Occupied Ukrainian cities highlight intent of genocide among Russians

Residents describe a ruthless campaign of ‘ Russification ’ and a reign of terror by the new administration

To find out what Russian President Vladimir Putin has in store for Ukrainians if his invasion ultimately succeeds, one need look no further than the captured areas of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, as well as Donetsk and Luhansk, all of which were formally annexed by Russia in September 2022. A ruthless campaign of “Russification ” is being implemented, and any sign of Ukrainian identity and nationhood uprooted.

About half of the pre-war population has left occupied Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, and for those who remain forcible integration into the Russian Federation, its laws and regulations has followed. The Russian curriculum is taught in schools, Ukrainian news sites are blocked on the internet and state Russian narratives are broadcast on local news.

Russian passports are a requirement to run a business, open a bank account or receive payments from the state, and 90% of people now have them. Mass expropriation of assets and property has followed for anyone who has left for Ukraine and elsewhere — a three-day window for reregistering property and assets was allowed late in 2023.

Public servants have been sent to administer the territories, and farm land has been offered to settlers from Russia. Those who wish to leave are quietly allowed to do so, as this removes disloyal citizens. These actions violate international law on the treatment of civilians in wartime.

Residents describe a reign of terror by the occupying administration, as well as the Russian military and security services. That includes detention, disappearances and widespread use of torture. Areas liberated from Russian occupation typically reveal mass graves. Even those with proRussian sympathies live in fear under what is arbitrary and brutish rule.

Voicing opinion that opposes Russia’s presence is extremely dangerous. In the occupied town of Skadovsk in Kherson province, a woman known for vocal opposition was taken from her home and hanged in public, according to media reports. Surveillance of private communication is systematic. “Filtration camps” run by Russian intelligence are operated to uncover real loyalties, with harsh consequences for those who fail the test. Under these circumstances most people are self-censoring their opinions to focus on survival.

Active and passive pro-Russian sentiment existed before the war in these areas. A minority

— about 35% — identified as Russian and wanted closer relations, though even this did not equate to support for invasion and annexation. Judging actual opinion now is difficult. There are no independent media or critical civil society groups.

Publicly, at least, a large group voices support for officially sanctioned narratives and participates in the occupation administration. At the same time, a Ukrainian resistance is carrying out sabotage and assassination of collaborators, at extreme risk to those involved.

The ostensible justification for Russia’s invasion was to protect the rights and identity of Russian speakers. Since Russia’s interventions in Crimea and the Donbas in 2014, laws passed to elevate Ukrainian to the national language have meant that Russian has been displaced, the native language of 34% of Ukrainians, while overt proUkrainian national identity has strengthened. Although language and ethnic tensions were accommodated within the political discourse before the invasion, Russian intelligence sought to inflate those conflicts and make them the basis for breakaway movements backed by covert military operations. This has also been the playbook in neighbouring countries Georgia and Moldova, where pro-Moscow statelets have been established.

In democratic societies, ethnic selfdetermination and minority rights issues are channelled through political and social discourse — local elections, legislation, historical redress and referendums on secession. This has been followed for decades in the Canadian province of Quebec.

Secession through political violence is a last resort. In Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea, they were the first resort; in Kherson and Zaporizhzhya, they have been imposed by military conquest. At no time have residents of these areas been given the opportunity to freely exercise their rights on their future status. Russia’s presence now ensures they never will.

It is in this troubled context that the ANC Youth League delivered its ill-starred endorsement of the referendums on Russia’s annexations in September 2022, sending an electoral observation team that praised them as an expression of democratic will. Rubber stamping the equivalent of a bantustan election, with no effort to uncover whether conditions of political freedom and independence exist, is more than shameful.

Electoral observation teams have a serious duty. They must prove that an election is fair and free, and they must use rigorous methodology. First and foremost, rights of freedom of expression and political association must be upheld and independent media, civil society and opposition activity allowed. Observing the calm casting of votes by the compliant and extrapolating from that — which seems to have been the extent of the Youth League’s due diligence — does not constitute good practice.

The absence of opposition or independent civil activity together with coercive conditions — detention, torture and disappearances — make the idea of them being representative of democratic will a cruel mockery.

Predictably, the result “in favour” emerging from these “referendums ” ranged between 94% and 99%. No credible international organisation participated, and most observers ended up being oddball Western conspiracy theorists. Aside from SA, official delegations included Venezuela, Syria and Belarus. UN secretary-general António Guterres called the referendums a “violation of the UN Charter and international law” that cannot be considered a genuine expression of popular will. By turning a blind eye to this and to manifestly oppressive conditions, the Youth League has declared what it chooses to see.

Any further Ukrainian territory taken by Russia can expect a similar fate. Putin’s ultimate vision for the rest of Ukraine is not even a satellite state in the Russian orbit, but a binational one in which Russia has ultimate dominion.

Rhetoric from Moscow has grown more threatening in recent months. In the most chilling, on January 17, security council chair Dmitry Medvedev denied Ukraine’s existence as a country and said any attempt to maintain its sovereignty would guarantee permanent conflict with Russia. It is better, he advised Ukrainians, to

“choose life”, and “life in one large common state, even one that they don’t much like at the moment, is better than death — their death and the deaths of their loved ones”.

There you have it, ANC: genocidal intent, spelt out in black and white.

Mason, an associate of Johannesburg-based risk and resilience consultancy Eunomix, is on assignment in Ukraine.