Washington Post - 08.08.02

The Washington Post

Ukraine and the West 

NATO's coming eastward expansion and its new partnership with Russia have prompted a major change in direction by one of Europe's largest and most unsettled nations, Ukraine. A country of more than 50 million people that is still struggling to gain its political and economic footing after a decade of independence, Ukraine has abruptly dropped its longstanding policy of balancing itself between the West and Russia. Its government recently requested talks on becoming a full member of both NATO and the European Union. The reaction has been guarded: Both European governments and the Bush administration seem unsure whether Ukraine should be a part of the Western alliance in the future, and there is resistance even to upgrading its relations with the EU. But Ukraine is too big to be safely kept on the back burner. The United States and Europe must formulate a clear answer.

In some respects, the question of what to do about Ukraine seems easy. Given its huge size, strategic location in southern and central Europe and relatively sophisticated industrial economy, Ukraine is a natural member of the transnational organizations that are slowly spreading across the continent. Without Ukraine, the longstanding Western goal of a Europe "whole and free" will remain incomplete; without an anchor in those institutions, the country's long-term stability and even its viability as an independent nation could be seriously threatened. Yet Ukraine as it exists today is a most difficult partner for the West to take on. Its economy remains a post-Communist shambles, and though it is nominally a democracy, its president, Leonid Kuchma, has frequently resorted to thuggish tactics. His own poll ratings are in single digits, but Mr. Kuchma managed to manipulate a recent parliamentary election so that his cronies, rather than opposition parties that won 70 percent of the popular vote, maintained control.

Of even greater concern is Ukraine's involvement in improper arms trafficking and service as a transit point for illegal drugs and other contraband. Flouting Western appeals, Ukraine's big weapons companies have shipped arms to Macedonia, Serbia and East Africa; secretly recorded audiotapes suggest that Mr. Kuchma himself at least discussed selling sophisticated antiaircraft systems to Iraq. Iraq recently opened an embassy in Kiev and announced it was interested in purchasing Ukrainian industrial goods and technology.

The Bush administration and most European governments have steadily distanced themselves from Mr. Kuchma. Congress has reduced U.S. aid. Some officials argue that Ukraine should not be invited even to begin discussions with NATO on conditions for becoming a member, at least as long as Mr. Kuchma and his cronies are in power. But NATO, which has laid out comprehensive and detailed reform programs for each of the countries seeking membership offers later this year, could also provide a structure for long-term change by Ukraine. A dialogue could constructively begin on such issues as arms sales, drug trafficking and military reform, with the understanding that these are the first steps in a membership preparation process that could extend for a decade. Making countries such as Ukraine fit for the club of Western democracies may not be NATO's first purpose, but the alliance is the best vehicle that exists for managing what is, ultimately, a transition vital to long-term European security.