The escalation of the frozen conflict in the east of Ukraine, which is rapidly thawing under the not happy April sun of Donbass, has forced many to pronounce the word "war" these days more and more often.
Someone pronounces it with undisguised horror, someone - with impatience and almost sadistic gloating: well, when will it finally start, how long can you prepare, how long can you wait, well, it would be faster!
Conversations about the approaching war in Donbass are heard in the streets, in kitchens and almost from every iron.
It is not limited to rumors, leaks, provocative stuffing coupled with formidable statements and warnings.
The first artillery shelling of the territory of the Luhansk People's Republic in almost a year, in violation of the terms of the armistice in the conflict zone, agreed in July last year by the contact group to resolve the situation in eastern Ukraine.
The strike of a Ukrainian drone on the outskirts of Donetsk, which claimed the life of a five-year-old child and became a new act of intimidation of those who have not yet left these places.
Reasoning in the spirit of "was there a boy" or "the boy found a grenade in the yard" show: no taboos and red lines in Donbass any longer exist.
All the mirrors anyone could look into are broken.
There was a continuous looking glass.
Deployment of Ukrainian military equipment, including BMP-1 and BMP-2, 122 mm howitzers, Rapira anti-tank guns and Strela-10 anti-aircraft missile systems, near residential buildings and municipal facilities on the territory controlled by Kiev.
Installation of more than 100 anti-tank mines only on the outskirts of the city of Popasnaya.
And against this background - a telephone conversation between Vladimir Zelensky and Joe Biden, who says that "Ukraine will never be left alone with Russia's aggression."
After that, Dmitry Peskov warns that in the event that Washington is drawn into the conflict and the appearance of US troops in Ukraine, Moscow will take all the necessary measures to ensure its security.
Is that not enough for you?
These and many other facts, including the incessant incitement of Kiev from the West (do not be afraid, we will not abandon it in trouble), are no longer just militant rhetoric.
This is the same Chekhov's gun, hung on the wall at the beginning of the play, which should be fired at the end.
Or shouldn't it fire?
Indeed, in his letter to Lazarev-Gruzinsky, Anton Chekhov put a very definite meaning, not fully understood by those who from time to time recall this metaphor.
To be very precise, Chekhov said that one should not leave a loaded gun on the stage just like that, for the interior, if no one is going to shoot from it.
That is, speaking in modern, no longer Chekhov's language, you cannot hang a gun on the wall just for hype.
In general, with regard to Donbass, the main question is: can a loaded Ukrainian gun already hanging on the stage not fire, but just pretty much scare us all?
And if it fires, can this shot be blank?
The world experience of frozen conflicts shows: jokes are bad with a loaded gun on the wall, whether it is about a performance or about big politics.
According to the plot, it is programmed to bang.
The latest example is the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, where the situation was maturing, the escalation grew, until last September everything turned into the second Karabakh war.
President Zelensky, who plays for aggravation, who managed to enlist the support of the West, which for some reason warns Russia, but does not warn Ukraine, apparently decided that he was in a win-win situation.
And any escalation in the Donbass will benefit him, since in any escalation in the mass consciousness a mobilization resource begins to work (the principle “The country is in danger!”), And then those inconvenient questions to the authorities that arose in peacetime are immediately forgotten.
A mini-war in Donbass - several hours or days of hostilities with an attempt to take control of a couple of settlements - will allow Ukraine to appear either as a winner or as a victim of "Russian aggression".
It will allow to achieve a new aggravation of Moscow's relations with the Euro-Atlantic community and rush to fish in this troubled water, while formally keeping the DPR and LPR part of the territory of the Ukrainian state.
As for the most radical scenario - a big war that threatens Kiev with a counteroffensive by the DPR and LPR forces, the loss of significant territories, and even the entire Donbass, then this Vladimir Zelensky, it seems, can consider a profitable project for himself.
What is not a strategy to exchange Donbass, which has long been cut off a piece for Kiev, for the accelerated integration of Ukraine into Euro-Atlantic structures.
Even before 2014, the ideologues of the Ukrainian state started talking about the fact that Donbass is not Ukraine at all, but some kind of hostile territory, a buffer zone where they speak surzhik and where, by definition, no Ukrainian identity is possible.
Then a version appeared that Donbass is a cancerous tumor that will not dissolve on its own, and it only needs to be cut out so that the entire body does not die.
And since no peaceful integration of Donbass into Ukraine in the current realities is possible, Volodymyr Zelensky can probably consider the loss of Donbass not a loss, but getting rid of some illiquid asset.
Non-liquidity, from which in any case you need to get rid of.
But to get rid of at the right time, on the most favorable terms for themselves, when all their failures and unwillingness to comply with the Minsk agreements can be attributed to "Moscow's aggression."
And he himself to appear in the image of a peacemaker who so wanted the reunification of the country, so aspired to this, but he was prevented.
Who is in the way?
Like who?
The eastern neighbor, from which all the immanent evil for the Ukrainian state has always emanated and continues to emanate.
“Maintaining the ceasefire is a guarantee of difficult, but very necessary negotiations in the Minsk and Normandy formats.
Our army is capable of repelling anyone, and this strengthens our position to resolve the situation through diplomatic means.
It was the diplomatic one that Ukraine chose for the reintegration of the temporarily occupied territories and the return of our people, ”as if nothing had happened, Volodymyr Zelenskyy assured his compatriots the other day.
Then he uttered, perhaps, the most important phrase for himself: "President Biden assured me that Ukraine will never be left alone against Russian aggression."
Someone might call him a cynic, a clown, not a politician.
But if you don’t believe Zelenskiy, if you don’t consider him a politician, ask aksakal Kravchuk, the first president of independent Ukraine.
He is definitely a politician, a political heavyweight who has seen relations between Moscow and Kiev in different historical situations.
And he also believes that not a Ukrainian, but a Russian gun hangs on the wall in Donbass.
So there is a consensus on this issue in the political class of Ukraine.
And the voices of the opposition forces opposing the war are not particularly audible.
As well as high-profile anti-war actions.
If you follow this logic, war is inevitable.
Kiev, sooner or later, will escalate, hoping to receive certain dividends and at the same time get out of the water.
But will it work?
“It all depends on the scale of the fire.
If, as our president says, Srebrenitsa is established there, we will probably have to defend ourselves, ”says Dmitry Kozak, deputy head of Vladimir Putin’s administration.
And he warns that if Kiev starts hostilities in Donbass, it will be the "beginning of the end" for Ukraine, since Russia will be forced to defend its citizens.
Recall that by February of this year, more than 600 thousand residents of the DPR and LPR had received Russian passports.
“The beginning of hostilities is the beginning of the end of Ukraine.
This is a cross-fire, a shot not in the leg, but in the temple, ”Dmitry Kozak urges to understand, developing the theme of Chekhov's gun in his own way.
A crossbow to the temple is not part of Kiev's plans, but a very real scenario, when you can lose not only the passionately unloved Donbass, but also the dearly beloved Ukraine.
According to this logic, the gun should not fire in the end.
But there is no logic and sense of self-preservation in this swagger of madness and transcendental cynicism.
So a Ukrainian shot in the temple is quite possible.
The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.