July 14, 2015

Visiting BINTEL — Stepan Havrysh

 Stepan Havrysh

Statesmen of Ukraine.

Advisor to the President of Ukraine on constitutional development in 2007-2008., Deputy Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council in 2008-2011.

People's Deputy of Ukraine of III and IV convocations.

Doctor of Law, Professor

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Stepan Havrysh: “A wise state leadership, understanding that it has exhausted itself, should give way to the better  prepared, creative and courageous in order to reset the power. This can prevent a new “Maydan” and split of the Ukrainians”

 

— You are one of the most respected analysts, at the time you were among the leaders of Ukraine's National Security Council, having significant special analyses both, geopolitical and relevant to the situation in Ukraine, after the study of which were taken or should have been taken, we can say, decisions fateful for the Ukrainian society. Tell me, please, if at that time there were warnings about the current problems of the Ukrainian state? If so, what materials were perceived as such?

— Of course, like a cell of an organism contains the entire development program for the whole body, in the daily information that we were studying, there were signs of developments which today are testing our and our state's strength. Trying to prevent (then by the virtual forecast) the annexation of the Crimea, which we did notice, contrary to the active strategic cooperation with Moscow, in the Office of the Security Council, we created a task force to develop a range of a system of countermeasures. We prepared the Security Council's decision on the Crimea together with the new National Security Strategy, as well as the Military (Defense) Doctrine. They contained advice to Yushchenko to recognize Russia not just our military, but also economic adversary, which may at any time apply its armed forces to make pressure on Ukraine. Russia already then did not hide it, officially declaring its readiness preemptive nuclear strike to protect in the expanded “menu” of its national interests.

— As at that time no one dared to mention the open confrontation between us and Russia, were there reasonable grounds for such conclusions?

— Already then we saw two reasons. The first one was economic: expansion of the Russian business, Russian oligarchs' massive buying of economic assets in Ukraine. First of all, with the assistance of high-ranking agents of influence who had, including a joint business with them in Russia: oil, gas, nuclear and weapon. Meetings of owners of Russian transnational corporations with the Ukrainian leadership had become traditional. The Russian Embassy worked as an operator. There was a large analytical staff there, accompanying all processes of expansion of influence on Ukraine. There was Russian money in the policy. With the active participation of many (including the current) pseudo-patriots, in our state at that time was created a huge Russian “Trojan horse”. A large part of them now, this way or other, have preferences on the Russian territory. From estates to economic assets. By the way, note that all those who were charged by Maydan, found a safe haven in Russia, and from there continue to put pressure on our state, taking advantage of the weakness of our government, and possibly of its dependence on certain assets and archives.

... The second important reason or theme is the active discussion about the essence of the Ukrainian state. The process of the program of de-sovereignization of Ukraine was launched by Russia back in the mid of two thousandth — by “Valdai Club” and Alexandr Dugin with his idea of neo-Euroasianism, and later — by the creation of “Russian World” on the basis of the three Slavic states. After that, Putin kept saying that Ukraine is a not “complete” state, failed state, etc. It was humiliation for us, Ukrainian leaders tried to “modestly” ignore it. That is why they did not even try to prepare for a confrontation with Moscow. Putin's propaganda began its massive attack at the minds of Western societies, and at the same time it began to actively brainwash the Ukrainians. It was not only on our television screens, dominated by the NTV and ORT, but also in all the processes of life in Ukraine. We kept quiet, and even were allocating money from the state budget for it. The Russians' specific goal was to stop the European course of Ukraine and to turn Ukrainians into Ugro-Finns and Moksels.

— It is not difficult to guess how.

— With the help of expansion of the “Russian world”, Putin is trying to influence globalization. That is, to stop the West's (as the dominant civilization's) historical expansion. That sort of “The Wizard of Oz”. According to him, this adventure should result in creation of the so-called “Russian civilization”. It must change the course of world development, which will help Russia to take control of much of the world, thus surpassing the United States. It is a counter-offensive westward, primarily against the EU. The Russian ideologist Dugin is a typical racist and chauvinist. For example, together with Stalin's “genetics”, he began to divide Ukrainians into Galicians (whom he does not consider Ukrainians or Slavs), eternally insecure central Ukrainians and Eastern Ukrainians that are “Russians”. Together with Dmitriy Tabachnik and other chauvinists, these ideologues realized their evil, so to speak, raid into the heart and soul of Ukrainian people. This should not have been ignored! In our turn, we offered President V. Yushchenko to act “mirror”, rigidly defending national interests. The troops in the Crimea were strengthened, modernization of the Navy began. The NSDC repeatedly invited military designers who participated in the launch of a large-scale military reforms and rearmament, in particular with a view to completely withdraw from military cooperation with Russia. We even planned to set up to strengthen the Ukrainian Navy with the Sapsan multifunctional operational-tactical missile complex — an “invisible” frigate and some new types of “smart weapons.” But, again, the so-called high-ranked agents of influence of Russia impeded the work.

— What was not enough — trust to you and your associates, funds to carry out these activities or convincing evidence?

