• 
  Eng
• 
  Укр

• Focus on Ukraine
• Exit-poll
• Eurointegration / NATO
• Polls
• Media about us
• Photo Gallery
• Video Gallery
• Press Releases
• Archive

Focus on Ukraine, May 17- 23, 2010 - WORDS FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE REVISITED

  PDF
 

І. Overviews of political events of the week

May 17

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev made a 2-day official visit to Ukraine.

He signed a number of inter-state agreements with his Ukrainian counterpart Viktor Yanukovych. They pertain to improving the European security system, regulating the problems in the Trans-Dnistria region and security in the Black Sea region.

They also signed several international agreements on the demarcation of borders not related to controversial territories such as the Kerch Straits.

The ministries of education and science and culture and tourism of Ukraine and Russia also signed agreements on inter-departmental cooperation.

Member of OU-PSD Andriy Parubiy challenged a criminal case filed against him for illegally putting pressure on the head of the Verkhovna Rada and members of parliament. He told journalists that this criminal case nothing other than political persecution aimed at applying pressure on the political opposition.

May 18

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev told students of the Kyiv Shevchenko National University that Russia will lobby the interests of Ukraine on an international level, particularly in terms of relations with the IMF.

He said Russia is buying up IMF bonds, which means it has a lever of influence on the decisions the organization makes.

The European Parliament approved a loan of half a million euro to Ukraine by the EU on condition that the money goes to reform of the country’s energy sector. The EU hopes such assistance will help stabilize the Ukrainian economy.

The parliament of Ukraine adopted the Law on the Procedure for Admission of Divisions of Armed Forces on the Territory of Ukraine in 2010 to participate in multi-national military training sessions.

The law allows armed forces of other states to take part in training on the territory of Ukraine, in particular, in the Ukrainian-American Sea Breeze program, the Polish-Canadian-Lithuanian Maple Arch program, the multi-national Barrier program, etc. 

May 19

Vice Premier of Ukraine Serhiy Tihipko informed that the Cabinet of Ministers approved the plan for priority measures for Ukraine’s integration into the European Union in 2010. He said that at the moment an agreement on partnership concerning a free trade zone is currently being drafted.

May 20

Head of the Accounting Chamber of Ukraine Valentyn Symonenko accused the government of Yulia Tymoshenko of misappropriation of UAH 1 billion.

He said the premier allocated 80% of the money in the reserve fund without the appropriate substantiation. He also noted that last year the expenditures from the reserve fund of the national budget were two and a half times the losses incurred by emergency situations.

VR Speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn predicted during a plenary meeting of the Parliamentary Advisory Council on Issues of Self-government that local elections will be held in March 2011.

May 21

Ukraine’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Kostyantyn Hryshchenko told the parliament that Ukraine has intentions of handing over its national gas transport grid or the Kerch Straits to Russia responding to questions posed by the opposition on the results of the talks held between Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in Kyiv on May 17.

Hryshchenko assured that talks about the merger of the gas transport grids of the two countries are not being held on an inter-state level or on an inter-departmental level. The talks are only about the effective use of the gas transport grid.

Russian MP Konstantin Zatulin stated in a live broadcast on one of Ukraine’s TV channels that Ukrainians are Russians living on the fringes of Russia.

Assistant Chief-of-Staff Hanna Herman, who was also present on the live broadcast, protested such judgments, stating they are derogatory towards Ukrainians.
As a reminder, Zatulin was barred entry to Ukraine a number of times during the presidency of Viktor Yushchenko.

II. Analytical Reference

WORDS FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE REVISITED

The change of leadership of Ukraine after the latest presidential elections, the formation of a new government and the emergence of a new parliamentary coalition are testimony to the new course of the Ukrainian government. The accents on setting priorities of domestic and foreign policy and the style of management have changed.

The new Ukrainian government has dynamically developed relations with Russia. In a short period of time it managed not only to revive Ukrainian-Russian relations, but also make them quite amicable. Moreover, the accents and tonality of bilateral relations have been shifted.

On May 17-18, 2010, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev paid an official visit to Ukraine. As the Russian president calculated, this was his seventh meeting with Yanukovych in recent times. During the third meeting of the Russian-Ukrainian inter-state commission, a total of five agreements were signed: on demarcation of the Ukrainian and Russian borders, cooperation in the aerospace industry, inter-bank cooperation, cooperation in the sphere of education and science and cooperation in the sphere of culture.

