“Do Not Hit a Raw Nerve” Is the Basic Principle

That the presidents of Ukraine and Russia signed a state border treaty during Vladimir Putin’s recent visit to Kyiv was quite unexpected for many. Commenting on the document, the Russian press immediately noted that Moscow managed to defend its standpoint on sea borders because the treaty says that the two states regard the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait as their inland waters. In reality, the treaty points out that “nothing in this treaty impairs the positions of Ukraine and the Russian Federation on the status of the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait as inland waters of the two states.” What all this means, whether the Ukrainians will soon be visiting Russia on the basis of foreign-travel passports only, and whether we will be able to “break the Schengen wall,” leaving the border with Russia open, is the subject of an interview with Yury SERHEYEV, State Secretary at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, who headed the Ukrainian delegation at the negotiations on delimitation of the border with Russia.

“What does the quite unexpected signing of the Ukrainian- Russian state border treaty really mean? For as recently as a couple of years ago the talks seemed to be dragging on without an end in sight.”

“Although we had been conducting the negotiations since 1996, the process speeded up approximately eighteen months ago, when Ukraine and Russia finally understood that they should place their modern-time neighborly relations on a solid legal basis. It is the legal solution of the difficult problem of delimiting the common land border that dispelled all suspicions and distrust in the negotiating process. What provided a powerful impetus to the successful work of the two delegations was the political will of the leaders and governments of Ukraine and Russia to allow their border relations to take a civilized and good-neighborly shape. It was also very important that leaders of the borderline regions also took part in the negotiating process. Governors on both sides of the border made quite a sizable contribution to the solution of problems. It is they who suggested the principle of “not hitting a raw nerve” which in fact helped find a solution to seemingly insoluble problems, when, for example, a number of Ukrainian villages might end up on the territory of Russia.

“By this treaty, Ukraine and the Russian Federation have officially drawn, for the first time in the many centuries of their existence, the line of their state border. In other, juridical, words, they have delimited the border.

“We expect this treaty to be ratified, which will enable us and the Russians to discuss how to make the existing border promote cooperation, especially in the borderline regions, how to cross the border in a civilized way, and how we can join forces in combating illegal migration. Then we will engage in negotiations on other components of our cross-border cooperation, the legal basis of which has been laid by the border delimitation. We must come to terms about how we can establish a situation that would create no problems for the people living on both sides of the border, and make the border a reliable barrier for third-country illegal migrants and criminal elements.”

“Is there any progress at the talks on sea borders? For there have been a lot of speculations about this treaty’s clauses dealing with the bordering sea areas.”

“The subject of this treaty is determined by its first article: the state border line from the intersection point of the borders of three countries — Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia — to the Sea of Azov. This is indicated in a large number of documents, border coordinates, and in over a hundred maps. So the land border is the subject of the treaty. But Article Five of this document sets forth our desire to continue negotiations in order to come to terms — I stress, to come to terms — about the border across the adjacent sea areas, namely, the Sea of Azov, the Kerch Strait, and the Black Sea. This article reflects the two countries’ positions which I think are already coming closer, and they must come still closer if an agreement is to be reached. Yet, this will involve new talks. I think both sides are optimistic about the prospects.”

“Could you describe the border’s future status?”

“In the course of the border delimitation talks, my Moscow counterpart, First Deputy Foreign Minister Viacheslav Trubnikov, and I, who headed the border problems sub-commission, also discussed cooperation in such difficult matters as combating illegal migration, smuggling and drug trafficking; readmission; and the establishment of cross-border checkpoints. Agreements on these matters are already being drawn up.

“This is what forms the juridical basis of border relations. Speaking of new checkpoints, a European-style checkpoint was opened last year between Kharkiv and Belgorod oblasts. All this is supposed to promote our bilateral trade and cross-border exchange of people.”

“Does the West assist us in some way to organize the border with Russia?”

“These checkpoints are being modernized to make the whole border crossing procedure easier, to provide technical facilities for rapid identification of people, goods, transportation vehicles, and not to delay border-crossing travelers longer than is stipulated by the standards of civilized countries. We still have the problem of railway transport inspection: there are too long delays due to the outdated system of identification. Naturally, this modernization will be carried out with the assistance of international organizations, first of all, the EU. They are also interested in stemming the tide of illegal migration and helping us achieve the same standards of border-crosser treatment.”

“What do you think caused some Moscow sources to announce recently that from July 1 onwards one can only cross the Ukrainian-Russian border with a foreign-travel passport?”

“I find it difficult to comment on this. I do not know the source of these allegations. In all probability, this is wishful thinking. What is more, the Russian side has already disavowed this information. The problem is we have a very long borderline between Belarus and Russia, with very many people residing on both sides of the border, so it will take time for them to acquire these passports.”

“Is it possible, at least in theory, to meet the conditions for striking Ukraine off the Schengen blacklist and, at the same time, to keep the border with Russia open?”

“Not a simple question. Both Ukraine and Russia are interested in establishing border relations which would satisfy two important requirements. Firstly, the border should not obstruct intercommunication of the two peoples. Secondly, the border should obstruct the inflow of illegal migration, smuggling, and criminals. As both sides are striving for this and have already signed the first of a whole package of documents, we — Ukraine and Russia — are actually doing what the European community expects us to. I think the border should be transparent in the sense that Ukrainian and Russian citizens will not have problems with bilateral contacts, but it should be opaque for criminal elements.

“It is also absolutely realistic to establish some other transparent borders: it is a matter of negotiations. For our neighbors are already raising the question of a liberalized visa treatment for Ukrainian nationals. They are aware that otherwise they will also stand to lose. Incidentally, as recently as 10-15 years ago, there was a migration job-seekers from some admittedly well-developed countries to other, more affluent, ones. Demand for labor is an objective reality which other countries now reckon with and, incidentally, offer good agreements on quotas.”