Skip to main content
Normal View

Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence debate -
Tuesday, 15 Feb 2022

Security Situation in Ukraine: Engagement with Ukrainian Ambassador

I have received apologies from Senator Ó Donnghaile and I offer apologies from Dáil Members on the committee for the late start, which is due to a vote in the plenary Chamber. I welcome the team from the Ukraine Embassy to Ireland. H.E. Ms Larysa Gerasko, ambassador of Ukraine to Ireland, is welcome. We thank her for taking time to meet our committee at this time of heightened tension and challenge. I welcome members of the committee and point out to members and guests that some members are joining us remotely from their offices due to the ongoing Covid restrictions.

The ambassador joins us at a time of heightened tension in eastern Europe. This meeting provides us and the Irish people with an opportunity to hear directly from the representative team and the ambassador of Ukraine in Ireland. We look forward to receiving an update from the ambassador on the current situation regarding the build-up of troops on the Russian border with Ukraine, the situation in Kyiv and beyond and in Crimea and Donbas. We also welcome Ms Olena Shaloput, who is no stranger to our work and our committee, and Mr. Dmytro Shchedrin, first secretary at the embassy.

The format of the meeting is that we will hear the ambassador's opening statement, followed by a discussion with questions and answers by members of the committee. I ask members to be concise in their questions to allow all members the opportunity to participate. We may have a second round, should members so desire.

I remind witnesses of the long-standing parliamentary practice that we should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make that person or entity identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of a person or entity. Therefore, if statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, the witness will be directed to discontinue his or her remarks and it is imperative than any such direction be complied with.

For witnesses attending remotely outside the Leinster House complex, there are some limitations to parliamentary privilege. As such, they might not benefit from the same level of immunity from legal proceedings as does a witness physically present in the room.

I remind members of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise, or make charges against any person outside the House or an official, either by name or in a way that makes that person identifiable. I remind members that they may only participate in the meeting if they are physically located on the Leinster House complex.

I call upon the ambassador to make her opening statement.

H.E. Ms Larysa Gerasko

I thank the Chair and members for inviting me. I am honoured to be here for the first time to address the distinguished members of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence on the threats that the Russian Federation poses to Ukraine and Europe in its entirety.

On behalf of the Government of Ukraine, I extend words of appreciation for Ireland’s support that we are receiving at this unprecedentedly challenging time for my country. Ireland has always been a reliable partner of Ukraine both on a bilateral level and in international fora. We successfully co-operated on a number of UN resolutions, including those on human rights in Crimea, militarisation of the peninsula and the security situation in the Black Sea and Sea of Azov.

We are also grateful to Ireland for its advocacy efforts on the UN Security Council. The strong statements delivered by the Irish diplomats within this body for the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of Ukraine are of utmost importance to us. Ireland’s non-recognition policy of the illegal occupation of Crimea, which is also included in Programme for Government: Our Shared Future, is another demonstration of its unwavering stance in this respect.

On 23 August last year, two major events took place in Kyiv. The first one was the Crimea Platform summit attended by all EU member states, including Ireland, which was represented by the Minister, Deputy Simon Coveney. The summit was an important first step towards the de-occupation of Crimea, aimed at returning the peninsula to the rule of law and respect for human rights under sovereignty of Ukraine.

I will avail of this opportunity to submit the appeal of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine on strengthening international co-operation within the framework of the Crimea Platform in the parliamentary dimension. I would appreciate if the Chairperson would share the appeal with the members of the committee. We look forward to EU-wide engagement in developing the Crimea Platform activities.

The second milestone event was the opening of the embassy of Ireland to Ukraine that has provided new opportunities for strengthening bilateral ties. It is my duty and need to fully update the Members of the Oireachtas on what is going on in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine in Crimea and Donbas, as well as along the border of Ukraine, where the Russian Federation continues its military build-up. For the eighth consecutive year, Ukraine has been countering external armed aggression from its neighbour.

