• am
  • ru
  • en
print version
11.03.2014

OPINION OF THE NORAVANK FOUNDATION DIRECTOR GAGIK HARUTYUNYAN: NO RETURN TO THE PRIOR STATUS OF CRIMEA

EnglishРуский

   

Mr. Harutyunyan, the whole world’s attention today is focused on the events in Ukraine. What do you think about these developments?

Indeed, there are multi-level complicated processes going on in Ukraine. One of the levels is the societal factor. Undoubtedly, the Ukrainian society wasn’t happy with the quality of governance in the country and its leadership in the person of Yanukovych. This discontent developed into protests. However, this is just the superficial level. Events happening in Kiev point to a well-organized force that seized the power in a bloody coup, which resulted in about 100 casualties and thousands of injured.

Classical, military, violent coup d’état…

In result of which the power was seized by some people, clearly illegitimate. The underlying geopolitical rationale of what is happening is obvious. The goal is to weaken Russia. In this case Ukraine was a mere instrument to weaken Russia’s positions, along with those of Europe, by the way. It’s no secret that the worst scenario for the USA is the creation of a greater Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok. Characteristically, the bloody Ukrainian events developed with direct support of the West, both individual politicians that added fuel to the fire and some Western governments. And ironically, this is the same West that makes a tremendous fuss about any single violation of human rights

If we now look at those who seized the power, we get an impression that the Ukrainian people fell out of the frying pan into the fire. They got rid of some oligarchs to fall into the clutches of some others.

Isn’t that the truth! As for the events in Crimea, Russia can be criticized for many things, including, especially, that as an immediate neighbor of Ukraine, Russia has been unable to exercise the so-called soft power. I am talking about information influence, weakness of the Russian media generally and in Ukraine particularly. Russia certainly cannot be proud about its positive image and was unable to improve it for many years. However, there is also the factor of Ukraine itself, something that can be described in Huntington’s wording as “civilizational fault line.” A few years ago I wrote an article analyzing this phenomenon and noted that Ukraine is among the countries that have such lines, because western and eastern Ukraine differ significantly by many parameters. We have to admit that unfortunately, Ukraine did not manage to establish itself as a state, as a consolidated country. It’s constantly prone to one or another type of revolutions and coups, Maidans, etc. But back to Crimea…

In Crimea it is about defending the rights of the Russian-speaking population that comprises no less than 60%. Another key factor is the Russian Navy base in Crimea. Generally speaking, Crimea was not part of Ukraine in the past and was made such by Khrushchev’s decision. Also, admittedly, many western and eastern territories were added to Ukraine somewhat artificially. The Russian-speaking population of Crimea indeed needs protection. It is simply terrifying to listen to the rhetoric of Dmytro Yarosh, leader of the Right Sector ultranationalist organization. But this is not only about him. Remember that the first thing Verkhovna Rada (Ukrainian parliament) did after the coup was to annul the law on regional languages. It was then reverted back, but today it is still part of the agenda. One can be absolutely sure that whatever final shape that law will take, it will never provide sufficient rights to the Russian-speaking population. In such situation the Russian leadership took some adequate steps. After all, Russia did not declare war on Ukraine, right? It just voiced about the possibility to send troops to Ukraine in case the events take a certain turn to the worse, which would require protection of the Russian (and perhaps, also Ukrainian) population . Meanwhile, the Crimeans took over the initiative and a process started for achieving greater autonomy, or I would even say, sovereignty for the peninsula. It is hard to tell what this will eventually bring about. Will Crimea become an independent nation that will incorporate also Donetsk and Odessa? We can only make guesses and offer scenarios. Yet one thing is clear – most likely there will be no return to the prior status of Crimea.

Is it possible that the events in Crimea somehow affect the process of Karabakh conflict resolution? And are there any parallels here?

Remember Leo Tolstoy’s phrase: “every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.” This concerns all trouble spots on the territory of the former USSR. The Crimean conflict is different from Karabakh in its roots. In case of Karabakh we had to deal not only with Azerbaijan, but also with Turkey. In this context some analogies can be found, since Turkey has a tremendous influence on the Tatar population of Crimea. That is the only common thing. Everything else is different – the processes are different both in scale and essence. South Ossetia and Abkhazia precedents bear some resemblance to the Karabakh conflict, but then again, the situation is very different there, because there is no civilizational disparity between Georgians, and Abkhazians and Ossetians. Unlike in the case with the Karabakh conflict, these peoples, in principle, have no clash of civilizations. And in Crimea still less, as the conflicting parties are both Slavs.

