The expert evaluation of the foreign and security policy of Ukraine was conducted by the Ukrainian Center for Peace, Conversion and Conflict Resolution Studies in the framework of the standing project Monitoring of Foreign And Security Policy of Ukraine in December 1997 in Kyiv. Analogous expert polls have been fulfilled three times before within the Monitoring project in March, June, and September 1997.
The group of experts comprised 42 specialists of four categories:
- Officials of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and researchers of the advisory bodies of the governmental structures (the National Institute for Strategic Studies, Institute of World Economy and International Relations, etc.) 13 experts.
- Members of the Supreme Rada (parliament) of Ukraine, primarily of the Committee for Foreign Affairs and Relations with the CIS and the Committee for Defense and State Security. They represent all the political spectrum: right, center, left 13 experts.
- Officers within the Armed Forces of Ukraine (the lowest rank was lieutenant-colonel), including professors and specialists of military higher educational institutions and research centers, most of them having a scientific degree (military professional intellectual elite) 8 experts.
- Leading journalists who specialize in international issues and represent the most influential mass media agencies. There are grounds to presume that they influence not only the formation of public opinion on the subject of our study, but also the political establishments' standpoint. 8 experts.
Approximately 50 per cent of the experts participated in the previous poll conducted in September 1997.
According to the answers put to clarify the foreign policy attitudes of the experts one can accentuate three groups:
- Adherents of Ukraine to become a NATO member 51.2%
- Adherents of non-bloc or neutral Ukraine 41.5%
- Adherents of Ukraine to become a NATO member together with CIS countries (unrealistic) 7.3%
Generally obtained grouping of experts according to the views (which are similar to the views of the establishment of Ukraine) coincides with the results of the previous investigations of our Center. At the same time we should stress that the represented through March-September polls group of adherents of Ukraine to become a CIS military-political bloc member disappeared in the December poll at all. The group of adherents of non-bloc or neutral Ukraine showed permanent tendency for growth during the year. And group of NATO adherents is stable consisting of 50% of experts.
The views of the experts reflect the formation of more and more homogenous approach among Ukrainian political elites (the future consensus ?). One can even assume that there are no divergences between the adherents of the two dominating orientations of a membership in NATO or a non-aligned orientation. This division has rather nominal character because most NATO adherents realize the unreality of Ukraine's joining the Alliance in the nearest future, i.e. within the next 1-3 years. At the same time stability of this group reflects European orientation of the Ukrainian elites looking for perspective for their country especially under condition of NATO's eastward enlargement and acceptance to the Alliance of Central and Eastern European states neighboring Ukraine. The number of Ukraine's-NATO-membership adherents among politicians and governmental officials shows the understanding of the fact that Ukraine's non-bloc status fulfilled its function to find way out of the sphere of exclusive Russia's influence and made impossible development of the Tashkent military bloc into a counterbalance to NATO. They also assume this status under certain circumstances can prevent Ukraine from further integration of the state with the European and Euro-Atlantic community of nations.
On the other hand, the adherents of Ukraine's official preserving the non-aligned status regard it as a preventive determinant able to provide a space for the state's maneuvering. Till these latter days this expert group meant generally prevention of Russia's attempts to rope Ukraine into the system of unequal military-political alliances and functional structures within the CIS. But as the parliamentary and presidential elections approach another argument for the non-aligned status is mentioned constantly: it can prevent foreign states from broadening legal intervention into domestic affairs of Ukraine. None of the experts rejected the necessity of cooperation with NATO in December. Comparing to the previous expert polls, the orientations have not changed radically, although we can assume that the mentioned changes indicate a tendency of further reorientation of the Kyiv foreign policy community and a certain latent development of its political conscienceness.
General Characteristics of Ukraine's Foreign Policy
We have good reasons to define the present level of Ukraine's international security as most safe in comparison with any another period of the 1997. In the end of the year the lowest level of worries concerning state of present danger to Ukraine (its territorial integrity) was registered. Only 19.5% of experts said this danger "really exists to-day". That is 1.5 times less than in September. According to 31.7% of the respondents, it doesn't exist but may appear any moment (43.9% in September). Optimists considering that "there is no present threat and we have enough resources to prevent its rise" (it is the main task of the Ukrainian diplomacy) 34.1 experts (it is three times more than in September 9.8% experts). 14.6% experts say a threat may appear 1-2 or 3-5 years later (practically the same level as in September).