Approximately 7% of the territory of Ukraine remains under foreign occupation in blatant violation of the UN Charter and international law. More than 14,000 people have been killed, more than 30,000 wounded and more than 1.5 million internally displaced. These are the consequences of this aggression, which Russia sells to the world as so-called internal conflict in Ukraine. We also keep the memory of 298 passengers of the MH17 flight, including one Irish national, killed as a result of the terrorist attack on 17 July 2014, when the plane was shot down by the Russian servicemen using the Buk missile system.

Unfortunately, the facts indicate that Russia intends to continue its odious policy of hatred. According to the latest estimations, the Russian contingent of armed forces totals approximately 119,000 troops, amassed around Ukraine’s borders and in Crimea. Ukraine, in accordance with the Vienna document on confidence and security building measures, requested the detailed explanation on the objectives of the military activity conducted in close proximity to the state border of Ukraine and in the temporarily-occupied Crimea.

However, due to Russia's failure to explain its action and military movements in a transparent manner, on 13 February, Ukraine requested a meeting with Russia and all participating states within 48 hours to discuss its reinforcement and redeployment along our border and in Crimea. As the foreign minister, Mr. Kuleba, said: "If Russia is serious when it talks about the indivisibility of security in the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, OSCE, space, it must fulfill its commitment to military transparency in order to de-escalate tensions and enhance security for all." We are worried about the coincidence of time and place of the above-mentioned build up of Russian forces at the Ukrainian border with joint Russian-Belarusian operational drills called allied resolve 2022 in the territory of Belarus and the massive Black Sea drills, which assembled almost one third of all acting warships of the Russian navy, including numerous landing crafts. Overall, the Russian defence ministry announced the conduct of the navy military exercises simultaneously in the Mediterranean, North and Okhotsk seas and in the Pacific and Atlantic, sabre-rattling and threatening even countries with traditional military neutrality.

Another alarming trend is a significant reinforcement of combat capabilities of the Russian occupation forces in Donbas. Currently, these formations comprise up to 35,000 personnel, including approximately 3,000 servicemen of the Russian armed forces on command posts and in other critical combat positions. Russia's decision not to extend the mandate of the OSCE border observer mission at the Russian checkpoints in Gukovo and Donetsk shows that Moscow’s main interest inheres in the use of its sole control over both sides of the 409 km segment of the state border between Russia and Ukraine in order to keep supplying weapons, military equipment, ammunition, regular troops and mercenaries to the temporarily-occupied parts of Donetsk and Luhansk regions unimpeded.

Despite the fact that last December, the trilateral contact group, TCG, reached another understanding on resuming the ceasefire regime, shootings, shelling and sniper fire on Ukrainian positions and systematic use of attack unmanned combat area vehicles, UAVs, against Ukrainian troops have not ceased. Meanwhile, freedom of movement of the OSCE special monitoring mission, SMM, continues to be restricted in the non-government-controlled territories of Ukraine. These realities are recorded in the numerous reports of the mission and are made publicly available on the mission's website.

We consider utterly unacceptable any withdrawal of SMM personnel by seconding states at this critical moment, since Moscow might use it as ground for shutting the SMM down. Thus, I urge Ireland to keep its mission members who are already on the ground and even to look into the possibility to strengthen the SMM by increasing the number of the monitors.

To our deep sorrow, since December last year, six servicemen been killed in action and more than 21 servicemen have been wounded. Most recently, on 25 January, the illegal armed formations of the Russian Federation once again attacked the positions of the armed forces of Ukraine in the area of Pyshchevyk in the Donetsk region, using an UAV. VOG-17 fragmentation grenades dropped from that UAV resulted in severe injuries to two Ukrainian servicemen and, on 2 February, the same firing was recorded in the entry and exit checkpoint near Hnutove in the same region, which serves as a humanitarian corridor. Unfortunately, the number of ceasefire violations committed by illegal military formations continues to increase. The latest were reported by the OSCE SMM just yesterday.

It is no surprise, then, that Russia refuses to take meaningful steps to launch new entry and exit checkpoints, although Ukraine has made all the preparations for the opening of Zolote and Shchastya checkpoints in line with the decision of the Normandy Four leaders reached in Paris on 9 December 2019. The prospect of a mutual release of the conflict-related detainees has also come to a halt, despite the previous agreement on this matter and numerous requests from Ukraine, as well as lists of the illegally-detained persons for the exchange submitted by our delegation in the TCG to the Russian side.

