Ukraine told to stay away from EC meeting 14/15 May

Well, I had a little mental note to look out for some aggressive, robust and chastening press releases following the EU meeting of the European Council (the council of EU Foreign Ministers) that meets on 14/15th May in Brussels as I had heard a whisper from within the bowels of Brussels that Ukraine would be on the agenda.

In the current political situation, the prevailing winds from the EU blowing in the direction of Ukraine are bitterly cold.  Thus thought I, some interesting press releases to follow said meeting.

Now, it has become public knowledge that Ukrainian Prime Minster Azarov had intended to attend but has been told in no uncertain terms, he will not be welcome.

Herman Van Rumpoy, the European Council President is quoted as saying “When the Prime Minister of Ukraine announced he would come to Brussels, we said “Stay home!”  It is a clear message from our side that they have to change inside Ukraine.  Ukraine was a model democracy in 2004 and it has to become that once again.

The way Ukraine is dealing with the former Prime Minister, Yulia Tymoshenko, is just unacceptable.  We have said this very, very clearly to President Yanukovych.

When once the Ukrainian Prime Minister announced intention to visit Brussels, we told him “Don’t come, stay at home.” 

About time too, if that is the strategy the EU now intends to take with regards to Ukrainian political figures in the political arena.  That said, I still have my doubts about the effectiveness of a political leadership boycott of Euro 2012 when considering the EU’s EaP strategy of direct contact with society rather than via political channels.

I am still of the opinion that being present on Ukrainian soil and speaking live on Ukrainian television, Ukrainian radio, to the media and directly with the Ukrainian people, a robust and prickly continuing set of statements will have a far bigger influence on the Ukrainian public than simply staying away and shouting a message over an EU border than many struggle to get Visas to cross.

The entire concept of not tyeing the Visa-free road map to national politics was and is to facilitate people to people contact, and thus through the masses, encourage change to match the standards within the EU they would experience.

The entire strategy of the EU EaP putting the Ukrainian politicians (governing and opposition) to one side and engaging directly with Ukrainian civil society was to encourage exactly the same without political interference from the political elite of any persuasion.

Does shrinking from directly engaging with the Ukrainian public on Ukrainian soil do anything to reinforce that message to Ukrainian society?

I am far more convinced by the strategy of shunning top level political meetings with the current administration.  Of course back-door diplomacy will continue at a high level but those things are done behind closed doors by those tasked to do so within the diplomatic (and not political) circles.

The problem here is that Yanukovych doesn’t have that many legal options to release Tymoshenko and maintain his line that he has had no personal involvement in her case in the present circumstances.  An overtly illegal action to release her would be a disaster for him and any which way things play out in the future almost all bode badly for him as well.

The most politically mitigating solution for him is a favourable result for Ms Tymoshenko via the ECfHR, which has seemingly been fast-tracked on a very slow train by the Council of Europe.  Enforcing their ruling as and when it eventually comes, is almost a get out of jail free card for him, although it still does not avert his nearly certain political demise (or revenge from Ms Tymoshenko that will very probably come if she returns to power).

Nevertheless, an interesting statement to the press from Mr Von Rumpoy on the day that Ms Tymshenko ended her hunger strike and agreed to be treated in a Kharkiv clinic by the German doctors.

Will all this political pressure building on the current Ukrainian government and president work?  I doubt it (but hope to be surprised).

The truly sad fact for Ukraine is that whenever Ms Tymosehnko is released, should she even return to power, when you strip away the veneer, Ukrainians are very unlikely to be any better off once the dust of EU victorious euphoria settles down.

As one diplomat from an EU nation told me, after she had been jailed and the EU publicly rallied to her cause, (and I now invoke the Chatham House Rule) “Ms Tymoshenko is not the champion of democracy she claims to be.”    To be honest, hardly breaking news to many in Ukraine, however, it is not her specifically that matters but the perception of the due process her jailing has left.

Also, to be fair to Ms Tymoshenko, it may also be that having gone to trial, then to jail and currently remaining in jail, Ms Tymoshenko may have changed.  She has certainly been reading a lot of the writings of the late (and great)Vaclav Havel.  (To the point of almost plagerising him on occasion.)  Maybe democracy will have taken root with her?

