Another hurdle on the road to NATO membership

“ Ukraine must make its stand clear with regard to Black Sea Navy deployment, because under NATO standards a country accommodating foreign military units is not eligible to become a member,” Serhiy Pyrozhkov, deputy secretary of the National Security and Defense Council, told journalists at a conference, Ukraine and Regional Security Cooperation: a Glimpse of the Future, organized by the European and International Studies Center. Academician Pyrozhkov further pointed out that the subject is still to be formally negotiated.

The Russian Navy’s press service promptly replied, “Black Sea Naval Commander Kuroyedov is aware of the statement made by NSDC Deputy Secretary Serhiy Pyrozhkov, concerning Kyiv’s intent to start talks on the future of the Black Sea Navy, but he will make no comment at this stage. The statement of the Ukrainian side is political and has no bearing on the navy whatsoever.”

This is nothing sensational, considering that the importance of solving the same issue was emphasized after the NSDC resolution on the strategy aimed at ultimately joining the NATO-based security system. “The Russians have shown their reaction. They don’t want any talks that might involve lease renewal, because nothing is being done to establish a new Russian naval base,” said Pyrozhkov, and that was nothing new, either.

“When it comes to formally applying for NATO membership, we’ll have to solve this problem among other serious issues,” The Day was told by a foreign ministry official. “We’re working on bringing the Russian Navy’s stay into conformity with the letter and spirit of the agreement.”

And there is the third party, NATO. Stephen Flanagan, director of the Institute of National Strategic Studies, US National Military Academy, told The Day that solving the Black Sea Navy issue will depend on the status of Russia’s relations with NATO and the West in general at the time. Thus, it is safe to assume that the problem is not on the agenda of NATO, particularly of the United States as its principal member, and that Ukraine will have to solve it on its own. NATO’s basic instruments contain no clauses making it imperative that a prospective member not accommodate any foreign military bases, probably because military bases of the member countries can be placed anywhere on the territory of the North Atlantic alliance. Other options have never been considered.

In general, the problem might seem a spontaneous provocation, but it could well aggravate relations with Moscow, where Kyiv has no initiative these days; also, it might prompt Brussels to say that Ukraine must first solve all issues in dispute bilaterally. In other words, Kyiv may once again miss its chance.

Moscow has no desire to join NATO and President Vladimir Putin stressed this again at a press conference. Simultaneously, he made it clear (using Estonia as an example) that Moscow would not stand in the way of other countries seeking such membership. The remote possibility of Ukraine’s membership is received calmly by Moscow. The foreign ministry, however, points out that Russia has never said go ahead. Moscow’s reaction cannot be interpreted as a change of stand. Russia cannot change the situation, so it is adopting a constructive stand, the way Ukraine did in 1993.

The Black Sea Navy will turn into a big stumbling block sometime later. At present, the question is whether NATO will go along with Ukraine’s effort to step up relations, and to what extent. Michael McFall of the Carnegie Foundation believes that Ukraine’s membership is a possibility but only in the distant future and that Washington will try to draw out the process. By drawing out he understands expanding Ukrainian-NATO relations on the basis of special partnership but not in terms of membership. Ukrainian experts believe that it is time to stop mulling over Ukraine’s uniqueness; this country must have the same chances as any other European state. Serhiy Pyrozhkov says that Ukraine is preparing a draft supplement expanding the special partnership charter. This might even be signed at the Prague summit. The document is to determine the format of relations in the context of Ukraine’s accession to the Membership Action Plan. In his words, signing this document will indicate a decision on accession but not accession as such. As it is, a national program is being prepared, concerning all five clauses of the action plan. These good intentions, however, must be received in an appropriate atmosphere. This, in turn, could mean additional problems.