This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/08/world/europe/Putin-Russia-Ukraine.html

The article has changed 11 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 6 Version 7
Putin Announces Pullback From Ukraine Border Putin Announces Pullback From Ukraine Border
(about 1 hour later)
MOSCOW — In an apparent attempt to halt the escalating violence in southeastern Ukraine, President Vladimir V. Putin said on Wednesday that Russia was pulling troops back from the border, and he urged Ukrainian separatists to call off a referendum on sovereignty they had hoped to hold on Sunday. MOSCOW — President Vladimir V. Putin, faced with rising violence in southeastern Ukraine that threatened to draw in the Russian Army at great cost and prompt severe new Western economic sanctions, pressed pause on Wednesday in what had started to look like an inevitable march toward war.
Speaking at the Kremlin after talks with the president of Switzerland, who is acting as the chief mediator for Europe in the crisis, Mr. Putin said that Russia wanted to give diplomacy a chance. But it remained unclear to analysts and political leaders on both sides of the Atlantic whether he was truly reversing course on Ukraine or if this was just another of his judo-inspired feints.
“We were told constantly about concerns over our troops near the Ukrainian border,” Mr. Putin said. “We have pulled them back. Today they are not at the Ukrainian border but in places of regular exercises, at training grounds.” Using a far less ominous tone than in previous remarks about Ukraine, Mr. Putin told a news conference at the Kremlin that Russia had withdrawn the troops menacing Ukraine from along the border and that he had asked separatists to drop plans for a referendum on sovereignty this Sunday. Russia would even accept Ukraine’s presidential election on May 25, he said, if demands for autonomy from the country’s east were recognized.
NATO officials said that they saw no immediate sign that Russian forces had pulled back, news services reported from NATO’s headquarters in Brussels. A White House spokesman, Josh Earnest, told reporters traveling with President Obama aboard Air Force One that while the United States would welcome a Russian military pullback from the Ukraine border region, “there has been no evidence that such a withdrawal has taken place.” Mr. Putin said Russia wanted to spur mediation efforts led by the Europeans. He said he did not know whether talks between the warring sides in Ukraine were “realistic,” but was determined to give them a chance, in particular a suggestion from Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany that the factions engage in a round-table discussion.
Senior British officials also reacted with some skepticism to Mr. Putin’s announcement, noting that the previous time he announced a sizable troop withdrawal from the border, in a phone call with Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, he moved only one battalion a modest distance while the great bulk of Russian troops remained in place. One official said satellite photos that would better verify Mr. Putin’s assertions would take a while to come through. “I simply believe that if we want to find a long-term solution to the crisis in Ukraine, open, honest and equal dialogue is the only possible option,” he said.
Nevertheless, British officials regarded Mr. Putin’s comments as positive. They suggested that he wants to avoid a larger economic confrontation with the United States and the European Union, and that some of the concerns of Russian businessmen may finally be getting through to the tight circle around Mr. Putin. While Western governments welcomed Mr. Putin’s apparent about-face, there was also abundant skepticism, based in part on his record in Crimea. Mr. Putin repeatedly denied that Russia’s soldiers were involved in the region, only to admit later that they were.
Speaking in Warsaw, NATO’s secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, said that NATO was also unable to confirm a withdrawal of Russian troops. A White House spokesman, Josh Earnest, told reporters traveling with President Obama aboard Air Force One that while the United States would welcome a Russian military pullback, “there has been no evidence that such a withdrawal has taken place.” NATO officials confirmed that on Wednesday, saying they saw no troop movements.
Citing negotiations between Ukrainian separatists and the interim government in Kiev, Mr. Putin also said he was appealing “to representatives of southeast Ukraine and supporters of federalization to hold off the referendum scheduled for May 11, in order to give this dialogue the conditions it needs to have a chance.” Senior British officials also reacted warily to Mr. Putin’s announcement, noting that he had once before announced a sizable troop withdrawal from the border, in a phone call with Mrs. Merkel, but moved only one battalion a modest distance. One official said that satellite photos that would better verify Mr. Putin’s assertions would take a while to come through.
