$ 15 billion and $ 268.5

On December 17, under the leadership of V. Putin and V. Yanukovych, a meeting of the Russian-Ukrainian interstate commission was held. As a result, a package of 14 documents was signed, including a loan for Ukraine in $ 15 billion and on a change in the price of Russian gas. From $ 406 to $ 268.5 per thousand cubic meters. How did it happen and what does it mean?

There are no specific answers and all this looks almost like the sudden generosity of Putin V.V. In particular, the Russian Federation as a whole. But this does not happen, which means that there is still something geopolitical inside. Well, probably how otherwise. But it’s better just facts.

$ 15 billion loan

So, V. Putin said that Russia provides Ukraine with $ 15 billion loan. Well, yes, a loan in this amount should, it seems, to assume some kind of obligation of the other side. For example, the Ukrainian opposition claimed that on December 17, Yanukovych would sign an agreement on joining the Customs Union. Did you sign it?

The explanation of Putin himself was vague: " Baking in mind the problems in the Ukrainian economy, which I believe, to a large extent with the global financial economic crisis in order to support the budget of Ukraine, the Government of the Russian Federation decided to place part of its reserves from the National Welfare Fund with a volume of $ 15 billion in the securities of the Ukrainian government ." But all these problems, which now inclined Putin, existed six months ago and a year. However, Putin added that the issue of Ukraine’s accession to the Customs Union at a meeting in Moscow was not discussed.

There was still a nuance, quite geopolitical. According to him, the decision of the Government of the Russian Federation on the placement of part of the FNB reserves in the securities of Ukraine is not associated with any conditions, either with increased, nor decrease, nor freezing social standards, pensions, benefits or costs . " This Putin transfers hello to the IMF, which gives out money only for fulfilling his requirements (for example, raised tariffs for gas for the population of markets - this is this one of the loan conditions for Ukraine).

Further, Putin said that " Russia and Ukraine could interact more tightly in the international arena, expand the coordination of positions on urgent global problems ." In principle, this could mean a refusal of Ukraine from non -block status, but so far Putin has spoke about regional versions. However, not quite like that. Starting with regional security, “ the key factor of which is the Russian Black Sea Fleet based in Sevastopol ,” he went further: “It is necessary to resume comprehensive cooperation in the military, military-technical spheres. We and I spoke a lot of Ukraine and I have talked a lot on this.” But it was hard precisely the topic of military cooperation that could become the main argument in favor of the provision of a loan.

And then there will also be an optical effect: Russian tranches will be visible. But the fact that Ukraine will give in return is not. So inevitable constant speculations on the sale of the country in Moscow are inevitable - with any action of power in Kyiv. Moreover, quite natural speculations. From the journalistic side here is simple: the heading "Russia bought Ukraine" is placed, and that’s all.

But this is, after all, a loan. This is exactly the first tranche : “ The Russian Federation plans to buy out two -year euros of Ukraine in the amount of $ 3 billion within a week, the media reports, referring to the statement of the Minister of Finance of Russia Anton Siluanov. The bond coupon will be 5% per annum, the deadline for their appeal is until January 1, 2016. ” And there were rumors that the price of a loan could be 9-10% (it is not clear whether a percentage is set for each trench or 5% forever). That is, the return benefit is already present here. There are no problems with the placement of the money of the FNB as such: they are placed, usually in the USA, only there the percentage is almost zero. To believe that this loan is such as loans of the USSR, which Russia now write off the countries of Africa is a romantic exaggeration. But, of course, the topic "Russia bought Ukraine" will live in this option.

$ 268.5 per 1 thousand cubic meters

The second, already obvious sensation. Gazprom and Naftogaz, in the presence of Putin and Yanukovych, signed an addition to the "Contract for buying-sale, deliveries, volumes and conditions of natural gas transit for 2009-2019" dated January 19, 2009. According to the addition, the price of gas supplied by Gazprom Naftogaz for the period until 2019 from January will be $ 268.5. Now the price of gas was $ 406 per 1 thousand cubic meters. At the same time, the contract is valid until 2019, well, the effect of the addition is also prescribed until 2019.

