There was a great deal of enthusiasm at the university for organising a ‘Ukraine’ theme day. As a result, lectures were held last Wednesday at the Faculty of Communication and the Environment and the Faculty of Society and Economics.
The event was opened by Prof. Dr. habil. Khrystyna Dyakiv from the Ivan Franko National University of Lviv (Department of Intercultural Communication and Translation Studies). In her lecture entitled ‘A Look at the History and Present (and Future?) of Ukraine’, delivered in Kamp-Lintfort, she began by discussing the history of Ukraine: Ukrainian territory in the Middle Ages and the modern era, Ukraine as part of the Soviet Union, famines and Chernobyl. She then discussed the Orange Revolution, the Revolution of Dignity, the war in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions over the past eight years, and the war in Ukraine that has been ongoing since February 2022. Another topic covered was the current language situation in Ukraine. The speaker also spoke at length about her personal experiences during the first days of the war, her arrival in Germany with her daughter, and the situation facing internally displaced persons and those who have fled abroad.
The first item on the programme at the Kleve campus began with Prof. Dr Jakob Lempp, Prof. John Henry Dingfelder Stone and Prof. Dr Eva Maria Hinterhuber. Each gave their assessment of the war in Ukraine from the perspective of their respective disciplines. In his brief presentation, Prof. Dr Lempp (Professor of Political Science specialising in International Relations) referred to the actors involved in the war in Ukraine and their interests. He made it clear that the answer to the question of the reasons behind this war always depends on who you ask, and that there are very different answers. He also explored the possible outcomes of this war: ranging from Ukraine’s defeat to the democratisation of Russia.
Prof. John Henry Dingfelder Stone (Professor of Law specialising in International and Public Law) analysed the war from the perspective of international law. He stated that this was clearly not a ‘special’ or even a ‘humanitarian’ military operation, as Putin describes it, but rather an invasion – illegal under international law – of a sovereign state. He refuted the narrative used by Putin in his speeches—that the Ukrainians want to be liberated by the Russians—saying: “I don’t invite anyone into my flat and then attack them.”
Furthermore, Prof. Dr Eva Maria Hinterhuber (Professor of Sociology specialising in Gender Studies) analysed Putin’s authoritarian system and Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine from a gender perspective, focusing on civil society resistance – particularly the power of mothers’ protests, which have existed in Russia’s past and continue to exist today. In the ensuing discussion with the students, particular concern was raised that Putin might also have his sights set on other countries. The discussion also touched upon NATO’s position in this conflict.
This was followed by two lectures and a discussion. First, Dr Jan Niklas Rolf (research fellow in Political Science specialising in International Relations) used event data analysis to examine the conflict in Ukraine prior to 2016, comparing the various verbal and physical actions in this conflict between the EU and the Ukrainian government on the one hand, and the actions of the separatists and Russia on the other, and concluded that Russia and the separatists acted significantly more aggressively than the EU and Ukraine as the conflict unfolded.
Prof. Dr Hasan Alkas (Professor of Microeconomics specialising in International Markets) then presented his game-theoretical analysis of the war in Ukraine, discussing in particular how the sanctions and strong signals from the Western world directed at Russia had affected the course of the war. He concluded that, in game theory and in this conflict, there can be no win-win situation. Early sanctions, imposed before the attack, could have prevented the war, but once the war had begun, they made Putin even more aggressive. The longer the war lasts, the higher the cost to Ukraine and the more concessions Putin will expect in order to end his military actions. He also simulated various possible courses and outcomes of the war, including the course of a nuclear war.
Finally, Dr Natalia Shyriaieva, Professor of International Business at the National Technical University of Kharkiv, gave an eyewitness account of her journey with her 8-year-old daughter from Ukraine via Poland to the Lower Rhine, where she was taken in by Prof. Dr Gregor van der Beek. The two have known one another and each other’s work for years. She described how her life changed abruptly from 24 February 2022 onwards. She spoke of sounds one might only expect to hear in films and the uncertainty of whether they might be attacked whilst fleeing. Since 7 March 2022, she has felt safe, but does not currently know whether her workplace or her university is still intact. She is glad to have been welcomed and integrated here, but at the same time hopes for a swift end to the war.
Her colleague, Prof. Dr Taras Danko, also a professor of International Business, joined the discussion via a live video link from Ukraine. He is no longer in Kharkiv but is now safe further inland. He expressed his outrage at the Russian invasion and emphasised: “I don’t need any ‘liberation’.” He emphasised that Kharkiv used to be a vibrant city and now has a city centre in ruins. He hopes that a ceasefire will be declared soon and that Ukrainian institutions and infrastructure can be rebuilt as soon as possible.
The events at the university were met with great interest by students, staff and the general public alike. Further events are being planned.
