UKRAINIANS HAVE SET THE WORLD IN MOTION
Lilia SHEVTSOVA, leading analyst, Brookings Institution:
“The year 2014 will go down in history as one that called into question generally accepted political axioms and upset the world order that had formed after the end of the Cold War; one that challenged European security and stability in the post-Soviet space. We’ve all of us been witness to the completion of another chapter in [the book on] world progress and the beginning of the next one, the contents of which remain to be seen. We owe all this to Ukraine, rather to the Ukrainian Euromaidan, considering that the Euromaidan triggered off an avalanche of events in a direction and with consequences that were hard to predict. One thing remains clear: the amorphous, marshy, rotten, intertemporal era has come to an end.
“Although the new world political landscape is only starting to take shape, certain features – rather, the trajectory of world development – can already be seen. For one thing, it is clear that the West won’t be able to sit what’s happening out, remaining comfortably complacent. The liberal democracies have suddenly found themselves facing the choice between remaining comfortably complacent, looking on as the world is turning into a Darwinian field of enmity of all against all, or getting back on stage and remembering their values. For many in the West this choice was a shocking reality.
“The post-Soviet personalistic-power-based development model also found itself under threat, and the crisis in Ukraine signaled the beginning of a new turbulence in the post-Soviet space. Ukraine simply proved to be the weakest link in the post-Soviet chain that broke it asunder, demonstrating that country’s desire to get out of the gray zone and move in the direction of a new kind of statehood, the rule-of-law state.
“The Russian elite (the upper echelons anyway) is a different most dramatic story; it is struggling to get back to the past because it is not prepared to live in the 21st century. However, regardless of who is moving forward, to the future, or backward, to the past, the international community has awakened itself to reality and is trying to solve – or at least figure out – the problems that have piled up over the past two decades.
“Ukrainians have set the world in motion. If Ukraine succeeds in creating a new kind of statehood, the rule-of-law state, consolidating the nation on the foundations of civism, this will be a great breakthrough. This will serve as an example for Russia and other post-Soviet states. The challenge facing Ukraine is more complicated and dramatic than the problems that faced the Baltic states, primarily because the Kremlin cannot see the Russian autocratic state without Ukraine as its province; also because the West that was prepared to integrate the Baltic states is still unprepared to offer Ukraine its embrace.
“Ukraine’s breakthrough toward a liberal democracy is far more difficult to accomplish. This breakthrough would be a test of strength for Ukrainians, their elite in the first place. It would prove their staunchness, consistency, and self-sacrifice. Ukraine’s breakthrough is the number-one civilizational challenge of the 21st century. It must demonstrate that the West is prepared to return to its principles and remember its mission. At the same time, it is a test for the world’s authoritarian ‘International’ and its leader, the Russian autocratic state. It must demonstrate their being prepared to expand and confront the liberal democracies.
“It is true that we are witness to a head-on clash between civilizations, although many in the West refuse to recognize this obvious fact, trying to reduce this crisis to a geopolitical conflict. There are influential forces in the West that are indefatigably calling for a compromise to the detriment of Ukraine, so that Russia gets Ukraine and [Europe] gets peace, security, and business as usual in return. If this line prevailed in the West, the obvious diagnosis would be the revival of the Munich spirit [back in the 1930s]. We know the end result! Personally, I doubt that all those accommodators and compromise lovers will get the upper hand because there is yet another trend, an increasing public understanding – also on the political level – of what will happen if the positions are surrendered again. There are signs of understanding that another ‘deal,’ trading principles for an outward conciliation, will only trigger a new wave of aggressiveness on the part of a system that is struggling to survive by breaching the rules of the game. Another thing is that they still can’t get together for this battle, and they don’t have the leaders for it. Nor can one rule out the possibility of the Kremlin making every effort to produce a generation of such leaders. Look at what the Kremlin has done to transform Chancellor Merkel!
“Last but not least, Ukraine and its struggle will have an impact on Russia. Some will say I’m overstating the situation. Absolutely not. The Battle of Ukraine has already caused a crisis in the Kremlin and undermined Russia’s stability. Its regime has turned out to be incapable of coping with the military paradigm to which it has reduced Russia. It is anyone’s guess how many resources are left for it to survive. This might as well be the beginning of the end of that autocratic regime. True, this agony could last for quite a while and, naturally, cause a great deal of suffering.
