A complicated Ukrainian issue: attempts of translation...

The desire to make part of the EU requires being able to present oneself. Especially, if the investments are needed. They are needed. “Invest into Ukraine, we are open!” the Ukrai-nian politicians like repeating this phrase. They often repeated it this time in London as well. The international conference “Inside Ukraine: a Success Story in the Making?” has recently taken place in the British capital. By the way, it was held for the second time. The audience consisted of the representatives of the large international companies working in Ukrainian market, experts, politicians, and, of course, journalists.

The problems with implementation of the legislative basis (of course, first of all there should be one), corrupt officials, inefficient judicial reform, unfortunately, existing in Ukraine make a serious brake. That is why even the “sweetest” promises about the investment attractiveness of our country are easily refuted.

A five-year political chaos after the Orange Revolution is the main argument used by the current government to explain the need for introducing a proper order and build the line of command to be able to carry out the reforms. They spoke a lot about the reforms at the conference. The Ukrainian government was presented by two vice-premiers: Minister of the Infrastructure Borys Kolesnikov and the Minister of Social Policy Serhii Tihipko. Here are some fragments of their speeches:

Serhii Tihipko: “During the period of 2008-09 there were hardly any reforms in Ukraine and the power was not consolidated. Meanwhile, other countries were moving ahead. I would like to emphasize certain changes that have recently happened in Ukraine. First of all, we managed to stabilize the situation in the macroeconomics. Secondly, we stabilized the banking system. Thirdly, the situation at the foreign markets improved. Fourthly, regardless of the fact that the Tax Code is being criticized it is efficient. The tax pressure is being released. The number of licenses has been significantly reduced. Starting a business has become easier. We approach the reforms systematically.”

Borys Kolesnikov: “Four new airports have been built in Ukraine from a scratch and three new landing strips. The first fast trains will start running in May. Today one can get from Berlin to Kyiv using the high-quality roads. Then we are going to the east. We are going to build an absolutely new highway ‘Kyiv – Cherkasy – Dnipropetrovsk – Donetsk – Rostov-on-Don.’ As for the seaports: we have recently opened a new terminal in Illichivsk that significantly increases our possibilities. The Ministry of Infrastructure in cooperation with the German companies is building new large container terminals in Odesa and we are developing our possibilities in Mariupol.”

One should do justice to what has been already done; however, it looks like the Europeans got to the core of the Ukrainian authorities’ formula: “the line of command in exchange for the reforms.” We spoke to Senior Policy Fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations Andrew WILSON:

In your speech you said that Ukrai-nian authorities speak about introducing proper order in the country but it does not contribute to the reforms. Could you prove your opinion?

“The present Ukrainian authorities argued about the need to introduce order in the country in contrast to the chaos that reigned after the Orange Revolution. The order was considered as a condition for carrying out the reforms. In 2010 the reforms were realized but they were a synonym of strengthening the line of command. It turned out that the talks about the order were used as a mantra for the West as well. The best scenario for Ukraine is carrying out the reforms: real, unpopular but those that will achieve the result in some period of time. The order implies the law order as well but I cannot see it in Ukraine.”

Little time is left before December 19. How can Tymoshenko’s question be resolved?

“The Ukrainian authorities say that it is not a political issue, however, Europe does not think so. I am a European and I think that it is a political issue. The main problem is that the serious charges were brought against Tymoshenko after the verdict was announced.

“It is well-known that the Ukrai-nian-Russian gas talks about the price have always been political games. The talks in this area are often nearly cri-minal. That is why the situation is complicated. Everything depends on the proofs presented in court and they were weak.”

Will it hinder signing the agreement?

“It will not hinder the agreement initiation yet there might be some problems, but it can hinder the ratification. Viktor Yanukovych said that he would not come to the summit, but the Europeans might not come as well. In this case both parties will send some technical staff (the officials) to keep the process going.”

The Ukrainian authorities and some oppositionists call the law on the parliamentary elections a compromise. What do you think about it?

