There are programs, but there is no fleet
- Sergey Alexandrovich, it is clear that it is extremely difficult to make predictions about the possible development of events in Ukraine. At least because of the inadequacy of the “Maidan” authorities in Kiev. And yet, probably a month ahead, you can try to look. Imagine: May, Petro Poroshenko realized the whole crime of war against his people, and began not only to fully comply with the Minsk agreements, but also recognized the DPR and the LPR ...- There are no chances for cardinal changes in Poroshenko’s views, and, moreover, for Kiev to recognize Donetsk and Lugansk people's republics. In our leadership, some people relied on Poroshenko at some time, we recognized the presidential elections in Ukraine, which, of course, was absolutely not necessary to do. These people believe that if Poroshenko cleans up all his inner circle, he will lead a more sane and systemic policy. But for such hopes and calculations there is no reason.
Poroshenko is on a short leash from the Americans, and this is not just some kind of propaganda figure of speech, but a reality. In a recent conflict with Igor Kolomoisky, he directly appealed to the United States, and they pressed on the "rebellious" oligarch, thereby actually once again saved Poroshenko. Kolomoisky-who is not so hot, but he definitely had the strength to seriously harm Poroshenko. That is why he ran to the Americans to ask for help - thus “owing” them even more.
Poroshenko - a politician is not at all independent; to play to strengthen his position is to actually play up to Washington. So waiting for someone to praise us for it is meaningless. He will act not in the way he considers necessary, but in the way advised by the Americans. And so, I think, while maintaining the tension is beneficial. And the nearest reference point is June, when the European Union will discuss the issue of extending sanctions against Russia and make a decision.
With high probability we can assume: Washington does not want to cancel or weaken these measures. To prevent this from happening, another provocation may be undertaken: I remind you that the “big package” of sanctions was approved against the backdrop of the crash of a Malaysian passenger plane in south-eastern Ukraine. Nobody understood the real causes of the catastrophe, blamed Russia for everything and, against the background of this emotional outburst, pushed through "punitive measures." Unfortunately, this may happen in June, the Americans are interested in this.
I do not exclude that they will start from Washington to stimulate the conditional “war party” in Ukraine to organize provocations. A convenient date for this may be, say, 9 May, the celebration of the seventieth anniversary of Victory. This binding is optional, the day, in this case, does not matter.
So, expecting Poroshenko to become a responsible politician is not worth it. He walks with the face of a man who is constantly gnawing at the thought of why he has run into all this ...
“In our press, analysts sometimes seriously reflect on a possible exit on the political scene in Kiev by some kind of“ world party ”existing in Ukraine. Is this a serious prediction?
- I do not see such a party, all these experts appeal to something abstract. What are the names of members of the "party of the world" or organizations and structures that are ready to act in this direction? They are not.
It is said that this “party” consists of Ukrainian oligarchs who have been tormented by losing money in the current situation and may affect the authorities. To this day, they haven’t influenced in any way; moreover, the majority of oligarchs, say, the same Kolomoisky, are just playing “war games”. Tension allows you to engage in redistribution of property, to implement scheming schemes and raider attacks.
The appearance of such a party - sooner or later - looks logical, but today there is none. The main thing is that: as a result of the “Maidan”, the Ukrainian political elite completely lost its independence. Therefore, the interests of the oligarchs no one takes into account. Well, who cares about the opinion of Rinat Akhmetov, who before the “Maidan” was the most influential and richest man in Ukraine, the actual owner of the “Party of Regions”, the largest parliamentary faction? Where is he now - nobody cares. Kolomoisky? Given that its negative role in the crisis is obvious, he tried to play against Poroshenko. And at least at this stage, he was crushed with the help of the Americans. I think Kolomoisky will return to politics as a serious player, but not today.
And who cares what some people there think when the Ukrainian political elite fully and voluntarily gave its sovereignty to the United States? And you will not be surprised with their money, and the fact that the oligarchs are losing money will not be pity, they don't care. For them, these are ants that crawl somewhere under their feet. Consumables, like the entire population of Ukraine.
