DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/jirud.v11i1.58952

Dilema Anarki: Strategi Intervensi Tidak Langsung NATO dalam Konflik Rusia-Ukraina

Annisa Khaira  -  Department of International Relations, Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah, Jl. Kertamukti No. 5 Cirendeu, Kota Tangerang Selatan 15419, Indonesia
*Keisya Imani Murad  -  Department of International Relations, Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah, Jl. Kertamukti No. 5 Cirendeu, Kota Tangerang Selatan 15419, Indonesia
Suyani Marth  -  Department of International Relations, Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah, Jl. Kertamukti No. 5 Cirendeu, Kota Tangerang Selatan 15419, Indonesia
Fatoumata Sonko  -  Department of International Relations, Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah, Jl. Kertamukti No. 5 Cirendeu, Kota Tangerang Selatan 15419, Indonesia

Citation Format:
Abstract

Penelitian ini membahas dinamika konflik Rusia–Ukraina dalam kaitannya dengan ekspansi NATO serta implikasinya terhadap arsitektur keamanan internasional pasca-2022. Kajian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif deskriptif-analitis dengan 1 memanfaatkan data sekunder yang berasal dari jurnal ilmiah, dokumen resmi NATO, laporan lembaga internasional, serta berbagai literatur strategis dan hubungan internasional. Penelitian ini dianalisis menggunakan teori Neorealisme Struktural Kenneth Waltz, konsep security dilemma Robert Jervis, dan teori deterrence strategy dari Thomas Schelling serta Bernard Brodie. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa ekspansi NATO ke kawasan Eropa Timur dipersepsikan Rusia sebagai ancaman strategis terhadap keamanan nasional dan keseimbangan kekuatan regional. Kondisi tersebut memunculkan security dilemma antara Rusia dan NATO yang kemudian mendorong eskalasi konflik di Ukraina. Di sisi lain, NATO menerapkan strategi intervensi tidak langsung melalui bantuan militer, intelijen, dan logistik kepada Ukraina guna memperkuat deterrence tanpa terlibat dalam konfrontasi langsung dengan Rusia. Sebagai respons, Rusia mengembangkan doktrin militer modern yang menekankan perang hibrida, strategi anti-access/area denial (A2/AD), modernisasi militer, serta penggunaan ancaman nuklir sebagai instrumen penangkalan. Penelitian ini juga menemukan bahwa perang Rusia-Ukraina telah menyebabkan perubahan besar dalam tatanan keamanan internasional, termasuk remilitarisasi Eropa, perluasan NATO, dan munculnya polarisasi geopolitik baru antara blok Barat dan kekuatan revisionis seperti Rusia dan Tiongkok. Dengan demikian, konflik Rusia-Ukraina mencerminkan kembalinya kompetisi kekuatan besar dalam sistem internasional yang anarkis dan semakin kompleks.

Fulltext View|Download Email colleagues
Keywords: Rusia-Ukraina, NATO, keamanan internasional.

