The first thing I pay attention to is, of course, that the “patriots” have long and radically leaked the theme of Ukraine’s independence. About her mention is not comme il faut. In the trend of strict binary - or the EU, or "Raska".
But it is fine.
But tell me, please, why this very “Raska” of the last 10 years has imposed on us such an “anti-Ukrainian”? Let's remember the epic accomplishments.
For example, accession to the WTO on a uniquely disadvantageous, as it turned out conditions. Its consequence was, for example, the disappearance of domestic oil refining as a class. Is Russia imposed on us?
No, Russia offered us to go to the WTO together and seek better membership conditions. Russia, by the way, received them. But we were in a hurry to make it faster than Russia. There was no time to negotiate. Especially talented patriots justified that if Ukraine joins the WTO for Russia, we can make claims upon it and get some trade (or political) benefits. Not only Ukraine, but even Georgia did not make claims ...
Gas contracts? They are usually blamed on Tymoshenko (and, moreover, she has already agreed that she signed unprofitable agreements), but Yushchenko started with breaking existing contracts in 2005 year. Russia was pleased, but it didn’t push Yushchenko in that direction at all - he himself, guided by “Tripoli arithmetic”, “calculated” that gas at $ 50 is very expensive.
By the way, the position of the EU on this issue is also well known: to sign the energy charter and energy packages, which, as it turned out, are also unprofitable for Ukraine - they are “sharpened” for the interests of consumers, and not producers and transit countries.
"Kharkov agreements"? In my opinion, no one particularly concealed that Yanukovych had been slipped a document that was being prepared for Tymoshenko (another thing is that she would hardly have signed it, but something was probably discussed). I don’t remember protests from the EU. There was a general concern about the opacity of gas agreements in general as such.
The extension of the base of the Black Sea Fleet did not cause any particular emotions. And the truth is that only in Ukraine could they recognize in these agreements the transfer to Russia of part of Ukrainian territory, despite the fact that the Russian fleet in this territory is based all twenty years of the existence of an independent Ukraine. Called - suddenly noticed.
Can? Russia pulled us into NATO? No, an American senator arrived and ordered. The terribly independent president, the prime minister and the speaker quickly made up a letter - take us, they say, because you really want to. They were not even embarrassed by the fact that the Cabinet of Ministers and Parliament were, in theory, collective and should be consulted with them.
Again, the question is not whether Ukraine needs NATO. Do you remember the case of a member of the Federation Council building Ukrainian leaders like this? If this were possible in principle, we would have been a part of the vehicle, the CSTO and also in different places in 100 / 500 long ago.
Pension reform? So no one hides that this is a requirement of the IMF, as well as the EU and the USA, which link the provision of financial assistance to Ukraine with the positive verdict of the IMF.
Yes, in Russia, the pension reform was carried out long ago (the Russian Federation in general is an ultra-liberal country, compared to Ukraine), but did Russia put forward its demands to Ukraine when it provided a loan?
By the way, few people remember, but the abolition of simplified taxation (which falls into the number of benefits for business) is also a requirement of the IMF ... It was just that during the “Tax Maidan” they were silent. And now talk about it even somehow indecent. Although Afghans, Chernobyl victims and other small entrepreneurs on the Maidan are now jostling. But the government to account for their benefits do not require for some reason.
Language law? In fullness. The “rashka” of the mouth still did not have time to open, and in Europe they have already expressed concern about the repeal of this same language law. What caused a panic in the new Ukrainian government. Why Europe did not deign to designate its position during the “movable Maidan”, I don’t know, but that’s not important - it’s it.
And certainly not Russia initiated the signing of the Association Agreement with the EU (it was generally against). The very same agreement, which the EU does not want to sign now, because it is not profitable for Ukraine (!) And does not imply prospects for EU membership (well, as prospects, they have now attributed, it seems that Ukraine has the right to apply, yes; Turkey also has moreover, it took advantage of this right 14 years ago ...). And, by the way, for the signing of this unprofitable and not providing prospects for an agreement, the people in Ukraine went to the Maidan ...
In general, the conclusion is the following: for the last 10 years, from the notable decisions of the Ukrainian authorities, the EU did not approve or directly impose the return to the Constitution of the year 1996 (this was not understood there, but limited to an expression of bewilderment) and the prosecution of Tymoshenko (by the beginning of Maidan, the EU asked only give her the opportunity to heal in Germany). By a strange coincidence, Russia did not impose these two decisions on us either (and even showed some dissatisfaction with Tymoshenko).
So, congratulations, gentlemen, we are already under Europe. Just something a little joy in your eyes ...