{"id":1240515,"date":"2025-06-12T10:40:51","date_gmt":"2025-06-12T07:40:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/prm.ua\/the-government-is-sliding-towards-a-full-fledged-dictatorship-the-defense-and-negotiations-have-failed-but-there-is-a-way-out-an-interview-with-petro-poroshenko\/"},"modified":"2025-06-12T10:40:51","modified_gmt":"2025-06-12T07:40:51","slug":"the-government-is-sliding-towards-a-full-fledged-dictatorship-the-defense-and-negotiations-have-failed-but-there-is-a-way-out-an-interview-with-petro-poroshenko","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/prm.ua\/en\/the-government-is-sliding-towards-a-full-fledged-dictatorship-the-defense-and-negotiations-have-failed-but-there-is-a-way-out-an-interview-with-petro-poroshenko\/","title":{"rendered":"The government is sliding towards a full-fledged dictatorship, the defense and negotiations have failed \u2013 but there is a way out: an interview with Petro Poroshenko"},"content":{"rendered":"

How obtaining a visa-free regime affected Ukraine’s further European integration; why the current government failed its work on the diplomatic front and whether the situation can be corrected; what is the situation with fortifications near the front line; how to break the deadlock in negotiations with the US; and why Bankova is curtailing reforms in Ukraine and increasingly sliding towards “tailoring” and dictatorship.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The fifth President of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, spoke<\/a> about this and much more during the joint special broadcast of “Pryamoy” and “Channel 5” “Let’s Talk About Ukraine”, dedicated to the anniversary of the visa-free regime with the European Union.<\/p>\n

\u2014 Now there is not enough diplomacy to receive new military assistance from the United States. That is, there is none. And then you and your team proved the effectiveness of diplomacy. Then the impossible happened. So I want to talk about this today. Against the background of what is happening on the front, what we are observing, our Armed Forces of Ukraine, we, Ukrainians, simply need this diplomatic support, which would consolidate these successes.<\/em><\/p>\n

Why was it important for you, as the president, to get visa-free travel for Ukraine? We are now continuing our strategic path to membership in the European Union and we cannot begin accession negotiations. How would this consolidate our successes in foreign policy in obtaining assistance and support from our partners, and in proving that we, Ukraine, have strong diplomacy, and not only on the front.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

\u2014 Thank you. First of all, thank you for inviting me. Especially thank you for inviting me on such a solemn day for me. June 11 is a combination of two important days. It is my father’s birthday. Today he would have turned 89. I tried very hard for this, and he, you can’t imagine, really dreamed of visa-free travel as a significant victory for Ukraine. I promised him that I would give him this gift on his birthday. And I was very happy when we managed to bring the date of visa-free travel closer and set it for June 11.<\/p>\n

The second position is why was visa-free travel so important? A country, a nation needs victories. And this was one of the most important victories of my term, when we signed the Association Agreement in 2014, when the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area was put into effect, when the visa-free travel was signed, when the Tomos was received, and when amendments were made to the Constitution that provided for Ukraine’s mandatory membership in the EU and NATO.<\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/live\/182ih2nxfho<\/p>\n\n

It was not an easy job. You are absolutely right that a large number of people both abroad and inside Ukraine did not believe in the very possibility. Few people know that I started working on visa-free travel as the Minister of Foreign Affairs in 2009-2010. And I can emphasize that at that time many demanded that visa-free travel be slowed down or made impossible. Today I am saying this for the first time: one of the proposals of the Russian Federation, at that time a “strategic partner of Ukraine”, was the requirement – let us jointly declare to the European Union that Russia and Ukraine will receive visa-free travel together. And I, as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, said no. We will not depend on the good or bad will of Russia. We are a European country and we have our own path to Europe. This was my public position.<\/p>\n

What happened in 2014-2015? Not only Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. I want to emphasize that in connection with the military events in Syria, the military events in Libya, there was a so-called refugee crisis in Europe. Almost 5 million Syrian refugees ended up in Europe alone. Another 3 million were stuck in Turkey. And then there was a statement that… They told me in plain text: “Mr. President, you are simply unlucky. No one in Europe will vote for visa-free travel for Ukraine, because it entails domestic political consequences. We have enough refugees from Syria for the country to be flooded with refugees from Ukraine during the war.”<\/p>\n

This was not a solution to the problem through the heads of state and government, and through the Council of Foreign Ministers, where we managed to form something that is not quite possible now – absolutely strong and unanimous support for Ukraine. This was a decision of the interior ministers. To do this, we needed to fulfill 144 benchmarks, starting from integrated border management and ending with real achievements in the fight against corruption, including cross-border corruption.<\/p>\n

