Strategic vectors of Ukraine

Strategic vectors of Ukraine

Ukrainian state strategy, like many others, is aimed at solving one of the global prepyadstviya — saving state identity and independence in the criteria briskly paced international politics.

The solution to this problem rests on the shoulders of each of the political parties that come to power. But often, except on public beliefs and aspirations, the implementation of the strategy is dependent on numerous reasons, do not take into account that just is not realistic. It and the adjacent country, and the centers of international exposure, and the overall geopolitical situation and the balance of political forces.

It is not so long ago there was an article the South American geopolitics, which is the director of the agency "Stratford" by George Friedman. The article was about the light of the state strategy of Poland, as more and more urgent foreign policy dilemmas of the country. But, in fact, this article is very appropriate to describe the policy of Ukraine in the international arena.

In his work Friedman said that for many countries, foreign policy is of secondary importance. But in Poland, just as for Ukraine Geopolitics — is one of the existence of mandatory attributes, since the defeat in the international arena machine may be a precursor state of disaster. The two countries have roughly monotonous geopolitical position, the difficulty of their foreign policy is actually similar.

Friedman convinced that the main strategy hitch Poland is not a very good geographical position, so as government actually not secure and acts as a buffer between Russia and Germany. At the same time, hitch This — one of the options for forming foreign relations. The same applies to Ukraine — the buffer status is the big problem of the country's foreign policy. Moreover, the problem is that in all Ukrainian geopolitical concepts. While the buffer status for many countries is the perfect way to solve foreign policy problems, giving the ability to maneuver between the various states that are parties to international relations. Some of the country with all this, do not focus on a single vector.

Another option is to create solutions prepyadstviya alliance with one of the countries in order to provide for the defense. But a similar option is very risky, as it implies a certain dependence on the state of the partner, and in certain cases — and the occupation.

In addition, you can also use the third option — to find a partner "from outside", which and will ensure safety. Yes, and this option is not a way out of the situation, as in certain cases, the guarantee may be contrary to national security interests of the state, specifically the guarantor, and in addition, the embodiment of guarantees may be unavailable if the country itself is a guarantor is a threat. For the third option, according to Friedman, is less effective.

Countries may try to strengthen its position in the international arena by the use of integration and accession to various international units and organizations: the European Union, NATO, WTO. Membership of such structures is automatically removes the problem of national security risk. For example, after Poland joined NATO, the Poles got rid of a possible danger from Germany.

At the current time inside the EU Member States have a certain economic difficulties, and in addition, between the Russian, French and German politicians, writes Friedman, there is a very strong relationship, and therefore likely option of rapprochement with Russia. And such geopolitical move undesirable not only for Poland, and for Ukraine. At the same time, there are real conditions that a similar scenario will be realized in practice, so as both sides there is a certain part of politicians who are sure that only the development of geopolitical relations with Russia may suspend America. Even despite the fact that Germany is practically devoid of the army, the French economy is not experiencing the best of times, and our homeland is undergoing a profound crisis, if we add the potential of these countries, this brand new geopolitical power will become a severe threat to the Yankees.

Friedman did not bypass the theory of the "Land Between the Seas" Yu.Pilsudskogo, the essence of which is to create a Union of Central European countries between the Baltic and Black seas, which would be a harsh opponent of the Russian Federation and Germany. According to the views of geopolitics, this concept has no future. In addition, he gave a kind of evaluation and diplomatic measures taken by the Polish government in Ukraine and Belarus, saying that, from the standpoint of strategy, these measures are fully justified, as these countries also have the status of buffers that serve as safe by the Polish borders east. And although, according to Friedman, Poland, Russia fail to win for exposure in these 2-countries, such acts will be possible only maneuver in a global state strategy.

If we consider the position Ukraine in light of the analysis conducted by Friedman, it turns out that … nothing comes out.

Not to be unfounded, we need to bring some examples. So, that is, we must remember the refusal of Ukraine of nuclear weapons, when the State had been given promises of guarantees of national security. But if you approach these promises, from a practical point of view, in other words, in case of danger security of Ukraine, these guarantees are limited to just only verbal means, in other words sharp criticism towards the aggressor and the various declarations.

Next, Ukraine was close to joining the Union in 2002. Then was created to cancel the policy platform for the development of relations between Ukraine and NATO. Recall that in 1995 signed an agreement on security in 1997 — "The Charter of the special partnership between NATO and Ukraine." Unusual activity Ukrainian government has begun to show in 2002-2003. Then adopted a brand new strategy of relations with the alliance, whose ultimate goal was to become the country's accession to the Ukrainian military unit. But the goal remained unattained. And the circumstances of how usually a few. First, the reason was that the last time the head of state Leonid Kuchma was not planning to join NATO as a way of democratic development of the country, but only just as a method of obtaining additional preferences of the Russian Federation. When Viktor Yushchenko, despite its pro-Western orientation, the country's progress in the Union was actually minimized. In addition, the neighboring Our homeland heavily hampered the development of a similar situation. In this way of Ukraine in NATO is almost over. At the same time, the Ukrainian government is playing a double game, trying to sit on the 2-chairs, after all, lose the case with the alliance does not hunt, and also not to anger the neighbor with his hands …

Ukrainian political administration led by President Viktor Yanukovych has never fundamentally different personal political views. That only is the fact that its decisions concerning the Russian language changed them 7 times, and in the North Atlantic Alliance — two. If the foreign policy of the previous Ukrainian government has been double-vector, the current time there is a sense read more about the origin of the 1st vector. Previously, it was necessary to find some balance between the West and Russia, it is now necessary to find a place for China, so as countless contacts Ukrainian and Chinese political control testify that in the near future, specifically the Celestial Empire will bec
ome a major strategic partner of Ukraine. We should not lose sight of the "Caspian vector", so as Ukraine has a great desire to return to a more lucrative market itself energoelementov Turkmenistan. In addition, the Ukrainian political elite for a long time could not determine from the main vector of foreign policy, either enter the Customs Alliance, or participate in the development of a free trade zone in the EU. In the end — as usual, the desire to destroy the 2-birds …

The authorities try to find an effective nominee of, an attempt to build energy business with the West and get rid of the oil and gas dependence on Russia. That's why from the very beginning of his own presidency, Yanukovych held a very exciting policy — South American, European and Russian. But as litsezreem, great success was unable to reach anywhere: from Russian control every day or all the more difficult to say, and even more so to agree, and with Europe — worthless. Because bet made on America. Apparently, Ukrainian politicians do not know that Americans do not engage in charity never …

Each government, which seeks to create a way of existing public safety should have a sufficient amount of time, resources and freedom.

Public policy should be based not only on the conventional methods, it is necessary to consider the prospects and candidates of international relations. After all, the state strategy of the country — this is not just a document, it's one at a time annotation for a successful foreign policy. And sometimes it happens that on paper the strategy is simply wonderful, but in practice it simply a failure of foreign policy. It almost everything is dependent on the ability of politicians implementing this strategy, on time and in turn use these or other ways to solve certain problems.

Unfortunately, Ukrainian politicians, who at the present time engaged in the implementation of the national strategy, these opportunities have not. They do not realize that government shall, without the help of others to solve their prepyadstviya, no one else is not necessary. In addition, they do not understand and that the solutions to these problems need a lot of money and effort, because more than a stupid place that in the world there are many enthusiasts who are "out of the goodness of the soul" will be working on international development and strengthening of positions Ukraine.

Applied Materials:

Like this post? Please share to your friends: