PARIS — In the aftermath of Ukraine’s new/old political crisis, the European Union is increasingly less enthusiastic about our country, as Brussels becomes more concerned about Kyiv’s Western European choice. Jacek Saryusz-Wolski, who is a member of the European People’s Party and head of this party’s Foreign Affairs Committee, commented: “We don’t know whether this choice embraces the whole range of Ukraine’s political class. Whereas before at least the Orange coalition proclaimed this choice, now that the coalition has collapsed, it looks as though there is no consensus on the Western European choice.” In his opinion, answers to these questions and Ukraine’s European prospects should be sought in Kyiv.
According to Saryusz-Wolski, Ukraine lost four years since the Maidan, as well as the pace of reforms that could have helped the country get closer to Europe. Ukraine also failed to preserve its political consensus. This Polish politician, who was on the Maidan in 2004, advised the Ukrainian government not to repeat Poland’s mistakes but to repeat its successful experience. First of all, Poland, in contrast to Ukraine, lacks consensus on the Western European choice. Second, Ukraine needs reforms that would introduce European standards in the economic, political, and social spheres. But his main message is not to argue about consensus but adopt decisions within a democratic framework if the political forces are unable to agree on these issues.
This member of the European Parliament went on to say that the conduct of the political class in Ukraine is making the mission of our friends in the EU very difficult. Ukraine’s silence during the confrontation between Georgia and Russia was alarming, if not suicidal, in view of the Crimean problem. Saryusz-Wolski added that official Kyiv’s European choice is sparking fear among Ukraine’s friends in the EU. Despite the legitimacy of creating a coalition between the BYuT and the Party of Regions, this is not proof of Ukraine’s European choice. After all, Ukraine’s largest opposition party has declared its support of Russia’s recognition of the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, which is unacceptable to the European Union.
As for our European prospects, Saryusz-Wolski noted that during the Ukraine-EU summit in Paris, chaired by President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, the European Union made a magnanimous gesture toward Ukraine by inviting Kyiv to sign an association agreement. Sarkozy said this agreement does not replace membership but has a symbolic meaning, inasmuch as it confirms Ukraine’s European choice. An official at France’s EU office said later that official Paris had a hard time convincing some of the EU countries to sign this kind of treaty with Ukraine.
The French diplomat added that there was an argument with Germany and the Benelux countries about whether call Ukraine a European country or a European state. It was hard enough to convince them to agree to a clause in the draft stating that “Ukraine is a European country,” which means a territory, not a state. The old countries were afraid to introduce the phrase “European state,” fearing legal consequences for the EU.
Saryusz-Wolski believes that Ukraine must stop asking the European Union for prospects or signals. First, it must carry out reforms and meet European standards in the economic, political, and social spheres. “This has to be done because you are Europeans, not because you have been promised something. Today, the answer to your prospects is not in Paris, Brussels, London, or Rome; it is in Kyiv,” he said, adding that Poland carried out reforms without any membership prospects. His country did this over 14 years, but Ukraine will have to spend a longer time because it will have significantly more work to reform the economy without losing time on a search for consensus.
Reiterating that the European Union is not interested in expansion right now, and there is no question of this before the Lisbon Treaty is ratified, Saryusz-Wolski said that no one doubts that Ukraine is a part of Europe, and that it can use Article 49 of the EU Treaty to ask the European community of nations to accept its membership as a country that has complied with all membership requirements. Ukraine is entitled to become a member of the European Union, no matter how much it will cost, he said.
Ukraine will also have to reject its Soviet mental, political, and economic legacy, the Polish politician said. He can hardly picture the European Union without Ukraine in the long run: “However, to become a member, Ukraine must rid itself of its Sovietness and show — and Ukrainians must prove — that they are 100 percent Europeans.”
Interestingly, experts in Brussels are also in favor of granting Ukraine EU membership prospects. But at the same time they emphasize that, in conjunction with the events in the Caucasus, there should be more EU and less NATO presence. A statement to this effect was made by Michael Emerson, Associate Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for European Policy Studies. He made it clear that Ukraine should forget about NATO membership because of Russia’s resistance. NATO expansion is being opposed in France’s diplomatic circles. A certain French diplomat even questions NATO’s legitimacy, even though there are no other effective systems of collective security. There are people in France who also believe that NATO is a continuation of the US.
Emerson called the resolution passed at the NATO summit in Bucharest, declaring that Ukraine and Georgia can become NATO members, mistaken. This expert is convinced that NATO should make its membership criteria more precise and state that any candidate member must, above all, secure public consensus.
Furthermore, a candidate member must demonstrate strategic responsibility. Today, Ukraine fails to meet the first criterion and Georgia, the second. Emerson believes that NATO cannot invite an irresponsible partner to become a member. There are four options for Ukraine: NATO without the EU; the EU without NATO; NATO and the EU; and neither NATO nor EU membership.
In the wake of the recent events in the Caucasus, opinions in Europe are changing. Here much depends on Ukraine, but its position was considerably weakened after the collapse of the coalition. Saryusz-Wolski admitted that people in Europe no longer see the president of Ukraine as the main factor in his country’s policies. At the same time, they do not see a new leader of Ukraine, who will lead the country along the path of reform and genuine rapprochement with the EU.
