Tuesday, October 29, 2019

Issue 36


THE BRETON/GEROL NEWSLETTER


CANADA, THE MORE IT CHANGES, THE MORE IT IS THE SAME


The results of the October 21st Canadian federal elections have elicited a lot of comments about the divide between Western Canada and the rest of the country. Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party managed to remain in power as a minority government, but failed to elect any candidate in the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan. This in itself is regrettable and preoccupying from the point of view of national unity, but not that unusual, considering the long-term tendency of popular vote in Western Canada. There was also an upsurge in the support for the Bloc Québécois that allowed it to regain a significant number of seats in Québec. The left-leaning New Democratic Party suffered some losses, but, paradoxically, will have more influence on the conduct of government as it will be holding the balance of power and will be the party to which the Liberals will turn to remain in power for the next four years. The Bloc will not openly support Justin Trudeau, but has made it clear it does not intend to bring down the Liberal minority government. In the meantime, the Conservative Party, having failed to transform its popular support plurality into even a minority government will be engaged in the painful discussion about what to do with Andrew Scheer, its less than charismatic leader.



Foreign policy was not a major discussion item during the election campaign with even the incumbent Prime Minister avoiding the debate focusing on that question. There were well- founded calls for a renewed, re-energized foreign policy, but not a great deal of public opinion interest. The new make-up of Canada’s federal Parliament is most unlikely to have any significant impact on the conduct of Canada’s foreign policy.  Ralph Goodale, previously the lone liberal Minister from Saskatchewan, was known as one of the strongest supporters of a pro-Ukraine policy. His catering to the Ukrainian community voters did not make any difference: he was soundly defeated. Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland, the other champion of the pro-Ukraine policy, was re-elected and may well keep her job in the new government, not necessarily for policy reasons, but for political ones. As a potential successor to Justin Trudeau and with her Alberta and Ontario connections, there may be some comfort for the Prime Minister in leaving her in a job where she is less likely to be in a position to build her own political basis, or maybe giving her another "problem" portfolio. At this time, in Canadian foreign policy there are many challenges and few opportunities for early success.  Nothing much can happen with the US or the EU, absorbed as they are, one with impeachment, the other with Brexit. Patching up relations with China is beyond the reach of the Foreign Minister, as long as a Huawei executive is under custody in Vancouver. There is no dialogue with Russia and unlikely to be any soon. Even the attempt to renew with Canada’s multilateral tradition by, for instance, getting elected to the UN Security Council for the 2021-2022 term does not look very promising, despite all the efforts of former Prime Ministers who were recently enlisted for that purpose.

--o--



MIKE PENCE, FOR PRESIDENT?!


These days, the obvious first challenge for political analysts is to offer a winning prediction on the outcome of the current impeachment process in the US. Despite the highly partisan views on the matter, a few things are clear. The prima facie evidence exists: an impeachable offence was committed, using US military assistance to an ally as a means of securing personal political advantage. The law is also clear: the offence amounts to a high crime or misdemeanour as the writers of the Constitution intended these words to mean. The problem with the offence is that it does not carry moral opprobrium in the Trump world: squeezing your partners while invoking a higher motive is seen by many as a good deed. As the Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney said after admitting the famous quid pro quo: “get over it”. This being said, the dilatory measures of the White House and the Bolshevik tactics of some of the Trump supporters in the House of Representatives (including breaching House rules and storming a meeting) confirm it: impeachment is possible. The question boils down to the number of Republican senators who will be willing to remove their partisan blinkers and possibly jeopardize their re-election chances by voting to impeach Donald J. Trump. This ultimately will depend on the quality and damning nature of the evidence that the Democrats will be able to produce. In light of all that has happened so far, it is not inconceivable that more such evidence could become available. Even more important, it will henceforth be made public.




