Michel Duray: “There are people in NATO who understand the Ukrainian people”

Michel Duray, Director of the NATO Information and Documentation Center in Kyiv, is the only ranking NATO officer who knows and speaks Ukrainian. Recently he was posted to Brussels to coordinate similar NATO centers in all the countries that are not members of the Alliance.

He said he would have a dish antenna installed in his residence, so he could watch Ukrainian channels, because he wants to keep practicing Ukrainian. Before the following interview he told me an informative story about the Belgian Consensus. In the early 1990s, when the German government moved to Berlin, Germany proposed to transfer the NATO headquarters from Brussels to Bonn, to occupy the vacated official premises. According to Duray, all political parties of Belgium, including those who opposed NATO, promptly signed a statement against this transfer.

Everyone realized that this transfer meant the loss of the Belgian capital’s budget receipts. Before boarding his flight to Brussels, Duray explained in a frank interview with The Day why the Ukrainian government and NGOs have so far failed to convince Ukraine’s population that NATO membership will be good for the country and to follow in the footsteps of the neighboring countries that have joined NATO. He also warned against politicizing the NATO membership issue in Ukraine.

UKRAINE KEEPS REAFFIRMING ITS EURO-ATLANTIC ASPIRATIONS

Mr. Duray, you have worked in Ukraine since 2002. How would you describe this country’s accomplishments and failures in its relations with NATO during this period?

“In terms of history, there is a big difference between the situation in 2002 and this year. Under President Leonid Kuchma Ukraine resolved that integration into the Euro-Atlantic structures would be its ultimate objective, but this was just the beginning of the Euro-Atlantic integration effort, as well as the effort aimed at carrying out the necessary reforms.

“Over the years Ukraine has constantly reaffirmed its Euro-Atlantic aspirations. It has reached the level of intensive dialog with NATO. The Bucharest summit promised that the NATO member countries’ long-term strategy envisages admission of Ukraine and Georgia as members of the Alliance and that both countries are entitled to become members of the North Atlantic family of nations.

“I think that this means progress. I would also add that Ukraine has succeeded in persuading the NATO member countries that it can be and is willing to become a donor to [international] security, by taking part in all military operations.

“This can be symbolic, as in the case of Afghanistan where ten Ukrainian servicemen are deployed. We know, however, that symbols also have their weight. I am convinced that Ukraine’s desire to become a player in this matter is very important. All of this is your achievement.”

What about our failures?

“There are problems, but I wouldn’t want to dwell on them, because there are problems all over the world, not only in Ukraine. There is, however, one problem, and I have been aware of it for a long time.

I mean the absence of adequate funding for reforms and promises laid down in various documents, including the NATO-Ukraine Target Plan or Ukraine’s annual Membership Action Plan program that will be shortly adopted, although efforts were made to implement some of its aspects in 2007 and 2008, including a public information campaign.

“We hope that the money will be found to finance the annual national program. There is no sense in working out documents unless you intend to implement them. I must mention this aspect, for this [implementation] would be a signal to our allies that the Ukrainian side has serious intentions and that it does not only makes declarations but also intends to honor its declared obligations. This is an extremely important aspect to our joint effort aimed at helping Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic integration. And this depends on Ukraine—we can do this for you.

“I would also like to emphasize another important accomplishment: the existence of a [national] security debate within Ukrainian society, all the way from Luhansk via Kamianets-Podilsky to Uzhhorod, Chernihiv, and Odesa. I think that even though some people manifestly oppose Ukraine’s NATO membership, yelling at every street corner against it (including people who are paid to do so), this debate still exists.

“It is always good to see people discuss certain issues. This way they can understand each other’s stand and accept or turn down certain ideas. Anyway, this is a hallmark of good democracy. Ukraine today has far more debates than it did seven years ago. We had no part in bringing forth such debates. We only served as a source of information that helped develop these debates. They were brought forth by Ukrainians, by some NGOs, ministries, and some politicians.

“I regard this as success, even though not so long ago this success turned into the politicized NATO membership issue. This doesn’t help because overpoliticizing this issue proved useless in the newly admitted NATO countries.”

