Al-Jazeerah History  
	 
	
	
	Archives  
	 
	
	
	
	
	Mission & Name   
	 
	
	
	
	
	Conflict Terminology   
	 
	
	Editorials  
	 
	
	
	
	
	
	Gaza Holocaust   
	 
	
	
	Gulf War   
	 
	
	Isdood  
	 
	
	
	Islam   
	 
	
	
	News   
	 
	
	
	News Photos 
	  
	 
	
	
	Opinion  
	
	
	Editorials 
	  
	 
	
	
	
	
	US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)   
	 
	
	
	www.aljazeerah.info
	  
      
       
      
        
        
     | 
     | 
    
      
  Brussels-Moscow Proposes, Kiev Disposes
	  
  By Ben Tanosborn 
	Al-Jazeerah, CCUN, December 23, 2013 
	     One could readily be swayed in the long labyrinth of economic 
	  and political interests which these days envelope Ukraine, as one’s 
	  geopolitical prejudices color our stance on whether this territorially 
	  largest nation in Europe should be holding hands with the EU or with the 
	  Russian Federation.  At the end of the day, however, it’s not how 
	  people might feel here in the West that counts, but how the people who 
	  inhabit this region of Eurasia feel… not just about their present 
	  well-being, but their future as well.   No matter from what vantage 
	  point you look, economically, Ukraine is lock, stock, and barrel bankrupt; 
	  and that is something any government in Kiev must carefully consider if 
	  its true concern is for the people of that nation, and not the personal 
	  needs or desires of its politicians, as widely claimed to have happened 
	  after the dissolution of the USSR.  Viktor Yanukovich, Ukraine’s 
	  president, is but the latest in a series of mandatories that have 
	  preferred not to tell Ukrainians of its chronic economic dire straits… 
	  looking externally for solutions, the chimera of all short-term 
	  politicians.  But neither the International Monetary Fund (IMF) nor 
	  the EU would consent by any stretch of the imagination to the millstone 
	  that Ukraine could represent for them.   Yanukovich’s request that 
	  the EU commit $160 billion over a 3-year period seemed way past absurd, 
	  particularly with Southern Europe still far from being economically 
	  viable.  All Brussels had to do is look at the IMF’s intervention in 
	  2008, during the recent global financial crisis, when it gave Tymoshenko’s 
	  government a loan for $16.5 billion; also approving a $15.5 billion 
	  stand-by program in 2010, this time Yanukovich’s government, which only 
	  had $3.5 billion disbursed as Ukraine failed to meet the conditions for 
	  the disbursement of the rest.  Little wonder that Brussels has been 
	  looking at a possible $25 billion during the next 7 years as loans, 
	  meeting only 10 percent of Yanukovich’s sky-high expectations.  Is it 
	  any wonder that, after the EU’s unwillingness to subsidize the government 
	  of Ukraine, Yanukovich became more receptive to a helping hand from its 
	  powerful East Slav sister-nation, Russia?   Truth be said, 
	  Yanukovich’s pursuit of integrating Ukraine with Europe is nonsensical.  
	  Culturally, historically and economically the near term future of Ukraine 
	  – and likely its far future as well, is tied to its neighbor to the east 
	  and north, Russia.  Not only is there a very strong commonality 
	  between the two major ethnic groups, including intermarriage, but Russia’s 
	  population – three times that of Ukraine, and vast natural resources – 10 
	  to 20 times those of Ukraine, make for a perfect geopolitical partnership, 
	  one where true synergy could be readily envisioned.  So, why is there 
	  such disdain by many Ukrainians towards Russia, including that of 
	  Yanukovich not so long ago?   In most economic-political alliances, 
	  most often the weaker partners feel they aren’t being treated as equals… 
	  which at times may be true, while others is not.  Not long ago, 
	  Viktor Yanukovich was loudly expressing his feelings that Russia wouldn’t 
	  consider Ukraine as an equal partner, but apparently he has been convinced 
	  otherwise, or the $25 billion deal would not have been inked three days 
	  ago.  [$15 billion invested against the nation’s debt and a $10 
	  billion subsidy (gift?), a one-third discount in the purchase of natural 
	  gas.]  Of course, there is likely to be a quid-pro-quo to Russia’s 
	  magnanimity.   Vladimir Putin has demonstrated unequaled leadership 
	  since taking over the reins of government from Boris Yeltsin in 2000.  
	  He has brought order and stability to a nation that had gone through a 
	  decade of transition from a central, state economy to one of private 
	  enterprise, with corruption and chaos prevailing throughout the nation. 
	  Putin brought not only order, but a greatly improved standard of living 
	  for the 143-milion people in the Russian Federation.  Now Putin is 
	  creating what he calls a “customs union of former Soviet states”… and 
	  that’s where the quid-pro-quo comes in for Ukraine.  But, what would 
	  be wrong with that?  Not a thing… for it’s likely to create an 
	  economic block able to compete, perhaps eventually surpass, the EU and the 
	  US.  Putin is aiming high, but given both the natural and human 
	  resources that would be available in a Eurasian Union, one would do well 
	  betting on its success.   Much has been written in the Western Press 
	  about those nonviolent revolutions as the Soviet Union economically 
	  imploded in 1989; and those color revolutions advocating democracy, human 
	  rights and independence from the communist union.  For Ukraine it was 
	  the Orange Revolution.  One extremely important thing which never 
	  received much press in the West, however, was Russia’s politically gallant 
	  gesture with the sister republics when it took up the responsibility for 
	  settling ALL external debt of the USSR… while only comprising half of the 
	  USSR population.  A singular “farewell Marshall Plan” for each and 
	  every republic which had been part of the Soviet Union!      
	  In the summer of 1998 my spouse and I visited Ukraine for the first time 
	  during a cruise that would take us to several ports on the Black Sea, two 
	  of them in Ukraine: Odessa and Yalta.  As the 2,000-passenger ship 
	  entered the harbor at Odessa, a decade after the USSR was no more; it 
	  seemed as a funereal entrance, myriad permanently-anchored ghost-ships 
	  welcoming us in their zombie rusty-best.  It was eerie; yes, eerie 
	  and sad, as almost total silence had taken over what once had been a 
	  vibrant and busy port, busiest port in the Soviet Union.  And, as we 
	  disembarked early that morning to spend the day touring the sights of 
	  Odessa, this city of over a million seemed to be empty as well, a statue 
	  of Major General José de Ribas, a Spaniard in the Russian Service, founder 
	  of the city two centuries before by order of Catherine the Great, the 
	  Russian Empress, seemed to be the only soul, inanimate at that, greeting 
	  us.  Here we were, climbing the wide Potemkin Steps and walking the 
	  main street, Derybasivska (yes, honoring De Ribas, the city’s founder, 
	  with a Russian accent).     Discovering a Spanish city-founder 
	  in Eurasia was enough of a shock for us; but an even greater shock was the 
	  somberness we saw in most people’s faces that we would encounter in the 
	  sparse streets and shops.  And that somberness, we knew, was not 
	  something innate in these people, but on the then current economic 
	  situation.        Yes, Ukraine could do much 
	  worse by not aligning itself, economically and politically, with the 
	  Russian Federation… much, much worse.     
	  
       
       
       | 
     | 
     
      
      
      
      
     |