Week’s news express analysis № 2/06



(June 6-12, 2016)


I. Peculiarities of the Development of the Situation in the Conflict Zones in Ukraine and around Our State

1.1. The East of Ukraine (the ATO zone)

Last week the situation in the conflict zone in the East of Ukraine was highly tense. In fact, the Russian-terrorist were actively firing along the contact line using both small arms, artillery of various calibers, and tanks. The average intensity of shelling was 45-50 times a day. The enemy shells at the positions of Ukrainian troops and peaceful settlements, including in the occupied territory.

All last week, the enemy’s permanent attacks continued in the area of Avdiivka and its neighbourhood (including Butivka, Opytne and Pisky), Dokuchayevsk (including Berezove, Yasne and Novotroivske), along Horlivka’s whole western and southern perimeter (first of all against Mayorsk, Zhvanivka and Zaytsevo), along the whole Svetlodarsk arc (from Svetlodarsk to Novozvanivka), as well as in the coastal direction (from Shyrokino to Granitne). Besides, Stanitsa Luhanska and the town of Shchastya were shelled. The enemy also massively shelled residential quarters of Donetsk, and now Russia and its puppets are trying to shift to Ukraine the responsibility for violation of the Minsk Agreements.

At the same time Russia is taking steps to develop and improve the system of basing its troops in the immediate battle area. Thus, the 1 AK new forward base of the RF Armed Forces has been deployed in Petrovskyi district of Donetsk, which increases the possibility of security forces in the action areas of the Donetsk airport — Pisky.

There are also signs of the Russian-terrorist forces’ preparation for the resumption of the offensive into the depth of the territory of Ukraine. Thus, between the cities of Luhansk and Shchastya, they are constructing a river crossing on the Siverskyi Donets, which can allow the enemy to try and redeploy its forces to the North of Luhansk region and to reach its administrative border.

The immediate confirmation of the enemy’s intentions has become large-scale supplies of weapons, military equipment and ammunition for the needs of the Russian-terrorist forces in the occupied territories of Ukraine. In particular, last week another echelon from Russia arrived in Ukraine, having brought ammunition, mines and rockets weighing about 500 tons, as well as a battery of rocket artillery, consisting of four 122-mm MLRS “Grad” systems, command and staff and transport vehicles. The aerial reconnaissance of the positions of Ukrainian troops never stops. Flights of the enemy’s reconnaissance UAVs were recorded at Donetsk, Mariupol, Volnovakha and Novoaydarsk directions.


1.2. The Crimea

The Russian Federation’s extremely important issue around the Crimean Peninsula is the question of construction of a strategic transport-bridge crossing (Kerch bridge) from mainland Russia to the occupied Ukrainian Crimea, as one of the main Kremlin’s project, which should allow to establish V. Putin’s regime’s full control over the Crimean Peninsula.

But due to banal lack of funds — the funding for this project has now ceased. According to informed Russian sources, the last time the money for the construction of the bridge was allocated to the company “Stroygazmontazh” (belonging toArkadiy Rotenberg — a billionairefrom V. Putin’s inner circle)in December 2015. This year, another 65.4 billion rubles (almost 1 billion US dollars) were supposed to be allocated, but due to the actual lack of funds in the RF state budget, the Kremlin can’t do it. The situation on the construction site is extremely critical.

The Russian Federation’s leadership’s promises regarding a rapid improvement of the economic situation in the Crimea having never come true, Putin’s regime continues speculations around the Crimean Tatar issue. On the one hand, Moscow is frightening the population of the Crimean Peninsula with Islamic extremism, and on the other — it is trying to “appease” the Crimean Tatars, as one of the main opponents of Russia’s occupation of the Crimea, by providing them with various kinds of preferences and promises.

In particular, a “Federal National-Cultural Autonomy of Russia’s Crimean Tatars in the Republic of the Crimea” is planned to have been created by the end of 2016. As part of this project, negotiations are taking place and pro-Russian leaders of the Crimean Tatar people are being bribed in Moscow, St. Petersburg, Rostov region, Stavropol and Krasnodar Krai of Russia, as well as in other regions of the Russian Federation.

Besides, Russia keeps blocking the work of all independent media in the Crimea. According to the Editor-in-Chief of the QHA news agency, a member of the Majlis of the Crimean Tatar People G. Yuksel, after the capture of the Crimea, its information field came under Moscow’s full control, with replacing the media disagreeing with the policy of the Kremlin. With this in mind, the journalist spoke on the need to develop in Ukraine a special information policy towards the Crimea, which should include both the preparation of relevant programs, and creating the necessary infrastructure to ensure live broadcasting onto the territory of the Crimean Peninsula.


