Ukraine on the way to optimal participation in international models of collective security

Oleh Soskin Institute of Society Transformation, National Academy of Management, Kyiv, UA Ukraine on the way to optimal participation in international models of collective security Today Ukraine is experiencing very difficult times. In fact, what is happening is a shift of the geopolitical vector of the state. Clearly, this is an extremely painful process because it means the total renunciation of the coordinates that were formed over the last twenty years and the transition to some kind of new direction. No one can describe or articulate it, no one knows its parameters, and no one can identify the consequences of moving this way or what awaits us. One has to analyze the situation that has developed and attempt to formulate some scenarios of how events might unfold. Thus, today we have the following situation. On 30 September 2010, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, decided: To rule that the Law of Ukraine On the Introduction of Changes to the Constitution of Ukraine of 8 December 2004 No. 2222-IV does not conform to the Constitution of Ukraine (is unconstitutional) in connection with the violation of constitutional procedures during its examination and adoption; the Law of Ukraine On the Introduction of Changes to the Constitution of Ukraine of 8 December 2004 No. 2222-IV is unconstitutional and null and void as of the day that the Constitutional Court of Ukraine adopts this decision. If today the 1996 Constitution is once again in force, then all of the normative and legislative acts that were in force prior to 8 December 2004 should have their validity renewed. Accordingly, the Law of Ukraine On the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine and the Law of Ukraine On the Rules of Procedure of the Supreme Council of Ukraine should be repealed and all other legislative acts adopted in 2004 2010 should be brought into conformity with the Constitution of Ukraine, which was adopted in 1996. According to Article 5 of the restored 1996 Constitution, the bearer of sovereignty and the only source of power in Ukraine is the people. The people exercise power directly and through the state and local governments. The right to determine and change the constitutional order in Ukraine belongs exclusively to the people and can not be usurped by the state, its bodies, or government officials. 11/2011 UKRAINE NATO / NEW UKRAINE 133

134 Oleh Soskin We need to analyze what is the existing system of government in Ukraine, including in the area of international collective security. Quite logically, the question arises as to whether it can be Law of Ukraine On the Fundamentals of Domestic and Foreign Policy (No. 2411-VI of 1 July 2010) passed by the unconstitutional Supreme Council is valid. Is indeed this document, which proclaims Ukraine's non-aligned status, also unconstitutional? Accordingly, we must implement the Law of Ukraine On the Fundamentals of National Security, which states that one of the priorities of Ukraine's national interests is the integration of Ukraine into the European political, economic, and legal space and the Euro-Atlantic security sphere as well as ensuring full participation of Ukraine in the pan-european and regional collective security systems, gaining membership in the European Union (EU) and NATO while maintaining good-neighborly relations and strategic partnerships with the Russian Federation and other countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) and other countries of the world. Thus, an ambiguous situation has developed in Ukraine. How should we act? We must be guided by the realization of the people s interests. No act of the authorities should be directed against the people. Because according to the Constitution of Ukraine the people are the only source of power. Under these circumstances, it is necessary to analyze the existing systems of collective security and choose the one that is most optimal for Ukraine. Let us take a look in which system of coordinates we are now living. The west and south of Ukraine borders on NATO and the EU. The EU encompasses twenty-seven countries, NATO has twenty-eight member-states. All of them have clearly articulated their politics and economics. The EU has asserted that it will not create its own security system because its security needs are covered by NATO (twenty-one European Union member-states are also NATO members). Therefore, they do not need any other security system. This is how the EU responds to the proposal of Russian President Dmitrii Medvedev to form a new system of European security. The EU clearly states that it does not need a new security system because for sixty years the Euro-Atlantic Alliance has operated very effectively. It has proven its absolute ability to keep the situation under control. The Warsaw Pact has ceased to exist, while NATO continues to exist. Twelve countries established NATO and now it has twenty-eight members. And NATO has not attacked any of its members and has not killed any inhabitant of a NATO member country. In contrast, the objective of the Warsaw Pact was to occupy the memberstates of this organization: East Germany (the construction of the Berlin Wall in 1961), Hungary (in 1956, during the suppression of the uprising, about 4,000 Hungarian citizens died and 35,000 were imprisoned), Poland, Czechoslovakia (in 1968, 500,000 soldiers from the Warsaw Pact were sent to suppress the popular movement for reform). The ongoing conflict with Romania and Yugoslavia, the establishment of a dictatorship and a state of emergency in Poland in 1981. This is the story of the Warsaw Pact. In the history of the North Atlantic Alliance there are no such events. Let us remember how Ukraine was concerned about the fate of Serbia and Yugoslavia. Left-wing parties were even ready to form a battalion of volunteers to help these countries. And now Serbia is actually one step away from joining NATO, and NATO membership is one of the main foreign policy priorities of Montenegro. Everyone aspires to join NATO. That is why we must first of all worry about our own country and ponder how we can form our own successful model. To the east of Ukraine lies Russia which seeks to restore itself as an empire. And there should be no illusions here. In early 2010, I, like many other politicians

