PRIZE WINNER AI, realism and the Ukraine conflict

Grace Cartman critiques an artificial intelligence generated account of the origins of the RussoUkraine War.

Through a realist lens, I will examine ChatGPT’s essay regarding the factors behind the Russo-Ukraine War. ChatGPT argues that the war is multifaceted with various factors. It discusses historical and cultural aspects, emphasising that Russia never accepted Ukraine’s sovereignty and that Ukraine’s ethnic divide has created tension. It considers material factors, such as NATO’s expansion, which Russia sees as threatening, and the economic and geopolitical significance of Ukraine for Russia. Nationalism is considered as integral to Ukraine’s resistance, whereas Russia used it as a justification for the war. It addresses international responses, focusing on sanctions.

I will argue using realism that the main factor was the security threat posed by NATO expansion, which prompted Russia to seek security by maximising its relative power through Ukraine. I will also engage with economic and geopolitical factors and argue against ChatGPT’s non-material factors. Realists agree that states are self-interested and that survival is their main goal. States must be self-reliant to survive within the anarchical international system. Power is exercised in relation to other entities and states are interested in relative material power.1

Realists would agree with ChatGPT that NATO’s expansion created a security threat for Russia, as it made them relatively weaker than NATO states, particularly the United States as a dominant power, and caused them to lose regional influence. NATO expanded after the Soviet Union dissolved, with Poland,

Hungary and Czechia joining in 1999, and others in 2004.² In 2008, NATO issued a statement favouring Georgia and Ukraine joining the alliance.³ Russia retaliated by invading Georgia later that year, and annexing Crimea in 2014, commencing the current war.⁴ This timeline supports NATO expansion as the main factor, and the annexation can be seen as an effort to demonstrate Russian power — pertaining to political scientist Hans Morgenthau’s power pattern of ‘prestige’ — and unwillingness to yield Ukraine to NATO.⁵ However, NATO continued expanding and by 2019 Ukrainian accession to NATO and the European Union seemed inevitable.⁶

Due to the uncertainty about other states’ intentions within the anarchic system, Russia assumed the worst of NATO’s expansion and invaded Ukraine in 2022, intensifying the war.⁷ This was done to increase their relative power vis-à-vis NATO states and prevent Ukraine’s accession to NATO, which would relatively weaken Russia further. Geopolitical ambitions are linked with NATO expansion. Realists would agree that Russia’s actions in Ukraine convey attempts to ‘reassert its dominance’ in the region but would see this not only because of the Soviet Union’s collapse, which lost Russia influence in the region, but also as a means of counterbalancing NATO’s expansion, which weakened their regional influence further.

Ukraine’s integration into the European Union and NATO would cause material losses for Russia, as it would weaken Russian trade and decrease Ukraine’s economic dependence on Russia. While realists would agree that Ukraine has traditionally been economically dependent on Russia, the ChatGPT essay omits to mention that this dependence decreased after the Crimean annexation, with Ukraine developing many sectors and increasingly being recognised as an important economy with great potential.⁸ Russia wants to prevent Ukraine from integrating with the European Union and NATO so it can maintain its influence in that country and take its wealth, counterbalancing NATO’s expansion by increasing Russia’s material capabilities.

Invasion excuses

Realists would disagree with ChatGPT’s inclusion of historical and cultural factors, arguing that Putin’s claims about protect- ing the Russian-speaking population in Ukraine and his claim that Ukraine is part of Russia’s identity are excuses. For realists, these cannot be factors because states are self-interested and motivated by power, not cultural ties.⁹ ChatGPT asserts that ethnic diversity in Ukraine has caused tension, and that the Russian government’s claim to be protecting Russian speakers has added ‘fuel to the fire’. Putin claimed that the 2022 invasion of Ukraine was to protect Russian speakers who had been facing genocide in the Donbas region.10 However, this allegation was false, undermining cultural factors and corroborating that they are excuses. These allegations echo those made to justify the invasion of Georgia and the Crimean annexation, where, similarly, Russian speakers were not under real threat.11 This furthers my argument as it elucidates a pattern of Putin using baseless allegations to increase Russian power in the face of NATO expansion.

