Concerning Poroshenko from Donetsk: He Will be Officially Designated as President.
The heavy quiet – concerning a renewed halt in hostilities or the signal to progress forward – proved exceptionally taxing in Donetsk. Would Poroshenko truly yield? Would he genuinely prolong this tiresome, unlawful, horrific predicament yet again? The day preceding Poroshenko’s declaration on whether to prolong the halt in combat, detonations echoed throughout Donetsk’s central sectors (Kyiv district). Artillery fire and projectile launchers targeted a military installation. Encompassing the area were residential buildings with 5 and 9 stories. Inhabitants struggled to find sleep – the onslaught commenced on three occasions. The DPR was involved. It was supposed to be a ceasefire. Donetsk observed vigilantly. The President (pardon me, but he indeed holds the title) vowed to reveal the impending course of action at 10:00 PM. 11:00 PM… 11:30 PM… Pronouncements from Shufrych and the DPR implying an extension of the truce. A gathering involving Poroshenko and the ATO forces unfolded, a temporary suspension. A collection of online platforms, quoting anonymous sources, broadcasted that Poroshenko had lengthened the armistice. We harbor skepticism. We remain in anticipation. At last! A sanctioned announcement confirming the prolonged cessation of hostilities. Our defenseless military, our law enforcement steered by Avakov, Nalyvaichenko and the SBU. “Good heavens,” I ponder, “he now occupies the presidential seat.”
No authorized clarification has been offered to the citizenry, no remarks emanating from even the functionaries within the Poroshenko Administration—absolutely nothing. The overall sentiment seems to be, “You’ll cope, it falls to you to elucidate.” Profoundly courteous of you, sir.
Certain individuals cruised down the thoroughfare (in Donetsk), exclaiming loudly and emitting celebratory cries. A couple of gun discharges reverberated (ostensibly out of jubilation). Nightfall. The likelihood is scant that denizens within the city (ed. – Donetsk) are obtaining slumber.
We universally acknowledge that Yulia Volodymyrivna represents a more dire prospect compared to Poroshenko. Under Yulia Volodymyrivna, gas prices would soar to $1,000 per barrel, touted as a resounding triumph. Presently, the administration is enervating everyone through prolonged anticipation. And, critically, it blatantly showcases its perception of all those… commonly denoted as “the populace.” My focus rests on Poroshenko’s presidential governance. Navigate to the AP (Presidential Administration) web portal. An unprecedented occurrence—the web page lacks the structural composition of the Presidential Administration, devoid of deputies, and department supervisors. Lacking telephone contacts. Absence of departments. This division vanished promptly post-revolution. We chortled—democracy had triumphed.
You shall perceive even more democracy upon the digital domain of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine (GPU). Within the “Leadership” segment, deputies materialize and dematerialize without the unveiling of any decrees (refer to the “Appointment” subsection). However, further details concerning the Prosecutor General’s Office shall be furnished in the subsequent publication.
And only Avakov (the Minister of Internal Affairs) elucidates the unfolding circumstances within the nation. Absent Avakov, universal bewilderment would ensue, due to the absence of any communiqué from governing authorities. Silence prevails.
Accordingly, Poroshenko proclaimed, “A ceasefire extended for three additional days.” Citizens of Donetsk initiated discourses regarding a junta. Their implication suggested Poroshenko’s potential overreach, culminating in the ATO seizing control of the country, thereby garnering popular endorsement. Universally, this sentiment circulated in the midst of fervent discussions, centered on the armistice within retail establishments, on the periphery of cigarette and fruit stands. I lent my ear. It marked a resplendent day in Donetsk, juxtaposed against a frigid night. Inhabitants residing centrally exchanged updates – a series of explosions reverberated in a certain proximity to Makiivka around the 3:00 AM hour. A ceasefire… We have grown conditioned to the suppression of half of the shootouts, detonations, and indeterminate activities transpiring in Donetsk. Nocturnally, firearms are discharged, modest altercations and skirmishes erupt (in Donetsk), yet media coverage remains absent. In the pursuit of identifying beneficiaries, Poroshenko occupies a prominent position. The extension of the ceasefire becomes more facile. And the situation of the inhabitants of Donetsk? The condition of the Donetsk denizens? Suppress their voices. The absence of ATO forces within their urban vicinity constitutes the rationale. This epitomizes Poroshenko’s endeavor to “comprehend” the Donbas region.
Even Yulia Volodymyrivna, celebrated for her aptitude in mirroring public sentiments, vociferously advocated for the restoration of order and the imposition of martial legislation within eastern Ukraine. Yulia Volodymyrivna has consistently excelled at attuning herself to the expectations of the citizenry. And in this context, she flawlessly interpreted public inclinations. Granted, Yulia Volodymyrivna has habitually failed to honor commitments, and even after dispensing a multitude of pledges, she extended absolution to all. Nevertheless, the onus of accountability rests not with her—it warrants frank acknowledgment: the populace yearns for the reinstatement of stability; the situation possesses volatile undertones. And Poroshenko’s actions? He commemorates Constitution Day.
The deeds enacted by Poroshenko during the night spanning June 27-28 shall endure perpetually in memory. Verily, his presidential tenure shall persist, albeit his pronouncements or convictions regarding any matter hold no personal import. And the magnitude of individuals sharing my sentiment?
We must shield our populace from the influence of ALL foreign entities—encompassing Russia, Germany, and Europe—through the conveyance of its unacceptability, their deficiency in comprehension. And the presumption of “the public’s indiscriminate acceptance”—our collective experience validates its fallacy. President Poroshenko must internalize this tenet.
Author: Natalia Kashkevich