All this is accompanied by Russia's stubborn denial of being a party to the armed conflict, attempts to impose a so-called direct dialogue with its puppet occupation administrations and refusal to engage in substantive discussion to implement a peaceful solution to the conflict.

The Russian Parliament appealed this morning to President Putin to recognise the independence of temporarily recognised territories in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions. If the Kremlin adopts such a decision then Russia will de facto and de jure withdraw from the Minsk Protocol agreement with all its repercussions. We have already warned our partners about this. I call on the Houses of the Oireachtas to issue a motion condemning the above-mentioned appeal by Russia's state Duma.

Dear members of the committee, Russian aggression has not only military but also has economic and financial dimensions. Russia is investing enormous efforts to undermine the economic and financial stability of Ukraine. Another proof of this is Russia's decision to hold military drills in the Black Sea region while in parallel disabling the international navigation and fisheries in the Black Sea and Azov Sea and the Kerch Strait. Such activities also block access by merchant vessels to and from Ukrainian ports.

We have already initiated contacts with our partners, including those in the Black Sea region, in order to ensure that Russia’s aggressive actions that are part of its hybrid warfare against Ukraine receive an appropriate international assessment and response. We also remain in close contact with partners to explore new ways of additional support to ensure economic and financial stability in Ukraine. It is obvious that Russia’s latest actions are aimed not only against Ukraine but can be viewed in a much wider context.

Russia uses gas, including the Nord Stream 2 project, as a weapon to aggravate the energy crisis in Europe. It used migrants as a weapon to escalate tensions on the Belarus border with Lithuania and Poland. On top of that, it increases cyberattacks in an attempt to destabilise the domestic situation in Ukraine and beyond. All those elements are part of Russia’s plan to seriously destabilise Europe. In the worst-case scenario, Russia may try to undermine the entire post-Cold War security architecture in Europe and redraw borders in Europe by force again, as it already did in 2008 in Georgia and in 2014, by occupying Ukraine’s Crimea and unleashing the war in Donbas.

We also see a surge in the Russian disinformation campaign, including false accusations of Ukraine's plotting a military attack in Donbas. Let me reiterate: Ukraine does not plan any military offensive action in Donbas. We are committed to seeking a political and diplomatic solution to the Russian-Ukrainian armed conflict. Ukraine wants peace, security and stability not only for itself, but also for all of Europe. Together with additional military support from our western partners, as well as with increased diplomatic and economic pressure on Russia, Ukraine is ready to defend itself. We are willing to keep diplomatic engagement with Russia open on various tracks and in various formats. We are ready to resume the Normandy Four talks in all formats, including at the level of the leaders and foreign ministers. The political advisers' meeting on 26 January in Paris showed many differences in the parties' positions concerning the implementation of the Minsk agreements. At the same time, the consultations showed the potential for further dialogue on the settlement of the Russian-Ukrainian international armed conflict. Regretfully, during their most recent meeting on 10 February in Berlin these differences persisted and no agreement was reached on any documents or statements. However, the participants in that meeting expressed determination to meet again for the next session of the trilateral contact group.

Dear Members of the Oireachtas, to conclude my remarks, I would like to stress again that Ukraine is committed to justice, peace and security not only for itself but for the whole of the Euro-Atlantic community. The future of the global security architecture is being decided in Ukraine but the ability of the coalition of the democratic states to take on the current threats and challenges in Ukraine will have a direct impact on their own future. We count on continued pressure on Russia from our partners. We need a clear message that the Kremlin’s plans will not work, and continuation of aggression will be met with a devastating response from the West and a multiplied support for Ukraine. I thank the committee so much.

I thank the ambassador for that opening address. I propose now to go to members of the committee. I will ask them for their observations and concise questions. I might group two or three members together and will return then to the ambassador and her team for their observations. I start with Deputy Brady followed by Senator Joe O'Reilly and Deputy Berry.

