II. Ukraine in Core Geopolitical Outlines

1. The Geopolitical Priorities of the World's
Main Powers and Ukraine

The development of a consistent geopolitical and foreign policy strategy for the future and the formation of an adequate strategic response to time challenges as well as to the possible strategies of main "players" and Ukraine's closest neighbors demand a comparative analysis of the geopolitical and foreign policies of the Eurasian and Atlantic communities.

The Geopolitical Strategy of the West. After the West's victory in the Cold War and the formation of a de facto mono-polar world model under US leadership, the main thrust of western geopolitical strategy has been directed toward a consolidation of the "status quo" and the prevention of the formation of a new geopolitical power or bloc opposed to the West's Euro-Atlantic-mondiallistic ideology. Russia, the Islamic world and China are considered to be potential candidates for this role. In theory, the possibility of a split inside the "western world" itself should not be excluded.

The main geopolitical priorities of the West can be defined in the following manner:

· the preservation of western civilization and the expansion of cooperation among its European, North Atlantic and Pacific components; the strengthening of the basic values and institutions of this civilization: democracy, mechanisms of the free market, liberal-democratic ideology, etc.; the formation of a new world structure based on the principle of geoeconomics;

· counteraction to the creation and strengthening of any geopolitical bloc or strategic power that could oppose western civilization and promote a new bipolarity or an antagonistic multi-polarity;

· the strengthening of NATO and the main strategic axes of the western world: USA - Europe, USA - the Middle East; USA - South-East Asia, USA - Japan;

· the curbing of the influence and expansion of "messianic states", including Confucian and Islamic states; the prevention of the transformation of regional conflicts into global wars;
· preservation and strengthening of the existing strategic advantage over former and potential adversaries and the ensuring of possibilities for strategic domination in any regional or global conflicts;

· the reinforcement of the "Rimland" (on the Eurasian rim from Iceland to Japan and the Philippines);

· NATO's eastward expansion and the stimulation of the entry into the European Union and European cultural sphere in general of the countries of Central Europe including the states that emerged after the disintegration of the USSR, especially those whose cultures are similar to those of the West.

· the development and expansion of the influence of international institutions which share western values, and the assurance of the integration of non-western countries into these institutions;

· economic and socio-cultural expansion into other countries, the support of social institutions and groups oriented toward western values, interests and lifestyles.

The above-mentioned priorities wholly correspond to a new mono-polar world structure (today multi-polarity remains mainly in the economic sphere) that has come into formation after the end of the "Cold War" and to the interests of a single definite pillar of world power, that being the United States in tandem with developed western countries. The West's victory in the "Cold War" was predictable. The war was won by the West's market economy. Not military potential, but the economy turned out to be the determining factor in the West's victory. However, the expectation of many countries that economic strength would necessarily transform itself into geopolitical influence and would lead to the formation of a multi-polar world corresponding to the new economic power centers (Japan, Germany, China) was in vain, as was the Marxist myth about the economy's domination over politics. Economic power proved to be a necessary, yet insufficient factor in the formation of large states and new power axes. The emergence of a mono-polar world with a universal Euro-Atlantic system of values significantly limited the influence and possibility for expansion of alternative value systems - Eurasian, Islamic, Latin American, Confucian, among others. These values and their corresponding societies have been preordained to play secondary regional roles.

The future of Europe and of world civilization mainly depends on a clear western position in their relations with the countries of the former USSR. Zbigniew Brzezinski believes that any Russian attempt to isolate and once again subdue Ukraine with the help of Moscow's stronghold in the Crimea as well as intervention in the Baltic states must be regarded as a reason for full-scale western help. The support of Baltic-Black Sea states should become a strategic priority of the West. In geopolitical sense it is important that Ukraine has the opportunity to stabilize its position as a powerful, independent state of Central Europe, which in turn will strengthen the hope for Russia's evolution into a democratic European state. For this reason the economic and political consolidation of Ukraine is today becoming a vital component of western strategy in Central Europe.

