• 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 Ivan Tomych, MP

A head of the Committee of the Supreme Rada on agriculture policy and land relations.

What means "Ukraine's European choice" for you?

Of course, talking about Ukraine's European choice and European integration, we, as a rule, mean standards, values that function in European countries. Therefore, when the question is about Ukraine's European choice, I associate it with those standards of living according to which European community lives. If we consider this question in the context of activity of the Committee of the Supreme Rada on agriculture policy and land relations and my work in this organization, then first of all it can be taken up through transformations in legislation, adoption of a number of laws and norms in this field that must be intelligible, integrated, and must meet legal standards, which regulate the activity of agricultural sector in European countries and EU. For already ten years agrarian Ukraine has been carrying out the reform of former socialistic system's agriculture sector. But our system differs even from similar systems of neighbouring countries (Romania, Poland, Hungary), apart from developed states of Europe. That's why the main thing for us is to put in practice alterations made in the Constitution of Ukraine: first of all "the holy of holies" — right of land possession (Land code have approved the right of land possession). Besides, approximately 20 drafts are considered in parliament today — a part of them is in the committees, another part is in first reading. Thus, we have a clear system of legislative guarantee of realization of Land Code's regulations, which we plan to form during this and next parliament' sessions. The other aspect of this problem is connected with Ukraine's joining of World Trade Organization: the matter is about adoption of norms and principles that world community is guided with in the field of trade relations, because our disparity with these norms essentially retards possible Ukraine's advancement to world, in particular, European markets. The third fundamental aspect is the development of agrarian market's conjuncture, because today those countries that carry out a successful agrarian policy, have also well developed conjuncture, which promotes effective price policy, increase of workers' professionalism, competitive ability of agrarian manufacture. Unfortunately, our conjuncture is extremely badly developed, and there must be adopted a number of laws, as well as a number of measures from the side of executive power must be taken. First of all, this is development of service agricultural cooperation, financial-credit cooperation, exchange trade, as well as future trade and technological measures regarding increase of agriculture's modernization. These are the main problems that the Supreme Rada and in particular our committee work on.

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

One can divide this question into two parts. The first part concerns the problems that formed in view of objective factors, and namely the factors of former development of agriculture before Ukraine's independence. This is a very painful factor; none of states except former soviet republics suffered such a deep crisis caused by a command-administrative system. There reigned collective and state farm's system, state economy and centralized command planning. It's absolutely clear, that during two or three centuries in western countries market mechanisms were forming and improving in the direction of socially oriented economy, effective social order, and this gave the possibility to solve problems positively, which food sector of that or other country faced. This is an objective factor, which has an influence not only in economical, but also in human context, because due to this obstacle we in fact extirpated such human qualities, as aspiration for self-fulfilment, wish to work effectively, improve his or her professional level, and have an adequate to his/her costs material benefit. This situation didn't enable to work effectively in full measure, and not only in agricultural sector, but also in other production branches, that eventually results in absence of average class — the buttress of society, which would give the dynamics to development of economy. Today there is a paradox in our agriculture: very small farms that work on two-five hectares, but produce 99% of potato, 88% of vegetables and fruit, and more than 70% of milk and meat. We call them "private farms", in soviet time they were called "subsidiary citizens' farms" and were used as an auxiliary food factor; just a negligible percent of such production was realized in the markets. Today's situation is, that these small farms became a leading productive section. It's clear, that this atomism doesn't give possibility to work efficiently and qualitatively, to develop appropriate conjuncture and successfully work in the European markets. This is an objective process. On the other hand, now in Ukraine appeared very big companies that work on large areas within the limits of 50-100 thousand hectares and more, which destroy settlement circuit in the country and don't bring well-being, form negative opinion, especially of rural population concerning private property and free market. Both first and second parts are obstacles for normal, civilized development of agrarian sector and its interaction with other sectors of economy. These factors need correction both from the side of executive and legislative power. And the main problem is, in my opinion, loss of manpower, rather than loss of economical resources.

As to subjective factors, one should mention, that for the last ten years we, i.e. "agrarian Ukraine", lost much, as during 1991-1992 we had exceptional opportunities and potential for carrying out of land reform, but it started just in 1999. We destroyed what we had without realizing a prospective substitution of the old system of collective property and management for new, private forms of agricultural production manufacture. Our agrarian policy often resembled the illustration of Lenin's work "One step forward — two steps backward!" The results were tragic for agriculture. The absence of weighted pro-European agrarian policy caused inadequate price-formation policy and disbalance in production relations. On the one side there is uncertainty, on the other side — absence of conception, action program. Besides, the lack of political will of the nation and lack of political force that would take responsibility for processes occurring in society — all this proves that "agrarian Ukraine" became a country of lost possibilities. In early 90s experts saw great outlook for our agricultural sector on the assumption of resource potential; and its loss and non-realization played the leading role in deceleration of processes of Ukraine's collaboration with European countries. Like in sport, there formed a situation with different weight categories, where our state due to its weakness has not the best chances. These are the main social-economical factors. But one can remember also political prerequisites, that impede equal in rights relations between Ukraine and EU, and first of all political diffusion of the body of electors, as nearly 150 parties — is a negative phenomenon that hampers coordinated work on economy.

