Western experts try to understand Ukraine’s situation
Ukraine has received just another message from the global community: only free and fair elections, on the condition of internal dialog between various political forces, can secure it a decent place in the world. This year is critical for Ukraine — this was said by virtually every foreign participant of the February 21 Ukraine in Europe and the World conference, among whom were former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, former Swedish Prime Minister Karl Bildt, Vice President of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Hanne Severinsen, along with renowned Western experts. It was perhaps the first time in the last several years that leaders of both those in power (Prime Minister Yanukovych) and the opposition (Viktor Yushchenko) delivered speeches at this conference held by the Institute for Euro-Atlantic Cooperation. However, Director of Poland’s National Security Bureau Marek Siwec commented on their speeches that they were “two monologues instead of a dialog.” The conference gave no clear answers to the question of how close Ukraine can get to the EU and NATO in case of successful reforms. Of all representatives of the so-called old democracies only Dr. Albright said openly that Ukraine has to become member of these organizations. However, the very fact of this representative meeting in Kyiv was evidence that Ukraine at least still attracts the attention of the international community, especially against the background of warnings concerning events in Russia.
The Russian factor will be not the last for the leading world forces in defining their policies toward Ukraine. One could draw this conclusion from the theses of Madeleine Albright’s opening speech: “President Putin is strong and popular, but it would be hard to define his democratic strivings... The fall of the USSR wasn’t a tragedy, as president Putin said recently,” and “There will be no Soviet Union, but Ukraine was, is, and will be.” Many international experts said in their comments that Russia is in fact lost for the West in terms of democracy. Now it is important “not to lose Ukraine.” Here the accent falls on the development of Ukraine’s internal situation. Dr. Albright said at the press conference that amendments to the Constitution should be introduced in legal way and that it is important to prevent intimidation, when people cannot meet with candidates for presidency and the latter have no access to mass media. Albright also recalled that in spite of the fact that the US appreciates Ukraine sending its military contingent to Iraq, one should not forget that it is in Ukraine’s interests to develop democracy, and the US will not close its eyes to any problems with democracy out of gratitude.
Dr. Albright’s words about “reasonable sanctions” were the first signal of this kind in the whole history of the Ukrainian democracy. Considering that she represents higher echelons of the Democratic Party, which has a good chance to replace the Republican government after the November elections, and that Washington will consider her words, it is safe to admit that these were not empty threats, even if the United States is busy with its own election battles.
Speaking about the level of the West’s interest in the potential winner of the Ukrainian elections, both Ambassador of the United States to Ukraine John Herbst and PACE Vice President Hanne Severinsen said that it is up to the Ukrainians whom they elect their president. “I am not in a position to speak about who is going to be president,” Ms. Severinsen told The Day’s correspondent on this issue. Ambassador Herbst indicated that the US would work either with Yushchenko or Yanukovych in case if one of them is elected.
Former Vice Premier of Sweden Karl Bildt also called upon Ukraine “not to play with the rules” and conduct fair elections.
In the words of expert from the Conflict Studies Research Center at the Defense Academy of the United Kingdom James Sherr, “We are not simply concerned with technical issues of the Ukrainian elections. We are concerned with strengthening the democratic culture, changing the style of the institutions’ work, reducing the gap between state institutions and the society.” Like Anders Бslund, he believes that neither the EU nor NATO have demonstrated their understanding of the situation in Ukraine.
Instead, in Sherr’s opinion, in Western institutions one can often hear that they cooperate with a “schizophrenic state,” which displays “fundamental schizophrenia” in defining its strategic goal (meaning the attempts of simultaneous integration with the Euro-Atlantic community and SES). The expert is convinced that there are enough people in the EU to stop doing right things for Ukraine unless Ukraine starts doing right things for itself. Dr. Бslund who is convinced that the EU has to change its policy toward and protectionist rules for Ukraine, also thinks that “it is very hard to persuade people in the West to protect Ukraine if Ukraine doesn’t protect itself, its identity, and its independence.”
However, it would be overly optimistic to think that the way the Ukrainian elections will be conducted would define Ukraine’s place in Europe. Director of the Atlantic Security Research Program and former Deputy Foreign Minister of the Czech Republic Alexander Vondra believes that it will take Ukraine seven or eight years to become an EU member. Karl Bildt spoke only of his hopes that “Ukraine’s road to NATO will be similar to ours.”
Other Western representatives named the term of twenty years. Director of Poland’s National Security Bureau Marek Siwec said only that EU enlargement creates both opportunities and threats. In his view, the quality of Ukraine’s democracy will influence the opportunities. Ukraine’s First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Oleksandr Chaly is convinced that the EU has no strategic view of its relations with Ukraine. These relations, he believes, need to be transformed “from Euro-romanticism to Euro-realism.” He believes it possible to work out an Action Plan by May and sign protocols on joining the ten new EU members to the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between Ukraine and the EU. In general, Kyiv often tends to view the EU’s attitude toward Ukraine as a display of what people here often call democratic imperialism.