UKRAINE IS SEEN AS A FUTURE NATO MEMBER

Regarding politicizing, Kyiv’s District Court recently ruled that the Ukrainian president’s edict banning a referendum on NATO membership, the official status of the Russian language, and Common Economic Space is unconstitutional. How can this affect the NATO debate?

“This is Ukraine’s internal affair; we are not in a position to comment on what happens within Ukraine. We can only say that unless most of the residents of Ukraine support the NATO membership idea, there will be no membership. None of the NATO countries will be willing to weaken the Alliance by admitting a country in which there are people opposed to this membership.

“On the other hand, what kind of referendum are we talking about? Ukraine’s NATO membership is not on our agenda at this stage; we are discussing the possibilities of supporting reforms in this young country that strives to reach the required level of independence in a competitive but fairly happy and free Europe. A referendum against far-reaching reforms? What does this mean?”

Mr. Duray, hasn’t NATO had some failures or a lack of vision regarding Ukraine since 2002? Leonid Kuchma wanted to receive MAP at the 2004 Istanbul summit but was refused.

“You know as well as I do that NATO operates on the consensus principle. If there is no consensus, you can’t help it. I can’t comment on these events because they resulted from a consensus.

“Looking back at your past doesn’t give you anything. ‘We have what we have.’ It’s true that one must have a vision of the future, and we have it. We see Ukraine and Georgia as NATO members when these countries have done everything it takes to enter the Alliance, period. I think that this is understandable to one and all.

“However, this depends on Ukraine. I can say this time and again, because such is the reality. Lord Robertson declared, after landing at Kyiv in 2003, that NATO would go as far as Ukraine was prepared to go. This remains a topical issue.”

As you know, Ukraine has a state public information program concerning NATO, annual target plans, as well as certain NGOs that support Ukraine’s NATO membership. Why can’t Ukrainians be persuaded of the benefits of NATO membership and following the example of neighboring countries that are NATO members?

“NATO is not a top priority for the Ukrainian people during the economic crisis. This is obvious from public opinion polls. This issue ranks probably 17th or 18th for Ukrainians.

“Then your politicians prefer to focus on issues that are really interesting, especially during the permanent electioneering mode in the past several years.

“On the other hand, quite honestly, something has been accomplished by your state. In 2008 and 2007 some of your ministries indeed carried out the information program. They financed the production of films that were property of Ukraine and organized thousands of roundtables across Ukraine. Let me tell you something: when I arrived here seven years ago, there were 7-8 seminars a year.

“I would say that this is just the beginning. You cannot persuade 46 million residents most of whom were brainwashed by Soviet propaganda. You won’t be able to refute all those myths and stereotypes in two or four years. This process will last a long while, but there is no alternative — otherwise this would be an abnormal process.

“If this process is allowed to follow its natural course, it will evolve peacefully, with the conflicting sides providing substantial and relevant arguments and holding constant foreign policy debates. Then Ukrainians will themselves determine what they want to see in [the country’s] foreign policy, especially in terms of national security. Then you will have laid a solid foundation for NATO membership.

“Frankly, I believe that the pro-NATO forces in Ukraine have much better arguments than they did nine or five years ago. At that time few people knew anything about NATO. Today, any Ukrainian national who is in favor of NATO membership knows what NATO is and understands the nature of changes in the Alliance. They understand the meaning of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty. Any such person will understand what consensus is all about and the way people live in other countries. They have arguments in favor of Ukraine’s NATO membership. Naturally, they fear that this will adversely affect the relations with Russia.

“I am aware that this issue exists. The more we discuss it, the better for all of us. We also have it. Honestly, I wouldn’t blame anyone in Ukraine for the fact that in previous years there was nothing that would cause competition around the NATO membership issue. This competition is now in place. This means we have things to discuss.”

POLITICAL REFORM RATHER THAN NATO MEMBERSHIP

Would you please comment on the emergence of the American Institute in Ukraine with its anti-NATO stand?

“We use fair democratic communication means. If other organizations want to use other means of communication when organizing events with regard to NATO and constantly forgetting to invite NATO representatives, these seem to be dubious events.