“The decision to increase the barrier was bad but not fatal. The election rules are more important, especially forming of the commissions. The election participants should not be more important than the procedure. Tymoshenko should participate in the elections; otherwise the opposition will be virtual. It is also important to understand that a lot of people in Ukraine support neither the Party of Regions nor Batkivshchyna; it means that new parties might appear.”

In your opinion, what trends will develop in Ukraine: authoritarian or democratic ones?

“The current situation shows a negative tendency. However, Ukraine is not Russia. Ukraine is in a different situation than Russia was in 2000 when the authoritarian regime came. That is why the tendency is clear but it is unclear how bad the situation in Ukraine will be.”

The oppositionist Natalia Korolevska and neutral Petro Poroshenko pre-sent at the conference cleared the air and brought some discussion to the conference. The representative of Batkivshchyna attacked the Ukrainian government at once: “I remind you that the

Soviet Union collapsed 20 years ago in the Belovezhskaya Pushcha. There were great hopes but they did not come true. We had another chance in 2004 but we lost it. The government’s reforms do not achieve any result. For example, the judicial reform resulted in Tymoshenko’s arrest. Why do we live like this? Because the counter reforms are happening simultaneously. A lot of initiatives are blocked by the post-Soviet bureaucracy. Ukraine is a Gulliver captured by the Lilliputians. We need to release the energy of people and capital.”

Petro Poroshenko also started with Tymoshenko: “We do not want the opposition to be in prison. I think that the main problem of Ukraine is the inefficient governing. After the USSR collapsed Ukraine was at the second place for its potential. Our positions were very good. We worked a lot but achieved little results since most of governments care about their own interests and not about the interests of the country. As a result, today our story is called one of the most disappointing.” Then Poroshenko went over the reforms that had to be carried out and finished his speech: “Ukraine has enormous possibilities for the investors. The main is the appropriate place which Ukraine is and the appropriate time which is now.”

We started the conversation with our next interlocutor Pierre DEFRAIGNE, Executive Director of the Madariaga College of Europe Foundation with Poroshenko’s phrase about “one of the most disappointing stories in the world”:

“I think it is also one of the most complicated ones. That is why the task for Ukraine is much more complicated than for any other country. For example, Poland did not have such problems. First of all, your country has to consolidate. That is why we have to be realistic about Ukraine, not to get disappointed, not to relax. We have to be persistent as for the future of Ukraine.”

What do you think the complicacy of the Ukrainian question is?

“The judicial system remains a big problem: the judges’ independence and competence. If I had to change something in your country I would start with the judicial system. If the judicial system is changed it is possible to completely change the country and the vector of its development.”

Is Tymoshenko’s case still very problematic in the talks between Ukraine and the EU?

“Probably, some cases against the opposition leader are grounded, especially the ones concerning the corruption. However, since the first trial was so non-transparent: groundless charges were supported by the public prosecutor, that today the faith in all Tymoshenko’s cases has been shaken. The government has to think now how they can regain people’s trust in them and the judicial system.”

Today they spoke a lot about the va-lues and that Europe will never exchange its values for any economic bene-fits. Do you think the Ukrainian authorities realize it?

“In fact, as for Tymoshenko, it is not only the question of values and rule of law but the one of practical things in the judicial system. For example, if the investors see that the economic results cannot be protected it is not the question of values anymore. I do not believe that the Ukrainians do not value the human rights, freedom of conscience and supremacy of law. It seems to me it would be unjust to say that Ukraine and the Ukrainian society do not share these values.”

Except Tymoshenko’s case there are other resonant cases in Ukraine: the murder of the journalist Heorhii Gongadze and the attempt of MP Yeliashkevych’s life.

“I can see much in common with what I have already said: the independence of the judges. Since the independence of the judges in Gongadze’s case or the cases with other journalists or politicians openly speaking about the problems is the reverse of the medal. The journalists reveal the problems of the government and the judges have to condemn the crimes with the help of this information.”