IPN interview: Moldova must take into account the developments in Ukraine, especially in Crimea, in the most serious way possible, so as to be much better prepared for overcoming the real risks and challenges. Hanna Shelest, Senior Researcher of the Odessa Branch of the National Institute for Strategic Studies, Ukraine, spoke about the possible risks, challenges and conclusions in an interview for IPN. At the same time, the expert considers that the crisis in Crimea casts doubt on the whole international political and law situation in Europe, when no state, with all its international guarantees, can be sure of its security.
---
- How can the situation in Ukraine affect the situation in Moldova?
- There is direct and indirect interaction. In fact, it appeared immediately after the Vilnius summit. Seeing how the situation in Ukraine develops and the position of Russia on the European integration, the EU started to more actively cooperate with Moldova and Georgia and accelerated the procedures for signing the Association Agreement. The same thing happened as regards the visas. Until now Brussels had certain doubts, but now it needs a positive example related to its Eastern Partnership policy.
Secondly, Moldova must draw some conclusions as regards the Russian-language speaking population so as to prevent tense rhetoric or some not well-planned steps from leading to another zone of ‘protection of the Russian-language speakers’.
Thirdly, special attention should be paid to Gagauzia and, surely, we should not forget about Transnistria, which was given priority when the two regions were at stake. The situation can worsen there and we should not expect the same methods as it Crimea. We can be absolutely unprepared for some methods. That’s why conclusions should be drawn and attention should be devoted to problematic aspects, which can destabilize the situation (as it happened during the referendum in Gagauzia).
Lastly, it is now the right moment to raise again the issue of withdrawal of the Russian troops from Transnistria. It is now one of the most suitable moments to maximally benefit from the support of the international community. The peacekeepers represent a separate issue which can be discussed later, though the reformation of the peacekeeping mission into a police one became urgent long ago.
The last of all, the events in Ukraine showed how fragile the international security guarantees and existing conflict prevention and resolution mechanisms are. From formal viewpoint, Moldova benefits from its status of neutrality, but is this thing sufficient? Ukraine in 2010 also declared its neutrality and benefited from the Budapest Memorandum on its security guarantees. But, as it turned out, not all the signatories have a serious attitude to this document. That’s why it is now the case to seriously think about alternative collective security mechanisms, possibly within GUAM and possibly within a bilateral Moldovan-Ukrainian format. There may be other variants too, but common military drills will be appropriate.
- What is the real situation in Ukraine as we, in Moldova, know things only from media reports?
- In the given case, everything depends on what media outlets prevail today in Moldova. If the mass media in Russian prevail in Moldova, as in some of the Ukrainian regions, the picture transmitted to the Moldovan TV viewers is much more deformed, if not turned upside down.
Ukraine is now undergoing transformations. It’s not just about the taking over of power. It’s about the demolition of the existing system. But not everyone, even among the opposition, is ready today for these transformations. But there are no other variants because society grew older radically in these three months. Unfortunately, the changes that needed more attention, professionalism, cohesion and time and, sometimes, not very popular measures overlapped with the situation in Crimea, which now requires more attention and forces. It’s a pity because the most serious reforms can be done only immediately after the revolution, when the level of confidence among the population is the highest. But Crimea for Ukraine does not represent only an issue concerning a part of its territory. The given crisis casts doubt on the whole international political and law situation in Europe, when no state, with all its international guarantees, can ensure its security.
- How does the situation in Ukraine affect the situation in our region in general?
- The Euromaidan could have passed unnoticed for the region, at conventional level. It surely intensified the discussions on the European integration and corruption in a number of states, but didn’t change the current situation. The people inquired about the situation in the ‘maidan’ and had certain emotions, but nobody really drew serious conclusions. But the events in Crimea made many people think because they can modify the configuration concomitantly in three regions – at the Black Sea, in the post-Soviet area and the Euro-Atlantic one. Turkey, which tried to keep its balance and partnership relations with Russia at the Black Sea till the last moment, reacted very painfully to the situation of the Tatars in Crimea, promising them its full support. Belarus and, especially, Kazakhstan, started to worry about their regions populated mainly by Russian-speakers. Moreover, I think that now any country from the post-Soviet area will seriously meditate when considering extending the terms for the deployment of Russian troops on their territory.
The U.S. and the EU were thrown back into the times of the ‘cold war’ rhetoric, they being absolutely unprepared for this. It turned out that they in fact can use none of the existing mechanisms – NATO, OSCE and the UN – and none of other mechanisms in the created circumstances. They don’t yet know how to speak in different languages: by using force and ignoring the international law or by using diplomacy and its values.
- Which are the most topical risks and how can they develop if the problems aren’t solved?
- In fact, all the risks are in sight. I will enumerate them not by importance as each of them can significantly influence the further developments in Ukraine and the whole region:
- The annexation of Crimea following the review of the existent borders and of the framework of the international system;
- The transformation of Crimea into an unrecognized entity, like Abkhazia and Transnistria;
- The humanitarian crisis in Crimea, given that the region depends in fact fully on Ukraine as regards financing, the supply of energy resources, drinking water and even of most of the food products;
- The economic crisis in Crimea, given that the tourism sector was actually fully disrupted, but this sector is the main source of income of the population;
- The ethnic conflict. It is known that the indigenous population of the region – the Tatars – is against the separation of Crimea. Moreover, refugees are fleeing Crimea not to Russia, but to other regions of Ukraine, including Lvov. Most of them are Tatars who do not feel safe, given the aggressive actions of some of the Russian ethnics;
- The attempts to destabilize the situation in other regions of Ukraine, first of all Harkov, Donetsk, Lugansk and Odessa. As the latest events in Donetsk and Harkov showed, the situation can be destabilized not only by political methods, but also by involving armed persons;
- The use of military force or the armed appropriation of the strategic facilities situated outside Crimea. Such an attempt was made in Herson region, when a group of 70 Russian soldiers arrived near Strelkovoe village of this region. Afterward, they were joined by four helicopters and three armored trucks;
- The major risk for Ukraine is now the fact that it does not enjoy the confidence of its people and the international community, as in 2004 after the Orange Revolution. If no substantial reforms are done in all the spheres and if we do not seriously counteract corruption and nepotism, the country and the people will not have the third chance.
- It was already announced that Ukraine and the EU will sign the political part of the Association Agreement. How is this possible given the uncertain situation in Crimea?
- The signing of the political part of the accord is a gesture of moral support and recognition of Ukraine’s European integration aspirations. The situation in Crimea is not so important for the provisions of the agreement. The economic part is much more difficult from technical viewpoint. Problems related to the implementation can appear here. But neither Ukraine, nor the EU will recognize the referendum results. In fact, the holding of the referendum does not yet mean automatic separation or joining of Russia. It should be noted that the Europeans themselves, during many months, underlined the impossibility of signing the political part separately from the economic one, given that it is very hard to separate them. Ukrainian experts also cannot understand how such separation can be done. That’s why I think that in this case we can speak rather about a demonstration of positions. Actually the EU, besides announcing that the political part of the accord will be signed on March 21, said that economic barriers will be removed unilaterally, without waiting for the formal signing.
Mariana Galben, IPN
