Alla mielenkiintoinen ukrainalaisen politiikan tutkijan Yuri Romanenkon analyysi Ukrainan kriisistä (haastattelu Valko-Venäjän radio ERB):
- Putin ja Merkel ovat (olivat) jakaneet Ukrainan keskenään omiin vaikutusalueisiinsa (tästähän oli se ukrainalaisten "Danke Frau Ribbentrop" - kampanja netissä): Venäjälle itäosat ja Saksalle länsi
- geopoliittinen tilanne on muuttunut radikaalisti
- Saksalla on iso rooli kriisissä
- Venäjän ja Ukrainan välillä on tosiasiallisesti sota Itä-Ukrainassa
- Venäjällä ei ole riittävästi sotavoimaa koko Ukrainan tai edes Donbassin valloittamiseen
- jotta Ukraina saisi IMF:n lainat joilla se voisi pelastaa taloutensa, sota pitää saada loppumaan: hän näkee että Poroshenkolla on mahdollisuus voittoon (totta kai patriootti sanoo näin).
- Ukraina olisi voittanut jo aikaa sitten ilman ulkopuolisten sekaantumista
- USA pyrkii estämään Saksan ja Venäjän "liiton"
- hän ennustaa Venäjän romahdusta: Putin on hyvä taktikko mutta huono strategi
- lopussa on pitkästi tarinaa mahdollisesta Itä-Euroopan Unionista, joka toimisi Venäjän vastavoimana vuoden 2020 jälkeen kun nykyinen turbulenssi rauhoittuu. Tuo lienee haavetta.
Googlen käännös alla: joitakin virheitä yritetty korjata.
Yuri Romanenko: Putin and Merkel agreed on the division of Ukraine before the Vilnius [ summit ]
http://obozrevatel.com/interview/50...ilis-o-razdele-ukrainyi-esche-do-vilnyusa.htm
Interviewed Zmitser Lukashuk, Belarus
ERB (Еврорадио/Euroradio)
August 23, 2014, 20:40
Katso liite: 2087
[Yuri Romanenko, political analyst and editor of the hvylya website in Ukraine
http://hvylya.org/].
The plans of the division of Ukraine between Russia and the EU, for the benefit of Belarus from the crisis and the possibility of revival of ON [ВКЛ] says political analyst Yuri Romanenko.
E: Do, please, political analysis of what is happening in Ukraine today.
Yuri Romanenko: To begin with, what many now say the likelihood of a large-scale invasion of Russian troops in Ukraine. In my opinion, it's really not [likely].
Firstly, everybody understands that Russia is already lead[ing] the offensive in the Donbas, because local fighters corny "knocked out" for these four months. And our military openly say that there are mainly fighting the Russians. So, we already have a military invasion - Russia every day there drives dozens of tanks, armored personnel carriers and soldiers, and there really is a war. But in order to deploy a full-scale invasion, Russia has neither the means nor the amount of the army.
After all, if she wanted to occupy half of Ukraine, then it would be for it took no less than a few hundred thousand men of the army and police forces. And efficient army of Russian experts estimate [to be from] 50 to 100 thousand people. And so [for] Russia [it] is easier to destroy the infrastructure of Donbass [in order] to create a difficult economic situation in Ukraine. When 2 million people from the region will "crawl" across the country and create unnecessary stress in other regions of Ukraine, it will create a social base in order to rock the political situation. Especially because there are objective circumstances that contribute to this. Plus, the large [layers] (
errors) of power that does not want to change and want to live in the old way. It also increases the radicalization of society and contributes to the fact that in late autumn - winter Ukraine may enter into a new stage of the revolution, which, strictly speaking, did not eventuate. [If] Happen destabilization, which will lead to serious problems and Putin's [plan] (
bid) could work.
ERB: The pessimistic forecast ...
Yuri Romanenko: Another option [is] if Poroshenko will receive support from the IMF and the United States. Termination of the active phase of the ATU is a condition for such assistance, and it motivates Poroshenko to ensure that as soon as possible to complete this operation. But it is at the level of logic, as well as at the level of "no logic" we see strange maneuvers that suggest a conscious tightening operation. Many of the soldiers said that they have long been able to complete this mess if they [had] (
do) not [been] interfere[d].
In any case, Poroshenko realizes that his chances are beyond question, and for him to complete the operation - a priority. Then the great resources freed on trying to stabilize the economic situation. And he will finally get the resources from the IMF, which had been promised to him. And without them, Ukraine simply [can]not stand.
E: Did proposed talks between the head of Belarus, Pyotr Poroshenko and leaders of the Customs Union, in particular Putin (will) play to stabilize the situation in the country?
Yuri Romanenko: If there is any exact arrangements in this triangle, rectangle or pentagon - Russia, France, Germany, Ukraine, and the United States where they were loitering, then what we can say? We just have nothing to talk about today with Russia. I think that [for] Kiev now there are many other problems to "bother" [than] the ordinary negotiations which no non-committal, about "something there." As we enter the Customs Union will not be exact, and after what happened, and forced us to not drag. We are ready to bear any loss, and we will now bear, but with Russia, we do not sit on the same field. Everything changed fundamentally during these few months: the geopolitical situation has changed radically. Of course, Russia leads the backroom negotiations with Germany and the role of Berlin in today's crisis is not considered enough, but ...