In this particular chess game, seasoned political operators on the Democratic side are not without realizing that impeaching Trump makes Mike Pence President. If nothing else, that is a very good reason to follow Talleyrand ‘s famous advice to “rush slowly”. In fact, drawing out a process that keeps discrediting Trump, his entourage and his partisans might be as good as impeachment.
The problem with an ongoing impeachment process is that it paralyzes the political system and prevents possibly useful legislation from being developed. An even more serious problem might be that the President may be looking for ways of bolstering his presidential stature by making decisions that make him look good even if temporarily. The decision to put an end to US troop support to Kurdish rebels in Syria was justifiably described as wrong. The decision to go after ISIS leader Al Baghdadi was not justified by tactical or strategic interests. Whatever fate Al Baghdadi may have deserved, his disappearance virtually changes nothing on the ground in Syria other than to encourage remaining ISIS elements to seek revenge against US elements left behind to “protect the oil” from being used by ISIS.

--o--



UKRAINE’S FRIENDS

President Zelenskyy meeting National Anticorruption Bureau of Ukraine,
October 28th, Kyiv
©President of Ukraine website



President Zelenskyy’s has said that he did not feel any undue pressure in his now famous phone call with President Trump. While Zelenskyy clearly did not want get involved in US politics he probably could have gone along with whatever Trump symbolic gesture might have asked from him, knowing full well that the investigation of past corruption cases is beyond his personal jurisdiction and, in the case of the Bidens,  would not have led to anything in any event.  During his recent meeting with Anticorruption officials, Zelenskyy clearly stated: "we will not influence you".Whatever poor judgment Hunter Biden may have shown for agreeing to sit on the Board of a company that would pay him USD 50,000 a month essentially for his name, that is not a matter inconsistent with the law or the practice in the region. Alexander Kwasniewski, the former President of Poland was on the same Board for the same reason and with a similar level of incompetence. No one flinched. As for the military assistance that was expected from the US, Zelenskyy had to go through the motions. He has to be seen as interested in US support, but he would know that US support is driven as much by US self-interest as by the interest of Ukraine.  Ultimately, Zelenskyy could be upset not for being under pressure but for the sorry spectacle of US politicians and political operatives not caring for Ukraine as much as using it as a playground for either getting rich (Biden Jr and former Trump associate Manafort) or for scoring political points (Trump and Giuliani).



--o--

UKRAINE: NO ONE SAID IT WOULD BE EASY


For President Zelenskyy, the priorities have not changed: eliminating corruption and achieving peace in Eastern Ukraine.

Eliminating corruption is a long-term goal for which there is widespread popular support. There may be back-room resistance among oligarchs or disagreement over methods, but there is a strong consensus over the objective. The greater difficulty will be to maintain that consensus over time. In order to do that, there will have to be real signs of improvement in the daily lives of ordinary citizens in the relatively short term.  Zelenskyy is on the right track in tackling corruption, but could use support on the economic front. With EU participation, there are continuing trilateral discussions about the possibility of Russian gas continuing transiting through Ukraine after 2019 and possibly even being delivered to Ukraine. A deal would be useful for the Ukrainian economy, but there are obstacles to resolve, including how to deal with the lawsuits that the Ukrainian gas company has won against its Russian counterpart and the extent to which they should be factored in any new arrangement.

Achieving peace in Eastern Ukraine will be a much more difficult task, not because of having to negotiate with Vladimir Putin. In the current negotiating format, the Normandy Four, Ukraine can essentially count on France and Germany as guarantors of the process itself and of its outcome. The principles behind the Minsk I and II arrangements are not so much at stake as the process of their implementation. During his tenure as Foreign Minister of Germany Frank-Walter Steinmeier had developed a formula that now bears his name. The formula was devised with a view to facilitate the implementation of the Minsk arrangements by sequencing events in a manner that is in principle more acceptable to the Ukrainian side. It was officially accepted by President Zelenskyy on October 1st. There is now considerable debate among those who were involved in the negotiations as to who was the initiator of the formula. It is no accident that during his recent visit to Japan for the enthronement ceremony of the new Emperor, Zelenskyy took advantage of the presence of Steinmeier, now President of Germany, to firm up the impression that the Steinmeier formula was the work of Steinmeier not that of the Russian Foreign Ministry.

