President Putin has expressed hope that a process undertaken by the OSCE would help to solve the crisis in Ukraine. What factors does Russia regard as important to make this process succeed?
It is of vital importance to launch as soon as possible consistent implementation of the Geneva agreement of 17 April on the basis on the Roadmap proposed by the Swiss Chairmanship-in-Office of the OSCE. Particularly essential is to stop violence which requires Kiev to put an immediate end to its punitive actions in the South-East of the country. We are confident that if Kiev implements these steps, leaders of self-defence forces in Donbass and Lugansk would react accordingly. It is also necessary to conduct a thorough investigation of all acts of violence including the tragic events in Odessa on 2 May. And certainly – neutralisation of Neo-Nazi and other right-wing extremists’ influence in Kiev and across the country.
All those steps would put in place conditions for the launch of a wide national dialogue involving all political forces and regions of Ukraine. In this context the ultimate goal of the series of Round tables announced by Kiev under the pressure from OSCE should be elaboration by Ukrainians themselves of a consistent approach to the constitutional reform based on the principles of inclusiveness, transparency and accountability.
The EU and USA say that Russia has failed to de-escalate the crisis. They say satellite photos show that there is still massive Russian military presence close to the Ukrainian border. What does Russia do to de-escalate the crisis?
Firstly, I cannot agree with such an interpretation. It is not Russia who staged a coup d’état in Kiev in February of this year and who is now conducting military operation against part of Ukrainian population. First and foremost, de-escalation depends on whether the so-called Government in Kiev is ready to implement the above-mentioned steps in practice. There is no sincere will for that from its side so far. It seems that they count on holding the elections on May 25 by all means and all costs.
Secondly, if we talk about external assistance for de-escalation, it is evident that the key role in this should play those who have influence on the leadership in Kiev, namely USA and EU. But unfortunately, on their part we observe just the opposite – encouraging Kiev to pursue the current course, including attempts to put all blame on Russia.
As far as Russia is concerned, we have clearly indicated our vision for the way forward towards a political settlement, we also supported the OSCE Monitoring Mission and the Swiss Roadmap. Moreover, on 7 May President Putin called on the representatives of the South-East of Ukraine to postpone the referenda in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions planned for 11 May in order to create necessary conditions for an pan-Ukrainian dialogue. It is not our fault that those people, brought to desperation by military actions, arbitrary arrests, torture and intimidation by the Kiev self-proclaimed authorities, still went forward with the referenda. We certainly respect the results of the popular vote which should be perceived by Kiev as an important signal.
As regard the allegations of Russian troops ostensibly massing on the border of Ukraine, those who raise these issues have not bothered themselves with any factual proof of their arguments.
After the exercises conducted in late April in the areas close to the Ukrainian border, Russian troops were brought back to their permanent dislocation. Moreover, we have facilitated a dozen inspections over the recent two months under the Open Skies Treaty and the 2011 Vienna document.
Remarkably, objective conclusions reflected in the official protocols of those inspections are consistently replaced with propaganda clichés announced to the public accusing Russia of violating its obligations. On 14 May the Russian delegation at the OSCE Forum for Security Cooperation in Vienna delivered a detailed briefing on the situation in the border regions, including satellite images, that provided ample proof of total lack of evidence supporting those claims.
Do you agree that the presidential elections on May 25 are important for the future of Ukraine?
It is a move in the right direction, but elections will not lead to restoration of normality unless all citizens of Ukraine understand how their rights will be guaranteed. Some people say that the Crimean referendum was illegal as it took place “at gunpoint”. But let me remind you that no single shot was made. In Eastern Ukraine there is a true war going on with heavy weapons. If that is something that contributes to free and fair elections, then I understand nothing in matters of freedom and fairness.
If we consider moreover the changes made recently to Ukrainian electoral legislation according to which voting may take place in just one single region and this would be enough for a national election and also a rather strange situation where there is no minimal benchmark for voter turnout, then people in the South-East of the country can hardly be expected to participate.
EU foreign ministers recently expressed that they “pay particular attention to all parties’ attitude and behaviour towards” the election. Will Russia encourage people from all parts of Ukraine to participate in the presidential elections?
I think I have already said in my previous answer that the elections planned for May 25 are important as a democratic mechanism – provided that necessary conditions to hold them are secured. And these conditions are elementary: the Kiev de-facto authorities must stop killing their own people in the East and South of Ukraine and must involve them, through their legitimate representatives, into a fully inclusive national dialogue on a future Ukrainian constitution. If these conditions are met people from all parts of Ukraine will be able to make their free choice. And we firmly believe that it is Ukrainians themselves, and not anybody from outside, who are to decide on what kind of a country they want to live in. And yes, we encourage them in this feeling.
How do you assess the impact of the sanctions that the USA and the EU have implemented? Do you fear stage three sanctions?
We fear nothing. And nobody. The sanctions demonstrate nothing less than a serious lack of wisdom and diplomatic skill on the part of our American and European partners. Confrontation is not our choice; it leads nowhere. We still believe reason and logic should prevail. If so-called “stage three” sanctions are introduced the EU will suffer most – worse than Russia and certainly worse than the US. Should the EU shoot itself in the foot? The choice is yours, indeed.
In your article on the home page of the Russian delegation to the EU you write about “Russophobia”. Others would argue that this is not an example of Russophobia but only critique of Russian actions towards the Ukraine?
Let me first give you just two examples to support my view. Among the few people who are actually happy with the latest gruesome turn of events are the leaders of NATO. As if the Ukrainian crisis was a God’s gift for the Alliance, providing it with a much-needed “raison d’être” in the post-Afghanistan period. But what does NATO build-up in the Baltic region have to do with Ukraine, other that expanding the artificial notion of “Russian menace”? Secondly, how would you explain senior EU politicians shaking hands with the leader of a Ukrainian party (currently part of the governing coalition) that has proclaimed its goal as “cleansing Ukraine of Jews and Russians” and described as racist, xenophobic and anti-Semitic by no one else than the European Parliament?
Generally speaking, criticism is in fact welcome. But phobia is radically different: while serious criticism always draws a nuanced picture, takes into consideration concerns and arguments of all parties involved and avoids one-sided simplistic explanations, phobia, on the contrary, is based on a dichotomy, clear-cut black and white approaches and ready-made answers to difficult multidimensional questions. So I call on you and on your readers to analyse again what has been said and written on Russia and Ukraine and draw your own independent conclusions. Not those imposed on you by others.
