The meeting of the Ukrainian and Russian presidents that started in Sochi on August 11 may become a turning point in the relations between the two countries. Yet the direction of the negotiations is still unclear.
The Russian economists expressed their concern about this issue and addressed a letter to the Russian Prime-Minister Vladimir Putin calling upon the Russian government to stop the tough “gas” pressure on Ukraine. According to them, the cooperation between the two countries should be carried out through the realization of the large joint projects.
Interestingly, Kyiv, which held the Russian-Ukrainian economic forum on Wednesday, was the first to react to the letter and not Moscow.
“I completely share the anxiety of the outstanding [Russian. – Author] economists,” said the Ukrainian Prime Minister Mykola Azarov addressing the forum, “I would like to claim that the economic relations between Ukraine and Russia are a much deeper issue than just the business prospects.” He concurred with Russian scientists that the declared large joint projects in aircraft and machine building, transport infrastructure and high technology are still only being discussed. The prime minister also remarked that despite the expected growth of the trade between Ukraine and Russia totaling 50 billion dollars this year, the Kyiv balance is negative because of the unprecedented gas price increase.
Besides, Azarov has presented the Ukrainian view on the main irritant of the Ukrainian-Russian relations – the gas issue. “Sooner or later the inequitable contract will seriously undermine the basis of the long-term cooperation,” the Ukrainian prime minister emphasized, “Even with the discount which followed the Kharkiv contracts the price is not commercial. The price for the Russian gas we receive is higher than the one for some European countries.”
As if he was anticipating the talks in Sochi and addressing his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin Azarov announced the position of Ukraine to the domestic and international community: “We are talking only about revising the contract so that it meets both Russian and Ukrainian interests and is based only on market principles. That is why we do not need any discounts or preferences. We only want to have fair relations.”
Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych arrived to Sochi and expressed hope that during the talks with Medvedev they would reach a compromise over the gas price for Ukraine. Answering the journalists’ questions whether Ukraine would seek compromise or would resolve the gas question judicially if the court found the ex-prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko guilty of signing the gas contracts Yanukovych said: “Of course we will discuss these questions. I think that both Ukraine and Russia are interested in finding compromise and we will try hard to do it.” “I think that today we will find the answers and make the adequate decisions,” said Yanukovych optimistically.
Dmitry Medvedev has turned the question around. “Certainly, we will talk about the integration processes with the participation of Russia and the probable Ukrainian accession if Ukraine finds it reasonable,” he said and only after that addressed the issue vital for Ukraine, “Of course, we will talk about gas cooperation that is traditionally complicated yet unavoidable issue.”
However, The Day before the talks started there had been attempts to wreck them. This is how one should interpret the information from Interfax (referring to an anonymous source in Moscow or in Kyiv) that Russia has suggested including the arrest of the Ukrainian ex-prime minister Tymoshenko into the agenda of the talks in Sochi. “It’s absolutely clear that Russia is staking everything defending the gas contracts and its important political bedfellow,” emphasized the source. This rumor could have been spread by both Tymoshenko’s and Putin’s supporters for whom Tymoshenko’s conviction in Ukraine means the manifestation of his corrupt principles of work. The last assumption is confirmed by the known unprecedented claim of the Russian Foreign Ministry: “We proceed from the fact the trial of Tymoshenko has to be fair and unprejudiced and meet the all the requirements of the Ukrainian law providing the possibilities of the defense and keeping to the basic humanitarian norms and rules.” The Russian diplomats did not fail to mention that “all the gas contracts of 2009 were signed in strict compliance with the national laws of both countries and the international law and both Russian and Ukrainian presidents gave the necessary instructions for signing them.”
Ukrainian political scientist Volodymyr Fesenko has explained this demarche: “Russia is not defending Tymoshenko but the contract of 2009. Indirectly… dropping hints that we can prosecute her for other causes but not for this one [gas contracts. – Author].”
Is there a possibility that the prospective presidential candidate Medvedev will use the Ukrainian factor and the trial of Tymoshenko in a hidden fight against his opponent? When asked this question, the independent energy expert Oleksandr Narbut has told The Day: “Of course, this temptation exists. Medvedev has to establish a contact with the Ukrainian president since only with his help the Russian president can receive serious arguments and facts. However, I do not see any real possibility to get the needed evidence for discrediting the 2009 contracts. Their results for Russia are more than amazing. The contracts are extremely profitable for Russia and remain in force; the Ukrainian government cannot find the political courage to refuse them. As a result, Russia and its gas monopolist [Gazprom. – Ed.] continue gaining high profit even on the falling market. So, Putin’s position is very strong no matter what. So, the current gas talks hardly have any chances to be successful [for Ukraine. – Ed.]. The only progress we can make is the new and realistic understanding of the complicated Ukrainian-Russian situation that the Ukrainian president might get after the talks. Russia makes the gas problems conditional on the entering of Ukraine to the Customs Union. Ukraine could table the questions that are able to tickle its partners’ nerves, for example, the refusal to ratify the treaty on the debts and credits of the former USSR. I think it could create the new talks’ configuration since our country has over 16 percent of them. As for the Black Sea Fleet, we can talk about the significant reduction of its territory and the objects it receives. Plus the ecological damage... I mean, Ukraine has some arguments. The question is whether our government wants to use them for it will make our relations with Russia yet more complicated.”
