Situation in the Autonomous Crimean Republic (ARC)
According to state security agencies of Ukraine, the Russian Federation continues to expand its military presence in Crimea, in particular, military aircraft of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation have been observed on the Ukrainian border near Sumy Oblast and Chernihiv Oblast as well as the accumulation of troops on the border with Belarus.
On March 11, 2014 camouflaged members of the Russian army as well as personnel in black uniforms without identifiable insignia together with “kozaks” (a group of 40 armed men) captured the “Evpatoria” office of the Border Services Department. Russian solders used physical force to remove members of the checkpoint “Crimea” of the Simferopol detachment of the Border Services of Ukraine.
The same day, approximately 15 “kozaks” arrived at the “Visktorservice” concern of the Simferopol branch of the Crimean Directorate of the Military and Economic Trade Department of the Ministry of Defense and demanded to hand over all documents held in the branch and to defect to the side of the Crimean authorities.
Current information from the local population of Crimea, in particular in the village of Perevalnoe and surrounding villages, indicates that passports have been stolen by groups of 3-5 people who claim to be reviewing personal documentation.
***
The SBU (Security Service of Ukraine) has also reported acts of sabotage against Ukrainian citizens in Donetsk oblast. In particular, they arrested a 37 year old citizen of the Russian Federation who was involved in the organization of armed sabotage and subversive groups to destabilize the situation in Ukraine.
On March 12, 2014 officers of the SSU office in Kherson oblast detected and detained an espionage group of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation that entered Kherson oblast from Crimea bypassing checkpoints.
The purpose of this group was to study the operational situation, and to obtain information about redeployment and readiness conditions of the Ukrainian Armed Forces on the territory of Kherson oblast.
The group’s leader is a citizen of the Russian Federation, a military intelligence officer of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and a native of the Riazan oblast.
The detainee was illegally using the passport of a Ukrainian citizen.
The Security Service of Ukraine is investigating the matter according to the laws of Ukraine and has informed the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine in accordance with the Consular Convention between Ukraine and the Russian Federation.
***
Activities of the Russian Federation
The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation in Crimea have transferred citizens of the Russian Federation to mainland Ukraine to the cities of Odesa, Kherson, Mykolaiv, Zaporizhya, Dnipropetrovsk and Donetsk to foment protests against the current government; have created pro-Russian political forces and extremist organizations in the south-eastern regions of Ukraine; have extended the movements of units of the Armed Forces and Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation on the territory of Crimea, increasing the number of heavily armored units in the western and northern parts of the peninsula; and continue the construction and improvement of fortifications and roadblocks at entry points to Crimea.
According to the State Border Service of Ukraine, there is a growing number of refugees on the outskirts of Crimea, most of whom are Crimean Tatars. To date, 256 people have passed through various control points.
Pro-Ukrainian activists and journalists have been kidnapped by gangs operating under the direct control of Russian forces.
***
On March 11, 2014 two Italian journalists were illegally detained near the city of Armyansk, Crimea by armed persons in military uniform without identifiable insignia.
The same military personnel confiscated the journalist’s technical (radio and television) equipment and told the journalists their property would be returned only after they received special permission and accreditation from Simferopol.
Overview of events around the Autonomous Republic of Crimea (ARC)
- On March 11, 2014 the parliament of the ARC approved the declaration of independence of the ARC and Sevastopol and allows for the entry of Crimea and Sevastopol into the Russian Federation. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation immediately recognized the declaration as “legitimate” and published their official statement.
- The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine has submitted an official protest against the statement by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation to recognize the ARC’s declaration as legitimate and strongly condemns the direct intervention of the Russian Federation in the internal affairs of Ukraine.
- The activity of the Russia is in direct contradiction to the fundamental principles of international law. Russia refers to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice regarding the unilateral declaration of Kosovo. However, the Russian Federation has not recognized Kosovo’s independence.
Moreover, in a written statement in the case against Kosovo formally submitted by the Russian Federation to the International Court of Justice in April 2009, it states “the right to self-determination can not be construed as authorizing or encouraging any action that would lead to a partitioning or a partial or complete violation of the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent state.”
