ANALYSIS: 2004 - a year of crucial changes for Ukraine

The following commentary by Dr. Yuri Scherbak, ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary of Ukraine, was published by Ukraine Report - 2004, No. 9, Art Ukraine Information Service (ARTUIS), Kyiv (www.ArtUkraine.com). (The version published here has been edited for clarity.)

by Dr. Yuri Scherbak

At the end of 2003 France was commemorating the 500th anniversary of Michelle Nostradamus, an astrologer and prophet. Thanks to the skillfulness of contemporary interpreters, the mysterious verses of Nostradamus are put into the specific political language of today. Thus, mentioning the defeat of an unknown southern king can always be interpreted as the prophesy of Saddam Hussein's fate.

Regarding Ukraine, one does not have to be a Nostradamus to foresee that the year 2004 will become one of the crucial years in the modern history of the young state, which will influence the development of Ukraine in the first quarter of the 21st century.

In 2004 in Ukraine the following will simultaneously be taking place:

• political reform with a switching to the parliamentary-presidential model;
  
  
• presidential elections in conditions of heavy confrontation from competitors;
  
  
• a further increase of pressure by Russia with the ultimate purpose of "tying" Ukraine to the Eurasian common space, and to the fuel and energy transportation empire created by Moscow, in which Ukraine will be the role of a subdued province ruled from the center.

The seriousness of Ukraine's problems in 2004 will be characterized by twisted and difficult to forecast situations with each of the above points.

The proposed political reform - due to its incomplete nature and the fact that it is aimed at serving the interests of a small group of people who want to remain in power - contains several dangerous points that are not yet fully comprehended by Ukrainian political circles. This reform plan was put together in haste, without a thorough, long-term forecast of what its consequences might be, including possible destabilization of the system of power. It might be appropriate to compare such reform with a change in the genetic code: changing a single part of it might create new, never before seen biological forms, including mutants not capable of living.

It is not hard to foresee an aggravation of the political reform battles in the Verkhovna Rada. In 2004 the Parliament will remain, in effect, the only working branch of Ukrainian democracy, whose historical significance and responsibility to the people will increase drastically. One would like to believe that the pro-governmental majority will show responsibility for Ukraine's fate and abstain from passing decisions aimed to please a group of people capable of doing anything and everything to preserve their administrative and financial power.

Let's hope that the opposition, which suffered a series of defeats in 2003, will find more effective arguments to the current regime than the wailing of sirens and blocking of the podium in the Verkhovna Rada. Only well-thoughtout and intellectually brave initiatives, clearly understood by the whole society, will give the opposition a chance to be heard by the people.

But the main thing is that the Verkhovna Rada should not fall prey to political provocations and remain a normally functioning branch of legislative power with significant controlling functions. Year 2004 gives the Verkhovna Rada the chance to become once again, as was the case in 1990-1991, the center of political life in the country, where the most important decisions are passed in an open and transparent manner.

The course and nature of the presidential elections will largely depend upon whether or not President Leonid Kuchma takes part. The Constitutional Court's unprecedented decision, which lacked any legal logic and common sense, that allowed Mr. Kuchma to run for president for a third term, may significantly worsen the situation in Ukraine, not to mention elicit a highly negative reaction among the international community. We can only hope that the president himself will demonstrate political wisdom and keep his word not to seek re-election.

The presidential campaign in Ukraine will lead to an increase in Russia's pressure on Ukraine. Most of the candidates will flirt with Moscow, assuring brotherly friendship and creating the illusion of a pro-Russian stance by Kyiv with the purpose of getting support during the elections from Ukraine's northern neighbor. The extent to which these assurances will be followed up after the elections is another matter.

Yet, one cannot doubt that the harsh strategy of Moscow towards Ukraine, which was continuously demonstrated in 2003 via the "carrot and stick" method (the "carrot" is the promise of a free-trade zone between the two countries, while the stick is the conflict over Tuzla Island in the Kerch Strait, will only become tougher in 2004 when the agreement on the Common Economic Space will need to be ratified, or when it is time to make a decision on the gas transportation consortium on Ukraine's territory. Analyzing the tough and coherent Russian policy towards Ukraine, one should keep in mind the ambitious geopolitical plan of Moscow to build - with Western, mainly U.S., support - a world fuel and energy transportation empire via which Russia becomes the supplier of oil and natural gas to the U.S. Japan, China, Turkey and Western Europe. In such an empire, Ukraine would be a very important adjunct on its southwestern borders. Ratification of the Common Economic Space agreement would be a serious sign of Ukraine's entering a new geopolitical formation that might ruin all its plans for Euro-Atlantic integration.

