Critic on Russia - Ukraine War
The ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict is a major source of anxiety for the international
community. The march of Russian soldiers to Mariupol has resulted in the loss of
numerous lives and the destruction of several localities, leaving others uninhabitable. To
make matters worse, people's freedom was taken away, and the horrors of the war will
live on in the minds of troops and citizens. To be critical of this issue, one must consider
the aim of war.
On the Russian side, they claim that Ukraine should be seized in order to prevent NATO
from embracing the country. Another goal is to reclaim territories lost during the "Cold
War," when Ukraine was a major Russian province. Because Ukraine is a wealthy country,
reclaiming Ukraine will assist Russia's economy. President Putin of Russia has implied
that the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict is important to avoid a larger conflict if Ukraine
joins NATO. He thought their actions were correct since they would prevent more
devastation. Ukrainians, on the other hand, are fighting for their moral rights: freedom,
independence, and the right to live in peace. They understand their moral responsibility
to safeguard what they value and to stand up for what they feel is right.
In my opinion, war is not a morally correct activity. In light of the two countries'
motivations, I am much more inclined to support moral rights. Killing, in my opinion, is
wrong. Stuart's utilitarianism appealed to me because I believe there are solutions that
do not need behaviors that cause suffering, and I value moral principles and my moral
commitments. Russia had become territorially ambitious, and it's possible that annexing
Ukraine to avoid a larger conflict was a ruse to reclaim its former territories. I believe both
countries have valid reasons; one is fighting for the greater good, while the other is
defending moral principles. The best course of action for Russia would be to make friends
with Ukraine so that it will not be persuaded by NATO. On the other side, I believe it is past
time for the Ukrainians to surrender in order to mitigate damages. People are more
important than the country.
Russian thought symbolizes Bentham's Utilitarianism. Pain is okay in this context as long
as the end result is for the greater benefit. On the other hand, the Ukrainian symbolizes
Miller’s approach to Utilitarianism. They represent moral standards in the sense that the
bigger advantage is meaningless if it breaks moral principles. In conclusion, I believe that
the appropriate approach is when everyone benefits, not just the majority. Life is valuable,
and it should be treated as such. Furthermore, thinking for the larger good will simply
normalize a scenario in which we will be less concerned if anything painful happens.