Berlin: Realpolitik

The latest events in Vilnius and mass rallies against Yanukovych’s refusal to sign the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU, which on Saturday morning gave way to dispersal of peaceful demonstrators, are in the focus of attention of the world mass media. As is known, Germany played practically the key role at the Eastern Partnership Summit, when the agreement was not signed. However, this time the circumstances differed from those in Bucharest in 2008, when Merkel stood against giving the MAP to Ukraine. The Day asked Alexander RAHR, member of the board of German-Ukrainian Forum, to comment on how the failure of the Eastern Partnership Summit is perceived in Germany, as well as the latest events which led to Saturday dispersal of the Euromaidan.

“THE EU IS NOT GOING TO BREAK RELATIONS WITH YANUKOVYCH OR ISOLATE HIM”

“Germany is annoyed by what happened at the summit in Vilnius, because everyone had expected Yanukovych to sign the Association Agreement with the European Union and release Tymoshenko. They were waiting for him. But the expectations were not fulfilled. Therefore there is a great disappointment. The politicians here are to some extent afraid that Yanukovych will burn bridges with the European Union and move into Russian direction, which the EU wanted to prevent at any cost. I think the EU will not break relations with Yanukovych or isolate him. So, it is not going to treat him like all Europeans treat Lukashenko, but will still try to leave all doors open, hoping that Yanukovych will sign the Association Agreement and Free Trade Area Agreement next year.”

Is it true that Merkel invited Yanukovych to visit Germany after the morning meeting in Vilnius on Friday before the Association Agreements with the EU and Moldova and Georgia were initialed?

“I saw that Ms. Merkel reacted to the situation in Vilnius without emotions. On the eve of the summit she said that she felt that the agreement would not be signed. At the same time, Baltic and Polish leaders thought that they would manage to persuade Yanukovych at the eleventh hour. I think Merkel will talk to Yanukovych and she understands as well the current situation in Ukraine. On the one hand, Yanukovych is the president of one Ukraine, whose population is divided. We have published quite comprehensive data of public opinion surveys in Ukraine which indicate that 90 percent of western Ukrainians want to bind their lives with Europe, whereas 75-80 percent of eastern Ukrainians – with Russia. The Customs Union seems more interesting to them. We can see that all young people want to be with the European Union, whereas the older generation does not want to lose ties with Russia and the Customs Union. This is it, if we analyze the situation soberly – and Germans are able to analyze the situation soberly. Yanukovych cannot be driven into a corner, it won’t yield any results; we need to find a way out of current situation.

“Germany will have a new government. Social Democrats will come back to power, and they, of course, have always had a very specific, even Realpolitik approach to Russia, Ukraine, as well as Eastern Europe. Therefore I don’t exclude that the new government in Germany won’t immediately reject Yanukovych and Putin’s offer to lead negotiations about the future Eastern Partnership in this triangle. Today the European Union is rejecting it, because it does not want to give grounds to Russia to say that it won the geopolitical battle for Ukraine. I can feel as well that there is an understanding in Germany that they should have talked more to Russia and that the Eastern Partnership, which was initiated five years ago without Germany, should be focused on cooperation with Russia, too. Today these questions should not be changed, rather somewhat corrected. Therefore I think not everything is so bad; if all the sides will lead correct diplomacy, we might see some lessening of tensions.”

“UKRAINE WILL STAY IN EUROPE ANYWAY; ANOTHER QUESTION IS WHEN IT ENTERS THE EU”

What is Germans’ attitude to Yanukovych’s arguments he voiced at the Vilnius Summit that nobody hears his arguments that he has for three and half years been resisting Russia and, second, that no one wanted to hear his request to help Kyiv, as well as to involve Russia in the dialogue between Ukraine and the EU?

“Yes. This is just one picture of Vilnius events. But only one conclusion can be made in this situation. Yanukovych is playing up the European Union against Russia, and vice versa. But I think that Yanukovych’s mistake is that at first he, of course, wanted to go to Europe, he wanted to sign the Association Agreement, he wanted to enter history as a Ukrainian leader who, unlike Yushchenko, achieved the first most important real step in Ukraine’s EU integration. It is clear to everyone that there is no other possibility. Whereas Russia can go to Asia, it is impossible for Ukraine. Ukraine will stay in Europe anyway; the question is when it enters the EU.

