And we said, those situations are quite different—Canada, China, and Russia/Ukrainian relations—these are different stories. But we told them, if you think like that then we’re not going to interfere. But in that case, we ask them to respect our right to undertake protective measures and to continue this economic policy. I would go even further, talking about the economics, and after the coup d’état, after the leadership changed in Ukraine, and Mr. Poroshenko arrived in power, at the request of our American partners and the request of the Ukrainian side, we did not implement protective measures.
Whereas the Ukrainian leadership signed the association agreement with the European Union. And they ratified this agreement, and after that they postponed that agreement from entering into force until January 1st, 2016. So you’re now shooting this documentary in mid-2015, and as of now, this association agreement between Ukraine and the EU has not yet entered into force.
That’s exactly what I had proposed to Mr. Yanukovych. He had proposed that the signing should be postponed. So the question is what was the reason for the coup d’état? Why did they drive this country into chaos, into civil war? So what was the sense behind all that? And now as to the unfolding of the political situation, indeed you have now mentioned the fact that there were riots and a coup d’état was perpetrated.
Let me remind you that before that, on February 21st, 2014, if my memory serves me correctly, three foreign ministers from European countries arrived in Kiev. They took part in the meeting between President Yanukovych and the opposition, and they agreed that early elections were to be held. [47] Background Information: Ibid.
They agreed on the future of relations between the president and the opposition.
And the following day, President Yanukovych went to the second largest city of Ukraine, Kharkov—he went there to participate in a regional conference. And once he departed, his residence was seized, his administration was seized, and the government was seized as well with the use of force. What would you call that? And the Prosecutor General was shot at, one of his security officers was wounded. And the motorcade of President Yanukovych himself was shot at. So it’s nothing more than an armed seizure of power. Naturally, someone supported this coup d’état. Where I started from this—not just personally against Yanukovych, but against the government itself because people were fed up with the chaos of what was happening. The poverty, they were fed up with it, as well as with corruption. After power was seized, some people liked it. But others didn’t like it. People were frightened by this surge of nationalism, radicalism.
The first thing the newly-arrived in power started to talk about was the need to adopt a law limiting the use of the Russian language. [48] Background Information: In provocative move, Ukraine government banned Russian as a second language. See, Ukraine Crisis: Timeline , BBC (Nov. 13, 2014). Retrieved at: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26248275
The Europeans prevented them from doing that. But the signal had already been sent to society, and people understood the direction the country was moving towards in such places as Crimea, where the overwhelming majority of people are Russians by nationality. Whereas Ukrainians who live in those places, as a whole, believe their native language to be the Russian language. Certainly, people in Crimea were especially frightened by this situation. [49] Background Information: See, “Ukraine’s sharp divisions,” BBC, (April 2014). Retrieved at: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26387353
Furthermore there were threats made against them directly. And all that led to the circumstances which are well known. I’ve elaborated on them on many occasions, so if you are interested, I can repeat. But something like that started to happen in the southeastern part of Ukraine on the whole. In the territory which is called Donbass, there are two large cities, and people didn’t accept the coup d’état there either. [50] Background Information: For good explanation on how and why the uprising in Donbass against the new, coup government began, see, “It’s not Russia that pushed Ukraine to the brink of War,” Seumus Milne, The Guardian (April 30, 2014). See, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/30/russia-ukraine-war-kiev-conflict
First there were attempts at arresting them using the police, but the police defected to their side quite quickly. Then the central authorities started to use special forces and in the night people were snatched and taken to prison. And afterwards there was the tragedy in Odessa. [51] Background Information: The “Odessa tragedy” that Putin refers to was the massacre of 42 individuals, among them 32 pro-Russian protesters, in the Trade Unions House in Odessa in 2014, see, “Ukraine crisis: death by fire in Odessa as country suffers bloodiest day since the revolution,” Roland Oliphant, The Telegraph (May 3, 2014). Retrieved at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10806656/Ukraine-crisis-death-by-fire-in-Odessa-as-country-suffers-bloodiest-day-since-the-revolution.html
And people who were unarmed took to the streets for peaceful protests and they were pushed into a building and were massacred atrociously. Even pregnant women. That is a catastrophe. But still no one is going to investigate it. Certainly not people in Donbass. After that they took up arms.