That said, I have read Marx, Mein Kampf, Lenin, Nietzsche, (as well as many others) and the idea of Communism and fascism or any radical “ism” never really took hold with me.  As a very famous Greek chap called Aristotle stated  “It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it”.  We can but hope that should Ms Tymoshenko ever return to power, she will do more than entertain the true concepts of democracy and the pillars upon which it is built.

Anyway, let’s see what particularly prickly statements come from the European Council meetings on 14/15th May towards Ukraine.  I anticipate some rather barbed language.  In the meantime, senior Ukrainian politicians would seem to be person non grata in Brussels – particularly when Ukraine is on the agenda.

(One wonders if the same unofficial  person non grata status applies to ex-President Yushenko who actually started the criminal proceedings into Ms Tymoshenko over the gas contracts and misuse of office investigation prior to his leaving office?)

Let’s see how well this strategy works on Kyiv, and what, when, how and if, any Ukrainian retaliation is forthcoming.

French election results and Ukraine

Well it hasn’t taken the political scientists and think tanks in Kyiv very long to start speculating over what the change of the French presidency will mean with regards to Kyiv and Ukraine.

Why would it?  These people are paid to state what they think.  Unfortunately they, like most political commentators, internal or external of Ukraine, will either state the blindingly obvious or slant things towards the bias of their paymasters.

So, let us have a look at the pearls of wisdom that have come forth (and I will do it all in English to save any of you the trouble of translation).

Institute of Global Strategies Director, Vadim Karasev:  “This victory is good news for Victor Yanukovych.  This may give rise to restart relations with the European elite, with whom Mr Yanulovych finally soured relations.”

He also went on to say that it is a blow to the Tymoshenko camp, stating, ” Now some of the lobbying capabilities in the EU, France, is lost to Tymoshenko.” 

Hmmm – Really?

Whilst it is true that there is a great deal to be said for personal relationships amongst political leaders on the international stage, and it is also true that the demise of Sarkozy may result in a weakened EPP, the EU umbrella party to which both Tymoshenko and Sarkozy belonged,  does that mean Mr Hollande will close the door to Ms Tymoshenko’s plight or human rights?

Now “Mer-kozy” is past and we now have “Mer-de” instead, (yes I know that means “shit” in French but it is funny and may well yet prove to be an apt name for the new Franco/German tandem), there will be trials and tribulations between these leaders, but also areas where easy political harmony can be found for the sake of public unity appearances.

Mr Hollande, like Ms Merkel have issues at home and within the broader Eurozone.  An unnecessary divergence over Ms Tymoshenko in public?  Hardly, when it is an easy political unity “win” to show to the rest of the world.  In short, there is little likelihood of a falling out over Ms Tymoshenko’s situation, when as many points of joint easily achieved public agreements are needed, no matter what they are.

Next we have Viktor Nebozhenko, political scientists of the” Ukrainian Barometer” who claims, “Regardless of who came to power now in France, in the next year the relationship between France and Ukraine will not change.”  

Now that is a safe prediction given the current situation, however as the saying goes, 24 hours is a long time in politics, and things change rapidly.  As Harold McMillan once stated when asked what he feared most, “Events dear boy, events.”

Now there are events in  Ukraine and several of them in the next few months.  There is the Euro 2012 who some are trying to politicise and others attempting to keep it a purely sporting event, and then there is the parliamentary elections in October in Ukraine which could well see the current government replaced by the opposition parties.  (The presumption is that should the opposition win, Ms Tymsoehnko will be released very swiftly, however that may not be the case with President Yanukovych remaining as President until 2015 before he is up for reelection.)

There is also the fact that whilst the issue of Ms Tymoshenko (and others) make the headlines, there is also numerous statements from EU bodies welcoming certain reforms and laws that have been passed under the Yanukovych tenure so far, and as such those positives have been recognised by France as an EU Member.

