Russia on Eurasian community
Contrary to repeated anxious predictions that the Russian or Moldovan president would voice his opinion concerning the alignment of forces in the future Ukrainian parliament during the summit in Odesa, both Vladimir Voronin and Vladimir Putin behaved quite correctly. In response to questions about the election campaign, both replied in general terms. The Russian head of state, when asked how the election turnout was likely to affect Ukrainian- Russian relations, replied, “Nothing will change so far as Russia is concerned. Russia has a nationwide consensus on its relations with Ukraine, which is our strategic partner. We hope that Ukrainian politicians will show a similar attitude, whoever wins the elections.” Voronin also had to display political modesty and refrained from communist declarations, probably because he did not want to irritate his Ukrainian counterpart and add to the complexity of Ukrainian-Moldovan relations. Previously, Comrade Voronin had voiced his support of the Communist Party of Ukraine and official Kyiv had taken a dim view of this stand.
The presidents decided to place emphasis on the stepping up of economic cooperation (particularly in the energy sector) and the Transnistria issue. In addition, Leonid Kuchma and Vladimir Voronin, rather unexpectedly, voiced their support of participation in the Eurasian Economic Community (EAEC). Broaching the subject must have been a logical sequel to the latest informal CIS summit in Kazakhstan. The only document signed by the three presidents was a statement expressing “confidence that the countries’ full- fledged participation in the EAEC would step up the economic development of Moldova and Ukraine, adequate functioning of the free trade zone, and raise the living standard in these countries.” Considering that the Ukrainian leader has not visited a single country west of Poland for over a year, and his recent remark about Ukraine’s erroneous Western orientation, it is quite possible that Kyiv will soon want to join the economic alliance of Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan. Moldova applied for membership two months ago.
Will this mean an end to GUUAM, heretofore often regarded as a counterpoise to the EAEC in general and Russia in particular? Does this statement tally with Kyiv’s proclaimed course toward European integration? “We can see that the attitude of the world toward us is not getting any better... There appear ever new obstacles in the way of our exports to Europe, so we have to put our heads together... to figure out how to survive,” said Mr. Kuchma.
Little is known about what was said and done about the Transnistria issue. Nothing much, analysts were sure a priori, because of the absence of Igor Smirnov, leader of the self-style Transnistrian Moldovan Republic. The Moldovan president is known for his adamant stand against the Tiraspol impostor’s participation in the talks. Russia, on the contrary, insists on it. Leonid Kuchma even offered Kyiv as a venue of the Transnistrian negotiations. Chisinau was silent for quite a while and then declined. In any case, the meeting between Kuchma and Voronin might at least help better Ukrainian- Moldovan relations damaged by last year’s exchange of sharply worded notes and Chisinau’s allegations that Ukraine is helping Tiraspol with contraband — the more so that Mr. Kuchma will have to fly to Chisinau to attend the next CIS summit this May.