“It is true that Ukraine has to pay a heavy, incredibly heavy price for its desire to break out of the historical impasse and get back to normal. Ukrainians will have to go through the ordeal. Most importantly, however, they have set off on this journey, and it is hardly possible to stop this nation which is resolved to protect its dignity.”
2014: REFLECTIONS AND PROGNOSIS
James SHERR, Associate Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Program at the Royal Institute of International Affairs, Chatham House (UK):
“From the twilight of the Yanukovych era, a few observers had a grim and unerring sensibility about what was going to take place. In an interview for this paper in February 2013, I expressed the view that Ukraine’s authorities ‘could put the state at risk.’ Over a month before Yanukovych’s departure, I warned that a Russian occupation of Crimea was a ‘serious possibility.’ Two weeks before Crimea’s annexation, in a rare burst of optimism, I had the temerity to tell this paper that ‘there will be a qualitative change in the West’s behavior, and Russia will feel it.’
“Today there is no basis for predicting what will happen tomorrow. Vladimir Putin has created a world of fantasy held together by half truths. His policy has sharpened every point of cleavage in Russia’s geopolitical position and his own presidency. Between 2008 and 2013, he played a high risk game based on a treacherously shrewd grasp of his opponents’ deficiencies and illusions. But he never was reckless. The danger today is that recklessness could be his only escape from the bind he has created for himself.
“First he has narrowed the circle of power to the point where the party game in Moscow is guessing whether three, four or five like-minded individuals have direct access to him. The methodology of the security services and GRU is now the methodology of the state. On the 19-member US National Security Council, there are four members with economic responsibilities. On the 31-member RF Security Council, there is one. This is not auspicious for a president whose nerves react slowly to economic stimuli.
“Second, and not for the first time, he has catastrophically misjudged the character of Ukraine. He has persuaded the most Russophile country in Europe that Russia is its mortal foe. He is also doing what no Western leader has done: persuading Ukraine to solve its own problems. For the first time since independence, Russia has become more of a threat to the average Ukrainian than his own authorities.
“Third, he has purged the once inexhaustible ranks of Russophiles in the West, including, fatefully, Germany. Beginning with Frank-Walter Steinmeier, those who have worked tirelessly to bring Russia into the European family now feel indignant and betrayed.
“Fourth, he has boxed Russia into a ‘civilizational’ conflict that it cannot win. Between 2000 and 2008, he appealed to Europe on the basis of ‘common European culture.’ Since then, he has demanded Europe’s respect for Russia and russkiy mir as a ‘distinctive,’ ‘historically conditioned’ ‘civilizational’ pole in world politics. Without Ukraine’s participation in this civilizational project, it ceases to exist.
“Those who have sewn this corset show no sign of accepting a compromise that other would find acceptable. They retain an impressive capacity to achieve lose-lose outcomes and a formidable body of supporters who believes Pyrrhic victory will be better than defeat. The West has an incurable fascination for ‘endgames.’ But it would be wiser to think about new games and ways to prevent endless turmoil. And it is no longer imprudent to contemplate dramatic change in Russia, even collapse.”
“UKRAINIANS LOOKED FOR EUROPE, BUT HAVE FOUND THEMSELVES INSTEAD”
Aliona HETMANCHUK, Director, Institute of World Policy:
“I see the statement ‘Ukrainians looked for Europe, but have found themselves instead’ as the most apt description of past year’s processes. Self-identification, which was going especially strongly in eastern, central, and southern regions of Ukraine, was a fantastic show, even if it involved primarily separation from foreign identities, in this case mostly the Russian one. Most importantly, Ukrainians, or people holding Ukrainian passports, began to ask themselves the question ‘Who am I?’, and the vast majority of their responses were in favor of Ukraine. It was well-defined self-identification that served as the watershed between war and non-war: there has been peace where Ukrainians make up a majority, but regions populated mostly by mere Ukrainian passport-holders have been engulfed in war.
