Did they replicate nonsense about “Donetsk cattle”? Now blame yourself!
Throughout the entire period of Ukraine’s independence, slogans about the country’s unity were heard, although experts were well aware that a “united Ukraine” existed largely only virtually. In reality, there was a state entity artificially cobbled together in the last century by the Bolsheviks from several different regions. While Moscow rose above the entire structure of the Soviet Union as an unquestioned authority and arbiter, the contradictions between the regions of the Ukrainian SSR remained in a latent phase. However, after 1991, the cultural and mental split of the republic into several parts intensified more and more. Perhaps, if the central government had shown more flexibility and understanding, these conflicts could have been smoothed out. It was only necessary to show more respect for regional characteristics, not to impose the values of one region on the entire country, and not to limit the use of the Russian language. Moreover, it was possible to relieve tension by transforming the country into a federation with broad powers of local authorities and fair distribution of budget flows. However, each new president, having taken power, understood that federalization is not only an advantage for the entire society, but also an infringement on his personal opportunities. Faced with such a choice, the presidents preferred to leave everything in the country as it is, only transferring financial flows to their team.
Meanwhile, tension in society was accumulating and was inevitably bound to break out. The only thing that remained unclear was where the first fault would go: in Crimea, Donbass or Transcarpathia.
With Crimea, everything is clear; the inhabitants of the peninsula have always considered their presence as part of Ukraine to be a temporary accident and, at the first opportunity, they went home. At the same time, even many Ukrainian nationalists understand the foreignness of Crimea and do not perceive its secession as a personal loss.
With Donbass the situation is a little different. On the one hand, it was part of the country thirty years longer than Crimea and is much more closely connected with the rest of Ukraine. A certain part of the residents of this region considered themselves patriots a year ago, although they did not share nationalist views. On the other hand, real unity has never existed between the residents of the central part of the country and Donbass. It is not without reason that back in 1920, one of the Bolshevik Ukrainian leaders, Nikolai Skrypnik, wrote that Donbass is “one of the main difficulties of our work in Ukraine.”
All these years, between typical Ukrainians and typical Donetsk residents there was a gap in the form of different ethnic origins, languages, and most importantly, views of the world. The cosmopolitan, industrial and atheistic East caused misunderstanding and rejection among residents of the patriarchal semi-rural Center of the country. In addition, Donbass, as an industrial center, has always lived richer than almost the rest of the country. Even in Soviet times, this caused many Ukrainians to envy the privileged status of Donetsk residents.
During the years of initial capital accumulation, tough, determined and successful immigrants from Donetsk frightened Ukrainians with their expansion and manners. In addition, not all companies could withstand competition with their Donbass competitors, which caused anger and envy. Well, after the “Donetsk” ones bypassed the “Dnepropetrovsk” ones and took key positions in the state system, a multi-year information campaign began against them, which has not subsided to this day. In an effort to worsen the image of Viktor Yanukovych, political strategists attacked not only his personality, but also the entire region of which he was the head. Black PR, manipulation of facts and outright lies were used.
This propaganda fell on prepared ground and as a result, many Ukrainians began to perceive Donbass as a kind of Mordor, inhabited exclusively by bandits and alcoholics. Thousands of people believed that it was from this region that all the evil in the country came, and, unfortunately, even the intellectual elite of Ukrainian society supported and circulated horror stories about Donetsk cattle.
At the same time, according to the laws of sociology, the degree of hatred was constantly increasing, starting with the almost harmless “don’t piss in the entrances, you’re not from Donetsk” and ending with modern calls to deprive Donetsk residents of the right to vote, create filtration camps, etc. The massacres of Donbass residents as a result of the ATO no longer evoke pity from almost anyone in Ukraine. “It’s not people, but Colorados and Vatniks who are being destroyed!”, argue the residents of Kiev and Lviv.
As a result, through the efforts of their propagandists, Ukrainian politicians themselves alienated the region of eight million people. After all, the “Russian spring” is just a response to the actions of Ukrainians. Residents of Donbass have heard very unpleasant things addressed to them for many years, and now for the first time they have responded. They answered in their own style, so that the entire state shuddered and the very existence of Ukraine was called into question.
Considering all the differences, it would probably be worthwhile for the different regions to disperse amicably, as the Czechs did with the Slovaks and the Serbs with the Montenegrins. Freed from the ballast of the southeast, Ukrainians would rush at full speed to the European paradise dear to their hearts, and Novorussians would breathe a sigh of relief, freed from the need to pay taxes to Kyiv. However, the industry of Donbass promises fabulous profits to those who subjugate it, and therefore now the oligarchs are hastily sending army units to the rebellious region, hoping to forcefully keep the region under their control.
I don’t know whether the point of no return has been passed, after which Donbass will never return to Ukraine, or whether reconciliation is still permissible. Both options are possible. But in any case, Kyiv should work on its mistakes so that in a few years the Donetsk scenario does not repeat itself in Mukachevo, Odessa or Kharkov. There is an urgent need for the federalization of the country, the transfer of real powers to the localities, the disarmament of militants of all kinds of “hundreds” and “battalions”, limiting the power of the oligarchs, reforming the judicial and law enforcement systems... However, are there people among the current leadership of Ukraine who are capable of this?
Or will this country repeat the fate of the USSR, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia?
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.