Merkel’s mission in Kyiv

Yesterday German Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel came with her visit to Ukraine. Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko expressed his hope that Merkel’s visit will help to strengthen Ukrainian-German relations. What expectations does Germany pin upon this late visit? Does the chancellor indeed view skeptically the events in Ukraine, as a close to Merkel German MP Manfred Grund stated in an interview? Why is not Germany going to change its position concerning Ukraine’s unreadiness to receive the MAP? These and other questions will be raised in The Day’s interview with German Ambassador to Ukraine Reinhard Schaeffers who is moving to Paris today, where he will head the German diplomatic office. The ambassador admitted in French that he knows this language better than English.

“I think that Mr. Grund meant that Ms. Merkel is not skeptical in her attitude to Ukraine but that she still has a lot of questions about your country. This also applies to Germany’s overall attitude to Ukraine. The same can be said about the general tone of my reports to Berlin. They are not full of skepticism but of questions that we have about our friends. We see that Ukraine has been in the grips of a political crisis — with various ups and downs — for almost two and a half years. We would like to see Ukraine as a viable partner.

“But the situation is a little different. For example, in February 2007 both the president and the then prime minister visited the German chancellor. At the time the two Ukrainian leaders were vying for power, and both of them were persuading the chancellor that everything would be all right and that there was no need to worry. But one month later Ukraine found itself in a very acute phase of the crisis. This is why the chancellor keeps asking about the real situation in Ukraine and the likely course of further events.”

Does this mean that the situation is still the same one year later?

“The stage sets have altered, but the theater production is still going on in the same spirit.”

And this is a cause for concern, as a sign of the Ukrainian government’s ineffectiveness.

“I would like to emphasize that we regard Ukraine as an important partner. And our country is also an important partner of Ukraine. Therefore, we need stability and a steady development of our relations. But this is not the case so far.”

Do the contacts between Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and Angela Merkel inspire optimism that in the future Ukraine will have a more viable and predictable government?

“Politicians throughout the world are inclined to assure their partners of a positive course of events in their country. This is a positive reflex. Unfortunately, at the moment I cannot reveal the details of the negotiations between Tymoshenko and Merkel. It will be important for the Chancellor to hear the viewpoint of her interlocutors — Yushchenko and Tymoshenko — and have a clear idea of what the situation is.”

Can we expect Germany to change its stance on granting the MAP to Ukraine?

“I have said publicly that changes in Germany’s position are out of the question now. In April I said that we will have to look at the results of our joint efforts in December. So it is too early to raise this question.”

Government officials have been talking about a civilizational choice, which NATO membership reflects to some extent. The fact that the former prime minister of Ukraine and the Party of Regions, which is now in the opposition, have changed their attitude to NATO membership should not affect the alliance’s decision on whether or not to raise the level of relations with Ukraine. Also, perhaps it would be logical for NATO to grant Ukraine the MAP so that the government could carry out reforms.

“I think that pro-Western attitudes and the depth and range of reforms are a fundamental challenge. We have noted what the Ukrainian leadership declared with regard to Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic orientation. It was also announced at the NATO summit in Bucharest that Ukraine will be a member of NATO member one day. But what really matters are reforms, the orientation towards common values, and the further steps that must be taken in the process of getting closer to the European Union. So the ongoing negotiations on an enhanced agreement between the EU and Ukraine and a free trade agreement are far more important for Ukraine than the MAP question. Still, I would not like to diminish the role of the MAP. Naturally, NATO-related reforms are as important as those that are connected with the path toward the EU. But the MAP-related reforms are not scrutinized as closely as those that are aimed at EU membership.”

What is Germany’s attitude to the statement by Dmitry Medvedev in Berlin, who said that “Atlantism is historically outdated,” and to his proposal to draw up a legally-binding European security treaty? Later, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said there is a political vacuum in the Euro- Atlantic system. Many experts call this an attempt to split the US from the EU.

“Germany has not officially responded to Medvedev’s proposal to draw up a new treaty on European security. We would also like to know more about what the Russian president really means. One thing is absolutely clear — and I have said this in many interviews. We regard Russia as a key player in the field of European security. On the other hand, the Lavrov statement that you mentioned points in a direction where we will not be going. It seems to be an old Russian tradition to shake trans- Atlantic unity. But if this position is adopted, we can also think about creating something new in this area.

“I would also like to remind you that the NATO-Russia Council, which has existed for a long time, deals with security matters and Russia occupies a privileged place in it. The council has not met all expectations. Russia could do a better job of performing the European security role that was assigned to it by the council.”

You know that Russia very aggressively opposes Ukraine’s accession to NATO. Russian politicians say that our country’s admission to the alliance can be compared with the erection of a new Berlin Wall.

“We do not see any wall. If we looked at it this way, we would not be talking about Ukraine’s NATO membership. But this statement should be taken into account. For a long time I have been saying, even preaching, that we must take into account Russia’s attitude to this factor. I mean the attitude not only of the Russian leadership but the Russian people. This should be regarded as a historical and psychological fact and phenomenon. It is not always necessary to agree with the way somebody else interprets a certain fact. But in politics it is always necessary to take this fact into account.”

