First Deputy Minister of foreign Affairs of Ukraine Vadim pristayko, "NATO makes Ukraine stronger in countering Russian aggression"
conversation with the first Deputy Minister of foreign Affairs of Ukraine Vadim Pristayko took place a few days after the President signed the decree on his appointment as the head of the Ukrainian mission to NATO. The last two years, Ukraine at the headquarters of NATO was represented by the acting. In diplomacy, which has always paid special attention to symbols and signs, the absence of the Ambassador for such a long time — a demonstration of serious problems in bilateral relations. However, in the case of Ukraine is much more prosaic. This slowness is the traditional policy of the administration Petro Poroshenko to appoint the heads of diplomatic missions. And for a country that is at war, this slowness is unacceptable. Moreover, NATO is one of the key partners of Ukraine in the sphere of security and defense. Perhaps the Ukrainian mission long would not have been its President if not for the anniversary — the twentieth anniversary since the signing of the Charter on a distinctive partnership between Ukraine and NATO. The Ukrainian government is effectively marked the event: the President signed a law which returned the Euro-Atlantic integration of Ukraine's foreign policy priorities in the Parliament held a solemn meeting, and in Kiev there has arrived delegation of the North Atlantic Council led by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. Also on Bank finally decided to appoint an Ambassador to Brussels. Conversation with the first Deputy Minister of foreign Affairs of Ukraine Vadim PRISTAYKO took place a few days after the President signed the decree on his appointment as the head of the Ukrainian mission to NATO. The conversation was not only about the future of relations between Ukraine and NATO, but on a recent visit to Kiev of the U.S. Secretary Rex Tillerson, as well as on "formula Rules". — Vadim Vladimirovich, at a joint press conference with NATO Secretary General, the President said that Ukraine begins the discussion with the Alliance about giving our country action Plan on NATO membership (map). Later the head a press-services of the Alliance pier Cazalet reported that the North Atlantic Council "took note of" the desire of Ukraine to membership action plan, but did not consent on this. So decided at the meeting of the Commission Ukraine–NATO (KUN)? —There was not quite an accurate interpretation of our proposal. I was in the room and heard that the President made a formal offer to initiate a dialogue on granting Ukraine the action Plan on membership in NATO. Alliance representatives said in response that they heard the offer. The consent to NATO to grant map to Ukraine were not discussed. — NATO members held consultations regarding the map? If there was the same story as with the law, which established the NATO membership a foreign policy priority of Ukraine? Undoubtedly, determine the foreign policy is an inalienable right of the country. But our partners from the Alliance found out about this change in the law after the fact, after the Parliament already voted and the unexpected decision of the Parliament caused not only surprise, but irritation on the part of some representatives of the countries-members of NATO. —We have started to hold consultations with NATO on the map back in 2006, when the Alliance formally invited us to begin work in the framework of the plan. The map not only a logical step of Ukraine, but also an obligatory route for the preparation of all new and potential members of the Alliance. We lost too much time bogged down in internal political opposition. Now the question is how to return the lost positions of trust among the partners, how to make the next steps were the most effective. As for our Parliament took a decision on foreign policy priorities, then I see no reason for this emotional response. Indeed, the right of every nation to choose the path of their interests, which she sees fit. Twenty years, we have been special partners of NATO and, when allowed by the political situation, did everything possible to become a member of the Alliance. Now all converge at one point — and are absolutely conscious of the need to raise the level of national security, and mass support of the population and the political class. Should not be taken the recent political decisions as something isolated and unexpected. Consistent work was conducted from 2014, when the legislation removed the infamous "non-alignment". It was clear then what will be our next step. I think, for anybody not a secret that we are not going to become a member of the Tashkent Pact, led by Russia. I believe that the deputies rightly elaborated on our foreign policy priority. Is a famous British analyst James Sherr previously warned the adoption of the law, which established the NATO membership a foreign policy priority, Ukraine claims to a new status, if Kiev will raise the issue of membership in the Alliance, this will only complicate our relations with him because the organization