When some were skeptical about this, I publicly emphasized that we would not only get visa-free travel, but we would get a decision on visa-free travel in 2016, and the date of its introduction in 2017. And what started inside the country? A terrible situation, when every “iron” was pouring out that Poroshenko had lied and there would be no visa-free travel either in 2016 or 2017. We worked hard and effectively. I was very pleased when the discussion was reduced to just this: how many low-cost airlines would be able to pull into Ukrainian airports and how much would a trip to Vienna cost to drink a cup of coffee. I said then, on the day of the introduction of visa-free travel, exactly 8 years ago, that you would be able to fly to Vienna for 20 euros and drink coffee.<\/p>\n\n

Then the absolute lion’s share reacted with disbelief to my predictions. We took the next step when I personally held negotiations with the president of Ryanair, the world’s largest low-cost airline. And we opened the first terminal at Boryspil airport for low-cost airlines. The first flight with the participation of the president of Ukraine and the president of Ryanair took place. I think the whole world reacted to this. It united Ukrainians. I was very happy with this outcome and I can emphasize that now we really lack such victories, diplomatic victories.<\/p>\n

I would like to talk today about whether these victories are possible now. At the front, Russia has taken the position of exhausting the Ukrainian state, exhausting the Ukrainian people, and exhausting the Ukrainian army. This is their tactic. What do we have and can we do to counter this? Not only the power of the Armed Forces, not only unity with our partners, but also, precisely and convincingly, the power of our diplomacy. I think that we will have the opportunity to talk about this diplomacy, about its possible successes, and about the tasks that we have today.<\/p>\n

You can’t live only in the past. I want to emphasize that we have an absolutely clear strategy for what to do in the future. And these will be the answers to the questions that are very worrying for Ukrainians today. The question is how to stop the war? How to end the war? The question is how to ensure peace? The question is how, with what tools, to put pressure on Russia to end the war in very, very difficult conditions?<\/p>\n

\u2014 Today we talked about fortifications, about the fact that the situation with them is catastrophic again. Fighters from the front line go on the air and say that Sumy region is in trouble, the work that should have been done on the fortifications has not been done there. Maybe this is a question, you know, maybe Kyiv should start thinking about it? Maybe we should start building fortifications around here too. How do you assess the situation?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

\u2014 Fortifications are not a panacea. And fortification issues should not be addressed now. I want to emphasize that when I asked the first question on fortification in August 2023, all the stones flew at me, saying: “Listen, we are attacking, we have a powerful counteroffensive, Poroshenko says, we need to look to the future and build fortifications.” Where did I say to build fortifications? Raise the question from two years ago. And I clearly emphasized that the question, when we now have a controlled situation on the Ukrainian-Russian border, fortifications should be built in Sumy and Kharkiv regions, where there were no battles at that time.<\/p>\n

And fortifications are not dug ditches. Often, as our deputies who came with an inspection saw, knee-deep. Let those who planned it now find themselves in such trenches. And our position was that the depth of the echelon of this defense – excuse me for these complex words – should be 15-20 kilometers. And there should be minefields and barriers there. How they would help us now, together with the entanglement nets, when attacking Russian brutes, assault groups of 5-10 brutes on motorcycles, who are very difficult to hit with FPV drones and small arms. Where are the minefields? Where are the entanglements? Where are the special “anti-cab” shelters? They were not built.<\/p>\n\n

When asked why they weren’t built, we were told that Poroshenko was sowing panic. And they are brilliantly built. They said this in 2023, they said this in 2024, and now they are trying to say this in 2025. But you don’t tell Poroshenko. You tell these residents of Sumy, who were surrounded, occupied, or driven out of our Ukrainian territories. You tell this to the widows and children of the fallen fighters who were forced to stop the Russian offensive in an open field. And there show where the deep-echelon defenses should have been located. You tell this to the residents of Pokrovsk, where I recently delivered military aid to the soldiers of our Armed Forces. Look at what Pokrovsk has now turned into, and before that Bakhmut, and before that other settlements.<\/p>\n

In this case, why is this issue no less relevant now? I emphasize that now, 20-25 kilometers from the line of combat contact, it is urgent to build new and modern fortifications, not like those built during World War II. And for this, not civilians, but in no case the presidential vertical of corrupt military-civilian administrations should be involved, which purchase construction materials and services at a price 5 times, not 5 percent, but 5 times higher than the market value, and lie by not building or completing fortifications. For us, this should be 1,200-1,500 kilometers of a powerful rampart, echeloned, mined, with a radio jamming system, with a video surveillance system – just like the Russians are building today. Look at what they have built, like the “Suravikin line”, draw your own conclusions.<\/p>\n

