23.11.2005 Georgia, Tbilisi. Georgia marks the second anniversary of the "rose revolution." From left: Ukrainian and Georgian Presidents, Victor Yushchenko and Mikhail Saakashvili, respectively, during the ceremony of laying a capsule into the foundations of the Freedom Monument in Freedom Square. ITAR-TASS
Photo: ITAR-TASS
| Other Photos |
 |
|
 |
Alternative Way for Ukraine and Georgia
// The U.S. has thought up a new way to admit them to NATO
Today Brussels plays host to a meeting of NATO Foreign Ministers, who will assess Ukraine and Georgia’s prospects to join the alliance. It is already known that Kiev and Tbilisi will not receive the membership action plan (MAP). However, it will not prevent NATO from accelerating Georgia and Ukraine’s integration into the alliance.
A tool of struggle
It became known long before that Tbilisi and Kiev would not receive the MAP at the NATO forum, planned on December 2-3. In Tbilisi’s case, it became obvious right after the war in South Ossetia when a number of the European politicians stated that NATO cannot run the risk admitting a country which is at war with a next-door state. The outcome of the negotiations concerning Ukraine was predetermined by a grave political crisis in the country and a serious confrontation in society.
“In Georgia everyone understands that we will not be given the MAP at the meeting in Brussels,” Georgian military expert Koba Liklikadze told Kommersant. “After the war the situation complicated; it is not clear what borders Georgia will have joining NATO. In addition, Old Europe objects to granting us the MAP because of Russia’s pressure.” Head of the Democratic Initiatives foundation Ilko Kucheriv also confirmed to Kommersant that there are serious obstacles to Ukraine’s receiving the MAP, “At the April NATO summit in Bucharest Ukraine was given two tasks: to reach an agreement within the Ukrainian elite and a consensus in society concerning NATO integration. Unfortunately, both problems remain relevant to date.”
However, a week ago, when the U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine William B. Taylor, Jr. stated that the MAP was not obligatory for joining NATO, Kiev and Tbilisi got cheered up. Also, U.S. State Secretary Condoleezza Rice added fuel to the fire saying that the MAP is not the only way to the alliance; and the New York Times reported that Ms. Rice conducted secret talks with European leaders about the necessity of Ukraine and Georgia’s accelerated integration into the alliance.
In the NATO headquarters in Brussels they told Kommersant, “The MAP is only a tool which helps candidate-states enter the alliance; however, receiving the MAP is not the main requirement for joining NATO, and the matter of Ukraine and Georgia will be addressed by the members of the alliance.” Following U.S. diplomats, Kiev and Tbilisi decided to expand on the MAP’s irrelevance: politicians in the two countries began arguing that granting the MAP is a “mere formality.”
Counter-measures
Georgia and Ukraine’s unexpectedly arising prospects of joining NATO have caused concern with Russian officials, who suddenly became ardent advocates of the NATO charter and the MAP. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has recently stated that NATO cannot integrate countries which did not receive the MAP.
Simultaneously Russian politicians started talking about the danger of Ukraine and Georgia’s integration into NATO. In an interview with the BBC, Russia’s Ambassador to NATO Dmitry Rogozin openly stated that Ukraine will break up in case admitted to the alliance. “After the war in Georgia Russia showed that it is ready to annex a part of a next-door state’s territories if it sees a threat to its geopolitical interests,” an expert with the fund of information policy development Andrei Serenko told Kommersant. “Statements about Ukraine’s possible collapse are deliberate — in case Kiev receives the MAP, Moscow can provide military aid to Eastern Ukraine and the Crimea, which oppose NATO integration.” A new gas crisis in relations with Kiev also plays into Moscow’s hands: along with exerting pressure on the neighbor, it should remind Europe who is the major gas supplier.
"Preventive" measures against Georgia were undertaken as well: Russia’s Federal Security Service warned Russians about a series of terrorist attacks, allegedly plotted by Georgian special services. According to experts, the terrorist threat emanating from Georgia can be used as a pretext for a new military operation.
The measures Russia undertook must have had some effect already. Last week U.S. State Secretary Condoleezza Rice stated that Ukraine and Georgia are not ready to join NATO. Also, a number of European officials started talking about Kiev and Tbilisi’s accelerated integration being premature. It allowed Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who was on a visit to Cuba, to declare with satisfaction, “I am happy that common sense has prevailed — unfortunately, at the end of the incumbent administration’s time in office.”
Thus, Moscow is not worried about the prospects of the Brussels forum. “All messages we got from our U.S. and European partners within the two previous weeks, allow us to assume that pragmatism and common sense prevail over New Europe’s Freudian attempts to satisfy their ambitions and involve Georgia and Ukraine in NATO,” chairman of the Russian Federation Council's international affairs committee Mikhail Margelov told Kommersant.
“They already in NATO”
Meanwhile Georgia and Ukraine do not rule out that the MAP issue may be removed from the agenda not to irritate Moscow. Kiev and Tbilisi presume that Brussels will authorize developing relations with Ukraine and Georgia overriding the MAP — by means of invigorating the work of the NATO-Ukraine and NATO-Georgia commissions.
Interestingly, Ukraine’s Foreign Office Chief Vladimir Ogryzko has recently said that the NATO-Ukraine commission’s target plan for 2009 almost mirrors the MAP. According to the Minister, the target plan is the means of Ukraine’s fulfilling NATO requirements and applying for membership in the alliance.
In recent years relations between NATO and Ukraine have actively developed: the Ukrainian peace-keeping contingent in Afghanistan and Iraq was boosted, and the Ukrainian military corvette Ternopil began implementing current tasks in the framework of the NATO operation Active Efforts. In addition, Ukraine is the major grain supplier to Afghanistan under the aegis of NATO, and it also assists the alliance in military transportation to Afghanistan (NATO uses Ukrainian transport planes). Kiev’s activity was highly assessed by NATO’s higher military command. At last week’s meeting of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Military Committee and the Ukraine-NATO committee in Brussels NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe, General John Craddock, stated, “Today Ukraine is the only partner which takes part in all operations of the alliance. It ensures the security of the Euro-Atlantic space.”
Georgia also takes an active part in NATO programs — its soldiers serve in Kosovo and Iraq, with the question of deploying a Georgian military contingent in Afghanistan discussed. According to the information of Kommersant, the Georgia-NATO commission is considering a new project of transferring NATO military cargoes to Afghanistan through the port of Poti. “Russia interferes with Georgia and Ukraine’s formally establishing relations with NATO, but de facto these relations already exist; as a matter of fact, both the Georgian and Ukrainian elites are already in NATO,” expert Andrei Serenko told Kommersant. “Americans decided to find an easier way out: given that Russia is against the MAP, they will integrate Tbilisi and Kiev without the MAP.”
Olga Allenova
All the Article in Russian as of Dec. 02, 2008
|
|
|
