On February 20, during his message to the Federal Assembly, Russian president Vladimir Putin devoted most of the time to internal state problems, however the international context was not disregarded. As for the internal Russian developments, we won’t deepen into the words of the Russian leader. After all, that is Russians themselves, who should deal with it. We may only notice that, notwithstanding Putin mentioned deteriorations by some indices, his report based generally on quite optimistic statistical figures. Let’s set aside the fact that the parallels for some reason were drawn with early 2000s, instead of the third presidential term (2012-2018) when oil was more expensive and sanctions have not exerted the real effect yet. Well, that is business of Russians themselves and their elite.

We are much more interested in a foreign policy part of Russian president’s message. The first to mention is a big attention to the new Russian arms. It seems that specification of new “Kinzhals” and “Neptunes”, “Zircons” and “Peresvets” sparked particular interest of the Russian leader, and was pronounced with special aspiration. However, the main message of the speech was that it is the US and not Russia who used to infringe the INF Treaty, and Russian armament is response to aggressive actions of Americans. That was covered with the most peaceful statements:

“We are not interested in confrontation and we do not mean it, especially with such global power as the United States of America… We realise that we deal with active, very talented people, however a lot of those from ruling class are excessively keen on the idea of their uniqueness and superiority over the rest of the world”.

At the same time the Russian leader snatched an opportunity to hint that rockets would be directed at the decision-making centres, that is Washington and Brussels. Actually, Putin resorted for the first time to threats against the USA. He did not lay aside the European countries in his threats as well. First of all, he meant Poland and Romania where elements of missile defence system are placed and where the US rockets may appear.

“I will speak frankly and overtly to make everything clear: Russia will be forced to create and place such types of arms which will be able to reach not only the territories which pose the threat to us, but also those which make the relevant decisions. We are going to implement it as soon as threats become real”.

Well, such rhetoric has nothing in common with the olive branch of peace. However, we should be aware that, regardless of all threats to the USA and NATO, primarily they are aimed at internal audience. Actually, most of the Russian high rank officials who listened to President’s speech and fought against sleep possess the real estate and have their families living in these states.

In his statements, the Russian leader tried to remind once again the ordinary Russians that Russia is surrounded by enemies. However, Russia is able to react and for this purpose Russians should line up for the strong leader. Well, such anti-Western rhetoric becomes less effective day by day. This message was meant by the Kremlin political strategists to raise Putin’s rating (according to the Russian sociologists, current level of credibility to the President is about 33,4%, being the lowest since 2006). Sure enough, sober-minded Russian would have to think that spending money for building school infrastructure is much more efficient than spending them for rockets. Actually, the President himself found unexpectedly at the 20th year of his ruling that 200.000 students study in unheated premises without water supply and canalization. That is in energy superpower, by the way! Still crisis phenomena in the Russian economy increase; therefore, there is no question of improvement of Russians’ welfare.

To reiterate, the probability of the Russian aggression against NATO member states is extremely low. Well, it is not impossible, but insignificant. Besides it, the most part of samples of the latest Russian arms mentioned by Putin are still at a development stage. That means the Russian government shall be realistic in such estimates of possible outcomes of confrontation with the USA, therefore such bravado seems to be rather information noise and blowing of cheeks.

Further self-isolation of Russia from the world is probable. New “Iron Curtain” gradually falls on the state. Currently Russians consider the possibility of creation of their own, autonomous Internet. Access to information from independent sources shall be blocked. Still these measures are inefficient; however, that is only the beginning. Further, the situation will only be aggravated: Russians will live gradually worse, yet they will not know that the other life is possible. Well, they will have powerful rockets. We can make already some parallels. One such state exists on our planet: it occupies a northern part of the Korean peninsula…

And the last but not least. President Putin in his speech told a witty joke as it appears to him about the US and NATO allies who are “oinking along with”. Well, it seems that it would be Russians themselves who will oink, since they are purposefully turned into a herd of pigs.