— Unfortunately, Russia then, like today, “prescribes” the agenda for the Ukrainian authorities' work. Therefore, all our national by spirit, innovative plans were blocked, including at the level of the National Security Council. When the Security Council's Secretary was Ms. Bogatyryova, unquestioningly following Yanukovych and Akhmetov's people's instructions, in every way using the presidential administration and politicians — senior officials stubbornly did not bring these plans for an extended discussion by the NSDC. Up until my resignation.

— But there must have been reports of the security services!

— Their position was difficult to understand, because they would come with an avalanche of irrelevant information. Not to mention the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, constantly trying to join the market and cash flows. It was it that at the peak of readiness scuttled the project of construction of the frigate for the Navy. And we had already successfully negotiated on it with foreigners.

— It is possible to specify with whom exactly?

— The Germans, the French. Ukraine felt the need for modern engines, ship missile systems and so on. The frigate had to get off the stocks in Mykolaiv maximum in five years. There were even starting finances for the purpose. But the leadership of the state somehow “slipped quietly” from the topic.

— How can this be explained?

— It feared that Russia would not like it. Then (like now) no one wanted to annoy it. Gas, oil, nuclear fuel.., it was and remains the joint business. And we kept preparing relevant reports and notes for the President on that subject, but they would be “lost somewhere”. To tell the truth, we could do nothing. Unfortunately.

— Didn't you and your associates have enough courage or perseverance?

— There were not enough really wise patriots in the President's environment. They were not there at that time, like they are not there now. By the way, the President then, like now, did not have even an adviser on national security issues.

Excuse me, but how were you supposed to report to the President when the need arose?

— Through the Head of his Administration, or even through his Deputies. They were our major, so to speak, opponents. But they have always had their own “game.” And very often the President “dances” exactly to their music. And they always are “extremely busy”.

— I feel uneasy to ask, but I wonder: what could be more important than the state affairs?

— Control of financial flows, the use of schemes for influencing the business, raiding as a form of redistribution of property by ruling clans. Pay attention to the massive arrival of incompetent people (sometimes completely ignorant) in the leadership. Among them there are some without proper education if any at all. And their one and only interest is business. I can say that corruption schemes, one way or another, were connected to the Presidential Administration.

— To put it mildly, we are talking about chance persons in such positions?

— The majority — yes. How can some ordinary salesman be a leader of a complicated sector of the economy, or a humble provincial automobile dealer — head the Ukroboronprom (Military Industrial Complex). None of them, a priori, is able to create a program trend of development.

When V. Yushchenko was a President, such wheelers-dealers actively cooperated with V. Yanukovych, and kept making agreements with Russia. The basis was banal, but great money. You know, at the heart of the Ukrainian authorities is the union of two opposite and mutually exclusive forces. This is like binary weapons, total fusion of business and political power. This “connection” poisons the state and makes it weak. We are still on our knees, but the slightest “spark” — and this “blend” explodes with another Maydan.

Recently, one of the authoritative deputies-interlocutors argued that the oligarchs' influence on political decisions is almost done with. Would you agree with this statement?

— It is an illusion or manipulation. Under Yanukovych's rule, oligarchs only strengthened their role in governing the country, and now they head it. Due to this we are hostages of Russia, which is a convenient partner for the shadow rapid enrichment of the handful of political businessmen actually controlling the state. I want to remind you that in 1997, Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine synchronically with the RF State Duma ratified the Agreement on Friendship, Cooperation and Strategic Partnership between the two countries. It is still in effect. And today we are at war with our strategic partner?! This is nonsense! Why do we not denounce the Agreement? Obviously because our politicians to this day are under Russia’s control, and we cannot adequately defend our independence and territorial integrity. Another fact — about the game of the two thrones' secret, separate policy of agreements covered with the Minsk Agreements.

The Security Council today has to be working on new, more sophisticated and damaging threats arising before the Ukrainian statehood. It is necessary to overcome corruption, which is de facto forming the principles of life in Ukraine. Politicians-officials overuse their power and then out of fear put on embroidered shirts. Tell me, is it logical to simultaneously call someone your strategic partner and at the same time to actively defend from him your territorial integrity? For example, the other day, listening to an interview of the Head of the Administration, I began to realize that he does not sound a statesman, ideologist of modernization of the government. He's just an effective businessman, “the President's manager”. And if we talk about the war, about the elites' competition for power, it is a desperate struggle for money.

— They argue that they are trying to do business in the current situation.

— According to their own statements, a “ticket” to even a temporary political party is five to seven million US dollars. They a priori, cannot be patriots. Note that even professional journalists when in power very soon turn into the same corrupt politicians.

— My “formula” of patriotism is as follows: a person must have conscience and should not have a large private property, with the help of which he could be blackmailed. Right?

— I cannot agree with this formulation. After all, a person, especially a politician or government official, from birth should have “a gene of statehood”. Or this “gene” is implanted by knowledge and culture. Agree that the Ukrainians have not yet become a state nation. While the Russians are an imperial supra state nation, which has given Putin a carte blanche of trust (to 89 %) for enlargement of the new empire with the help of military force. Putin can at any moment unleash a full-scale war, based on such support. Over the 23 years we have not become a political nation, while remaining electoral mass, which can be endlessly manipulated and which can be bought for a bottle of vodka or buckwheat.

