Over a month ago Ukraine agreed to suspend supplies of heavy weapons to Macedonia for the duration of peace talks. Almost a month has elapsed since a peaceful settlement plan was signed in the Macedonian city of Ohrid, along with it half the term in which NATO promised to disarm the Albanian extremists in Macedonia. Meanwhile there has been nothing from Ukraine to indicate that it thinks it high time the US and EU lifted their undeclared embargo on Kyiv, banning weapons deliveries for the Macedonian government.
The Day learned from competent sources that Skopje is looking for a different partner in the sphere of military-technological cooperation. Simultaneously, Ukraine could be levied penalties for its non-fulfillment of contracts signed. Kyiv is actually threatened by a triple fiasco. First, currently idle Ukrainian military manufacturers could lose billions of dollars in revenues. Second, the Ukrainian side could face penalties. Third and most importantly, Kyiv could be labeled as an unreliable business partner, and it will be quite some time before it removes that label.
Ukrainian authorities advised Macedonia of suspended weapons supplies just as US National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice was visiting Kyiv. In fact, she did not have to pull any heavy levers, as the Ukrainian leadership, badly shaken by the political crisis, was prepared to make any concessions to regain US confidence. And it hardly stands to reason to accuse Washington of treachery or undue pressure. By contrast, it was the clumsiness of Ukrainian diplomacy that was glaringly obvious. From the outset, none of the diplomatic officers concerned fully realized what Ukraine’s going back on its commitments toward Macedonia actually meant. The key words “heavy weapons” and “for the duration of peace talks” seem to have been used in Ukraine’s official documents not so much with understanding as perforce. Not surprisingly, some US diplomats already mention in private conversations Ukraine’s suspended deliveries not for the duration of peace talks, but in general until the conflict is somehow settled. Also not surprisingly, some of these diplomats are chagrined even by hints from the Ukrainian side at resuming military-technological cooperation with Macedonia. As for the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry’s vague statements concerning the prospects of such cooperation, they are something even the most clueless diplomat would wince at. When asked when we are going to resume supplies, they call it a matter of time.
Macedonian officials remain silent and Ukraine naively believes that Skopje is showing understanding. Perhaps they once did, except that such understanding is as forced as is our stand in the matter. In late April, in an interview with Ukrainian television, Macedonian Ambassador Vlado Blazevski voiced his government’s concern over the possibility of stopping shipments from Ukraine. He stressed that the situation in Kosovo must be regulated in the first place, because terrorists penetrate Macedonia precisely from that territory. Skopje’s opinion changed quickly, almost a week later. Characteristically, it happened during EU Secretary General Javier Solana’s visit, together with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Anatoly Zlenko. Mr. Solana must have explained the situation to his colleagues without mincing words.
The greatest paradox is that Kyiv has failed in similar situations. We do not know how to learn from our mistakes. Does Ukraine need another Bushehr? After Ukraine bungled a good contract with Iran, Washington promised help. Some help, comparing several thousand to millions of dollars.
With Macedonia, the situation looks even more absurd. No one is promising anything, only asking.
