UKRAINE: SENATOR LUGAR MEETS NEW GOVERNMENT;

C O N F I D E N T I A L KYIV 000097 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/16/2018 TAGS: PREL PGOV PHUM UP SUBJECT: UKRAINE: SENATOR LUGAR MEETS NEW GOVERNMENT; PUBLICIZES UKRAINIAN REQUEST FOR A NATO MAP Classified By: Ambassador for reasons 1.4(a,b,d). ¶1. (C) Summary. Ukraine's plan to request a MAP at the April NATO Bucharest Summit dominated discussion during visiting Senator Richard Lugar's January 15 meetings with President Yushchenko, PM Tymoshenko and opposition representatives. Yushchenko expressed the strong hope that Ukraine's request for a MAP would be well-received, both by the U.S. and NATO Allies at Bucharest, and Tymoshenko stressed that the decision to request a map was jointly made with the President and Rada Speaker Yatsenyuk - all three signatures were on the letter of request. Shadow foreign minister Gryshchenko representing Regions told Senator Lugar that the party would not support the request for MAP, but stressed that Regions was not anti-NATO and was interested in continued cooperation with the Alliance. Both Yushchenko and Tymoshenko told Senator Lugar that they hoped President Bush and Secretary Rice would be able to visit Ukraine -- either in April or later this year. Senator Lugar's discussions regarding energy and our biological threat reduction programs will be reported via septels. ¶2. (C) Comment: An unexpected by-product of Senator Lugar's visit was the fact that the letter containing Ukraine's request for a MAP was made public after the Senator's meeting with the opposition. The orange team's worries about how and when to release the letter were overtaken by events, and the text of the letter addressed to NATO SYG De Hoop Scheffer was posted on the presidential website the evening of January 15 (and the MFA tells us that the letter will be delivered to the NATO SYG in Brussels on January 18.) Thus far, the Ukrainian Government's public reaction to the release of the letter has been calm, with PM Tymoshenko agreeing with Senator Lugar that the issue should now be discussed by average Ukrainians. Ukraine's request for MAP will be both a key topic for PM Tymoshenko's proposed January 28-29 visit to Brussels and will undoubtedly kick-off a renewed domestic debate about the pros and cons of joining NATO - a topic for the Government's re-invigorated public information campaign about NATO. Both the Ukrainian Government and the Allies can help by continuing to explain that MAP is not the same as membership. Given our long-standing position that NATO's door is open to Ukraine, we recommend that the USG be supportive of Ukraine's request and work to encourage our Allies to take a positive approach. End Summary and Comment. Ukraine Hopes for a MAP at Bucharest -------------- ¶3. (C) President Yushchenko began his meeting by announcing that he, the Prime Minister and the Speaker of the Rada had just signed a joint letter requesting a MAP. Ukraine was vitally interested in approval of a MAP at the Bucharest Summit, but U.S. backing was needed to help get Allied support for the request. He said that the orange team was united in its request and expected that at least some in the Party of Regions would also be supportive. Later in the conversation, Yushchenko acknowledged that about 33% of Ukrainians supported NATO membership; another 33% were opposed and 33% were undecided. In Yushchenko's view, this was an "ideological struggle," not only domestically, but against Russian influence. Yushchenko said he was speaking frankly, but stated simply NATO membership equaled Ukrainian independence. Otherwise Ukraine would remain in a semi-colonial state because of its energy dependence on Russia and due to shadow "political projects" emanating from Russia. In Yushchenko's opinion, there was only one way to assure Ukraine's sovereignty and that was through NATO membership -- he reiterated several times during the conversation that "there was no other policy." With most of Ukraine's borders still undemarcated, only NATO membership could guarantee Ukraine's borders and territorial integrity. ¶4. (C) According to Yushchenko, there will be a referendum on membership, but "at the right time, not today." What was needed now was more intensive coordination with NATO. In response to Senator Lugar,s question about the reaction to MAP of "undecided" Ukrainians in the weeks leading up to Bucharest, Yushchenko acknowledged that there would be debates. In his view, the majority of Ukrainian youth would accept it, and the generation that lived through the Soviet Union would not. However, Yushchenko stressed that the decision now was not whether or not to join; the decision now is to start a dialogue with the nation. This will entail cooperation with NATO. Yushchenko said that the letter requesting MAP noted that consultations with the public would take place at the right time. He noted that several countries had held referenda on NATO membership; years of dialogue with society were ahead, but Ukraine could not afford to waste time. A request for MAP was "important and urgent" and was supported by all branches of power. Yushchenko recalled that Ukraine's EU and NATO aspirations were enshrined in law since 1993. In the past, these aspirations had not been supported by BYuT, the Socialists or the Communists. However, now BYuT supports, and Regions had supported this policy before as had Lytvyn. Today, according to Yushchenko, only the Socialists and Communists opposed MAP for Ukraine. ¶5. (C) Lugar noted that he had supported NATO expansion since 1992 and recalled that during the Clinton Administration, a compromise had been found in the creation of the Partnership for Peace. In 1996, NATO's