ANALYTICAL REVIEW OF THE MOST IMPORTANT DOMESTIC, FOREIGN POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC EVENTS OF THE WEEK
07.06.- 13.06.2021
CONTENT:
SUMMARY AND KEY TRENDS.
INTERNAL POLICY.
1. Kravchuk's statement about "Donbass as a cancerous tumor."
2. The Venice Commission criticized the amendments to the law "On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges" prepared by the Verkhovna Rada.
3. "V. Medvedchuk's tapes", searches within premises of the founders of the "Party of Shariy".
4. The CEC registered Vasily Virastyuk as a people's deputy.
5. The split in the "Voice" party.
6. Sociology. Presidential and parliamentary ratings.
FOREIGN POLICY.
1. Joe Biden's telephone conversation with Volodymyr Zelensky and the invitation of the Ukrainian president to a meeting in Washington in July.
2. Preparation for the meeting of the presidents of the United States and the Russian Federation.
3. US hints of potential accusations against China in the spread of the coronavirus.
4. The International Tribunal in The Hague has confirmed the life sentence to Serbian General Ratko Mladic.
ECONOMY.
1. The government plans an increase in taxes for individuals.
2. The world is going to impose a total tax on techno giants., And in the US, the ban on Chinese social networks TikTok and WeChat was lifted.
3. Kobolev's scheme. As a structure of "Naftogaz Ukrainy" paid millions to lobbyists in the United States for PR.
4. The European Commission is preparing a mission to Ukraine regarding the launch of "industrial visa-free".
5. In Ukraine, they want to increase electricity tariffs for the population.
6. MPs have registered a bill on the restructuring of the state debt to the IMF.
SUMMARY AND KEY TRENDS.
Summing up the results of the outgoing week, we note the following:
Firstly, against the background of the stalled process of the peaceful settlement of the conflict in Donbass, representatives of the Ukrainian authorities are directly declaring their unwillingness to implement the Minsk agreements and questioning the need to reintegrate the uncontrolled territories. This conclusion follows from the recent statement of the head of the Ukrainian delegation to the Trilateral Contact Group Leonid Kravchuk, who publicly quoted in his interview the statement of the writer Alexander Oles, who compared Donbass with a "cancer tumor". In essence, such statements indicate the inability and unwillingness / inability of the current government to solve the problem of a peaceful settlement in Donbass and the reintegration of uncontrolled territories, the ongoing processes of forming a position in public opinion that the implementation of the Minsk agreements is unrealistic.
Secondly, this week continued the struggle between the Office of the President and Western partners for control over the judicial system of Ukraine. Under the guise of establishing transparent appointment processes and fighting corruption in the courts, external players want to establish their control in this area and promote a profitable option for judicial reform. In this regard, the Venice Commission criticized the amendments prepared by the Verkhovna Rada to the law "On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges", prescribed in the interests of the President's Office.
Thirdly, the trend of “tightening the screws”, suppression of the main political and economic competitors and the authorities continues. The SBU is conducting searches of the founders of the public organization "Party of Sharia", and the media are promoting the topic of "Medvedchuk's tapes", which simultaneously discredit both V. Medvedchuk and P. Poroshenko.
Fourthly, active preparations continue for the upcoming talks between the American and Russian presidents in Geneva. As part of it, among other events, US President Joe Biden made a call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, during which the American leader invited his Ukrainian counterpart to Washington in July. This call and invitation was the signal that Biden sent to Putin. Its main purpose was to demonstrate that the United States retains control over Ukrainian politics and at any time can use Ukraine as a pretext for destabilizing Russian borders and / or introducing new anti-Russian sanctions. The Kremlin responded to this message of the American side with an interview with Vladimir Putin, where he called Ukraine's NATO membership a "red line" for Russia.
Fifth, another trend that made itself felt in the outgoing week is the American-Chinese geopolitical confrontation. As part of it, the United States hints at possible accusations against the PRC in the spread of coronavirus, and is conducting an appropriate investigation. Given that it is entrusted to intelligence, and not to scientific research structures, it can be assumed that in this way the Americans are preparing public opinion for accusations against China and demands for reparations.
Sixth, the trend continues for the Ukrainian authorities to search for new sources of budget replenishment. The preferential area of land for farming in Ukraine is planned to be reduced from 2 to 0.5 hectares. The authorities intend to tax speculation in the real estate market through the introduction of VAT on the sale of more than two units of real estate. Also, electricity tariffs will rise by 35% on average to the end of 2021.
Seventh, on the scale of the global economy, “old money” is fighting against “new money,” namely, IT giants, both American and Chinese. The US lifted sanctions on TikTok and WeChat, but at the same time banned investing in Huawei.
INTERNAL POLICY.
Briefly:
Against the background of the stalled process of the peaceful settlement of the conflict in Donbass, representatives of the Ukrainian authorities of Ukraine (in the person of Leonid Kravchuk) are already directly declaring their unwillingness to implement the Minsk Agreements and questioning the need to reintegrate the uncontrolled territories. In essence, such statements indicate the inability and unwillingness / inability of the current government to solve the problem of a peaceful settlement in Donbass and the reintegration of uncontrolled territories, the ongoing processes of forming a position in public opinion that the implementation of the Minsk agreements is unrealistic.
In addition, this week continued the struggle of the OP and Western partners for control over the judicial system of Ukraine. Under the guise of establishing transparent appointment processes and fighting corruption in the courts, external players want to establish their control in this area and promote a profitable option for judicial reform. In this regard, the Venice Commission criticized the amendments prepared by the Verkhovna Rada to the law "On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges", prescribed in the interests of the President's Office.
There is also a continuing trend towards "tightening the screws", suppression of the main political and economic competitors, the authorities. The SBU conducts searches of the founders of the Sharia Party public organization. And the media are promoting the topic of Medvedchuk's tapes, which simultaneously discredit both V. Medvedchuk and P. Poroshenko.
1. Kravchuk's statement about "Donbass as a cancerous tumor."
This week, the head of the Ukrainian delegation to the Trilateral Contact Group, Leonid Kravchuk, in an interview with journalist Yanina Sokolova on Channel 5, told how to reintegrate the uncontrolled parts of the Luhansk and Donetsk regions. At the same time, he recalled a quote from Oles Honchar, who called for "cutting off the Donbass, like a cancerous tumor, for the sake of Ukraine's development."