These results correspond to higher estimation of the level of international guarantees to Ukraine's security provided by other countries. The estimation is closer to "medium" mark now against "low" in September. It looks paradoxically because it is hard if possible to mark any significant decision during Fall 1997 which could improve the situation (and further progress in NATO enlargement). We believe it indicates more calm attitude towards progress in the East and West directions of the spring/summer foreign policy 'breakthrough'.
Experts' estimation of the state of international security in Europe is also little bit going up in comparison with September. Only 2.5% consider it is worsening (12.2% in September); 46.3% say it is becoming better (41.5% in September); most experts (51.2%) believe 'there are no changes' (41.5% in September).
The tendency of moderate stable optimism is noticeable in estimations of current state of the international security of Ukraine: 27% of the experts consider "it becomes better" (the same in September); 36.6% no change (12.2% less than in September) and 29.3% "it's worsening" (22.3% in September). No clear standpoint 7.3% (2.4% in September)
Similarly to the previous poll in ensuring Ukraine's international security the decisive role is played by 'economic factors' (68% of the experts) and 'political' ones (41.5%).
Situation with the estimation of the extent to which Ukraine should follow other countries, even if it contradicts it's national interests really has been improved: the level of country's dependence is little under "medium" point against between "medium" and "high" in September. It indicates an active multivector efforts pursuing foreign policy goals. The answers given to the question "to what extent Ukraine should rely on the allies?" also shows some improvement and goes closer to the "medium" (distribution of estimations: "medium" 43.6% (the same as in September), "low" 38.5% (same in September), but "high" has raised twice (from 7.5% in September to 15.8% in December), and 'nought' now is not mentioned at all.
Although the fighting capability of the Armed Forces of Ukraine is still declining, the estimation of the extent to which Ukraine can rely on its own army in providing national security is going up. Probably the estimation proceeds from a still continuing non-involvement of the military in the political struggle in the country.
There are certain changes in estimating of the Ukraine's integrative developments opposite to the September trends:
- integrative process to the East, with Russia, the CIS has become less intensive;
- integrative process to the Black Sea region has become more intensive, but it is still rather slow than medium;
- contrary, integrative process to the West has become quicker;
- there is no speed up of Ukraine's integration with the Eastern and Central Europe.
There are certain political and social groups showing a stable support of different directions of integration. Leaders among integrators with Russia are: the leftists of the Supreme Rada; socially deprived groups of the population; industrialists from joint Ukrainian-Russian companies (support of the last to this direction of integration is going down).
Among adherents to integration with the West right in the Supreme Rada; leaders of financial and banking business; centrists in the Supreme Rada; middle size business. There are no significant changes in comparison with September.
The expert evaluation of Ukraine's foreign policy in accordance with traditionally mentioned criteria as its stability, deliberatedness, predictability remains comparatively at satisfactory level with some progress in deliberatedness (high 7.5% in September, 15.8% in December.
Estimation of Bilateral Cooperation with Foreign States and Alignments
According to the priority of a desirable development of Ukraine's relations with other countries, Russia yields to such states as the USA (the 1st place) and Germany (the 2nd place) since September, having occupied the 3rd place; in December, 1997 the USA kept the leadership 80% of the experts, being followed by Russia with 78% and Germany with 73%; the 4th place during all the polls had been occupied by Poland 50%. We should note that the shifts in grade of the first three states are of a rather conditional character because the difference in the percentage between them is little and statistically insignificant. Lately, the positions of Canada have been improved, it kept the 5th place since September 23%; the significance of other countries in accordance with this index, does not worth examination.
As for the development of bilateral relations, here Poland the absolute leader of the recent times in this respect yielded to the USA. Irrespective of the fact that the estimation of the status of bilateral relations with Poland is nowadays the highest one compared with other countries 4.10 points (though it is lower than in September 4.27 points), we can say that its general rating has decreased a little. The experts still give a high but not the highest evaluation to the Ukrainian diplomats' activities at the international arena in development relations with Poland. On the other hand, 48.8% mentioned Poland as an ally, while in September this estimation was given by 63.4% of the experts. The same way, only 26.8% of the experts mention Poland among the countries Ukraine could rely on in the process of reformation of the Armed Forces, that is almost two times less than in September (40%).
