The caution syndrome

The Russian and French heads of state came to office practically at the same time, with the inauguration in Moscow held on a traditionally large scale, with the police clearing the streets for the limos and outriders, and Russia’s main fortress ready to burst at the seams accommodating all the VIP guests. All this was meant to demonstrate Russia’s urbi et orbi status, along with its everlasting vertical chain of command, regardless of the recent protest rallies. Putin wanted all those present to see that he had the situation under control. Matvei Ganapolsky told the TBi Channel that Russia was exposed to rampant reaction.

In Paris, whose beauty is acknowledged by one and all, the ceremony was the exact opposite, considering that the taxpayer didn’t have to pay more for another president being sworn in, what with the world crisis and the need to tighten one’s belt. In the end the new President of the French Republic, Francois Hollande, stepped into the Elysee Palace without pomp, with the Diplomatic Corps and 30 guests in attendance, without family members, even without the Parteigenossen. Why? Because the head of a democratic state is fully aware of his responsibility for his country’s needs, above all the tax burden, whereas all those “sovereign democracies” offer vast room for uncontrollable and irresponsible activities. Here no one is held answerable for embezzlement, especially before the people.

What took place in Moscow and Paris would have passed without much ado, considering the different political systems, but then something happened in Brussels, and it had an impact on Ukraine.

The relations between the European Union and Ukraine are markedly strained, with noted figures, members of parliament, foreign ministers, heads of state and government voicing concern over Ukraine’s fixed trials and shaky democracy. German Chancellor Angela Merkel says Ukraine’s current administration is dictatorial and that it smacks of the Belarusian regime. Voices are heard for boycotting the Euro-2012 soccer events in Ukraine, yet all such campaigns appear to stop at a certain point.

This point is Russia, with Putin as head of state. Angela Merkel did not mention Russia as a nondemocratic country, despite the videos with Russian police brutally dispersing protest rallies (unlike their counterparts in Athens and elsewhere in Europe, the Russian protesters didn’t smash shop windows or set cars on fire; in fact, many just strolled down public boulevards. Of course, Moscow isn’t New York, walking down a city street peacefully is a problem, yet hearing a United Russia MP compare Russian policemen to US – even British – cops sounds absolutely hypocritical, but falsehood is their daily practice.

History is known to have never taught a lesson to anyone, politicians in the first place. There are many examples of sacrifices made to achieve some noble goals, ending in human lives lost and painful memories. Authoritarian regimes and dictatorships are known to have been shown their true worth and told to reconsider their attitude to the man in the street, yet in each such case the end result was verbosity concerning lasting peace and promises given by such dictators which they would keep, cross my heart and hope to die.

French Prime Minister Edouard Daladier and his British counterpart, Chamberlain, knew what they were doing when they signed a death verdict for independent Czechoslovakia in Munich. They believed that they would achieve lasting peace by making such a small sacrifice. They regarded rallies and military parades in the German cities as a manifestation of true strength, despite British intelligence reports to the effect that Germany wasn’t ready to start a war, that the German generals were afraid to start it, that even the Fuehrer was scared to start the campaign, that the Czechs and Slovaks were prepared to rise in arms to defend their country. All Deladier and Chamberlain had to do was say a final “no” to Nazi Germany’s invasion of Czechoslovakia, then millions of human lives would have been saved. As it was, when Wehrmacht troops were marching down Prague streets, France harbored the slogan Mourir pour Danzig? (Die for Danzig?) Most French politicians and their British counterparts agreed that the game wasn’t worth the candles. We know the outcome. The cost Paris – and especially London – had to pay.

Vladimir Putin’s inauguration presented a painfully memorable picture, with Gerhard Schroeder and Silvio Berlusconi among the VIP guests, considering that Schroeder has long been tagged as a Kremlin agent in Germany and Berlusconi is facing unpleasant interviews at the Italian Prosecutor’s Office. Both politicians are no longer active.

Europe, however, doesn’t want to pressure Russia to stick to its “sovereign democracy” regulations. Czechoslovakia was sacrificed in 1938-39. Moscow is forgiven many things today due to its oil, gas, and other preferential supplies. How can President Hollande pressure President Putin, considering Project Mistral, a contract worth billions of dollars during the crisis?

Europe appears to take humble measures against certain high-ranking Ukrainian bureaucrats, saying that any harsher measures would push Ukraine into Russia’s embrace. Ukraine’s administration, skilled in this kind of power play, is doing its best to support this myth. In fact, President Yanukovych flew to Moscow to do just that, being well aware that Moscow would agree to no concessions. There are also the problems in the relations between Yanukovych and Putin. In other words, no sober-minded European politician should be fooled by this situation.

Another scenario reads that Yanukovych can prove his loyalty to Europe by having fair, transparent elections in October. I can’t think of single politician anywhere in Europe who will buy this tale, what with the record of rigged elections in Ukraine. Easing the pressure on the Ukrainian administration, allowing its time and room for maneuver would help strengthen the existing regime. If all understand this but don’t act, then the reason(s) should be sought elsewhere.

Strange as it may seem, Europe doesn’t appear to be interested in Ukraine’s European integration. Analyzing the reasons rates a separate story. My impression is that Ukraine is part of a big game being played by Brussels and Moscow. Brussels is taking advantage of official Kyiv’s going through the motions of integrating with Europe to pressure the Kremlin, to the effect that Europe will seriously deal with Ukraine unless Moscow meets Europe’s economic/financial requirements with understanding. Ukraine calling it quits with Russia – as the Baltic States did – is a nightmare for many in the Kremlin, so keeping Ukraine as a pendulum seems to be comfortable for the players of this game.

All this is proof that Ukraine can rely on its own resources. Should other countries offer help, Ukraine would accept it with gratitude, of course. The current regime is well aware of all this. They stick to their schemes, so Europe should take more effective measures, for this would help European democracy, as well.