(I) Introduction
 
There have long been concerns regarding a new Cold War between Russia and the US. Relations between these nations have historically been tenuous. This has been fuelled by a constant competition for regional influence and territorial control. Further, there is a basic ideological difference between the two nations. Therefore, both nations must understand each other better as well as explore potential solutions that might address any existing differences that fuel conflict between them. 
 
Background 
 
The precise history of Ukraine and the significance of its location define the origins of the current conflict. Ukraine’s strategic location at the junction of Europe and Asia makes it the favourite battleground between opposing nations, such as Russia and the West. Although Ukraine earned independence from the then USSR back in 1991, the nation faced a difficult time transitioning to a democratic, market-based society. Viktor Yanukovych, Ukraine’s pro-Russian president, faced massive demonstrations from leftist political party supporters seeking improved relations with Western nations (Smith & Dawson, 2022). This crisis further deepened when Yanukovych declined to sign an association agreement with Europe instead preferring closer ties with Russia.  
 
Yanukovych’s government was toppled in a populist revolution in February 2014 that was thought to be provoked by the West. Russia responded by annexing Crimea, a Ukrainian territory since 1954 (Walt, 2022). As soon as Russia annexed Crimea, many Western nations imposed economic sanctions upon it and pro-Russian separatists staged an uprising against the Ukrainian government in eastern Ukraine – leading to thousands of lives being lost during an ongoing struggle that pits Russia against Western nations and fuelling speculations of new Cold War conflicts. 
 
Thesis Statement 
 
In this research paper the historical background of US-Russian ties and the circumstances that led to the Ukraine crisis will be investigated. The research will also look at how realism theory may be used to explain the intentions and behavior of the major players. In addition, there will be an evaluation of the chances of a peace agreement and compare the foreign policy of the Trump and Biden administrations toward Russia and Ukraine. In the light of theoretical framework, this research will provide a thorough understanding of this conflict’s root causes and the importance of a realistic evaluation of the power dynamics. 
 
Theories 
 
Many hypotheses can shed light on the causes of the ongoing crisis in Ukraine. These include critical race theory, queer theory, Marxism, feminism, environmentalism, constructivism, realism, and liberalism. After analyzing the nine theories, realism offers the best justification for the ongoing Ukrainian issue. According to realism, a state’s activities are motivated by its self-interest as well as its desire for strength and security (Genest, 2004). The behavior of big powers in the international system is frequently explained using this notion.  
 
Russia’s involvement in Ukraine can be understood as an attempt to defend its strategic interests, preserve regional influence, and prevent NATO expansion. On the other side of this coin lies an intention from America and its allies to maintain global dominance by decreasing Russia’s impact. These two countries’ competing interests have raised tensions that could eventually result in a Cold War (Smith, 2019). While other theories may shed light on specific aspects of the conflict, Realism provides the most thorough analysis of the underlying causes of the Ukrainian crisis. 
 
(II) History of US/Russian Relations and the Ukraine Crisis
 
There have been times of strong conflict and times of cooperation in the complex history of US-Russian relations. Cold War tensions between Russia and the US often led to proxy conflicts worldwide, as their competition for global power manifested itself through proxy conflicts. Following the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991, relations between emerging Russia and the United States improved somewhat and they collaborated on issues like arms control, counterterrorism and economic cooperation (Smith & Dawson, 2022). Recently though tensions have begun reemerging as NATO expands in the Eastern region while Russia seeks to exert their dominance once more, potentially sparking proxy battles worldwide.
 
Viktor Yanukovych, then President of Ukraine in 2013, indicated his preference to forgoing an association agreement with the EU in favour of strengthening relations with Russia instead of signing one (Masters, 2022). This decision led to political turmoil within Ukraine. Yanukovych’s government was eventually overthrown via popular uprising on February 14, 2014 (Masters, 2022), following Russia’s response of annexing Crimea from Ukrainian territory that contains many Russian speakers while also lending support for rebellions that helped secure Donetsk and Luhansk independence. The US condemned the illegitimate involvement of Russia in Ukraine and subsequently imposed multiple economic sanctions on Russia.
 