— And here it is difficult for me to agree with your “formula”. We, when we were torn, at least in three different directions between neighboring countries, did manage to maintain respect for our ancestors, our history and culture, language...

— When even from the President's environment there come offers to abandon the Crimea and Donbas, it is an indication that the people is not able to maintain and develop its own independent state. Ukrainians need a breakthrough in consciousness; they must understand that only uniting around the idea of ​​statehood, not around temporary leaders (!) is a request for the national idea. After all the statehood of Ukrainians was just smoldering in the form of small outbreaks. It did not become a stronghold and the only form of existence of the people. The task of the new Ukrainian elite, which should have conscience — is to form a state nation. People should unite not around a political party, not around temporary factions or ideas, individual phrases and formulas proposed by politicians (“To live in a new way!”), but around the values ​​that will be taken by further generations. The tragedy of our state is in the fact that the government not only does not have a successor, but each new “team” seeks to change everything up to the vision of the new head of the state. This is currently the most problematic and conflict factor in the evolution of development of Ukraine.

— Stepan Bohdanovych, do you believe that Ukraine has no national idea? Then here is an observation: if the people that has its own language, history, faith and culture, is not given the opportunity to build and develop its state, then its best, scattered all over the world representatives will take up the creation of some national “lodge” in order to position themselves and enjoy their national consciousness. The most successful in this regard in the second millennium have been recognized, if I remember correctly, the Armenian, the Jews are second...

— Well, our national idea is Ukrainians' statehood, which they actually never had. At some point, it seemed to me that its formation would be influenced by the numerous Western Diaspora, united for this purpose. But this did not happen. Diaspora somehow is indifferent in its genetic memory. Besides, constant failures of “young Ukrainians” discourage it. Perhaps it was a mistake that we did not dare to offer them Ukrainian citizenship on the basis of place of birth and descent. Like the warring Israel does — without extra conditions and restrictions. But Ukrainian voters, unfortunately, are ready to be bought for a penny by all kinds of nouveaux riches rather than to fight and support smart patriots that are at the helm of the state. Look, no one is particularly outraged with the “double” policy of the authorities. And with the fact that they feed the massive corruption which kills and destroys the legal basis of the state, or with the fact that the legal system is falling apart, but instead there emerged and acts the conceptual law. And each ruling group configures it for itself. Yanukovych may serve as the most typical example. Not only the “family” stole from Ukrainians more than 75 billion US dollars, it also received a “green corridor” for taking the money out of the country! It deliberately created a large external debt and today seeks to exert pressure on the financial security of the country. All members of the “family” live safely in huge estates owned by them in Rublyovka, in Spain or in Israel. And every day they pull the strings, fueling conflicts in Ukraine. Their parties and so-called schemes prosper, none of the fugitives has been arrested, and no one's illegally acquired riches have been confiscated.

— And what, in your opinion, should be done in such a situation?

— The State should conclude with the society, a new, fair agreement and to establish common, uniform rules. Like Hetman Orlyk's agreement with senior officers and Cossack army, which for some reason is called “Constitution”. Uniform rules for all citizens, from the President to the ordinary, as they say, uncle from Lviv, Kharkiv or Donetsk. The rules are simple. For example, a Ukrainian citizen has the right to do business, at this he/she has to pay taxes to the state. But taxes must be moderate, encouraging. Not more than 12% — for persons and 30% — for legal entities, with a moratorium on their change of at least 10 years. The state should give real guarantees of inviolability of property, because it alone is the material foundation of democracy. Courts — outside any administrative and political control. The President should guarantee, not to appoint trying to influence, other branches of government. His status must necessarily be constitutionally reduced. Otherwise, he will constantly produce conflicts.

— Like they are trying to do in the Communist China?

— The Communist China has grown as many billionaires, as there are in all European countries combined. Its middle-class population is catching up with the European one numerically. We do not see billionaires leading parties there, or in the post of the President. But we know that for the crimes they are brought to court and sentenced to capital punishment. But China is a part of the whole global world. That is why within a day its main stock exchanges lost three trillion US dollars, as communism and capitalism are not compatible.

All the calls to deoligarchization which we hear here sound ridiculous (if not hypocritical). In reality, it's just unfair competition. “I am a billionaire. And I have all the power. Either you give me a part, or I will not answer for myself”.  Unfortunately, this is the truth of our life.

There is no real democratic competition in our country. Parties are just tools for enrichment. And parties are not competing for political principles, but for economic ones, that is, they seek to benefit. They are corrupted to the core and they corrupt voters. Some of the “cunning” politicians create parties as business incubators, earning during the election tens of millions of dollars. That is why everything here is oversaturated with rude populism, and no promise of the leaders is ever fulfilled. Democratic mechanisms for rapid legitimate change of power do not exist because this is persecuted. We will not have them until we put an end to the oligarchy and return to the idea of ​​the natural statehood.

