MOSCOW, July 10. /TASS/. Ukraine unlikely to get invitation to join NATO at Vilnius summit; US seeking to explain its decision to provide banned cluster bombs to Kiev; and potential fallout seen for grain deal from Zelensky-Erdogan meeting. These stories topped Monday’s newspaper headlines across Russia.
Vedomosti: Will NATO offer Ukraine anything more than platitudes at Vilnius summit?
Various ideas are now being bandied about ahead of NATO’s Vilnius summit regarding what tone the bloc’s member states will give to their interaction with Ukraine. However, no one is expecting Kiev’s fast-track accession to the alliance to be among the outcomes of the summit, Izvestia writes.
US President Joe Biden stated recently that now is not the time to decide on Ukraine’s NATO membership, mainly due to the country’s ongoing armed conflict with Russia. Still, the US may offer security guarantees to Ukraine, similar to the guarantees it provides to Israel.
Under the guarantees, Israel gets advanced weapons from the West, but in this regard Ukraine has been far from deprived, said Denis Denisov, an expert at the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation. Although Ukraine has not yet received advanced fighter jets, its armed forces already have the most cutting-edge unmanned aerial vehicles and tanks. The expert expects the NATO allies to adopt a memorandum in support of Ukraine and voice numerous chest-beating slogans, but little more. In addition, a NATO-Ukraine Council will be established and previous agreements will be ratified. The alliance members are unwilling to go beyond that, however, and will not make any commitments of a more serious nature to Ukraine, Denisov emphasized.
It is an obvious fact that Ukraine will not be granted NATO membership, said Ivan Skorikov, head of the Ukraine department at the Institute of CIS Countries. Both the leaders of a number of European countries and senior NATO officials have spoken out against the idea. Perhaps, Kiev will try to sell the upcoming decision on deliveries of F-16s to the Ukrainian armed forces as a success achieved at the Vilnius summit. Skorikov notes that this initiative has been in the works for quite a while and pilot training has already begun, but a final decision is still pending, so Kiev will pull out all the stops to herald it as a triumphant victory. Meanwhile, the NATO allies will in turn be able to pat themselves on the back for demonstrating their support for Kiev.
Kommersant: US seeks to explain decision to provide banned cluster munitions to Kiev
Washington’s decision to provide Kiev with cluster munitions that are banned in most countries has triggered an ambivalent reaction both domestically and internationally. The Biden administration acknowledges that it was compelled to take this step in an effort to prop up Ukraine’s flailing counteroffensive, Kommersant writes.
The US announced an additional $800 mln aid package for Kiev on Friday. The new shipment will include ammunition for Patriot and HIMARS systems along with dual-purpose improved conventional munitions (DPICM), or so-called cluster bombs. Cluster munitions pose a serious threat not only to troops but also to civilians because bomblets may remain unexploded on the ground for years. Such ammunition is banned under a 2008 international convention. However, the US, Ukraine and Russia are not parties to the convention.
Kiev applauded the US move, while the United Kingdom, Italy and Spain, for instance, were not happy about it and pledged to adhere to their obligations under the convention. Under fire over the issue, the Biden administration has had to justify its decision. US Under Secretary of Defense Colin Kahl explained that the Pentagon was sending such weapons to Ukraine because of the urgency of the moment in terms of Ukraine’s counteroffensive.
US human rights activist Matthew Howe, a retired US Marine who also served at the Pentagon and the State Department, assumed in a conversation with the newspaper that the Biden administration’s move to send such weapons to Kiev would not give an advantage to Ukraine, but would only serve to escalate the conflict and raise the risks for civilians and the Ukrainian army. According to the expert, White House officials are well aware of these issues, but the unencouraging news about Ukraine’s underwhelming counteroffensive and weapons shortages is forcing them to raise the stakes.
The expert expects that Kiev will be disappointed with the outcome of NATO’s summit, set to take place in the Lithuanian capital of Vilnius on July 11-12, and thus will need some sort of distracting pacifier to calm it down.
Vedomosti: How will Zelensky-Erdogan meeting impact grain deal’s future?
Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky visited Istanbul on July 7 for the first time since April 2021 to meet with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The Black Sea Initiative grain export deal, the latest extension of which expires on July 17, was the focus of their talks. The Kremlin has already announced that Moscow sees no reason to extend the deal as the Russia-related part of the agreements has to date never been implemented, Vedomosti writes.
Turkey, the United Nations, Russia and Ukraine initially agreed on the grain deal on July 22, 2022. The Ukraine-related part of the accord provided for grain exports from the ports of Odessa, Yuzhny and Chernomorsk, while the Russia-related part was meant to ease restrictions on exports of Russian agricultural goods and fertilizers.
