ROME. “Behind this war there was a personal cause, which can be framed in a sort of revenge to cancel what happened in 2014 with Euromajdan and the deposition of Yanukovich (the former Ukrainian pro-Russian president), and also, perhaps, for the ambition of Putin to go down in history as the Russian leader who brings Ukraine back under the control of Moscow, ”he said Stampa.it Professor Giorgio Cella, professor at the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, international politics analyst, author of the book “History and geopolitics of the Ukrainian crisis. From Kievan Rus’ to today ”(Carocci Editore).
Wishfulness
“This is at least in the ambitions, since we have seen how much more difficult and problematic than expected this military adventure has turned out: as few predicted the Russian invasion of the country on a large scale, even less did they foresee such a fierce and geographically homogeneous Ukrainian armed resistance in the country. – continues Professor Cella-. So two concepts so far to keep in mind in this bad story: predictability and continuous return of historical issues and reasons or, if you like, of the exploitation of history ».
The origin of the invasion
“The decision of a large-scale military offensive in Ukraine was an option that took the analyst community by surprise, many more expected some military action limited to the Donbass in order to make them independent and perhaps then annexed to the Russian Federation. underlines the historian Cella-. In the book, which I began writing as a doctoral thesis at the time of the first Ukrainian crisis in 2014, it does not deal with the current crises, stopping in an articulated reconstruction over the millennia right in 2014, with Euromajdan ». The study of history in this case, adds the professor of the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, “serves to determine the reasons and causes of the global friction between the West and Russia, but we see no direct cause that justifies or reasons this terrifying military offensive. Time will give us historians and analysts more elements to understand what happened, what pushed Putin to such a surprising, unpredictable, violent gamble ».
The geopolitical and religious framework
«The Ukrainian religious scene is quite varied, in perfect coherence with that intrinsic nature of a land crossroads, a synthesis of various cultural backgrounds settled there over the centuries, the millennia- emphasizes Professor Cella-. The Greek-Catholic “sui iuris” church is one of the identitarian-confessional faces of today’s Ukraine, traditionally disliked by Moscow and the Russian Orthodox Church, as the bearer of European, Latin and Catholic cultural demands. The rest of religious Ukraine is divided into an Orthodox church that looks to the patriarchate of Moscow, and a Ukrainian national church that in 2018 received recognition from the patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew, thus making it a self-cephal church “. A move, the Lombard historian points out, “wanted at the time by the former Ukrainian president Porosenko, who expressed the Ukrainian desire to become independent also from a spiritual-religious point of view. Let me express a mere hope, however little hope may mean, that is, that none of the splendid religious buildings will be affected in the course of the ongoing conflict in the country “.
Crime against historical heritage
«This would constitute a further tragedy and a crime against the historical heritage, which would go alongside the humanitarian ordeal which we have unfortunately already been witnessing for weeks – explains Professor Cella-. Pope Francis and the Vatican, in the now very laudable policy of multi-religious dialogue, in this case multi-faith, could also prove to be an important diplomatic channel: in addition to the Greek Catholics, in fact, Pope Francis’s Vatican in particular has over the years maintained excellent relations with the patriarchate of Moscow, we all remember the historic meeting in Cuba between the Pontiff and Patriarch Kirill, the same one with whom in recent days he is remarkably trying to keep alive the feeble and difficult negotiation channel with Kiril to put an end to the conflict “.