The reaction in Kiev and among the separatists in southeastern Ukraine was a combination of suspicion and mistrust. In Ukraine, there was a feeling that Mr. Putin was again seeking to manipulate the situation, while the separatists either declined to comment or said they were unsure about exactly to whom the Russian leader was appealing. Nevertheless, British officials regarded Mr. Putin’s comments as positive. They suggested that he wants to avoid a larger economic confrontation with the United States and the European Union and that some of the concerns of Russian businessmen may finally be getting through to the tight circle around Mr. Putin.
Mr. Putin said he wanted the authorities in Kiev to immediately halt all military actions in southeastern Ukraine, referring to them again as “punitive operations.” He also welcomed the release of militants the Ukrainians had been holding, particularly Pavel Gubarev, a “people’s governor” in Donetsk who had been detained by the Ukrainian security services. While the world was caught off guard by Mr. Putin’s sudden peace offensive, analysts in Moscow cited several robust military, economic and political reasons he might be inclined to switch tracks.
“We think the most important thing now is to launch direct dialogue, genuine, full-fledged dialogue between the Kiev authorities and representatives of southeast Ukraine,” he said, standing next to Didier Burkhalter, the president of Switzerland and the chairman of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which is coordinating the mediation effort. First, there has been an increasing sense here, as elsewhere, that conditions in Ukraine were rapidly approaching the situation in Yugoslavia in 1991, when the former Soviet satellite broke into pieces. The violence among various factions was creating facts on the ground, they said, that nobody could predict or manage.
“This dialogue could give people from southeast Ukraine the chance to see that their lawful rights in Ukraine really will be guaranteed,” he said. Mr. Putin also left the door open to Russia accepting, under certain conditions, the May 25 presidential elections, which Moscow had previously rejected. Paradoxically, some added, this dynamic was nurtured in large part by round-the-clock reports on Russian state television that Ukraine was heaving with violence instigated primarily by neo-fascist cells emanating from western Ukraine. But with the notable exception of some 40 deaths in riots last week in Odessa, far from the separatist hotbeds of Slovyansk and Donetsk, the violence was mostly confined to small skirmishes.
“Let me stress that the presidential election the Kiev authorities plan to hold is a step in the right direction, but it will not solve anything unless all of Ukraine’s people first understand how their rights will be guaranteed once the election has taken place,” Mr. Putin said. There were worrying signs that was changing, however.
Mr. Putin was basically demanding that the mediation achieve what Russia has been seeking since the rebellion in Kiev overthrew Ukraine’s leader and Moscow’s ally, President Viktor F. Yanukovych, on Feb. 21: that Kiev grant some level of autonomy to the regions, including electing their own governors and directing their own foreign policy with their immediate neighbors. “The problem is that in all these types of conflicts, once the black swans have started to fly, you will never control the situation,” said Sergei A. Karaganov, dean of the School of International Economics and Foreign Affairs at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow and a periodic adviser to the Kremlin on foreign policy.
Such a change would allow Russia some measure of control over the future direction of Ukraine and a possible veto over Ukraine’s attempts to join the European Union, or worse from Russia’s viewpoint, NATO. In modern international relations and finance, “black swans” refer to random, unexpected events with unforeseeable consequences. “Law and order was beginning to fall apart, and more and more groups were fighting each other,” Mr. Karaganov said.
“We all want the crisis to end as soon as possible, and in such a way that takes into account the interests of all people in Ukraine no matter where they live,” said Mr. Putin, according to the official Kremlin transcript of his remarks. The other reasons follow a certain logic. Mr. Putin wants to shape Ukraine’s future, but an invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Army would be wildly expensive, bloody and unpredictable. Even a nominally successful invasion could breed an insurgency in the east by pro-Ukrainian militants, while the partition of the country would stick Russia with a failed state in southeast Ukraine that would take tens of billions to restructure. It would also create an implacably anti-Russian and pro-European state in western Ukraine that would most likely join NATO as fast as it could.
Given Russia’s record in Crimea, where Mr. Putin repeatedly denied that Russia’s soldiers were involved, only to admit later that they were, there was some chance that it was all a feint. Previously, for example, senior defense officials have said Russia was withdrawing what Western officials said were 40,000 troops from the border to barracks. But the soldiers remained. And an invasion would almost certainly galvanize the European Union into joining the United States in imposing much tougher sanctions that might target entire sections of the Russian economy, like banking, energy or steel.
