#20_1-8

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2 No.20 MARCH 29, 2018 DAY AFTER DAY WWW.DAY.KIEV.UA Pryluky: An Updated Profile The fresh issue of Route No. 1 offers a unique look at that “small great city” By Olha KHARCHENKO, The Day “...How many people know that there was a time when Pryluky actually ruled Muscovy? And this plotline could have been used to create a drama on William Shakespeare or Friedrich von Schiller’s model, or a whole historical TV series, given the present realities. It would have become another Game of Thrones... According to biographers of the city, the Hlynsky princely family owned Pryluky for a time. Studying the story of the Hlynskys makes clear how we were giving impetus to the birth of a monster from the very beginning. One of the Hlynskys wed his daughter to Prince of Moscow Vasily III, and from this marriage Ivan IV was born, known as Ivan the Terrible. And does anyone ever recall that Boris Godunov was among those who destroyed Pryluky? But after its many destructions, that occurred at various points in time, the city always revived. And it was mainly by the efforts of the princes, whom many of us “abandon” to Poland, Russia, or Lithuania... But all of them were actually locals: the Vyshnevetskys, the Galagans... In western Ukraine, they use a very good word for it – tuteishi, ‘natives,’” editor-in-chief Larysa Ivshyna intriguingly writes in her column for the latest issue of the glossy magazine. The creative team of Route No. 1’s March issue made every effort to make the word “Pryluky” sound in a new way. We talked about people as the main asset with Artem Skrypka, director of production at the OJSC British American Tobacco for Ukraine, Caucasus, Central Asia, Belarus, and Moldova subregion. This enterprise provides sizeable incomes to approximately 10 percent of the city’s population and implements a number of social projects in it. The rich church architecture of the city, the centerpieces of the Pryluky Local History Museum’s collection, the unique Hustyn monastery and the nearby villages of Kachanivka, Trostianets, and Sokyryntsi are all covered in our separate travel descriptions. Also, Route No. 1 talked about their perspectives on Pryluky to prominent natives of the city: Consul General of Ukraine in Chicago Larysa He rasko, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Ukraine to the Holy See (Vatican) and the Sovereign Order of Malta Tetiana Izhevska, actress of the Franko National Academic Drama Theater Svitlana Prus, director of the Chernihiv State Center for Olympic Training Viacheslav Derkach, and well-known citizen of Pryluky, Paralympic champion Oleh Len. In addition, the issue offers contributions dealing with how Pryluky has used its right to self-government, how the authorities are making the city attractive to young people, where one can get a tasty meal in it, and which European localities are also 933 years old. You can order Route No. 1. Pryluky from Den’s online store at https:// day.kyiv.ua/en/catalog/9678 or by calling our sales department: (044) 303 96 23. Also, you may wait till March 30 to buy it at a newsstand in your city or go to Pryluky on March 29 to attend the solemn opening of Den’s Photo Exhibition, as our glossy magazine will reach that city before it appears anywhere else, as an exclusive gift! The Kremlin’s “Ukrainian gambit” By Mykola SIRUK, The Day All over the world, no one doubted that Russian President Vladimir Putin would be re-elected for a fourth term. Indeed, the Russian regime had done everything to ensure the necessary turnout and, most importantly, a convincing victory in the first round. During the election campaign, the Russian regime widely exploited anti- Western rhetoric, using as an excuse the expulsion of Russian diplomats from Britain because of the involvement of Russian security services in poisoning a former Russian spy and his daughter. Now, after the end of the campaign, many politicians and experts ask a question: what will Russia’s policy under Putin be with regard to the EU, the US, and Ukraine, and vice versa, how will the Trump administration build relations with the Kremlin, given that its head has not personally criticized Putin and is trying to establish friendly relations with the Russian leader? The Day asked Russian political analyst, expert in Russian- American relations Lilia SHEVTSOVA to answer these questions. ● “WHILE MAINTAINING AGGRESSIVE RHETORIC, THE KREMLIN IS TRYING TO LOOK FOR WAYS TO EASE TENSION” “The Kremlin’s foreign policy has always been an instrument for ensuring its domestic agenda succeeds. Until recently, the Kremlin was able to resolve tactical issues of survival at the expense of foreign policy. For instance, the annexation of Crimea added about 30 percentage points to Vladimir Putin’s support level and allowed him to obtain legitimacy for a time as a ‘gatherer of Russian lands.’ But at the same time, the ‘Ukrainian gambit’ of the Kremlin has begun to destroy the model under which the Russian system existed by using Western resources. “The main foreign policy challenge of Putin’s new presidential term is to find a balance between deterring the West and maintaining dialog with it, which would allow Russia to go back to using the Western By Natalia PUSHKARUK, The Day This week the world has shown an unheard-of solidarity with the UK in connection with Russia’s likely complicity in poisoning the former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia – about 20 countries expelled over 100 Russian diplomats (as we were going to press, the exact number was 139). At first, a decision to this effect was made in the European Union: Donald Tusk, President of the European Council, announced that 14 EU member states had joined the initiative. “Additional measures, including further sanctions within the common EU framework, cannot be excluded in the coming days and weeks,” Reuters quotes him as saying. In particular, the number of Russian diplomats was reduced in the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Spain, Sweden, and Finland, CNN reports. Following the EU, the US took a similar step, giving 60 diplomats a week’s notice to leave the country. Besides, the Russian consulate in Seattle will be closed. In Canada it was announced about the expulsion of financial and technological potential. Putin, apparently, hopes that by escalating tension and threatening to ‘break windows,’ he will force the spineless liberal democracies to accept his rules of the game and return to the previous policy of appeasement. He obviously expects that the Russian elite and society will be compelled to agree to living in a ‘besieged fortress’ for an indefinite period of time. “However, neither the Russian president nor the ruling team is fully confident that this madman blackmail will succeed. And it is already obvious that, while maintaining its macho and aggressive rhetoric, the Kremlin is trying to look for ways to ease tension. ‘You did not hear us, you did not respect us, and look what you have made us to do! Listen to our complaints now and we will again comfortably coexist!’ is the current Kremlin mantra. “The problem is that the Kremlin, while knowing how to escalate, does not know how to retreat when it becomes clear that the West is not ready to return to the pre-Crimea consensus. Meanwhile, the blinking game can end badly for both sides. “Of course, the Kremlin’s main focus is on the US. Donald Trump’s presidency turned out to be much more unpleasant for Russia than fairly harmless Barack Obama’s America. Despite Trump’s inexplicable sympathy for Putin, his administration is pursuing a rather tough course against Russia, which the previous American president did not dare to do during his four Russian diplomats and the denial of accreditation to three. DW quotes Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland as saying: “The four have been identified as intelligence officers or individuals who have used their diplomatic status to undermine Canada’s security or interfere in our democracy.” Australia is going to expel two diplomats, while New Zealand says they have no Russian agents, but if there were some, they would also be expelled. Lilia SHEVTSOVA: “It has begun to destroy the model under which the Russian system existed by using Western resources” term. The Kremlin, of course, will try not to provoke the US to take even tougher measures. But here is the question: how is one to swallow insults without losing face?!” ● “THE KREMLIN HAS BEEN QUITE DISMISSIVE ABOUT THE ABILITY OF EUROPE TO DETER RUSSIA SO FAR” “Speaking of Europe, the Kremlin has been quite dismissive about the ability of Europe to deter Russia so far. The Kremlin did not expect at all that the Europeans would be prepared to maintain sanctions against Russia for so long. But now, when the position of Chancellor Angela Merkel, who ensured European unity on the issue of sanctions, has begun to weaken, the Kremlin will again hope that Europe can be split, either by intimidation or by seducing with ‘carrots’ businesses and politicians who are ready to cooperate with Moscow. “The Europeans’ reaction to the Skripal case will be a test of their ability to take a tough stand against Russia: to what extent will Europe support Britain in its confrontation with the Kremlin over a poisoning with a neuro-paralytic agent in the UK that Russia denies its involvement in? But no matter how this story ends, Russia will continue its old policy towards Europe, which is to disregard the EU outright and to try to split the Europeans and create blocs of Russia’s own making with ‘Trojan horses’ – the countries which stand ready to resume dialog with the Kremlin.” “The next goal is to build up the pressure of sanctions” What does the unprecedented expulsion of more than 100 Russian diplomats mean? ● UKRAINE’S SOLIDARITY Ukraine has also made a similar decision. According to President Petro Poroshenko, this was announced “synchronously and in coordination at 3 p.m. Brussels time, or at 4 p.m. Kyiv time.” “I am sure that the expulsion of 13 Russian diplomats from Ukraine will strengthen our security and dash the efforts of the fifth column to destabilize the domestic situation in Ukraine,” he said. In the head of state’s words, diplomatic presence has long been reduced almost to zero – “to the critical minimum that allows us to care about our citizens held hostage in Russia.” This stirred up discussions