Says US Ambassador to Ukraine
“Can we really speak about some warming in the bilateral relationship?”
“The relationship has improved, and I hope it will continue to improve. I think all of us believe that the best thing for the United States and Ukraine is to have productive relationship that produces practical benefit to both sides. Over the past few months we have indicated that we will pursue a strategy of incremental possibilities. It is difficult to define the ideal relationship between the US and Ukraine given the certain difficulties we have experienced. We also believe it’s possible to open doors leading to new understanding that can create additional incremental possibilities. We also reaffirmed that the long-term goals that we have consistently had in our relationship with Ukraine are still applied. We are committed to promoting Ukraine as a democratic and market-oriented state and support its integration with Euro-Atlantic structures. We’ve also reaffirmed that in spite of some difficulties we are committed to maintaining contacts between our governments and our societies at various levels. This includes contacts between our government officials, lawmakers, senior political figures, as well as contacts with representatives of the media and civil society. And of course this includes contacts between our militaries, which has been very productive. We’ve also reaffirmed that we are ready to work together in a whole range of sectors. For example, in military relations it’s support of security issues, particularly, strengthening Ukraine-NATO relations, in economic issues — improving the business climate, developing of medium and small enterprises, addressing bilateral trade and investment issues. Of course, the United States has reaffirmed that we will continue working to support Ukrainian civil society and the development of independent media, since these are fundamental building blocks to developing a democratic and transparent society.”
“During the visit of the US Congressional delegation to Kyiv it was stated that both sides have made mistakes. What are the mistakes made by each side and how can we overcome their consequences?”
“I don’t think it’s constructive to spend time speculating upon what the errors of the past may be because there might be different views and opinions on this. What is constructive is to formulate positive and results-oriented approaches to the future and dedicate one’s resources and attention to implementing them. We’ve seen that we can actually produce results as a result of this process. Let me give you some examples. On issues related to the FATF sanctions the US worked with Ukraine to try to define what the requirements for lifting the sanctions were. We stated very clearly that if Ukraine met those requirements we would support lifting the sanctions. Indeed, when Ukraine took necessary legislative actions we played a very proactive role within FATF, supporting the removal of sanctions against Ukraine. We keep working with Ukrainian side on and discussing possible additional assistance to Ukraine to fight money laundering. We raised with Ukraine a number of concerns that we had in our bilateral trade relations that are also linked to the WTO, particularly, issues related to intellectual property rights and the poultry trade. In the end, we’ve reached a practical decision to support Ukraine’s movement to the final stage of negotiations in the WTO process, specifically to develop the working party report, while at the same time giving the highest possible priority to resolve the remaining bilateral trade issues between us.
“I can list a number of other issues where we see positive cooperation. We are strengthening our cooperation on export control; we’ve indicated our willingness to provide assistance to Ukraine to strengthen the security around its sights that have sensitive biological, nuclear, and radiological materials. We’ve appreciated Ukraine’s willingness to consider the possible deployment of a nuclear, biological, and chemical decontamination unit that could be based in the Gulf region in the event that chemical or biological weapons are used by Iraq. I would stress that if Verkhovna Rada approves that, the deployment of this unit would be in a country outside of Iraq and not a part of the conflict. Recently Mr. Horbulin was in NATO headquarters in Brussels, and our ambassador there hosted a dinner for him with a number of senior officials, giving them an opportunity for an off-the-record constructive exchange with their views about NATO-Ukraine’s relationship. A couple of weeks ago we had our Senior Advisor on Caspian Basin Energy Diplomacy, Ambassador Stephen R. Mann, here, who had an opportunity to meet Ukraine’s senior government officials to discuss the prospects for Odesa- Brody pipeline and give our best advise on some of the key issues that could help make it commercial success.”
“Can we say that Ukraine’s leadership’s readiness to send this unit to the gulf was among the factors favoring the warming in the relations?”