— But before the whole people they state that our political organizations compete!

— It is propaganda used by those in power to support the electorate's constant instability, giving it no chance to become real voters. All the oligarchs have their own personal parties or powerful party factions. They are one-day lasting, started on a wave of emotions of the party's voters. They can be called organizations to conduct legitimate business or expanding business empires. Such parties have no ideology and no idea of ​​statehood. They slowly destroy the country and democracy. They are, so to speak, activated by their masters’ struggle for the added cost, withdrawing assets to offshore accounts. Economically, we are like a big coal kopanka (hole) from which in primitive way we dig out coal and sell it cheap. Parties do not care about general, let alone pluralist, democracy, because they want it only for themselves. As a method of domination and a ground for a long-term “Schengen”.

— You see, everybody will agree with what you say, everybody knows what should be done in such a case, but is anybody trying to do anything?

— Hopeless question. I do not have an answer. Note each time worse people come to power — business, “sawing” the state budget and property and politicians — “frost-bitten” populists, fiercely criticizing everything, but “behind the wings” taking money for servicing the oligarchic politics. Isn't this a theater of absurd? The position of the voters has to be changed and we need citizens with anti-oligarchic immunity. Oligarchs want only power. They cannot and do not know how to build the state. They can only build, so to speak, their own state within a state. For example, Mr. Akhmetov controls at least three huge sectors of the economy. Oligarchs, with the help of a party, Government and Parliament control the courts and all (or almost all) state institutions. They are the democracy's death itself. Besides, they are — “people of the world”. Patriotism is strange to them. Try to communicate with them on this subject.

— Don't the oligarchs realize that one day them may be visited by, so to speak, more powerful oligarchs from the East or the West, who would demand their share? And no one can stand against such “guests” without a strong state with its protective power structures, about which no one has cared for more than twenty-four years, being carried away by plundering the state property?

— They know perfectly well that there are no such oligarchs “there”. There are rich, but law-abiding billionaires and millionaires “there”, so our oligarchs are not afraid of them. But having power, they will not let foreign multinational corporations to Ukraine. Like, for example, Lee Kwan Yu did. Look at Kolomoiskyi — the monopolist in air transportation. He shoved from the sector all “low costs”.  And we are paying for tickets to Lviv as much as, for example, to Paris. Oligarchy has legalized corruption in public administration. The richest in Ukraine are state officials. There are legends about their riches. Look how much money was confiscated from the low rank law enforcers. Popular politicians take 5-7 million US dollars for winning places in lists. That is what this so-called form of governing the state looks like a huge “iceberg”, its top slightly powdered with democracy, while under the murky water there is a primitive society, primitive forms of existence, of one piece with the power that is unable to carry out any reforms. Except for Saakashvili...

— Do you consider his appointment a positive example?

— Frankly speaking, I am against mass assignment of foreigners to ministers. This practice is a challenge to honest and intelligent Ukrainians. And it is another “Fata Morgana”. But the example of Mikhail Saakashvili's appointment is a positive step. He's doing what I am impressed with his example should be followed by our leadership, because it does not dare to take similar steps. I cannot agree with the proposal that we must “pig-headedly” fence ourselves off Russia, although he can be understood. After all he had lost South Ossetia, Abkhazia, though later he did raise Georgia... As for giving away the Donbas and the Crimea in exchange for new protected border with Russia, I believe that it is detrimental to the Ukrainian statehood. But such a “model”, unfortunately, has dominated in the political moods of the society. Is it not clear that with the loss of Donbas, we would lose the industrial base of the economy and the key energy resource of the country — coal? And with the loss of the Crimea Ukraine would no longer be a maritime state?

— Can we state that in such a way the principles of our geopolitics are being tested?

— It seems that the Ukrainian geopolitics is increasingly dependent on Moscow. The latter’s secret agents are working diligently with our state administration. Putin (in spite of Minsk and the “Norman Four” not defending Ukrainian interests) communicates with Poroshenko about something. Everybody knows very well that Ukraine, under today's circumstances, is not able to strategically protect its integrity. Moreover, the West has begun to openly put pressure on Kyiv, forcing it to “soft surrender”.  On the one hand, it says it does not recognize Russia's occupation of Ukraine, but on the other — it proposes to give “special status” to the Donbas and the separatists there without solving the problem with the Crimea. At this, the new Constitution, as Kyiv’s unilateral commitment, winds down democracy, and this, I think, undermines the unitarity of our state and starts the processes of its unpredictable disintegration. The West does not take any responsibility for Ukraine, and due to the weakness of our leadership, does not give any guarantees to Ukraine’s independence. Of course, here there is a tendency at any cost to put an end to the war dangerous for the EU. The West is increasingly leaning towards Putin’s plan — to give Ukraine to Moscow into some incomprehensible to us “civilized” management under the supervision of the OSCE and the Council of Europe. That is, with the eternal pseudo European integration process, illusive freedom of speech and caricature struggle against corruption. Moscow so far surely enjoys the right to veto any, not just geopolitical, but also the internal development of Ukraine. The main thing for it is to prevent Ukraine’s joining the EU or NATO, not to let it sign bilateral military agreements with the United States or individual countries of the EU/NATO. Moscow's pressure is so powerful that Washington did not dare to adopt the prepared agreement on military alliance.