How much time and effort Mr Hollande will give to Ukraine is really rather unknown.  He certainly has some very big fish to fry domestically and internationally the markets have not reacted well to the democratic decision of the French people.  As far as foreign policy is concerned however, it remains to be seen where and how Mr Hollande will make his mark outside of the EU.  In the old French colonial territories or the EU bordering nations perhaps?

In short, it is far too soon to be making any predictions, particularly as he does not take office until 15th May and who knows what will happen between then and now, other than predictable and unpredictable “events.”

The Ukrainian foreign policy position must surely be to drive a wedge between France and Germany over Ms Tymoshenko if they plan to leave her in prison.  As yet, it remains to be seen if a crack appears into which a wedge can be pushed.

Too soon to say how the Franco/Ukrainian relationship will change, or even if it will change, so I won’t be jerking my knee just yet with predictions and pontifications.

* * * * *

Possibly more exciting than the guesses relating to the new French presidency towards Ukraine, is that tomorrow, on what is known as Victory Day in the FSU (and more politically correctly as Europe Day within the EU),  is that there will be a guest blog, fingers crossed, relating to Odessa, The Great Patriotic War/WWII, Hero City status and something for the TAOW/war-gaming community as well!

If that fails, then you will be struck with more ruminations from me – Apologies in advance.

Ukraine, NATO, Afghanistan and $2.1 Trillion

Over the last week, President Yanukovych signed the now almost ritual event of a cooperation agreement with NATO which among other things allows for the unpopular annual Sea Breeze exercises with the US.

Quite why it is so unpopular is really something of an enigma.  Ukraine is non-aliened.  Its military trains and exercises with all of its neighbours both East and West (NATO and CSTO) alike.  It is very active in supplying UN personnel and equipment globally.  There is no real reason for the anti-NATO stance by so much of the public given the non-aliened status of Ukraine .  Russia also cooperates with NATO regularly despite their disagreements.

It would be more understandable should Ukraine decide to join NATO as that is definitely against the wishes of the vast majority of Ukrainians currently.  Equally there is not great desire to join the CSTO either.

Anyway, aside from signing the annual NATO cooperation agreement, Ukraine also committed itself further into the future with regards to its presence in Afghanistan.   This time however, rather than bomb disposal teams that have been in Afghanistan for what seems like forever, Ukraine has pledged anti drug trafficking expertise and personnel.  It has also offered to transit logistical support to Afghanistan for NATO with effect from 2014.  Needless to say, there will still be a massive presence in Afghanistan long past the official troop withdrawals.  In fact a large presence is being muted until 2024 in some diplomatic circles.

Now some may mock the idea of Ukraine offering anti-drug personnel and training and wonder what it knows about such matters, however in the past 6 months it has carried out 3 very successful drugs operations at Odessa docks alone, seizing vast quantities from African and South American ships.  As a natural transit hub between North Africa, Russia and Eurasia as well as the EU, it is naturally extensively targeted for nefarious purposes by serious and organised crime just as it is for legitimate cargoes.  Ukraine is far more switched on to such matters than most would assume and give it credit for.

So, I have briefly mentioned, Ukraine, NATO and Afghanistan.  What about the $2.1 trillion?

Well, for the first time ever, the UN in conjunction with the World Bank have given an official estimate of the size of the global criminal GDP.  Yuri Fedotov, head of the UN Drugs and Crime Office (UNODC) stated that organised crime from which Odessa is certainly not immune, and Afghan heroin trade, which Ukraine will send personnel to attempt to manage, accounts for $2.1 trillion.

$2.1 trillion is 3% of global GDP.  If it was a country, it would be in the top 20 economies on the planet.

It is the first ever official UN global guesstimate regarding the serious and organised crime economics.  The figures are based on 2009 statistics.

Within this truly massive figure, $40 billion is spirited away corruptly in developing nations.  It is a figure to which Ukraine is certainly one such contributing culprit.  The truly abhorrent practice of human trafficking accounts for $32 billion each year which Ukraine as an obvious transit country, from East to West and also MENA to West, is not immune either.

