Dear EYP Community, We approach you now as your fellow EYPers and, most importantly, citizens of Ukraine. We would to express our immense appreciation of the fact that during these days one of the committees at Riga International Session has been working on the current situation in Ukraine. We welcome their efforts, but in the same time we wish to react to some points of the motion for resolution proposed. Recognizing the educational essence of the EYP, we are in no position to influence the debate. However, we would like to encourage those working on such challenging issues to double-check their sources of information and put an effort to keep up with a pace of the events – since the current political and military crisis is one of the biggest ones in Europe since WWII. We cannot neglect the impact of the EYP as a voice of European youth. If we, young parliamentarians, wish to make a difference in the modern world – we cannot stay indifferent.
The European Youth Parliament, A. Deeply concerned by the lack of international cooperation in attempts to resolve the current Ukrainian crisis, International cooperation has been sufficient but, unfortunately, not efficient. Partially, because of RF right to veto most of the resolutions of the international institutions, in particular UN Security Council and Council of Europe. It is important to mention that the responsibility of the current events shouldn’t lay on shoulders of international community, but rather on ineffective and inert Ukrainian government, which has been blocking international aid during the protests and hasn’t responded promptly to the military invasion in Crimea. As for Crimea, in particular, diplomatic solution of the conflict has been blocked, as mentioned above; as for military response, it has been wise for international community not to be an initiator of blood shooting. Nevertheless, it is with a big regret that international community hasn’t taken necessary economic sanctions before the escalation of the crisis. B. Recalling the existing cooperation between the European Union (EU) and Ukraine within the framework of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) and the Eastern Partnership, European Neighbourhood Policy has never been suspended since the crisis in Ukraine emerged; it is a powerful tool that responds to economic and governmental reforms of the EU’s neighbour countries in the form of financial assistance. The process of positive transformation of Ukraine has been underpinned by a previously agreed Action Plan, designed back in 1998 and constantly updated. The Action Plan has been sufficiently implemented in order to allow Ukraine to sign an Association Agreement with the EU back in November. C. Fully aware that the political part of the Association Agreement (AA) between the EU and Ukraine will be signed in the coming days,
At the time of the present resolution’s discussion the political part of the AA has been already signed in Brussels, 21 March. Moreover, customs duties on Ukrainian export to the EU have been temporally removed by the initiative of the EU. D. Having studied the different interests the EU, Russia and the United States (US) have in Ukraine, Interests, in its traditional meaning, normally are not named out loud during the diplomatic negotiations. If Ukrainian crisis is a subject of discussion, the interests of Ukrainian people are generally discussed though the prism of rule of law, human and minority rights, etc. E. Deplores the tension spanning several decades in Ukraine that has resulted from its engagements with the EU and Russia, Events in Ukraine during the past decades cannot be called “tensions”, especially in the context of relations with the EU and Russia. If it referred to the Orange revolution in 2004 – it is a political crisis, which hasn’t engaged EU-Ukraine and Russia-Ukraine relations. If it referred to oil question – it shall be rather called disputes with Russian Federation. Ukraine has clearly demonstrated the European vector of integration in the economic and political sphere by signing PCA (Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, and Ukraine) back in 2008. At the same time, Ukraine has always showed willingness to cooperate with Russian Federation and other ex-Soviet Union States being a member of CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States). F. Bearing in mind the existing divisions in the Ukrainian society which have led to the Euromaindan protests and the current unrest in Eastern Ukraine, Division in the Ukrainian society does exist, but it hasn’t led to the Euromaidan protests. The protests were a response to the ineffective and corrupt government of Ukraine: the “last drop” was illogical refusal of the ex-President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanykovych, to sign the Association Agreement with the EU towards which the whole society was hardly working during many years. Current unrest in the Eastern Ukraine is mostly due to the external groups of provocateurs and misleading information in the media that plays on the linguistic difference and political diversity of views of the society. G. Deeply alarmed by the current instability and danger to public safety in Ukraine, in particular the human rights violations of the ban against torture, the protection of minorities and the freedom of the press, Human rights violations have been a case during the protests, when the violent dispersal of manifestation took place, preventing people from using their rights for an assembly and rights to voice their opinion. However, as for protection of minorities, numerous groups, including the United Nations, OSCE and the Ukrainian rabbinical association, have not seen widespread human rights violations, or anti-Semitic pogroms anywhere in Ukraine. No credible/verifiable evidence
