Russian ambassador’s observations
The first press conference of the RF Ambassador to Ukraine Mikhail Zurabov produced an ambiguous impression. To be more precise, some of his observations are surprising. It should be noted that before starting to answer the journalists’ questions, Zurabov admitted, “At present I am not ready to make serious conclusions about the essence of the events taking place in Ukraine and my view of how Russian-Ukrainian relations are developing. Today I can speak about this only based on my own observations.”
Zurabov called the situation, in which the president, government, and the majority of the Verkhovna Rada are able to act in a coordinated way, a unique chance and an “emergence of quite an exclusive situation for the Ukrainian state.” “In my opinion, we have not seen a step in the past months that would be accidental or unreasoned,” he marked, commenting on the actions of the Ukrainian authorities.
Judging from the observations of the Russian ambassador, one can come to the conclusion that, on the one hand, he is versed in energy, finance, and demographic questions. He also knows what Ukrainian branches are of interest for integration with Russian branches, and aptly uses terms, such as bridging loan and aircraft production line. On the other hand, it appears that Zurabov has not managed to gain an understanding of modern Ukrainian history or the events that led to the Orange Revolution, and did not even read Leonid Kuchma’s book Ukraine is not Russia. Otherwise the Russian ambassador would hardly assert with deep confidence that “we (Ukrainians and Russians. — Author) are a single people with our nuances and peculiarities.”
It appears that Zurabov has failed to understand, or does not want to, that the topic of the Holodomor, the recognition of this tragedy as genocide of the Ukrainian people, is by no means aimed against the Russian people, who have also suffered under the totalitarian Communist regime. The Russian ambassador said at a press conference that “a sensitive reaction in our country was caused by the attempt to make mischief between our peoples using elements of our common history.” If Zurabov had looked into the matter, he would learn that nobody in Ukraine blames the Russian people for this tragedy. The court has named the culprits – all of them high-ranking leaders of the totalitarian regime. “Of course, the policy carried out in those years could not be called humane. The transformations that were implemented in order to realize a certain model of social and public development, led to immense human losses,” the Russian ambassador coolly characterized this tragedy.
Zurabov denied that Russia is exerting pressure on the Ukrainian leadership. Answering The Day’s questions on how should one perceive the statements of the Russian leadership concerning strategic partnership with Ukraine, with Russian MPs and experts demanding the Ukrainian leadership make Russian the second state language and hold a referendum on NATO in order to forever close the topic of Ukraine’s entry into the Alliance, the Russian ambassador said the following: “These relations have just entered an extremely precautionary and delicate level, in terms of tonality and stylistics of communication. Indeed, I have heard a number of statements regarding what you’ve just mentioned. But I can foresee that quite contradictory statements can be frequently heard in Ukraine as well. This is an absolutely normal political process. It should be understood that many people who made their political names and political reputation in the period of certain relations between Russia and Ukraine, cannot backtrack on this. They will go on with agitating public opinion and use any opportunity to reassert themselves as defenders of national interests – that is how they are going to present themselves. I treat this with utmost tranquility, because I think, if you want to work in the kitchen, you should not be afraid of embers.”
However, less than a week ago, Zurabov spoke at the International Roundtable “Ukraine and Russia: New Cooperation,” within the framework of the Great Russian Word Festival in Yalta, stated, “All proposals formulated by Russians for their Ukrainian colleagues of course have a severe time limitation. If there is no reaction to this proposal for half a year, a year, 18 months, Russia will, unfortunately, resolve the problems on its own.” But the ambassador speeches are inconsistent. Whereas at Yalta Zurabov introduces time frames for solving some problem or another in our mutual relations, thus resembling an ultimatum, in Kyiv he declares a benevolent and polite attitude. What is the real attitude of Russian leadership to Ukraine?
Seemingly, the Russian side has understood that out of various reasons Ukraine does not want, for example, to integrate its aircraft industry with the Russian one. Zurabov has admitted that he had no data to prove the prospect of rapid integration of the Russian aircraft and Ukrainian aircraft manufacturing complex. “I can say that in the near future it will be possible to create a joint enterprise with a 50 to 50 share, which will be producing the planes ANTK Antonov. A joint venture’s task will be to optimize this production, as well as after-sale maintenance,” he said. The ambassador considers that in the near future it won’t be possible to expect the same dynamics in Ukrainian-Russian relations that as those from before the Kharkiv accords.
Answering the question on the prospects of cooperation in the energy sphere, Zurabov said, “We understand how delicate Russia’s energy cooperation with European countries is for Ukraine.” At the same time, he tried to explain the logic that guides the Russian government in its aspiration to build bypass gas pipelines. Marking that the level of competitiveness on the gas market is increasing, the ambassador said that under these circumstances the construction of new transport networks is a strategic, rather than an economic decision.
“We have huge currency reserves, therefore we are investing them into the infrastructural projects that could provide more efficient or more adequate supply routes of Russian energy raw materials, to Europe among others. Therefore one should not see this as something aimed against Ukraine’s interests,” he explained. The logic of the Russian leadership’s actions is quite clear and it is defined with the help of the expression, “They have money to burn.” According to Yurii Boiko’s statement, the Ukrainian leadership has actively started to seek ways of diversifying their gas supply. Thus the drop in positive dynamics in Ukrainian-Russian relations looks quite logical.
Answering the question of a Ukrainian journalist, whether Russia is ready to refuse building a bypass way in exchange for the access to the Ukrainian gas transporting system, the ambassador said, “I know the answer, but I won’t tell you. This is a question for our next meeting.”
As is known, Ukraine’s Minister of Fuel and Energy Yurii Boiko has recently stated that building the South Stream Pipeline threatens Ukraine’s national interests in the energy sphere. Apparently, the Russian ambassador has not heard this statement. Yet Zurabov said that before the second round of presidential elections Viktor Yanukovych was speaking about Ukraine’s interest in investing money into the South and North streams (In fact Yanukovych spoke about Ukraine’s interest to take part in their construction. – Author).
Journalists also asked the Russian ambassador how his Ukrainian was coming along. He promised that within a year he will have quite a decent command of the language and will be able to show this. “You can be sure about this. I am a persistent man.” By the way, answering the question about the complexity of the language, he said, “Whereas Chinese is equal to seven European languages, Arabic – four European languages, Ukrainian is equal to a half European language.”
Zurabov considers Ukrainians happy people, because they are bilingual. “You have a deeper understanding of many words existing in Russian language than the people who have been speaking Russian since their birth and have never heard Ukrainian.” He used as an example the words “druzhina” (squad) and “rodina” (fatherland), which are used by Russians without giving a thought about their primary content.
However, he stated, “Now I am in a situation, when I try to define as precisely as possible for myself, on what occasions, what circumstances and in what amount I will need Ukrainian in Ukraine in the nearest years.” Similarly worrying is the Russian ambassador’s confidence that everything is fine with freedom of speech in Ukraine. In his opinion, many things are presented as if they are the consequences of the political process in Ukraine, although they are most likely to be the result of the cluster of certain economic interests – the change of some paradigm of political developments is always followed and will be followed by redistribution of property and the emergence of conflicts.
“I have not plunged deep into this problem, I will make inquiries, and it seems to me if I don’t find the precise reasons behind these developments, I might express some anxiety to some of my close friends,” he said. It sounds all too diplomatic for an ambassador performing a diplomatic mission for the first time in his career.