“We certainly appreciate the willingness on the part of President Kuchma and the Ukrainian government to consider this possibility. I think it’s clear from the list I just gave you that it’s just one of many examples of practical cooperation. I think for both sides it’s important to continue to identify concrete practical areas for our cooperation where we have common interests and in some cases where we may serve broader global and regional interests. If increasingly Ukraine can undertake actions, which bring it closer to the international community on economic and anti-terrorist policy, basic internal political policies, then this over time would serve Ukraine’s interests and Ukraine’s basic goals to be recognized as a mainstream partner of Euro-Atlantic community.
“I think it’s best to turn to the Ukrainian Presidential Administration and authorities for information on where and when this unit might be sent, because this is really in their jurisdiction. We also recognize that Verkhovna Rada is to consider this question and only after that it would be possible to speak about the unit’s deployment. I would reinforce a few points. First, that Ukraine’s position would be not that of a combatant but based in the region as a preventive measure to respond in the event of emergency where chemical or biological weapons might be used by Iraq. There are many countries that have volunteered to play this role, and many of these countries are already deployed, for example, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and it’s my understanding that Romania will soon join them.”
“What is your impression on whether those five points you named in your Washington statement are implemented?”
“We’ve started to work on all of them, and we continue this work. First, we reinforced that Ukraine and the United States may not reach a common understanding. But it’s in both our interests to extract the lessons from this incident and apply them constructively to strengthen Ukraine’s export control system. We have already taken a number of steps including work with the Committee on Military and Technical Cooperation, and Export Control Committee, as well as the types of preventive measures we are discussing with Ukrainian government, as I described. Secondly, I’d stress the importance of making contacts on various levels and sectors. We saw the examples of such contacts in the visits of Minister Khoroshkovsky to the United States and Congressman Weldon’s visit to Ukraine. I had an opportunity to have a number of meetings with President Kuchma recently. I believe that these contacts are beginning to produce a better understanding and better results. Third, we’d stress the importance of strengthening the development of Ukraine’s democracy and civil society. We’d had a very constructive and frank discussion about including the importance of developing independent media. While we may not agree on all points, the fact that the dialog is proceeding is useful to both of us. We continue to provide assistance to Ukrainian non-governmental groups and media organizations that are working to promote greater transparency in Ukrainian political life and can help Ukrainian citizens have better information and facts that can serve as a basis for the choices that they make. As we’ve stressed before, it is not for the United States or any other foreign country to make choices about Ukraine’s future politics. Rather, the constructive role that we can play is to work with those organizations in Ukraine that can help ensure that Ukrainians can make their choices, and that these choices can actually be realistic. The fourth point raised was continuation of our very strong military cooperation. There has never been a break in this area of our commitments to continue. And our fifth point was to work with Ukraine on its integration into global and regional structures, particularly, NATO and the WTO. As I’ve indicated before, we continue this work.”
“Getting back to the Kolchuga issue, when will it come to an end so that we could forget about it?”
“Our policy on the Kolchuga issue is very clear. The United States and Ukraine, as I’ve stated earlier, may not agree on the specifics about this case. However, we can agree that the important lesson to be drawn is to increase our joint work to strengthen Ukraine’s export controls system. We are committed to move forward with this and allow it to be a tendency for constructive dynamics in our bilateral relationship. There have been some statements in the press that Ambassador Pifer and I have different positions on this matter because of different analogies each of us used concerning the “box.” Unfortunately, we used the term “box” differently, but if you look at our comments, we described exactly the same policy.”
“How can Ukraine’s leadership achieve some progress in the US government’s position toward it? I mean not the President of Ukraine alone.”
“There have been some unfortunate elements that have created problems in relations on both sides at high levels. At the same time, both the US and Ukraine recognize that the best thing for both our countries is a positive and constructive relationship between our countries. That relationship has to be based on our mutual goals and principles that would serve the interests of our countries. At times there are question of personalities that influence relationship between the countries. But in the end, the policies are most effective when they are focused on long-term goals and interests what, I believe, both sides are committed to try to do.