Presidents Zelenskyy and Steinmeier
Tokyo, October 23rd
©President of Ukraine website


As could be expected, after Zelenskyy’s acceptance of the Steinmeier formula, there were popular demonstrations aimed at denouncing Zelenskyy’s efforts to bring peace to the Donbass and to cast them as “capitulation”.  These protests re-confirm the polarization of Ukrainian society over the Donbass issue. They, however, are not an insurmountable obstacle to Zelenskyy’s peace plans. Here, it is the result that will matter.

President Zelenskky near the front line in Zolotoe area
October 26th
©President of Ukraine website


For Zelenskyy, a far more difficult problem is to deal with the voluntary nationalist battalions that have essentially been at the front line of the confrontation with Eastern Ukraine rebel forces and their Russian supporters. At this stage, the next step in the negotiation is conditional on a cease-fire holding for a period of seven days in two disengagement areas. This had been impossible to achieve until recently. The OSCE Monitoring Mission continues reporting daily violations of the cease-fire. On the Ukrainian side, it appears that the view among many voluntary fighters is that separating the two sides has not worked before and could only lead to more casualties. This is why, at the end of October,  Zelenskyy travelled to the front line area, put on a bullet-proof vest and engaged in conversations with local people as well as with some of the fighters from the voluntary battalions, including the famous Azov battalion. As a result voluntary battalions complied with the requirement to withdraw and remove their weapons from a first disengagement area. Almost simultaneously, rebels also complied. This is a significant victory for Zelenskyy. If the other disengagement area is freed up shortly, this would open the way for a Normandy Four Summit in November.  The first steps have been taken on what will most likely be a very long and difficult road.

--o--



RUSSIA'S GEOPOLITICAL RESURGENCE, THE MIDDLE EAST



After a virtually flawless and successful operation in Syria, that started in 2015 and culminated in regaining most of Syrian territory under the rule of Bashar Al Assad, Moscow has powerfully returned to the Middle East. At the same time even such a complicated and possibly unsolvable problem as a standoff between pro-Iran Syria and Israel is being handled by Moscow by a multi-leveled cooperation between such countries as Turkey, Iran, US and Israel.

Israeli PM Netanyahu has visited Russia more than any other country, including the US, last year. In 2019 he met Putin 9 times. Russia has become the main conduit in the delicate and often dangerous relations between Damascus, Jerusalem and Tehran.


Presidents Putin and Erdogan
Sochi, October 22nd
©President of Russia website


Even the American military activities in Syria are being conducted with at a certain degree of cooperation with the Russian command in the area. President Trump especially thanked Russia for keeping the skies open for its operation to neutralize the ISIS leader on October 27th in the province of Idlib. (Russia has for now refused to acknowledge any involvement.)

Paradoxically Russia has become the only major power that holds the balance between major Sunni and Shia powers because the United States though it has normal relations with the Sunni world, has been in conflict with Iran (the largest Shia state) since 1979. Iran and Turkey, both countries being hostile to each other for various religious and geopolitical reasons, come to Moscow for mediation in many areas, especially when it comes to their neighbourhood problems. Finally, it was Russia that separated Turkey and Kurdish SDF forces after the rapid and questionable withdrawal of the US troops.

--o--


RUSSIA'S GEOPOLITICAL RESURGENCE, AFRICA


The most unusual conference took place in Sochi in October of this year. All countries-members of the African Union led by President of Egypt Abdel Fattah el-Sisi attended the first Africa-Russia Summit: they had two day-long meetings with President Putin and leaders of Russia's major corporations from the civilian and military-industrial sectors.

President Putin put it bluntly; "unlike the Soviet Union that dealt with Africa on a strictly ideological platform, modern Russia wants to have economic and cultural partnership with the rapidly developing African continent".