In addition, during this speech at the UN Security Council on February 18, 2008 regarding Kosovo’s declaration of independence, the Russian delegation maintained that the parliament of Kosovo’s declaration on February 17 is “a gross violation of the norms and principles of international law—foremost the UN Charter and destroys the foundation of international relations. This illegal act is an open violation of the sovereignty of Serbia…”
Having expressed this position, the attempts of Russia to apply a principle they condemned to the situation in Ukraine is strange. Their reference to the decision of the International Court of Justice is a classic example of Russian double standards.
And this, by the way, is a definite trend in the policy of the Russian Federation: Russia is currently actively appealing to the February 21, 2014 agreement regarding the settlement of the situation in Ukraine, which it did not support, despite the fact that an official representative of the Russian Federation took part in the negotiations.
Again, I would officially underscore:
- The decision of the of the Crimean Parliament—is unconstitutional, illegal and in violation of international instruments, including the statement by the President of the Security Council of July 20, 1993, that was unanimously supported by all members of the UN Security Council including the Russian Federation.
- In as much as the decision by the Crimean Parliament to hold a referendum is illegitimate, Ukraine will not consider inviting international observers to monitor its progress.
- The Russian backed self-proclaimed Crimean authority’s reference to a statement by acting Foreign Minister of Affairs A. Deshchytsia ostensibly in support of international observers is an arbitrary interpretation of the words of the minister.
The minister actually insisted and continues to insist that international monitoring missions assess the situation on the ground in Crimea regardless and independent of any so-called referendum. However, to date international missions, in particular from the OSCE have not been able to enter Crimean territory because of blatant obstruction by Russian aggressors in violation of all international obligations.
- The Ukrainian position maintains the need to allow the activities of the OSCE mission in Crimea to monitor the situation on the peninsula and calls on the Russian Federation to not interfere with or block the appropriate decisions of the OSCE framework.
- Up until recently, statements made by the Russian Federation regarding the participation of observers from the OSCE during the referendum due not reflect the reality:
- It is cynical, and in violation of all norms to have extended an invitation to an official representative of the Russian Federation to be an official OSCE observer on the sovereign territory of Ukraine;
On March 10, 2014 the permanent representative of the Russian Federation to the OSCE Andriy Kelinym passed a letter from the Speaker of the Crimean Parliament Volodymyr Konstantynov to the Swiss Chair to the attention of the OSCE General Secretary Lamberto Dzannyero, requesting the presence of OSCE observers (from member states as well as the ODIHR) to monitor the referendum vote on March 16, 2014 in Crimea.
- The Swiss Chair of the OSCE has already recognized the “referendum” as illegitimate and excluded the possibility of his participation in the observer mission.
Additionally, we have received multiple signals from various sources that the Russian position, in its attempts to attract at least some international observers, has actively engaged with its expatriates who have citizenship in European countries, to come to Crimea as election observers, promising to cover all the costs associated with their travel and living expenses. It is clear that the quality and objectivity of the conclusions drawn by these so-called observers with be immensely doubtful.
➢ V. Yanukovych’s second press conference took place in Rostov-on-Don.
- The synchronization of V. Yanukovych’s public appearance and the actions of the Russian Federation, specifically, the statement made subsequently in the comments of the Department of Information and Press of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation supporting the intentions of V. Yanukovych to request from the organs of the federal government and the judiciary of the USA to regard as illegal the providing of financial aid to the Government of Ukraine, is evidence of the continuation of the active use of the ex-president by the Russian Federation for the legitimization of its aggression toward Ukraine.
*******
On March 12, 2014, the Charge D’Affaires of the Russian Federation in Ukraine, A. Vorobyov, was summoned to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, and was handed a note from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine regarding the statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia dated March 11, 2014 in support of the Declaration of independence of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol.
Specifically, the note stated that Ukraine considers the aforementioned statement by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia as direct and overt interference of the Russian Federation in the internal affairs of Ukraine, which violates the fundamental norms of international law and universally accepted principles of relations between states. The statement by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia not only clearly violates Article 7 of the Second UN Charter, which guarantees the inadmissibility of “interference in matters which are the domestic affairs of any state”, as well as Articles 2, 3, 4, 6 and 11 of the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation dated May 31, 1997.
