From a visa-free regime to a free trade area, from Freedom to Likud

Yacov LIVNE, director of the Israeli Foreign Ministry’s Eurasia 1 Department, in charge of Ukraine and Russia, visited Ukraine the other day. In spite of a tight schedule of meetings and negotiations with Ukrainian officials, he found time to grant an exclusive interview to The Day. Mr. Livne told us about the first results of a visa-free regime and explained why the establishment of a free trade area is being delayed and why the alliance between Likud, a twin of Ukraine’s Freedom party, and the party Israel Our Home should not arouse concern.

INVESTMENT CLIMATE IN UKRAINE AND THE SYRIAN ISSUE

“There have been positive changes in the relations between our countries lately – first of all, because of the cancellation of visas. Now more Israeli and Ukrainian tourists are visiting Ukraine and Israel, respectively. This brings people closer, helps businessmen, and promotes positive economic ties. Many come to Israel to have a dip in the Mediterranean and Dead seas, visit the holy places in Jerusalem and Eilat in the south, when you have winter and we have what may be called quite normal summer weather. And, vice versa, when we have a hot summer, the Israelis willingly come here to freshen up.”

And what will you say about the fulfillment of the plan to achieve the pre-crisis trade turnover level?

“We have begun talks on the establishment of a free trade area. Incidentally, Ukraine is the first ex-Soviet country to enter into this kind of negotiations with us. The next round will be held in December in Jerusalem. We think that both sides – Israeli and Ukrainian – are interested in signing a treaty to this effect.

“Speaking of our economies, they are not so much competing with as complementing one another. From this angle, such negotiations are not supposed to be very difficult. Experts should meet, negotiate, and sign a free trade area treaty, which will provide a strong impetus to bilateral relations. Israel has signed such treaties with the US and the EU. Once signed, they brought about a drastic boost in bilateral relations. And it seems to us that we could move in this direction very well with Ukraine, too.”

But, oddly enough, the free trade area talks have been dragging on for so long…

“The concrete negotiations have been in progress for not so long – just in the past six months. It takes time to work out an agreement like this. There emerge intermediate options sometimes, which also need to be agreed upon. We think this is a process of rather a technical nature because both sides have come to a conclusion that this treaty will be mutually beneficial.”

What do you think about the investment climate in Ukraine? Is it easier now for Israeli business to come here?

“I think there are great possibilities for cooperation in this field, too. Israel and some other countries practice cooperation on a governmental level, when the two states agree upon mutual support of investments. We are negotiating with the Ukrainian side the possibility of signing a treaty like this. We recently signed this kind of agreement with Belarus. We began with modest figures, but today our agreements are worth 300 million dollars and involve Israeli companies that invest in Belarus as part of this treaty. It is possible to conclude similar contracts with Ukraine even on a larger scale.”

Mr. Livne, you are also in charge of Russia. So I would like to ask you if Moscow is contributing to the settlement of the situation in Syria which borders on your country.

“When we look at the current situation in the Middle East, we can see that it has been developing and changing rather fast of late. Israel is in the epicenter of these events. The situation may be calm in Israel itself, but we can see very clearly what is going on in the region. We are watching this and cannot remain indifferent. Unfortunately, the current Syrian regime is responsible for the killing of tens of thousands of Syrians, and, for this reason, we have stated that this situation must be put an end to. As for Russia, it naturally plays an important, by no means the last, role in the Middle East.”

Positive or negative?

“It plays an important role for both historical and present-day reasons. In general, both Russia and Israel are interested in a stable Middle East. In this sense, Russia is playing a positive role.”

But is it really positive if Russia keeps rejecting UN resolutions on Syria?

“Russia and we often and intensively discuss the situation in the Middle East, including Syria. It is no secret that we not always take identical attitudes to the Syrian problem. So the dialogue now underway between Jerusalem and Moscow is really important, for it promotes a better understanding of the two countries’ positions.”
 

Does Russia recognize Jerusalem as capital of Israel?

“You should ask the Russians. But if you take the Foreign Ministry of Israel, it is situated, naturally, in Jerusalem and all negotiations with the Russian side are held on its premises.”

And what do you think of Ukraine’s position on Syria?