Ukraine on the way to optimal participation in international models 135 in Ukraine, received a letter from deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation Evgenii Fedorov, which discussed the formation of an organizing committee to develop guidelines for the restoration of a single state consisting of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. Fedorov projected ten years as the term needed to implement this project. A careful analysis of events reveals that this project is being realized. The shift of the current Ukrainian government towards non-alignment is a step precisely towards creating a single state in the form of the Eurasian Union. They want to exile Ukraine from the center of Europe. Saddest of all is that our country is in fact gradually being exiled. In various ratings, Ukraine occupies the lowest positions, and only Moldova rates lower. However, we rank at the top in terms of corruption, the shadow economy, and aversion to investment. For negative features Ukraine occupies top ratings and for positive traits it as at the bottom. For example, the Index of Economic Freedom compiled the Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal, Ukraine in 2010 was ranked 162 with an index of 46.4%. Compared with 2009, this figure declined by ten positions. According to the same source, our economic freedom ranking is at the level of 1999. That year the indicator was 43.7% and now it is 46.4%. And we see a trend that in 2011 it will be no more than 41 43%. The World Economic Forum s global competitiveness index ranked Ukraine 82nd among 33 countries, dropping ten positions from the previous year. We continue to drop in the Transparency International corruption ratings. This rating is structured so that at 10 points corruption is virtually absent and 0 points means absolute corruption. Ukraine is now ranked at 2.4. This is 134th in terms of corruption! (http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2010/results ) According to Transparency International, in 2010 Ukraine was ranked 181 st out of 183 countries with respect to the ease of paying taxes. According to Freedom House, in 2010 Ukraine's status dropped from free to partly free. The British Maplecroft Political Risk Atlas for 2011 shows that in Ukraine there is a high degree of risk for foreign investors (data for 2010). According to the report, corporate governance and macroeconomic stability worsened in 2010 along with guaranteeing human rights by law enforcement and the level of education dropped critically. In addition, the degree of state regulation of business and political stability has increased in the country, the overall stress level of the population has grown, and the threat of terrorism has decreased. In 2010, Ukraine has shifted from 62nd to 74th place, between Burkina Faso (73rd) and the Republic of East Timor (75th). These figures indicate that Ukraine today is a non-competitive and corrupt country in which it is difficult to do honest business and, moreover, a country that is moving toward authoritarianism. That's how we are perceived by our potential partners abroad. Are there other exiles along with Ukraine? Yes, Belarus, Moldova, Transdnistria, and the three Caucasian republics Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia. There are no other countries in the world that still have not chosen a geo-economic and geopolitical model for their development. This is extremely embarrassing for Ukraine because during the Soviet period our country was always among the leaders. And today, under the conditions of a ruined economy, the inability to support a process of renewal and economic bankruptcy the ruling clan-oligarchic elite has declared Ukraine a non-aligned country.