Ukraine categorically disagrees with the assessment of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia that the decision of the Crimean Parliament is “absolutely legal”. A decision cannot be absolutely or party legal, when it violates the Constitution of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, the Constitution of Ukraine and its national laws, and the principles and norms of international law, enshrined in the UN Charter, the 1970 ”Declaration on principles of international law concerning friendly relations and co-operation among states in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations”, the Final Act of the CSCE/OSCE of 1975, and provisions of other international documents, including the declaration of the president of the UN Security Council dated July 20, 1993, which was unanimously upheld by all the members of the UN Security Council, including the Russian Federation.
Ukraine points to the provisions of the “Declaration on principles of international law concerning friendly relations and co-operation among states in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations” dated 1970, which, in the interpretation of the meaning of these principles, defines its limits. Thus, according to the Declaration, “nothing, in the foregoing paragraphs shall be construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States conducting themselves in compliance with the principles of equal rights and self-determination of peoples as described above and thus possessed of a government representing the whole people belonging to the territory without distinctions as to race, creed, or color”.
Regarding the reference of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russia Federation to the “decision by the International Court of Justice dated July 22, 2010 about Kosovo”, we point out that this decision has an advisory character and is not legally binding, and moreover, the Russian Federation lost any right to reference this decision by the International Court of Justice when it refused to recognize the independence of Kosovo. Thus, in the joint statement of the Federation Council and the State Duma of the Russian Federation in the aftermath of the self-declaration of independence of Kosovo (Serbia), ratified on July 18, 2008, it clearly states that the right of a nation for self-determination cannot justify the recognition of Kosovo’s independence, and also, that both houses of the Russian Parliament “find it impossible to recognize Kosovo as a sovereign state, accept Kosovo into the UN or any other international organization, dedicated to the principles of international law.” In a written statement officially submitted to the International Court of Justice by the Russian Federation on the subject of Kosovo, it is stated that “the right to self-determination cannot be construed as authorizing or encouraging any action that would lead to a partitioning or a partial or complete violation of the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent state.”
Thus, the use by the Russian Federation of an approach to Ukraine which in the past it has repeatedly condemned and denied in regard to Serbia, cannot be seen as other than the use of double standards by the Russian position.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine also expresses its doubt about the ability of the population of a region of Ukraine currently occupied by the armed forces of the Russian Federation to express its free will. Current international law defines clear requirements for a plebiscite, including demilitarization, democratization, and de-extremization on the territory where the plebiscite is to take place, as well as effective oversight by the UN. A plebiscite which occurs during a foreign occupation of a region, will not be recognized by the international community, and its results will be seen as legally worthless.
We also disavow the assurance of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation that the referendum in Crimea will take place under the supervision of OSCE observers.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine once again urged the Russian side to return to a civilized framework of bilateral relations envisaged by the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation.
Openly ignoring or selectively applying international law may have unintended consequences for the existing system of generally accepted rules of international interaction.
************
In another note, in response to the decision by the Council of Federation of the Federal Council of the Russian Federation dated March 1, 2014 regarding the decision to allow the President of Russia to deploy armed forces on the territory of Ukraine, it was brought to the Russian side’s attention that, since President of Ukraine V. Yanukovych delegitimized himself from his constitutional authority and according to the provisions of the Agreement dated February 21, 2014 to solve the crisis, the Parliament of Ukraine, with a constitutionally-mandated majority, ratified Resolution 757-VII, which removed V. Yanukovych from office. Therefore, citizen V. Yanukovych cannot be regarded as the legitimate President of Ukraine, cannot represent the Ukrainian State in international relations or foreign affairs, nor negotiate or conclude international agreements on Ukraine’s behalf.
It was explained that, in accordance with the Constitution of Ukraine and Ukrainian law, the approval of any decision to permit units of armed forces of foreign states to enter the territory of Ukraine lies solely within the authority of the Supreme Council of Ukraine.
It was underscored that, based on the aforementioned, any references by the Russian Side to appeals and declarations made by former Ukrainian officials as a basis for sending armed forces into the territory of the sovereign state of Ukraine are unlawful and illegitimate.