And what about the West? What is its response to the challenges of year 2004 regarding Ukraine? There is very limited maneuvering space considering the cold calmness, if not indifference, of European Union leaders to Ukraine. The EU's interest in Ukraine may culminate in appeals for transparent elections in Ukraine - nothing more than that.

The gradual warming of U.S.-Ukraine relations since Ukrainian peacekeepers have taken part in the Iraq campaign gives us a little more hope. U.S. support for Ukraine's attempts to join the NATO could become an important aspect of restoring balance in the Central and Eastern European region.

Strategically, however, the United States has yet to determine more clearly its geopolitical vision of the future of Ukraine and of the Central and Eastern European region as a whole. And even though the U.S. presidential elections in 2004 hardly make this a suitable period for geopolitical projects, there is no time for hesitation.

The loss of Ukraine as a strategic partner of the United States may have long-term negative consequences, the significance of which may not be fully realized until as far down the road as 2025-2030.

But all is not yet lost. One needs only to reflect upon the situation that we have at the beginning of 2004, and make responsible decisions regarding the future of Europe so that it does not become divided into empires and enemy blocs.

* * *

ARTUIS editor's note: Dr. Yuri Scherbak was born in Kyiv on October 12, 1934. He graduated from Kyiv Medical University in 1958, and has both Ph.D. and D.Sc. degrees in epidemiology. He is a member of the National Academy on Environmental Sciences of Ukraine and honorary member of Scientific Studies Institute of Harvard University.

Dr. Scherbak began his active political career in 1989 when he won a seat in the USSR Supreme Soviet, where he was a close associate of Dr. Andrei Sakharov. As an opposition leader and chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy and Nuclear Safety, Dr. Scherbak initiated and led the first parliamentary investigation of the Chornobyl accident and the nuclear catastrophes in Semipalatinsk and in the Urals.

Never having been affiliated with the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, he founded and became the leader of the Ukrainian Green Movement (an organization that united more than 500 Ukrainian NGOs) in 1988 (it became the Green Party in 1990).

In 1991 he was appointed minister of environmental protection of Ukraine and a member of the National Security Council. He was Ukraine's first Ambassador to Israel in 1992 and remained in that post until November 1994, when he was appointed Ukraine's ambassador to the United States.

In 1997 he was appointed Ukraine's first ambassador to Mexico (concurrent with his service as ambassador to the United States). In November 1998 Dr. Scherbak completed his tour of duty as Ambassador to the United States and was appointed adviser to the president of Ukraine on international issues.

From March 2000 to May 2003 Dr. Scherbak acted as ambassador of Ukraine to Canada. Since 1993 he has held the diplomatic rank of ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary of Ukraine.

An eyewitness to the 1986 Chornobyl nuclear disaster, Dr. Scherbak wrote the sensational exposé documentary story "Chernobyl," which has been printed in most of the former Soviet republics and also in the West. The book was published in English in 1989. Dr. Scherbak also has written extensively on the Stalinist man-made Famine in Ukraine of 1932-1933. In 1998 Harvard University Press published Dr. Scherbak's book "The Strategic Role of Ukraine."

As a writer, Dr. Scherbak is a well-known novelist who has authored 20 books of prose, plays, poetry and essays and more than 200 publications and interviews on medical, ecological, political and historical issues. He is a member of Ukraine's Writers' Union and Cinematographers' Union, and was on the executive board of the Writers' Union from 1987 to 1989. He was been awarded medals and prizes in literature, medicine and diplomacy. Ambassador Scherbak and his wife, Maria, have two children.

Copyright © The Ukrainian Weekly, February 1, 2004, No. 5, Vol. LXXII

| Home Page |