Interview with a refugee from Donetsk

In order to gain a broader perspective on this whole conflict, I am obligated to let both sides have their say in this. To create some order in the chaos I asked some people from the East of Ukraine, one refugee from Donetsk and one who just returned from years in Canada, and more Europe minded people for an interview. In order to each have the same treatment, I presented them the same questions and asked them to answer extensively without me interfering.

First interview with a refugee from Donetsk

D.Y is a 28-year old salesman who fled from Donetsk right before the situation escalated in his region. He is currently living and working in Kiev.

What do you think is the main reason for the crisis in Ukraine?

In my opinion the current crisis in Ukraine was caused by a chain of events. The start of this chain was the corruption all over Ukraine, which led to the revolution (Maidan), which exploded into war backed by the media of both sides. As the revolution developed, the Ukrainian government couldn't respond quick enough to the anger which was  brewing in the Eastern regions. You could predict what would happen as it started the same way as in Kiev with the Maidan. So maybe if they had acted quick enough, gotten power in their hands and were able to forcefully stop these kind of movements from capturing these buildings that belonged to the city government, then maybe the situation in my region wouldn't have escalated in such a degree. I can't talk for the Lugansk region, which is a really complicated region near the Russian border with more Russian minded people.
But there are of course other causes, like the events in Odessa. Ukrainian thinking people won in Odessa in a really bloody way which sparked a whole new wave of anti-Ukrainian media propaganda and movements in the Eastern regions. It got sparked by the burning in Odessa. This was one of the catalysts of the situation, people started to believe that these were the kind of actions that Ukrainian nationalists would perform if they came to power in the Eastern regions. They made the assumption that they needed to take power in their own hands, and of course these people got backed by people from Russia. It is one of the reasons that disturbed our region. A lot of people also feel that they are Russians instead of Ukrainians and because they saw the example of Crimea; the non-violent, non-bloody capture of land by Russia, many believed that it would be the same way in the Eastern regions.  After Maidan they were disturbed, after Janoekovitsj fled they were disturbed and after Crimea they thought that there was a possibility to become independent with a fairly easy process, of course it was backed by a lot of Russian media.

So to recap the different reasons:  after Crimea they thought they thought it would be possible to become a part of Russia,  after Odessa the hate sparked against the Ukrainian lovers, so after these situations the Eastern side decided to capture all the buildings, just like in Maidan, but it was with more weapons in the arms of civilians and there was opposition from other civilians. There were meetings in Donetsk, meetings where Ukrainian loving people protested and  were guarded by Militia, but the pro-Russian people arrived in much greater numbers and started fighting  the Ukrainians. Meanwhile the people who were supposed to protect them just stood there doing nearly nothing to prevent the Russians from attacking the Ukrainian nationalists. They did nothing while those guys got totally beaten up. It was very strange, it was like some invisible forces helped them to develop all this stuff, like it was a guided note. Not only by the people of those regions, but also by the government.

So the whole situation is out of control and I don't know who's right and who's wrong. I mean, both Maidan and Federalisation (Eastern regions) were pretty good ideas on their own. Like in Maidan, they said "let's fight corruption", we need to clean the government and put the right people in the right places". It was a great idea but the implementation kind of failed. We're hoping for the best but as it seems right now, the fundamental problems are still intact.. The same is with federalisation of the Eastern regions. We got a lot of factories, we got a lot of industries there. We don't want to give away our taxes, we want our taxes to circulate inside of our region. We want to be a part of Ukraine, but we want to be an independent part inside Ukraine. People thought that since the Ukrainian  government is present,  things are even worse than before and it wouldl destroy the country. They want to have their own government to survive. So, you see these reasons of both 'revolutions' were great but in both cases the implementation was poorly. Of course it's way worse in the Eastern regions, it is insane (long silence).

Well to recap, it's so hard to tell which is the main reason. It's a chain of events, a bunch of inside jobs and just cultural misunderstanding and it just turned out like this.

You come from a certain region in Ukraine, do you believe there are fundamental differences between the two parties and do you think these differences are concealable over time? Clarify.

I do think there are differences between the people of Eastern and Western Ukraine, but they're not worth fighting for. The main difference is in language, but the ways of living and thinking are pretty similar. Of course one side has its propaganda that tell us that it's different, but i know people from Western side and those people know me and it's all so exaggerated. Our Eastern propaganda often tells us that Ukrainians are fascists  and Ukrainians on their side often just say that all Russians are bad, because they are Russians and Russians brought nothing but bad things to Ukraine, that's why all of them are bad. It's been going on for such a long while, it's one of the main engines of this whole conflict. A lot of historical feelings and actions of war are developed into the thoughts of people and keep sparking into new events, it just keeps on going like this. These days, this created hatred makes it very hard for Ukraine to ever be like it was before after all the incidents and the new desires in the East . I do hope that it will resolve, I so hope it does. I hope Ukraine gives independence to those regions, so they can elect their own government and then Ukraine politically destroys the government of those regions because I don't think the current Eastern 'government' would do a good job, because it's not as easy as they think it is to rule the country. 

What is the role of Russia/USA/Europe in this whole conflict?

Russia: some guys I know who fight for the DNR (Donetsk People's Republic) in Donetsk, they claim to be former ex-intelligence officers from Russia. Maybe they're not ex, who knows. They came from the liberation of Crimea.  They came here so I think it's naive to believe that Russia has like they state it  "nothing to do with the situation in Eastern Ukraine", when this whole nation of people is governed by ex-intelligence officers of  Russia. Maybe they are Russians forces, I don't have any evidence of Russian forces there, but some supplies and some weapons are certainly Russian. Of course there are Chechen guys there, but maybe they're just sent from somewhere in Russia, but it's not like it's thousands  and thousands of them. Of course it's enough to cause a lot of damage and destruction.

