drd. Larisa N. HAREA^

„Orice conflict internaţional este în acelaşi timp politic şi juridic,
ceea ce variază este doar ponderea aspectelor politice sau juridice”¹
Nguyen Quoc Dinh²

Abstract. Starting from the size of the geopolitical interest of the Russian Federation in the Ukrainian sovereign and independent space, as well as in the Georgian and Moldovan space, it determines mainly a big business for the state. This study highlights the specific character of Russia in determining the generation of secessionist conflicts, in other words, the specific character of the current leadership of the Kremlin (cases confirmed by the international community) in time and space -, Spring 2014, in the Eastern space (Donbass, Luhansk ) and southern (Crimea) of Ukraine, as a geocardinal element, determined in the direction of major changes in the geopolitical taxonomy of international relations. Courage, will and impetus, more immoral than moral, determine the law of nature of the foreign policy character of the Russian Federation, especially in its diplomacy of geoIntelligence -, element of negotiation, based on combinations of dissemination in the Russian strategy, to deny, to distort, to confuse, to intimidate in order to destroy and capture, and, of the foreign territories in its close vicinity, through which it can control not only the occupied territories, but also the whole state. This warlike action of Russia presents the inadmissibility of the intervention in the internal affairs of Ukraine. Thus, the freedom of the Ukrainian people to choose the geocardinal direction of alignment with Euro-Atlantic values has become a subject of negotiation in the contemporaneity of international politics. Certainly, any state / nation in the former Soviet system would align with Euro-Atlantic values if it had the political will and courage, and the freedom in the geocardinal spectrum of foreign policy would not encounter obstacles in the negotiation process, only to escape Russian influence. It should be noted that the process of expanding the EU and NATO political systems to Eastern Europe was not much desired by Westerners. Was it due to the avoidance of direct confrontations with the Russian Federation or, for the underestimation of the economic and military potential of the Eastern European states(?).

Keywords: Ukraine, Russia, geopolitics, security, negotiation, diplomacy, interest, Normandy format