Zelensky NATO performance

Anna van Densky OPINION UkrainePresident Volodimir Zelensky declarations at NATO headquaters could be hardly considered as good news for inhabitants of Donbass – joint drills in July with Alliance vessels in Black Sea can not be mistaken for a flight of a dove with an olive branch.

Zelensky is ready to negotiate Donbass conflicts, but only in the context of NATO integration. It means to continue imposing on Russians in Donbass the vector of development they had initially rejected – to choice a camp of Russia’s foes. But not only, it means the complete submission to a totalitarian Ukraine language law, stripping Donbass of their minority national and linguistic rights, destroying their identity.

National identity became a huge problem for ethnic Russian on the terrotries of the former USSR, when a number of former Soviet Republics have chosen for openly anti-Russian policy, eradicating Russian language and identity in contradiction with international law, and European values. Ukraine has taken an aggressive stance against Russian minority, who voted for its independence unaware it would be the beginning of the end of their national identity profile.

President Putin promise to facilitate the procedure of issuing Russian passports to Ukrainian citizens of Russian origin, based on widely used practiced of jus sanguinis, accepted by the majority of the NATO allies, has caused concerns of the Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. He said it would ”destabiliseUkraine, omitting the fact, that the opposite, namely the attempt to eradicate Russian identity is behind the political turbulence of Ukraine, degrading into an armed conflict.

The denial of the fact that the Ukrainian state, being composed in different political contexts from different territories with autochtone populations, causes tensions fueling into conflict. In rejection of human rights, identity rights, linguistic rights of Russian, Hungarian and other minorities, Ukraine weakens the state, wasting a great deal of time and energy for suppressing the justified claims.

The declared by Jens Stoltenberg Ukraine-NATO drills in Black Sea in July, will serve as demonstration of power to Moscow, senseless and dangerous, enhancing Russia, the nuclear superpower to protect its borders, and assume it role as a guarantor of psychical survival of Donbass populations, threatened to be exterminated by Ukrainian neo-nazi as it happened in Odessa massacre (2014),  where they cremated Russians alive.

The official restoration of fascism in Ukraine took place in 2010, when President Yushchenko attributed status of national hero of Ukraine to a nazi criminal and terrorist Stepan Bandera, who led extermination of 300 000 Jews in Ukraine in a number of huge pogroms.

Jens Stoltenberg underlined that NATO is an alliance of democracies, subsequently the West should require respect of democratic values first, before undertaking rapprochement with Ukraine, contaminated by neo-nazis. The enforcement of Kiev  by NATO without demanding authorities to assume their responsibilities to respect democratic values, and minority rights will also nourish the most marginal political forces, interpreting the rapprochement as la carte blanche to return to Stepan Bandera ideology of Ukrainian nationalism.

Ukrainian linguistic totalitarianism

Ukrainian representative to UN Oleg Nikolenko called Russian request for UN Security Council meeting an “absurd”, insisting recent language law imposing Ukrainian unique status is no different to similar legislation in the other countries. Is it?

Ten years of prison for an attempt to establish multilingualism, and three year sentence for failure to use Ukrainian language in public institutions. Where language laws amount to such a Draconian practice? In what modern state there is such a supervising instance of powerful language inspectors, resembling Inquisition with extraordinary powers to repress?

However the totalitarianism of language  law is impossible to understand without the context of the contemporary Ukrainian nationalist ideology, resurrecting  fascist collaborator, and terrorist Stepan Bandera, glorified by President Yushchenko (2010) claiming his “sanctity“.

The “resurrection” of Nazi criminal Bandera has drawn the vector of development for contemporary Ukrainian nationalist idea, opening the tragic sequence of events from violent Maidan coup d’état, to Donbass conflict, and Odessa massacre.

The imposition of Bandera cult, marked a clean break from the humanist tradition of Ukrainian national idea of the XIX century, reflected in poetry of Taras Shevchenko and Lesya Ukrainka. Modern Ukrainian political elites could turn for inspiration to their heritage, developing national idea through creative spiritual growth, but they have chosen otherwise.

Ukrainian language law nr. 5670 enters open confrontation with the  Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights  announcing individuals of linguistic minorities cannot be denied the right to use their own language.

Linguistic rights were first included as an international human right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.

 

Ukraine prefers Zelensky to Poroshenko

In the first round of the election in Ukraine Vladimir Zelensky (41) is clear winner, leaving behind two heavy-weight incumbent President Poroshenko, and former Prime Minister Timoshenko.

The result means a huge disappointment of the Ukrainians with the results of Poroshenko mandate, but also with the systemic politics, which did not deliver anything close to the promises made.  Choice of Zelensky above all indicates a desire for change, and new generation in leadership.

(Below video with #Zelensky dancing in a show)

On January 21, 2019, the “Servant of the People” party nominated Vladimir Zelensky as a presidential candidate. He studied law in Kiev, but after graduation has never worked in accordance with his professional qualifications, pursuing a career in showbiz.

 

French hypocrites versus Yellow Vests

In prime time indignant Prime minister Edouard Philippe ensures audiences that hundreds of thousands of people in the streets would be not allowed to overthrow the French institutions. He called for new tough laws against the Yellow Vests protesters.

But why French  are so DOUBLE passionately supporting protest movements elsewhere, immediately blaming the leaders in oppression of their citizens? Why cheering at violence of Maidan revolution in Kiev, overthrowing the legitimate, but unpopular President Viktor Yanukovych? He was elected in the procedures, which were acknowledged across the world as democratic.  In Ukraine in the capital the uprising was performed by minority groups, who were actively supported by French government in their fight to overthrow the legitimate head of the state, and the government.  Subsequently the coup d’état in Ukraine was ‘legitimate‘ because it brought to power the pro-Western candidate.

