Reputation is an asset

News agencies report almost every day that a certain European politician is going to boycott all Euro-2012 matches. It became known recently that even the British Queen’s grandson, Prince William, who, among other things, is president of the Football Association, will not attend his national team’s matches in Donetsk and Kyiv. It is a serious blow to Ukraine’s reputation.

Another slap on the Ukrainian leadership’s face is the Yalta summit. Only three presidents – of Poland, Moldova, and Slovakia – have so far confirmed that they will arrive, while 12 heads of state have refused to come over.

It has long been common knowledge that the leadership itself is to blame for getting into a deadlock. For to free Yulia Tymoshenko now or to let her receive medical treatment abroad would mean to show weakness and pliability, which is not part of the rules these people are playing by. Not to free would mean to go on suffering heavy losses in political and personal reputation. This raises the question of whether the Party of Regions knows what embarrassment is and whether they are really unperturbed with their own humiliation.

“It seems to me our leadership does not know at all the mentality of European politicians. They always think they [European politicians] are as pragmatic as they are,” Yevhen Holovakha says to The Day. “In reality, things are different. It is a consistent policy. The more Ukraine will be flouting the European community’s standards, the tougher policy the European Union will be pursuing. There will be more and more instances of ignoring, discrimination, and contempt every month and on every pretext. We may finally end up as downright outcasts. It is a very serious fact. It is no laughing matter.”

Obviously, it is unpleasant and humiliating for any individual to be in isolation. And for a country, it is disastrous. Viktor Yanukovych has placed all of us, not only himself, out of bounds of the civilized world. Together with him, we are now in a deep “reputation pit” from which it will be very difficult to scramble out.

But it is not only the Tymoshenko-related events that have tarnished this country’s reputation. It is a complex and, above all, domestic process. For Yanukovych is facing problems not only in the West but also in the East. After “giving up” the Crimea to the Kremlin and in fact abandoning historical memory, much to the delight of the latter, Yanukovych was not invited to Vladimir Putin’s inauguration. Even though the new-old Russian president has said he will invite Yanukovych to Moscow in the next few days for an unofficial CIS summit, it is an altogether different case.

And, while a Russian TV channel shows a pre-election debate between Nicolas Sarkozy and Francois Hollande, our state-funded First National Channel reports live on the May Day march of the Communists and the speech of their leader Petro Symonenko. So Putin’s Russia seems to be closer to Europe than Ukraine which has found itself in an artificial reservation, a “mud trap” of sorts. And what happens when Ukraine has its “door” to Europe nailed up and is invited, instead, to use the Russian “window”? History teaches nothing – perhaps because nobody learns history.

The situation is close to Ukraine’s international isolation, and those to “thank” for this are not only politicians but also journalists. Ukraine would not be facing these problems if it had settled all the important domestic issues in good time. For example, among the guests of Shuster Live talk show devoted to religion and faith was a Communist, Holub, who got a nice opportunity to sermonize the audience and TV viewers on how one should believe. Downgraded standards, for which journalists are also to blame, are not conducive to the formation of wise voters, the critical mass of sound-minded people, and, accordingly, high-quality politicians. All those who like pre-election ration handouts should remember this.

“UKRAINE IS FACING A BIG PROBLEM OF IMAGE”

Leonid KRAVCHUK, the first President of Ukraine:

“This championship is being held for the people, for all the people of Europe, not for the authorities. Whoever wants to come will buy a ticket and come here. Those who do not want will not buy a ticket and come. Nobody is being specially invited. It is the good will of everybody. The UEFA is not making invitations; it is only organizing the championship.

“For this reason, the championship will take place no matter whether or not princes, kings, premiers or presidents will arrive. Soccer has nothing to do with politics. Both Platini and Blatter have said this. So I do not think that the arrival or non-arrival of high-ranking officials will affect the Ukrainian authorities.

“As for the Yalta summit, these demarches humiliate this very event rather than Ukraine. In other words, from the viewpoint of the leaders who are not coming, the summit will fail to accomplish the assigned mission. They see no sense in it. It has no impact on international processes.

“I believe Ukraine is really facing such big problems as image, rule of law, human rights, etc. This is a proven fact, and I accept it. But I see no catastrophe in this case.

“Ukraine is just being told in this case that it is taking steps that do not conform to European values.

“Will this situation help Tymoshenko? I don’t know. I think Tymoshenko will be getting the same deal as before. And, unless the Verkhovna Rada modifies Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code, as the BYuT faction proposes, nobody will be taking any further steps.”

“IF YANUKOVYCH FAILS TO RESOLVE THE TYMOSHENKO CASE, HE WILL BE TURNING, SLOWLY BUT STEADILY, INTO A LUKASHENKO”

Alexander RAHR, director, Russia and CIS programs, German Council on Foreign Relations:

“It is a conflict. Both sides are driving one another into a deadlock. On the one hand, it is Ukraine and, on the other, it is Germany which is trying to persuade other countries to politically boycott the Europe soccer championship and demand in the form of an ultimatum that Tymoshenko be dispatched to the Charite clinic. When a thing like this is said by the German chancellor, it amounts to maximum pressure. At the same time, if Ukraine does nothing, Germany will not lose face. Yet it cannot afford such a human rights failure.

