Consistency is the foreign policy’s number one rule, says Kostiantyn Hryshchenko
The passing year has been very tense for Ukraine in terms of foreign policy; it has also yielded tangible results. Next year may well prove even more complicated. Official Kyiv, while obviously banking on strong personalities, appears capable of coming up with initiatives and taking effective steps. Among such strong personalities one ought to mention Foreign Minister Kostiantyn Hryshchenko. The Tuzla crisis and SES controversy were his baptism of fire, reaffirming the newly appointed minister’s professional reputation. Although it would be premature to say that his domestic and foreign policy trials are history. Below Mr. Hryshchenko answers The Day’s questions addressing the rules and principles of the foreign policy game.
The Day: You made a trip to Iraq recently and could assess the situation there. How do you think Saddam’s arrest will affect the process of postwar political and legal settlement in that country?
Hryshchenko: I think it will serve to ease tensions and that it could happen quite soon, but will have long-term consequences. It will add to that country’s stability and improve the situation in terms of security. Those engineering acts of terrorism in Iraq may have subconsciously expected Saddam’s return to power. In addition, no one knew whether he was actually in command of those acts that were carried out on a regular basis. The dictator’s being at large was an actual threat factor. Therefore, I believe that Saddam’s arrest could help assert stability in Iraq.
The Day: While in Iraq, you broached the subject of Ukraine’s participation in rebuilding that country. When could we expect to make the first such contracts?
Hryshchenko: There are several levels of financing postwar Iraqi reconstruction. The first, the immediate one, consists in what is being paid by the US government to rebuild the Iraqi infrastructure, strengthen its security and educational system. Contracts in that domain will be awarded primarily to countries directly involved in the Iraqi stabilization process. In other words, owing to our peacekeeping presence in that country, we have a real opportunity to take part in postwar Iraqi reconstruction. Otherwise this matter would not be discussed at all. At this first [and immediate] level, US companies will have priority, of course. This is in keeping with US legislation, and is only natural, for payments are being made from the US federal budget. Ukraine had from the outset meant to win subcontracts, so we could take part in large projects. All this will be done in accordance with US and internationally recognized standards: holding tenders where the bidders have to conform to certain international requirements. We must prove that we have the needed experience, and we must present business projects in line with a more comprehensive program. Moreover, companies taking part in the competition will have to offer price and reliability guarantees. We don’t have many such companies in Ukraine, but enough to prove they can operate in Iraq and show an adequate performance. Some of their executives accompanied me on my trip to Iraq. They represented business entities actually capable of adequately performing at that level, having sufficient resources and international experience, so their presence in Iraq would not be a matter of formality, but an opportunity to win such contracts and proceed to cooperate.
However, the biggest obstacle today is the situation in Baghdad and in most other Iraqi regions — security. Returning to your question concerning Saddam’s arrest, I would like to point out that, yes, we expect the situation to improve considerably, so we will be able to dispatch our civilian experts on a more or less acceptable risk basis. Such people would, of course, be aware of the risks involved and would be free to accept or reject such missions. So far we don’t have this balance. No one is going to dispatch experts to face unpredictable risks. This won’t be done by the Ukrainian government or by any Ukrainian companies. After all, who would be willing to put his life on the line in a situation like this?
The next level of cooperation with Iraq is not only US spending, but also what we know as credit resources. In the initial phase this could mean the involvement of international financial institutions, including the World Bank, commercial banks, and a possible consortium. Iraqi needs are immense, they cannot be ignored. Here the task of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry is in assisting all possible business associates with comprehending the risks involved, assessing their capacities, and figuring out what should be done in the first place to meet certain standards; also helping those with the required potential, infrastructure, political will as well as endurance, so they can win the competition and assert their lasting presence on the Iraqi market.
The Day: When it came to dispatching the Ukrainian peacekeeping contingent to Iraq, the issue caused pitched verbal battles among the parliamentary opposition and even among those in power. What do you think now? Was the decision justifiable?
