In the richness of their emotional coloration, Ukrainian-Russian relations are perhaps unmatched, compared to Ukraine’s contacts with the other neighboring countries. First, this is due to both sides doubting the other’s sincerity as a partner and being unsure of whether the proposed level of contacts can be considered really equal. Assurances of historically rooted friendship are accompanied by suspicions that Russia is still afflicted with the imperial complex, all this takes place against the background of the expectations of integration, even reunification cherished by a considerable part of the population. The latest Kuchma-Putin summit in Dnipropetrovsk was preceded by a degree of wariness; everybody was wondering how the two leaders would behave now that Ukraine had found itself in a difficult situation.
Regrettably, one has to state that before and after the summit emotions and bias, rather than pragmatism, were predominant in the reviews and commentaries. I would also like to discuss this. During Soviet times, I was at the head of what was known as the All-Union Research Institute of Monocrystals in Kharkiv. I was directly involved in Ukrainian-Russian contacts, and not at the level of the slogans about the friendship of peoples but in terms of hi-tech developments and output.
Aware of the value of combined efforts in this domain, I am pleased to state that the Dnipropetrovsk summit demonstrated precisely that style and level of relationships which completely corresponds to the status of mutual interest in and respect for the national interests and priorities of both countries. In fact, Ukraine has pursued this status for the past several years, trying to convert its relations with Russia to the format of pragmatic bilateral contacts free from the ideological and geopolitical considerations that have been present in the CIS international cooperation project from the outset.
Primarily, Ukraine and Russia are striving to enhance their positions on the international market as leaders in aerospace technologies. Here the emphasis is not on rivalry but on the allocation of revenues and dividends. Moreover, cooperation with Russia in space administration will also stimulate Ukraine as a hi-tech country. Here, too, we find a distinct quality compared to our other bilateral contacts, Europe included. Recall the An-70 project.
Yes, we want to enter Europe, yet we can do so even more effectively without distancing ourselves from Russia, but owing to powerful breakthroughs in both countries investing in each other not only in terms of raw materials and low-grade capital, but also in terms of sound money allowing breakthroughs at the level of a new hi-tech economy. This is also true in the information sphere, as both Ukrainian and Russian programmers, mathematicians, and space technologists are quickly evolving; in hi-tech output, as Russian enterprises can use Ukrainian developments, such as Kharkiv crystals and Kyiv welding techniques along with synthetic proteins using genetic engineering technologies which Russia needs.
Such partnership will not drive us away from our ultimate goal, European integration; on the contrary, it will expedite the process, filling it with new content. We will step into Europe not as a poor relation, but as a hi-tech trendsetter. The fact that we are prepared to travel part of the road together with Russia is evidence that Ukraine is effectively coping with its role as an intermediary between Russia and Europe.
Russia, incidentally, also regularly reaffirms its course aimed at rapprochement with Europe. I remember attending the Fifth European Forum in Germany. Leonid Drachevsky, the then Russian minister in charge of the CIS, stressed the trend in an attempt to reassure his suspicious European colleagues, which suspicion was understandable under the circumstances.
In this way our policy of rapprochement in the Western and Eastern sectors lies in consistently transforming Ukraine from a restricted zone into a factor helping two giants, Russia and Europe, come closer together, with the main emphasis on protecting and providing for the interests of our own development.
The somewhat wary attitude toward the prospect of Russian goods on the Ukrainian market is justified only with regard to obsolete technologies that cannot secure the development of a new twenty-first century competitive economy, sticking to old industrial standards and creating numerous ecological problems. However, the same attitude should be adopted toward low-grade European capital.
Of course, acute problems are encountered here, like dumping in metal and ore exports, yet they can be solved. Thus let me stress again that combined efforts in paving the way for powerful economic and technological breakthroughs in information sciences, science in general, and knowledge-intensive technologies are the expressway for our mutual economic and civilized rejuvenation. In other words, what we need is not any kind of economization in the foreign policy domain, but only that which opens up strategic horizons; we need economization based on a new economy.
Such pragmatic, mutually advantageous, and reciprocally enhancing relationships will be far more effective in strengthening trust between our countries and peoples, lending real content to the notions of historical and cultural closeness, rather than incantations about selfless friendship between Slavic nations, often concealing markedly selfish interests being pursued by various business groups.
Considered from whatever perspective, the external vectors of development make it clear that there are no geographic priorities. Instead, there are serious political and economic advantages to the strategy, tactic, and dynamics ensuing from the main task, in particular, the stable development of Ukraine and Russia, tempestuous dynamics, a quest for whatever ways make possible great starting opportunities for both our countries. To this end, one is tempted to infer that our foreign policy and foreign trade ministries, as well as industrial, research, and educational institutions do not show the same degree of attention to the main vectors, Western and the Eastern. Unfortunately, the effectiveness of the Western sector is quite small. The Eastern one is obviously unused. Meanwhile, whether we like it or not, Ukraine’s road to Europe lies also through Russia, through the mutual strengthening of both Russia and Ukraine.
Thus in our opinion the most important task of our foreign policy agencies today — and the same applies to all the state-run and non-governmental enterprises and organizations operating in the Russian direction — should be the consolidation of the developed quality of relations as the base matrix of Russo-Ukrainian cooperation. We need to rid ourselves of any unfriendliness and, to put it mildly, unreasonable interest in weakening our neighbor. It is only the political stability and positive, qualitative economic dynamism, resonantly demonstrated by Ukraine and Russia, that will allow our countries to solve, without Herculean social efforts, the problems of market transformation and democratic maturation which are bringing us closer to Europe.
