Ukraine Zmey © UNICEF/ The Children of the Contact Line in East Ukraine: An Assessment of the Situation of Children and Their Families Living in Government-Controlled Areas along the Contact Line in the East Ukraine Conflict Zone. Troitske Markivka Novopskov Bilokurakyne Milove Svatove Kyiv Starobilsk UKRAINE LUHANSK OBLAST Bilovodsk (GCA) Kreminna Novoaidar Rubizhne Lyman SEVERODONETSK Lysychansk Petrivka KHARKIV OBLAST Triokhizbenka Sloviansk Shchastia Stanytsia Luhanska Orikhove Krymske Kramatorsk Soledar Zolote Kirovsk Bahmut Popasna Pervomaisk Stahaniv DONETSK OBLAST Troitske LUHANSK Alchevsk (GCA) Svitlodarsk Brianka Kostiantynivka Dobropillia LUHANSK OBLAST Krasnodon Toretsk Debaltseve (NGCA) Dnipropetrovsk Horlivka Oblast Verkhnotoretske Enakieve Krasnyi Luch Sverdlovsk Pokrovsk Avdiivka Shahtarsk Antracyt Opytne Makiivka Rovenky Pisky Snizhne Krasnohorivka Torez Marinka DONETSK Velyka Novosilka Kostyantynivka DONETSK OBLAST Vugledar (NGCA) Novotroitske Komsomolske Mykolaivka Volnovaha Russian Federation Starohnativka Hranitne Telmanove ZAPORIZHZHIA Chermalyk OBLAST Pavlopil Sartana Novoazovsk MARIUPOL Shyrokine Mangush SEA OF AZOV EASTERN CONFLICT AREA Location of UNICEF Field Offices/Presence LEGEND Contact Line (~472km) Territory of Ukraine Settlement ‘Buffer Zone’ (5km Zone) Non-Government Unicef Field Office/Presence Controlled Area (NGCA) ‘Buffer Zone’ (15km Zone) UNICEF JUNE 2017 THE CHILDREN OF THE CONTACT LINE IN EAST UKRAINE: AN ASSESSMENT OF THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND THEIR FAMILIES LIVING IN GOVERNMENT-CONTROLLED AREAS ALONG THE CONTACT LINE IN THE EAST UKRAINE CONFLICT ZONE. 3 INTRODUCTION The conflict in Eastern Ukraine continues to threaten the weapons, the higher prevalence of mines and other explosive well-being of children throughout the region. Some of the remnants of war, and the greater presence of checkpoints and most vulnerable of these children are those living in proximity restricted movement areas (i.e. the contact line itself). As one to the contact line: the demarcation point distinguishing respondent in East Marinka put it: government-controlled areas (GCA) from non-government- controlled areas (NGCA). On the government-controlled side “Yes, it is terrible to have to listen to the shelling from alone, there are over 54,000 children living within 15km of the Kurakhove [about 17km from the contact line], but what contact line. With hundreds of ceasefire violations recorded they are listening to is us being shelled. And we understand daily along the contact line by the OSCE Special Monitoring that they have less work due to the conflict, but we have no Mission and the presence of mines and unexploded ordnance, work… If they get sick they can get to the hospital. If we get these children are exposed to the danger of armed conflict hurt during shelling, we have to wait until the shelling ends or in ways that children living beyond this zone do not face. But hope soldiers evacuate us… My child can’t go to kindergarten it is not only direct exposure to violence that distinguishes because our kindergartens were destroyed. Their children this area from territory further from the contact line. The are safe in school. Yes, they lose power sometimes, but I’ve creation of a de facto barrier to movement between GCA had to sit in cold basement almost every evening with my and NGCA, damage to transportation infrastructure and the husband and children for the last two months just waiting… 2 collapse of public transportation in many locations has greatly and the suspense is heavy. The war is here.” isolated settlements. This isolation combined with continued Though the respondent’s neighborhood in East Marinka is a violent conflict, infrastructure damage, and mined farmland particularly dangerous location, her point is nonetheless valid: has dramatically increased unemployment among parents, areas where shells fall, even if only rarely, suffer from different with many settlements having practically no work outside of challenges than areas out of range of these weapons.3 The government institutions such as schools and medical facilities. effects of this are palpable in settlements along the contact line. This high unemployment, coupled with a greatly depreciated To paraphrase a psychologist working for a UNICEF-sponsored Ukrainian currency, has deepened monetary poverty. The mobile team, “Around 15km from the front conditions get really conditions of, and access to, key infrastructure such as health, bad and around 5km from the front they go off a cliff.” education, and water has been negatively affected as well. The situation is, overall, one of greatly heightened vulnerability of With these distinctions made, it also must be stressed that those living along the contact line. the situation