• Home page
• News
• About the Foundation
• Donors
• Programs
• Donor Advised Funds
• Publications
• Events

• Grantmaking programs
• Equal Opportunities
• For Tolerance
• Your Vote, Your Choice
• Watchdog Initiatives
• Legal Education
• Civic Institutions
• Community Initiatives Partnership
• Memoria
• East East
• Citizens in Action
• Operational programs
• Debates and Conferences
• Anti-Corruption
• International Cooperation
• Alcohol and Drug Program

International Program

The Enlarged EU and Ukraine: New Relations

contact:
Grzegorz Gromadzki
ggromadzki@batory.org.pl,
Anna Wróbel
awrobel@batory.org.pl

The project is financed by the Stefan Batory Foundation (Warsaw), International Rennaissance Foundation (Kyiv), Open Society Institute (Budapest) and has been supported by the Poland-America-Ukraine Cooperation Initiative (PAUCI), financed by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

Interviews

Interview with Kostiantyn Sytnyk

Director of the Institute of Botany of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Academician, Member of Parliament, Yulia Tymoshenko block faction.

What does "Ukraine's European choice" mean to you?

Ukraine's European choice I consider, first of all, in the light of my family, as I have two sons, two daughters-in-law, and four granddaughters. That is why I see Ukraine's European choice as that which is able to make my descendants' lives prosperous, peaceful and full of good. I had lived a long life together with Russia and within Russia (it does not matter what the country's name was: the Russian Empire or the Soviet Union as an imperial formation). We realise that Europe faster than the rest of the Slavic world mastered the ways to live better: they built better economy, better culture; more perfect public life architecture that gives more freedom to their people, both in their relations with the state and in their personal contacts, as well as in the situation with mass media. As the saying goes, "A fish is seeking where it is the deepest, and a man — where it is the best". Undoubtedly, life is better in Europe. I have been to almost all European countries, except for Spain and Portugal, and people live better there than in Russia, Ukraine or Uzbekistan. And Ukraine's European choice means for me the choice of a better, more intellectual, more cultural life; a life that would be more prosperous economically, a lawful life, when my rights are being protected by law and the state's legal system. I always ask myself, "Why do we live worse than citizens of Italy, Spain or Poland do?" I am surprised at some of my colleagues' position: they point out the USA's certain loopedness at Ukraine in a negative sense. There are few of those who think of that the USA are forced to treat Ukraine negatively, and they are forced by our executive power's actions, by its incompetence. And the conflict between the legislative and executive branches of power in Ukraine has once again testified the executive power's irrelevance of actions, its incapacity to convince the parliament of necessity of taking of certain decisions which are of great importance for our country's future. Afterwards this impropriety develops into undesirable sanctions against Ukraine on the part of foreign financial structures.

Purposes and obstacles of Ukraine's participation in the processes of European integration.

Of course, there are a lot of purposes and obstacles. I would like to point out psychology, mentality that had been being formed during many years of existence of the Soviet system of education. When people had been educated under a slogan, "NATO is an aggressive bloc, an enemy and invader", — even frequent repetition of the fact that today's NATO differs from what it was 10-20 years ago, cannot change their attitude towards this alliance in a moment. They will not be able to grasp the idea that in case of its enlargement on account of, for example, Ukraine, Russia, etc., the North Atlantic Alliance will become a different, more progressive bloc, reasoning from the very fact of its enlargement. People are intimidated by an enemy's image, they had been frightened a long ago, and certain political forces are profiteering in this fear, trying to get political capital and enlarge their electors' number. Correspondingly, the Communists will never support the idea of Ukraine's entering into NATO. However, the Communists still constitute a quite influential force in the Parliament, able to impede enactment of a number of important decisions concerning European integration. But this integration is not only a political of military one, — it concerns scientific, intellectual sphere, as well as economic and legal fields. The second obstacle impeding Ukraine's integration in the European direction is the inconsequence of steps taken by both the Ukrainian government and the president. The multivectorness of the foreign policy, declared some time ago, is now seriously hampering Ukraine's progress in this direction. I would not hasten to speak of integration in any other direction and go beyond one or two countries which can be mentioned there. And when our president goes to China, India or countries of the Middle East, where he does not engage himself in solving of any important questions (for example, an oil one), taking over only Saudi Arabia's experience concerning an inflow of investments, I am very surprised at the purposes of his visit. While on the whole there are many obstacles, and I have tried to single out the most prominent ones in the way I see them.

How do you see your country's contribution to the future of Europe; Ukraine's role (real and desirable) in the all-European political, economic and public processes?