What is, in your opinion, the contribution of your country in Europe's future; and what is Ukraine's role (real and desirable) in European political, economical and social processes?

One thing is our wishes, another thing — our reality. I'd like Ukraine to take its optimal place in European family. I mean concord of those interests that have already formed in Europe, and those realities that meet current level of Ukraine's development. It concerns Ukraine's occupation of those economical niches, which are free now; saturation of European market with goods that are not produced or produced in insufficient quantity in Europe. I believe it would be beneficial for both parties and help economic growth of Ukrainian agricultural production. What do I mean? In Ukraine the manufacture of agricultural production, both cereals and vegetables, takes place mainly in environmentally appropriate conditions; these are safe, clean natural products, which high-tech Europe needs. I think, that a high level of industrialization of western states will need such goods. This kind of cooperation, Ukraine's participation in European processes is quite possible. But one should remember, that our state should take a number of responsibilities concerning corresponding standards worked out for EU countries. These are bringing of our legislation to conformity, standardization, and joining of WTO. Then we could get good chances and positive advertisement for Ukrainian goods to enter world, and first of all European markets. Another element of cooperation is a complex of favourable conditions for production of not only upscale (due to good natural soil and climate conditions), but also cheap products (because of gut on the market of agricultural labour force). Recently I've seen analysis of EU carried out by German advisory panel, and together with members of this panel we discussed expediency of Ukrainian milk, the cost of which is much low than European analogical product.

Besides, Ukraine's natural peculiar properties are still unused, for example the landscape of the Carpathian Mountains, which can be considered as a base of "green tourism" and a source of natural resources. We didn't work here on the professional level, and didn't open the potential of this region neither for ourselves, nor for the world. The Crimea also doesn't work at full capacity, and its uniqueness completely can be used both as a resort, and a tourist zone. Moreover, the combination of Ukraine's agrarian and technological potential, great experience in EU management can give considerable dividends and be a prospective way of cooperation between EU and Ukraine.

Today's EU expansion and its influence on Ukraine.

EU expansion will approach to Ukraine a number of upscale goods and services due to neighbourhood with countries-members of EU, that in its turn will influence on changes in social consciousness of Ukrainian citizens. Therefore Ukraine can't stand aside those integral processes that occur in Europe. This situation requires more active and drastic carrying out of a complex of reforms, directed to approach of Ukraine and its system of administration and management to European standards. For instance, our land reform had the following format: for ten years we had been deciding what should we do, in 1999 we started land reform, in 2000 owning to nature and private initiative we gained first results and decided to content ourselves with these results, having stated unexampled rise. It was false way — to think that reforms will work for us. Reforms are a responsible, hard work intended for long-term period, and one gets results (dividends) gradually. And if Europe moves to us now (let it be a mechanical, "territorial" movement), it's of Ukraine's interests to advance to Europe at the same pace, and not in mechanical, but in intellectual, science-technical, legislative and mental way. It should be not only a movement, but also a complex of measures that would guarantee a positive result. We wasted much time, and now, while moving toward Europe, it's necessary to develop the resource we have with double efforts. Bilateral movement is able to ensure positive result for both parties. In other words, today's EU expansion is a certain threat (owning to noncompetitiveness of Ukraine), and a good stimulus for our state.

The role of neighbouring countries, which soon must become EU members (Poland, Hungary, Slovakia), in realization of "Ukraine's European choice".

Of course, approach of EU borders to Ukraine gives certain possibilities adequately compare and analyse the situation in Ukraine and new EU members. That's why, of course, firstly we can study experience of neighbouring countries heading toward EU, and the difficulties they faced while approaching European structures. These are a character of two-sided agreements, economy's reforming, the process of construction of civil society, changes in political sphere — a complex of problems that faced Hungary, Poland and Slovakia, and that had to be solved before entering EU. Experience of our neighbours is a matter of our plan of actions in the process of advancement to EU.

An effective way of Ukraine towards European structures: independently or along with Russia?

