Ukraine is succeeding in spheres of foreign policy, energy independence (08/15/99)

Ukraine is succeeding in spheres of foreign policy, energy independence

by R.L. Chomiak

Ukraine must be doing something right in the spheres of energy independence and foreign policy. One indication of this is the July 17 article in the Kyiv newspaper Zerkalo Nedeli, an article that was summarized by Jan Maksymiuk of RFE/RL Newsline (The Weekly, August 1).

Generally, Zerkalo Nedeli is a serious newspaper, but as does most of the newly independent media in Ukraine, at times it fumbles. The article by Sergei Goncharenko, "Ukrainian Diplomacy Myths," resembles the temper tantrum of a 2-year-old rather than a serious analysis of the political situation - with particular reference to Ukraine's energy supply. One of my journalistic sources in Ukraine claims the author hid behind the pseudonym of Sergei Goncharenko - hiding behind pseudonyms is a device from the Soviet days used for vitriolic articles that unfortunately still has currency in independent Ukraine - and that he must be very close to the editor if she decided to publish the piece that is clearly below the newspaper's usual standards.

The author's aim was to fire a torpedo at Ukraine's Foreign Affairs Minister Borys Tarasyuk for his unabashed pro-Western policy moves, and to undermine Ukraine's deliberate (if slow) moves to seek sources of energy other than those flowing from Russia.

I would describe it as a view of Ukraine's "Russia lobby" - the people who are dismayed by Ukraine's refusal to return to the fold.

Shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union, world oil producers began salivating over access to the Caspian Sea reserves, now controlled not just by the Soviet Union and Iran, but by the "upstarts" like Kazakstan, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Georgia.

Last December in Washington, Cambridge Energy Research Associates held a second annual international conference devoted to finding solutions for Caspian pipeline construction. Ukraine was represented by Valerii Shuliko, project coordinator of the Eurasian Oil Transportation Corridor and by Ambassador Anton Buteyko. Energy Secretary Bill Richardson and Ambassador Richard Morningstar spoke from the U.S. government point of view. There also were executives of every major American oil company and partners of Washington law firms.

The simplest way to transport new oil from the Caspian Sea would be via Iran, with its big infrastructure built to a large degree with American know-how. However, when it comes to oil, politics plays a bigger role than geography or cost effectiveness. At this time, for the U.S., Iran is not an option.

The U.S., however, has an important strategic ally in Turkey, and the U.S. was pushing for construction of a long and expensive pipeline to Ceyhan, Turkey, and from there move on to the world markets. The Ceyhan pipeline would branch off from an existing one, running from Baku, Azerbaijan, to Supsa, a Black Sea port of Georgia. For oil-starved Ukraine this is a neat source of new energy, because Ukraine, too, is a Black Sea country, and could get the Caspian oil delivered by tankers.

To this end, Ukraine - despite crass interference from the "Russia lobby" - has been doing two things: building an oil terminal near Odesa, and a pipeline from Brody, near Lviv, to the Odesa terminal. Brody is where two big Soviet-era pipelines called Druzhba (Friendship) carry energy to European markets. Concurrently, Ukraine is modernizing a refinery in Drohobych, a short hop from Brody, to process the higher quality crude that would come from the Caspian.

All this would indicate, that things are moving along in the sphere of Ukraine's hoped-for energy supply diversification. The U.S., while still pushing for a big pipeline to Turkey's Ceyhan, has no objection to Ukraine getting some of the vast Caspian oil reserves.

Poland and Hungary are boosters for the Odesa-Brody pipeline, because they have access to the Druzhba pipeline and need more oil for their growing economies.

The countries of the southern tier of the former USSR see this route as an element of their independence.

Last April, when oil started to flow from Baku to the Georgian port of Supsa on the Black Sea, Georgia's youthful parliamentary speaker Zurab Zhvania called it a "vitally important project for the entire region, defining the region in the broadest sense as stretching from Ukraine all the way to Uzbekistan and Kazakstan. It gives us a chance to connect ourselves to each other and to the world in a way that keeps us free from political pressure or influence or manipulation."