Gabhaim buíochas leis an gCathaoirleach. The ambassador is very welcome before our committee. I can only imagine that this is a very difficult time for all Ukrainian citizens given the heightened and escalated military tensions facing its country. I express my solidarity from the outset and my total support for what I see as a very important resolution which has been adopted by the UN as United Nations General Assembly Resolution 68/262 back in 2014 which clearly recognises the territorial integrity of Ukraine. I again send my full support for that resolution and for the territorial integrity of Ukraine.

Things seem to have moved in a slightly positive direction this morning in the withdrawal or calling back of Russian troops from the border regions into barracks within Russia. Hopefully, that is the start of a de-escalation which is something that I and other members of this committee have called for when we had the Russian ambassador to Ireland, Mr. Yuriy Filatov, appear before our committee. Ireland, unfortunately, has been dragged into this also because our waters have been used as a mechanism to sabre-rattle tensions in the carrying out of naval manoeuvres by Russia close to Irish shores. I called on the Russian ambassador at that stage to de-escalate the tensions and a sure way of showing a commitment to that de-escalation would be not just to move that naval manoeuvre out of the exclusive economic zone, but to cancel it in its entirety.

I have also called on NATO to de-escalate the tensions. I have been very vocal on the need to de-escalate and to use the diplomatic channels to ensure that we have a peaceful resolution to what is a very tense situation.

I welcome that some moves have been made to de-escalate. That needs to be followed now by more actions to ensure that diplomacy wins out. I note the commentary of the Russian foreign minister yesterday, Mr. Lavrov, where he said that we need to ensure that all diplomatic channels are followed, which I welcome.

It is still a very challenging time and I note that the EU has been very strong in respect of the repercussions for Russia if it carries out military actions on Ukrainian territory.

That has been very loud and has been heard by the Russians, which is also adding to some of the pull-back in terms of the military build-up. That needs to be followed by NATO, which, in my view, needs to de-escalate the tensions from its side.

It is quite concerning. I am following this very closely and with huge concern. When we hear daily reports that intelligence is coming in that a Russian invasion is imminent and is going to happen within the next 24 or 48 hours, the most level-headed people in the room are actually the Ukrainians. Only a couple of days ago, President Zelenskyy, in playing down some of the concerns and the warnings of a possible invasion within days, said he has not seen any convincing evidence that an invasion was imminent. I would ask that question in the first instance. He asked for intelligence to be shared with Ukraine to show that an invasion was imminent. I would ask whether that intelligence is reliable and whether an invasion was or is still imminent. They say that, in war, the truth is the first victim. An awful lot is being said and it is very hard to determine what is accurate and what is not. I would like to hear this addressed from a Ukrainian perspective.

On "Today with Clare Byrne" yesterday, Fergal Keane reported live from Kyiv that things are normal there and that people are carrying on their daily business. That is not what we are hearing from the Western media, which suggests that citizens are bunkered down and ready for an invasion. I would like to get a first-hand account of what is actually happening on the ground in Ukraine.

I know the Ukrainian ambassador to the UK clarified his remarks when he spoke about the possibility of Ukraine dropping its bid to join NATO. I ask H.E. Ms Gerasko for her views in regard to that also. What does she see as a way out of this? The Ukrainian people are the only ones who can decide their future and what they should or should not be allowed to sign up to, and I say categorically that it should be the decision of Ukraine only.

In the context of the Minsk agreement going back to 2014, I know that had to be revisited in 2015 with version two of that agreement when ceasefires could not be secured. Does the ambassador still see that as a possible long-term solution to the situation in Ukraine? Is that agreement still viable? Why was that agreement never fully implemented and why were ceasefires not fully secured? Why do we still have escalated tensions in the region? Does the ambassador think it is still viable and a possible solution?

When I speak about truth being the first victim in any conflict, there are reports coming out of mercenaries being used on all sides, with reports of Russia building up troops in Donbas and also counter-narratives about mercenaries being sent in to fight from the Ukrainian side. I see some reports being circulated that there are extreme far-right and neo-Nazi groups that have been incorporated into the Ukrainian army to fight against the Russians. The ambassador might take the opportunity to answer that.