It would be interesting to hear the comment of the oust President Yanoukovich on intention of French government to crush the protests of the Yellow Vests. Does he think the Ukraine history would have taken a different cause, if he had not listen the French hypocrites, applying double standards to themselves, and the rest of the world?..

Quod licet Iovinon licet bovi”,  Romans said, enshrining double standard for the God Jupiter, and his bull. But in XXI century this arrogance of playing Jupiter in guided palace will certainly not pass, serving as a seance of an aversion therapy vis-à-vis French leadership.

Macron-Philippe might scorn the grievances of people, and wrestle down the discontent of Yellow Vest, but they will certainly lose respect of European, despising pretensions hypocrites, claiming leadership: false democrats, false republicans, false human beings.

 

Minsk Agreement funeral

Today, the 2 of September, the assassinated leader of self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic Aleksandr Zakharchenko (42) will be lying in state, and the Minsk Agreements are buried together with him.

If, before the assassination many commentators would say, there was no alternative to  ‘Minsk‘, and they were the only road map we had to end  the bloodshed in Eastern Europe, after the terrorist act taking away life of a man, who believed in negotiated peace with Kiev, the Agreement died, because the trust in good will of Ukrainian authorities was definitely killed.

After the explosion in cafe, which took lives of Zakharchenko and his two bodyguards there is no one left in Donetsk who cherishes the illusion of Kiev’s intentions to reintegrate the breakaway Russian-speaking region through the negotiations.

A son on a coal-miner, Zakharchenko was widely appreciated for his integrity and believe in the success of Donetsk Republic independence. As  a soldier he fought against Ukrainian nationalism, defending Donbass people identity. “I’m speechless. Blessed be his memory…”, write Twitter micro blog users. “Heroes don’t die“,  echo the others. “He will go on forever!“. Unfortunately, we can not say the same about the Minsk Agreements. The bomb explosion in the center of Donetsk took live of its leader and trust in ‘Minsk‘. The local media reports readiness to counter-attacks, repelling Kiev troops. War hawks win again. Hoc est bellum – this is war…

EU foreign policy drama

migrants-bodies-on-coast

With flows of migrants from Libyan cost, the EU Southern Neighbourhood, ravaged by Islamic terrorists, and the defrozen conflict in the EU Eastern Neighbourhood with tanks moving along the vicinities in Donetsk, the EU foreign affairs Council, 6.2.2017,  finds itself in the worst situation in years, if not in decades, since the Balkan war.

Both problems have one element in common: the active involvement of the EU in shaping of the future of the neighbouring countries. The zeal of the implementation of the Neighbourhood policy in Ukraine led to the break of pro-European and pro-Russian populations, while the overthrowing of the Libyan ‘tyrant’ caused a turmoil on a half of the African continent.
Due to the EU efforts Libya from a donor became an acceptor, requesting funds to keep the flows of migrants on its coasts. 200 000 euro of taxpayers money were pledged to UN-backed Government of National Accord (GNA), while the destiny of Colonel Gaddafi’s fortune of 200 000 billion, as reported shortly before his assassination, remains obscure. However,  even if donated as agreed the major question remains if there are structures and institutions able of the implementation of the programme to improve the conditions of migrants, and fight against the smugglers.
GNA hardly controls Tripoli, where recently an explosion next to Italian reopened Embassy brought into focus grave security concerns for corps diplomatique, already shuttered by the tragic death of US Ambassador Stevens.
The EU mission on its page still calls it an ‘exiting’ time:
“It is an exciting time to be in Libya as the country is seeking its path towards democracy and stability. Just over two years ago (! -av), the Libyan people showed to the world that popular will could prevail over a ruthless dictatorship. For their courage and determination, Libyans gained the admiration of the whole world”, – although unlike Italians they prefer to watch if from the safe distance of ‘Prestige Business Center Bloc’ in Tunis.
Obviously impossible to compare ravaged by jihadists Libya with the  ‘Anti-terrorist operation’ (ATO) of President Poroshenko in Ukraine, the latest active fighting at the front line in Avdeevka, next to Donetsk endangered Minsk agreements, showing the fragility of the situation there and a huge ambition of Kiev’s leadership to conclude ATO, even at cost of the devastation of once wealthy industrial region of coal-mining.
Till present on contrary to the EU expectations the prolonged restrictive measures against Russia have not delivered an expected result to force Kremlin to abandon its support to two self-proclaimed Republics of Lugansk and Donetsk.
However the sanctions have an effect of the European agricultural sector and business, suffering losses as the result of this policy: the rise of the anti-EU forces in old member states is too obvious to ignore even for myopic bureaucrats of the European external action service, risking to lose their jobs soon, while the European nations demand referendums on EU membership from their governments, profoundly unsatisfied with the impact of  EU foreign policies on their lives.

Dutch Parliament to decide EU future of Ukraine

 

dutch-tulipe

The awaited decision on the fate of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement is now at the hands of the Dutch Parliament. The European Council stated that they ‘noted carefully’ the   referendum outcome in The Netherlands, however following the existing legal procedures the Agreement has to be endorsed/adopted by all 28 member states according to national relevant procedures. In case one of the states denies the ratification, the entire Agreement dissolves.

The debate and vote in Dutch Parliament will take place before the election on 15th March 2017.

‘The European Council notes that the Decision set out in the Annex is legally binding on the 28 Member States of the European Union, and may be amended or repealed only by common accord of their Heads of State or Government. It will take effect once the Kingdom of the Netherlands has ratified the agreement and the Union has concluded it. Should this not be the case, the Decision will cease to exist’  (Source: European Council Conclusions on Ukraine 15 December 2016, Brussels).