From Yalta to Kiev
It is still called the Yalta European Strategy Meeting. But this year, the annual international forum on Ukraine and and the world is taking place in Kiev, not Yalta. That is because Yalta is now in Crimea, which has been annexed by Russia. To judge from the mood of the conference, nobody expects Crimea to return to Ukraine anytime soon. On the contrary, on Saturday morning Arseniy Yatseniuk, the Ukrainian prime minister, warned the conference that Vladimir Putin’s goal is “to take the entire Ukraine”.
Yatseniuk’s language is uncompromising. But, in fact, compromise is in the air. On Friday it emerged that key parts of Ukraine’s association agreement with the European Union – which was the origin of all the uproar in the first place – will be delayed for a year. Opinion in the corridors of the conference was divided. Some regard this as an unacceptable concession to Russia – tacitly accepting that Russia has a say over what Ukraine does in its dealings with Europe. Others argued that this was a small compromise that is worth making, in the effort to bring the fighting and bloodshed to a close.
The atmosphere at the Yalta conference is understandably very pro-Ukrainian – although there were some Russians on panels and in the audience. An issue that I discussed outside the conference is the formation and ideological bent of some of the volunteer battalions that have been fighting for Ukraine. Put bluntly, some argue that some of these fighting forces do indeed harbour far-right groups – as the Russians constantly allege. One interviewee turned out actually to be a member of the controversial Azov battalion and willingly donned his uniform – arguing that the insignia on his arm stood for national independence, and bore no real resemblance to the “Wolfsangel” symbol that was popular among the Nazis. I asked this character if any of his comrades expressed neo-Nazi sympathies: “I haven’t met any neo-Nazis,” he said. “But you would be amazed at the number of pagans and sun-God worshippers.”