Read More

In the context of continuing Russia aggression in the east of Ukraine, which proceeds to a chronic stage, events on its western borders remain in a relative shadow. Unfortunately, they are far from being conflict-free! While the eastern neighbor has visited Ukrainian territory on tanks, the Western prefer the soft force, money and manipulating sentiments. Though Hungary’s actions can be hardly referred to as impetuous, declarations and behavior of its officials give no grounds to doubt that western neighbors of Ukraine are always ready to use its internal and external problems.

The latest reason for concern was an appointment of the authorized Hungarian representative in Transcarpathia – the government’s representative who is responsible for development of the Ukrainian territory. The mere title of the position leads to a question whether that is an intervention in internal affairs of the sovereign state and in literal sense a step over the boundaries of peace neighborliness?

Whatever representations Hungarians have made with regard to sincerity of their intentions to develop Transcarpathia region and to support the ethnic Hungarians residing there, little by little Hungary interferes in affairs which by default fall under the scope of the sovereign state’s competence. Thus, the Hungarian parliament made an express stand against education act adopted by Ukraine in support of their language. The document provides for the protection mechanisms of Ukrainian by using it as basic language during school educational process without limitation to ethnic minorities. According to this law, beginning from the 5th form children of ethnic minorities shall study in Ukrainian, and learn their native language as a separate discipline. However, studying some disciplines in languages of EU states is not excluded.

Budapest has not only distorted the very meaning of the Ukrainian Act, having accused Ukraine, but even issued a resolution on this matter. The Hungarian parliament in its decision claimed that the Education Act outlaws all schools, higher education institutions and professional technical institutions which provide education in Hungarian. That is obvious and deliberate distortion of the Act. Also, deputies of the National Assembly of Hungary declare that educational process in languages of minorities becomes impossible though the Education Act provides for teaching several subjects in foreign languages, including Hungarian and Romanian.

The first meeting of Prime Minister Orban’s Government following the elections was marked by the adoption of the Memorandum on the Protection of the Transcarpathian Hungarians. The document was sent to the leaders of all NATO member states and the Secretary General of Alliance. In the memorandum the Hungarian government suggests NATO member states to consider “the problems of ethnic minorities in Ukraine related to the Ukrainian laws”.

To this end, manipulations by Euro-Atlantic aspirations of Ukraine are used as well. For instance, Foreign Minister of Hungary Peter Szijjártó emphasized that Hungary will not support rapprochement of Ukraine with NATO unless Kiev “stops encroachments upon the Hungarian minority”. In support of this statement Budapest proceeded to blocking up organisation of the Ukraine-NATO Commission’s meeting.

What are then the reasons for so strong counteraction of Hungarians to the implementation of such basic right as using of a state language in education by Ukraine?

Primarily, all this actions creates prerequisites for the probable scenario of stirring autonomist intentions in Transcarpathia region. Hungarian officials deny such charges in every possible way, though contribution of the Hungarian nationalists can be traced at the informal level, as long as they call certain regions of Ukraine their territory.

Secondly, at the latest parliamentary elections Hungary’s ‘passport policy’ in Ukraine provided support of ethnic Hungarians to Fidesz party, which expresses more and more Euroskeptical spirits. Modern Hungarian elites, similarly to those in Russia with their “Russian World” project, try to revive previous regional influence of the Austro-Hungarian Empire by means of ethnic Hungarians and pro-Hungarian public organizations, advancing the ideas of Hungarian autonomies within the territory of other states.

Perhaps such similarity of imperial aspirations and purposes allows Hungarians to perceive Russia as such “strategic partner” which can facilitate “restoration of historical justice” for quite insignificant concessions from the Hungarian side, and help Hungarians to reunite or even to return some lands.

If Budapest achieves their purposes and the Ukrainian Education Act will get amendments for their benefit, Transcarpathia in the nearest future will be completely madiarised and will lose language and cultural ties with a maternal part of Ukraine. Such approach perfectly meets the Russian plans for the partition of the Ukrainian lands.

