New Format
The NATO-Ukraine Commission adopted two documents on November 22: the NATO-Ukraine Action Plan and the target-oriented bilateral action plan for 2003. Ukraine’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Anatoly Zlenko, who headed the Ukrainian delegation at the Commission session, said Ukraine faced wonderful prospects. “We are opening a new format of relationship aimed at NATO membership,” Minister Zlenko said.
President Leonid Kuchma told the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council that Ukraine welcomes the invitation of new NATO members. He congratulated Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia on being invited to enter into NATO membership negotiations, stressing that Ukraine “also contributed to bringing this long-awaited day closer for these countries” by strengthening its independence, making a multifaceted contribution to the reinforcement of Euro-Atlantic security, wholeheartedly supporting the process of NATO enlargement, and following a consistent course toward Euro-Atlantic integration. According to the president, Ukraine is aware of having to go “a long way to a Prague of its own” but is still determined to go this way. “We are going to continue market-oriented transformations, strengthen the democratic principles of government and society, and ensure European standards in the field of human rights,” Mr. Kuchma said in his speech. He also noted that the Prague meeting is the first summit to get the NATO member states and partner counties together “on the other side of the former Iron Curtain.” This, Pres. Kuchma believes, “imposes on us a special responsibility to ward off new dividing lines on the European continent.”
So we have embarked on a journey to “a Prague of our own.” It is common knowledge what complicated this embarkation: just on the eve of the Prague summit, the North Atlantic Council decided to downgrade the NATO-Ukraine Commission meeting to the level of foreign ministers. Western spokespersons warned via many channels that the visit of President Kuchma to Prague was undesirable. Also in the air was the possibility of boycotting the meeting in case he arrives. This was caused by US suspicions that the Ukrainian leadership might have authorized the sale of Kolchuha radar systems to Iraq.
The National Security and Defense Council (NSDC) of Ukraine decided at last week’s emergency meeting that Ukraine would be represented by President Kuchma at the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council meeting and by Minister Zlenko at the session of the NATO-Ukraine Commission. “This was the best option,” NSDC Secretary Yevhen Marchuk, who participated in the commission session, told The Day by phone. In his words, “it is good that Ukraine chose not to isolate itself,” but still “there should be no euphoria because there are very serious problems to address.” According to Secretary Marchuk, the functions in which the Ukrainian delegation took part came off “in quite a diplomatic way, without traps, retreats, or scenes...”
During the summit, President Kuchma met Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi of Italy, President Rudolf Schuster of Slovakia, President Aleksander Kwasniewski of Poland (who is said to have told Mr. Kuchma on the summit’s eve that he was ready to be even the only head of state to meet the President of Ukraine), NATO Secretary General George Robertson, Secretary General of the EU Council Javier Solana, the presidents of Kazakhstan, Moldova, Uzbekistan, Georgia, Lithuania, and Tajikistan, foreign ministers of Russia, Italy, and Austria, as well as Zbigniew Brzezinski. According to Minister Zlenko, he was warned beforehand about the situation with Colin Powell (the US Secretary of State attended just the beginning of the Ukraine-NATO Commission session): “that was the only reason, for when the president is leaving, the secretary of state must accompany him — the president is not supposed to wait for him.” President Bush was hurrying to St. Petersburg to see Mr. Putin; moreover, news agencies reported he had flown with Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Igor Ivanov.
Another detail was switching the seating plan during the Euro-Atlantic Cooperation Council meeting to the other alliance language, French, taking Ukraine well away from les Etats Unis (the United States) and le Royaume Uni, the United Kingdom. As a result, President Kuchma was sitting next to Javier Solana and President Bush next to the leaders of Estonia and Macedonia. But all these diplomatic embarrassments will be soon forgotten. What Ukraine will have to do first of all is follow the documents unanimously adopted in Prague. As Mr. Marchuk told The Day, practically all the ministers who spoke at the Commission session supported the Ukrainian aspiration for Euro-Atlantic integration but still noted that Ukraine had now some extensive work to do. As it became known, Ukraine received the strongest support from the representatives of Poland, Greece, and Turkey.
According to the NSDC secretary, the Kolchuha issue figured in some speeches as an existing problem to be solved, although nobody dwelled on it. Interfax-Ukraine quotes Minister Zlenko as saying that US accusations are “groundless and unjustifiable... We want to show that it is just so. We have nothing to prove. This did not and could not have happened. Let those who accuse Ukraine do the proving.”
Also noteworthy is the almost complete absence of negative comments on the part of the Russian leadership about a new major wave of NATO enlargement as well as about the publicly-announced plans of Ukraine and Georgia to join the alliance in the future. While Moscow quite recently assumed a totally negative attitude toward a new expansion of NATO, analysts now point out that rhetoric gave way to pragmatic cooperation. Russia’s Foreign Minister Ivanov noted in Prague on November 22 that this should be cooperation between equals.
The alliance is saying today it might next invite Croatia, Macedonia, and Albania to join. Some analysts do not rule out that Ukraine could also be on this list if it manages to meet the ambitious obligations it has assumed. NATO Secretary General Lord Robertson said in Prague that this is not the last enlargement of the alliance.
However hackneyed it may sound, the prospects of Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic integration will depend on Ukraine itself. The Prague documents should be treated as just the first step after which it will be clear to what extent the declarations that Kyiv incessantly makes are realistic and how far Ukraine and NATO are prepared to see each other halfway in this reality. According to Minister Zlenko, the next session will discuss the prospects of an intensified dialog. Conversely, the prospects of Ukraine joining the Membership Action Plan will be discussed as Ukraine fulfills its obligations, the more so that NATO, which is adopting a new strategy in the new conditions, will include 26 member states in eighteen months, and no longer is an instrument of the Cold War, is going to have to set the standards which Ukraine must seek if it is to develop as a European country. This is all the more true in that Ukraine still has the potential to be a contributor to, rather than a recipient of, common security.
SPOT COMMENTARY
Yevhen MARCHUK, Secretary, National Security and Defense Council:
“We have confirmed our commitment to Euro-Atlantic integration. The result we achieved in Prague is good from the standpoint of our prospects. The process is not going to stop, it has been given a serious impetus in spite of all the problems, our misunderstandings with the United States, and our domestic political situation. The most important moment was adoption of the Ukraine-NATO Action Plan and the action plan for the year 2003.
“In fact, the Action Plan is a long-term program aimed at achieving European standards not only in the field of defense but also in those of the economy, research, and combating terrorism. It also presupposes cooperation in such spheres as handling emergencies and managing natural and manmade crises. It envisages the implementation of political, economic, and defense reforms, as well as the observance of human rights, freedom of the press, and freedom of expression.
“This document outlines the working mechanisms of cooperation and provides for top level meetings. It points out that meetings of the Ukraine-NATO Committee and working meetings at the level of foreign ministers, ministers of defense, and chiefs of staffs should take place four times a year. In general, the Action Plan includes a wide range of issues, as well as all the paragraphs and goals stipulated by the Membership Action Plan. We can say that the document is ratified de jure as the NATO-Ukraine Action Plan but de facto as the Membership Action Plan, which in fact brings into play an intensified dialog between Ukraine and NATO. On our part, it essentially comes down to 80-85% of hard work. The NATO foreign ministers noted this. They all appreciated the plan but emphasized it calls for a great deal of homework. But we realize this perfectly well.
“Obviously, the plan will have to be put into force by a presidential order or in some other way. It should become our domestic program and demonstrate that we reject empty declarations.”
