THE ESTIMATION OF THE WAR IN DONBAS BY SCIENTISTS AND FORMER POLITICIANS ON THE PAGES OF THE NEWSPAPER THE NEW YORK TIMES (FEBRUARY 12, 2015 – APRIL 30, 2018)

Abstract

The views of scientists and former high-ranking politicians on the war in Donbass in the period between February 12, 2015 and April 30, 2018 are analyzed in the article. On that basis the best ways to end the war are shown. The scientific novelty of the study is that for the first time in historiography, the opinions of scientists and ex-politicians on the war in eastern Ukraine in the period between February 12, 2015 and April 30, 2018 were studied on the basis of the newspaper The New York Times. The following conclusions were made. Firstly, some analysts predicted that Russia would not try to seize Ukraine, but would fight in the Donbas to keep the country destabilized and prevent it from getting closer to the EU and NATO. Other experts predicted that Russia might not stop at Ukraine and use the Russians from the Baltic states to create frozen conflicts there. Secondly, the use of different terms to denote the war in Donbas and the enemies of Ukrainian troops was ambiguous. They were called mostly “insurgents”, less often “separatists”, and occasionally “militants” and “terrorists”. The war itself was most often referred to as “uprising” or “conflict”, less often as “invasion” and in isolated cases – “war”. Thirdly, after approving the first and second Minsk agreements, almost all experts immediately doubted their viability. In Minsk-2 agreement, Donbas was recognized as an integral part of Ukraine, Vladimir Putin periodically resorted to military escalation here, and instead of a political settlement he sought a frozen conflict so that Ukraine would abandon its strategic European and Euro-Atlantic course. Russia has done everything to make Ukraine look like an internally unstable, failed state in the eyes of the world, in order to take advantage of its weakness in the future. Fourthly, in the debate whether the West should provide weapons to Ukraine, two camps crystallized. Some advised the West to properly arm Ukraine, which would prevent Russian aggression against other states. Others believed that arming Ukraine would not deplete Russia. On the contrary, it could lead to the catastrophic defeat of Ukraine and the humiliation of the West. Fifthly, Western sanctions against Russia have prompted it to relinquish its claims to Donbas and warned against an aggressive course toward other countries. At the same time, the establishment of lasting peace in Ukraine, thus ending the war in Donbas, was associated exclusively with diplomatic efforts such as searching for and approval of a compromise option of autonomy or expanded local self-government.