Regardless of what decisions Erdogan may make, the Russian side has sufficient grounds to refuse to extend the grain deal further, Viktor Nadein-Rayevsky, a senior researcher at the Russian Academy of Sciences’ Institute of World Economy and International Relations, emphasized. "The West is still reluctant to meet at least some of Russia’s conditions. The Russian Agricultural Bank remains under sanctions and is unable to serve Russian exports. There still are problems with insurance for commercial vessels transporting Russian wheat. Extending the grain deal makes no sense unless restrictions on Russian trade are lifted," the expert pointed out. Until recently, the Russian authorities were willing to make concessions to Turkey on economic and political issues, Nadein-Rayevsky noted.
In the meantime, Erdogan appears to have made a gesture of goodwill toward the West by handing over custody to Kiev of Ukrainian POWs, who had been held in Turkey since last year’s liberation of Mariupol by Russian forces, following his meeting with Zelensky, in violation of an agreement with Russia, said Ikbal Durre, associate professor at Moscow State Linguistic University. Still, Durre expects that this move does not signal any revision of Ankara’s relations with Moscow by Erdogan, who can be expected to continue to pursue a policy of balancing between centers of power. According to the expert, Ankara will retain its role as a mediator in the Ukrainian crisis. Erdogan is unwilling to lose this role given that it strengthens his negotiating position, the analyst concluded.
Izvestia: UK faces rocky road to legally seizing Russian assets
The United Kingdom is not likely to be able to legally seize frozen Russian assets worth about 26 bln pounds sterling for transfer to Ukraine, a member of the British House of Lords told Izvestia. Nevertheless, London is considering such steps, along with the European Union. Should the UK start seizing Russian state-owned assets, Moscow would respond in kind, a member of the Russian State Duma (lower house of parliament) noted.
The main reason why Western countries have thus far been unable to seize frozen Russian assets is that there is no legal mechanism to do so, Yekaterina Entina, professor in the Department of Regional Studies at the Higher School of Economics (HSE University), explained. "Western countries are working to develop a mechanism to legalize the seizure of Russian assets, both state-owned and private. There are several ways to do that. One of the options is to have [Russia] blacklisted by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) [global money laundering and terrorist financing watchdog - TASS]. However, FATF members, including Washington and London, have so far refrained from making such a decision," Entina said. Another option is to designate Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism. "This is the option that they will increasingly promote and try to bet on," the expert assumed.
In June 2023, the UK changed its national rules for lifting sanctions. Now, this can be done only after damages are paid to Ukraine. No specific mechanism has been developed yet, but London will seek to establish a pattern where payments of damages can be carried out not only voluntarily but also through asset seizures, Entina added.
Even if the West succeeds in seizing the Russian assets, the proceeds would hardly end up reaching Ukraine, said Yevgeny Nifantyev, a member of the State Duma Committee on Industry and Trade. "All the funds will be used under the guise of loan repayments and assistance to refugees, or will somehow be distributed among companies close to the British authorities," the lawmaker noted. However, according to him, if such a thing happens, Moscow would be sure to have its own reciprocal response at the ready.
Media: Uzbekistan’s early presidential election turns out to be no contest
Uzbekistan has held its early presidential election. The final outcome of the vote will be announced in the coming days but incumbent President Shavkat Mirziyoyev is the hands-down favorite to win re-election. An early parliamentary election may follow next, completing the political cycle of the country’s constitutional reform, Nezavisimaya Gazeta writes.
An early presidential election was called in Uzbekistan after the April 30 constitutional referendum. Mirziyoyev pointed out that the Central Asian country’s new constitution sets new political, social and economic goals that could not be postponed. This is why a decision was made to hold the election three-and-a-half years ahead of schedule.
Nabi Ziyadullayev, senior researcher at the Russian Academy of Sciences’ Institute for Market Problems, believes that it was the right decision to hold an early election. "Mirziyoyev has a strong and well-thought-out program that he needs to implement. <...> The president is active not only inside the country but also on the international stage, coming up with new initiatives in various fields that he will develop further. However, it will be hard to do that without public support," Ziyadullayev noted.
"This election is the key stage in Uzbekistan’s administrative and bureaucratic reform. Although its results haven’t been announced yet, no one doubts that Mirziyoyev will win. Based on the election’s outcome, he will gain the opportunity to ensure his authority for at least the next seven years," Kazakh-German University Professor Rustam Burnashev told Izvestia.
"The reforms that Mirziyoyev is carrying out and those that he may be planning to carry out in the future may prove unpopular. This is why he needed an additional vote of confidence and trust from society," said Alexander Knyazev, an expert on the Middle East and Central Asia.
Experts do not expect Tashkent to radically review its foreign policy in a situation where the country’s leadership is unchanged.
TASS is not responsible for the material quoted in these press reviews