Agency WPS
What the Papers Say. Part B (Russia)
March 28, 2005, Monday
VIKTOR YUSHCHENKO WILL RETURN TO HIS OWN VETERANS
SOURCE: Kommersant, March 28, 2005, p. 10
by Boris Volkhonskii
President Viktor Yushchenko of Ukraine has finally given an answer to
the question of his attendance at celebrations of the 60th
anniversary of victory in World War II in Moscow on May 9: he’ll
attend the CIS summit of May 8, but will celebrate Victory Day at
Kreshchatik in Kyiv, together with Ukrainian World War II veterans.
Thus, the president of Ukraine has been added to the ranks of CIS
presidents who have refused to take part in festivities in Moscow,
and this event won’t have the propaganda effect Russian leaders have
counted on.
“I wouldn’t feel comfortable knowing that our own veterans are
celebrating the great Victory here, in Kyiv, while I’m in Moscow,”
the Ukrainian president stated on March 26. However, Yushchenko
promised he’d attend the CIS summit of May 8, and expressed the hope
that “Mr. President Vladimir Putin and other colleagues” would
understand his decision.
In any case, the Ukrainian president has been added to the ranks of
CIS presidents who have refused to take part in festivities in
Moscow. In March, the presidents of Lithuania and Estonia, Valdas
Adamkus and Arnold Ruutel, declined invitations to come to Moscow in
May. The issue remained unsettled in other capitals so far; according
to our sources, the number of “refusers” may reach half of the
presidents of CIS countries.
Each leader has his/her own reasons for refusal. Leaders of the
Baltic states account for it with the fact that for their nations the
World War II ended not in 1945, but at the start of the 1990s, when
the “occupational” troops were withdrawn. The fact that the
presidents of Lithuania and Estonia missed the opportunity to meet
with a multitude of global leaders hasn’t influenced their decisions.
A simple solution was found: U.S. President George Bush arrives in
Moscow en route to Riga on May 6; this is where the U.S.-Baltia
summit takes place.
President Mikhail Saakashvili of Georgia (the latest reports from
Tbilisi indicate he has no intention to attend Moscow either) refers
to the fact that he need to make preparations for George Bush’s visit
to Tbilisi on May 10-12, after the celebrations end in Moscow.
According to signals received from Baku, Azerbaijani President Ilham
Aliyev may also refuse to attend the CIS summit and celebrations of
Victory Day. His problems is different: Moscow hoped to avail itself
of this plea to have the Azerbaijani president seated to the table of
negotiations with his Armenian counterpart Robert Kocharyan on the
Nagorno-Karabakh problem. However, Baku has been more skeptical of
late with regard to the settlement of this problem and doesn’t seem
to be ready for summit talks.
As a result, the propaganda impact of the upcoming event could be
much less than Moscow might wish. The Kremlin intended to arrange the
celebrations of the 60th anniversary of Victory Day on an even
grander scale than the St. Petersburg tercentenary.
At the same time, many leaders of the states who have confirmed their
attendance in Moscow intend to add a fly in the ointment. Thus,
President Aleksander Kwasniewski of Poland intends to raise the issue
of censuring the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact to the Russian leaders
(which permitted Germany’s aggression against Poland and division of
the country); he also intends to elucidate Warsaw’s position with
regard to the Yalta Accords of 1945, which divided Europe into two
opposed camps.
President Vaira Vike-Freiberga of Latvia, the only Baltic leader to
arrive in Moscow, is surely not very eager to do that. On the one
hand, this is because she wishes to improve the complicated relations
with Moscow; on the other hand, solving all the problems within a
couple of days of their stay in Moscow is impossible.
Finally, Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi’s participation in
the Moscow festivities is also greatly in doubt. The media reported a
couple of weeks ago that the Japanese prime minister refused to
attend Moscow referring to the fact that by the timeframe the
celebrations coincide with the second half of the parliamentary
session. Apparently, this excuse seemed to be unconvincing even for
the Japanese authorities and the Foreign Ministry of Japan
immediately issued a refutation, in which it noted that the issue is
not settled yet. To all appearances, it is being solved and Tokyo is
yet unable to determine what suits its interests more – a gesture of
goodwill or the display of firmness in the dispute over the northern
territories.
Translated by Andrei Ryabochkin