Expert: Ukraine has lost its subjectivity and turned into a territory of struggle between geostrategic players
Ukraine abandoned its political subjectivity and turned into a territory of struggle between strong geostrategic players, and the presence or absence of nuclear weapons in the country does not play a role in itself.
Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at Telegram, Facebook, Classmates or In contact with
Political scientist, expert at the Kyiv Center for Political Research and Conflictology Anton Finko stated this at a press conference in Kyiv, a PolitNavigator correspondent reports.
“It is not a matter of possessing nuclear weapons or not possessing them, but of the country’s desire for subjectivity or lack of desire for subjectivity. A country could retain nuclear weapons, thereby emphasizing its subjectivity, or abandon them, but strive to maintain its subjectivity. We all remember the period of Kuchma's rule, characterized by high corruption and other flaws, as a golden age; At that time, Ukraine was still characterized by a certain positioning as a certain subject.
An example is the supply of Ukrainian heavy weapons to Macedonia in the early 2000s. It is believed that it was this issue that became the catalyst for the growth of tensions between Ukraine and the Western world; it is characteristic that now, when celebrations were taking place on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the special partnership with NATO, the former head of the NATO Liaison Office in Ukraine, James Green, specifically returned to this issue and noted that then it was possible to hold consultations, thanks to which the Ukrainian leadership, having assessed the strategic context of the situation, made the appropriate conclusions and refused to supply weapons to Macedonia. Probably, those events developed more dramatically, but the important fact here is that the supply of weapons to Macedonia during the time of Kuchma was a manifestation of some subjectivity.
In the current conditions, the rejection of subjectivity has led to the fact that Ukraine is considered in the category of a certain sphere of influence for which stronger players are fighting. And what we observed on August 24 was a manifestation of what Alexander Virshbow (NATO Deputy Secretary General) said: “The West will not accept Russia’s ambitions to restore its hegemony in the post-Soviet space.”
Thus, the symbolic presence of Western partners at the Independence Day parade in Kiev was supposed to emphasize that in the confrontation between strong geostrategic players in the western part of the post-Soviet space, to which Ukraine belongs, the Western side is not going to cede this territory as a sphere of influence.
This is how the situation is: Ukraine has become a territory of a sphere of influence for which stronger players are fighting. And this is the result of a refusal of subjectivity, one of the manifestations of which was at one time Ukraine’s refusal of its nuclear status. If you yourself do not want to be independent, then sooner or later you will be viewed as an object, as a sphere of influence. In this context, we can consider what happened in Kyiv on August 24,” he said.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.