Just what figure the UN puts on the Afghan heroin trade now it has for the first time ever compiled such an all encompassing criminal GDP estimate, who knows?  How much Afghan heroin moves through Russia and then into Ukraine, some of it onwards to the EU, again who knows?

Whatever, it is surely in Ukrainian interests to cooperate with NATO over the Afghan heroin issue just as Russia has said it will do.  No matter how unpopular this decision may be with large numbers of the Ukrainian public, it is the right decision.

That said, most Ukrainians have domestic priorities and this decision will only draw demonstrations during the week the US Navy carries out exercise Sea Breeze in Ukrainian waters with the Ukrainian Navy.  Those protests are likely to come from Odessa and Crimea as they do every year, and seem more ritual and obligatory than passionately reasoned.

How Ukraine tackles its share of the $2.1 trillion organised (rather than street) criminal economy is something to ponder.  Who are the organised actors?  What are they involved in?  What strategies and tactics will work most effectively?  Who does Ukraine partner with when it comes to international agencies over international crime?

Some of those answers are obvious and others not.

EYP (European Youth Parliament) Ukraine

Well this is something I don’t normally do, however I am going to raise awareness of a NGO.  In fact a European NGO but specifically it is the Ukrainian branch I am highlighting.  It is the European Youth Parliament (EYP).

Why am I doing this?  Because it is not tied to Yanukovych or Tymoshenko or Yatseniuk or any other dubious politicians in Ukraine.  It is domestically A-political and free from the stench of Ukrainian political parties and personalities.  It is for and by the youth and it encourages youth to youth/people to people contact across the European continent on policy rather than political party issues.

Amongst these young people, one day Ukraine may end up with leaders that are not recycled Soviet machinery with a single style of autocratic leadership regardless of party you vote for.

To promote it and encourage  the Ukrainian youth to actually participate in something bigger than Ukraine, which does not function by the power vertical or is identified by a single personality (to the point of a Bloc name), and is not subject to oligarchy orchestration or the endemic corruption that runs through the main party politicians of all colours when it comes to policy debates, can only be a good experience for any who engage in it.

For the youth in Odessa, the EYP hold their regional session 15 – 19 August.

I have no vested interests in the EYP to declare.  I am far too old to be classed as a youth and I am in no way affiliated to the EYP currently or historically.  My interests such as they are, rest only in the fact I live permanently in Odessa and have the firm belief that policy politics and not personality politics is the only viable road ahead for Ukraine if the current cycle of useless (with a few notable exceptions across party lines) and corrupt politics is ever to be broken.

Anyway, plug for the EYP now made in English.  You can ignore the next bit as it will say the same thing but in Russian for Cyrillic SEO reasons.

Also, before I forget, happy birthday to HM Queen Elizabeth II who is 86 today.  What a fantastic monarch she has been!

*  * * * * * * * *

Ну это то, что я обычно не делаю, но я повышаю осведомленность о НПО. На самом деле европейские НПО, и особенно это украинский филиал выделяющий это Европейский молодежный парламент (ЕМП).

Почему я это делаю? Потому что это не связано с Януковичем или Тимошенко или Яценюком или любых других сомнительных политиков в Украине. Это внутри-политический и свободный от вони украинских политических партий и личностей. Это для молодежи и призывает молодежь к молодежи / между людьми контактирующиж на европейском континенте, о политике, а не политическим вопросам партии.

Среди этих молодых людей, в один прекрасный день Украина может закончить с лидерами, которые не утилизируются советскими машинами с одного стиля самодержавного руководства независимо от партийного голосования.

Чтобы продвигать и поощрять украинскую молодежь реально участвовать в чем-то большем, чем Украина, которая не работает в вертикали власти и определяется одной личностью (вплоть до блока имени), и не подлежат олигархии или оркестровкакоррупции, которая проходит через основной политической партии всех цветов, когда дело доходит до политических дебатов, может быть только хороший опыт для любого, кто участвует в нем.

Для молодежи в Одессе, ЕМП проводить свои региональные сессии 15 – 19 августа.

