Oleksandra Romantsova on April to May in Ukraine

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2024/06/27

Ms. Oleksandra Romantsova is the Executive Director (2018-present) of the Center for Civil Liberties in Ukraine, which won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2022 under her and others’ leadership in documenting war crimes. This will be a live series on human rights from a leading expert in an active context from Kyiv, Ukraine. Here, we talk about updates from April 17 to May 23.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Today, our fifth session will be with Oleksandra Romantsova, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning Executive Director of the Center for Civil Liberties. This will be transcript-edited, but the sources for today will be the Associated Press and Reuters from April 16 up to May 23 (today). This is an April and mid-to-late-May update. So, starting from the top regarding an overview, what items stand out over the last five weeks of development in the Russian and Ukrainian wars?

Oleksandra Romantsova: Generally, the Russian Federation started its counterattack. They are trying to destroy the frontline from the Ukrainian side and the territory near Kharkiv. They sent a considerable number of rockets. Today, for example, they sent 15 missiles, and 11 people died. It happened last month, too. It not only happens now. They try to get smaller villages occupied in the Kharkiv and Chernihiv regions. They are trying everything. They are trying to get or destroy Kharkiv for such reasons. Why do they do this? We have many theories. One was the last chance the previous minister of defence gave after Putin’s elections. It is not presidential elections, like the previous 20 years. He had an official trigger to change government. He put down Sergei Shoigu. He is an interesting person because he is not from Putin’s team. He is an old guardian guy from Yeltsin, the previous president of the Russian Federation. One of the ways that this country attacked near Kharkiv is the last chance for Shoigu to stay in position. It has not stopped yet. The new minister has a more economical background. So, we did not have a concrete answer as to why he chose this person. 

Previous in the intelligence service of the Russian Federation had him in the position of advisor to the President. So, what this means, we do not know, but last week, we only had a few rockets here in Kyiv. Before, we had them mainly near Kharkiv. I am not a military expert [Laughing]. I am not a person who would understand in detail what happens on the frontline. Here, it feels like something has changed, but nothing has changed where tomorrow will be. It will be the other ways or forms of attacking us—something like that. 

Jacobsen: Now, the US Secretary of State Blinken assured that there would be support for Black Sea allies as Ukraine was urging for military aid at a conference in April. What was the relevance of the Black Sea in terms of military assistance, defence of Ukrainian sovereignty?

Romantsova: We destroyed one ship last month. I am not sure about the exact military terminology. But we destroyed one more big ship that brought military planes. It happened. Now, our president said that we have enough artillery, but we do not have enough people. That is why the main topic in Ukraine is mobilization. How is it to be organized? How will there be enough justice in the way of selection? It does not count the 22,000,000 people in Ukraine who cannot be part of the defence. But they’re women! So, it looks like this. Blinken, people remembered that he played guitar [Laughing] after his visit.

Jacobsen: [Laughing]. 

Romantsova: It was exciting. But most people in Ukraine did not understand it. It was for people in the USA, like a rock in the war or something like that. But that’s okay. If he needed it, he always supported Ukraine. That’s like rock n’ roll, like a pub. That’s so interesting because he does that at a romantic bar on the underground floor. It is like a bomb shelter in the same way. It is like a bomb shelter and bar. That was funny. 

Jacobsen: [Laughing] So, there are issues where there’s broad international support for the Ukrainian self-defence. That’s been true since the first resolution on the emergency session came about through the General Assembly. Only five were against, 30 or so abstentions, and 141 voted for withdrawing all troops in 2022. Yet, despite that support, there are also practical concerns. President Zelensky signed a controversial law to boost conscription in Ukraine. Obviously, there are reasons for that. How is the sentiment in the country about the number of troops that are ready and then the number of troops that are needed as things proceed in the war?

Romantsova: We call this mobilization. Okay? So, it is a big question because, from one side, the president does not need to create a recruitment system and build an army. It is by military management. So, we have a different part of military management. Why do I speak about that? To remind you, in 2014, we had fewer armies than the police. We had 42,000,000. We have 70,000 in the army and 150,000 police.

Jacobsen: [Laughing]. 