Because of the Russian Side’s argumentation about the necessity to provide security for the lives of citizens of the Russian Federation and personnel of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation stationed on the territory of Ukraine, attention was drawn to the fact that the right for humanitarian intervention for the protection of the rights of individual ethnic or linguistic communities, including «the Russian-speaking population that lives in the eastern and southern regions of Ukraine», is not a customary norm of international law and directly contravenes Article 2, Paragraph 7 of the Charter of the United Nations, which proscribes intervention “in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state.”
Based on the fundamental provisions of international law contained in acts such as the Charter of the United Nations, the 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States, the 1975 Final Act of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe, and in consideration of the legal positions formulated by the United Nations’ International Court of Justice, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine calls upon the Russian Side to reject even the potential possibility of using RF Armed Forces on the territory of Ukraine and cancel Resolution №48-SF of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of Russia from March 1, 2014 because it contravenes customary and conventional norms of international law.
The following resolute demand was stated: remove from the territory of Ukraine, including its territorial waters, Russian naval ships, equipment and personnel, which were dispatched in contravention of the May 28, 1997 Agreement between Ukraine and RF on the status and conditions of the stationing of the RF BSF on the territory of Ukraine and other related bilateral agreements.
Nevertheless, a willingness was expressed to address all concerns of the Russian Side regarding the so-called violation of rights of «the Russian-speaking population that lives in the eastern and southern regions of Ukraine», within the framework of universal and regional mechanisms of cooperation, regular conventional instruments, in which Ukraine participates, including the 1950 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities from 1995, the 1992 European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, and others.
Another note expressed concern in connection with the Russian Side’s refusal to conduct consultations as provided by the Treaty on friendly relations, cooperation and partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation from May 31, 1997.
It was noted, that the Russian Side’s approach is not only erroneous and irresponsible, but also violates customary and conventional international legal norms, which require that parties should resolve any conflicts that arise in their relations strictly through peaceful means.
In turn, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine reaffirmed its commitment to resolving all conflicts strictly through peaceful means and its desire to continue the process of peaceful regulation and search for mutually-acceptable solutions.
Attention was drawn to the fact the Russian Side’s refusal to commence the process of talks is a violation of customary and conventional norms of international law, and is also inconsistent with the judicial practice of the United Nations’ International Court of Justice and other international judicial bodies. Furthermore, it contravenes the responsibility of states to cooperate with one another in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
In context of the aforementioned, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine cannot not draw the Russian Sides’ attention to the fact that “promoting good-neighborly relations with adjoining states and helping to overcome existing and prevent potential tensions and conflicts in regions adjacent to the Russian Federation” was declared as one of the primary goals of Russian foreign policy, as it was approved in the 2013 Concept of the Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation.
International REACTION TO RUSSIA’S ACTIONS IN THE AUTONOMOUS REPUBLIC OF CRIMEA
On March 5, 2014, the Caribbean Community and Common Market (CARICOM) adopted a declaration of support of the people of Ukraine and called for respecting our state’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
***
On March 7, 2014, a Declaration by Austrian Minister for Europe, Integration and Foreign Affairs, Sebastian Kurz, on behalf of Central European Initiative (CEI) Presidency was published on CEI’s official website concerning the crisis situation in Ukraine connected with the military aggression on the side of the Russian Federation.
The CEI “is gravely concerned by the violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity by Russian armed forces and calls on Russia for an immediate withdrawal” and “underlines the importance of the respect of the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine including Crimea” and “ calls for a peaceful solution.”
***
Ukraine - USA
On March 11, 2014, the United States House of Representatives, nearly unanimously passed H.Res.499 «Condemning the violation of Ukrainian sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity by military forces of the Russian Federation».
The House Resolution includes the following provisions (among others):
✓ condemns the violation of Ukrainian sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity by military forces of the Russian Federation;
✓ states that the Russian Federation is in breach of international norms and its international obligations that its actions pose a threat to international peace and security;
✓ calls on the Russian Federation to remove all of its military forces from Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula, other than at those operating in accordance with its 1997 agreement on the Status and Conditions of the Black Sea Fleet Stationing on the Territory of Ukraine, and to refrain from interference in all regions of Ukraine;
✓ calls for the deployment of independent monitors from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe in Crimea and other areas of Ukraine;
✓ calls upon the US President and the leaders of the other democratic states to consider expelling Russia from the Group of Eight;
✓ calls on the US Administration to work on imposing sanctions against senior officials of the Russian Federation, Russian and Ukrainian oligarchs and majority state-owned banks and commercial organizations and other state agencies;
✓ states that the United States should participate with its European allies and other countries in a joint effort to provide the Ukrainian government with financial, economic, and technical assistance, including asset recovery;
✓ supports efforts by Ukraine, European countries and countries of the former Soviet Union to achieve energy independence; and calls upon the USA to increase its natural gas exports;
✓ affirms the right of all countries in the region to exercise their sovereign rights within their internationally recognized borders free from outside intervention and to conduct their foreign policy in accordance with their determination of the best interests of their peoples.