- One of the predictors - well, if someone believes them ... - he said that Petro Poroshenko was born with astrological indicators of a good commander. So, they say, if he takes responsibility for the fighting and seriously studies military affairs, then his chances, as supreme commander-in-chief, are great to win. In March, Kiev continued to arm - and at the expense of decommissioned "used" British armored personnel carriers and new American Hummer jeeps. You said that in May you do not rule out a new provocation. Provocation or war?
- The fact is that war needs a reason. For the resumption of hostilities, Kiev needs casus belli, since the start of a full-scale operation means the final breakdown of the Minsk agreements. Today, their implementation is inhibited, but we cannot say that they are completely disrupted. There is a cease-fire - at least intensive -, the withdrawal of troops is taking place. But the implementation of the political part of the agreement is in place.
So, to completely trample the agreement, Kiev needs a reason.
- Washington is close to the beginning of the supply of "serious" weapons to Kiev, assuring that, first of all, he wants to prevent Russian aggression. It is interesting to know how you see the actions of Russia in this case?
- First of all, the delivery itself weapons Kiev, even lethal, in my opinion, will not be a final argument that can prejudge the outcome of the case. For the time being, the “bareuchnaya” equipment from NATO countries, including the Soviet one, goes to Ukraine. For suppliers, it's just business.
- Somehow I didn’t meet the details of these deals in our press, I thought that they were supplied with this technique as “gratuitous help” ...
- No, all this is given to them not at all for free. Gifts to Kiev do not. And, pushing the former countries of the Eastern bloc to supply weapons to Ukraine, the West immediately concludes with them contracts for the sale of modern technology. This supposedly help makes money. In addition, no one is going to deliver any kind of up-to-date or ultra-precise weapons to which the Ukrainian authorities raved. They simply fear whose hands it can fall into, and the conflict with Kolomoisky clearly showed: the situation can be completely unpredictable. In whose direction these “trunks” will be deployed, if they get to Ukraine, no one is exactly ready to say. In the end, some of the new weapons could fall into the hands of the militias.
Yes, the supply of weapons to the conflict zone increases the risk of war, but they will not be the decisive factor. In addition, the last two offensive of the Ukrainian army, autumn and winter, ended, as is well known, with its defeat. Americans can push Kiev to a new war, but for now the state of affairs in the Armed Forces of Ukraine is not so good that the authorities can be confident of success. From the point of view of logic, Kiev can renew the war only if he is confident in his "blitzkrieg". Today, the “Maidan” authorities fear that their next attack may also fail.
- You can predict our actions in this case?
“If Kiev breaks the implementation of the Minsk agreements and renews the war or organizes a large-scale provocation, we will have only one way out: to help Donetsk and Lugansk. Again, help is help, but hostilities will mean the death of civilians. We can talk about weapons assistance, although I am sure that drawing Russia into the war would be extremely undesirable.
Personally, I think that at this stage it is necessary to freeze the conflict and shift our focus to internal Ukrainian problems. So far, the whole situation in the eyes of the West is reduced to the situation in the Donbass and the “Moscow invasion”, and this consolidates the anti-Russian position and does not allow people to soberly analyze events. If the conflict is frozen, then, of course, it will “hang” a burden on us. But it is better than the endless war of annihilation. It would be possible to conduct a conversation about peacekeepers - but only those with a UN mandate, and certainly from neutral countries.
- In the last days of March, Ukraine was on the verge of collapse. Ukraine’s national debt reached 70 percent of GDP, international rating agencies, always supportive of the “new Kiev democrats”, were forced to admit that the country was in default and lowered its rating, the authorities understand that they cannot repay debts, the IMF does not guarantee new loans ...
“I suppose the West will still“ drag out ”Ukraine, it should be understood that the Americans are in charge of all the country's finances today. Therefore, the question of whether to declare a default, or not, they will decide.
If, however, Western “props” are removed from Kiev, Ukraine will really fall apart, the same conflict with Kolomoisky has shown it. Imagine what would happen if the Americans did not interfere in this quarrel. Everything, domino knuckles are falling, not only is the Ukrainian political elite giving all rights to sovereign management, in fact, and other spheres of life depend on the West. Everything related to the economy and default is in the hands of the IMF, the World Bank and other Kiev lenders.
