Norman summit: Is there a prospect?

Diplomat Konstantin Eliseev and politician Georgy Tuka: Will the leaders meet in April?

Vitaliy Portnikov: The Munich conference, which had recently, was supposed to revive the process of preparing for the Norman Summit, which its participants expected to spend in April in the German capital. But instead, there was a new exacerbation on the demarcation line between Ukraine and the occupied territory of the country. Will the Norman Summit pass? What will be Russian-Ukrainian relations in the near future, is there an atmosphere for dialogue? We’ll talk about this with our guests: this is the chairman of the Public Organization of the Center for New Decisions , the Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Ambassador Konstantin Eliseev and the former deputy minister for the temporarily occupied territories Georgy Tuka . Now we offer a plot about the essence of what is happening.

Correspondent: On February 18, 2020, the Council of National Security and Defense of Ukraine, headed by President Vladimir Zelensky, gathered at an emergency meeting. Early in the morning on this day, the separatists attacked the positions of Ukrainian units in the Lugansk region. Pro -Russian formations tried to make a breakthrough through the demarcation line. The fighting lasted almost six hours.

The current aggravation of the situation in the Donbass is one of the most serious after 2018. The Ukrainian military had to leave one support point near the Zolotoye village. The President of Zelensky at a briefing after a meeting of the Security Council called the separatists' attack “cynical provocation” and stated that it would not break peace negotiations on the Donbass. “We are sure that this provocation will not change our course, since only with a strong army you can sit at the negotiating table. Our course is a confident movement to end the war and to the world,” the head of state emphasized.

Politicians in Kiev believe that Moscow again demonstrates force in the Donbass, and this can be a lever of pressure on Ukraine during the negotiations expected in the spring in the Norman format.

As you know, the Norman format was created in 2014 to resolve the conflict in the Donbass with the participation of the leaders of the four countries - Ukraine, Russia, France and Germany. Over the past years, six meetings have passed in this format - including in Milan, Minsk, Berlin and Paris. The first and so far the last negotiations of the "four" took place in France. In June 2014, in the town of Benuville (Normandy-the Northern Region of France) the ways to settle the conflict in the east of Ukraine were discussed by Petro Poroshenko, Vladimir Putin, Francois Hollande and Angel Merkel, and on December 9, 2019, after more than three years of break, Vladimir Putin, Emmanuel Macron and Angel Merkel gathered at one table. The next meeting of the leaders of Ukraine, Russia, France and Germany, according to the agreements of the Four, is planned in April 2020 in Berlin.

The Russian authorities say that they do not see the grounds for a new meeting in the Norman format. According to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, progress in the implementation of the agreements reached in Paris is necessary for the next negotiations. According to these agreements, until the end of March, the dilution of troops in three more sections should take place on the demarcation line in the Donbass. In the last months of last year, the parties moved one kilometer from their positions in the village of Lugansk, gold (Lugansk region) and Petrovsky (Donetsk region).

On February 15, at the Munich Security Conference, Vladimir Zelensky announced the advisability of breeding troops in the Donbass on the sectoral principle and proposed jointly with representatives of individual regions of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions to patrol the eastern border with Russia now. These initiatives criticized in Ukrainian society.

The Russian authorities say that they do not yet see the grounds for a new meeting in the "Norman format"

An attempt to present at the Munich conference a plan of the phased settlement of the conflict in the Donbass called "Twelve Steps to strengthen security in Ukraine and the Euro -Atlantic region" caused even more criticism in Kyiv. The document, in the preparation of which several international organizations participated, including experts from Russia and Ukraine,, among other things, involves the mitigation of anti -Russian sanctions without the fulfillment of Ukrainian requirements for the Donbass. It is noteworthy that even ardent supporters of restoring relations with the Russian Federation in the Verkhovna Rada called this plan a provocation aimed at disrupting the Minsk agreements on the Donbass. And the foreign policy of Ukraine said that this document does not correspond to the official position of the country.

