The Polonization of Ukrainian politics

Last month and a half has seen ample attention accorded to Ukraine in the European Parliament. Actually, there hasn’t been a week in Brussels without a visit of important politicians from Kyiv, representing both the opposition and the government. It seems to me that Ambassador of Ukraine to the EU Kostiantyn Yelisieiev and others spend day and night in the parliament building. Some guests from Ukraine follow old roads, but they also beat new paths and make new acquaintances. Some are closer to the European socialists, others — to the Christian Democrats.

In fact, everything would be fine if it were not for one petty detail. I’ll put it this way: in one aspect the Ukrainian politics has been acquiring a dangerous resemblance to Polish politics. Everything started when a part of Polish politicians, who belonged to the opposition a few years ago, questioned the lustration principles which imposed on them the duty of repeated declaration that in the communist time they didn’t work for the special services.

Unfortunately, one of the honored Polish politicians, a deputy of the European parliament, decided deliberately not to submit such a declaration and started defending his position to all his friends in Europe. Since that time numerous Polish controversies are solved in European salons, and also in newspapers of Paris or Berlin, and their decisions are taken as trustworthy domestic political discussions.

Today Ukrainian politicians in Brussels adopted similar methods. But Germans, Italians or Russians don’t work according to this scheme. Only Poles and Ukrainians are good at it. Fortunately, Poland is already in both the EU and NATO, and we sometimes, as representatives of a few political parties, manage to determine a common position despite the controversies. The last time it happened was when we managed to postpone the voting regarding the resolution on Ukraine. However, for Ukraine this “Polonization” of European politics can be dangerous. As a result, Kyiv’s conflicts, seen at the Brussels forum, will be used against Ukraine. In key moments as, for example, during debates about the possibility of EU enlargement, European politicians who dislike Kyiv can use arguments which they heard Ukrainian politicians use between themselves.

I do not want to look ridiculous. Of course, I do not advocate “limiting” the visits of guests from Kyiv to Brussels — it’s good there are so many of them. It is also clear there is no sense to hide deep internal feuds. Certainly, in the era of the Internet it is difficult to work according to the principle that one should wash one’s dirty linen at home: it is also difficult for Ukrainian politicians to pretend there are no problems, which are lively discussed in Kyiv. What is sure is that in its European politics Ukraine needs two things: a minimum plan, which is accepted by both the government and the opposition, and it would be the best if they took the same position in that regard. This was the case in recent weeks during a sitting of the committee of foreign affairs of the European Parliament: the position of Kyiv was commonly presented by Borys Tarasiuk and the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Pavlo Klimkin.

The approaching local election to self-government bodies is a battlefield for the opposition and the government. Outside Ukraine no one will really worry about the results. For the European Union they will be important in the sense that they will become one more democracy test for Kyiv and will be reduced to answering the question whether Ukraine is a European country that will once become the EU member. By the way, in this manner, without harming the European choice of the Ukrainian elite, they managed to explain the political conflicts of recent years. Otherwise, there is a threat that Ukraine will be regarded as a post-Soviet country that is constantly troubled with holding fair elections. Therefore, both the course of the elections and what Ukrainian politicians will say about them in Europe is very important.

There is one more important thing for which mainly the government is responsible. Ukraine needs a political structure — a special council or committee, which would consist of leading Ukrainian politicians of all groups that would coordinate actions within the framework of a previously formulated minimum plan. Under the auspices of such a committee, key deliberations on the core issues of the Ukrainian road to Europe should be held from time to time: visa problems, negotiations about the association agreement or free trade areas. Establishing such a structure would show Brussels that there is at least some mutual understanding between parties in Kyiv. It is not my role to think of the organization of this association and who should participate in it, etc. But the Polish experience suggests me that before we entered the EU in 2004 the phrase that Polish politicians should be unanimous on the European affairs was repeated every day as a prayer, though often for politicians it was more like a corset annoying them, since it limited their freedom of expression, especially in Brussels salons. It seems to me that Ukrainian European politics have been polonized too quickly.

Pawel Kowal is head of the European Parliament delegation in the EU-Ukraine Parliamentary Cooperation Committee