All Three Moscow Proposals for Donbass Seek to Maintain Russian Influence and Keep Ukraine Neutral, Portnikov Says

Paul Goble

            Staunton, September 28 – Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov says the future status of Ukraine’s Donbass should be like what Moscow has proposed for Moldova’s breakaway region of Transdniestria, Vitaly Portnikov says. That would mean the permanent federalization and neutralization of Ukraine ensured by the continued presence of Russian troops.

            The author of this plan, Andrey Yermak, a deputy prime minister of the Russian Federation, has been in active contact with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, the Ukrainian commentator says (radiosvoboda.org/a/30187796.html in Ukrainian; charter97.org/ru/news/2019/9/28/349998/ in Russian).

            This idea is now in active competition with two others: the first is that Vladislav Surkov, a Putin aide, has long been associated with, “the preservation of ‘the peoples republics’ as quasi-states, as levers on Ukraine and an instrument for the profit of the Russian political elite; and the second, that of Dmitry Kozak, who wants “the incorporation” of these republics into Ukraine but with “the preservation of their ‘state infrastructure’ and of course the Russian military presence.”  

            Such a plan would also allow Russian elites to profit and ensure the neutralization of Ukraine, Portnikov says. And in this regard, he continues, Zelensky’s constant talk about a referendum on Euro-Atlantic integration is a means by which Ukrainians could give up any drive to join NATO and thus represents “preparation for ‘a quiet capitulation’” to Moscow.

            In his statement, Lavrov declared that “the law is the law but the opinion of the self-proclaimed republics must be considered,” words that gut the Minsk Agreements and mean that mean what the chief goal of Moscow is “the preservation of ‘peoples republics’ and of Russian forces on Ukrainian territory” to ensure Ukraine remains neutral.

            The same goal animates the proposals of Surkov and Kozak with only this difference: In Surkov’s mind, the peoples republic would remain “puppet ‘states’ under the Kremlin’s protectorate, while in Kozak’s, they would be that “but with their formal return into the composition of Ukraine.”

            Zelensky must reject “the dangerous illusion” that it is possible to achieve an agreement with the Kremlin “on Russian conditions,” Portnikov says. Instead, “Kyiv’s goal must be the restoration of the territorial integrity of the country and the real re-integration of the Donbass,” not its return as a cancerous and potentially fate tumor within Ukraine.

Independent Crowd Counting Group Seeks to Provide Accurate Numbers for Russian Protests

Paul Goble

            Staunton, September 28 – Often the most important aspect of any demonstration is control of the narrative about how many people took part, with supporters often overstating the figures to make it appear they have more support than they do and opponents lowballing them to send the opposite message.

            In the Russian case, the government typically offers smaller numbers for opposition figures than the leaders of those actions do; and journalists committed to the principle of balance as evidence of objectivity typically reproduce both, given the Kremlin added reason to understate the figures confident that its numbers will gain an audience.

            In Western countries, there are a variety of independent monitoring groups which seek to give accurate numbers and thus prevent the two sides from being able to offer these competing accounts with success. Now, there is one in Russia too. Its leader Dmitry Nesterov tells MBK media’s Aleksandr Semenova about it (mbk-news.appspot.com/suzhet/proekt-belyj-schetchik-ka/).

            The group, which calls itself “the White Counter,” arose in 2013, grew out of election observers at that time, Nesterov says.  It uses the same technologies its Western counterparts do and believes that the margin of error in its final reports about the size of any demonstration is “on average, three to five percent,” far smaller than the range of other estimates.

            The activist notes that his group faces a variety of problems. One of the most intriguing concerns the differences in the behavior of participants in protests depending on which groups are involved.  The more liberal the group, he suggests, the later its younger members show up and that makes counting harder.

            Nesterov says that to try to reduce the impact of these differences, his group has asked organizers to let them know not only when the demonstrations are supposed to begin but also when people have been asked to assemble. 

            Up to now, he continues, his group “observes only opposition or moderately opposition meetings” rather than pro-government ones. It relies on volunteers, although it carefully checks them, and these people often would otherwise come to the meeting but “want to do something else useful.”

            Typically, Nesterov says, “the police do not interfere with the volunteers and even appear interested in the results” his group has obtained especially when they are at odd with those the government would like people to accept. The police have their own numbers, of course, and some of them may come from the White Counter itself.

            Unfortunately, the Russian media spread the government numbers rather than the real ones, and Russians “who do not read the independent media receive only those numbers which serve the powers that be.”

St. Petersburg Activist Stages Protest on Behalf of Ingush Detainees, Promises More

Paul Goble

            Staunton, September 28 – The Russian media and the Russian opposition are now paying more attention to what is occurring in Ingushetia, at least in part because of the obvious parallels between the way in which the authorities in Moscow and St. Petersburg are treating demonstrators in Magas.

            Yesterday, Marina Ken, an activist in St. Petersburg, staged a one-person demonstration in which she sought to call attention to the 33 Ingush under detention since April for “’the Ingush Bolotnaya affair’” and promised to organize more such protests in the future even as officials in the North Caucasus continue to extend these detentions (kavkaz-uzel.eu/articles/340643/ and kavkaz-uzel.eu/articles/340630/).

            Meanwhile, in Moscow, Aleksandr Malkevich, chairman of the media commission of the Russian Social Chamber, said that in his judgment, new Ingush head Makhmud-Ali Kalimatov has failed to build authority within the old elites of the republic, will be constrained in his activity and may ultimately be forced out (akcent.site/mneniya/5995).

            And in yet another development, Magomed Daudov, the speaker of the Chechen parliament, came up to the Ingush border to meet with a challenge one of his Ingush critics. His approach to the border attracted widespread attention and criticism in Ingushetia as something incompatible with his official status and an action that has further exacerbated tensions between the two republics (kavkaz-uzel.eu/articles/340618/ and kavkaz-uzel.eu/articles/340597/).