EP Rapporteur on Vulin: If he eavesdropped on the Russians, then he is an accomplice in the crime

The European Parliament’s rapporteur on Moscow and former Lithuanian Prime Minister Andrius Kubilius told Nova that the Russian opposition’s wiretaps in Belgrade will certainly be in the EP report on Serbia, unless the Serbian government presents evidence to the contrary.

Referring to the cooperation between the Serbian and Russian authorities in the fight against the so-called color revolutions and information that this cooperation has resulted in the interception of the Russian opposition rally in Belgrade and the arrest of the rally co-organizer Andrej Pivovarov, Kubilius said that this is a scandal that could significantly affect Serbia’s European integration.

“It’s very scandalous information. I am not familiar with the details of what is happening in Serbia, but I know very well Vladimir Kara-Murza, who has told this story. I was shocked when I heard it all. This is very dangerous for the candidate country, because it worsens its image, especially in the field of European institutions. If your interior minister handed over to Patrushev the details of the recorded conversations of the Russian opposition, then from my point of view it is co-operation in crime and this is very detrimental to the image of Serbia,” he said.

Kubilius stressed that he is convinced that the issue of wiretapping the Russian opposition will be included in the EP report on Serbia, if the Serbian government does not provide information that the story is not true.

“I am absolutely sure of that. If there is not enough evidence from the Serbian authorities that this is not accurate information, then this topic will surely be in the European Parliament report. Candidate countries should pay special attention to issues such as the rule of law and democracy,” he said.

The MEP, one of the main representatives of the European People’s Party (EPP) in the European Parliament, of which the SNS is an associate member, said their group would seek an explanation from its member on the case.

“When we see that our group party is making certain mistakes, we ask them to remove those mistakes and explain them. We are often more critical of those in our ranks than those who are, for example, from the left group or from the ranks of the Social Democrats. We ask our friends and partners more than we ask others and this is my position in this case as well,” said Kubilius.

How do you comment on the information about the wiretapping of the Russian opposition in Belgrade?

This is very scandalous information. I am not familiar with the details of what is happening in Serbia, but I know very well Vladimir Kara-Murza, who has told this story. I was shocked. I trust Kara-Murza, and when I read that the Russian opposition rally had been secretly filmed in Belgrade by Serbian police and that information about it had been passed to the official Kremlin, I was surprised.

How dangerous is it for a candidate country for EU membership to cooperate with a country in this way?

This is very dangerous for the candidate country, because it worsens its image, especially in the field of European integration. It is dangerous to allow the official Kremlin to interfere in Serbia’s domestic politics, because it is clear that they have no interest in your country’s EU integration. The fact that the Kremlin is working with the opposition and what we have seen in examples like Navalny and Andrei Pivovarov is a crime and that is why the EU is imposing Mangit sanctions on those who persecute the opposition. Even collaborating with those who do this is a crime. If your Minister of Interior handed over to Patrushev the data of the recorded conversations of the Russian opposition, then from my point of view, this is cooperation in crime and is very detrimental to the image of Serbia.

What can the European Parliament do in this case? What mechanisms are available to you?

We are closely following the accession negotiations of all candidate countries and we see that these negotiations are not easy. Serbia, as one of the most important countries in the Balkans, if it really wants to become part of the EU, must take care of its image and the way it will be treated in the European institutions, especially since such things appear and if this kind of cooperation continues. I do not know what the Serbian police minister talked to Patrushev during his stay in Moscow, but I know who Patrushev is and what Patrushev is doing. We are familiar with the talks between Serbia and Russia and their agreements on how to help each other in the fight against the so-called color revolutions, and it is very difficult for me to believe in such things. Therefore, I must emphasize that if Serbia really wants to become a member of the European Union, it must prove itself as a democratic state and show that in addition to democracy, where there is freedom of thought, rule of law, freedom of the media and there is no problem with people’s freedom to protest. These are the Copenhagen criteria.

If, on the other hand, you are talking to the official Kremlin about how to stifle those rights, then this is a very bad message for the rest of Europe, which wants Serbia as an EU member, but as a proven stable democracy in which the opposition has the right to express its position, without fear that it will be subjected to methods similar to those applied to their counterparts in Russia.

 Do you believe that the next report of the European Parliament on Serbia will include this story about the wiretapping of the Russian opposition?

I’m absolutely sure of that. If there is not enough evidence from the authorities in Serbia that this is not accurate information, then this topic will certainly be found in the European Parliament report. The issue of democracy and the rule of law, not only outside the EU, in countries like Belarus, but also within it, because of the bad examples of Hungary and Poland, is attracting a lot of attention. These are basic things and basic criteria. Candidate countries need to pay special attention to these issues in order to convince the EU institutions, and in particular the European Parliament, that they are good at them. The EP pays special attention to the democratic development of the countries of the region and is the most important condition for EU membership.

Can the EP influence the institutions in Serbia to launch an investigation into the wiretapping of the Russian opposition?

We have certain instruments. We send letters to governments from time to time when we feel the need to explain something or give evidence. I am not so engaged in the countries of the Western Balkans, I am more committed to Russia and the eastern countries, but I assume that the representatives of the European Parliament will ask the Serbian authorities to give accurate answers to what happened in this case.

You are also the representative of the European People’s Party in the EP, whose associate member is the ruling party in Serbia, the Serbian Progressive Party. Could this affect their position within that group and will you seek answers from them?

We in the EPP pay special attention to EU enlargement. It is of great geopolitical importance for us for your country to become a member of the EU. Of course, when we see that our group side is making certain mistakes, or at least when we get angry or it seems so, we ask them to remove those mistakes and explain them. We are often more critical of those in our ranks than those of, for example, the left-wing group or the Social Democrats. We ask our friends and partners more than we ask of others and this is my attitude even in this case.

And what can the European Parliament do to help in the case of Andrei Pivovarov?

Directly, we can not do much to free Andrei Pivovarov, just as we can not fight for the freedom of Alexei Navalny. Everything is in the hands of Mr. Putin, who unfortunately is becoming increasingly aggressive. He fears the development of the situation in Russia itself, so Pivovarov and Navalny are in prison. At the same time, he fears losing geopolitical influence in the region, Ukraine, Moldova and Belarus and is therefore becoming increasingly aggressive.

How do you explain this tension around Ukraine? What do you think will be the epilogue of everything?

If I could predict, I would be a miracle worker. Putin is threatening the West and trying to figure out how he will react to his actions. If the West turns out to be weak, then Putin will take the next steps. You can clearly see that they are preparing for something big and it is good that the West, NATO and the United States are sending messages to Putin that they will not betray Ukraine and that in case of military aggression against that country, Russia will be punished with severe sanctions. However, I still do not see a clear position of the West on what we are saying in the European Parliament. Starting a war against Ukraine and Western countries is not a small thing, it is a serious international crime and the same goes for war threats. It’s like the Penal Code – if someone threatens to kill and beat someone, it’s a crime. Of course you can not compare the criminal code with international relations, but morality and logic say that it is a crime if one state threatens another state with war and will kill its own people. It is an international crime, which should be investigated by an international court. Putin needs to know what awaits him if he continues with this behavior. This is the answer I expect the West to instruct Putin and not go on with the story of how a dialogue takes place. Dialogue must take place, but before that a clear message must be sent that such behavior is unacceptable and that it is a preparation for an international crime.