Gerald Nash (Louth, Labour) | Oireachtas source

President Putin has used the threat of the far right as a convenient fig-leaf to justify the invasion of Crimea. I am glad it is acknowledged that Crimea has been invaded. The territorial integrity of Ukraine has been undermined and has been violated and international law has been violated. That is a demonstrable fact. In the context of the de-escalation of the dispute and the hope of a negotiated peaceful resolution to it, I would be anxious to see it ensured that the constitutional reform path that Ukraine was on would not be diverted from.

I also hope that the EU will continue to support the aims of the Ukrainian people in the type of constitutional reform that a significant number of them believe is required. Is it the ambassador's view that the Ukrainian people still continue to demand the type of institutional and constitutional reform that they demanded prior to the integrity of their border being compromised by invasion? I do not want the reform path that Ukraine was on to be diminished or undermined by any settlement that might emerge. I appreciate that resolving this difficult and complex set of circumstances may involve a sacrifice from all sides to the dispute, but is it the ambassador's opinion that Ukraine should remain on the reform path and that this not become a casualty of any settlement?