Hryshchenko: I think that we must always assess the risks involved and how all this can serve our national interests — and this is something that can’t be measured in terms of only tangible assets. After toppling Saddam’s regime, it became clear that urgent steps had to me taken to rebuild that country, not only financially, but also in terms of security and stability. That task could be carried out only by concerted action on the part of the international community of nations, by a broad coalition. One could become a security consumer, but then one’s country would not be seriously considered by anyone in the international arena; in that case one’s country would become a target of someone else’ bargaining; it would remain a territory but no longer a real player as an entity of international relations; it would become simply fictitious. In this context, our participation in peacekeeping missions elsewhere in the world is the most significant signal to our partners (wherever they are, in the East or West); we have our potential and can put it to the best use; we can operate on a par with those having great potentials; we have sufficient resources to keep pace with those we consider our true friends. We demonstrated all this at a very complicated period. We succeeded in demonstrating to the Americans, British, and Poles, to all those having to cope with Iraq’s daily problems, that our contingent in Iraq is manned by true professionals capable of carrying out not only military, but also other, far more complex; that we are well prepared and equipped to meet most threatening challenges. Our military intelligence in Iraq timely warned against a number of complicated situations. We are being reckoned with and duly respected. I have met with the interim civilian authorities and heard words of genuine appreciation about our peacekeepers. The sector under our control is marked by law and order, as well as by carefully balanced approaches to the local situation. I am personally convinced that this is what makes the Ukrainian responsibility sector in Wasit province register the smallest number of dangerous outbursts.
The Day: What do you think Ukraine should do to make the NATO Membership Action Plan look more realistic at the Istanbul summit?
Hryshchenko: I think that we have been taking a number of important steps in that direction. The recent Ukraine-NATO Commission meetings at the foreign and defense minister level showed that there was a clear vision of this ultimate goal and are prepared to achieve it. We simply have to comply with the existing schedules. We must be consistent. We cannot afford to make any deviations from such plans as we may have set for ourselves, for the sake of politics. And this concerns the military as well as other realms. If we act the right way, I think we’ll be able to get the ball running and transfer to a higher level of relations with NATO. I would say that the fact of our presence in Kosovo, our courage and farsightedness when deciding to dispatch a peacekeeping contingent to Iraq have played a very important role with regard to Ukraine’s Euro- Atlantic and European integration prospects. This attitude served as a signal telling our partners that we are prepared to measure up to their standards; that we can do more than just declare our being prepared to act shoulder to shoulder with them. Some might regard this decision as not too complicated, yet assuming responsibility for security and stability in another country’s province — in this case Iraq, with its fifteen provinces — could be shouldered by few other countries.
The Day: The predicted increase in anti-NATO public sentiment in Ukraine faced with the presidential campaign might impede the NATO integration process, and it could also affect the campaign.
Hryshchenko: I believe that long-term national interests and Ukraine’s overall foreign policy should be kept separate from any tactical planning, in the context of presidential, parliamentary, or any other political campaigns, as some political forces or other would always be eager to use them for their own purposes in trying to gain more votes. Such campaigns in Europe and North America are known to have shown steps being taken contrary to logic and common sense. It is also true that those coming to power would seldom try to make their campaign mottos come true. Being in power always requires an acute awareness of one’s personal responsibility. All political forces displaying a responsible attitude to Ukraine’s future cannot deny the validity of its current European choice. A closer look at Ukrainian history, as well as the current political realities considered worldwide shows that the global process affects the destinies of states and those of every individual in those countries; it is time we realized that we have no alternative. This does not mean that we have to bang our heads on closed doors. We should seek opportunities to serve our interests precisely where we feel these interests could be served, where we could expect to be rewarded for our efforts. However, the main guidelines have been outlined by the president and Verkhovna Rada. They are accepted by all those genuinely concerned about the future of this country; they are accepted by the younger generation. Our young people agree that their future is in Europe. They know that the kind of living standard they can achieve will determine the degree to which they will be able to implement their individual selves. We know where the living standard is not just higher, but where it answers our Ukrainian spirit.
