FOR THE RECORD: Kuchma speaks on the CIS and Black Sea Fleet issue (12/29/96)

FOR THE RECORD: Kuchma speaks on the CIS and Black Sea Fleet issue

Following is the text of a speech by President Leonid Kuchma, which was broadcast by Ukrainian Radio on December 14. The president focused on the Commonwealth of Independent States and the Black Sea Fleet issue.

My greetings to you, dear listeners. This year's memorable dates include the fifth anniversary of the formation of the Commonwealth of Independent States. I would like to devote my conversation with you to precisely this topic and lay special emphasis on Ukrainian-Russian relations, taking into account the following important circumstances: Russia is our closest neighbor, not just from the point of view of its location but, first and foremost, from the point of view of the two countries' age-old common history, their long-standing traditions, and purely human relationships. We expect that Russian Federation President Boris Yeltsin will finally pay a visit to sign a large-scale treaty on friendship, cooperation and partnership. There have been certain events recently which have caused tensions in relations between the two states.

Incidentally, undeniable facts and Ukraine's stand have been deliberately distorted. The results of the nationwide referendum, which outlined the main trends for the development of our state as an independent, democratic, non-aligned and non-nuclear state, were already known by December 8, 1991, when the political vocabulary was complemented with a form of words which was unusual for that time - the Commonwealth of Independent States. Ukraine, having been one of the CIS co-founders, takes part in its activities as an associate member; in other words, we at once rejected any possibility of entering a commonwealth which would be a suprastate formation along the lines of a reshaped USSR.

This is how I explain the need for setting up the CIS: firstly, the impact produced by the collapse of the Soviet Union, which was objectively imminent and unavoidable, was cushioned. Thanks to this, the new independent states obtained their new status in a more or less smooth manner. This process was not the direct cause of political and military upheavals and human tragedies.

I believe that at the present stage the existence of the CIS is potentially useful, primarily from the point of view of developing economic relations, mainly on a bilateral basis. They sometimes accuse us of abusing our special status within the CIS. In reality this means they are trying to impose on Ukraine participation in the joint power suprastructures, and this means, apart from other things, significant spending for the maintenance of these institutions. For whose sake, I wonder? Unfortunately, hundreds of their decisions, programs and projects remain on paper.

Our approach is different. We regard the CIS as an interstate mechanism for consultations and negotiations. And this gives us a real opportunity to work out and polish methods of holding negotiations, to bring our stands closer together, to maintain the balance of interests in a better way and coordinate economic policy principles.

Every state is free to determine the degree of its involvement in the CIS and the trends of its activities within its framework. For example, Russia and Belarus recently set up a commonwealth. Jointly with Kazakstan and Kyrgyzstan, they agreed to deepen integration. This is their right, which we respect. However, one cannot deny the fact that unreserved participation in the customs union would have resulted in an unequal exchange, and this would have significantly complicated the situation for domestic producers and resulted in economic losses.

Our stand on military and political agreements within the CIS framework is clear-cut and unambiguous. Ukraine's accession to these agreements would run counter to its policy of non-alignment and neutrality. We view this stand of principle in the light of each of our citizens and of each family, in the light of a specific life.

I would not like to say that the CIS has already exhausted itself and its possibilities. But it will have realistic prospects for the future only if there are no elder and younger [brothers], if every member-state enjoys equivalent and equal rights.

Esteemed compatriots, I think no one needs to be convinced of the importance of maintaining friendly and good-neighborly relations between Ukraine and Russia. Peace and tranquillity not just on our lands and in our homes, but throughout Europe, in many ways depend on this. This is a truism that originates from history and present-day realities. It is precisely this principle that forms the basis of Ukraine's foreign policy. We have abided by it consistently and unswervingly, except, perhaps, for a short period of time following the declaration of independence, when some manifestations of isolationism were allowed to take place in relation to Russia and other ex-USSR republics - although these were often a response to, let's say, unfriendly moves by the other side.

Those who talk about Ukraine's unilateral dependence on the Russian Federation are wrong. Both countries are keen to develop mutually beneficial and equal relations - this is an objective reality and necessity. Unfortunately, attempts to douse our relations with a cold shower of alienation and mistrust are made from time to time. Not everyone in Russia has so far learned to perceive Ukraine as a sovereign state. They still cannot get rid of the syndrome of aggressiveness in relations with us and refrain from ordering Ukraine about. Hence attempts to exert pressure on Ukraine and to put forward obviously unacceptable conditions and demands.

The issue of dividing up the Black Sea Fleet and the status of Sevastopol have been turned into a particularly knotty problem. One month ago, we were actually ready to sign an agreement on the fleet. Incidentally, we agreed to provide the most favorable conditions for the functioning of the Russian part of the fleet, and this would automatically have opened the way to signing a large-scale treaty. However, there are politicians in Russia who are stubbornly playing the Crimean card, with very far-reaching intentions in mind.

I would not like to make a detailed assessment of the actions by those who have gone as far as making territorial claims against Ukraine. The futility and danger of their stance are obvious. I would only like to say that making threats, up to promises of the use of force, are not the best method of conducting international affairs in general, and dealing with such states as Ukraine, in particular.

It seems that the authors of those belligerent statements live in another dimension, outside time and space, so to speak. It looks like they continue to take today for yesterday, when a word pronounced in Moscow would echo like a bolt of lightning in all corners of the USSR. Is it not clear that territorial claims and other uncivilized demarches run counter to the very logic of the current international developments and that not just Ukraine, but the entire world community, will not allow them? Truth is on our side, and everyone should proceed from this fact.

Action always causes counteraction, and one should not bring the situation to the boiling point. Irresponsible statements by well-known figures in Russia cause corresponding reaction by hotheads in our country. These diametrically opposed stands on both sides stimulate each other and, therefore, they stimulate tensions in Ukrainian-Russian relations. The way out of the situation is through a calm, balanced and civilized negotiating dialogue. Emotions and extremes should not prevail; rather, there should be a desire to understand each other better and to reach a reasonable compromise.

I would like to emphasize again that the division of the Black Sea Fleet must be completed and agreements regulating the conditions for the temporary deployment of the Russian part of the fleet on Ukrainian territory must be signed. I hope that good will, political wisdom and plain common sense will triumph as far as this issue is concerned. The main thing is to prevent the desirable result from being achieved too late and at too high a price.

Our state is ready to do all it can toward that end. The more constructiveness, sound pragmatism and desire to reach mutual understanding there is in our relations, the sooner the voices of doubt and irreconcilability will fade away. The age-long history and traditions of good-neighborliness between Ukraine and Russia form a basis solid enough to build a new structure for their mutual relations in compliance with the demands of the present complicated time. I sincerely wish this to both states and their peoples.

| Home Page |