first round of expansion had been difficult; in the second tranche, Congress had been more receptive. Lugar said he would relate Ukraine's story to the Senate, and although there were differences of opinion in the U.S., he was sympathetic to Yushchenko's message. In response to the Ambassador's question about when the letter requesting MAP would be sent, Yushchenko responded that this was a "technical" question once agreement and understanding had been reached with the Allies. The Ukrainian Government was talking to European partners and the U.S. in order to "avoid complications." In Yushchenko's words, "if the letter goes out and Ukraine does not get MAP at Bucharest, then it would be very bad for us." FM Ohryzko said "we can't fail -- if we do so, it would be a huge step backward." (Embassy note: The FM was presumably referring both to the prospects for NATO membership and for the success of the new government which would be publicly criticized by their opposition. End note.) Tymoshenko Highlights Unified MAP Request -------------- ¶6. (C) At her meeting with Senator Lugar, PM Tymoshenko led off with a reference to the request for MAP, highlighting what she termed "the historic fact" that the President, Government and Parliament were completely unified in signing this request for a MAP for NATO. She and the President had even sipped celebratory glasses of champagne after the signing. In response to Senator Lugar's question about moving forward on MAP, Tymoshenko said that a unified government would allow Ukraine to rapidly achieve all of the important priority goals that have been pending for the past 17 years. When Senator Lugar asked about the unity of the orange team, Tymoshenko said that there was still work to be done, but that the members of the orange team had good relations with each other and that all were committed to cooperating in order to succeed. She said that cooperation with the President was much better than it had been in 2005, but there were challenges still ahead. ¶7. (C) In response to the Senator's comment that the letter requesting MAP was now public, Tymoshenko was relaxed, noting that it was the right time for the Ukrainian people to discuss the request, and noted that she was pleased that the opposition would be taking part in the debate. The PM said that the large number of Ukrainians opposed to or undecided about NATO was the result of a propaganda machine that had worked overtime up until now. The Government's challenge would be to give out real facts and rebuild the people's "mentality" through information. Tymoshenko said that her government was committed to providing funds in the budget for a NATO information campaign. Regions to Oppose, but is not Anti-NATO -------------- ¶8. (C) Referencing his earlier meeting with President Yushchenko, Senator Lugar raised with shadow foreign minister Gryshchenko the MAP request letter signed by the President, PM Tymoshenko and Rada Speaker Yatsenyuk and suggested that this request would trigger a discussion within the USG about how to assist in pushing forward on MAP, while realizing that MAP was a process of intensified interaction and dialogue, and not membership. Lugar asked about the reaction within the Party of Regions to the request, and Gryshchenko replied that for many Ukrainians, and especially Regions supporters, the "benefits of NATO were still not clear." Gryshchenko also noted he was still not completely clear on role of "shadow FM," but believed that overall purpose of the shadow cabinet was to provide input and contrasting views to government and be prepared to step in if government failed. ¶9. (C) Gryshchenko indicated that although foreign policy experts (like himself and Regions MP Leonid Kozhara who also attended the meeting) were supportive of the request for MAP, their personal opinions were irrelevant. Gryshchenko predicted that Regions would not be able to support a request for MAP at this juncture, but that the U.S. needed to understand that this did not mean that the party was anti-NATO. The party had taken its position in the 2006 elections (calling for a referendum on neutrality) to undercut the position of radical anti-NATO forces. He lamented that foreign policy had "been taken hostage" by politics in recent years, noting that under the Yanukovych government large budgets had been allocated for a NATO public information campaign. (Embassy Note: The Yanukovych government's info campaign was widely seen as under-budgeted, and not very effective. End Note.) The current government had control over the political levers and could decide their NATO policy without obstruction. Regions would reserve its official position for now and react following an internal meeting of the Party's Politrada (political council). Yushchenko Also Looking for Closer EU Ties -------------- ¶10. (C) Also on the European front, President Yushchenko told Senator Lugar that after a successful February 5 WTO General Council meeting, he anticipated fast movement toward a Free Trade Agreement with the EU. Ukraine had a plan including the issues to be resolved -- approximately 6-7 pages worth -- and Yushchenko was confident that an FTA with the EU could be achieved this year. He noted that an Enhanced Agreement with the EU was even more important; Ukraine wanted a "Neighborhood Policy Plus." Yushchenko said that he had talked to French President Sarkozy regarding some kind of associate membership with the EU and noted his belief that key partners like the UK and Germany would also be supportive. ¶11. (U) Senator Lugar did not have an opportunity to clear this message before his departure from Kyiv. ¶12. (U) Visit Embassy Kyiv's classified website: www.state.sgov.gov/p/eur/kiev. Taylor