In the political space of Ukraine, the word “negotiations” is increasingly heard. On August 30, Advisor to the Head of the Presidential Office, Mikhail Podolyak, said that Ukraine is ready for negotiations with the Russian Federation. Russian oppositionists, just leaving Putin’s prisons, also started talking about negotiations and lifting sanctions
President Vladimir Zelensky promises to prepare a peace plan by the end of November 2024, assuring that it will not include territorial concessions to Russia. However, Russian dictator Vladimir Putin is setting out his own conditions for a ceasefire. Among them are not only the well-worn “demilitarization” and “denazification”, but also territories.
He insists that three regions - Lugansk, Donetsk, Zaporozhye, Kherson - and the Autonomous Republic of Crimea be given to Russia.
According to recent sociological studies, 44% of Ukrainians support the idea of peace negotiations with the Russian Federation, but more than 80% do not agree with Putin’s terms.
However, according to the results of another survey, almost a third of Ukrainians - 32% - admit that in order to achieve peace and maintain independence, Ukraine may give up some territories.
Does this mean that the Lugansk and Donetsk regions can be “sacrificed” to Putin for the sake of “peace”? And will this sacrifice be in vain, and what could be the consequences of such a decision for the residents of the occupied territories and internally displaced persons?
These questions for Realnaya Gazeta are answered by former residents of the Luhansk and Donetsk regions, who were forced to leave their regions due to war and occupation.
Roman Vlasenko, Chairman of the Severodonetsk District State Administration of the Lugansk Region: “Only the restoration of the 1991 borders can bring sustainable and just peace to Ukraine”
“I think it won’t come to that, and such an agreement will not be signed.” I consider it incorrect to trade territories in exchange for a peace agreement, and this cannot be part of the negotiations.
There are several aspects to this. The first is the position of the authorities, which declare that they will not trade territories, and only the restoration of the 1991 borders can bring sustainable and fair peace to Ukraine. The second aspect is public opinion. I would not be very focused on sociological research, because globally the majority of Ukrainians want peace and victory, but are not ready to cede territory, and this will not happen. The third aspect is the position of the military, who defend Ukraine in the east and south, and will not understand such decisions.
Negotiations should be about the complete withdrawal of Russian troops from the territory of Ukraine, in particular from the Luhansk region, Donetsk region and Crimea. However, I can understand a temporary ceasefire and a stop in hostilities in the positions where we are today in order to begin the negotiation process. But only as a temporary measure.
There is also an international context to this issue. Historical experience, in particular the Second World War and conflicts in the modern world, indicates that appeasing an aggressor can play a cruel joke. If there are concessions in this war, authoritarian regimes will perceive this as a weak position of the democratic world.
The international community must take more seriously the conflicts that provoke the states of the so-called “axis of evil”: Russia, Iran, China, North Korea and the like. These authoritarian countries bring disorder and chaos to the world and are trying to oppose themselves to the democratic world. Today we have theses from the EU and the US that they will not allow Ukraine to lose, but they will not allow us to win.
Russia's war against Ukraine must end in victory for Ukraine, and only this will guarantee security for the democratic world. Also, Russia’s loss is beneficial to Russia itself, its citizens, because Putin’s regime must fall. Only such developments can contribute to a sustainable and just world.
As for those who live in the occupied territories, Ukraine’s refusal from the region will be a continuation of the incomprehensible situation in which these people now find themselves. There is no development yet in the occupied territories. The Russian Federation spends a lot of money on the war, but there are not enough resources for the development of the occupied territories. These territories will continue to be populated by residents of the Russian Federation, who will assimilate with the local population. There are already many representatives there from the Caucasus, Siberia, the so-called small peoples of the Russian Federation, and there will be even more in the future. As for the IDPs, and I myself am from Popasnaya, we are left without our property and houses, and these are new challenges for the state - to provide the displaced with housing and social support.
However, I do not consider the scenario that we will lose territories or statehood. I think there is reason to hope for victory and increased international support. We will be able to survive.
Konstantin Reutsky, human rights activist, military man: “We are simply giving Russia a chance to restore its strength, regroup and f*ck us stronger than now”
— I am sure that our region will definitely become a subject of bargaining in negotiations with the Russian Federation. Of course, they will demand consolidation, so to speak, of their territorial achievements. I don’t see that anyone - we or our partners - is ready to recognize the occupied territories as part of Russia de jure.
In any case, if we decide to temporarily freeze the conflict, this situation will work against us. If we pause now and do nothing to destroy Russia from within, in a few years we will face an even greater threat. We're just giving Russia a chance to regain its strength, regroup and fuck us harder than it is now. The next stage of this war will be even more painful.
I feel a little uneasy that our Western partners do not understand the scale of the threat from the Russian Federation. If there had been an adequate vision of these threats, then, I think, this conflict would have ended within 2 years. Because the enemy would no longer have anyone or anything to fight with. Obviously, if the West had acted consistently, the Russian regime and economy would have been overthrown. However, this is not yet the case. I see that many Western stakeholders are simply panicky afraid of the fall of Russia and are doing a lot to prevent this from happening. And this is truly tragic for us. That is why we are approaching a stage where we will most likely have to negotiate with the Russians. And most likely, this will definitely not be beneficial for us, because we are talking about our territories and people, whom we will lose at least for some time, most likely for a long time.
