[Ohio UZO News] Ukraine: FT (3 articles); International Herald Tribune (Ukraine NATO op-ed); Washington Post

[Deychak, Orest]

Financial Times 

www.ft.com <http://www.ft.com/> 

Ukraine open for business, west told

By Chrystia Freeland 

Published: January 25 2008 

Viktor Yushchenko, Ukrainian president, arrived in Davos this week with a clear message: his country is back on course after its recent political troubles, open for business and ready to become a democratic member of a democratic Europe.

The message was the same as it had been when Mr Yushchenko came to power on the back of the 2004 Orange Revolution. As the world briefly marvelled at events in Kiev, it seemed an astonishing but just about credible claim.

That expectation was worrying for neighbouring Moscow, which feared a copycat revolution, and has been dashed over the past three years, as Ukraine descended into bitter and chaotic political squabbling, culminating in early parliamentary elections last year. That election finally delivered a new government last autumn headed by Yulia Tymoshenko, prime minister and the president's sometime ally and rival.

Now, Mr Yushchenko says, Ukraine is back on course and knocking with vigour at the door of the west, which, grappling as it is with a resurgent Russia, may be discomfited by its advances.

"The Ukrainian authorities for the first time are in a situation where the president, the prime minister and the speaker of the parliament are all openly proposing a pro-west path and Euro-Atlantic co-ordination," Mr Yushchenko said in an interview with the FT. "I am not idealising things . . . but I believe that today the government is united."

He is using this new consensus to push a pro-west strategy on several fronts.

In his interview, he called on the west to support Ukraine's bid to join Nato's membership alliance plan, a step towards accession, in April.

Ukraine hopes to be admitted to the World Trade Organisation next month. After that, Mr Yushchenko would like to speed up discussions with the European Union about entering its associated free trade zone.

Mr Yushchenko does not disguise his ambition to join the EU. "We have a desire to join the EU club, to join the EU collective."

In time, he believes: "Europe will find itself asking - why isn't Ukraine a member?"

But for all his enthusiasm, Mr Yushchenko is enough of a realist not to set a timeline for Ukraine's accession to Nato or the EU.

"I don't like this question," he said. "We know what we have to do, and if you are committed, you can do it very quickly and if you are not it will take a great deal of time."

He thinks Ukraine's big strength is its democracy, which he believes has been bolstered rather than undermined by the conflicts of the past couple of years.

"Over the past 2½ years we have demonstrated to the whole world that we are able to resolve any internal disputes, even those with polar political views, in a democratic way," said Mr Yushchenko, who described his country as enjoying a "democratic renaissance".

Other communist, or post-communist, countries such as China and Russia have been promoting the view that in countries with weak social and market infrastructure, authoritarianism can be a surer path to development than democracy. It is an argument made more credible by the growing prosperity and influence of both countries, but Mr Yushchenko is unconvinced.

"Democracy works, it is worth it," he said, citing Ukraine's 7.3 per cent growth last year.

And anyway, even if you wanted, he is certain that "you couldn't put Ukrainian society back into bondage again . . this is a society that has enlightened itself".

Financial Times

Kiev's time has come, says Yushchenko

By Chrystia Freeland in Davos 

Published: January 25 2008 

Ukraine's Orange Revolution is Victor Yushchenko's proudest accomplishment. But the turbulent weeks that saw him emerge as president exacted a physical toll - a near fatal poisoning that left him scarred.

Three years later Mr Yushchenko is back. He says that Ukraine is back too, and ready to become a democratic member of a democratic Europe.

That was Mr Yushchenko's ambition when he first came into office and, as the world briefly marvelled at the protesters in snowy Kiev, it seemed astonishing but just about credible.

These expectations were thwarted in the subsequent three years as Ukraine descended into bitter political squabbling, culminating in a pre-term parliamentary vote last year. After weeks of jockeying, the election finally delivered a government led by Yulia Tymoshenko, the president's sometime ally and sometime rival, as prime minister. Now, Mr Yushchenko says, Ukraine is again on course.

