Moscow and Kyiv are gradually coming to a compromise agreement. Such statements were made on March 16 by representatives of the parties. The priorities of the Russian Federation are the demilitarization of Ukraine, its neutral status and the absence of threats to Russia; Ukraine’s goals are a ceasefire, the withdrawal of Russian troops and further guarantees of its security. The most problematic place remains questions about Crimea and the independence of the partially recognized republics of Donbass. Negotiations are ongoing. In parallel with this, it became known about the exclusion of Russia from the Council of Europe – since March 16, Moscow is no longer a member of the organization, for the exit from which it had previously applied.
Difficult but possible
Moscow and Kyiv continue direct negotiations on a settlement in Ukraine. Them the fourth round is held via video link and has been going on for the third day. During this time, the parties took a technical break twice. – then special subgroups performed their work.
The parties do not hide: the process is not easy. On the evening of March 15, a member of the Ukrainian delegation, adviser to the head of the presidential office, Mikhail Podolyak Twitter described it as “very difficult and viscous”. “There are fundamental contradictions. But there is definitely room for compromise.”At the same time, he stressed.
The head of the Russian delegation, presidential adviser Vladimir Medinsky, on the morning of March 16, made approximately the same assessment. “Negotiations are hard, slow, and, of course, we would like it to happen much faster, he told reporters. “<…> It seems to me that the main task of the negotiating group is to find among the huge number of complex issues those on which agreement can be found.”
According to Vladimir Medinsky, Russia has the following goals in these negotiations: “achieving peace on the soil of Ukraine, a peaceful, neutral, friendly state towards us, which is not a NATO foothold, which is not an outpost of those forces that want to harm our country”.
If earlier the Ukrainian delegation publicly informed about the course of the negotiations, now the Russian side has begun to present new inputs. The key word in her statements is neutrality.. The day before, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov saidthat the goal of the talks is “the neutral military status of Ukraine in the context of security guarantees for all participants in this process”; demilitarization of the country, “so that no threats to the Russian Federation ever come from its territory”; “an end to the policy of nazification”, which implies “the abolition of all discriminatory restrictions imposed on the Russian language, education, culture and the media”.
As Vladimir Medinsky reported on March 16, “Ukraine proposes an Austrian, Swedish version of a neutral demilitarized state”, which has its own army and navy. This was followed by a statement by Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov: according to him, this option is indeed being discussed, it can be considered “as a certain compromise”.
Mykhailo Podolyak, commenting on these statements, said that the model of neutrality “can only be ‘Ukrainian’ and only with legally verified security guarantees.” At the same time, Mikhail Podolyak did not refute the information that some options for neutrality were discussed.
Each neutrality is individual
According to experts, when it comes to neutral status, individual parameters apply to each individual country.
– Let’s say that the neutrality of Austria and Finland was determined by the results of the Second World War. The neutrality of Switzerland is a centuries-old tradition, due to the geographical position of the country and the diversity of its population and culture. The neutrality of Sweden is a conscious choice of the country, made after attempts to build a Baltic empire, which ended in a complete depletion of resources, – Alexander Nosovich, editor-in-chief of the analytical portal RuBaltic.ru, explained to Izvestia.
Vladimir Schweitzer, head of the department of social and political research at the Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences, also says that each model is individual.
– Neutrality is not just a single word, it is part of the country’s history. In Austria, in the mid-1950s, a de facto Swiss version was proposed. It includes not joining military blocs, not hosting foreign armed forces and not participating in conflicts,” the expert reminded Izvestia. – Austria voluntarily recognized this neutrality, although there were many contacts on this matter with the USSR. At the same time, the country did not refuse to participate in other blocks – in particular, in the EU. Moreover, when she joined there in 1995, she introduced a clause into her Constitution, according to which Austria does not evade EU actions (including sanctions).
According to media reports, by March 16, Russia and Ukraine had made “significant progress”: newspaper The Financial Times (FT), citing three sources involved in the talks, said the parties had reached a 15-point agreement. According to the publication, they suggest, in particular, the withdrawal of Russian troops from the territory of Ukraine, occupied after the start of the military operation on February 24; Kyiv’s refusal to aspire to NATO and the non-deployment of foreign military bases and weapons; at the same time, Ukraine is allowed to retain limited armed forces.
The most problematic, the newspaper writes, remains the territorial issue – the recognition of Crimea as Russian and consent to the independence of the partially recognized Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics.. Vladimir Medinsky called these topics key.
The Kremlin did not refute the information about the agreement, saying that it is now considered premature to disclose the agreements. The leadership of Ukraine, in turn, announced the preparation of documents that will form the basis of the Russian-Ukrainian summit. According to Mikhail Podolyak, the meeting of the presidents and the signing of documents “may happen soon.” Commenting on the FT material, the Ukrainian representative confirmed the following points: “a ceasefire, the withdrawal of Russian troops and security guarantees from a number of states.”
Expelled or left?
On the same day, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe (CMCE) expelled Russia from the organization. This decision was unexpected, if only because the Committee was supposed to discuss her further participation on March 17th.
The day before, on March 15, the Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) recommended expelling Moscow from the Council of the Committee of Ministers of Europe, adopting the appropriate report. At the same time, the Russian side handed over to the Secretary General of the organization a notification that it was leaving the Council of Europe on its own..
She did so in accordance with Art. 7 CE Charter – based on it, if the notification is sent in the first three months of the financial year, then membership is terminated by its end, that is, December 31, 2022. Diplomats in the permanent mission of the Russian Federation at the organization received a notification from Sergey Lavrov that their business trip ends exactly at this time.
But the decision of the CMCE on March 16, adopted on the basis of Art. 8 of the Charter, to immediately exclude Russia from the council, the Russian intention blocked: from that day on, after 26 years of participation in the organization, Moscow is no longer included in it.
The question arises what will happen to European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)which underlies the work of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Russia’s withdrawal from the council requires its parliament to denounce the 1998 federal law “On the Ratification of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and its Protocols.” Should this internal procedure be carried out now?
– This is an open question. The convention was ratified by federal law, that is, the legal technique requires that the fate of the law be decided,” Pavel Chikov, head of the Agora international human rights group, explained to Izvestia. – This can be done precisely by the procedure of denunciation, that is, the bill submitted and adopted in the same way. But the Convention has ceased to work for the inhabitants of Russia from today.
This means that now the Russians can not submit their complaints to the ECtHR. Court website reportedthat he decided to suspend consideration of all claims against the Russian Federation. In his Telegramchannel Pavel Chikov notes that, besides this court, there are other international platforms – within the framework of the UN, which can consider the claims of citizens of the Russian Federation. These include the Human Rights Committee, the Committee against Torture, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women and the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.
“The criteria for applying are generally similar to the requirements for complaints to the ECtHR. The term for appeals to UN bodies is significantly longer (up to five years), and appeals can be sent by e-mail“, – the lawyer notes. At the same time, the above committees do not award compensation – this decision depends on the Russian courts, he clarifies.
#Tetaneutrality #status #Ukraine #discussed #Moscow #Kyiv