The resignation of the deputy head of the Presidential Administration responsible for socio-economic cooperation with the CIS countries, Abkhazia and South Ossetia Boris Rapoport, in whose management was also included the New Russia, has been hailed by many as an attempt to "merge" the People's Republic of Donbass with Ukraine. In an interview with the journalist "MK" former senior official debunked the rumors, assuring that the Kremlin is no one who would put the interests of the republics in doubt. It was the first interview after his retirement.
Boris Rapoport: "Already in 2013, Surkov had a map in his office on which the Crimea was marked as part of Russia"
- Your dismissal from the Office of the President on social and economic cooperation with the CIS states, Abkhazia and South Ossetia has caused a lot of talk in the Ukrainian press and was named almost indication "failure of the policy of the Kremlin."
- Complete nonsense. Like so much else in the Ukrainian press. My departure is related to health. I am for a significant period should stop working.
- You talked about this with Surkov?
- Yes of course. He expressed regret that I'm leaving. Still, I worked with him for almost 10 years. This decision was hard for me. But he supported me and said that as soon as will be solved health problems, will be happy to continue to work together.
- Is it true that there were massive layoffs in the management?
- Over the period of management under the supervision Surkov two employees were laid off, including me. For a team of 30 people it is negligible. Normal routine process.
- Is it true that you were engaged in the project of New Russia?
- Activities of our department are reflected in the title. Yes, I did also Ukrainian direction.
- What was it?
- First of all work carried informational and analytical information gathering, preparation of reports and monitoring.
- How do you assess the success of Russia in the Ukrainian direction?
- The main thing is that Russia has taken a firm stand on protecting the interests of the inhabitants of the south-east of Ukraine. Determination with which Russia's actions in this direction, in itself is already a great success.
- But the country is in civil war?
- Well, first, we were not the ones who unleashed it. This war was triggered by a gross interference in the internal politics of the West of Ukraine.
Millions of people in Ukraine believe that blood was shed not in vain and that the inhabitants of the south-east will win the struggle for their rights. These people rely on the moral and material support of Russia. They do not have any other ally. Russia will not turn away from them, and they will win.
- Secession of Crimea from Ukraine was also supervised by Surkov?
- I do not think it necessary to dwell on the subject. When I was appointed in 2013, Surkov had already had a map of the Russian Empire in the waiting room of his office, map where Crimea was part of Russia. Prior to the referendum in the Crimea many issues were repeatedly reviewed, including discussing problems related to the preparation of the agreement on the construction of a transport corridor through the Kerch Strait. And the rest - think for yourself.
- Some experts have called Surkov curator of warlords and others accused that he was "losing Novorossia."
- Due to many years of work in politics he has a very wide circle of collegues. We can not exclude that some militia in UA southeast are his old friends. Donating Novorossia - it is certainly not about him. He has always been a supporter of the doctrine of "Moscow - the Third Rome" and said that if any state does not expand its sphere of influence, it starts to degrade. He comes from the fact that the expansion - is the natural state of a healthy state. Surkov in 2005 ushered in the current political use of the term "Russian world" and that he was at the forefront of a new Russian holiday of peace - National Unity Day.
- How do you see the fate of Donbass and the New Russia in general?
- The results of parliamentary elections in Dnepropetrovsk, Kharkov, very low turnout in Odessa, similar to the boycott of the elections showed that people of the south-east oriented against the new Kiev government. It's not a mere result of a victory of party "Opposition Bloc" in Kiev, it is direct protest of citizens against anti-Russian policy that Kiev conducts. It is a protest, they reacted to the word "opposition".
- The conclusion from all this - Ukraine must be changed to save the country?
- First scenario: Ukraine should be reconstructed to contractual federation. Whether Donbass will remain or not in Ukraine depends on the conditions of a federal treaty.
Another scenario is the continuation of Kiev sadistic socio-economic blockade of Donbas. This scenario will force Donbass to introduce its currency, reorient the industry, and separate from the Ukraine. This will be the detonator for the separation of other regions because there are strong protests in Odessa and in the Carpathians, and in the Western Ukraine. Which scenario will be chosen - it's up to Ukraine.
Russia will assist the southeast, under any scenario. Once again: It should be the choice of the Ukrainian government. This is their inner conflict, and their fate in their own hands.
- What is the fate of the Minsk process?
- No one should have no illusions: Poroshenko is a supporter of violent reintegration of Donbass. He had the possibility of a peaceful solution to the problem from coming to power, he rejected this possibility. Now he builds himself a "Dove of Peace", but it is cunning. Minsk peace protocol was signed not by his "plan", and according to the plan of our President. And it was signed because the commander in chief Poroshenko frightened military defeat before the elections to the parliament
We remember that in August the militia took the offensive on all fronts. Poroshenko could lose a significant part of the territory, and only because of electoral considerations, he agreed with ceasefire proposals. He was ready to sign anything just to stop the militia, even adopted a law "On special status." And when the election is over, he regretted what was done and now pursues a policy of economic strangulation of Donbass. Looks forward to the food riots of the population against the DPR and LPR. This is cynical and inhumane policy. Rather than engage in dialogue with the people, Poroshenko simply tries to destroy it.
Perhaps he would behave softer, but Kiev is dominated by the party of war and the pressure of Western curators is tremendous. Poroshenko hopes that Russia will falter under the weight of sanctions and blockade will force Donbas to capitulate. A vain hope. Kiev will have to change approaches. It is necessary to negotiate.
Originally Posted by Bill Moore
Bookmarks