NATO and Ukraine Employ Language of Models, Not Injunctions
As the NATO Prague summit, to be held in November, expected to admit new alliance members, and transform it from a military-political alliance into a Euro-Atlantic mechanism of security, is approaching, Ukraine and NATO are obviously strengthening their relations. It is perhaps in this context that one must view the visit to Ukraine of General Sir Jack Deverell, Supreme Allied Commander for Europe, who watched the Cossack Steppe exercise and met Chief of Ukraine’s General Staff General Zatynaiko. “Ukraine has voiced its desire to become a full NATO member,” Gen. Deverell told journalists on September 4, “so we must map out the path Ukraine must follow to achieve this goal.” To draw up this way, the British general thinks, one must have profound knowledge of this country and its cultural specificity.
Gen. Deverell said nothing concrete about what changes and innovations (including those in military cooperation between NATO and Ukraine) could be expected from the Prague summit. Like many of his predecessors, he nevertheless noted that his meetings in Ukraine contributed very much to understanding what is being done here in terms of the military reform. “We must first wait for the summit itself,” he told The Day. “It will make the political decisions.” Then he traditionally added, “NATO conducts an open-door policy.”
As the general noted, the process of preparing prospective members was difficult for both sides, for it required, first of all, democratic control of society over the country’s armed forces and a transparent and stable budgetary system.
Nothing was said about NATO’s appraisal of the course of the Ukrainian defense reform, especially in light of the most recent tragedies that occurred through the fault of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
Yet, Gen. Deverell said he thought the Ukrainian units taking part in NATO and UN operations are quite fit for joint actions with NATO forces. And, in his words, when he personally commanded Ukrainian units in a Bosnia and Herzegovina peacekeeping operation, he was fully satisfied with the level of compatibility the Ukrainians showed.
In general, to his mind, compatibility consists of two components: the ability to accomplish missions by using each other’s weapons, equipment, ammunition, fuel, communications and, more importantly, the ability of both sides to speak and think in one language, which is one of the most difficult tasks in integration, taking into account the whole range of modern combat actions — from purely military to peacekeeping operations. Moreover, operations will depend to a large extent on the decisions made at the lowest level — therefore, lowest echelon commanders should be supported and encouraged by their immediate superiors as well as have the necessary decision making powers. These must be the criteria the Ukrainian leadership must take into account if it is to integrate this country into NATO.
As Gen. Deverell said, NATO supports the intention, expressed by Ukraine’s Minister of Defense, to conduct a defense review. He told in this connection how the latest review of this kind was held in his country, Great Britain, in 1988: at first, there were questions about the kingdom’s foreign policy and whether the armed forces could fit in with this system. Only then did the year-long review begin. This is not an instruction for Ukraine, Gen. Deverell said, but an example of how to approach the matter. In his opinion, Ukraine needs help in doing such a review, and NATO is ready to offer it.
Preparations for the Prague summit are in full swing. It is still unknown, by all diplomatic traditions, what can be expected from the summit. There are enough skeptics both in the NATO member states and in Ukraine about the decisions the Prague summit might make on Ukraine. The alliance’s top leadership avoids speaking concretely today about the status Ukraine could get (given the fact that NATO and Russia have formed the Twenty) and about the prospects for Ukraine’s joining the Membership Action Plan. In any case, Brussels has not yet publicly expressed any negative reaction to the Ukrainian leadership’s desire to come closer to NATO or any encouragement. Everything is quite clear: one must first see what NATO will look like after the Prague summit and in what situation Ukraine will be. Yet, things seem to be moving forward.
(See also page CLOSEUP)