Both Crimea and southeastern Ukraine have large populations of ethnic Russians, and Mr. Putin has insisted on Moscow’s right to intervene to protect them if they are endangered. Western governments have accused the Kremlin of fomenting the very unrest and violence that Mr. Putin has vowed to protect ethnic Russians against. The Russian aim in Ukraine has always been clear, analysts said. Mr. Putin wanted to annex Crimea with minimal cost, which he appears to have done. Generally, Washington and the European capitals have been so focused on the possible dismemberment of Ukraine that Crimea was shunted to a back burner.
The pro-Russian militants who have seized public buildings in at least a dozen cities in eastern Ukraine have said they will hold a referendum on the future of the region on Sunday, creating a possible flash point with the interim government in Kiev. Mr. Putin wants to maintain the ability, they say, to manipulate events in Ukraine to keep the country out of a full embrace by the European Union and, worse, NATO. Toward that end, Russia has been pushing for regional autonomy, a slippery concept that leaves plenty of room for maneuvering at a later date. If he can get European mediators to push through an autonomy plan that keeps southeast Ukraine in Moscow’s orbit — without risking his army or sanctions — so much the better.
Analysts suggested that if the people in eastern Ukraine vote in the referendum Sunday to join Russia, or for independence, or they demand Russian protection in some orchestrated way, Mr. Putin will be forced to react. To avoid intervention after repeated statements that he would protect ethnic Russians everywhere would appear to be going back on his word and would make him look weak. “He really promised nothing,” noted Kirill Rogov, an economic analyst and political commentator in Moscow. “He demonstrated that he controls the level of tension in Ukraine. He can return the situation to the high levels of violence at any moment. He did not refuse the referendum, but only proposed delaying it.”
Above all, perhaps, Mr. Putin is known to loathe chaos, and southeast Ukraine was staggering in that direction.
Analysts suggested that if eastern Ukraine were to vote in the referendum Sunday to join Russia, or for independence, or if they demanded Russian protection in some orchestrated way, Mr. Putin would be forced to react, given his past statements about Russia’s responsibility to ensure the safety of ethnic Russians beyond its borders.
“The decision was taken not to increase Russian involvement in Ukraine, and not to increase the chances of major violence there,” said Konstantin von Eggert, an independent political analyst and a commentator for Kommersant FM radio.“The decision was taken not to increase Russian involvement in Ukraine, and not to increase the chances of major violence there,” said Konstantin von Eggert, an independent political analyst and a commentator for Kommersant FM radio.
Most analysts believe that Mr. Putin wanted to avoid war, and a minor incursion into Ukraine would not have been enough to resolve the crisis there. Instead, it could easily have developed into a long, bloody, expensive slog, bruising the reputation he gained from annexing Crimea with virtually no bloodshed. Most analysts believe that Mr. Putin wanted to avoid war, and say that a minor armed incursion into Ukraine would not have been enough to resolve the crisis. Instead, it could easily have developed into a long, bloody and expensive slog, bruising the reputation he gained from annexing Crimea with virtually no bloodshed.
“This one would not have been bloodless,” said Mr. von Eggert. “This would have been a real war, not by stealth, not by new methods, but a real old-fashioned war, and this is something that Mr. Putin does not want.” “This one would not have been bloodless,” Mr. von Eggert said. “This would have been a real war, not by stealth, not by new methods, but a real old-fashioned war, and this is something that Mr. Putin does not want.”
It would have also been followed by punitive Western sanctions that would have damaged Russia’s already weak economy, and cost Moscow potentially billions of dollars that it would prefer to spend at home. The intense public support generated in recent months, all the glow about renewed Russian strength, would have evaporated.
In the past couple of weeks, as the death toll suddenly rose on both sides in Ukraine, there was concern in Moscow and elsewhere that events were beginning to take on a momentum that outsiders would be unable to control. Many pointed to Yugoslavia in 1991, where the violence on the ground eventually swamped the efforts to contain it. Mr. Putin repeated Russia’s longstanding demands. He said the authorities in Kiev, the Ukrainian capital, should immediately halt all military actions in southeast Ukraine. He demanded the release of all prisoners linked to the uprising. He also expressed sympathy for the goals and actions of the rebels in the southeast, where armed men have paralyzed most of the major cities by seizing government buildings and barricading themselves inside, with just enough weapons to fend off government attempts to recapture them.
