Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic interest: conditions, dates, possibilities
ROAD MAP, UKRAINIAN STYLE
“Could you name our fundamental standpoints on the Ukraine-EU Action Plan?”
“January 27 saw the first round of consultations with the EU about the Action Plan. We had sent our proposals to Brussels as long ago as last year. Earlier this year we received the Acton Plan’s detailed description from the EU. We are now drawing up a joint document. Next consultations are planned to be held on February 24 in Brussels. In my opinion, this is going to be to some extent crucial meeting which will finally set the pace of our work. To finalize the document, we must do substantial work by the end of March. I mean clarification of the still controversial positions and drawing up the text itself. If we succeed in this, the work on the Action Plan will be quite likely to be finished on time. Then we will tentatively approve the text at the meeting of the Ukraine-EU Cooperation Council. Following this, we will be able to make a general decision on document implementation at the Ukraine-EU summit to be held in early July in the Hague, during the Netherlands’ presidency of the EU.
Our fundamental position is that, while we are ready to work in a short time span, we want to conclude a well-balanced, realistic, and serious document in the end. This document should bring about a qualitative breakthrough in Ukraine-EU relations. It should be a short-term — a two-year — document. Another important element is (and we have agreed on this with the EU) that the Action Plan should be a ‘subject of joint ownership.’ This means, on the one hand, that Ukraine must take measures to meet certain criteria indispensable for further Europe- bound movement and, on the other hand, that the EU will assist us in some other measures. The plan should be based on joint, rather than unilateral, actions. We also think the document must contain the system of monitoring so we could see in two years’ time what we have or have not yet achieved. We will be working to get this Action Plan to be Ukraine’s road map of sorts aimed at signing a free trade zone agreement. Naturally, our WTO membership is a very important condition. At the same time, we think we must — even before this happens — conduct negotiations with the EU, identify and take measures required for concluding a free trade area agreement. All these actions should lay the groundwork for creating conditions conducive to signing later an association agreement between Ukraine and the EU.”
“Could you name the most controversial points in EU negotiations on the Action Plan? Is it not a controversy that Brussels strives to automatically extend the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) to the ten new EU members?”
“Although the PCA has something to do with enlargement and the Action Plan, it is still self-sufficient. The EU believes there are ample legal grounds for extending the PCA to the new member states. Our position is based on the following considerations. First, it is as flexible and constructive as possible. Ukraine does not set a goal to thwart the PAC’s extension to the new member countries. We are really striving to complete our negotiations with the EU before May 1 by reaching a mutually acceptable compromise.
This is a very essential point which distinguishes our position from that of other states in a similar situation. Secondly, we think it absolutely necessary that our national interests be taken into account in the course of PAC extension talks. What do I mean? Clearly, the PAC is already obsolete and needs some editing, which the European Commission accepts. Thirdly, we suggest that PAC extension to the ten new EU members be accompanied with the solution of other problems that cause concern in Ukraine. I mean minimal review of the treaties and laws that govern Ukraine’s cooperation with the new EU member states and aversion of a decline in certain areas of cooperation caused by the EU enlargement (veterinary science, standardization, etc.). Granting Ukraine market economy status before May 1, 2004, entering into negotiations with the EU on a free trade area in 2004, and signing certain sector agreements would be the best way of solving these problems. Also important for us is the solution of the problems of antidumping investigations (for example, by declaring a moratorium) and steel product quotas. We must reach mutually advantageous decisions by means of a package approach, that is, the extension of the PAC to the new member states should go hand in hand with the solution of the problems caused by the enlargement of the European Union. I stress again that we are adopting a constructive stand: not to foil the negotiating process but to reach an agreement with the EU in the spirit of partnership.”
TO NATO WITHOUT STAGNATION
“Could you assess Ukraine’s preparedness for a higher level of cooperation with NATO in joining the Membership Action Plan (MAP)?”
“By all accounts, 2003 was a really turning point in our aspiration for Euro-Atlantic integration. Undoubtedly, the first step had been taken in 2002, when the Prague summit adopted the Action Plan which identifies prospective NATO membership as our ultimate goal. Ukraine managed to take some very important steps to achieve this goal. We have formed a system of measures and institutions that allows us to follow the Euro-Atlantic road. It is very important that we have the President-supervised State Council for European and Euro- Atlantic Integration as well as the National Center for Euro-Atlantic Integration. These bodies can coordinate the efforts of various domestic institutions to reach the Euro-Atlantic goal. We have also appointed some lower- level national coordinators of sector cooperation between Ukraine and NATO.
“NATO has given a largely positive tentative appraisal of Ukraine’s fulfillment of the 2003 Annual Target Plan (ATP). This lays very sound groundwork for the 2004 ATP which we hope will be approved in the immediate future. One of the most pivotal issues of cooperation with NATO is military reform. Our partners noted (including during the visit of NATO Military Committee Chairman Gen. Harald Kujat to Kyiv) they saw qualitative shifts in the way Ukraine was carrying out the military reform.
“Incidentally, we attach great importance to the visit of NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer who is arriving in Kyiv on April 19 at the president’s invitation. The main item on the agenda will be a meeting with President Kuchma. We consider this as a very important stage in preparing for the Istanbul summit.”
“Still, what chance does Ukraine have to join the MAP? Would you say concretely what countries support and oppose this action?”
“It is better to ask the alliance members themselves whether or not they support this. All I can say is that our efforts are aimed at raising our level of relations with and eventually coming closer to full integration with NATO. I will note that, apart from the MAP, there is also a stage of Intensified Dialog (ID) with NATO. The current MAP is, in many aspects, broader than the Intensified Dialog. We are doing serious work inside this country to meet NATO membership criteria. The ID and the MAP are the formats of NATO’s work with the prospective alliance members, the official programs of membership preparation. This also means NATO has reached a consensus on the admission of these countries. The Action Plan is a transitional stage of sorts. Yet, full integration with NATO requires further steps by both Ukraine and NATO.”
“When did you last hear Ukraine’s top leadership speak about the intention to raise the level of cooperation with NATO? I do not mean the ministers of defense and foreign affairs...”
“It is worth recalling that the course toward European and Euro- Atlantic integration was charted by decisions of the president and the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. These institutions have repeatedly confirmed that our policy in this field is not going to change. Nevertheless, what really matters in this respect is concrete deeds, not statements. It is very good that the decisions on our integration into NATO are being fulfilled. They are not on paper only. If Brussels says we achieved quite a lot in 2003, this by no means indicates stagnation in our actions. We are not obliged to repeatedly voice our aspirations. Will anything change if we do nothing but keep declaring our integration? Declarations are important but not the main thing. We have already announced our intention to move towards full-fledged integration with NATO. Now comes the time of concrete steps and actions. Such actions, inspired by our top political leadership, have undoubtedly been taken in all — military and civilian — fields of cooperation.”
