A recent public opinion survey by the Sofia Center for Social Research reflects this confusion and demonstrates the pitfalls of reading too much into surveys taken in desperate times. Just like it is likely that Shakespeare’s King Richard (who – in the midst of battle – offered to exchange his kingdom for a horse) would have reconsidered his offer on calmer reflection, so it is likely that popular surveys made in difficult times may not be a fair reflection of public sentiment or a basis for policy decisions . The Sofia survey shows that 48.5% of Ukrainians consider ending the war to be the nation’s top priority , while approximately 40% consider a variety of largely economic issues to be of a higher priority. Even the one issue that had topped all prior surveys – corruption – was now chosen by less than 8%.
When asked whether they would be prepared to give up the occupied territories in exchange for peace, 61.8% agreed. However, when asked whether – in exchange for peace and normalization of relations with Russia – Ukrainians should make concessions in negotiating with, only 45.2% were prepared to do so. Even more interesting was the answer to the question whether Ukraine should recognize the independence of the DNR and LNR, only 12.7% agreed.
Similar contradictory positions are found throughout the survey, which is understandable because there are no good answers to many of the tough problems facing Ukraine. Even Ukraine’s first president, Leonid Kravchuk, recognizes that there are no immediately conclusive solutions to the Donbas crisis as long as Russia maintains a firm control on the occupied enclave.
Kravchuk believes (as I do) that Ukraine should not allow its compassion for its compatriots to color its judgment on what Ukraine has to do in the near term to “eliminate a cancerous growth”. Certainly, the isolation of the enclave and embargoing the flow of any supplies or funds that may be seized by the separatist leaders (or allow it to escape the burden of governance) should be among the very first priorities. Fortifications and the strengthening of military forces all along the “line of demarcation” as the provisional line of separation between the occupied territories and the rest of Ukraine will stop that “cancerous growth”.
But taking all necessary and appropriate steps to contain the enemy and burden him with the cost of his occupation is a far cry from letting (or willing that) the enclave “float away” into either independence or annexation by Russia. That may very well become the final result and beyond Ukraine’s ability to preempt, but Ukraine should do all in its power to reassure the residents of that enclave that it has not forgotten about them. Furthermore, it should use whatever means are at its disposal to blanket the enclave with radio and TV programs and to spread leaflets from helium balloons to counter the propaganda of their rulers. Until such time as it becomes indisputably clear that its residents prefer to live under the control of a rogue regime or as part of Russia, Ukraine should not cease in its efforts to liberate these territories…..not by direct invasion, but by the use of its special forces, its communications, and its display of a free and prospering civil society from across the fortified lines. In the meantime, as Kravchuk has suggested, “life will test (the occupiers’) talents”.