By all means, Moscow encourages the Hungarian expansion to Transcarpathia not for nothing. They have repeatedly used Budapest for pressure upon Kiev. In 2015 after Mr. Orban’s visit to Moscow official Budapest refused to resell the Russian gas to Ukraine. At the same time Mr. Orban makes conciliatory declarations about the conflict in Donbas, levelling Russia’s participation in the armed conflict. Avoiding mentioning sanctions, he on the contrary calls to conciliation with an aggressor in exchange for economic sops, causing disruption of international law and order.

As a result, Ukraine appears between two states which prepare a ground for reconstruction of their ‘great empires’ of previous centuries upon the unspoken consent of the EU leaders. And if one of them makes it in the way of uncovered aggression, then another uses to this end covert and short, though not less decisive steps.

Read More

The flagrant violation of the international law by Russia and its aggressive policy towards neighboring countries have led to the sharp reaction of international community and sanctions imposition. In particular, it has greatly affected the military-technical cooperation. However, some countries from Eastern Europe, even being the NATO members, continue to suffer the syndrome of ‘big brother’ to the detriment of own defense capability, keeping ties with Russian military-industrial complex.

Particularly Bulgaria, which became NATO member in 2004, and then that of EU in 2007, continues its military partnership with Russia. The situation with update and maintenance of MiG-29, which are which are in service with the Bulgarian Air Force, proves it. This issue is still in the competence of Russian aircraft corporation MIG. This situation exists even though Bulgarian pilots refuse to fly at MiG-29 because of its extreme breakdown rate even after the capital repair in Russia. But Bulgarian authority keeps using Russian industry to repair its military aviation. And the tender on replacement and further maintenance of engines for MiG-29 has proved it. Earlier it was envisaged that such contract would be signed with Poland and a corresponding preliminary agreement was reached with Warsaw. In addition, such contract could allow Bulgaria to save a great sum of budget money. But after victory of pro-russian Rumen Radev at presidential election, the new MoD’s authority refused to sign a contract with Poland and decided to continue its cooperation with MIG corporation. Moreover, the pro-Russian Bulgarian leadership deliberately delays the terms of contract fulfillment for purchase of new Swedish fighters Saab JAS 39 Gripen, having its own vision of modernization of Bulgarian Air forces. And this situation is taking place notwithstanding Bulgarian NATO membership.

Hungary is also committed to military cooperation with Russia. In 2016, Hungarian Ministry of defense negotiated with Russia to purchase 30 Mi-8/17 helicopters with approximate cost $490 million. The only reason to cancel the deal was the lack of budget money. Later, Budapest came to agreement to repair 4 Mi-17 helicopters for Hungarian Air Forces and in spring 2017 the repaired helicopters were returned to Kecskemet air base. At the same time, Hungarian government believes that signing contract with Russia for helicopters repair does not contradict with sanctions imposed against Russia, though the repair of military equipment is covered by a concept of military cooperation. In this case it is quite remarkable not only the fact of military cooperation with Russia, but also the decision of investment in military helicopters, which would remain the equipment of last century even after their repair. Many military experts believe that the best decision for Hungary would be total replacement of current aircrafts with modern types produced by NATO members. These aircrafts have better characteristics than Mi-17 or Mi-24 adopted by Hungarian Armed Forces. It is obvious that friendship between Orban and Putin obliges Hungarian leader to be loyal to Russian military industry. It is absolutely clear that repair of old military equipment is much more expensive for the state budget. It is also a hard blow for defense capability of a country.

Croatia also has some aspects of cooperation with Russian military industry, though it became the EU member in 2009. In August 2017, Ministry of Defense of Croatia signed a contract with Russia for complete overhaul of 10 helicopters of М1–171Sh for Air Force and air defense.

These examples show that Russia, obtaining contracts for delivery and service of military equipment, tries not only to find the markets for sale of outdated equipment, uncompetitive products, but also weakens the defense capabilities of NATO members, undermines the unity of the European community and creates new challenges for the EU security in general.

Read More