E: What do you mean by Germany's role in the Ukrainian crisis?
Yuri Romanenko: Today it is clear that Putin and Merkel agreed on the division of spheres of influence in Ukraine long before the Vilnius summit (summit of the Eastern Partnership in Vilna, where Viktor Yanukovych refused to sign the agreement "On the association with the EU", - ERB) and they try to continue this scheme in the format of "Association". Even after Yanukovych was expelled from Kiev and Ukraine signed the "Agreement on association with the EU," suddenly appear from the terms of Germany, that "we must agree with the position of Russia, [so] that Russia did not feel uncomfortable." Question: why did the European Union sign(ed) the "Association" with Ukraine, and Germany was one of the providers of this signing, why was Vilnius? Why do they bother then, [and] started all this fur fly with Yanukovych, the Maidan, and so on? The motivation is simple: Germany wants to gain access to the markets of the North and West of Ukraine, and Russia needed the defense industry and heavy industry, which is in Ukraine, markets, political influence and the base in the Crimea. Therefore, they are long enough to prepare a situation where a conflict of interest by business legalized would surrender [by] Europe, especially Germany, our south-east [to] Russia. This scheme has been fixed in the Moscow Agreement of 14 December 2013: We have seen that through the debt Russia received the opportunity to gain control over the great Ukrainian enterprises such as "Antonov", "Pivdenmash", "Dawn" and others. To then through a constitutional reform that should have been taken in March 2014, and which was prepared for three years, since the arrival of Yanukovych to power, was to engage a new political model, which weakens the position of the center, [with] the power transmitted to the regions.
This is what Putin is now permanently say[ing]. And then had to be signed by such an association agreement with the EU, which would have secured the interests of Russia. But this scheme Maidan broke. Independence, for which there was a game of oligarchs plus the wrath of furious social groups that are most affected by the policy of Yanukovych. Well, Americans, for whom the Russian-German alliance, which appeared on the horizon, was a threat. As a result, the circuit has been broken, and Putin had to start this game with the Crimea, which he had planned for 2015. At the same time [there was a] (
we) plan and parade of sovereignties in the Donbas, and in that case there would be no today's logistical problems with the Crimea.
E: If you plan described "fading", how would the new situation [have] looked for Belarus: benefit or would [it] become a new threat?
Yuri Romanenko: And you are in conjunction with Russia, and you, by and large, have no choice. You have the choice appears when the weakened Russia will fail in itself. Then you will need to determine what you will do without its resources, and how to play with Europe, how to play with Ukraine, how to play with the United States, who are interested in that in Eastern Europe [there will be] established regimes loyal to them.
This we see now in the case of Ukraine, which is likely to be in a position to win back our region [like] (
such as) Egypt and Israel in the Middle East. [For us] (
We under) it appears a serious conceptual framework and will form the appropriate motivation. If Germany and Russia have managed to create an alliance, and then there would be dragged (
into) China, it would have formed a new global agenda. In this case, the United States turned to the world [as an] (the) island, and their hegemonic position in world politics, which they have largely lost, would have been completely lost. That [is], [the United] States (
and) play (
a) proactive[ly] [and is] (
as) well aware that [to] prevent continental union of Germany and Russia for them [is] like [to prevent] death. And I think that they will not admit it, because Russia is acting too clumsy[ly] and in a tactical manner: Putin [is] a good tactician, but as a strategist, he is very bad.
Those tactical benefits of the annexation of the Crimea [are] (
is) very short term, and in a historical perspective, we see in the case of sanctions, the annexation will have negative consequences for Russia. And Belarus is a hostage of this situation, as well as Ukraine. Belarus after Russia will fall into a result of the complex multi-level games, [where] (
which are) against her [are the United] States, will [be left] with nothing, and in this new situation: when the Russian [patron] (
cartridge) is very weak, and economic resources will not be taken from [there]. You will need to rebuild the model, built by Lukashenko in 20 years, and rebuild on the new resource base, which will be very limited.
ERB: No scare!
Yuri Romanenko: And I'll tell you this: in this situation for Ukraine will be a very serious window of opportunity, and I think we will try to implement it. This formation ligament Ukraine-Belarus. If we sell it, it will allow us to take a stronger position in relation to Russia and to the European Union. In principle, if all goes well, we will be able to form a sort of Eastern European Union. In general, the strengthening of relations along the axis of Baltic-Belarus-Ukraine-Turkey is another very powerful player in the region, will create a new geopolitical structure where the top will be [the United] States, which will aim to prevent the bond of Old Europe with Russia, and as a regional allies will be Turkey, Poland, Ukraine and several other states that will join this platform. I think about the formation of this structure, it will be possible after 2020, when all this global turbulence calm.
E: Why after 2020?
