Moving towards membership

A pro-EU Ukraine is good for Europe and its ambitions should be taken seriously, MEPs tell Sarah Collins

Against a background of soaring gas debts and political infighting, Ukraine is slowly emerging as an important neighbour. Since 2004 the country has shared a border with the EU and acts as a transit partner for 25 per cent of European gas supplied from Russia. With the ink just dry on their WTO membership and talks on closer bilateral relations with the EU now gathering pace, what are Ukraine’s ambitions and what is the European parliament’s analysis of the situation?

EU officials met on 11 March with a delegation of Ukrainian parliamentarians led by prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko, on her second visit to Brussels in as many weeks. She made very clear Ukraine’s position. “We are not flirting any more,” she told an audience at a business conference in Brussels. “We are serious. All the steps we have taken recently – WTO membership, the negotiation of a free trade agreement with the EU – have the support of Ukrainian citizens.”

Last month at the 10th round of the parliamentary cooperation committee, speaker of the Ukrainian parliament Arseniy Yatsenyuk said, “Ukrainian legislation clearly prescribes European integration for Ukraine, so the main direction of Ukraine is to join the EU. God knows when, but this is the direction.”

His colleague, head of Ukraine’s European integration committee Borys Tarasyuk, is looking to the European parliament for support in Ukraine’s bid. “The European parliament is much more perceptive to Ukraine’s European vocation and much more perceptive to the prevailing public opinion in European member states. The council and the commission haven’t yet agreed on the common objective, which is to prepare for membership.”

But Romanian MEP Adrian Severin, head of the EU-Ukraine cooperation committee, thinks they might be putting the cart before the horse. “I think that Ukrainian politicians would be best advised to talk less about the support received for future EU membership and to work more in order to build the national consensus backing the necessary structural reforms which are needed in the light of such membership.”

Polish Socialist deputy Marek Siwiec is more effusive in his analysis. “I have always repeated that MEPs are Ukraine’s best friends – we represent Ukraine’s interests before other EU institutions. Today, it is more of a daily business; we are concentrating on stimulating political and economic reforms in Ukraine. We understand that it will be very painful, but on the other hand, we know there is no other way.”

Tarasyuk doesn’t see the integration process taking more than 10 years, though, depending on “how quickly we can set up the joint agenda”. And this is the crucial point that Severin stresses. “We want to persuade European organisations and European member states that Ukraine is needed by the EU and that it is an eligible state for EU membership. But, in order to achieve that, we need to convince the Ukrainians that they have to transform their country in such a way as to reach a legislative, institutional, cultural and political interoperability with the EU.”

EU-Ukraine relations are based on an action plan put in motion in 2005, under the European neighbourhood policy. Leaders on both sides meet annually, with ministerial and civil service level meetings taking place more often. Last week in Brussels the EU agreed a one-year extension of the current action plan for Ukraine and endorsed a joint report that says, according to Tymoshenko, “the dynamic between the EU and Ukraine is positive”.

Severin says that a common strategy concerning energy security for Ukraine is a step towards the transformation of Ukraine in preparation for its European integration. “Energy independence for Ukraine is crucial for its independence as a whole, and Ukrainian independence as a whole is crucial for its European integration. So, these are in a way interlinked.” Siwiec thinks the energy issue is a political one. “The current system of gas transit and supply between the two countries is completely unclear. There are some indicators which point out that it may not be just a business matter. If, for instance, the Russian parliament expresses support for the actions of Gazprom, it tells us that it is more about politics than economy.”

Ukrainian politicians would mostly agree with this evaluation. Yatsenyuk says it’s time for more long-term energy strategies, and is critical of the pace at which the EU has been moving lately. “It’s clear the energy issue is very sensitive in different European countries. It sometimes has a political smell. I called on commissioner Piebalgs to elaborate a common energy policy in the EU. It takes time on the one hand, but on the other, they lost the momentum after the green paper in 2005. Big countries have already purchased major stakes in European energy distributors.”

So what is the way forward? While Siwiec is worried about the state of play between Ukraine’s leading parties, he is positive about the influence the EU can exert. “I must admit that the political situation in Ukraine is very fragile. We must remember that the ruling coalition has a slight majority, to such an extent that even a flu epidemic in Kyiv may bring the Ukrainian government down. Of course, the closer the ties between EU and Ukraine the better for political standards there. For this we must exert constant positive pressure by all possible means on the political actors in Ukraine. We must be supportive, but – when needed – also critical.”