“One of the most emblematic memories of Ukraine-2014 for me is the fate of monuments to Lenin. We, in fact, still have three Ukraines: one where there are no such monuments, another where Lenin statues have been painted in blue and yellow, and the last one where Lenin monuments are still safe. In fact, these are areas where the Soviet legacy is still alive, regions where people are stuck in the post-Soviet reality, and, finally, places exhibiting a high willingness to have changes and Europeanization.
“Den cemented its status as a civil society newspaper for good in 2014. It served as an intellectual support for hundreds or even thousands of civic activists, volunteers, just smart people who were trying to do something for their country. By providing a platform for ideas and new faces of civil society, Den has made a significant contribution to enabling it to not only exert pressure on the government changing the latter from outside, but trickle inside and change it from within as well. That is, they are now trying ‘to split that rock,’ as Ivan Franko put it in his famous poem.
“And most importantly, Den was able to keep the hope alive that even in the most difficult days of the outgoing year, to prevent death displacing life. People who started to believe in themselves were the spark of the Euromaidan. Now, believing in our country has to become the spark setting us on the path to a successful Ukraine.
“Den’s Photo Exhibition shows precisely life displacing death. This, in my opinion, is the best and most exact visualization of the past year.
“A week before the presidential election, our institute received from Petro Poroshenko a flag of the EU which our Vilnius friends had with them when they braved freezing weather and kept the fight for a European future for Ukraine on. It now hangs in our office and serves as a reminder that we have to monitor implementation of the European agenda very closely indeed. Larysa Ivshyna very aptly said at the flag’s solemn transfer that was accompanied with a discussion on how well this or that president would be able to implement the European agenda: ‘President needs programming.’ To paraphrase, I would say that we programmed not only the president, but the country’s future as well this year.”
“SLOWLY, BUT THE FREE WORLD DID WAKE UP”
Gerhard GNAUCK, Die Welt correspondent, Warsaw:
“In this year we saw an attempt to reverse the achievements of 1989: the collapse of communism and of the Eastern Block. And if we talk about 2014 only, this attempt was partly successful, but the Western world – and we need to remember the old, forgotten, but good word – the free world woke up. Slowly, but it did. And I think Russia’s leadership played above its league and we will see the results of it in 2015.
“If we talk about tendencies, unfortunately, Russia came back to that epoch, as Solzhenitsyn said, when Russian pride is viewed only in the category of military power and force. Besides, we see a pivot to the authoritarian police state, and it will be increasingly harder for market economy to develop in such conditions. Famous Russian sociologist Lev Gudkov has just said that Putin will be able to hold power for two years at the most. I thought so too, and made a bet with my German colleague on how much longer Putin will hold power. It was this summer. My colleague said that it will be one year, and I said two. Of course, it will be very hard to get out of this new authoritarian state. I think those who said early this year that this Maidan would be of great importance for Russia, namely for transformations in Russia, were also right.
“The history is moving on, I don’t believe in such categories as the ‘person of the year.’ But if we talk about it, Merkel’s ability to balance between demands of foreign policy, external situation on the one side, and completely different sentiments within the country on the other, should be pointed out.
“If we take a look at Ukraine, it seems to me that Poroshenko and Yatseniuk are candidates for person of the year in Ukraine, each in his own way. And I think it is a good case, this tandem turned out to be good, and I hope the next year will justify this assessment.
“As for Poland, there is a new tandem made of the president and the prime minister, where Komorowski leads by a wide margin in polls, leaving quite popular Kopacz and other politicians behind, and is the most popular politician in Poland. That is why he is a serious candidate in the ‘person of the year’ category.”
RUSSIA TORE UP A SECURITY ORDER
Edward Lucas is a senior editor at the Economist and also a senior vice-president at the Center For European Policy Analysis:
“2014 was the year when the world we knew ceased to exist – although many in the West have not realized it. Russia tore up a security order with its roots in the Helsinki Final Acts of 1975. Vladimir Putin publicly avowed a new foreign-policy doctrine based on ethnonationalism.
“Meanwhile the West remained weak and self-absorbed. Europe’s ill-designed common currency throttles growth. America’s political system is gridlocked. We have no answer beyond bluster to cyber-attacks. Chaos and war in North Africa and the Middle East call out for leadership, as does the torment of eastern Ukraine. Will that leadership be forthcoming in 2015? I am not hopeful.”
