Tymoshenko’s plans to lift mandatory army conscription starting next year has been hit with sharp criticism from Yushchenko’s camp
Firebrand politician Yulia Tymoshenko has promised to end mandatory army conscription almost immediately after she is confirmed as Ukraine’s next prime minister. But defense analysts, as well as politicians affiliated with Tymoshenko’s Orange forces, warn that the transition to a professional force cannot be rushed.
Tymoshenko, who was fired by President Viktor Yushchenko amid accusations of populism months after backing his presidential candidacy in the Orange Revolution of 2004, is set to return to power after a stunning show of voter support by her Byut bloc in last month’s snap parliamentary election.
However, as soon as her potential coalition announced its main policy programs, including lifting mandatory army conscription starting next year, it was hit with sharp criticism from Yushchenko’s camp.
On Oct. 18, two days after Byut and the Yushchenko-backed Our Ukraine-People’s Self-Defense bloc publicized the terms of their coalition agreement, the president said that the agreement’s part on pushing up army reform contradicts a program already in place.
“I would like to tell my political friends and colleagues that they can formulate such visions at their level if they like, but I would advise them to stick to the National Program for the Development of the Armed Forces of Ukraine to secure a national defense strategy,” Yushchenko was quoted as saying during his trip to Portugal for a summit of EU leaders.
According to the National Program, the Ukrainian army will conduct its final conscription campaign in 2010 and be staffed exclusively by enlistees by 2011.
To try and achieve a professional army two years earlier, according to the president, would be “to ignore the interests of the military and the security of the nation.”
Toning up
Ukraine’s military has been dramatically cut in size since independence, when the former Soviet republic inherited a massive army of more than 700,000. Currently, the army boasts about 200,000 active duty personnel, with 38,500 enlistees.
The Ukrainian Defense Ministry is aiming to create a completely professional army of 143,000, including 80,000 contracted enlistees, by 2011, according to ministry spokesman Andriy Lysenko.
Lysenko said that the transition involves new housing, higher salaries and additional training, all of which require more funding for the military budget, as well as time.
Under former Defense Minister Oleksandr Kuzmuk, the deadline for the creation of a professional army was set at 2015.
Defense Minister Anatoliy Hrytsenko has sped things up, cutting around 15,000 officers and enlistees per year since being appointed by Yushchenko in 2005.
Lysenko said the cuts are accomplished by taking on less conscripts and offering officers early retirement with benefits like English lessons and business courses that are partly funded by Western governments, such as the US and UK.
The West in general, and NATO in particular, are keen on Ukraine’s pushing ahead with army reforms for security reasons, such as the elimination of weapons stockpiles, and to put the country more in line with European standards.
But despite Western funding, Ukraine’s Defense Ministry said it would need even more state money to carry out reforms.
To fulfill the current National Program, military spending has to rise to 3 percent of GDP between now and 2010, Minister Hrytsenko said on Oct. 21.
“We are currently specifying issues related to budget financing over the next three years to be sure that this task [the cancellation of conscription] will be completed,” he told journalists in Kyiv.
Hrytsenko envisions military spending at 2 percent of GDP in 2008, 3 percent in 2009 and 2010 and back to 2 percent per annum thereafter. In monetary figures, the defense minister put spending at Hr 16 billion ($3.2 billion) in 2008 and around Hr 26 billion ($5.2 billion) in 2009/2010 (due to expected rises in GDP). Ukraine currently devotes just over 1.25 percent of GDP to military spending, Lysenko said.
What’s the rush?
All major Ukrainian politicians publicly support the country’s further integration with Europe, but Yushchenko and Hrytsenko have been the engines behind military reform and the controversial issue of NATO entry since 2005.
The major argument for military reform is that it will eventually pay for itself by cutting future spending on training, equipment and the overall cost of each soldier.The ministry currently spends Hr 16,000 [$3,200] a year on maintaining a single conscript. Conscripts get next to nothing in pay but the conscript system nevertheless eats up budget money spent on soldiers’ quarters, food and equipment.
Ukrainian contract soldiers are paid more – a minimum of around $170 and a maximum of $400 per month. However, a fully professional army will still be much cheaper, as it will require fewer soldiers, who will pay for their own food and housing utilities and not need to be continually retrained, Lysenko said.
But he called Byut’s promise to pay future enlistees $500 per month “pure populism.”
“Where are they going to get the money,” Lysenko asked.
Sergey Gurets, a military analyst for the Kyiv-based Defense Express website and magazine, said the problem with raising salaries is that it has to be done across the board.
“A Ukrainian major currently makes $500 a month,” he said, so how can they pay a sergeant that kind of money?”
Gurets, however, acknowledged that a professional army costs more money.
“If you want to enlist a capable recruit and not some bumpkin, you have to offer a decent salary and housing.”
Housing costs relate to converting barracks into dormitories, which takes money as well as time. Then there is the problem of training. Gurets said it takes half a year to train 8,000 recruits into soldiers. Since the ministry plans to go from 38,500 to 80,000, Gurets said the three years it has given itself is about right.
“I personally do not understand the need to rush,” he said.
Byut lawmaker Andriy Kozhemyakin, who oversees security issues, said the ministry’s delays are just an excuse to protect vested interests.
“This is all just words. Sufficient housing already exists. New housing will be built later. What kind of additional training are they talking about?”
According to Kozhemyakin, the numbers speak for themselves.
“If the state spends Hr 16,000 a year on a conscript, it can pay more for fewer professional soldiers,” he said.
Kozhemyakin said that unlike other factions, Byut wants to give the Ukrainian public their money’s worth without any budget padding.
“As soon as Yulia Tymoshenko gets into office, you will see. We will do what we said we would.”
“The election campaign has ended and it’s time to start work on all tasks professionally. Therefore, this [coalition] agreement foresees the cancellation of conscription on Jan. 1, 2008,” Tymoshenko said on Oct. 17.
Yuriy Lutsenko, the head of Our Ukraine-People’s Self-Defense, was less categorical in his support for his coalition partner.
“To take a decision on the halting or continuation of army conscription, we would like to have the specialists who consulted Yulia Tymoshenko on this idea submit their reports to the National Security and Defense Council. This is precisely the body that deals with such matters, and the president heads it,” he said during a television interview last week.
Matthew Clements, Eurasia Editor for Jane’s Country Risk, said Ukraine wouldn’t be alone among Western-looking former Soviet republics still trying to cancel the draft. Georgia, Estonia and Lithuania are all still phasing out conscription, even though the last two have already joined NATO.
“The fact that these countries, which maintain far smaller armed forces than Ukraine, have been phasing conscription out over several years and still maintain contract forces, suggests that the idea of simply halting conscription from the start of 2008 could be a little hopeful,” he said.
