ex-Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine about the lawsuit against the Russian Federation in The Hague and world negotiations
The International Court of Justice in The Hague on March 7 began its search against Russia because of the war that Moscow started on February 24 in Ukraine. The lawsuit was filed already on the second day of the shelling and was accepted for consideration in a record prescribed manner. The Ukrainian exhibition adds that the pretext for crimes in Ukraine (accusations of the genocide of the Russian-speaking population in the Donbass) is “There is no genocide on the territory of Donbass, nor on the territory of Ukraine!
In Kyiv, a court decision is awaited. At the same time, the Russian side did not take part in the process at all, some experts say that there is no insignificant influence on the Russian side of the court decision.
Is it realistic for Kyiv to search in The Hague for a decision in its favor, and why was such a lawsuit filed? The current time asked this question to the former Foreign Minister of Ukraine Pavlo Klimkin. We also intended to comment on it with the course of the middle round of talks between Moscow and Ukraine, which took place on March 7 in Belarus.
– How do you assess the prospects for business in The Hague?
– I assess the prospects for international courts against Russia as absolutely sufficient. Yes, indeed, this is a very long process, like all international law. Unfortunately, the disclosure of the facts of the truth is not achieved today for tomorrow or today for the day after tomorrow. But responsibility is bound to come. And it is very important for me that Russia and its cases be prosecuted in all possible directions: both the crimes of Russia as a state and the Russian regime, and the cases of those who achieve them.
So what the International Criminal Court is doing now is actually very important. And it is important that we also act with individual lawyers who must collect and assess the risks of the crimes that Russia is now committing. It is very important. Yes, we didn’t find a solution very quickly, but it should be an authoritative, very precise solution with really tough measures and tough sanctions.
– Today Belarus hosted the third round of talks between Russia and Ukraine. After two rounds, how did you feel about the meeting between the representatives of Kyiv and Moscow?
– I am skeptical about them, although naturally, it is better than their absence.
When they meet at such negotiations, they always determine on which issues it is possible to agree, and on which issues it is impossible to agree. We are well aware that the key demands of Russia – the prince of Crimea, the prime minister of Donbass and everything that is being hyped up now – will never be accepted. Therefore, of course, possible compromises on a number of negotiating positions will not be easy, they will be very painful, and perhaps politically they will be close to a political incident. But nevertheless on all issues to agree on the impossibility of settlement.
And we are also well aware that in Moscow they constantly claim that they are actually traveling with the West, with the West, with the Confidential States – with anyone. Therefore, the main thing for the President of Russia is to achieve some understanding or, conversely, the prospects for development with Washington and the collective West.
You said it would be “political assassination”. For whom?
– I said that they do not really matter, but results are possible if the parties come to compromises. It happens on a wave of emotions – in fact, it is a tsunami of emotions. Because you can bring our emotions when we show aggression, when people die every day, when residential areas are shelled, when people sit in cellars for days, realizing that something threatens their lives every minute. And, of course, every compromise in the conditions of the meeting at the scene. Because you translate perfectly, because more than 90% of Ukrainians are transporting, that the surrender of positions means the surrender of Ukraine as such.
— Today, Hristo Grozev from Bellingcat, citing two sources, wrote exactly what conditions Moscow put forward in the negotiations. The conditions are as follows: Zelensky remains president, but Yuriy Boyko becomes prime minister (a pro-Russian politician from the Opposition Platform – For Life”); Ukraine recognizes such “LPR”, “DPR” and Crimea; Ukraine refuses NATO membership.
– I think it sounds strange. Firstly, Mr. Boyko should be appointed prime minister in parliament, and this is a very difficult story.
Secondly, I do not think that he himself agrees to this post in the situation in which we are. And what does this give the Kremlin – I really do not understand.
As for the recognition of Crimea and Donbass, this is in the place of impossibility, especially within the boundaries of the allocated places. These are the compromises we’re just killing. This issue cannot be compromised for Ukraine. We cannot assume that part of our territory, part of our citizens are actually part of Russia. Nobody ever does this.