But once hostilities started, instead of engaging in a dialogue with people in the southeast part of Ukraine, after they used Special Forces, they started to use weapons directly—tanks and even military aircraft. There were strikes from the multiple rocket launchers against residential neighborhoods. We repeatedly appealed to the new leadership of Ukraine, asking them to abstain from extreme actions. They started hostilities once, they were put to rout, they stopped, then elections took place, then this new president arrived in power. I talked to him [Poroshenko] on many occasions. I tried to persuade him not to resume hostilities. [52] Background Information: Putin is correct that thousands have died as a result of hostilities in the Donbass. According to the United Nations, as of December of 2016, approximately 2,000 civilians have been killed in the conflict in the Donbass region of Ukraine, with another 6,000 to 7,0000 injured, while the total dead, including soldiers reached nearly 10,000. See, http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=55750#.WRxo1JIrLcs
And he had an opinion of his own about what was happening. He always referred to the losses his forces had sustained to two or three as people during the hostilities with the militia. Certainly that was a tragedy. It is always sad when people die. But when he resumed the hostilities, thousands of people died. And the official forces suffered another defeat. Then they started hostilities for the third time. And once again they were defeated. After that, the latest Minsk Agreements were signed. They agreed that these agreements would be adhered to by both parties. Unfortunately, we’re not witnessing that, and I think the official authorities in Kiev are not willing to engage in any direct dialogue with Donbass. They refuse to be engaged in direct dialogue. Up to now. All the provisions of the Minsk agreements stipulate directly that issues related to amendments to the Constitution, issues related to the adoption of the law, on municipal elections, issues related to this special status of Donbass—all these issues have to be coordinated, that’s what it says. But nothing like that is happening.
Right now, the Kiev authorities are trying to make amendments to the Constitution. But according to the information I have—just yesterday I received new information—there is no contact, no negotiations with Donbass. Moreover, the Minsk agreements say directly that the law which had already been adopted by the Verkhovna Rada should enter into force. This is along with the special status of Donbass. Unfortunately, just several days ago President Poroshenko announced that no special status would be granted to Donbass. I have to talk to him. I have to understand what it means. Does it mean that the Kiev authorities refuse to adhere to the Minsk agreements? [53] Background Information: For more on the contours of the Minsk Agreements that Putin references, see, “What are the Minsk Agreements,” N.S., The Economist (Sept. 14, 2016). Retrieved at: http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2016/09/economist-explains-7
There are other considerations at work here. One of the provisions of the Minsk agreements says that it’s necessary to adopt a law on amnesty. But the law has not been adopted yet. How can you talk to people in Donbass who are threatened with criminal prosecution? Another provision—the economy and the social sphere of Donbass have to be restored. But instead the authorities are strengthening the blockade of these territories. [54] Claim: “…the economy and the social sphere of Donbass have to be restored. But instead the authorities are strengthening the blockade of these territories.” Supporting: Putin is correct about the blockade of the Donbass by the central government and the resulting suffering. Indeed, UNICEF reports that, due to the blockade of the Donbass region of Ukraine, one million children are at risk of starvation. UNICEF’s position is that the Minsk Agreements must be complied with to stop the war and this humanitarian disaster. See, https://www.unicef.org/media/media_94886.html
And all things boiled down to one thing—they are saying that Donbass is fighting against them and that’s why they’re not going to pay them anything. And I say there are pensioners who are entitled, according to the law of Ukraine, to a pension, that there are people with disabilities who are not fighting anyone. They are just victims of this situation—hostages. I asked them, “Do you consider them to be citizens of your country? Well in that case you have to take care of them.” Their response was quite simple—“We do not have money and we’re not going to pay them anything.” We are supplying energy. Ukraine has refused to pay for that energy.
Читать дальше