At a press conference, Vladimir Putin explained everything like this: " We believe that this is also a temporary decision. Baking in mind that long-term, long-term agreements should and will be reached. This applies to gas supplies to Ukraine, this also applies to ensuring uninterrupted transit to Russian consumers in Europe ." This is what he has in mind by non -temporary relations: " Russia is ready to continue to meet our partners, but we are faced with the task of developing a truly effective and long -term interaction scheme ." Given that earlier the leadership of all levels - both Russia and Gazprom categorically denied even the possibility of negotiations on changing the price of gas, then these words of Putin explain nothing. Well, besides the fact that something very important clearly stuck here.

The Ukrainian profile deputy prime minister Y. Boyko explained to Gazprom the price of gas for “Naftogaz” by Russia's fears to lose the Ukrainian market: “ The understanding that Russian colleagues are losing the market, we are losing production. It is time to meet each other .” That's for some reason suddenly right now, yes. It is interesting here that A. Miller, who previously categorically denied the revision of the contract, did not say a single word about this. Well, while his comments were the figures $ 268.5 came across.

Another detail. Typically, contracts correction were called either Ukraine’s entry into the TS, or the transfer of the Ukrainian GTS to the Office of Russia. The first paragraph of the President of the two countries denies. According to the second - the situation is more curious. A. Miller nevertheless made one statement, saying that with Ukraine the question of creating a tripartite consortium - with the participation of Russia, Ukraine and the EU - does not discuss. Moreover, this question " has not been the subject of negotiations between Gazprom and Naftogaz for a long time . But then another question is - if "has not been" for a long time, then why talk about it? And here there is an answer and it is simple: that Ukraine and Russia plan to resume negotiations on the creation of a tripartite consortium, N. Azarov reported the day before.

That is, the topic of taking the GTS under the control of Russia clearly exists. And to her there is also the opinion of K. Bondarenko, now it will be, at the end of the next head.

"What will give Kyiv to Putin for this"

So, the reasons why all this was produced was not directly reported. Then, of course, experts are accepted to calculate these reasons and it cannot be said that they were able to find any specific logic in Russia's behavior. At least, it looks like in the selection that the League.net agency made: " What will give Kiev to Putin for a 15-millionth loan and a gas discount."

T. Berezovets suggests that " we are talking about the surrender of strategic enterprises that may be interested in Russian business. In addition, it is possible that manipulations with the GTS ." He believes that in the near future, Russian agents of influence may appear in the Ukrainian government - " and this is not even Medvedchuk ." However, the Berezovets does not think, " that Yanukovych signed up with blood under any documents that would close the path of Ukraine to the European Union ."

V. Naobozhenko was more specifically, saying that in the near future Ukraine would abandon the Energy Charter of the European Union. In his opinion, " these agreements are a hidden form of sale of the GTS ." Another version of Nebuzhenko is that " Yanukovych received guarantees of support from the FSB" - because he realized that "in Ukraine everything against him is building intrigues ." Nebuzhenko also suggests that 15 billion. Now - " This is a form of restructuring of the debts of Yanukovych's entourage. This is not live money, but the personal economic dependence of President Yanukovych on President Putin. But the situation will still demand from Ukraine to achieve money from the IMF ."

The most interesting was the option of K. Bondarenko, who took the situation far to the west. About his versions, the main concession was geopolitical, " Kiev agreed with the demand of Moscow to postpone an association with the European Union ." This would have remained a general reasoning if it were not for the detail: " Russia does not require abandoning the European vector at all, but offers to wait several months before the planned meeting of German Chancellor A. Merkel and V. Putin, where the format of relationships in Europe, as well as meetings of Merkel and Yanukovych will be discussed ." K. Bondarenko did not explain where he got this information, but this option does not look impossible.