The leaders of the two countries also signed three agreements on improving the European security system, security in the Black Sea region and regulation of the Transdnister problem.

On a positive note, the agreements signed on May 17-18 were the result of a certain compromise. The government took into account its lessons and experience in the signing of the Kharkiv agreements, ambiguous public opinion on this issue and discussion of agreements in Ukrainian and international mass media and somewhat slowed down the pace and gravity of issues put up for discussion in this round of bilateral relations.

An undeniable plus is the agreements reached concerning the border. Specifically, an inter-state agreement was signed that allows Ukraine to demarcate its border on an international legal level. The Russian side demanded that a agreement on the border be signed in a package deal, meaning the simultaneous signing of an agreement on demarcation and delimitation of borders. The plus for the Ukrainian side is that only the agreement on demarcation was signed. The agreement on delimitation was not signed.

The deferral of signing the agreement on delimitation gives grounds to surmise that the option of dividing the border administratively as it was done in Soviet times, which does not satisfy the Russians and on which Ukraine is insisting, was the basis of the talks. Factoring in Ukraine’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and national interests, the new government must continue to devise a strategy of maintaining such a position.

During the talks Ukraine conceded to side with Russia on a new system of European security, security in the Black Sea region and regulation of the Transdnister problem. Regarding the latter, Ukraine lost its position of sovereignty and supported peacekeeping operations, which means that it supports the continued stationing of the Russian military base on the territory of Transdnistria.

Ukraine also conceded in the sphere of humanitarian aid. So far, this applies to the list of measures that give Russia certain possibilities of implementing its plans of introducing the Russian language in the sphere of education and on the whole. Strengthening cooperation in education and introducing student exchange and education programs are testimony to attempts at ideological indoctrination.

Taking into account the fact that Ukraine showed an example of the most successful democratic transformations on the territory of the former CIS and Russia decisively departed from democracy and is moving in the direction of creating an authoritarian, neo-democratic state, the domination of Russia will have a negative impact on democratic processes both in Ukraine and in the entire region of the former USSR.

Economic forum – delusions of Ukrainian authorities

The economic forum held as part of the official visit of Russia’s president to Ukraine should have provided answers to the burning question of the current Ukrainian government – namely, why should Russian-Ukrainian relations be harmonized and what positive results will this give to Ukraine at large and Ukraine’s economy in particular.

The main result of the economic forum – Russia is not willing to swap economic concessions for political services to the degree and scope that today’s Ukrainian leadership is hoping for. There will be no non-parity exchange. Russia is interested in entering the Ukrainian market with confidence and take over all leading positions in the most interesting sectors of the economy.

Such a variant in no way satisfies Ukrainian oligarchs and Ukrainian business and in no way envisages resolving social issues in Ukraine which the government is counting on. The result incited certain amazement on the part of Ukraine, seeing as the latter is prepared to integrate with Russia, but the latter does not want to pay for integration with Ukraine. This is likely the first conclusion that can be drawn from the first round of Ukrainian-Russian relations.

The Ukrainian government is totally enthralled by the Russian political or socio-political models. It believes this model is ideal and is interested in devising something along this line. Today the Ukrainian government is considered close-minded, is not transparent when it comes to decision-making and unsubstantiated and reactionary in terms of the dynamics of making strategically important decisions. The tonality of talks with Russia is turning into an echo, neutral relations with the West and authoritative signs of conducting domestic policy.

The contemporary political Putin-Medvedev model is not effective from a political vantage point. It is an authoritarian neo-imperialistic monopoly of one political force.One must be blind to not see the flaws in this model. The Russian political model is based on the Russian economic model, which can in no way be applied to Ukraine as here the conditions are different. The greatest problem and threat is the blindness of the Ukrainian government as it does not have an objective view of Russian realities.

The Ukrainian government needs to contemplate the situation more quickly and stop existing on short-term private interests, but instead start building a concrete strategy for conducting an independent policy.

The Ukrainian government needs to quickly contemplate the situation and stop existing on short-term private interests, but instead start building a concrete strategy for conducting an independent policy.

Comments (total 0)Write Comment

Add New Comment

Your Name:	*
Comment:	*
Please enter symbols from the image.:	*