They will continue to give money to the “Maidan authorities”: in order to keep this political system afloat. And they will close their eyes to the real situation in the country. After all, the default does not occur automatically, it becomes the result of a subjective assessment. So, the IMF, on the recommendation of Washington, will not notice the unfavorable facts in Ukrainian finance and the economy, and stick out the beneficial ones. How can this be? One of the international agencies recently raised the rating of Ukraine, no matter what. At the same time, she lowered the rating of quite stable Kazakhstan, stressing that when the situation with the change of power clears up in Astana, then the assessment can be raised.
There is nowhere to go, the “experts” explain in plain text that their assessments do not depend on economic objectivity, but on absolutely subjective political factors. Therefore, in relation to the default of Ukraine, the situation may develop as follows: the IMF will see only what it wants to see. Or the fact that he will advise the Americans.
Theoretically, a default is possible, but practically everything will be done to avoid it.
“But after all, money will be given to Kiev, as they say, in the amount of the“ subsistence minimum ”. He will not receive the funds he requests, right?
- They will never be given what they want: simply, because Europe has no such money. No such wild sums and the IMF. Ukraine will be given exactly as much as necessary for: a) keeping the Kiev regime afloat; b) as much as is necessary to repay debts to the West. With interest, of course. That is, the script is known, all this has already been done with many states of the world.
- Today - not fortune-tellers anymore, but political scientists - they are talking about a possible change of Arseniy Yatsenyuk as prime minister. The usual thing: Petro Poroshenko need to make a sacrifice to impoverished citizens from rising prices and hryvnia exchange rate. There is even an opinion that the current Minister of Finance, Natalia Yaresko, a US citizen and a former employee of the State Department, will become the head of the Ukrainian government. You will agree that in the near future in Kiev will make a similar "exchange"?
- I think this is quite possible. Relations between Poroshenko and Yatsenyuk are complex, it is not for nothing that the first one departed from discussing and resolving any economic issues and transferred these functions to the government. Like, Arseny, you want to be known as an economic hero — you hold the cards. This suggests that Poroshenko understands where the reforms being carried out in Ukraine lead to in reality, and intends to dump all their negative consequences on Yatsenyuk.
And the "success of the reformers" can simply drown the current Ukrainian prime minister - both as a political figure and as a real competitor to Poroshenko. After all, today the powers of Yatsenyuk are quite comparable with the powers of the president, and he represents a tangible threat to Poroshenko. Yatsenyuk, as an independent political figure, is simply unprofitable for him.
Well, and through Yaresko the Americans will receive the most direct management of Ukraine’s finances. In addition, she, as a creator of the United States, does not pose any particular danger to Poroshenko and, being an American citizen, will not become a competitor in the fight for votes. And the image of Yatsenyuk is the image of the Ukrainian politician, who even has his own party.
Poroshenko is easily able to go on a similar exchange. At the same time, he will lose even more independence, but, on the other hand, he already has nothing to lose ...
- Should the mindsets of Ukrainian citizens be taken into account in forecasting? It seems that the people are divided, and people are completely disoriented, even the protests against the depreciation of the hryvnia are collected not too many demonstrators. Can they come together to achieve some goal? And what can this goal be?
- While I do not believe in it, first of all, because people themselves never unite. For this, leaders are needed, and in modern reality, some structures or parties are needed that could lead people along. Today, I do not see such leaders and parties in Ukraine.
Potentially, of course, they can arise. Let us recall once again the demonstrative conflict between the authorities and Kolomoisky: an oligarch could “raise people”, but he was frightened. Even if he did not begin to organize "discontent" in such a sharp conflict, then others will not even do so. At this stage he retreated, but he will definitely start the game, Kolomoisky remembered everything and did not forgive anything. He is a very impudent man, unleashed semi-bandit semi-oligarch.
As for the “simple Ukrainians,” unfortunately, they have worked very seriously with their brains, I think for a long time they will believe in “aggressive Russia” and “evil Putin.” They will continue to assimilate all this without questioning, because today they are not able to critically analyze what is happening.
- Usually, there are several variants of the forecast, including “optimistic” and “pessimistic”. Which category will you assign yours to?
- I think it should be attributed to the realistic. He looks sad and pessimistic, but in fact these are the realities today. I do not see any prerequisites for its change. Changes, of course, will take place in the long term, but in the near future development will take place in the direction of deterioration in all directions.
Information