We really came through possibly the most terrible 10 days in our modern history. Why were they terrible? And why it is our history? That is because for the first time in last 17 years a war broke out between the former soviet countries. It is the first war between the countries that have been forming Soviet Union. And it is a grave symptom. I think it requires us to conduct a very precise investigation. Why did that happen? What is the lesson we have to learn as a state, as citizens?

Without doubts, it is an unprecedented situation and therefore Ukraine may not be indifferent towards it. The society may not be dormant in that situation either. The most important thing here is to draw a number of conclusions out of what has happened. The first one applies not only to Ukraine but also to all the states in the region and even from beyond. It is the conclusion that no national model of security is capable of giving proper response to challenges threatening national sovereignty. There is no model that would be self-dependant and, at the same time, would allow forming own national position.

What has happened to Georgia is a good example of how easy it is nowadays to bring combat, violation of territorial integrity and sovereignty to any territory that lacks a mechanism of collective guarantees protecting it. In other words: without proper guarantees any territory may suffer actions of such kind, which would put the most sacred thing for the nation – its independence, under question.

I am not speaking now about whom we should be fighting against; quite the contrary – I am speaking about what we should be fighting for. It is another matter. And the answer here is that we should be bringing Ukraine closer towards collective security because it is the only way to secure national sovereignty and integrity of our boarders.

Only collective security system is capable of providing top-level guarantees to Ukraine and other states; the guarantees that could stop any actions like those that have taken place on August 7-8, first at the territory of South Ossetia and then, at other Georgian territories.

Another thought. When there is a discussion and we are trying to make an analysis of the conflicting parties, to form definitions and to shape our position towards sides of the conflict, I would put at the first place the following: in that conflict it is important for Ukraine to come out in favor of principles of territorial integrity and sovereignty. Regardless of the stage we are analyzing – let it be the beginning of the aggression, its end or settlement of the conflict.

We all remember that speaking of legal aspect, Europe came out of the Second World War only in 1975, when Helsinki Final Act was adopted. The Act provided foundation for general acknowledgement of key criteria for national security: national sovereignty and territorial integrity of the European states (because it was a document which has been prepared within the scope of European security policy). Another important and broader document was the Charter of the United Nations. Yet, Helsinki Final Act was legal and fundamental conclusion of the Second World War, and its aim was to put territorial integrity of European countries into the foundation of security policy.

That is why territorial integrity of any country is number one aspect. If this aspect is put under question by anyone, it means that we are at the doorstep of deep and serious military action. That is why, applied speaking, Ukraine must support territorial integrity and sovereignty of Georgia when it comes to the conflict there. This idea should be insisted upon in our polemics and our discussions. Threat to anyone’s territorial sovereignty is the threat to our own sovereignty. Allowance of revision of sovereignty and territorial integrity of any of the European countries means allowance of revision of territorial integrity of Ukraine.

Therefore I would like to emphasize: our position is – Helsinki Act’s principles aimed at strengthening territorial integrity of any European state should be strictly observed. And the country that suffered should face in that question Ukraine’s policy of consolidation, unity and support.

We understand well enough that formation of Georgia’s territorial integrity has not been easy. That regards Abkhazia, Adzharia, South Ossetia; that regards conflicts on state level at the beginning of nineties, particularly in 1992 when these complications were made a part of state sovereignty of Georgia. But until now all the countries of Europe and of the world have been proceeding from the formula of Georgia’s territorial integrity. It was the basis for policy of peace and security. I am sure that it is the ground Ukraine should be standing upon. We support Georgia’s territorial integrity and we support this country’s sovereignty because we support territorial integrity of Ukraine and Ukraine’s sovereignty.

I understand that there is a lot of discussion going on among the journalists and among Ukrainian citizens about the extent of solidarity, Ukraine and Ukrainian community should be demonstrating to Georgia and to South Ossetia. I would answer this question with one example. In the forties a German priest and philosopher wrote a book about the tragedy of the Second World War. To retell plot of the book in short it was like this: “When they have come to take away communists, I was silent because I was no communist. Time passed and they have come to take away Jews, and I was silent again, because I am not a Jew. When time has come and they came to take away Catholics, and they were taking them away before my very eyes, I was silent because I’m a Protestant. But when they have come to take away me, there was no one left to protect me.” With this I would like to say that Ukrainian nation should be sensitive – sensitive to principles of democracy, to freedoms. If we really want to be in Europe, we must protect these principles – freedom of speech, democracy territorial integrity and sovereignty. I emphasize that – anybody’s sovereignty. Because on that depends our own sovereignty. And I refuse to support logics of some politicians or maybe even of a part of society, who say: “Lets remain undetermined in categories”. In my opinion it is the most dangerous position.

