IJASOS- International E-journal of Advances in Social Sciences

Abstract

In Ukraine, even after the termination of the USSR, during the last two decades, ethno nationalism had not produced ethno clashes between existing ethnicities: Ukrainians, Tatars and Russians. The coexistence between these and other ethnic groups seemed more likely in the Crimean peninsula.

The last year marked an end to the status quo. The Ukrainian government lost control over Crimea and other eastern regions. A new political reality is being created in this part of Ukraine. As the political scientist Robert Jackson said, Ukraine is turning into a “quasi-state”. It is gradually turning into a country, where most territories remain outside the center’s control, ungoverned.

In Ukraine’s case, the EU has proven that it can carry out historic missions. The mediatory mission of the three foreign ministers, from Germany, France, and Poland, showed the first fruitful results - avoiding the clashes between the West and Russia.

However, now after one year, can we still say that the EU has a consistent agenda for Ukraine? If so, Ukraine will soon realize that the agenda, with its motto for peace and freedom, has its costs. How should we understand this “lack of an agenda”? Can we speak of a geopolitical relocation or of retrieval to the dormant alliances? The conservative German circles are showing understanding towards Russian and Serbian interests. This stand feeds the idea of promoting the return of the Russian-German “dormant tradition”. This idea is destined to fail, since it is not in accordance with Berlin’s interests. Therefore it can be concluded that it is time for the revival of the typical German rationalism in the field of political opinion, in favour of drafting a European agenda for Ukraine, as well as for the Southeast of Europe.