Iraq: what are the pros and cons of Ukraine’s participation in the stabilization forces?
The May 26 NSDC decision to send Ukrainian peacekeepers to Iraq called forth a series of statements from Ukraine’s Ministries and lawmakers who offered their forecasts as to whether this decision will be approved by the parliament. According to Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry Press Service Director Markiyan Lubkivsky, his ministry believes that the NSDC decision to send Ukrainians to Iraq is “consistent with Ukraine’s national interests” and hopes that Verkhovna Rada will uphold this decision. Mr. Lubkivsky further called this decision “strategically important, politically mature, and justified.” As he put it, Ukraine has been given “a real chance to make a leap forward on its way to Euro-Atlantic integration.”
The Day went to the experts for comment on the possible positive and negative consequences of Ukraine’s participation in the stabilization forces in Iraq.
Oleksandr BOHOMOLOV, Vice President, Center for Middle East Research:
“I believe that the involvement of Ukrainian peacekeepers in the stabilization forces in Iraq is advantageous for Ukraine. It will enable the country to move to a fundamentally new level of relations above all with the West, Poland, Great Britain, the USA, and NATO. Incidentally, Lithuania is currently at the same stage of deciding this issue. Moreover, participation in peacekeeping operations, monitoring the possible actions of the conflicting sides, and the Ukrainian military’s technical ability to accept this challenge will earn Ukraine a mandate of trust. The ability to perform this assignment is evidence of the feasibility of what has been long discussed at the political level, that is, Ukraine’s possible NATO accession. Thus, the mission of Ukraine’s military is viewed primarily as a test”.
“Within the context of the extraordinary circumstances in today’s international politics, that is, the war on terrorism and neoconservative approach of the US toward the Middle East, more and more new opportunities are arising. I doubt there would be as many new chances for Ukraine in more peaceful circumstances. Under such new conditions in today’s changeable and very dangerous world, under circumstances when certain new approaches and relationships are reconsidered (for example, the US relationship with leading European states), the proposal made to Ukraine and accepted by it, on the one hand, could potentially create risks. But, on the other hand, risks should worry countries that have something to lose, that is, countries enjoying a stable position in international politics and having major economic interests in various regions (Germany, France, etc.)
“Meanwhile, for emerging participants and subjects of international law like Ukraine, this is a chance to improve its position in the international arena. Obviously, the Poles understood this at an early stage, chose their direction, and won more than expected. At a time when France obviously lost out economically and politically because of its putatively peaceful stance, other countries of the new Europe that found themselves at the right time in the right place came out as winners. Aside from being assigned its own zone of control in Iraq, Poland has received other interesting proposals. Today we know that a former Polish finance minister will serve as the chief financial aide to the future Iraq administration. Of course, what Ukraine has received thus far is less than what Poland has managed to get, but it’s a chance all the same. And if we continue to react quickly and act wisely and professionally from the technical viewpoint, Ukraine might considerably improve its position within the context of the broader Europe with respect to the EU and NATO.
“As for the negatives and risks, two factors should be considered. First, if you look at the context within which the decision to send our peacekeepers to Iraq is discussed, it becomes obvious that many Ukrainian observers link this participation with the chance to reap economic dividends in Iraq. One must understand that, although such an outcome is possible, the path is long and winding. To secure certain economic benefits, one has to work hard.
“There are some political risks as well. It should be understood that under the current conditions of creative chaos certain risks always exist. In this case I see the risk in the following: Ukraine solves this problem and makes this move within the context of its relationship with NATO. But one must keep in mind the fact that the location of this operation is the Middle East and the central players are Western states. Thus, all issues will be solved with Western, not Arab states, and even more so not with Iraq, which at the moment has no legitimate national and political leadership. This aspect must not be overlooked. We must think of the implications this might have and decide what political texts should be prepared by Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry in this connection, and how Ukraine should explain certain obvious things which may not be all that easily understood by an Arab observer. For example, the fact that in the not so distant past Ukraine used to have a quite warm relationship with Saddam Hussein, in fact, so warm as to create a Ukrainian-Iraqi bilateral committee. And the persons on the wanted list published by the US and Britain (some have been already apprehended) could come and be received at an official level. Thus, it looks like Ukraine has done an about-face. Nobody is saying that such U-turns are impossible. However, one must not overlook their attendant risks. One must be ready to answer similar questions, formulate one’s arguments and pursue a consistent Mideast policy. It’s time to start thinking about it.”
