Ukrainian Army: a Defender, not a Burden

The times when the press was mercilessly exploited by Communist Party bosses are gone forever. Society has at last gained the right to receive unbiased information about the current political and economic processes in the state, particularly in the army, which is going to celebrate its twelfth anniversary. It would be a good idea to analyze now, on the eve of the new year, the current state of Ukraine’s Armed Forces and again stress the lingering negative phenomena and the positive changes that have taken place of late.

There have always been many of those willing to pour scorn on the army and criticize the Defense Ministry’s top executives. Recall the early 1990s, when some so-called patriots ardently accused then Defense Minister Kostiantyn Morozov of all deadly sins: allegedly he bungled everything he set his hands on. That was only natural, because Ukraine was one of the first former Soviet republics to begin forming its own armed forces and thus lacked experience in this matter. Heading the Ministry of Defense under extremely difficult, especially from the political angle, conditions, Gen. Morozov was doing his best to keep the army combat-ready and took great pains to improve the social security of servicemen. Yet the so-called patriots achieved their goal: Gen. Morozov was dismissed from office.

Today, the defense ministry is steered by Yevhen Marchuk, a civilian. Still, the same old story. As before, some pie-in-the-sky politicians try to touch off a debate on whether Mr. Marchuk is the right person to head the ministry. So I will take the liberty of asserting that Yevhen Marchuk is exactly the kind of minister the state and the army need today: he is resolute, principled, energetic, and unsurpassed in terms of military savvy. It is for this reason that, faced with Mr. Marchuk’s firm standpoint, his numerous adversaries are now painstakingly looking for any pretext to malign him and undermine the trust of both the civilian and military public in the minister. I would advise these self-styled politicians not to search for a black cat in the dark room: the cat is just not there.

***

For decades, the Soviet totalitarian regime was trying to hammer all kinds of ideological dogmas into our heads in every imaginable way — and brilliantly succeeded in doing so. The ruling elite, with a powerful propaganda apparatus at its disposal, found it quite easy to achieve absolute uniformity of thinking. Then, all of a sudden, perestroika, glasnost, new independent states, bitter criticism of an army only yesterday exalted to the skies. Down with the military-industrial complex! Up with disarmament and arms reduction! Down with Communist Party committees and political commissars! Down with the communist ideology! Down, down, down with... We have gotten rid of the signs of the empire. There are no signs left. But what has our society, our military, been offered in exchange in ideological terms? Not much.

Some will argue: haven’t we had enough ideological blinkers? But the question is not of blinkers or stupefied people but of ideology. For when an officer says, “I no longer believe in anybody or anything,” no measures aimed at increasing the army’s professional level will remedy the situation. When the only information an ensign or commissioned officer receives is that some top brass are building capitalism for themselves only, it is no wonder that he will not be overjoyed at the news of a slight pay rise. When a soldier is not aware why on earth he has been wrested from civilian life and the parental home, he will be looking forward to early discharge as if it were manna from heaven, not caring much about upgrading his military skills.

This involuntarily raises a question: is there any kind of ideology in our society at all? There naturally is if one goes by the official speeches of many public office holders. And at the level of a specific individual? I may have just been unlucky, but I have not seen for a long time a soldier whose face did not break into a grin when he heard lofty words about the sense of duty. Is this what we really strove for and wanted? I don’t think so. Hung up on economic and social transformations, governmental ideologues utterly forgot about molding the young person’s sense of identity. For while the previous ideals were ruined, it turned out not so easy to form the new ones at a time when the individual needs clear guidelines, a stable ideological and moral linchpin. This is precisely what our youth lack today. And we adults are also to blame for this in a way. Consider a few examples.

It was the Committee of Soldiers’ Mothers that did much to undermine the imperial army. But why has the latter been so sluggish lately, much like the parents of those who are going to fill the ranks of Ukraine’s Armed Forces? Or is shirking military duty the only thing they wish for their offspring to do? Who says we should waive our parental duty to instill courage, bravery, and dauntlessness in our children so they could, if necessary, defend their kin, their family, and their Fatherland? Questions, questions...