Vitaliy Portnikov: Is it possible to assume that the conference, at which there is an unexpected plan of resolving the situation in Ukraine, and the exacerbation, which occurs literally the next day after the conference, when Ukraine categorically does not agree with this plan, are these just such coincidences?

Konstantin Eliseev: There are no such coincidences, especially in relations with the Russian Federation. I agree that the Ukrainian side did not use the Munich security conference. In particular, it was a big omission that a meeting of foreign ministers did not take place in the Norman format and in Munich. Moreover, the decision in Paris provided for a meeting and dialogue at the level of foreign ministers. The Ukrainian side has not yet proposed a strategy for the return of Donbass, instead we see chaotic mutually exclusive initiatives. The President says about some things, the Minister of Foreign Affairs - about others, advisers - about the third, and it turns out an abracadabra, and not a settlement plan.

Vitaly Portnikov: A situation may arise when armed formations on the border between the territory, which is now controlled by Moscow, and the Ukrainian armed forces will be able to enter into a clash without direct instructions from the center?

George Tuka: No, this is excluded. Working in the ministry, I received closed data from the foreign intelligence service at least twice a week, from the Main Intelligence Directorate, which indicated that decisions, up to the collection of scrap metal, are made exclusively in Rostov. Comrades who position themselves as the leaders of the "young republics" can not do anything without this solution: this applies to any military operations.

George Tuka

2014-15 The situation was completely different: the Donbass was actually divided into eight to ten different gangs, and these groups quite often arranged clashes among themselves, primarily for financial flows, for control over the highways on which they simply collected tribute from passing cars. About the second half of 2015, the situation has changed radically, the Russians completely took the whole process under control, and there can be no question of any amateur.

Vitaliy Portnikov: Back to the topic of Munich, to these 12 points. How do such documents arise in general, how are your signatures of your, Konstantin, former colleagues, Ukrainian diplomats, who occupied a very high position in the country's Ministry of Foreign Affairs?

Konstantin Eliseev: The roots of this situation did not arise directly on the eve of the Munich conference, but much earlier. Just these people, Ukrainian oligarchs attracted an exchange option a couple of years ago: Donbass to the Crimea. Remember, there was an article, if I am not mistaken, at Wall Street Jornal, where it was proposed: let's forget about the Crimea and at the same time resolve the situation in the Donbass. I think that just this storyline was held further, a plan was written. Obviously, he was coordinated in Moscow: Russians are honestly talk about this.

The only thing, in fact: how were the signatures of three Ukrainians? By the way, we raised this question at the Munich Conference. Everyone was surprised. It is possible that they simply waved this document, not reading, thinking that it is actually beneficial to Ukraine. Here our Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not work a little.

It is known that this plan was known about a couple of days before its public appearance. In my opinion, this is not a dangerous trend - it was a test, a test for Ukrainians, for Ukrainian authorities, primarily for our partners: how they will react. Thank God that there was a statement by American politicians who categorically reserved this plan, and the Ukrainian side was absolutely negative about it.

Vitaly Portnikov: Could this be an element of pressure on the President of Zelensky? He goes to Munich with his peaceful sentences, he must make a speech, and suddenly a plan that is practically an alternative to what he wants to say?

Georgy Tuka: If you take the last two or three weeks, the appearance of this scandalous plan and exacerbation in the Donbass, then between these two events there was a Kremlin’s statement about the next stage of simplification of citizenship by the so-called “native speakers of the Russian language”. At the same moment, information was followed by the supporters of the President of Zelensky about the possible option for the resumption of the supply of Dnieper water to the Crimea. Then this plan appears, an exacerbation occurs in the Donbass, and a day later a meeting was held in the UN, initiated by Russia. It’s good that I managed to break the agenda. But the agenda was actually announced: the fault of Ukraine for the disruption of the Minsk agreements. There is not the slightest doubt: these are all links of one chain.

