Ukraine-U.S. relations: Washington experts offer their assessments
by Yaro Bihun
Special to The Ukrainian Weekly
WASHINGTON - The worsening state of relations between Ukraine and the United States has been the subject of much discussion here in recent weeks. While visiting here at the end of January Ukraine's Minister of the Economy Valerii Khoroshkovskyi spoke about a "cooling" in the relationship; a week later a former prime minister who is now leader of an opposition bloc in the Verkhovna Rada, Viktor Yushchenko, called it a "crisis"; and a week after that U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Steven Pifer characterized it as "most difficult and complex."
Mr. Pifer gave the official U.S. assessment of the relationship on February 13 during an appearance at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (see story on page 1). And Ukraine's ambassador to the United States, Kostyantyn Gryshchenko is expected to present his government's view at a forum organized by The Washington Group on February 26.
To get a broader, non-official view of how the relationship was doing, The Ukrainian Weekly asked six Washington-area experts with an interest in how U.S.-Ukraine relations develop to give an assessment from their various - political, human rights, economic, diaspora and democracy-building - points of view.
Following are excerpts of their comments.
U.S.-Ukrainian relations are at a very difficult stage, but the long-term relationship remains sound, because the leaders of both countries and, I think, those informed people in both countries believe that a strong relationship is in both countries' national interest.
The leadership in Ukraine is changing; one generation is already passing, and the next presidential election will bring a new president, probably on the new wave of the new democratic majority that appeared in the last parliamentary elections.
Ukraine's present government has said that it wants to be a full member in NATO, the European Union, the World Trade Organization - all Euro-Atlantic organizations. The key political premise in being a partner is, of course, to have truly empowered democratic institutions. And that's the agenda for the next several years. Clearly there needs to be reform in the area of freedom of expression; a free press that's open to all political persuasions is necessary for meaningful elections. ...
I think [the Kolchuha issue] is going to be resolved, but it's done great damage. There is no question about that... There's a distinction made between the actions of leaders and the people, as a whole, and the nation. And that distinction is extremely important. We, as Americans, as American policy, are solidly behind the people of Ukraine and the Ukrainian nation. That hasn't changed since 1991. ...
I'm a believer in active diplomacy, that there is no substitute for getting to know your counterparts in other countries ... Certainly on the military side it's as active as it can possibly be, and on many, [high] and lower levels. But at the top [administration] levels, no, there's not the interchange that there should be. If there are problems, they should be discussed; if there are grievances, they should be aired - and face-to-face. I don't see any alternative to settling problems than talking these things out, particularly when between nations that are such friends as Ukraine and the United States. ...
I think that the policy of Russia [toward Ukraine] has not changed. From the beginning Ukraine is a key element in its so-called near-abroad policy, that is, to have close, friendly relations. And we support that, but not at the expense, in any sense, of Ukraine's integrity as an independent, sovereign nation. And it's only natural that there be close and considerable trade ties and cultural ties between Russia and Ukraine, but this should not in any way diminish the necessity to have trade and commerce and cultural ties with the West. And that I think is Ukraine's fundamental policy, and it's something that we fully support.
With respect to the leadership of Ukraine and in particular with President [Leonid] Kuchma and the presidential administration - I would characterize relations as highly problematic. The reasons include the Kolchuha affair, Gongadze, constraints on media, high-level, pervasive corruption, and inconsistent or non-existent movement on political and economic reforms. How can you trust a leadership that has violated your trust - and not just once or twice? Ukraine, thankfully, is more than its leadership and I think the U.S. continues to have the same goals for Ukraine that it has had for the last decade - to see it fully integrated into the Euro-Atlantic community. This means a state that is democratic and respects human rights and the rule of law.
Virtually everyone, including many Ukrainian officials - although some only privately - acknowledge that Ukraine is principally responsible for the poor state of U.S.-Ukrainian relations. People who work on U.S.-Ukrainian relations in our executive branch and in Congress are frustrated, for understandable reasons, but I don't get the sense that most have given up on Ukraine - at least for the time being. ...
What we, the United States, can do, however, is continue to think in the long-term: that means work with those forces - and they do exist - in the Ukrainian government who genuinely understand that Ukraine's future lies in the West and are willing to work to that end, even if constrained by Kuchma and his oligarch cronies. It also means keeping up the pressure on Ukraine to live up to its international human rights and democracy commitments ... [and doing] what we can to ensure that there is a level playing field in the run-up to next year's presidential elections. ... We should also, very importantly, continue our assistance programs in areas such as civil society development, independent media, small and medium business, local reform and military assistance programs.
Ultimately, however, the ball is in Ukraine's court. I think an excellent blueprint for Ukraine is to make real efforts to implement the NATO-Ukraine Action Plan, which not only talks about the military reform necessary for Ukraine to become a NATO member, but also about democratic values and principles that will help Ukraine strengthen internally.
Ukraine should be taking all these steps to become part of the Euro-Atlantic community not just for the sake of strengthening U.S.-Ukrainian relations, but, first and foremost, because it is in Ukraine's national interests to do so. A democratic, prosperous Ukraine in which human rights and the rule of law are paramount is the best guarantee that Ukraine will remain an independent state.
American corporations are having banner years, partially reflecting the incredible explosion of Ukrainian agriculture, which is quickly restoring its reputation as a breadbasket. They started having good years at around 2000, as the reforms started to kick in, but in the last year business conditions have improved considerably and the prospects are that they are going to continue to improve. ... Basically, the Ukrainian economy is now in very solid shape. ...
I have no American companies, with one or two exceptions, that are experiencing difficulties... The age-old commercial disputes, which involved mostly small American investors who were fleeced when they went in by their partners - some of those problems have been resolved. ...
