Ukraine’s Election Plans Hindered by Ongoing Conflict

By Nina Bachkatov

In a summer fraught with geopolitical tension, Ukraine finds itself grappling with a disrupted electoral schedule. Originally slated for parliamentary elections in October and a presidential vote in March 2024, the shadow of the ongoing conflict looms large over the nation’s political landscape. As early September unfolds, hopes for a much-anticipated Ukrainian counter-offensive gaining momentum cast uncertainty over the feasibility of conducting a fair election. The conflict has left millions of Ukrainians as internal refugees or residing abroad, making voter registration an arduous task with many official documents lost to the ravages of war.

Please continue reading page 2

Pages: Page 1, Page 2

Ukraine: Reconstruction Amid Ongoing Conflict

By Nina Bachkatov

Daily devastation and loss of life persist in Ukraine as the counter-offensive rages on, with no decisive outcome at present. Optimists are now openly acknowledging the possibility of military operations continuing until 2024 or longer. Despite the ongoing war with no end in sight, the urgent issue of reconstruction has become a paramount concern for Ukraine’s survival, placing the burden on the ‘Friends of Ukraine’ group. This paradoxical situation might be a way for the West to reframe its unwavering support for Ukraine, extending far beyond military assistance.

Since the fall of Kherson in September 22 and subsequent events in spring 23, even with the supply of sophisticated offensive weapons, the expected counter-offensive failed to materialise, leaving Kiev unable to negotiate from a position of strength. Additionally, public expressions of frustration emerged during the NATO Vilnius summit between Ukrainian and Western representatives. More recently, Ukrainian attacks on Russian territory and escalating tensions in the Black Sea have further complicated the situation.

Please continue reading page 2

Pages: Page 1, Page 2

Another ‘Historic Meeting’ – This Time in Vilnius

By Nina Bachkatov

The NATO summit held in Vilnius in 2023 has been hailed as a “historic summit”. It projected the image of 31 resolute Alliance members, meeting under tight security measures in a city emptied of its inhabitants but adorned with blue and yellow colors. The tensions preceding the summit were so high that, unlike traditional international gatherings, the final communiqué remained a mystery until the end of each session. Eventually, common sense prevailed, and it was acknowledged that there is a difference between public debates and private exchanges, during which frank differences can be expressed, notably between the cautious President Biden and the openly disappointed President Zelensky. Furthermore, national leaders became aware of the political risks they faced at home as the cost of aid to Ukraine skyrocketed. Hence, the importance of communication tailored directly to their citizens, emphasizing certain catchphrases that would resonate with their respective countries’ media.

During these tense hours, the typically stern-faced Secretary General Stoltenberg acted as a welcoming and affable host, ensuring that everyone had their place in the family-like exchanges and the final photo. His demeanor played a role in projecting a sense of strength and unity regarding NATO enlargement around the Baltic Sea and the agreement to provide billions of dollars in new military aid and security measures for Ukraine, which were the focal points of the agenda.

Please continue reading page 2

Pages: Page 1, Page 2

A NATO Summit Confronting the Future of European Security

By Nina Bachkatov

Tensions have been steadily escalating in the lead-up to the NATO summit in Vilnius on 11-12 July. While both Washington and Brussels share the common objective of securing the European continent, which now includes Ukraine, and safeguarding the democratic world, they differ in their diplomatic, political, and financial approaches to achieve these goals. Furthermore, their perspectives diverge on China, a country positioning itself as the primary beneficiary of the deteriorating relations between EU institutions, European capitals, and Russia due to the latter’s invasion of Ukraine. This apprehensive climate has led to nuanced expressions through official statements, orchestrated leaks, and interviews. There is a concern that the outcomes of the summit will leave everyone dissatisfied.

Please continue reading page 2

Pages: Page 1, Page 2

Moldova, Another Headache for EU

By Nina Bachkatov

Since 1992, Moldova has remained largely overlooked by Westerners, confined to a realm of obscurity within Central Europe. Its borders, which have shifted throughout centuries, only gained attention after the collapse of the Soviet Union. With a population speaking Moldovan/Romanian and Russian, the latter also serving as the lingua franca for minorities, Moldova is widely regarded as the poorest country in Europe, with an estimated population of 2.2 to 2.5 million. Despite its peculiarities, it was in this very country that 47 European leaders, including the 27 EU members and 20 guests as diverse as the U.K., Turkey, and Andorra, convened on June 1 for the second meeting of the European Political Community (EPC). This gathering was marked by its symbolic significance on multiple fronts.

Please continue reading page 2

Pages: Page 1, Page 2

Zelensky’s Diplomatic Gamble: Seeking Support in a Divided World

By Nina Bachkatov

On May 26th, Mikhailo Podolzhak, a trusted aide to President Zelensky, stated during an interview with an Italian channel that the Ukrainian counter-offensive “has been underway for several days”. This statement supported the speculation that a summer counter-offensive had replaced the much-anticipated “spring counter-offensive.” The Ukrainian offensive began in early May with heavy shelling targeting Russian defense lines, border villages, and even infrastructures deeper into Russian territory. During this period, both sides engaged in an unprecedented use of drones, with reports of thousands of drones being deployed. These drones varied in size and sophistication, ranging from small, unsophisticated devices to more advanced ones. The drones not only inflicted casualties but also created an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty.

Please continue reading page 2

Pages: Page 1, Page 2

E.U. attempt to unlock the Karabakh Issue

The president of the EU Council Charles Michel wanted a discreet meeting; he got it, but not for the reasons he wanted. He had invited Azerbaijan president Ilham Aliev and Armenian prime minister Nikol Pashinian for a trilateral meeting in Brussels on 13-14 May. But, the same week-end, all attention were on the elections in Turkey and the impromptu visits of Ukrainian president Zelensky through European national capitals – not to the stability in Caucasus. Anyway, the meeting has participated to the ‘normalisation process’. On 1 June, Pashinian and Aliev shall meet France’s Macron and Germany’s Scholz in Chisinau, on the sidelines of the summit of the European Political Community. Moscow has just reminded that the trilateral agreements it signed with Baku and Yerevan after the ‘second Karabakh war’ of 2020 remain the only basis for the settlement” of relations between the two South Caucasus countries.

Please continue reading page 2

Pages: Page 1, Page 2