Abstract:
Since late 2013, Ukraine’s contentious political environment has received many labels:
riot, revolution, coup, invasion, civil war. Unfortunately, the use of a particular label
often hinges on the user’s political sympathies and affiliations, which does not
encourage balanced discussions. Recently, Jesse Driscoll entered the fray with his policy
memo arguing that the Ukraine crisis could/should be described as a "civil war." He
has two overarching arguments: 1) that events in Ukraine fit the scholarly definition of
"civil war," and 2) should this description be consistently applied by actors in academia
and in policymaking, it will contribute to conflict resolution. Both claims are dubious. I
argue that "transnationalized insurgency" is a much more appropriate way to describe
the situation in Ukraine’s Donbas. I also explain why changing terminology will
probably not influence conflict resolution.