У меня нет никаких корыстных интересов в ЕМП. Я слишком стар, чтобы быть классифицированым как молодежь, и я никоим образом не связанных с ЕМП в настоящее время или истории. Мои интересы, такие как они есть, отдыхать, только я живу постоянно в Одессе и есть твердое убеждение, что политика политикой, а не личности политика является единственной жизнеспособной дорогой для Украины, если текущий цикл бесполезных (с некоторыми исключениями по партийной линии) и коррумпированных политики ли будет побит

A look back and a look forward – The Yanukovych presidency so far

Today I am not going to write much.

I will bring to your attention this Carnegie article published on 2 April 2012, highlighting the highs and lows of reforms to the Ukrainian economy under the current president.  Suffice to say, its author, Nazar Kholod, it not so very wide of the mark and as a general recap so far, it is well worth a read and a reasonably accurate summary.

Next up, a You Tube video of Ukraine’s Foreign Minister, Mr Gryshchenko, during a presentation and Q&A session as the IISS in London on 3 April 2012.

Enjoy!

The Korolevska Foundation – Right questions, wrong location!

Well not so very long ago I wrote a small entry on Natalia Korolevska and debated whether she was to be the new female face of Ukrainian politics replacing her former leader and mentor, Ms Tymoshenko.  It certainly seems that if her star is not rising through ability and worthy recognition, she is catapulting it into the celestial realms on the back of self-promotion.

As such I was not overly surprised to see that on 27th March the Korolevska Foundation, (it is popular to have a foundation/think tank if you are a politician), is holding a meeting to discuss 3 very important issues:

1.   Creating a credible opposition.

2.   Defending civil liberties and justice.

3.   Campaigning for EU democratic values.

Very good.  All worthy of discussion and all worthy of engagement with the Ukrainian opposition leaders, Ukrainian civil society and academia and most importantly the Ukrainian public I am sure we would all agree.  I would even go along myself if it was local to Odessa.

Unfortunately it isn’t local to Odessa as many political meetings involving leaders aren’t.  Lest we forget, Kyiv is the centre of the Ukrainian universe and we in the provinces are but a far flung orbiting meteor visited only when campaigning for votes or random and infrequent public relations events.  Apart from that we are left to defecate in the streets for the amusement of passing tourists in the hope they will through their loose change in our hats.

To be fair though, most people in Odessa are very pleased to be left alone by the powers that be residing in Kyiv, so tourists please continue to throw your loose change in our hats.  That is generally far better than unwelcome attention from Kyiv.

Nevertheless, if the Korolevska Foundation cannot or will not do a traveling roadshow around Ukraine to promote her and debate these 3 relevant issues with Ukrainians, then Kyiv is obviously the place to engage with all levels of Ukrainian society.  On that most would agree.

However, this meeting is not going to be held in Kyiv.  It is not even going to be held in Ukraine.  If you want to attend, debate or simply listen to the Korolevska Foundation over such important issues here is the address:

Scotland House, Round-Point Schuman 6, 1000 Brussels.

If you want to attend, simply complete this application form, but if you are Ukrainian, unless you already have a valid Schengen Visa, it is very unlikely you will get one in time to attend now!  I expect it will be an interesting jolly for those who go along but what will that achieve other than being interesting?

It would appear that the Korolevska Foundation will be asking how to create a credible opposition in Ukraine, how to defend civil liberties and justice in Ukraine and how to campaign for EU democratic values in Ukraine, not with Ukrainians (unless they happen to be there), but with anybody except Ukrainians who can make it to Scotland House in Brussels on the 27th!

One must seriously question the legitimacy of this gathering.  Is it to genuinely find answers to these questions or is it simply another event to reinforce Natalia Korolevska as the new female face of Ukrainian politics amongst the Brussels technocracy.

For certain such advice from Brussels can be given to the Korolevska Foundation in Ukraine.  Ukraine hosts ambassadors, political scientists, advisors et al from every EU nation as well as an EU Ambassador and staff as well.  She could gather 80 – 100 very smart top level EU policy advisors and policy implementors amongst the diplomatic ranks posted in Ukraine quite easily.

