The newspaper still calls it Russia’s war against Ukraine to this day. We believe it’s the most accurate description of the tragic events unfolding.
We have never believed in adopting the Ukrainian government’s description — an Anti-Terrorist Operation — for many reasons.
We believe the description demeans, cheapens and misleads the world about what is happening — a war directed, instigated, fomented and supported by Russia. This war will only go away when Russian President Vladimir Putin stops it — or the world stops him.
Secondly, I believe the word “terrorist” should be avoided. When the word is applied by both sides, it loses its meaning and doesn’t adequately describe what is motivating both sides. While I certainly believe Russia and its proxies are committing terror in the east and are guilty of war crimes, the label “terrorist” does nothing to illuminate the reasons for their actions or present the combatants as human beings.
Thirdly, using the word “terrorist” dehumanizes the person and leads to both sides to say they have “destroyed” the terrorists. And if a terrorist is destroyed, nobody is supposed to care. It’s one of the reasons why I don’t believe in the numbers that both sides are reporting as casualties.
For the record, I believe that property is destroyed and people are killed. The slain soldier was human — maybe a bad human, maybe even a bad human who had to be killed or deserved to be killed in combat — but still human.
And fourthly, on a practical level, Kyiv Post and other journalists have to work in the separatist-controlled areas where Russian military forces are present. To call them “terrorists” in news stories would endanger them and give the separatists no reason to talk to us. We need to talk to the other side, to the extent possible, to keep the public informed about all sides of the conflict. Given the escalation in tensions and the hardening of lines on both sides, this may not be possible for much longer, however.
We have adopted the words “separatist,” “insurgent” and “fighter” for descriptions of those fighting against Ukraine.
We usually preface that with the adjectives “Kremlin-backed” or “Russian-led” or “Russian-supported.”
Recently, in February 2015, we have taken to describing the combatants against Ukraine as “Russian forces and their separatist allies” or the “Russian army and their proxies.” We believe this is the most accurate description. The evidence from multiple sources, including our own Kyiv Post journalists who have risked their lives to report from the war front, is that the military power amassed against Ukraine includes Russian regular army and special forces, mercenaries and their separatist allies or proxies, some of whom are, indeed, Ukrainian.
Long ago, I struck out the words “pro-Russian rebels” because I believe that is a much too gentle term. There are many people who are “pro-Russian” or “rebels” who do not engage in a violent campaign to dismember an independent, sovereign nation, as the gunmen working for the Kremlin are doing in the east. Besides, the word “rebel” connotes sympathy with the other side’s aims, which most of the world does not have. It conjures up benign images in my mind of the 1955 movie “Rebel Without A Cause” starring James Dean and Natalie Wood.
So “rebel” is definitely too kind for gunmen who kill, torture and humiliate Ukrainian prisoners of war and who hide in residential neighborhoods where they stage violent attacks on the Ukrainian army and volunteer battalions.
We also refuse to call this conflict, unlike some misguided Western media, “a civil war.”
This conflict simply would not be happening if it were not instigated by Russia. There is no fratricidal conflict in the east among Ukrainians, nor is there much support for any kind of secessionist movement in the Donbas. Moreover, if Russia was so confident that Crimeans wanted to join Russia, then its troops would not have broken into the Crimean parliament at gunpoint, invaded the peninsula and staged a sham referendum in March 2014.
If you have more fitting descriptions, please let me know.
It continues to amaze me how some people, after reading an opinion published in the Kyiv Post that they disagree with, accuse the newspaper of selling out to one side or the other.
Anybody who reads the Kyiv Post knows we haven’t been bought and could never be bought for any price. For that to happen, the publisher, the CEO, the staff, the readers and the advertisers would have to be engaged in one of the most absurd and gigantic conspiracies foisted on the public. It’s nonsense, and every credible journalist who has worked here for the last 20 years will say the same. We make mistakes, but they are honest ones.
We have consistently taken stands that are pro-Ukrainian and against Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war and the record is there in print and online for everyone to see.
We have also editorialized consistently on the opinion pages asking the West to arm Ukraine, toughen sanctions against Russia and offer more generous financial aid to Ukraine conditioned on an effective anti-corruption program and adherence to democratic/market principles by Ukraine’s leaders.
We strive for accuracy and fairness in our news pages. We also welcome legitimate opposing viewpoints on the opinion pages.
Those who are against giving arms to Ukraine have credible points to make, however, and we give them a platform. Nobody has the corner on truth and our position could be wrong. It’s a newspaper’s job to present a diversity of opinions so that people can reach their own conclusions about who is right and who is wrong. We are not going to become propagandists for any side in this war.
Support for Ukraine doesn’t mean that its political leaders are above criticism.
There is plenty to criticize about Ukraine’s continuing corruption, especially the judicial system’s inability or unwillingness to bring to justice those who have allegedly committed heinous crimes against Ukraine, including deposed President Viktor Yanukovych and his cronies.
There is also plenty to criticize about Ukraine’s war strategy. It seems that Ukraine should have mobilized the nation more quickly and more thoroughly, calling upon the nation to make deeper sacrifices for its survival.
President Petro Poroshenko, while far more effective than his four predecessors on many issues (except on corruption), is still not articulating a key wartime strategy.
He is not leading, but remains captive to events on the battlefield. One day he’s telling Ukrainians that he will bring the war to an end quickly, another day next he acknowledges Ukraine is in for a long fight. One day he’s saying that protecting human life is the most important, another day he’s saying Ukraine will retake the Donbas by force. One day he’s saying Ukraine should defend the Donetsk airport at all costs, another day the troops are giving it up at the cost of horrendous casualties.
Poroshenko, however, is not to blame for the past. It is almost fitting that ex-President Leonid Kuchma is forced to meet with the separatists as part of the Minsk contact group. Kuchma, more than any other Ukrainian president, is responsible for the poor condition of Ukraine.
One only has to look back at the 1990s to understand why. While Eastern and Central Europe nations were racing to reform, democratize, adopt free-market principles and bolster their defenses to escape Russian imperialism, Ukraine under Kuchma’s 10-year rule did nothing to build an effective state.
Kuchma was too busy presiding like a mob boss over a gangster, oligarch state that he created. If Ukraine had an independent judicial system, he long ago would have been put on trial for murder and other high crimes, including extensive financial corruption. Meanwhile, other nations were joining the European Union in 2004 and 2007.
Ex-President Viktor Yushchenko perpetuated the corruption and incompetence.
Yanukovych merely deepened it and became too greedy and murderous for even long patient Ukrainians.
So by the time Poroshenko, a creature of the oligarch system, took power, it’s no wonder that the West is not exactly rushing to Ukraine’s side with unconditional love, weapons and financial support. Ukraine is paying a terrible price today for the mistakes and corruption of its past leaders and for not choosing the democratic course earlier.
Ukraine is also making huge leaps forward today. The best evidence of that is Russia’s relentless drive to destroy the nation.
Kyiv Post chief editor Brian Bonner can be reached at [email protected]
