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.
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.