“Kyiv is in a fix now. The risk is that the projected ‘window to Europe,’ i.e., the European soccer championship, may ‘slam shut’ again. Instead of having a historic event, signing an associated status agreement, and getting European Union membership prospects, Ukraine may remain empty-handed. What is also clear, Ukraine will host no championships like this in the next 20 years. It is a unique historical chance to use Euro-2012 in order to reorient to the West.

“I think there can be only one resolution of this conflict: Tymoshenko is allowed to undergo medical treatment not necessarily in Germany but in some other EU country. At the same time, Ukraine must at least pressure the EU into signing the almost ready treaty on Ukraine’s associated status in the European Union.

“This sudden ultimatum on the part of Germany is absolutely unexpected for Ukrainian politicians and elite. It is also out of the question that Tymoshenko can be freed right now without any agreements reached by the Ukrainian side and the EU. Should everything remain as it is now, the mass media will brand the politicians who will go to visit Euro-2012 as defenders of a dictatorial regime [in Ukraine. – Ed.]. At the same time, all the media will be showing not only the soccer matches, but also Tymoshenko behind bars, which will undoubtedly deal a blow to Ukraine’s image. The question is not so much in politics and the championship itself as in whether Ukraine will want to use it in order to enter Europe. It is a political, geopolitical, and moral question, a question of the future. It is a crucial question for Ukraine. If Yanukovych fails to solve it and ignores the attitude of Europe, he will find it hard to speak to Western politicians. In the eyes of Europe, he will be turning, slowly but steadily, into a Lukashenko. I don’t think Ukraine can afford this. To save face, both sides should resort to intricate diplomacy.”

“THE TYMOSHENKO CASE IS NOT A PRETEXT FOR IGNORING THE EUROPEAN SOCCER CHAMPIONSHIP”

Nika CHITADZE, political scientist, Tbilisi:

“What happened to Ms. Tymoshenko in prison is physical violence. This can be regarded as criminal assault on an opponent. On the other hand, in spite of the coming of Yanukovych to power, Ukraine is one of the most democratic states in the post-Soviet space. If compared with Belarus and the Russian Federation, not to mention the states of Central Asia, Ukraine is head and shoulders above them, even though it does not meet all European standards. The same applies to Georgia which Freedom House views as a semi-free state.

“As for the boycott of the European soccer championship in Ukraine and the refusal of presidents to visit the Yalta summit, we can, on the one hand, share the European Union’s attitude but, on the other, we can accuse the Europeans of double standards. Why are no sanctions being imposed on Russia which is more authoritarian than Ukraine? Why are there no calls to boycott the Sochi Winter Olympics in 2014? The Tymoshenko case should not be a pretext for ignoring the European soccer championship.”

“IT IS BETTER TO BOYCOTT THE YALTA SUMMIT THAN EURO-2012”

Andrzej SZEPTYCKI, analyst, Institute of International Relations, Warsaw University:

“There is more talk in Poland about boycotting Euro-2012 than about ignoring the Yalta summit. It is a very important thing. There is a broad-based debate going on at various levels. The media publish very limited information on the Yalta summit, but there is no debate on the political or expert levels. Besides, summits like this rather seldom adopt concrete historic decisions. The visit of [Polish President Bronislaw] Komorowski to the Yalta summit is viewed as another attempt to influence President Yanukovych. The Civic Platform, which holds a majority in the Polish parliament, does not endorse the idea of boycotting Euro-2012, whereas the oppositional Law and Justice party favors the boycott.

“In my opinion, political and economic issues are much more important for Ukrainians than the Euro-2012 boycott. Besides, I do not think the boycott will be effective, for it will not bring down the rating of the current Ukrainian government. The Ukrainian leadership and personally Yanukovych will be trying to persuade the Ukrainians after the championship that Euro-2012 was a great success and a well-organized event. If asked about the boycott, he will do what Leonid Kuchma did 10 years ago: he will present it as Western Europe’s negative attitude to Ukraine – ‘they don’t want to see us in the European Union, so we must do something else…’ This boycott may result in worsened relations between Ukraine and Europe, although these relations are not very ‘good’ even now because of the Tymoshenko case. The boycott will be just one of the factors that will bring about the deterioration. This will in turn expand Russia’s possibilities to influence Ukraine. I am not saying that Ukraine will start moving towards the EU immediately after Euro-2012, but the current situation in Ukraine is favorable for Moscow.

“Nevertheless, if somebody does not like the domestic or foreign policy of a country, they should boycott its leaders rather than sporting events in it. For sport and politics are two different spheres. The summit could be a good event where various countries would have shown their negative attitude to Yanukovych. Yet it is better to boycott the Yalta summit than Euro-2012.”

Interviewed by Ihor SAMOKYSH, The Day