“I thought, there was no war then. And a person, as befits a talented, brilliant, I would say, people, already then understood that there would be problems with Donbass, ”said L. Kravchuk. In his opinion, it would have been possible to build a different policy towards the region if it had been known earlier what "problems" would arise with the Donbass.
The head of the TGC said that he did not know if Ukraine needed Donbass, but his people were definitely needed. He compared Donbass to the GDR, where people, after the partition of Germany, were at first the carriers of Soviet ideology, but later after the fall of the Berlin Wall, their views changed.
He also added that if the problem of Donbass is submitted to a referendum and Ukrainian citizens support the option “to leave him in this struggle for a while,” then this will be true. But a lot, he said, depends on how the question is framed. In May, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said he was considering holding an all-Ukrainian referendum on a settlement in eastern Ukraine.
Earlier L. Kravchuk expressed the opinion that after the arrest of Roman Protasevich in Minsk, negotiations on Donbass should be moved from Belarus to a neutral country - Poland, Switzerland or Finland.
The Russian Foreign Ministry reacted to L. Kravchuk's statements regarding Donbass. They believe that Ukraine has thus recognized that it will not be possible to break the inhabitants of the region by military means. And the official representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Maria Zakharova pointed out that L. Kravchuk's statement is apparently based on the logic that it is possible to "cut out the Donbass from the territory of Ukraine or start irradiating it."
It is worth saying that the Russian leadership has repeatedly accused the Ukrainian side of unwillingness to conduct peace negotiations and implement the Minsk agreements. And now the statements of the head of the TCG will serve as an additional informational reason for criticism from Russia. Since against the background of the deadlocked peace process, representatives of the Ukrainian government are already explicitly declaring their unwillingness to implement the Minsk agreements and even questioning the very need for reintegration.
And if earlier politicians talked only among themselves about the “unnecessary” of Donbass, now they bring these theses to the public. It is possible that in this way the authorities can prepare public opinion (expanding the Overton window) to recognize the need to abandon the idea of reintegrating the uncontrolled territories.
2. The Venice Commission criticized the amendments to the law "On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges" prepared by the Verkhovna Rada.
On June 8, at the conference "Democracy in Action", the head of the Venice Commission, Gianni Buquicchio, said that the commission does not support bill 3711, which concerns amendments to the law "On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges", since it does not comply with its recommendations. Gianni Buquicchio said that Ukraine should restart the judiciary as soon as possible. Relying on the old composition of judges, whose activities have been compromised, is not worth it.
In this regard, the Venice Commission supported the creation of an updated High Qualifications Commission for Judges (HQCJ). But at the same time, she pointed out that the High Qualifications Commission should not be merged with the High Council of Justice, which must be tested before being entrusted with the appointment of the High Qualifications Commission, otherwise "judicial reform will be doomed." That is, the composition of the SCJ must be revised before the appointment of the VKKS is entrusted to it.
Earlier, the Venice Commission had already expressed its opinion on V. Zelensky's bill No. 5068 on resetting the High Council of Justice (SCJ) and checking the integrity of SCJ members. Then the Commission noted that international experts should be given a decisive role in the process of selecting future members of the SCJ and checking the integrity of its current composition. And in March this year, contrary to the demands of Western partners, the XVIII Congress of Judges of Ukraine took place, at which the delegates of the Congress elected 4 members of the High Council of Justice.
It is obvious that in this issue the Venice Commission is lobbying for the Western version of the judicial reform, despite the active resistance of the OP.
Also on Thursday, it became known that six judges of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine blocked the activities of the Constitutional Court with the requirement to ensure the participation of the ex-head of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine Oleksandr Tupitsky in court sessions, whose appointment V. Zelensky canceled by his decree. As we wrote earlier, the Office of the President is fighting, in particular, for control over the Constitutional Court. In this regard, pressure continues on the ex-head of the KSU A. Tupitsky with the help of criminal cases and searches.
In the trend of the listed events, V. Zelensky is trying to re-subordinate the country's judicial system to himself, and here he has to compete both with the influence of the former president, oligarchs, the judiciary, and with Western partners who want to establish their control, and accordingly promote an advantageous version of judicial reform ... As a result, the judicial system can only expect an aggravation of the crisis phenomena. The segmentation of the judiciary, when individual clans compete with each other, will further increase at the expense of those brought in by V. Zelensky and Western partners.
3. "V. Medvedchuk's tapes", searches of the premises of the founders of the "Party of Shariy".
This week the theme of the so-called. "Medvedchuk's films". On the resource Bihus.Info, another series of audio recordings has appeared with the alleged voice of the leader of the OLE party. The sources of the records are not disclosed in the publication.
The National Anti-Corruption Bureau asked the Security Service to hand over the tapes that were leaked to the media for study and possible use. At the same time, the head of the NABU Artem Sytnik, in essence, disclosed the source of the tapes, saying that "they (that is, the SBU) made the recordings in accordance with the law."
From the records it follows that since June 2014, a person similar to V. Medvedchuk, possibly on behalf of former President P. Poroshenko, has been negotiating both with representatives of ORDLO and with the political entourage of Russian President Vladimir Putin. According to journalists, V. Medvedchuk negotiated, including on economic issues, caring primarily about his own interests, as well as the interests of Petro Poroshenko. As for the exchange of prisoners, V. Medvedchuk not only did not help Ukraine to free the prisoners, but sometimes even interfered with this process.
Prior to this, the criminal prosecution of V. Medvedchuk began, who was accused of “high treason” and was taken as a preventive measure in the form of house arrest, in connection with which there is a need for additional “evidence” to keep him.
It should be noted that from a legal point of view, Medvedchuk's films are of little weight. They are used as an information tool to strike at the reputations of both V. Medvedchuk and P. Poroshenko, who for their supporters are the conductors of clearly expressed warring ideologies, and at the same time act as the main political and economic competitors of the authorities. Here they appear in the form of prudent businessmen, acting in "one bundle".
In turn, Petro Poroshenko called the investigation of Bihus.Info journalists on the so-called "Medvedchuk tapes" an example of "zombie". At the same time, one should not expect that the publication of the tapes will result in serious consequences for P. Poroshenko. The core of his electorate will remain behind him. The figure of Poroshenko can become toxic only for that part of voters who have doubts. The goal of the information campaign against P. Poroshenko is to keep him in the narrow niche of his fans and not allow him to expand its scope.
Also this week on June 8, the SBU conducted searches of the founders of the Sharia Party public organization. In their opinion, representatives of the organization are involved in the distribution of campaign materials in the capital region aimed at changing the borders of the territory or the state border of Ukraine in violation of the order established by the Constitution of Ukraine.