“Yanukovych made a mistake when he started to speak about money and demand from the European Union some financial aid and compensation three or four days before the summit. You must recall that before that Yanukovych said that he wanted to the European Union, that it will be good for Ukraine if it enters the European Union, and he started to voice potential problems with Russia only in the last few days. By this he dumbfounded the European Union and most of Ukrainian populace.”

How will the situation develop? Will Germany’s attitude to Ukraine change?

“I don’t exclude that trilateral negotiations in some way will begin. There is no alternative to negotiations in this format. I don’t think Germany will support Yanukovych’s isolation, if the blood is not shed. If blood is shed on the Maidan, everything will be reconsidered. For now the president has apologized for what has taken place. Not everyone would do the same. I don’t think he will be equalized to Lukashenko. At the moment Europe understands that it needs to achieve the Association Agreement via Yanukovych. The door is not closed. The 2013 year is coming to an end, the 2014 year will begin soon, and in three to five months it is possible to come to agreement to Russia and explain that it is not a losing party. There is a possibility to build the relations like the President of the European Commission Romano Prodi offered, so that Ukraine after signing the Association Agreement could cooperate with the Customs Union. I don’t exclude that such an opportunity will be found (this is a political question, not only economic); then Ukraine will sign the Association Agreement, and Russia will launch negotiations with the EU on creation a Free Trade Area several years later, when the situation is resolved. I think we cannot exclude this version. This is an optimistic version. And the pessimistic one is as follows: everyone, including Europe, Russia, and Ukraine, will continue to make mistakes, confront one other, which will exacerbate the geopolitical conflict. And when next year we will be celebrating the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, we will find ourselves were we were 25 years ago. I think nobody wants this.”

ON SPECIAL ROLE OF RUSSIA AND LOSING AUTHORITY BY EUROPE

Do you believe that it will be possible to persuade Putin that the Association Agreement and Eastern Partnership do not pose any threat to Russia? European officials have said much about this since the initiative was launched, but as we can see, these arguments have had no effect.

“It is good that you have mentioned this. But it is the technical part of the process. I don’t want to offend anyone, but Russia is no Moldova or Georgia. It is at the least short-sighted of the EU to put Russia into the same basket with these countries and say they led negotiations with the EU by the book. Whether we want it or not, Russia is a different actor than these countries. Therefore we should have led a special dialogue with it within this partnership. I know that what I am saying is not maybe supported by the majority of Europeans. But sooner or later they will understand, too, that Europe, unfortunately, does not have anymore the possibilities to treat Russia, China, and other countries like in the 1990s. The world is changing. Europe used to say: we can make everyone follow our way, because we have values and money. But it is not true anymore. Europe does have wonderful values, but during the financial crisis other countries in Asia showed that their systems with other values proved to be stronger in terms of finance. And the question of who can help whom arose anew. Russia, China, and other countries can much easier help such countries as Greece to ride out the crisis than the European Union. Therefore the reality has changed, and I think Europe starts to understand it. Therefore we need to lead a special conversation with Russia within the framework of this partnership and no way at the cost of other countries’ interests, with an aim to improve the situation; another way is a conflict situation.”

TO THE POINT

“TRILATERAL NEGOTIATIONS MEAN THAT UKRAINE DE FACTO LOSES THE STATUS OF SUBJECT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS”

Volodymyr OHRYZKO, former minister of foreign affairs:

“Incidentally, Europe has made it very clearly that there can be only bilateral format, because the question is about a bilateral agreement between Ukraine and the EU. Therefore the memorandum the Europeans offered to sign in case the agreement is signed mentioned a very clear thing. This memorandum secures both parties’ interests, I mean macroeconomic help, and, what is very important, in case of necessity technical consultations are led in a trilateral format with the Russian Federation, possibly on the level EU-Russia or Ukraine-Russia. But those must be exclusively unofficial consultations. And trilateral negotiations mean that Ukraine de facto loses its status of subject of international relations, which means that two forces will in fact decide for Ukraine how it should act. This is a form of protectorate, rather than an independent state. Therefore this is a total loss of face in foreign policy for Ukraine. If it agrees for a trilateral format of negotiations about the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU, it means that Russia will dictate to both sides whatever it wants. How can our rulers misunderstand this? This is a mystery for me. Some technical consultations are a different thing, but there should no way be any participation of Russia on equal terms in bilateral contacts between Ukraine and the European Union.”