My approach to looking for sources has been to seek out the newest scholarly articles about the Russian invasion and its effects on the global economy, focusing on the United States. Finding these articles was not easy because the war had started almost five months ago, as of writing this annotated bibliography. Most of my searches led me to news articles or opinion pieces. One particular goal is discovering research on the United States’ involvement in the war and its effects. The articles mostly focused on the economic drawbacks of the invasion of the global economy. Ultimately, I wanted to argue that the involvement of the United States in the Russia-Ukraine war led to the escalation of conflict between America and other influential countries, such as China and Russia.
This research article examines the specific influence of China on the Russia-Ukraine war, giving valuable context to the involvement of the United States. Madumika (2022) states: “The power battle between the United States and China has reached a fever pitch” and “a good illustration of this is the Cold War between China and the United States” (p. 3, p. 6). The author provides information about the Thucydian trap and asserts that the United States and China are in the same situation. NATO and China are directly backing two warring states and escalating tensions in the geopolitical sphere of the entire world. I decided to include this article since it gives clear and concise evidence of my claim and is relevant to the topic.
This article discusses the outcomes of the Russia-Ukraine war, mostly assessing the economic situation in the world, specifically in the US, UK, Canada, and Europe. The main consequences of Mbah and Wasum (2022) came to be higher inflation, reduction in household consumption due to higher prices (oil, gas, wheat, minerals), economic growth impediments, and stock swings globally and in Europe in particular (p. 150). The article claims that these economic drawbacks negatively affecting the countries examined are severe enough to require salvation through diplomatic negotiations with Russia. The conclusion that the writers come to, in my opinion, leaves the reader believing that negotiations are possible without assessing the tense political situation between Russia and the United States.
This article suggests that the Russian economy will go into a deep economic recession as a consequence of the Russian invasion. The estimates they provide are: “Russia’s real GDP will fall by 4–9 % in 2022, while growth will range from –1 % to 2.5 % in 2023 “(2022, para. 5). The article outlines clear consequences of massive sanctions placed on the country as of the start of the war. I used this as an example because it explains the economic tension between Russia and other countries, such as Europe and the United States. In my opinion, it adds to the argument I am trying to make – that the invasion triggered massive escalation contention between these global giants. Sanctions and the limitation of export as a response to them from Russia worsen its relationship with the Western world.
This article specifically focuses on American foreign policy and the relationship between the United States, NATO, and Europe. It states: “One can argue that the relationship between the US and Europe/the EU/NATO has strengthened” (2022, p. 161). Olsen asserts that transatlantic cooperation has increased because of America’s continuous support of European NATO members that increased defense spending. Olsen also provides the peace negotiations between the United States and Russia as evidence for this claim. I cannot entirely agree with this statement because, as Olsen explains himself, the EU member was hesitant to decide on the invasion of Ukraine, which pushed the US to such “unilaterally” (2022, p. 161). In my opinion, it only worsened the relationship between the United States and Europe.
This article focuses on the global economic impacts of the Russia-Ukraine war. To summarize its conclusion, the instability costs of the war go beyond the context of Russia and Ukraine, meaning it will affect many other countries, and there is a risk of economic spillovers from sanctions to Europe. These spillovers will impact “European countries in the sample and the USA while China has shown resilience to the sanctions” (Qureshi et al., 2022, para. 5). This article clearly illustrates the argument I want to make – America’s involvement in sanctioning Russia escalates tension between the two, and both suffer some drawbacks.
This essay draws parallels between the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the Taiwan Strait situation between the United States and China. Smith (2022) indicates the similarities and differences between the two, and that the war could have serious ramifications for the Taiwan Strait – a contested territory between China and Taiwan. Smith (2022) writes: ” Four important considerations for the United States and Japan to consider as they look ahead at maintaining peace across the Taiwan Strait emerge from the example of Russia’s invasion” (p. 89). The United States may have to use force to secure the Taiwan Strait, pushing back China. This possible confrontation shows the negative impacts of the Russia- Ukraine war on US foreign relations.
References
Madumika, I. (2022). Emerging Chinese-American authority through the Russian-Ukrainian war.
Mbah, R. E., & Wasum, D. F. (2022). Russian-Ukraine 2022 war: A review of the economic impact of Russian-Ukraine crisis on the USA, UK, Canada, and Europe.Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 9(3). 144-153.
Nezhyva, M., & Mysiuk, V. (2022). War in Ukraine: challenges for the global economy.Foreign Trade: Economics, Finance, Law, 121(2), 16–25.
Olsen, R. G. (2022). “America is back” or “America first” and the transatlantic relationship. Politics and Governance, 10(2), 154–164.
Qureshi, A., Rizwan, S. M., Ahmad, G., & Ashraf, D. (2022). Russia-Ukraine war and systemic risk: Who is taking the heat?. Finance Research Papers, 48.
Smith, A. S. (2022). The United States, Japan, and Taiwan: What has Russia’s aggression changed?National Bureau of Asian Research, 17(2), 69-97.