Yes, we do have internal problems, and the “Russian world’s” interests in Ukraine can be realized. Even the widespread use of the Russian language and Russian culture which is an important part of the internal mental development, can help it.

I agree that an immediate military operation to liberate the East is now quite risky. But are we modernizing our army, which by its the structure, strategy and generals (compare the figures: we have 450 Generals, the USA has 40), is a typical replica of the former Soviet army? Defeats from Russian troops and terrorists can in no way raise the fighting spirit of the Ukrainians. And Mr. Stets' Ministry’s simple PR won’t help it. In my opinion, there are only two ways out of this situation: sooner or later — a war or some surrender under “anesthesia”, for example, the adoption of the same new Constitution. But what will happen to the Ukrainian statehood?

— Our leadership should take care of this, as it has the mandate of the people's trust from the moment of the elections, right?

— I think that all the current politicians-leaders are so much burdened with wrong decision that psychologically it is difficult for them to influence the country's defense strategy. The Crimea was betrayed without the slightest resistance, Yanukovych was let out, the Donbas was captured by separatists, and in Minsk the same terrorists were given the opportunity to create powerful professional armies in our East. Now, declaring a blockade of Donbas, we somehow are even “cooperating” with the terrorists. To a greater extent — by smuggling. We supply them with gas and electricity on the cost of our taxpayers, we deliver humanitarian aid. And everybody is gradually getting accustomed to this. Do the Supreme Commander and the General Staff have plans for establishing a truly volunteer, professional army? It is high time to move on to formation of a completely different type of Armed Forces of Ukraine.

We have a war in the ATO format, led by the Deputy Chief of the Security Service and the General Staff seems not to be responsible for anything. There is the Army, the National Guard under volunteer battalions that are forcibly included in the composition either of the Army or of the Police. But we are also trying to discredit them in public, arresting officers, accusing ordinary soldiers of violence. But the cruelty, the terrorists-militants' inhuman torturing of Ukrainian warriors, turning them into rightless slaves, humiliation at the civilian population, are mentioned only briefly. And even that — thanks to the bloggers.

We need to convince the world that on the territory of Donbas there have been created extremely dangerous terrorist organizations, consisting of no fewer than 50,000 militants, with almost a thousand of tanks, tens of thousands of cannon and rocket artillery. They are not going to mine coal, to sow the fields, to organize fair trade there. They capture and kill hostages; they conduct cynical slave trade and sell human internal organs and drugs. The population there is their hostage, and feels like a victim of the so-called “Stockholm” syndrome. Ukrainian people, seeing such a threat are actively arming themselves. The population now has not less than 7.5 million units of rifled unregistered weapons. And our security services and the police can't help this. We need other solutions, other policies of government through which we will be able to protect and to resume the sovereignty. We need political diplomacy, but of a different type and a military strategy, which provides for at least a determined active defense. And it is advisable to replace all the negotiators, because the impression is that they are not able to do something and slowly hand over the country.

— Well, then do you think that today’s system of collective security of NATO is reliable? And what prospects does Ukraine have to become a part of the system? And what should be the priority: first to join NATO, then the EU, or vice versa?

— We're too much carried away with the myths that we will be defended by the NATO. And the authorities “feed” us daily with these myths trying to calm the public mind. You see, until we have really restored our statehood, strengthened the border with Russia, we have no right to say anything about the European integration or “NATOzation” of Ukraine. Of course, they may even delicately promise it, comforting us. But how will operate the Free Trade Area with the EU after 1 January 2016, when there emerges the threat of mass migration and smuggling, especially from Asia, through the 450 km of the uncontrolled border with the Russian Federation? No one can answer this question. But I believe that European integration is the banner which we must not let go. The same is true about a visa-free regime for citizens of a country at war, in which, to all that, there is total corruption. The government, “lulling” us by such plans, thinks that with the course of time everything will somehow “sort itself out”. But what to do about Putin, this pushed into the political and economic impasse rogue bear, ready to fight to the end? Personally he has nowhere to retreat. It seems that our government in its dealings with the electorate has almost exhausted all the resources with which the social stability can be maintained. It has one last resource — demoralizing the society propaganda, daily brainwashing Ukrainians so that they do not go to Maydan to protest.

Since our statehood is under a question mark, the West, realizing this, keeps reminding the Ukrainian political elite that the first thing it should do is to save the statehood, resuming it in historical limits and to put an end to the oligarchs' control and the immense corruption. Only having eliminated these problems, we can count on the candidate status in the EU and accession to the NATO Membership Action Plan for NATO Membership (if it withstands Putin's strikes).

