The Situation in the Ukraine. #22

There’s a reason most revolutions in Eastern Europe begin in the winter, from Russia in 1905 to Ukraine’s Maidan in 2013. Once the cold settles in, a government’s empty promises are laid bare. Over the next several days, forecasters are predicting, the temperature in Ukraine will plunge to freezing. When President Petro Poroshenko looks at the thermometer, he should be worried.

Ukrainians are seething with anger over the plunging quality of life and the government’s failure to purge the country of oligarchy and corruption, the very issues that ignited the 2013-2014 Maidan uprising in the first place. This is not Kremlin propaganda. A Washington Post article in August spoke of the “sense that last year’s wave of protests delivered little but fresh misery.” A recent Atlantic Council report states that “[i]f the Ukrainian government does not follow through with an ambitious reform agenda, public support for reforms will wane while dissatisfaction will increase, threatening political stability and the country’s successful future.” Even George Soros, a stalwart backer of Kiev, wrote this month that “the general population is increasingly dissatisfied both with the slow speed of reforms and the continued decline in living standards.”

If Ukraine were a stable country, this mounting public disillusionment would manifest itself through an unseating of the ruling party in the next election or perhaps through a referendum of no confidence in the administration. But Ukraine — fresh off a revolution followed by 19 months of war — is far from stable. Its citizens have more weapons than they do trust in their government. If the average Ukrainian can’t scrape together enough money to feed and heat his family in the brutal Ukrainian winter, he will blame Kiev (and the West) and express his outrage not at the polls, but in the streets.

Russian President Vladimir Putin is not the only one who would love to see the Poroshenko government fail. Ukraine has an active far-right movement composed of ultranationalist groups, organizations that combine radical political agendas (with racist and homophobic overtones) with sizable paramilitary formations. Some of these groups, such as Svoboda, began as far-right political parties that were on the margins of Ukraine’s politics before Maidan. Others, like Right Sector, were formed out of paramilitary groups of street fighters that merged into a movement during the uprising. As the war against Russia-backed separatists unfolded, these organizations formed volunteer battalions that proved crucial in containing the separatists.

As with many things in Ukraine, the far right’s numbers, as well as the extent of Kiev’s control over their battalions, remains nebulous. In July, Right Sector’s Dmytro Yarosh was able to call up around 5,000 members for a march in Kiev, though how many of the participants were fighters as opposed to party supporters is unclear. Likewise, the Azov Battalion, which has been banned from receiving U.S. training and weapons by Congress, has been nominally under Kiev’s control when it comes to fighting separatists; where Azov’s loyalty lies when it comes to facing Kiev is an open question.

What is clear is that these groups are capable of sowing immense chaos and carnage, as was proved on Aug. 31, when grenade-wielding thugs from Svoboda killed four Ukrainian National Guardsmen and wounded 138 others in front of the parliament building in Kiev. This attack was far from the first time that the far right has threatened Kiev or spilled blood: On July 11, Right Sector was involved in a deadly shootout with police in the western Ukrainian town of Mukacheve, and members of several battalions have threatened a coup after the fighting in the east is concluded.

Up to this point, more or less, the far right and Kiev have shared a common enemy: Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine. But as the violence in the eastern regions abates, the ultranationalists — including their affiliated (and heavily armed) battalions — are turning their attention inward. Over the past several months, these groups have been increasingly ratcheting up the pressure on Poroshenko, declaring his administration to be an “internal occupation” and calling, as Right Sector put it, for the “new phase” of the revolution.

Kiev and the far right are at a stalemate. Poroshenko doesn’t have the power to disband the ultranationalists (the administration’s response to the Aug. 31 bloodshed has been restricted to a handful of arrests), but the far-right factions aren’t able to openly move on Kiev either. For that, they’ll need to have everyday people protesting in the streets. They need another Maidan.

This is why two narratives are currently battling each other in Ukraine — across op-eds, social media, and news conferences. Poroshenko is exhorting his compatriots to stay calm and look to the future. The far right, meanwhile, is exploiting frustration and anger amid economic hardships and urging people to take to the streets.

In September, IMF chief Christine Lagarde wrapped up her visit to Kiev by praising reforms carried out by Ukraine as “astonishing” and urging Poroshenko and Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk to stay the course. From a big-picture perspective, Lagarde is correct: Kiev’s accomplishments are remarkable considering that it had inherited a country saddled with debt, paralyzed with corruption, and bleeding from a devastating war with Russian-backed rebels. The fact that Ukraine hasn’t imploded is in itself a testament to both the Ukrainian people and Western aid.