"The Ukrainian authorities for the first time are in a situation where the president, the prime minister and the speaker of the parliament are all openly proposing a pro-west path and Euro-Atlantic co-ordination," Mr Yushchenko says in an interview with the Financial Times. "I believe that today the government is united."

The president is using this consensus to push on several fronts. He has called on western countries to support Kiev's bid to join Nato's membership action plan, a step towards accession, and hopes Ukraine will be admitted to the World Trade Organisation next month. After that, Mr Yushchenko wants to speed discussions with the EU about entering its associated free trade zone.

He does not disguise his ambition of eventual EU membership. In time, he believes, "Europe will find itself asking: why isn't Ukraine a member?"

Kiev's trump card is its democracy, which Mr Yushchenko believes has been bolstered rather than undermined by the recent domestic conflicts. "Over the past 2½ years we have demonstrated to the whole world that we are able to resolve any internal disputes, even those with polar political views, in a democratic way."

Other communist, or post-communist, countries such as China and Russia have been promoting the view that, in states with weak social and market infrastructure, authoritarianism can be a surer - and more prosperous - path to development than democracy. But Mr Yushchenko is unconvinced. "Democracy works, it is worth it," he says, citing Ukraine's 7.3 per cent growth last year.

"You couldn't put Ukrainian society back into bondage . . . this is a society which has enlightened itself."

For a US administration that has made democracy-building a centrepiece of its foreign policy - without much success - these are welcome declarations. Indeed, after Condoleezza Rice, US secretary of state, met Mr Yushchenko earlier this week in Davos, US officials took care to say she had supported Kiev's Nato ambitions.

But other countries may not be so delighted by Ukraine's renewed claims.

Russia's petro-fuelled economic rise, and the political aggression that has come with it, may have made backing Ukraine seem riskier. And while the EU's eastern enlargement has brought an economic boost, it has also provoked populist concerns about a flood of migrants.

Russia is the most ambivalent of all. The political muddle that followed Ukraine's Orange Revolution was a gift for Moscow's leaders, worried about a copy-cat revolt at home.

As Moscow flexes its geopolitical muscle, it has also spoken out against Ukrainian moves towards Nato, accusing Kiev of seeing links "as an alternative to good-neighbourly ties with Russia".

Mr Yushchenko says that is not so and believes he can persuade the Russians to see things his way.

"A good-neighbourly dialogue will, step by step, establish the understanding which is necessary for Russia, in particular the Russian foreign ministry, to accept this step."

He is a believer in the power of time. Time, he says, has helped Ukraine to jettison the Soviet past and become more democratic and united.

Time, he thinks, will also help Russia to accept Kiev's new geopolitical stance, just as it has come to accept Nato membership of the eastern European states that were once part of the Warsaw pact.

But changes over time do not always run in a single direction - and at the moment Russia seems keener on turning back the clock.

Financial Times

Deadline looms for Nato enlargement

By Stefan Wagstyl and Stephen Fidler in London, and Chrystia Freeland in Davos 

Published: January 25 2008 

Nato countries are divided over the alliance's enlargement plans as decisions loom over membership bids from Croatia, Albania and Macedonia and applications for future membership from Ukraine and Georgia.

With the organisation's summit in Bucharest taking place in early April, Nato governments must make decisions in the next few weeks.

Nato diplomats said Washington had wanted the summit to focus on enlargement and backed reaching out to new members, not least to signal to Russia the west's commitment to the Balkans and the Black Sea region.

But, they said, some western European allies - including Germany, Italy and France - had reservations about provoking Moscow, which strongly opposes western influence in former Soviet territory.

The deepest Nato split is over requests by Ukraine and Georgia for membership action plans, the ante-room to membership. Ukraine surprised many by requesting such a plan this month in a joint letter from its president, prime minister and the speaker of parliament.

The request prompted a rebuke from Russia's foreign ministry, which said Ukraine's integration with Nato would "seriously aggravate" Moscow-Kiev relations.

In Davos, Victor Yushchenko, Ukrainian president, urged Europe and the US to support its application. "Having had discussions with our strategic and political partners and with our European friends, we think it is appropriate to expect that we will receive a positive answer ... at the Bucharest summit," he told the FT.

