Two-state solution for Ukraine?

I24 NEWS – Several days ago, Ukraine’s ambassador in Israel announced that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would soon visit Kiev, and Ukraine’s President Petro Poroshenko would reciprocate with a visit to Jerusalem for the first time in his term (he was here on a secret visit last April as a presidential candidate).

Poroshenko will certainly not be surprised if his Israeli counterpart brings up the possibility of dividing Ukraine into two states in order to resolve the ongoing tragedy in his country. While everyone in Ukraine talks about territorial integrity, Kiev’s control over Donbass has long been a mere formality, whereas the bloodshed between the pro-European west of the country and the pro-Russian east shows no sign of abating.

China’s stock market crash has shifted the world’s attention to the possibility of a global financial crisis, the first in seven years, pushing off the global agenda other important issues. Yet the Ukraine problem keeps festering and the Minsk II Agreement (signed after negotiations between Vladimir Putin, Poroshenko, Francois Hollande and Angela Merkel) has yet to be implemented. It seems the world has come to terms with the “low intensity” conflict in Ukraine, “reasonable bloodshed”, with 50,000 Russian soldiers stationed on the border as a “subtle” hint of Putin’s real intentions, and 9,000 others inside the country, wearing different uniforms.

Those following events in Ukraine will see some provocative steps on the side of the regime against Russia. On the one hand, Russia annexed Crimea, in violation of international law, and the world accepted it as a fait accompli. On the other hand, Poroshenko named ex-Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili as governor of the Odessa region – the same president who got his country involved in a war with Russia and then fled Georgia following corruption allegations. The two-month old nomination forced Saakashvili to give up his Georgian citizenship and receive a Ukrainian one. Ukraine is a sovereign country, backed by the West, but the nomination, designed to spite Putin, might not have been the wisest.

The deadlock and continued violence have generated some problematic solution proposals. US Senator John McCain, who recently visited eastern Ukraine, has called on the US administration to arm the Ukrainians with defensive weapon. He did not explain, however, what would happen if the Russians insist on regarding the weapons as offensive. He did not explain if Ukrainian armament, significant as it might be, would enable it to stand alone against the Russian forces. If the answer is “no”, the only solution is a diplomatic one.

The Washington Post, surprisingly, suggested in an editorial the division of Ukraine: mostly Russian-speaking east Ukraine, with its clear affinity to Russia, is an important industrial region but also very poor; handing Russia could annex the region and assume responsibility for its economy, providing its inhabitants with autonomy. Western Ukraine would then be free to join NATO, like its Baltic neighbors, without angering Russia.

Another solution is to understand that Russia is serious, that NATO will never help Ukraine and that it is better to recognize a Russian entity inside Ukraine. Some urge Ukraine to recognize the rebels (who have been ignored so far by the government), and discuss with them the future of east Ukraine, recognition of Russian as the formal language of that area, greater autonomy and investment in the region’s failing economy. In that case Crimea would obtain, with time, the same status as Turkish Cyprus (which is recognized by Turkey alone) or the Golan Heights (which only Israel recognizes as its own).

Dividing Ukraine while recognizing the Russian Ukrainians seems to the outsider as the most reasonable way to ensure Ukraine’s unity, but the real question is how important this territorial unity is to the Ukrainians themselves. A “two-state solution” is not necessarily the best solution in every situation, and both sides might not want it, but holding on to a fake sovereignty while living under constant Russian threat might not be better. Minsk III must take place as soon as possible in order to choose among all the options. This is a challenge from which Europe cannot escape.

Yossi Beilin is president of the business consulting firm Beilink. He served in three Israeli governments and in the Knesset for Labor and Meretz. He was one of the pioneers of the Oslo Accords, the Geneva Initiative and Birthright.