But Russia only considers its own view of things and does not listen to fears in Ukraine, particularly those of the Ukrainian government, which believes that NATO membership is the guarantee of its security and territorial integrity.

“That is not at all the case. It is crystal clear that a major part of the population does not approve or is skeptical about Ukraine’s NATO membership. These two groups make up the majority of the population, and public opinion surveys have confirmed this fact many times.”

But the majority of the population elected the current government, which supports our country’s accession to NATO. Moreover, voters gave the Orange team a second chance.

“I think in this case we have to go back to our first question. I would personally have liked to see that in the past few years, at least since 2004, there was a change in public opinion and growing support for this intention. But we see the opposite. The point is that most Ukrainians take a dim view of NATO membership — incidentally, as a result of the political crisis. This is why that which was declared in 2004 has not been realized.”

What do you think of the Ukraine-EU negotiations on a new agreement and the likely results of the Ukraine-EU summit scheduled for this September?

“I think that the summit in the French resort of Evian under France’s presidency will be very important. I believe that we will be able to conclude that the enhanced agreement’s political chapters have already been agreed upon. But these political chapters will not be signed, will not be finalized in writing because free trade talks are still going on. The two sides must also reach a compromise at the talks on political issues. I think we will do this. As a result, Ukraine will gain support on its way to the European Union.

“But let’s not forget that the free trade area talks are more difficult. These talks are still underway. They are going to be no less complicated and difficult than the talks on Ukraine’s entry into the WTO because they concern the interests of certain well-established groups. In this case, too, we will need very many compromises and a major ability to adjust. We also need a functioning Verkhovna Rada. All this will lay the groundwork for a rapprochement between Ukraine and the European Union. I would like to repeat that this is the most ‘unpleasant,’ demanding, but indispensable part of the negotiations.”

Will the EU agree to give Ukraine a European prospect in this new enhanced agreement, the title of which is still being disputed?

“This is an issue that still requires compromise. But I think it will be reached. And Germany will not stand in the way of this compromise.”

What is your assessment of the fact that Ukraine’s foreign ministry is worried that the proposed “Eastern Partnership” may be an alternative to membership?

“I think that Poland, your good neighbor and friend, proposed this idea as a program, not as an alternative. This program, which was drafted together with Sweden, calls for closer integration for Ukraine rather than an alternative.”

But it looks as though there is one more obstacle to Ukraine’s integration into the EU — a negative referendum in Ireland on the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty. Do you see any way out of this situation, taking into account that the European parliamentary and EU presidential elections will take place next year?

“This is a real problem for the European Union, and heads of state and governments will be tackling it this October. There is no ideal way out of this situation. The problem is that a small country, which accounts for a mere two percent of the EU’s total population, said ‘no.’ Most of the other, big, countries have confirmed this treaty or will do so in the next few months. So there will be a 26 to 1 ratio. This is not a simple treaty because it is supposed to ensure the further viability of the European Union.

“It is also a prerequisite for the EU’s further enlargement. Without it, enlargement will be out of the question. Therefore, all EU actual and potential candidates are vitally interested in this treaty. So far, it is not clear what the way out will be. Maybe the Irish will be asked to hold a new round of voting, or Ireland will not be a full-fledged party to this treaty. But we should wait for new ideas on this matter, above all, from the Irish.”

Mr. Ambassador, your transfer to Paris is a promotion. Clearly, this means that you have coped well with your mission here in Kyiv. Could you tell us which achievements led to this reward?

“That is a very difficult question ( laughs ). What should I say about myself?”

Tell us about your achievements.

“I think Berlin was satisfied with my work. Most of my Ukrainian partners in politics and the economy were also satisfied with my performance. At least I heard this from my interlocutors at the end of my service here. I didn’t just hear pleasant words from them but also confirmation of the fact that they had finally seen an ambassador who was openly and methodically seeking to promote bilateral relations. What did Germany achieve during its EU presidency? Through its statements, it exerted a positive influence when the political crisis in Ukraine was aggravated. The trade turnover and Germany’s direct foreign investments have grown considerably in the past few years. I think that the relaxation of visa requirements can also be listed as a positive result. It is up to you to judge whether this is a lot or a little. At any rate, two years of work is not such a long period.”

What directives will you be giving to your successor Hans-Juergen Heimsoeth?

“I would advise him to work in all spheres. First of all, he will have an opportunity this September and October to present the weeks of German culture in Ukraine and thus raise public awareness about Germany’s cultural achievements. It will also be important to boost German investments. In this connection, I hope that the new German ambassador will manage to do what I was going to in my third year of my posting here: to travel more all over the country, see more regions, and meet people.”

With what impressions are you leaving Ukraine?

“The main thing is that I am leaving this country as its true friend. I have spent two beautiful years here. Ukraine is on the way to joining Euro-Atlantic organizations. As I have already said, society and the economy are developing rapidly. The political class is not developing as fast. But I hope that at least in the medium term, Ukrainian politicians will identify the top-priority questions of a general and national nature, as this is done in many other European countries. They also have disputes, but when it comes to defending the country’s fundamental interests and reinforcing its democratic gains, they all stand shoulder to shoulder.”