1.3. Ukraine and its Allies and Partners

The USA. Absolutely important for Ukraine is the issue of presidential elections in the USA in autumn of 2016. This is due to fundamental differences in the positions of the main candidates for the post of the head of the United States — namely, Hillary Clinton, who supports the continuation of strict policy towards Russia, and Donald Trump, who in a certain way has positioned himself as a “supporter” of V. Putin’s regime.

In the situation of Russia’s openly anti-Western policy, which is accompanied by a demonstrative provocations against the US and NATO, D. Trump’s pro-Russian position causes a very negative reaction of both, his opponents from the US Democratic Party, and among his allies in the Republican Party. In fact, since the Second World War, the collapse of the Soviet Union and Russia’s armed aggression against Ukraine, this has become one of the main factors of uniting the interests of both the American parties in the aspect of protecting the USA’s national interests.

Thus, during a visit to the city of Elkhart (Alabama), US President B. Obama strongly criticized D. Trump’s election promises to restore the USA’s relations with Russia without taking into consideration the “Ukrainian issue.” D. Trump’s policy on the Ukrainian and other issues (in particular with regard to immigrants from Latin America) is also opposed by a number of his fellow party members, in particular the former Mayor of Los Angeles A. Villaraigosa and Chairman of Texas Federation of Hispanic Republicans A. Muniz. According to them, “…D. Trump’s current policy is an outspoken surrealism in the modern world”.

The result was the quite expected trend of D. Trump’s rating to keep falling. Today, Hillary Clinton, as D. Trump’s main competitor, is already ahead of him by more than 11 %. So, V. Putin’s regime’s hopes for a possibility of restoring the Russian-American relations and easing the US sanctions against the Russian Federation are actually doomed.

Evidence of this was the results of the US Senate’s hearings on Ukraine on 9th June, where Senators severely criticized the US State Department and Pentagon’s behaviour and their policy towards Ukraine. In particular a deep concern was expressed about the “…lack of the Obama Administration’s efforts to counter Russian aggression in Ukraine”. Besides, the question was asked: “Why do the majority of the western partners put pressure mainly on Ukraine, not on Russia?” During the hearings, American lawmakers also pointed out that the issue of Russia’s occupation of the Crimea has actually disappeared from the agenda.

France. June 8, 2016, the French Senate (the Upper House of the Parliament) overwhelmingly endorsed a resolution calling to ease sanctions against Russia. 302 Senators voted “for”, 16 — “against.” The document is a recommendation and calls on the Government of France during the discussion of the question of sanctions against Russia with the leadership of the European Union to demand their gradual easing in connection with “…a significant progress in the implementation of the Minsk Agreements.” The authors of the document believe that the gradual easing of sanctions in the economic sphere, and their revision in the political one will help the progress in Russia’s implementation of the Minsk Agreements on Ukraine. They also regretted the strained relations between Russia and the EU, and considered it necessary to return to the “confident and strong.” According to the Senators, “…relations with Russia are of fundamental importance, and strategic partnership is important to solve common problems.”

As it is known, on 28th April, 2016, the Deputies of the Lower House of the French Parliament — the National Assembly — voted for a resolution calling on the government to act against anti-Russian sanctions. The document, proposed by the opposition, headed by the Deputy Thierry Mariani, was approved by a majority vote. All in all 98 deputies participated in the voting, 55 of them voted in favor of the resolution, which was of a recommendatory nature.

Germany. Following France, Germany also wanted lifting of sanctions against Russia. Thus, the Eastern Committee of the German Economy, which brings together the richest businessmen of the country, demanded easing of sanctions against Russia before the fulfillment of the Minsk Agreements. According to the Chairman of the Committee W. Büchel (June 9), “…gradual lifting of sanctions should take place in parallel with steps to implement the Minsk process.”

B. Büchel reminded that in late June 2016, the EU will once again take a decision on the extension of sanctions and emphasized that he considered it necessary to “modify” the EU strategy. “We support the initiative of the Foreign Minister Steinmeier, who put forward the idea to lift sanctions gradually, in parallel with the implementation of the Minsk Agreements. Lifting of sanctions against Russia should not take place at the end of the Minsk process, but already in parallel with essential steps for its implementation,” he said.

