Are there any grounds for ‘Europessimism?” This was the main question of a roundtable held at The Day ’s editorial office with the participation of Borys TARASIUK, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine; Ian BOAG, head of the European Commission Delegation to Ukraine; Oleksandr CHALY, former deputy foreign minister for European integration; and Andriy KURKOV, a writer who is well known in EU countries.
(Conclusion. For Part One, see the previous issue)
“Does Ukraine have sufficient resources to move toward European integration without outside monitoring and control?”
Andriy KURKOV:
“We have had a very consistent foreign policy and a very inconsistent domestic one. Unfortunately, this tradition still stands. Now everyone in Ukraine, from the Carpathians to Luhansk oblast, knows about the goals we have set ourselves but nobody really knows about the pluses and minuses of EU membership. Domestic policies have been practically thrown at the mercy of regional, rather than central, political forces. This problem generally hinders the state from being regarded as a certain geopolitical unity. So there should be a consistent domestic policy.
I am not talking about joining the EU: we should at least muster the strength to achieve European living standards — from Donetsk to Bukovyna. This will in fact mean movement toward the EU. If we are unable to explain to people from Donetsk why they must love Europe, we should not expect them to demonstrate any political activity or accept the very idea of Ukraine’s Europeanness. It is easier for Turkey in this respect: the majority of its population is simply obedient. Conversely, our democracy is more deeply rooted, so we are disobedient. But we must unite our country around national, not ethnic, interests, so that everyone will think about the entire country, not their region alone.”
Oleksandr CHALY:
“Indeed, we should carry out European integration from the inside, proceeding from our interests. Look: last year’s two crucial decisions — to privatize Kryvorizhstal and settle the gas row with Russia — were made in a totally Eurasian way. Arselor, Europe’s largest and well-respected company, wanted to acquire Kryvorizhstal. We had a genuine European integration project. However, we finally opted for Mittal Steel, a Eurasian rather than European company. And how did we tackle the gas problem?-in a purely Byzantine, Eurasian manner. To this day nobody understands what we signed. This is not the way important problems are solved in Europe. So it is imperative that we speed up our domestic — cultural, economic, and bureaucratic — transformation.”
Borys TARASIUK:
“You say that problems cannot be solved this way in Europe. They can. Do you remember the Gerhard Schroeder story? (The German ex- chancellor signed a contract with Russia on the construction of a gas pipeline under the Baltic Sea, which raised a public outcry in Poland and the Baltic states. Then, after resigning as Germany’s leader, Schroeder took over as head of the shareholders’ committee at the company that operates the North-European Pipeline — Ed.). If you are calling for dealing with Russia in the European way, then why should this not apply to Germany? It was not the president or the prime minister who signed an economic contract on gas supplies. And nobody can say that the president or the premier have a personal financial interest in this contract.”
“So is there internal potential? Yes. I’ll try to prove this by way of figures. First, public opinion polls that have been conducted in Ukraine over many years show a stable tendency: most Ukrainians favor EU membership. Secondly, the Verkhovna Rada held a hearing in October 2002 and passed a resolution by 336 votes, i.e., more than the constitutional majority of parliamentarians. This means that there is a constitutional majority in parliament that favors European Union membership.”
“Do you think we should trust the moods of the Verkhovna Rada? Are they that ‘stable’?”
Borys TARASIUK:
“I am not talking about the present-day Verkhovna Rada that is brimming with emotions. Look at the way it is done abroad. Polls in Austria show that 55 percent of Austrians are for Ukraine’s EU membership. There is approximately the same percentage of support in six other EU countries.
Now let us recall the Orange Revolution. Did its participants not protest against Byzantine methods of public administration? Did they not clamor for the observance of human rights, democracy, and European standards in Ukraine? Were there no European Union flags on Independence Square? I remember that when I told the Maidan protesters that the EU countries were welcoming the Orange Revolution, hundreds of thousands of people applauded. This proves that there are forces in Ukraine interested in European integration. These are, above all, young people, our future.
Ukraine’s political elite should lead society, not trail behind it: for instance, in the early 1990s all political forces in the Central European countries, right and left alike, reached a consensus that their states must head for the EU and NATO. They have already achieved this goal. This country, however, is still debating, and everyone is seeking political advantage. A considerable number of Ukrainian politicians are still waiting for praise from an eastern capital.”
“Perhaps European Commission Vice-President Guenter Verheugen made this statement only because he came to the conclusion that Ukrainian politicians will never reach an understanding. You cannot achieve integration by debate alone. Maybe Verheugen is a farsighted person?”
Oleksandr CHALY:
“The Ukrainian people are a European people. We are children of the Euro-Atlantic civilization. It is in our blood. People should not humiliate us by saying that we are going to Europe because the EU is also going to integrate with us. But does the elite have the right to lead the people nowhere? Does the elite have the right to claim that it is leading the people to EU membership when it is crystal clear that we are not ‘up for this’ in the next 20 years? Verheugen has come under scathing criticism here, but all he is doing is defending the European Union’s identity. He is aware that they are unable to deal with more members lest they fall apart. The EU is facing a very serious structural crisis that will take at least 10 years to overcome. We must honestly tell our people that European integration does not necessarily mean membership. You are right, Mr. Tarasiuk: 50-60 percent favors EU membership, but at the same time they do not object to being in the Single Economic Space.”
