Changing Course-or Speed?

People in Brussels are commenting more emphatically on possible changes in Ukraine’s foreign policy off the record. An anonymous, well-informed source told Radio Liberty that “Victor Yanukovych’s statement about the danger of joining NATO, if it is truly quoted by the Russian media, runs counter to Ukraine’s course toward Euro-integration.” The source further stated that Ukraine’s NATO membership would not inflict any losses on the domestic military- industrial complex: “NATO doesn’t tell its member countries what kind of weapons they can manufacture or purchase.”

As could be expected, Russian experts praised the Ukrainian leadership’s new initiative. Russian Duma MP Andrey Kokoshin stressed, “Premier Viktor Yanukovych has proclaimed a new doctrine of Russian-Ukrainian relations, emphasizing the Russian-language issue among other things.” Mr. Kokoshin obviously appreciates Ukraine’s unwillingness to join NATO (as he recounted in detail in a recent interview in The Day).

Former Ukrainian Defense Minister Yevhen Marchuk, one of this country’s most active Euro-Atlantic lobbyists, told the Fifth Ukrainian Television Channel that Viktor Yanukovych’s statement indicates changes in Ukraine’s foreign policy, stressing: “This is the political background, which today is being obscured by information and statements that essentially serve as eloquent proof that something is being cooked up somewhere and that a presidential candidate has been instructed to make a certain statement, however differently the situation may be described by others.”

A CHANGE OF COURSE IS IMPOSSIBLE

A number of Ukrainian Euro- Atlantic advocates are simply refusing to comment on the premier’s statement; in some cases, bound by their governmental posts, they cannot afford to tell the truth. Off the record, most agree that his statement is yet another campaign stunt. An anonymous cabinet source told The Day, “Even if Ukraine suspends the NATO rapprochement process, in time it will arrive at the same conclusion-that there are no alternatives to NATO membership.”

Ironically, an international conference on NATO cooperation took place in Kyiv on September 30, organized by the National Institute for Strategic Studies. Many political VIPs were in attendance, meaning that the NATO issue has not degraded to the campaign stunt level.

Volodymyr Horbulin, Chairman of the National Euro-Atlantic Integration Center, believes that the NATO people will continue working in Ukraine, specifically to study current bilateral relations, with an eye to raising this cooperation to a higher level. In his own words, “this work will continue, statements being made by the so-called technical candidates and others notwithstanding.” He further stated that Ukraine had made considerable progress on the road to NATO membership, and so “aspiring to full membership is not a political declaration. Our country has slowed down the NATO membership process, but it has not changed the course, only altered the speed.”

Oleh Zarubinsky, First Deputy Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada’s European Integration Committee, is convinced that Ukraine’s NATO choice is “an objective priority in the current process of international cooperation in the security sphere... I am fully aware that there are politicians who feel more comfortable about becoming integrated with semi-authoritarian countries and operetta democracies... but this must not be a problem facing Ukraine and its people.” Mr. Zarubinsky feels sure that Ukraine’s integration into NATO will not damage the domestic military-industrial complex, but will be instrumental in upgrading it: “It is a fact that the Ukrainian defense industry remains largely integrated with Russia’s...” Mr. Zarubinsky adds that such coexistence has no future because Russia currently shares a mere 0.3% in the world’s military hi-tech turnover.

Oleh Shamur, Deputy Foreign Minister of Ukraine, noted that any discussions of Ukraine’s NATO membership were “campaign-related...Various statements that we are hearing these days reflect all those diverse attitudes toward NATO membership on the part of our political elite and the rest of society.” The Ukrainian diplomat is convinced that avoiding pauses is the most important aspect of Ukraine-NATO relations: “We mustn’t lose the positive impulse we have had lately, starting with Prague, we must forge ahead.”

Those present agreed that everything depends not on short-lived declarations but on what practical steps Ukraine will take to implement its commitments, including the main one-holding fair and transparent elections; this approach would determine Ukraine’s progress on the way to NATO membership.

Volodymyr HORBULIN, Presidential National Security Aide, Chairman of the National Euro-Atlantic Integration Center:

I don’t think that Viktor Yanukovych’s statement will have any national security consequences. We all remember that his statement was made at the Russian Media Club. He spoke as a presidential candidate, not as a prime minister of Ukraine. As the head of the Ukrainian government, he is responsible for solving problems relating to the efficiency of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Therefore, I would not attribute the prime minister’s statement to any issues having to do with Ukrainian national security. Of course, his statement must have attracted our NATO partners’ attention — those who still wish to number Ukraine among the member countries, who are called upon to uphold security and stability in Europe. Most likely it’s a psychological rather than a military-technological issue.

