The importance of being earnest

As is known, Slovakia had to go down quite a rough road to the European Union and NATO. In the mid-1990s, when Vladimir Meciar was in power, that country was called “Europe’s black hole.” The Slovaks believed the European-minded forces and carried out the necessary reforms. As a result, it is now one of the most successful countries in Europe and part of the Eurozone. Ukraine clearly declared a course towards integration into the EU in 2003, while Slovakia signed an agreement to join the EU. Ukraine hopes to sign the EU Association Agreement in the coming November. But this requires the consent of 27 EU member states. How can we persuade the European community to take this step? The answer is in an exclusive interview with Miroslav LAJCAK, Vice Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Slovak Republic.

THE EUROPEAN PROSPECT CHANGED US AND HELPED US TRANSFORM OUR SOCIETY

Minister Lajcak, a few days ago your country marked the 10th anniversary of signing the EU accession agreement, and we can see how this has changed your country. Do you think the same will happen to Ukraine if it signs the Association Agreement in November?

“I have never doubted that the European prospect was the best prospect for my country. This prospect changed us and helped us transform our society. Ukraine does not yet have this prospect. But I want to emphasize that the Eastern Partnership initiative, to which Ukraine is a party, does not say what the final stage of relations between Brussels and Kyiv will be like – it neither offers nor rules out the European prospect. I want to stress that, as a result, it depends on you what benefit you will derive from Eastern Partnership. If you show adherence to European values, the EU will treat you more seriously.

Do you think the release of Lutsenko is proof of a serious attitude?

“The release of Lutsenko is good and great news indeed. But I’d like to get back to the December conclusions of the European Council on Foreign Relations. They are about the necessity to reform the judicial system, not about whether Ms. Tymoshenko will stay on in prison or be released. We should not focus too much on personalities: we should speak about the system. In other words, there are positive moments, on the one hand, and some incomprehensible ones, on the other. In particular, the situation in your parliament is causing concern. We are pressed for time, but we still have some and you must use it to show the seriousness of your intentions.”

But one must perhaps also take into account that Ukraine experienced a totalitarian regime and it is not easy for it to change its post-Soviet system. Therefore, the West should be more tolerant towards Ukraine and try to bring it closer to Europe. Do you agree to this?

“I do. When we launched the process of accession, we were told: ‘We will be judging you by your deeds, not only by one concrete step. We will see what you have done in a year’s time and then say whether this complies with the chosen direction, whether there have been steps into opposite direction.’ You will agree with me that Ukraine’s road was not straight.”

Yes, but Slovakia’s road was not straight either. Suffice it to recall Meciar.

“Of course, we had the Meciar era. And we learned this lesson after his rule. When we arrived in Brussels, we said: ‘We got rid of Meciar at last, so you can perhaps admit us now.’ But we were told: ‘No. From now on we will be watching your progress. We believe in your best intentions, but we will be judging you by your concrete actions and steps.’ The same applies to Ukraine. It is common knowledge that you are a post-Soviet country and have a lot of structural and other problems. The EU is prepared to solve them, but it must see a fair approach and true devotion on your part. Unfortunately, Ukraine failed to convince the EU that it is fully determined to be fair and adhere to European values.”

THE TRAJECTORY OF YOUR MOVEMENT TOWARDS THE EU IS CAUSING CONCERN

What does Ukraine have to do to persuade you to believe in its devotion and honesty?

“It is now the reform of the election law and the judicial system. These things are very important. But you should also change the political atmosphere and encourage the opposition to take part in the important political processes. Whenever amendments to laws are discussed, there should be no doubts that it is being done in order to adopt good laws, not the laws that will help one political party or another win the elections.”

The Polish MEP Pawel Zalewski said in an interview with The Day that signing the Association Agreement would speed up the release of Tymoshenko, for Ukraine will have to make more changes as it fulfills this document. What do you think in this connection?

“There are different viewpoints in this connection. We know from our own experience that one must deserve the honor to be awarded. So signing the Association Agreement is not a freebie. You can say that you have already done very much. But the trajectory of your movement towards the EU is causing concern. Some argue that if we sign the Association Agreement now, Ukraine will begin to believe that it is easy and can be received for not so great services. And then it will be even more difficult to persuade the Ukrainians to make more efforts to carry out reforms after we have given them the Association Agreement as a reward for a half-effort.

