BATTLES CONTINUE to rage on in the Donbass region of eastern Ukraine. The seven-year war pitting Russia-backed separatists against Ukrainian forces is reminiscent of the trench warfare of World War I. Several peace agreements have been reached since fighting broke out in 2014, but none have lasted for an extended period of time. As tensions between Moscow and Washington resurface under President Joe Biden, the situation remains highly unstable with the potential to deteriorate even further.

From revolution to war

   Ukraine has become the arena of the most significant East-West conflict since the end of the Cold War. On Nov. 21, 2013, thousands of people took to the streets of Kyiv to protest against the breakdown of negotiations for a landmark agreement with the European Union (EU). Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the independent state of Ukraine has had to balance closer ties to the West, on the one hand, and being mindful of not alienating Russia, on the other.

   After three weeks of violent clashes between protestors and security forces, the Ukrainian government was forced to resign and President Viktor Yanukovych fled for Moscow. Taking advantage of the political turmoil, on March 8, 2014, Russian leader Vladimir Putin seized Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula and the city of Sevastopol. International condemnation swiftly followed. A United Nations General Assembly Resolution supported by 100 states condemned this act as a violation of Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty [1].

   In the Donbass, a Russophone region of eastern Ukraine, news of what looked like a coup d’état against Yanukovych’s administration spread fear among the population. On May 12, 2014, the Donetsk and Luhansk provinces unilaterally declared independence, following unofficial referendums held by pro-Russian separatists. International observers reported serious irregularities such as intimidation at polls and people casting more than one ballot [2].

   The new Ukrainian government immediately sent its troops to regain control of the breakaway region, but resistance there was greater than expected. Although Moscow has been accused by Kyiv and its Western allies of backing the separatists with weapons, funds, and troops, it continues to deny any involvement in the Donbass [3].

   The situation reached another critical point on July 17, 2014, when Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur was shot down by a surface-to-air missile while flying over Ukraine. There were 283 passengers on board and 15 crew members, none of whom survived. An investigation carried out by the Dutch Safety Board (DSB) later revealed that the missile had been accidentally launched by pro-Russian separatists operating on the outskirts of Donetsk [4].

   Just one month after this tragedy, the Ukrainian army suffered its deadliest attack near Ilovaisk in the southeast of Donetsk, during which around 400 soldiers were killed [5]. Ukraine took steps to prevent further escalation and a ceasefire agreement known as “Minsk-1” was signed in September 2014 by representatives from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), Russia, Ukraine, and the self-declared Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics (DPR and LPR). Minsk-1, however, immediately collapsed and the different parties agreed to meet again in 2015.

   On Feb. 12, 2015, subsequent expansion of the previous agreement, “Minsk-2,” was announced; both sides were to immediately cease hostilities, withdraw heavy weapons from the front line, and allow unimpeded passage of humanitarian aid [6]. The agreement also reaffirmed Ukraine’s right to exercise full control over the Donbass region, provided that a meaningful dialogue would be held with the separatists on the issue of local autonomy. But Minsk-2 was only partially implemented: heavy weapons were withdrawn but the ceasefire did not last for long.

Election conundrum

   While the intensity of the fighting has decreased considerably with the removal of heavy weapons, both sides have begun to employ trench warfare. Trench warfare, used extensively during World War I, is a defensive military tactic whereby opposing armies build tunnels in the ground to escape enemy fire. In the Donbass, most of the Ukrainian soldiers are now dug in, ready to repel attacks by separatists. They no longer suffer daily bombardments, but are under constant threat of sniper fire [7].

   The election of Volodymyr Zelensky as President of Ukraine in May 2019, however, has raised hopes of a solution to this so-called “frozen conflict.” Throughout the presidential campaign, the former comedian with no political experience challenged senior politicians and promised to put an end to the war. His landslide victory, winning 73.2% of the vote against incumbent Petro Poroshenko, showed that Ukrainians want him to fulfill that promise.

   Zelensky’s first meeting with his Russian counterpart took place in Paris in December 2019, at a “Normandy Four” summit convened by French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Russia and Ukraine renewed their commitment to a ceasefire and agreed to an exchange of prisoners [8]. The discussions also resulted in an agreement to carry out local elections in separatist-held territories. The goal is to let the residents of Donbass determine their political status democratically, as this seems to be the only way out of the crisis.

