The Czech dimension of security

Before assuming his current office, First Deputy Foreign Minister of the Czech Republic Tomas Pojar worked in non-governmental organizations. He chaired the People in Trouble foundation and participated in debates on international problems. He says he is delighted to be working as first deputy foreign minister.

What does Prague think about the Black Sea Synergy meeting of the EU foreign ministers and the Black Sea Region countries, recently held in Kyiv, and about the prospects of the Organization of Black Sea Economic Cooperation (OBSEC)? These and other questions are raised in The Day’s exclusive interview with Tomas POJAR, who visited Kyiv a few days ago to take part in the Black Sea Synergy conference.

What is Prague’s vision of the current ministerial meeting between OBSEC and the European Union troika, and of the prospects of this organization?

“In my opinion, it is very important that the European Union is focusing more attention on this region than before. Some EU officials said that this is a strategic priority. We, in Prague, have also considered it a strategic priority for several years. The EU is finding a common language on this matter with increasing frequency. Nobody should expect this event to be a real breakthrough. Still, I consider this meeting important and positive. The organization’s future will depend on specific projects that will be chosen and submitted by specific countries.”

What OBSEC projects is your country interested in?

“We are interested in various economic projects, energy security matters, and transportation projects. We also have an interest in political projects that are related to stability and security in this region. We feel that regional stability meets our national interests. The greater contribution we can make to this, the better.”

What do you think about Ukraine’s efforts with regard to its European integration?

“I think Ukraine is in Europe. I am firmly convinced that Ukraine should belong to the European Union. This will depend on both sides’ daily work. Much will depend on reforms inside Ukraine, on whether your legal and judicial system meets European standards. If both sides — the EU and Ukraine — make real efforts to move ahead and Ukraine shows openness on its way to European structures, then I think there will be success. We are not speaking about concrete dates, months or years: we mean a longer time frame. But it is obvious that Ukraine’s future lies in the European Union. I always use my country as an example. In 1989 we thought we would join the EU in a few years, but it happened 14 years later. Nobody could have said in 1989 that it would take us 14 years to join the EU. It was a long but positive process. I am sure the same will be said about Ukraine years from now.”

I know that you negotiated with Hryhorii Nemyria, Deputy Prime Minister for European Integration and International Cooperation. To what extent do you think the current Ukrainian government is active, and what do you think about its plans to establish a special body in charge of European integration?

“We support the current government’s European vector. In our opinion, it will be in the interests of our country if Ukraine joins the European Union. We talked about some concrete things, such as establishing an area of free trade between the EU and Ukraine. I think we should be heading in this direction and discussing specific projects and actions so that all sides will benefit from it. We discussed the Czech EU presidency in the first half of 2009. Another topic of discussion was coordination: what we can help Ukraine with, while it is making efforts to move towards European integration.”

Did Nemyria make any concrete proposals about assisting the Ukrainian side? And what concrete assistance can you offer Ukraine?

“We consider the eastern policy dimension one of the three priorities for our forthcoming presidency. This does not mean that all attention will be focused on Ukraine and other countries. I talked about our system. Our government also has the office of Deputy Prime Minister for European Affairs now held by Alexandr Vondra. I described the way our department works in comparison with the structure now being formed in Ukraine. We discussed the future meetings in Brussels and Prague as well as concrete plans of joint actions with respect to both bilateral and inter-EU relations. I think there will be a few different-level meetings this year between the representatives of our countries, who will achieve positive results. I always caution against nurturing expectations that are too high. We should do our daily work and be realists rather than nurture excessive expectations. But this realism can also lead to progress.”

What do you think of the statements of some Ukrainian politicians and diplomats, who say that the European Neighborhood Policy is a sort of replacement for Ukraine’s membership prospects? Meanwhile, EU Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner often emphasizes that Ukraine should take advantage of the instruments that this policy provides.

“I believe that the European Neighborhood Policy is aimed at determining who will become an EU member and who will not. It is an instrument of cooperation, and I am strongly convinced that it should be taken advantage of — by the European Union, Ukraine, and any other country embraced by the European Neighborhood Policy. We do not think that it should determine who does and who does not have a chance to become an EU member. I am 100 percent sure that in the future some countries now pursuing the European Neighborhood Policy will be much closer to the EU and will become part of the European community, but some will not. I am absolutely convinced that the EU should expand not only towards the Balkans but also towards the east. But this will take both sides a lot of time, hard work, willpower, and everyday work. Unless work is done every day, there will be no results.”

A Ukrainian diplomat noted that the EU created the European Neighborhood Policy by itself, without involving in this process the very countries at which this policy is aimed. Can you comment?

