NATO-UKRAINE AMBASSADORIAL MARCH 5: PREPARING FOR

C O N F I D E N T I A L USNATO 000089

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/05/2018
TAGS: PREL NATO MARR UP
SUBJECT: NATO-UKRAINE AMBASSADORIAL MARCH 5: PREPARING FOR
THE NUC SUMMIT

REF: A. NUC(PC)N(2008)0001-REV1

B. NUC(PC)N(2007)0006-REV3

C. KYIV 462

Classified By: Ambassador Victoria Nuland for reasons 1.4 (b),(d).

SUMMARY
--------------

1. (C) Ukrainian Ambassador Sagach discussed the broad
outlines of next month's NATO-Ukraine Summit with PermReps on
March 5. He reaffirmed Ukraine's request for an invitation
to MAP and pressed for a Joint Statement at the Summit; both
issues are controversial within the Alliance. He signaled
Ukraine's intention to step up its contributions to NATO-led
operations in 2008 and to the NRF in 2010. He acknowledged
"political tensions and turbulence" in domestic politics, but
insisted that the government was committed to eventual
membership in the Alliance. Ambassador Nuland reaffirmed
U.S. support for Ukraine's Euro-Atlantic aspirations, saying
the question about MAP for Ukraine was not "whether," but
"when." Poland, Lithuania, Canada, Romania, and Estonia
called for a positive decision on MAP at Bucharest. Germany,
the Netherlands, and Belgium questioned the level of
Ukrainian political and public support for NATO. France
called for "a positive message of cooperation" at the Summit.
End Summary.

UKRAINE: STILL WANT MAP
--------------

2. (C) Ukrainian Ambassador to NATO Sagach met with PermReps
March 5 to lay the groundwork for the April 4 NATO-Ukraine
Commission (NUC) Summit meeting in Bucharest. The main
questions for Bucharest are how to respond to the letter from
Ukrainian President Yushchenko, Rada Speaker Yatsenyuk, and
PM Tymoshenko to NATO Secretary General de Hoop Scheffer
requesting an invitation to launch a NATO Membership Action
Plan (MAP) and whether to strive for a Joint Statement at the
Summit. Sagach reffirmed Ukraine's request for both MAP and
a Joint Statement. Although Allies have not reached
agreement on those questions, a number of PermReps stated
their national positions, breaking with the usual practice of
remaining silent on issues lacking consensus.


3. (C) Sagach said that, after MAP, his government's foreign
policy priorities were continuing defense and security sector
reform, completing democratic control over all sectors of
government, and pressing forward a public information
campaign on NATO. He called for increasing the tempo of NUC
Ambassadorials and Intensified Dialogue sessions and invited
the SecGen and the NAC to visit Ukraine again. Sagach
signaled Ukraine's intention to step up its ISAF contribution
in Afghanistan, as well as reaffirming Kyiv's offer to
contribute forces to the NATO Reaction Force (NRF). Turning
to domestic issues, he cited energy security, investment
promotion, fighting corruption, and (again) defense and
security sector reform as priorities. He acknowledged that
"political tensions and turbulence" existed, explaining that
domestic political arguments over NATO were a pretext for
contesting "the issue of power."

MANY VOICES OF SUPPORT
--------------

4. (C) Ambassador Nuland reaffirmed strong U.S. support for
Ukraine's Euro-Atlantic aspirations, saying that Allies were
carefully considering a MAP invitation and the question was
not "whether," but "when." MAP, she reminded PermReps, was a
process, not an invitation to immediate membership. She
urged quick approval of the 2008 Annual Target Plan (ATP )
REF A) for delivery to Heads of State and Government at
Bucharest. Finally, she asked for a prognosis of the public
information campaign on NATO and asked how Ukraine planned to
manage the tightening of its energy supplies by its "big
neighbor."


5. (C) Seventeen other Allied reps took the floor. Poland,
Lithuania, Canada, Romania, and Estonia explicitly endorsed a
positive decision on MAP at Bucharest. Turkey, Slovakia, and
Slovenia signaled their support slightly more ambiguously.
Several of them also went on record supporting a Joint
Statement for the Summit, to which Germany responded with
words of caution. The Netherlands and Belgium questioned the
level of Ukrainian political and public support for NATO,
emphasizing the need for a "stable and lasting consensus" on
an issue as critical as undertaking MAP. France sounded more
supportive, calling for "a positive message of cooperation"

at the Summit.


6. (C) Sagach responded that Ukraine's Governmental Program,
endorsed by all parties in the coalition, contained concrete
taskings to work toward eventual Alliance membership.
Turning to the U.S., he reported that one million dollars had
been allocated to the public information campaign, which was
coordinated by the State Committee for Television and Radio
Broadcasting and involved no fewer than 50 Ministries and
Agencies. The Foreign Ministry, he continued, was promoting
its own public outreach effort focusing on regional news
outlets and broadcasters. He said the energy dispute with
Russia was strictly a commercial issue and would be addressed
in bilateral negotiations.

NOTATION OF THE ATP
--------------

7. (U) The NUC Ambassadors noted the 2007 ATP Assessment (REF
B) before concluding business.

COMMENT
--------------

8. (C) For a first-time performance, Ambassador Sagach did a
good job, tiptoeing through a minefield of domestic Ukrainian
and inter-Allied divisions. He pre-empted some awkward
questions about internal divisions by acknowledging that
those were part of the natural "vibrancy" of a democracy.
The elephant in the room, however, was why he -- and not PM
Tymoshenko -- was in the chair. Tymoshenko was scheduled to
be in Brussels later the same day, but chose not to attend
the NUC. Her apparent snub of NATO -- the second since the
beginning of the year -- reinforced the tendency of some
Allies to question the breadth of high-level Ukrainian
commitment to pursuing MAP by Bucharest.

NULAND