The path of the Donbass: when the republic will be part of Ukraine
Donbass will be part of Ukraine. This version of the development of events, so unpopular in the patriotic environment of Russia and the Donbass, has today become the basis of the "state" policy of the two unrecognized republics. Yes, nobody likes their leadership, but they just don’t see any other development of the situation.
That is exactly the way the Foreign Minister of the LPR and the representative of the republic at the Minsk talks Vladislav Dane said in his interview the other day.
And this is not a “plum”, this is the very version of the development of the situation, to which Moscow inclined all parties to the conflict during the three years of war. And it was obvious at the end of 2014 of the year. It is unfortunate that emotions often overshadow our mind and suppress logic.
The author of these lines, at the end of that terrible year, wrote about such a scenario as the most likely and optimal one. He was not understood and accused of all mortal sins. Meanwhile, in his reasoning, like the current reasoning of the head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the LPR, everything was subordinated exclusively to logic.
Once again, everything that you read below was generally described by the author in a series of articles at the end of 2014 - the beginning of 2015.
Initial data
The starting point for building this forecast was the statements and actions of the Russian leadership, starting in the spring of 2014.
Point one, referendum. Moscow did not really want him (in the form in which it was conceived by the organizers). And she managed to convince them to remove the issue of joining Russia. She initially (since March 2014 of the year) was set to preserve the integrity of the territory of Ukraine (not counting the Crimea, of course), and therefore recommended that residents of the South-East of Ukraine tune in to dialogue with Kiev.
This proposal was made by Vladimir Putin four days before the referendum and was repeated by the leadership of Russia several days later, after the appeal of the DPR and the LPR to accept them into Russia.
Point two, Moscow position. At the same time, the leadership of Russia understood that there would be no good will from Kiev, and only a military defeat would force him to change his mind. And this defeat was organized for him at the end of August 2014.
To finish off Kiev regime in 2014 was easy. A strike on Kharkov put the junta on his knees, and the exit to the Dnieper was a sentence for her. But what next? Any division of Ukraine, at least on the administrative borders of Donbass, even on the Dnieper, meant the formation of two Ukrainians, and the smaller the territory remained under the rule of the nationalists, the easier it would be for them to keep it in the long term. And that would mean defeat for Moscow.
To clear the territory of Ukraine from the gangs of nationalists completely, at that time it was impossible to do without the regular army of the Russian Federation. It is obvious that this scenario did not fit into the plans of the Kremlin, and therefore Minsk was invented.
Point three, when Minsk began. Today, somehow everyone has already forgotten that the start of the Minsk process was not given as a result of the defeat of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Donbas, but in June 2014 of the year after the meeting between Putin and Poroshenko in the “fields of Normandy”. Even then, in general terms, its basic principles were developed, which were then transferred from project to project, until they were first signed by September 2014 of the year and in the final version for today in February of 2015.
It took Kiev two defeats to understand that each subsequent version of Minsk would not be in their favor, and therefore it is better to stop in time. And he stopped.
How to win Kiev
So, the Minsk agreements were signed. Even then it was clear that they became a strategic loss to Kiev and their implementation was fatal for the regime that signed them.
Therefore, the Poroshenko regime did not make a single real step towards its implementation. On the contrary, immediately after the signing of the agreement, Kiev began to carry out a systematic program to squeeze the Donbass from Ukraine.
The first step towards this was the cessation of activities of all state-owned Ukrainian structures in the territory not controlled by the regime. This was followed by blockades and attempts to completely separate the electricity and gas industry in the region (today the process is almost over).
This decision of Kiev was completely obvious and logical. The separation of Donbass and the suppression of the political activity of its population gave it a chance to preserve the stability of the regime and retain power through pseudo-democratic procedures.
But Moscow has done everything to prevent this process and convince the main European countries that only the preservation of the territorial integrity of Ukraine can resolve the Ukrainian conflict.
There was just a comic situation. Kiev formally demanded respect for its sovereignty, and Moscow shoved back “Ukrainian” territories squeezed out by the nationalists to him.
What Moscow is seeking
The same thing that she sought in the spring of 2014. Dialogue of all parts of Ukraine and rebuilding the country on new principles, which at the same time would help it to solve the problem of Crimea.
Formally, her position is flawless. Russia wants to stop the war. That war, which does not allow it to return to Ukraine. Europe, this position is clear and acceptable. In the loss from such a scenario Kiev nationalists and Washington.
While the US foreign policy was unified, everything worked out in Ukraine. But after the split of the American elite, which involved Ukrainian politicians in their internal clashes, the controllability of the processes in Kiev was largely lost. This immediately strengthened the position of Moscow, which, with the help of European leaders, was able to reach an agreement with Poroshenko (probably promising to give amnesty and peace after his victory).
And as a result, since the summer of 2017, the leadership of the republics has increasingly begun to talk about its possible future in the framework of the new Ukrainian state and projects to build an alternative Ukraine-Little Russia.
US reaction
During the summer and fall of 2017, Kurt Volker reported to his management that urgent and effective intervention was needed.
The plan to return to Ukraine with a special mission of Mikhail Saakashvili looks more like an attempt to gain time and not allow the enemy to consolidate his successes. History The third Maidan showed this with all the evidence. Within a week, Poroshenko was able to neutralize the enemy and was preparing to deliver a final blow to him when Washington threw “heavy artillery” into battle (criminal cases against the Kiev elite and corruption scandals against President Poroshenko).
In general, Washington is trying to seize the initiative from Moscow. The main strategic goal for the coming year is, with the help of peacekeepers in the Donbass, to gradually neutralize the most unpleasant points of the Minsk agreements (for example, the order of implementation of the points). In this case, it is the United States that will be able to have a wide range of decisions, to which Moscow will have to respond.
Up to the preparation of a successful confluence of the political circumstances of the military adventure, similar to the Croatian operation "The Tempest" against the Serbian Krajina.
At the same time, Washington is trying to regain full control over the Kiev regime so that it can fulfill any of their orders, if necessary, as Mikhail Saakashvili did in the 2008 year. As far as he succeeds, we will look. In the meantime, Kiev and Washington agree that more attention should be paid to the re-equipment of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
This, as corruption scandals show, is very beneficial to the first and may be useful to the second.
Conclusions
You should not be surprised at the words of Vladislav Dane and other leaders of the unrecognized republics of Donbass. Their actions are fully consistent with the plans of Moscow, and these plans are not short-term. As we have seen, Moscow plays “in the long” and immediately to the whole territory of Ukraine. Neither the Donbass, nor even Left-bank Ukraine is satisfied with it.
This plan was developed as a whole back in the 2014 year and is carried out with surprising persistence and allies and opponents. Yes, he may not like him, he may seem wrong, but let's judge by the result. True, we still have to wait for him for a very long time.
Information