This question reminds me of situation, when a pupil, after he has finished the secondary school, decides, what to enter: an institute or a professional school, or follow his desk neighbour's choice. We must seek our own way, without taking into consideration the plans and wishes of "desk neighbour". We should on our own analyse and in the manner of protectionism policy decide, what is profitable for us. The main thing is a positive result for Ukraine. It isn't true, that our way is impossible without Russia; however, the cooperation with it can bring obvious benefits, and we should make use of that. The problem is in other thing: I can't see a purposeful, considered and clearly formulated Ukraine's policy concerning EU. The position of our authority continuously sways from side to side, and with its uncertainty it compromises the idea of Ukraine's direction toward European integration. First of all, this problem should be solved on the authority level.

What are the interests of Ukrainian business in EU countries?

What are the interests of Ukrainian agrarian business in EU countries?

Of course, I can speak with confidence only about agrarian business, as it's my scope of activity and my pain. Now technical policy of Ukraine and modernization of agriculture are if not on the zero, than on the primitive level. More than 50% of combine harvesters have already worked out their term; 70% of motor and tractor fleet have worked out their potential. Therefore foreign combines, tractors and other machinery, as well as a long-term program of technical cooperation are vast for Ukraine now. Besides, we need a considered finance-credit policy. But we are unlikely to manage without assistance of western countries. Ukraine's dimension is ten times, and Ukraine's natural and man potentials are hundreds times higher, than, say, Belgium's, but technical lag geometric series reduces our competitiveness. That's why only mutually beneficial cooperation is a prospective direction of our activity. With this purpose one should more actively represent Ukraine at different forums and exhibitions that will enable to intensify economic contacts, rousing the interest of potential partners in prospective of the future rise. Unfortunately, our cooperation takes place not behind barbed wire, as in soviet times, but "behind the glass": the parties can see each other, but can't contact directly.

Those resources that EU loses both from consolidated budget, and from the budgets of separate countries for support of production of some kinds of expensive foodstuff in Europe, one could transfer to other, more profitable productions, and Ukraine could take the manufacturing niche, which was mentioned above. For instance, the production of a ton of grain in Poltava region and the same quantity in western lands of Germany or in the Netherlands under identical technical conditions can twice or three times differ in favour of Ukrainian grain. Moreover, this production can be solved not only in EU countries, but also used in the regions that have foodstuff shortage or hunger. Food market is a great policy. Besides, as I said, there are many free niches, which Ukraine could take up. The example is production of biodisel. We can work in this direction now, beginning with seeds planting, and finishing with transportation of biodisel. Both Europe and we have many innovations. The use of them can be very beneficial for both parties. Besides, one can't forget about new conditions, in which Europe exists now. It's quite possible, that competitive activity between two continents — American and European will soon become more acute, and in the conditions of severe competition (where EU has far from such confident and firm positions, as the USA does) it will be a mistake to underestimate and not use unexampled potential, which Ukraine possesses.

What would you advise to change in the policy of EU concerning Ukraine?

EU policy concerning Ukraine is based on democratic principles, market economy, and therefore it doesn't allow adequately perceive the situation, in which Ukraine is. What do I mean? During ten years of independence Ukraine have been getting aid — scientific-technical, professional, financial and moral — both from representatives of Ukrainian diaspora, and from leading persons of the western world (Europe and the USA) in various spheres. Many specialists — politicians, businessmen — have been to Ukraine for these years, but their orientation was based on their mentality, therefore their estimates were not very real, and, accordingly, the results of this cooperation were low. For example, the program of aid "Farmer to farmer" (the USA-Ukraine), advertised in the first years of independence. The situation was limited by the contacts of O. Tkachenko's enterprise (a former head of the Supreme Rada of Ukraine, now a deputy, a member of communists' faction — editor's note): it operated with maize and combines "John Dir". And what did a farmer gain? Our farmers knew nothing about the possibilities of a program; they didn't have access to it. Other people used this program. And this was carried out on the governmental level, without contact with a farmer. Tkachenko was then a minister; he took advantage of the possibility, founded the enterprise "The earth and the people", took away combines and maize, and this was the end of cooperation. The weakness of "the third sector", apathy of Ukrainian farmers make a serious obstacle on the way to positive changes, but it's connected, first of all, with consequences of long-term subjection of our nation. Therefore any aid from the side of developed and "educated" neighbours should be targeted.

Common and differences between Ukraine and "western culture". Is Ukraine a part of the Western World?

This question is quite difficult. Of course, to some extent Ukraine is a part of western world. But I think, that Ukrainian culture is an absolutely unique phenomenon, which formed in the course of historical processes, through which passed Ukrainian people. In general, any European nation is unique on a certain stage of its development, and then national features grade in favour of globalisation processes. However one can say with confidence, that Ukrainian mentality has more European features, than Asiatic. This confirms high level of Ukrainians' adaptability in EU countries.

Copyright © Fundacja Batorego