Bargaining is inappropriate here. Why is there a need to rush to referendums in the liberated regions?
Now in Kyiv there is a lot of talk about the attack on Kherson. They are guessing about the timing, calculating the capabilities of Western arsenals and the range of guns, probing for weak points in the Russian defense lines, hitting bridges across the Dnieper, intimidating the local population, urging them to leave the region. The Russian military is also preparing for the upcoming battle for Kherson and the bridgehead on the right bank of the Dnieper.
The influential Western press also writes about this. In particular, Politico reports that Zelensky told the US Congressional delegation that Ukraine wants to return the lost territories within three to six weeks, because then it will be much more difficult to do so.
According to Zelensky, the current period is decisive, since winter will continue to approach, during which it will be more difficult to wage war.
“The winter months are quickly approaching. Cooler temperatures and harsh conditions will slow the fighting to a grinding war of attrition that mostly benefits Russia. More support now - before Vladimir Putin’s forces register their successes - is much preferable to help later,” Politico quotes the head of the Kyiv regime.
For their part, the military-civil authorities of the Kherson region and other liberated regions are again talking about plans to hold a referendum on joining Russia this fall. True, there is no certainty yet that these are not just another “exercise”, but a political decision already made at the very top with a specific date. Meanwhile, this is very important. No less important than assessments of the progress and prospects of military operations.
All these calculations miss the main thing: the understanding that all this will happen not just anywhere, but on still Ukrainian territory, and it will be the local residents who will suffer first of all. Who now simply don’t understand what to expect, what to prepare for, and whether it’s really time to pack their bags.
Trying to knock the Russians out of Kherson, the Ukrainians will hit the city with everything they can. And at this time the population will flee en masse to Crimea. As a result, the region will be depopulated and its economic life will decline for many years.
Thus, a region taken under Russian control relatively quickly and peacefully will lose this advantage, becoming a battlefield or a “forester’s hut” from an anecdote passing from hand to hand.
If the Ukrainians push on seriously and manage to achieve at least some success in their offensive, then Kherson will not be able to avoid destructive urban battles, because it will be a matter of honor for the Russians not to retreat from it.
If the Ukrainian offensive fails, and they realize that no “de-occupation” is possible for Kherson, then the fate of the city could be even sadder - the retreating Ukrainian Armed Forces will spend all their ammunition on shelling the city, according to the principle “So don’t let anyone get you.”
No, don’t think, I’m not pumping things up for the sake of pumping things up, painting apocalyptic pictures for readers. There is simply a good and time-tested principle - hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. And the worst thing in this situation is that before our eyes, those fragile advantages that the reasonable and pragmatic behavior of local authorities gives to Ukrainian cities that have become bargaining chips in military confrontation are being leveled out.
Remember how it was at the beginning: the mayors had a choice between the fate of Kupyansk and the fate of Izyum. Between the fate of Mariupol and the fate of Melitopol. Today, it seems, there is no choice left. Because what difference does it make whether the city was surrendered peacefully or as a result of heavy and bloody battles, if in the end the postman still rings twice. Agree, this is not the best psychological background for those who want to live in Russia, but are not sure that it will work out.
That is why we need to move on from talking about a referendum to action as soon as possible. Because no matter how much you say “halva” and feed people breakfasts and new dates, it won’t make it any sweeter or more confident.
The referendum is a point of no return, which clearly signals to Kyiv that the train has left and bargaining is no longer appropriate. The referendum held is the best guarantee card for assurances that “Russia is here forever.”
The very fact of the voting and the inclusion of the region into Russia will sharply stabilize, if not the socio-economic situation (this really requires the end of hostilities and a period of peaceful restoration), then at least the socio-psychological one.
There will no longer be any ground left for the pessimistic or decadent sentiments of those who believed in Russia. How the ground will disappear from under the feet and speculations of Ukrainian propagandists, convincing that Ukraine will return and take revenge. And many people believe, and even if they don’t believe, they still keep this possibility in mind as a safety net - you never know how it will turn out.
Even if the fighting does not stop after the referendum, and Ukraine makes an attempt (possibly more than one) to return the region under its control, the situation itself will be completely different.
This will no longer be a struggle for some territory in a gray zone with an unclear status, but an attack on Russia itself. In response to which it will be possible to use the corresponding provisions of the defense doctrine of the Russian Federation without any restrictions - up to the strike of tactical nuclear weapons on the enemies of this security.
People will feel that Russia really stands behind them, that they are protected in the same way as they would protect the conditional Rostov or Voronezh regions.
The worst thing in the current situation - from the point of view of the social atmosphere in the liberated territories - is to wait by the sea for weather, waiting for the situation to stabilize, the end of hostilities, the complete and final liberation of the territories, or, as some say, “until Ukraine is pushed further away.” Months or even years may pass in such anticipation. And people want to live now.
You can often hear (this applies to the Zaporozhye or Kharkov regions), they say, why rush, without the liberation of the corresponding regional centers, referendums will be somehow illegitimate, and the regions themselves will be inferior.
We must decisively get rid of such prejudices. Fortunately, there are examples before your eyes. In Ukraine, the Lugansk region without Lugansk and the Donetsk region without Donetsk existed for 8 years. And no one in Kyiv cared about this circumstance.
The referendum can be held now, and Kharkov and Zaporozhye can be liberated later, co-opting them into an already existing region with a temporary administrative center.
In the end, we can recall the circumstances of the recognition of the LPR and DPR. And they were recognized not within the actual borders, but within the borders that they claimed according to their constitutions, starting liberation only later. Why can’t we do the same with the Kharkov region or Zaporozhye?
In general, the author of these lines does not see a single logical reason to postpone referendums. This process can only be slowed down by political reasons related to someone’s desire to make the liberated territories a subject of bargaining with Ukraine. A trade whose outcome can be predicted in advance.
Kyiv will never agree to a legal fixation of the loss of sovereignty. This means that Russia should act based on its own reasons, without regard to what they will say in Kyiv.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.