‘Ukrainian opposition is morally and politically bankrupt’
RT:The opposition wants everyone freed unconditionally. Why should rioters who injured or even killed policemen be released, when these actions typically land you in prison for decades? Is it realistic?
Nebosja Malic: The opposition keeps moving the goal posts. Obviously they want the government to unconditionally surrender on all of their demands whatever those demands might be. Today they are requesting one thing, two days before they were demanding something else and the week before something else altogether. If they are given this by the parliament they will demand even more.
They’ve made it obvious that only unconditional surrender will do. Releasing these people would send a dangerous message to everybody in Ukraine that you can get away with murder literally if you happen to lend in power. And you get there by blackmailing the government, by occupying the town squares, by resorting to violence. This is not going to end well if these demands are appeased. Appeasement usually doesn’t end well anyway.
RT:President Yanukovich has shown he's willing to negotiate and compromise. Why isn't the opposition making similar efforts to try and end the violence?
NM: They are like a dog chasing cars. They have no idea what to do when they catch it. Their whole gambit is to take over the government. Short of taking over the government their effort will be a failure. They need to capture the government to be successful. So this is the marching orders they were given by people financing them. Anything short of dismantling the government and hanging it over to them would be a failure; this is why they just cannot compromise even if they wanted to.
The offer to Yatsenyuk to take over the prime ministership the other day, I thought at first it was just a sign of weakness, but it might be a brilliant gambit to expose the bankruptcy of the opposition because here take exactly what you demand and see what the response is. If the response is “no – we want even more.” So they have declared themselves completely morally and politically bankrupt and yet the government tries to appease them, which is further definite sign of weakness.
RT:The EU Commission chief said he wants to see a political solution in Ukraine, US Secretary of State John Kerry said the same in a phone call with the opposition. Do you think the West will try to push the opposition towards dialogue now?
NM: I sincerely doubt it. The European Union wants to see a client regime in Kiev. I think they want to see a government that would obey them in every respect like what they have in Serbia currently. I think that’s the ultimate goal and if opposition coalition is willing enable to get into power using any means necessarily and making any demands it sees fit, and the government is weak enough to let them, then I don’t see why the European Union would essentially stop them. They want this to happen, they want these people to take over the government.
RT:The EU and the US have hailed Viktor Yanukovich's concessions as a sign of progress. Why are they basically praising the president's efforts all of a sudden?
NM: Because he is capitulating. I think the perception is “OK, we will praise you when you surrender, we will criticize you when you fight, so sooner or later you’ll be conditioned to surrender on demand.” I think they’ll be happiest with Yanukovich if he resigns tomorrow and hands Ukraine over to Klitschko, Yatsenyuk and Tyagnibok, which if they will then run things into the ground is completely immaterial to these foreign backers.
I don’t think trying to appease the protesters and trying to get into good graces of the EU and the US by essentially self-destructing the country is a good strategy for any politician, but I would really like to point to Serbia as an example of what not to do, for everybody in the world, including Ukraine.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.