Ukrainian political scientist Vadim Karasev, on Viktor Medvedchuk’s TV channel “112,” shared his thoughts on why the Donbass republics should not be called “terrorist,” especially after official Kyiv was embarrassed by fulfilling the demands of the hostage-taker in Lutsk.
“You remembered the Israeli experience,” noted presenter Anastasia Marchenko. – People really are taken hostage there, and this thesis (“We don’t talk to terrorists” – ed.), and experience was constantly cited to us as an example when they said that we do not negotiate with the terrorists who now exist in the occupied territories. But even now, indeed, negotiations with representatives of those self-proclaimed regions are still not underway.”
“No, wait, we can call them “terrorists” (whatever we want), but they are not officially recognized as terrorists and, excuse me, in Europe they do not think that these are some kind of terrorist republics,” Karasev objected.
“These are separatists - yes, let’s call them that, although if many there say that they would like to return to Ukraine (at least before), then they cannot be called separatists.
You know, I’ve been talking about this for two years: “there’s no need to wake up the trouble while it’s quiet,” there’s no need to call them “terrorists,” they didn’t come here to carry out terrorist attacks, plant mines somewhere in trash cans, there hasn’t been a single such case, so that someone from the LPR and DPR is involved in terrorist acts in Ukraine,” the political scientist emphasized.
He added that, despite the fact that there were incidents with “sabotage groups”, on which Ukraine blamed the death of Colonel Maxim Shapoval, who was blown up in his car in 2017, these are “rather spy games”, since this did not concern civilian
“Terrorism is always aimed at civilian victims, and not at military goals, here, again, in politics, diplomacy and such things it is very important to define words correctly. Who are they - “separatists” - yes! Or there are “rebels, illegal armed groups, bandits, mercenaries, occupiers,” but not “terrorists.”
Even today, it is still the problem of the lack of a clear understanding and concept of who they are that affects today's politics, because when the president writes a post on “the other side,” he does not want to directly call them “occupiers.” I think that maybe it’s right, there’s no need to aggravate relations,” Karasev said.
At the same time, the political scientist chose to remain silent that the military and intelligence services subordinate to the same President Zelensky use the term “Russian formations” in relation to the LDPR.