Kremlin shows its hand

President Yanukovych’s recent working visit to Moscow to attend a jubilee CIS summit also included a private meeting with the Russian President, Dmitry Medve­dev. There were Ukrainian media reports, referring to reliable presidential retinue sources, to the effect that this private meeting would dot the I’s and cross the T’s in the gas saga.

UNIAN reports that President Medvedev had this meeting canceled. A Kremlin spokesman informed the media but declined to specify. The Day called President Yanukovych’s Press Secretary Darka Chepak but she never answered the phone. In other words, at press time, the press service of the Ukrainian Presidential Administration had no comment on President Medvedev’s cancelation of the meeting with Yanukovych, as well as on any reasons behind it.

Prime Minister Mykola Azarov flew to Moscow to continue the gas dialog. His press service says Azarov plans to meet with Vladimir Putin, and that he will discuss matters relating to cooperation in the gas sphere for the next year, including the price for gas Ukraine will have to pay. One can just hope that Putin will have the time to meet with his Ukrainian counterpart.

COMMENTARIES BACK IN THE 1990s WE MADE A BAD MISTAKE ALLOWING RUSSIA TO USE GAS SUPPLIES AS POLITICAL LEVERAGE

Bohdan SOKOLOVSKY, formerly the Ukrainian president’s aide in charge of energy security:

“We have heard such euphoric statements. The situation with Ukraine’s energy security is critical, so the debates on the issue are in high gear. The only thing I can believe now is that those in power won’t give up Ukraine’s strategic interests in Moscow’s favor, what with the bad experience of the Kharkiv accords.

“In my opinion, a positive aspect is the current Ukrainian administration’s consistent policy aimed at lowering gas prices, and that the Gas Transportation System remains Ukrainian. What saddens me is Kharkiv accords, all over again.

“Can one expect the gas dialog with Moscow to end in Ukraine’s favor? Hardly likely. The Russian side has no reason for making any concessions. They have spent a long while scheming to make the gas price this high and all the terms and conditions as uncomfortable as they are now for Ukraine. It would be absurd to expect Russia to refuse the fruit of years of painstaking efforts. Ukraine doesn’t have cards strong enough to win this gas game — although it could have played the trump cards of alternative energy sources, liquefied gas terminals, increased domestic extraction, energy-saving technologies, alternative natural gas supply routes. All these arguments ought to have been worked out and coordinated a long time ago, for this kind of work takes more than a year or even two years. Should we start working on this now, getting this pile of convincing arguments ready would take five, even seven years, considering our condition. In other words, Ukraine stands a chance of getting prepared for making new contracts with Russia, but Ukraine has to make do with the existing terms and conditions.

“I believe that Ukraine will keep paying for Russia’s gas under the current contract, and that it will do so in 2013 and later, until Ukraine can come up with enough arguments for a pragma­tic dialog. One can negotiate a deal with Russia only with an ace up one’s sleeve. In the case of gas supplies from Russia, Ukraine could say something like here is the deal; either you pump your gas at our price, on our terms and conditions, or you don’t, but we have other options, so we can make a deal elsewhere. I believe that’s the only way to deal with Russia, and I won’t believe in any breakthroughs.

“Back in the 1990s, under President Leonid Kravchuk, we made a very bad mistake allowing Russia to use gas supplies as political leverage. This is precisely what Russia is exploiting in its dialog with Ukraine. In fact, Russia makes it perfectly clear that it will use its energy resources, particularly natural gas exports, to reach its political goals. Regrettably, this legacy had to be accepted by Leonid Kuchma, Viktor Yushchenko, and Viktor Yanu­kovych.”

FLIRTING WITH RUSSIA WILL MAKE THE SITUATION WORSE

Volodymyr MAISTRYSHYN, partner, project manager, Granite Opencast LLC, former member of the Ukrainian Parliament:

“Yanukovych doubtlessly flew to Moscow in a bad mood after having been shown the door by Europe… Our president’s critical remark concerning Europe’s support of the South Stream project is proof that Europe has assumed certain obligations after signing the Energy Charter. I don’t know who is to blame for failing to honor these commitments, but the fact that Europe failed to support the president of Ukraine (I hold this man in esteem) had an effect on his mood and on the status of the Ukrainian party to the talks. Ukraine is now left to face Russia alone. Ukraine hasn’t been helped by the Kharkiv accords or by the Energy Charter. Under the Charter, Ukraine has no right to sell its gas pipeline to anyone who sells gas to Ukraine. Europe is keeping a sharp eye on this clause and will demand Ukraine’s withdrawal from the Charter if and when such a purchase is made.

“Talking about Russia, how can you blame a wolf for eating lambs? Any flirting with Russia, as in the case of Kharkiv accords, or when asking for a lower price of gas in return for something, will make the situation worse. Ukraine, therefore, should behave accordingly because such flirting would result in what we have today. Hopefully, the Ukrainian industrial lobby in Russia will help coordinate the efforts of our top-level bureaucrats and spare Ukraine dangerous trends, like when one position is surrendered after the next. What kind of position is that of Ukraine being prepared to give up its pipeline on conditions of parity property?

“How will all this end up? The bad way if we don’t get protection, including from the judicial system.”