Yuri Romanenko: By 2020, we will witness a civil war, [and] may have regional and global wars. As long as the issue is not resolved, "the sick man of Eurasia" - Russia. Just as the Ottoman Empire in the late XIX - early XX century was the "sick man of Europe" and Russia today is "sick man of Eurasia." With its vast resources, and feeling an interest in these resources from almost all the major players and multinationals, Russia has failed to adapt its anachronistic political system to the new realities. Which in turn creates a system of internal risks, which will now be "warmed up" by outside actors. They are interested to weaken Russia so that it ceased to appear a destabilizing factor in the global system so that it either disappeared altogether or risks to disappear as its nuclear weapons as an instrument of influence on world politics. It's frustrating, because we all understand what that means for Russia, but on the other hand, if a State or society do not tend to change in accordance with the spirit of the times, the zeitgeist modifies it in accordance with the fundamental processes that generate such changes.
ERB: A design concept Ukraine-Belarus-Baltic States at least at the level of the expert community worked?
Yuri Romanenko: Why not? I worked through it for a long time, even before the crisis began. And with your Belarusian colleagues worked through. Here we are talking about one of the Baltic-Black Sea arc, which has already been said many times. There are two designs of the implementation of this arc: either it will be a bunch of Poland and Ukraine, or it will be a bunch of Belarus and Ukraine. I think we must first implement the "Belarusian bunch", as it will give both Ukraine and Belarus in a stronger position in relation to Poland. We must not forget that Poland is a member of NATO and the EU, and therefore it is possible foreign maneuver limited brackets its obligations to these structures. We are not limited by these brackets, and the crisis has shown the weakness of both the EU and NATO.
Therefore, at this stage of Ukraine [it is] profitable to enter into direct associations with the United States, for example, the same [as] Egypt or Turkey, in order to obtain the necessary resources and sustainability in the fight against the Russian Federation. And in a silent struggle with Germany, which leads the game. Greater independence of Ukraine and Belarus, which do not fall within the brackets of the EU and NATO, will push to ensure that we coordinate their positions. Because Belarus will have to find a new resource base so as not to collapse into the abyss of economic crisis in the context of a weakening Russia. Question for Belarus will be the following: (
it) will [it] enter into this crisis with already conscious awareness of the opportunities that this crisis [creates], [or] will [it] be just trying to rake all the new challenges that will emerge during this crisis?
Here, much will depend on Lukashenko: whether he can still see it or not. After all, this will depend on the future of his political regime, of himself and of the country. It seems to me that the problem of Belarus at this stage that there is Lukashenko [and that's] it! There are no elites or a successor who would be able to get a situation where Lukashenko for objective reasons (he was a man aged) will leave the political front of the stage. This is the main risk for Belarus. If Lukashenko will be all right, given his flair, maybe you and propetlyaete in this very difficult situation.
E: The rate of successful completion of ATO dependent approximation of the crisis in Russia and the construction of the Ukrainian-Belarusian-Baltic "construction" of which you speak?
Yuri Romanenko: ATO and this whole crisis in Ukraine will continue for at least three years. We will leave to the new platform in late 2017 - early 2018, but all calm down somewhere between 2020, when he comes to a certain stability of the entire global system. After all, it is impossible to consider processes in Ukraine and in general in Eastern Europe outside the context of a serious conflict between the United States and China, between the United States and Russia. This time should be used to crystallize these projects and to declare them in the public space, to infect the masses of ideas and above all the elite. And then begin to prepare concrete steps for the implementation of such a platform. I think it can be beneficial and Ukraine, and Belarus - we will be able to get out of the crisis is not weakened, but strengthened, if we properly maneuver. I do not know how to Belarus, but for Ukraine this crisis - a great chance. It is, in spite of all obstacles, is attached to the orbit of the Western bloc. Namely, the Western bloc has the best chance in the big global war that is unfolding before our eyes.
E: So, is "fixed on the orbit of the Western bloc" or build the local political structure?
Yuri Romanenko: The situation in Ukraine showed that out of a really represents Europe and those Euroskeptic voices that were here before the Vilnius summit, now resounded with renewed vigor. But what Russia is doing here, even more intensified voice rusoskeptikov. As a result, now in Ukraine formed request completely independent policy, the fact that the form is the state with the concept of "Israel [of] Eastern Europe." This is totally militarized state with a new function of the army conducted a rigid separation of the elites and the population against "Ukrainian project". With the modernization of the economy and the creation of a new economic base that will enhance the stability of the new political regime. And with the knowledge of the new mission of Ukraine in Eastern Europe.
E: And what is the mission?
Yuri Romanenko: The flagship of this space, which creates standards and a model that allows you to fully realize the enormous humanitarian capital, remaining in this space. After all, Russia has been 20 years since the loss of the organizer of this space - it has ceased to be a source of cultural and management standards. If in our region will have a new manager this, it will be broken by a strong external players. And Ukraine has all chances to take this position of regional organizer. If we denote this situation historical parenthesis, the old dispute between V.K.L. (Grand Duchy of Lithuania - ERB) and Muscovy acquires new features in the new geopolitical historical situation. And reborn in the format of the Eastern European Union, of which I spoke, and to which we must move. Then it will be to implement an alternative model of development of this space, which was buried in the confrontation in the 16-18 centuries. Everything returns to normal, but on the new technological, economic, organizational foundations.