about whether or not this step of Kyiv was reasonable. The Russian president’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov has already said Russia will be guided by the principle of reciprocity when taking retaliatory measures. At the same time, it should be taken into account that some Ukrainian citizens, including political prisoners, still remain in the neighboring state – they need support and help from our diplomatic representatives. Commenting this, Iryna He ra - shchen ko, First Deputy Chairperson of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, noted that the expulsion is a right decision, a political signal of solidarity to our European partners. “Freeing the Kremlin’s political prisoners depends on Putin alone, not on consuls. At the same time, support and help from consuls is perhaps the only support our political prisoners receive and are aware of. Given a complete isolation, a ban on being visited by and communicating with relatives by phone and by correspondence, the absence of the Ukrainian press, TV, and books, a consul’s visit, at least once in several months, is perhaps the only link with Ukraine, a signal that the fatherland is struggling for them. Consuls will find it more difficult to contact the political prisoners, for it is obvious that Russia will be revenging itself. But we have the right to demand that the world increase pressuring Russia into releasing our captives,” she wrote in Facebook. Continued on page 4 ➤ ● “THE ‘RUSSIAN FACTOR’ IS THE MOST IMPORTANT TOOL THAT STRENGTHENS UKRAINIAN IDENTITY” “What about Ukraine? Russian leaders understand that Ukraine remains the main reason for Russia’s current confrontation with the West. Undoubtedly, the Kremlin will hope that the Ukrainian issue will vanish from the main international agenda and the West will get tired of Ukraine. By exacerbating the issue of international security and shifting attention not only to international terrorism, but to the threat of the collapse of the strategic security system, as well as turning nuclear weapons into an instrument of blackmail, the Kremlin effectively tells the West: look, we have more important problems for discussion and we have a means of coercing you to adopt our vision of global priorities and the rules of the game. “Of course, as long as imperialism and the view of Ukraine as an element of the ‘Russian civilization’ remain elements of the political mentality of the Russian ruling elite, Ukraine will always be in a zone of geopolitical instability. On the one hand, having Russia in the neighborhood and the Kremlin’s desire to undermine Ukraine’s territorial integrity will destabilize the situation in Ukraine. On the other hand, the ‘Russian factor’ is the most important tool that strengthens Ukrainian identity. “But it is also obvious that President Putin understands that the Donbas is not benefiting him, but harming his reputation and narrowing the room for international maneuver instead. Still, I think that despite this understanding, Putin is not ready to willingly abandon the Donbas and lose this instrument of influence in Ukraine and a possible pawn in dealing with the West. Apparently, surrendering the occupied districts of the Donbas is seen by Putin as likely to have worse consequences than keeping the current conflict going. “However, the situation is developing rapidly. We extrapolate the current trends into the future, but new circumstances arise all the time, which can radically change the political picture. What is impossible today can become possible tomorrow, and it can happen very quickly and unexpectedly. After all, we are at the stage of the collapse of the former world order and the formation of a new one. In any case, the situation in the ‘Russia-Ukraine’ space is not static and it is hard to freeze, unlike other conflicts in the post-Soviet space.” Should we expect any progress on the part of the Kremlin in fulfilling the Minsk Agreements? “I do not see any opportunities so far for the Kremlin’s position on the Minsk Agreements to change, as Putin has repeatedly said. But we are talking about the present moment here. It is difficult to foresee at the moment what will happen in a year or two.” ● “ANY THOUGHT OF NORMALIZING RELATIONS WITH RUSSIA MAKES THE U.S. ELITE TO SUSPECT ITS AUTHOR OF BEING A SELL-OUT” What do the US elite expect from the fourth term of Putin, and what kind of policy are they going to pursue with regard to Russia? “I think that neither the American establishment, nor the Trump administration can, or want, to think strategically now. Everyone in Washington is obsessed with a situational agenda, often regulated by President Trump’s crazy tweets. It is clear that the ‘collective Washington’ does not expect anything good from Putin. Moreover, we see that any thought of normalizing relations with Russia makes the US elite to suspect its author of being a sellout. Even Henry Kissinger, who liked to visit Putin in the Kremlin and always called for ‘taking into account the interests of Russia’ on his return, has now fallen silent. Continued on page 5 ➤