We are now exhausted and it is really difficult for us, but I advocate that we do not stop and convince our partners not to stop and no matter what add an aggressor country. The chances of this happening are quite high. The enemy is also exhausted, which is why Russia is now in every possible way leading us and our partners to the start of negotiations.
Valentina Troyan, journalist: “I do not rule out that circumstances will develop in such a way that Ukraine will abandon the Lugansk region”
“I do not rule out that circumstances will develop in such a way that Ukraine will abandon the Lugansk region, and the country’s top leadership will explain this as a condition for peace. For those who find this outrageous and impossible, let me remind you that the war in Ukraine has lasted more than 10 years.
The first step towards rejection, in particular of the Lugansk region, was taken when the previous leadership decided to freeze the war and refused to recognize the fact of occupation of the Luhansk and Donetsk regions. This turned out to be contagious, because even from President Vladimir Zelensky one could hear stories about “the other side.”
Who was punished for discrimination against migrants? Nobody. This is significant. The Lugansk region has almost disappeared from the information space. The only way to find out what is happening there is through relocated Luhansk media, or the inclusion of representatives of military administrations. Recently, on air, my interlocutor assured me that the Luhansk region is completely occupied. It's good that I'm aware and corrected it. I think that this needs to be said and reminded: yes, most of the region is occupied, but there are liberated settlements and people live in them.
What will change in my life if Ukraine officially abandons the Lugansk region? In the short term, nothing. In the long run, I won’t be able to take people close to me on their last journey. What could such a territorial concession lead to globally? To other territorial concessions.
Nikolai Khanatov, head of the Popasnaya city military administration: “Perhaps people in Ternopil don’t care whether Popasnaya exists or not”
— Ukraine is a unitary state, and any territorial concessions are, first of all, a gross violation of the Constitution, which cannot be amended during martial law. That is, the authorities simply have no right to renounce territories.
However, I understand what a difficult situation the president is in today, because no matter what decision he makes, they will be unhappy.
The deoccupation of the Luhansk region, in particular Popasna, is the meaning of my life. On the other hand, it’s easy to think and say something while lying on the couch while people are dying in war. Yes, I want Popasnaya to be released, but I understand that the war has been going on for a very long time, and perhaps people in Ternopil don’t care whether Popasnaya exists or not.
The paradox of our situation is that we all want to live in a democratic country, but are not ready to defend it. We want victory, but not with our own hands and not with the hands of our loved ones. As they say, we are for the collective farm, but not in our village.
Alexey Beda, military man: “Only a hypocrite or an enemy agent can call a state of permanent war “peace””
— The Luhansk region can become a subject of bargaining. The consequences are simple: any suspension of hostilities with the occupier is only time to restore its military strength with a new escalation and new occupied territories.
That is, not only me, but also my children will have to go to war. And this is unacceptable. Only a hypocrite or an enemy agent can call a state of permanent war “peace.”
Marina Kuraptseva, journalist: “Exchanging Donbass for peace is an unrealistic plan, it cannot satisfy the cannibals”
“I don’t think such a plan is realistic at all.” In the imagination of Putin and a significant percentage of Russians, Donbass and the southeast have been part of Russia for a very long time. And for us, a country that defends its sovereignty, trading territories is not a good idea.
The point here is not even in the Lugansk or Donetsk regions, but in the fact that Putin needs something else. As they said during the Holodomor, “finally solve the Ukrainian question,” that is, destroy us all.
Therefore, exchanging Donbass for peace is an unrealistic plan; it cannot satisfy the cannibals. I do not believe that Russia is capable of peace, even if the agreement was signed in the presence of the whole world. We have had peace agreements on Donbass since 2014, and not once have the Russians adhered to the peace.
My opinion is no negotiations with terrorists who commit acts of genocide. When I read the comments of the Russians about the shelling of Okhmatdyt, my hair stood on end.
I lost everything twice. For the first time in 2014 in Yenakievo, then in 2022 - in Borodyanka. However, I do not lose hope for the reunification of Ukraine, although in 11 years I have forgotten what it means to be at home.
I don’t understand how you can give away territory with living people. I’m scared to even think that someone could transfer my land to a foreign state. How is this possible?
In my opinion, Russia must lose, it must be done with what was done with the German Democratic Republic - take control, introduce filtration, the same as what Russia is now carrying out, but, of course, without torture and observing the norms of international humanitarian law .
I currently live in eastern Germany. The Germans of the former GDR studied Russian in schools, people who are 55+ still know it and think that borscht is that soup with tomato paste that is sold in Russian stores. Unfortunately, in Europe they still consider the image of the Russian vanka funny and amusing.
In fact, peace is impossible unless Russia's opponents unite, just like in World War II. I don't know what needs to happen for the world to intervene. They threw Ukraine into the arena with tigers and covered themselves with it like a shield. It looks pretty gross.