“We always invite members of the parties that are opposed to or even hate NATO. Last year two members of the Communist Party accepted our invitation to visit the NATO headquarters in Brussels. We had a constructive dialog. We work and listen to what people have to say. We do not work through slogans.

“However, everything in this world is relative. Let the best man win in our competition. On our part we will try to keep telling the truth. We tell the truth because it is less expensive. You see, we don’t have to spend money to tell the truth.”

Mr. Duray, you mentioned that NATO membership ranks 17th among Ukrainians’ priorities, according to public opinion polls. You must have noticed, however, that this issue has been essentially the number one problem in all election campaigns. Would you please comment on this phenomenon?

“I wouldn’t advise anyone to politicize the NATO membership issue, because this would help neither you nor us. This could become an incentive to turn a blind eye to where real problems are.

“Today the real problems of Ukraine’s society are not about NATO—they are about the political reform and reforms of the economy, health care system, as well as funding and upgrading the Armed Forces. These are real problems, while all talk about NATO only adds emotions. The use of lies here simply produces dust that will be unhealthy when it settles.”

Speaking of realities, how would you assess the current Ukrainian government’s activities in terms of bringing Ukraine closer to NATO?

“NATO foreign ministers resolved at one time to develop relations with Ukraine as part of the annual national program. The Ukrainian government is finishing work on this program and I think that this instrument can only benefit both sides. Reinforcing the NATO-Ukraine Commission, the most important forum for cooperation, and the Alliance countries’ aid promoting Kyiv’s Euro-Atlantic integration [is also important]. Let these instruments be used. We see only positive aspects in this.”

THE MAIN THING IS TO CONTINUE THE DEBATE AND REFORMS

Is this program mostly declarative or does it envisage realistic measures to help bring Ukraine closer to NATO?

“I am convinced that these are realistic, specific proposals aimed at carrying out the reforms undertaken by Ukraine in order to reform this country and society. What I mean is Ukraine’s possible NATO membership in the future. This, however, takes a quality process. If the process is on an adequate quality level, we will all vote in favor of your membership, and we will, of course, help you. And if close to the end of this process, after utilizing our assistance, Ukraine refuses to become a member of the Alliance, we will respect your stand.”

Considering your many years of experience in Ukraine, your meetings with politicians and businesspeople, how long do you think it will take Ukrainian society to realize the necessity of having NATO membership?

“Considering the experience of recently admitted NATO member countries, this has more to do with generations. The younger generation is a more active supporter of the European course than the older one that lived in different conditions and has the right to have its history. Therefore, I don’t think that this will happen tomorrow. The main thing is not to stop and continue the debate and the reforms.

“In all countries this issue was a matter of several years. Let me add that this is true of not only Ukraine, but also other countries, where we constantly hold debates on security, so as to attract tangible public interest. I would like to emphasize again that the quality of the reform and information process is very important.”

THERE ARE NATO PEOPLE WHO UNDERSTAND THE UKRAINIAN PEOPLE

Mr. Duray, you must have heard that many European politicians say they’re tired of Ukraine. What about you?

“After seven years in Ukraine, I can say that I made every effort to carry out my mission modestly and relying on what resources I had. NATO is not too rich an organization. I won’t praise myself or try to get good press from MPs and ministers. I am not interested in any of this. I only hope that during those seven years we succeeded in showing that NATO is an organization where Belgians work on a par with Walloons and that there are people in NATO who understand the Ukrainian people and what is happening within Ukrainian society.

“I am happy about my new posting and I will often visit Ukraine because in Brussels I will be responsible for coordinating the performance of documentation and information centers in all non-member countries.

“True, I am physically leaving Ukraine, but a part of my life and my soul remains with you.”

Were there any events in Ukraine that you still vividly remember?

“I am proud that Renat Akhmetov presented me with a soccer jersey with my name and number 11. I am proud that we invited Ukrainian performers to the NATO headquarters for the first time in the Alliance’s history. Needless to say, I will always remember the political evolutionary process that started during of the Orange revolution. Those were extremely interesting times.”

What recommendations have you left for your successor in Kyiv?

“First, do not fear being interviewed by Mykola Siruk and enlisting the largest possible number of independent Ukrainian media. Second, try to listen to what people have to say and pay more attention to their problems and apprehensions.”