Media had a field day commenting on Russia’s Speaker Sergei Naryshkin’s official visit to Kyiv, focusing on Ukraine’s domestic political struggle aggravated by pressure from Moscow. Naryshkin had hardly set foot on Ukrainian soil, Monday morning, when the Ukrainian news agencies carried his statement to the effect that Russia and Ukraine would simultaneously ratify a free trade agreement CIS FTA), considering that the final arrangements had been made. One hour later, Naryshkin’s peremptory statement (that had shocked quite a few in Ukraine) was refuted by official Kyiv. MP Oleksandr Yefremov, head of the Party of Regions faction, declared: “We aren’t prepared today to implement the existing document,” reports UNIAN. Yefremov went on to say that Ukrainian and Russian experts are still working on this document: “If and when the wording becomes understandable [acceptable] to us, we will be prepared to implement it anytime. At the moment, work on it is still underway.” This statement was meant to cool down the Russian MP.
In view of Ukraine’s dramatic domestic political situation, Naryshkin’s statement could be regarded as this country’s knockdown. Although experts – particularly those asked for comment by The Day – insist that the CIS FTA poses no global geopolitical threat to Ukraine, that what really matters is its context, whether it implies free trade as well as information area. Ukraine does have a free information area. In this sense, implementing this document could be the beginning of the end for Ukraine. The promised 10 percent gas price discount – as Moscow’s concession to Kyiv – perfectly fits into this process of digesting Ukraine. Also, the possibility of Ukraine’s withdrawal from the IMF may well reduce Ukraine to a status when it will enter Russia’s space without even making a formal alliance.
There is no sense in discussing the humanitarian sphere, considering the current Ukrainian administration’s childish fear of marking the 1,160th anniversary of Ukrainian statehood. Russia, meanwhile, has declared its intention of celebrating its 1,150th anniversary. Even though Minister of Education Dmytro Tabachnyk insists the Ukrainian schoolchildren have never been denied history lessons, his ministry’s activities are another major threat to Ukraine.
Add here the debate at the Russian embassy in Kyiv (February 17) when Russia’s intellectuals echoed their Ukrainophobic counterparts. This is further proof of what is being done to destroy the Ukrainian state. Apparently, the foundations are being laid for both Russia and Ukraine’s presidential elections. There is no doubt about the outcome of Russia’s presidential race ending on March 4, just as there is no doubt about it boding evil days for Ukraine.
The Day asked its experts for comment on what would happen if and when Ukraine ratified the CIS FTA simultaneously with the CIS member countries, as alleged by the Russian Speaker.
Anton FILIPENKO, president, Ukrainian Association of International Economics:
“This would be a sequel to the war that has begun. Of course, there is some bargaining underway, considering that the FTA was quickly signed, without the text being coordinated [by Moscow and Kyiv] or studied by experts and members of the Ukrainian parliament. That was a typical Soviet approach, one being practiced by our old guard. Now that Russia faces the presidential elections, with the cheese war raging, I believe that Yefremov was right when he said that Ukraine isn’t prepared [to implement the CIS FTA] and that there will be some bargaining. Otherwise the whole affair is part of the post-Soviet syndrome, including Russia’s imperial ambitions and Ukraine’s inferiority complex. To quote from our classical [politician, Leonid Kravchuk, the first president of Ukraine], ‘We have what we have.’
“I believe that Muntiyan will make every effort to soft-pedal the whole affair. The [CIS] FTA was signed on one level, now this agreement has to be approved on another one, at the Verkhovna Rada. Let’s wait and see what its committees and experts will have to say.
“I was denied an opportunity to read its text after the media reported the fact of its having been signed. I was told the wording wasn’t final, that they were still working on it.
“Summing up, I would like to state that this case reflects the ambiguity of Ukraine’s foreign policy, its inefficiency, the absence of corporate behavior. Russia wants to start a zero sum game. Ukraine wants to play this game its own way. Under the circumstances, none of the players stands a chance of receiving dividends.
“Some believe Ukraine can gradually enter the [CIS] Customs Union. Ukraine could probably adopt the 3+1 formula, simply because there is no way to reject the post-Soviet space. There is that gravitational concept; there are two players drawing us into their game. Last year, Ukraine-CIS commodity turnover was 40 percent, and Ukraine-EU turnover amounted to less than 30 percent, compared to the overall indices. Russia proves to be Ukraine’s number one foreign trade partner.
“Does the current Ukrainian administration realize that getting European spells deeds rather than words? One starts having doubts at a certain stage. There is all that rhetoric, including a separate law providing for association and an all-embracing EU FTA. However, there is little doubt that certain persons ‘upstairs’ aren’t interested in Ukraine becoming another European country. For them it’s best to receive 400-500 percent profit, even if the rest of the people get a mere 17 percent in nominal terms – as was the case last year. Not all in Ukraine want the European standards instituted, including transparency and other [democratic] principles, because the techniques they used at the start of the privatization and independence campaigns suit them best. Nevertheless, I believe that the critical mass of scholars, politicians, and ordinary people in Ukraine will finally make it clear that Ukraine’s only road leads to the West, even if all those ‘upstairs’ keep pondering something, saying something else, and doing something different altogether.”
Ihor BURAKOVSKY, director, Institute for Economic Research and Policy Consulting:
“This is actually another attempt to sign the CIS FTA and thus implement the arrangements made back in 1994. A closer look at its clauses shows that free trade among the CIS countries is the key point. This is doubtlessly good for Ukraine. There are other matters to be considered, too. FTA terms and conditions actually read status quo for the Ukrainian exporters on the Russian market, ditto Russian exporters on the Ukrainian market. All things considered, this agreement doesn’t lower the risk of trade conflicts, considering that the situation during such trade contacts can take a sudden turn. It is safe to assume that the signing of this agreement will make the [CIS] Customs Union observe the free trade clauses in doing business with Ukraine. This is the good aspect. On the other hand, the Ukrainian producers and manufacturers will have to rely on their own resources to keep these procedures implemented – depending on the manner in which the Ukrainian administration will use this instrument in its relationships with Russia.
“Some are afraid that the ratification of this agreement will be another step in the direction of Ukraine’s [CIS] Customs Union membership. Signing a free trade agreement is standard business practice across the world. As a rule, this agreement doesn’t provide for the contracting parties’ institutional rapprochement. Customs Union and FTA would mean another rung up the regional integration ladder, although this option doesn’t directly envisage the establishment of a customs union. Rather, it is a certain cooperation phase, without a rigid coordination of the economic policy.
“I’m hard put to comment on the gas price cut and its being allegedly related to [Ukraine’s] ratification of the CIS FTA, considering that the 10 percent discount was what Gazprom’s East European partners achieved, on the average. In other words, this 10 percent discount could be a concession to Ukraine, but within the boundaries of Gazprom’s policy.”
