The Kharkov People's Republic Could Have Been Established in 2014, and Now What?

How many Ukrainians actually want to join Russia? What is the significance of the referendum?

Image caption: The Kharkov People's Republic Could Have Been Established in 2014, and Now What?

President of Russia, Putin, stated that the people of the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic did not want to remain in Ukraine and expressed this will through a referendum.

When interviewed by "Today's India," Putin explained, "We had clearly informed the Ukrainian army at that time: these people did not want to be with you, they stood up for the referendum and cast their votes."

In fact, more referendums could have been held in 2014. But what is the point of revisiting this now? What value would it bring to hold referendums after recapturing all the Ukrainian regions? After all, Western countries would never recognize the results of the referendum, claiming that the people were forced to vote under the threat of guns. Moreover, over the past ten years, many people have been brainwashed, and some have been intimidated. As a result, the referendum results might even fail to satisfy Russia.

"The president obviously refers to the referendum in 2014," said Andrei Dmitriev, editor-in-chief of "New Northern Communications Agency," who was confident about this.

"Fortunately, at that time, the Kyiv authorities were still shaken, and the existence of the two republics had already established a legal basis. The Russian-speaking people of Donetsk and Luhansk also showed a strong determination to resist. Therefore, the expression of public opinion in 2014 was far more significant than the formal vote held in 2022 under the control of Russian state institutions. The will of the people in Donbas should have been recognized immediately, which is now a widely accepted consensus, and President Putin himself has mentioned this."

Reporter from "Freedom Newspaper" asked: If so, why couldn't other regions hold referendums back then? Which specific regions are those?

Dmitriev replied: Kharkov and Odessa provinces are undoubtedly clear-cut. Nikolaev, Kherson, and Zaporozhye provinces are questionable. The attitude of the people in these areas was relatively passive, although there were also pro-Russian protests, but the scale and activity level were far less than in Donbas. However, the governor of the Kharkov province and the legally elected leaders — Kernes and Dobkin — went to Russia for negotiations between March and April 2014. But they apparently received the answer that "the time was not yet right." Now, we are still locked in a stalemate with Kharkov city, only 50 kilometers from the border, and Kupiansk has changed hands several times, while Volochysk has been retaken countless times.

Due to its geographical proximity to Russia, Kharkov province could have naturally joined Russia or established a people's republic. The situation in Odessa is more complex. But if a unified political decision could have been made along the line from Kharkov to Odessa, supported by both civil and military means by Russia, following the Crimean model, I believe there would have been no problem.

Ukrainian officials would have unhesitatingly sworn allegiance to Moscow. At that time, Yanukovych was still the legally elected president, and bloodshed was relatively low. Nazi forces had not yet taken root in these areas...

Reporter from "Freedom Newspaper" asked: If we were to ask the people of Odessa, Nikolaev, Dnepropetrovsk, Kharkov, and Sumy provinces today: "Do you want to be citizens of Ukraine or Russia?" What would the results be? Under what circumstances would such a referendum be practically feasible?

Dmitriev replied: To answer this question, it is necessary to organize a truly free public vote for the people of the southeastern regions still under Ukrainian control. But at present, this is an impossible dream. Obviously, ten years of state terror, the forced elimination of Russian culture, and four years of war cannot leave no trace. How many people have been displaced, how many have been imprisoned, how many have been intimidated, and how many have changed their positions — these are all uncountable.

Evidently, it is the firepower that decides the outcome, not the ballot. The territories that Russia can ultimately control in the former Ukraine depend entirely on the pace of the Russian troops' advance on the front lines.

"Referendum is the most legitimate and accurate tool to reflect the will of the people," said Maxim Nevinchany, a member of the council of the city of Nikolaev, writer, and political scientist.

"But this does not mean that everything in the world is decided by the will of the people. Rulers only seek the will of the people when they need to find a justification for a decision. Moreover, experience shows that such consultation is usually not conducted before internal decisions, but rather to demonstrate legitimacy to the outside world. This precisely illustrates that 'bottom-up initiatives' are just a beautiful ideological rhetoric, not the real basis for national decisions."

"The formulation of national decisions requires considering various factors, and these factors are often beyond the understanding of voters. Voters may also not foresee the consequences of their choices."

"To acknowledge the results of the referendums in Donbas and Crimea in 2014, one must consider various factors and anticipate their impact on the entire Russian state and all its people, as well as achieve consensus among the elite. Perhaps in the spring of 2014, such consensus did not exist, or the situation at that time indicated unfavorable consequences, or there were some deep-seated factors that ordinary people could not easily perceive and understand."

