The OSCE and compliance with principles

International roundtable “Ukraine in the Priorities of Germany’s Presidency in the OSCE,” held in Kyiv on January 27, demonstrated desire of the EU’s most powerful member to contribute to solving the conflict in the Donbas. Counselor and Permanent Deputy Ambassador of Germany to Ukraine Wolfgang Bindseil said that the German presidency’s motto was “renewal of dialog, restoration of confidence and security.” According to him, Europe is living through crisis brought about by an unprecedented challenge, a violation of the international law, and causes of the crisis should be identified. “By annexing Crimea, Russia has broken the paradigm of post-Cold War peace. The OSCE remains a pillar of security in this situation. And we know how to overcome the crisis, and need a pragmatic approach which should be aimed at dialog and a return to the spirit of the OSCE during the Cold War, when we were rebuilding trust and restoring security,” he said.

On the other hand, we still find it hard to understand how Germany, having contributed to the adoption of the controversial Minsk Agreements which effectively reflect the Kremlin’s diktat, will now be able to force, in its new capacity, the Russian side to comply with its side of the deal. Accordingly, director of the Konrad Adenauer Foundation’s Office in Ukraine Gabriele Baumann noted in her speech that the OSCE’s work to resolve territorial disputes and conflicts, including in the Donbas, which is the main interest of the OSCE, is limited by the need to achieve consensus among the 57 members of the organization. It is this factor, in her opinion, that paralyzes the OSCE. In her view, a possible way out of this situation would be to explore under the German presidency the possibility of banning countries directly or indirectly involved in the conflict from the observation missions. Baumann also emphasized that the OSCE was one of the platforms for dialog with Russia, but it should not become a means of appeasement.

It is common knowledge that all parties involved in reaching the Minsk 2 Agreements are pinning hopes on the implementation of these agreements in the coming months. However, no one can give a clear answer whether this will happen, given the fact that even the first provision of the agreements, which is a permanent ceasefire, cannot be enforced for any length of time. A German diplomat admitted to The Day on condition of anonymity that he did not know whether these agreements would be fulfilled by the end of the year. “Russia is a very unpredictable country. At the beginning of 2014, I could not even imagine that it could annex Crimea,” our source said.

Another European diplomat told The Day, also off-record, that the implementation of the agreements requires the political will of two parties, Ukraine and Russia. That is, Ukraine should honor all political commitments, and Russia should do its part, this source noted. However, when asked by The Day’s reporter how he imagined conducting fair and honest elections in the Donbas without the withdrawal of Russian troops and weapons and return of the border to Ukrainian control first, the diplomat had no answer. The prospect is clear, then: it would be at least a re-run of elections at gunpoint as it was done in Crimea, and they will bring suitable results.

Deputy director of the Department of International Organizations at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine Vasyl Pokotylo said in his speech that the program of the German presidency was largely in line with the interests of Ukraine. “Russia has undermined the security of the European continent established after the adoption of the 1975 Helsinki Final Act, and therefore the resolution of the conflict in the Donbas is crucial to preserve the credibility of the OSCE, and the future of the organization depends on its compliance with its principles,” he stressed.

The thesis about the principles of the OSCE was developed further by Chairman of the Crimean Tatar Mejlis, member of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine’s Committee on Human Rights, National Minorities and International Relations Refat Chubarov. He emphasized that Sergey Lavrov’s statement on “Russia’s compliance with the Budapest Memorandum” and Nikolai Patrushev’s explanation of reasons behind Russia’s invasion of Crimea represented an attempt by the Russian side to impose their vision of the principles, which should guide the dialog between Russia and the international community.

“We are trying to shape a civilizational dialog. We take the future of the entire world into consideration, and it is better to do so than to present ultimatums to the world, as Russia does,” he observed. According to him, the success of Germany’s effort to fundamentally restore effectiveness of the OSCE under its presidency will depend on whether its activities will be based on principles.

“In Russia, we face an enemy of human civilization, and therefore our objectives should be such that Russia will believe that we will work to achieve them. Therefore, we do not advocate the strengthening of OSCE principles, but rather their revival,” Chubarov stressed. He drew attention to the fact that the priorities of Germany’s crisis management plan included Nagorno-Karabakh and Transnistria, while Crimea was absent, even though it was a case of the basic principle of the inviolability of borders being broken.

In addition, Chubarov quite rightly said that one should not discuss conflict prevention, as mentioned in the priorities of the OSCE, if one could not get the basic principles enforced, foremost of which is the inviolability of borders.