Упрощенная HTML-версия
VIKTOR YANUKOVICH, though incompetent and corrupt president not alien to power abuse,
consistently objected to the NATO membership for his country. The West, however, consistently
refused to accept Ukraine's new non-aligned status. It never missed an opportunity to remind
that Kiev and Tbilisi had reached the NATO threshold, that the doors remained open, etc. None
of the prominent Western politicians either American or European deemed it wise to say that
"we respect Ukraine's choice of neutrality."
The deficit of mutual trust between Russia and the West was exacerbated by the fast and calami-
tous collapse of the February 21 agreements which Moscow regarded as a considerable conces-
sion on its part. Guaranteed by Germany, France and Poland the agreements were devalued on
the next day by an illegitimate regime change.
For a better understanding of what happened next we should bear in mind that seen from Wash-
ington the situation in Ukraine went beyond the limits of geopolitical contradictions: it was po-
litical strategy rather than Ukraine that was at stake. The United States was upset by Moscow's
a-systemic actions in Crimea which in fact cast doubt on Washington's ability as the world leader
to achieve its aims and maintain the norms of and principles of te post-1991 world order.
So far everything or practically everything still depends on the Russian elite and its ability to con-
trol the situation inside the country and use the unique organizational resource of Russian diplo-
macy. We should launch the announced and long overdue reforms inside the country and correct
the development models of Russian society and economy so that not to make the country even
more vulnerable.
Электронное приложение к журналу «
Международная жизнь
»