“I would stress that the United States recognizes President Kuchma as President of Ukraine and his constitutional authority to guide this country’s foreign policy. We also certainly recognize that in order to have effective relations between our countries we will maintain contacts with President Kuchma. Over the past months we’ve seen willingness on both sides to engage. I think our relations have produced constructive results in the past six weeks, including progress on FATF, the WTO, export controls, security issues, NATO-Ukraine relationship, etc. While at this point it may not be possible to have a meeting between our presidents, I think it’s clear that there is a great deal that we can do between our countries that produces positive results for both sides.”
“Why, in your view, did the so- called Kharkiv initiative not work as it was expected to? Why it was recalled only recently?”
“I’d never forgot about our partnership in Kharkiv. I’ve been actively engaged in seeking to implement it in the last two years. I first went to Kharkiv in January 2000, when Governor Kushnariov and I focused our efforts on improving business climate, promoting specific investment, and strengthening small and medium enterprises and job creation in medium enterprises. We worked very hard to open microfinancing bank in Kharkiv, which has now extended approximately $11,000,000 in loans.
“We also worked hard in Kharkiv city and oblast to simplify processes of registration and licensing for small and medium enterprises and creating a generally more favorable climate for private investment, not just foreign but also Ukrainian. I think this approach is really starting now to produce very concrete results. In 2001, Kharkiv oblast reported that it created 22,000 new jobs for small and medium enterprises. In 2002, they changed the measure that they were using to assess the development of small business, but in this case it was reported that 20,000 enterprises were registered in small and medium business. I do not claim that all this is a result of the United States united efforts with Governor Kushnariov, but I think it’s indicative of the fact that the approach that we have taken is paying off in real jobs and real business activities and is stimulating what in the US and throughout Europe is the most dynamic sector of the economy.”
“What is your view on the rate of Ukraine’s movement toward NATO, prospects for starting intensified dialog, Ukraine’s joining the Membership Action Plan and possible support from US for Ukraine on this way?”
“Apparently, Ukraine has a great opportunity. The NATO-Ukraine action plan was based on the Membership Action Plan that other countries have used, and the best way to Ukraine to move toward the MAP is to implement effectively the action plan before it now to demonstrate its serious intentions. In the past few months Ukraine has focused a great deal of its effort on creating the institutional structures that would support implementation of the action plan. In particular, the creation of the Euro-Atlantic Integration Center which is headed by Mr. Horbulin is a very constructive step. And to be sure, he’ll need support from the president and prime minister. I can state that in many ways the calendar on when Ukraine might move to MAP lies in Ukraine’s hands and its serious performance is going to be the best mechanism to accelerate the timetable.”
“You have been protecting US interests during a most serious crisis in the bilateral relationship. Wouldn’t you like to have a less stress-fraught job for yourself?”
“The last two years has been a complicated period for bilateral relations. At the same time, I am proud I had an opportunity to serve my country, and I hope to be of some service toward our mutual goals, which is to help in Ukraine move toward a democratic, market-oriented state integrated with Europe. As an individual, one cannot help but be moved by this very important moment in Ukraine’s history. You really have grasped an opportunity to give meaning to the independent state of Ukraine. Ukraine is a country filled with talented friendly people. I have been very touched by the way people have received me as an individual, human being, not just American ambassador. It’s also beautiful country. I have traveled to most regions of Ukraine, and I only regret that I had not been able to get to all the places that have been on my list. My time here will come to an end at some point this summer. If there is any regret that I have, it’s only that as a result of this difficult period we’ve not been able to take as many steps forward as we hoped. But at the same time, there have been things that succeeded my expectations, like the consolidation of civil society and independent media in Ukraine where despite difficulties Ukrainians are formulating there own vision for what they want for their country. I’m sure that these efforts in the end will be most fundamental contribution to Ukraine’s success.”
