Paul
Goble
Staunton, March 23 – Even as Europe
and the United States encourage the countries between Russia and the West to
adopt a “both/and” approach to relations with the two, Moscow has signaled that
these countries must make an “either/or” choice and is demanding that Ukraine
break with the West as the price of good relations with the Russian Federation.
Such a demand
reflects Moscow’s growing self-confidence that it can do so because of the
difficulties many of these countries face and because of the West’s failure to embrace
fully some of these states. But it means that in ways resembling the Cold War,
Moscow is demanding that they isolate themselves from the West and subordinate
themselves to Russia.
And
consequently, while some diplomats and analysts may be inclined to play down
this latest development and view Moscow’s latest demands as limited to oil and
gas and to Ukraine, these demands and both the language in which they were
delivered and the individual who delivered them reflect the re-emergence of a
Russian approach that could re-divide the continent.
The case which gives rise to such
concerns is an article by Ivan Gladilin yesterday entitled “Moscow has Asked
Ukraine to Leave Europe” in which he describes a statement by Prime Minister
Dmitry Medvedev about Ukraine as showing exactly what Kyiv can expect in the
future depending on how it responds to that demand (km.ru/world/2013/03/22/organizatsiya-tamozhennogo-soyuza/706679-moskva-poprosila-ukrainu-vyiti-iz-evropy).
By his declaration, Gladilin
suggested, Medvedev “had put an end to much speculation” in the media about
Moscow’s supposed willingness to make concessions and shown that the Russian
government has adopted a united front whose position Ukraine must either accept
or face the consequences.
In Gladilin’s words, the Russian prime
minister “dotted the I” when he said this past week that “a gas consortium
between Russia and Ukraine can be established only on the condition of Ukraine’s
withdrawal from a whole line of corresponding institutions including the treaty
about uniting to the Energy Union.”
Such a withdrawal from Europe,
Medvedev continued, is a requirement for Moscow to be certain that Ukraine,
having enjoyed certain advantages from Russia for a time, won’t at some point
turn against “our interests, in this case the interests of Gazprom and the
interests of the [Russian] state as a whole.”
If Ukraine decides that it is not
interested in withdrawing from Europe and uniting with Russia, it is free to go
ahead, the Russian leadere said. But “that means that we will develop along our
own path, and Ukraine” can do the same. “That
is its sovereign right.” But Moscow is
going to “protect its interests” first and foremost.
Up to now,
Ukraine has been trying to have it both ways, signing agreements with Europe
and seeking observer status in the Russian-led Customs Union. But that can’t continue, Medvedev said. It has to make a choice, and Russia is going
to insist that it do so by holding the gas weapon over Kyiv’s head.
“Russia of course would be glad to
see Ukraine in the Customs Union,” and in the Eurasian Economic Union as well,
but countries that try to get the benefits of these organizations not through
membership but through observer status are going to be disappointed: “An
observer has no special rights,” Medvedev continued.
Consequently, “each country must
decide for itself what matters.” If Ukraine does not decide to join the
Russian-led group “entirely,” then it will not have “all the possibilities and
privileges of the Customs Union.”
Instead, it will remain outside, whatever illusions some Ukrainians have
to the contrary.
Some Ukrainian politicians
understand this reality, Gladilin says, and they recognize as well that at
present, Europe is offering nothing more than verbal criticism of Moscow’s
position as laid out by Medvedev. Unless
Brussels can give Ukraine something more, the journalist suggests, Kyiv will
have little option but to agree to Moscow’s terms, however harsh.
No comments:
Post a Comment