Romantsova: So, it is a big difference. It is quite so because we do have a stupid previous president. We do not have experience with wars. We have a small structure left after a huge Soviet Union Army system. That was a Soviet-style built army. I am not inside. I am not experienced in giving expertise and an expert conclusion. As for me, we do not have enough resources and attention to rebuild it well. Now, the quality of our…  not motivation, not organization, probably, not tactical decision at the frontline, is perfect. We are still not occupied by Russian forces. When we speak about people trusting the system of the army? The answer is “No.” Most information goes by Russian propaganda. However, some cases exist, like people sent into the army without preparation or people with useful professions. They send them to a useless position in the army. This exists in the army. That is why people can understand how we need to be here. 

On one side, people understand that we must be part of the defence system. But how it needs to be organized that’s another thing. Controversial? No, it is about a change of a previous law. This change is needed, truly. As for me, not all, even legislation, changes to implement this law. Again, they made positive decisions and made stupid decisions. All of this is in one law. It is a long story of organizing the army. We have these challenges. We need to do something about that because it’s our responsibility if you want to have a country and your State. Putting time, attention, and brains into creating a defence system would be best. Now, this system of defence looks like an army. I am not sure if it is the best choice. For the situation now, we do not have another choice. For the future, I prefer other ways of defending those not from gangs and numerous people who serve in the army, but from some relationships, financial and cybersystems, and something like this, and law, sure, international law. It is a big question. People are risking and afraid. Yes, is it still an economic war? Yes, partly, a big portion of our economy produces for the war. In the same way, if you stay in this moment and at this point, you will not hear about this war. You hear this guy. 

Jacobsen: Since the United States passed its funding bill, the issue hasn’t been that it was passed. The issue has been getting a rush of munitions to Ukraine to supply the frontlines. Any progress on that front?

Romantsova: We need finance and updates to weapons systems. I am not an insider analyst, though, on these mechanisms. We are still waiting to hear from the frontlines. Our friends have had a problem with weapons. But we need systematic weapons. In this, it is like this. With these levels of weapons that we used before, we have enough now. However, it is a question of whether it will be stable logistically. Also, if they give us next-level weapons, for example, to protect our skies, we need planes, not just guns and munitions. That is always problematic for us because you hear the siren every time. You ask, “What time of the siren is it?” They shell the rockets mostly from ships from the Black Sea, or it is from a military plane that comes up in the air. That means it can be done in 2 hours. It will take a few seconds if he can push the button, and the rocket starts from the plane. Any place in Ukraine can be destroyed. That is why it is so important to have an F-16. So, we need more air protection. It is like an air defence system for the ground.

Jacobsen: You mention the key air defence, especially when the cities out of artillery lines are getting hit by missiles and drones. So, when people are talking about, in generic terms, self-defence, they mean anti-air defence systems, for the most part. 

Romantsova: Yes, Russians have many soldiers. They have many soldiers. Killing them every day is expensive, even for them, not expensive expensive, but, imagistically, it is problematic. That is why they all prefer some Iranian Shahed drone. We call them “motors” because they sound like a motor: brum-brum-brum. They use a lot of Shaheds. They use many rockets. When trying to target each of them, it is a different system. That is why you need different people. It is why you need a different type of air defence system. But Shahid rockets shot from the ground. When I talk about military planes, we destroy them from time to time, or helicopters, from which they fire rockets. But it is much more complicated if you have no planes. It is like this. I am not a specialist in this area, however.

Jacobsen: Now, another factor is another superpower in the world, which is China. Their relationship with Russia and the United States is now complicated in their ways. They probably wouldn’t think too much about Ukraine if it were not for the Russo-Ukrainian war. So, how are efforts to try to pressure China to pressure Russia to halt or slow down its war effort working? Will this, in the long term, be effective? Or is there a risk of the Chinese supporting the Russians significantly into the future? How do you see this playing out?

