Kyiv Offers Belgrade Help to Clean Up the Danube
Assessing the results of any bilateral political talks is difficult when no concrete agreements have been made. The trip by Yugoslavia’s Foreign Minister Goran Svilanovic on February 12 to Ukraine was called successful on the official level. This evaluation can be disputed only if other countering arguments were available. Still, their lack is no evidence that the visit was productive.
On February 12 Mr. Svilanovic met with Verkhovna Rada Speaker Ivan Pliushch, Prime Minister Anatoly Kinakh, and his Ukrainian counterpart Anatoly Zlenko. The talks focused on how to improve trade between our countries. In order to start things off, Svilanovic and Zlenko agreed to hold the next session of the Ukrainian-Yugoslav trade commission as soon as possible. Since Soviet times Yugoslavia has traditionally remained our primary market in the Balkan region, with trade indicators, sadly, proving the opposite as last year’s trade between our countries was only $75.3 million. To compare, the 1999 trade level was only lower by eleven percent. It would certainly be stretching the truth to call such a growth rate dynamic, especially because in 2000 the trade turnover shrank in the aftermath of the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999 and almost revolutionary accession to power by Vojislav Kostunica. It is no longer a rhetorical question why 2001 failed to become a turning point in the relations between Kyiv and Belgrade. Any cooperation yields positive results, given interest and appropriate efforts by one of the parties. While there is no lack of interest on the part of both Kyiv and Belgrade, the efforts have been inadequate.
Ukraine’s interest was proven by Leonid Kuchma, whose first foreign visit in 2001 was made to Yugoslavia. In the fall of 2001, the head of the Yugoslav federal government, Dragisa Pesic, came on an official visit to Kyiv. However, the visit to Kyiv by Yugoslav President Vojislav Kostunica slated for last April did not materialize, with the Yugoslav diplomats convincing Kyiv that this was not related in any way to the cassette scandal and its fallout in Ukraine. It is no secret that the ouster of Slobodan Milosevic and coming to power of Kostunica has caused a shift in Yugoslavia’s foreign policy priorities making it look toward the European Union and the United States. True, Mr. Svilanovic thanked Kyiv for having helped Belgrade in its time of ordeal.
For Ukraine, Yugoslavia is attractive not in the least for the support, investment, and financial help it is receiving from the West. Yugoslavia can offer expanding markets for Ukrainian companies which on their part can assist a friendly country, and make profits from such cooperation. In this context, the signing on by Ukraine to the Pact on Stability for Southwestern Europe encompassing the countries of the region plus Moldova is of the utmost importance. But so far, some Ukrainian representatives say, the chances of Ukraine’s accession to the pact seem rather slim. This is not to say that Ukraine cannot make deals on technical assistance with Yugoslavia directly, just as with other former Yugoslav republics. Incidentally, last year Ukraine initiated the post of special envoy to the Balkans, appointing Deputy State Secretary for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ihor Kharchenko to take the job, with him spending the last few weeks in the region. At the talks between Zlenko and Svilanovic, Ukraine also offered help in restoring shipping on the Danube jammed by the ruins of bridges destroyed in the NATO air raids. Another promising avenue in our bilateral relations is military technical cooperation with Yugoslavia, especially since the UN Security Council’s ban on arms supplies to the area has been lifted.
On February 12 Mr. Svilanovic left Kyiv for Belgrade, making a promise to come back since the visit by Vojislav Kostunica is scheduled for this year.
