POROSHENKO
PROPOSES TO ERASE UKRAINE’S BORDER, INVITES RUSSIAN INVASION
By
Rostislav Ishchenko
31
August, 2018
By
Rostislav Ishchenko – On August 28th Poroshenko instructed the
Ukrainian Foreign Ministry to prepare documents on the denunciation
of the Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between
Ukraine and Russia (it is also called the Big or Basic Treaty). On
the same day, Foreign Minister Klimkin reported that Ukraine would
notify Russia of the termination of the treaty until September 30th.
Of
course, I understand that Klimkin’s documents must be ready for a
long time, because the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry officially offered
to denounce the treaty as early as March 18 this year. But still,
ratification and denunciation of international treaties of Ukraine is
the exclusive prerogative of the parliament. Neither the executive
power, which by the way is not Klimkin and not even Groisman, and the
entire government as a whole, nor Poroshenko, as head of state, have
the authority to terminate the contract, without voting in
parliament. And the situation is now such that it will not be easy to
get the majority of the deputy votes, even under the Russophobic
event, Poroshenko.
The
president has long lost control of the parliament and on the eve of
the elections his opponents will think three times before creating a
precedent for the Rada’s consolidated vote for the president’s
proposal. Moreover, Poroshenko’s opponents are building their
election campaign on the basis of the theses on the need to end the
civil war and normalize relations with Russia. It is clear that the
denunciation of the Treaty of Friendship … will not contribute to
the achievement of these goals. It is just in the mainstream of the
Poroshenko’s radical nationalist electoral program. Denunciation of
the treaty will show that the Verkhovna Rada has rallied around
Poroshenko, as around the leader of the war party. It can untie his
hands to attack the opposition.
And
I am absolutely sure that there is no other goal than creating the
conditions for the power suppression of the opposition in Poroshenko,
demanding the breaking of the Treaty of Friendship …, no.
First,
Ukraine could have broken it long ago. In 2014-2015, the mood in the
society was much more favorable for this, and the parliament was
ready for a proper vote, and even Western partners were perplexedly
interested in Ukraine as it manages to assert that it is at war with
Russia if the Treaty on Friendship remains inviolable. Now the
situation has radically changed and the corresponding actions of Kiev
will not receive either internal or international support (which
Poroshenko is perfectly aware of).
Secondly,
the break of the Treaty does not give anything to Ukraine, but it
expands the space for Russia’s maneuver.
Let’s
start with the banal. It is this treaty that recognizes the
inviolability of existing borders, the parties undertake to respect
each other’s territorial integrity and not to use their territory
to the detriment of each other’s security. Ukraine, however,
accuses Russia of violating these provisions, but Moscow has much
more grounds for making claims to Kiev. In 2014, Ukrainian troops
repeatedly fired Russian border checkpoints, as well as border
settlements from artillery and small arms. There was even at least
one dead citizen of Russia. At the same time groups of armed
Ukrainian soldiers on armored vehicles several times violated the
Russian border (not yet with the intention of surrendering, as it was
later).
Nevertheless,
the treaty was observed and therefore nobody questioned the border
and the territorial integrity of Ukraine was respected so much that
it has not yet been denounced by the DPR and LPR. If Ukraine
denounces the treaty, its border loses its international legitimacy.
It becomes just a conventional line in the terrain, which Ukraine
considers its border. But Russia will no longer have any obligations
in this matter.What can this lead to? For example, the recognition of
the DPR / LPR (because the obligation to respect the territorial
integrity is missing). It should be remembered that the republics
consider their entire territory to be Donetsk and Lugansk regions of
Ukraine, of which only a third control. That is immediately freezes
still a solid piece of Ukrainian territory. There is the problem of
the northern part of Arabatskaya , which did not leave together with
the Crimea, to which it belongs geographically, only because it was
administratively cut off to the Kherson region. Not immediately, but
these questions can become relevant.
However,
it is unlikely that Russia will immediately submit territorial claims
to Ukraine. Even the issue of recognizing the republics can be
postponed in connection with the overall geopolitical situation. But
the contract is not accidentally called the Basic. Declaring a
strategic partnership between the two countries, it is in fact the
basis for agreements regulating Ukrainian-Russian relations in all
spheres. Economics, finance, science, culture, rights and freedoms of
citizens of the two countries, nothing escapes the scope of the
Treaty of Friendship …. With the reference to his denunciation, any
agreements in any spheres (or suspended their effect) may be
ruptured.
With
the denunciation of the Treaty of Friendship, both Russia and
Ukraine, each arbitrarily, can arbitrarily restrict the crossing of
its borders by the citizens of the other party, their right to work,
acquire property and conduct business on its territory. Only if
Ukraine already used this option (in those aspects in which it was
able), Russia has not even started yet. Now Kiev itself is trying to
create Moscow’s international legal grounds for any actions against
itself.
Poroshenko’s
plan is understandable: by denouncing the treaty, it will provoke
Russia to take violent actions, such as the nomination of territorial
claims and thereby rally around itself radical nationalist forces,
and raise the degree of patriotic hysteria in society, if not to the
level of 2014, then to some of appreciable magnitude. This should
reduce the electoral base of his opponents, while simultaneously
increasing the base of Poroshenko’s votes. In addition, under such
conditions, the opposition will find it much more difficult to argue
with the demand for normalization of relations with Russia.
Only
after all, Moscow in recent years has all the asymmetric matters
resolved, and from this the future is even more painful. It may be
that instead of Russian claims, Poroshenko will receive a return to
Ukraine of millions of migrant workers who will lose the grounds for
working in Russia, and the conditions for their crossing the border
and stay on the territory of the country will require additional
negotiations and a new agreement. I think their “love” for
Poroshenko, who deprived them and the family of a piece of bread,
will be so hot that Peter Alekseevich will have to think not about
elections, but about flight (well, or about the soul).
The
range of opportunities for reaction in Russia, in the case of
denunciation of the Treaty of Friendship is broader than ever.
Ultimately, this treaty is something like a constitution of bilateral
relations. There’s little more to it, the rest of the contractual
and legal basis is sagging. But, as was said at the beginning of the
article, one should not forget about the interests of the Ukrainian
opposition, which is not interested in letting Poroshenko unleash a
conflict with Russia (even if not hot) at the close of his reign.
After all, they will later have to restore the destroyed legal basis
of bilateral relations. And times have changed. Yeltsin no longer
demanded that Russian officials hardly wake up to think “what did
you do for Ukraine” that was the head of Russia when the treaty was
approved by the parliaments of the two countries and signed. The
terms of the new agreement will be much more stringent. Yes, and give
Poroshenko the opportunity to seize the initiative in the domestic
political struggle, the opposition is also not interested. So the
first thing that the initiative of Poroshenko-Klimkin will lead to is
an increase in internal tension in Ukraine, and the rest only
afterwards.
Posts