The input holding such a meeting in Ukraine would be no less qualitative or clever than the input given by holding it in Brussels.  Certainly such a gathering in Ukraine would get far more Ukrainian media and public attention, but I suspect it is not Ukrainian media attention Ms Korolevska is seeking, but that of the Brussels Quarter and more for her own ends than any to receive substantive answers she hasn’t already arrived at herself.

To answer the first question relating to creating a credible opposition, then firstly there must be trust between the 18 or so opposition parties.  As most of the opposition parties have had experience of working together within the Tymoshenko government, then trust is a very rare commodity.  Nobody within the opposition trusts her and equally she has no trust in other opposition parties (or some members of her own).  That lack of trust is equally apportioned around the opposition parties about each other.

To understand this you must consider the RADA as closed shop business where majority and opposition change places as majority and minority shareholders at election time, and the personal dividends that brings individual deputies is dependent upon what position they hold.  That is a situation that becomes very complicated indeed when a coalition government is made up of numerous parties and each party and each deputy is focused in retaining and improving their position and personal dividend windfall.

In order to gain any sort of trust amongst all opposition parties, Ms Tymoshenko would have to permanently leave politics.  She currently has a dislike for Yatesniuk (again – and not for the first time) which makes uniting a credible opposition very difficult when Yatseniuk and his party are the second most popular opposition party in Ukraine, not far behind her own.  Recent Ukrainian political history is replete with examples of what happens to careers, positions and actions when Ms Tymoshenko took a disliking to somebody within her coalition, something Ms Korolevska discovered herself on 14th March when expelled from Ms Tymoshenko’s BYuT faction.  Trust therefore, is severely lacking.

Next is a complete lack of policy.  There is a policy void amongst the opposition, individually and combined, that is so vast it makes the Grand Canyon seem like a hair-line fracture.  The only thing they have agreed on publicly is to try and create a single voters list amongst themselves to stand against the current government but even that, despite being announced in January, has still to be done and even if it is done, not only does it stand a chance of falling apart before the October elections, it also significantly reduces voter choice.

That does not even begin to address the vastly differing ideologies and places on the political spectrum that so many different opposition parties occupy.  The opposition ranges from the extreme right of Svoboda all the way across to the centre left socialists.  It is no wonder there can be little agreed policy to act as a platform for electioneering other than “we are not the PoR”.

As unpopular as the PoR may be, when push comes to shove at voting time, it is not hard for the Ukrainian public to remember what happened last time there was a populist, policy-less, dysfunctional, multi-party coalition in power.  As all political observers know, any polls today are meaningless with the elections 6 months in the future.

It may already be too late to create a credible opposition as credibility and legitimacy is not given, but earned over time through policy and action.  The clock ticks towards election day and there is as yet no credible united opposition.

When it comes to defending civil liberties and justice, the opposition have a very difficult task.  When in power they did a particularly poor job of doing either, let alone improving it.  The EU policy as per the recent EEAS policy document and numerous statements and meetings by Stefan Fule, is now to engage with civil society and NGOs to do this.  Just as Ukraine fatigue set in within the EU when the opposition were in power, it seems quite clear by the EU adopting this policy towards civil society and NGOs, it suffers from the same fatigue now these parties are in opposition.

No effective credible opposition means no effective and credible actions over civil liberties and justice will come from it.  Better to go directly to those who are united in a cause, have far fewer internal conflicts, have policies and plans and fund them directly- which is exactly what the new EU policy does with civil society and NGOs.  Whether it will be an effective policy or not remains to be seen, but it can certainly be no less effective than the Ukrainian opposition.

Quite why the Korolevska Foundation is holding a meeting in Brussels about which campaigning for EU democratic values is on the agenda I am unsure.  National ambassadors from every EU nation, the EU Ambassador to Ukraine, the Council of Europe, OSCE, European Commission, European Parliament and European Council are hardly likely to be saying nothing to the leadership of Ukraine when the most important nation in their EaP strategy is baulking at the DCFTA and AA final fence and the stumbling block is indeed EU democratic values.

