During his visit to Dnipropetrovsk oblast Ukraine’s President Leonid Kuchma announced that he has accepted the resignation of Defense Minister Yevhen Marchuk. He made a statement to this effect after a meeting to discuss the problems of solid rocket fuel disposal at the Pavlohrad Chemicals Plant, attributing Marchuk’s dismissal to the ministry’s poor record of destroying the nation’s huge arsenal. The dismissal of Yevhen Marchuk, who is considered a key political player by his allies and opponents alike, has sparked extensive debate both within Ukraine and abroad. Politicians and experts are voicing different opinions about the causes and possible consequences of his dismissal.
National Security and Defense Committee Chairman Heorhy Kriuchkov (Communist Party) expressed his deep concern over the frequent replacements of Ukraine’s defense ministers. “Such frequent replacements in such a post do not help matters. But this is within the president’s competence,” Kriuchkov said last Wednesday, commenting on the dismissal of Ukraine’s Defense Minister Marchuk. The national security chairman also expressed his concern over the manner of the dismissal. “I don’t think this is normal for a country. Today an official can learn about his dismissal from the mass media.” Kriuchkov also believes that the dismissal of “such a political figure is always a political move.” As he put it, Marchuk did not resign voluntarily. “According to news reports, the minister resigned. But this implies that he tendered his resignation. But I talked to him today (September 22 — Ed.) and it was a complete surprise to him. The initiative did not come from the minister,” he stressed. Kriuchkov also thinks that the dismissal of Yevhen Marchuk will not result in changes to Ukraine’s foreign policy course toward Euro-Atlantic integration: “The course has been determined — the Euro-Atlantic choice. There will be no revision of the foreign policy.”
Speaking of Marchuk’s performance in his ministerial capacity, Kriuchkov said that he did much to boost defense reform. “But he worked under conditions of ill will,” Kriuchkov said, adding that such a decision was not unexpected. “When two reprimands are issued within a short period of time, this should be viewed as a signal,” he said.
The dismissal of Ukraine’s Defense Minister Marchuk surprised Ukraine’s Parliamentary Speaker Volodymyr LYTVYN. He said as much in a September 22 interview, commenting on reports to the effect that President Kuchma had accepted Marchuk’s resignation. “This surprised me, because today Yevhen Marchuk presented a bill (in parliament — Ed.), and there was nothing to indicate that such a decision was forthcoming,” Lytvyn said, adding that he has no detailed information about his resignation.
Professor James SHERR, analyst at the Sandhurst Defense Academy, Oxford University, said that the dismissal of Yevhen Marchuk has not been well received in NATO, according to Radio Liberty. “This is another signal that the West’s opinion does not matter in the least,” he said. He recalled that Yevhen Marchuk was appointed defense minister after the Kolchuga affair, when the Ukrainian government needed his personal reputation as an advocate for Ukraine’s accession to NATO to contain the scandal. However, after the NATO Summit in Istanbul, when Brussels did not offer Ukraine prospects for NATO membership but instead emphasized the need for fair elections, the government no longer needed a good relationship with NATO, Sherr believes. Moreover, Marchuk’s radical and rapid reforms of the army met with intense resistance, which the government could not afford on the eve of the elections.
Geroge Washington University Professor Taraz KUZIO believes that “Ukraine’s foreign policy is beginning to resemble Russia’s in that Ukraine is ready for cooperation with NATO and the EU, but is not setting a goal to join these organizations. The reason for this is that the Ukrainian authorities are tired of the criticism that Ukraine’s democracy is backsliding.” According to Kuzio, another reason for Marchuk’s dismissal is that he would not allow the army to be involved in the election campaign. “Recall how a month ago Yevhen Marchuk said that he wouldn’t permit the army to be used for political ends.”