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Articles
Language : ID
  1. Allison, R. (2014). Russian ‘deniable’ intervention in Ukraine and the risks for the broader European security order. International https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12170 Affairs, 90(6)
  2. Anak Agung Banyu P., dkk. (2013). Pengantar kajian strategis. Graha Ilmu. 1255–1279
  3. BerŻiņš, J. (2023). The theory and practice of new generation warfare: The case of Ukraine and Syria. The Journal of Slavic Military Studies, 36(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/13518046.2023.2174525
  4. Brodie, Bernard. (1959). Strategy in the Missile Age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
  5. Buzan, B. (1994). An introduction to strategic studies: Military technology and international relations. Macmillan Press
  6. Ciaramella, E., & Green, E. (2025, February 14). Ukraine, NATO, and war termination. Council on Foreign https://www.cfr.org/reports/ukraine-nato-and-war-termination Relations
  7. Cichocka, A. (2016). Understanding defensive and secure in-group positivity: The role of collective narcissism. European Review of Social Psychology, 27(1), 283–317
  8. Cindy Atsetya, E., & Damayanti, R. (2025). TRANSFORMASI PERAN NATO DALAM MENANGGAPI ANCAMAN RUSIA PASCA INVASI KE UKRAINA: TINJAUAN GEOPOLITIK DAN KEAMANAN KOLEKTIF. Jurnal Riset Multi Disiplin, 9(7)
  9. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.)
  10. SAGE Publications. CSIS. (2023). NATO at the crossroads: Implications of the Russia-Ukraine war for alliance cohesion and deterrence. Center for Strategic and International Studies
  11. Eichler, J. (2021). NATO’s expansion after the Cold War: Geopolitics and impacts for international security. Springer
  12. Freedman, L. (2022). Command: The politics of military operations from Korea to Ukraine. London: Allen Lane
  13. Freedman, L. (2022). Ukraine and the art of strategy. Oxford University Press
  14. Galeotti, M. (2019). Russian political war: Moving beyond the hybrid. London: Routledge
  15. Galeotti, M. (2022). Putin’s wars: From Chechnya to Ukraine. Osprey Publishing
  16. Gerasimov, V. (2013, 27 Februari). The value of science in prediction. Military-Industrial Kurier
  17. Goldgeier, J., & Shifrinson, J. R. I. (2023). Evaluating NATO enlargement: From Cold War victory to the Russia-Ukraine war. Springer
  18. Hermawanto, A. (2026). Pengantar studi perang. Madani Kreatif. Hermawanto, A. (2026). Pengantar studi perang. Madani Kreatif
  19. Hoffman, F. G. (2007). Conflict in the 21st century: The rise of hybrid wars. Arlington: Potomac Institute for Policy Studies
  20. Ikhwan, M. (2019). Ulama dan Konservatisme Islam Publik di Bandung: Islam, Politik Identitas, dan Tantangan Relasi Horizontal. In I
  21. Burdah, N. Kailani, & M. Ikhwan (Eds.), Ulama, Politik, dan Narasi Kebangsaan. Yogyakarta: PusPIDeP. Jervis, R. (1977). Cooperation under the security dilemma. 167–214
  22. Jervis, R. (1978). Cooperation under the security dilemma. World Politics, 30(2), 167–214. https://doi.org/10.2307/2009958
  23. Karaganov, S. (2022). The new world order and Russia’s role in it. Russia in Global Affairs, 20(3), 5–22
  24. Kofman, M., & Fink, A. (2020). Russian military strategy: Core tenets and operational concepts. Washington, DC: CNA
  25. Kukla, M. J., & Batta, A. (2026). A new security framework for nato’s eastern flank. The US Army War College https://doi.org/10.55540/0031-1723.3395 Quarterly: Parameters, 56(2)
  26. Kulesa, L., & Raynova, D. (2023). Rebuilding European security architecture after the Ukraine war. European Leadership Network Policy Brief
  27. Lanoszka, A., & Hunzeker, M. (2022). Conventional deterrence and the future of NATO’s eastern flank. Journal of Strategic Studies, 45(2), 179–210. 26 https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2021.1897374
  28. Mankoff, J. (2022). Empires of Eurasia: How imperial legacies shape international security. New Haven: Yale University Press. Marchlewska, M.,
  29. Cichocka, A., Łozowski, F., Górska, P., & Winiewski, M. (2019). In search of an imaginary enemy: Catholic collective narcissism and the endorsement of gender conspiracy beliefs. The Journal of Social Psychology, 159(6), 766--779
  30. McDermott, R. (2017). Russia’s conventional armed forces and the Georgian war. Washington, DC: Jamestown Foundation
  31. Mearsheimer, J. J. (2014). Why the Ukraine crisis is the West’s fault: The liberal delusions that provoked Putin. Foreign Affairs, 93(5), 77–89
  32. Mearsheimer, J. J. (2014). Why the Ukraine crisis is the West’s fault. Foreign Affairs, 93(5), 77–89
  33. Mearsheimer, J. J. (2014, September/October). Why the Ukraine crisis is the West’s fault: The liberal delusions that provoked Putin. Foreign Affairs, 93(5), 77–89
  34. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.)
  35. SAGE Publications. Miller, A. E., & Josephs, L. (2009). Whiteness as pathological narcissism. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 45(1), 93–119
  36. Mills, C., & Brian, P. (n.d.). Post-conflict reconstruction assistance to Ukraine . House of Common Library. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-9728/CBP-9728.pdf (2024)
  37. Muhsin, A. (2026). Peran Kerjasama Nato dan Ukraina Terhadap Keamanan Ukraina
  38. Odgaard, L. (2007). The balance of power in Asia-Pacific security: US-China policies on regional order. Routledge
  39. Ozgoeker, U. (2017). NATO and Russia’s security dilemma within the European Union’s far neighbors. Journal of Social Sciences
  40. Pant, H. V., & Super, J. (2023). The Russia-China partnership and the transformation of global order. Asian Security, https://doi.org/10.1080/14799855.2022.2134556 19(2), 123–141
  41. Perkuhn, R., & Overhaus, M. (2023). European defence integration after Ukraine: The return of territoriality. European Security, https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2023.2208310
  42. RAND Corporation. (2023). After Ukraine: NATO’s strategic adaptation and European security architecture
  43. Sokov, N. (2020). Russia’s nuclear doctrine. Russian Politics, 5(3), 417–434. Sugiyono. (2019). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta
  44. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Tril, M. (2025, November 5). NATO confirms $60 bn Ukraine aid package for 2026, double of country’s self-funding capacity. Euromaidan Press
  45. Addison-Wesley. Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics
  46. Addison-Wesley. Waltz, K. N. (2018). Man, the state, and war: A theoretical analysis. Columbia University Press
  47. Wemer, D. A., & Pollock, J. (2023). The NATO-Ukraine relationship after the Vilnius summit: Implications for European security. Atlantic Council
  48. Wilk, K., & Antczak-Barzan, A. (2023). Poland’s defence transformation: From consumer to producer of security. Polish Institute of International Affairs PISM Policy Paper, 12
  49. Zed, M. (2014). Metode penelitian kepustakaan. Yayasan Obor Indonesia

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update:

No citation recorded.