There are also reports coming out that Turkey is using some former members of ISIS who have been fighting in places like Syria, Armenia and Azerbaijan, in the most recent conflict there, and Libya, and that they are being utilised and put into the conflict zone. Is that the case? If it is not, the ambassador might be able to steer us right on that.

I want to go back to my opening comments. I offer my solidarity to all Ukrainians in what is a very difficult time, given that there is huge concern internationally. I think all Irish people would agree that we are looking for a peaceful outcome and we offer our solidarity.

Thank you. I will call Senator Joe O'Reilly at this stage because he is due on duty in the Chair of the Seanad at 4 p.m.

Thank you. I will have to read the responses later but I will be interested to do so.

We have a great appreciation and understanding of all of the suffering of the Ukrainian people right through the 20th century and into the 21st, and there is no question about that. There is great empathy towards that here in Ireland and a great awareness of the huge suffering. The ambassador mentioned in her remarks our relationships in international fora, and I have worked with her parliamentary colleagues on the Council of Europe. I had the privilege of visiting Kharkov on one occasion. It is a beautiful city and, sadly, in a conflict situation, it would be very much on the front line, which is tragic.

It is the Irish position that we respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine and we are against the occupation of Crimea, and Donbas as well. I want to ask a question and it is important that this gets asked and that the ambassador responds to it. It is a question that many people want to ask but they are a bit too polite to ask the ambassador. Would she accept it is reasonable for the Russians to be afraid of Ukraine's full participation in Europe and in NATO without some guarantees? Is that a reasonable fear on the Russian side? Although it is not reasonable that Russia should occupy Ukrainian territory, would the ambassador accept there is an onus on Ukraine in the middle of the current diplomatic efforts? We pray that there is a successful meeting between the German Chancellor and the Russian President today. Would the ambassador accept that while Ukraine has a right to national self-determination and the right to join any international body it wants, the Russian people would want a sense of security, and that to have NATO on their borders is quite frightening from their perspective too? How would the ambassador respond to that?

What is her response to the Russian withdrawal of troops today? Does she see that as a good sign or does she see it as some sort of manoeuvring? Hopefully, she will be fit to tell us it is good news. In Ireland, we would love to believe that it is. There is nobody in this Chamber who does not realise, for many reasons, the horror of war and we want a war avoided at all costs. The ambassador might comment on that initiative today.

On a question that has already been asked, the ambassador might comment on the Minsk agreement and its working out. Why has there been a breakdown and breaches of that agreement, and what can be done?

I raised a point with the Russian ambassador on civil liberties and human rights in Belarus and the horrendous things that are happening in Belarus. I understand that there used to be close relations between Ukraine and Belarus but that, under Lukashenko, those relations are strained and that this presents a threat and a worry to Ukraine.

The ambassador might comment on that or explain to us the relationship with Belarus, its implications for Ukraine and indeed what the ambassador would say about several rights issues in Belarus. Unfortunately, that is not the ambassador’s main agenda or concern here today.

In summary, and I thank the Chair for facilitating me because I have to go back to a job elsewhere, we are a mutually peace-loving people. The ambassador recognises our role in the UN, etc. We want a peaceful outcome here. If she were to get sense of what the Irish people want, the Irish people would love the ambassador to say today that she will go any distance within reason to achieve peace, that she is actively seeking peace and that she is happy to give the Russians a confidence that they are not threatened by an independent, strong Ukraine, and that that could be achieved through diplomatic methods.

We will come back to the ambassador after Deputy Berry. Then we will revert to members.

The ambassador and her team are most welcome. I have two brief questions. The first is in relation to the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, of 1994. It is a straightforward memorandum and is only one-and-a-half pages long. It is freely available on the Internet. The memorandum was brought in when Ukraine got its independence and when it agreed to hand over all its nuclear weapons to Russia in return for security guarantees. The security guarantees are quite explicit here, and I will read them into the record. Russia agreed to “refrain from economic coercion” and reaffirmed its “obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine”. My question to the ambassador is on whether Ukraine has handed over all of its nuclear warheads. Has Ukraine handed over all of its nuclear weapons to Russia, thereby abiding by its side of the agreement? My second question is what would the ambassador’s assessment be as to whether Russia has abided by its side of the agreement? Those are my first two questions. The last question relates to the percentage of the population in Ukraine that is interested in joining NATO and the European Union. What is the approximate percentage of the public in Ukraine that is interested in joining NATO and the European Union?

