This case can illustrate why the European Commission raises the issue of democracy and the rule of law in Ukraine during the discussion of EU membership. The dismissal happened immediately, and several conditions preceded it.
An extremely important person
The dismissed Vadym Prystaiko was a very influential person, as he held two positions at the same time:
- Ambassador of Ukraine to Great Britain;
- Permanent representative at the International Maritime Organization.
Both positions have recently become “burning”. The official reasons for the dismissal have not yet been announced. However, after analyzing what has been happening in recent days, you can independently complete the whole picture.
Grain corridor
As a permanent representative at the International Maritime Organization, Vadym Prystaiko has been in the thick of things in recent days. After the termination of the Black Sea grain initiative by Russia, water corridors and ship routes from Ukrainian ports became the most discussed topic in international politics.
There were several proposals from the Ukrainian side:
- to continue exporting despite Russian threats to bomb any ships;
- to change the waterways for grain export.
Since the decision has not yet been made, it can be concluded that the persons responsible for it are inefficient.
The scandal after the NATO summit
Perhaps the word “scandal” is too strong, but the fact that the situation became a precedent for further diplomatic relations between Ukraine and Great Britain cannot be denied. The chronology of events is as follows:
1. UK defense secretary Wallace said that his country would like to see more gratitude from Ukraine for military assistance.
2. Zelenskyy replied that the accusation has no grounds because gratitude is constantly expressed. Therefore, he proposed to thank Wallace, particularly every morning.
3. Prystaiko, as the Ukrainian ambassador to Great Britain, said that Zelenskyy resorted to “unhealthy sarcasm”, which should not be present in relations between partner countries.
Refusal of membership in NATO
Another decisive step on the way to his dismissal was the words of Vadym Prystaiko that Ukraine should think about the refusal of its future as a NATO member if it will help stop the war with Russia.
Whether it is permissible for the Ambassador to express opinions that contradict the official course of the country’s government is a rhetorical question.
However, it is clear that the opposition and foreign mass media of unfriendly countries will definitely use this fact as proof of the suppression of dissent and democracy in Ukraine.