   But the Donbass election plan may well prove to be a pipe dream. Experts and journalists have criticized its lack of clarity on some key procedural issues. While Ukraine demands that the region be cleared of all Russian forces and returned under Ukrainian jurisdiction before any election occurs, Russia has refused to comply, leaving open the possibility of voting manipulation. As the agreement reached in Paris does not provide a clear-cut answer to these issues, elections have not been held yet.

Russia vs. the West

   Russia’s primary objective is clear: to prevent Ukraine from joining the EU or, even worse, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). In April 2014, during his annual Q&A TV show, Putin blamed the Ukrainian crisis on repeated Western betrayal: “We were promised that after Germany’s unification, NATO wouldn’t spread eastward [9].” Whether this promise was made or not, the fact remains that the US-led alliance, which was created in 1949 to counter the Soviet Union, has grown to 30 member states, including former members of the Warsaw pact and the USSR.

   Fourteen Central and Eastern European countries have joined NATO since the fall of the USSR in 1991. Four of these new members (Poland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania) share a border with Russia. Joint military exercises near Russia’s territory have increased in recent years, especially in the Baltic and Black Sea regions, which are of strategic importance due to their reserves of oil, natural gas, and coal [10]. Given this, it is likely that Russia regards Ukraine as the last bulwark against Western forces, foremost among them the United States.

   The war has convinced more and more Ukrainians that Russia, not the West, is their country’s greatest threat. Although there are still doubts as to the intentions of Western powers, recent polls suggest that a slim majority favors Ukraine’s accession to both the EU and NATO [11]. Knowing that anti-Russian sentiment is rapidly expanding in Ukraine, it appears that the Kremlin is unwilling to annex the DPR and LPR, as it has done for Crimea.

   The political solution that Moscow supports is the transformation of Ukraine into a federal state [12]. A federal system would give pro-Russian politicians in the Donbass enough power to block the federal government from joining Western institutions. If Kyiv persists in refusing to guarantee substantial autonomy to its eastern regions, Russia sees no other option but to continue to back the separatists and make the war drag on. Critics say such an approach reduces Ukraine to a mere bargaining chip in the power struggle between Russia and the West.

A not-so-frozen conflict

   More than 14,000 people have been killed and 2.5 million have been displaced since the outbreak of hostilities in April 2014 [13]. The civilian population trapped in the conflict area has paid, and continues to pay, a heavy toll. Along the front line, checkpoints have been set up for residents to meet relatives living on the other side, visit their old homes, do business, and access social benefits such as pensions. However, movement restrictions imposed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic have prevented this in recent months [14].

   Ukraine is calling upon other states to get involved in the peace process. “I would like to point out that it is not quite right to say ‘the war in Ukraine.’ It’s the war in Europe,” stated President Zelensky in his speech at the Munich Security Conference last year [15]. But his call for greater regional (if not global) solidarity with Ukraine has received little response from the leaders of the Western world thus far. The United States is perhaps the only power capable of dealing with Russia on an equal footing, but it is still absent from the negotiating table.

   Public awareness outside Ukraine is also lacking. Apart from the annexation of Crimea and the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17, which both received wide coverage and public attention back in 2014, the dire humanitarian situation in eastern Ukraine has drawn little interest from mainstream Western media. This is not the first time that Russia has encouraged and actively participated in secessionist activities in a neighboring country. Other Russia-supported frozen conflicts include fighting in the Georgian regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and Transnistria in Moldova. Given the current lack of consensus and political will, these conflicts are still unresolved, and there are fears history could repeat itself.

Future scenarios for the Donbass

   Separatist attacks on the Ukrainian positions have increased in recent weeks while US-Russia relations have worsened. President Joe Biden provoked Russia’s anger by calling Vladimir Putin a “killer” in an interview last March with ABC News [16]. In the following month, tensions escalated sharply over an unprecedented Russian military build-up along the border with Ukraine. On April 22 amid mounting international pressure, Russia announced it was ordering troops back to their bases. However, Kyiv says that the withdrawal of Russian troops has only been partially completed [17].

   In the wake of the current turmoil in eastern Ukraine, The Yonsei Annals interviewed Dr Aliyev Huseyn, a lecturer in Central and East European Studies at the University of Glasgow. An expert on issues of ethnonationalism and non-state armed groups in the post-Soviet space, he has conducted extensive fieldwork in Ukraine since 2014, interviewing active and former members of pro-government militias operating in the Donbass. Dr Aliyev shared his views on the nature of the Ukrainian conflict and its future developments.

The Yonsei Annals: In April, more than 100,000 Russian troops were sent to the border areas with Ukraine, sparking fears of a full-scale military attack. What are the reasons for this show of force?

