Not “blockade”

“Blockade” — a term that sounds for several years and popular since the beginning of the year when individual politicians, public figures, journalists began to use it actively and often in their own way. The term which needs to be quoted, because essentially a decision of the Council of 15 March 2017 on temporary termination of the movement of goods across the line of demarcation in ORDA (more precisely: “On urgent additional measures for countering hybrid threats to national security of Ukraine”) does not identified with the official international definition of the blockade, because the decision of the Council clearly indicates that the message is terminated goods, “except the goods of a humanitarian nature and providing Ukrainian and international humanitarian organizations.”

That is, no one is blocking Ukrainian citizens. Moreover, according to the Geneva Convention of 1949 on the obligation to keep the occupied territories takes on the occupier. But the fact of the matter is that there is no single legislative act that would have recognized part of the territory of Donbass, which hosted Russian gang leaders together with the Russian regular troops occupied. Recognized only occupied the Crimea, and therefore blockade of the Peninsula a logical fit, both in Ukrainian legislation and the rhetoric of Russia itself, which does not deny the fact of annexation.

Shows how Russia used the term “blockade” to promote. By the way, at the National Institute for strategic studies during the presentation of the evaluation referred to “blockade” the view was expressed that Ukraine was not ready to stop the movement of goods from ORDO, while sufficiently prepared was Russia. What does this mean? Not difficult to guess that Russia, which is the word “blockade” started to use in their propaganda in the Donbas in the spring of 2014, the year, as if only waiting for the initiative from Kiev to shift the responsibility. They say, “Ukraine’s Donbas is not needed”. From the side of Kiev, we have seen and are seeing is chaotic, not United in the strategy of the movement.

“Confusion between the actions of “volunteers” and the official decision of the authorities, scarcity and negligence assessments and the inaccuracy (perhaps intentional) of certain comments not only increase the degree of domestic political instability, but also hurt the international image of Ukraine, — noted in his opening speech, the Director of NISS, doctor of technical Sciences, Professor, academician of the NAS of Ukraine Vladimir Gorbulin. — Heavy national security Council decision is based on the unconditional recognition of the territory ORDO the territory of Ukraine. Ukraine reserves the right to claim compensation from violators of sovereignty within national and international jurisdiction. Since safety should be paramount. Economic determinism in the discourse of security is misplaced. Introduction control and test, restrictive measures in the areas of warfare is a worldwide practice. Of course, the imposition of restrictions and control over the movement of persons, vehicles and goods across the delimitation line in Donetsk and Luhansk regions is a necessary measure, but its positive effects can not be questioned. This measure is intended primarily to the localization of the conflict, prevent its spread, countering hostile intelligence and subversive activities and, as a consequence, the reduction of the military, terrorist and other threats to the rest of Ukraine”.

With regard to the positive measures the cessation of freight traffic from ORDA while there are only theoretical calculations. Of course, this “positive” conditional. The press conference participants noted that if in 2014, this “blocking” to hold it was too early, because Ukraine was not ready for it, the best period for HPAI was the autumn of 2015. At least so say the analysts present, as if justifying power in that “blockade” if there were belated, it is still necessary. Published in analytical work chart “radar” threats to national security as a result of HPAI in all categories, the Institute assessed the lower half. And this internal and external policy, macroeconomics, microeconomics, Finance, energy, social and information-communicative environment. Depart from expert opinion, and to trace the steps of the authorities throughout the war years, it becomes obvious inconsistency of the top management, and therefore the lack of vision and reactions to the situation. Therefore, it is difficult to imagine in the amorphous behavior of the authorities the opportunity to give a thorough and objective evaluation in such a complicated sphere as the relationship with the occupied territories and the country of the aggressor.

“The system of national security, unfortunately, had a hybrid morality, said on meet the press first Deputy Director of NISS, a member-correspondent of the NAS of Ukraine Oleksandr Vlasiuk. — Hybrid morality lay in the fact that for the past three years, we thought it possible to fight with the aggressor and at the same time to sell. In this regard, the decision of the Council will make some important steps for the improvement of public morality. Now we have the opportunity to resume the national consensus and at least to reduce the level of distrust in the government. After this decision, many will be uncomfortable to announce or articulate the concept of “trading in blood” or “war is profitable to the corrupt government and the oligarchs.” Second. This solution allows to strengthen the morale of our population, which, for the last three years living with a sense of humiliation due to territorial losses, losses. No wonder that to this point has Russian propaganda in order to reduce the resistance force. Morale is very elastic category, because it replaces and the lack of resources, and lack of good governance. In addition, this solution allows to restore faith in the ideals of the Maidan”. Actually quite strange to hear that the” blockade” will somehow restore those ideals, though, because the ideals themselves are a rather abstract category. The urgent need in society today are not so much the “ideals of Maidan”, as in need of end of war and economic stabilization. Again — the need to ensure security and economic development. So can the “blockade” with the obvious lack of government strategy effectively to ensure victory? Note — win, not just a cessation of hostilities. The last is entirely dependent on the aggressor. The victory depends on us. And the word “victory” does not mean the involvement of exclusively military actions. Victory begins with clear strategic vision algorithms, with a clear course. When we talk about public policies, it is necessary to recall the statements and actions of the head of state. In the spring of 2014 years of then still the candidate for President Pyotr Poroshenko has clearly stated that “the terrorists understand only the language of force.” Immediately after the inauguration, he introduced a truce. Following the President sounded seditious phrase of “our” children who go to school, and them that sit in basements (the phrase, which was emphasized by Russian propaganda). Then, either at the time of transfer or during the events in DaPa, nor in Debaltsevo trade with the occupier and the aggressor was not stopped. After activists on the one hand and populists on the other began to erect redoubts and tension began to grow, effectively opening a second front in the state, the government has introduced the procedure of blocking the transport of goods, that is, became the head of the “blockade”. Can we call this behaviour a strategy?

On the question of “Day”, whether the government listens to the research and practical advice of the Institute, Volodymyr Horbulin said, “the Correlation between our developments and the reaction of the authorities is, however, from our point of view, it is insufficient. We regularly send to various ministries, departments and security structure their research. Can’t say how practiced these documents. But this is not the level that we could arrange in terms of level of engagement in decision-making. First what is missing is the platforms on which it would be necessary to unite. And it is not only our Institute, but also about other expert environments, public associations, where the sound is sometimes very interesting and constructive proposals. Unfortunately, now there is a party lack of discipline when decision-making does not emanate from the state interests and the interests of political parties.”

Experts from the National Institute of strategic studies note that the threat of economic burden on the population in the energy sector is, but this entire problem can be solved. Including by diversifying the procurement of anthracite coal, which Ukraine depends 50%. However, as noted by Vladimir Gorbulin, there is a significant problem not so much with the fuel delivery to the plant, as the disposal of relevant waste. Here we are still dependent on Russia. Unfortunately, during the war years in this direction little has been done to minimize such dependencies, and risks. It turns out that the extreme of finding and implementing alternative solutions in the energy sector have started talking only after a radical (often radical) action on the part of the society. And this is a troubling practice, because of Brownian motion in society, spurred on by the speculative statements of certain forces, in the absence of the mentioned public policies can only expose our weak points. The point at which will hit the enemy.