Heorhy KRIUCHKOV, chairman of the Verkhovna Rada National Security and Defense Committee:
“It is a little too early to speak of what stand our committee will take. The thing is that the NSDC has made a political decision to send Ukrainian peacekeepers to Iraq to take part in the stabilization forces. However, the NSDC has given the government two weeks to settle the legal, organizational, and financial issues. These will include the area to be covered by our peacekeepers and exactly what they will be doing, who will be responsible for ensuring their safety, and who will finance this operation. We must also study whether the May 22 NSDC decision is in line with our legislation, under which international peacekeeping operations are to be performed under the UN control. In general, all issues must be decided before we take a certain stand. Incidentally, NSDC Secretary Yevhen Marchuk has spoken in the same vein.
“I believe the majority of Verkhovna Rada deputies will support deployment of Ukrainian peacekeepers in Iraq, of course, unless something alarming should happen before the vote, as, for example, the recent crash of our plane in Turkey, which claimed the lives of 52 Spanish peacekeepers. Thus, the deputies will be most interested to know how safe our boys will be in Iraq.
“In geopolitical terms, since the UN Security Council in fact recognized the US and Great Britain as invaders, then, perhaps, the status of the stabilization forces will also be half-legitimate. It is possible that the peacekeepers will be also involved in solving the issues of revitalizing the Iraqi economy. This should be kept in view. We live in a cynical world and have to follow its laws and act in keeping with the national interests. That is, the economic aspect of this issue makes our participation necessary. But as far as morals are concerned, eliminating the consequences of American aggression does not seem all that good to me. In general, this issue is very complex and ambiguous.”
Volodymyr BONDARENKO, political scientist:
“The pros and cons of sending Ukrainian peacekeepers to join the stabilization forces in Iraq should be above all considered within the geopolitical context. Today Ukraine seems sure of its geopolitical goals. We have declared our European choice and a course toward NATO and WTO, which we hope to join by yearend. Given these circumstances, especially latter two, much depends on Ukraine’s interaction with the US. Ukraine’s relationship with the US is only emerging from a cold period. Under present conditions America is in dire need of partners who would share with it the responsibility for its operations in Iraq and the destiny of the Iraqi people. There can be no better opportunity to improve our relationship. The example of the Ukrainian battalion in Kuwait is graphic evidence of the benefits of an active stand. However, this is far from only argument in favor of the NSDC decision. As is known, Ukraine’s trade turnover with prewar Iraq came to hundreds of millions of dollars. In order not to let competitors snatch our share of this market, Ukraine needs a firm foothold in the region. Ukrainian companies’ active participation in the reconstruction of Iraq — which is very promising in the long run — is impossible without a strong political support. Thus, all things considered, the decision of the country’s leadership is quite positive. Simultaneously, I would like to point to some dangers of this situation. The occupation of Iraq is still very questionable from the perspective of international law. Therefore, it is advisable for our military to be sent to Iraq under a UN mandate and receive some kind of invitation from the host country — as was the case with the deployment of the Ukrainian battalion in Kuwait — that is, from Iraqis and not only Americans. Our military in Iraq will face a tougher challenge than that of its compatriots in Kuwait. Defending strategic sites and settling civil conflicts is a dangerous undertaking that could result in Ukrainian casualties. And this means that professional requirements to our military must be very strict. Finally, there is the financial aspect. The operation will in fact carry a heavy price tag and could cost far more than the upkeep of the chemical defense battalion in Kuwait. Thus we must do everything possible to have the Americans, British, or whoever else to offset our expenses. Nonetheless, I believe a solution can be found to these problems and hope that Verkhovna Rada will make a wise, rational, and considered decision that will reflect Ukraine’s national interests.
INCIDENTALLY
Verkhovna Rada Deputy Speaker Oleksandr Zinchenko believes the parliament will approve the decision to send Ukrainian peacekeepers to Iraq. He further stressed that a positive decision by the parliament will be influenced by the fact that our forces will participate in a peacekeeping effort and the rebuilding of the country, which means “opportunities for Ukrainian companies.”
In turn, Stanislav Stashevsky, chairman of the parliamentary Foreign Affairs Committee, is confident that Verkhovna Rada should support the decision to send peacekeepers to Iraq. He reminded us that, in keeping with the established procedure, the committees with jurisdiction, in particular, the Committees on National Security and Defense and Foreign Affairs, will study this issue before submitting it for consideration in the parliament.
SPU leader Oleksandr Moroz also thinks that the parliament will support this decision. He stated, however, that his fraction will vote against it.
