Submit Your Work
Security
International Relations
Thursday, July 30, 2020

Russia’s weaponization of passport in East Ukraine

This article is by
Syed Ahmed Uzair
Syed Ahmed Uzair
Eastern Europe

Share this article
Download as PDF
Cite this Article

Article Contributor(s)

Syed Ahmed Uzair

Article Title

Russia’s weaponization of passport in East Ukraine

Publisher

Global Views 360

Publication Date

July 30, 2020

URL

Pro-Russian rebels in Donetsk, Eastern Ukraine

Pro-Russian rebels in Donetsk, Eastern Ukraine | Source: Mstyslav Chernov via Wikimedia

On 24th April 2019, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree which would simplify the procedure for acquiring Russian citizenship in the regions of Eastern Ukraine namely, Donetsk and Luhansk. He followed this up with another signing on 1st May. It extended the citizenship right to other categories of Ukrainians including the natives of Crimea.

Putin defended the move on humanitarian grounds but it drew criticism from the European Union and Ukraine. Despite the opposition, Russia went ahead with the distribution of passports in these regions of Ukraine.

The Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs had announced on Jan 1, 2020, that it had granted citizenship to nearly 196,000 Ukrainians. Moscow plans to grant one million citizenships to people in these areas by the end of 2020,

Russian President Vladimir Putin defended the move by saying there was nothing wrong in granting citizenship to the people of Eastern Ukraine and cited the example of countries like Poland and Romania which also grant citizenship on the basis of ethnicity.

At the end of a summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un Putin told the reporters "How are Russians in Ukraine worse than Romanians, Poles or Hungarians? I don't see anything unusual here."

The move, however, has drawn criticism from Ukraine and the European Union. It also  dashed hopes of reviving the Russia-Ukraine peace talks that have stalled since 2015.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the new President of Ukraine who was less confrontational towards Russia during his campaign said “Unfortunately, this decree does not bring us closer to the ultimate goal of a ceasefire.” He further stated “These actions are yet more confirmation for the world community of Russia’s true role as an aggressor state, which is waging a war against Ukraine.”

Pavlo Klimkin, Ukraine’s Foreign Minister termed it a “continuation of aggression and interference in our internal affairs.” He was seen advising people in a twitter post that Russia had deprived them of the present and was now trying to trespass on their future.

Ukraine warned that it would not recognize the passport in the event of its usage for crossing the border. The then Prime Minister of the country, Volodymyr Groysman wrote on Twitter,” I emphasize that we will never recognize the citizenship issued by the aggressor country” and termed the passports as a “flagrant violation of all rights and morals”.

The Deputy Foreign Minister of Ukraine targeted the timing of the announcement and said that it was a challenge “not only for Kyiv but Berlin, Paris, Brussels and Washington”.

The EU also stated that it was against the spirit and the objectives of the Minsk peace accords signed by Russia and Ukraine in 2015. Federica Mogherini, a spokeswoman for the EU’s top diplomat, said the distribution of Russian passports was "another attack on Ukraine's sovereignty by Russia."

Putin’s move to grant passports in Eastern Ukraine has been cited as Russia’s unwillingness towards granting Ukraine full control over the Russian occupied regions. It indicates Moscow’s intentions to increase Russian influence in the country and hence weaken the sovereignty of Ukraine as a nation.  

It appears that Russia has now weaponised the passport in its six-year long undeclared war with Ukraine in a hope that this will vastly improve its claim of working to protect the interest of Russian citizens in the disputed region of Eastern Ukraine.

Support us to bring the world closer

To keep our content accessible we don't charge anything from our readers and rely on donations to continue working. Your support is critical in keeping Global Views 360 independent and helps us to present a well-rounded world view on different international issues for you. Every contribution, however big or small, is valuable for us to keep on delivering in future as well.

Support Us

Share this article

Read More

February 4, 2021 4:42 PM

Trump’s “Israel-Palestine Peace Deal”: Cheered by Israelis and Jeered by Palestinian Authority

In January 2020, President of the United States, Mr. Trump, elaborated on a plan that, according to him, would bring peace to the Middle East with respect to the ongoing Palestinian crisis. The plan was welcomed by Israel but rejected by the Palestinians as they perceive it to favour Israel at the cost of Palestinian interests. It gave Israel the right over Jerusalem and the settlements in the West Bank as well as Jordan Valley. The settlements in the West Bank came as a consequence of the 1967 Mideast war, in which Israel had captured it but never formally claimed it due to international opposition. 

According to the plan, the proposed Palestinian state would not have a standing military and would be required to live up to benchmarks set up by the Israelis. The new state of Palestine will be established on the land which is non-contiguous and Israel would retain the security responsibility of the West Bank. The new Palestine therefore will become unviable as a functioning state.  

The president of the Palestinian authority, Mahmood Abbas, denounced the plan immediately and called it a conspiracy deal which is unworthy of serious contemplation. “We say a thousand times over:”, he said ”no,no,no,” after which the Palestinian leadership has not been on speaking terms with the Trump administration. Mr. Abbas played no substantive role in the plan-making process.

In January, Israel was planning to vote on the unilateral annexation of the West Bank after their Knesset elections, which is the national legislature of Israel. Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister who promised the annexation if he was elected, was re-elected in the March elections. "Today, I announce my intention, after the establishment of a new government, to apply Israeli sovereignty to the Jordan Valley and the northern Dead Sea," said Mr. Netanyahu in September as a part of his election campaign.

The annexation, in the opinion of the Prime Minister of Palestine, would destroy the progress made in the Oslo accords, which were agreements between the two states signed in 1993. On 20th of May, the Prime Minister vowed to annex parts of the occupied West Bank and that he’d act in July, to which the Palestinian authority dissolved all treaties, understandings and agreements with Israel and the United States, which include the Oslo accords.

In the beginning of June, the Palestinian Prime Minster announced that the state would declare independence for Palestine if Israel follows through on the threat. The announcement detailed that the authority would declare an independent state along the 1967 partitions with Jerusalem as its capital. The authority would also manifest as a state on the ground, which means there would be a founding council and a constitutional declaration. 

All eyes are now on the action of Israeli government and reaction of Palestinian Authority in this  long drawn saga.

Read More