Ukrainian society is quite aware what EU democratic values are.  Well at least they thought they knew what EU democratic values are.   Events in Italy, Greece, Hungary and Slovakia this year may well have caused the Ukrainian public to rethink just exactly what EU democracy really is.  If it has then they would not be alone.  Many in the EU are now wondering as well.

Anyway, the Ukrainian public know/knew what EU democratic values are.  They do not live in a cocoon.  They travel, they have the Internet, they have millions of European visitors to Ukraine every year with whom they can and do interact.

The Ukrainian public can organise itself over issues it feels overstep the mark or are decidedly wrong.

They did it over the Tax Code without any organisational help from the opposition parties.  In fact the opposition parties were told by the demonstrators the protests was A-political and they would not allow the opposition to hijack it.  To date, since the current government came to power, that has been easily the biggest demonstration, dwarfing any other.

Locally, as yesterday’s post shows, they are also capable of forcing appropriate action where none is taken.

Should the Korolevska Foundation not be asking these questions of themselves, other opposition parties and in particular, the Ukrainian public in Ukraine rather than technocrats, journalists, interns, bloggers, and associated bodies within the Brussels bubble?

Has she not noticed the increasing perception amongst the EU citizenry of a democratic deficit between themselves and the Brussels bubble?  Even the EU elites are waking up to that fact, although the only answer they seem to have is more central power and political union which simply increases nationalist rhetoric amongst the EU nations and their citizens.

There is bountiful foreign advice to be had here in Ukraine if that is what the foundation seeks, not to mention a large amount of quality domestic advice from the academia of Ukraine.

The future of Ukraine lays with Tigipko, Yatseniuk and yes with Korolevska.  At some point in the next 10 years the European stage will be theirs without the clutter of Yanukovych, Tymoshenko and the other recycled parts of the old Soviet apparatus.  Her star will rise in its own good time and I see so very little to be gained from this meeting being held in Brussels in comparison to holding it in Ukraine, other than some egotistical attempt to force her mobile number onto the speed-dial of mandarins she will soon enough put in the political shadows of the fairly near future.

Invitations and refusals – President and opposition

Two days ago saw the conclusion of the latest Council of Europe (PACE) meeting and amongst many statements made about many nations, Ukraine was one.

The Council of Europe statement was, as you would expect, critical of Ukraine and also the current situation with Ms Tymoshenko and her past colleagues.

Now Ukraine has given assurances behind closed doors that it will abide by any ECfHR ruling relating to Ms Tymoshenko and others.  That ruling however seems to be months away even in the fast tracked system.  This is really the only legal way the President has of releasing Ms Tymoshenko without breaking the law himself unless she asks for a pardon which she categorically states will never happen.

However, in light of the Council of Europe statements, the Presidential Administration issued invitations to the Speaker of the RADA and heads of parliamentary factions to discuss what can be done about the issues raised.

In response to those invitations, the political parties of Yulia Tymoshenko and Yuri Lutsenko, who happen to be the parties that have the most high profile people in jail, point blank refused to attend because others would be there.

This leaves the rather bizarre situation where the President, RADA Speaker, leader of the ruling PoR and several leaders of other opposition parties will meet for 2 days and discuss issues amongst which relate directly to the two opposition parties who flatly refuse to attend but should have the most interest in being there.

Is it reasonable for BYuT and OU-PSD to refuse an attempt at an all-inclusive discussion on matters criticized by PACE?  After all only 2 years ago BYuT and OU-PSD were in power and many of the issues unrelated to their party members incarceration but mentioned by PACE in its statement, happened and were left unchanged under their watch.

Do they want no others present so that any misleading or spurious allegations they may wish to make after any such meeting can go unchallenged?  (A common phenomenon in Ukrainian politics.)

Should they not be participating in this meeting for the voters who elected them and that have relatives in prison under the conditions highlighted by PACE?

The PACE statement is not all about Ms Tymoshenko and their political colleagues, but also about the conditions and suffering of relations of some of their voters.  Conditions they did nothing to change when in power and therefore BYuT and OU-PSD have a responsibility to discuss and address them with the President and current government for the sake of Ukraine and Ukrainian society.

