Ulad Vialichka: In our presence common European stance on Russia is being established

malishevsky.livejournal.com

Current social and political situation in Russia is much more dangerous for the long-term establishment of European security than the Russia-Ukraine conflict itself.

Minsk agreements on Ukraine are not fulfilled to the right degree, as the participants of the conflict have different interpretation of the agreements and the ways of their realization. Moreover, Minsk agreements are only a part of the common situation at the east of Ukraine, as the main long-term aim is the cessation of war between Russia and Ukraine.

At the end of the last week Belarusan national Platform has made a statement concerning military conflict in the east of Ukraine and in light of the murder of the Russian opposition politician Boris Nemtsov in Moscow.

Ulad Vialichka, the head of the International Consortium “EuroBelarus”, comments upon the adopted documents in the interview with the “EuroBelarus” Information Service.

- Belarusan National Platform addressed the Secretary General of the United Nations Organisation, the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, the Secretary General of the OSCE, and the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy suggesting a number of immediate actions that “can lead to the real resolution of conflict and cessation of the Russian aggression in Ukraine”. What caused the issue of the document?

- The issue of this statement is caused by the need to evaluate the level of realization of Minsk agreements. Ukrainian conflict is the most important event that is happening in the Eastern Partnership region today, including the level of the Civil Society Forum, and that is why Belarusan National Platform cannot be left out. Now it is very important to assess the degree to which Minsk agreements are fulfilled in order to define further actions for settling the conflict at the East of Ukraine.

The degree to which Minsk agreements are fulfilled still remains an open question. All signers have different interpretations of the agreements and the ways of their realization. Personally I doubt that they can be fulfilled at all.

The parties to conflict might be demonstrating willingness to direct conflict towards its de-escalation; however, people are still dying, and bombardments and armed conflicts appear again and again. Minsk agreements are only a part of the common situation at the East of Ukraine, whereas the main long-term goal is to stop Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, though the Russian side hasn’t yet recognized its direct involvement.

- All the enumerated actions for returning the situation to the legal course (recognising Russia an aggressor, admitting the fact of Crimea’s occupation, admitting “LPR” and “DPR” to be terroristic organizations) have already been voiced long time ago; however, the international community has ignored them. Have the new grounds for the reaction of the international community appeared?

- International community is constantly analyzing the situation and we see that the level of comprehension of the situation by international actors is gradually changing. Situation is developing; European countries overestimate their stance re the conflict at the east of Ukraine, review the role of the conflict in the system of common European security. It seems to me that right now, behind our eyes, the common European stance on Russia, who nullified the whole system, is being established. Every day we receive news that proves the further escalation of tension in the region: First American tanks arrive to Latvia, then Russia left the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE). All these are links of one and the same chain that cannot but worry us. Enhancement of tension in the region makes situation in Belarus extremely risky and non-safe.

- National Platform calls upon prompt consideration of Ukraine’s appeal to the UN Security Council about introduction of peacemaking contingent to the territory of the military conflict at the east of Ukraine without Russia’s participation. How possible is that scenario in the situation when Russia has a right to veto in the UN Security Council?

- it is hard for me to assess the possibility of such scenario; it is important to preserve and continue such discussions. We need to find the variant where the institute of peacemakers can be used in Ukraine. We need arbitrator at the east of Ukraine, and OSCE’s ability to perform this role is very doubtful, especially when we talk about objectivity and competence of this organization.

Apart from performing the observing mission, Ukraine needs the institute of “Blue Berets”. Even though Russia has a right to veto in the UN Security Council, such scenario should be discussed and we need to find ways for its realization.

- Simultaneously with this statement National Platform called Boris Nemtsov’s murder the political act and expressed solidarity with the Russian civil society. National Platform believes that the reaction of the western countries to the latest developments in Russia is too mild, whereas clear actions for restricting aggression are expected from them. How should the West react to the latest developments in Russia?

- In my opinion, the current situation in Russia is much more dangerous for ensuring long-term safety than the Russia-Ukraine conflict itself. Chauvinism and encouragement of population’s ignorance at the expense of political technologies of the third generation are growing in Russia, as well as the growth of colonization purposes.

What can avert Russia’s transformation into a dangerous armed monster? Russia has already stepped this way, and that is why Europe should provide support to the reasonable forces in Russia. Over the last decades Europe has canceled programs that support civil society in Russia, and the current state of the society in Russia is the result of such decision. Now total dominance of aggressive anti-European groups is observed in Russia, and these groups are not going to stop mere Ukraine’s seizure.

Europe has to establish long-term cooperation with the real Russian civil society, alternative opinion leaders, people, who are able to think critically and independently. We are not only talking about financial support, but also about synchronizing our actions, aims, and goals. Now Russian society is in the state of voluntary conservation and it is very hard for it to find its pivot. It is very important to support sensible people, who aim at international integration, cooperation, de-chauvinization of Russia, as well as to launch media projects that would be offering well-founded and argued opinion, the one different from Putin propaganda, to the Russian-speakers.

The fate of the common European processes depends a lot of what tactics and strategy will Europe choose in relation to Russia.