According to him, it would also be great if such a proposal were supported by the majority in Brussels, — then it for sure would be possible to start the process of cancelling sanctions against Russia.

The Netherlands. The government of the Netherlands wants to revise some points of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the European Union.

In particular, it proposes not to give Ukraine automatic access to the European Union’s financial sources, and not to guarantee it a membership in this organization.

Besides, the Netherlands side offers to eliminate or at least mitigate the items on cooperation between Ukraine and the EU in the defence sphere. The authors of the amendments point out that the defence sector is not a competence of the European Union and should be handled by NATO.

These initiatives are justified by The Hague by the need to take into consideration the negative results of the referendum in the Netherlands on the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU. At the same time, according to independent experts, the real reason for these proposals is the Netherlands side’s reluctance to take responsibility (right now the Netherlands have Presidency in the EU) for supporting Ukraine in its confrontation with Russia.

Leading independent experts also believe that the government in The Hague is actually beginning quiet diplomacy behind the scenes. And it is happening because during the Netherlands’ Presidency in the EU they have the opportunity to try to change some provisions of the Agreement. According to a number of European media, the Netherlands have already begun consultations on this issue with the other 27 EU member states.

In this regard, it is believed that changes in the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU will undermine the credibility of the European Union and will make it possible to lift sanctions against Russia.

It is estimated that the amendments won’t be adopted before the Brexit referendum. Besides, any amendments have to be coordinated with Ukraine, whose position on this “initiative of the Netherlands” has not been published and as of today is not clear.

Poland. Poland sticks to its clear position of supporting Ukraine in its confrontation with the Russian Federation. June 8, 2016, the Lower House of the Seim (Parliament) of Poland presented a report on V. Putin’s regime’s crimes in the Donbas, from 2014 onwards. This document provides irrefutable evidence of the Russian Army’s direct participation in the occupation of Ukrainian territory, as well as in murders and tortures of civilians. Having been considered by the Polish Parliament on the 10th of June 2016, this report was submitted to the International Court of Justice in The Hague.

Kazakhstan. According to leading independent experts, the problem of extremism and terrorism covers all post-Soviet territories, controlled by the Russian Federation today.

Thus, despite Russia’s all attempts to stabilize the situation in the North Caucasus, the region is still Moscow’s “headache” due to the continued permanent terrorist activity in its territory. Evidence of this is militants’ systematic attacks against checkpoints and patrols of the Russian Police in Chechnya, Dagestan and North Ossetia.

However, an even more resonant case was the attack by a group of militants against a military unit and weapon shops in the Kazakhstan city of Aktobe (former Aktyubinsk, about 110 km from the border with Russia) on the 5th of June, 2016. Almost a week-long special anti-terrorist operation of law enforcement agencies and special services of Kazakhstan was conducted and ended in neutralizing the discovered terrorists. As a result, 17 people (including 11 terrorists, three soldiers and four civilians) were killed and 37 people, most of them — the military were wounded. At this, 13 terrorists were killed and 9 terrorists were arrested.

The obvious reason for worsening of the socio-political and criminal situation in Kazakhstan is the complications of the economic situation in the country as a result of the fall in world prices of oil — the main Kazakhstan’s export (1/3 of all exports), and the devaluation of the national currency by 86 %, and a negative impact on Kazakhstan’s economy of the growing economic problems in Russia under the influence of Western sanctions. For example, over the past two years, Kazakhstan’s economy has fallen by more than two times, and that had influenced the living standards of the population.

Besides, the situation in Kazakhstan is also affected by the activities of Islamic extremists in Afghanistan and Iraq. According to available information, in the past year, the Afghan branch of the Islamic State (IS) has been active in strengthening its presence and influence in Central Asia.

According to independent experts, the latest events in Kazakhstan (including the mass strike of oil workers December 16, 2011 in the city of Zhanaozen, Mangistau region; active unsanctioned protests against the new amendments to the Land Code in April and May, 2016, etc) are nothing but Russia’s attempts to undermine the domestic political situation in Kazakhstan according to the “Donetsk” or, even more likely, the “Syrian” scenarios.

It is characteristic that the surge of extremism in Kazakhstan is explained by the country’s leadership by manifestations of “color revolutions”, “…which have a variety of methods and begin with contrived rallies, murders and attempts to seize power.” The above-mentioned events were recognized as features of such processes.


