“The European Union and Ukraine can hear each other better now,” Ukrainian Foreign Minister Anatoly Zlenko said in an interview. To hear better means to understand better, which represents perhaps some progress. Especially remembering the situation last year when the leaders of EU member states simply did not want to talk to Ukraine’s leadership, when the relations looked more like mild diplomatic isolation than partnership proclaimed in the 1994 [EU-Ukraine] agreement.
The questions of whether Ukraine really wants European integration and if it is really important to the EU, which were put in the book The EU-Ukraine: Neighbors, Friends, Partners? published by the Britain’s Federal Trust were answered by very influential authors, among them, in particular, Minister Zlenko, EU Council Secretary General Javier Solana, and other prominent international experts. Both questions were answered in the affirmative, albeit with some nuances. This really means that the sides are beginning to listen to each other, apparently being aware that in any future circumstances neither will benefit from distancing themselves. And the fact that the book is addressed primarily to those who are involved in policy and decision-making confirms Zlenko’s conclusion.
But Ukraine is constantly reminded that if it wants its declarations to be taken seriously, it has to make its words work in terms of concrete policy. Otherwise, the question how seriously Ukraine intends to integrate with Europe will simply not arise. The issue continues to be about the same things: democracy, favorable business environment, freedom of the press, now fair elections, structural transformations in every sphere, responsibility, and so on. And all these are only one side of the coin.
Representatives of the West say openly that from the very beginning Ukraine with its situation and its problems simply has not been understood. Now they already say and write that the TACIS program is not effective, that the EU Common Strategy for Ukraine is abstract, that someone is satisfied with Ukraine remaining a buffer zone between the European Union and Russia or a country within Russia’s sphere of influence. Tomorrow it may well be admitted that Ukraine has been treated inadequately not only by the European Commission and other EU bodies, but the EBRD as well. That the policy of tightening the border regime for Ukrainian citizens instead of working out mutually acceptable solutions has brought about no result whatever. Finally, that the European Union, even overburdened with its own expansion problems, should go from declarations over to concrete steps toward eliminating the existing gray zones in Europe.
The publication of the book and the most recent changes in Brussels can mean that the West is ready to accept views other than its own and to realize that Europe is more than its fifteen member states. Building an autobahn is not on the agenda so far, but at least a normal two-way street would be a good result. There are very clear signals at the same time that, first, any result will be solely in response to Ukraine’s moves; secondly, one shouldn’t expect too much and, thirdly, no one is going to solve Ukraine’s its problems for it.