does not have the support of a new status for our country. How justified are the fears of the British experts, known for their sympathy for Ukraine? —How to tell my military friends, let's not drop to the shot. We are not the first day, interact with the Alliance and its members. It is, after all, a military-political organization, to be able to articulate that and when possible. There are forms of interaction which we are interested at this stage. An action plan on NATO membership (map) — among them. I want again to remind that back in 2006, NATO formally invited us map. Then-Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych remained only to thank the Alliance. If he did it then, we would now have worked on the plan in its eleventh year. So long within the map was not one of the new members of NATO. All have successfully completed the necessary reforms and joined the Alliance. A special case is Macedonia, which since 1999, performs map. But this is another story associated with the position of Greece in the former Yugoslav Republic. Hopefully, the General Prosecutor's office, collecting data on treason Viktor Yanukovych, who for all his sins, and even refused to sign the Association Agreement with the EU, will not forget and about the refusal of a similar programme with NATO, which in fact is the map. — Deputy Prime Minister Ivanna Klimpush-Tsintsadze said the need to revise the Charter of special partnership Ukraine–NATO. Why? The new document will differ from the Declaration to Supplement the Charter, signed in 2009? Maybe instead of new documents is to focus on "homework" — the implementation of the Annual national programmes? Twenty years ago, when he signed the Charter, was a completely different situation in the security sphere in Ukraine and around it. Now a new situation, and these changes should be reflected in the main document on cooperation between Ukraine and NATO. First, we need to prescribe more precisely the situation in which security was Ukraine and the Alliance, and how we can help each other in these difficult circumstances. Second, do not rule out that Ukraine during the work on this document will propose to clarify our goals and objectives for cooperation with this defensive Alliance. And then, to successfully implement the Annual programme, by the way, are similar to those performed by candidates for membership in the Alliance in the framework map, is not even discussed. Of course, we will improve, saecularium annually for the needs of Ukraine, its society and government, the security sector. — NATO is ready to discuss the revision of the Charter and the signing of a new document? —NATO is a complex organization. Each member has their own specific needs and expectations. That decisions are made by consensus, the strength and weakness of the organization. It is very difficult to manage the organization, when the result should be acceptable to all at the same time. At the same time the question of revising the Charter violates the Ukrainian side not for the first time. And what was the reaction of our partners? From low-key to readiness to work... And Ukraine and further claims the status of a special partner for NATO and a key ally? This status is still at the Wales summit in 2014. joined Sweden, Finland, Australia, Georgia, and... Jordan. — In Ukraine there are two approaches to how to move toward our goal of full membership in NATO. Proponents of the first say: we need to join all the different formats of cooperation with the Alliance. For example, you should obtain a special status of a US ally outside NATO. Proponents of the second believe: it is better to set a goal and clearly to talk about it, and not to accept any of the alternatives, not to limit opportunities for Ukraine on its way to an Alliance half-hearted solutions. Here between supporters of these two approaches and the debate continues. You what kind? —I am inclined to the latter. Not because I don't understand the use of different formats of cooperation on each stage of interaction. Just for his career in the diplomatic service is not just faced with a situation where omissions, compromises in matters of principle and half-hearted workarounds have become a stumbling block in the way of further progress. Let us keep at least in the question of defense of logic with military straightness: Ukraine should become a full member of the Alliance. All. Point. If it is obvious, then, on the way to membership you can use the advantages of work in various formats. — If used only every fifth citizen of Ukraine was ready to vote for joining NATO, now this figure rose to 69%. Sociologists see it as an emotional reaction to the Russian aggression Ukrainians believe that the Alliance will guarantee the security of our country. But the membership of our country is not on the agenda of this organization. NATO is also not going to send a military contingent to the conflict zone or to supply weapons in our country. If the Alliance is not now able to ensure our security, then what is valuable for Ukraine cooperation with him? —NATO involves