Neutrality will cost more

What are NATO and the European Union today? Borys Tarasiuk, director of the Institute of Euro-Atlantic Cooperation, claims that, according to opinion polls, over 60 percent of Ukrainians feel they are ill-informed. This lack of information is especially evident in eastern Ukraine. The public hearings “Ukraine’s European Mission: New Patterns of Integration” were specifically aimed at bridging this knowledge gap and leveling regional differences in public informedness.

Two debates recently took place on the same day at Kharkiv National Vasyl Karazin University. One of the hearings was attended by Ukrainian and foreign political scientists, politicians, diplomats, local party militants, civic activists, and university professors. The other was held in a student classroom. Both events were organized by Tarasiuk’s institute and Germany’s Konrad Adenauer Foundation whose mission in Ukraine is headed by Nico Lange.

Borys TARASIUK, director, Institute of Euro-Atlantic Cooperation (Kyiv); leader of the Popular Movement (Rukh) of Ukraine:

“In 2002 the institute launched a unique project of regional roundtable debates, which is still going on. On the one hand, it is our task to help the regional political elites gain a better understanding of relations between Ukraine and the European Union, and Ukraine and NATO. Our mission is also to help Ukrainian citizens, especially in the regions, learn the truth and gain access to real facts. We have already held 42 roundtables and workshops in various oblasts of Ukraine, and the 43d and 44th in Kharkiv. In other words, we are doing what other non-governmental research centers are not. We conduct debates and bring experts in.

“We furnish unbiased information about what NATO and the European Union are and what benefits can be derived from cooperation with them. Naturally, sometimes an audience has a negative attitude, but this negative stance triggers a debate that finally brings out the truth.

“Incidentally, two ambitious, high-profile public information projects were approved in 2004, when Leonid Kuchma was still president: one on NATO and the other on the European Union. They were planned for 2004-07. But nothing was done either in 2004 or 2005 because no funds were allocated for these programs. It was not until 2005, when the government changed, that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs persuaded the government to earmark funds in the 2006 budget to implement these two state-sponsored programs.”

Various participants in the debate, from students to professors and journalists, posed a stream of questions that were not always totally negative.

Nico LANGE, head of the Konrad Adenauer Foundation office in Ukraine:

“A while ago a woman from the Kyiv office said to me, ‘European integration is such a complicated thing! And why should Ukraine join the European Union?’ This is a rational question. I answered as follows: I see no alternative to economic integration as far as Ukraine’s sustainable economic development, modernization of the economy, and effective utilization of this country’s undoubtedly great potential are concerned. And speaking about you personally, about your self-realization and that of your children in the conditions of freedom, when you will have every chance to get an education, learn foreign languages, and choose a profession, there is no alternative either to an open, modern society based on the ideas of every individual’s human dignity.

“Ukraine is already part of Europe proper. I mean not only European-style house renovations, European-made cars, or the European soccer championship that is going to be held in Ukraine and Poland. It is very symbolic that during the week when the political rivalry in Ukraine reached its peak, both rivals headed for Brussels and Strasbourg. Even the rhetoric of the debate that is unfolding in Ukraine is exclusively European: they are talking about democracy, a rule-of-law state, political compromise, popular vote, and adherence to the Constitution.

“One can say that these are mere words. But 50 years ago the speeches of Konrad Adenauer and other founders of the European Union concerning European values, European identity, and the European zone of peace and well- being also seemed to be mere words. But they produced a spark that kindled European integration as a real success story.

“How can Ukraine become part of this success story? I think the key is in accepting European values as your own. Ukraine is not a pupil who must obey the European teacher’s instructions. To live in freedom, have confidence in independent courts, be certain that your investments and property will remain yours, not have to bribe bureaucrats, have access to higher education without having to bribe the admissions committee - these are the things for which one must strive whether or not a country is going to join the European Union.”

Andras BARSONY, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Hungarian Republic to Ukraine:

“The whole world is full of competing blocs and countries. And we live in a part of the world where this competition is relatively peaceful.

“Your country is hosting the Euro-2012 soccer championship, and all we can do is congratulate you. But this is also a competition! Integration also includes learning, and one should also learn how to lose. Unless you learn this, you will have difficulties in the future.

“When Ukraine finds itself among those who win — not only in the UEFA tournament but also in politics and economics — you will see integration as a process for yourselves, not somebody else.

“Where was Hungary 16 years ago? About 80 percent of the economy was in the hands of the state. The private sector accounted for a mere 9.5 percent. Today it is the contrary. Moreover, there is not only Hungarian but also foreign property. In the past, there were 100,000 soldiers of the Hungarian Army per 10 million of the population. Today there are only 30,000. But these 30,000 troops know how to do things much better than the former 100,000 because they are professionals.