Condoleezza Rice, US secretary of state, met Mr Yushchenko this week. State department officials said she had indicated Washington's support for Ukraine's effort to join the membership action plan. 

The US is pressing for membership invitations for Croatia, Albania and Macedonia. 

_________________

Note:  The following superb op-ed by former US Ambassador to Ukraine Steven Pifer should serve as a guidepost as efforts gear up to support Ukraine's bid for a MAP at the April Budapest NATO summit.  OD 

 

International Herald and Tribune

 

NATO MEMBERSHIP

It's time for Ukraine to get started

By Steven Pifer

 

January 24, 2008

  

At NATO headquarters last Friday, the Ukrainian foreign minister presented a request from his government for a membership action plan for Ukraine, which Kiev hopes will be approved when the alliance's 26 leaders meet in Bucharest in April.

 

NATO should say yes.

 

The goal of NATO enlargement since the mid-1990s has been to achieve a broader, more secure Europe. This has driven alliance decisions to take in Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary in 1999, and seven additional Baltic and Central European states in 2004. Those decisions have produced a more stable and integrated Europe, and underpin the dramatic democratic and economic transformations made by the new member states.

 

The "open door" policy adopted by NATO in 1997 allows that any European country that meets alliance standards and can contribute to Euro-Atlantic security can be considered for membership. A membership action plan - or MAP - offers no guarantee of membership, but it would provide a guide for Ukraine's further integration in Europe and internal reform efforts. A MAP is not a request for membership; Ukrainian leaders have said their electorate will have a chance to express its view on NATO membership in a referendum before Kiev formally decides to make such a request.

 

Granting Ukraine a MAP at the Bucharest summit meeting would be fully consistent with alliance policy. It would enhance European security and stability. It would encourage the large and growing number of Ukrainians who want greater integration with Europe. Moreover, none of the arguments against the measure stand up to scrutiny.

 

Some might assert that Kiev is not ready to prepare for NATO membership. Not true. Ukraine has made as much progress on democratic, economic and military reform as Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia and Albania when they received MAPs in 1999. Moreover, in late 2005, in the aftermath of the Orange Revolution, many in NATO considered a MAP for Ukraine a strong possibility ahead of an Alliance summit meeting in November 2006. But the Ukrainian prime minister at the time, Viktor Yanukovych, derailed that prospect. Today, however, a unified Ukrainian executive branch, backed by a majority coalition in Parliament, desires a MAP. And, over the past two years, Ukraine has further burnished its democratic credentials, deepening military reform and conducting two free parliamentary elections and a peaceful changeover of power.

 

Others might argue that Ukraine's population does not support NATO membership. Perhaps. While polls show that only about one-third of Ukrainians currently favor membership, popular support for joining NATO in countries such as Slovakia and Slovenia was likewise weak in 1999. Those two countries, use their MAPs to broaden popular support. Ukraine's leaders have indicated that they will do the same.

 

Skeptics might assert that Ukraine would bring little to the alliance other than an additional security burden. Wrong. Kiev has demonstrated that it has serious military capabilities and the political will to use them. In recent years, the Ukrainian military has provided the alliance with strategic airlifts; participated, often side-by-side with NATO troops, in peacekeeping operations in the Balkans and elsewhere; and made a significant contribution to coalition ground forces in Iraq during 2004-05. Ukraine would be a net contributor to Euro-Atlantic security.

 

Finally, some might fear that preparing Ukraine for NATO membership would provoke new difficulties with Russia. Let's be clear. The Kremlin would not welcome the move, now or at any time in the foreseeable future. But there is nothing to suggest that holding off would prompt Moscow to take more accommodating positions on other issues, such as Kosovo.

 

Indeed, allowing the Russia factor to block a MAP would only reward Russia's petulant behavior. In the past year Moscow has suspended the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty, threatened to recognize the breakaway states of South Ossetia and Abkhazia and blustered about targeting nuclear missiles on Central Europe.

 

NATO poses no threat to Russia. Unfortunately, the Russian foreign policy elite choose to regard it as an adversary. While NATO should engage Moscow by offering new, cooperative programs, it is up to the Russians themselves to decide not to portray NATO as a threat.