The events described above are a continuation of the “tightening the nuts” trend. Demonstrating to the public the image of a “strong hand”, the authorities continue their actions aimed at suppressing and discrediting the main political and economic opponents. At the same time, to a greater extent, this concerns the "anti-Western" opposition, which indicates the preservation of the pro-Western political course. In parallel, the Western partners are shown the alleged fulfillment of the requirement of "de-oligarchization".
4. The CEC registered Vasily Virastyuk as a people's deputy.
This week, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court upheld the protocol of the Central Election Commission on the results of elections to the Verkhovna Rada in the 87th constituency, according to which Vasily Virastyuk from the Servant of the People party won.
Earlier, on April 5, the district election commission finally established V. Virastyuk's victory in the by-election to the Rada. On May 1, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Council declared illegal the actions of the CEC to establish the election results, and on May 5, the CEC refused to register V. Virastyuk as a people's deputy. On May 19, the CEC drew up a new protocol on the results of elections in constituency No. 87, recognizing the victory of V. Virastyuk, but on May 24 the Supreme Court canceled this protocol. The CEC filed an appeal against this decision. As a result, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the Supreme Court, which canceled the protocol of the CEC on recognizing the winner of the midterm elections in the Verkhovna Rada in the 87th constituency of the candidate from the Servant of the People, Vasily Virastyuk, thereby recognizing him as the winner in the elections.
5. The split in the "Voice" party.
On June 7, it became known that Sergei Pritula left the Golos party. He referred to the fact that the leadership of Golos had strayed too far from the "original foundations." In April, Sergei Pritula announced that he wanted to lead the Golos party. Two days later, Yaroslav Yurchishin announced that another 10 deputies could leave the Golos faction.
Obviously, we are talking about the deputies who at the beginning of the year went into opposition to the party leadership and announced the usurpation of power by the head of the "Voice" Kira Rudyk. A split has been brewing in the Golos party for a long time. A wing, which was previously associated with the "Ukrainian Galician Party", may break away from it. In this case, there will be a threat of disintegration of the faction and its transformation into a deputy group. In the previous parliamentary elections, Golos entered parliament mainly thanks to its ex-leader Svyatoslav Vakarchuk.
At the request of Kira Rudyk, before the local elections, the party charter was changed by significantly expanding the powers of the head of the party. She was accused of behind-the-scenes negotiations with the President's Office about the coalition and repression against disloyal party members. Over the past month, the heads of "objectionable" regional organizations in the Dnieper, Chernivtsi, Kherson and others were dismissed.
The deputies then demanded that K. Rudyk resign. But the head of the parliamentary faction of the party, Yaroslav Zheleznyak, then made it clear that the dissatisfied could leave the party. People's Deputy from the Golos faction, Solomiya Bobrovskaya, noted that S. Pritula's withdrawal from the party is an example of "failed communication on the part of the leadership." Failed, because they understand well that the project of the Golos party is coming to an end. "
It is worth noting that such political projects as Golos are not durable, since they initially tried to combine pro-American liberalism with Ukrainian nationalism. The combination of these two incompatible ideas led to the fact that the party did not form a stable electoral base. As a result, initially “inflated” due to an active PR campaign, the rating of the “Golos” party began to fall. A significant role in this process was played by the faction's position on the most important bills for society. The party supported such unpopular demands of Western partners in society as land and medical reforms, as well as cuts in social spending.
6. Sociology. Presidential and parliamentary ratings.
This week, the Kiev International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) published a sociological study, according to which V. Zelensky continues to lead in the presidential rating - 27.7% of those polled who made their choice. In comparison with the poll conducted by KIIS in April, the president's rating decreased by 3.5% (then the rating was 31.4%). P. Poroshenko - 14.6%, since April the rating has decreased by 3.5%. Yulia Tymoshenko - 11.9%, the rating has not changed. I. Smeshko - 9.5%, has not changed significantly. Yuri Boyko - 9.2%, has not changed.
There are seven parties in parliament. The leader in the parliamentary rating is "Servant of the People" - 17.7% in comparison with the poll conducted by KIIS in April (21.3%), the rating decreased by 3.5%. European Solidarity - 15.4% Since April, the rating has decreased by 2.3%. “HLE” - 14.7% (+ 2.5%, dynamics for an increase). "Fatherland" - 13.9% (+ 3.7%, dynamics for the increase).
In addition, the majority of the respondents noted that over the past year they have faced an increase in tariffs for utilities - 91.5%.
• with an increase in prices for basic foodstuffs - 90.6%.
• with a decrease in salaries or pensions faced 35.4%.
• with full or partial loss of a job - 31.9%.
The main reason for the economic crisis in Ukraine is believed to be:
• high level of corruption - 42.9%.
• incompetence of the authorities - 33.8%.
• war in the east of Ukraine - 10.6%.
• pandemic coronavirus - 8.3%.
As a result, the majority of Ukrainian citizens - 54.5% of those polled, oppose V. Zelensky's running for a second term. Only 37% support this initiative.
Survey results may indicate the following:
Despite the fact that by concentrating control over the main information flows, V. Zelensky still manages to maintain a leading position, his rating and the rating of the party are already demonstrating the dynamics of decline. Due to the lack of implementation of the basic needs of the country's population, society has lost confidence in V. Zelensky and does not want his re-election. In the future, the situation may worsen, for example, by autumn, when the issue of tariffs and prices will become more acute.
It is also noteworthy that the electoral effect of demonstrating a "strong hand" and governing the country with the help of the NSDC is beginning to wither away. Having exceeded 30%, the presidential rating "crawled" down again.
FOREIGN POLICY.
Briefly.
In the outgoing week, two main trends showed themselves in international politics.
The first of them is active preparation for the upcoming talks between the American and Russian presidents in Geneva. As part of it, among other events, US President Joe Biden made a call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, during which the American leader invited his Ukrainian counterpart to Washington in July. This call and invitation was the signal that Biden sent to Putin. Its main purpose was to demonstrate that the United States retains control over Ukrainian politics and at any time can use Ukraine as a pretext for destabilizing Russian borders and / or introducing new anti-Russian sanctions. The Kremlin responded to this message of the American side with an interview with Vladimir Putin, where he called Ukraine's NATO membership a "red line" for Russia.