***
From March 12-13, 2014, Prime Minister of Ukraine Arseniy Yatsenyuk will visit the USA. On March 12, the delegation is scheduled to meet the President of the US, representatives of Congress, World Bank President Jim Kim and IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde.
Ukraine – United Nations
Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights, Ivan Simonovic, who is in on a mission to Ukraine (March 6-15, 2014), canceled a planned visit to the Autonomous Republic of Crimea for logistical reasons, namely because the Simferopol International Airport refuses to land airplanes from Kyiv.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs learned that the decision to cancel the visit to Crimea may have also been caused by reservations expressed by the so-called “Crimean government” concerning Ivan Simonovic’s visit.
The continued obstruction of missions of international organizations to Crimea by the so-called Crimean government that is controlled by the RF, shows that the Russian Side has not changed its position on not allowing an international presence on the peninsula. The purpose of these actions on Russia’s part is to prevent the international community from receiving objective information concerning the situation on the peninsula, including the situation surrounding human rights.
Ukraine - EU
The European Commission passed a decision to temporarily lower duties on Ukrainian goods imported by EU countries (until November 1, 2014). The EC’s decision amounts to a commencement of the implementation of the tariff provisions of the Deep and Comprehensive Tree Trade Agreement even before the signing of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement, unilaterally reducing or removing EU customs duties on products made in Ukraine.
These measures are not aimed at substituting the free trade zone and they will only be in effect for a limited period of time: until November 1, 2014. The EC decision is subject to ratification by the European Parliament and the EU Council. EC President Jose M. Barosso stated that these trade provisions «This will represent an economic benefit to Ukraine of around 500 million euros per year».
Concerning the President of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barosso’s remarks during the European Parliament’s plenary session in Strasbourg
On March 12, 2014 the European Parliament debated the topic of «invasion of Ukraine by Russia» during its plenary session in Strasbourg. EC President Jose Manuel Barosso delivered a speech in which he noted that the events in Crimea are an act of unprovoked and unacceptable violation of Ukraine’s state sovereignty and territorial integrity.
«G-7» leaders, the President of the European Council Herman Van Rampuy and the President of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barosso “strongly and unequivocally condemned this action.”
Jose M. Barosso noted that at 1500 Kyiv time, a joint declaration by the G7 and EU is expected that will call upon the RF to ceases its attempt to annex Crimea.
During the debates, European Commissioner for Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy Stefan Fule stated that the RF’s actions are a serious challenge to the entire Helsinki process and threaten the stability of borders in Europe.
***
On March 13, the Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs of Germany Frank-Walter Steinmeier will visit Budapest where he will take part in a meeting of the foreign ministers of the Visegrad Four; a discussion about the situation in Ukraine is on the agenda for V4+Germany meeting;
On March 17, the Foreign Affairs Council of the Council of the European Union will convene for a regularly-scheduled meeting;
Ukraine - OSCE
On March 12, 2014, the preliminary report of OSCE inspectors who will visit Ukraine under the mandate of the 2011 Vienna Document "On Confidence and Security Building Measures," was circulated to OSCE member states. Despite the fact that the inspection group was not allowed to enter the territory of Crimea, the report indicates that there is sufficient evidence to indicate that Russian military personnel are present at the checkpoints located at entry points to the ARC.
Concerning Ukraine’s plans to conduct an observation flight over the territory of Russia in accordance with the Treaty on Open Skies
Ukraine and the Russian Federation are parties to the Treaty on Open Skies that allows participating states, or groups of participating states, to conduct observation flights over territories of participating states with the use of observation sensors.