“I can explain this using the example of the Czech Republic. It was our country that wished to join the EU, not the other way around. Countries that want to enter the EU do not create any instruments. On the other hand, the instruments that contribute to the achievement of results should be created in cooperation with and in respect of the country that is carrying out reforms. It is not about the dictates of one side; the creation of instruments results from the cooperation of both sides. I would like to stress that we joined the EU proceeding from our own interests rather than out of pure love for the EU. Therefore, every country should decide if it wants to join a club and determine if it will derive any benefits or sustain losses from this membership. As for EU membership, I am 100 percent sure that it produces more positive results than negative ones.”

Let’s talk about another club, NATO. Is the Czech Republic going to support the idea of offering Ukraine the Membership Action Plan?

“NATO has always pursued an open-door policy and favored enlargement and cooperation with all the countries that wish to collaborate with the alliance. This is why we support offering Ukraine the MAP. As for the time limits, this depends on debates inside the organization. But in this case, too, I want to emphasize that we should not nurture excessive expectations. For this to happen, we must work hard every day. I am 100 percent sure that sooner or later we will reach the set goal. We know that Ukraine is cooperating closely with NATO and will one day become a member of this organization. Again, this is a question not of weeks or months but years of difficult everyday work. And we should be prepared for this.”

As far as I can see, you are talking about full NATO membership. But what about offering Ukraine the MAP at the April summit?

“No decision has been made on this matter. But I think this is a long-term process. It is not a question of a specific summit. Let us work together on a long-term basis. If this happens in Bucharest, that will be very good. But if this happens later, nothing will be lost. Yet this should not be a zero-sum game with respect to one summit. The two sides should understand that only a long-term approach to fulfilling the obligations can produce success. So I cannot say for sure that Ukraine will join the MAP in Bucharest because it has not yet been decided who will get an invitation to enter NATO. There will be more meetings and talks, and we shall see. But I am absolutely convinced that NATO will continue pursuing an open-door policy towards membership, the MAP, intensified dialogue, and many other instruments that have been made or are being made in order to expand the security space, prosperity, and democracy. And NATO is the guarantor of all this.”

Can I deduce from your answer that the Czech Republic has not yet decided whether or not to offer Ukraine the MAP?

“It is not only the Czech Republic but 25 other countries that make decisions. And they have not made the final decision.”

What is your forecast about the summit?

“I do not think we should cultivate excessive expectations. We must move towards closer cooperation between NATO and Ukraine. This serves our mutual interests. We should not delude ourselves that this will be an easy process. Frankly, we must be aware that there will be difficulties on this path and that this will be a long but ultimately successful process.”

Do you think that failure to extend the MAP to Ukraine will look like NATO’s concession to Russia, which categorically opposes the enlargement of the alliance and Ukraine’s accession to it?

“NATO will be making a serious decision. And this process is not confined to one summit or one meeting. It is a long-term approach. If NATO still cares about the security of the entire European territory, it will continue pursuing an open-door policy and will show this in Bucharest. We should not fixate on one specific date because this is a strategic, not a tactical, question, and we should adopt a long-term approach.”

Another sore point in Europe and in US-Russian relations is the US plan to deploy antimissile facilities in the Czech Republic and Poland. Polls show that more than one-half of Czechs oppose this plan. So is the Czech government going to decide to deploy the US radar system on its territory?

“According to surveys, 70 percent of Czechs are urging the government to do its best to protect the country from missiles. At the same time, 70 percent of those polled oppose the deployment of radars in the Czech Republic. It is a kind of schizophrenia. The government has decided to continue talks with the US. Should an agreement be reached, the Czech parliament will have to ratify it. If it does, radars will be deployed on Czech territory, which will benefit not only our country, the US, and Poland but also NATO’s entire antimissile system. This will also benefit other national systems being developed under NATO’s auspices. The deployment of this system will ensure the defense of a considerable territory of NATO member states against all kinds of ballistic missiles.”

Has your government weighed all the likely consequences of the deployment of US antimissile facilities? Russia is actively opposing these plans and threatening to take asymmetric measures. It may also decide to use its energy leverage against your country.

“We are holding direct talks with Russia. We are being open and transparent with the Russians. We are not hiding anything. We are fully convinced that this defensive system presents no threat whatsoever to Russia’s deterrence measures. We are absolutely sure that we must do our utmost to install a defensive system that will protect Czech citizens and, broadly, all the NATO member states. We have every right to do so. This system is not aimed against Russia. And Russia should not be afraid of this.”

Before assuming the office of deputy minister, you worked in NGOs. To what extent have your views changed since you assumed your current office?

“I don’t think my views have changed considerably. Similar issues are still occupying my time. I have always been involved in debates on international problems. I am delighted to be working as a vice-minister.”