But the average Ukrainian doesn’t have the luxury of looking at the big picture. Utility tariffs have skyrocketed, as have prices for goods and services and the unemployment rate. The eastern regions are in the middle of a humanitarian crisis, with more than 1.5 million internally displaced people subsisting on the mercy of volunteers and sporadic funding from Kiev’s strained coffers. A July poll showed that only 3 percent of the country is satisfied with the pace of change, while Yatsenyuk, the man responsible for carrying out the IMF’s reforms, has an approval rating of 11 percent.

Each week brings winter closer, making austerity measures such as reduced social services and raised utility fees bite harder. Meanwhile, the far right’s cry will resonate more and more. Perhaps the clearest indicator of this has come from the way in which some of Ukraine’s bigger parties have taken up ultranationalist talking points while distancing themselves from Poroshenko. In early September, Oleh Lyashko, the leader of the Radical Party, which officially split from Poroshenko’s coalition, denounced the president as Ukraine’s biggest criminal. Poroshenko’s rival Yulia Tymoshenko went even further, telling the Independent that the administration’s unpopular reforms are going to trigger “an uncontrolled uprising that could sweep Ukraine away as a country.”

This is exactly what the far right needs. Groups like Svoboda function best when they can mix in with crowds, presenting themselves as fighters against corruption and injustice; when a crowd is gathered, any imprudent move on the government’s part will be seen as a move against “the people.” Throngs of protesters are the far right’s fuel, and once they are in place, the country has no shortage of explosives.

Under the most optimistic scenario, a far-right uprising would greatly destabilize Ukraine; Poroshenko wouldn’t be able to continue implementing IMF reforms if he were busy fending off an armed insurrection in the middle of Kiev. At worst, this would set off a chain of events that would rapidly turn the country into a fractured, failed state of 45 million people in the middle of Europe.

To give democratic Ukraine the best chance to survive, Washington must minimize the chances of citizens rising up once winter hits. Statements of solidarity aren’t enough. What’s needed are food, clothing, medicine — tangible, visible, and immediate relief, all stamped with “Courtesy of Kiev and the United States” — to ensure that the people of Ukraine continue to believe that they have a positive future with the West.

This isn’t a novel idea. During the Cold War, the State Department turned it into an art form. From the Berlin Airlift in 1948 to the Russian-language Voice of America broadcasts beamed into the Soviet Union through the 1980s, the United States has a long history of analyzing the situation on the ground, predicting the needs of the population, and acting to win over hearts, minds, and stomachs.

America’s current Ukraine policy has mostly neglected this kind of aid. That’s a shame. Washington has an opportunity to mitigate what the United Nations describes as an impending humanitarian disaster while combating the destabilizing power of Ukraine’s far-right radicals. It’s an opportunity that shouldn’t be ignored, because if angry, starving people take to the streets of Kiev, the result is likely to be most unpleasant, both for Ukrainian and American interests in the region. Meanwhile, the temperature is continuing to drop.

“Everything will be ok - Donetsk columnist to ‘Russian Spring’”

Among residents of the DPR and LPR, panic and rumors have spread in recent times. It’s said that Russia is leaving us, switching to Syria, and now they will put us back in Ukraine.

Let’s reason logically.

What will there be after the October 18 (DPR) and November 1 (LPR) elections? The certification of passports, conditional independence, long years of waiting for recognition by the world community, and the situation of “neither war nor peace, with the constant danger of unexpected shelling and the penetration of Ukrainian sabotage-reconnaissance groups as a permanent hassle.

Prospects of the republics in the conditions of isolation

Defense is an expensive area, and Donbass can’t pull its own. In order to effectively protect a 500-700 km border with Ukraine, an entire army and serious engineering structures are needed. This is completely unaffordable, as the republics simply have no money.

Is it possible to do without a full banking service? Yes. But it’s wildly uncomfortable. Citizens and entrepreneurs are suffering. The former don’t have the opportunity to get a loan, and the latter can’t develop business given the modest purchasing capacity of the population. Dooming Donbass to further economic blockade is a path towards degradation. But without recognition by at least several countries, not a single bank will be able to enter Donbass, as its SWIFT will be a cut, without which there will be no ATM’s or terminals in stores.

Donbass is an industrial region. But our industry can’t develop in the conditions of economic embargo. There is coal trade, but that goes with great difficulties and interruptions. In order to develop engineering, revive the electronic industries and other traditional professions, international connections are needed. In the end, for the republics to go the “fast” path, we are waiting for industrial degradation and a lack of perspectives of development.

There is, of course, a chance to live a fulfilling life in the case of a reunification with Russian, which would allow much of the above to be avoided.