Borys TARASIUK:
“Which doesn’t exist.”
Oleksandr CHALY:
“I realize that, but we should not set unrealistic goals — especially to mobilize people. We can keep the idea of membership on the agenda, but why should we make it the main objective? It involves too much responsibility to lead the people to an unattainable goal, especially with such a neighbor as Russia.”
“Does this mean that Ukraine must drop the idea of membership as a political slogan in order not to irritate Russia?”
Ian BOAG:
“The European Union has always stressed that relations between Ukraine and Russia and between Ukraine and the European Union is not a zero-sum game. In other words, if Ukraine has established a good relationship with the European Union, this does not mean that it should have bad relations with Russia. We have always believed that Ukraine should develop cooperation with both of its great neighbors — the EU and Russia.
Yet at a certain stage of development there comes a point, when the same relationship becomes impossible. In particular, this is about a free trade area in Ukraine. We have already begun informal consultations on this matter. But a free trade area will be impossible if Ukraine forges a customs union within the SES framework. In that case these entities will just be incompatible. We are not saying that you must maintain good relations with some and bad ones with others. But there comes a time when you have to make a choice.
“I would also like to note that accession to the EU will not put an end to the ‘Eurodebates.’ For example, in 1975 I voted in the referendum that brought the UK to the EU. But this was not the end of disputes because the European Union is continuing to develop quickly. Therefore, no matter what future Ukraine chooses for itself, the discussion of all problems must go on. President Yushchenko was right in saying that Ukraine should carry out reforms not to please the EU but to bring about positive changes in the state itself.”
“Indeed, there are times when one must make a choice. You cannot always be liked by the EU and Russia at the same time. Yet Ukrainian politicians do not seem to be ready to make unambiguous decisions but prefer to go with the flow. Are we at least going to do something?”
Oleksandr CHALY:
“Life will force us. Ukraine has found itself between two customs unions, which is the main challenge for our economy in the next 20 years. Mr. Ambassador said, ‘You should choose,’ but other countries’ experience of European integration shows that all those on whom the EU imposed the dilemma of choice immediately obtained the prospect of membership. But in our case the EU wants us to choose it without promising us anything. Can Ukraine cope with this? We have not yet made a clear-cut decision about a free trade area. We should opt for the Swiss economic model: sectoral cooperation and sectoral integration, provided there is a common area of free trade with all neighbors. If it is of benefit to us, we will integrate an industry into the EU. If not, we must refuse. If we have serious reasons to integrate with Russia in the missile and space sector, we should work with it. We must care about our national interests.”
“Will the new parliament be able to form a cabinet that will pursue this kind of policy? Are there any chances of a stable coalition?”
Oleksandr CHALY:
“I was recently in Hungary. The latest poll revealed Hungarians’ great disappointment with EU membership. We should not picture the EU as paradise or true communism. Although it is not our fault, we have no prospects of EU membership and so we must come up with a somewhat different concept of European integration. I suggested to Mr. Tarasiuk that we apply for membership right after the Orange Revolution. At that time we had a chance to get support against the backdrop of public, non-bureaucratic, sympathy in Europe. The bureaucrats in Brussels have never supported us. Those who have been supporting us are students, the European Union’s civil society, and the European Parliament. We had a chance. We were ‘lulled into sleep:’ implement the Action Plan and then we’ll see. Now it is clear that the bus has gone. We must work with European civil society. A sound-minded European cannot possibly understand why Turkey stands a chance for EU membership but Ukraine does not.”
“The previous leadership’s foreign policy was also aimed at the EU, but the domestic policy often discredited this very goal. Do you think that if we fail to achieve tangible results in the economy, the proclaimed slogans will be finally devalued? Those who are disappointed with the Orange Revolution — for whom will they vote? The United States recently granted Ukraine market economy status. This is, above all, a political signal, as is Mr. Verheugen’s statement. What is more, it sounded just on the eve of the elections.”
Borys TARASIUK:
“I think the awarding of market economy status is not a political signal but recognition of the economic results that the Ukrainian government has achieved over the past year. I must still say in the spirit of self-criticism that this process dragged on too long. We could have obtained this status last year. It can be interpreted as a political signal, but it is still recognition of Ukraine as a market economy. Incidentally, the European Union granted us the same status one and a half months earlier.
“Is the European Union sure of the future foreign policy? Will a stable coalition be formed? I can confirm on the basis of my personal contacts that the European Union is increasingly worried over the situation in Ukraine after the elections. What really matters to the EU is that the elections should be fair and democratic, not who wins. In this respect, it depends on both the government and the Ukrainian people whether we finally put an end to foreign debates on Ukraine’s identity. If the elections are fair and the results reflect the viewpoint of the Ukrainian people, this will mean that we have finally done away with our post-Soviet past and that we have every reason to say that we are a European people not only in our consciousness.
“Will there be a coalition? I dare say there will be a majority in the Verkhovna Rada, which will form the cabinet and adhere to European values. This coalition will have European integration as its goal.”