Russia then levied countersanctions on nations in the West. In 2015, Ukraine and Russia signed a cease-fire agreement, but this did not bring about a total cessation of violence (Smith & Dawson, 2022). Reports continue of violent incidents occurring within Ukraine. However, the tension between Russia and the US remains elevated over a variety of issues such as Ukraine, Syria and arms control – leading them to escalate further their disagreement. The US has consistently shown its support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity by providing military backing, along with diplomatic initiatives at Minsk designed to put an end to fighting in eastern Ukraine.
 
Russia on the other hand has denied playing any direct role in Ukraine’s ongoing civil conflict and instead blames the US and its allies for engaging there. Russia claims their participation is essential to safeguard their language-speaking populations within Ukraine. Ukraine issues are having widespread effects on US-Russia relations as well as world politics (Smith & Dawson, 2022), creating greater animosity and tensions between both nations – each side accusing the other of destabilization and aggravation (Smith & Dawson, 2022). Issues surrounding Ukraine have brought to light the challenges associated with managing the conflicting interests of powerful states within an ever-more interdependent globalized environment.
 
Ukraine Crisis of 2014
 
Protests flared in Kiev shortly after President Viktor Yanukovych made clear he would not sign an association agreement with the European Union, marking the official beginning of the Ukraine Crisis 2014. He chose to deepen ties with Russia instead, which caused great anger among Ukrainians who preferred tighter connections with Europe. As demonstrations escalated, Yanukovych was overthrown in a popular uprising in February 2014 (Masters 2022), fleeing Russia before leaving Ukraine behind with no government in place; although quickly accepted by most European and United States nations; Russia on the other hand denied this legitimacy and denounced it as a Western “coup”.
 
As part of their response to political unrest in Ukraine, Russia annexed Crimea-a predominantly Russian-speaking Ukrainian territory-to retaliate. This move drew swift condemnation from both the US and EU allies who saw this action as violative of Ukraine’s autonomy and territorial integrity; economic sanctions were issued as reprisals; furthering tensions. Separatist groups across eastern Ukraine believe they had Russian support when declaring independence under Donetsk Peoples’ Republics and Luhansk People’s Republics respectively (Smith, 2019), prompting military offensive operations that continue today to recapture these territories by government troops from both nations to recapture them.
 
To recapture these territories they launched military offensive campaigns which continue causing conflicts today as both governments struggle against each other; conflict has endured to this very day resulting in protracted war between nations which began around the year 2010. Regional and international politics have been deeply impacted by the Ukraine crisis (Masters, 2022). The conflict has raised tensions between Russia and the West as well as raising doubts over Russia’s intentions, underscoring how difficult major power rivalries can be in modern politics while reinforcing diplomatic efforts as necessary to settle any disagreements amicably.
 
Furthermore, its effect has rippled throughout European dynamics with some members advocating a harder line when dealing with Russia; prompting European Union officials to reconsider their approach towards Russia while others demand adopting a more confrontational tactics stance in dealing with Russia than previously planned (Masters, 2022). NATO was also thrust into new discussions over its role, with some nations demanding increased military assistance to deal with what they viewed as Russian aggression. Furthermore, this conflict caused havoc to both countries’ economies.
 
Trade flows between both were severely interrupted during wartime while sanctions against Russia for annexing Crimea and supporting separatist groups hindering Moscow’s access to Western markets and technologies were tightened further (Smith, 2019). Furthermore, Ukraine suffered further economic issues with rapid depreciation of currency value and rising inflation; all due to international confrontation. The Ukraine conflict caused thousands of deaths and displaced millions, adversely impacting humanitarian needs and access to necessities like food, water and healthcare for many population groups displaced during that war.
 
Overall, it drew attention to regional and global affairs’ fragility as a test case of diplomacy’s effectiveness against crises (Masters 2022). Furthermore, its consequences continue to pose threats both regionally and worldwide security – it serves as an indication as to how effectively our international community will deal with crises in our twenty-first-century world. Realism is an influential theory in international relations because it emphasizes the fragility and potential instability in global order, including potential conflict among states. Realists hold that without an authoritative body to enforce rules and norms, states have more freedom than ever to pursue their interests, even when this leads them into conflicts with others.
 
