Is Europe implementing Vladimir Putin’s proposals?

It seems that Europeans are growing more inclined to meet Russia’s demands in order to resolve the conflict in the Donbas. Let us recall that the Kremlin stated during the first crisis talks with the leaders of the US, the EU, Germany, and France that Ukraine abandoning its NATO aspirations might be a prerequisite for ending the conflict in eastern Ukraine, and this promise should be guaranteed by the West, while federalization of Ukraine was proposed as the other condition.

European Council President Herman Van Rompuy called on November 25 for “a comprehensive solution to the Ukrainian crisis” involving decentralization or federalization of the nation. Let us recall that “a reasonable federalization idea” was supported before by Germany’s Economy Minister and leader of the German Social Democrats Sigmar Gabriel.

The president of the European Council also called for trust-building measures in the dialog between the parties to the conflict. In particular, he spoke in favor of holding a roundtable involving key players in the mold of the Oslo peace process of 1993. “We need to bring principal figures of the crisis in Ukraine to the negotiation table to reach an agreement similar to that reached in Oslo in 1993,” Van Rompuy said in a speech he presented at the L’Institut d’Etudes Politiques de Paris (Sciences Po). Otherwise, in his view, the consequences of Ukrainian crisis for Europe may be as grave as those of the Balkan Wars. “Worse, we are looking to having a war on the continent, which risks becoming the most deadly conflict since the Balkan Wars. Boundary breakers undermine peace,” Van Rompuy stressed.

The Day turned to former Ambassador of Ukraine to Israel, the US, and Canada Yurii SHCHERBAK, who represented our country in the State of Israel when the talks were held in Oslo, for a comment on Van Rompuy’s new proposals.

“When talking about the Oslo process, we must remember that it was conducted in complete secrecy for a very long time. No one, not even the US intelligence knew that Yasser Arafat’s Fatah party and the government of Israel were talking to reach a peaceful settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This is why our case cannot be seen as analogous to the Oslo process. It was totally different. Fatah was an internationally recognized force, in no way similar to the self-proclaimed terrorist republics in eastern Ukraine.

“Our starting point has to be the words of President Petro Poroshenko that the Minsk Accords have not been put into practice, which must be set as a precondition for any further negotiations. Moreover, any subsequent negotiations may be conducted only in the format recognizing Russia as a party to the conflict. It is a party to the conflict, it is responsible for 90 percent of what is going on. This may be the basic precondition of these negotiations. Moreover, the negotiations must involve the US and the EU, or at least Germany and France. Only then we would be able to talk about restarting this process, where the signatures of states carry much higher weight than the signatures of so-called ‘Donetsk People’s Republic’ and ‘Luhansk People’s Republic,’ which have no standing under international law.

“As for the self-proclaimed republics, we should do everything to stop their international legal recognition, for any step towards negotiating and signing new agreements with them will mean their recognition without any major progress for our side. After all, you cannot sign new deals while old ones are not fulfilled.”

As you know, the Oslo document entitled Joint Declaration on Principles envisaged introduction of local government in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank for a period of five years, which should have led to a permanent settlement. Is it appropriate to apply any of its provisions to our situation?

“This comparison may be just a superficial analogy. Our situation is completely different. We must remember that these Oslo negotiations culminated in a Nobel Peace Prize awarded to Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat. They shook hands. Can you imagine, say, Oleksandr Zakharchenko, a leader of a self-proclaimed criminal republic, shaking hands with the lawfully elected president of Ukraine on the White House lawn? I think not.

“It was a completely different process. As a result of the Oslo Accords, Fatah was officially recognized as a party to negotiations by the Israeli authorities. Indeed, the terrorist activity against Israel was suspended for five years while Fatah was in control. However, the rise of Hamas has led to the history of terrorism repeating itself.”

What is your take on the general European understanding of the situation in eastern Ukraine? Rompuy stressed in his statement: “I no longer call this a ceasefire. Future ceasefires will meet the same fate if we restrict ourselves to controlling the situation on the ground. We need a comprehensive solution. We must find a way for Ukraine to become decentralized (or federalized) and inclusive country. We must define Ukraine’s place in Europe.”

“It is surprising to hear this federalization talk from a man who recognized the European perspective of Ukraine and signed agreements with Ukraine, including the Association Agreement. It is even more surprising to hear proposals to change the political system of Ukraine. The format proposed in Minsk and the laws on special self-government for the occupied areas which were passed by the Verkhovna Rada very reluctantly and under pressure, and have been canceled lately – these measures offered sufficient prospects for decentralization and simultaneously gave rise to no illusions that Ukraine could be dictated its constitutional order from outside. Van Rompuy is in no position to talk about federalization or decentralization of Ukraine. Moreover, decentralization has been proclaimed as one of the main areas of the political reform to be conducted in Ukraine. So, European officials should not interfere with it. However, when Ukraine will join the EU, they will get the right to dictate Ukraine certain things. But they should not dictate anything to Ukraine today, at the point when they are not going to officially confirm the European perspective of Ukraine.

“Why would not they talk about a federal polity for, say, Romania, which has a huge Hungarian minority in Transylvania? This issue can be raised as well, but no one does so, because Romania is a sovereign country, free to determine its political structure. Ukraine is this way as well. It just sounds ridiculous and is unacceptable for Ukraine. We need more imagination and creativity to solve the conflict. I even think that we, unfortunately, lack active leaders today, people like Zbigniew Brzezinski or Henry Kissinger, who could come up with an acceptable format. Let us recall the negotiations on Vietnam, conducted by Kissinger in a fiendishly complicated environment when the US, a great power, lost a war to North Vietnam and had to get out of this situation without losing face. The US found a way out of it then. However, for this success to be repeated, we basically need the active participation of Russia. If Russia torpedoes all proposals, stand by and say that it is not a party to this conflict, that it is an internal matter of Ukraine, this approach will prevent any progress.”

By the way, federalization of Ukraine is precisely a Russian demand...

“It is in no position to make such demands. Ukraine should not change its political system as dictated by a foreign power. It will be a shameful thing to have a sovereign nation, a founding member of the UN submitting, in the 21st century no less, to the imperialist chauvinist Nazi Russia’s diktat to rewrite its Constitution so that it pleases the Kremlin. The EU itself will despise Ukraine, should we agree to that. Therefore, we must protect the national interests of Ukraine and not yield an inch on such issues. This is a complicated process, because Ukraine is likely to have to make certain concessions. However, we have already proved that we made concessions, we adopted special laws for those areas currently occupied by the Russian terrorists. We went for it, but our outstretched hand has been rejected, and now, of course, the situation has grown more complicated. Even so, it is clear it should be resolved through negotiations, not through direct warfare and repetition of the horrors which would see tens of thousands of deaths.”