WWW.DAY.KIEV.UA DAY AFTER DAY No.20 MARCH 29, 2018 3 Missiles against hatred and lies By Natalia ISHCHENKO March 24 marks the 19th anniversary of start of the NATO bombing campaign in the former Yugoslavia. Ukrainians know very little about the circumstances of those events. Information that we do have is often incomplete, often distorted, and sometimes absent at all. One of the little-known episodes is the bombing of the Radio and Television of Serbia (RTS) in April 1999. This attack was not a mistake. The RTS building in Belgrade was hit by a missile because the broadcaster was part of the propaganda machine of the then Yugoslav authorities, a weapon in the war waged by the regime of Slobodan Milosevic. ● MILOSEVIC’S RESPONSIBILITY The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY, then including Serbia and Montenegro) was attacked because the Yugoslav leadership made sure that the peace talks on the resolution of the conflict in Kosovo failed. The negotiation process, which lasted from February to March 1999 in Rambouillet and Paris (France), was suspended on March 19. The parties could not reach an agreement, since president of the FRY Milosevic refused to sign military annexes to the crisis settlement treaty. Meanwhile, the number of Albanian refugees from Kosovo continued to increase... Javier Solana, then secretary general of NATO, made a special press statement on March 24, 1999, in connection with the start of the air operations. In particular, he said: “In the last months, the international community has spared no efforts to achieve a negotiated solution in Kosovo. But it has not been possible. “Clear responsibility for the air strikes lies with President Milosevic who has refused to stop his violent action in Kosovo and has refused to negotiate in good faith. “The time has now come for action. “Let me reiterate: NATO is not waging war against Yugoslavia. “We have no quarrel with the people of Yugoslavia who for too long have been isolated in Europe because of the policies of their government. “Our actions are directed against the repressive policy of the Yugoslav leadership. “We must stop the violence and bring an end to the humanitarian catastrophe now taking place in Kosovo. We have a moral duty to do so.” ● 78 DAYS AND NIGHTS The Operation Allied Force began without the formal consent of the UN Security Council and lasted 78 days. During that time, the North Atlantic Alliance carried out air strikes with cruise missiles and aircraft against hundreds of targets in Serbia and How Slobodan Milosevic’s “propaganda machine” was attacked by NATO Montenegro. They were mostly military, industrial, and infrastructure facilities. According to various estimates, more than two and a half months of bombing killed 1,200 to 2,500 people. The total property damage is estimated at tens of billions of dollars. The operation ended with the signing of a military technical agreement in Kumanovo (Macedonia) on June 9, 1999. Three days later, the withdrawal of the FRY forces from Kosovo began. The NATO secretary general issued an order to stop the bombing on June 10, and the last missile exploded at 1:30 a.m. that day. On June 10, 1999, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1244, and 37,800 Kosovo Force REUTERS photo “ The isolated ruined buildings in the center of Belgrade, which have been specially left unaltered since 1999, remind the Serbs and should remind everyone else what happens when an authoritarian ruler wants to build a “great country” over the objections of the international community, by brainwashing people with propaganda and carrying out military aggression against other peoples. ” tified, since they were part of the “apparatus of the dictatorship and power of Milosevic.” (KFOR) troops from 36 countries were sent to Kosovo. The international peacekeeping mission in Kosovo continues to this day. ● BOMBING THE “PROPAGANDIST MACHINE” One of the significant episodes of the Allied Force operation was the bombing of the RTS. On April 23, 1999, a cruise missile launched by a NATO aircraft hit the RTS building in Belgrade. Three TV channels and four radio stations then broadcast from the home of the region’s leading broadcaster. The attack took place at night, at 2:06 a.m., just when Milosevic’s recorded interview was being broadcast on the central channel. Two of the four floors of the RTS building col- The publication also quoted a statement by UK International Development Secretary Clare Short: “This is a war, this is a serious conflict, untold horrors are being done. The propaganda machine is prolonging the war and it [the RTS building] is a legitimate target.” Admiral Ian Garnett, chief of joint operations at the Ministry of Defense, noted that Milosevic’s “propaganda machine consists of transmitters but also the studios from which the information is transmitted. That makes it part of the overall military structure. Both elements have to be attacked.” And NATO spokesman David Wilby, according to The Guardian, called lapsed, the main instrument room was destroyed, 150 to 200 people (who worked the night shift or were on duty) were then present in the broadcaster’s building. As a result of the bombing, 16 RTS staff were killed, including directors, editors, programmers, cameramen, guards, a makeup artist... More people were injured, and then