(III) Realism Theory
 
Explanation of Realism Theory
 
A well-known theory in international relations called realism places a strong emphasis on the role that power and self-interest play in influencing state conduct. Realists contend that nations are the main players in international affairs and that they behave intending to maximize their power and security in a chaotic world (Genest, 2004). Realists hold that states function in a self-help system in which there is no superior authority to impose laws or norms and where conflict is a natural byproduct of the quest for power.
 
Realism in international relations emerged as an influential paradigm during the Cold War era and holds that international affairs are an arms race among sovereign states where each acts solely to further its self-interests and prioritize its survival and security. Realists hold that anarchy reigns supreme and believe there to be no overarching authority or global government with rules or norms enforced upon states; instead, they must depend on themselves alone for survival and success. Realists hold power as an indispensable factor in international relations and contend that states aim to maximize it to protect their interests and secure survival.
 
Power can take many forms: military, economic or diplomatic. Realists emphasize the role of self-interest in-state conduct. States are seen as rational actors who make decisions based on their self-interest rather than moral considerations or considerations for ethical principles. Realists argue that states will use force or engage in conflict when necessary to further their self-interests, with power competition an inexorable feature of international politics. Realism emphasized the nation-state as one of its main features. Realists hold that states are primary actors in international relations.
 
The behavior of these states depends on internal characteristics such as political system, economic structure and cultural values that characterize each state individually. Furthermore, realists believed that international society comprised independent nations without higher authorities that enforce rules or norms upon them all equally. Realism has often been criticized for its pessimistic view of international relations and focus on power politics and conflict. Critics assert that its focus neglects opportunities for cooperation or the achievement of common goals through diplomacy or negotiation.
 
Realism in US/Russian Relations
 
Over recent decades, realism has had an outsized effect on US-Russian relations. Realism influenced both parties during the Cold War period when each side sought to increase its power while maintaining an appropriate balance (Genest, 2004). At its conclusion and following Russia’s disintegration came both cooperation as well as an alteration in balance toward US interests (Genest, 2004). With that shift came also an eventual shift of balance favoring American interests that were marked by US actions.
 
As both administrations have pursued policies that reflect an aggressive and competitive international relations approach, realism has seen an upsurge in US-Russia relations in recent times. Russia’s acquisition of Crimea by Russia in 2014 was considered realistic because it would reassert Russia’s dominance in its immediate region while counteracting Western influence (Masters, 2022). For its part, the US has adopted measures including increasing NATO membership and applying economic penalties aimed at reducing Russia’s influence.
 
Realism and the Ukraine Crisis
 
The 2014 Ukraine crisis can be better understood by using realism as a lens. Realistically speaking, Russia’s acquisition of Crimea might be understood as a calculated response to threats to its influence and security. Russia blocked the influence of the Western countries in the area by reclaiming power over Crimea and was able to re-establish its authority in one of the main territories (Masters, 2022). Russia may find its influence and authority challenged by Ukraine’s efforts to strengthen relations with Western powers.
 
Realists maintain that Ukraine’s war is driven by Russia and Western rivalry for dominance and influence; any resolution must take this into account (Smith, 2019). Furthermore, realists believe the US and European allies should exercise extreme caution when responding to Russian operations in Ukraine; any attempts at dislodging Russia would only result in greater tension and possibly war conflict. Realism theory also helps explain their responses during this crisis in Ukraine.
 
Realists contend that states prioritize their survival and security and will act in their own best interests to meet these objectives. The Ukraine issue poses a possible threat to the security and stability of the US and its allies because a resurgent Russia might destabilize the Western-led liberal international order. Therefore, in response to the Ukraine crisis, the US and its allies have pursued policies meant to restrain Russia’s influence and defend the liberal international order (Smith, 2019). These initiatives include expanding NATO, providing Ukraine with military aid and imposing economic sanctions against Russia.
 