“The problem is that in all these types of conflicts, once the black swans have started to fly, you will never control the situation,” said Sergei A. Karaganov, dean of the School of International Economics and Foreign Affairs and periodic Kremlin adviser on foreign policy. “Law and order was beginning to fall apart, and more and more groups were fighting each other.” “I can understand the people in southeast Ukraine, who say that if others can do what they like in Kiev, carry out a coup d’état, take up arms and seize government buildings, police stations and military garrisons, then why shouldn’t they be allowed to defend their interests and lawful rights?” Mr. Putin told the news conference, according to the official Kremlin transcript of his remarks. The Kremlin has for months referred to the interim government as a “junta,” called it illegitimate and warned of its infiltration by neo-fascists.
By pulling back from the threat, Mr. Putin seemed to be trying to reassert some measure of control. It is possible that the people holding the referendum could proceed without him, but the question of what happened next would then hang over the referendum. “It would be difficult to conduct this referendum without Russian support,” said Mr. von Eggert. The reaction in Kiev and among separatists in southeast Ukraine was a combination of suspicion and mistrust.
The question on the referendum is bland enough, namely, “Do you support the act of the Declaration of the Independence of the Donetsk People’s Republic?” In Kiev, Andriy Parubiy, the head of Ukraine’s national security council, said that Mr. Putin’s remarks were “clear evidence” of what Moscow had been denying all along, that the separatist movement was directed from Russia.
But the fallout would be unpredictable. “We understand that the center of the Ukrainian crisis is not in Slovyansk, not in Donetsk, not in Luhansk,” Mr. Parubiy said. “The center of the Ukrainian crisis is coordinated in the Kremlin.”
There is also the chance that it could fail. Although rebels control some urban centers, they by no means control all of southeastern Ukraine. Repeated surveys have shown that only about 20 percent of the population want to join Russia. He added that the call to delay the referendum in Donetsk was not surprising given that it was illegal and impossible to carry out because the separatists control only a few public buildings in the center of a dozen or so cities.
On Wednesday, the militants controlling at least a dozen towns in southeastern Ukraine seemed perplexed by the Kremlin’s announcement. Both Moscow and the militants have repeatedly said that their actions are not coordinated, despite the shadowy presence of well-trained, well-armed men Ukraine accuses of being Russian military. On Wednesday, the militants seemed perplexed by the Kremlin’s announcement. Both Moscow and the militants have repeatedly said that their actions are not coordinated, despite the shadowy presence of well-trained, well-armed men Ukraine accuses of being part of the Russian military or special agents.
In Slovyansk, the ground zero of some of the toughest, most militarily experienced opposition to Kiev, the separatist mayor, Vyachislav Ponomaryov, first claimed that he had not heard Mr. Putin’s announcement and then confessed confusion.In Slovyansk, the ground zero of some of the toughest, most militarily experienced opposition to Kiev, the separatist mayor, Vyachislav Ponomaryov, first claimed that he had not heard Mr. Putin’s announcement and then confessed confusion.
“I don’t know exactly who he is appealing to with this request,” Mr. Ponomaryov said.“I don’t know exactly who he is appealing to with this request,” Mr. Ponomaryov said.
He said the militants were still ready to hold the referendum, with the ballots prepared and polling stations being set up. He added that the militants were still ready to hold the referendum, that the ballots were prepared and polling stations were being set up. “If a collective decision is made not to hold the referendum, then we won’t,” he said. “Otherwise, we’re ready.”
“If a collective decision is made not to hold the referendum, then we won’t,” he said. “Otherwise, we’re ready.”
A spokesman for the Donetsk People’s Republic in Donetsk declined to comment and said that his group would make a statement or hold a news conference Thursday afternoon.
If Russia really accepted the mediation route, some Ukrainian analysts thought it was a way for Mr. Putin to save face. But they were not entirely accepting.
“I don’t have any basis to say at this point that his strategy is changing; I see that his rhetoric is changing,” said Viktor Zamyatin, a political analyst with the Kiev-based Razumkov Center think tank.