Letter to the Editor - Kyiv Post November 10 1998

	Publication	Kyiv Post
	Title	Ukraine cuts itself off from the West
	Author	Bohdan Skrobach
	Published	November 10, 1998

     In the article "The West has abandoned Ukraine" ( Oct. 30 ), Jaroslav Koshiw makes a number of complaints about the West. First, that the European Union has not granted Ukraine associate membership, but has given privileged trading status to the Baltic states. I feel the reason for this falls at Ukraine's door, not the European Union's. Ukraine still remains a part of the Commonwealth of Independent States. As long as it is unable to detach itself from the commonwealth (as the Baltic states did), it will be disappointed with the offerings from Western Europe.
    The consequences of Ukraine's CIS membership can be seen in the European Union assistance strategy toward the East. This is divided into two EU programs, PHARE and TACIS. All East European nations that have obtained associate membership are under the PHARE umbrella. Those in the CIS are under TACIS. No one in that program has been given (or is being considered for) associate membership.
    Another complaint is the U.S. government's influence in selecting the transport of Azeri oil through Turkey rather than the shorter and more economical route through Ukraine. From an American viewpoint the Turkish route is attractive because it would provide greater security control over the pipelines. Turkey is already a member of NATO. The United States thus has a security treaty that would allow it to defend its oil interests in Turkey if they were in danger. No such arrangement exists with Ukraine.
    One of the goals in choosing an Azeri oil route is to avoid Russian territorial control over the pipelines. If the United States sought to go through Ukraine, it must be assured of the relationship that will develop between Ukraine and Russia in the next century. Today this is not yet clear.
    There are three potential scenarios. First, Ukraine and Russia could remain separate states and become peaceful neighbors. That would make Ukraine a sound choice for the oil pipelines. Second, as separate states they could become involved in territorial conflicts. That could require American military intervention in Ukraine against a nuclear Russia if its oil interests were threatened. A Turkish route, on the other hand, would only mean a potential conflict with the Kurds. America could handle that, as it did Iraq. In the final scenario, Ukraine and Russia could enter into some type of union. Such an occurrence would undermine the rationale for selecting the pipeline route.
    The last complaint is about Western markets being closed to Ukrainian grain and other foodstuffs. While that may be true, the West is not the only market in the world for food. Ukraine might be rich in food production, but it is poor in energy production. There are non-Western nations in the opposite situation. Ukraine could develop trade relations with them. Ukraine should not view Western barriers as eliminating any solution to its economic problems.