has been presented to justify claims that Russian nationals are under threat in Crimea or elsewhere in Ukraine. There has been no evidence of attacks on churches in Eastern Ukraine, as the Russians have claimed. Moreover, Ukraine’s interim President refused to enact legislation limiting the use of the Russian language at regional level. As for freedom of press violations, there are two cases: 1) prevention of journalists from objectively covering the events during the Euromaidan protests by representatives of executive power (or under their will) 2) obstruction of journalists’ direct duties to cover the situation in Crimes by entry ban on the peninsula territory; by levy of materials on the grounds of Crimea; by intimidation and, in some cases, kidnapping of journalists whose intention was to cover the referendum or military intervention on the peninsula. H. Aware that the Ukrainian interim government is not seen as legitimate by Russia, First of all, it is necessary to specify that it is the President that is interim. Secondly, the Parliament remains unchanged and was elected in a free vote of the people in Ukraine almost two years ago. Moreover, the appointed Cabinet of Ministers was approved by an overwhelming majority in a free vote in the Ukrainian Parliament, including representatives of Yanukovych’s Party of the Regions. And finally, it is indispensible to mention that all the world countries, a part of Russia, recognize legal and executive authority of Ukraine. I.
Fully believing in the right of all Ukrainian citizens to have a legitimate government, Ukrainian citizens already have a legitimate government, unless you would like to prove the contrary. The interim President will fulfill his duties until the next Ukrainian presidential election scheduled for the 25th of May 2014.
J. Recognizing that the Ukrainian interim government will hold elections in May 2014, It would be correct “Presidential elections”, not “government”. K. Welcoming the International Monetary Fund (IMF) efforts to provide aid to Ukraine, L. Noting that the Ukrainian state is on the verge of bankruptcy, M. Further noting that the Ukrainian economy is in a state of deterioration,
1. Calls for the United Nation to urgently organize a high-level summit which would involve all parties who have an interest in the Ukrainian crisis; What would be the outcome of the summit? Would the decision of such summit be legally binding or it would remain on the level of high talks, especially considering that the participants proposed would be “parties who have an interest in the Ukrainian crisis”? United Nations has already conducted numerous meetings on the subject of Ukrainian crisis: 19 March, 13 March, 10 March, 3 March, 1 March and 28 February. 2. Recommends that no further sanctions be imposed on the parties that agree to attend the UN summit;
Previously, there hasn’t been a case when the sanctions are imposed on those parties that have agreed to attend or that have refused to attend any of the UN organized event, including high-level summits. 3. Further recommends that current sanctions be revoked if the escalating military crisis is halted; Military crisis is quite a vague term, it would be more appropriate to specify that “all foreign military forced should be withdrawn from Ukrainian territories, including Crimea” 4. Emphasizes the need for Russia and the US to remove their forces from the region in order to achieve the aforementioned de-escalation; There has been no evidence of the US military forces presence/action in Crimea (or any other region of Ukraine). 5. Further requests that all involved parties in the crisis abstain from taking actions to aggravate the situation; So far, there has been only one “party” who has been taking actions and has been aggravating the situation. 6. Encourages more severe sanctions against Russia if any further inflammatory actions are taken; Encourages more severe sanctions against Russia not only in case of inflammatory actions, but in any action that threatens the territorial integrity of Ukraine or any other country. At the same time, since the EU hasn’t officially recognized the referendum in Crimea, the more severe sanctions have been already announced in case Russian Federation does not withdraw the troops and dismisses the grounds of Crimea. 