We need national reconciliation

“THE WAY OUT IS TO MAKE PEACE RATHER THAN USE FORCE”

Ihor KABANENKO, former First Deputy, Chief of the General Staff, Armed Forces of Ukraine:

“The situation is critical from all angles. The armed confrontation has reached the peak. The two sides are in a direct battle contact. Given zero trust on the part of the sides’ political leadership, the conflict is bound to develop. The way out is to make peace rather than use force. This means, first of all, that the authorities should make a mental U-turn.

“As for the Russian influence, I cannot make a credible comment for want of firsthand information. At the same time, some indirect signs (style and techniques) allow me to assert that Russia began to exert influence as long ago as last April, if not earlier.

“As for the peacemaking side in this conflict – in the absence of political will to reach socially important agreements, weapons will say their word. Either negotiations and agreements or weapons – there is no other option in modern-day conflict resolution practice. In other words, this brings up the question of having a mediator who will help the sides to negotiate and force them to make a deal. Is there a mediator like this in Ukraine? If so, why has he failed to show up? This is difficult problem, but if no agreements are reached, the conflict will further grow, involving new means and funds, methods and techniques, and inflicting more casualties. Besides, the mediator should rely on political (a mandate from an influential international organization) and military (peacemaking) force to be able to force the two sides to negotiate and disengage them on a tactical (field) level, establish a buffer zone and maintain a ceasefire in it. Naturally, it is a classical time-tested option. There may be other, too. But, if there is no political will and wisdom, only weapons will talk.

“The crucial point is that the use-of-force stage of the conflict will in any case come to an end, for there are no wars without end, and there will be peace. The question is at what price this peace will be achieved, who will impose it, and what will remain after all this.”

“THE RUSSIAN SCENARIO OF DESTABILIZATION IN UKRAINE IS BEING IMPLEMENTED NOT ONLY BY THE AUTHORITIES, BUT ALSO BY SOME OF THEIR OPPONENTS”

Maksym ROZUMNY, Doctor of Political Sciences; chief, Political Strategies Section, National Institute for Strategic Studies:

“We are now in a situation that can result in two scenarios. The first is escalation of violence and use of force. If the Verkhovna Rada fails to convene, the parliamentary majority does not come to terms with the opposition, the situation will most likely lead to an armed confrontation, imposition of a state of emergency, curbing human rights and freedoms, mopping-up the Maidan, etc.

“The likelihood of this looks very great now, and many Ukrainians can feel this. Many are panic-stricken – they are withdrawing money from ATMs on a mass scale and sweeping everything off supermarket shelves, filling stations are short of gasoline. In this situation, people may equally support storming the Presidential Administration or distance themselves from the Maidan altogether, i.e., care about their survival and leave the insurgents face to face with the regime.

“It is important that this country’s east and south have not yet reacted politically to these events. But if they begin to mobilize anti-Maidan-minded civilians, this will be serious, for a long time, and very bad.

“It is very difficult to say whether another scenario is likely and what it is about. If the Verkhovna Rada makes a certain decision, this will be the best option. This will mean that the country has a new center of power which can rally together the constructive forces that see a possible way out of the crisis. Should parliament fail to do so, this way out of the crisis will look rather unlikely.

“Besides, the removal of Yanukovych from power will not solve very many geopolitical, economic, political, and other problems in this country. What seems to be the best option is to wait until the 2015 elections and make sure that they are free and democratic and power is changed in a legitimate way.

“Yanukovych’s resignation may stem the tide of violence, but it is not ruled out that things will go the other way round. The loss of any control over the uniformed services and absence of any decision-making center may produce a different effect. It is difficult to make forecasts here. To do so, we must know who really manages Ukraine’s uniformed services and makes all decisions. But this is in fact the sense of the game – the true puppeteers should be unnoticeable.

“It should not be ruled out in this situation that the Russian scenario of destabilization in Ukraine, when she loses the status of a subject and is unable to tackle problems on her own and be a decision-making center, is being implemented not only by the authorities, but also by some of their opponents. Are most of the oppositionists and the bulk of the protesters involved in this? Obviously not – knowingly – but they are very predictable in their reactions and behavior. These people are not subjects of decision making. They just respond to outer stimulants and challenges, so the abovementioned scenario can be implemented without their consent or deliberate participation.

“Many are claiming that what has happened since November 30 is not a scenario but just a coincidence, a series of mistakes the authorities have made. But I find it difficult to believe this. If you compare the previous and the current situations, if you take into account how systematically obstacles, challenges and provocations have been emerging, how fast (nobody could believe) they have brought about the present-day state of affairs in Ukraine for no apparent reason, you will agree there was a Russian scenario.

“It would be worthwhile to try to find the implementers of this scenario. I think Viktor Yanukovych faced, at a certain stage, the problem of finding out who was on his side and who was perhaps playing a double game in his inner circle. I think when the president checked his inner circle and replaced Presidential Administration Chief Liovochkin with Kliuiev, he thus showed that he believed the latter.

“However, the fact that Kliuiev has not had much impact on decision making lately, while the circle of Yanukovych’s advisors has narrowed to Zakharchenko, Lukash, and Portnov, has been confirmed. The impression is that the president’s inner circle now comprises only the people who are personally loyal to him and are working to implement the Russian scenario.”

Interviewed by Yulia LUCHYK, The Day