Quote: “Before the army units and the so-called battalions – armed nationalist units – appeared on those territories, there were no weapons there; and there still would have been none had they tried to resolve the situation by peaceful means right from the start. Weapons appeared there only after they started killing people using tanks, artillery, multiple rocket launch systems and aviation. That gave rise to resistance. Once an attempt is made to resolve the issue by political means, the weapons will be gone.”
There are several problems with this, not least of which is that this statement is demonstrably false, a lie. In and of itself that is not surprising as Putin’s relationship with the truth has grown ever more tenuous, but the biggest problem is the possible underlying purpose or meaning of such pronouncements.
The truth
It is ridiculous and illogical to suggest that the army units and battalions (isn’t the selective use of the phrase “so-called” very interesting?) simply went to eastern Ukraine PRIOR to their being an armed situation in that part of the country. What happened in Sloviansk is recorded history, that this early stage was staffed by armed Russian citizens is also a documented fact. Suggesting anything to the contrary is a crass attempt to rewrite history. We don’t know the identity of all of the masked gunmen that seized the town halls and police stations across eastern Ukraine, but we know they were led by Igor “Strelkov” Girkin and Igor Bezler. It is fair to say that without those Russian citizens the conflict that became a war and has now killed well in excess of 10,000 people would never have started. It is not only fair but absolutely completely factual to state that the actions of Ukraine’s armed forces in eastern Ukraine were in response to and not the cause of the sudden, heavily armed, Russian led, seizure and occupation of towns and cities across eastern Ukraine.
Analysing the statement
Why would Putin say such things? Here we have to speculate, but none of the potential answers I have found are good.
One of the prerequisites to war is a dehumanizing of the enemy. Ordinary people have to be conditioned to hate and to believe that the loss of life on the other side is justified, or, at a minimum, can be silently accepted. By painting Ukraine as the aggressor, and making an accusation that Ukraine “started killing people using tanks, artillery, multiple rocket launch systems and aviation” simply just because, without provocation, out of the blue; this is an attempt to dehumanize the enemy. To pretend that they are barbaric animals slaughtering the innocent, is part of an ongoing and concerted attempt to build a convenient war narrative. For many many months it was common in Moscow to refer to the “so-called” anti-terrorist operation as a “punitive” action, punitive means as punishment, the story was that Kyiv’s “junta” were punishing people for making a choice against Ukraine, a complete fallacy.
Another possible explanation for Putin’s remarks is that he is just about to do another “dah dah!!” moment by admitting, as he did regarding Crimea, that in fact those are and always were Russian troops. A softening up of the long held li(n)e that there are no Russian troops there, until all of a sudden, well, yes, they were and are there, but it was necessary to protect the free choice of the people. And the previous lies and denials will all be forgotten (domestically) because, well, his heart was in the right place. He appears to be very strongly indicating both that he supplied the weapons and also that he can remove them at any time too. That is very significant.
A third possible interpretation for this statement is that it is simply a naked threat. In much the same way as the horribly corrupt Yanukovych kept doubling down during the revolution that ousted him, is Putin just doubling down now? In Yanukovych’s case he and his cronies threw gangs of thugs on to the streets of Kyiv to beat and intimidate people, when that wasn’t enough on January 16th of 2014 his rigged parliament introduced a package of draconian laws to attempt to legislate an end to democracy. In each case when Yanukovych doubled down, raising the stakes, the resistance to him and the resilience of the people only grew. He doubled down, but he was bluffing, playing an ace hand while holding a pair of twos. The threat that is coming from Putin now is plain to see: “Once an attempt is made to resolve the issue by political means, the weapons will be gone.” So he is saying that weapons will be removed when there is a political solution, turn that on its head, weapons will remain and fighting and death will continue until there is a “political” solution. And a political solution on terms dictated by Putin through his armed proxies at that.
The political solution requires 45 million strong independent Ukraine to give up the freedom to make sovereign choices. To be a subject to and vassal of Moscow. The “political” solution being demanded is to have autonomous entities, clearly directed by Moscow, who would have a veto on Ukraine’s foreign policies and association choices. There are maybe 2.5 million people in those occupied areas, a significant number for sure, but this is 5% of Ukraine’s population on 4% of Ukraine’s territory, and the actual local population, sick of war, are not making any such demands or articulating any such requirements through legitimate and recognized community leaders. Just men with guns. Is Vladimir Putin indicating that this is his demand? Ukraine must capitulate and allow a structure that achieves what has been demanded by Moscow from the outset (remember when it was called “federalization”?) or the death and destruction continues.
There is a fourth possible explanation, and these are not mutually exclusive, it could be a combination of all or none of these things, and that is simply that Vladimir Putin has reached the very dangerous stage of believing his own lies.
The way out
In response, several measures are required.
World leaders have to make it abundantly clear to Putin that his demand for control over Ukraine’s foreign policy is a non-starter. It is not on the table for discussion, it is not a point of negotiation and never will be. How they do this, well, people smarter than I (who have the tools at their fingertips in the form of further and more meaningful sanctions) can figure out the “how” part.
In acknowledging the aforementioned, that Russia’s goal for Ukraine can never be realized, it is essential to start to dismantle this manufactured conflict. The Minsk agreements are a road map to achieve this. It is of the utmost importance that the whole border between Russia and Ukraine is monitored by the OSCE. All convoys of materials entering Ukraine must come through recognized border control points and must be inspected by an organization such as the Red Cross. In the territories that are currently the site of death and destruction on a daily basis the fighting must stop, now. The legitimately elected authorities in Ukraine must do much more to communicate effectively with their citizens in eastern Ukraine. The OSCE Special Monitoring Mission for Ukraine must expand their mission so that they can more thoroughly oversee events in the present conflict zone, an area to which it must be insisted that they have absolute and unfettered access.
This combination of measures cannot reasonably be refused by any person who genuinely wants to see peace in Ukraine. Any person who creates an obstacle to any one of these provisions, and in fact any person who seeks to crassly rewrite the history of this conflict, is not an agent of peace. But this is not enough alone. The Minsk agreements also have a requirement for local elections to take place in eastern Ukraine, the measures suggested will allow that to happen, but at the same time the genuine leaders of the communities affected by this conflict need to step forward and lead. With a backdrop of peace they must stand up and participate in the process of gaining the trust of local citizens and promise to represent them in an honest and hard-working manner if the people will elect them to represent their wishes in Ukraine’s expanded genuine democratic structure.
A series of doubled down bets, backed not by a winning hand but by a threat of more violence, did not work for Victor Yanukovych and it will not work for Putin either, if the world gets serious about insisting on ending this conflict right now. The time for talk is over, the time for action is now, the war must end, the people of eastern Ukraine have to have peace installed in their lives and their real leaders installed in Ukraine’s Parliament where currently vacant seats await them – they will be welcomed with pleasure.