 

NATO leaders should thus welcome Ukraine's request and give a positive answer in Bucharest. Anything less would be a reversal of 10 years of alliance policy, would discourage those in Kiev who want to modernize Ukraine, and would waste an opportunity to advance the process of shaping a broader, more secure Europe.

 

Steven Pifer is a senior adviser with the Center for Strategic and International Studies. A retired foreign service officer, he served as U.S. ambassador to Ukraine from 1998 to 2000.

 

  <javascript:void(0)> 

A Section

Aide Helped Controversial Russian Meet McCain; Davis, Then a Lobbyist, Has Spurred Debate in Reform-Focused Campaign 

Jeffrey H. Birnbaum and John Solomon 

Washington Post Staff Writers

25 January 2008

FINAL

A01

A top political adviser in Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign helped arrange an introduction in 2006 between McCain and a Russian billionaire whose suspected links to anti-democratic and organized-crime figures are so controversial that the U.S. government revoked his visa. 

Rick Davis, who is now McCain's campaign manager, helped set up the encounter between McCain and Russian aluminum magnate Oleg Deripaska in Switzerland during an international economic conference. At the time, Davis was working for a lobbying firm and seeking to do business with the billionaire. 

There is no evidence that McCain did anything for Deripaska after they met at a social gathering over drinks and dinner. Deripaska was grateful for the introduction, writing a thank-you note to Davis and his partner and offering to assist them in a subsequent business deal, according to a copy of the note obtained by The Washington Post. 

With a net worth of more than $13 billion, Deripaska is one of the richest men in Russia and a close ally of President Vladimir Putin. McCain has been one of Putin's sharpest U.S. critics, calling for Russia to be kicked out of the Group of Eight industrialized nations because of Putin's anti-democratic activities. The Arizona Republican has also repeatedly complained about the negative impact of Kremlin-linked oligarchs such as Deripaska. 

When Deripaska met McCain, Davis was part of Davis Manafort, a lobbying firm that was being paid to provide political advice to pro-Russian and oligarch-funded candidates in Ukraine, according to interviews and news accounts. At the same time, McCain was publicly supporting those candidates' Western-oriented democratic rivals. 

The socializing with Deripaska provides a case study in the challenges faced by McCain, a longtime foe of Washington lobbyists who has a well-known lobbyist as his top political aide. Davis, who has been a political adviser to McCain on and off since 1999, was part of a lobbying firm that worked not only for Ukrainian politicians but also for telecommunications firms, a lottery services provider and freight companies. 

Mark Salter, a spokesman for McCain, said that meetings with Deripaska took place during official trips abroad by senators and that McCain did nothing improper. "Any contact between Mr. Deripaska and the senator was social and incidental," he added. 

Salter said the contact between McCain and Deripaska did not constitute a "private meeting"; both men were part of larger gatherings. 

Davis declined to comment, saying by e-mail that his activities regarding Deripaska "all relate to my private business and have nothing to do with Senator John McCain." 

Within the campaign, Davis's role has been controversial from the start, as some aides in late 2006 argued to McCain that the Davis firm's work overseas conflicted with the senator's record as a pro-democracy champion and an advocate of reducing the influence of lobbyists in Washington, according to two people familiar with the conversations. The sources spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of internal campaign conversations. The aides questioned whether Davis should be given an important title in the campaign because that would make him more vulnerable to criticism, the sources said. 

At first, McCain agreed to give Davis a less conspicuous title, one of the sources said. But then, the source added, "a few days later he [McCain] came back and said he had changed his mind." 

Salter strongly disagreed with that recounting. "No one suggested Rick shouldn't be in the campaign or discussed such a thing with the senator," he said in an e-mail. 

Last summer, a power struggle broke out in the McCain campaign after it ran short of money. Many staffers were dismissed, but Davis survived the purge. 

The work of Davis's firm put him on the opposite side of Eastern European politics from McCain, who has spoken out vigorously against what he sees as Putin's attempts to subvert elections in former Soviet republics such as Ukraine. 

