According to https://en.delfi.lt, the Seimas (Lithuanian Parliament) recently heard and approved a Marshall Plan for Ukraine, specifically a 10-year loan of 50 billion euros as aid to small and middle-sized businesses. They expect this project to be adopted by the Eastern Partnership summit scheduled for November 24 this year in Brussels.
The project was initiated by Lithuania’s ex-foreign minister Andrius Kubilius. Among those present during the launch of the plan in parliaments were Eastern Partnership ambassadors, including the current Foreign Minister, Linas Linkevicius. He said that Ukraine needed their Marshall Plan badly, that under the circumstances time wasn’t its ally. “It is very important for us to make sure that what aid we supply to Ukraine proves effective; that the donors [invest freely] pay willingly without being scared of the red tape and corruption that still exist there,” he stressed.
According to VOA, the original Marshall Plan was launched in 1947 by US Secretary of State George Marshall, and was designed to revive Europe after the Second World War. Under that project, the US donated 13 billion dollars (some 140 billion dollars as per current exchange rate) to Europe’s economies.
UKRAINE NEEDS HARD CASH
Hanna HOPKO, MP, Chairperson, Verkhovna Rada Foreign Affairs Committee:
“We must thank our Lithuanian friends for attracting the attention of the West to the problem of finding further support for Ukraine, the importance of finding the instruments that will help the Ukrainian administration and opposition combine efforts to continue reform and implement the important bills [passed by the Ukrainian parliament]; also by discussing this initiative in resolving the existing pressing problems, among them corruption, business being pressured by various law-enforcement agencies, and a very low institutional capacity to implement the loans received from European financial institutions.
“Lithuanians are right when they say that [what we actually need] is hard cash, in addition to microfinancial stability, using IMF loans; we need it to secure those economic sectors that will help us increase our GDP by more than 4-7 percent, in or order to step over our poverty threshold, resist the mounting populist trend, and prevent any pro-Russian revanchist or populist outbursts from happening in 2019.
“The Ukrainian side must do its homework; we should have long established a platform with government and Verkhovna Rada officials, with analysts, in order to work out the main doctrine: What this country is all about, what it wants, especially when considering that some of our businesses are rivals to their European counterparts. It is very important to show our vision of economic growth.
“Lithuanians have made estimates, considering the infrastructural gap between Ukraine and its closest neighbors and EU members, such as Poland and Hungary. We can clearly see that our infrastructure needs investments numbering billions of euros.
“Take our small and middle-sized businesses. These people get UAH loans from commercial banks at 20 percent. If they could get them at 5-7 percent interest, we would have top-notch entrepreneurs who would launch their startups and other businesses because they wouldn’t have to pay so much. Or take the energy efficiency fund… It has potential, especially for investors in terms of high-cost projects and initiatives. If any resident of Kyiv could ride on board an express train that would get him to Odesa in two hours, this trip would make headlines and the whole project would pay for itself before long. I mean that there are a number of projects that could benefit Ukraine and companies in the West.
“Lithuanians are saying loudly and clearly that the IMF loans we have received will suffice only for microfinancial stability. In 2015, Ukraine’s hard currency reserve amounted to 5.6 billion dollars and that in 2017 it amounts to some 18 billion dollars. All this money has been received in order to stabilize the banking sector – in other words, to replenish our reserve. However, this doesn’t benefit small or middle-sized businesses, so the Lithuanians propose a philosophy. They refer to the Marshall Plan or its historical analog, considering that this plan helped Europe meet the challenges of the communism, Stalinism, other authoritarian ideologies, and proved helpful for the populace after WW II. Americans were also interested in Europe’s progress.
“Lithuanians are telling us that Ukraine can combat Russia’s aggression by raising our living standard, by showing economic growth. Surrounded by countries ruled by law and with people living well, the Putin regime will inevitably have to answer questions posed by Russians: Why hasn’t anything changed for the better for us?
“There are many who criticize the slow rate of reforms in Ukraine. Be that as it may, this country must be closely watched and supported in every way, including all high VAT sectors that can secure progress and stability. Such is their philosophy. They say Ukraine could receive this aid if it had a supervisory board, to make sure that this money isn’t stolen, and that our parliament and government should work out the procedures, because this is our business, not Lithuanian.”