The situations when we are rejected can be explained by only one thing. The corrupt are interested in the fact that where they allegedly built fortifications, this territory is captured by the enemy, because this is the destruction of evidence of their corruption. And, of course, what we demand, I gave a briefing on this issue yesterday, so that this issue is considered at a separate meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. We fought for a year to create a temporary investigative commission. Do you know what they did? They classified its meetings. Friends, 65 years ago Gagarin flew into space in Russia. And for 65 years, Russia’s satellites, just like the United States, have seen this open secret of yours. The only thing you are hiding it from is you are hiding it from the people, so that they do not interfere and do not prevent you from stealing.<\/p>\n

It’s not about money. It’s about the fact that ultimately, and this is also my demand, we need to stop losing people, stop losing territories, and stop losing time. You’ve lost two years. And I was very pleased that the soldiers reacted to our briefing yesterday first of all. I thank Yuriy Butusov, by the way, who fully confirmed it. This information was commented on from the words of the combatants. And therefore I can say that I do not accept Prime Minister Shmyhal’s answer, where he repeated what he said in December 2023. Answering my question, he said: “The construction, Petr Oleksiyovych, of the third line of fortifications by the government of Ukraine has been completed on the entire section of the contact line.” I want to say: who will now bear responsibility for this lie?<\/p>\n

It reminds me very much of the lie of January-February 2022, when there will be no war, and we have built a defense system that will allow us to stop the enemy at the border. A very high price is being paid for this. A high price is being paid for the Kursk operation. The first 1,200 bodies of the fallen Ukrainian heroes, most of whom are from Kursk, we must not just honor and pay tribute, we must ask the question of what they died for and what was the result of this operation. And the result would be at least when we are fighting on the territory of Russia, and on the territory of Ukraine we are building defense lines that cannot be overcome, against which waves of Russian attack aircraft will crash. And instead, the fighters say that we cannot find them either near Sumy, or near Pokrovsk, or in Zaporizhia region, or in Kostyantynivka, and today we need to build them already in Dnipropetrovsk region. Because the enemy has reached the borders of Dnipropetrovsk region.<\/p>\n\n

I simply demand that we take this very seriously. Because we no longer have the human resources to stop the Russian offensive with meaty counterattacks. We do not have a sufficient amount of weapons that would allow artillery, missiles, guided bombs, and aviation to destroy the advancing formations of Russian troops. And we do not yet have any light at the end of the tunnel regarding the supply of American weapons. Because the work that was done by the previous American president, a great friend of Ukraine, my great friend Joe Biden, has ended or will end in July.<\/p>\n

\u2014 Petr Alekseevich, this is exactly the topic I wanted to talk about and ask about. Negotiations, or what we see, their absence, regarding the end of the war. Relations with the United States, this peace process and receiving assistance from them, about a new military package. We have heard absolutely nothing from the current authorities, negotiators and diplomats, 5-6 managers, whatever you want to call it. And even they flew to Washington last week, we expected some result.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

But I have the impression that we are at a dead end in terms of relations with the US. How can we get out of it in general, how can we establish this effective process of cooperation with the United States. Because they are, in fact, always a strategic partner and support Ukraine. And, in fact, negotiations to end the war. What prospects do we have?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

\u2014 First of all, I consider myself, without undue modesty, a competent, professional diplomat. And, of course, against the background of your question, which is very disturbing, I would like to say that the purpose of my answer will be \u2013 there is light at the end of the tunnel. We know what needs to be done in order to get the situation out of the dead end. We are ready to publicly present our strategy and tactics of action. The only thing that I, perhaps for the first time in the long history of our acquaintance, will allow myself to disagree with you for the first time, is that we need to concentrate all efforts after February 28.<\/p>\n

I think you mean the catastrophe and tragedy that occurred in the Oval Office. I think we should have concentrated all our efforts “before”. And I think the main reason that led to the catastrophe of the Oval Office was “before”. The meeting was completely unprepared in terms of diplomacy, professionalism, and competence. Neither the president, nor the minister, nor the negotiating team, nor the American side was ready. And that was the reason… And we are paying the price for this. The Armed Forces of Ukraine are paying, the state of Ukraine is paying, the people of Ukraine are paying.<\/p>\n

In order not to be unfounded, I will show you such an example. Tell me, please, we gathered three “peace summits”. Now I can tell you about it. Why did our partners go to these summits? You know, for what? To hear from Ukraine how they, the Ukrainian authorities, have scenarios for ending the war. What are their demands, what joint coordinated actions? And what needs to be done? What does Ukraine expect from its partners? Did we express our scenario? No. They will tell you that it was secret, not secret. Remember. When this government talks about something secret, it means that they have terrible results. They have nothing to say to society. Why? Because they are oriented towards PR. If they had at least something to come up with, they would have come up with it.<\/p>\n\n

So let’s analyze it. The first summit. The leaders of a hundred states and international organizations arrived. They say: what do you need? It turns out that all that was needed was a “family photo”. It happened, it was photographed, and the main result \u2013 we agreed on the next meeting. How?<\/p>\n