I cannot agree with those who claim that our boys are too weak to endure the hardships of military service. For their peers, now keeping peace in Lebanon, Sierra Leone, and Iraq, have to endure what some will call unheard-of difficulties. You might tell me they earn handsome money for this. Yes, they do. But aside from the financial incentives, those soldiers have a desire to serve in a hot spot, overcome fear, and gain battle experience, that is, to be true warriors. Yes, for economic considerations, this country is so far unable to maintain a professional army. Asked about putting the Ukrainian army on an all-volunteer basis, Ukraine’s minister of defense stressed that “this kind of service will really ensure a higher quality of professional training.” Yet, in his view, it is impossible to form a professional army in Ukraine in the near future because the price tag of such an army would be too heavy for the government. So what stops us from setting up a streamlined system of military and patriotic education of young would-be soldiers? The limited progress we can see in Kyiv or oblast centers is merely a drop in the ocean.

***

The army and language... On the face of it, these things are not related. For what did the Soviet Army and the Ukrainian language have in common? Nothing. The Soviet Army needed Ukrainians, a lot of Ukrainians — but without their native language. Today, such things as the Ukrainian army and the official language are coming closer to each other, but this is a very slow process. The truth is simple: the people and the army will only be a single whole when the army begins to speak Ukrainian. Still there is a glimmer of hope. The official language is used on an increasingly wider scale in the army. This is quite natural, for can Ukraine’s interests be defended by an army that speaks a language that, albeit understandable, is not native to Ukrainians? Can an army be considered Ukrainian if it relies on foreign traditions, ethics, culture, and history?

***

A general once said to me privately, “You know, I really feel happy that, after so many years away, I have come back to my Fatherland that has gained independence and is now building an army of its own. I cannot understand, however, why the military were made to solve so many army-related problems single-handedly — as if building the army is the job of a bunch of enthusiasts, not of the whole nation.” It is an open secret that these thoughts also haunt other officers who put military duty first. The fact that the military are today overwhelmed like never before, and their anger and resentment can be put down not only to inadequate living standards but also to a longing for real work. So it is little wonder that people are nostalgic about old practices and look back to the days of full-fledged military training.

As for social problems in the army, they have not been addressed for years on end. Instead, many government officials have been brimming with lofty words about their passionate love for the military.

Although the current government takes a better attitude toward the army, everything still remains unchanged by all accounts. Daily hardships, impossibility to fully realize oneself in the Armed Forces, and other negative factors force the uniformed people to repeatedly appeal to various ministries and Verkhovna Rada in a hope to be heard. Unfortunately, these attempts were futile. The powers that be speculate on the presumption that the military — people of honor — will under no circumstances resort to provocative actions. But is this an excuse to forget that they have wives, children, and elderly parents to take care of? Why should they suffer? Yes, one can endure temporary privations and inconveniences out of love for one’s profession. But when the profession turns into an endless ordeal, then no amount of love will do. What we need is something more reliable, for example, a government program that would help weather the times of trouble without betraying oneself and the cause to which one devoted the best years of your life.

Incidentally, as long ago as January 1992 then Prime Minister Vitold Fokin promised the military to implement the State Housing Program. His successors also made promises, but the problem remains unsolved. Moreover, it has been further aggravated, so the military no longer take seriously the government’s numerous promises to remedy the situation. And it could hardly be otherwise, with budgetary spending for military housing cut back many times over. There is still a glimmer of hope that the new minister of defense will help improve things.

***

“You know, colonel,” a nouveau riche Ukrainian once told me, “it must be the paradox of our times that the image of ‘tough guys’ in our society is far more prestigious than that of engineers, doctors, or you, the military... We drive Mercedeses, and you ride on streetcars and trolleybuses; we relish caviar, you chew bread and low-grade sausage, walk about on weekends in shabby clothes. And, what is more, we launder our ‘dough’ right before your eyes. And you still cherish an illusion that reforms will change your life for the better. But where are those reforms? Perhaps on paper. And we, you see, seize the day and are having the time of our life.”

The above monologue convincingly proves that our society is seriously ill, affected by the virus of irresponsibility, cynicism, deceit, and intellectual paucity. Uncertainty about what will happen tomorrow and poverty (let me emphasize that many servicemen’s families are living on the breadline) force people to put their personal concerns above the concern for the Fatherland. Yet, there still exist such qualities as courage, valor, and nobility. These common human values cannot and should not vanish, especially in the uniformed services. For, irrespective of the historical epoch and the prevailing social system, treason remains treason and cowardice remains cowardice, as well as honor is always honor and dignity is always dignity.