We (Ukraine and its inhabitants) do not differ from Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece, Bulgaria, etc. in an intellectual, scientific or cultural sense at all; perhaps, differences can be observed as regards those countries which are more mature politically: Great Britain, Germany and France. We have not become a great country yet, but we possess strong potential in this direction. For instance, if our science were given half money than that put into the European science, I am absolutely convinced that we would take the lead over European countries in most main characteristics. As we, under our beggarly conditions, are managing to survive and make epoch-making scientific discoveries; and what opportunities our science will have under the sufficient financing! In addition, Ukrainian scientists have great authority with the scientific world; they work in countries of the European Union, and one could say that exactly they are influencing Europe's development greatly, even if we are not aware of this influence. And when our fellow-citizens appear in the Council of Europe, they are influencing the EU's development, too. In this way, we demonstrate what life should not be like, and suggest right and wrong ways of evolution to Europe. We influence countries of the European Union with our faults. One can take S.Holovaty in different ways; regard him and his counterparts as not patriots who create a negative image of our country. However, these people show that the executive power in Ukraine does not make for any rise of our prestige. Nonetheless, if they had held back negative facts from Ukrainian life or had given untruthful information on state of affairs in Ukraine, this would have worsened our image much more, as our country is not an isolated space, and one can easily observe most of negative phenomena of the inner political and social life with the unaided eye. And there exists a feedback: they suggest possible ways out from this or that crisis, and we are gradually changing themselves, and changing for the better. Of course, there is also a desirable role of Ukraine in European processes. We would like to act at the level of Great Britain or France, and not to try to catch up with Slovakia or Hungary. We would like to play the key, important role in our region, not being a simple buffer between the West and the East. We intend to be the vanguard, not the rearguard of Europe. Despite our country's tumbledown and plundered economic system, during his trips over Ukraine one can see small and medium enterprises reviving and becoming quite competitive not only in Ukraine but in international markets. This often happens with the help of our foreign partners. For example, in Krasny Luch, in Donetsk region, the Americans built a clothes factory, production of which finds markets not only in Ukraine but also abroad, and is exported actively. Besides, we have relations of various kinds, first of all, cultural contacts, and I can unambiguously say that we have only one way — the way to Europe.

The EU's present expansion and its influence upon Ukraine.

Undoubtedly, we have to develop pride for our nation in ourselves. I am extremely worried that Bulgaria, Romania, Poland are advancing towards the European Union with more speed than my own Ukraine does. I consider (and have always considered) that Ukraine has always been a part of European civilisation, and a thousand and a half years ago, it was developed to a greater extent than today. So what happened? We had Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, Kharkiv, Lviv universities, and this means that we were a university state, — prominent European statesmen studied in Kyiv-Mohyla Academy in their times; why then are we unworthy of being a member of the EU? Who is responsible for that? The only answer I can give to this: our politicians, our economists, all those people who had to promote Ukraine's interests on the European level, on account of their professional functions [responsibility]. The same concerns our highest ranks — two presidents, ten governments, — all of them are responsible, and nobody else. Science cannot be accused of that, as it only proposes, but nobody listens to it, nobody pays attention to its suggestions. This is being our country's trouble, as for now.

The role of the neighbouring countries intending to become the EU members soon (Poland, Hungary, Slovakia), in realisation of the "European choice of Ukraine".

Our neighbouring countries that are now preparing for entering the EU (Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, even the Baltic countries, as they treat us better than Russia does) can provide moral help, through their kindly feelings for us. But it is up to Ukraine to decide, I am convinced of that. In other words, the neighbouring countries' role in realisation of Ukraine's European choice, in comparison with the role of Ukraine itself, is a minor one, as neither Poland nor Hungary and Slovakia will not work instead of us. They can share their experience or offer their encouragement, but we will have to work for ourselves.

Ukraine's effective way to European structures: independently or together with Russia?

Ukraine's way towards the European Union and European structures can be only one: exclusively independently and as soon as possible! If our politicians know how economic, industrial contacts can fasten our advance towards Europe and optimise the fulfillment of requirements set by the European Union (this is still possible), if we manage to establish such relations and create such a model when our economy profits by strengthening of economic contacts with Russia, — then I will understand and appreciate such an advance (merely economic one) "together". And in the political aspect, when they submit an application and we simultaneously do the same, — of course, no. We have kept our close relations from the Soviet times, consequently, any economic contacts able to contribute to positive processes in the economy should be supported by the government and the lawmakers. However, I am speaking about the economic aspect only, and the cooperation must be based on autarkic, independent positions of the two countries. Moreover, I am surprised at the very formulation of the question: why should we attach everything to Russia? Why do we mean only the same three nations — the Russians, the Ukrainians and the Belarussians — while speaking about the Slavs? Is looks like the Polish, the Bulgarians and the Czechs are not the Slavs any more, or not the Slavs we are bound up with for the future. So we say "the Slavs" and have in mind "the Eastern Slavs" solely.

What are the interests our domestic business has in countries of the European Union, and European business — in Ukraine?

As a scientist and a head of the subcommittee on science and education, I am very far from business. But I have always held the opinion that when a German named Hartman had come to Luhansk in 1795 and built a plant existing to this very day, and the machines belonging to Hartman's times have still been working there; when an Englishman John Use had come to the town which was afterwards named after him (the present Donetsk) and established a number of enterprises there — this is very good. These are the economic contacts between the countries and their businessmen which are mutually beneficial. I think that business should take the lead over politicians. If it is beneficial for us to let a businessman from Holland in, — then let it be so, let him construct and invest his capitals; let both of us enrich ourselves. Business contacts can aid in mutual understanding and drawing countries and their peoples together.

