Canadian Academic Experts on Ukraine and NATO
September 28, 2009 – 11:45 pmWhy, one wonders, do you find support for Ukraine joining NATO in the USA among all shades of the Ukrainian-America diaspora and its academic institutions but not among Ukrainian experts in Canadian academia? In Canada, leading academic experts on contemporary Ukraine – David Marples (University of Alberta) and Dominique Arel (University of Ottawa) – remain either skeptical of Ukraine ever joining NATO or are opposed to Ukraine joining NATO.
The Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute and its three Chairs have never come out against NATO. During summer schools, conferences and workshops the Ukrainian Research Institute has organized important discussions of Ukraine’s national security that has included a pro-NATO component. Similarly with the Ukrainian programme at Columbia University.
Of the Canadian academic experts on Ukraine, Professor Marples has long been the most outspoken about the undesirability of Ukraine joining NATO. His articles have long included titles such as “Ukraine’s Fast Track to NATO Too Quick for Many in Nation”, “Ukrainians shun NATO, Support Ties with Russia” and others. Marples also writes in the Kyiv Post that Party of Regions leader Viktor Yanukovych will win the January 2010 presidential elections because, he believes, there is no “alternative” to him: “To Western observers it seems unthinkable that voters would choose Yanukovych as the next president. The lack of suitable alternatives suggests, nonetheless that it could happen”. Yanukovych is on record as being opposed to NATO membership for Ukraine.
An article entitled “Why Ukrainians Don’t Want NATO” in Diplomatic Courier (23 November 2008) draws on Marples comments against Ukraine joining NATO, “For the time being, however, David Marples, a program director at the Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies of the University of Alberta, says “the dislike has deep roots and stems from what are perceived […] as very aggressive NATO policies in the past, particularly the 1999 bombing of Belgrade” and the U.S. invasion of Iraq which was widely, though mistakenly, “perceived as a NATO-led venture.”
The Ukrainian-Canadian diaspora and Liberal MP Borys Wrzesnewskyj are staunch supporters of Ukraine joining NATO, as are the US and Canadian governments. What is it that puts these Canadian academic experts on Ukraine so at odds with those who are, so to speak, working on the ground (as opposed to in the ivory towers of academia)?
What is it that these academicians know that very much involved politician Borys Wrzesnewskyj, (Liberal MP) whose foundation has contributed so generously to their research, has not grasped? Should not this perplexing contradiction be addressed – simply because the Ukrainian Canadian diaspora, which supports the various chairs of Ukrainian studies in academia, has successfully lobbied hard to obtain the backing of both the the Conservative government in power and the Liberal opposition for Ukraine’s entry into NATO?
BorysWrzesnewskyj MP gave keynote speeches detailing Canadian support to Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO to international forums in Kyiv and Kharkiv in 2008 and 2009 devoted to Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic future. The forums were organized by the Center for US-Ukrainian Relations whose executive director is Ukrainian-American Walter Zarycky.
All post-communist states in Eastern Europe, the Baltic states and the Western Balkans have sought NATO membership as firstly, support for their national security and secondly, as a step towards European Union membership. President Viktor Yushchenko, Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and then parliamentary speaker Arseniy Yatseniuk signed an open letter to NATO in January 2008 requesting that NATO grant Ukraine a Membership Action Plan at its April Bucharest summit. At that summit Ukraine did not receive a MAP but NATO – for the first time – stated that Ukraine and Georgia would one day become members of NATO.
It would be opportune for Canadian experts on Ukraine to live some of the time outside their ivory towers and contemplate these issues in greater detail. If – as it seems to be the case – they are so adamantly against Ukraine joining NATO then it would be opportune for them to advocate alternative national security strategies for Ukraine and to maybe seek alternative financial sponsors.
13 Responses to “Canadian Academic Experts on Ukraine and NATO”
Hi,
Fully rich meaning article.. really professional, nice.
Keep up the Wonderful work!
By ram on Sep 29, 2009
I added your blog to bookmarks. And i’ll read your articles more often!
By Floost on Sep 29, 2009
You’re the best! Take care.
By ownbig.ru on Sep 30, 2009
According to me NATO-Ukraine defence-technical cooperation makes possible to exchange information and present Ukrainian initiatives during participation in the meetings, which are open to Partners.
By blank media on Oct 2, 2009
Because, the so called Canadian scholars you mention are left wing progressives.
By Wolodymir on Oct 2, 2009
The role of an academic is to report and analyze what one reads and sees, not to be an advocate of a particular position or personality. Once an academic begins to take sides or support particular courses of action, then he/she is no longer an academic. All I did was describe what opinion polls show, namely that Ukrainians overall are opposed to NATO. I don’t personally care one way or the other whether they are or not but I respect their position. If they were in favor of Ukraine joining NATO, I would have reported that too. Of course there is no such thing as complete objectivity, but it is always something to aim for. Liberal MP Borys Wrzesnewskyj, on the other hand, is in a completely different position and pursues what he sees as the best interests of Ukraine. I have no problem with that and we are not in conflict in any way.
