Russian fleet deal

The Ukrainian parliament in Kyiv has ratified a deal with Russia extending the Kremlin's lease for a key naval base in Ukraine's Crimea. The use of the port at Sevastopol has been a sticky issue between the two countries for some time, and this latest decision has been met with fierce opposition by pro-Western Ukrainians. Deutsche Welle spoke with Ukrainian Foreign Minister and former ambassador to Russia Kostyantyn Gryshchenko about the controversial new deal and what the consequences are for Ukraine.

Deutsche Welle: How important is this deal for Ukraine?

Kostyantyn Gryshchenko: It's crucially important, because under the previous government there was a contract signed in January 2009 that created an unbearable situation for the Ukrainian economy. Essentially, the price of gas that Ukraine pays up till when this contract comes into force is much higher than what Germany pays to us. That was extremely unfortunate, to put it mildly.

We had to find a solution to an acute problem in the economy, because without knowing what kind of reasonable gas prices we could achieve, we could not form a budget. The budget has been adopted today with this ratification of the deal. Without that, we could not get the credit to jump-start the economy anew from the IMF and other credit sources - international and private ones.

So it was a kind of stalemate that was extremely dangerous for internal stability, and the economic prospects of the country. On the other hand we also settled a major danger posed by the constant frictions with Russia related to the Black Sea Fleet based in Sevastopol. The extension gives Russia the ability to plan for a certain period of time in the future, and removes the emotional friction that is dangerous for the relationship. It provides for a better atmosphere, which is essential for us to agree on major common strategic projects. It's a win-win situation.

However, not all Ukrainians are in favor of the deal. During Tuesday's ratification in parliament smoke bombs and eggs were thrown, and demonstrations also took place outside parliament. Were you expecting such a strong response?

One could expect strong views, and the political parties are usually very eloquent in expressing these views. I think they went over the top, but essentially it is just a too-vivid demonstration of the competitive democracy we have in Ukraine.

But democracy is ruled by a majority that is legitimately brought to power through elections that are also legitimate. In this particular case, I think the situation will quiet down in the next few days, and we will continue to move on with the reform program that is a key element of what President Yanukovych and his government want to achieve in the years to come.

Ukraine has a new president and a new foreign minister - how is this going to affect the country's foreign policy? What changes should we expect?

The biggest change is that we will not be so ideologically motivated - it's a more pragmatic approach to what we can and should achieve for the benefit of the Ukrainian economy and the Ukrainian people - on the basis of promoting democratic principles inside the country, but being receptive and at the same time tough with our major partners.

What will stay the same is our orientation towards the European Union - the maximum possible - and fastest possible - integration with the EU. We do understand that it's not an easy process, but it's a priority. The association agreement, the free-trade zone, and visa liberalization - those are the key tasks we have set before us, and we have agreed with the EU that they should be reached as soon as possible. Reforms and coming closer to Europe go hand-in-hand.

On the other hand, what is new is that we see our relationship with Russia as an opening, rather than as a threat. We see that bringing to life projects that would be beneficial to both Russia and Ukraine is not only possible, but is a necessity for us to be more competitive in the current world. We are now going to be very resolute in exploring the possibilities with the EU, but also with Russia, with China, with India - areas that were not covered previously by our foreign policy. Foreign economic attempts to improve relationships with these countries will bring us positive results.

Ukraine has signaled that it is no longer interested in NATO membership - how do you envisage a neutral status for your country?

We are not talking about a neutral status. We have defined our stance according to our reality: we are a European non-bloc state. We are not neutral. The level of support for NATO membership has never exceeded 30 percent, and in the final days of the previous administration, it went down to less than 20. With that level of support, no government could strive for membership.

President Yanukovych was elected on a platform of not joining NATO at least for the foreseeable future. Why? Because it creates major tensions with some of our neighbors, and we do not have a clear road-map that would allow us to have an alternative security system that would protect us. We believe that the best protection for Ukraine is very friendly, very open and mutually beneficial relations with Europe, the United States, and Russia, while being able to defend ourselves at the level which is needed for any threat to be neutralized if anything unthinkable happens. I would say that this stance is now getting acceptance from our partners in Europe and in the United States.

Does this mean the bottom line is closer economic ties with Europe, but closer economic and military ties with Russia?

No. There is no need for closer military ties with Russia whatsoever. We have a very extensive relationship with NATO - the formula for this relationship will not change. We would like to have, and we do have the most intense exchanges with the alliance. We will continue to hold annual joint exercises with NATO member states under the Partnership for Peace program.

With Russia we have a very serious military technical cooperation, because our armed forces rely on military equipment that we have inherited from the former Soviet Union, and it is also important for our defense capability. That will continue, and in parallel we are also cooperating with major western suppliers of certain systems for our armed forces for the future. There is no imbalance in that relationship.

Last year's Ukrainian-Russian gas crisis had quite a significant impact on Europe. So far there hasn't been a repeat of the crisis. But European fears remain over supply security. How is Ukraine going to tackle this image problem?

There simply will be no problem in this particular regard, because we have settled the gas issue with Russia, so it might sink in the mind of Europeans - not tomorrow, but I think the first winter without any problem will appease their concerns. The transit of Russian gas through Ukraine to Europe is now guaranteed, at least for ten years.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev is scheduled to travel to Kyiv this May. What do you expect from his visit?

We expect new agreements, we expect new projects to be adopted or to be given a green light - projects that will help us not only to resolve past issues but also open up new vistas and new opportunities. This visit is not simply symbolic, it's also a practical opening for bilateral relations in most important fields. I think now we will have regular visits on all levels, including on the level of presidents, because we need to catch up on the almost total lack of contacts, at least on the presidential level, during the last five years. We simply need to return to normality, and explore more than normality in relations with Russia. And we will do so.

Interview: Neil King/bk/dfm

Editor: Rob Turner