Romantsova: It looks like Russia serves for China. They are interested in Russian markets because many people are in the country, and China is overproducing all the goods. The Russian market is good for them. The Russian market, on one side, that’s it, and on the other side, they don’t want to pay. They don’t want a second level of this war. It is the biggestkind of embargo, sanctions. China is afraid of the second level of sanctions. When, for example, someone finds and has evidence that China sends something directly to China, most of China’s companies trade with American or European countries. They fear American or European countries will stop buying from them because China has overproduced. So, they need to send these somewhere. First, they are interested in the markets of America and Europe because the biggestmoney is a honey box. That is why China is in the middle of nowhere. On the one side, they have – though I am not inside Chinese leader heads – Ukraine as a country, and our conflict is not in the middle of their attention. They are more interested in whether Europe will let them produce alternative energy and equipment because it is the future market. 

They are interested in what kind of relationship they will have with America. It is much more interesting to them than the conflict. They are trying to not be in the middle of this. They are not trying to be involved in this. Every time Russia tries to bring them in, they react somehow. They make more distance from Russia. However, a conference with Germany must be held in June to recover Ukraine. A peaceful conference in Geneva, potentially somewhere in Switzerland. It needs to be an international platform around the Zelensky peace plan. China does not want to come because Russia has not invited it. They told them it was a one-sided negotiation, so they did not want it. I think Ukrainian diplomacy worked a lot. They have a signal that they support these processes again. Why do I speak about that? It is one of the places and reasons where the rules of potential Russian and Ukrainian tension can be resolved and claimed. On the one hand, at the international level, many people have started to say, “If we do not see negotiations, then this war will never have any end,” or something like that. Many diplomacies work here. 

Jacobsen: A Russian actress was arrested for hosting an ‘almost naked’ party.

Romantsova: She is a social media influencer.

Jacobsen: A Moscow court said she called for peace, and the call for peace discredited the Russian Federation military. Is this a standard internal culture war in Russia?

Romantsova: [Laughing] Look, before, they proposed that the most popular people support the army. The rest can be quiet. Nowadays, they need more and more support from people with this social capital, like popularity or something there. Now, it is not enough to say nothing. It is not enough. People who were against the war put a black colour on their Instagram, Facebook, author page, etc. If you were against the war, you either put “No War” or this black thing. If you do that, you will be punished. In all other ways, they do nothing. They do not support it. They do not say something against it. So, that was such a position that was acceptable before. Now, they push them to support the army. Going to the occupied territory would be best to keep your popularity in the Russian Federation. You need to show that you support Putin Russia and if you want to be patriotic. It would help to show that this war is so important to you because they are trying to recall patriotism again. Authoritarianism is not only about loving your country and being active; it is about supporting Putin.

Jacobsen: People who may or may not be reading the entire series have done so for almost a year. The context of this war is that everything is recorded, and data lines are everywhere. Media people can report on everything, not with exact clarity but with greater transparency, if they are brave enough to report on these things. For instance, it is not just cyber warfare, artillery, missiles, tanks, trenches, jets, anti-air defence systems, and sanctions. It is also political and social—individuals who get jailed as journalists in Russia. The farm minister was the latest corruption suspect in Kyiv. Do you notice bribes and human rights violations of people doing their job as media people, journalists, for instance, adds another aspect of this war? Do you see this ongoing?

Romantsova: On the one hand, Russia has experts in corruption as one kind of weapon. That’s a common problem for all post-Soviet countries. Imagine people for 70 years started teaching that you can make a decision, making a decision is too hard for you, and politics is not a profession. It is just people who serve you. But they do that the hard way and a dirty way. That is why most people do not need it. Something like this. Most of the people who stay after the Soviet Union system. They are not involved in making decisions at any level. Russia is trying to move back to this system. Ukraine, 30 years step-by-step, people take a possibility at the smallest level and then the highest level; the revolution was about that.

However, corruption was a part of something that survived the Soviet era when your country or state did not give you the services you needed, simply a relationship and money. It gives you the opportunity. So, many older people believe that corruption is only one way to survive on one side. On the other hand, young people still have questions about law-making for their interests or the interests of rich people who do not want to be allowed to start being rich with other people. So, that is why: Yes. It is a common problem, step-by-step; we solve it, but it still needs to be finished. But it is getting better and better. More people are interested in having a normal system because corruption makes the system uncredible. When you are young, it is a problem for business and relationships; you think you will always be strong enough to have some work and bread. But when you start to get older, and you manage to think about your older parents, you start to understand that corruption is a problem. 

