Editor’s Note: Henry Kissinger, as American Secretary of State in the 1970s, famously asked who he should call if he wanted to speak with Europe. It took some 40 years for the European Union to answer, but they finally got down to it and entitled Catherine Ashton to answer the phone as their foreign minister earlier this year. Jose Manuel Pinto Texeira, Ukraine’s No.1 contact for the European Union, chose to tell this particular story at the start of a recent interview with the Kyiv Post. A native of Portugal, he arrived in Kyiv two years ago to lead the EU delegation, which now represents all the EU institutions in Ukraine, many things have changed in Ukraine, including presidents, parliaments and the EU itself. After the Lisbon Treaty came into effect, Texeira is no longer sharing representation duties with an ambassador of the country that holds the rotating presidency of the EU. The Kyiv Post caught up with the EU ambassador to check on his new job description and see what he makes of Ukraine after Viktor Yanukovych became president.
KP: If the foreign minister for the EU wanted to understand if Ukraine’s foreign policy is changing under the new administration. What would you tell her?
JMPT: Everybody thinks that Ukraine is going to Russia, but I think that’s a simplistic approach. I think we should understand what Ukrainian people want first. Having visited every corner of this country over two years, I understand that they want Europe. They want Ukrainian living and governing standards to measure up with European. And this is the feeling shared in the Crimea as well. The EU is seen in Ukraine not as a threat, but something that is good, stable, more predictable, and more prosperous.
Of course, Ukraine is represented by the government that people elected and therefore from time to time we may have different approaches. It’s up to elected leaders to implement change to approximate with the EU.
KP: You’ve been here for two years. You came under one administration and are now working under another. President Viktor Yanukovych’s office keeps sending an ambiguous message declaring they want to be a part of the EU. And yet we see that cooperation with Russia is accelerating while the EU membership is placed on the back burner.
JMPT: The cooperation with the EU has already been there and is based on a very clear agenda. We have several agreements to negotiate. With Russia, there’s a new beginning [after] a period of estranged relations. Now you have a period of at least normalizing or even improving relations. For the EU, that is positive. The EU, particularly certain member states, has very good relations with Russia.
KP: So is there fear in the EU that the Russian model of development is slowly taking over Ukraine? What do you make of countless instances of Ukraine slipping on democratic standards, civil rights, the freedom of speech?
JMPT: We are attentive to the situation. But those possible concerns are largely the result of the previous administration’s inability to consolidate these sectors. If they had done so, it would be difficult [to reverse] at this moment. We talk for instance about pluralism of the media.
In Ukraine, there is no public broadcaster. It’s one of the top priorities on the association agenda [as was the case with action plan between the EU and Ukraine] to establish a strong and impartial broadcaster in Ukraine. Little or nothing was done.
So what we see today is that those who controlled the media in the past are the same people that control it today. Back then, they were not aligned solely with one political power but today they tend to be more aligned. So it’s not so much that the legal context has changed, it’s the arrangement of the media in the country that’s different. Had this problem been dealt with before, it would make it more difficult to reverse now.
KP: Still, in terms of the alleged media crackdowns, the TVi case in particular, bills impeding the freedom of gathering, and latest efforts to change Ukraine from a parliamentary to presidential republic, would you agree that the administration is playing with the rules but not by the rules?
JMPT: This is one of the questions that I am not going to answer straightforwardly because again we adhere to a specific system of dialogue assessing and then expressing our opinion. We have not reached the moment of expressing an opinion yet. But the issues you are referring to are on our radar screen. Most of the things you mentioned have not been adopted … [But I would say that] that the radar screen is flashing yellow light now, and we have to monitor more carefully.
In economic areas, we have some positive changes, which demonstrate that if this government wants to take decisions, they are able to do so. I refer to the IMF [International Monetary Fund] agreements, which took three months to even start negotiations. Conditions were tough.
KP: If Ukrainian authorities are slow to implement change, why not open up Europe for Ukrainians so that they can freely travel abroad, experience the Western standards of democracy to bring the knowledge of it back home and demand change?
JMPT: If we are talking about visa liberalization regime, visas are not the only concern.
Today, there are at least four million Ukrainians in the EU sharing the information with their families. It concerns not only the EU, but Canada or Australia or the U.S. I think this is already a large contributor to promote the change of a mindset in Ukraine. Also, there were a million Ukrainians who have received visas under the new liberalization agreement and many have got multiple entry visas. I think there’s a lot more said about the pressure on visas than what the reality is.
Of course, our aim is visa liberalization, and we hope this will be achieved. [But there are problems.] There’s a phenomenon of falsifications of documents, which is very evident in this country, false passports, security of documents, problems of border management. For example, Ukraine has a 3,000 kilometer border with Russia which is not demarcated. And the issue of illegal migrants transiting through Ukraine, which in many cases is associated even with criminal activities like human trafficking.
So to move into a complete visa liberalization regime, we need to address these problems. We’re working on an action plan, which will be adopted by the end of the 2010, if all goes well. But we must also remember if Ukraine does all the reforms that it should do, Ukraine will not have enough people in Ukraine to work. I understand the wish for the freedom of movement, but I think the priority should be to remove all the bottlenecks and constraints that are holding the country back in terms of socio-economic development..
KP: A bill has been recently pass in parliament that will break down the state-owned Naftogaz energy company, open up the natural gas sector and hopefully allow the inflow of private players. Do you feel that this bill is up to EU standards?
JMPT: If the bill that was adopted is the bill that we have been working on with the government, [then yes.] I say that because in the past when bills prepared with our assistance reached the parliament, by the time they came out they were different. So the bill we worked on with the government was compatible with the EU standard. It also would make the admission and confirmation of Ukraine as a member of the energy community treaty a reality. But we have not seen the adopted bill and we still have to check on it.
KP: The EU has repeatedly said that they would be interested in modernizing Ukraine’s gas transit system. Russia voiced the same interest. It’s clear that on the Russian side, it would be Gazprom pumping in money and expertise. Who would it be on the EU side?
JMPT: The EU involvement in this process is not about taking a stake in the gas infrastructure or business in Ukraine. It is targeting the reform of the gas sector. Therefore, our conditions are within an agreement, which was signed at a conference in Brussels in March with Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko.
What we are interested in is open competition and a predictable environment. The companies in the EU are not led by the states, as is the case with Gazprom. They operate autonomously. When you talk about Gazprom, of course, it is a different approach. It is like a puzzle.
When you add all the pieces together, you will reform the gas sector that allows for these financial institutions to provide finding. This puzzle has not been taking shape yet. We are not yet in the process of starting even to think about the disbursement of funds for the actual rehabilitation works. All depends on decisions.
Look at the IMF. In one week they adopted all the laws in parliament. Let’s see if the gas prices are raised as envisioned by the IMF conditions. These things can go very fast if there is political will. This administration is definitely making decisions faster than the previous one. But we must also pay attention to quality.
Kyiv Post lifestyle editor Yuliya Popova can be reached at [email protected].
