In the month after the National Security and Defense Council decided to work out a strategy aimed at joining the collective security system based on NATO one can see a certain evolution in the statements and evaluations from representatives of both Ukraine and the West: they are becoming more concrete on both sides. Ukraine seems to be gradually proving its seriousness of intent: the national security strategy, one of whose chapters is dedicated to Euro-Atlantic integration, is soon to be confirmed by a presidential order (this is planned before the Ukraine-NATO summit on July 9). Western experts in turn are becoming more concrete in their evaluations, the impression is that all this will have a political effect as well, and NATO’s Secretary General Lord Robertson during his visit to Ukraine will be able to express a united position of all the nineteen NATO member states. Experts call for being realistic and not expecting an immediate political response; however, if the answer were negative, it would have already been given in one form or another.
The evolution in statements by Ukraine’s leadership consists in openly speaking about step-by-step entering NATO and about this being a process parallel to Ukraine’s general course toward European integration, which does not contradict it and should not be considered separately. Recently this was stated by NSDC Deputy Secretary and Director of the Institute for International Security Problems Serhiy Pyrozhkov at the Challenges for Ukraine and the Region after the Events of 11 September international seminar organized by the National Institute for Strategic Research and the Conflict Studies Research Center at the Royal Military Academy (Great Britain). “Believe me, if Ukraine moves consistently from declarations to actions, the response from the West will be equal and positive,” says fellow with the Center for Conflict Research Studies James Sherr, NATO consultant for relations with Ukraine and Russia. In his view, “NATO never has and never will rule out membership for Ukraine.”
On the other hand, today nobody speaks of this except as a lengthy and difficult process, in the course of which Ukraine would be evaluated not only in terms of its military reform and security expenses, though without doubt they will be one of determining factors in making a decision.
“NATO is halfway through from a defense union to a security organization.” These words of NATO Secretary General’s political adviser Christopher Donnelly are evidence that, first, the NATO with which Ukraine has signed its Charter on Special Partnership is no longer there, and second, that from now on the concept of security includes elements that previously commanded significantly less attention, meaning that requirements for new candidates will be much stricter.
Also being noted is the fact that Ukraine’s movement toward Euro- Atlantic integration is easily accepted by Moscow, evidently not just because today Russia is radically rethinking its relations with the alliance. In particular, First Deputy Director of the Russian Institute of Strategic Studies Vasily Krivokhizha told The Day on this occasion that if the NSDC’s May 23 decision is in fact firm and well considered, there is no alternative to it. Therefore, both sides seem to realize that this is a question of creating an absolutely new security system, which is deemed to become a part of a new structure of relations in Europe. However, there are many tasks to be solved along the way, and even this would not guarantee a completely favorable environment (Ukrainian diplomatic sources claim that at present literally a couple of NATO members fully support Ukraine’s course toward Euro-Atlantic integration).
COMMENTS
James SHERR, Fellow, Conflict Studies Research Center at the Royal Military Academy:
“In the sphere of cooperation with NATO Ukraine already has moved from declarations to implementation. I do not underestimate the problems of Ukraine’s defense reform; I would also say there are many shortcomings. But there is defense reform in this country; it is no longer virtual but a real thing.
“This is why there have already been on the side of NATO very considerable efforts to help and try to do more. Where Ukraine has not proceeded in moving from declarations to practical changes is in the spheres of interest of the European Union. That concerns the way Ukraine’s economy, society, and political system work.
“When it comes to NATO, Ukraine must continue on the trajectory it’s already on. I do not think that Ukraine’s relations with NATO will be too strongly affected by what was decided on May 23. What matters to NATO is what Ukraine does in the sphere of defense reform, not Ukraine’s declarations and long-term aspirations. What is important for NATO is to create conditions in the country that promote entrepreneurial activity not only by Westerners but by Ukrainians. None of this will be possible until the relationship between the state and society changes and until the state has enough money to ensure that the tillers of a decent society – law enforcement, the judiciary, the armed forces – are able to do their jobs and able to escape from the influence of criminal elements.”
If Ukraine implements all this, will it be invited to NATO?
“NATO at present has too much reality to cope with, and in fact very few people are thinking that far ahead. Therefore I can only repeat my answer: what matters is the direction Ukraine establishes and the degree to which it establishes a correspondence between its words and its actions, what it does in practice.
“In principle, NATO has never and will never rule out membership for Ukraine. The decision will not be based upon the interest of some other country. It will be based solely on the interests of Ukraine and NATO.”