This document allows for the observation of the entire territory the state over which the observation flight is being conducted.
In connection with this, on March 11, 2014, Ukraine sent the Russian Federation, through OSCE channels, a request to conduct an extraordinary observation flight over Russian Territory in accordance with Section ІІІ of Annex L of the Treaty.
In accordance with the Treaty, the Russian Side is required to respond in 24 hours, i.e. by 18.30 on March 12, 2104.
We expect the Russian Federation will agree to such an observation flight.
***
Om March 11, 2014, OSCE Chairperson-in-Office, Swiss Foreign Minister Didier Burkhalter issued a statement concerning the referendum planned in Crimea on March 16 of this year.
The OSCE Chairperson-in-Office stated that this referendum «contravenes the Constitution of Ukraine and should be considered illegal.».
He also discounted the possibility of sending OSCE observers to monitor the referendum. Didier Burkhalter also noted that «an invitation by a participating state is a precondition to any observation activity».
He called upon all OSCE member-states to support the approval of the decision to send an OSCE observation mission to Ukraine.
Ukraine supports the initiative for the OSCE observation mission to begin monitoring in AR Crimea in order to follow developments on the peninsula.
***
Ukraine – CIS
On March 11, 2014, an extraordinary meeting of the Council of Permanent Plenipotentiary Representatives of Member States of the Commonwealth under Charter and Other Bodies of the Commonwealth, was held at the CIS Executive Committee. The meeting was initiated by Ukraine.
The meeting was attended by Permanent Plenipotentiary Representatives of all CIS member states, except Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan and the leadership of the CIS Executive Committee.
One item was proposed for the agenda: «Timeframes for conducting and materials on the agenda for the extraordinary meeting of the Council of CIS Foreign Affairs Ministers initiated by Ukraine».
During the meeting, the majority of permanent plenipotentiary representatives of CIS member states said that conducting the proposed meeting of CIS foreign ministers in Kyiv on March 12, 2014 is not possible due to the need to complete further work on the issues proposed for consideration, namely the situation in several regions in Ukraine, in particular the Autonomous Republic of Crimea.
Ukraine’s Permanent Representative to the CIS made a separate statement which indicated that the refusal to conduct a meeting of CIS foreign ministers in Kyiv on March 12, 2014 signifies that the CIS is de facto absolving itself from a role of even discussing, let alone resolving, the situation in Ukraine, in particular the situation in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea.
In addition it was underscored that Ukraine, as the state that is chairing the CIS in 2014, in accordance the Rule of Procedures of the Council of Heads of State, Council of Heads of Government, Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs and the CIS Economic Council, has the full right to convene a meeting of the Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs.
It is our view that the artificial postponement of timeframes for conducting such a meeting only serves to create an atmosphere of mutual distrust and, in this way, harms the CIS’ reputation.
***
On March 11, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kyrgyz Republic issued a statement indicating that it shares the international community’s concern over the escalation of tensions in Ukraine.
The Kyrgyz Republic condemns any actions aimed at destabilizing the situation in Ukraine. In connection with this, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kyrgyz Republic considers V. Yanukovych’s statement from March 11, 2014 to be inappropriate and incompetent.
The sole source of government power in any country is its people. A person cannot be a legitimate president if he has fully lost his people’s trust, has de facto lost presidential powers and, moreover, fled from his country. The improperly-thought-through actions and corruption of Ukraine’s former government led to the current crisis and death of dozens of innocent people.
The Kyrgyz Republic calls for the speedy resolution of the situation in Ukraine by peaceful means, with the help of talks and dialogue and the unconditional keeping to the norms of international law and the Charter of the United Nations.
Ukraine – CE
On March 7, 2014, the President of the Conference of European Regional Legislative Assemblies of the Council of Europe Herwig van Staa issued a statement concerning the referendum planned for March 16, 2104 in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea:
«I cannot but deplore this initiative. To hold a referendum, at such short notice, using closed questions, without consultation with the national authorities and in the unauthorized presence of military forces, in flagrant violation of international law, is a travesty of the democratic process and one that I condemn. It would be a serious step backwards for the democratic development of this region.»
***
On March 12, the regularly-scheduled 1194th meeting of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe will be held; the situation in Ukraine is one of the items on the agenda.