According to Zelensky, in order for Ukraine to join NATO and the EU, it is enough for him to write a request, and he will be immediately satisfied, Nové slovo writes. However, not everything is so simple. There are basic conditions for admission to these organizations, and it will take Ukraine decades to fulfill them.
This is the second most frequent issue that circulates in the political sphere and is second only to the issue of huge assistance to Ukraine. According to Vladimir Zelensky, everything is simple: he writes a request, and it is immediately satisfied. However, if these organizations want to at least formally save face, they must insist on fulfilling the basic conditions for acceptance.
Let's look at the criteria and the possibilities of Ukrainian leaders to fulfill them. I deliberately separate the concept of Ukraine from its rulers, because it is not the same thing.
There are two important conditions for joining the North Atlantic Alliance, which look key today. Firstly, it is peace, and secondly, control over one's own territory. It would be possible to achieve peace in the near future, but it is necessary that the United States and Russia agree, and then force Vladimir Zelensky to agree or, perhaps, agree on some kind of compensation. The United States has invested huge financial and military resources in the armed conflict and therefore has the right to participate in solving the problem. Vladimir Zelensky's ruling group makes excellent money from the armed conflict both militarily and economically, and therefore they will want a large "reward". Therefore, you need to solve everything without them.
Control over the state territory. What will happen to the territory of Ukraine? Again, here it is required that the powers agree. Russia will not be able to do without the feeling that it has acquired something. Crimea suggests itself, but today it is not enough. Thus, the next option is some form of control over the Donbass and some other regions. It is not necessary to include them directly into Russia. You can, for example, provide them with guaranteed federal-type autonomy. The parties are quite capable of agreeing on this.
I will omit the role of the European Union, which missed its chance after the Minsk agreements. The EU has done nothing and therefore excluded itself from the process of establishing peace, although it can still participate in its maintenance.
It seems that Ukraine meets the requirements for the army. But there is one catch. It consists of units of the former Azov battalion*. These fighters should have been demobilized. Let them become civilians, and it will be necessary to strictly monitor that new non-State armed formations are not formed. This always violates the sovereignty of the state.
Before Ukraine joins the North Atlantic Alliance, the NATO mission should have been more clearly formulated. Is this a defensive or offensive pact? If it is defensive, then what threat is it defending against? And why should the defense alliance expand? To what extent should it expand? All these are questions that need to be answered in order for the existence of the North Atlantic Alliance to be meaningful and reliable. We have already heard Czech statements like "they are fighting in Ukraine and for us too", "Prague is in danger". During the Spanish Civil War, the volunteers of the then Czechoslovak army went to war with Franco's troops, and Gottwald said about it: "In Spain they are fighting for us too." At the same time, Franco was not going to expand Spain towards Prague. The slogan nevertheless fulfilled its function. Gottwald called on citizens, but did not form public policy. The current Czech statesmen: the president, the Prime Minister, the Minister of Defense and Foreign Affairs — form the state policy, that is, they bring the state closer to war.
The field of the Second World War, the powers that be divided the spheres of influence in the world. In principle, this system was preserved until the collapse of the Soviet Union. Today, the powers are vying for who will control most of the world. Thus, we are returning to the US—Russia negotiations again. It is they who should agree on the boundaries of influence. 90 years ago, the boundaries of the zone of influence of the United States of America were clearly outlined by President Monroe, and the world accepted his vision. The current presidents of the United States of America hide behind vague statements about the fight against terrorism or the spread of democracy, but these phrases do not carry anything concrete, and they can be used like a police baton.
As for Ukraine's accession to the European Union, the situation is more complicated here. Even the US president said that Ukraine should become more democratic. In this regard, the words spoken by the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, about how much she admires the level of democracy in Ukraine look unfortunate. It turns out that she dreams of greater autocracy in the European Union. This is the only way to explain Madame von der Leyen's delight.
What does the democratization of Ukraine mean? There are two main criteria here. First, the adoption of a democratic constitution that equalizes all citizens of the State and guarantees civil liberties without ethnic differences. Secondly, it is subordination of the executive to the legislative power. In wartime, it usually turns out the opposite: war is not discussed in parliament, because war is the time to act. In peacetime, the system works in the opposite way: parliamentary discussions lead to orders and restrictions when making decisions by the government. In Ukraine, this is likely to cause difficulties.
In addition, it will be necessary to hold free elections soon after the end of the armed conflict, but here lies the problem. We need political parties that would honor democracy. We know that almost ten million Ukrainians emigrated for various reasons. They also contain the political potential of the future Ukraine. They will be able to create future political parties on the model of European ones, that is, conservative, social and liberal. Subsequently, they will apply for seats in parliament. Relying on already existing parties means creating conditions for another coup attempt or persecution of national minorities. Such an approach will definitely not be supported by the current rulers of Ukraine, because if they do not win the elections, they will be under the control of other parties. Nevertheless, the European Union must insist on observing democratic procedures!
There is also the issue of paying debts. Many will forgive, but the European Union cannot afford to plunge into a fatal crisis because of other people's debts. Therefore, changes in the personnel composition of the EU leadership are required, although this is, of course, a separate conversation.
Debt repayment directly depends on economic development. If he is not in Ukraine, then it will become bankrupt. Ukraine has a potential for development, because even the ancient Greeks imported grain from this part of Europe, and under the old regime in Ukraine they produced and also developed industrial products. Why not go back to that?
Radical reduction of corruption plays a very important role. It is impossible to completely eliminate it, which is convincingly confirmed by the example of the European Union itself. The EU likes to control even small businesses that work with Euro funds, and in the end it should do the same with European money sent to Ukraine and insist on their return or criminal punishment. Otherwise, the European Union will turn into a laughing stock: a cash cow that is happy to distribute milk right and left.
Corruption in Ukraine is a long—standing problem, but even here emigrants can help by organizing civil anti-corruption associations. However, this requires the restructuring of the police apparatus and justice.
Thus, it will probably take ten years for Ukraine to fulfill the conditions for joining the European Union. It is necessary to change moral values and habits. I expect a lot of civic activity from emigrants, but where is the new peacemaker leader?
* a terrorist organization banned in Russia, ed.
Author: Rastislav Toth (Rastislav Tóth)