Davis's firm provided political advice to a pro-Russian party in Ukraine during the parliamentary elections of 2006. McCain, on the other hand, backed President Viktor Yushchenko, a Western-oriented reformer who led 2004's Orange Revolution, which overturned what he and his allies considered an election stolen by the party helped by Davis's firm. McCain visited Ukraine to boost Yushchenko after he won a new election and even nominated him for the Nobel Peace Prize. 

Deripaska, 40, a former metals trader, is No. 40 on Forbes's billionaires list as owner of two-thirds of the world's largest aluminum producer. He has been accused of shady business practices in lawsuits in the United States and Britain, and his multiple-entry U.S. visa was yanked by the State Department in the summer of 2006. 

One source familiar with the decision said it was made because of concerns about Deripaska's business dealings in Russia. 

The Wall Street Journal has linked Deripaska's entry ban to concerns that he might have ties to organized crime in Russia, but Deripaska has denied any such links. "He's not the nicest in terms of law abidance," said Anders Aslund, a Russian expert at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, based in Washington. "But he is by no means among the worst." 

E-mails to Deripaska's office asking about his meetings with McCain went unanswered. His attorney in Washington declined to comment, as did a spokesman for Deripaska in London. 

The first gathering that brought McCain and Deripaska together occurred in January 2006, when McCain was part of a congressional delegation trip. He and a small group of senators, including Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) and John E. Sununu (R-N.H.), met for a drink near Davos, Switzerland, at an apartment where they were greeted by Davis and Deripaska. The group then went to a dinner at the ski chalet of Peter Munk, founder of Barrick Gold, the world's largest gold-mining company, based in Toronto. Participants at the buffet dinner said Munk complimented his sometime business partner Deripaska during his brief remarks to the 40 or so guests. 

Later that month, Deripaska wrote to Davis and his partner, GOP political consultant Paul J. Manafort, to thank them for arranging the meeting. "Thank you so much for setting up everything in Klosters so spectacularly," he wrote. "It was very interesting to meet Senators McCain, Chambliss and Sununu in such an intimate setting." 

The letter went on to mention a business deal that Deripaska and the consultants had apparently been talking about. "Please will you send me the information on the metals trading company we discussed and would be happy to see if I can do anything to help," Deripaska wrote. 

The letter was sent to Davis at the Reform Institute, a Virginia-based nonprofit group that McCain helped start to promote many of his trademark reform efforts, including increasing the transparency of lobbying and campaign financing. 

Davis was the institute's president from January 2003 until December 2005. During that time, he was also a registered lobbyist at Davis Manafort. The institute was located at the Davis Manafort offices until January 2006. 

Seven months later, in August 2006, Davis was present again at a social gathering that was also attended by McCain and Deripaska, this time in Montenegro, another Eastern European country in which Davis's firm was working. The three were among a few dozen people dining at a restaurant during an official Senate trip. 

Davis was a paid consultant to the governing party in Montenegro and had advised it on a just-ratified independence referendum, Salter said. That was why he was at the dinner, he added. 

Afterward, a group from the dinner took boats out to a nearby yacht moored in the Adriatic Sea, where champagne and pastries were served, partly in honor of McCain's 70th birthday. 

Salter said neither McCain nor Davis recalls Deripaska being on the yacht after dinner. 

"The Montenegro government handled all arrangements with the codel, including invitations for the dinner," Salter said in an e-mail, using a term for "congressional delegation." "Rick was not involved in making dinner plans for either the government or the codel." He added: "I assume the government invited him [Deripaska] because he is reportedly the largest single employer in the country." 

In Switzerland, Davis was "an invited guest at the World Economic Summit at Davos and was not traveling with or serving in a capacity as staff to the senator," Salter said. 

Staff writer Peter Baker contributed to this report. 

http://www.washingtonpost.com <javascript:void(0)> 

 

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://clevelanduzo.org/pipermail/uzonews_clevelanduzo.org/attachments/20080125/cf1e53a0/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 3160 bytes
Desc: image001.gif
Url : http://clevelanduzo.org/pipermail/uzonews_clevelanduzo.org/attachments/20080125/cf1e53a0/attachment.gif