The second trend that made itself felt in the outgoing week is the American-Chinese geopolitical confrontation. As part of it, the United States hints at possible accusations against the PRC in the spread of coronavirus, and is conducting an appropriate investigation. Given that it is entrusted to intelligence, and not to scientific research structures, it can be assumed that in this way the Americans are preparing public opinion for accusations against China.
1. Joe Biden's telephone conversation with Volodymyr Zelensky and the invitation of the Ukrainian president to a meeting in Washington in July.
On June 7, in the evening Kiev time, Joe Biden had a telephone conversation with Vladimir Zelensky. In the course of it, the American president invited his Ukrainian counterpart to meet with him in Washington in July.
It is interesting that in spite of the seemingly long-awaited invitation to Washington by the Ukrainian president, this time it was not without oddities and trickery on the part of the President's Office.
Following the telephone conversation, the White House and Bankovaya issued conflicting statements. The Office of Volodymyr Zelensky said that Biden, quote: “emphasized the full support of Ukraine's Euro-Atlantic integration and the importance of providing the Ukrainian state with an Action Plan for membership in the Alliance. He assured that Ukraine's position will certainly be taken into account when discussing strategic issues in NATO, as well as planned events of the highest level. "
However, the White House denied this report. They said that Kiev had misrepresented the essence of the conversation.
Following these comments from the Ukrainian side, representatives of his Office corrected the initial statement. The new version reads: "He (Biden - Ed.) Assured that Ukraine's position will certainly be taken into account when discussing strategic issues in NATO, as well as during planned events of the highest level."
And although the Ukrainian president, following the curiosity, called such a free interpretation of Biden's statements "insignificant", trying to pretend that nothing had happened, from our point of view, the Ukrainian side's interpretation of the words of the American president had a planned character.
The fact is that for more than a month, in conversations with all foreign politicians, Volodymyr Zelenskyy has raised the topic of his desire to receive an action plan for Ukraine's membership in NATO. Western European leaders have repeatedly denied him this, both directly (stating that it is too early to consider the prospect of Ukraine's membership in the military-political bloc) and indirectly (without inviting the Ukrainian delegation to the NATO summit to be held before Biden's meeting with Putin).
In this situation, the PR service of the Ukrainian president urgently needed news that would create for Volodymyr Zelensky the image of "a man who knows how to get his way." Apparently, the main idea behind the misrepresentation of Biden's words was to throw into the Ukrainian media environment a signal: - "Zelensky demanded a MAP - Zelensky received support for his demands from Biden."
If we talk about the consequences of the aforementioned telephone conversation, it should be noted that they are most relevant for the internal policy of Ukraine.
After 2014, personal conversations and meetings of Ukrainian politicians with American presidents are perceived in our country as a kind of necessary external legitimation. The President of Ukraine, whom the American leader called and met with, begins to actively promote himself as "the main conductor of Washington's will in Kiev," and on this basis demands obedience from oligarchs and political counterparties. The latter, of course, nod understandingly in response to such demands, but the instructions of the holder of the "American label", as before, sabotage.
As for the foreign policy reasons why D. Biden called V. Zelensky and made an appointment with him, they are quite simple. Ukraine serves as a relatively cheap and reliable tool for the United States to irritate pressure on Russia. By calling Kiev, Biden made it clear to his Russian counterpart that this instrument could be used by Washington at any time.
Well, the meeting with Vladimir Zelensky, which will take place about a month after the meeting with Vladimir Putin, is likely to be purely formal. Of the essence, Biden will probably put pressure on the Ukrainian president, demanding judicial reform in accordance with Western patterns, deoligarchization, and everything that the G7 ambassadors in Kiev are so fond of publicly voicing.
In our opinion, it is not worth expecting that “Biden will bring to Zelensky the decisions on Ukraine made at the meeting with Putin”. The Ukrainian question is one of the most confrontational in Russian-American relations, and there is almost no chance of reaching an agreement on it today.
In Russia, American-Ukrainian contacts on the eve of Biden's meeting with Putin were not ignored. On June 9, the Russian president gave an interview entirely devoted to the Ukrainian issue. In it, Vladimir Putin criticized the draft law “on indigenous peoples” submitted to the Ukrainian parliament, and also stated that Russia perceives the threat of Ukraine's joining NATO as quite real and considers it a “red line”. Quote:
“Expanding NATO and bringing infrastructure closer to the borders is of practical importance. Why? Here Poland, Romania became members of NATO. The Americans easily agreed with them on the deployment of anti-missile defense (ABM) systems. But the launching systems of these installations can be used for strike systems that reach the center of Russia, including Moscow. Moreover, in a very short time: 15 minutes - flight time to Moscow. The flight time from Kharkov and from Dnepropetrovsk to the central part of Russia, to Moscow, will decrease to 7-10 minutes. Is this a red line for us or not? "
This message from the Russian president is clearly directed to the American side and is aimed at delineating the "boundaries of what is acceptable" for Russia in its near abroad, on the eve of Putin's meeting with Biden.
2. Preparation for the meeting of the presidents of the United States and the Russian Federation.
The most discussed topic in recent weeks has been the preparation for talks between the American and Russian presidents. As you know, they will take place in Geneva on June 16.
According to Vladimir Putin's press secretary Dmitry Peskov, the parties are currently discussing the topic of a joint press conference. He noted that so far this is an unconfirmed point of the program. Quote:
"Again, this should be a mutual decision, and after we agree on either one or the other option, we will inform you."
In addition, Peskov assured that Russian President Vladimir Putin would in any case talk to the Kremlin pool of journalists after meeting with American leader Joe Biden.
Later, unconfirmed reports began to appear in the American press that there would be no joint press conference.
It should be noted that in the practice of international negotiations of this level, a joint press conference, as a rule, is supposed only in cases where the parties managed to agree on at least one of the agenda items. Otherwise, each side is limited to a solo release to the press following the negotiations.
It should also be understood that all major agreements are agreed and discussed mainly before the summit meeting. The presidents, in turn, are entrusted with the task of their final agreement and approval. So, if a planned joint press conference is announced before the meeting, it will mean that the parties managed to reach a consensus on at least one of the issues discussed, and perhaps even work out some kind of solution.
Along with the Kremlin, the White House also announced intensified preparations for the upcoming summit this week.
White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki said that US President Joe Biden, in preparation for a meeting with Russian leader Vladimir Putin, is addressing decades of experience.
In fact, an appeal to many years of experience, in this case, is not a figure of speech, but a hint of what issue can be expected to move after the meeting of the American and Russian presidents. The fact is that throughout his political career, Joe Biden has been a consistent supporter of arms control agreements. Adherence to this idea was confirmed after he took the presidency and agreed to extend the START-3 treaty.
