Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06KIEV1444
2006-04-11 15:25:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Kyiv
Cable title:  

UKRAINE: NSDC SECRETARY ON TRANSNISTRIA, BELARUS,

Tags:  PREL PBTS ENRG ETRD PINR OSCE MD BO RS UP 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXRO9648
PP RUEHDBU
DE RUEHKV #1444/01 1011525
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 111525Z APR 06
FM AMEMBASSY KIEV
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 8747
INFO RUCNCIS/CIS COLLECTIVE
RUEHZG/NATO EU COLLECTIVE
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 KIEV 001444 

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/11/2016
TAGS: PREL PBTS ENRG ETRD PINR OSCE MD BO RS UP
SUBJECT: UKRAINE: NSDC SECRETARY ON TRANSNISTRIA, BELARUS,
RUSSIA

Classified By: Ambassador for reasons 1.4 (b,d).

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 KIEV 001444

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/11/2016
TAGS: PREL PBTS ENRG ETRD PINR OSCE MD BO RS UP
SUBJECT: UKRAINE: NSDC SECRETARY ON TRANSNISTRIA, BELARUS,
RUSSIA

Classified By: Ambassador for reasons 1.4 (b,d).


1. (C) Summary: In an April 11 meeting, National Security
and Defense Council (NSDC) Secretary Kinakh told Ambassador
the Ukrainian government was concerned that Transnistrian
authorities might provoke an armed confrontation at one of
Transnistria's "border crossings" with Moldova. The Russians
had agreed to a meeting of guarantors and observers (Ukraine,
Russia, EU, and OSCE, but not Moldova and Transnistria) in
Moscow, and Kinakh hoped the U.S. would join the April 19
meeting. Kinakh said he did not expect President Yushchenko
to meet Belarusan President Lukashenka during commemorations
of the April 26 twentieth anniversary of the Chornobyl
disaster. (An MFA official separately confirmed Kinakh's
understanding and committed to alert us if discussion of a
meeting did start up again.) A new Ukrainian government was
unlikely to annul the natural gas agreement with Russia, but
attention would turn to an intergovernmental agreement
governing Ukraine and Russia's energy relationship. The
Ukrainian government was not considering imposing a
tit-for-tat measure in response to Moscow's prohibition on
the import of Ukrainian dairy products. End summary.

Transnistria -- April 19 Moscow Meeting
--------------


2. (C) NSDC Secretary Anatoliy Kinakh told Ambassador April
11 that the Ukrainian government continued closely to monitor
the "serious" situation in Transnistria. Ukrainian Black Sea
ports continued to lose revenue from the Transnistrian
authorities' decision to close its borders in response to
Ukraine's implementation of a customs agreement with Moldova.
With the exception of a handful of companies, Transnistrian
leader Igor Smirnov continued to forbid Transnistrian
companies from registering with the Moldovan government,
leading to financial losses from their inability to export

their product, but, Kinakh said, the Ukrainian government
suspected Moscow of providing funds to compensate these
losses. Without specifying his reasons for saying so, Kinakh
said the Ukrainian government was concerned that the
Transnistrian authorities might provoke an armed
confrontation at Bender (the Moldova-Transnistria "border
crossing" point on the rail line between Tiraspol and
Chisinau).


3. (C) Kinakh said the key to resolving the present impasse
lay in Moscow and also with the OSCE and the United States.
Plans were moving forward to hold a meeting in Moscow April
19 of Ukraine, Russia, the EU, and OSCE. Kinakh said he
hoped the U.S. would participate, and he confirmed the
Russian government had agreed to the meeting. The meeting
participants would discuss the issue of Russia's fulfillment
of its Istanbul commitments and Transnistria's self-imposed
economic blockade.

Belarus - No Presidential Summit
--------------


4. (C) On Belarus, Kinakh said there had been agreement in
principle to hold a Ukraine-Belarus summit since the
September 2004 CIS summit in Astana, Kazakhstan. These
plans, however, had not been made concrete, and a meeting
during April 26 commemorations of the 20th anniversary of the
Chornobyl disaster was unlikely. In addition to the badly
flawed presidential election, Belarusan President Lukashenka
had taken a number of steps unfriendly to Ukraine recently.
As an example, around April 6, he had sent Transnistrian
leader Igor Smirnov a letter of support that promised to
provide Transnistria with "humanitarian shipments." Kinakh
agreed that this was probably at Moscow's bidding. Kinakh
noted, in view of the high volume of trade between the two
countries, that Ukraine would continue to endeavor to
cooperate on the economic front with Belarus.


5. (C) Note: Later on April 11, MFA 2nd Territorial
Department Director Anatoliy Ponomarenko separately told us
there were no discussions ongoing concerning a possible
meeting of the two presidents. He noted Ukraine had
originally set two pre-conditions for such a meeting: 1)
signing of a consular accord regarding visas for workers at
Chornobyl and 2) signing of an agreement to permit transit of
construction materials for the new Chornobyl Shelter
Implementation Program. Belarus had not come back to the GOU
on the agreements. Ponomarenko said MFA would let us know if
discussions on a possible meeting began anew, but he was
quite dubious that there would be any movement on the
agreements or a meeting soon. Further on Belarus,
Ponomarenko added MFA had asked Ukrainian Ambassador to the
U.S. Oleh Shamshur April 10 to inform the Department that
Ukraine was looking at the possibility of hosting an informal
"donors" meeting on Belarus democracy in Kiev April 28-29.

KIEV 00001444 002 OF 002


Ponomarenko said the meeting would be modeled on a similar
meeting held in Stockholm. End note.

Russia - Trade and Natural Gas Friction
--------------


6. (C) Kinakh said the trade war with Russia was continuing.
Although Moscow had authorized six Ukrainian companies to
export their dairy products to Russia, no resolution of the
general prohibition was in sight. Beginning April 1, Russia
had prohibited the import of Ukrainian alcoholic spirits.
Russia, however, had been more flexible after Ukrainian
officials warned Russia they would advise Ukrainian
businesses to turn to pro-Russian political forces in Ukraine
to overturn the embargo. Kinakh said the Ukrainian
government had not really considered a tit-for-tat imposition
of an embargo on Russian imports since such a move would
merely aggravate the situation and the economic impact on
Russia would be negligible.


7. (C) Kinakh said a new Ukrainian government was unlikely to
seek to annul the January 4 Ukraine-Russia natural gas supply
agreement. The focus of attention would instead turn toward
the signing of an inter-governmental protocol defining
Ukraine and Russia's obligations to one another in the energy
field. Such a protocol would address the process of moving
toward market prices not only for Russia's supply of natural
gas to Ukraine but also for the transit of natural gas across
Ukrainian territory. Unfortunately, the current agreement
would not ensure the same gas price from Russia after July 1.
The Russians were warning that the price had been predicated
on supplies of Turkmen gas, which might not be available in
the near future. In fact, Kinakh noted, Russian agreements
with Central Asian countries gave Russia a virtual monopoly
to supply Central Asian natural gas. Kinakh urged the USG to
work with the EU and within the G-8 to obtain a Russian
commitment to guarantee access to its energy transport system.


8. (U) Visit Embassy Kiev's classified website:
www.state.sgov.gov/p/eur/kiev.
Herbst