Konstantin Eliseev: Why are such plans appear? This is the fault of our power, we ourselves do not have a strategy and plan. We and our partners expected that at the Munich conference the president would finally clearly set out the strategy for the de-Ukrainian de-capacity and the strategy for the return of Donbass and the settlement of the situation. Unfortunately, this did not happen.

Vitaly Portnikov: And the president can offer some strategy in a situation where Moscow, in general, does not hear it?

Konstantin Eliseev: He is obliged to do this, especially since he repeatedly promised: immediately after the election, but we are still waiting. We had conversations with the Turks, they asked: but still what is your strategy? We can’t even clearly say, for example, we will or will not supply water to the Crimea. I do not exclude that until there is a clear strategy, new fake plans will be thrown.

Georgy Tuka: One of the signatures from Ukraine, Mr. Filipchuk, in 2017 came out of non -being, in which he had been in 2010, due to the fact that he published his plan - 9 steps of Ukraine to complete the conflict in the Donbass. They provided for the neutral status of Ukraine, the transfer of Crimea for a hundred years for rent and many theses that are included in these scandalous 12 steps.

Vitaly Portnikov: Mr. Chaly, the former deputy minister of foreign affairs, was also engaged in European integration. These are not the people who worked in the Russian direction.

Konstantin Eliseev: You are absolutely right. Moreover, I remind you that Alexander Chaly was at the NATO Bukharest summit, when, unfortunately, we were not given a plan of action regarding membership.

But I would like to concentrate not on specific surnames, but on how the Russian side behaves, how they use the trusting of the West, American partners. They calmly work on documents, look for “useful idiots”, which later implement this.

George Tuka: And not only idiots. There are people who openly cooperate in this direction. I mean both Americans and Europeans, including various kinds of deputies whom the Kremlin openly uses.

Vitaly Portnikov: Konstantin, you were a member of the preparation of other "Norman summits": do you generally admit that a summit in Berlin can take place in April? Remember, when there was the last summit in Berlin with the participation of former President Poroshenko, they also said that the next would take place, and nothing happened before the change of power in Ukraine.

The summit can hardly take place, as Russia has put forward absolutely unacceptable conditions for its implementation

Konstantin Eliseev: Then there was a completely different situation. Immediately after the summit in Berlin, in 2016, elections in the United States followed, then in France and Ukraine, and the Russian side paused in the hope that a new front would be formed against Ukraine, it would be possible to pave the new president of France and so on.

As for the future summit, its prospects are very vague. Judging by the current situation, it can hardly take place for one simple reason: Russia clearly put forward absolutely unacceptable, in my opinion, conditions for its implementation. If the summit will take place (they talk about April 7), then this will mean further surrender of the Ukrainian side, because the conditions that they now put forward (they were clearly noted by the Russian Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs), of course, are unacceptable for us.

I am concerned about something else: why does our Ukrainian side behave offensive? After all, the Paris summit decided that from December 31, 2019 there should be a comprehensive ceasefire, but this does not happen. Why will the Ukrainian side clearly not set this condition and not to tax on our partners? Unfortunately, the question of sanctions, as I understand it, is our side very diplomatically bypasses. Our president, speaking in Munich, did not say a word about sanctions. A few days ago there was a meeting of the Security Council, there was a good performance by our Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, but the question of sanctions was not again raised.

Vitaly Portnikov: Technically, the decisions that were made in Paris can be provided: a comprehensive ceasefire, strengthening the OSCE mandate to round -the -clock duty?

George Tuka: impossible.

I want to strengthen the thesis of Constantine about sanctions. Not only does the position of Ukraine recently, from my point of view, have changed radically, in this regard, the President of Zelensky at the Munich Conference, when he reproached the Europeans, that, they say, the issues of Ukraine are only eight points from a large list, causes some bewilderment. Sorry, but here we are first to blame, our position. Three decisions of the Cabinet of Ministers for sanctions against the Russian Federation have been made throughout the cadence. Both of these packages were also prepared, being in the office of ministers. There is no initiative in this direction, alas.