Canada has regained the positions of leadership according to the state of bilateral relations with Ukraine, having almost reached the Poland's level of 4.07 points (the 2nd place). It is not surprising because it shares the 3rd place among the countries, the relations with which had been successfully and intensively developed, with Russia (25%), after the USA and Germany. In September Canada occupied the 4th place (18%) and in June the 9th (7%).
According to the direct estimation, Ukraine has the best relations with Poland, while by the other indexes in this respect the USA is an undoubted leader. According to bilateral relations evaluation, the USA (3.90 points) occupies the 3rd place (in September the 4th). However, as mentioned above, the USA is the first among the countries the relations with which are being intensively developing. In accordance with this, the average evaluation of the successfulness of the Ukrainian diplomats' activities in relations with the USA has grown compared with September (3.60 points). At the same time, the experts stress the USA as the first country among those the development of relations with which is priority for the present-day Ukraine at all. This is not at variance with the data that the USA is regarded as an ally of Ukraine by 51.2% of the experts (the 1st position), while in September the USA was second after Poland 41.5%. Besides, 56.1% of the experts stressed that Ukraine should rely on this very country in the process of reformation of the Armed Forces.
Still, irrespective of the shifts, the "best five" countries having the highest estimation of bilateral relations with Ukraine remains unchanged. Besides Poland, Canada and the USA it comprises Georgia (3.90 points) and the Baltic states (3.86 points). The same way, the Baltic countries keep the third position (43.9% of the experts) among the allies of Ukraine after the USA and Poland. At the same time, the Ukrainian diplomacy in this direction is evaluated to a certain extent lower than in September. The 6th place, almost without any distance from the last country, is occupied by Germany (3.85 points). According to the experts, the Ukrainian diplomacy's activities in developing relations with this country are more successful than before. Germany's positions by all the examined indexes are firm and almost have not altered since September.
The following places are occupied by the countries which, according to the experts, may periodically improve their positions depending on circumstances and the recent events. Thus, this time these are the Czech Republic having risen to the 7th place (3.80 points) from the 10th (3.70 points) and Benelux countries the 8th (3.72 points) from the 15th (3.57 points). Last time Hungary and Azerbaijan yielded to them, occupying now accordingly the 9th (3.65 points) and the 12th (36.2 points) places. The estimations concerning Moldova considerably decreased (to 3.38 from 3.76 points in September) and it found itself on the 20th place after the 9th one. Instead of this, together with Benelux countries the estimations of bilateral relations between Ukraine and Finland have grown from the 21st to the 10th place. Israel is keeping the 11th place. The same way, the 13th position is still occupied by the Republic of Korea; according to the experts the relations between Korea and Ukraine are being gradually improved. As a whole, the shifts in positions of other countries since September ranged between 1 and 3, that is not significant. It concerns all non-mentioned countries except France which proceeded from the 34th to the 24th place and Iran which vice versa found itself on the 33rd place after the 26th one. The last positions are occupied by Russia (2.65 points, as well as in September) the 35th place and Belarus the 36th place (2.50 points; in September the 33rd place with 2.83 points).
As mentioned before, Russia occupies the 2nd place among the main four countries, development of relations with which is the priority of Ukraine's foreign policy. Relations with Russia had been intensively developing lately. 25% of the experts stressed this fact that means the 3rd position of Russia together with Canada after Poland and the USA; Germany and Georgia are most close to it, sharing the 4th position. Besides, the successfulness of the Ukrainian diplomacy in relations with Russia is estimated higher than in September (though not very high compared with other countries). Majority of the experts (62.5%) regarded concluding the Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation of 31 May 1997 as a "positive event of 1997". Though the rating of Russia as a country which may be a Ukraine's ally has decreased almost by two times (22.2% of the experts mentioned Russia in September and only 12.2% in December), still, 22% of the experts mention Russia among the countries on cooperation with which Ukraine can rely in the process of reformation of the Armed Forces after the USA, Poland and Germany.
