3 – Ukraine. “PROJECT UKRAINE”
The independence of the state of Ukraine became reality thanks to mutual efforts of post-Soviet communist nomenclature, which first in a low voice, than louder and louder declared its exclusive demands on the “Ukrainian region”, and to conservative or traditional Ukrainian patriots.
American Vision Of “Project Ukraine”
At the same time American “Project Ukraine” becomes clearer. The USA are surely interested in Ukraine as in a buffer state between NATO and Russia+. They understand quite clearly, that it is not worth strengthening Russia by way of Ukraine annexation. Furthermore, they suggest that Russia had a chance to become a democratic (predictable and safe for the USA ) country if it gets rid its imperial ambitions.
It is no use talking about mutual position of the West, because there is no common position due to the contradictions between the USA and the EU, inside the EU and inside NATO. The possible way for Ukraine suggested by the USA is in tight co-operation and further future membership in NATO, rapprochement with the EU (perhaps the US support is not excluded). Certainly nobody talks about the EU membership, but the movement in this direction is suggested. This US position is very useful for Ukraine while it can embody “European” or “Euro-Atlantic” way.
4.3. EU Vision Of “Project Ukraine”
One can talk about the complete absence of the EU “Project Ukraine”. The EU has so many home problems connected with enlargement perspectives, that “Ukrainian question” could be hardly seen. It does not mean, certainly, that the problem disappears when the eyes are closed.
Only now they started to seek for a space for Ukraine in the substance recently named “common house”. It became clear, that the offered place is not inside comfortable EU, but “close to” or rather between EU and RF. EU stands strictly on this position in spite of Ukrainian pro-European motions. And it is right, because it is impossible to build in such a state-monopolistic and stagnating in authoritarian direction “Project Ukraine” into “European House”. But the question remains open whether it is possible to deprive Ukraine in general, but only “Gosudarstvo” Ukraine/ parallel Russia/ crypto-Russia” of European prospect? That is why the official EU position has no restrictions as to the European future of Ukraine, but only after two waves of EU enlargement and changes in Ukraine itself.
4.4. Oligarchy-Nomenclatural Vision Of “Project “Gosudarstvo” Ukraine”
It was already mentioned above, that there is no single “Project Ukraine”, based on all-national consensus, as well as that consensus itself. There are instead several different proposals to the “Project Ukraine”, not only distant but even quite opposite to one another. But it does not mean that at least one of them is implemented.
The real way of things in Ukraine could be described as a finished oligarchy-nomenclatural “Project Ukraine” in the form of “Gosudarstvo ”Ukraine”. Stagnarchy has practically embodied this project and almost happy about that. It saved power, consolidated itself around state monopoly as political integrity, overcame successfully the transition from planned to state-capitalistic economy, carried out and finishes now the redistribution of property. It is not interested principally either in destroying of state monopoly or in introducing “civic society”, which can cause threats for it. At the same time stagnarchy did it best to deprive the EU prospect for Ukraine, which could finish the “Project “Gosudarstvo ”Ukraine”. Stagnarchy has no interest in civilizing economic policy in Ukraine, so the declaration of its “European choice” could not be considered seriously.
Non-admittance of such way of things by the West is the only discomfort for stagnarchy, though a healthy political cynicism of strategic partners helps them to watch the small drawbacks of “Gosudarstvo ”Ukraine” turning blind eye to them. That is the reason for particular US support of “Gosudarstvo ”Ukraine” project due to some anti-Russian or anti-EU considerations. EU does not understand and does not accept this project. Poland is the only close neighbour, which delicately makes no barriers to that project, as Czechia does, having its own concrete geopolitical interests in Ukraine.
The same particular support is received by “Gosudarstvo ”Ukraine” project from Russian side while it promotes the way to Russia+ reintegration. Some other tendencies, certainly, could be noticed. Part of Ukrainian stagnarchs are not interested in redistribution of property and power in Ukraine in favour of more mighty Russian oligarchs, so they can sabotage reintegration to Russia+ as effectively as the EU approach. There could not be final orientation – in Eastern or Western direction – in the frames of “Gosudarstvo ”Ukraine” project. The great sense of that progect consists in moving nowhere, because otherwise the rules of the game for power elites are to be changed, the property and, therefore, the power – to be redistributed. Big Western or Russian capitals would at once swallow weak capitals of Ukrainian “new Russians”.
4.5.Proposals to “Project Ukraine”
In spite of everything, Ukraine remains a problem. The problem for itself, because the present way of things is not acceptable for the majority of its citizen. Common silence does not mean common agreement. If society is going only to survive, not to change itself, it is condemned to sink down sooner or later. It is important therefore to think at least conceptionally what to do next, for it is really impossible to live so any longer.
4.5.1. European Project
For such an average state in world scale as Ukraine the European project could become the most attractive. Taking into account that the membership of Ukraine in the EU is impossible this project may consist in maximum homogenisation of all social and state life spheres with the standards adopted in EU. Recently Ukraine adopted a 7-year program for EU integration, where practical co-ordination with EU standards of economics, legislation etc. are previewed. It has to approach the EU with the maximum the US support, and in further perspective – supported by the FRG and Poland (in technical aspect). The time frames of the project would be determined by the EU effectiveness after two waves of its enlargement and by possible political collisions, which can accelerate or slow down this process.
