Luhansk region: from the eastern gate to the eastern hole (a conversation with the author of the book “Post-Luhansk Region” Andriy Zaitsev)

At the beginning of November, the book “Post-Luhansk region. Cycles of regional history” by Andriy Zaitsev was published – a work that analyzes the history of Luhansk region, focusing on the events of the last decades. The author investigates the reasons that led to the occupation of the region and seeks to show how from the “eastern gate “Luhansk region has turned into an “eastern hole”.

Andriy Zaitsev is a native of Luhansk Oblast, a graduate of the Eastern Ukrainian University named after Dal. He worked for more than 15 years in the Luhansk regional administration. He is closely connected with the political life of the region, so he knows the political processes of the region from the inside. In July 2014, due to military operations, Zaitsev left Luhansk, moving first to Svatove, then to Siverskodonetsk, and later to Kyiv, where he published his book.

What processes took place in Luhansk on the eve of 2014? With what stereotypical standards do historians approach the Luhansk region? From what moment did Luhansk region become post-Luhansk region, i.e. entered the period of post-history? This is our conversation with the author of the book. Today we are publishing its first part.

All these processes happened before my eyes

A significant part of the social and political processes in Luhansk region took place before my eyes. I can’t say that I agreed with all the events that happened there, but they left their mark and became the object of my thoughts. The result of these reflections was the book “Post-Luhansk Region”.

The idea to write this book arose in 2020, but the opportunity to publish it appeared only in 2024. The publishing house was carried out in Dnipro, and the book is distributed through the online store of the Zaporizhia publishing house “RVV”.

My life as an official, at first glance, was quite routine. But the events unfolding in Luhansk region made me think about what happened since 2014 and even earlier. These were ambiguous processes, and I tried to understand their nature: how they arose, what they led to, who tried to manage them and what profit was obtained from it. In the book, I explore who ultimately benefited from these events and why Luhansk became what it is today. If you want a more detailed picture, I advise you to refer to the book itself. I may have done better as a writer than as a storyteller.

Two books – fiction and documentary

Andriy Zaitsev is the author of two books that explore the history and realities of Luhansk region in different ways. His first book, “Northeast”, published in 2013 in Luhansk, is an artistic futuristic description. In it, the author imagines what life in the region would look like if separatist sentiments had won before 2014. Written from 2007 to 2013, the book simulates scenarios in which Luhansk region leaves the control of the Ukrainian authorities, examines possible relations between Luhansk and Donetsk regions, as well as the role of external states in the development of such events.

My book “Northeast” is an attempt in an artistic form to explore how events might have developed if separatist sentiments had actually prevailed in the Luhansk region at that time. In the book, I model what life could be like under such a scenario, how relations between Luhansk region and Donetsk region could develop, and how other states would influence it.

The publication of the book coincided with the beginning of the Euromaidan, namely in January 2014. At that time, I admit, I even had a meeting with Hleb Bobrov, the author of a well-known book at that time, which also touched on the topic of separatism, although from a different perspective. To be honest, it was mainstream at the time: apocalyptic scenarios exploring the possible consequences of regional conflicts were in high demand.

Ideas about the separateness of the regions of Luhansk region and Donetsk region, which appeared after the events of 2004, turned out to be the basis for many books with a similar focus. However, I can say that my book, unlike some others, was not written by an “FSB agent” or a supporter of schism, but by a person who tried to understand the possible development of events and comprehend their consequences.

My book was published in 2013 thanks to my own efforts and funding. In it, I not only depicted a possible reality, but also tried to analyze how separatist ideas could affect the life of the region and its inhabitants. This experience helped me to better understand how important it was to prevent such scenarios from actually happening.

Did the prophecies of your first book come true?

We understand that separatist sentiments existed in Luhansk region for quite some time, they did not appear in 2004 and even, probably, not in 1991. Certain speculations on this topic by the Moscow regime have existed for quite a long time. I predicted that Luhansk would be left without heating and electricity and would become a place where gangs would rule. Part of these assumptions became reality after 2014. Unfortunately, the entire circulation of the first book remained in Luhansk, except for a few copies transported to Siverskodonetsk, where they were lost during the war.

And how did the idea for writing the second book come about?

The second book, “Post-Luhansk region”, is a journalistic work. The idea of ​​writing it arose in 2020, and the final version was completed and published in 2024. This work focuses on the analysis of socio-political processes that led to the occupation of Luhansk region. Unlike the first book, “Post-Luhansk Region” is a serious analytical study that tries to understand the origins and consequences of the events that changed the life of the region.

The first book was a kind of futuristic experiment, and the second was a deep study of reality. They have a connection, as ideas that have been brewing for decades finally manifested in the dramatic events of 2014.

What prompted you to “take up the pen”?

Luhansk region is a region with a complex, multifaceted history, which, unfortunately, has not been studied enough. This especially applies to the most recent period, roughly speaking, from 1900 to the present. There are very few historical materials about the Luhansk region, in particular, analytical works that would try to understand the problems of the region in depth. Publications that exist have extremely limited editions, not comparable, for example, to the scale of local history books published in Kharkiv or Donetsk regions. What can we say about the Dnipropetrovsk region, where the central avenue of the city of Dnipro bears the name of the famous historian and researcher of this region, Dmytro Yavornytskyi.

