Great Britain is an old Western European country that has consistently supported Ukraine in its effort aimed at integrating into Euro- Atlantic structures. London favored granting Ukraine the Membership Action Plan at the Bucharest summit on April 2-4. How does Great Britain feel about NATO’s postponement of its decision on MAP for Ukraine? What makes a country which is farther from Ukraine than Germany or France be more “pro-Ukrainian” on this issue and believe that democratic reforms will lead Ukraine to the heart of Europe? Is the Ukrainian government showing a systematic, consistent approach to European integration? How can the withdrawal of Ukraine’s peacekeeping contingent from Kosovo affect Ukraine’s international image as a founder of the United Nations? Below these and other issues are broached in an interview with Her Majesty’s Charge d’Affaires Martin HARRIS.
Mr. Harris, what do you think the Bucharest summit’s decision means for Ukraine?
The outcome for Ukraine at Bucharest was a positive one. For the first time Allies gave a clear commitment that Ukraine will become a member of NATO. Allies supported Ukraine’s application for MAP. The work starts now to bring Ukraine into the MAP process.
Were the arguments of the countries that found Ukraine unprepared for MAP in Bucharest really substantiated?
All NATO countries expressed their support for MAP. The next step is a period of intensive work between now and the December Ministerial to prepare for the decision. We hope Ukraine will be able to demonstrate progress in many areas on its agenda of cooperation with NATO. And we hope to see Ukraine’s leaders do more to explain to the public what MAP is and why NATO membership is good for Ukraine. As a modern European democracy is established the old ways of thinking — including outdated perceptions of NATO — will fall away. Every day, in a myriad of ways, Ukraine is drawing closer to the rest of Europe. MAP will be a major undertaking which will accelerate this process with far reaching reforms in the economic, social and security sectors. That’s in Ukraine’s interest and in NATO’s.
Don’t you think that the Russia factor was at play when these countries took their stand in regard to MAP for Ukraine at this stage, particularly that Berlin, Paris, and Amsterdam didn’t want to irritate Russia by granting MAP to Ukraine?
The question of MAP is one for Ukraine and for NATO. Russia has made its concerns known, but Ukraine is an independent country and its application needs to be treated on its merits.
What makes your country, which is farther from Ukraine than Germany or France be more “pro-Ukrainian” on this issue?
I wouldn’t see it in those terms. There was a clear single vision at Bucharest — all Allies want to see Ukraine become a member of NATO. And on the EU, all member states are keenly interested in Ukraine’s success. The French President has brought new creative thinking to the EU’s relations with Ukraine. That is a very welcome initiative which I hope will bear fruit at the EU-Ukraine summit later this year.
Her Majesty’s Ambassador to Ukraine Timothy Barrow said in an interview with The Day that Ukraine’s relations with the EU will be determined by progress in terms of reform. What does Great Britain think of Ukraine’s European integration effort now? Do you see a systematic and consistent approach on the part of the Ukrainian government?
I see a developing consensus in favor of Ukraine’s European integration that spans the regions, the generations, the parties of Ukraine. It was that consensus which delivered Ukraine’s most important achievement in economic reform in recent years — completing negotiations on accession to the WTO. This was a major step in relations with the EU, since we have now been able to start negotiations on a comprehensive Free Trade Agreement. I hope that the Verkhovna Rada will be able to ratify the WTO Accession Protocol in the coming weeks.
Is there anything else Ukraine should do to receive a greater degree of support from EU countries in implementing its European integration aspirations?
The main challenge is to consolidate the huge gains Ukraine has made in the last three years in democratic reform. The free and fair conduct of parliamentary elections was a big achievement. But Ukraine must not be sanguine. It needs to press ahead with reforms to the electoral list, to develop strong democratic political parties, to strengthen local government and to increase the debate and incisiveness of its genuinely free media. The other key issue is corruption. This really holds Ukraine back. We need to see real determination — in society as well as in politics — to root corruption out.
There is a bill on the withdrawal of the Ukrainian peacekeeping contingent from Kosovo. How does Ukraine benefit from participating in peacekeeping missions and what do you think Ukraine will stand to lose, as a founder of the United Nations, by withdrawing from Kosovo? How will this affect its international image?
I understand shock in Ukraine caused by the death of Senior Lieutenant Ihor Kinal. It was a big shock for people in Britain too. And it redoubled our determination to work with our partners including Ukraine to bring peace and stability to Kosovo. Ukraine and its armed forces are admired world over for their contribution to peacekeeping operation. As we in Britain know only too well these missions are always difficult and often dangerous but they are our collective responsibility and I am sure that Ukraine will continue to join us in shouldering it.
Have you noticed any improvement in the investment climate after Yulia Tymoshenko’s government came to power?
The Government has just marked the first 100 days. There have been important achievements. I’ve mentioned the first of those — completing negotiations to join the WTO. This will be a big boost to Ukrainian business abroad and to investors looking to do business in Ukraine. But there’s still a lot to do, especially in legal reform so that investors have confidence that their rights will be upheld in Ukraine’s courts. I hope the President and Prime Minister can join forces in making a big push on this in 2008.
How do you estimate the democratic process in Ukraine? Isn’t there too much democracy which a number of Ukrainians and their northern and eastern neighbors describe as anarchy and chaos compared to the situation in Belarus and Russia?
Winston Churchill famously commented that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. It took centuries for the UK to develop its system of parliamentary democracy. I am hugely impressed by what Ukraine has achieved in the 16 years since independence. It is no surprise that this process is complex and difficult, but it is taking Ukraine to where it should rightfully be in the heart of Europe.