In my time as Co-Chairman of the Ukraine-NATO Commission on Reforming Defense and Security Sector, I worked a lot to accelerate the entry into this respected organization. I remember in 2008 in Bucharest, our almost agreed on NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP), turned into a Request for Extension of the Partnership. Putin then circling in an airplane over Bucharest was pressing and pressing on Merkel, demanding for himself favorable changes. She did change everything officially, having in fact given us a bureaucratic document without giving any guarantees for us for the future. She also closed for Ukraine the door to NATO.

— In exchange for what?

— In exchange for the desire to build with Putin-Medvedev Europe “from Lisbon to Vladivostok”. Eventually, this led to a crisis in our state. If, then, we had signed the MAP with NATO, Putin would never have dared to attack the Ukraine. Here is the price of one document that can change the whole world order! The same illusions about Putin-Russia, and the fear of them do not allow NATO now to give Ukraine a strong support in its defense, in the fight against terrorism. By the way, the Europe’s indecision once spawned Hitler and provoked World War II.

— How about the five newly established trusts for Ukraine?

— Where is the result of their work? These are a kind of “deferred” projects. At the time, we raised the question of giving us more advanced weapons and military technologies. To no avail.  However, during the presidency of Viktor Yushchenko was made a strong breakthrough which (strange as it might seem) needed the state’s support (despite all Yushchenko's national conscience). Kyiv then was being torn between the EU, USA and Russia. And the Party of Regions and the pro-Russian leaders in the Defense and Security Sectors were blocking all the initiatives and, as the saying goes, “flushing them down the toilet”. The Security Council, by its composition being a super-team, then acted as a fairly independent body. It is no accident it was called “the second Cabinet of Ministers.” In a short period of time we had taken 56 open decisions alone and about half a dozen in the protocol mode, the rest — by a closed and secret procedure. All those decisions were unique. I am sure that the NSDC’s work will never be as intensive again.

Tymoshenko, as Prime Minister, then mentioned Radbez at every meeting of the government. On the one hand, as a body, constantly annoying her, controlling the work of the Cabinet in the sphere of national security, and on the other — as an efficient structure, which was always putting pressure on the government, demanding to meet its obligations. NSDC’s meetings took place in public three times a month.

Experts and representatives of mass media were present at those meetings, briefings were held on the constant base. We were really closer to NATO. And then it all was just instantly destroyed thanks to Yanukovych-Lyovochkin-Ermolaev’s efforts. They turned our country in the direction of the “Russian world”. Lyovochkin rigidly told Bohatyryova to remove me from office immediately, and then Yermolaev told me that all Ukraine's interests were in Eurasia, not in Europe. Because the latter was dying, and all the financial markets were moving into Russia and Asia. That's when I realized that this was the end of the era of Euro-romanticism.

But we still remained in the “trend” of Europe. This can't be changed. The West realizes that if Putin does not stop in Ukraine, he will go further, first of all — into the Baltic countries. And he will not stop there. It is not known whether his successor will stop there, because Russia tends to be an empire, and Russian voters are inspired with this fetish. I think that Putin himself has a lot of time. We do not know his real plans, and cannot guess about any! He does not believe that he is losing something because of the sanctions, because they have not affected Russia too much in the short-term trend. Russia has not sunk into the internal depression. On the contrary, its patriotic mobilization is in high gear there. As long as Putin has 2 trillion US dollars and 89 % of voters support — nothing will hold him back. This does not mean that he is not looking for a compromise with the West. On the contrary, he needs a compromise, but at the cost of Ukraine and other geopolitical concessions. Look, the Ukrainian economy is falling faster than the Russian one. Assets, resources stocks, the trend of political stability, all-round support for Putin by the Russian society, suggest that the war with Ukraine — specific, with a new strategy of asymmetry — will continue for a very long time. Until we have an elite, which will start to operate rigidly and symmetrically on Putin's actions. Because our present elite, I believe, has lost the fight to him.

We have so far some advantage — the Western world is on our side. But, I repeat, we need to change our diplomacy in our attitude to it, it is necessary to strengthen together at different levels the pressure on Russia. But the main thing is to create with its help a strong, motivated army. Perhaps we need to resort to direct military cooperation with those who are now ready for this. For example, with Lithuania, Estonia, possibly with Poland, Great Britain, the USA, Romania.

— To start cooperation on a bilateral basis?

— Yes. This is the ticket to NATO in the future. But our leadership, as we see, is leading a double policy here. It is afraid of Putin that is why we were not able to become military allies of the United States outside NATO. Now we are too much bogged down in the “squabble” with Moscow, and Washington and Brussels do not like it. We have already been accused of violating the Minsk Agreements. Meanwhile Putin is destroying our economy and his informational aggression is destroying consciousness of Ukrainians. We really need not debate about European integration and visa-free regime, but about a new “Marshall Plan” for Ukraine. But for the West to be able to compensate our losses, we must get out of the war with terrorists and resume sovereignty.

— Do you think that the West does not understand that Ukraine is in need of help?

— The West does understand, but, apparently, it does not see a team here ready to do the job, and it is not going to finance oligarchy and feed corruption. If our politicians really care about the interests of our state, it won't take us long to succeed. And we will have a complete Victoria in relations with Russia, which will be forced to sit at the negotiating table. But not in Minsk, to talk “on concepts”, but in the UN Security Council. Of course, we must not compromise. Although the problem of the Crimea does hurt, we should not betray our principles. In any case, it is necessary to withdraw the Crimea from Russia.