As for anxiety, this is actually pure nonsense that exists in Moscow. Because no outbreak is coming from Ukraine. We can perfectly agree that some types of weapons, in particular, some types of missiles, are simply not deployed on the territory of Ukraine. Are there any missiles in Latvia now? No. Some battalion, which is now spending there, will reach Moscow? As you can imagine, neither.
Therefore, it is a mythology that even the Martians do not believe in. And this can only be referred to as a kind of picture, as a kind of mythology that the Kremlin is pushing to embellish its position. I don’t even want to say “justification of my position”.
— What are the general expectations then of the Ukrainian competition travels in a special way? Membership in the union is not suitable and much more is not suitable?
– I think that this is primarily a state – how to stop the fire. This is the key story. It is clear that these are humanitarian corridors, this is the painful suffering of Ukrainians, since we are shelling every minute, almost every minute they are shooting at civilians and civilians. Here are the most important questions.
– Are you ready to make concessions for the sake of this Ukrainian competition?
– Concessions and compromises are, as they say in Odessa, “two big differences.” I think that compromises are possible, but they will be very difficult. But there are no concessions in the community. I would say that the arrival of the Crimea and Donbass is due to the impossibility of living. And any agreements that are reached under pressure, as you know, are considered legally worthless in a judicial proceeding. I think that in Moscow it’s time to be considered worthy.
– Volodymyr Zelensky observed an approximate set of measures from Western countries: refusal to import Russian oil and gas; establish a request for a no-fly zone over Ukraine. The West has already made it clear that there will be no no-fly zone over Ukraine. Zelensky keeps asking. Is this also a kind of revealed game?
– The West is afraid that Russia will enter into direct conflict with it. If he does not press the “nuclear button”, he will use other means. The assessment that exists today in the West: Putin’s psychology is close to this. Whether he is bluffing or not is another matter. Nevertheless, there is a certain political position that this is possible today.
And the technical closure of the sky over the whole of Ukraine will not be very easy. This is not an easy task. But as for the possibility of closed skies for Ukraine, Kyiv also demands: give us an air defense system, give us some more important things, and we could handle it ourselves. There are other non-trivial creative solutions, but political development is simply needed to enable them. And then it is possible.
As for other things, you perfectly understand that in the case of very many emotions. But the West must understand that what was not done in 2008 reverberated in 2014. What was not done in 2014 (the year of the annexation of Crimea and the beginning of hostilities in Eastern Ukraine – NV) has reverberated now, in 2022. And there may not be a third chance to correct this situation. You can get a real third world war. Real in the sense that it covers the entire planet, and then no one will be funny. And I’m really not kidding.
– During our broadcast, the news came that the application began with the consideration of applications from Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova to join the EU. Why do you think Kiev needs it now? And what will Ukraine really give?
— It is important emotionally — as a support for all Ukrainians, especially now. This is important for the Ukrainian authorities – in order to show that if there is any temporary or [постоянный] agreement on neutrality, which is still a movement towards the European Union, thus balancing the agreements. All this can be shown on an open palm.
But here it is very important to understand and assume whether there is a consensus there. And most importantly – what can happen today or tomorrow and what can happen through language time. I believe absolutely sincerely in our path to the European Union. But in today’s situation, a direct war with the Russian Federation, fears that the ranks of the members of the European Union will unite gradually and will not specifically raise the stakes.
We remember 2013 very well, when Ukraine was formally a non-bloc state, but nevertheless the Kremlin tried to blackmail President Yanukovych into not signing the Association Agreement with the EU. I remember this moment very well – I was the main negotiator for this agreement and devoted seven years of my life. And I remember very well that for the Kremlin there is movement in Europe – it was the same way out of Russia’s range, as well as NATO. And it’s not a safety issue. Therefore, today the European Union will be fairly accurate in meeting this request.