Aliyev Huseyn: According to the Russian authorities, these were no more than military exercises near the Ukrainian border. However, we must keep in mind that this move comes at a time when sanctions are being taken against Russia. President Putin wants to show that he is ready to respond to any provocation from the West.

   Another aim is to distract the Russian population from the recent demonstrations across the country in support of Alexei Navalny, Putin’s greatest political rival who has been in prison since January 2021.

Annals: The Russian President claims that his tough stance toward the government in Kyiv is a response to Western aggression. Some analysts believe that the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian crisis is evidence of a new Cold War. Do you share this view?

Aliyev: Some elements are indeed reminiscent of the Cold War. In Russia’s view, Ukraine’s moves toward the EU and NATO threaten its national interests. They demonstrate that Western governments are still trying to undermine Russia and to get closer to its borders. Although at present Ukraine is far from being eligible for accession to either organization, a potential threat remains.

   Ukraine for its part is torn between the EU, the United States, and its old ties with Russia. During President Poroshenko’s administration, it was more firmly oriented toward the West, but things have changed since the Minsk agreements. Many Ukrainians believe that France and Germany have taken pro-Russian positions by requiring that they make significant concessions to the separatists. This explains why President Zelensky is trying to involve more partners in the peace talks, particularly the United Kingdom and the United States.

   Whether or not we are looking at a new Cold War in Ukraine is debatable, but there is certainly a resurgence of great power competition and potential for further escalation.

Annals: What can we learn from the so-called “frozen conflicts” in Transnistria, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia about the future of the Donbass?

Aliyev: The most obvious similarity between these cases is “passportization,” the mass issuance of Russian passports to residents of these unrecognized states. In fact, over 60 percent of the people living in Donetsk and Luhansk already have a Russian passport. Salaries, pensions, and other benefits are also being paid by Russia. The strategy remains to have the greatest economic impact without officially making these territories part of the Russian Federation.

Annals: Former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko declared that Ukraine is “blessed” with Joe Biden’s victory. What can Ukraine expect from President Biden?

Aliyev: Ukraine has high expectations of President Biden, but there seems to be no radical departure from previous administrations. Going back to the Obama administration, even when Crimea was annexed and fighting broke out in the Donbass, Ukraine was never on top of America’s foreign policy agenda. It was always overshadowed by North Korea or Syria, for example. Ukraine wants to bring the United States to the negotiating table, but there are few positive signs from President Biden.

Annals: You have conducted fieldwork in Ukraine and interviewed members of pro-Kyiv militia groups that fought in the Donbass. How influential are they?

Aliyev: Back in 2015, the Ukrainian government tried to push these militias away from the front line, encouraging their members to join the regular armed forces. At present, roughly a hundred paramilitaries remain involved in skirmishes with the separatists. The majority has returned to civilian life where they pursue their agenda as members of far-right groups.

   President Zelensky has come to rely on ultra-nationalist groups to persecute his political opponents who stand up for Ukraine’s Russian-speaking population. Many of these groups receive funding from the government. They organize “patriotic camps” where children are taught far-right ideology and trained to use weapons. Zelensky has been heavily criticized for supporting them. With respect to freedom of expression, the situation is worse today than it was during Poroshenko’s or even Yanukovych’s time in office.

Annals: How is the Ukrainian conflict going to evolve in the next few years?

Aliyev: Ukraine is unwilling to make concessions. It cannot give Donetsk and Luhansk greater autonomy because ultra-nationalists and far-right political parties have threatened to overthrow the government if that is the direction it goes in. A year ago, Putin was probably ready to make concessions in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions. However, the conflict has escalated even further recently, making a political solution highly unlikely for the near future.

   On the military side, Ukraine has no capacity for gaining ground over the separatists. The Ukrainian army is under-equipped and paralyzed by corruption. It could not retake control of the Donbass even if Russia abandons the separatists. For their part, the latter has no interest in taking more territory from Ukraine. Russia is barely recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic and its economy is still in recession. It cannot afford any further military expenses. The present stalemate is set to continue into the long term.

[1] United Nations General Assembly Resolution 68/262

[2] The Atlantic

[3] Journal of Soviet and Post-Soviet Politics and Society

[4] The Guardian

[5] BBC News

[6] European Parliament

[7] NBC News

[8] Euractiv

[9] The Washington Post

[10] Atlantic Council

[11] EU Reporter

[12] The Wall Street Journal

[13] United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)

[14] Atlantic Council

[15] Kyiv Post

[16] ABC News

[17] Al Jazeera