According to the statements of both the American and Russian sides, the issue of "ensuring strategic stability" will be discussed within the framework of the talks between the two presidents. This formulation implies the extension of the old, and the discussion of new arms control mechanisms. Actually, it is only on this issue that Moscow and Washington have points of contact.
As for the rest of the topics for negotiations, information about them varies. For the second week, the media reported that the presidents, in addition to strategic stability, will talk about the "current international situation", local conflicts, and countering the pandemic. However, with regard to a more specific agenda, rather than vague wording, the views of the parties clearly differ.
So, on May 31, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said, quote:
“The agendas of the United States and the Russian Federation do not coincide, but we are traditionally ready to respond to any questions posed by the American side. Unfortunately, counter readiness is observed much less and less often. "
Later, the absence of a fixed agenda for the meeting was confirmed by the press secretary of the Russian President Dmitry Peskov.
According to him, a significant part of the time will be devoted to issues that the heads of state themselves want to voice. In response to a clarifying question, Putin's press secretary noted that the Russian leader does not plan to specifically raise the topic of Belarus.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov also spoke about the expectations of the summit with the utmost restraint, quote:
“We do not create illusions, and we do not try to create the impression that there will be some breakthroughs, some historic fateful decisions. But the very fact of a conversation between the two leading nuclear powers at the level of top officials is, of course, important, it must be supported in every possible way. "
As for the American side, just over a week ago, Joe Biden, quite in the spirit of the ultra-liberal ideology dominating in the United States, said that he intends to discuss with Vladimir Putin the topic of human rights violations. However, this statement was made, rather, for domestic consumption.
Speaking about foreign policy messages, according to Biden, Washington would like to "cooperate with Russia on issues such as strategic stability and arms control." He also stressed that the meeting with Putin in Geneva will take place after discussions "with partners and allies looking at the world through the same prism as the United States." The purpose of the US president's trip to Europe, according to his own statement, is to "rally world democracies."
Thus, on the eve of the meeting of the American and Russian presidents, the only issue on which they can find mutual understanding is the so-called "strategic stability" - that is, agreements on control over various types of weapons.
As for the rest of the topics, there is a profound confrontation, akin to the one that took place in the second half of the 20th century during the Cold War. The hopes of some analysts that the meeting of the American and Russian presidents may initiate the formalization of the multipolar world order that has emerged in recent years will most likely prove futile. Globalist-oriented Joe Biden is clearly not the kind of person with whom one can agree on the division of spheres of influence.
The same can be said about the forecasts of some media, suggesting that the United States is ready to make concessions to Russia in order to discourage it from rapprochement and coordination with China. Of course, for the American side, such a scenario would be desirable. However, firstly, as mentioned above, the Biden administration is not ready to make serious concessions, and secondly, Moscow understands that if one succumbs to the tricks of Washington and abandons joint US opposition with Beijing, sooner or later America will simply "Interrupt them one by one."
Understanding all of the above, Russia is preparing for a long geopolitical confrontation with the United States. This, among other things, is evidenced by the recent statement of the Minister of Finance of the Russian Federation Anton Siluanov about the transition within a month to a new structure of the National Welfare Fund. There is no place for reserves in dollars in this structure (previously, the dollar was 35% of the NWF). The euro will account for 40% of the fund (previously 35%), yuan 30% (previously 15%), gold 20% (previously 0%), British pound 5% (previously 10%), yen 5% (unchanged).
The exclusion of the dollar from the reserves of the Russian National Wealth Fund suggests that the abandonment of the American currency in reserves and mutual settlements is a consistent strategic course of the Russian Federation in the financial sphere, due to the current geopolitical situation.
3. US hints of potential accusations against China in the spread of the coronavirus.
In the geopolitical confrontation between Washington and Beijing, another front is being prepared to open. This time, the United States seems to be planning to accuse China of constructing the coronavirus and, as a result, try to blame it for the beginning of the pandemic.
Back in late May, United States President Joe Biden said that American intelligence had not yet come to a final conclusion about the origins of the coronavirus.
In March, he said, his adviser instructed the intelligence community to prepare a report on the origins of COVID-19, including whether it came from human contact with an infected animal or from a laboratory accident.
"To date, the US intelligence community has" united around two plausible scenarios, "but has not come to a final conclusion on this issue," Biden said in a statement released by the White House.
As the American leader stressed, he asked the US intelligence to redouble efforts to collect and analyze information and inform him of the results within 90 days.
Several points are noteworthy in this statement.
First, Biden poses the question of the origin of Covid-19 to the intelligence community, and not to research institutes or laboratories for the study of viruses. This fact alone suggests that the White House is preparing the public in advance for accusations against China. After all, intelligence is a political instrument, not a research one.
Secondly, the statement of the American president says not just about the natural or artificial (without clarification) origin of the virus, but mentions a very specific version of the leak from the laboratory. In the event that Washington decides, for political reasons, to bring charges against China, such a wording will make it possible to accuse it of two "atrocities" at once, namely, the deliberate development of deadly viruses with an increased degree of infectiousness, and criminal negligence in handling them. Of these two reasons, the American liberal press is capable of stirring up a scandal of a universal scale, under the pretext of which the United States will be able to force satellite countries to declare a boycott of certain Chinese technological goods.
In China, they reacted rather harshly to the unambiguous hints of the American president. So, the official representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China Zhao Lijian said, quote:
“This time, the US is trying to let the intelligence services draw scientific conclusions. This only suggests that the United States is not interested in the truth, they do not want any scientific research, this is just a political game, an attempt to throw the blame on others and throw off responsibility. "
On June 8, this position was confirmed by the press secretary of the Chinese Embassy in the United States, Liu Pegyuy.
He stated that the origin of the coronavirus is a matter of science and should be studied jointly by scientists around the world, and not politicized. Quote:
“Any conclusion must be made in accordance with WHO procedures and evidence-based methods. The campaign to politicize the study of the origins of the coronavirus and accuse China is no different from the lie that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction 12 years ago.
But perhaps the most interesting thing about this topic is that just six months ago, social networks supporting the US Democratic Party actively fought against the thesis about the artificial origin of the coronavirus. Supporters of ex-President Donald Trump, who called the virus nothing but "Chinese", were ruthlessly blocked by these social platforms, and the mainstream liberal press called the version of the artificial origin of the virus populist obscurantism and conspiracy.