And Speaker Zhvania said more, as reported by Stephen Kinzer in the April 13 issue of The New York Times: "[This project] means a great deal to us, which is why not everyone around us likes the idea. I'm talking about Russia, but also about Iran. They are not happy and I can understand why. Actually, I think our enemies understand the importance of this project better that our friends."

Russia is unhappy, because Russia is losing control over assets it feels belong to it and it is unhappy because this is yet another indication that the cozy arrangement it enjoyed in the Soviet Union is crumbling. So its lobby attacks.

The author of the article in Zerkalo Nedeli chose the favorite tactic of the "Russia lobby" - to ridicule Ukraine's moves as simply stupid and childish and doomed to failure.

The author brought up the fact that the U.S. government is pushing for the Baku-Ceyhan route from the Caspian oil fields, but didn't mention that it has no problem with some of the oil going to Brody; after all, the proven Caspian reserves are huge.

He warned that Ukraine has no tankers to ship the oil across the Black Sea, as if there were a shortage of tankers in the world.

The author criticized Foreign Affairs Minister Tarasyuk for getting Ukraine into GUUAM (a loose regional arrangement comprising Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan and Moldova), because, according to Mr. Goncharenko, they're all "losers," without influence in world politics and trade. But he made no mention of what Georgia's parliamentary leader, Mr. Zhvania, said about the Baku-Supsa pipeline project.

He then criticized Mr. Tarasyuk for not dealing with Kazakstan, without mentioning that since 1992 Kazakstan has been trying to find ways for its Caspian oil to reach world markets by means other than through the existing network, because Russia controls its valves and decides how much oil will flow. And he didn't mention another fact: Ukraine already has received Kazak oil - by rail.

The author even criticized Mr. Tarasyuk for not making a deal with Russia's old ally Iraq to buy its oil, somehow forgetting that he had already written Ukraine has no tankers, and Iraqi oil would have to reach Ukraine by sea. He also omitted the fact that Turkey is limiting tanker traffic through its narrow straits to the Black Sea.

And then the mysterious Mr. Goncharenko shed crocodile tears over the drop in Ukraine's international trade after Mr. Tarasyuk took over the Foreign Affairs Ministry from Hennadii Udovenko, but didn't mention that there were several global economic crises in that period that wrecked many countries' trade balances.

Mr. Goncharenko also pooh-poohed Ukraine's good relations with Poland by saying, "Unfortunately we have already convinced the Poles of our inferiority. They have begun to speak increasingly about Poland's special role in promoting Western values in Ukraine, about assisting us in building democracy, about supporting Ukraine in international organizations ..."

Some Washington officials are comparing the change in Ukrainian-Polish relations to the one that occurred between France and Germany in the early 1950's. They are seriously promoting, the Poland-America-Ukraine Cooperation Initiative, PAUCI. But this is yet another affront for the "Russia lobby." So it reacts in a temper-tantrum like that thrown by Mr. Goncharenko in Zerkalo Nedeli: Why can't these Ukrainians make do with what oil and gas Russia sends them? Why aren't they satisfied with Russia guiding them to the world? It's all Mr. Tarasyuk's fault. Get rid of him, President Kuchma, or else you'll lose the election.

But Mr. Goncharenko and Zerkalo Nedeli picked the wrong time for this temper tantrum. It came out just as the effect of purposely decreased world oil production became evident at the gas pumps and the drivers of Ukraine's 5 million automobiles were finding that it cost much more to run them. Perhaps some of them will realize that there's something wrong with Mr. Goncharenko's arguments in the usually respectable Zerkalo Nedeli and realize that more sources of oil are better than one.

R.L. Chomiak is a Washington journalist who for the past five years has divided his time between the United States and Ukraine.

| Home Page |