Vitaly Portnikov: I want to ask about the steps that Ukraine can take, perhaps showing my idea of how to solve the problem of Donbass. The idea of national reconciliation, by the way, is very well in the subject of our program, because it was supposed to go immediately after the Munich Conference, but it was postponed, according to the Secretary of the Security Council of Ukraine, former showman Sergei Sivokho, because such a tragedy in the Donbass, which Mr. Sivokho himself calls the provocation: exacerbation on the line of distinction. You are both natives of Donbass. Does it make sense in reconciliation with those who live in the Donbass, even in those parts that are under occupation today?

Konstantin Eliseev

Konstantin Eliseev: So far, Russian occupation troops and the Russian occupation administration are there, there can be no talk of any reconciliation. Although the initiative sounds beautiful. Indeed, we need to continue the adequate information policy and so on, but so far it doesn’t work out: the channels are closed, and the new ones are not launched.

Vitaly Portnikov: Do you admit that the information policy is changing something in the mood of people (even on the free part of the Donbass)?

George Tuka: No doubt. I like it or not, but it would be stupid to deny that the information environment affects the position of a person. I am ready to agree with Konstantin: the very idea of reconciliation very reminds me of the development of the initiative of Medvedchuk, or rather, Putin's initiatives of 2014 about the direct dialogue of Kyiv with Donetsk and Lugansk. And I am doubly alarmed by the fact that the person who was now headed by the president’s office, Mr. Ermak, is a direct counterparty of Mr. Kozak in the Russian Federation.

Vitaly Portnikov: This is your evaluative opinion: we cannot prove in this program that he is a counterparty.

Georgy Tuka: Dmitry Kozak is also known for the fact that he is the general designer of the creation of the Transnistrian Moldavian Republic, direct negotiations between Chisinau and Thysopol, moreover, after the victory, Russia contributed to the bringing to power in the Moldovan President Dodon. It was Mr. Kozak who influenced the process of removing the Cabinet of Ministers and actually transferring powers to the pro -Russian president in Moldova.

Who are these people who are trying to reconcile with each other now? Me, for example, with the inhabitants of Donetsk and Lugansk? I will communicate with them today, I talked with them yesterday, I didn’t quarrel with them, whatever the different views on what is happening. And to talk with puppets ... This is an absolute decoration!

Russia is ready to continue this conflict to infinity, but it does not need sanctions during it

Виталий Портников: Кстати, хорошая мысль: не является ли одной из важных целей этого переговорного процесса приведение Украины к национальному единству по молдавскому сценарию? Мы об этом часто говорили в наших эфирах, в том числе с нашими молдавскими коллегами. Это возможная цель?

Константин Елисеев: Это цель не совсем приемлема для нашей ситуации. Я опять хочу обратиться к 12 пунктам, где нас постепенно толкают к тому, чтобы обсуждать идентичность с соседями и с Россией. Мы должны сами себя уважать. Я считаю, что все эти вбросы идей не несут никакой пользы для Украины, а только отводят от главного – от освобождения Донбасса от российских захватчиков.

На постсоветском пространстве существует и ряд других конфликтов. Во многом они имеют сходство: во всех задействована Российская Федерация, российская армия, во всех есть мирные планы, механизмы урегулирования. Но есть одно глобальное отличие ситуации на Донбассе от Приднестровья, Нагорного Карабаха, Абхазии и Южной Осетии. В ситуации с Донбассом против России есть международные санкции, и это тот инструмент, который позволяет не заморозить этот конфликт. Санкции и границы – это ключевое. Нам надо решать вопрос с границей.

Виталий Портников: Кстати, вы назвали то, от чего Россия хотела бы отбиться. Она готова продолжать этот конфликт до бесконечности, как и приднестровский, но ей не нужны санкции во время него.