two different planes of cooperation. First — cooperation with NATO as a Union of 29 countries. The second is the bilateral format of interaction with members of the military — political bloc. All these States have full authority to act within the framework of both NATO and bilateral cooperation. Regarding the equipment, weapons and other NATO members have the right to make decisions for themselves. And on this issue we have interviewed. For example, the United States has not supplied us with a lethal weapon. But they provided us with modern defensive weapons, enabling us to better protect ourselves, know what is going on at the front and his line. Member countries of the Alliance gave us the means of electronic communication, treat and rehabilitate the wounded, helping to deal with mines. Their instructors teach our military, at the same time learning from our soldiers and officers that have acquired a unique combat experience. We are working together to make Ukraine a more democratic, sustainable and strong. In Ukraine often underestimate NATO, seeing the Alliance primarily of "hard security" and forgetting about what we get from it during emergencies, such as explosions in the storage of arms and ammunition or during the flood in Transcarpathia, and the like. Or that Ukrainian scholars — one of the main participants in programmes of scientific cooperation with NATO. Of course, American, Estonian, British and Croatian soldiers are not fighting for us, because Ukraine is not a member of this military-political Alliance. To defend our land and the right to the future is our challenge. But Ukraine, even in this difficult time, sees the world globally. Traditionally, we participate in all NATO operations, making a contribution to the common world. In addition, political pressure from members of the Alliance on Russia. Such as the United States. That is why the Secretary of state Rex Tillerson came to Ukraine two days ago. And the visit of the Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Jens Stoltenberg, along with ambassadors from 29 countries-members of the Alliance is very important for us as a demonstration of support for Ukraine. — Numerous knowledgeable sides DT.UA explain the failure of the members of this military-political organization to provide the country with a defensive weapon, the lack of trust to Ukraine from the countries-members of NATO. For this reason, they do not provide us with intelligence in real time.Why NATO does not trust Ukraine? —It is not necessary to draw final conclusions on the basis of what someone says, such as NATO doesn't trust us. In fact, the Alliance tries to build its policy based on the defense vision of security. In his calculations he took the goal to improve security in the Euro-Atlantic area, without provoking Russia into a response. The leaders of the countries-members of the Alliance believe that there is still a window of opportunity to convince Russia to wage a conflict through diplomatic means without resorting to war. At the same time the nomination of the armed forces of countries-members of NATO on the Eastern borders of NATO are a response to the threat posed by Russia. — But what gives Ukraine the strengthening of the Eastern wing of NATO? We ensure our security? The war is going in the Eastern regions of Ukraine... —Even though this has no immediate impact on our defense, that is a demonstration to Russia of the seriousness of the Alliance. This is the first. Second: even without becoming a formal member of this organization, Ukraine is actually the Eastern flank of NATO. Among the areas where the most actively developing cooperation between Ukraine and NATO, and Advisory assistance from the Alliance. What now the priorities of Kiev to such assistance? —Advisory assistance operates on many levels, starting with the advisors working in the Ministry of defense, the intelligence agencies and even the foreign Ministry. But when we talk about NATO experts, it is necessary to understand that this is not specialist from the headquarters in Brussels and the representative of one of the member countries of the Alliance. Similarly, we can talk about the British adviser, Lithuanian, American and the like. Expert assistance is very important. For example, recently the head of the SBU together with the Deputy Secretary General announced the completion of the first phase of the project for strengthening cyber security in Ukraine. By the way, I am particularly pleased that the allies agreed with our vision of the immediate threats to the foreign Ministry, and the first batch of special vehicles will go on strengthening of protection of the information infrastructure that is Mead. So, in this project, except for assistance with electronics and software, and also provides for the training of our professionals and expertise on the part of NATO. Accumulated with the help of consultants and documents. The experts of the countries-members of NATO participated in the development of such existing instruments, as a Strategy of cyber security, Defense Bulletin. Now advisors are working on