The second summit. Maybe now you will come up with something? No. We categorically reject China’s proposal, we categorically reject Brazil’s proposal, we categorically reject the proposal… Friends, what are you left with? You have neither Ukraine’s proposal nor NATO’s proposal. It was terrible.<\/p>\n

The third meeting is when we are again preparing a position. The first visit of our delegation to the new team was in December. No proposals were made on how we see the end of the war. We were told: okay, let us propose a ceasefire to you. What was Ukraine’s response? No, we don’t like the end of the war, we demand a full-fledged agreement after the end of the war. And why don’t you like the end of the war? We reject it.<\/p>\n

Two weeks pass – Ukraine’s positions change. They say: we are ready for a ceasefire, but only in the air and at sea. On the ground – it is unacceptable. Our partners throw up their hands, saying: why don’t you like a comprehensive ceasefire? Two weeks pass – Ukraine’s positions change again. They say: okay, we are already satisfied with a ceasefire on the ground, but one that is permanent. We reject 30 days. Okay, say the partners.<\/p>\n

Two weeks pass – we are already satisfied with a 30-day ceasefire, but we demand security guarantees from the US. The Americans say: no, for a ceasefire, first stop, then we will discuss all the conditions. Another two weeks pass – we say: okay, we are already satisfied with the lack of guarantees, but we need French, British, German troops on the territory of Ukraine, who will be able to ensure the functions of observing the ceasefire. They tell us: no, this will not happen now. We say: okay, and we agree to this, but we demand that we be at the negotiating table, and this is absolutely right, Americans, French, Germans, British. They say: no, go face to face to these negotiations.<\/p>\n

Listen, when you have 20 concepts and no one in the world understands how you are going to end the war, it is impossible to help you. And I do not blame the Ukrainian authorities and I do not blame the partners. I am saying that this is an incompetent position in preparing a negotiating position. What position did I propose and do I propose? You have gathered the “Coalition of the Willing” here. We came out with an absolutely clear strategy. We are giving Putin five days. And if there is no unconditional 30-day and comprehensive ceasefire without any conditions in order to start negotiations, then what Trump said will happen, and what we had to grab onto. This is called “Plan B.”<\/p>\n

What is “Plan B”? What if Putin doesn’t stop the war in five days… Because there are two approaches in negotiations with Putin. One approach, which is mistakenly used by Trump, who calls Putin “my friend”. It doesn’t work. Because Putin, as a KGB officer, specifically learned how to turn such a situation in negotiations to his advantage and deceive, lie to his partner, in this case Trump. And the second is the “language of strength”. And the Western world has the opportunity to speak to Putin in the language of strength.<\/p>\n\n

What are the components of this “Plan B”, this language of force? Number one is the list of weapons that the United States and NATO will provide to Ukraine the day after Putin’s refusal. Putin must have no hope left that he can be deceived. There must be long-range missiles, there must be air defense systems, there must be guided aerial bombs, there must be a sufficient number of artillery shells, there must be electronic warfare and countermeasures against Russian technical intelligence. This is the first.<\/p>\n

The second is a resolution of the Congress providing the necessary financial support, coordinated with the European Union. The third is sanctions. I want to emphasize that today I had a meeting with representatives of the NB8, that is, the eight Baltic and Nordic countries, who were represented at the level of ambassadors, fully supported my position on sanctions. Europe has prepared the 18th package of sanctions, which takes into account most of my proposals.<\/p>\n

Position one is sanctions against energy carriers. Limit the maximum price ceiling for Russian oil to $45 per ton. And stop any possibilities to circumvent sanctions. I ask the question: how can Ukraine demand this when it provides transit through its territory of 300 thousand barrels of oil per day, when Russia will receive $21 million per day through this transit? The Prime Minister gave me the answer that they are for it. Only the European Commission is against it. This is a lie. They are for it, but Hungary is against it. Excuse me, please. Hungary has a completely different motivation for us to follow their demands very clearly. Especially since there is information that part of the products in the form of oil products, which are produced in Hungary from Russian oil, are returned back to Ukraine at reduced prices, and therefore are a source of corruption. And the only thing we can do in this case is to stop the operation of the oil pipeline. At least this will bring 6-7 billion in lost export revenue, which means that 6-7 billion will not be used to finance Russian armed aggression.<\/p>\n

The second is the sanctions of the European Union – this is the disconnection of the 20 largest Russian banks from the SWIFT system. The third is the attack on the so-called shadow fleet in order to stop Russian exports. The fourth is sanctions, this is an already agreed document, this is not just “blah-blah-blah”. Sanctions against the “Nord Streams”, the de facto stoppage of gas supplies up to the supply of Russian liquefied gas. And what will these sanctions lead to? A reduction in Russian exports, the cessation of Putin’s ability to finance the war. This is the conversation that Putin understands.<\/p>\n\t\t