But! Imagine how many new displeasures would befall a large country as a result of such a step? And Novorossiyans will be a scapegoat in the yes of some liberal-minded citizens...and we don’t want to disturb our own.

A chance for Ukraine - what in fact does this mean?

Ukraine has already demonstrated utter inability to comply with a single point of Minsk-2. For European guarantors of the agreement, this means a loss of face and confidence. And knowing European traditions, it is easy to assume what will happen next.

And further, if Poroshenko does not fulfill the Paris commitments, Merkel and Hollande will stop pushing him morally and move on to more effective measures. And at the same time they will recognize the right of the negotiating DPR and LPR, in fulfilling obligations, to independence. Rather, the unilateral declaration of independence. If Russian diplomacy works well and professionally (and to this day there is no reason to cast doubt on this), then on the international level, the right to proclaim independence will be recognized not only for the current territories, but for the Donetsk and Lugansk regions. That is, we will have the opportunity to return the occupied territories without firing a shot!

Suppose, hypothetically, that Poroshenko meets the obligations? What will this mean for Donbass?

Absolutely nothing will change. The special status in the wording of the DPR and LPR refers to a broad confederation, and this means that we will have the opportunity to hold a referendum recognized by the world community. And as the people will decide in such a referendum, so be it! The international community will have no choice but to recognize the results of the plebiscite and the new states on the world map. And further - here’s the trick - one more referendum, and I think you all know which questions will be written on the bulletins.

A small remark on the question of exciting all residents of Donbass. Borders. Will it come to be that, after gaining control of borders with the Russian Federation, Ukraine will simply cram us into a reservation and starve us to death?

It’s not going to happen. Control over the border is the last point of the Minsk Agreements, and it will be fulfilled after the full implementation of all the preceding points, among which are the points about the people’s militia, the election of prosecutors and judges, and the armed forces and security services (which includes the border guards). So, even if Poroshenko (or the one that will replace him in his post) vouched for some fantastic way to fulfill all of the agreements, there won’t be any new faces seen at the checkpoints of Uspenka, Marinovka, Izvarino, and others.

How long will the wait be?

I don’t think that we will have to wait a long time. The Ukrainian authorities already declared their refusal to fulfill Minsk-2. The whole world hears this and is drawing conclusions. Even considering the little interest that Europe and the US have in our fates, they will have to accept the Ukraine's irresponsibility as a given. If Ukrainian deputies and ministers maintain the current degree of “separation,” they will recognize us already in December-January. But this process won’t last later than February-March.

The price that won’t have to be paid

For an imaginary well-being, which some just can’t wait to attain today and now, we have had to pay in blood. The blood of residents of Mariupol, Kramatorsk, Severodonetsk, and other occupied cities. Even taking our cities by force means endangering the lives of their residents. Aren’t peoples’ lives worth two or three months of inconvenience? Yes they cost a hundred, thousand times more. Yes, it’s necessary to save the lives of our heroes, defenders, servicemen of the NAF, avoiding victims. They, without argument, are ready to sacrifice the future of Donbass, but it’s better that we stick it out for a while. We will not pay such a price for uncertain prospects, the failure of which is described above.

What if the UAF go on an offensive?

Firstly, they have nothing with which to attack. According to the intelligence of the armed forces of the DPR, they are running a few columns here and there along the contact line, creating the illusion of a serious movement of armed forces. Actually, 85-90% of the equipment aimed at Donbass is of third and fourth category, that is, have been kept in open-air storage for 30-40 years with questionable fighting prospects and rusty metal. Add to this low morale, low professionalism, moral decay, and a lack of incentives, and a probability of the occurrence of an offensive can be understood.

But if by some miracle the UAF go on the offensive, breaking all conceivable and inconceivable norms, those European guarantors under the slight pressure of Russian (and possibly without) will initiate pressure on Ukraine up to the imposition of sanctions, which the country can hardly endure. The last thing that Europe needs today is a mass-scale war in the center of the continent. To whom do you think anyone will trust the operation to force Ukraine to peace?

What to expect from the future

In my opinion, only good things can be expected. We’ve already survived the most difficult times. Let’s look around: integration is not simply going, it’s at full steam ahead! Every day, new laws are made and new innovations are published. All areas of our lives are being transferred to new standards. Do you think that they would do this if they ditched us?

The ruble zone, school programs, Russian diplomas - is this not evidence that we are moving in the right direction and that we are not about to go wrap things up? Not everyone can voice our leaders and those who make decisions, but believe me, before we can go independently, it’s worth including logic.

I want to end with a banal phrase, because we all need it: everything will be ok!