[Editor's Note: This article describes a dynamic we have covered before: After the US suffered its major setbacks with Crimea's secession and the Novorossiya uprisings, they needed the EU and Russia to help re-manage part of the situation. So much for 'F*ck the EU', and Nuland's attempt to alienate other interested parties. Poroshenko was an optimal compromise candidate; he was someone that the Three Powers involved could more or less live with. The US and Russia both have mechanisms at their disposal to push Poroshenko in various, often contradictory, ways. This article helps to explain why the Russians saw Poroshenko as someone they could minimally work with - J. Flores]

Experts: Part of the Russian governing class is closely connected with Poroshenko

russian Kremlin
A view of Russia's Kremlin
Visible manifestations of Russia's support for the Ukrainian economy and, as a result, the Kiev regime, are really there. But on the question of how much they are capable of significantly affecting the economic situation in Ukraine, experts' opinion diverge. Many political analysts, writers, and simply indifferent observers, blame the Russian government, convicting it of evil intent in their aspiration to maintain good relations with the West, by protecting the Kiev authorities who are waging war against the rebellious Donbass.

So by what ways and, above all, for what is Russia, albeit indirectly, contributing to the maintenance of the positions of the hostile powers of the puppet and criminal Ukrainian "elite?"

Granting discounts on gas and electricity supplies at preferential prices

In order to justify here the policy of "Gazprom," the argument can be made that, first of all, Ukraine is a transit territory for Russian natural gas, and attempts to establish an alternative path of transit have thus far been unsuccessful. The objective reality is such that, dependent on resource exports, Russia is compelled to make concessions. The second argument is a concern for the "brother Ukrainian people" which, of course, it is impossible to regain due to the unhealthy actions of the leadership of Ukraine.

But, given that the bills for the population as a result of Russian discounts in Ukraine do not at all decrease, and social policies are not gravitating to be wider encompassing, this argument also appears unconvincing. Moreover, experts notice that discounts on gas are one of the most important areas of unofficial support for Kiev from Russia's side.

In the case of electricity, it's also possible to reference the dependent status of Crimea on Ukraine on this question. The peninsula is currently 70% dependent on Ukrainian electricity. In the words of the Minister of fuel and Energy of Crimea, Sergei Egorov, the peninsula could independently provide for basic energy needs by 2018, when private energy generation will reach 950 MW per day.


Russia's mild position in relation to Ukrainian debt

It is understood that one needs to help friends - this is true not only for a human but also for a state. But here, where to financially help those who with all of their strength maintain animosity and hatred and use financial resources instead of paying back debt, hardly anyone agrees. However, the requirement of the early payment of debt would mean direct confrontation with Ukraine and the "civilized" world - because by returning this money it is unlikely that there would be a Ukraine. In support of this, Ukraine continues to insist on restructuring debt to Russia, and in Ukrainian media "expert appraisals" appear explaining why Russia should agree with this.

For the effectiveness of international mechanisms of influence on this matter, it does not lend towards hope given the prevailing unfavorable situation for Russia. Therefore, it is possible that Russia, in order to save its face, is trying to build "a good sport amidst a bad game," demonstrating the nobility and breadth of the Russian soul, which even if it does not forgive enemies of their debts, at least doesn't dispose of them in their favor.

"The term of redeemed repayments by Russia of eurobonds of Ukraine expires in December, 2015. Minister of Finance of the Russian Federation Anton Siluanov already reserved for the possibility of "some kind of temporary process for reclaiming these resources. One can also understand this as a willingness, under certain circumstances, to delay the payment of debt. Perhaps this is evidence that Moscow already now doesn't see effective tools allowing for the collection of Ukrainian debt on time", - said political analyst Mikhail Neyzhmakov.

He recalled thatthe lenders of Greece took very serious efforts and time to force her to accept their plan for the restructuring of debts.

"Meanwhile, for Athens the European lenders were the main source of external financial assistance. But in the relations of Moscow and Kiev, the situation is different, Ukraine finding other sources of external financial support. The IMF has not yet and is unlikely to exert clear pressure on Kiev on the issue of its debts to Russia. And this means that the Ukrainian side, even refusing to answer for debts to Moscow, can continue to receive credits from other sources. In this way, once it will be difficult for Russia to compel Kiev to pay its debts, then the instrument of political pressure on Ukraine in this situation comes out weak" , - explained the expert.

The policies of Russian banks supporting the financial system of Ukraine

About this the public figure Oleg Tsarev wrote as previously reported by IA Regnum. He noted that Russian state-owned banks are increasing their share in the assets of the Ukrainian banking system - for 2014 their share has increased up to 12%. In addition, Tsarev drew attention to the fact that Ukrainian enterprises en masse do not return and do not tend to their taken credits, and the courts, "driven by financial incentives received from the borrowers as well as patriotic sentiments", en masse withdrawing assets out from underneath bank mortgages, do not recognize loan agreements. "The return on loans today does not exceed 20%. Russian banks in Ukraine are ready to give 80% discounts just to get back at least part of the funds given out" - Tsarev ascertained. He also recalled that in the previous year, the "daughters" of Russian Sberbank and VTB were all involved in the issue of war bonds.

The economist Vladislav Zhukovsky explained the actions of banks by the desire to save their positions and their revenues and noted that the root of the problem is to be found in more fundamental causes.

"It's not that our individual state-owned banks, state corporations, private sector, or those close to the Kremlin's oligarchical structure continue to cooperate actively with Ukrainian counterparts, providing direct or indirect economic support. In fact, what in Russia that is in power in Ukraine is the raw offshoring of oligarchical capital", - noted the expert.

