Yevgeny Fedorov, a Russian politician who is head of the State Duma committee on economic policy, did something strange and hard to explain last month.
Out of the blue, Fedorov sent official letters to nearly 100 Ukrainian officials and deputies, outlining his revolutionary idea of creating a “great European Ukraine (with Russia and Belarus), from the Carpathians to Sakhalin.”
An attachment read: “The principles of re-creating a single state on the lands of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia (2010-2020),” which, according to Fedorov, “suggests basic mechanisms for integration of the three states, for the creation of a unified state in the future.” Its capital would be Kyiv, and it would have three state languages, Ukrainian, Belarusian and Russian.
The Russian deputy suggested the formation of an organizing committee. The letter ends: “Your opinion on the start of this project, the composition of its organization committee and the principles of its work is welcome.”
Since the Ukrainian political elite – despite its own declarations – treats anything coming from Moscow too seriously, the letter gave birth in Ukraine to a political scandal.
It was reinforced after Deputy Prime Minister Volodymyr Semynozhenko seemed to support the idea during the Shuster Live political show. He, of course, soon said that he was misunderstood, and his kind words about the union of brotherly nations “were twisted by the opposition.” But the aftertaste remains.
I would like to reassure the Ukrainian political beau monde. Relax, dear colleagues. There is no chance of such a union, and especially the unified state, that Fedorov wants. There are three reasons why.
First, Belarus does not want a unified state. This country has a personalized charismatic regime under Alexander Lukashenko, who has been moving away from Russia. He’s not planning to become the Kremlin’s vassal. He simply used the phantom of a unified state between Russia and Belarus (which, by the way, has formally existed since 2000) to get from Moscow much-needed economic advantages. As soon as the advantages ran out, the great friendship died. The culmination of this eternal union was a recent scandal in Minsk, when Lukashenko flew to Venezuela on the first day of Vladimir Putin’s visit, completely ignoring the Russian prime minister. And then Belarus went to the Economic Court of the Commonwealth of Independent States with a “friendly” lawsuit against Russia.
Second, Ukraine does not want a unified state. After more than 18 years, the Ukrainian elite has perfectly understood all the advantages of its own independent state. Even the most pro-Russian representative of the ruling Party of Regions will always confirm – at least in a private conversation – that the prospect of becoming a part of the Kremlin power structure does not suit them. Of course, anything can be said. But these passionate integration speeches have nothing in common with political actions.
Third, Russia does not want a unified state. For a long time, the Russian elite has perceived any integration projects on the post-Soviet space as an unnecessary financial burden. It’s not an accident that inter-state structures like the Commonwealth of Independent States have effectively stopped existing. The customs union is effectively stillborn. Of course, the Kremlin leaders sometimes are forced to use imperial rhetoric. But this is purely for the sake of soothing the phantom pains of the Russian people.
So what was the point of Fedorov’s action? His message is a typical provocation. There are several pieces of evidence that show it is not serious.
Fedorov is known in the Russian parliament as a classic business lobbyist. The problems of the post-Soviet space have never bothered him. He has also said that he has never been to Ukraine.
If Fedorov himself treated his own project seriously, he would have had to have a debate behind closed doors. Instead he just sent out the concept all over the world. And the majority of the recipients were Verkhovna Rada deputies from Yulia Tymoshenko’s faction and Our Ukraine, who would not like this project.
Also, Fedorov’s concept of integration contains statements that are so foolish that one cannot help but to perceive them as concealed mockery. For example: “The main principle of integration of the three states is a consensus of all political forces and groups of Ukraine, Russia and Belarus.” Or “Our aim is to ensure by 2020 that the citizens of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia have a living standard that would allow for their life expectancy to be no less than 75 years.”
Moreover, it seems the author wanted a public scandal in Ukraine, but not anywhere else. Thus, it seems that Fedorov simply decided to discredit any potential future Russian-Ukrainian initiatives at its root.
Fedorov achieved another result: he created a new reason for the opposition to criticize President Viktor Yanukovych, raising the question of whether all of this was pre-planned for this effect.
One thing to keep in mind is that the rumors of Moscow’s support for Yanukovych in the last election are exaggerated. Putin would be more comfortable working with Tymoshenko, a woman with few complexes, who perfectly understands the real motives of her Kremlin counterparts.
Stanislav Belkovsky is a Russian political analyst. He is a founder and director of the National Strategy Institute and of the communication company Politech.
