The oligarch-president Poroshenko wants money from Russia to “restore” the Donbass that Ukraine has destroyed over the past five years of its genocidal war against the Donbass people’s republics.
On August 2, the President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko announced Ukraine’s intention to file a lawsuit against Russia for “damage in Donbass.”
According to Poroshenko,” Moscow’s aggression” has destroyed the infrastructure and undermined the economic potential of the Donbass territories beyond Kiev’s control. Poroshenko, with the usual pathos that betrays his insecurity, wrote on his Facebook:
“With each passing day, Russia’s ongoing military aggression brings new, unspeakable suffering to Ukrainian lands, destroys infrastructure and enterprises, and destroys the economic potential of Donbass and Crimea. Therefore, the formulation of a consolidated claim by Ukraine against Russia for compensation for the damage cannot be delayed for a single minute.”
In turn, the Kiev regime ruler appealed to the Cabinet to create a working group that should formulate the desired lawsuit.
Meanwhile, members of Russia’s State Duma and Federation Council (the lower and upper houses of parliament) have expressed confusion over such claims, especially since international authorities do not consider Moscow a party to the conflict in South-East Ukraine. Moreover, experts interviewed by RT have noted that these statements by Ukraine’s president might be attempts at raising his approval rating ahead of the upcoming elections.
There are many problems with this case being cooked up by Kiev.
First of all, the amount of the claim against Russia has not yet been named. But it will obviously be high enough so as to completely extinguish Ukraine’s foreign debt, which is growing by leaps and bounds, and also find its way into the pockets of Poroshenko and his entourage.
Ukraine’s foreign debt is about 85% of its GDP in the current and in 2018-2022 period, a debt which Ukraine must pay off, according to some estimates, to the tune of $28.7 billion. The claim amount calculated by Ukrainian economists, by the way, does not include the amount for the loan issued by Russia in December 2013 which Ukraine has refused to return on the grounds that it does not “recognize” the sovereign Ukrainian government that agreed to it, what Kiev’s stooges call the “Azarov-Yanukovych regime” (ie., Ukraine before the Maidan coup).
Another such glaring contradiction on the part of the Kiev junta is that recognizes Ukraine’s continuity with the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (the reason why post-Soviet Ukraine had the territories that it did), while denouncing the latter as illegitimate and totalitarian.
In other words, Ukraine has a reputation of extracting as many benefits as possible while avoiding any logical accountability.
But besides foreign debt and a complete lack of any kind of legal integrity, Ukraine is suffering from $15-16 billion in domestic debt. A number of high-ranking Ukrainian politicians (for example, the “gray cardinal” of Transcarpathia, now a deputy of the Verkhovna Rada, Viktor Baloga) are openly declaring that Ukraine does not have enough funds to repay its debts.
Thus, Poroshenko’s recent proclamation definitely has financial motives.
Secondly, Ukraine has begun its election campaign season. Poroshenko is going to run for a second term, but his candidacy is in fifth or sixth place in popularity among the runners.
Of course the probability that Ukraine will receive money for the “destruction of Donbass” is close to zero. But why not try, since these attempts are worth nothing, and, moreover, bring political points?
Poroshenko has a very low rating and ultra-high anti-rating. The easiest way to increase one’s reputation is to issue empty promises and threats. Poroshenko is, at the same time, taking an ever-stronger turn in the direction of becoming the country’s leading political demagogue. This is not the first nor the last statement of its kind from him.
Thirdly, through maintaining such a high degree of hostility towards Russia, Poroshenko is demonstrating to his “Washington regional committee” his commitment to the anti-Russian crusade.
In other words, Poroshenko’s statement is a cheap move at political self-promotion.
But there is something else I’d like to point out here – something uncomfortable for the Russian foreign ministry. While Russia’s diplomatic institution has released refutations and counter-arguments to Poroshenko’s statement, such a position is merely defensive and reactive. It is a losing stance. Meanwhile, for whatever reason, Lavrov and his ministry have not bothered to file a counter-claim against Ukraine, and seem to be too shy to count all the money that Russia has spent on humanitarian aid.
This is good for Ukraine. For example, in July 2008, Russia provided Ukraine with the largest batch of humanitarian aid of all to help with the Carpathian landslides. Two to three weeks later, Ukraine “thanked” Russia by sending special forces and air defense systems to Georgia to aid the invasion of South Ossetia and the shooting of Russian peacekeepers. In other words, while Russia provided aid to Ukraine, Ukraine launched aggression against Russia.
But the Russian foreign Ministry, for some reason, has not demanded the return of the money spent by Russia to assist with the Carpathian disaster, and it is not demanding that Russia’s provision of humanitarian aid to the people of Donbass be reciprocated. And these funds are enormous. I know because I was directly involved in the work to receive hundreds of thousands of refugees from Donbass to Russia in the summer of 2014. Russia received these people who escaped from the bombings and shellings of the Ukrainian army, and supplied them with food, medicine, and shelter. I organized the payment of social aid and pensions to these people.
Now, more than four years since Ukraine launched its war against Donbass, Ukraine still refuses to pay pensions to the elderly people of Donbass who spent their lives working for Ukraine on the grounds that they are “terrorists”. But these “terrorists” were the ones that created Ukraine’s national wealth and paid into the Pension Fund. Meanwhile, residents of Western Ukraine who worship Bandera and Shukhevich, are working as prostitutes in the Czech Republic or plumbers in Poland – work which does not benefit Ukraine.
Russia has been paying the pensions of the elderly people of Donbass for more than 4 years. My friends from the LPR are raising a little daughter, and although they are well-off people, they still receive humanitarian aid from Russia on a monthly basis, which includes baby food and hygiene kits. These are essential things which Ukraine has not and won’t provide to the people of Donbass.
It is very strange that Lavrov’s ministry is not opting to count Russia’s expenses for the people whom Kiev still calls and legally insists are Ukrainians, and is not demanding reimbursement in the face of Ukraine’s “financial aggression” against Russia.
Of course, there is no point in thinking that such would actually work – Ukrainians do not have the mindset of paying for what they don’t have to or can’t pay. But if Russia did make such a move, it would effectively transition from the position of having to justify itself on the defensive to an offensive that would show the oligarch-Nazi regime in Ukraine just how much their adventure will cost them.