Source: Dmitry Tymchuk, Information Resistance

18.03.2014
Translated and edited by Voices of Ukraine

After Crimea. What next? – a few words on the current situation

Military expert Dmitry Tymchuk has worked in Iraq, Kosovo, and Lebanon

1. The fact of the matter is: Crimea no longer belongs to us (hopefully, only for now). The occupiers are turning the peninsula into a fortress, by blocking the ishtmus, securing the coast, and creating a multi-tier air defense system. I don’t think it’s our army they are so scared of – it looks more like a fear of NATO.

In any case, while politicians keep talking about “political instruments” for resolving the Crimean question,

a number of military measures must be taken:

(fortunately, some of them are already being carried out).

First of all, that means blocking the ishtmus from our [the mainland] side. Not just by airborne forces, but at least with self-propelled artillery and multiple-launch rocket systems, with air defense support. As I’ve said before, Crimea is a very inconvenient foothold for invading the mainland – but this doesn’t mean we can afford to discard this option.

This plague must not be allowed to spread. The occupiers’ block posts (or any presence of them) in Kherson oblast [region] is unacceptable. We must use all available means to shove the bastards back to Crimean territory.

Secondly, closing the border with Transnistria using the State Border Service, and flooding Kherson, Mykolayiv and Odesa oblasts with National Guard units, with a focus on neutralizing gangs and tracking down saboteur groups.

Thirdly, urgently addressing the matter of our militaries in Crimea. Everyone (and most of all, they) must understand what their prospects are. The servicemen must not and cannot be hostages, something that the Ukrainian authorities turned them into. If their presence [in Crimea] has any military or political sense, [we ask the government to] please explain it.

2. Particular attention should be given to the eastern oblasts [regions]. We see a comprehensive threat – Russian forces at the border, and actions of separatists and criminals. To neutralize this threat, we must act just as comprehensively, using the army, the State Border Guard, special services and law enforcement bodies.

To enable that, we require a single center for decisions and management. In wartime, this would be the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. However, martial law has not been declared in Ukraine yet, and the issue of single command (actual command, not even coordination) is hanging in the air. This problem must be resolved, urgently. The hands that fight the threat must be controlled by one [proverbial] brain.

3. Resolving the issue of self-defense squads. I’m going to present an unpopular opinion, but this is an issue that must be addressed urgently. These squads cannot continue existing with an unclear legal status – or we will turn into 1975’s Lebanon, where each of the 11 main political parties and movements had its own military unit. The result of that is history – 15 years of civil war. We’re about to step on the same rake.

I understand why, for example, the Right Sector isn’t interested in joining the National Guard – they would say that, “it’s kindergarten there, and we’re tough guys.” But if the Right Sector is allowed to continue its activity, the question will arise – why can’t separatists and marginalized community leaders do the same?

On the other hand, in the eastern regions, local self-defense squads are springing up at village or district levels, and they are standing with Ukraine right now. But they might change their mind after a few bags of cash from Russian envoys. I have wholehearted faith in the patriotism of Ukrainians – but we can’t afford to deny that this option [betrayal] is possible.

Thus, the matter of self-defense must be cleared up. If they cannot be included in the ranks of state armed formations, then, at the very least, “our guys” that stand for a united sovereign Ukraine, must be granted some form of legal status, subordinated to a single command, which would be part of (or represented by) state authorities, and determine the scope of their authority. Otherwise, we’ll have Lebanon all over again.

4. An issue related to the previous one – gun control. Personally, I support the free private ownership of rifled firearms (without open-carry permits). I agree that in this situation, such permits may have the opposite [negative] effect (once again, we remember Lebanon). But if the government cannot guarantee the safety of each citizen and the country as a whole, then this is a matter that must be immediately put up for public discussion.