Childish behaviour and refusal to attend and discuss such serious matters does nothing but undermine their self-appointed misnomer label of being democratic.  Continued refusal to engage through publicly open invitations for dialogue diminishes the claims that the current authorities are autocratic or a dictatorship as they orate.  Who is refusing to speak to who here and what message does that give to the Ukrainian public (and foreign observers)?

Diplomacy, negotiation and democracy all require dialogue and the willingness to take every opportunity for meaningful engagement when and where those opportunities arise.  That is even more essential when your political legacy is also being questioned by prominent external actors.

What will happen should the government put everything to the liking of PACE?  What part can BYuT and OU-PSD claim to have played in these human rights issues?  As far as the general population of Ukrainian prisons and their families go, obviously none having so publicly refused to take part in any dialogue!

One can only hope that politicians like Arseniy Yatseniuk and his Front for Change party not only continue to close the popularity gap on BYuT but overtake it and then some.  Maybe then as far as cross party pluralist democratic engagement goes in the corridors of power. the Ukrainian people will actually get to something resembling debates and discussion rather than the childish actions currently being displayed.

It is easy to look at this issue as one which relates solely to Ms Tymoshenko and colleagues, but when it comes to Ukrainian prisons and the conditions therein, it is a much broader matter and as such, BYuT and OU-PSD by not attending this meeting are not only letting down their supporters but also Ukrainian society in general.

Hardly the actions of a responsible leadership in waiting!

Are retrospective reviews under the new Ukrainian Criminal Code Procedure a good idea?

A few interesting comments were made by President Yanukovych over the weekend during a 2 hour television interview relating to many things, from elections to the current situation Ms Tymoshenko is in.

For instance, he stated  “From what Europeans say, I agree with the fact that Ukraine’s legislation is imperfect and that the trial of Tymoshenko and others didn’t meet European standards and principles. I absolutely agree with this.”  - Well quite right.  Nobody within Europe has stated she was innocent, they have complained bitterly that the process was not to European standards.

However, every Ukrainian citizen is subjected to the same imperfect trial system which is why the courts are so corrupt.  If and when her conviction for misuse of office is ever overturned, that should not be the end of the matter as far as European standards of due process are concerned.  Tomorrow, I may face the same imperfect system under some old Soviet law that remains on the statute books and has no place in modern day Ukraine.

Credit where credit is due, this government has actually got around to dealing with Ukraine’s 1995 Council of Europe commitments and has produced a Criminal Procedures Code, although it has yet to pass through parliament, it is likely to do so before the summer.

In fact the President went on to state  “I believe that that we should have all these cases considered again from the point of view of the new Criminal Procedure Code, which will comply with all European standards.”  The question is really when parliament will actually get around to looking at the new CPC and voting for it.  Once that happens then there is a review, but can and should the introduction of a new code and new laws be applied retrospectively?

If Tymoshenko’s case (and other high profile cases) are subjected to a retrospective quashing under the new CPC, why not every other Ukrainian prisoner who has been subjected to the same below European standard due process?  Where would it stop, why would it stop and who decides where it stops?

To simply apply it only to ex-politicians of all parties (including the party of the President) is not necessarily going to sit well with the Ukrainian public and will open the door to numerous human rights campaigns from NGOs and public alike.

In going down that road, will the EU promptly stop asking if Ukrainians have previous convictions when they apply for a Visa?  They have all been subjected to the same below European standard of due process after all.  If Ukrainian due process is not good enough for Tymoshenko, then it is not good enough for me or anybody else I know.  We are, after all, equal before the law (and due process) when it comes to European standards are we not?

Don’t misunderstand me here, as historical readers are aware, my position is that Tymsohenko should not be in jail because the due process was not of a high standard.  I am also very pleased to see Ukraine finally doing something about the promises it made to the Council of Europe in 1995 and actually generating a CPC that moves closer to European norms.

I appreciate that the new CPC is a possible tool to allow for Tymoshenko to appeal if applied retrospectively, however with retrospective application, there is a Pandora’s Box sat waiting to be opened.