Kyiv has recently been visited simultaneously by delegations from the German Bundestag and US Congress. These visits would have probably been immediately forgotten if conditions in Ukraine had been different. But in the current situation, when the question is about a crisis and sellout of Ukraine to Russia, both visits look — and apparently are — extremely important signals from the West. After all, it is hardly accidental that the two visits coincided. Come what may, they clearly showed what, not whom, the West supports. Especially taking into account that the German delegation visited Kyiv hard on the heels of a threesome from the European Union.
“We had many consultations with foreign ministry experts about whether it is appropriate to go to Ukraine now,” Hans-Ulrich Klose, chairman of the Bundestag foreign policy committee and leader of the German parliamentary delegation, admitted to The Day . “But we decided we must pay this visit right now.” Approximately the same was said by the US Congress delegation. The fact still remains: although the existence of the Ukrainian domestic political crisis is obvious to foreign lawmakers and diplomats (“sort of a crisis,” Herr Klose told The Day), Ukraine at least has not found itself in isolation. “The visit of our delegation can confirm our vital interest in the existence of a stable, independent, and democratic Ukraine,” said Klose. “We see it is still far from the goal that has been set, but you must go forward in spite of difficulties,” he told the meeting of politicians and experts organized by the Atlantic Council of Ukraine.
The German lawmakers refrained from assessing what they heard and saw, speaking to the president, minister of foreign affairs, and Verkhovna Rada leadership. “We are no arbiters. The problems must be solved by Ukrainian politicians,” they said.
Mr. Klose told The Day, the delegations regarded all branches of government in Ukrainian as a single entity and the opposition as a component part of the legislative branch. What surprised the Germans much more than the scandals were placards in the session hall. As to the cassette scandal, Mr. Klose noted only that he heard several versions, including one about its foreign roots. There were no conclusions, only diplomacy. In general, the visits of both delegations did not seem to be at a critical time. On the contrary, the words of the Bundestag delegation members were supposed to confirm that we are at last beginning a normal exchange of delegations and experience, and to study the opportunities, as if to confirm the German political scientist Rahr’s claim that Ukraine’s problems will not affect its relations with the West (see interview on page 3).
Obviously, the statement of Minister of Foreign Affairs Anatoly Zlenko, “Under no circumstances will Ukraine eschew its course toward European integration,” was taken positively. The German delegation leader noted that “we welcome the European perspective of Ukrainian foreign policy” and said Germany could render assistance to adjust Ukraine’s economic policy to EU requirements. Both the experts and the German parliament members are satisfied with the normalization of Ukrainian-Russian and Ukrainian- Polish relations. They also noted other positive points in Ukraine, such as agricultural progress, the development of some industries, and initial improvements in the energy sector. There was also criticism, but it was hardly the kind of opposition one might expect if Ukraine was treated the way Belarus or Milosevic’s Yugoslavia was. For instance, they expressed concern over the Gongadze case investigation but still refrained from any appraisals of governmental actions and from any attempts to put pressure on anyone or interfere in the internal affairs of this country. The deserved criticism will indeed not jeopardize the course toward European integration launched, incidentally, by forces other than the opposition.
However, the Germans, who welcome Ukraine’s striving for European integration, which they do not seem to doubt, and keep reiterating their support for European Union expansion, are very reserved about the real prospects of Ukrainian integration. While earlier this question was summarized in the phrase, “You must first fulfill the provisions of the already existing documents,” now we can hear the words, “no need to rush.”
The advantage of such parliamentary visits is that delegations have a chance to confer with more than one branch of government and thus have a broader idea of what is really going on in the country. The problem of Ukrainian parliamentary delegations is that their members very often take the diametrically opposed viewpoints, which neither the Germans, Americans, Japanese, Poles, nor Bulgarians ever demonstrate.
Ukraine, as an integral independent state, has in this case the advantage of having received a signal of support from two influential Western countries and having a chance to build a real partnership with each of them. It is also obvious that these two visits provided a chance for the Western media to somewhat change the tone of their publications. If, of course, Ukraine makes use of this chance.