along the contact line is highly variable from settlement to settlement within the 5km zone or even in This assessment focuses on the conditions of children different districts of the same settlement and there are and their families living in government-controlled territory exceptions to almost every generalization. Regarding security within 15km of the contact line: a zone defined in the Minsk for example, ceasefire violations are not evenly spread along Agreements as a heavy weapons exclusion zone. In addition the contact line. Some 5km settlements are shelled daily, while to distinguishing between areas within the 15km contact line others have only been hit a few times in the last two years. and those beyond, this assessment makes a further distinction In fact, for the last three months of 2016, the vast majority between the conditions of settlements within 5km of the of ceasefire violations concentrated near smaller settlements contact line and those 5-15km away. There are certain factors around the city of Donetsk and the area around Mariupol. unique to the 5km zone that heighten the vulnerability of Economic security provides another example of such variance. children living there; chiefly the range of small arms and light Most locations have high employment, but in a small number of settlements factories or mines still operate and unemployment 1 For the purpose of this assessment, territory and settlements are described as remains low and spares the population from the degree of either government-controlled areas (GCA) or non-government-controlled areas monetary poverty faced in most settlements. The interactions (NGCA). GCA refers to territory controlled by the Government of Ukraine and NGCA refers to territory controlled by supporters of the so-called Donetsk and of these widely varying factors have a major impact on the lives Luhansk People’s Republics. This assessment is focused on children living in GCA of children along the contact line and are reflected in this report. settlements, so unless specifically marked with the label “NGCA,” all locations mentioned in this assessment will be government controlled areas. For example, the government controlled city of Mariupol will simply be written “Mariupol,” 2 while the non-government controlled city of Horlivka will be written “Horlivka Interview in East Marinka, November 4th, 2016. (NGCA).” The exceptions to this are the terms Donetsk Oblast and Luhansk 3 Commonly used 82mm and 120mm mortars have ranges between 0.5-7km. Oblasts. If these regions are mentioned without “GCA” or “NGCA,” then the They are usually fired some distance back from the contact line itself, so it is entire region is being discussed; otherwise “GCA” or “NGCA” will be attached. very rare for mortar shells to land further than 5km away from the contact line. THE CHILDREN OF THE CONTACT LINE IN EAST UKRAINE: UNICEF JUNE 2017 AN ASSESSMENT OF THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND THEIR FAMILIES LIVING IN GOVERNMENT-CONTROLLED AREAS 4 ALONG THE CONTACT LINE IN THE EAST UKRAINE CONFLICT ZONE. METHODOLOGY The first stage of this assessment involved a desk review compare conditions within the 5km and 5-15km zones. of available information collected by UNICEF Ukraine, Interviews averaged 55 minutes (90% fell between 40-80 its partners, academic institutions and the Government minutes) and were conducted in Russian language by two of Ukraine. This was combined with consultations with UNICEF consultants, one male social-science researcher UNICEF section chiefs, heads of field offices, and field office and one female clinical psychologist as per design to create monitors to identify gaps in information. a gender balance in the interview dynamic. Respondents were 85% female due to the strong demographic gender In the second stage, pilot interviews and focus groups were imbalance in education fields. Interviews covered a wide designed and conducted at the same time as data requests range of topics including (but not limited to), conditions 4 were made to raion and oblast-level education and health in schools, current security situation in settlements, facilities for compiling student numbers and geocoding employment for parents (both now and before the contact line facilities. Eleven pilot interviews were conflict), child protection issues, behavior changes among conducted with school and kindergarten teachers in the students and psycho-social support, current and pre- 5km zone, staff of UNICEF-supported community protection conflict enrollment figures (used to verify and update centers (CPCs), as well as village and city council members numbers shared by raions), IDP students, externat7 who worked in education and social services. Two pilot enrollment, students coming from neighboring villages focus