II. The Main Trends in Further Development of the Situation around Ukraine

2.1. The Donbas

During the next week, the main factor in the development of the situation around Ukraine will be the question of the revision by the EU countries of the sanction policy towards Russia. Taking into consideration the fundamental importance of this issue for Moscow (from the point of view of further deterioration of the Russian economy), we should expect activation of V. Putin’s regime’s actions in support of pro-Russian political forces, especially in the “old” EU member states, in particular Germany, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece. Besides, Moscow’s greatest attention will be focused on “young” EU member states in Central and Eastern Europe, first of all the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary.

At the same time, we’ll see activation of provocative activity of Russia and its puppets-militants in the zone of the armed conflict in the Donbas.

Due to this, Moscow, as before, will defiantly try to shift to Ukraine the responsibility for violation of the Minsk Agreements. In this regard, as the revision of the EU sanctions policy towards Russia comes nearer, the more possible become resonant terrorist attacks with mass casualties among the civilian population in Donetsk, Luhansk and other settlements in the occupied territories of Ukraine, carried out under the Kremlin’s orders.


2.2. The Crimea

The failure of Moscow and local (Crimean) leadership to ensure the minimum acceptable socio-economic conditions in the Crimea and its stable link with the Russian Federation leads to another failure of the holiday season in the Crimean Peninsula. Unlike previous years, the Crimea’s tourist attraction is not even discussed in the information space of the Russian Federation. In this regard, despite the Russian government’s numerous prohibitions and possible threats of international terrorism and crashes of passenger aircrafts, the majority of Russians prefer Turkey, Egypt and Thailand, where they fly by planes via Belarus and Kazakhstan.


2.3. The European Union

A significant challenge to the European Union’s unity may be the results of the referendum in the UK on June 23, 2016, regarding the country’s further staying within the EU. According to the auditing company PwC, the British people’s decision on the Brexit will cause irreparable damage to the image of the Organization and can start a chain reaction for its complete disintegration.

Besides, both, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, would suffer significant financial and economic losses. Thus, the United Kingdom would lose up to 100 billion pounds, equivalent to more than 130 billion US dollars. At this, about one million British citizens could lose their jobs. In turn, the losses of European banks could reach 100 billion Euros.

There is no doubt that all this would be used by Moscow in its own interests to strengthen Russian positions in Europe, first of all — in the countries of the former socialist camp. At the same time, the resumption of Russia’s dominant influence in Ukraine and other former Soviet republics would become inevitable.


2.4. Spain

The results of new parliamentary elections in Spain, scheduled for June 26, 2016, can also have negative consequences for the European Union and Ukraine.

As you know, the King of Spain Felipe VI, who, according to the country’s Constitution, has a formal duty to nominate the Prime Minister, as well as to convene and dissolve the Parliament, has signed a decree to dissolve the Parliament and to hold new elections on June 26, 2016, as the Deputies elected in December 2015 could not reach an agreement on the candidacy of a new Prime Minister. (King’s decree was signed in the presence of the Speaker of Parliament Patxi Lopez after the deadline for the appointment of a new government expired at midnight on 2nd May, 2016).

According to sociological studies, at the moment the de facto leader (including due to his election program for a substantial increase in social expenditure) is Mariano Rajoy’s conservative People’s Party. According to European experts, its victory in the new parliamentary elections would lead to a collapse of Spain’s economy, as it previously happened in Greece. In turn, this increases the threat of a new economic crisis like the one of 2008-2009. A similar crisis forced the USA and EU to reset relations with Russia, and that is exactly what V. Putin’s regime counts on.


2.5. Georgia

According to independent experts, Georgia is to face a hot political summer. June 8, 2016, the country officially launched the election campaign, and parliamentary elections will take place on the 8th of October, 2016. In 2012, they were won by the “Georgian Dream” coalition, which consisted of six parties, with 55 % of votes. 42 % of voters voted for the “United National Movement” (UNM) Party, which was then in power.

According to preliminary information, the members of the ruling coalition “Georgian Dream” will now take part in the elections independently. The main competition will be between the party “Georgian Dream” and the ex-president Mikheil Saakashvili’s UNM opposition party. It is believed that both parties will be in the Parliament, but they can’t count on absolute majority.

Besides, it will be the longest election campaign — for four months. As a rule, usually two months were enough, but the current President Giorgi Margvelashvili insisted on increasing the term.

Whether the additional months will help the politicians — time will tell, but the budget of the country will suffer significantly from this — according to the Georgian Central Election Commission, amounting of 3 million lari (1 million 250 thousand Euros).


Схожі публікації