rescued out of the rubble of the destroyed building. Representatives of NATO and its member countries asserted that the RTS was a dual purpose object, which made an important contribution to the propaganda war being conducted then by the Yugoslav authorities. The Guardian newspaper quoted Tony Blair in 1999, immediately after the attack, who insisted that the bombing of TV stations was fully justhe Serbian state broadcaster two weeks before the attack “a legitimate target,” because it “filled the airwaves with hate and with lies over the years.” ● WHO IS TO BLAME? International journalist unions and TV broadcaster associations were, as expected, extremely negative about the news from Belgrade. Human rights organizations Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch (HRW), in turn, criticized the Alliance for attacking the Serbian broadcaster due to the deaths of civilians. However, the HRW cited in its report on the Kosovo crisis, posted on the official website of the organization (https://www.hrw.org/reports/2000/na to/Natbm200-01.htm#P420_111626) Paragraph 7 of the 1956 Guidelines of the International Committee of the Red Cross, which lists among legitimate military objectives “installations of broadcasting and television stations” (the source referenced by the human rights activists is ICRC, Commentary on the Additional Protocols, p. 632, para. 2002, note 3). In 2001, the European Court of Human Rights declared inadmissible for consideration of the merits a complaint lodged by relatives of several dead and wounded RTS workers against NATO members who participated in the bombing. Other international tribunals also found no grounds for opening cases against the countries participating in the Allied Force operation. In June 1999, the UN International Court of Justice refused to comply with the request of the FRY to institute proceedings against the allies. In 2000, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia informed the UN Security Council of his decision not to conduct an investigation into this issue. Instead, in 2002 (two years after the overthrow of the Milosevic regime), the Serbian court sentenced the former head of state radio television Serbia Dragoljub Milanovic to 10 years imprisonment because he did not ensure the safety of his employees. According to the HRW, Western media organizations that used the facilities of the Serbian broadcaster for the transfer of materials from Yugoslavia were warned by NATO representatives that the headquarters of the RTS would be attacked. As soon as Western media learned about the Alliance’s plans, the authorities of Yugoslavia also received relevant information. But as the court found, the head of the RTS deliberately did not comply with the evacuation order for TV and radio workers, although he knew that the RTS building could become a target for bombing. Dragoljub Milanovic was released in August 2012. He takes an active part in social and political life, speaks on TV and recalls the old times. He tried to sue journalists who wrote that he “sacrificed 16 employees of the RTS” in 1999. He has been unsuccessful so far: in the beginning of this year, the Supreme Court of Cassation of Serbia decided that such a value judgment was based on a court decision and did not detract from the honor and reputation of the former chief manager of the main Serbian broadcaster. ● LEARNED AND UNLEARNED LESSONS As far as the RTS itself is concerned, it has... repented. On May 23, 2011, the RTS management apologized to the citizens of the country and residents of the region for the fact that in the 1990s, the RTS programs contained insults, slander, and incitement to hatred and hostility. The media company acknowledged that this was happening to discredit the political opposition in Serbia and its leaders, and was also part of propaganda of the then undemocratic regime. The RTS executives stated that programs of the broadcaster harmed honor and dignity of representatives of the political opposition, critically-minded journalists, humanist-oriented intellectuals, ethnic and religious minorities in Serbia, as well as some of the neighboring peoples and nations in the 1990s. The new RTS has pledged to be independent in its work and implement the principles of rule of law, social justice, and civic democracy, protect human rights and minority rights, and devotedly observe European principles and values. In general, today’s Serbia strives to behave in a European manner. In particular, it aims to resolve all the conflicts – including old ones, first of all, the settlement of the Kosovo situation – through negotiations and agreements. The isolated ruined buildings in the center of Belgrade, which have been specially left unaltered since 1999, remind the Serbs and should remind everyone else what happens when an authoritarian ruler wants to build a “great country” over the objections of the international community, by brainwashing people with propaganda and carrying out military aggression against other peoples.
Page 1: MARCH 29, 2018 ISSUE No. 20 (1152)
Page 5 and 6: WWW.DAY.KIEV.UA TOPIC OF THE DAY No
Page 7 and 8: WWW.DAY.KIEV.UA CULT URE No.20 MARC

#20_1-8

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?