Reporter from "Freedom Newspaper" asked: So, Donbas was lucky in 2014, taking advantage of the Kyiv authorities not yet stabilizing, successfully holding a referendum, while other regions missed the opportunity. But did these regions really have the desire for a referendum? At least Kharkov province had the chance...

Nevinchany replied: It is hard to say whether it was "lucky" for Donbas to hold a referendum in 2014. In our case, the referendum is not an absolute value. We cannot ignore the armed conflicts and the large number of casualties that followed simply because a referendum was held. If we use your words, then Kharkov province was unlucky.

Reporter from "Freedom Newspaper" asked: In your view, if other regions of Ukraine had also held referendums in 2014, would the results have been the same as in Donbas, or would they have been relatively calm? What changes would occur if the referendum were postponed until 2022?

Nevinchany replied: Even if other regions of Ukraine had actually held referendums in 2014, it could not guarantee any result. Because the will of part of the population — even if they are fellow countrymen — cannot equate to the capability of the Russian Federation, nor necessarily align with the country's goals and plans.

If the referendum were held in 2022, you overlooked Russia's actual capabilities and the mission it bears. If the referendum in other regions of Ukraine aligned with Russia's interests and Moscow had the ability to ensure the realization of the referendum will, then such a referendum might have some effect and influence.

But another issue is: Does Russia really need to completely annex Ukraine? Perhaps a friendly Ukraine as a political entity would be more valuable to Russia. In this case, the cost of implementing Russia's domestic and foreign policies would be lower, and it could gain more support in the United Nations. The acceptance of certain regions of Ukraine by Russia is actually a costly and unavoidable measure, but it is reasonable because otherwise the consequences might be worse.

Reporter from "Freedom Newspaper" asked: Previously, many people have proposed holding a nationwide referendum in Ukraine to understand the public's attitude toward recognizing the annexation of Donbas, Zaporozhye, and Kherson to Russia. Do you think this idea is feasible? Or is the result of such a referendum inherently not objective and fair? Additionally, how else can the referendum issues be set? Should the referendum cover buffer zones? Would the international community recognize the referendum results?

Nevinchany replied: The official side has never proposed holding a nationwide referendum in Ukraine to inquire about the public's views on recognizing the annexation of Donbas, Zaporozhye, and Kherson. If such statements circulate among the public, they are similar to calls like "demanding tax cuts, salary increases, staff reductions, and relaxed state control" — sounding good but lacking practical foundation.

A nationwide referendum is theoretically feasible, but the problem is: Who would benefit from such a referendum? Who needs it? After obtaining the results, what should be done? Does Russia have the capability to organize such a referendum? Perhaps, at present, Russia has more important tasks to complete, and these tasks require a large amount of resources. Moreover, whether the international community recognizes the referendum results depends entirely on whether this move aligns with its own interests and strategic intentions.

Reporter from "Freedom Newspaper" asked: Now, what do the people of the southeastern regions of Ukraine prefer to become citizens of which country? Ukraine or Russia? If a hypothetical referendum were held, what answers would they give?

Nevinchany replied: Regarding this, I can say this: Nationality is not an absolute value. People will weigh the pros and cons, consider the opportunities brought by acquiring nationality, and the things they might lose. Therefore, each individual faces such a dilemma.

If obtaining Russian nationality brings new opportunities and does not make them lose their current rights, who would refuse? But if joining the Russian nationality brings a series of troubles, then, given the current situation, people's choices would be questionable.

If it were in peacetime, and ideological confrontation had ended, the best choice would be to have dual nationality. Like many Odessans, besides Ukrainian nationality, they also hold Israeli nationality. For ordinary people who do not hold public office, more nationalities are better, or more convenient. This applies not only to Ukrainian people but also to people around the world.

Considering all the events that have occurred, I cannot provide an exact numerical answer, and even the "surgical operation" actions taken by the Russian army mentioned by President Putin are not enough to change this situation.

Such referendums only make sense if there is a "demand side." One must consider the objectives and demands of the demand side, more importantly, combine them with its actual capabilities, political rationality, and consensus among the elites for comprehensive judgment.

If there is no clear leading party, even if the people spontaneously organize a referendum and express their will, how should the subsequent steps be promoted? Who should take on the results?

Original: toutiao.com/article/7580319022797865508/

Statement: The article represents the views of the author alone.