As for hiding away in the ivory towers of academia, in 2008-09 alone, I have given more than 30 public talks outside the university, including many to schools and at events held by the Ukrainian community. I was awarded a Shevchenko Gold medal for my work with the latter. Interestingly no one in the Ukrainian community ever suggested I take a particular line or position on any subject. I have also travelled in Ukraine from the Carpathians to the Donbas, and Chornobyl to Crimea. I am a great fan of the country and its people. But I would never be so presumptuous as to tell them what they should be thinking or how they should be voting.
By David Marples on Oct 16, 2009
If you do not like the message attack the messenger. This is a common practise amongst Ukrainian Diaspora or to be more precise supports of Ukraine’s president Viktor Yushchenko.
Attacks against Taras Kuzio have been vicious of late. Previous he was seen as the pin-up boy of Ukrainian Nationalists but of recent times he has become the focus of their vilification.
Remaining objective is difficult particularly when the facts and events speak so loud and favour one point of view over another.
I find it extraordinary that those who spouse the words of democracy are quickly to deny democratic values to others tat do not share their political point of view.
Democracy is not perfect but it is the best alternative.
Democracy is about rule of law and representative governance. pro Russian, Ant Russian, Pro Ukrainian and or pro West. Each one has a right to their view and opinion and should be able to express it without fear, threats or intimidation.
If you support democracy then you must also support and respect the will of the people. This does not mean that you give up your belief or your right to continue to advocate and develop your ideas and beliefs.
The NATO question is a good example. Here is an issue that clearly the people of Ukraine overwhelmingly share a common point of view. If provided a chance I am sure most of Europe would also share the same opinion as Ukraine.
NATO is an outdated unrepresentative organisation that no longer serves its members. Norway and Switzerland are not members of NATO. If anything Europe needs to take control of its own security and form a new European Security Organisation. One that includes Ukraine, Russia, Moldova and other European states. One that is independent from America and Canada. the fact that it was a USA missile base and not a European missile base that threatens European Russian security is of grave concern.
Europe like the people of Ukraine can make their own assessment and determination, they do not need to be told how they should act or think.
Likewise Ukraine must act to solve its won internal problems and accept collectively responsibility for its own future.
Everyone has a role and responsibility to help support and shape their decisions though the democratic process. Help give them strength to stand on their own, independently without intimidation or force. The main thing we should be supporting is the formation of a means in which Ukrainians can be properly and democratically represented without seeking to favour one group or section of the community above or beyond any other. The system needs to be fair, equal and just. It needs to provide each person with a voice that can be heard and respected.
It is my sincerer belief that this can not be achieved under a presidential system. If Parliamentary democracy is good for Europe and or Canada then surely the same values apply to Ukraine. If its good enough for Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Romania and Moldova then surely its good for Ukraine also. Those who oppose Ukraine completing the transition to a parliamentary democracy do so not on the basis of principle but anticipated outcome that favours their political point of view. They might call for greater authority and power to be given to Ukraine’s head of state but would they support such power being held by those who they oppose?
Which ever way you look at it the Presidential system can not deliver democratic governance in a country that is so divided. But a parliamentary system can provide a better opportunity for each point of view to be represented and with it a mans in which all parties can begin to build confidence and respect for the political process. The presidential system at best will only support a simple majority.
I for one have and will continue to support Ukraine’s Parliamentary system and establishment of rule of law and effective representative government even if others wont.
“Where there is no counsel, the people fall; but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety.” (Proverbs 11:14)
By UkrToday on Oct 18, 2009
This guy UkrToday, aka Anthony Van Der Craats talks alot about democracy, yet he’s the same person who threatened an opposition candidate Bill Lang in Melbourne. Carefull Taras, if you don’t agree with him, or call his bluff, he’ll take his intimidation campaign against you to levels you won’t believe, just google or look at his blogs, you’ll see what I mean.
By Wolodymir on Oct 19, 2009
Wolodymir obviously has nothing of substance to post <a href="http://blog.taraskuzio.net/2009/10/11/russian-or-ukrainian-nationalism-which-is-the-most-violent-in-ukraine/#comment-19892"IN reply to his out of context comment .
By In Reply on Oct 19, 2009
Wolodymir obviously has nothing of substance to post IN reply to his out of context comment .
By In Reply on Oct 19, 2009
Marples give his reply and is attacked by UkrToday aka Anthony Van Der Craats. Seems the only allowable opinion is his, despite the fact that he threatened and intimidated an opposition cadidate for Melbourne City Council because he didnt agree with him. UkrToday, In Reply, Ukraine United, and all the other monickers you use, you really should get some help with your problem.
By Wolodymir on Oct 19, 2009
Here is the 2nd time weve come across your blog in the last few weeks. Appears like I should look at it.
By Dallas personal injury attorney on Jan 12, 2011
I added it to favorites and i’ll be your constant reader.
By moncler on Nov 18, 2011