Another thing: we need a new strategy that can be summarized in some new international agreement. It is clear that the Ukrainian government has made a serious strategic mistake when under Putin’s pressure it abandoned the “Budapest Memorandum”.  Without exception, all negotiations should have been conducted on its basis. Minsk was imposed on us, its approaches having been developed in Moscow. This is nonsense in international law when on the part of the government documents are signed by “people without responsibility” (as once for Boyko's towers). I believe that inability to take advantage of the guarantees of the Budapest Treaty is our big political defeat. Therefore it is extremely important to resume the debate on this issue.

— On what basis can we raise the question of the Budapest guarantees?

— The Budapest Treaty is international. The Minsk Agreements, most likely, are some conceptual internal document under the aegis of the three ambassadors, none of whom has proper jurisdiction. I am sure that this war will not end in bilateral, so to speak, narrow truce with Russia. This requires only a new peace treaty as a guarantee of the sovereignty of Ukraine. It would be great if it were voted for in the UN. By the way, the Treaty on our strategic partnership with Russia, signed in 1998, is registered with the Secretariat of the UN Security Council. But have you heard anybody accuse Russia of non-compliance, or simply remind of its existence?

It is clear that Russia will demand, in respect of Ukraine, to enter into a new agreement on its own terms.

— Do you think that Ukraine could be subject to bargaining?

— Yes, I do. At the moment Ukraine is too weak a player in geopolitics. For example, the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry has no active position. We act as a filtration buffer between the West and Russia. The West is afraid of the Russian madness, and does not know how to counteract it. As I have said, Ukraine will not be able to defend itself, and the West does not want war with Russia. It is important, who of them will be the first to back down. Meanwhile Ukraine is more and more squeezing between these solid millstones of these two, so-called geo-political machines.

— Let's narrow the question of the Russian-Ukrainian interests. Is not the problem that the owners of strategic enterprises of Ukraine (and their income from production), one way or another, are representatives of Russian business? And our attempts to declare our moving westwards are not profitable for Russians, — for reasons of their business included?

— This is what is called geopolitics. Russia has never lost control of the Ukrainian economy. Because it has always been Ukraine's largest supplier of strategic resources, and consumer of its not very modern production, which has a low added cost, low technology of manufacturing, let alone absence of innovations. Our market has had the highest degree of cooperation, within nearly a century it has firmly spliced ​​into one chain with the Russian one. Moscow did nothing but increased expansion in the Ukrainian market, using corruption — the incurable disease of the ruling elites. Revenues from gas, oil, nuclear fuel were common to Moscow and Kyiv. Russia has always been interested in using the Ukrainian oligarchs to corrupt Europe. The main danger for Europe lies not so much in the “green men” and Russian tanks, but in Russian “cases with greenery”. Through nominees Russia continues to buy Ukrainian assets and Ukrainian politicians. Please note that the moment the danger looms over them — they all run away to Moscow. It turns out that they have both, business and real estates there. The cleverest in undermining the Ukrainian state are awarded and assigned to public office by the Kremlin. Many Kyiv officials and politicians have been honored with Russian awards for achievements in the matter of the “Russian world” and for “importing” Russian ideas in Ukraine. Is it not the reason for our President's having not signed the letter to the International Criminal Court yet, despite the “one-time ratifications” of certain articles of its Statute in the Verkhovna Rada?

Nobody says that it is easy to get rid of Russia's influence. But nobody is trying to do it either! On the contrary, it seems that Russia keeps absorbing us, increasing its pressure from the military to the humanitarian and informational. The Kremlin, not the West, actually forms the agenda for Ukraine. It does it with the help of legions of agents, using our discord, our oligarchs’ greediness, corrupt officials, genetic fear of famine. While the EU remains a project on paper. Look, the President willfully, without special explanations, to Russia’s benefit, postpones the entry into force of the Agreement on Free Trade Area with the European Union till the beginning of 2016. But as shown by the last Maydan, the European integration trend is already strong enough and can't be broken easily (although the crisis in Greece does not add to Ukrainians' optimism). Especially when the “carpet” bombing of the brains of our citizens by the Kremlin propaganda machine is at full blast.  For Europe, we so far are just recipients, beggars, not able to defend their own country.

— There are stories about open demonstrations of the Russian diaspora in Germany in support of the DPR and LPR.

— Everything is clear here: they are paid by “Gazprom”. You remember in what role now serve the former German Chancellors and Ministers — advisers to Putin, and for they are paid by the Russian gas monster.

— Do you think that what you are saying now, is perceived by our leaders, who should be inspired by all these thoughts on their state level?

