“To be proactive in opposing Russia”

The international conference on security issues in the Eastern European region and the place and role of Ukraine in it, held recently with the support of the Representative Office of the Konrad Adenauer Foundation in Ukraine and in partnership with the Strategy XXI Center for Global Studies, demonstrated, on the one hand, the efforts of the expert community to develop certain recommendations on how Ukraine should act in the region in order to protect its interests, and on the other, a lack of interest of the Ukrainian diplomatic agency in this topic. The single representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to apply for the event, director of its political department Oleksii Makieiev, ultimately failed to attend the conference.

THE EU IS GRADUALLY WAKING UP

Hanna Hopko, who serves as chairperson of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, stressed in her speech that after four years of Russian aggression in Ukraine, the EU was gradually waking up. She emphasized that it started happening after we saw the Russian secret services interfering with elections, email hackings, and toxic Russian propaganda, as Russian hybrid warfare tactics had spread beyond the conflict zone.

In her view, the sanctions imposed by the West on Russia over the annexation of Crimea and aggression in the Donbas are only an instrument, while a strategy is needed. “All over the world, there is a shift in emphasis from values to interests, including in the EU, so supplies of oil and gas should be considered in one package with the sanctions. But the energy issues, such as abandoning the Nord Stream 2 project and reducing the supply of Russian oil products in the EU, get a weak response. However, it is the cash flow that further contributes to the destabilization of the political situation in Ukraine and the continuation of Russia’s hybrid war against the West,” Hopko stressed.

Director of the Institute for Foreign Policy Studies Hryhorii Perepelytsia drew attention to the fact that, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, a vacuum of security initially emerged in the region of Central and Eastern Europe, which was then eliminated due to the expansion of NATO. Russia has lost its dominant position in this region, as some of its countries have chosen the path of Euro-Atlantic integration. The West intended to somehow take Russia off the anti-Western pathway, but these attempts were executed in a totally wrong manner, Perepelytsia stressed. According to him, when the balance of power changed in favor of Russia, it started trying to return to this region. Consequently, Eastern Europe, and in particular Ukraine, is now facing the direct danger of armed attack, and the central part of Europe is influenced by Russia’s hybrid warfare.

“UKRAINE SHOULD NOT CONSIDER ITSELF A BUFFER STATE BETWEEN THE EU AND RUSSIA”

Senior researcher at the Polish Institute for Advanced Studies (Warsaw) Vladislav Inozemtsev agrees with other experts that Russia is a major source of instability in Eastern Europe. He recalled that the policy of controlled instability began before the Russian annexation of Crimea and aggression in the Donbas. According to him, Russia is interested in spreading instability in neighboring countries in order to allege the existence of a threat from the countries that have chosen the European development path.

“It openly states that it will not allow the entry of former Soviet Union countries into NATO or the EU. And, besides, the idea of invading neighboring countries is ingrained into Russian culture,” stressed Inozemtsev.

He believes that Ukraine should not consider itself a buffer state between the EU and Russia. “This is a false idea that limits the scope of action and allows others to disregard you as a prospective member of NATO or the EU,” noted the expert.

Another problem, in his opinion, is that Ukraine only reacts to events, just like the EU which was surprised by Vladimir Putin’s actions and did nothing to prevent Russian aggression.

Inozemtsev believes that Ukraine should be proactive in opposing Russia, including with the proposal to deploy peacekeepers. The Ukrainian government should not rely on the talks between Kurt Volker and Vladislav Surkov, as it should shape its own agenda instead and impose it on the West.

In his view, the EU should admit Moldova as soon as possible, which would be quite cheap for the European community. “Nonetheless, it would resolve the Transnistrian conflict and send a strong emotional signal for the EU, Russia, and Ukraine, which would know that it would be the next EU member state, even if not so soon,” Inozemtsev stressed.

“SECURITY IN THE REGION IS CLOSELY LINKED TO SECURITY OF UKRAINE”

Director of the NATO Information and Documentation Center in Ukraine Barbora Maronkova dealt in her speech with the issue of strengthening the NATO-EU cooperation on the continent. “And security in the region is closely linked to security of Ukraine, with which the Alliance is directly cooperating,” she stressed.

According to her, a number of instruments are used for this: the Annual National Program (ANP) which promotes the progress of reforms, joint exercises, trainings, trust funds.

Senior researcher at the Euro-Atlantic Cooperation Institute (Kyiv) Andreas Umland believes that the main reason for what happened with Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia, which have partially lost control over their own territories, is their exclusion from the security structures of Europe, in other words, their location in the gray zone.

According to the expert, signing a new security treaty in the region is currently unlikely. However, he added, it was still possible if Romania, Slovakia, and Poland would show interest right now.

The Intermarium initiative, which is often mentioned now, emerged as a reaction to the threat posed to the gray zone countries by the Soviet Union and Germany.

And now, this initiative is more about energy, transport corridors, and infrastructure. However, when there is no clear goal, it is not clear what added value this initiative has.

The same, according to Umland, is applicable to the Bucharest 9 group, which emerged as a reaction to the annexation of Crimea. What does this group add to NATO, what is its purpose?

“THE MEMBERSHIP ACTION PLAN MEANS THAT A COUNTRY IS READY TO REFORM ITSELF”

Oleksii Melnyk, who serves as co-director of foreign policy and international security programs at the Razumkov Center, emphasized in his speech that Ukraine was a security contributor in countering illegal immigration and in other areas, and it acted that way not for the sake of Europe, but for the sake of common security.

In his opinion, Norway should be seen as the best model for Ukraine’s relations with the EU in the short-term perspective, and Sweden or Finland as the model of our relations with NATO.

Melnyk believes that the main instrument of preparing for NATO membership is the ANP, which is part of the Membership Action Plan (MAP) and was granted to us in 2008. Meanwhile, the MAP, he stressed, was just a nice cover. Consequently, in his opinion, Ukraine should only restore the original name of this document, which was called the ANP of Preparation for NATO Membership before Viktor Yanukovych came to power in 2010, and wait for a window of opportunity.

Melnyk’s assertion that the fact of the invitation to start the MAP was less important than the signing of the ANP caused a lively debate among the experts.

In particular, Perepelytsia noted that obtaining the MAP imposed a serious responsibility both on the applicant country and NATO members. In other words, he emphasized, the MAP meant that a country was ready to reform itself, while the ANP could be filled with any content.

Meanwhile, Maronkova reconciled both participants of the discussion in a diplomatic manner, noting that NATO devoted a lot of attention to technical issues. “Regardless of the name of the process, be it A or B, we are its co-owners and believe that both sides are responsible for it,” she stressed.

At the end of the conference, Umland expressed the view that Ukraine had to be ready to use a window of opportunity that might arise in connection with the decline of Russia. Moreover, the expert believes that the West should have a plan for this case, not limited to readmitting Russia to the G8, but including a list of specific measures that its government should take, including the exit from Crimea.