#268 "The Future of Ukrainian-Russian Relations" Conference Roundtable Transcript This roundtable was part of a conference entitled "Ukrainian National Security" held on May 8-9, 1997. The conference was sponsored by the Kennan Institute, the Harriman Institute, the RAND Corporation, and the Kyiv National Taras Shevchenko University Institute of International Relations. The Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars The Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies is a division of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Through its programs of residential scholarships, meetings, and publications, the Institute encourages scholarship on Russia and the former Soviet Union, embracing a broad range of fields in the social sciences and humanities. The Kennan Institute is supported by contributions from foundations, corporations, individuals, and the United States Government. Kennan Institute Occasional Papers The Kennan Institute makes Occasional Papers available to all those interested in Russian studies. Occasional Papers are submitted by Kennan Institute scholars and visiting speakers. Copies of Occasional Papers and a list of papers currently available can be obtained free of charge by contacting: Occasional Papers Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies 370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW, Suite 704 Washington, D.C. 20024-2518 (202) 287-3400 This Occasional Paper has been produced with support provided by the Russian, Eurasian, and East European Research and Training Program of the U.S. Department of State (funded by the Soviet and East European Research and Training Act of 1983, or Title VIII). We are most grateful to this sponsor. The views expressed in Kennan Institute Occasional Papers are those of the authors. ©September 1997 Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars transcribed by Jodi Koehn PARTICIPANTS Ian Brzezinski Legislative Assistant, Office of Senator William Roth, U.S. Senate Speakers Sherman Garnett Senior Associate, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Oleksandr Pavliuk Associate Professor, Kyiv-Mohyla Academy Alexander Rahr Head of the Russian CIS Unit, German Society for Foreign Affairs, Bonn (Forschungsinstitut der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Auswatige Politik) Roman Solchanyk Senior Analyst, RAND Corporation Igor Torbakov Fellow, Institute of Russian History, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow Roundtable: The Future of Ukrainian-Russian Relations Ian Brzezinski: We will commence the newly independent state-whose last session of this conference on identity is still very much in a phase of "Ukrainian National Security." My consolidation. It is a relationship that is name is Ian Brzezinski and I am the very interactive. We have heard from legislative assistant to Senator Bill Roth c:hers and from the members of this of the U.S. Senate. I have had the honor panel :hat the future of Ukraine's of being asked to chair this very independence will very much shape the distinguished panel of experts on future of Russia's role in world affairs European security, experts who have a and ·;rice versa. strong interest and have played important roles in Ukrainian security Let me introduce our speakers. On affairs. Over the last day and a half you my far right we have Dr. Sherman all have looked at various dimensions of Garnett, Senior Associate from the Ukrainian security-the political, Carnegie Endowment for International economic, and military dimensions. Peace where he specializes on the foreign and security policies of Russia, The panel we have today is going to Ukraine, and the other Newly look at one aspect of Ukraine's Independent States. He is widely relationships with the rest of the world published with articles appearing in in which each of these dimensions are Foreign Policy, The Washington Quarterly, particularly acute-that is Ukraine's and other leading journals, and has just bilateral relationship with Russia. They published a book on Ukraine entitled are acute because in each case you can Keystone in the Arch: Ukraine and the New look at the dimension as being a Political Geography of Central and Eastern significant challenge to Ukraine's Europe. To his left, we have Oleksandr security. Just to reiterate what you have Pavliuk, who is an Associate Professor probably already heard over the last at the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy in Kyiv. day: in the economic field you have a He is an old friend of the Kennan relationship that is one of perhaps Institute and was here as a Regional dependence, particularly in the energy Exchange Scholar three years ago. He sector; in the political you have a has written extensively on Ukraine's relationship in which there are security policies. We have to my right stresses-Ukraine neighbors on a nation Igor Torbakov, who is a fellow at the that still has difficulty recognizing its Institute of Russian History at the independence and refuses to recognize Russian Academy of Sciences in Ukraine's borders, at least on a bilateral Moscow. He has attained numerous and basis; you have a security dimension fairly prestigious scholarships. He was that is very acute, with the stationing of an Eastern Research Visitor at the foreign forces on Ukrainian territory RFE/RL Research Institute in Munich, and the ongoing difficulties over the and two years ago he was a Regional negotiation of the future of the Black Sea Exchange Scholar at the Kennan Fleet. Then there is the broader aspect of Institute. To my left we have Alexander having two nations whose own Rahr, who is the Head of the Russian identities are evolving and whose CIS Unit at the German Society for evolutions are deeply intertwined. We Foreign Affairs. I know of his work have Russia, whose geographic space is through his time at RFE / RL, where he far different from what it was in was a Senior Research Analyst. His previous history, and who is trying to work has provided him a fair amount of adjust to that reality; and we have study both in the United States and in Ukraine-which in many ways is a Russia in addition, of course, to his 1 horne, Germany. He has written quite than a few weeks afterwards, but they extensively on Russian-Ukrainian understood the need to avoid a security relations. To my far left, we breakdown. This pragmatism at the core have Roman Solchanyk, whom I have has been more important than the sort known for a number of years through of nutty and irreconcilable chorus on the my work in Kyiv and his travels out outskirts. Nationalists in both countries there. I have turned many times to his at this point are less critical of the work as an important source for fre relationship than this pragmatic core. policy activities we have in our office in So, the second theme that defines the U.S. Senate. Roman is a senior Russian-Ukrainian relations is analyst at the RAND Corporation and is muddling through. You really have an now working on a book on Ukrainian­ intricate muddling through. The two Russian relations. sides do not just "luck" through things. I have asked our speakers to keep That brings me to my third point, their remarks fairly brief-no more '.:..1.&.:....._ the main obstacle in this relationship. ten minutes-and then we will move to Some call it psychological, but I would an open discussion. We will start off call it a crisis of expectations. The main withSherm. obstacle in my view is that the Ukrainian side believes in the need to Sherman Garnett: I just want to make normalize this relationship, to make it six points and I will try to do so within like any other country. It will not the time constraints our chairman has become less important in Europe, but suggested. If you drew up a list of the they would like to make it a settled relationships in Europe that were at relationship in Europe. They are once the core relationships for the future certainly too weak to impose this on of the continent, and you drew up a list Russia. The Russians want something of the most unsettled relationships-not better from their point of view-what necessarily in crisis or unstable, but Ryurikov called the "fraternal Slavic unsettled-the Ukrainian-Russian compromise." They want an intimate relationship would be high on both lists. relationship, something better than a It might be the only one that is that high normal relationship. The psychology on both lists. This conference has here is very compatible with muddling certainly talked about Ukraine's through. In other words, from the importance, location, and size, Russian side, they do not want to let the especially after NATO expansion which Black Sea crisis get out of hand. But if makes it a front-line state with NATO. It they settle this thing and sign this treaty, is the most important and unsettled it will obstruct the movement back to relationship. some more intimate relationship than normal that will inevitably come two The second point is that the years, four years, or seven years later. I relationship has not broken down. It is think that is the main issue, because not, as many predicted, a relationship of !hey all play out, if you look at the Black conflict, although it is conflictual at Sea fleet, the VAT, the border issue, times. Someone on an earlier panel anything. I think it is less sinister, less made the point this morning about it irreconcilable in its nature than the being governed by a "perverse extremes on both sides suggest, but stability." I agree with that. I think that there is a really core obstacle here, a there has been an amazing pragmatism crisis or a differentiation of expectation. when it counted, there have been summits in which both sides have Now here is where I begin to conspired to make progress that they diverge from the panel this morning, knew would not actually hold for more and this is my fourth point.