The Day: The turnout of the Russian parliamentary elections showed that there is Russian political market demand for Tuzla-like approaches. How do you think Ukraine should respond to this attitude? Is there a possibility of changing our habitual defensive stance?
Hryshchenko: Any country should adopt a consistent and self- confident foreign policy course, showing that its actions served its own interests as well as those of its neighbors or partners. It is necessary to establish a line of conduct and then unswervingly adhere to it, proving one’s stand to one’s partners, using substantial arguments, appealing to common sense and international experience; if need be — and I would like to stress the same consequence — even by turning to international institutions. The latter should be asked for assistance only when the situation actually demands this, not when one’s feelings are hurt, the more so when the situation needs to be figured out first. Given these prerequisites, I believe that we will always be in a position to defend our interests. But if we prove inconsistent, if we respond to external challenges, acting on the spur of the moment rather than sober contemplation (and it’s true that there may develop situations hard to understand at first), we will betray our weakness, vulnerability, inability to adequately respond to challenges. In our case, I think, we have demonstrated precisely the right kind of consistent approach.
The Day: What is the status of the Azov-Kerch delimitation talks? Is there any progress in understanding between the negotiating parties?
Hryshchenko: There is a degree of rapprochement, yet there is a certain distance to be covered between rapprochement and understanding. I wouldn’t want to repeat the principles the Ukrainian side adheres to. We are prepared to look for balanced solutions to certain problems, in a way that would not hinder Ukrainian interests and would meet the vital needs of the people on both banks of the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait. There is still a very considerable amount of things to be done, but there is also the desire of both sides to make headway. This desire is not always made public — and with reason, for steering a middle course is something few rallies would able to achieve.
The Day: How do you feel about the SES prospects?
Hryshchenko: A decision has been made and we have a document. This document must be implemented, but only within the limits it contains. We made our attitude clear from the outset; we want the SES idea to be made a reality with the emphasis on a free trade area , so our partners’ markets provide the best possible access for Ukrainian goods. After that we could move to further integration stages, depending on how well the first one performs. It is of principal importance for us to see just how far our partners are prepared to go in that direction.
The Day: Could we go further than the free trade area?
Hryshchenko: We must first pass the initial phase. We must understand precisely how far we can get there, so we can figure out our next steps. Let me remind you that SES is a framework agreement, meaning that its implementation calls for making dozens of other specific agreements. Experts are working on this, but the issue cannot be left unnoticed by the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry.
The Day: The Year of Russia will end in Ukraine. What kind of Russia will we say goodbye to at the end of the year and what will we see next year?
Hryshchenko: We are not bidding goodbye to Russia. We know that country the way it is. It remains our closest neighbor, with its immense potentialities and its interest in Ukraine. It can still lend us a hand in difficult situations, as was the case with the grain crisis, when Russia promptly came to our rescue. On the other hand, we must continue studying Russia; we should not be afraid of that country, we should establish relations so we could really understand each other and remain true friends. We must build these relationships not on a subservient basis, but proceeding from the obvious fact that we will have to coexist as [equal] states, being divided by borders but not by a solid wall. Russia is a country whose problems will concern our posterity, so we must work to make this legacy less burdensome.
The Day: You have mentioned consistency as the first and foremost foreign political rule. Do you believe that Ukraine has the domestic political prerequisites to implement this rule? As a professional in the field, you are certainly well acquainted with the US State Department being one of the world’s most powerful foreign political machines. Would you care to comment on the Ukrainian president’s recent edict On Measures to Increase the Efficiency of the Nation’s Foreign Political Endeavors?
Hryshchenko: It’s an edict, duly issued and signed by the Head of State. It must be implemented. On the other hand, the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry reserves the right — in fact, it is its duty — to submit its own proposals to the president, aimed at upgrading such foreign policy efforts.