“Slovakia has its own view of this. Ukraine is our neighbor, and we strongly support Ukrainian ambitions. I am trying now to express the EU’s opinion, the opinion of the 27 countries that must agree to ratify the agreement.”

What role do you think the Cox-Kwasniewski mission is playing in this?

“This mission proved to be useful and fruitful. In my view, the release of Lutsenko is the result of their efforts. Mr. Cox and Mr. Kwasniewski are honestly trying to achieve results. The mission proved to be the most effective channel of communication between the EU and Ukraine, so I believe that this channel should remain open. One should not forget that it is an extraordinary channel. It would be much better if we could use standard channels – we have plenty of them but they obviously produce no results. Let us hope that the mission will produce more concrete results.”

Kwasniewski even said that in 10 years’ time the EU would be asking Ukraine to join…

“I do not think so.’

But he cited such factors as workforce and manpower shortage in the EU…

“It is a very speculative statement which can make Ukraine be complacent – we can do nothing and wait for Europe to come and ask us to join. I doubt that this will happen. Ukraine is undoubtedly important for Europe. But everything costs an effort. Nor will this occur thanks to Ukraine’s geopolitical situation. Instead, there should be a show of devotion to European values. There can be no agreement without this.”

Have you ever heard this formula: Ukraine is not a burden for Europe but a source for solution of its problems?

“I’ve heard this, but I do not remember who said it.”

Kostiantyn Hryshchenko, former minister of foreign affairs.

“The EU is a community of nations based on common values. One should not underestimate this. This sounds like a cliche, but it is wrong. If we invite a country to join the EU, we do so not only because we are solving the problems of this country. This country should help the EU to function still better. Therefore, claiming that Europe needs us more than we need the EU is of no help to us.”

IF YOU ARE NOT AT THE TABLE, YOU ARE ON THE MENU

I have been visiting GLOBSEC for two consecutive years and noticed that there are no representatives of the Ukrainian government here. To tell the truth, this baffles me. What do you think about this?

“Let me quote Radek Sikorski: ‘If you are not at the table, you are on the menu.’ No doubt, your country will be discussed here. If there is nobody to speak on behalf of Ukraine, someone else will be speaking about Ukraine. But this is not the same. Naturally, we would like to see Ukrainian representatives here. I can understand Mr. Kozhara. This was to be his first visit to Slovakia, and it was supposed to have all the elements of an official visit, which was impossible to do due to the presence of other ministers, presidents, and prime ministers. So he will pay this visit later.”

THE LEADER IS THE ONE WHO MARCHES AHEAD OF HIS PEOPLE

Did the presence of Zbigniew Brzezinski at the forum meet the Slovak side’s expectations?

“I heard his speech. He is a great thinker and has a really global vision of the world. Every time Brzezinski speaks he offers new ideas. He did so this time, too. He made a considerable contribution to the conference. The very fact of his presence confirms that it is an important and top-class conference. This in turn helped attract some other important people.”

Do you share his view that a Wider Europe should include Russia, Ukraine, and Turkey?

“I met Brzezinski and we discussed this issue. Europe is a community of values. You may historically or geographically belong to Europe. But the question is whether you are mature enough to be allowed to apply for membership.”

And what can you say about his claim that Europe is being ruled by the old leaders who lack vision?

“He also mentioned this in his speech. He said there are other de Gaulle and Adenauer now. I think Europe has its democratically elected strong leaders. We often hear that there was more vision in the times of Kohl and Mitterrand. It is important for me that Europe managed to react to the crisis and took the necessary measures. Therefore, I can see no lack of leadership. This may look differently for some political scientists or those who stand at a distance, but the truth is that genuine leaders are usually recognized after they leave politics. Margaret Thatcher was not considered a great leader during her premiership, but when she quit this office, everybody appreciated her contribution to the development of Britain and Europe.”

What lesson do you think Thatcher taught Europe?

“She was a leader. ‘Leader’ derives from ‘to lead.’ So she really led her nation. She had a vision and was not afraid to make decisions, for she believed in her vision. Of course, she cared very little about the consequences and side effects of her decisions. For this reason, now, more than 20 years later, British society still remains divided over her legacy. The leader is the one who marches ahead of his or her people. This fully applies to her.”