Now, Joe Biden may well come forward with theses about the "artificial" and "Chinese" origin of the coronavirus. And the reason for this is simple: no matter who is at the helm, the geopolitical interests of the United States remain unchanged.
4. The International Tribunal in The Hague has confirmed the life sentence to Serbian General Ratko Mladic.
This week in The Hague, an international tribunal confirmed the life sentence of Serbian general Ratko Mladic.
On July 8, judges of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals upheld a life sentence for the former commander of the Bosnian Serbs, General Ratko Mladic. The hearing from The Hague was broadcast on the court's website.
The Appeals Chamber confirmed the previous verdict, according to which Mladic was found guilty of murder, inhuman acts, crimes against humanity, terror, attacks on civilians and hostage-taking.
Earlier, in November 2017, the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia found Ratko Mladic guilty on 10 counts out of 11 for war crimes in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1992-1995, including the genocide of Muslims in Srebrenica in 1995, when about 8 were killed. thousand people.
The court also found him guilty of crimes against humanity and violation of the laws and customs of war in ties and the three-year siege of Sarajevo, which killed 11,000 civilians from shelling.
The only point on which Mladic was acquitted was the accusation of genocide of Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats in some municipalities of Bosnia and Herzegovina (excluding Srebrenica). The Appellate Body confirmed this decision.
After the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Mladic was on the international wanted list for more than 15 years. He was caught in 2011 in the village of Lazarevo in northern Serbia - at the house of his cousin. In 2012, a trial began against him. The general himself denied his guilt on all counts.
Mladic's defense argued that his responsibility for the killings and ethnic cleansing committed by Serb forces and allied paramilitaries "has never been established."
In speaking of this verdict of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, it is difficult to shake off the feeling of bias and blatant double standards prevailing in this court. In fact, the tribunal is actively prosecuting only Serbian politicians and military leaders whom official Washington has long ago made "extreme" for everything that happened during the civil wars in the vastness of the former federal republic.
But opponents of the Serbs, in the person of the Bosnians, Albanians, and even more so - Croats, neither in the ICTY, nor in the Western press or official statements of politicians, are not to be blamed.
Of course, one of the Albanian warlords was taken into custody last year - Hashim Thaci, nicknamed "The Serpent", convicted by a Serbian court of terrorism and accused of illegal trade in organs of kidnapped people. But unlike Ratko Mladic, who was forced to hide from persecution for 15 years, Hashim Thaci was "taken" only after 20 years of a successful political career, the peak of which was the office of President of Kosovo, universal approval and recognition from the Western political establishment. It is unlikely that he will now be given a life sentence.
ECONOMY.
Briefly:
The trend continues to search for new sources of filling the budget. The preferential area of land for farming in Ukraine is planned to be reduced from 2 to 0.5 hectares. The authorities intend to tax speculation in the real estate market through the introduction of VAT on the sale of more than two units of real estate. Also, electricity tariffs will increase by 35% on average until the end of 2021.
On the scale of the global economy, “old money” is fighting against “new money,” namely, IT giants, both American and Chinese. The US lifted sanctions on TikTok and WeChat, but at the same time banned investing in Huawei.
1. The government plans to increase taxes for individuals.
On June 2, the Cabinet of Ministers submitted to the Rada the bill # 5600, which was first informally called “anti-Akhmetov's”, since it meant an increase in the rent for ore mining. In addition to ore, the bill implies an increase in excise taxes on alcohol and the introduction of rent for individuals. The Cabinet of Ministers focused on the new formula for deductions from the sale of real estate. When three or more real estate objects are sold per year, starting with the third one will already need to pay personal income tax, that is, 18%. This is without taking into account 1% of the state duty and 1.5% of the military tax. That is, to sell an apartment worth $ 100,000, you have to pay 20,500 tax. The concept of a minimum tax burden on land is emerging - a tax that will be paid by those who grow agricultural products, including gardeners. Preferential land area - up to 0.5 hectares.
The bill spelled out additional powers of fiscal officials in knocking out taxes - they will be able to request information about the payer, including from government agencies, banks, etc., collect tax arrears, charge taxes on land plots that are processed without documents (their users will be established by local authorities), etc.
The state taxes speculators in the real estate market, since the profitability in this market is from 10 to 50 percent. If speculators sell apartments in new buildings, then they pay an additional 5 percent tax on the value. Sales of housing, both primary and secondary market, except for apartments from the state, will be subject to VAT. In the secondary market, value added tax arises, and this is 20% of the cost. And, if the wording in the project is not changed, the owners of the apartments will have to give 20% to the state upon sale, regardless of whether they are selling the first or third object in the account.
The so-called minimum tax burden on land is being introduced. It does not apply to land tax (it does not change), but will be an additional payment. The formula for determining the minimum tax liability is also prescribed - the normative-monetary value multiplied by the area of the site, the number of months of land cultivation (or its lease), the coefficient (0.05, but for individual entrepreneurs in the fourth group is half as much) and divided by 12.
On average in Ukraine, the normative-monetary value of arable land - 26.4 thousand hryvnia per hectare. That is, for example, for a plot per hectare, you will need to pay an additional about 660 hryvnia of the new tax (taking into account the site's stay in processing for 6 months). Individual entrepreneurs will pay 330 hryvnia, as a reduction factor is provided for them. But this is from a hectare. Farmers usually have several hectares in processing. More than 3 thousand hryvnias will have to be paid from 10 hectares. In some regions, the normative-monetary value of the land is higher. For example, in the Cherkasy region 33.6 thousand hryvnia, in the Chernivtsi region - 33.3 thousand. Accordingly, the minimum tax liability will also be higher.
The new tax did not include ERUs, which is 485 hryvnia per hectare of land. That is, you will have to pay both ERUs and the minimum tax liability. The VAR proposes to include ERUs in the new tax or to reduce it to a maximum of 4% of the regulatory monetary value. Experts also draw attention to the fact that there is no transition period for the launch of a new tax. For individuals, the minimum tax liability for land will be set by the regulatory authorities. Therefore, there are no specific formulas in the project and it is not clear how much you will have to pay in the end. But it is indicated that all land in excess of 0.5 hectares falls under taxation. That is, if you have, for example, "free 2 hectares" allocated for personal farming, you will have to pay for 1.5 of them.