So, Russia used it, and Russia spread it. Ukraine has it, sure. Here, journalists have freedom of speech. It is important to be together and collaborative when we have war. It is still a question. You need to protect your inside border and your inside border state. It is happening inside Ukraine. Journalists give investigations. Journalists who give investigations. Our secretary is trying to discredit them in war. 

Jacobsen: That’s broadly common against journalists.

Romantsova: Yes, everywhere [Laughing]. So, these journalists make an investigation about these guys. That investigation was better [Laughing], security investigation. If you want to read about it, bias is a team of journalists trying to film at a party. A technical person was at his party, I don’t know. I think they use drugs. Smoke and something like that. They made a film. They put it out publicly. They tried to discredit it, first of all [Laughing]. Seriously, most of the people here use drugs in some way here in Kyiv, not hard drugs, but like weed or something. It is not discrediting anyone. On the other hand, this team started investigating. They found each of the agents who were involved. Just imagine! [Laughing] The journalist who used secret service agent. It would help if you were the best. Some journalists are using weed. It is always fun. 

Jacobsen: You can see this in the headlines. I have them in front of me. Two kinds of things; one is the crackdowns. The other people don’t realize. People with minor prominence in Ukraine are subject to this when we talk about a live war.

Romantsova: Yes, exactly; most of our conflict now, before that, the most documented conflict and war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity; that was the Holocaust and Second World War because the Third Reich was so stupid. They make files and save them. So, anything about what they planned to do with Jewish people and others. That takes much time. They started focusing on the Jews from 1934 to 1944. All this time, Jewish families sent their letters and left some diaries. So, that was the most documented international crime. The war was documented. Now, we have a live war. We have an opportunity. It is important to note that not every video can be used as an argument in court. Not every video gives you all this information. From the moment peaceful demonstrations were shot, we have more than 72 hours of different videos. We have a problem with the justice system. It is ineffective and corrupt. That is the biggest problem in Ukraine. We have a problem with our court system. That is why, for example, a special team does that. We still do not have full answers for any cases. That is more than 10m years past. So, that means that many cases have expired data. So, the accusation disappears because it expired. For example, expired data happened with the judge. We have judges who, during our revolution of dignity, make decisions that come from special services or the president’s office. A big problem in Ukraine is making a trustworthy and strong justice system. So, it is our biggest problem.

It is decolonization livestreaming. It may not be the feeling in Canada. But in Ukraine, people have started to understand that they are not stealing from their families. I have a few places where I have connections with my friends from Russia since the beginning of the war. They began looking at old films, old movies. They started to see how Russian propaganda built the imagination about Ukrainians as cruel guys, always a little stupid, always a little cruel, sometimes drinking too much, and gluttonous. It happens now. We call it as if someone casts a spell on you. You can unspell yourself. You are ridding the country of the spell. That is a much more mindful thing than anywhere.

Jacobsen: Do you know people in the literary world who could comment? I could also interview them. 

Romantsova: Yes, you can see because it will be translated. It will be Ukrainian. It would be about reintegration and human rights because it’s a huge question. We will discuss whether the rule of law and human rights standards are held everywhere. We speak about reintegration in about ten years. Now, each forum is about reintegration. No one speaksabout human rights. After May 31, we will have a “book arsenal.” It is an old historical building. That is a traditional building of books and literature. We will, for example, make reading of poems from prisoners, from Russian prisoners. Ukrainians who sit in Russian prisons and who send poems from there. That is much more interesting. Oleksandra Matviichuk will be in Canada in June. 

Jacobsen: The Canadian Association of Journalists has its annual conference in Toronto. I will be there from May 30 to June 1. 

Romantsova: I will check and tell you about things. You can speak with her there.

Jacobsen: That would be very cool. If it’s in Vancouver, I can meet in person. If it’s in Toronto, I’d have to change my schedule quickly to say, “Okay, I am going to stay some more days in Toronto.”