reform of the SBU and the entire security sector. — Project for reform of the SBU prepared a year ago and since then lies in AP, waiting for the President's signature... —For me, as a bureaucrat, this means that the document has not been prepared. If he was ready, the President would have signed it. — Following the meeting, KUN announced the establishment of the platform between Ukraine and NATO in the sphere of countering hybrid threats. Along with Ukraine Finland is preparing to launch a Centre of hybrid warfare, which will become a platform of cooperation between the EU and NATO. What's the difference? —What makes Finland, and what makes Ukraine — two very different concepts. We do not claim the creation of the center for learning. Our idea platform. And the platform does not necessarily have material expression. It is expected that Ukraine will share their experience with European partners. And to become a hub for the exchange of experience and information and hold conferences with hybrid threats, create database and knowledge base, to provide study of the latest threats. This work, in our opinion, should lead national Institute for strategic studies and personally to its Director Vladimir Gorbulin. — Last year Ukraine managed to "swing" the Center for strategic communication — Stratcom... —We agreed that the creation of Stratcom to coordinate the national security Council. Ukrainian authorities announced plans to 2020 go to NATO standards. How successful is this transition? —It is quite a complex process, and our military are working on this transition. It is not only the gauges, meters and kilograms. We are talking about the transition to the technical standards of NATO (quality of fuel, accounting for and control munitions and the like) and social (for the military housing and medical assistance). It is also the rules of engagement, the service of women in the army... This is a very ambitious task — to manage to do everything up to 2020, the Task of the foreign Ministry to help the military to implement it.And for me as the newly appointed Ambassador of Ukraine to NATO are among the priorities is to help our security sector and defense to adapt to NATO standards. As well as to receive assistance with trust funds. As for the political part, my priority is the granting map to Ukraine and the beginning of its fulfillment by our country. — What security model is now the most acceptable for our country? Membership in NATO in the far future. Washington has no plans to create a military-political Union with Kiev. After the Russian aggression the idea of neutrality discredited. So what will be forged auspices of the Ukraine? —If to speak about what may be the best security system for Ukraine, we can recall the Russian Tsar Alexander III, who said: "throughout the world we have only two true allies — our army and Navy." We must realize that now we must rely primarily on their own forces — the army, intelligence services and, of course, civil society. And no one in the jungle can not live without having friends. It is ridiculous to believe that our best path of neutrality, when the country is sandwiched between two military blocs — NATO and the CSTO, whose members have at their disposal nuclear weapons. If we are talking about the security of our country, then perhaps this is not neutrality, and membership in NATO. — The last quarter century Poland actively supported Ukraine on the world stage. Including NATO, have been a consistent supporter of providing our country map. However, at the summit of the initiative "Three seas" in Warsaw was not. Why Ukraine is not invited to participate in the summit? Is it because of Ukrainian-Polish relations are currently going through a crisis? —Although Ukraine sees itself as part of the black sea region, we will see how this particular infrastructure project, initiated by Poland, interesting our country. — Why the Ministry later appealed to the poles for the organization of the Warsaw meeting of the presidents, Donald trump, Andrzej Duda and Petro Poroshenko? One thing a bilateral meeting and quite another at the summit in the presence of many. We chose a bilateral format. And negotiations Poroshenko with the trump has already taken place. — At the recently held summit of "Big twenty", where he first met Putin and trump. The American President called the meeting amazing. What were your impressions? "Big deal" did not take place? —"Stunning" lack "a Great deal". But seriously, it was naive to expect an immediate progress in a very complex, multi-layered and intricate relationships of the USA and Russia. For Ukraine it is important to mutual understanding between the two presidents and their administrations. Maybe only when Putin will hear directly from trump's the same words that told him in Brisbane three years ago, canadian Prime Minister Harper ("get out of Ukraine"), he will realize that hopefully the agreement does not appear and you have to leave. And the fact that a significant part of the meeting was devoted to Russia's intervention in U.S. elections... humanly understandable