All things considered, I believe that the presidential campaign should be considered outside the notion of our cooperation with NATO. We must shape our relationship with the alliance on a medium-range basis at least — and on a long-term basis at most. The long-term prospects mean integrating into NATO, a road our country will travel by all means, regardless of who becomes the next president in 2004.

Oleksandr DERHACHOV, Institute for Political and Ethnic Studies:

It all depends on whether Mr. Yanukovych wins the presidential race. If he does, considering his campaign statements, his presidency will result in Ukraine’s temporary isolation, which, however short-lived, will be bad for this country. I must point out the spontaneous, opportunistic, and inconsistent nature of his statements, which do not correspond to the national interests, but are subordinated to the logic of the presidential campaign. The prime minister’s statement was an attempt to make the best of several years’ worth of brainwashing, convincing people that cooperation with the West would only harm them, spreading lies about international institutions, particularly Euro-Atlantic ones, operating in Ukraine. This approach dominates some of the Ukrainian electorate, those representing the Soviet subculture. This may serve to encourage some of his supporters, people who are willing to vote for him anyway. However, this will not provide presidential candidate Viktor Yanukovych with new supporters.

As for Ukrainian-NATO cooperation in general, it will continue come what may. After all, the civilized world maintains contacts with what is best described as outcast countries; there are certain practical matters to resolve, information has to be exchanged. I mean there is no way to avoid cooperation. Yet its scope depends on how much the leaders of the countries under study - in our case those at the helm of Ukraine and our Western partners - can trust each other. Here little progress can be expected. We can only count on preserving our achievements, mainly in the technological domain, and then await a political response.

Heorhy KRIUCHKOV, Chairman, Verkhovna Rada National Security and Defense Committee:

The prime minister’s statement won’t affect any of our national security issues. He simply stated a point of view that exists in our society. This doesn’t change anything in principle. The orientation to Euro-Atlantic integration remains. Viktor Yanukovych simply voiced his concern about the military- industrial complex; there are reasons for such fears. Let’s not forget how the West treated our AN-70 project; how the new NATO countries feel about our alleged supplies of military spare parts to some countries. In a word, they are trying to keep us on a tight rein — and this considering that we manufacture rockets that are no worse than anywhere else in the world, that our aircraft industry also meets world standards. These industries are being jeopardized and Viktor Yanukovych said as much. I would describe his stand as that of a statesman concerned about the national interests of Ukraine. The West is now concerned only about having Viktor Yushchenko win the presidential campaign. If he does, we will be West- and NATO-oriented. If Viktor Yanukovych becomes the next president, our relations with the West, NATO included, and East will be balanced.

Michel DURE, Director, NATO Information and Documentation Center:

As stated recently by the NATO Secretary General, we attach considerable importance to the election campaign process in Ukraine. The quality of this process will certainly affect NATO-Ukrainian relations. I hope that everything will be fine. We do appreciate the military reform, yet we attach as much importance to the political aspect. Whatever the election’s outcome, Ukraine will remain Ukraine. It will remain a polity located in Europe. We will continue to build our relationships with an independent Ukraine, and we will, of course, take into account Ukraine’s wishes with regard to our cooperation. We are prepared to cooperate with Ukraine, but many things depend on this country. NATO is an organization dealing with matters of collective security. If Ukraine wants to be a security provider, it can embark on the membership path. Whichever way remains the Ukrainian choice. This must be clearly understood. We never impose this choice on anyone.

I believe that NATO membership is not a crucial issue in Ukraine. Ukraine, however, is moving in only one direction, that of NATO membership. Ukraine’s relations are aimed at rapprochement with NATO. This is also very important for us and we take this into account in our relationships. If Ukraine says she doesn’t want to join NATO, this will be her choice, too. I am convinced that any such choice will be made independently. You know that certain countries embarked on an intensified dialogue with NATO, but later refused membership.

As Director of the NATO Information and Documentation Center, I would like to stress that achieving national consensus on the Euro-Atlantic issue is a very important prerequisite. As stated by the conference participants, there is still work to be done with Ukrainian society. Here explaining, rather than brainwashing, is necessary because you lack information about NATO.

Serhiy PYROZHKOV, Deputy Secretary, NDSC:

We must keep working the way we’ve been doing up to now. We must carry out certain plans. NATO made it clear that our cooperation could be upgraded after the elections.

Oleh SHAMSHUR, Deputy Foreign Minister:

We have made considerable progress in our relations with NATO, practically with regard to every important aspect, ranging from military to civil. All this allows us to seriously consider the possibility of expanding our cooperation. We will continue to make every effort to implement the arrangements made during the summit in Istanbul; we will also start preparing for the foreign ministers’ meeting of the Ukraine-NATO Commission.