Paweł Pieniążek - Greetings from Novorossiya - Eyewitness to the War in Ukraine

There are, however, places more susceptible to these demands. In Donbas, with its six million people, there are many postindustrial cities with populations of one hundred or two hundred thousand inhabitants. In the times of the Soviet Union they were centered around big factories. The Soviet Union collapsed, the factories were collapsing, too—obsolete, inefficient, and often useless. Today most of them don’t exist and many jobs have disappeared. In some cities unemployment has really become a serious problem. That is why it is not only elderly people who are dreaming about the return of the Soviet Union.

According to Oleksij Matsuka, editor in chief of Novosti Donbasa , many political organizations worked very hard to exacerbate this discontent. They used left-wing populism, conservative ideas of russkii mir (literally, “Russian world,” a nationalist concept of a cultural zone of “Russianess” outside Russia’s political borders), and old Soviet rhetoric. It was they who prepared the foundation for the events in Donbas in 2014. “It is not that Russia just came here. Everything has been the result of our internal problems and Russia interfered a little later,” says Semenchenko from the battalion Donbas.

From March to April the Russian Spring spreads with special intensity to the towns of Donbas and other Ukrainian regions, although it doesn’t go beyond street protests and short-term building occupations. But there were also some tragic incidents. Particularly bloody disturbances took place in Odessa, when the House of Trade Unions was set ablaze and about fifty separatists lost their lives. Clashes were also taking place in Kharkiv, Mykolaiv, Zaporozhia, and Dnipropetrovsk. At that time there was a common worry in Ukraine that the Crimean situation might be repeated, in other words, that more and more Ukrainian territories would be annexed by Russia. Very quickly, however, pro-Russian demonstrations were halted all over—with the exception of Donbas.

In the Donetsk and Luhansk regions hot spots appear one by one. Small postindustrial towns there turn into the main headquarters of pro-Russian activists and militants. It is much easier there to find support among populations struggling with serious social problems. It is also easier to project an impression of mass involvement and total control. Pro-Russian demonstrations in Donetsk coincide with demonstrations in Alchevsk, Khartsyzk, Druzhkivka, Horlivka, Kramatorsk, Makiivka, and Slovyansk. They also erupt in two larger cities, Luhansk and Mariupol. The scenario is usually the same: pro-Russian demonstrations lead to the occupation of the city council, the police headquarters, or the security service.

In Horlivka the police immediately join the militants. The police station is guarded by “volunteers” armed with police shields and batons. The officers do nothing to oppose them. Some surrender, because they sympathize with the separatists’ ideas, others surrender because they know they can’t count on any help from Kiev. In principle, postrevolutionary authorities lacking any structure and a corrupt system make any action impossible. At the beginning of the conflict you may get the impression that Kiev hardly cares what will happen to Donbas.

In mid-April in Kramatorsk and Slovyansk cheering demonstrators are joined by the “little green men.” That’s what the Russian soldiers in unmarked uniforms who were responsible for the intervention in Crimea were called. “We are Crimean… I mean Donbas Mass Mobilization…,” “Balu” begins his speech. He is a commander of the little green men. Those in Slovyansk are armed with automatic rifles and grenade launchers. They also have armored vehicles. A Russian flag is flying on one of them. Until now in Donbas this has been a rare sight. For several months Slovyansk becomes the unofficial capital of separatism. It is here that the majority of the militants’ forces are stationed.

“How did you get your weapons?”

“The residents gave them to us,” explains one of “greens” with a sarcastic smile.

“And what about the armored vehicles?”

“In the morning we found them parked here, so we took them.”

It is certain that some equipment is being seized from the few and undisciplined Ukrainian forces, which in the initial phase of the conflict are not fighting the separatists. Instead, they surrender without a single shot. From the very beginning it is the Russians who are suspected of arming the separatists.

“It would never have begun, if the Russians hadn’t helped them,” claims Vasil, a resident of Donetsk. His view is shared by many people.

The protests in Donbas as well as the intervention in Crimea were caricatures of the events on the Maidan in Kiev. On the Maidan barricades appeared and official buildings were occupied. After a while there was violence, and in the end the authorities were forced out. In Donetsk as well the barricades went up in front of the administration building. Posters and flags appeared. Tents have been put up nearby, there are leaflets and posters. Loudspeakers are positioned outside the building, speeches go on, and music is playing. If we leave out the number of participants, we can get the impression that we are dealing with a copy of the events in Kiev. “At first glance everything looks the same, but it evokes apprehension rather than joy,” one of my friends wrote. As a matter of fact, something is not right.

The Maidan was fighting the regime, sooner or later doomed to collapse, but at that moment still strong. In Kiev the streets were flooded with complete police units who were defending the government. They were the Berkut—the special police forces of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. They had no problem in pacifying their compatriots with clubs, cruelly and ruthlessly. During their first attempt to disperse the Maidan, the police were beating up people covered with blankets (there were no tents on Independence Square yet) who were simply sleeping around the Independence Monument.

Yanukovych’s apparatus could defend itself for a long time from the thousands of exasperated demonstrators who in January wanted to storm the Parliament building. The result was that a hundred people were shot and the Maidan was completely crushed.

“Donbas had its Maidans, too. We’re sick of this government. They are responsible for all this.” You can hear these words almost everywhere. But the new administration is targeted and becomes an embodiment of evil. Yanukovych has been erased from the collective memory very quickly.

“What does Yanukovych have to do with this? He doesn’t rule in Kiev,” replies Vadim when asked about the former president.

I disagree and I say: “The new government has been in power since only recently and has inherited a plundered state.”

“So what? They are all the same.” Although one of the most important demands of “the Anti-Maidan” is fighting the ubiquitous corruption, surprisingly enough this ubiquity doesn’t apply to the police, according to the Anti-Maidanists. They know how to explain police behavior during the demonstrations and clashes.

“The Maidan humiliated the police, so they joined us,” claims Serhiy from Donetsk.

“Glory to the Berkut,” shouts the crowd, frequently. The Berkut was a special police unit, notorious for particularly brutal treatment of the demonstrators on the Maidan. When power changed hands the Berkut was dissolved. Some officers fled to Crimea, where they received Russian passports and were incorporated into the Russian equivalent of the Berkut—OMON. Others disappeared and then showed up on the separatist side. A large group, however, was “rehabilitated” and now fights for the Ukrainians. Word has it that among them there are snipers from the Maidan, who had been firing at the demonstrators. Deputy Hennadiy Moskal maintains that this is their way to atone for their sins.