Realists contend that these actions are driven by a desire to maintain the status quo and prevent Russia from challenging American and allied supremacy. Yet realists also note the risk these policies present of increasing tensions or sparking confrontation; both parties could find themselves locked into zero-sum games as they work toward their respective goals and protect the security, potentially leading to conflict. Realists suggest the best strategy for solving Ukraine crisis without further conflict lies within practical approaches which acknowledge power dynamics between Russia and the West, seeking areas of agreement as possible between both.
 
(IV) Trump and Biden’s Foreign Policy
 
Donald Trump’s controversial foreign policy during his administration was marked by its emphasis on “America First” and its more transactional approach to international interactions. Many saw Trump’s approach to these interactions as disengaging from allies, cultivating close ties to Vladimir Putin (President of Russia) while remaining silent regarding Russian aggression against Ukraine; numerous controversial decisions taken under his watch had an effectful ripple-through to US-Russia relations as well as impactful decisions that changed course during Ukraine crisis resolution efforts by taking concrete actions against Russia that had significant ramifications impactful results that affect US-Russia relations as well. For the first time in the conflict, the US gave Ukraine lethal military assistance in 2018, and Trump signed the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative into law (Altbach & de Wit, 2022). This action accelerated the conflict.
 
Additionally, Trump faced criticism for his divisive 2019 decision to withhold military assistance from Ukraine, which he ultimately reversed under pressure from Congress and the public (Masters, 2022). Joe Biden has adopted a more conventional stance on foreign policy, emphasizing the need to reestablish US leadership in the global arena and repair partnerships. Working with friends is crucial when facing common concerns, like Russia’s aggressiveness in Ukraine, according to Biden (Altbach & de Wit, 2022). The US has imposed several sanctions on Russia in reaction to its aggressiveness in Ukraine and its meddling in US elections, taking a harder stance on Russia than Trump has.
 
Impact on the Ukraine Crisis
 
Many people criticized Trump’s foreign policy for being overly friendly to Russia and under-supporting Ukraine. Some believed his decision to refuse to provide Ukraine with military aid was an effort to use the aid as leverage to force Ukraine to look into his political rival, which resulted in his first impeachment. On the other hand, the Biden administration has taken more proactive steps in supporting Ukraine and deterring Russian aggression. Many have applauded its decision to censure Russia and send military supplies as evidence of renewed US support for Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity (Huebert, 2019). But some detractors have voiced concerns that its more forceful stance towards Russia could escalate tensions to such an extent that conflict breaks out.
 
Ukraine remains tenuous, and conflict remains an imminent risk as Russia and the US compete to establish dominance over this area of Eurasia. Under Vice President Biden’s administration, however, moves have been made to increase diplomatic operations within this region. In a joint statement issued in March 2021, the US and its European allies strongly condemned Russia’s military buildup near Ukraine’s borders, calling on them to defuse the situation (Huebert, 2019). Violence and instability continue in Ukraine despite calls from Western allies. Millions have been displaced due to fighting that has resulted in thousands of deaths; further escalation remains a worry; therefore this conflict will likely remain one of their top bilateral issues for many years to come.
 
(V) Conclusion
 
Summary of Findings
 
The conflict of Ukraine is a complex one with roots extending deep into both history and geography. When Ukraine’s pro-Russian president was ousted in a popular uprising, this set off protracted conflict in eastern Ukraine as well as Russia’s annexation of Crimea. Realism seems to be the most capable of capturing the fundamental causes of the conflict among the nine theories we have examined. Realism dictates that states want to maximize their power and security for self-interest. Russia’s actions can therefore be seen as attempts at strengthening its position while protecting its strategic interests in Ukraine.
 
One strategy to counteract Russian influence and safeguard Western security interests is to help Ukraine. The problem was also influenced by the foreign policies of Trump and Biden regarding Russia and Ukraine. Trump faced criticism from the West and allegations of cooperation with Russia as a result of his strategy of disengagement and reluctance to confront Russia. Conversely, Biden has taken an aggressive stance toward Russia and strengthened his support for Ukraine, sparking fears over a new Cold War or direct confrontation between Moscow and Washington or its allies due to this issue.
 