“One of the reasons why I came here is to exchange opinions about the Middle East situation with our Ukrainian colleagues. I think we have a good mutual understanding of what is going in our region. The international community ought to support the processes of democratization and the forces that want to lead to a normal life in our region rather than those who lead to religious extremism or try to explode the situation. From this angle, Ukraine and we see things in the same vein.”

ON FREEDOM AND VOTE-BUYING

Mr. Livne, Germany and France used to look at the situation in Ukraine through the eyes of Russia. The same seems to be happening now with Israel which has condemned, in unison with Russia, the election of the Freedom party to parliament.

“This is connected with anti-Semitic statements.”

Were any of them recorded during the parliamentary campaign? I have found none in the Internet.

“I think the deputy ambassador can help you in this. I do not know if there were any during the election campaign.”

But it is the crux of the matter.

“But there was a political life before the election campaign, too. Whenever there are any anti-Semitic statements, they are the problem of not Israel or Jews but of the country where they are made. At the same time, we, as a Jewish state, cannot remain indifferent or refuse to react to such statements no matter where they are pronounced – be it Ukraine, Russia, France, the US, or any other place. Naturally, we are watching and monitoring such statements. They occurred at least in the texts of some Freedom leaders. I don’t think finding quotations is a problem. We respect the elections and the Ukrainian people’s choice. But, at the same time, we hope that the party that has been elected to parliament will behave more responsibly. I want to emphasize that our position will follow from our history and our own experience and will not be associated with any concrete state. Besides, what is connected with anti-Semitism or fascism is being condemned not only by Israel, but also by many other countries. From this angle, the situation is changing for the better and differs from what it was in other periods.”

The point is that Likud is a twin of Freedom. It is also called a xenophobic party which demands that Israeli citizens learn the native language and Jewish traditions. The Freedom party favors the same.

“There is a difference between a xenophobic party and…”

Likud is called xenophobic.

“Xenophobia is hatred towards other nations, minorities, etc. When a party supports learning the national language, it is not xenophobia at all – it is part of a normal national life. Xenophobia is something different. If you follow some statements of Freedom party leaders, you will see they do have this inclination. We expect this to change in the future.”

You know, Yanukovych used to say to European MPs at the beginning of his presidential term: do not listen to what I am saying but look at what I am doing. In all probability, there should be the same approach in this case. As for Likud and its alliance with the Israel Our Home party, Israeli newspapers are raising the alarm. The newspaper Haaretz published in this connection an article titled “Likud and Israel Our Home: towards a Totalitarian State.” Would you comment on this?

“The merger of Likud and Israel Our Home – is part of a normal political process in Israel. We are going to have parliamentary elections on January 22.”

Still, what will you say to the newspaper’s claim that this alliance is leading to a totalitarian state?

“There are very many journals and newspapers, and still more journalists, in Israel. Each of them has its own opinion. This is normal. I don’t think I should criticize them – it is a normal part of journalism.”

In other words, you do not share the media’s fears that the Netanyahu-Lieberman tandem may declare war on Iran to prevent the latter from developing nuclear weapons?

“As for Iran, Israeli society, politicians, and establishment have a very clear consensus: we cannot tolerate a nuclear Iran, we cannot but react to the fact that the Iranian regime of fanatic extremists is openly saying that the Israeli state must be destroyed, on the one hand, and is moving towards the production of nuclear weapons, on the other. But it is absolutely clear that this is a danger not only to Israel but to the Middle East as a whole. This is a danger to international stability and to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Today, very many countries are aware of this danger and are taking concrete steps to stop Iran. We hope very much that these steps will be effective. We have said more than once that Israel cannot but adequately react to this danger.”

Incidentally, which of the two – Obama or Romney – can better assist Israel in stopping Iran?

“Israel and the US maintain very close, strong, and trust-based relations. In this case, there is a clear bipartite consensus in the US that a nuclear Iran is out of the question. All the leading US politicians, including the two candidates, are saying so. From this angle, Israel, the US, and Europe are clearly interested in Iran being free of nuclear weapons.”
And what about another article in the same newspaper, “A Ploy Too Far,” and, in general, about the comparison of Israeli leaders and the Putin-Medvedev tandem?
“Israel differs greatly from Russia by very many parameters, from territorial size to many other factors. This also applies to the political system. We are a parliamentarian, not presidential, democracy. So it is very difficult to draw this comparison.”