Ukraine is hardly alone among European democracies enjoying the stresses of coalition politics. Currently Germany, Italy, Belgium and Ukraine would together have no problem in agreeing with Winston Churchill that ‘democracy is the worst of all political systems, except for the alternatives’.
However Ukraine’s new coalition is sending messages of strategic significance to the West, both the EU and NATO.
President Yushchenko, Prime Minister Timoshenko and Rada Chairman Yatsenyuk wrote a joint letter to the NATO Secretary- General, associating itself with the West’s paradigm of democratic security, and requesting that ‘Membership Action Plan’ status be granted in April at a summit meeting in Bucharest. This could be the beginning of organizing a basic turn-around in Ukraine’s majority negative view (according to polls) of NATO.
Regarding the EU it is apparent that the same three leaders are agreed now to get Ukraine better organized to give credibility to its ultimate political objective of EU membership. The past has all too often seen an embarrassing disconnect between the lofty rhetoric of presidential speeches and the poor capacity of the administration to follow through. This could now be on the mend, with Timoshenko’s appointment of Hryhory Nemyria as deputy prime minister responsible for overseeing EU integration. Nemyria has excellent knowledge of European Union affairs, which is spread very thinly still in Kiev. The next step will have to be the creation of a central coordinating office for European integration, that will have to be strong both in professional competence of its staff and in its institutional place in the government.
The European Union must respond in as substantial manner as possible. Fortunately next steps are already traced out for negotiation of a new ‘Enhanced Agreement’ incorporating a deep free trade agreement. This future Treaty can be comprehensive in coverage - political, economic, and security affairs. The ‘membership perspective’ question is still controversial within the EU, but language must be found to sustain Ukraine’s political strategy in the short-run, while the ultimate perspectives for Ukraine could be transformed by a credible performance by the new government. Tuomas Ilves, President of Estonia constantly reminds us of his country’s experience of the EU’s initially negative position on Estonian accession. His message is ‘don’t take no for an answer, for the answer will change’.
The EU and Ukraine must also work together urgently to improve Ukraine’s energy security drastically. Russia in the recent past has been moving very fast to eliminate its dependence on Ukraine as a transit country for its gas exports to the EU. There is already the Blue Stream pipe across the Black Sea to Turkey, the planned Nord Stream in the Baltic, and now the new South Stream from the Black Sea up the Balkans. While this will make Russia independent of Ukraine, it will at the same time make Ukraine more dependent on Russia. All this is a deplorable development, economically since it involves wasteful investments, and politically since it is installing a regime of monopolistic realpolitik instead one of mutually beneficial interdependence based of the rule of international law (such as the Transit Protocol of the Energy Charter Treaty, which Gazprom refused). In this situation what should Ukraine do? Actually it has significant gas supplies of its own, and the enormously wasteful use of energy in Ukraine provides an opportunity to reduce substantially the need for net imports. The EU should work with Ukraine in support of energy saving and alternative supply routes from across the Black Sea.