136 Oleh Soskin Considering all of the circumstances of Ukraine, it is imperative to determine which system of national security is the most effective. There are three geostrategic security models for Ukraine: Euro-Atlantic model a possible path of development for Ukraine that provides for its joining NATO and the EU. Eurasian model of development that strengthens the supranational, paternalistic tendencies of Russia vis-à-vis Ukraine. Non-aligned-isolationist (neutral) model of development that presupposes, above all, self-reliance. Ukraine first of all has to decide what kind of country it is Euro-Atlantic or Asian? Or maybe we are a different country: one of a kind and non-aligned. It should be noted that in international law there is no definition of non-alignment. Thus, the Supreme Council in approving the non-aligned status of Ukraine once again revealed its ignorance and incompetence. What is collective security? It is the protection of states from external threats through the creation of joint organizations or joint institutions. Ukraine rejected collective security, declaring non-aligned status. An international collective security system includes measures to support peace, prevent war, and implement collective resistance and aid in the event of aggression. In Ukraine, these principles do not apply. We must rely only on our own resources. Let us think about what kind of world we now live in. Previously, everything was clear, the world was bipolar, and within it two superpowers competed against each other the Russian Communist empire (the USSR) and the U.S. Each had its satellites. Both superpowers competed economically and in the Cold War. And then the Communist empire collapsed, and what followed was the rebirth of an entire group of countries, including Ukraine, which restored itself as a European country after 350 years of colonial occupation. Thus, today Ukraine and its citizens should realize who we were and who we will be, where and how we will live, and what the parameters of our country are, all in accordance with the mentality of our people. The population, unfortunately, is varied. Thus, the attitude toward life in different parts of Ukraine is different and this complicates the situation. Still, statistically 90% of the population positions itself as Ukrainian. Thus, we have a mono- not a poly- national system. But these Ukrainians experienced 350 years of colonial occupation. Over these centuries, Ukraine experienced a process of denationalization. Are there similar examples in history? Yes there are. The collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the German Empire, and the British. The nations that left the empire could not revive themselves immediately. For example, the Czech, Slovak and Hungarian languages remained functionally active only in the countryside and German was spoken in the cities. So we are not unique in this respect. Other countries also went through this. Now we need to choose a security system. Why do we need to choose? Because the world has become multipolar and multi-civilizational. There is the Euro- Atlantic civilization, to which we strive, the Chinese civilization, the Islamic, Hindu, Latin American, and African. And which civilization do we want to belong to? Or will we absorb elements of all civilizations and on their basis build our own? What is neutrality? In international law it is the political and legal status of a state that does not participate in war, maintains peaceful relations with belligerent countries, and does not offer any of them military aid. Also, the concept in-

Ukraine on the way to optimal participation in international models 137 cludes non-interference in the affairs of others, any kind of struggle, strife, and so on. But neutrality has to be recognized by the United Nations. Currently, the neutral countries are Austria, Finland, Ireland, Sweden, Switzerland, Costa Rica, and Turkmenistan, which declared their neutrality and had it formally recognized by the United Nations. These are countries that have defined their security systems. For example, Switzerland is positioning itself as follows: Switzerland has no army. Switzerland is an army. Switzerland bases its neutrality and security on the strengthening of its own armed forces. The military leaders of this mountain country believe that it must have a strong army in order to afford being truly neutral. The population has a universal military obligation, and along with a professional army and conscripts Switzerland maintains hundreds of thousands of reservists in a state of readiness former recruits who are called up each year. Some countries have already dropped their neutrality. These are Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Already in 1949 they helped found NATO. Although they were neutral prior to World War II, the Baltic states joined NATO after the collapse of the USSR. Perhaps Ukraine wishes to become neutral. Then the question arises as to whether our country has enough financial resources to ensure its neutrality? Let us take a look how much neutral countries spend on their armies. Austria spends $3.65 billion (2009) on defense. GDP in 2010 was $330.49 billion, GDP per capita was over $39,000 the population was only 8.4 million. Sweden spends $6.1 billion on defense. GDP is $444.58 billion and per capita GDP of is over $37,000; the population is 9.3 million. Switzerland spends about $4.1 billion on defense. GDP is $522.43 billion and per capita GDP is over $41,000; the population is 7.7 million. Finland spends $3.54 billion on defense (plus a $303 million reserve fund). GDP is $231.98 billion and per capita GDP is over $34,000; the population is 5.3 million. What are the allocations for defense in Ukraine? The 2011 State Budget of Ukraine allocated $1.71 billion for defense. GDP in Ukraine in 2010 was estimated at $125.944 billion and GDP per capita was $2,740. The population of Ukraine is about 46 million people. Compared with the above-named neutral countries our country is a beggar. Thus, in order to be neutral Ukraine should have a GDP per capita of at least $25,000 and the country's GDP should be about $1.3 trillion. Then we will be able to spend $27 billion on defense. Otherwise, we cannot afford to be a neutral country. Ukraine currently spends $1.7 billion on defense. Under these conditions, what kind of non-alignment can we possibly talk about? Now let us examine the Eurasian security model. The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) was established in May 1992. In fact, the organization serves as a counterweight to the Muslim challenge in the Caucasus and the challenges and threats in southern Russia, including the struggle against drugs and psychotropic substances. Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Russia have agreed to become CSTO members. According to the organization s statutes, decisions are made by a majority vote, and Russia always has the majority. Regarding Ukraine, the ideologists of the organization strive to bring it under their control. They do not want Ukraine to join NATO. One of the modern, influential ideologues of Russia, Aleksandr Dugin, openly declares: The Orangeists

