By Ambassador Stewart Eldon

 

 

The NATO Council spent two days in Ukraine in mid-June.  The visit was part of the high-level dialogue on Ukraine's wish for a Membership Action Plan (MAP) mandated by the Bucharest Summit.  The Council had last been in Ukraine two years ago.

 

The background to the visit was complex.  The Bucharest Communiqué made it clear that Ukraine would become a member of the Alliance, but some Allies questioned whether the time was right for MAP.  The recently elected Ukrainian government is clear about its NATO aspirations.  But parliamentary opinion in Ukraine is divided, and popular support for membership of the Alliance low, though increasing.

 

In two packed days there was plenty of opportunity to get to grips with these cross-currents of opinion.  A 7am take-off from Brussels in an aircraft kindly provided by the Slovakian government got us to Kyiv in time for a late-morning meeting with the President, Prime Minister and Speaker of the Ukrainian Parliament.  All made clear their strong support for Ukraine's Euro-Atlantic vocation, but acknowledged the need to carry the Ukrainian public with them.  In the NATO context, they believed the next step should be an offer of MAP at the December Foreign Ministers' meeting.  By the same token, it was important to emphasise that MAP did not equal NATO Membership, on which there was no automaticity.  And many Ukrainians didn't appreciate that NATO was a political, not a military Alliance.

 

After lunch, on to a formal meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission with the Ukrainian Foreign and Defence Ministers.  This was a good opportunity to register the progress made in NATO's programme of practical co-operation with Ukraine.  The Foreign and Defence Ministers described the government's plans for an expanded programme of public diplomacy on NATO issues.  Allied Permanent Representatives (PermReps) expressed appreciation for Ukraine's contribution to NATO operations - the only non-Ally to participate in all of them - and Ukraine's intention to offer a contribution to the NATO Response Force.

 

Our next meeting at the Ukrainian Parliament clearly illustrated the differences of view over NATO within Ukrainian political opinion.  The majority of the party leaders were strongly in favour of the government's aspirations for membership of NATO and the EU.  But others - notably the Communists and Party of the Regions - were not, arguing that if Ukraine joined the Alliance it would be forced to participate in expeditionary military operations overseas at the behest of the US.  Many MP's pointed to the divergence of view between the Russian-speaking East of the country and the Ukrainian-speaking West. Ambassadors made it clear that they weren't there to sell NATO but to provide information and hopefully dispel some of the Cold War stereotypes described above.  All respected the decision of the Ukrainian Government and Parliament to put any decision on NATO membership to a national referendum.

 

After a separate meeting with the Ukrainian Prime Minister, a group of PermReps went on by Ukrainian government Tupelov to Dniepropetrovsk in Eastern Ukraine.  Others went to Kharkov and Lviv.  In Soviet times Dniepropetrovsk was closed to foreigners and housed a large number of military installations, including the Yuzhmash missile factory, where SS-20's and other Soviet missiles were built.

 

Now the city is prospering, and preparing for the next European Football Championship.  Interestingly in this Russian-speaking area, the governor told us more than 30% of the population were in favour of NATO membership.  The younger and better educated fell into this category; pensioners and the less well-educated had different views.

 

On leaving our hotel, we were greeted by a small but vocal anti-NATO demonstration.  The average age must have been close to sixty.  We were given a one-page manifesto blaming the Alliance for many of the world's ills and invoking Eastern Slavonic solidarity as a reason for Ukraine to boycott NATO.  As we left, one demonstrator attempted to stick a poster reading 'NATO-Gestapo' to our bus.

 

We spent the morning at a conference with interested local government agencies and NGO's sponsored by the NATO Information Centre in Dniepropetrovsk.  There were worries that Russia might exact an economic price if Ukraine got closer to NATO, but at the same time much enthusiasm for a Euro-Atlantic future.  There were a number of appeals for support in getting the public message across.  Outside a few hundred pro-and anti-NATO demonstrators set out their respective stalls.

 

Media interest in the visit was high.  Regional television carried interviews with Ambassadors in the group almost every hour.  In all cases the message was the same: decisions on NATO are for Ukraine, and the Alliance's role is to provide information, not twist arms.  The questions I was asked - about intimidation from the demonstrators and future NATO bases in the Crimea - illustrate there's still a long way to go to overcome some significant misperceptions of how a politico-military Alliance works.

 

Our final engagement was a meeting with students and engineers from the Yuzhmash plant, held in the Ukrainian Space Academy for young people.  Here again, there were questions about the economic impact of NATO and EU membership.  Two members of the audience - one of them a local Communist parliamentarian - took the opportunity to ventilate more hostile political questions on Kosovo and Northern Ireland.  These interventions were dealt with calmly and, I hope, effectively.

 

The visit helped set the scene for the first review of Ukraine's MAP application by NATO Foreign Ministers in December.  But it also highlighted the importance of outreach and communication.  Decisions on issues like NATO and EU membership need to be taken with a proper understanding of what these institutions do, including the relationship they both have with Russia.  Communicating this is primarily for the Ukrainian authorities but NATO will have an important role in providing factual information and filling any gaps.