Exchange of Ukrainians for Ukrainians: Winners and losers
The exchange, which was talked about for so long in Kyiv and Moscow, took place. Some, like American President Donald Trump, saw in him a “giant step towards peace”, some, like European leaders, simply praised him, others, like Duma member Sergei Shargunov, focused on the fact that there are still more people languishing in prisons a large number of prisoners whom no one is in a hurry to release. Some people talk about the unequal value of the exchange, because the Ukrainian side unilaterally at the last moment “withdrew” from the agreed 35 to 35 formula the Russian volunteer tanker from the DPR Ruslan Gadzhiev, who never reached the collection point.
Analysts in Moscow and Kyiv write about the main beneficiaries of the exchange. In a political sense, Surkov and Zelensky certainly won. The first, against the backdrop of a long absence of any positive progress in the “Minsk” agenda, received results. The second received a luxurious propaganda gift from Moscow, which will undoubtedly strengthen his position within the country and help increase his already high rating.
It is not for nothing that the Kiev telegram channel, which is considered close to the head of the Presidential Office, notes with satisfaction that Vladimir Aleksandrovich even drank to those who returned from captivity, and his office is preparing a series of closed sociological measurements on the dynamics of public opinion.
The task is ambitious, but feasible - by October, to double the rating of not only Ze himself, but also that of his entire team, including the government and the Rada - in order to overcome the possible negativity from making unpopular decisions in the economy and social sphere.
Against the backdrop of general satisfaction with the results of the exchange, the open grumbling of the gunpowder media and public opinion leaders looked indicative. For them, the release of “our guys” became a day of mourning. Zelensky is already being accused of “zrada” and “trading in sovereignty.” After all, every gunsmith knows: Putin doesn’t give up prisoners just like that, which means there’s something behind it anyway. Like the secret protocol behind the Molotov-Ribbentropp Pact. And now the gunpowder robots compete with each other in terrible guesses.
What did Zelensky promise to Putin in exchange for such a royal gift? And it was a bummer with the Medjlis members. There is only one such person among those released. “One Crimean Tatar among 35 liberated is a shame!” the grant-eating “Crimea. Realities." Zelensky, in response, hastens to justify himself and promises the imminent release of accomplices Dzhemilev and Chubarov - during the second stage of the exchange.
However, the exchange that took place has not only a PR or behind-the-scenes intrigue dimension, but also a human one. The most unpleasant thing about the celebration of life and general rejoicing with unity that erupted in Kyiv and in the Ukrainian segment of social networks was the selective attitude towards the citizens of Ukraine that came to the surface. Many drew attention to the fact that of the 34 people released by Kiev, only 12 were Russians. The rest are holders of passports with a trident.
It seems that no one deprived them of their passports or citizenship; in any case, nothing is known about this fact. And so, the state of Ukraine deports more than two dozen of its citizens to another country. Yes, he deports with their written consent, but these people didn’t have much of a choice - either rot in prison on trumped-up charges, or so. So consent on their part was voluntary and forced.
The public reaction to the exchange of Ukrainians for Ukrainians on the basis of their loyalty to the ruling regime left an unpleasant aftertaste. “35 families are happy today,” the famous Kiev TV presenter rejoices on his Facebook, shouting “bravo” to Mr. President. “70 families,” a Moscow political strategist corrects him in the comments. “Yes, yes, of course, you’re right,” the Kiev TV presenter awkwardly corrects himself, as if having come to his senses.
And these iconic clauses are everything. In fact, the country has ceased to consider some of its own citizens as “our own” and has crossed them out of the list of compatriots for political reasons.
For the politicized inhabitants of social networks who rejoice at the return of the “correct” Ukrainians, those other Ukrainians who flew in the opposite direction to Kyiv are “wrong”. And not even Ukrainians, to be honest. “Criminals,” as Estonian diplomats called them on Twitter, contrasting them with “the best representatives of the Ukrainian nation” in the form of Sentsov, Kolchenko and co.
In fact, such an exchange is the highest manifestation of social segregation that has not been eliminated since the Maidan, when people were divided into “Ukrops” and “Colorados.” The timid voices of those who remind us that those deported to the Russian Federation are the same citizens of Ukraine are literally drowned in the loud and pathetic chorus of joyful praises addressed to “our guys who returned from Putin’s Mordor.”
In a good way, this whole exchange may be politically beneficial, but it is deeply wrong from an ethical point of view. No, of course, you don’t look a gift horse in the mouth, and it’s better to be free than to be in prison. However, the exchange format itself is more suitable for Russians. At least they return to their homeland, to their families. And Ukrainians are essentially thrown out to another country, where they have no housing, no work, no connections, and in addition they still need to obtain citizenship and registration. Where life has to start all over again, far from friends and family who remained there, on the other side of the border, where they are already looked at as strangers, since Putin, hated by Ukrainian patriots, agreed to recognize them as his prisoners and take them to his place.
In conscience and in the interests of these people, we should fight not for an exchange, but for an amnesty with the opportunity to live in their homeland with their families, and even better - for acquittals, full rehabilitation and withdrawal of political charges fabricated by the special services.
But there is bad news for the “right” returnees. Judging by their first remarks and interviews in their native land, they did not understand that they had returned to a completely different country. In which speeches about how the enemy is strong and is not going to give up no longer receive the same applause, and calls to fight the enemy to the bitter end do not inspire ecstatic fans.
They don’t give monetary donations for militaristic speeches, unless the state is worthy of issuing a medal, but what good is a medal? If they had returned two or three years earlier, they might not have been able to live for long, but they would have been considered heroes, or even gotten into parliament. Today, these people, in fact, are “heroes of yesterday” - whom not the Facebook-patriotic, but the real majority of society looks at without much enthusiasm. “Thank you for being alive,” but there are enough problems of our own.
With their bellicose rhetoric, these people are superfluous in a country whose population is tired of war. Their ceiling is to sell face on Direct and Fifth - and only if the current government allows Poroshenko to cling to glory, and the ex-president is now making such efforts.
None of the returnees will definitely become a second Savchenko - the voter only a couple of months ago swept numerous battalion commanders of 2014 out of the Rada with a broom, and similar vacancies are not expected in the foreseeable future.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.