“The Ukrainian Army is undergoing surprising metamorphoses” was the theme of the ICTV host Dmitry Kiselev’s analytical program aired the Sunday before last for the first time after his summer vacation. Incidentally, the program itself has also undergone some surprising metamorphoses of its own. From now on, the program will be broadcast daily for 45 minutes. Moreover, it will be not just a customary review of the previous week’s events but a deep (if this word can be applied to television at all) insight into a specific problem that excites the public mind, which the first show of the updated project amply demonstrated. The chief guest in the studio, Defense Minister Yevhen Marchuk, was asked almost every conceivable military-related question broaching such topics as the army reform, Iraq, NATO, military doctrine, corruption in the army, and even whether Ukrainian generals will meet NATO fitness standards. Mr. Marchuk briefly defined the army metamorphoses as the beginning of its reform, “so that the Armed Forces could most adequately correspond to our ambitions and our economy.” As to concrete reform measures, they specifically provide for a drastic cut of the Ukrainian army’s strength to an estimated 200,000 by 2005. The minister explained the necessity of simultaneously raising the military budget and reducing manpower this way: “Eliminating one regiment requires spending a one-time amount of money three times as large that needed to maintain it for a year, but it will eliminate further expenses of this kind. So the naked truth is as follows: we will spend a great deal in order to reform and cut the army — and then not spend at all, or we will inadequately fund the reform and then torment everybody — the military, the economy, and ourselves — for another decade.” Mr. Marchuk hopes the parliament will support him. “If not, we will all say frankly that it is financially impossible to reform the Armed Forces and bring about the most reasonable structure and strength by 2005.” As for reducing the top brass, the minister noted that “dismissals for misdeeds and inefficiency (on the one hand) and reform-related staff cuts (on the other) are different things. In case of serious miscalculations that have caused problems and additional dangers for our servicemen, we will be very tough and mince no words.” Moreover, Minister Marchuk never asks himself whether or not the army likes him, “I’m like a surgeon who operates. Only when the patient gets well again, that is, when we accomplish at least the first stage of the reform, will it be clear who loves whom.”
Speaking of the security of our peacekeepers in Iraq, the minister pointed out that there is even “a plan of the emergency evacuation of the brigade.” Yevhen Marchuk also defended the Ukrainian soldier who resorted to arms in Iraq: according to the minister, the serviceman fired his weapon when the ongoing car did not obey his command and hit him, so the falling soldier opened fire in compliance with instructions. A joint Ukrainian-Iraqi investigation has found that the recourse to arms was legitimate.
Incidentally, Mr. Marchuk pins great hopes on the Ukrainian peacekeepers. In his words, when the brigade comes back in February, it will not be disbanded, “This is a brigade of professional military servicemen who have undergone their baptism of fire, among other things... This will be one of the units that will form the core of our future army. This is a professional all-volunteer brigade.” Explaining “why Ukraine participates today in almost ten” peacekeeping missions, the Minister of Defense stressed again that “today one must know how to defend the national interests and security not only on his own territory but also far outside it — of course, within the existing international legal framework.” It is perhaps in this context that one should interpret the reorientation of the Ukrainian army toward “collective defense systems,” NATO being one of them. The defense minister views the 2004 NATO summit as the next stage of NATO membership process: “I think we must be prepared for the Membership Action Plan by that time... If we manage to convince the overwhelming majority of NATO members and they vote for us to embrace the Membership Action Plan, which includes specific deadlines, this will be considered major progress.” He added that financing is the main difficulty in modernizing the Ukrainian army according to NATO standards. He also noted the great importance of the compatibility of professional languages. “I mean the way of thinking, not just linguistics.” To sum it up, there is a great deal to do. Nevertheless, Mr. Marchuk likes his current job, “A great many things can be done that are very important for the state, society, and especially the military.”
