Bruce JACKSON, president of the Project on Transitional Democracies, is a frequent visitor to Ukraine. He has an excellent understanding of both American and Ukrainian foreign policies. Our readers will find it interesting to acquaint themselves with his thoughts on Prime Minister Yanukovych’s visit to Brussels and whether his statement that Ukraine is postponing joining the NATO Membership Action Plan presents any risks to Ukraine. In the following interview the American analyst also describes official Washington’s assessment of the steps taken by the new Ukrainian government and the hopes it is pinning on them.
“How would you assess Prime Minister Yanukovych’s visit to Brussels and his talks with the leaders of the North Atlantic alliance?”
“Obviously, the prime minister of Ukraine was received very well in Brussels and his statements sparked favorable comments. US Ambassador William Taylor’s announcement that President George Bush is reconsidering the possibility of visiting Kyiv, as well as European Commission President Jose Barroso’s invitation to Prime Minister Yanukovych to visit Brussels again, can be regarded as encouragement to the new government and an opportunity for the Ukrainian prime minister to develop close relations with the EU and NATO.”
“What about the prime minister’s statement that Ukraine is not prepared to join the NATO Membership Action Plan?”
“From the viewpoint of official Washington, Prime Minister Yanukovych’s statement on NATO was almost certainly misinterpreted by the media. Neither Ukraine nor NATO allies are prepared to make decisions on the Action Plan or any other membership-related matters during the alliance’s summit in November. The fact that the Ukrainian government admitted this and is ready to continue establishing closer relations within the framework of the existing dialogue was welcomed with relief by many NATO ambassadors.
“Some ambassadors commented that the Ukrainian prime minister’s remarks during the closed session were correct and received with understanding. The prime minister said that Ukraine needs time to prepare for accession to NATO and the EU, and fundamental efforts must be carried out in order to inform the public better about NATO and economic reforms. He also quoted the agreement with President Yushchenko, which states that Ukraine’s goal is to continue the policy of European integration and close relations with all European institutions. That was exactly what Secretary General Scheffer and NATO member states’ permanent representatives in Brussels wanted to hear.”
“Does the rejection of the Action Plan mean that the Ukrainian government is not prepared to carry out the necessary reforms?”
“Obviously, like any other government, the coalition cabinet in Kyiv should demonstrate that it is prepared to carry out reforms. I agree with Defense Minister Anatolii Hrytsenko, who maintains that Ukraine is meeting defense reform requirements. This is why high- ranking officials in Washington and Brussels are going to be looking at the way the Ukrainian government carries out urgent reforms in other fields. I have already mentioned the very low level of public awareness of NATO and the need for public outreach work.
“The prime minister stressed, however, that the government’s priority would be reforms in trade and the economy. Independent observers will be monitoring Ukraine’s progress toward WTO membership and the implementation of anti-corruption measures within the framework of the US Millennium Challenge grant, as well as reforms within the framework of the EU-Ukraine Action Plan. Only a few spheres have been mentioned here. After being elected prime minister, Yanukovych made it clear at a meeting with foreign officials and representatives of non-governmental organizations that he is aware of the large number of reforms that must be carried out and that he is prepared to begin implementing them. (President Yushchenko said similar things in this respect.) In this sense, Europe and the West are taking the Declaration on National Unity seriously.”
“How did Washington react, officially and unofficially, to Prime Minister Yanukovych’s statements and actions in Brussels?”
“It is too early to speak of actions. Any administration holds fact-finding tours during its first weeks in office. The real work of Ukraine and the EU are still ahead. Washington had no official reaction to Yanukovych’s visit to Brussels — and it did not need to have one. I am not sure that our friends in Europe will understand Washington if it judges an EU- organized meeting where the US was not represented. Unofficially, Washington is pleased that Yushchenko and Yanukovych are working together on sensitive national problems and that there is strong opposition in parliament, which will make the government and the president stick to their promises. I must admit that the new government’s first weeks surpassed all of Washington’s expectations. It is also true that after last year’s turmoil, these expectations were very low. I think in the next few months we will see the resumption of visits by high US officials with a simple message. If Ukraine wants to have pragmatic and close relations with the US, the EU, and international institutions and markets, the US is prepared to help.”
“Does Ukraine’s deferral of its membership in the Action Plan mean that Ukraine’s membership in NATO will be buried forever?”
“Not at all. There is nothing bad about a pragmatic and methodical approach to integrating into European institutions. This is just a decision to be made by your country, and taking into account the weak public support and relative instability of Ukrainian politics, this may be the fastest way to NATO and EU membership. Poland built a close relationship with NATO without undue haste. Romania and the states west of the Balkans were more emotional, which I think is called a romantic approach in Kyiv today. You may recall that those countries were regularly applying and were disappointed for years. Finally, Romania succeeded, soon to be followed by success for the countries west of the Balkans. The most important qualities of a successful pro-NATO campaign are an all-round reform program and comprehensive public support. With the aid of these two components, Ukraine can make it to NATO if it wants to.”
“What risks can the postponement of membership in the Action Plan present to Ukraine?”
“It does not matter whether and when Ukraine chooses to join the Action Plan. Everything that Ukraine may want to do with NATO in the Action Plan can be done today in the framework of an intensified dialogue. The Action Plan merely gives candidate countries an opportunity to improve some defense reforms and other aspects that represent mutual interest. The Action Plan sort of resembles a university tutorial before final exams. By the time Ukraine makes the formal decision to switch from having close relations to applying for NATO membership, its defense reform may well be so advanced that this kind of tutorial will not be needed.
“As for your question about risks, today Ukraine is facing the same risks it did yesterday and will tomorrow. These risks include a struggling economy, rampant corruption, a young and unstable political system, political isolation, as well as a large population without adequate opportunities to work, trade, travel, study, or just prosper. It will take the government years to reduce or increase these risks. It will take months for us to see if the new coalition is able to get down to this work.”
“Now that high-ranking representatives of the new Ukrainian government have made their first visits, can we now say that Ukraine’s foreign policy is more predictable?”
“Again, it is too early to talk about this. The EU showed a positive response to Ukrainian visits to Moscow, Sochi, and Brussels. I do not think I will be able to answer this question until the same high- ranking Ukrainian officials visit Washington. Since the Senate primaries are happening in the US now, I hope that high-level visits will take place in November.”
“What kind of signals should Kyiv expect from Western states, including the US? Or has the West lost its influence on the political situation in Ukraine?”
“I think it would be a mistake to believe that American foreign policy resembles the picture of a Soviet-era May Day parade in Moscow, which contained a lot of hidden signals. US policy on Ukraine is very simple: Ukraine is an independent state that is independently choosing its own path. International and European institutions should keep their doors open and welcome Ukraine. The US is offering an intensive program of economic and political reforms and is ready to help Ukraine succeed in implementing them. That’s all.
“I think this policy is applicable to the Yanukovych government in the same way it was to the Tymoshenko and Yekhanurov governments. Finally, I think it would be wrong to interpret political developments in Ukraine according to such categories as the West is either losing or gaining influence in Ukraine. I think it would be more correct to say that Ukraine is losing or gaining interest in what the EU and the West can offer it.
“During the last elections, Ukraine was interested in nothing but internal political rivalry. Now that Ukraine has a parliament and a government, it is showing renewed interest in what is beyond the border. Ukraine is again taking an interest in trade, markets, visas, direct foreign investments, and cooperation with European institutions. This is very good and opens new opportunities for Ukraine.”
