Russia rejects Ukraine’s initiatives
The next session of the ministerial taskforce of the four prospective member states of the single CIS economic space has been slated for June 4 in Kyiv, Vitaly Lukyanenko, aide to Ukraine’s First Vice Premier Mykola Azarov, told The Day in a comment on the results of the fourth ministerial taskforce session held on May 16 in Belarus.
The session was supposed to endorse the taskforce action plan, analyze probable differences on goods and services during the talks on WTO accession, and agree on a joint concept of forming a single economic space, as well as the composition, action plans, and consultations timetable for expert groups. Despite the mainly routine work in Minsk, Lukyanenko believes a breakthrough has been achieved, as the session participants agreed with the Ukrainian side for the first time and instructed experts to “begin calculating and estimating the common market of the four countries.” To quote Mr. Azarov, a single economic space is no abstraction but specific parameters for our cooperation. In his view, the economic benefits of creating the single space will be the decisive argument that will help its member states achieve the goals set by their heads of state. Session participants agreed on the need to study the possible effects of economic integration. By June 10 experts must analyze our nation’s legislation on the turnover of goods, capital, and services. The taskforce has approved a draft of requirements for a comparative analysis of member states’ economic legislation.
By contrast, the differences on the concept of a single space have remained unsolved. Ukraine keeps insisting on the creation of a free trade zone as a first step toward a single economic space.
Meanwhile, the Russian mass media have offered their own assessment of the talks. In particular, Interfax-West reports that session participants have agreed on the draft concept of forming a single economic space, citing Russia’s Vice Premier Viktor Khristenko. According to him, the sides have not only agreed on the draft concept of forming a single economic space but also outlined the steps that will be taken to this end: “This means that we have come to an understanding of the previous international documents required to implement the idea of a single economic space.” Kazakhstan’s Vice Premier Karim Masimov seemed less optimistic. He merely underscored that the session “to some extent solved many issues in terms of the conceptual understanding of what a single economic space is and what primary steps must be taken to form it.” Simultaneously, Mr. Masimov tried to contribute his share of optimism: “I would like to tell all those skeptical of the progress made by the taskforce working on the creation of the single economic space that there is a considerable degree of certainty that this agreement will be drafted within the timeframe outlined by the heads of the four states.” Belarusian Vice Premier Andrei Kobiakov also tried to downplay the level of differences: “We have reached an understanding that the differences on the draft concept are no obstacle to progress.” The head of the Ukrainian delegation, Mr. Azarov, was especially careful in choosing words: “We also understand their (taskforce members — Author) stands and thus our stands have come closer.”
According to RusEnergy, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Belarus have rejected Ukraine’s proposal to include in the concept a separate clause on a free trade zone. The participants also disagreed on the issue of WTO accession. All the participants except Kyiv have proposed joining the WTO on coordinated terms, while Ukraine thinks it necessary to confine this process to consultations and keep to the principle that the first country to join it will not obstruct other members’ accession to the WTO and will assist them in this process. Moreover, the Ukrainian side does not support the idea of creating a Council of Heads of State and proposes not to take anything further than creating a Council of Government Heads and a Committee on Trade and Tariffs. There are also differences on the principle of voting. Kazakhstan and Russia have proposed distributing votes among the members in proportion to the size of their contributions. Instead, Ukraine and Belarus, which are strapped for natural resources, support not the shareholder variant (which places them in an obviously unequal position) but a general democratic variant, that is, one vote per state. On the face of it, the idea of a single economic space has run aground.