It is also proposed to make a very important change to section 4 of the Tax Code concerning taxes on personal income. The innovation is as follows - they want to revise the area of the land plot on which the products are not taken into account in the income of the individual. Now it is 2 hectares, but according to the new project - only half a hectare, that is, four times less. In other words, if you grow potatoes on a hectare of a garden and then sell them, then only potatoes from half a hectare will not be taken into account in your total income. The money for the rest is added to the total income, which is taxed at a rate of 18%. There is one more important nuance here, in addition to the tax - subsidies. After all, the higher the total family income, the less chances of getting budget aid for communal services.
It is possible that the increase in the tax burden on land is not just happening - it will force some owners to sell off "extra" land, just before the opening of the land market from July 1 this year. Bill # 5600 reflects the trend of total fiscalization in order to find funds to patch holes in the budget. Firstly, upon the initial purchase of real estate (including land, after the opening of the market), it is taxed upon purchase and sale, which means that re-taxation is unacceptable. And secondly, if people are obliged to regularly pay the state for the use of their private property, then it does not belong to them in fact. Thus, bill No. 5600 in terms of taxation of individuals partially abolishes the right to private property. The reduction of the preferential land area from 2 hectares to 0.5 hectares motivates poor peasants to sell their land on the eve of the launch of the land market. The bill also plays into the hands of large developers, as it suppresses schemes when investors buy unfinished real estate objects and resell them cheaper than the developers themselves. One of the few thriving markets in Ukraine, the real estate market in Kiev, now faces the risk of a sharp drop in demand and business activity due to new taxes.
2. The world is going to impose a total tax on techno giants. The United States lifted the ban on Chinese social networks TikTok and WeChat.
Ukraine has just adopted a new law “on tax on Google”, according to which tech-giants will pay 20% VAT to our budget from services provided in our country, but the prospects for getting even more from international corporations are already emerging.
The other day the G7 countries agreed on an important issue - the payment of corporate tax or income tax by tech giants. Today, global corporations pay this tax at the place of registration. This allows companies to register in so-called "tax havens" - countries with low tax rates - and thus save money.
The G7 countries have made a historic decision - international corporations must pay tax in the countries where they earn, not where they are registered. The corporate tax may be 15% - this is how much the global tech giants will deduct to the budgets of the countries where they work. Ukraine, theoretically, will also benefit from this decision, since we will be able to claim 15% of the money that Microsoft, Google or Facebook earn from us, and this is billions of hryvnias per year.
On June 9, US President Joe Biden signed a decree overturning a number of decisions by his predecessor, Donald Trump, to ban transactions with WeChat and TikTok owners in the United States. But he gave the order to check once again how much these Chinese companies can threaten US national security. Biden has signed a new executive order banning investments in China's 59 tech companies. Among them SMIC and Huawei.
Thus, the ruling elites of Western countries are fighting against representatives of the "new money" in the person of techno-corporations trying to take over political functions. In the future, this trend will continue.
3. Kobolev's scheme. As a structure of "Naftogaz Ukrainy" paid millions to lobbyists in the United States for PR.
In the United States, on behalf of Naftogaz, the Washington-based lobbying firm Yorktown Solutions LLC is fighting the Russian-German project. At the end of December 2020, the Federation of Oil and Gas Industry Employers controlled by Naftogaz of Ukraine signed an agreement with Yorktown Solutions for PR services for almost $ 1 million (the exact amount is $ 960,000). Services will be provided throughout 2021.
One of the two main goals of the customer under this agreement is called "effective elimination of threats" that are created on the basis of the Nord Stream 2 project. The second goal is traditional ritual phrases for Ukrainian politics like "integration into the EU," "support for reforms," etc. That is, the fight against the Nord Stream 2 project is so important for Naftogaz that it is singled out separately from the list of all the others. tasks. A similar agreement was in effect throughout 2020 and was concluded between the same parties and for the same amount - 960 thousand US dollars. The essence of both agreements was to "inform and involve interested parties" on important Ukrainian issues. In reality, according to published reports, the services consisted of posting publications in various media and social networks (mainly American), as well as conducting email mailings and calling American senators, White House employees and other representatives of the US political elite and leading media outlets. Naftogaz Ukrainy worked with its Washington lobbyists before, until 2020. In 2017, an agreement was concluded with them for 37 thousand dollars, in 2018 - for 34.4 thousand. The key difference is that after Zelensky came to power in 2020, Naftogaz began to pay tens of times more, and not directly. and through the "gasket" represented by the Federation of Oil and Gas Employers. Now Yorktown Solutions is in the process of concluding another agreement - for $ 80,000, but with another state-owned company - Spetstechnoexport, which is engaged in the export of weapons and military products.
The text of the agreements on lobbying in the United States to disrupt the construction of Nord Stream 2 became known thanks to the US Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). The texts of the agreements, as well as reports on their execution, are available in the public domain.
Thanks to such reports, one can understand how Washington lobbyists hired by Naftogaz structures are fighting against Nord Stream 2. For example, in one of its most recent reports on its work, dated May 25, Yorktown Solutions tweeted Polish politician Radek Sikorski in which he called for a halt to the pipeline's construction. The report concludes that the material is being distributed by Yorktown Solutions LLC on behalf of the Ukrainian Federation of Oil and Gas Employers.
The report does not explicitly state that the material was "ordered" and that its publication was paid for by lobbyists. However, in clause 5.4 of the agreement between the Federation of Employers and American lobbyists, it is said that all prepared public materials must be agreed with the Customer (i.e., with the Ukrainian side) before they are released on behalf of the customer.
Since the material was released on behalf of the Federation of Employers, it can be assumed that before publication it was also previously agreed with the Ukrainian customer.
High-ranking Ukrainian officials are trying to hide information about the millions in spending on American lobbyists. For example, the former Deputy Foreign Minister of the Poroshenko era, Elena (Lana) Zerkal, reported on her Facebook on June 2 that the services of the companies that assisted Naftogaz in disrupting the construction of Nord Stream 2 cost only $ 2,600. Yorktown Solutions lobbyists' services cost about $ 2 million.
If under Trump, the interests of Ukraine and the United States coincided with regard to the resistance to the completion of Nord Stream 2, then under Biden, who had already refused to introduce new sanctions against this enterprise, Ukraine continued its attempts to influence public opinion in the United States and even certain American politicians on the highest level so that they support the fight against the completion of Nord Stream 2.
4. The European Commission is preparing a mission to Ukraine regarding the launch of "industrial visa-free".
The results of the EU's preliminary assessment of Ukraine's compliance with the Agreement on the Assessment of Conformity and Acceptability of Industrial Products (ACAA Agreement) showed progress in the implementation of European standards, but a number of shortcomings still need to be corrected.