The Geopolitical Strategy of the Russian Federation. The main directions of the geopolitical strategy of the Russian Federation are determined mainly by its geopolitical ambitions and by its attempts to restore the superpower status lost after the disintegration of the Warsaw Pact and the USSR. The feeling of strategic vulnerability that emerged in the process of Russia's transformation from superpower into a large regional power, in addition to the natural anxiety felt in the new geopolitical realities stimulated a considerable number of analytical reports and recommendations¹.

The analysis of these reports and the actualities of RF foreign policy lead to the conclusion that Russia's main geopolitical priorities are:

· the recovery of superpower status and the formation of a new Eurasian power or bloc on the territory of the former USSR;

· the gathering together of "historical Russian territories"; integration of states and "open spaces" surrounding Russia;

· the joining of the "G-7" and active counteraction to NATO expansion;

· a change in the strategic balance between the Atlantic community (NATO) and Russia as the USSR's military-strategic successor; an orientation toward the formation of a new strategic bipolarity;

· the formation of new Eurasian strategic axes: Moscow - Berlin, Moscow - Teheran, Moscow - Tokyo;

· the ensuring of access to "warm seas", primarily through Iran and Iraq (preferably by political means);

· counteraction of separatist movements inside the RF, especially in the Caucasian regions, the so called "Tiurk Triangle" (primarily Tatarstan and Bashkortostan), Yakutia and the Far East;

· the neutralization of the Baltic states and the geopolitical decomposition of Ukraine (or at least the so-called "finlandization" of these states). The complete integration of Belarus' into the RF;

· the establishment of economic and political domination in the countries of the Transcaucases and Central Asia;

¹ See for example: Goncharenko A. Ukrainian-Russian Relations: An Unequal Partnership. - London, Whitehall: RUSI, 1995; Global Transformations and Development Srategies, ed. by O.Bilorus, Kyiv, Vipol, 1998.

· economic and socio-cultural expansion into all independent states on the territory of the former USSR; the support of the Russian speaking population; the creation of conditions necessary for the political control and domination of Russia in these states.

The above-mentioned priorities wholly correspond to traditional Russian imperialistic strategy and the Russian messianic idea. The fulfillment of this idea has always been and remains the basis for traditional Russian strategy. And all of the processes of "liberalization", "democratization" or "westernization" cannot alter this strategic tendency in a historically short period of time.

A closer look at the potential of Ukrainian-Russian relations and their deep roots shows that there are no fundamental reasons for their worsening. Both countries are indeed related in culture and civilization, have mutual economic interests, and are capable of pursuing a coordinated policy toward other states. An analysis of the reasons for difficulties in Ukrainian-Russian relations makes it obvious that these difficulties are mainly subjective in character, that is, dictated by the intentions, views, and aspirations of the dominant political élites of these states.

A fundamental difference in mentality causes Russians to see themselves as a great-power nation, while Ukrainians from their point of view are a secondary ethnos, of lesser value, not able to form an independent political life. The Ukrainian rejection of telurocracy is interpreted as the incapacity of creating statehood. Viewing itself as the USSR's sole successor and in a wider sense the successor of the idea of world domination, Russia has shown ambitions toward restoring a macro-political state structure in Eurasia and as a result attempts to subdue its foreign policy to the messianic idea.

In the past 300 years the majority of nations in the Russian Empire have partly accepted and were partly forced to accept a framework of beliefs and foreign orientations that still prevails in the RF's politics - the Euro-Asian paradigm, which recognizes the domination of the Moscovite Center. Russian foreign political doctrine concerning the "near abroad" has a relatively clear definition: Russia regards this region within its sphere of vital interests and maintains the right of interference in these countries' internal affairs with the aim of "protecting the interests of Russian-speaking minorities". Concrete Russian policy in Transdniestria, Abkhazia, and Tadjikistan attests to the fact that these are not just mere words. Officially, on the parliamentary level, Russia has repeatedly expressed territorial claims toward Ukraine.

The Geopolitical Strategy of Ukraine. Unfortunately, Ukraine has never had a clearly defined geopolitical strategy. Nevertheless, the development of such a strategy is of vital necessity for Ukraine in its capacity as a sovereign power and geopolitical subject. This fact completely corresponds to the geopolitical potential and possibilities of Ukraine as a Central European state.

