“Putin showed Trump, that in the territories he considers as his zones of influence, he’ll do what he wants”

From January 29 situation has sharpened in Ukraine’s east—Donbass. The Ukrainian side and representatives of self-declared Donetsk People’s Republic stated on numerous victims and the wounded. “168 Hours” covered geo-political reasons of the outbreak with Sergey Gerasimchuk, Ukrainian analyst, Head of International program of Group of Strategic Studies and Defence Studies (Ukraine).

Mr. Gerasimchuk, these days military operations have sharply activated in Ukraine’s Donbass, for which authorities of Moscow and Kiev accuse one another. Opinions of the expert community are also contradicting. However, according to the dominating opinion, purpose of sharpening was possible reflection of Trump’s administration. What do you think, why did the situation escalate in Donbass?

There are several reasons for sharpening of the situation. The first factor, undoubtedly, is regime change in the USA, political uncertainty of the new administration regarding Europe’s and particularly, Ukraine’s issue. We know that Ukrainian crisis has recently been covered during Trump-Putin telephone conversation, however, no clear view was developed regarding whether any agreement was reached or no. The second factor is the situation in Europe, which is distinguished by its turbulence and instability.

We have a situation that presidential elections should be held in France, which means, change of an actor in war settlement process between Russia and Ukraine is anticipated. This also makes the situation uncertain. Tension was observed, when president Poroshenko was on a working visit in Berlin, where he met Merkel.

This is also a signal that the tension was instigated by the Russian side. On the one hand, Russia, needed to show Putin if he isn’t ready to agree with Russia in this issue, at the same time, abstaining from interfering, then in the territories, which Russia considers its zones of influence, and will do whatever it wants. This was also a signal addressed to Germany, no matter how Merkel refers to sanctions, expresses sharply toward Russian authorities, Russia is going to do what is beneficial for itself in the zones, which it considers territories of its interest. I’d like to touch upon another factor as well. In some sense weakness of the Ukrainian side was a reason as well.

On the one hand, Ukrainian army is so powerful, that it was able to counteract, oppose attacks of the Russian side, the developments clearly showed that, as the Ukrainian army succeeded to keep its positions, on the other hand, the government isn’t strong enough from domestic policy perspective, as there are figures not supporting the government, or persons, who require more radical steps, or the contrary, require negotiations with terrorists, and attempts to settle the conflict through concessions.

Thus, the Ukrainian side today appeared in a situation, when there is army, which attempts and is able to oppose, however, the president and the government don’t have enough political support to move forward their agenda.

It isn’t clear what Trump wants and how strong Merkel’s positions will be. All these factors together led to the situation that we currently have in Donbass.

However, in your opinion, how will Trump’s administration function in this issue on account of his scandalous decisions after the inauguration, meeting results with British PM Theresa May?

I think if we observe USA-Europe relations, currently we appeared in a paradox situation. There were times, when the EU was calling the USA to reduce its influence in Europe, the EU was calling the USA to withdraw its military bases, the EU was claiming that it intends pragmatic relations toward Russia and tense relations of the EU and Russia prevent European business only. Currently the situation has sharply changed.

Thus, currently the EU is ready to welcome Americans on its territory, it’s ready to accept US military bases, US military potential as well. Currently Europe has changed its “voice” regarding Moscow, which proved Merkel’s position as well, which became rather radical, Hollande’s position has changed as well—he calls Europe for unity.

And the USA, in its turn, has focused on its own internal issue, i.e. we see despite the fact that everybody follows Trump and his policy, Trump first and foremost undertook steps, which refer to the US life. It turns out that the US is doing what Europe has been doing for years.

As it’s known, Trump is from business environment, he wasn’t an active political figure, thus, it isn’t excluded that Trump’s approaches are being developed, in his words, on business orientation and business interests. In this regard, it’s not excluded that Trump will launch negotiations with Moscow, the only point, which should be taken into consideration, is that many insist that he’ll show interest regarding Europe and Ukraine, however, from the businessman’s perspective he’ll show interest for a high price, this is the essence of business.

It’s another issue that until now it’s impossible to clearly formulate his strategy neither from his appointments, nor from his internal and external steps, as figures with different orientation came to his office, who are sharp in Russia’s issue, and who, just the contrary, have ties with Russia, thus, anticipating Trump’s possible attitude, approaches is rather difficult. I think, this is the power of the White House, i.e. the power of unpredictability, no one can clearly calculate what Trump’s behavior will be like, what bothers Europe, Kiev and Moscow.

Is that possible that Moscow, like in Donbass, will attempt to check Washington’s reflection, escalating the situation on NK conflict zone, and NK has traditionally been one of the hearths for Moscow, which it used in its relations with the West as well, as a leverage?

Frankly speaking I think there is no need to anticipate escalation, probably there will be some tension, however, I wouldn’t insist that it will be initiated, I wouldn’t anticipate escalation in Transinistria as well. Why? As in Moldova, Armenia and Azerbaijan Moscow has rather strong influence to send signals without use of military force, which requires additional resources.

Thus, Moscow may instigate tension on the level of the country’s leaders, through the president-elect of Moldova, however, there is no need to consume military potential in this conflict to hint something to Washington. However, in case of Ukrainian conflict Moscow doesn’t have enough influence, control over Kiev, thus, Moscow exerts military resources and attempts to show, that in the territories it doesn’t have enough political influence, it’ll attempt to reach militarily.

By Araks Martirosyan