The conclusion that should be drawn out of the situation is that it is necessary to elaborate conflict settlement plan as early as possible. The plan is being prepared in extremely difficult circumstances and Ukraine, as a democratic country, should have active position for that complex plan to be completed as soon as possible.

On August 9, Ukraine has formulated its perception of the issue and presented it before EU countries via diplomatic channels. With that we wanted to demonstrate that we could be that active side to take part in democratic settlement of the conflict.

Certainly condition number one is ceasefire.

Condition number two is withdrawal of forces to deployment positions they had been occupying before August 1.

Condition number three is humanitarian aid.

Condition number four Ukraine is persisting in is that the plan should include confirmation of Georgia’s territorial integrity.

The last condition in my opinion is the most important component of the plan. It is crucial that neither of the documents to be signed within the peacemaking process doubted sovereignty and integrity of Georgia.

Condition number five regards peacemaking troops. The trilateral peacekeeping mission that had been working before, as Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine noted on August 5, was proved to be ineffective. Peacekeepers that began shooting civilians do not deserve confidence. Therefore we speak for internationalization of peacemaking forces. And Ukraine is ready to send a number of its peacemakers for the needs of this operation within the framework of proper international mandate.

Another important thing in my opinion is that military forces deployed at Ukrainian territory were taking part in the events. I am speaking about Black Sea fleet of Russian Federation. The fleet occupies more than 18 thousand hectares of territory (by the way Ukrainian fleet is deployed on 600 hectares). There are more than 30 military ships and approximately 80 aircrafts deployed at the base of Russia’s BSF. In other words we are speaking of very powerful force. And the situation that arose in Georgia, when ships of this fleet were taking part in blocking sea waters near Georgian coast, has shown how easy Ukraine can be passively pulled into an international conflict, without its will or consent. I don’t think Ukrainian nation and authorities are indifferent towards this question. That is why I have sent through official channels an immediate proposal to the President of Russia to begin talks on elaboration of appropriate agreement that would regulate our relations in cases of military actions, similar to those, we were witnesses to in the beginning of August, and that would ensure protection of Ukraine’s national interests in such cases. In other words we should form clearer regulations that would guarantee national security of Ukraine in such situations.

The following thesis may be continuation of the previous one. The NSDC has adopted a decision few days ago, introducing two sets of regulations for Russian Black Sea Fleet units deployed at the Ukrainian territory. The first set of regulations established rules of Ukrainian state boarder crossing and enumerated procedures to be taken by corresponding national authorities in order to arrange the abovementioned legal action, as legislation demands it. The second regulates movement of Russian military vehicles and personnel, deployed in Ukraine, across our country’s territory. For us all to understand better what is going on (although these two documents are available at the website of the President of Ukraine and one can familiarize oneself with them) according to current rocedure Russian military units have the right to freely move across Ukrainian territory. They may inform corresponding Ukrainian authorities either before or after they had exited their base and went on a route. Certainly this is not an adequate situation that would correspond with national interests of Ukraine.

Ukrainian side insists that we must ensure observation of permission system of foreign military units movement across Ukrainian territory. That is the goal the document aims at. It sais that Black Sea fleet Command must provide the Ukrainian side with the information on the route, forces composition and other details 10 days before the movement takes place. Also the regulation requires such movements to take place only in daytime as well as provides additional requirements to them.

I’d like to remind that such regulations exist in every country, where foreign troops are deployed. Therefore it is not a tactless step to introduce them in Ukraine. It is not about our attitude towards anyone. It is about attitude towards national security policy.

Ukrainian nation and Ukrainian authorities should be fully aware of all the military processes happening at national territory. It is one of the basic things for national security. Therefore, it is unnecessary to perceive these things fin inadequate ways. I would ask journalist and society to show understanding to Ukrainian authorities’ actions in that field.

Direct link