Well it was bound to happen eventually and really there is no surprise it is happening now.
Ms Tymoshenko’s activities and those of her former company, United Energy Systems of Ukraine, will now come under further scrutiny as the Russian Defence Ministry has now lodged a formal complaint with Kyiv over an outstanding debt which it is owed by UESU. The debt claimed is UAH 3,239,450,000 - yes that’s just over UAH 3.2 billion.
Add to this an additional $18 million being sought from Ms Tymoshenko by a US registered company through the US courts at the moment over other irregularities with UESU and the timing of this does not bode well for Ms Tymoshenko, and by association the United Opposition, during the official electioneering period prior to the parliamentary elections in October.
Possibly worse still, is that after many years of denying there was a debt to Russia, a month or so prior to her jailing for alleged misuse of office, Ms Tymoshenko made a statement on television that there was indeed a debt to said Russian Ministry but disputed the size. No doubt somebody somewhere in both Russia and Ukraine have that televised statement ready to deploy once her Ukrainian court case over tax evasion and various other nefarious shenanigans when running UESU begins very shortly.
That is of course, if Ms Tymoshenko is well enough to appear at court. She has already refused to give video evidence to a US court over the UESU related $18 million and also refused to give video evidence to any Ukrainian courts.
How that affects the US proceedings I have no idea, but the Ukrainian proceedings will be forever delayed until she makes some form of appearance, either physically or virtually.
To compound matters further, very soon we will discover what the US will do with Pavlo Lazarenko, Ms Tymoshenko’s UESU partner, as his release date after a 10 year sentence for money laundering is imminent. Will he be allowed to remain in the USA or will he be sent back to Ukraine where he is wanted on an international arrest warrant and has been for the best part of 10 years.
Could the US send him back to Ukraine whilst having been so vocal about the flaws of the Ukrainian justice system when stating their concerns over Ms Tymoshenko and others in recent hearings?
Returning to the Russian move, the question has to be asked, why now?
Has somebody there looked at the Ukrainian opinion polls prior to the elections, done the math relating to proportional representation and single candidate seats and come to the conclusion, as I have, that Party Regions will retain power (even before they cheat) - therefore why not do the current majority a favour and give them additional ammunition for both court case and electioneering?
A favour to be returned in due course no doubt.
Is it a case that they see the United Opposition (and thus Ms Tymoshenko) losing, and therefore they can safely afford to burn their bridges with her as she will not be in a position of any power for a good number of years to come - if ever in power again?
Is it more simple than that? Is it just Russia proving that it has the ability to interfere, directly or indirectly, in the electoral process of Ukraine by choosing to put additional bad public relations pressure on Ms Tymoshenko and by inference the United Opposition, and yet simultaneously also require the current government to action the formal complaint despite the fact in doing so, it will make the current government even more unpopular with the EU?
Whatever the reasons, the timing for Ms Tymoshenko with her USEU trial immanent is not good. The timing for the United Opposition by association to Ms Tymoshenko is also not particularly good either. Especially so as all recent polls have them trailing Party Regions by far more than the margin of error in the survey methodology.
It will be interesting to see how this is used - or not - during the remaining 6 weeks of electioneering.
Yet another question also raises it’s head. The US case relating to Ms Tymoshenko and UESU is aimed at exactly that - Ms Tymoshenko and her now defunct UESU company. No claims against the Ukrainian State. Why then is the Russian claim being seen, or at least reported as, an issue against Ms Tymoshenko and UESU that should ultimately be underwritten by the Ukrainian nation?
Surely the entire purpose of the nefarious UESU was to sit in between the nations of Russia and Ukraine and spin off profits and excess gas as a private company allowing the official distancing of both States relating to the nefarious profits that no doubt where shared amongst a certain set of thieves.
One could of course conclude, or at least see an avenue, whereby should the Ukrainian State repay the debts of Ms Tymoshenko and UESU to settle the Russian Defence Ministry claim, whilst unquestionably further damning the reputation of Ms Tymoshenko in the process, a nefarious little deal to split that repayment into personal off-shore accounts (via smoke and mirrors naturally) could be reached and the sum simply written off by the Russian Defence Ministry.
Let’s sit back and watch how this all plays out - although it is unlikely to play out well for Ms Tymoshenko. Whether the EU and EPP would back her amongst allegations of tax avoidance, money laundering and an official complaint from Russia must also be in question. After all, the EU has a very public stance against tax avoidance, money laundering and those that partake in such shenanigans.