Having lost time to organize a dialog with Ukraine, today Russia stakes at Sergey Glazyev’s rigid statements. But they are mainly targeted at intra-Russian audience and only consolidate Ukrainian elite.
September, 2013 became a moment of glory for Sergey Glazyev. Never before a politician who was an MP in the communists group in the 90th, and a co-chairman of Rodina group in the 2000th was so much in-demand in his country. Although in reality Glazyev was born in Ukraine (in Zaporizhzhya), where he also graduated school.
Glazyev happened to be on the verge of Russia-Ukraine relations, and his statements can possibly be called “compulsion to the dialog”. Vladimir Putin’s assistant uses every opportunity to voice his negative attitude towards the prospects of Ukraine’s eurointegration.
For example, mister Glazyev is sure that Ukrainian ministers haven’t read the text of the Association Agreement because they don’t know English. The hint at the sold pig in a poke is obvious. His words were overturned by the former minister of economic development and trade Petro Poroshenko who noted that he touched upon the creation of this document. I don’t think that Glazyev doubts this, simply his task is to discredit Ukraine in the eyes of its European partners as much as possible.
In this aspect skillful figures’ juggling draws attention: Glazyev emphasized that Russian banks “Sberbank” and “VTB” had allocated a 750 million dollars credit to Ukraine, capable of saving our country from default. And that same day the adviser to the Russian president declared that the signing of the Association Agreement with the EU would lead our country to the inevitable default the prevention of which would cost 35 billion euro to the European Union. A typical manipulation for Russian politicians.
What’s interesting is that unlike European Union representatives who focus their attention on the all-European values, Glazyev constantly emphasizes financial benefits. Russia can’t get used to the idea that the era of “petrodollars” comes to an end, and offers impressive sums for loyalty. Thereby, Glazyev assembles 10 billion dollars benefit for the Ukrainian foreign trade balance from the following factors: reduction of the gas price by three times, cancellation of duty on oil and cancellation of phytosanitary norms for Ukrainian agricultural production. The Russian official actually admits that Kremlin consciously discriminates Ukraine not to allow its closer relations with the EU. Seems like Kremlin’s cynicism simply goes off scale.
Another Glazyev’s proposal goes beyond international law: he expressed readiness to help Ukraine on behalf of Russia in the conduction of a referendum aimed at choosing the economic integration vector. It seems like the famous economist has confused historical periods, since Ukraine is not the Ottoman Empire at the end of the XIX century where it could introduce external management elements. Before offering something like this, it would be good for Russia to conduct a referendum about the destiny of the Far East with the participation of China.
Russia’s pressure upon Ukraine looks like a senseless loss of time, or aspiration to compensate what’s already lost. Kremlin believed that the fact of Yuliya Tymoshenko staying in jail was enough to torpedo the eurointegration of our country. However, analysts in Russia played the wrong card, moreover: the pressure of Russia promotes consolidation of Ukrainian elites around the subject of the European integration. Moscow again repeats its mistake made when Baltic and Central European states were entering the EU. And inability to learn lessons from its own errors can be worthy of the superstate status for it already in the near future.