What would you advise to change in the EU's policy as regards Ukraine?

I can see no argument able to convince me of that the EU has ever been biased against Ukraine. Of course, there are certain problems, but Ukraine was noticed for its non-fulfillment of those obligations it had assumed voluntarily (while entering the Council of Europe of ratifying certain agreement), more than once. Therefore, in future it will be treated more exactingly than anybody else will. This is a psychological effect rather than a political one. Let us remember the parliamentary hearings on freedom of speech: the authorities regarded them insignificant, and when Mrs Severinssen confirmed her observations concerning pressure exerted upon freedom of speech in Ukraine, our Presidential Administration did not invent any better than to accuse the respected representative of European structures of lie and autosuggestion. Even in the times of a strong confrontation between the West and the Soviet Union, they were more unbiased than we were. The broadcasting stations like BBC, Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty, and the Voice of America have always been covering various events both in the Soviet Union and abroad, more widely and impartially. And what did our mass media do? They were lying all the time. That situation resembles the present one very much. So I do not see any problems in this plane. And though I am longing for a well-off European future and competitive power on the European level for Ukraine, however, I still wish European structures to be exacting to our country. This corresponds with our interests. Not to mention elementary things. If someone signed an agreement and assumed the responsibility, why should he be surprised when he is criticized? Ukraine never said openly and frankly, "Yes, we have signed, but we are not able to meet our engagements for any of several reasons. And when we are being criticised, and criticised justly, we feel hurt by this. Such a position is not constructive; it is to no avail.

The problem of visas and migration from Ukraine to the EU.

I have always held the opinion that one should do everything properly, from the very beginning to the very end. We are an independent individual country, therefore, we should have visas and borders, as well as civilised rules of their crossing. I cannot understand those people who make complaints or protests like that, "How come! We are such good friends, we are all not strangers here, — so why to demand any passports of us on the border?" My dear ones, open borders imply that anybody goes wherever he or she wants, and we are situated in the middle, that is why exactly we become those who have to settle the problems of the illegal migrators coming to our country from Russia. In addition, this creates favourable conditions for an increase in profiteering and smuggling, as statutory requirements of Ukraine and Russia differ, and negative consequences of our border policy will cause damages, first, to our economy, legal order and the image of Ukraine. For example, we have good mutual relations with Poland, but establishing of visa mode is the European Union's compulsory condition, — and we feel drawn to European requirements. Undoubtedly, we have to work at visas' moderateness and accessibility. However, in general, visa mode should be regarded as a standard of international life and a base for civilised international contacts. As for me, migration has to be altogether limited, but if such are the existing standards concerning refugee status, there is a need to organise the procedure in order that Ukraine would look like a civilised European country with all the necessary elements of infrastructure, including those concerning the refugees seeking for a political asylum.

Ukraine has serious problems because of the indeterminacy about the status of its border with the Russian federation. The matter concerns not only those negative economic moments which are taking place (I have already mentioned them; these are profiteering and smuggling), but in that uncontrolled flow of illegal migrators who then accumulate on our western border and have no intention to come back to their native countries. This means that a huge quantity of foreigners will either try to cross the border again and again (what will do considerable harm to our image which is dubious anyway), or establish their settlements on the territory of our state (what can noticeably worsen the situation with law and order). Who in Ukraine is engaged in drug-trade, especially in traffic of the most destroying and expensive dopes? Natives of African countries are. Who organises trafficking of Ukrainian girls and women to countries of the Middle East? Natives of these very countries do. I do treat any foreigners kindly, but the fact remains, and only control of these processes on the part of state structures can reduce negative phenomena in our life.

What is common and what is different between Ukraine and the "Western culture"? Is Ukraine a part of the Western world?

I think that the Ukrainian culture in principle, if taken in its popular, public aspect, is higher than the Western one. Kindness, mutual respect, non-indifference to each other, hospitality, and tolerance are integral characteristic features of our people. If divide today's culture in an elitist, lofty and a mass one (which makes young people look like a herd of animals), and taking into consideration the mass culture's dominating role, — probably, our culture could be ranked higher. Nevertheless, now there exists a serious threat of the elitist culture's absorption by the mass one, in our country. Look, today everything able to open the mouth sings. I visit the Opera theatre with my granddaughter from time to time, trying to accustom her to the classics. Even only one for three million of Kyivans Opera-house is not filled up now. And some kind of the so-called "modern" music makes an enormous gain. Therefore, probably, we have in common with the Western culture exactly that trash, everything that is negative.

Is the Ukrainian culture a part of the European one? Yes, of course. In addition, the Western world is polysemantic and heterogeneous. I consider myself as a Ukrainian. But I participated in various congresses abroad, — in Australia, the USA, Russia, — and communicated with their conferees. Which world am I a part of? The Western or the Eastern one? Of course, while sharing our information, we perform interpenetration of cultures; and the Ukrainian culture is an integral part of exactly the Western world and Western civilisation.

Copyright © Fundacja Batorego