How to avoid ‘failed state’ without Donbas and under permanent war actions

By the Editorial Board of VoxUkraine

Recent events with deployed regular Russian troops at the east of Donbas and decisive attacks of Russian forces to unlock the Donetsk encirclement of separatists have posed for the Ukrainian society a critical question: How can the country survive and develop while having Donbas occupied and facing permanent military actions or persistent instability akin to the situation in Transnistria, Abkhazia and South Ossetia.  Indeed all previous assumptions of Ukrainian authorities as well as international financial institutions (e.g., the IMF) presumed quite fast stabilization of situation and excluded presence of Russian regular forces on the Ukrainian territory. Under such scenario, the Ukrainian army was expected to finish anti-terrorist operation in a few months and the progress on encirclement of Donetsk in August indeed promised very fast conclusion of the conflict. 

On August 24 the situation has changed dramatically.  Now we are talking about long-run though still unannounced war with Russia on the Ukrainian territory with poor chances to put the situation in Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts under control of Ukraine’s authorities in the nearest future.  In other words, Ukraine received a constantly rotting wound on the body of its economy.  It will be killing the country slowly with very poor chances to fend off the smoldering conflict.  We are talking not only about military costs eating a large part of the government’s budget, but also about subsidies to the region which will not be paying taxes and not supplying raw materials (coal) to the rest of the country, about boom of smuggling and drugs supply through our territory (no border, no mechanism of control, no instruments of influence).  The Ukrainian society faces an incredible challenge how to start developing in such extremely tough environment.

Turn the Ukrainian army into a Swiss one?

By Roman Khimich (Ukraine)

 

Mid-August was marked by a series of statements by Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense. These statement signal a fundamental change in the system of manning the armed forces and, in a broader perspective, vision of the entire defense doctrine.

 

The system of basic military training is declared to be mandatory and should cover all reservists, that is, effectively a major part of the adult population, including both men and women. Citizens who have passed such training should form a people's militia, which, in turn, should serve as the basis for a national territorial defense system. Finally, the authorities voiced the aim to create guerrilla, sabotage and intelligence networks on the basis of volunteer corps in cases of external aggression.

All these steps, taken cumulatively, comprise the elements of a comprehensive reform, a model set by the organization of the Swiss Armed Forces.

 

This is not the first attempt undertaken by Ukrainian authorities to solve the problem of mobilizing population in the event of hostilities. In mid-March 2014, in the midst of a military confrontation on the Crimean peninsula, several working groups were created at the request of Andrii Parubiy, the former secretary of the NSDC (National Security and Defense Council). The experts were required to prepare a regulatory framework and trigger the establishment of the mass mobilization system. Specific forms of this system were to be clarified in the working process.

 

The author participated in one of these groups, which developed the project of Ukrainian Army Reserve. The working group proposed a framework governing territorial defense forces in different states and developed a holistic view on the matter. Based on this experience and knowledge, author offers his assessment of the ideas expressed by Ministry of Defense leadership.

Five Compelling Reasons For The U.S. To Offer Lethal Military Assistance to Ukraine

By Paul Gregory (Hoover Institution and University of Houston)

With Washington’s attention diverted, as radical ISIS forces march towards Baghdad, it is no coincidence that Russia chose to send tanks, missiles, and armored personnel carriers across its border into east Ukraine. Forget Putin’s assurances that he had nothing to do with this. Movements of heavy weaponry in border areas require authorization from the highest levels in Putin’s notorious power vertical. The June 12 passage of Russian tanks, missiles, and armored personnel carriers across the border (confirmed by U.S. sources) was so blatant that even the timid NATO officially labeled it as “a grave escalation” by Russia.