The precondition for the formation of such a strategy is a clear definition of basic values and national interests, of internal and external parameters of development, and of geopolitical orientations for the future. The preliminary development of these crucial categories together with an analysis of the main directions and aims of the strategies and goals of Ukraine's partners in the international arena as outlined above allows for the elaboration of Ukraine's geopolitical and foreign policy priorities.

The possibility of direct interaction with other world regions and powers constitutes the main sense of the gaining of independence. The nation attains a new quality of life, becomes the subject of international life, includes itself in world processes. The ensuring of the national interests of any country demands, first of all, the formation of its own system of orientations within the geopolitical world model. The state coordinates its policy and positions taking into account the interests and positions of other states.

Historically, Ukraine has interacted with the world mainly through mediators, through the prism of foreign interests, and through the means of a more politically developed foreign consciousness (Polish, Russian, German). Ukraine today stands on the threshold of opening the world onto itself, a process that Europe has been developing for several centuries, and also itself to the world, as for many countries Ukraine still remains a geopolitical terra incognita.

The process of Ukraine's gaining real independence and its entry into the international community have created a fundamentally new situation for the comprehensive development of the Ukrainian nation. The new quality of Ukrainian society demands a corresponding reappraisal of its own values. This re-evaluation has to begin with the almost complete reorientation of the whole system of consciousness characteristic to the Ukrainian people.

The aspiration for an entry into direct contact with other countries demands an independent comprehension of other structures of consciousness, which determine the actions of influential political and economic powers. Penetration into the outside world begins with attempts at understanding it, with establishing contacts with it and with an entry into multilateral dialog. Only then will we be able to find those forms of the presentation of our self-identity and our interests that are understandable to the outside world. Ukraine must conceptualize itself in the geopolitical context and in the context of the development of world civilization. Such a conceptualization is irremovably connected to the way civilized society sees Ukraine and its place in the world. The definition of Ukraine's geopolitical interests demands a taking into account of the combined system of interests of various states and the balancing of the economic, political, military, and spiritual potential of different world regions. This especially concerns Ukraine's closest neighbors and those global powers that aspire to find their own interests in Ukraine or themselves are of special interest for Ukraine.

Three main paradigms, whose interaction determines the configuration of the state's foreign political orientations currently define Ukraine's geostrategy: the Euroasian (Russia and the CIS) paradigm, the Euro-Atlantic (European) paradigm - and the South-Eastern paradigm. All of them have sufficiently deep historical roots and are determined by a number of geopolitical factors. This attests to their objectivity and importance for the existence of the state. They are traditional for the political life of Ukraine. The determination of adversaries and partners has been the first action Ukraine has had to take each time it has obtained the possibility of going its own way. With the attainment of independence Ukraine must once again express itself in this sphere. Public sentiment is torn in a severe struggle between the proponents of western and north-eastern directions for Ukraine. The identification of Ukraine's national interest in this issue constitutes a strategic choice, one that will influence the fate of the country for decades to come. In our opinion, the geopolitical situation of Ukraine demands the creation of a balanced system of neighborly relations.

In terms of classical geopolitics the Euroasian model incorporates the so-called "telurocratic principle" (based on power on land, the stability of civilization's main features, social traditions, ethical norms), the Euro-Atlantic model incorporates the "talasocratic principle" (based on marine power, dynamic development, market relations, individual initiative, ethical flexibility, etc.) while the South-Eastern model embodies the principle of the frontier (the seashore line, the zone of contact of the two previous principles).

Proceeding solely according to the terminology of this interpretation of geopolitical space, without a critical approach to its grounds, it is possible to clearly define Ukraine's position as a "civilization of the frontier". Having European roots, Ukraine has historically emerged on the frontier of the collision with nomadic cultures and is still often regarded as the zone of struggle for domination between two superpowers.