Authorities in Russia and Ukraine, in Zhukovsky's opinion, defend not the interests of the working majority or the representatives of small and medium-sized firms, but the interests of major raw capital and international financial speculators. In addition, the elites of both countries aspire to friendship with the West and are trying to enter the "waiting room of the global managerial class, where they were allowed only the rights of the whipping boy."

"State-owned banks don't just support the Kiev regime. As I understand it, the lion's share of the Russian governing class is very closely linked to Poroshenko," - the economist said. For this reason, in his view, the referendum in the republics of Donbass was not recognized and the idea of the Russian World didn't find support as it threatened the Russian offshoring aristocracy. "The oligarchs will always agree with each other and find common ground. Our authorities, like our businesses, don't want to quarrel with the West, and our financial system is tied to the West," he stated.

With regard to the policy of Russian banks, for them it also business and money. And their actions in Ukraine can be explained by their desire to save sinking assets and keep afloat their subsidiaries and affiliates. In this way the main support for the Kiev regime is not that of the banks. "We are helping those whom we supply electricity at preferential prices in installments, and to those whom we supply industrial metals. Support goes on all fronts - credits and bonds for which we don't require repayment ahead of schedule, although also where they could do this, with the supply of gas, oil, industrial metals, state orders which we place at Ukrainian enterprises. The whole war is a big imitation", - the expert summed up.

Political analyst Boris Kagarlitsky drew attention to the fact that what is important in this situation turns out to be the position of Russian banks throughout Crimea. He recalled the words attributed to German Gref which were disseminated throughout Russian and Ukrainian media and from which, it is true, Sberbank disassociated itself on its Twitter profile: "Crimea is the territory of Ukraine from the point of view of the international financial sector and we adhere to this position."

Speaking plainly, for Sberbank "Crimea is not Russia" - the head of Sberbank allegedly said this in an interview with the Germany radio host Udo Pretenzel for radio WDR5. However, regardless of whether there was this interview or not, the policy of "of Sberbank" in Crimea remains unchanged - it actually continues to participate in the blockade of the peninsula. In both the two Russian regions, the Republic of the Crimea and Sevastopol, to this time there is still not a working branch of the leading bank of the country.

In the words of Boris Kagarlitsky, banks do everything in order to damage in Ukraine. "If the Russian authorities would take a tougher stance, they would say: 'You know, guys, chose, either you put hurt on Ukraine, or Russia will suffer to a much greater extent.' But the state, as the main shareholder in Sberbank, sanctions the very same behavior in Gref," - Kagarlitsky believes.

Industrial and commercial cooperation, including with military enterprises

At the height of hostilities in 2014, the media reported that the Yaroslavl Diesel Equipment Plant (YaZDA), included in "GAZ Group," which is owned by Oleg Deripaska, continued the delivery of units (groups of diesel) for the engines of tanks produced in the Kharkov plant of transport engineering named aver V.A. Malyshev. It was reported in June-July YaZDA significantly increased deliveries of its products to the Ukrainian side. Later followed categorical refutations of this information from the side of "GAZ Group" and YaZDA.

However, smoke doesn't happen without fire, and as the political analyst Boris Kagarlitsky said, these contracts could have been annulled retroactively and some kind of such deliveries were nevertheless carried out. The expert believes in the first stage of the war, there took place the delivery of spare parts and the sending of Russian specialists to repair Ukrainian weapons and military equipment fighting with Donbass.

Besides this, speaking of trade cooperation between the countries, it should be noted that the dominant position of Russia is in the export of coal to Ukraine. Russia, according to officially released figures, was the leader in the ratings of coal exporters to the country in January-July 2015.

Replying to the question as to why Russia conducts such a two-faced economic policy towards Ukraine, experts first of all pay attention to the reluctance of the Russian elite to quarrel with the West. On this Kagarlitsky is sure, observing that Russian authorities with all their strength are trying to reconcile with Ukraine and the West, in every way demonstrating their good will, but the other side stubbornly refuses to reciprocate.

In turn, department head of the Russian University of Economics named after Plekhanov, Ruslan Dzarasov, is convinced that the spinelessness of Russian political in regards to Ukraine and its half-hearted position in support of Donbass have the same origin. Russia hopes for the success of the Minsk process, which could find support among Europeans for a peaceful settlement even if this does not fit the pressure of the United States in its geopolitical strategy.

"If you go on for a peace plan which pushes our leadership, then the entire strategy of the Americans is undermined, meaning more than 20 years of working on the subordination of Ukraine. And Russia is counting on it, hence our half-hearted support for Donbass. We stubbornly cling to peace plan which is unacceptable to the Americans. They keep it as a carrot for us, so that our support of Donbass would be ineffective and not match the scope of the support for the Kiev regime by the West. Here lies our economic aid to the Ukrainian, anti-Russian regime by the fact that we want to leave the door open, we do not want to burn the bridges, so that the West would compromise with us on these conditions, which we consider acceptable for ourselves," - he said.

The economist Vasiliy Koltashov clarified that the Russian policy of economic mildness is based on the fact that presidents come and go, but the country remains, and with it it's necessary to work and negotiate. In his opinion, one should not exaggerate the significance of the economic support for the Ukrainian economy from the side of Russia, for it doesn't help Ukraine in any way - the economy of the country is still in critical condition.

Via Novorosinform - translated by J. Arnoldski