Looks like the passing week gave us the opportunity to take a breath but what to expect next: a new strike or the end of a war? It seems that Ukraine is getting ready for the first option, because the deputies are breaking off “friendly relations” with Russia, allowing our sailors to use deadly force, and NATO countries are thinking about entering the Black Sea. In details about the main thing – in the traditional digest of Opinion.
The 90s of Ukrainian art were all about media art. The 90s are the first decade of Ukraine’s independence. Although contemporary art was born here a little earlier, in late life of the Soviet era, but in the 90’s it received a new boost, a new impulse for its development as a new cultural identity. First of all, the interesting thing is the extension of our consciousness, which gives it a new freedom, mobility, and flexibility. The TV is here – both the image carrier and the independent element of the integrated 3D composition.
Verkhovna Rada supported the end of “friendship” with Russia. The bill, introduced by the President Petro Poroshenko, provides for the termination of the treaty after the expiration of a 10-year term from the day of its last extension.
“The termination of the Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation, and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation, taking into account its continuing significant violation by the Russian Federation… will allow Ukraine to protect its national interests in international relations in an appropriate and effective way,” the explanatory note says.
During his speech in the parliament, deputy secretary of state for foreign affairs Serhii Kyslytsia noted that Russia had rudely neglected the main provisions of the treaty, and its continuation is fundamentally impossible.
Both Ukrainian and Russian politicians put forward proposals on the termination of the contract; however, neither Russia nor Ukraine was intended to break the treaty. Russia believed that its potential withdrawal from the treaty would not “contribute to solving the problems of Russian-Ukrainian relations”. The Ukrainian authorities intended to use the formal extension of the treaty in order to “bring Russia to justice” for what is, in their opinion, a violation of the document.
What was in the treaty? These lines: “The High Contracting Parties, in accordance with the provisions of the UN Charter and the obligations under the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, respect the territorial integrity of each other and confirm the inviolability of the existing borders between them”.
What was the incitement for Poroshenko to submit the bill: disappointment in the ability to bring Russia to justice, or the presidential election in 3 months? Decide yourself.
In Ukraine, the martial law came into force on November 28. It was introduced for 30 days from 14:00 on November 26 to 14:00 on December 26, 2018, in 10 regions. This happened after Russian ships fired and captured Ukrainian ships near the Kerch Strait on November 25. In total, there were 24 Ukrainian sailors on the three ships, two of them – officers of the SBU.
In 10 regions of Ukraine, “the martial law” lasts for 10 days, but what has changed in the lives of the citizens? In Odessa, law enforcers dispersed an action against illegal construction works, the country began reserve training, and deputies made the area of the Ukrainian water control twice bigger up to 24 miles, and the fighters of the Naval Forces and Coast Guard (border unit) were allowed to shoot to kill. Also, Ukraine restricted the entry of Russian males from 16 to 60 years old. Every day a hundred Russians are turned around at the border, and many musicians from the Russian Federation cancel their concerts in Ukraine. Due to the introduction of martial law, foreign citizens, in particular journalists, are prohibited from entering the territory of the occupied Crimea and Donbas. It seems that Ukraine has lost nothing except Boris Grebenshchikov‘s concert. Actually not to everybody is a fan of “BG”, too.
On the one hand, it may affect the activity of these restrictions (don’t forget about the elections), and on the other hand, you can be comforted, that finally there is a stability and progression in the relations with the aggressor state.
The case of the former President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych, who is accused of treason, has come to an end – on December 5, judges went to the jury room to make a sentence. Yanukovych has never had the last word in court – lawyers assert that he has a serious trauma, and in the clinic, where he is, it is impossible to hold a video conference. These arguments didn’t convince the judge. The date, when the judgment will be delivered, is unknown and taking into account the resonance of the case, the court promise to inform about it in advance. Hromadske.ua reports about the one and a half year trial of the ex-president.
He is accused of treason, complicity in conducting an aggressive war and deliberate actions committed to change the boundaries of the territory and the state border of Ukraine.
The main argument is that same letter of Yanukovych to the Russian president. The Prosecutor General’s Office believes that the former president gave the green light to the annexation of the Crimea.
Prosecutors demand Yanukovych the maximum sentence – 15 years of imprisonment.
The process looked like a political show – especially during the court debates in August this year. The defense of Yanukovych and the police had a fight in the court-house, and during the speech of the prosecutor lawyers shouted and interrupted him.
But it is highly unlikely that Yanukovych, in the case of a conviction, will actually serve the sentence. Russia has not joined the European Convention on the International Validity of Criminal Judgments, therefore it cannot bring back the vanished president to Ukraine.
Another “media trial” is coming to an end: Kolomoyskyi vs. PrivatBank. Officials of the state bank came to arbitration in London and it was there where the real problems began. The High Court of London (which imposed a worldwide arrest on Kolomoyskyi’s assets) made a decision on the case of nationalized PrivatBank against its former oligarch owners. It held, that the bank’s case against the former owners is not in its jurisdiction.
Kolomoyskyi and Boholyubov are subjected to fictitious contracts, they took up to 2 billion USD from PrivatBank before nationalization which caused significant losses for the bank.
The oligarchs did not even deny the fact, that they actually took money from PrivatBank and even made an admission, that they caused 248 million USD losses. Their defense was based only on the fact that this case is not of London’s competence. And Kolomoyskyi managed to achieve the goal. The legal proceedings against the former owners of PrivatBank should be transferred to Ukraine or to Switzerland. And the judicial authorities of these countries cannot arrest their assets outside their borders.
While there are three weeks to appeal, funds will be blocked. However, if the Ukrainian side loses, the oligarchs will have access to hundreds of millions of dollars. And who knows how they will spend them in the midst of the election race, but certainly not in support of the current authorities, which actually made them flee from Ukraine.
By Konstyantyn Rul