7. Calls upon Member States to request the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to convene and deliver a ruling on the legitimacy of the recent referendum in Crimea over joining the Russian Federation; 8. Calls upon the UN to send a delegation to Ukraine that will investigate breaches of human rights and compile a report on the issue; Normally, UN doesn’t send a delegation for such purposes, only in a case of mediator’s role during conflicts. On 3rd of March UN delegation has visited Ukraine and has confirmed that no human rights violations have been detected from the part of Ukraine and the only single greatest destabilizing force in Ukraine right now is Russia. Furthermore, it already exists a UN body that deals with human rights issues – UN Human Right Council (HCR). HCR conducts country visits, prepares annually a report on each UN Member country and, after its consideration and discussion, issues advices to be implemented and follows up on the implementation. There are 3 tools HCR uses to
investigate human rights situation in the country: TB (Treaty Bodies), SP (Special Procedures), UPR (Universal Periodic Review). It is already working on the grounds of Ukraine and there is no need of another body (or delegation) to be created. 9. Requests that Interpol compiles a list of Ukrainian human rights offenders and ensures that they are brought to justice; In order to compile a list, investigation should take place. Ukrainian Interior Minister, Arsen Avakov, has already requested to put ex-President Yanykovich on the Interpol’s “red” list. 10. Affirms the need for journalists to move freely throughout Ukraine; Journalists have to obstacle to move freely throughout Ukraine. The only precedent was the restriction of entry on the grounds of Crimea by the foreign military forces. 11. Trusts that the Ukrainian government will support and protect international media within their borders; There have been no complaints about Ukrainian government not supporting international media within the borders. Exception is, once again, the territory of Crimea, where the entry for any media was restricted, however, it is necessary to underline that the government of Ukraine hasn’t been controlling the territory at that time, since it was occupied by the foreign military forces. 12. Supports the interim government in their aim to hold legitimate and fair presidential elections in May 2014; On which grounds the elections shouldn’t be legitimate? 13. Further requests that the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) be permitted to send monitors for the forthcoming Ukrainian elections in May and any future elections in the region of Crimea; OSCE has been always represented by groups of observers to monitor all elections on the grounds of Ukraine, except the referendum in Crimea, where OSCE has been refused in entry by the occupants. 14. Encourages all Member States and the international community to officially recognize the results of these elections if they are conducted fairly; Member States never recognize the elections if they are conducted unfairly: is there a need to remind about this principle? (unless there is a doubt that Member States might recognize the unfair elections) There have been no signs of unfairness of the upcoming elections, thus, there are no grounds for doubting it beforehand.
15. Supports multi-lateral talks between the EU, Ukraine and Russia held after these elections on the economic future of Ukraine; It should be recognized that Russian Federation has suspended trade relations with Ukraine by closing the borders without prior announcement first in September 2013 as well as recently. Multi-lateral talks shouldn’t be limited to two actors, EU and Russia, as there are many more countries that play significant role in economic life of Ukraine. 16. Urges continued measures of support such as the 1 billion euro in loans given by the EU to aid Ukraine with its debts; The EU has decided to increase macro-financial assistance to Ukraine from EUR 610 million to EUR 1.610 billion. Taking into account previous aid, the matter concerns more than $2 billion, which will come to the accounts of the Ukrainian government to stabilize the economic situation. This is not an aid that directly helps Ukraine to cope with its debts, but a medium term credit aimed at stabilizing the economy. 17. Further urges the European Investment Bank (EIB) and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (ERBD) to provide favourable conditions for Ukrainian businesses, such as low interest rates; For now, the European Investment Bank has suspended its activities in Ukraine since 19 February until stabilization of the situation. Previously EIB has been financing EU’s Eastern Neigbourhood, including Ukraine, basing on low fixed interest rates for all lenders (in some cases, though, revisable and convertible rates were applied, however, as a rule, all interest rates were kept as low as possible). Thus, no need to urge low interest rates as EIB loans imply low interest rates per se. 18. Encouraged European businesses to consider investing in Ukraine. There were 65 billion USD of FDI (Foreign Direct Investments) in Ukraine over the last year. Do you mean “Encourage European businesses to continue investing in Ukraine despite the crisis/recent events”?