Three conclusions from Munich forum

Valerii CHALY, deputy director general, Razumkov Center:

“Syria and Ukraine were the key items on the agenda of the 50th Munich Security Conference. The Ukrainian question was in the foreground (at least in terms of media coverage). The fact that both the political opposition and the government were represented at the forum enabled all the leaders to shape their vision of and assess the situation in Ukraine. The expected decisions not always come up immediately after a conference. We already know about some of them:

“1. Western counties have formed a common attitude: condemnation of the facts of violence, the necessity of continuous monitoring, establishment of international commission to inquire into violations of the laws of Ukraine and international conventions, and the necessity of permanent presence of Western representatives in Ukraine.

“2. It is understood that the situation in Ukraine is rapidly crossing the limits of a purely domestic issue. There were different approaches. US Secretary of State John Kerry emphasized that ‘nowhere is the fight for a democratic… future more important today than in Ukraine’ and that the US and the EU ‘stand with the people of Ukraine’ in this struggle. He urged Kyiv to choose whether to be with the entire world or one country alone. This triggered a very nervous, for an experienced diplomat, reaction from Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. This in fact shows that the Ukraine situation is assuming a geopolitical nature. It is the Ukrainian issue that has prompted the main players to reconsider their responsibility for the future of Europe and the formation of mechanisms that will ensure stability on the continent. The Ukrainians have drawn the whole world’s attention by the fact that, by defending their personal security and their country’s sovereignty, they are also standing on the way of new dividing lines in Europe. It may be for this reason that, perhaps for the first time in the past few years, leaders of the European Commission and EU member states called for giving Ukraine a prospect for European Union membership.

“3. There is in fact nobody to defend Ukraine’s position on the international stage. Official representatives are catastrophically losing trust. The former foreign ministers Petro Poroshenko and Arsenii Yatseniuk, as well as Vitali Klitschko, who is very well known in Germany, seem to have taken on the job of drawing up, jointly with Ukraine’s partners, a plan of riding out a grave crisis.

“As for sanctions, it is sad that they may affect Ukraine as a whole. Particularly, the Council of Europe may deprive the Ukrainian delegation of the right to vote as a first step. In my view, it is not the most effective measure. Sanctions should be of a pinpoint nature and imposed on those who not only break the laws of Ukraine, but also commit crimes against humanity.

“The Council of the European Union is going to discuss the sanctions issue in the near future. Some countries have already banned the entry of some persons involved in human rights abuse in Ukraine and introduced stringent financial control. These measures, now in force, are having an impact on the situation, as are, incidentally, the Russian ‘sanctions’ which create export problems for some influential Ukrainian businesspeople. As a rule, international factors have a post factum effect. They try to respond to a situation, whereas they are supposed to think and act preventively. Sometimes one must be more resolute in order to ward off a catastrophe later.”