One of the main questions from journalists at the May 13-14 meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Antalya, Turkey, was: what is the real result of NATO-Ukraine agreements? Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin was among the invitees, but, what is more, the NATO-Ukraine Commission was also in session as part of this event. The Alliance’s General Secretary Jens Stoltenberg called it “a very successful meeting,” while Mr. Klimkin said he was touched by the support from his counterparts in the NATO member states. He even quoted one of the ministers as saying: “If Ukraine does not hold out, we will all fall through.”
But what has been really done, besides saying good and emotional words, in order not to fall through? Again, all are in fact officially saying almost the same: the efforts of five Ukraine aid trust funds; political support for our country, the necessity of carrying out security reforms in Ukraine itself, and the supply of non-lethal weapons by some NATO countries. Among the additions is a proposal to reinforce the NATO office in Ukraine by increasing its staff and discuss the possibility of setting up one more trust fund aimed at resisting Russian propaganda.
The same situation is with the main points: Russia is being condemned for the aggression against Ukraine and the illegal annexation of and deliveries of its arms to Crimea; Russia must observe the Minsk agreements and, should it fail do so, new sanctions must be imposed against it; Russia is being urged to stop destabilizing the situation in Ukraine and supporting separatists as well as to withdraw its military personnel and equipment.
In reality, we have heard all this for a long time. It is therefore difficult to say, by all accounts, that the Antalya meeting was fruitful – particularly as far as Ukraine is concerned. Rather, it was a working meeting that showed the way top-level decisions are being fulfilled, for example, those made by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and the Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow or, moreover, by the US Secretary of State John Kerry and Putin in Sochi.
Indeed, NATO is doing very much for Ukraine, especially at the level of its individual members. But the organization’s Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg openly admits that the Alliance is forced to change, particularly after the challenge of Russia which is to blame for the tragedy in Ukraine. He said at the concluding press conference that the Alliance is not going to restore practical cooperation with Russia. “NATO decided last spring to suspend all practical cooperation with Russia as a response to the aggressive actions of Russia in Crimea… Our position remains unchanged: practical cooperation with Russia is suspended due to the actions of Russia in Crimea and eastern Ukraine,” Stoltenberg said.
We would perhaps like to receive more help from the West, but we must do homework for this, i.e., carry out real reforms. We should drop endless rhetoric in the conditions of an old political system, while Russia continues its aggression. The Antalya meet is a fresh example of this. Indeed, the official Ukrainian delegation got a very warm reception. In Klimkin’s own words, he had more than 20 meetings, in addition to the session of the NATO-Ukraine Commission itself, and all foreign representatives were voicing strong support for our country. But there was clearly no team game on the part of the Ukrainian delegation. At a critical moment for the country, our leadership must make as much advantage as possible of an event like this. But nobody approached and spoke to the Ukrainian journalists – the only exception was Klimkin’s own official press conference. Nor could anybody be found in the sidelines. Conversely, NATO representatives did hold closed-door meetings. This situation must be corrected.
Shortly before that, the NATO secretary general said: “We will help Ukraine to defend itself.” He also added: “Our focus now is the full implementation of the Minsk Agreements.” Incidentally, the Ukrainian leadership itself is to blame, in many respects, for accepting the Kremlin-favored format and rejecting the “Geneva format” which would include the US as a negotiating party. Now we have to follow the Minsk Agreements, for things have already gone too far.
COMMENTARY
“THE MINSK AGREEMENTS ARE A SET OF ECLECTIC DEMANDS, WHEN MEETING SOME OF THEM MAKES IT IMPOSSIBLE TO MEET THE OTHERS”
Hryhorii PEREPELYTSIA, conflict researcher, professor, Kyiv National Taras Shevchenko University:
“Nobody expected anything special from this meeting. NATO, particularly the NATO-Ukraine Commission (NUC), works as follows: Ukraine offers its proposals about the NUC’s session agenda. NATO approves these, and only then the NUC discusses. The question is: what did Ukraine offer for this meeting? And what could it have offered?
“The Wales Summit adopted a provision on trust funds. Incidentally, NATO has always offered programs to fit in with trust funds. Moreover, the Alliance sent its experts to Ukraine, but then NATO saw hidden sabotage on the part of Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense. Only the intervention of parliamentary committees broke down the MD resistance, and NATO experts and advisors could work within the framework of five programs which are to be financed by trust funds.
“We managed to persuade the president to sign one more program of cooperation with NATO. It is May now, but the program is still not working. If you analyze the program, you will see that it is one of cooperation. Under this program, NATO is not obliged to carry out security and defense reforms – it must cooperate only. NATO representatives can only advise, but the organization bears no responsibility for this.
“This is why, in Turkey, NATO representatives expressed concern again that Ukraine shows no progress in security and defense reforms. NATO expresses its concern in a very diplomatic manner. Still Ukraine has very serious problems about fruitfulness of these reforms.
“So, what kind of breakthrough could we expect in Turkey? Moreover, the expert community made a great effort to ensure that the National Security Strategy mentions Ukraine’s aspiration for NATO membership. Finally, this project was approved by the National Security and Defense Council, and the president even announced that Ukraine should strive to join NATO. But, again, there is no guarantee that this declaration will be fulfilled. We heard new declarations but not a single word about NATO membership prospects. Even when the Ukrainian side was asked pointblank, there was no answer.
“This meeting in Turkey is of no consequence. It is just a statement of the situation and a NATO wish that the Ukrainian side will carry out military reform.
“The Minsk Agreements are not being observed not because the Russian side or separatists do not want to do so. They are not being observed because they are, a priori, a set of eclectic demands, when meeting some of them makes it impossible to meet the others.
“When these agreements were being drawn up, each side interpreted them differently. As the conflict settlement process envisions, Ukraine interpreted them as follows: ceasefire, withdrawal of weapons, setting up a safe area, disarmament of the armed formations (separatist units of the ‘DNR’ and the ‘LNR’), and withdrawal of foreign (Russian) troops and mercenaries. But Russia looked at this differently: it is the Ukrainian troops and volunteer units that must be pulled out. This allows Russia to continue setting political conditions, mounting new offensives and opening systematic hostilities, creating new ‘pockets,’ and issuing ultimatums to the Ukrainian side. This is needed to force Ukraine to make further concessions aimed at legalizing the quasi-governments and militants and holding a referendum.
“We have created a mantra of the Minsk agreements and convinced Europe, Germany, France, and the US that there is no other way out than the Minsk agreements. Accordingly, everybody, including NATO, begins to chant this mantra. As these demands cannot be met in principle, and if Russia cannot be forced to halt the hostilities, then you can pressure Ukraine… If there is no ceasefire and no troops are being pulled out, you should begin to deliver on other agreements, such as holding a referendum and unblocking the economic and financial flows. This is what they will be pressuring Ukraine with. When at least some clauses of the Minsk agreement have been fulfilled, everybody will say that peace is on the way and Russia will say that sanctions could be lifted. NATO will say in turn that it is restoring strategic partnership with Russia and defuses this conflict in Eastern Europe. However, it has global consequences which may lay the groundwork for not only a new cold war, but also for a global hot conflict.”
Interviewed by Ihor SAMOKYSH, The Day