Keep in mind that all parties involved have attempted to address the Ukraine crisis through diplomacy, and peaceful resolution remains possible. A peaceful solution is essential – for Russia, US, and all members of the international community alike; its promotion serves the best interest of all concerned. Ultimately, Ukraine Crisis highlights difficulties associated with reconciling differing interests within an intricate geopolitical environment. It also emphasizes how crucial it is to comprehend how various theories of international relations influence how we perceive major world challenges.
 
Opinion on the Possibility of a War
 
The international community is extremely worried about the threat of war between the US and Russia over Ukraine. Both parties have made diplomatic attempts to end their dispute, yet tensions still run high and an escalation remains possible. On one hand, there are compelling arguments that a war would be devastating for both nations as well as for world peace. Nuclear weapons could quickly escalate and cause unimaginable casualties. Such a conflict would likely have far-reaching economic and geopolitical ramifications, possibly disrupting world markets or heightening geopolitical tensions significantly.
 
On the other hand, certain factors make war more likely. Populist and nationalist movements in both countries have intensified tensions, making it harder to establish common ground and reach a peaceful resolution. Furthermore, the Ukrainian crisis represents wider geopolitical conflicts between Russia and the West that make finding peace more challenging. While war cannot be completely avoided or predicted with certainty, I believe it must remain unlikely and neither side should pursue war as an ultimate solution – instead pursuing diplomatic means as part of international negotiations to resolve their differences through diplomatic negotiations or via negotiations as long as possible.
 
Although both parties will need to make adjustments and concessions, peace is the only solution that truly works. It is crucial to recognize that the Ukraine crisis is just one of many challenges our world currently faces. Pandemics, climate change and transnational concerns require all nations to work in concert in response to them. The US/Russia battle would compromise global stability and security by diverting attention away from more urgent matters like pandemics and climate change. Despite worries of war over the Ukraine crisis resolution, I believe a peaceable resolution can still be reached with persistent diplomatic efforts dedicated to cooperation and collaboration – however much might worry may exist regarding its resolution.
 
Future Outlook for US/Russian Relations
 
There are opportunities and difficulties facing both nations when considering the future prognosis for US/Russian relations. There may be signs of hope with Joe Biden being elected US president as it offers the possibility for new beginnings between them – particularly on matters related to weapons control and nuclear disarmament. He has stated his intent to engage in more constructive cooperation. Yet future US/Russia relations will undoubtedly also face many difficulties.
 
The current crisis in Ukraine, which has damaged relations between both nations and impeded their efforts to find common ground, is one of the primary obstacles. Furthermore, rising nationalism and authoritarianism have intensified tensions further, making fostering mutual trust more challenging than before. Furthermore, Russia’s increased participation in world events – often at the expense of Western interests – remains concerning; their attempts at projecting themselves as key players frequently include weakening democratic institutions and standards while increasing Russian influence across nearby nations.
 
Both nations share the goal of finding solutions to global issues such as terrorism and climate change, while diplomatic initiatives to ease tensions and foster trust may pave the way for future relations that are more constructive and cooperative. There are both hopes and reservations about US-Russian relations – with significant obstacles arising but also chances for cooperation on issues of mutual interest presenting themselves; forging deeper ties will require engagement in honest communication as well as commitments to diplomacy and cooperation between these two powers.

 
References
Altbach, P., & de Wit, H. (2022). Global Engagement in a Time of Geopolitical Tensions: A New Cold War. International Higher Education, (111), 3-4.
Genest, M. A. (2004). Conflict and Cooperation: Evolving Theories of International Relations. Cengage Learning.
Huebert, R. (2019). A new Cold War in the Arctic?! The old one never ended!. Arctic Yearbook, 1-4.
Masters, J. (2022). Ukraine: Conflict at the crossroads of Europe and Russia. Council on Foreign Relations, 1.
Smith, N. R. (2019). A new cold war?: Assessing the current US-Russia relationship. Springer.
Smith, N. R., & Dawson, G. (2022). Mearsheimer, realism, and the Ukraine war. Analyse & Kritik, 44(2), 175-200.
Walt, S. M. (2022). An international relations theory guide to the war in Ukraine. world, 2, 39.