Константин Елисеев: Поэтому они пытаются создать такую ситуацию, что "вроде бы на Донбассе есть прогресс, так что давайте постепенно снимать санкции". Кстати, недавно был визит комиссара ЕС в Украину по вопросам расширения санкций, и он сказал одну очень тревожную фразу: модификация санкций против России будет зависеть от прогресса в выполнении минских договоренностей.

Виталий Портников: Об этом говорил еще господин Штайнмайер, когда был министром внутренних дел.

Константин Елисеев: Для нас это категорически неприемлемо. У нас есть четкое решение ЕС, что санкции будут сняты только в случае полного выполнения Россией минских договоренностей: Украина возобновляет контроль над границами, возобновляется ее территориальная целостность (в данном случае я говорю о Донбассе).

Виталий Портников: Украина, по-моему, сама не очень стремится к полному выполнению минских соглашений, а с другой стороны, заинтересована в их выполнении, для того чтобы против России были санкции. Как выбираться из этого тупика?

Георгий Тука: Минские протоколы – не юридический документ, но даже с политической точки зрения сам алгоритм их реализации прописан таким образом, что, с одной стороны, это позволяет России трактовать их в свою пользу, а с другой, мы тоже можем трактовать их так, как удобно нам. Фактически это приводит к отсутствию честной позиции. Вообще, трактовка этих протоколов Россией неприемлема для моего государства. Если подчиняться логике Кремля, то я противник выполнения минских договоренностей. Но вместе с тем, если трактовать их с моей точки зрения, то они абсолютно подлежат выполнению. Все противоречие в их толковании.

Константин Елисеев: Минские договоренности – это три документа, ключевая суть которых – политико-дипломатическим путем восстановить суверенитет, территориальную целостность на Донбассе. Вы абсолютно правы: если взять три документа, то есть проблема последовательности выполнения шагов. Для этого еще в 2016 году лидеры "нормандского формата" договорились о так называемой дорожной карте, имплементации минских договоренностей, трех документов, где прописана последовательность шагов. Самое главное, что Россия тогда поддержала нашу инициативу и согласилась, что сначала выполняются ключевые меры по безопасности: прежде всего, полностью прекратить убивать украинцев, не стрелять, а дальше идем постепенно.

Но, к сожалению, Россия после этого "нормандского саммита" пыталась любыми путями избежать подготовки дорожной карты. Более того, она была скоординирована и подготовлена в формате Украина – Франция – Германия, а также подключились и ассоциировались с нами США в лице Курта Волкера. Мы согласовали ее лишь процентов на 60, а потом ситуация заглохла (в Украине были выборы).

Я не знаю, по каким причинам новая команда отбросила этот документ. Это находка, которая позволяла дать систему выполнения минских соглашений, как раз то, что сейчас говорит наша команда, и Меркель об этом сказала в Париже: давайте покажем гибкость этих договоренностей. Документ позволял полностью продемонстрировать эту гибкость. Я думаю, еще не поздно.

Второй фактор – это миротворческая операция ООН. Я вижу, что новую команду Зеленского кидает из жара в холод: один день они об этом упоминают, а на второй день забывают. Недавно министр Пристайко снова публично объявил, что мы готовы поставить этот вопрос перед мировым сообществом. Но выходит президент и не говорит об этом. Они выходят на Совет безопасности, где как раз надо давить, аргументировать эту тему, но ни слова об этом не говорят. Мы все-таки должны понять, каким способом наша новая власть, наш президент хочет урегулировать ситуацию на Донбассе. This is a big question for me.

Виталий Портников: Надеюсь, в ближайшие несколько месяцев мы получим ответ на этот вопрос, в зависимости от того, что будет происходить на линии фронта, и от того, действительно ли мы приблизимся к проведению нового саммита в "нормандском формате".