But what exactly is the role of Merkel? Bondarenko has everything seriously: “ Ukraine offered to abandon the American version of the Association with the EU in exchange for the German-Russian version. This is the Berlin-Moscow axis, and Kiev has chosen this direction. In exchange for this choice, Ukraine received a loan and discount on gas. But the European prospect remains, the score is just changing: instead of the Washington-German-Russian ”.

The key here is the energy topic, and Ukraine turns out to be the key link in the new energy project: " The old game is over. The new one begins. Putin won, Merkel won. Yanukovych won only locally - inside the country, receiving money and". At the same time, Bondarenko believes that the association with the EU will be signed, " only this will be done after Putin and Merkel B negotiations ."

It looks logical, but even too logical. However, it is possible that Merkel took so much Bondarenko’s mind because it was on Tuesday that she became the chancellor of Germany for the third time. In general, how very pathos and geopolitical. In addition, there is a problem: Bondarenko turns out that A. Merkel personally leads the whole of Europe. However, it is sometimes necessary to go beyond the landed context and inflame somewhere, such as in a square, where everyone is discussing geopolitics. But only with Germany, Bondarenko still has a non -bond: the new German Minister of Foreign Affairs Steinmeier has already " expressed indignation at the pressure of Russia to Ukraine to prevent the signing of an association agreement with the European Union ."

Inside Ukraine, opposition

Experts with their versions are one thing, and everything is perceived in the country differently. So let there be criticism, that is, the opposition version. On the fact of understanding the incident there was no, there was no coordinated position.

O. Tyagnibok said on the Maidan that V. Yanukovych “ betrayed Ukrainians today. He today actually signed agreements under state guarantees and actually passed the agro -industrial complex, aircraft industry, shipbuilding, etc., and now with these Moscow money, he wants to patch holes in the first quarter in the state budget .” Then he called on the Maidan to continue the protest, " so that the authorities could not conclude the final agreement to join the Customs Union ." Of course, he had a format "it is necessary to say something to people."

A. Yatsenyuk has another version of the same format. He requested on the Maidan so that V. Yanukovych showed the documents that he signed in Moscow on December 17. The reason is already more specific: " Yanukovych received free $ 15 billion for free and also received a discount of $ 130 per thousand cubic meters of gas, this is about 5 billion dollars. We want to hear what he gave. 20 billion is not just a lot of money, it is a lot of money ." That is, Yatsenyuk does not believe that the Treaty on the Customs Union was not signed.

However, A. Yatsenyuk said that the opposition will accept an agreement on the price of gas under one condition: " If the price of gas from January 1 of the next year will be 30 percent less, this means that the Yanukovych government should reduce all tariffs in Ukraine. Then we will feel that this is true. Otherwise, this is a lie in the scheme, and that it is in corruption ." Here - from the point of view of the state - Yatsenyuk for some reason did not realize that the reduction in gas price could just help fulfill the IMF requirement to bring tariffs for the population to the market level. Moreover, without raising tariffs.

V. Klitschko held on for a long time as a politician (in his understanding), but now he returned to the image of the athlete again: " The exit for the country is only early elections. Yanukovych said at the KCCRULE table that he was not afraid of early elections. I call Yanukovych - he is my personal rival, and I call him to the ring ." Well, yes, for the whole time of his presence in politics, Klitschko did not learn new words that could be spoke on professional topics.

In the same spirit, there was an explanation of why the elections were the output for the country: " In this crisis in which Ukraine is now, it is not the time to consider the current issues of the agenda ." This, of course, is an outstanding statement: if the country has a crisis, then there is no need to think about reality. You just need to re -elect everyone. But he could not really explain this option, Klitschko went “weakly”: “So let him prove it in the honest elections that should take place. I am sure that they should take place in March 2014.” He never called a specific reason for extraordinary elections.

But the topic of re-election in 2014 will still become the main one for the Maidan-they must somehow keep people there. That is, this is such a paradox: saying that it is not necessary to deal with the "current issues of the agenda", they are engaged in exactly this: to constrain the Maidan until the New Year. Well, so far to the new one. But why? What, in fact, re-election. Well, the Maidan for no specific reason is, in general, the drain of the Maidan as such and in principle.