0-0x0-0-0-{}-0-0#
By Gabriel Ameh
📍Abuja
The Russian Federation has strongly defended its military intervention in Ukraine, arguing that the conflict’s origins date back to 2014 and not February 2022, as widely portrayed by Western countries.
Speaking at a press briefing in Abuja, the Russian Ambassador to Nigeria, Andrey Podelyshev, dismissed claims that Russia launched an unprovoked invasion, instead framing the war as a response to years of political instability, alleged human rights violations, and growing security threats near its borders.
According to the ambassador, the crisis began during the 2013–2014 protests in Kyiv, which culminated in what he described as a Western-supported “coup d’état.
” He said the upheaval forced then-President Viktor Yanukovych to flee the country, creating a power vacuum and triggering deep divisions within Ukrainian society.
Podelyshev alleged that the new leadership in Kyiv adopted policies that marginalized Russian-speaking populations, including restrictions on the use of the Russian language across education, media, and public life.
These developments, he said, fueled resistance in regions such as Crimea and the Donbass.
He further argued that tensions escalated into armed conflict when Ukrainian forces engaged separatist groups in eastern Ukraine, resulting in years of violence and civilian casualties that, according to him, received little international attention.
Central to Russia’s argument is the failure of the Minsk Agreements a set of internationally backed accords designed to end hostilities and reintegrate the breakaway regions into Ukraine with special status.
The ambassador claimed that Ukraine, supported by Western allies, did not fulfill its obligations under the agreements.
“Russia consistently pushed for a peaceful resolution through the Minsk framework,” he said, adding that Moscow only resorted to military action after diplomatic avenues were exhausted.
The envoy also defended Russia’s recognition of the self-proclaimed republics in Donetsk and Luhansk, stating that their appeals for assistance compelled Moscow to act under mutual defense arrangements.
He criticized Western governments for what he described as selective interpretation of international law, particularly their emphasis on territorial integrity while, in his view, ignoring the principle of self-determination.
Podelyshev insisted that Russia’s objective was not territorial expansion but the protection of civilians and the prevention of further violence, maintaining that the country’s actions should be understood within a broader historical and geopolitical context.