The experts analyzed more than 80 Ukrainian legislative acts. Their findings point to progress in the harmonization of Ukrainian legislation regarding the national infrastructure for quality and industrial goods with the main provisions of the EU.
The identified shortcomings, in particular, relate to the system of market supervision in Ukraine, as well as the use of product labeling by Ukrainian manufacturers.
The EU supports Ukraine in the implementation of the Twinning project in the field of national quality infrastructure. The second stage of the preliminary assessment will focus on the implementation of the analyzed Ukrainian legislation. This will be followed by a formal assessment and negotiation of the ACAA Agreement.
The ACAA agreement is a recognition of the equivalence of the European technical regulation and conformity assessment system, which would allow manufacturers of industrial products to obtain the necessary certificates in Ukraine, and not go to the EU in search of an official representative (EU resident) who can receive this certificate.
Quality standards are an ideal way to artificially reduce the volume of Ukrainian imports to the EU. Thus, even within the free trade zone, the European side can de facto continue the protectionism of European producers, protecting them from Ukrainian imports, which are cheaper due to lower salary costs, etc. But at the same time, the European Union simplifies labor migration from Ukraine, and now, with the help of the future launch of "industrial visa-free", the requirements will be written out in such a way as to launch on the European market only those goods that the European side really needs.
5. In Ukraine, they want to increase electricity tariffs for the population.
The Ministry of Energy is considering three scenarios for increasing electricity tariffs for the population.
The first model is to reduce tariffs for those who consume less than 100 kilowatts per month (and these are, first of all, pensioners and poor citizens) from the current 1.68 hryvnia to 1 hryvnia per kilowatt. According to the analyst of the Institute for Strategic Studies Yuri Korolchuk, in fact, several options are being discussed for this tariff - from 90 kopecks to 1.2 hryvnia per kilowatt. That is, in fact, it is proposed to return the tariff to the level of the previously canceled preferential (it was 90 kopecks per kilowatt). But, if all citizens received a preferential tariff - for the first 100 kilowatts, then only those who generally consume no more than 100 kilowatts per month will be able to pay 1 hryvnia per kilowatt.
If it is more, then the tariffication (from the first kilowatt) will go according to a different scheme. For those who consume up to 200 kilowatts per month, the tariff can be left at the current level - 1.68 hryvnia per kilowatt. With a consumption level of 200 to 500 kilowatts, the price tag will rise to 2.3 hryvnia. If the consumption is even higher (from 500 kilowatts) - up to 3.5 hryvnia per kilowatt. According to Yuriy Korolchuk, 200-400 kilowatts per month is just the average level of household consumption in Ukraine. That is, the majority of families will fall under the tariff increase.
Average consumption in apartments with basic household appliances (washing machine, dishwasher, refrigerator, electric kettle), as well as TV, computer and other electronics is at least 300-350 kilowatts per month. If there are also "excesses", for example, a warm floor, a gaming computer or an electric stove in the house, an air conditioner is actively used (for heating or cooling), it is easy to exceed the bar of 500 kilowatts. That is, in fact, the audience of potential payers for increased tariffs is not as small as it seems at first glance.
The second option, which is being discussed in the Ministry of Energy, is as follows:
Leave the current tariff at 1.68 hryvnia per kilowatt for those who consume up to 300 kilowatts (that is, do not reduce it for consumption less than 100 kilowatts, as in the first option). For those who "burn" 300-500 kilowatts of electricity per month, set a tariff of 3.5 hryvnia per kilowatt. Those who spend more than 500 kilowatts will pay 4.3 hryvnia per kilowatt. There is also a third option - to leave the same price tag for everyone, but to raise it from the current 1.68 hryvnia to 2.5 hryvnia per kilowatt.
These are the main options. In fact, according to experts, the main problem is how to balance the balance and at the same time not greatly increase the price tag, but it is better to also lower it, for poor consumers. In addition to PR for the authorities, this is also a matter of subsidies.
"That is, they are looking for how to plug financial holes in the market and at the same time preserve and, if possible, reduce the tariff for socially unprotected groups of the population. But in the end, those who consume more will have to pay for them," says Oleg Popenko.
For example, if now the average family pays for 300 kilowatts of 504 hryvnia per month, then according to the first option, the PSO will pay 690 hryvnia, and according to the second - 1050 hryvnia, according to the third - 750 hryvnia. Households with a consumption of 500 kilowatts (say, 550 kilowatts) now pay 924 hryvnia per month, according to the first option, the PSO will pay 1925 hryvnia, and according to the second - 2365 hryvnia, according to the third - 1375 hryvnia. It is not yet clear how the issue will be resolved with those who heat their homes with electric boilers.
6. MPs have registered a bill on the restructuring of the state debt to the IMF.
On June 10th, 37 MPs from different factions and groups registered in parliament a draft resolution No 5607 on the restructuring of Ukraine's external public debt to the International Monetary Fund. In the explanatory note to the draft resolution, the need for its adoption is justified by the fact that most of the reforms proposed to our country by the IMF were "contradictory and ineffective." Therefore, further conditions of cooperation with the International Monetary Fund should be revised.
“In 2021, our country will spend 468.4 billion hryvnia to pay off public debt and another 158.6 billion hryvnia to maintain it. That is, a total of 627 billion hryvnias were received. And this is almost half of the entire expenditure side of the state budget, and a third more than in 2020, ”the draft resolution says.
MPs also stress that more than 300 lawmakers from around the world called on the IMF and World Bank on May 13, 2020 to write off the debts of the poorest countries and increase funding to stave off a global economic downturn.
The authors of the resolution suggest:
the government urgently prepare and send an appeal to the IMF with a proposal to restructure part of Ukraine's external public debt as a country affected by the pandemic;
hold consultations and negotiations with the IMF to clarify Ukraine's position on the external public debt;
create a temporary ad hoc working group to develop a set of measures to restructure Ukraine's external public debt to the IMF with the involvement of deputies.
According to the NBU, the peak of payments on external debt falls in the third quarter of 2021 - $ 5.7 billion. In total, payments on foreign currency public debt in 2021-2022 will exceed $ 17 billion.
At the same time, the IMF expects more progress in implementing reforms to provide Ukraine with the next tranche.
Edited by:
Ruslan Bortnik,
Daniil Bogatyrev.
Authors:
Daniil Bogatyrev,
Oksana Krasovskaya,
Andrey Timchenko.