Russia-Africa Summit
Sochi, October 24th


Russia looks to substantially increase the sale of more advanced weapons to African countries,  ahead of major suppliers as the US, the UK, France and China. Africa is rapidly becoming a diversified exporting entity. Aside from its natural resources Africa also produces everything from cars to computers to heavy machinery.

Moscow promised its African partners to open Russian markets to its goods and to invest in various industrial and energy projects across the continent. It was decided that such summits will take place every three years.

To a large extent, Russia is applying the principle of diversification to its foreign economic relations as well as developing useful long-term alliances that can serve it in global multilateral forums. With relatively low-cost diplomatic initiatives, it is advancing further its already profitable relationship with Africa.

--o--


PERSON OF THE MONTH:

MARIE JOVANOVICH



Marie Jovanovich was US Ambassador to Ukraine till March 2019, at what time she was abruptly removed from that position. Marie Jovanovich is a diplomat’s diplomat. To those who have had the fortune of meeting her she represents the best qualities that anyone would want to see in a foreign service officer from any country. It is highly unfair, to say the least, that she should have suffered retribution for her professionalism and honesty and that such retribution should have been engineered by “individuals with questionable motives”. She, however, was able to testify before Congress on her own personal knowledge of “Ukrainegate” and thus contribute to some form of justice. Her testimony was similar to that of Fiona Hill and William Taylor. Fiona Hill is one of the foremost experts on Russia and served on the National Security Council. Her testimony was regarded as one of the most substantial heard in Congress in recent years. William Taylor succeeded Jovanovich as the most senior diplomatic representative in Ukraine. His testimony was regarded as one of the most damning so far for Trump.

Hill and Taylor could also have been persons of the month, in their own right or collectively with Jovanovich. Jovanovich, however, also represents the State Department, a previously formidable institution that is currently being gutted by a short-sighted President and Secretary of State. In the highly political and partisan Washington environment, the State Department’s task of providing well-informed professional advice was never easy. Under Trump it is now being deprived of some of the means to do that job. The long-term consequences could be detrimental for US interests. They will not contribute to make America great again.

In the circumstances, there is no small irony and some inherent justice in the fact that it is in part the testimony of State Department officials that could be instrumental in bringing down the Trump presidency.

--o--

OPEN SKIES, NOT


Various media report that U.S. President Donald Trump has signed a document signaling his administration's intent to withdraw from the Treaty on Open Skies, the latest in a series of major arms control and disarmament accords that are on the verge of collapse. Unnamed US officials have revealed that the document has been signed. The White House has refused to respond to questions surrounding the issue.

Signed by 34 nations, including Russia, the treaty aims to increase international stability by allowing signatory nations to conduct surveillance flights over one another’s territories, to observe military installations and other areas.

The treaty is one of several arms control agreements that are on the verge of collapse or have already collapsed.

--o--

KAZAKHSTAN


Kazakhstan's effort to tap into its offshore oil and gas wealth has taken a hit with the withdrawal of major foreign investors from two Caspian Sea projects. Kazakhstan announced on October 21 that British-Dutch energy giant Royal Dutch Shell was walking away from its agreement to develop the Khazar field, which is located next to the country's giant but troubled Kashagan field.

The Kazakh state gas firm KazMunaiGaz said in a statement that Shell had invested about $900 million into the Khazar field, which is estimated to contain 40 million tons of oil and 10 billion cubic meters of natural gas, but opted out due to "low profitability." The Khazar field, of which Shell held a controlling stake, is set to be returned to the Kazakh state.


--o--

SERBIA


Serbia has signed a free-trade agreement with the Eurasian Economic Union (EES), despite veiled warnings from the European Union. The accord was officially signed during a October 25th visit by Serbian Prime Minister Ana Brnabic to Moscow. It will replace the existing free-trade deals between Belgrade and Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan.

Serbia does not have any such accords with Armenia and Kyrgyzstan, the two other EES members. The deal provides for "instant savings in customs payments" in trade between Serbia and the bloc's member states.