Although Ukraine is a regional European state (of the Central European region) it has a definite range of interests outside of this region. Ukraine's place in Europe resembles India's position, as does its current geopolitical philosophy - the position of a state that has liberated itself from colonialism suits Ukraine. Ukraine's former position as the largest and the most important province of the Russian Empire is analogous to India's former position as the largest and most important British colony. The collapse of the British Empire with the withdrawal from it of India parallels the collapse of the USSR with Ukraine's gaining independence. On the other hand, the ideology of modern Russian liberal democracy resembles the principles of neo-colonialism and economic neo-imperialism.

Thus, discussions about the multidimensionality of Ukrainian foreign policy should not be viewed as being declarative. They are based, in a non-evident manner, on corresponding ontological grounds. According to the logic of possibilities a subject must follow all possible alternatives in a parallel fashion until reaching the point at which they begin to contradict each other. At this point one of the alternatives is chosen, but at the same time it is prudent to continue the search for new possibilities in order to renew the spectrum on a new level. Therefore, the strategic goal of Ukraine - a comprehensive integration into European and Euro-Atlantic structures, should in no way exclude the possibilities for a thorough development of economic, political and socio-cultural relations with other regions of the world.

The main geopolitical and foreign policy priorities of Ukraine are:

· the survival of Ukraine as a sovereign independent nation; the strengthening of the fundamental values and institutions that ensure prosperity, security, socio-cultural progress;

· the return of Ukraine into the European community of civilized states through a multifaceted integration into European and Euro-Atlantic political, social structures and security structures;

· the strengthening of the economic and political potential and Ukraine's "capability" in wide understanding of this term including the intensification of internal development, participation in European security structures; the conclusion of bilateral and multilateral treaties, along with the receipt of corresponding assurances and security guarantees, etc.;

· the priority of an orientation toward integration into the EU and the WEU; the enhancement of a distinctive partnership with NATO, including as a first phase a course toward joining the political structures of this organization, as a cornerstone of European security;

· the strengthening of a strategic partnership with the USA and of ties with western European countries in correspondence with national interests and priorities of Ukraine;

· the support and development of equal and mutually beneficial economic, political and socio-cultural relations with the RF;
· the strengthening and consolidation of special relations with strategically important neighbors. Of primary concern are Poland, the Baltic states, Turkey, Georgia, Azerbaijan, and states of the Vishegrad group;

· the promotion of the formation of a "stability belt" and regional security structures from the Baltic and Black Seas to the Caucasus and Central Asia;

· active participation in the creation of European and Eurasian "transportation corridors" along the "Baltic - Black Sea - Middle East" axis as well as along the "Western Europe - Ukraine - the Transcaucases - Central Asia - China" axis; The use of these corridors for the purposes of creating a reliable multi-alternative system of supplying energy carriers and strategically important resources;

· a course toward alternative leadership within the territories of the former USSR, first of all in Black Sea-Caspian Sea region; Active cooperation with those states that regard Ukraine as a reliable, equal partner, free of superpower and hegemonic ambitions;

· the counteraction of uncontrolled foreign economic penetration and the comprehensive protection of economic sovereignty; the prevention of economic and political dependence in any form;

· the blockage of current attempts of unilateral foreign socio-cultural and informational expansion and domination;

· the purposeful formation of universal European and Euro-Atlantic values and socio-cultural orientations.

Today, one of the most important Ukrainian state-building tasks is the development of the premises of a consistent national strategy for the future according to new geopolitical and foreign policy priorities. The geopolitical dilemma can only be resolved in one manner: a return to the European community as a full-fledged subject of Euro-Atlantic geopolitics. This today appears as the sole rational choice for the people of Ukraine. Semi-colonial vegetation in the style of the new "Belarusian ghetto" or in a "sharovary" (baggy-panted) reservation on the territory of the next Eurasian Empire constitutes the only alternative to this choice.

Along with other theoreticians of geopolitics, Jacques Attali, the former director of the EBRD, points to three leading world regions that will become the centers of dominant economic regions in the future. They are:

· The region of the Americas, which will ultimately unite both Americas into one financial-industrial zone;

· The European region that will emerge as a result of European economic unity;

· The Pacific region, a zone of "new prosperity" that will consist of several competing centers - Tokyo, Beijing, Taiwan, Seoul, Singapore etc.

Let us examine Ukraine's role and place in the key geopolitical outlines of the future.