“You need fewer political actions and more routine work. Believe it or not, this will be the success of an entire nation, as was the case in my country. We too have some domestic political problems. This does not mean that there are no differences in the way parties and organizations view the country’s political goals, but there are certain common values in society. Our experience and our road is an open book for Ukraine. How and to what extent you use this experience depends only on you.”

From where will Ukraine draw resources for a military- political operation, like the one in the former Yugoslavia and Iraq? Do we need this?

Oleksandr SUSHKO, research director, Institute of Euro-Atlantic Cooperation, Kyiv:

“The Iraq operation was not conducted by NATO but a group of states. Ukraine is not a NATO member but it was there, too. But Germany, a NATO member, was not. Therefore, NATO membership in no way prevents a state from making its own decision about whether to participate in a certain peacekeeping operation.

“Yugoslavia is a very popular subject. This country disintegrated as a state the way the Soviet Union did. Nevertheless, the countries in that region are now closer to NATO membership than post-Soviet Ukraine. Paradoxically, some of us are still shedding tears over what happened to Yugoslavia in 1999, while the post-Yugoslavian countries are heading for NATO. Slovenia is already in NATO and the European Union, Croatia and Macedonia will join NATO in two years, and Serbia is next in line.

“So what are we talking about? If even the former Yugoslavia is entering NATO, it means that it does not feel like a victim of this bloc.

“And what happened? Wars had been raging in Yugoslavia for almost a decade. Then NATO intervened. The tactics that were used may be called into question, but there is no denying the obvious fact: there had been never-ending wars in the former Yugoslavia before the intervention, and no wars at all for eight years after it. No refugees, either.

“It sometimes occurs in world practice that you have to resort to violence in order to stop violence. So NATO’s operation in Yugoslavia proved effective.

“It is a moot point how long peace will prevail there. This region remains unstable. Still, what was going on in the 1990s is no longer there. Another important vindication of NATO is that almost all the ex-Yugoslav countries are going all out to join this organization, while we are still agonizing over 1999.”

Tamara TRATSEVYCH, chairperson, the Tree of Life human rights center, Kharkiv:

“Ukraine is marching towards Europe, and this course is irreversible. Meanwhile, public knowledge about the European Union and NATO still remains at almost the original level. People, especially in eastern Ukraine, know almost nothing about them, apart from the fact that these aspirations damage relations with Russia. This may be the only argument advanced by those who are taking a hostile attitude to NATO. Even the fact that in contrast to Ukraine there was not a single public protest in Russia during the joint Russia-NATO military exercises cannot convince these people. All they know is that Russia does not want Ukraine to be in NATO, and if Russia does not want it, we should not want it either.

“In all probability, opponents of the European vector are aware that discussing unbiased and multi- sided information can essentially change not only the public’s attitude to integration processes but also the speed of building a civil society free of authoritarianism, corruption, poverty, and social injustice. And the current state of informedness makes one think that very few desire this kind of transformation.

“Not enough people are going to the countryside to satisfy the villagers’ elementary right to information. But inadequate supply always triggers a brisk demand. We made sure of this during the Ukraine-EU-NATO debate that was held last year in the village of Kamiantsi, Izium district, in the southeastern part of Kharkiv oblast. Incidentally, schoolchildren in Kamiantsi wrote a quiz about NATO as successfully as their Kharkiv peers. The reason is that the librarians who had participated in a roundtable debate a few months earlier brought home some sizable packets of literature.

“Librarians and teachers, who are usually concerned about rural intellect and spirituality, should visit the European institutions in Brussels more often, as well as the new EU and NATO member states. They, above all, are the ones who should personally see what is good for Ukraine and what is not. The same applies to rural journalists.”

This is why the public hearings in Kharkiv are just the first in a series planned for this year.

Nico LANGE:

“By the way, we are working on a book on the European Union that pursues practical, rather than purely academic, interests. The book is called Europe in Concrete Terms because we know that European and Euro-Atlantic integration is often presented in a very abstract light in Ukraine. In other words, in many cases both integration opponents and supporters are not sure of what they are talking about. This is a classic field of work for our Konrad Adenauer Foundation. We are going to publish Europe in Concrete Terms in Ukrainian and Russian and circulate it around Kharkiv oblast.

“This year we are especially focusing on eastern and southeastern Ukraine. So this meeting in Kharkiv is one of a number of actions we are holding in this region. We will come back to Kharkiv in June to hold a conference on reconsidering the legacy of the past. This subject is also important for Ukraine’s European integration and development.

“We are also going to continue working with students. There is a program that makes it possible to discuss Europe and gain practical knowledge about it. We decided to invite young men and women from the eastern regions to represent Ukraine on European Youth Days in Leipzig.

“We will be glad to support any interesting regional initiative or idea about European and Euro- Atlantic integration.”