I thank Deputy Berry. I will now come back to the ambassador to deal with the questions from Deputy Brady, Senator O’Reilly and Deputy Berry. The ambassador should feel free to call in her colleagues as she deems appropriate.

H.E. Ms Larysa Gerasko

I thank the Deputies and Senator for their good and interesting questions.

First, with regard to today’s statement by the Minister of Defence of the Russian Federation regarding the withdrawal of military troops from the border of Ukraine, we hope that Russia will fulfil its obligations under international law and that it will fulfil its promises. However, we know how Russia acts. We of course want to see this withdrawal in place. If Russia started to de-escalate the situation, we would be happy. As I have mentioned before, we are looking for a peaceful resolution only. Of course, we are ready to defend our country. We are ready to defend our independence, but we do not want to have more casualties. We have already lost 14,000 people. As I mentioned, thousands of people were wounded. It is important that we find a peaceful resolution. We keep all of our diplomatic channels open for peaceful settlement. I would like to underline that there are no NATO troops, US troops or any other country’s troops in Ukraine. Of course, we have to develop and to strengthen the capabilities of our army to defend ourselves. We are grateful to our partners for supplying defensive weapons. However, there are not any foreign military troops on the ground in the territory of Ukraine. We only have such troops on the temporarily occupied territories. Yesterday, our ambassador to the UK clarified this in his interview.

I would like to remind the committee that in 2014, before the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, Ukraine had a neutral status by law. However, after the invasion, we amended our constitution. Our Euro-Atlantic integration is enshrined in our constitution and it is supported by an overwhelming majority of the population. Some 75% of the population now supports us joining the EU and NATO. We are looking for a defensive alliance, which is NATO, or any other defensive alliances to defend ourselves. Unfortunately, we had, and now are having, a bad experience with our neighbouring country.

With regard to the Minsk agreements, they are the key framework to allow Ukraine to achieve the final goal, which is to resume control over a currently uncontrolled segment of our border with Russia, and to restore Ukraine’s sovereignty over temporarily occupied Donbass. The problem is not about the content of the Minsk agreements but about Moscow’s lack of a political view to implement them. Implementation of the security provisions of the Minsk agreements, the withdrawal of the Russian armed forces, the disarmament of the machinery of the illegal separatist groups and the restoration of border control are essential. How, can the committee imagine, could we organise local elections in an insecure environment? It is impossible. This election, in this case, will not meet any Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, OSCE, requirements or the requirements of any other international organisations.

I probably did not understand the point about Nazi groups. I do not know what Deputy Brady means, because I never heard about any Nazi groups in Ukraine.

We are a very peaceful and tolerant nation. I am sure that you will not find any reports or documents, for instance in the UN Human Rights Council stating we have Nazi groups or Ukraine violates human rights or anything like that. In the contact lines in the occupied Donetsk and Luhansk regions, we only have military troops from the Ukrainian forces. It seems to me that I have answered all of the Deputy's questions.

In response to Senator O'Reilly's questions, to some extent I probably answered them already when I spoke about the Minsk agreement. With regard to the reasonable fear from Russia's side of NATO expansion, Russia demanded security guarantees of non-expansion by NATO in eastern Europe. Who threatens Russia? Russia has the second strongest army in the world. Russia has the biggest nuclear arsenal in the world. Russia is one of the most powerful countries in the world. Who threatens it? Ukraine does not. It is one of Russia's narratives that Ukraine or western Europe now threatens Russia and are going to invade it, but of course that is nonsense.