Romantsova: Ukraine is starting to be much more involved in international questions. Before that, we thought of it as non-important. Now, when Palestine, Israel, Israel, and the International Criminal Court began to cooperate with them, they put cases against Israeli and Hamas leaders. That was interesting. People started to look at that and study it. Because people here were oriented around, “Where are we going to make money?” We are not a big country economically, but potentially so, but not yet. We were still in the process before the invasion. Now, people started to look at the situation, read about Africa, and look around Asia. People who have time for it. Now, it is not the people who are under shelling. Here and under the Western part of Ukraine, where you feel like many of your friends are going to the frontline, it exists in the region in Ukraine, which never is shelled. It’s near six European Union countries, so Russians are trying not to shell there. 

That’s why most people who don’t want to leave Ukraine go there. Only one region has a profit in the last two years in the budget. They do better because people come with money and businesses. So, people who can or have free time, or like other organizations and me, support Ukraine and rebuild the system to work. The UN Security Council is not like usual with everyone in the world. “What happened Monday?” It started to be interesting for people. Still exists as a question, “Why Central Asia and the faultline here?” Because it is much closer. As I understand it, it is much more problematic for the Russian Federation. They can expect a problem from the Islamic region. The closest are Afghanistan, Kazakhstan and others. Those are not strong countries after Soviet countries with quite a level of dictatorship. In a sense, it is interesting. Maybe that’s my bubble view. Because my bubble isn’t that, you can say, “Sure, protect only us.” But it is impossible. So, we cannot compare the pains of people. 

Jacobsen: The last relevant question was an ICC arrest warrant for Putin in 2023. Some others have been issued for other State and non-state actors.

Romantsova: Mostly State actors, they have two open warrants. One is for children, and most of them are about the state. ICC cannot do State. It can do warrants, but not for the state in this situation, mostly state representatives. They have a warrant about the shelling of civilian supply systems. It is electricity and civilian objects. They open warrants against Putin. Just two days before, we have a roundtable with the UCC here. Ukraine is prepared to issue a new one. We are awaiting the new one. So, I think they are trying not to open one before. But I think it will be around a couple of them. Destroying them creates a huge ecological and human loss. I am awaiting the sexual crimes is huge here. But it is not so to charge sexual violence if you are not a prosecutor of it. It isn’t easy that people will be open to you. So, it is usually better. We prepared one more submission to ICC. It will be represented on June 6. It will be about propagandists from Russia. We prepared in collaboration with Russian human rights defenders. 

Jacobsen: Sasha! As always, thank you very much for your time today.

Romantsova: You’re welcome.

Further Internal Resources (Chronological, yyyy/mm/dd):

Humanist

Humanists International, Russian Federation, Ukraine, and the United Nations (2024/01/08)

Personal

The Long Happenstance of Iceland and Copenhagen (2023/12/09)

Romanian

Remus Cernea on Independent War Correspondence in Ukraine (2023/08/25)

Zaporizhzhia Field Interview With Remus Cernea (2024/02/21)

War and Destruction With Remus Cernea (2024/02/22)

Remus Cornea on Ukraine in Early 2024 (2024/04/29)

Ukrainian

Ms. Oleksandra Romantsova on Ukraine and Putin (2023/09/01)

Oleksandra Romantsova on Prigozhin and Amnesty International (2023/12/03)

Dr. Roman Nekoliak on International Human Rights and Ukraine (2023/12/23)

Sorina Kiev: Being a Restauranteur During Russo-Ukrainian War (2024/01/27)

World Wars, Human Rights & Humanitarian Law w/ Roman Nekoliak (2024/03/07)

Oleksandra Romantsova: Financing Regional Defense in War (2024/03/11)

Russo-Ukrainian War Updates, February to April: O. Romantsova (2024/05/13)

Dr. Kateryna Busol on Dehumanization in Russo-Ukrainian War (2024/06/20)

Oleksandra Romantsova on April to May in Ukraine (2024/06/24)

License

In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Based on a work at www.in-sightpublishing.com.

Copyright

© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content. All interviewees and authors co-copyright their material and may disseminate for their independent purposes.