sensitivity of Donald trump to this issue. I'm sure the next meeting will be less emotional and more productive. In particular, and for us. — It is known that the Ukrainian side has sent us his proposals concerning the possibilities for the participation of United States in resolving the conflict in the East. During the visit, Rex Tillerson you received a clear answer, what is the format of Washington will participate in the negotiation process? —In the diplomatic slang for the visit of United States Secretary of state called "the practical implementation of the leaders decisions." In addition to traditional discussion of the agenda of the "Ukraine–USA", was held the conversation on ways to resolve the conflict in the Donbas and Crimea. As for the format in which Washington will participate in the negotiation process... At the core of the peace talks remains "Normandie" and the Minsk process of the tripartite group. Our partners repeated several times that no one sees instead of "Minsk" is another effective format. From Washington, the expected additional track of talks, which will help the basic process, not to duplicate it. — And what exactly will be the functions of the special representative of the United States Ukraine, Kurt Volker? Won't the activities of Volcker renewal of a parallel track Nuland–Surkov? —Actually — Yes. Kurt Volker to work in the same format as Victoria Nuland, having, probably, the same contact with the Russian side. Unless, of course, approve the candidacy of Surkov. — Among recent initiatives to resolve the situation in Donbass — the proposal of French President Emmanuel Macron: the withdrawal of military forces and weapons, allowing international observers to all points in the Donbass and the liberation of the hostages. Maybe "formula Rules" be the solution of the conflict? And how it differs from the Minsk agreements? Formula"Macron" is no different from the Minsk agreements. The proposal of the French side only detail "Minsk". I respect the proposals of the French President who genuinely wants to help resolve the conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Deals of Macron suggests that the current France intends to participate more actively in resolving the conflict than in the previous guide. God forbid that we helped at least some formula. But, as practice shows, "the formula Steinmeier" and other sincere efforts of our partners in the "Normandy format" breaking on the misunderstanding of our friends the essence of what is happening in Ukraine, about their sincere faith in the fact that in Russia the same goals as them, and she also wants to resolve this issue. Unfortunately, our attempts to convince partners so far, to put it mildly, not very successful. It's not because we don't convince ourselves or we do not hear. Our partners are not yet ready to admit that the goal of Russia is absolutely contrary to the principles of peaceful settlement. But to realize this state of Affairs — a radical step, which would have to make a decision about what Russia should be a different attitude and, consequently, to act. Some countries it is not easy to decide. Americans look at Ukraine through the prism of the political "relegate" geopolitical appetites of Russia. Donald trump, who sat in the presidential office in the White house from the business office in trump tower, used to operate specific things. What Kiev has to offer the property trump to Ukraine has become interesting for Washington? Of course, in addition to the purchase of American coal... —By the way, us coal is also a good topic. And if the work to provide alternative energy sources have started early, I think that Ukraine's economy would be more stable, and we would have had much more intimate relations with the same United States. But, besides coal, there are other issues that need to be addressed to Washington. Our American colleagues I'm constantly trying to explain one simple idea: the modern global problem of the United States — the uncontrolled spread of weapons of mass destruction, withdrawal from agreements and the growth of the nuclear threat in the world. The problem of North Korea, Iran — all the result of unresolved issues of security of Ukraine, which voluntarily renounced nuclear weapons. No one will ever believe in the document, on a sample of us signed the Budapest Memorandum, if countries such as the United States does not show that these two sacred pages, and the independence of Ukraine will be protected and its security guaranteed. Many other issues that we discussed — it projects, starting with food security (in the world die of famine every day hundreds and thousands of people, and Ukraine is able to feed them) to the space industry. It is justly famous engineer and entrepreneur Elon Musk said that in the world, except his rockets are only the Zenith. We have something we can be interesting for the United States. And not only the US but for the world. This was reported in the Ternopil regional state administration.Ïåðåâåäåíî ñåðâèñîì "ßíäåêñ.Ïåðåâîä÷èê": translate.yandex.ru.
Source: http://uzinform.com.ua/