With regard to our relationship with Belarus, we had and I hope we will continue to have a very good and productive relationship with it as one of our neighbouring countries. As members know, the self-proclaimed president of Belarus, Lukashenko, has threatened to block the supply to Ukraine and he has even promised he will join with Russia in the case of further invasion. I hope the people of Belarus will be free and will have transparent elections. I wish the best to Belarus.

According to the Budapest memorandum, to which Russia is one of the parties to the document, it reaffirms its commitments to respect the independence, sovereignty, and existing borders of Ukraine. It also reaffirms the obligation to refrain from threats of use of force against the territorial integrity of political independence of Ukraine and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine, except in self-defence. In 2019, by signing this memorandum we gave up our nuclear arsenal, but we did not receive anything from Russia in return. Russia has breached everything - the Budapest memorandum, the UN charter and the other bilateral agreement on friendship and co-operation. We fulfilled our obligation under these memorandums, but Russia did not.

I thank the ambassador. I am going to revert to Deputy Stanton and Senator Craughwell for brief comments.

I welcome the ambassador and her team here today. I thank her for her presentation. I want to focus on one particular issue which other speakers have focused on. None of us wants war and it beggars belief to even think of a war or the invasion of Ukraine. It is very hard to contemplate it.

The ambassador said in her presentation that there is also an economic and financial dimension to aggression. Could she let us know what is the situation from an economic point of view in Ukraine? How is the economy doing? What impact has Covid-19 had on Ukraine and its people?

I also note that a deep and comprehensive free trade agreement was signed in 2014 with the European Union. Could the ambassador describe Ukraine's economic relationship with the EU at the moment and also its aspirations for EU membership? Could she also comment on Nord Stream 2? What is the government's view on it, where it should go and the impact it may have, and what should happen to it?

Currently, Ukraine has 1.5 million refugees in addition to the 43 million people living in Ukraine. Could she talk about where the refugees have come from, how they are doing and how they are being treated? It is a debate we have had as well for some time.

The ambassador mentioned the use of gas as a weapon. What is Ukraine's situation regarding energy and gas at the moment and how does she envisage it in the future?

The ambassador is very welcome. I thank her for her presentation. How successful does she think sanctions would be if there were an invasion? Does she think the Russians would pull out because of sanctions, or would they just ignore them?

My colleague mentioned the use of mercenaries. It is the case that militia have been set up in Ukraine and local citizens have trained in the use of weapons. How concerned is the ambassador that one of these militia groups might do something on its own and that they are not being controlled by the military forces? We can all think back to the start of the First World War and the single shot that caused it.

The report that was mentioned yesterday on RTÉ radio spoke of Ukrainian citizens being equally comfortable speaking Russian or Ukrainian and that they are quite proud of their use of the Russian language.

Does the pride in the use of language also call into question the commitment to Ukraine as a state?

Deputy Brady and Senator O'Reilly mentioned the talking-up of the problem between Ukraine and Russia by western powers such as the UK and the USA yet the President of Ukraine is constantly talking things down and speaking about calming down the situation. Have there been discussions with the United States and the UK to ask them to tone down the rhetoric to see if we can find a diplomatic solution? I will take no more of the ambassador's time. She made an excellent presentation and we got some wonderful answers. I thank her.

I thank Senator Craughwell. I have apologies from Senator Ardagh.

I will return to the ambassador to deal with the issues raised by Deputy Stanton and Senator Craughwell.

H.E. Ms Larysa Gerasko

Of course the ongoing situation has a strong impact on our economy. Russia tries to destabilise our economic and financial situation. Some investment has fled the country. Our Government does everything to keep the national currency stable, for instance. Yesterday the Government adopted a decree to finance insurance risks for international flights because a couple of days ago some airlines stopped their flights to Ukraine.

For many decades Ukraine was a part of a large Soviet economy which interconnected with the economy of other republics. Until the 2013 invasion, Russia was Ukraine's largest trade partner. We work hard to cut the remaining trade ties with Russia. They still account for 5% of the overall trade balance of Ukraine. Today the EU is Ukraine's biggest trade partner. Our bilateral trade accounts for almost $50 billion which is more than 30% of Ukraine's overall trade balance. Ukraine did not buy natural gas or nuclear fuel from Russia in 2021. We are looking for other trade partners and we are interested in deeper trade and economic relations with the EU.