ChatGPT asserts that Russia has never accepted Ukraine’s sovereignty, seeing it as tied to its historical identity. Realists would disagree that Russia is motivated by historical identity factors, seeing them as excuses and actions to muster nationalism. While nationalism is not a realist concept, international relations scholar John Mearsheimer argues that it can be used as a ‘power multiplier’ to mobilise armies.12 At the BRICS summit in Johannesburg in 2023, Putin defended the war as a counterbalance to US global dominance.13 This supports the idea that identity claims were excuses, that have not been sustained for the duration of the war, with Putin now attempting to justify it for what it is: an attempt to increase Russia’s relative power.

A realist understands the international responses to make sense within their balance of power theory. ChatGPT states that sanctions imposed on Russia are a response to Russian actions in Ukraine, seemingly implying their human rights breaches. For realists, states disregard international law.14 Realists would understand US sanctions as an effort by the United States to maintain dominant status by balancing Ukraine against Russia to prevent it from gaining more power and threatening the United States and its allies. European sanctions would be understood similarly, given that a stronger Russia could directly threaten them. This realist argument is strengthened because many Western powers, particularly the United States, are inconsistent in their efforts to oppose illiberal states, sometimes ignoring human rights breaches when those states do not constitute a threat to Western interests.15 Thus, the United States and its allies are imposing sanctions in order to prevent Russia from becoming a regional hegemon, which would constitute a real threat.

ChatGPT’s multifaceted approach to the factors behind the Russo-Ukraine War is wrong from a realist perspective. The primary factor behind the war was the security threat posed to Russia by NATO expansion, prompting Vladimir Putin to seek security by maximising Russia’s relative power through Ukraine and preventing that country’s accession to NATO. Russia’s claims that Ukraine is part of Russian identity and that the war is about protecting Russians in Ukraine are merely excuses to justify Russia’s actions.

Grace Cartman is a second-year student studying law, international relations and French at Victoria University of Wellington. This essay won the 2024 NZIIA essay prize in international relations. Contestants were given a 48-hour assignment to prepare a critique of an AI-generated article provided to them.

The essay prize, which the NZIIA established at Victoria University of Wellington in 2014, encourages and recognises undergraduate excellence in the study of international relations, consistent with the NZIIA’s long-standing commitment to enhancing New Zealanders’ understanding of international issues. It is awarded on the recommendation of the head of the School of History, Philosophy, Political Science and International Relations in consultation with the academic staff and head of programme in Political Science and International Relations. For further details see www.wgtn.ac.nz/scholarships/annual-prizes/current/ nziia-prize-in-international-relations.

Notes

1. John Baylis et al, The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations (Oxford, 2020), pp.135–41.

2. Danny Singh, The Tripartite Realist War: Analysing Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine (London, 2023), p.77.

3. Ibid., p.75.

4. Dana Tandilashvili, ‘Classical Realist and Norm-Based Constructivist Analysis of Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine and Annexation of Crimea’, Classical Realist and Norm-based Constructivist, no 49 (2015), p.10 (bpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/wp.towson.edu/dist/b/55/files/2016/06/ SPRING16FALL15ISSUEpt2-1jhiif 4.pdf).

5. Baylis, p.136.

6. Singh, p. 85.

7. Baylis p.137; Singh, p.133.

8. Justin Ho, ‘How industrial standards help explain Russia’s economic motives for invading Ukraine’, Market Place, last modified 17 May 2022 (www.marketplace.org/2022/05/17/industrial-standards-helpexplain-russias-economic-motives-inva ding-ukraine/).

9. Alexander Bukh, ‘Realism/Neo-Realism,’ 18 Jul 2023, Victoria University of Wellington.

10. Elizabeth Wilmshurst, ‘Ukraine: Debunking Russia’s legal justifications’, Chatham House, last modified 24 Feb 2022 (www.chathamhouse.org/2022/02/ukraine-debunking-russias-legal-justifications).

11. Tandilashvili, p.10.

12. Konstantinos Kostagiannis, Realist Thought and the Nation-State (London, 2018), p.153.

13. Mark Trevelyan, ‘Putin uses BRICS summit to justify Russia’s war in Ukraine’, Reuters, last modified 23 Aug 2023 (www. reuters.com/world/putin-uses-brics-summit-justify-russias-warukraine-2023-08-23/).

14. Bukh, op cit.

15. Singh, pp.109–10.

National Conference

‘Prosperity: Security: Values. New Zealand Foreign and Trade Policies in Contested Spaces’

12 June 2025

Venue: Tākina Wellington Convention & Exhibition Centre