Russia can repeat aggression. Who and how will Ukraine's security after the war

During the presentation, one of the authors of the idea was present - Presidential Head Andriy Yermak. The key goal is to strengthen the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Ukraine in its internationally recognized borders. They should also contribute to the continuation of democratic reforms. In other words, the contract will establish a mechanism for obtaining international support in the case of a new wave of aggression by the Russian Federation.

In the end, it is not necessary to prepare a purely political document, as a Budapest Memorandum, and legal with specific guarantees. For example, as in May 2022, the United Kingdom signed with Finland and Sweden, guaranteeing them security, including in the event of an attack of Russia, before their NATO membership began.

The declarations then provided a change in defense and security cooperation between the United Kingdom and each country, strengthening the exchange of intelligence data, accelerating joint military training, exercises and deployment, as well as strengthening security in all three countries and Northern Europe.

In fact, Stockholm and Helsinki received support at the level of NATO's 5th Article (which says that an attack on one of the Alliance members is an attack on all its members and each of them). But now it is obvious that the Ukrainian security document will not be like that. The EU, the US is not ready to fight for Ukraine. It is expected that Ukraine will be fighting for Ukraine as now, but they need to be taught and equipped.

As for NATO itself, the concept says that these security guarantees in no way interfere with the movement of Ukraine into the Alliance. Just until Ukraine has entered NATO (and the state in the active war can hardly become a member of the organization, and even after its completion, it will not take place automatically - Ukraine will expect reforms not only in the army), but this is the ultimate goal that is recorded in the Constitution, And which are spoken by the authorities, these should act.

You can also talk about the strong composition of potential signatories. Among them are the USA, the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, France, Italy, Poland, as well as Australia, Turkey. Slovakia and the Czech Republic, as well as Baltic countries and Scandinavian, may probably be. But, unlike the March plan, there is definitely no aggressor country, Russia, and there is no China.

We will remind, at the end of March in Istanbul Ukraine already offered a guarantee of a security agreement (on the eve of the world learned about murder in Bucha, Kyiv region). Then it was about participation in it both China and the Russian Federation. And if everything is clear from the Russian Federation-in March it was naive to try to reassure the occupier country, then with China everything is not so clear.

Answering the questions of journalists about Beijing's involvement, Andriy Yermak said: "The list shows those countries with which, let's say so, consultations were conducted. We did not consult on this topic with China. We would be" for "if China is on the list . But it would be incorrect now to indicate at least initial consultations. But as far as I know, a meeting of foreign ministers will be held in the near future, so we do not reject this idea.

" But it is impossible to imagine that China and the United States will be in some security union, experts say. Oleksandr Kraev asked about the prospects of signing and implementation of Kyiv Security Compact, as well as its quality, the director of the North America.

After the presentation at the President's office, you had to hear a few approving reviews about the project of the security contract that you think about it? In the beginning, I was a little more optimistic because it sends us in one way or another to those arrangements that Sweden and Finland with the United States and Britain had.

That is, intermediate guarantees at the level of Article 5 of the Statute of NATO-Scandinavian countries have received protection from Russia even to a full entry into the Alliance. And it seemed to me that we were going to this format. When we went away from what was offered in March, it seemed to me that we would go to the Swedish-Finnish scenario. But it seems not. Yes, there are strategic issues of cooperation, the question that we will continue to receive support at the Land League level.

That is, weapons, assistance in the reconstruction of the defense-industrial complex, economy and more. And it is good that all this is fixed on paper. And it is good that this will not be fixed by Russia and China. It is important that someone outside the region and NATO is Australia, which is considered by all Western colleagues a new safety guarantor in the Indo-Pacific region, but . . . But if we talk about accessible, adequate and such security guarantees of Article 5, then they are required not.

This document is good as auxiliary. And it is good that it states that it is not a replacement of NATO. In general, I wanted more. How will this contract differ from the Budapest Memorandum? As far as you can understand, there will be no specific delivery indicators, such as weapons.

First of all, the fact that the Budapest Memorandum, even if you look at the text, was purely political, there was nothing to say about the specific provision of these guarantees or at least some support outside the political statement. Here we have some lessons learned. We see the continuation of the Land League, Material, Economic Support Program, political. It is clearer what we will receive as part of this guarantee. The Budapest Memorandum also affirmed our neutrality and nuclearism.

It is said that this memorandum is not exhaustive, does not provide all our needs, and therefore we continue to move in other tracks. There is also a mention of sanctions. This is what President Joe Biden and many other Americans have said. Even when Russia leaves Ukraine, direct aggression will end, it will not mean the removal of sanctions. Because the Russians have to feel the weight of their crimes, the weight of what they did.

