The war next door
Interview with Ukraine’s Chargé d’affaires in Hungary, Mihajlo Junger
It is just over a year since Russian-leaning Ukraine president Viktor Yanukovych fled the country after lengthy and bloody protests in Kiev because he reneged on signing a political and trade deal with the EU. Russia annexed Crimea in March last year and fighting broke out in eastern Ukraine between government troops and pro-Russian separatists. A fragile ceasefire has been in effect since last month but violations have followed. Ukraine’s Chargé d’affaires in Hungary, Mihajlo Junger, talks about the situation.
As a member of the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, Hungary is committed to the West, but by tacitly supporting Russian policy has Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán undermined Ukraine at a time when the EU has been striving for a unified political front in the face of Russian aggression?
It should be recalled that the EU and the United States introduced sanctions against Russia not to start a new “cold war” but because Russia, not the EU or the US, violated basic norms of international law, illegally annexed the Crimea, organised armed aggression against Ukraine in Donetsk and Lugansk regions, and pursues a policy of destabilisation with the far-sighted aim of preventing the release of Ukraine from the “grey” zone of its influence.
This all happened by applying the means of hybrid war, which allowed the official Moscow to claim its non-involvement and state that the annexation of the Crimea to Russia was decided by the Crimean people, and that in the eastern Ukraine, as Russian President Putin said in Budapest last month, “tractor drivers and miners” are fighting against Ukrainian government forces.
It is very important for us that in March 2014 Hungary, along with 100 other United Nations member-states, backed a resolution of the UN General Assembly regarding the condemnation of the Crimea’s annexation. During 2014 Hungary voted for all, without exception, EU decisions on sanctions against Russia. Perhaps it is about changing the rhetoric of the Hungarian government, which until last September, in fact, contained some criticism of the sanctions or, better to say, their effectiveness.
In September 2014 it became clear to everybody that there are 10,000 Russian soldiers in the eastern Ukraine, separatists from Russia are supplied with latest weapons, manufactured only in Russia, and without political interference and financial support of Russia this conflict would have never taken place. The leaders of the EU and NATO started to voice these facts, and the European Parliament and the Council of Europe officially condemned Russia’s military presence on the territory of Ukraine.
What happened next?
It was then, when we heard a clear position of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, stating unambiguously and publicly that Hungary is not against sanctions and will implement all the respective decisions of the EU. We cannot deny the effectiveness of the EU and US sanctions against Russia. Of course, the sanctions themselves are designed to resolve the conflict as a whole. However, they certainly bear not only economic but also political sense, because they have shown that the democratic world condemns the policy of Russia on Ukraine. Due to sanctions, we managed to launch the negotiations with the participation of Russia. It is very important to remember this.
Therefore, it is rather about a certain development of the rhetoric of Hungarian authorities than a significant change in the political position, which has not been the subject to change and is aimed at supporting Ukraine.
As for the contacts between Hungary and Russia, it is a well-known position. As it is explained to us, this position is based purely on economic interests. The main thing is to keep a balance between economic interests and European, democratic, Christian values, which are the basis of many EU member-states.
It should be well remembered that it was the desire of the Ukrainian people to become part of the EU that was the main reason for the beginning of the Euromaidan and its struggle against the corrupt and pro-Russian government of Yanukovych. After Yanukovych’s government had been toppled, the pro-European orientation of Ukrainians caused Russian military aggression against our country. The circle closes.
Therefore, theoretically, any democratic state, which aims to maintain beneficial economic ties with a country, whose leadership organised armed aggression against their common neighbour, denying the right of this country to democracy, must realise that in this way it creates grounds to doubt its commitments to democratic values. In this case, a state that has its national minority in the country that suffers from aggression, obviously is not supposed to contribute to the economic strengthening of the aggressor country. These, of course, are general formulas, and each state, more precisely each government, adopts its own decisions in its sole discretion and with regard to its responsibility.
...................
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario