I was being facetious. A lot of blame has been placed on the Vilnius agreement and yes, the negotiators were naive, but it does not look like Yanukovych was ever serious about signing the agreement.
Ukraine has major economic problems. Its economy was never reformed or modernised after independence. It is one of the poorest, most corrupt countries in Europe. It was kept propped up, partly by Russia, though cheap gas prices and imports of Ukrainian goods.
Yanukovych was talking to the EU, partly because his government was short of cash, partly because a sizable voting block wants closer ties with the EU.
Yanukovych would probably have signed the agreement if the EU gave him cash with no strings attached, but the EU/IMF, quite rightly, wanted economic/structural reforms. Yanukovych could never have agreed to these reforms, such as reducing corruption, since it would have undermined his own political base.
He probably would also have preferred not to sign a deal with Russia, since again there was opposition from western Ukrainians, but Russia did not ask for any structural refoms and gave him cash up front.
So no, the Vilnius agreement was not the cause of present situation, it was only one of many contributing factors.
__________________
|