EURASIA


There is a most healthy competition among countries of Eurasia for their ranking in the annual World Bank report on the ease of Doing Business, both in terms of absolute ranking and in terms of year-on-year improvement. The latest report was published on October 23rd.

For countries that rank among the first 50, moving up the scale clearly becomes more difficult but is probably not so important as being in the first tier. Among the countries of Greater Eurasia the best performers this year are Georgia (7), Kazakhstan (25) and Russia (28), Azerbaijan (34), Armenia (47), Moldova (48) and Belarus (49).

Ukraine jumped seven spots to rank 64th. It registered most of its progress in the post-2014 period by moving 48 spots since then. Uzbekistan is not far behind in 69th place. Its progress has been even more striking as it was 166th in 2011.

For purposes of comparison, the top-ranking economy is New Zealand. Canada ranks 23rd.
The relevance of the World Bank classification is that it shows the long-term efforts of governments at improving their business climate. In some cases, it usefully contradicts widely shared perceptions with evidence collected on the ground by professionals.


UKRAINE


Ukrainian prosecutors have opened a criminal probe into former Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili’s deportation from Ukraine in 2018. The Chief Military Prosecutor’s Office said that the investigation was launched after Saakashvili filed a complaint over the "abduction and violent actions against" him and "his illegal" deportation to Poland last year.

In May, Ukraine's new President Volodymyr Zelenskyy reinstated Saakashvili's Ukrainian citizenship almost two years after it was removed by Zelenskyy’s predecessor, Petro Poroshenko.


BELARUS


Belarus is the only European country that still executes people. There have been repeated calls by the European Union for the abolition of the capital punishment in Belarus.

A court in the western city of Brest on October 25 found 47-year-old Viktar Syarhel and his co defendant, 26-year-old Natalya Kolb, guilty of murdering Kolb’s eight-month-old daughter in October last year. The woman was sentenced to 25 years in prison, the maximum punishment for women in Belarus.

Syarhel is the third Belarusian sentenced to death this year. According to human rights organizations, some 400 people have been sentenced to death in Belarus since it gained independence following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.


ARMENIA


Armenia has been elected as one of 14 new members of the UN Human Rights Council, receiving votes from 144 of 193 countries. In his Facebook post Armenian PM Pashinian wrote; "This is a testament to the great confidence of the international community in our country, especially in the field of human rights".


TURKIC COOPERATION


Uzbekistan has officially joined the Cooperation Council of Turkic Speaking States, also known as the Turkic Council. The decision to accept Uzbekistan to the group was made on October 15th during a two-day summit of member states in Azerbaijan's capital, Baku. This is in line with Uzbekistan's efforts to pursue more active international cooperation, after years of relative isolation.

The Turkic Council was established in October 2009 with Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Turkey as the group's founding members.

Also, on October 15, Kazakhstan’s former President Nursultan Nazarbayev, who represented his country at the summit, was elected as lifetime honorary chairman of the Turkic Council. Although Nazarbayev resigned the presidency in March, he still enjoys the "leader of the nation" title.


--o--


THE AUTHORS

Ilya Gerol, former foreign editor of the Citizen in Ottawa, syndicated columnist in Canadian, US and European media specializing in international affairs. His area of expertise includes Russia, Eurasian Economic Union, Eastern and Central Europe.  Ilya Gerol has written several books, one of them, The Manipulators, had become a textbook on relations of media and society.

During his career in the Canadian Foreign Service, Gilles Breton had three assignments at the Canadian Embassy in Moscow. His first posting there began during the Soviet period, in 1983. His last was from 2008 to 2012 as Minister-Counsellor and Deputy Head of Mission. He also served as Deputy Director responsible for Canada’s relations with Russia from 2000 to 2008. As an international civil servant, he was Deputy Director of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights in Warsaw from 1994 to 1997.

Gilles Breton also currently serves as Chairman of the National Board of the Canada-Eurasia-Russia Business Association. The views expressed in this newsletter exclusively reflect the opinion of the authors.