Europe: there is a part of Europe on the Ukrainian side, of course Europe has their own goals, I have no idea what they are . Some of them are aiding Ukraine by forcing economic sanctions against Russia, but I don't think it does that much, or maybe it does, I don't know, it's hard to tell. They got this whole economical circle between them, Russia and Russian resources and further sanctions would be pretty insane. I do know that there is a political influence of Europe on Ukraine, they provided some small military aid, like helmets, life vests and small amounts of money.

And of course there is a big influence from the USA,  as you can clearly see in the speeches of Obama and the information on the website of the White House. You can see they are on the Ukrainian side of the conflict, but they mask it pretty strangely. I don't know whether it is beneficial for them for the war to continue or whether it is not. I do, in my humble opinion,  think it's beneficial in some ways for the Ukrainian government and Russia to have this conflict in my region. For Russia as it keeps the attention away from Crimea, maybe they want these Eastern regions to be theirs, maybe they don't care as much about them as we might think. On the Ukrainian side there are a lot of people in the government from the old regime, and a lot of activists are currently fighting in the East. So at the moment there are less activists, which means less disturbance in the power. So, in my opinion, I do think there is some foul play there because Ukraine has a lot of cases where they don't take care of their own soldiers and this is actually the biggest support I have. The guys who are willingly to go fight/ die, I bet there are people there who go off fighting in the East for reasons that are really bad, like they hate everything that's connected with Russia, but there are also guys who were summoned by the government to go fighting. I mean they weren't proposing to fight over there and they were sent there without any good support. The government is not taking care of their soldiers. Some of them are not  being fed for several days and some of them are being trapped in places where they will die for sure. They were told that there was no resistance in some cities and they ended up fighting 100 against 500 and only some returned alive, I don't have the exact numbers. Someone in the army government wants people dead or wants this war to continue. It's all a very strange situation because the main minister of Ukraine also keeps spreading false information and telling a lot of strange things. His speeches are very questionable, and if the main guy is questionable, you don't even want to know what's going on below him.

Where do you see Ukraine in five years?

I hope they give the Eastern regions some kind of autonomy so the war will end,  I really hope the war will end. Then the Ukrainian government will politically take the Eastern regions in their hands so it will just be Ukraine again with some differences in those parts, so in my opinion it would be okay. This is what I hope it will be and I hope we will not go to war for Crimea. You shouldn't try to take Crimea back with force because that would truly destroy the country as we would not be able to deal with that kind of stuff. Like, we are strong, but not as strong as our neighbour who took Crimea. This is the scenario that I hope will happen. What I think will truly happen is that the war will continue, winter will come and the army will become two or three times as expensive, so Ukraine will have a lot of economical troubles and life is going to be really hard and everything is just going to be really  bad from that point on, even much worse than it is right now. I really hope that the Eastern regions will not go to war outside of Donetsk and Lugansk. I hope it's everything that they want. It might not be like that because of the incidents in Odessa, it's like a symbol to them so they might remember that, and in Charkiv there are a lot of activists, but they were forced down by the Ukrainian activists and militia so a lot of them went to my region and a lot of Russian nationalistic organisations who are now fighting in Donetsk came from Charkiv. There is for sure an underground movement in those cities, so something might sprung out of those movements. I hope to god this won't happen because it will just tear everything apart. I hope the people will deal with it in some way, but I am afraid my hopes don't seem very realistic at the moment.

What is your opinion on the new Porosjenko government?

Well, it's hard to tell. For starters, I don't think the people who are now in charge would be this popular in normal situations. The events of the last couple of months/years made people move to more extreme ideas.  This new government after Maidan has made a lot of bad decisions and they were too busy distributing power and influences among each other and lost sight of what was happening in the Eastern regions. I think they were led by other desires than the desire for Ukraine to be well. But honestly, I am often confused by this new government.  We're so easily influenced by propaganda that in the end we don't know who's telling the truth and who's lying. But  after any cease fire or other things that might stop the war, I  call my brother in law and ask "has the bombings stopped?", and they say "no it's still continuing" and when I call him again after a few hours with the same question, his answer is also the same. It's hard to tell who's attacking who, I often get the idea that most of the people in this war have no idea who they're firing at. A lot of infrastructure like hospitals, schools and kinder gardens are destroyed. All places where there are no DNR forces, but some rockets are still landing there for no reason. You might have a bad aim, but if you have bad aim for more than one month you should consider stopping (laughs). So the reasons behind those bombings might be different, maybe they want to destroy the infrastructure? Like a lot of Ukrainians believe that the DNR forces destroy the city themselves, they drive around the city and destroy the buildings themselves and of course most of people who live in Donetsk think that it's the Ukrainian army. I don't think you can blame one side or the other, every side has a part in this conflict, but if the Ukrainian army is truly responsible for these random bombings than the people in charge should be held accountable for that. The army told a couple of months ago that they could capture Donetsk, but up to today they still haven't been able to do that, maybe these events are some sort of last go-to tactic?

What is your opinion on Crimea:

I don't like the fact that Russia took Crimea, but this world is not ruled by law or honour, but by force. Ukraine became weak and Russia took Crimea from us. I don't think that they saved Crimea from something, but most people in Crimea want to be a part of Russia. However, this doesn't give Russia the permission to just take it. So no, I don't support this action. It wasn't legal and I don't think it's going to be good for Crimea in the long run, but I might be wrong. I was in Crimea lately and a lot of people feel good that the Russians came. They think Russia is better for them. I don't like it but I hope the Ukraine will only fight politically for Crimea because I really think that something else will  just destroy the country completely.