Wlodzimerz Cimoszevicz:

Polish Foreign Minister Wlodzimerz Cimoszevicz, in an interview with Ukrainian journalists after the NATO foreign ministers’ meeting, looked more optimistic than during his previous visits to Kyiv. Mr. Cimoszevicz is known for his invariably principled stand, so his statement that Warsaw would try to change the format of EU-NATO- Ukrainian relationships should be seriously considered. He said, in particular, that everybody discussed Ukraine at that NATO meeting and there was an optimistic and hopeful atmosphere. Everybody was very impressed by the response of that part of Ukrainian society which came out in such unanimous support of the Ukrainian people’s right to open and fair elections.

A number of speakers expressed hopes that the third round scheduled for December 26 will be held in keeping with democratic standards and that the newly elected president will be the man most Ukrainians want to see in office.

Mr. Cimoszevicz was convinced that fair elections were the best guarantee of Ukrainian sovereignty, stability, and territorial integrity; also that rigging election turnouts was the worst threat to that integrity.

Amending the election law and constitution is very important, of course, but there are other important things to consider, he said, adding that he knew that the election campaign was still underway, that Ukraine would face a number of challenges and problems after the elections. And that no one could deny the fact that Ukrainian society is faced with strong divergences and divisions. Such divisions must be overcome, but in a cautious and considerate manner. Mr. Cimoszevicz hopes that all Ukrainians will realize the need to respect the democratic choice and decision [made by the Ukrainian nation] even if it’s to someone’s chagrin, meaning people harboring different preferences.

Also, the course events are taking in Ukraine offers fresh opportunities for this country. Naturally, it is for the Ukrainians to decide what they actually want. This regards Ukraine’s subsequent cooperation with partners, other countries and international organizations. Mr. Cimoszevicz said he had told his NATO colleagues that, if and when the Ukrainian elections are recognized as having been held in accordance with the law, and if they are acknowledged as democratic, NATO should be prepared to raise the level of its cooperation with Ukraine - naturally if Ukraine concurs with this approach. No one will ever try to impose anything on Ukraine, but NATO and the European Union must keep their minds open for a higher degree of cooperation with Ukraine.

This is by no means directed against any other countries, least of all Russia, Mr. Cimoszevicz stressed, adding that he was perfectly sure that Ukraine would maintain good cooperation with Russia, because Ukraine really needs it, just as Russia and Europe do. No one wants conflicts and tensions, but we must all recognize the Ukrainian right to make a free choice, not only with regard to the presidential or parliamentary elections, but also with regard to Ukraine’s political future. This right must be respected, he declared.

Mr. Cimoszevicz, how do you see the prospects of cooperation with Iraq? You know that Mr. Yushchenko promised to withdraw the Ukrainian peacekeeping contingent after winning the campaign, and that the Verkhovna Rada recently passed a resolution urging this withdrawal.

Cimoszevicz: Yes, I know about the VR resolution. Let me tell you frankly that we expected the Ukrainian political leadership to be open for consultations with its allies. No one should make unilateral decisions fraught with [unwelcome] consequences for the allies. The [peacekeeping] operations in Iraq aren’t popular in Ukraine and in Poland, but if the government resolves to take part in such operations, it stands to reason to assume that there were valid reasons involved. I’m still convinced that it was a reasonable decision, and I keep telling this to my close and dear ones and Poland, but it’s also true that I hear different views.

It doesn’t really matter know who was right. What matters is that we combined efforts in forming a multinational military unit, a division. We must now carefully consider the prospects of this mission. Without a doubt, this mission will be subject to restrictions. We expect the elections in Iraq to help strengthen the legitimate Iraqi government; that upgrading the Iraqi army will enable this country to assume full responsibility for its national security. That way countries whose military contingents are involved in this peacekeeping mission will be able to pull out or resort to personnel reductions. Poland, for example, has been discussing the possibility of such reductions for some time.

Ukraine’s decision to withdraw its contingent on short notice would create serious problems for the multinational division allies, Poland included, of course. We wouldn’t be able to fill in the military presence gap, meaning that a situation like this calls for consultations.

Would you dwell on Polish peacekeeping personnel reductions?

Cimoszevicz: We expect to carry out such reductions after the elections in Iraq and I expect tangible reductions, something like several dozen percent. But we have just decided to appoint a team of Polish military experts to help train Iraqi officers and men within the NATO framework. Meaning that part of the Polish contingent will be withdrawn from the multinational division, but they will stay in Iraq.

Does the fact that discussing the situation in Ukraine showed such international representation signify only political assessment or that there could be other responses as well?

Cimoszevicz: You can look up the final document of the ministerial meeting. Paragraph 12 is dedicated to Ukraine, stressing the right of the Ukrainian people to freely make their own decisions; it is further hoped that the elections will be in accordance with [the universally accepted democratic] standards, without any transgressions. The document also reads that the recent VR resolution is supported, that it should be implemented as soon as possible in order to enable the holding of the presidential elections.

But there are no indications concerning future cooperation...

Cimoszevicz: No, and this would be premature. But I’m sure that NATO foreign ministers will promptly establish contact with the new Ukrainian political leadership after the elections, and that there will be fresh opportunities of upgrading NATO-Ukrainian relationships in every respect. But I must stress again that this will be Ukraine’s sole decision. No one wants to impose any decisions on Ukraine!

Of course, the new president and cabinet will have certain views on the Ukrainian foreign policy; they will certainly know what they’re after. If they decide to merely support previous declarations, about Ukraine’s desire to deepen cooperation with NATO and EU, I’m sure that both the Alliance and the Union will have to respond to such decisions positively. And there will be time enough to cope with particulars.

Does this mean that Ukraine’s desire to join the Membership Action Plan could be treated favorably?

Cimoszevicz: Poland has long suggested that NATO concur with Ukraine’s MAP ambition. We will continue to support the idea. NATO couldn’t do this until recently, but I hope that Ukraine will stand a bigger chance now, although there is little Poland can guarantee here, being the only supporting country and thus unable to act on behalf of the Alliance.

However, I can’t recall a single other instance of such profound [international] interest being shown in Ukraine — or such deep understanding of Ukraine’s importance as a partner and neighbor, which means that the need to cooperate with Ukraine is realized as a special priority. I can’t remember any such precedents; it’s an entirely new phenomenon.