Will this protection be exclusively from the Russian Federation? In fact, we have the aggressor now. This memorandum shows that the West realized that we will continue to prepare that Russia can repeat its aggression. What is positive ideologically, let's just say, in this memorandum - the West realized that Russia would not refuse to influence Ukraine, capture it, destroy it.

This document shows that even after winning the battlefield or diplomatic, it does not mean that Russia will calm down that the issue with Russia will be closed. It is narrative right. But from a practical point of view, a lot has to be added. An approximate list of signatories has been published. It does not have China. But the President's office is still hesitant, is this decision final? I very much hope that our leaders will have enough wisdom and courage not to attach China.

You see, China's non -comparison is not a question of economic benefits, it is ideological. Our struggle against the Russians is perceived as a struggle of ideological, for freedom, democracy, human rights, open markets, the rule of law. We fight against dictatorship. And China embodies all the negative that can exist for the Western world, all that can threaten Western democracy.

And if in such a fight one of our guarantees is China, then the question is how fundamental our struggle is? What were the bad guarantees of March? In addition to being guaranteed by the aggressor country, we were guaranteed by a country that is associated with dictatorship, a undemocratic regime-China. That is, from my point of view, China does not need to be included purely in terms of positioning our struggle.

The logical question is: why did China (not mentioning the Russian Federation) appeared in March? The President's office is in the modern paradigm of international relations, many centers of influence, centers of force. In fact, from this point, China is not just a chapter for hegemony, according to the schools of neorealists. China is one of the centers of force that strategic relationships need to have.

Recall that Ukraine has previously declared our strategic partner at the moment when it broke up relations with the United States, just based on this concept of multipolarity. This is the thinking of our decision -making center. Of course, it has a normal theoretical basis, but in this case it does not need to be used, it no longer works. How did Australia be on the potential guarantee list? Australia has become one of China's key countries over the last few years.

Let's recall the Aukus project when the British, Americans and Australians create a joint underwater fleet of Australia. Australia has joined many democratic initiatives in the Pacific region, helping all the countries that China tried to promote its interests as much as possible. Australia really became a potential, a point of influence, an outpost of the West in the East.

Although China is trying to flirt both with the West and Putin, we need to unite with countries that will be able to press China even more so that such flirting does not happen. Turkey potentially agreed to sign. Can Guarantors Romania and Bulgaria to ensure safety in the Black Sea? I think they will join, although their position was quite passive. Still, Bulgaria and Romania served as infrastructure hubs that allowed us to take out our grain somehow.

Both countries helped weapons, resources, economically - were with us, did not play the Russians. They are part of NATO's eastern flank, like Turkey, part of the safety in the region. What is the role of the United States? The US can be inflamed on everything. The US is the only officially recognized Hegemon. That is, the country that defined the agenda affects the policies of other states, has a decisive word in solving most global problems.

The United States is almost 90% of NATO countries, almost 80% of Western countries. And one way or another, the US is the only one who can restrain China. That is, they can do so that China does not work with the Russians. It was through US diplomats that China has terminated all long -term treaties with the Russians, frozen Russia's gold and currency reserve - the part that was in China.

The US is now playing very important and very difficult political matches, and they are all aimed at helping us. This may not be so possible, but everything that is done against China helps us in many ways. Because if China got to Russia, it would be much more difficult for us. Many concentrate on Rasmussen, why was he asked to lead this work? With Rasmussen, the classical story of Western politicians who, after their official career, switch to less official formats, although it is still public.

Rasmussen is popular in the West, it is considered one of the NATO hawks, a harsh agent to restrain opponents. Therefore, it is good that it is he. When can the document work and what can be the Russian reaction? The Russians have already said, stated violations, escalation. I don't think something will change over time. The maximum they can do is new provocations, new shelling. Russia is not capable of doing something that we have not seen. But they will not be able to influence this system.

The document is said to be signed at the end of the year. It will work when it becomes obvious that Ukraine is releasing all its territories, goes to state borders, or at least the Ukrainian army wins Russian in our territory. That is, at the moment when the accession to these guarantees will not bear the threat of threat to determining full participation in the conflict. Conditionally, when it does not provoke a large -scale nuclear war.

What and when will it be considered a new act of aggression of the Russian Federation? The document states that the Ukrainians dumped the Russians, and now let's make the Russians not repeat aggression. That is, the contract can be signed now, but in the final provisions it is stated when it takes effect. The importance of the document is that the programs that exist during the war will continue after our victory in order for us to rebuild the army and economy.