Yesterday the Chancellor of Germany paid a visit to Ukraine. He discussed the Nord Stream 2 pipeline project with the president. I understand that Germany promised that it would act as - how can I best say this - a guarantor state in the energy dimension. We believe in a peaceful settlement but in case of invasion we hope that further development of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline would be in the package of tough sanctions.

The course towards EU membership is supported by an overwhelming majority. The U-turn by then Ukraine President Viktor Yanukovych in 2013, when he refused to sign agreement of association with the EU, was the reason for the revolution of dignity. We do a lot to fulfil our obligation under the agreement of association. We do a lot to implement reform. The Government of Ukraine and President Zelenskyy fully support the implementation of anti-corruption judicial reform as a crucial instrument to strengthen the rule of law in Ukraine. The process of renewing Ukraine's judicial governance, the high council of justice, is underway. We launched the supreme anti-corruption court, relaunched the national agency on corruption prevention and established the system of anti-corruption institutions. There was an important step towards ensuring transparency system of the state management with the adoption last year of the deoligarchisation law designed to combat oligarch influence on the country's economy and politics. Ukraine's aspirations toward the EU is very high. We do our homework to meet all the EU requirements.

On language, part of our population speak Russian. We had a common past for many years.

Half of our TV is in Russian. Half of the mass media in Ukraine is in Russian. We have Russian schools and cinema. By this I do not mean they belong to the Russian Federation but that they are Russian speaking. It is a matter of choice to speak in Russian or in Ukrainian. We do not have any problem with the Russian language. The younger generation prefers to speak Ukrainian especially after the beginning of the invasion in 2014. It is not a matter of concern in our country. Many of my friends speak Russian and I am Ukrainian speaking. There is no problem understanding each other and there is no conflict.

I thank the ambassador. We very much appreciate her presence at our meeting and the manner in which she has dealt with the questions of our members. On behalf of the members I acknowledge her stated appreciation for the support of Ireland and the Irish people. I assure her we stand in solidarity with the people of Ukraine at this time of heightened challenge. I note with concern what she said in her opening statement regarding a resolution or statement this morning in the Duma on the part of Russian parliamentarians. I say to my fellow members that is important we reaffirm our support this afternoon. The joint committee notes with some alarm the statement in the Russian Duma calling for recognition of the occupation of Crimea and Donbas and we reaffirm our support this afternoon for the independent territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine in a unit.

The Irish Embassy in Kyiv in Ukraine, in common with the embassies of partner states, will remain open with a small number of essential staff remaining. I acknowledge the work of the Irish ambassador, Therese Healy, in Ukraine. She is staying in her post. She is working to assist Irish citizens out of the country and to manage the affairs of the embassy. The Department of Foreign Affairs now advises against all travel to Ukraine. It further asks Irish citizens in Ukraine to leave immediately. Updated travel advice is available on the website of the Department of Foreign Affairs at dfa.ie. I acknowledge the work of our people in Kyiv.

We wish that all exploratory avenues will continue to take place in order to seek a diplomatic solution. We urge all partners involved to keep talking, whether by means of the Normandy format between Ukraine, Russia, France and Germany or bilaterally between the US and Russia or other partners. We wish the people of Ukraine well at this time of heightened challenge and tension. I thank the ambassador for being with us.

While the western media are ratcheting up the notion that tomorrow could well be the day of an invasion, the Ukrainian President has categorised tomorrow, 16 February, as a day of unity when the Ukrainian flag will fly and the national anthem will be sung by Ukrainians. I want to acknowledge tomorrow is a day of unity and I will stand with Ukraine on that day.

Through the ambassador, I wish the people of Ukraine well at this time of difficulty. I ask her to take a message from here that the Irish people stand in support and solidarity with the people of Ukraine.

The committee has private business and I ask members to remain.

The joint committee went into private session at 4.26 p.m. and adjourned at 4.35 p.m. until 3.15 p.m. on Tuesday, 22 February 2022.
Top
Share