Unlike Schroeder, German Experts Not Terribly Satisfied With Ukraine
After Chancellor Schroeder had visited Ukraine, the German press relegated anti-Kuchma publications to the background, giving way, perhaps for the first time since Ukraine was rocked with scandals, to a sober viewpoint that Ukraine should be regarded not so much in the context of its domestic political problems as in the historical aspect of European geopolitical factors. The following newspaper headlines is ample proof of this: “Berlin Eases Ukraine’s Debt Burden,” “Schroeder Wants to Bring Ukraine Closer to the EU,” “Schroeder Supports Ukrainian Association with the EU,” and “Germans Grateful for Return of Bach Musical Archives.”
Most of the reports were written by journalists who came from Warsaw or Moscow rather than those accredited to Kyiv. This stark reality should prompt Ukrainian leaders to ponder what caused this. German media sources say that the Ukrainian ruling elite is not interested in a continuous exchange of opinions and information with foreign journalists. As a result, the only German-language newspaper that has an office of its own in Kyiv is the Swiss Neue Zuericher Zeitung.
Comments are mostly focused on economic deals, such as the renewal of insurance guarantees for the Hermes Company and the rescheduling of DM 650 million in Ukrainian debts under an agreement between Ukraine and its Paris Club creditors. Next come positive assessments of the increased German- Ukrainian trade turnover, especially in the agrarian sector. What comes under fair criticism is insufficient control of the Ukrainian-Russian border, which enables refugees and drug dealers to penetrate the West through the territory of Ukraine. The media also report that German Internal Affairs Minister Otto Schily has authorized earmarking DM 300,000 for the Ukrainian government to reinforce its borders. The publications quote Minister Schily as saying that Kyiv does not pay adequate attention to this crucial problem.
Die Welt is the only newspaper to touch again, in Jens Haertmann’s article, the subject of tapegate and the Gongadze affair which isolated Leonid Kuchma in international politics and pushed official Kyiv closer to Moscow. Condemning nobody, the author claims that “Ukraine has become Russia’s forgotten buffer” in the wake of these events.
It follows from the private comments of Chancellor Schroeder’s aides that he is satisfied, for he thought the visit would be far more difficult than it was in reality. Praises are being lavished on Ukrainian Ambassador in Berlin Anatoly Ponomarenko for his preparation of the talks. Yet, German non-governmental organizations clearly seem to be bewildered over the uncertainty of Ukraine’s concepts. The overriding view is that Ukrainian leaders are too shy to find a proper place for their state in the new situation, at least the way Vladimir Putin did for Russia. Some of them think that Kyiv’s self-isolation will further underscore Ukraine’s provincialism and backwardness in an epoch of radical changes. The common perception is, for example, that Ukraine has missed the chance to turn GUUAM from a purely informal regional association into an active and full-fledged international organization. Everything ended up in resounding declarations without any specific content. Also missed is the idea of cooperation between Baltic and Black Sea countries, which caused disappointment among the Poles and Lithuanians. According to the Germans, Ukraine has not come to the proper conclusions from the initiative by Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski who recently convened a regional antiterrorist conference and deliberately put Mr. Kuchma in the foreground, hoping that he would take further steps to strengthen the regional concept.