What cannot stand up to any criticism is the pacifism of some shortsighted politicians who cry out at the top of their voice that all countries of the world strive to live in peace and, therefore, any defense expenditure means a waste of money. Those who toy with these mindless ideas perhaps find it hard to understand that the army is an instrument of the policy pursued by the state; so, instead of talking idly, we must ensure that the army is well-provided for, alert, and ready at any moment to resist those making territorial claims on our land. Such states do exist, the recent Tuzla affair being a glaring example of this.

It is common knowledge that upgrading the military hardware and arms and training the personnel carries a heavy price tag. And, no matter how difficult the situation is, we must reckon with this if we do not want to lag hopelessly behind the world’s leading powers. It is no accident that I have mentioned this. Statistics suggest that some of Ukraine’s neighbors have been of late allocating more and more funds for research and development projects, assuming that it is dangerous to economize on defense. Suffice it to say that Slovakia, Poland, and Russia quite recently spent 2%, 2.8%, and 3.5% of their GDP, respectively, on defense, while Ukraine spends a mere 1.7% of its GDP for this purpose, although military economists estimate that the army in fact needs 3.4%.

Naturally, I am not going to say that all passions that run high over defense spending are being stirred up with the sole purpose of reminding again to the military: sorry, gentlemen, the state has some more important things to do. Without doubt, the current deplorable state of Ukraine’s Armed Forces is the result of a flawed cadre policy which allowed some statesmen to amass their financial and political capital for many years and forget the old maxim that the nation that does not want to feed its own army will sooner or later feed a foreign one.

Thus there is a plethora of problems that the Armed Forces and the new minister are facing literally every day. Neither the minister nor the military are hiding them as well as their achievements. Yes, achievements! For example, we can congratulate the Ukrainian military that they managed to meet the principal target of 2003: they kept up the desired level of operational and mobilization preparedness. The Ministry of Defense and the General Staff have organized and carried out dozens of professional training measures, such as Cooperative Partner-2003, Shield of Peace-2003, and Cossack Steppe-2003 multinational exercises, as well as sending a peacekeeping unit to Iraq. The Air Defense Forces managed to solve the problem of conducting live-fire tactical exercises at a Russian proving ground. In 2002 and 2003, our army tested some new Ukrainian-made weapons and equipment.

Mr. John Colston, NATO Assistant Secretary General for Defense Policy and Planning, who recently visited Ukraine, rated highly the achievements of our Armed Forces, “I was very much impressed with what I saw. This especially applies to the General Staff’s progressive thinking. We saw the manifestations of a creative approach to what Ukraine’s Armed Forces may become in the future... We think the quality of their work is beyond reproach.” Besides, NATO Secretary General George Robertson, while in Kyiv on October 20, thanked Ukraine for contributing to the international peacekeeping efforts and expressed interest in using our transport aviation in NATO’s target plans.

Our army is pinning many hopes on the Ukrainian Armed Forces reduction program. As Defense Minister Yevhen Marchuk stated repeatedly, this is a very difficult and painful problem that has been growing for many years. Naturally, reduction requires big funds. So the minister immediately warned that, unless the state allocates enough money for this program, not a single commissioned or non- commissioned officer will be demobilized, and his social status will thus not be affected.

Now I would like to address one more issue. I have never sided with those who think that highlighting army problems should be put under a taboo and, hence, the army should be above criticism. All democratic states cultivate respect for the army, and all things related to the latter are subject to all-round analysis in the mass media, governmental and non-governmental institutions. I just do not agree that anyone is able to give a competent judgment of what is or will be going on in the Armed Forces and, moreover, to offer his or her own methods of reforming them. I have read quite a number of stupid articles in various civilian publications. Upon my word, the overwhelming majority of authors are just unable to rise above street-corner chatting. Therefore, army matters should be discussed by experts who know military manuals and garrison life very well and are thus obliged to speak more often in various media and give a piece of their mind about army-related problems.

So I think it necessary to reiterate that the army is the defender of the people, not a burden to it. Hence, a respectful attitude to the army is a sure sign of a nation’s moral health, although a complete recovery is perhaps still a long way off. But I am sure this time will come, and we will be proud of both our country and Armed Forces. Opinion polls suggest that the army comes second after the church, as far as public trust is concerned. It is quite telling! Let us remember this and reinforce the public confidence in the army with concrete deeds. The times of slogans and empty declarations are gone. It is time for all of us to act!