96
What is missing from the presented puzzle is an element of truth, which, as
existing knowledge suggests, plays a crucial role in establishing a long-lasting
peace. The Ukrainian authorities focus on what is possible to achieve. The problem,
however, is that such steps can hardly be a basis for reconciliation. It is simply a
continuation of a precarious status quo.Truth and peaceThere is no clear post-conflict strategy for Donbas. This is to a significant ex-
tent caused by the hybridness of the conflict. It effectively prevents the engaged
parties from achieving the fundamental goal of peace. As a result, any considera-
tions regarding a proper modality of post-conflict justice remain rather theoreti-
cal. At the same time, the Ukrainian situation is a good opportunity to formulate
some conclusions that may be useful from the perspective of other similar conflicts.
The Ukrainian authorities focus on efforts that are supposed to prevent the de-
terioration of social and economic conditions of those affected by the conflict, and
criminal prosecutions (within the ordinary justice system) against those respon-
sible for the onset of the conflict. Criminal prosecutions – under national law or
at the ICC – are acceptable manifestations of jus post bellum, but current experi-
ence suggest that they are not enough. In particular, what is missing is the element
of truth. In any given circumstance, it seems that the establishment of some basic
truth about the conflict accepted by all sides is a sine
qua non for establishing a measure of justice. Howev-
er, this should not be seen as identical to the tradition-
al “truth first and justice later” approach.
The main problem with hybridness is that it effec-
tively conceals the international dimension of the con-
flict. One may debate whether the rebellious territories
actually faced some form of discrimination (and if so,
to what extent). These issues should be subjects for a
separate analysis. What can be said for sure is that at
the dawn of the conflict the ideas publicly expressed
by political and military leaders of the self-proclaimed
“DNR/LNR” did not occur in a void. They were supported by a significant part of
the population. The third state – Russia – utilised it to achieve its own political aims.
It is thus natural that achieving peace will continue to be the top priority. With-
in the described circumstances it is hard to expect that any working agreement
referring to justice can be achieved between Kyiv and the “DNR/LNR” withoutThe main problem
with the Donbas
situation is its
hybridness, which
effectively conceals
the international
dimension of
the conflict.Opinion & Analysis Is it too early to speak about justice in Donbas?, Gerhard Kemp and Igor Lyubashenko