I believe that what currently happens in Crimea is beneficial for Armenia in the geopolitical terms, because in case if the Russian Navy base in Sevastopol is gone, then the Black Sea will become sort of an inner sea of Turkey. Loss of such a strategic outpost would strengthen Turkey, which is not our best friend, to put it mildly. It has to be admitted that all the steps so far taken by Russia have been in line with our geopolitical interests in one way or another. For instance, we realize well, that had Russia not intervened in South Ossetia, the Azerbaijanis would have been inclined to carry out a military operation against Karabakh in a similar manner that Saakashvili attempted to do with South Ossetia.

Then again, the Russian intervention in the Middle Eastern affairs and prevention of the aggression against Syria was in line with our interests as well, given the stalemate with the Armenian community in Syria and in the Middle East as a whole. The same can be said about Crimea. Russia having strong positions in general and in the Black Sea, in particular, is in our interests. However, regardless of that, under no circumstances one should forget about the rights of people, about their right to live with their language, traditions and beliefs. With all due respect to Ukraine and the Ukrainians, the process happening in Crimea must be welcomed in principle.

Today there is a lot of talking about a new round of the Cold War provoked by the events in Ukraine and the recent statements by Obama come to prove that…

In 2002 I published an article in Golos Armenii titled “The Cold War-2.” You see, prerequisites for such war existed even then and the Cold War continues. However, the situation in the world has changed. Currently we live in a multi-polar world. Let’s recall the numerous attempts to isolate Iran from the world; they did not succeed because there are some serious geopolitical actors around, such as Russia, China, as well as India. Well, if the military cooperation between Russia and the USA stops, it’s no big deal either for Russia or for the West. That’s how it works…

Back to Ukraine. Here is a quote from a recent interview about the situation in Ukraine given by Marine Le Pen, a right-wing French politician, leader of the Front National: “It is everyone’s fault, if I may say. First of all, because the European Union added fuel to the fire by helping the revolt to turn into a revolution. Because they made part of the Ukraine believe that Ukraine may be accepted in the EU, which is absolutely wrong. It has to be clearly stated: European people do not want Ukraine in the EU. By the way, they also do not want Albania, Macedonia and Turkey…” Your comments, please…

Well, what she said is true. The problem is that many confuse the EU Association Agreements with the EU membership, although the former does not imply the latter. Similar EU Association Agreements had been signed with Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Mexico, Palestine, Tunisia, Chile, and South Africa – so what? Did it somehow change anything in Egypt, for example? Moreover, what has changed for such countries as Bulgaria or Romania after the EU membership? They lived not so well 30 years ago, and they continue like that now. Even the Baltic countries that integrated into the EU so smoothly, now face an economic crisis. The economy hardly grows, there are numerous problems.

Many people in the Armenian society also think that an Association Agreement with the EU provides an opportunity to become part of the EU. But it does not. It is an ordinary agreement on trade relations, and nothing more. Today Ukraine has fallen far behind economically and is at the brink of a collapse, a financial default. Naturally, there is no prospect for Ukraine’s EU membership, not to mention that now there are such people in the power structure as Yarosh, who blames for everything the American and European imperialists, the Jews, the Poles, the Moskals (i.e. Russians) and everyone else around. The EU definitely does not need such Ukraine and actually, such Ukraine is a persona non grata for many. The biggest mistake of Yanukovych was that he decided to make a choice on whether to turn right or left. If Ukraine maintained equal relations with both Russia and Europe, it could become a very important structure for unification of the greater Europe and could reap lots of dividends. However, I repeat, the Ukrainian leadership made a huge mistake in an attempt of choosing “either, or”, and consequently, as a country that has not established itself in geopolitical terms, with no strategic directions and without a so-called geopolitical code of its own, Ukraine now faces the situation that we observe now.

Zara Gevorgyan

Return
Another materials of author