All official information concerning the meeting between Presidents Putin and Yanukovych in Novo-Ogaryovo is negative for Ukraine, especially considering Russia’s comments. A Russian periodical’s subsidiary in Ukraine quotes Sergei Ivanov, head of Russia’s presidential administration, as saying that Yanukovych paid his visit primarily in conjunction with the parliamentary campaign in Ukraine: “Apparently they [i.e., the Ukrainian side] needed this visit in the first place.” He went on to say, with barely hidden neglect, that there was “nothing new” in the conversation between the heads of state, including the price for Russian gas. “We have made it clear that countries in Eastern Europe are paying more for Russian gas,” he added.
All things considered, Yanukovych’s totally unprepared visit to Moscow has exposed him to all kinds of verbal attack from opposition. “The fact that this visit was organized on a top priority basis, that its date was agreed upon at the last moment, that the agenda was never made public knowledge is proof that the president of Ukraine isn’t sure of his stand on the eve of the parliamentary elections,” says All-Ukrainian Alliance Svoboda leader Oleh Tiahnybok, adding that such top-level visits, making any agreements a week before the election date make no sense from the standpoint of international relations. Tiahnybok believes that, should the parliamentary elections turn out to have been fixed in Ukraine, “our society will find itself being totally politically and economically dependent on the Kremlin; [Ukraine] will become part of the Russian World, a project being actively promoted by Putin, with Russia and Belarus becoming Ukraine’s only contacts [with the international community of nations].”
The Ukrainian delegation’s comments after returning from Moscow sound like an attempt to explain one’s failure. “The talks on the so-called gas issue – which is topical for Ukraine – are underway, and we expect to achieve an economically substantiated formula of gas prices that will be acceptable to Ukraine,” said Yanukovych. Energy and Coal Industry Minister Yurii Boiko’s comment sounds even more pessimistic: “The [Russian and Ukrainian] sides agreed that the [oil/gas] dialog should continue.” He added later that the date on which these talks will resume will be made public knowledge later.
The big question is: Who will determine this date and the terms and conditions? Gazprom’s second-in-command Aleksandr Medvedev told The Day his company is waiting for an independent foreign expert assessment of Ukraine’s gas transportation network, and that the findings will serve as a basis for further consortium and gas pipeline development talks.
Another big issue – whether or not Ukraine will join the CIS Customs Union – must have been raised during the [Novo-Ogaryovo] talks. Viktor Yanukovych said, before flying to Moscow, that he wished to discuss relationships with the Customs Union: “We believe that collaboration with the Customs Union will benefit our manufacturers. We must further this collaboration, for this will only benefit our economy.” Vladimir Putin had to respond in kind. He said: “This is very important for the Russian and Ukrainian economies; naturally, we have to provide special conditions in developing cooperation ties.”
President Yanukovych’s visit to Moscow; gas supply price; Ukraine’s Customs Union membership – more on this in the following comments by The Day’s experts.
Hennadii RIABTSEV, CEO, Psykheia R&D Center:
“Ukraine has gained nothing from these talks. A number of documents must be prepared for signing before each such top-level meeting is held. In the absence of such documents, the only possible result is political. No political result. Moscow told Kyiv there would be no gas cost concessions; Gazprom wants to keep the gas supply agreement with Ukraine [signed by Yulia Tymoshenko]. In fact, no one in the business domain had pinned any hopes on Yanukovych’s visit. I belong to a business community. We explain the situation that has developed in Ukraine as follows: At first, overstated expectations, when no one had to do anything to make them come true; that was when a dissident business movement started taking shape, when the authorities had to approach financial-industrial groups (FIGs), asking for hard cash. Today, the stability of these groups is determined by the stability of the Ukrainian state, with the oligarchs shaping the national policy. This policy is export-oriented. Joining the Customs Union would mean acting counter to the FIG requirements. Those currently in power in Ukraine are faced with a choice: (a) stop supporting FIGs and (b) keep status quo. That’s precisely what they’re trying to figure out ‘upstairs.’”
Oleksandr NARBUT, independent expert:
“We’re back at square one – no progress toward the Customs Union, with gas prices remaining unchanged. Gas prices appear as a kind of mirage for those currently in power in Ukraine. Russia is using it to impose a dialog on a broader scale, including political solutions. Russia’s varying scenarios amount to the same thing: Ukraine will get fair gas prices only after joining the Customs Union. What makes me sad personally is that no systemic effort has been made during these repeated top-level meetings; no legal framework has been worked out for gas transportation relationships in regard to Ukraine as transit territory. Russia’s monopolies are acting on an upward scale. Ukraine’s political leadership has done nothing to combat this battle-hardened Russian monopoly, considering Gazprom’s aggressive attainments within the CIS and elsewhere in Europe. January 2013 will see the end of [Russia-Ukraine’s] intergovernmental agreement. Afterward, coping with Russia’s ambitions will be harder by far. We may well see a slap-dash agreement made, one solicitously referred to in Russia as ‘Measures to Further Cooperation in the Gas Sphere.’ I’m scared to predict that this one will be very much like the infamous Kharkiv accords.”
Valerii BOROVYK, chairman of the board, New Energy Alliance:
“I think Ukraine is getting closer to Customs Union membership after these talks. Yanukovych is practically cornered, owing to his political and economic decisions, especially in the gas sphere (I mean the Kharkiv accords). Now he knows that Ukraine will actually lose its national independence after joining the CU. Psychologically, he is in a maze, with the Customs Union lurking somewhere. I believe that common sense will prevail. Yanukovych isn’t likely to make do with the post of a regional governor in a Russia-controlled Ukraine. He wants to be head of state. We are now witness to a struggle between two psychologies, two ideologies within a single human mind. Yanukovych will have to make his choice. We’ll see it after the elections.”