138 Oleh Soskin [supporters of the Orange Revolution] are leading Ukraine to NATO, but we must lead Ukraine to Russia. We in one direction, they in the other. Who gets whom: Either Ukraine is torn apart, or one of us will be able to grab it for ourselves. (http://uncensored.km.ru/uncensored/index.asp?data=01.08.2008%208:00:00, 1 August 2008.) Dugіn's optimal scenario is to take half of Ukraine or, if possible, two thirds. He does not hide the geopolitical goal, but he does conceal his aggressive plans with false phrases such as all of this is ours, all of this is a part of Russian civilization. In his textbook on geopolitics, which is used at military institutions of higher learning in Russia, he writes that the continued existence of Ukraine is unacceptable, that this area must be divided into several zones. The current military doctrine of the Russian Federation considers the use of military force to ensure of the protection of its citizens living outside the Russian Federation to be legitimate. It is also important to note that the Eurasian model considers the use of energy resources as a means of pressure on other countries. The situation is such that in 2009 Ukraine imported 26.83 billion cubic meters of gas and extracted about 17 billion cubic meters. In 2010, Ukraine imported 36.473 billion cubic meters of gas. Let us also recall the agreement between Ukraine and Russia on the basing of the Black Sea Fleet in Ukraine, which allegedly allowed the reduction in the price of gas to 100 dollars per 1,000 cubic meters. In fact, Ukraine's debts to Russia only grew. In 2010, they have already reached $2 billion. Ukraine received about the same amount in credit from Russian banks. And now for the Euro-Atlantic model. In the next fifteen years we are not threatened by membership in the EU because we do not meet any of its requirements. The EU is an entity composed of democratic and economically developed European countries working together for peace and prosperity. EU member-states remain independent, sovereign nations that have formed common institutions. The EU consists of twenty-seven countries with a population of over 501 million people. In 2010, the European Union's GDP was estimated at 12.119 trillion euros. For Ukraine to join the EU it must meet the following basic conditions: Political achieve stability of the institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, as well as human rights, freedom of speech and assembly, and protection of minority rights. Economic a developed market economy and the ability to withstand competitive pressures and market forces within the EU, a developed business environment, and support for small and medium businesses. General willingness to undertake the obligations of EU membership, in particular the recognition of the tasks of political, economic, and monetary union. To develop and strengthen relations with its eastern neighbors, the EU has proposed the Eastern Partnership project. To begin its implementation it allocated 300 million euros, but the project has not yet been set in motion. For Ukraine, it is of interest as a tool to promote and support specified cooperation with the EU. It also serves as a platform for regional political dialogue focused on European values and standards. At the moment, a third of our trade is with the European Union. Ukraine, unfortunately, is in the red on all indicators. We do not have a cooperation agreement with the EU because the original one expired in 2008. There is, therefore, an element of uncertainty in our relations; negotiations are ongoing. Unlike Medve-

Ukraine on the way to optimal participation in international models 139 dev, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych did not attend the EU s Lisbon summit (November 2010). The Bologna process has collapsed. Overall, Ukraine's integration into the EU is stagnating. Generally, it would be good if journalists were to consider the EU integration experience of Poland, Spain, Hungary, Slovakia, and Slovenia. Today, Ukraine's cooperation with the Visegrad group countries is extremely important. The Visegrad countries can share with Ukraine their economic and financial experience, their experience in the reform of local government, well as the adaptation of their military to European parameters. Cooperation with Poland may be exceptionally fruitful. In particular, there could be effective cooperation in the joint project with the missile cruiser Ukraine. The cruiser Ukraine was built in 1984 and today its readiness is at 95%. According to various estimates, the cost of the cruiser is up to $1 billion. Jointly, Poland and Ukraine could build a cruiser, provide it with modern equipment, and form a Ukraine-Polish military naval unit to service the cruiser. Thus, the cruiser Ukraine could become the basic structure for joint operations of naval forces in Ukraine and Poland, and in the future with naval forces in Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and Hungary, operating off the coast of Somalia. Additionally, the realization of cooperative naval operations might include the Baltic States. It is clear that such cooperation would promote the improvement and development of naval forces in Ukraine. The realization of this project will be a serious contribution to Ukraine's Euro-Atlantic security system and an active step in the formation of an effective national security system.