As a whole, according to the estimation of actions aimed at the securing of national interests of Ukraine, the Ukrainian diplomacy received higher evaluations than in September, except for several directions; the evaluations of relations with Poland and the Central and Eastern Europe generally remained unchanged; the evaluations of relations with the Baltic countries and the states of the Middle East and the Persian Gulf. The best evaluation is given by the experts to the Ukrainian diplomacy at the directions of relations with the UN 4.10 points, Poland as before, 3.90 points, NATO 3,71 points, the USA 3,60 points. As a whole, the evaluations have grown by not more than 0.3 points. The average evaluation constitutes 3.20 points (in September 3.03 points).
As for the effectiveness of the Committee for Foreign Affairs and CIS of the Supreme Rada of Ukraine, the experts consider that it has not grown compared with September and is low. The same could be said about the activities of the SR Committee for Defence and State Security.
Parameters and Desirable Directions of Cooperation between Ukraine and NATO
Among the current priority directions of cooperation with NATO, the experts first of all stress "providing additional security guaranties to Ukraine" 41.5% of the experts; secondly, 39.0% of them emphasize such a direction as "creation of preconditions for Ukraine's accession to NATO in the future". Lately, such a direction of cooperation as "arms, specialized technics and military-technical services trade", which was previously put on the last places by the experts, became popular. It was mentioned by 36.6% of the experts (22.5% in September). "Direct assistance in carrying out the military reform" is keeping the 4th place; the 5th and 6th places are occupied by the "joint development of conceptual grounds" and "participation in peace-making operations" (29.3% per each). The priority of the "joint exercises" was estimated a little higher than in the course of the previous poll (22.0% Vs 15% in September). The rating of the "coordination of political course in connection with NATO's eastward enlargement" has considerably decreased. In September this direction occupied the third place, now it shares 8-9th places with "participation in peace-making operations (19.5%). Nobody of the experts said that "cooperation with NATO is not necessary at all".
According to expert estimations, the rating of NATO as an ally has to a certain extent grown 34.1% (in September 26%). By this index, NATO is fourth after the USA, Poland and the Baltic states; this placement coincides with the September results. Besides, the experts highly estimated the Charter on Distinctive Cooperation between Ukraine and NATO signed on 9 July 1997 in Madrid; 55% of the experts stressed its positive character (the 2nd position). At the same time, the role of the Council of Europe as a Ukraine's ally has grown by two times.
Expert Estimation of the Internal Determinants of Formation of National Security Policy
According to expert estimation, lately a certain lowering of confidence of influential elite leaders in the state structures in charge of foreign policy of Ukraine is observed. The percentage of those estimating this level as "low" increased a little (59.5% Vs 50.0% in September) due to the decrease of the percentage of those estimating it as "high" (2.7% Vs 11.1% in September). In turn, the present-day level of influence of the elite leaders upon the heads of corresponding structures considerably increased, being equal to the "medium" one.
As for the current level of the elite leaders' confidence in and influence upon the heads of the state structures in charge of Ukraine's defensive policy, here increase of expert estimations is registered. As a whole, the mentioned level is close to "medium", while before it was rather "low".
Besides, according to the experts, the level of the military's support of the state leadership's policy has to a certain extent (but not essentially) increased compared with September. It now ranges between "medium" and "nought".
As for regional divergences in attitude to foreign policy, the number of experts considering that they are leveling 44.4% (in September 14.6%). At the same time, the percentage of those considering that the divergences between the regions remain unchanged 36.6% (in September 56.1%).
As a whole, in our opinion, the data of the last quarterly expert poll of 1997, gives grounds to conclude that Ukraine has not lost this year, rich in events, in the sphere of foreign policy. A certain slump of indicators it is described with, in the year, was caused by rather overestimated expectations of the results of the so called "breakthrough" in the end of spring/summer. Ukraine ended 1997 with better international positions than in the beginning of the year.
The UCPCCRS annual report "Ukraine's 1997/1998 Foreign and Security Policy" will be dedicated to analysis of the established trends of foreign policy development which may be fixed (if not lost) in 1998.