EVENTS

Date:	Tuesday, January 7, 2003
Time:	12:00 PM -- 1:30 PM
Location:	Wohlstetter Conference Center, Twelfth Floor, AEI 1150 Seventeenth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036

January 2003
Ukraine: Doomed to Fail?

Ukraine has lost considerable standing with the West. In November, following the apparent sale of "Kolchuga" radar systems to Iraq as well as other scandals, Ukrainian president Leonid Kuchma was ostracized at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's Prague Summit. A month later, the Bush administration accused Ukraine of being a "primary money-laundering concern" and--for the first time--moved to impose sanctions under the provisions of the anti-terrorist USA Patriot Act. However, according to James Sherr of the UK Defence Academy, who spoke at the New Atlantic Initiative on January 7, Ukraine is far from being an unsalvageable disaster.

James Sherr

Three factors are dragging Ukraine down. First, the Ukrainian presidential administration is determined to preserve the hierarchy and succession of power, regardless of the impact on the country's image, economic interests, or security interests. The second factor is Russian policy, through which President Putin applies one set of rules for his dealings with the West and another for the former Soviet republics. The West sees Russia's best face while the East interacts with its worst. Russia uses conspiracy-like networks to meddle in Ukraine's politics and economy and continually threatens to cut off energy supplies to Ukraine--which Russia has actually done on several occasions. 

The third negative factor is the policy of the European Union. The EU is resigned to "losing" Ukraine. In April 2002, it adopted a "special neighbor" policy, which groups Ukraine with states that have European aspirations but almost no capacity to realize them. Romano Prodi, the EU Commission's president, reportedly said that the Union's "ultimate border" would not include Ukraine. Moreover, the EU does not understand Ukraine. It treats foment in that country as a sign of regression, rather than change. It fails to see that pro-democratic and pro-Western forces have never been as strong since independence. Whilst the EU proceeds to construct the Schengen frontier, Russia refuses to demarcate its border, and offers Ukraine "firm good neighborliness." The EU does nothing to suggest that Ukraine's return to Europe is welcome. 

Nonetheless, Sherr argued, there are just as many positive developments, most important of which is the growth and strength of the civil society. Solidly one third of the Ukrainian population now has pro-democracy and pro-Western views. When the Ukrainian people are fed up with the government, they react as Westerners do--with protests and demonstrations--and not like Russians, with apathy. Recent election results show that reformers are becoming a national force, and the communists are aging. Highly capable, well-educated, and Western-oriented officials can also be found within the structures of the state. They are promoting as much change as they can and being critical of the leadership. Interestingly, this behavior is not punished, but tolerated. To a large extent this results from an exceptional NATO-Ukraine relationship, which is no longer about superficial gestures but about thorough reform of the Ukrainian military and state agencies. Moreover, the political leadership knows that it cannot cross a certain line. The new Ukrainian prime minister Viktor Yanukovich has refused to sign a new treaty with Russia asserting that Ukraine's current status within the Confederation of Independent States is sufficient, despite Russian prime minister Mikhail Kasyanov's strong desire for a new agreement. 

In James Sherr's view, the United States has a much more sensible policy towards Ukraine than other Western countries have. The Bush administration recognizes the difference between President Kuchma's clique and the people, although it probably does not distinguish well between the president, other state structures, and the people. The U.S. handled the "Kolchuga" affair very well. It reacted promptly but did not break off its military cooperation. In fact, Sherr argued, the Ukrainian military has nothing to do with arms sales of this type; this is the business of the president's cronies. The Ukrainians should be presented with a clear message: "You're in charge of your own affairs; if you decide to join Russia, we will not stop you. If you decide to join us, you will have to fulfill certain conditions. These conditions are not political; they are objective. If you play by our rules, we will be thrilled to have you and we will do whatever we can to help you." The United States should convince the European Union to send that message and keep its doors open to Ukraine. However, it cannot overpressure the EU, as it did in the case of Turkey.