• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

NATIONAL SECURITY & DEFENCE π 2 (106) CONTENTS 2009 PRESENT-DAY SECURITY CHALLENGES REQUIRE JOINT RESPONSES ..............................2 UKRAINE’S NATIONAL SECURITY IN THE XXI CENTURY: Founded and published by: CHALLENGES AND THE NEED FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION .......................................................3 UKRAINE’S NATIONAL SECURITY POLICY IN PRESENT-DAY CIRCUMSTANCES (Presentations by expert discussion participants) ..................................................................7 Ihor ARHUCHYNSKYI ...............................................................................................................7 UKRAINIAN CENTRE FOR ECONOMIC & POLITICAL STUDIES Viktor KORENDOVYCH .............................................................................................................8 NAMED AFTER OLEXANDER RAZUMKOV Yevhen SHELEST .....................................................................................................................9 Petro KANANA .........................................................................................................................9 Director General Anatoliy Rachok Oleksandr BELOV ...................................................................................................................10 Editor-in-Chief Yevhen Shulha Valeriy CHALYI .......................................................................................................................11 Layout and design Oleksandr Shaptala ..............................................................................................................12 Technical & computer Mykhaylo HONCHAR support Volodymyr Kekuh Oleksandr LYTVYNENKO ........................................................................................................13 Yuriy RUBAN ..........................................................................................................................14 This magazine is registered with the State Committee Mykola SUNGUROVSKYI ........................................................................................................14 of Ukraine for Information Policy, registration certificate KB №4122 Vadym HRECHANINOV ...........................................................................................................15 Oleh BODRUK ........................................................................................................................16 Printed in Ukrainian and English Andriy SOBOLEV ....................................................................................................................17 Circulation: 3 800 Oleksandr SEMIKOV ...............................................................................................................17 Serhiy DZHERDHZ .................................................................................................................18 Editorial address: Ihor DOLHOV .........................................................................................................................19 34 Mazepy str., 2nd floor, Volodymyr VAHAPOV .............................................................................................................19 Kyiv, 01015 tel.: (380 44) 201-11-98 ARTICLES fax: (380 44) 201-11-99 DEFICIT OF SECURITY: FACTORS, TRENDS, ROLE OF EXPERT COMMUNITY IN ITS REMEDY e-mail: [email protected] Mykola SUNGUROVSKYI ........................................................................................................21 web site: www.razumkov.org.ua LIVING THROUGH BAD TIMES James SHERR ........................................................................................................................28 Reprinted or used materials must refer to ENGAGING UKRAINE IN 2009 “National Security & Defence” Anders Aslund, Jonathan Elkind, Steven Pifer .......................................................................31 CANADA SHOULD PUSH FOR A RETRO NATO The views expressed in this magazine James Bissett .........................................................................................................................39 do not necessarily reflect those CIVILIAN CONTROL: THE PENTAGON EXPERIENCE of the Razumkov Centre staff Leonid POLYAKOV ..................................................................................................................43 Photos: SECURITY IN THE PUBLIC EYES: FROM NATIONAL TO PERSONAL .............................................47 static.panoramio.com – cover, pit.dirty.ru – р.22, NАТО – р.24, 27, 29, k.img.com.ua – р.34, www.vokrugsveta.ru – р.37, img1.liveinternet.ru – р.40, artofwar.ru – р.41, otvaga2004.narod.ru – р.42. © Razumkov Centre, 2009 Financial support for this publication is provided by Information on how to receive this magazine on a regular basis may be found at: Embassy of the Netherlands in Ukraine http://www.razumkov.org.ua/magazine PRESENT-DAY SECURITY CHALLENGES REQUIRE JOINT RESPONSES ver the past decade, the global security environment saw deep changes that prompted the conclusion of O a deficit of security on all levels and speculations of a new Cold War. So-called “new threats” (along with reinstitution of “old” ones) acquired an integral character and demonstrated an extreme speed of spread to entire regions and the whole world.1 Meanwhile, difficult processes associated with emergence of new centres of influence, along with changes in the list of the leading world actors, led to restoration and toughening of geopolitical competition and brought about aggravation of “frozen” conflicts and emergence of new conflict areas, including in the Euro-Atlantic space. Trends of the decade brought growth of Russia’s ambitions of regional and global leadership and creation of a “privileged” area of its interests in the post-Soviet space. To push its position, Moscow resorted to economic pressure, used energy resources as a tool of foreign policy, “encouraged interest” of separate states and their officials in supporting its positions and initiatives, including those concerning third parties. All this caused tension in the relations between Russia and the EU, USA and NATO. The security sector saw ever hotter disputes about NATO enlargement, deployment of ABM elements in Europe, the Balkan events, the military campaign in Afghanistan, etc; on the European side, the problem of Russia joining the European Energy Charter and its Treaty, the Eastern Partnership initiative, plans of joint participation in reconstruction of the Ukrainian gas transportation system came to the forefront. Those processes not only caused a new confrontation between Russia and the West but also revealed the lack of unity between the USA and the EU, within the EU and NATO on many security issues, including building relations with Russia. That was largely prompted by difficult internal processes, related: in the EU – with its expansion and structural and institutional changes under the Lisbon Treaty, in NATO – with problems of functional, structural and resource sufficiency and different opinions as to the ways and goals of the Alliance transformation.2 Finally, Russia’s suspension of the 1990 Treaty on Conventional Forces in Europe, legislative establishment of possible use of its Armed Forces outside Russian borders and its role in the Caucasian conflict in August 2008 questioned the effectiveness of the international European and the whole Euro-Atlantic security system, resting on the Helsinki agreements, arrangements and guarantees of 1990s. Ukraine found itself in an especially vulnerable situation, from the security viewpoint.3 On one hand, having refused from nuclear weapons as a means of deterrence, it got no reliable external security guarantees and mechanisms of their enforcement; having cut its Armed Forces and started their reformation in line with the NATO standards – failed to attain full-scale integration in the Alliance. Such situation mainly stemmed from the internal weakness, inconsistent and controversial actions of Ukraine itself, ineffectiveness of the Ukrainian authorities, their focus on corporate interests to the detriment of the national interests and strategic goals. On the other hand, however, there are also external factors preventing the Euro-Atlantic integration of Ukraine and getting effective security guarantees. The above-mentioned processes of realignment of forces in the Euro- Atlantic space, lack of unity inside the EU and NATO, unreadiness of their member states for joint solution of the problem of Russian ambitions weaken the attention of the West to Ukraine (and other Eastern European countries) and prompt a focus on Russia, as witnessed, among other things, by the US initiative of “resetting” its relations with Moscow. Now, the future of that initiative is unclear, but there is a risk of the key actors’ problems solution at the expense of weaker partners.4 Therefore, there is a possibility of Ukraine sliding (or being pushed out) to the Russian sphere of influence, which, along with the loss of Ukraine’s independence in foreign policy, is fraught with emergence of new dividing lines in Europe. Avoidance of such developments will require efforts of Ukraine itself and assistance from its Western partners. By and large, the described events and processes evidently demonstrated that international security systems established in the second half of the past century need modernisation. And the world financial and economic crisis of 2008 revealed not only the unreadiness of national governments for prompt and adequate actions but also the insufficiency of

Load more

  56

Copy Link