The National Security and Defense Council (NSDC) of Ukraine decision to launch a NATO membership process is still the object of political and expert debate. Most comments can be divided into two groups. The first is the discussion of details, dates, standards, and risks associated with NATO membership. The second is criticism for the sake of criticism: it is already bad because its being done by the current leadership. In his interview with Public Radio, NSDC Secretary Yevhen MARCHUK reflects on the difficulties of Ukraine’s way to NATO, on what NATO expects from Kyiv and Ukraine from the alliance.
“What caused the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine to make a decision on Ukraine’s movement toward NATO precisely now?”
“It took a long time for the decision to be formulated. This was caused by the evolution of Ukraine’s foreign policy. The September 11 events in the US showed that the world had radically changed. As early as September 12, 2001, the National Security and Defense Council met. Precisely at that time, the president instructed us to conduct a detailed and all-encompassing study of cooperation with NATO, seeking new ways to reinforce and deepen this cooperation. Such international developments as the dramatic breakthrough in NATO-Russia relations plus a favorable domestic situation (out of the six political parties and blocs that made their way into the parliament, five support Euro-Atlantic integration), as well as Ukraine’s experience of cooperation with NATO within the framework of Partnership for Peace and the Special Partnership Charter have made it imperative to revise this issue with a view to mapping out a new strategy of Euro-Atlantic integration.
“The NATO Prague summit is supposed to create a huge system to provide defense and security. This will comprise about 25 countries of Europe as well as Russia, the US and Canada. Thus neutrality, multivector approaches and uncertainty about crucial matters are no longer practicable.
“The European community, namely the North Atlantic alliance, is a community of highly-developed, affluent, and well-protected states.
“This is a club or, to use sport terminology, the top league No. 1 team capable of playing well, living a decent life, and defending itself collectively. Should at least one of them be attacked, all the others will strike back.”
“Is this what Ukraine should strive for? What will this country gain by joining NATO?”
“First of all, NATO membership is not and cannot be a goal in itself. It is our own guarantees of security that are the goal in itself and the main criterion of national security.
“In today’s world, national armed forces alone cannot guarantee security. Even the US, the world’s largest nuclear and militarily strongest state, failed to adequately respond to the challenges of our times. So, above all, this guarantees the security of individuals and civil society in the best possible way.
“Secondly, this means high living standards. All NATO countries are rich and powerful democracies.
“But in no way should we idealize and make an icon out of NATO. This is a very intricate mechanism comprising 19 capitals, 19 presidents, premiers, chancellors who have domestic problems of their own. This is also a far from simple history. Suffice it to recall Kosovo.
“But this is all in the past. What is now being created belongs to the future. This gives Ukraine the chance to declare the choice it makes and the course it chooses. And we said in no uncertain terms that we set the ball rolling not just to be with it but to join the European community. In other words, we are doing this in our own interests: to ensure security and protection.”
“Does this decision put an end to multivector approaches? What is our northern neighbor going to say?”
“Indeed, this decision puts an end to multivector tendencies in Ukraine’s foreign policy. Russia itself is today quite seriously busy building a new Twenty format of its relations with NATO.
“Russia is becoming a de facto NATO member with a right to vote on certain issues without being a formal member. But this does not change the crux of the matter. Let us be frank: there are diverse attitudes toward Ukraine’s NATO membership in Russia, including a negative reaction. But I think this will be an open, transparent, process on the part of both Ukraine and NATO.
“And in addition Russia will be present at NATO headquarters, from where it will be able to see which way Ukraine goes. Besides, the process of Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic integration is not aimed against any third party. This is impossible even hypothetically because any conflict with neighbors of any country wishing to join NATO automatically blocks the way to one’s own integration. There is no danger here either for Ukraine or Russia. Nor are there any grounds to suspect Ukraine of anti-Russian intent.”
“What does the Ukrainian taxpayer have to pay from his own pocket and how long does he have to wait for any kind of result?”
“This process can be compared to building a house. First you need a lot of money to lay the foundation and put up the walls. You always need more money in the beginning than in the end. But you won’t have to pay rent, for this is a thing of your own. We also have to go this way.
“But in the future, it will be cheaper to ensure the guarantees of security. We now maintain Europe’s second largest army after that of Germany. Germany’s army is just a little larger than ours. But this does not mean we are protected better than the NATO states. It means we have to carry out a very basic reform of our armed forces.
“This in turn means that we need money, because retiring officers and warrant officers must be provided housing. Moreover, the future armed forces should be built on a contract basis. This transition will cost a great deal. But in the future, it will be a far smaller, in terms of strength, but a far more effective defense structure equipped with sophisticated hardware and armaments. In other words, it will guarantee a higher level of security than it does now, the more so if it makes part of one of the top league’s strongest teams.”
“Will you say more exactly: how many years and how much money?”
“The process could last for eight to ten years. Some optimists say five. I don’t think it realistic. As to the money, everything can be calculated, but this requires financial discipline. This should account for at least 2.2-2.5% of GDP, while now we spend 1.25-1.28%”.