The lack of in-depth research prompted me to try to look at the history of Luhansk region in a new way, analyze the processes that took place in the region, and draw conclusions that may be useful for future generations of researchers. In fact, the history of Luhansk region reproduces the “small in the big” format. The attitude towards the Luhansk region in Ukraine is very similar to how Ukraine is perceived in the world. On the one hand, the region is experiencing tragedies – there is a war, people are dying. On the other hand, there are people who call it a “civil war” or try to create an ambiguous impression of the events. This complicates external perception and the formation of a complete picture.

Photo: IA “FACT”

My book, among other things, aims to demonstrate that Luhansk Region exists as an integral part of Ukraine. This is the Ukrainian Luhansk region, and this is a reality that cannot be ignored. It is very important to consider what processes shaped this region, what consequences they had, and how this may affect the future. For me, this is not just a reflection or an analysis. This is an aspiration to contribute to the understanding of the history and modernity of Luhansk region, which remains an inseparable part of the Ukrainian world.

Documents, blogs, oral histories

What sources did you use while working on the book?

There were very few sources to draw upon while working on the book. As an employee of the Luhansk regional administration, I mostly used official statistical data from state statistical bodies and the Central Election Commission.

Among the literary sources that came in handy, it is worth mentioning the book “History of the Luhansk Region” by Vitaly Kuril, created with the participation of a large group of authors. Although it was written in the context of contemporary politics, its materials remain valuable for understanding the region’s past. Another important source was Igor Orl’s book “The Story of One Battalion”, which tells about the birth of the “Aidar” battalion in 2014. It contains quite interesting and unique materials.

In addition, I consulted personal blogs and publications, but even with these sources, the information was lacking. It is because of this that I set myself the goal of filling the gap and leaving a written trail that will help future researchers to better understand the history and modernity of Luhansk region.

Is it difficult to write a story?

Writing books about modern history is much more difficult than about antiquity, than about the Neolithic and parking lots – a context where I do not judge anyone. Modern history is difficult to describe because many of those you write about are alive. They can, looking into your eyes, say that there is some other way of looking at the events that are taking place. And that’s normal. There is no one absolute understanding here, there is a plurality of opinions, each of which has the right to exist.

There is also a living oral history that cannot be ignored. These testimonies, these voices of people who experienced or witnessed those events are not just facts, they are emotions, experiences, tragedies, sometimes even memories full of bitterness. In such studies, it is necessary to be as objective and open as possible. This does not mean avoiding your own point of view, but it means having the courage to look people in the eye and defend it.

An attempt at rethinking

Do you know about the existence of the book “How Ukraine lost Donbas”? Did you use this work?

Yes, I know about its existence. Its authors are Denys Kazansky, a journalist from Donetsk, and Maryna Vorotyntseva, a journalist from Luhansk. However, these names may mean nothing to “non-Luhansk” people. Nevertheless, the book really deserves attention, although it has its own peculiarities.

Kazansky writes a lot about Donetsk region – probably 75% of the book is dedicated to it, while Luhansk region is mentioned much less, maybe 25%. Why so? It is difficult for me to judge. But it is noticeable that the author tries to emphasize the problematic nature of Donetsk region, often comparing it with Luhansk region, as a place where the situation was even worse. For example, the former head of the Luhansk regional administration Oleksandr Efremov is mentioned in the book only on two or three pages.

On the one hand, this reflects the general attitude towards Luhansk region in Ukraine: its history, problems and social processes are often perceived as something secondary. But I am convinced that Luhansk region has its own specifics, its own logic of development, which is important to understand. And this is exactly what I do in my book.

Luhansk region, like Donetsk region, was at the center of processes that were seen quite differently from Moscow and on the ground. For example, the story of how Putin called Galenka with a demand to withdraw the regional council and vote for independence shows that even the local elite tried to avoid direct confrontations. They were looking for ways to preserve their positions and capital without exposing themselves to open confrontation. But it did not save.

It is incorrect to accuse Luhansk region of bringing the war to Ukraine. Let’s recall that in February 2022, the attack was on Kyiv Oblast, Chernihiv Oblast, Sumy Oblast, as well as Kherson Oblast, which was already half occupied on February 24. It was a large-scale plan, and it is wrong to reduce it only to the events in Luhansk.

Luhansk elite are not to blame for what happened?

You can often hear that I am trying to justify some elite who have been ruling the region since 2014 or even earlier. But it is not so. The shadow of suspicions and prejudices that fell on those politicians, unfortunately, casts a negative light on the entire Luhansk Region and all its natives. This is manifested even in everyday situations, for example, when internally displaced persons are refused to rent apartments or the price is tripled.

In this context, it is important to understand that the unconscious actions of leaders lead to the fact that hundreds of thousands of ordinary people pay for their mistakes. And I want to show that Luhansk region is not a “problem region” as it is often portrayed. This is a region with its own logic of development, which in no way contradicts the Ukrainian state idea. Luhansk Region has its own specifics, its own view on social processes, but this does not at all mean a conflict with the all-Ukrainian identity.

Read about the continuation of our conversation in the following material.