Obviously, Ukrainian membership in the WTO would regularize a lot of things. It would probably produce immediate graduation from the Jackson-Vanik Amendment ... [and] market-economy status, which Ukraine is more qualified to have than Russia. ...
On the Ukrainian side, they're focusing on another tax reform bill which will resolve a lot of irritations that investors see with the tax structure. ... The new commercial code was passed in January, and it's a good one, and as far as law is concerned, it takes care of the problem. But it hasn't been implemented yet. ...
In my own judgment, the growing Russian influence - some people would say domination - of the marketplace in Ukraine is an inevitable product of our public ostracizing of the Ukrainian government. I don't think you can have the U.S. government and the U.S. ambassador denouncing the Ukrainian government on the Gongadze case - all based on the Melnychenko tapes - and all series of things, and not have that have a chilling effect on Western investment. At the same time, knowing the Russians as I do, it serves as catnip to them; they're just thrilled. The more we talk about Gongadze, the more business they get. ...
I hold no brief for President Kuchma; I am abhorred by the treatment that some journalists have had in Ukraine and I'm distressed by corruption when it appears. But it goes on all over. We're doing business with Turkmenistan, in fact we're using some of their air bases - with pleasure. And that's got to be the biggest Stalinist state in the world right now. And we don't seem to have any trouble dealing with the mayor of Newark, N.J. ...
My feeling is that the human rights conditions in Ukraine are getting better; protests are held; people don't get killed and they aren't being sent to gulags. They may get arrested, but they get arrested right in front of the White House. I think we need to be, as President [George W.] Bush said in his inaugural address, somewhat more humble as we exercise our unprecedented power in the world.
The "cooling-off" of U.S.-Ukraine relations in the past year is of tremendous concern to the Ukrainian-American community. To a community that has labored to bring the country of Ukraine to the forefront of U.S. politics in the past decades, the recent Ukrainian delegation on economic matters that visited Washington brings a fresh new perspective to a continued dialogue with Ukraine.
In fact, our friends in Congress, whether in the form of the Congressional Ukrainian Caucus or members of the Senate, understand the depth of the relations between the United States and Ukraine, and have attempted to use various means to promote continued economic, political and societal reform in Ukraine.
It is through their efforts that Ukraine has remained on the radar screen during this "cooling off" period through various legislation such as PNTR [Permanent Normal Trade Relations] status for Ukraine, increased foreign assistance levels to Ukraine, the Foreign Leadership Program and others. All of these measures indicate that Ukraine is a strategic partner of the United States that must not be forgotten, but brought to work together for the betterment of U.S-Ukrainian relations.
The Ukrainian Congress Committee of America maintains that an open dialogue is essential to sustained relations with Ukraine, which must continue on all levels based on the same standards accorded other countries as well.
From my point of view, [U.S.-Ukrainian relations] are worse then they have been for a long time, certainly much worse than they were in the Clinton administration period. ... They're still OK in the U.S. Defense Department and Ukraine's Ministry of Defense, and there's some progress in the economic field, but otherwise, they are very bad, and I don't really see them, in the political sense, improving in the next 10 years. The sense that I get from our meetings with State Department officials, and the message that we get from them about how the administration feels is that until President Kuchma is no longer in office, the relations will remain at this level, at this very cool, cool level between Ukraine and the United States. ...
We are very, very concerned in the United States, especially those of us who represent the Ukrainian American community often before Congress and the administration, because it is much more difficult now to persuade [them] that it is extremely important that the United States and Ukraine continue to have relations, to have talks, that Ukraine remains strategically a crucial country in Eastern Europe.
The other thing that concerns us - the whole Ukrainian community - is that because of the poor U.S.-Ukraine relations there is a clear tendency on the part of the Kuchma administration to tilt toward Russia. In spite of all the pronouncements about how Ukraine is firmly committed to its path toward Europe, the actual actions in Ukraine seem to show otherwise.
We - those who represent the Ukrainian community in the United States - have a great problem in energizing the community. ... How do you persuade the Ukrainian community, which had really different expectations of an independent Ukraine, to still lobby the U.S. government, to lobby their congressman, to work on behalf of Ukraine. It does not mean that we should stop. I think that it's very important that we shouldn't stop. ...
I think the administration is acquiescing to [Russia's closer ties with Ukraine]. I think the administration doesn't care. There is the very important element of the administration working with Russia because of Iraq, because of the terrorism, and so Russia is a priority, and Ukraine has been definitely shoved into second or third place. ...
We understand that as U.S.-Ukrainian relations worsen or remain at this stage that this still may continue, and therefore it is in the interest of the Ukrainian American community to work to improve the relations between Ukraine and the United States in the hope to reverse what we perceive as a closer move toward Russia.
There is no doubt that the relationship has endured some difficult times as of late. But IRI's work, which is democratic development, has really been unaffected. IRI is an independent, non-governmental organization, so we do not represent the U.S. government. And I think that that has assisted us during this difficult time when communication between the U.S. and Ukrainian governments has not been as frequent as we hoped it would be. We hope that the relationship will improve and we've seen signs that the two governments are increasing the level of communication. ...
We're continuing to run various programs in the oblasts, including one for newly elected members of city councils - training them in various things like how to set up a press office, a constituency office, how to communicate with constituents and train staff to deal with administrative tasks. In other words, we're trying to strengthen the ability of locally elected council members to represent the people who reside in their district. ...
At the same time, what the U.S. government has consistently said, from a democratization standpoint, is that an independent media is important, as is the ability for political parties to operate freely and independently, and other non-governmental organizations, civil society organizations, being able to register and implement their activities freely and without undue interference. Those are important things in terms of democratization, and those are areas where we think that the Ukrainian government could be helpful.
Copyright © The Ukrainian Weekly, February 23, 2003, No. 8, Vol. LXXI
| Home Page |