4.5.2. Black Sea-Mediterranean Project
In case of blocking the EU-directed project and complications with its development in Russian direction “Project Ukraine” can choose Black Sea-Mediterranean area as a possible direction for further development of its relationships. GUUAM (the political union of Georgia, Uzbekistan, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Moldova) is a considerable prolegomenon of that project. This project has good economic prospects: oil and gas transportation from Caspian, Caucasus and (what is not excluded) Gulf regions with their possible processing. There is no basis for discussion of the democratization resources of that region. Ukraine is an actual leader of this political-economical union and can occupy good position in the Black Sea Co-operative Organization.
4.5.3. Russia-Centric Project
The “Russia-centric project” could not be ignored, but not the one, formed by Russia, but a purely Ukrainian one. Ukraine itself can attempt to build its relations with Russia according to personal “Russia-centric project”. This project could be very effective in certain but almost impossible circumstances, when real consensus were found. Hence, Russia and Ukraine have to change themselves for that. Russia first of all has to refuse from its imperial syndrome and to seek strategical, not tactical, profitable co-operation with friendly Ukraine. At the same time Ukraine has to forget its fears connected with Russian imperialism and to go out from the stagnarchial dead point.
4.5.4. Buffer Project
The mixture of stagnarchial and American “buffer projects”, timidly planned in Washington as well as in Kyiv, is partly implemented now in Ukraine. Strategic partnership with the USA and Russia allows Ukrainian stagnarchs to realize their buffer state policy, which moves nowhere and does not develop as a social organism. The form of a regime dominating in their partner-state is less interesting for the USA than its faithfulness to political and military obligations undertaken as a political partner. Kyiv uses that successfully. It parasites on its geopolitical resource, preserving the present state of things. At the same time Kyiv does not approach Russia+ too close, leaving a space for stagnation in this direction as well.
4.5.5. Baltic Sea – Black Sea Project
This project is almost impossible or lost due to Russia and Byelarus reunion and undoubtable the EU direction of Baltic countries. Byelarus was neutralized by this reunion as a natural strategic partner of Ukraine. It is a pity that practically everybody forgot about that. About Poland, however, it is talked much more, though it is distinctly and incomparatively different to Ukraine. Nevertheless what is going on in Byelarus, its resource could be finally activated.
4.5.6. Temporal “Project Ukraine”
Awaiting new generations could become a possible project, when the old way of thinking and, therefore, decision-making would go away together with old nomenclature. The youth should have a more developed “state” and “enterpreneurship” experience. Finally, it has to declare inevitably its right for power. Is this youth brought up now? The majority tries to make ends meet in the problems of stagnating society. At the same time the stagnarchs invented the system of their reproduction. Soviet nomenclature delivered oligarchy and stagnarchy, and those, respectively, are “bringing up” their new generation, which, certainly, are not interested in the loss of their position and in construction of civil society. It can stop the development of Ukraine in general.
4.5.7. Language “Project Ukraine” / “Project Ukraine-Language”
Even in the case of complete prospectlessness of this project in “Gosudarstvo ”Ukraine” conditions, it has to be declared. The Ukrainian language as a consolidative element of potential Ukrainian political nation has a great prospect. But nevertheless it is suppressed severely in already independent Ukraine in its post-colonial, in fact neo-colonial period of history. That is why the society has a task to compose its enlarged self-identification with the Ukrainian language, creating Ukrainian world vision. It is impossible to build an effective and independent identity on the basis of actual bilinguism of Ukrainian population (in conditions of rigid Russian neoimperialistic discourse pressing and neo-Russian / Russian-speaking identity).
The only thing left is to work on those and, perhaps, some other directions of “Project Ukraine” development.
Not a single drop of blood was shed for independence of a new state of Ukraine and for the “Project Ukraine” embodiment. That is why it is price-less indeed. It has no price, it was not paid for and, therefore, not valued by nobody. Stagnarchy lives with what it manages to “grab” today. For nine years of “Gosudarstvo ”Ukraine” existence it has kept all its capitals abroad. Those are compradors, every moment ready to leave the sinking ship. “Gosudarstvo ”Ukraine” project almost gave nothing to the pauperized masses, whose percentage in the society is constantly growing, so any sentiments towards it could be hardly expected. The so-called middle class cannot be born in nomenclature-oligarchic society.
Geopolitics Nations Parties Person Crisis Euroskeptic Society Youtube
*YOUTUBE – What Does ‘Peace Through Strength’ Mean Today? Rodger Baker Responds. Readers have asked some thoughtful questions about “Understanding America’s Global Role in the Age of Trump,” the most recent column from VP of Strategic Analysis Rodger Baker.
*YOUTUBE – Lionel Barber, editor of the FT, and Gideon Rachman discuss the major political events of 2016, including the election of Donald Trump in the US, and how they will affect the global order in 2017.
*YOUTUBE – Noam Chomsky on Trump and the decline of the American Superpower.