— We do not have a Ukrainian strategy of development. Well, if nothing else, because Ukraine is sinking into the so-called critical crisis of statehood. Besides, our country's strategy is worked on by one person — the President. He works on it against the background of original decorations in the form of the National Security Council, FIS and other public institutions, which are supposed to ensure the effectiveness of collegial decision-making. MFA is the only President’s speaker, without self-vision of the problems. The same applies to the government. Therefore, we lack hard and principled response to Russia's policy of war. We are not able to diplomatically and informationally influence the West. We even do not try to counteract Russians ideologically. It is necessary to build up “asymmetric” responds to the aggressor, using his sensitive “pain points”.

And then what can be said about the possibility of a “third Maydan”?

— We are a plundered country with poor people trying to leave a large empire in a most civilized way. History shows that when comprador elites come to power, such countries often go through “color” revolutions. Because the “third Maydan” is just an objective response of history to our inability to build a modern nation-state. Besides, for the next maydan there is already detonator-critical mass, which is able even tomorrow to launch another revolutionary process. And it's not just the defeat of the current government in the war. It is its inability to build the state and carry out reforms for the sake of the civil society. Our strategy of economic and social development is close to failure. The government seems to be falling into some hole, as if caught between Keynesianism and monetarism, choosing completely ineffective, it can be said, semi-feudal system of economic management.

Instead of allowing the people to freely manage their means, allowing them to finance their economic ideas, to invest for the purpose of the common salvation, it, like with steel tongs, reduces consuming, increasing fiscal pressure. It has so deeply got into the pockets of the citizens that they will soon be forced to sew them up to prevent something else to be taken out from there “by mistake”. This cannot continue for a long time. People today are using the saved in previous years, and what will happen when they run out of savings?

Note, the crime is rapidly increasing; there is a total corruption everywhere. And there are no clear legal mechanisms for real protection of citizens. The judicial system is in full decline, the role of the police and intelligence services is growing, and they are used for raiding. All this rapidly provokes internal resistance of the population. It is already clear that another heavy conflict is maturing. The government and political authorities intentionally or not intentionally, have opened a “second front”— internal, political one. Worst of all, if it merges with the front in the East. For Ukraine, an explosion of resistance can be fatal.

— A “hybrid” civil war?

-  It must not be excluded. In Donbas, Ukrainians are fighting against Ukrainians. Yet there is little ground for the escalation of the conflict turning into a large-scale war. Perhaps it will be a political revolution against the government and the oligarchs. There will be no Maydan as such. Because there are thousands of armored vehicles and military jeeps. Such events can last for several days, if not a few tens of hours. And it is important for politicians to realize this and to find a safe way out. There is one such way out — to reset the political system through early parliamentary and presidential elections. It would be a sort of removing the lid from the pan, where the revolutionary kulish (old Ukrainian dish) is boiling. Otherwise, we can dive into uncontrollable chaos for an indefinite period of time.

— A sort of the once famous Makhnovshchyna? (anarchy)

— Yes, its symptoms can be seen today. In the form of willingness of certain volunteer units to act independently and political twists. Aren't the hay-fork at a political banner a symbol of Makhnovshchyna? It's definitely not a political symbol, because it can in no way be uniting.

You know, I think if after all this we somehow manage to survive, we will need to reestablish the state itself. Right now this in any case cannot be done, because we are one genetically with the Crimea and Donbas, and without them Ukraine is doomed. Moreover, we cannot let the “DPR” and “LPR” turn into legitimate “wide, with a special status autonomies”.  It will be a bomb under our statehood.

— It's sort of a suicide bomber with explosives under the cloak...

— This is exactly a classic terrorist organization. Blackmail, intimidation, acts of terrorism — that is their arsenal of pressure on the official leadership. Now they have put on suits and ties, and work in Minsk over creation of a mousetrap for us...

A wise state leadership, understanding that it has exhausted itself, should give way to the better prepared, creative and brave in order to reset the power. This can prevent a new “Maydan” and split of the Ukrainians. This should be talked about in order to predict further development of events and their consequences. We are creating this history, we will live here and for this it is necessary to preserve our society and state. If we do not try to do this, historical events may develop on the worst scenario.

— At the beginning of our conversation you mentioned that attempts to develop our army were unsuccessful. Perhaps there were fears that it could interfere with “sawing” of the state property?

— The Army is not being developed today either. There is lots of PR, empty words and frank fear to irritate Putin. This is already the sixth wave of mobilization, but the problems at the front are only increasing.

Isn't there a fear that the military might encroach on the power?

— Well, the history of the world shows that the military always take power in their hands independently. This is called a military junta. In Ukraine, there are a lot of the military who do not agree with the government so this version cannot be completely ignored. But we have no real military traditions, and the Army was too depressed to become a sort of independent force. Now things may change and, in fact, this is also the evolution of the society of the warring countries.

Your prediction of future events?

— You know, if we speak about our future, it seems to me that we are now at such a pass, from which we can continue moving up or slide down rapidly. Moving up means moving to a civilized civil society, to Europeanness.  Down — into the twilight of the “Russian World”, political feudalism under the cynical power of the oligarchs. The key to the development of the country — is a daily struggle for creation of the true Ukrainian statehood as the only place of promise of the ancient European Ukrainian ethnos.

Thank you for your honest answers to my questions.

Interview was recorded by Oleh Makhno