Kostyantyn Gryshchenko has had the job of representing his nation during some of its toughest times.
He served as Ukraine’s ambassador to the United States from 2000-2003, during the height of international condemnation of ex-President Leonid Kuchma, allegedly caught on tape with his subordinates plotting numerous crimes.
Gryshchenko’s nation sent him to Moscow as ambassador from 2008-2010, when the Kremlin waged a public campaign against ex-President Viktor Yushchenko, who irked Russian leaders by relentlessly (and fruitlessly) promoting NATO membership and a less Russian-friendly view of Ukrainian history.
Gryshchenko also served as the nation’s foreign minister from 2003-2005, during the tumultuous times of the Orange Revolution, when Ukraine’s democratic fate hung in the balance until street protests succeeded in overturning a rigged presidential election, leading to Yushchenko’s election on Dec. 26, 2004.
Now he serves as the top diplomat in a nation led by a president, Viktor Yanukovych, and a political party, the Party of Regions, with whom he is very comfortable.
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Kostyantin Gryshchenko at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Kyiv on Nov. 16. (Yaroslav Debelyi)
After all, Gryshchenko served as adviser to then-Prime Minister Yanukovch from 2006-2007. He also once took part in the upstart Republican Party with current Energy Minister Yuriy Boyko, a close associate to a very powerful group of tightly connected politician-businessmen in this nation: Serhiy Lyovochkin, the presidential chief of staff; Valery Khoroshkovsky, the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) chief; and Dmytro Firtash, the billionaire owner of energy trading intermediary RosUkrEnergo.
Gryshchenko’s immediate task is to keep the world convinced that Ukraine is committed to democracy and ultimately belongs in the European Union.
Those diplomatic skills will next be tested on the international stage in Brussels on Nov. 22, during the Ukraine-European Union summit.
Expectations are not high for concrete results in the European Union’s administrative capital – not even among Gryshchenko himself, who is only talking about making progress on the central issues of free trade and visa-free travel for Ukrainians.
Gryshchenko’s defense of Ukrainian democracy may prove to be a tough sell among critics who consider the Oct. 31 elections as undemocratic, who are alarmed at the monopolization of power by the president’s party and who remain chagrined at the ongoing trampling of rule of law.
Moreover, nearly 20 years into national independence, Ukraine’s international image remains bedeviled by sinister crimes it cannot – or does not have the will to – solve.
Among them are the 2000 murder of journalist Georgiy Gongadze and the 2004 near-fatal poisoning of ex-President Yushchenko.
Also, in the words of such top administration appointees as SBU chief Khoroshkovsky, “corruption at all levels’in Ukraine continues to harm the nation’s progress.
The following are excerpts from the Kyiv Post’s Nov. 16 interview with Gryshchenko:
Kyiv Post: Ukraine has been hit pretty hard with assessments of the Oct. 31 local elections as undemocratic. Do you expect this to hurt your chances in Brussels during the European Union-Ukraine summit on Nov. 22?
Kostyantyn Gryshchenko: It was the first time that we had local elections separate from national elections where we have invited international observers.
We are still searching for a better system of a legal framework for the elections to be held in the future.”
– Kostyantyn Gryshchenko, Ukraine’s foreign minister.
It is an unprecedented demonstration of openness and desire to have an international assessment based on actual facts and also on the standards that are being applied elsewhere.
We are still searching for a better system of a legal framework for the elections to be held in the future.
That’s why the president [Viktor Yanukovych] after the elections issued a decree where he formed a special group to formulate proposals for the election code which would govern both local and national elections in the future.
And while we will be listening very carefully and we will take that we think is the wisdom accumulated in the democracies, the decision will rest with the Ukrainian people and the Ukrainian parliament for that.
KP: So you will defend these elections as democratic and transparent?
KG: I think we already have this general appraisal that these elections, while having their deficiencies or things to improve, essentially reflected the will of the people.
KP: Do you agree with the U.S. assessment that this was a setback from this year’s presidential elections?
KG: No, I talked specifically with the U.S. officials. They have made a very clear point that the official position of the U.S. is reflected in the statement that was issued by the [U.S.] Embassy here and posted on their website. And it said that the local elections were not up to the level of the standards set by the presidential elections.
As I said, it’s local elections. It’s a different set of issues and a different set of circumstances.
So, from that perspective, clearly we need many things to be improved upon on how it’s done on the local level.
And that is something that is taken seriously and that is why the president has decided to develop and then to adopt the election code that would be an answer to these deficiencies.
KP: But these elections were conducted under the president’s legal framework, his own law which…
KG: As I said, that was reaction to the previous criticism to what was previously seen as something needed to be rectified.
And you know the parliament tried to address the issues which were on the foreground of the criticism in previous elections.
KP: Do you see how bad it looks for Ukraine? The question is whether Ukraine has the will to be a democratic nation and when the first elections under Yanukovych, who is still tarnished by the rigged presidential election in 2004, does not have democratic elections…
KG: 2004 is a separate issue. We have seen practice of democracy in the last five years when the competition between the political forces or among them who formed the previous governments and previous coalitions clearly showed the limits of what one can expect from demagogues when they come to power.
We have had fair, transparent, democratic elections at the beginning of this year.”
– Kostyantyn Gryshchenko, Ukraine’s foreign minister.
Again we have had fair, transparent, democratic elections at the beginning of this year.
They were attested to be such by all the observers coming from different nations and institutions.
We believe that it provides the current government with the mandate to move on with the agenda of reforming the country, of improving the social, political, and economic standards that would bring Ukraine in what we hope a very short time to be the standards which are common in the European Union nations. That is our ambition.
KP: The harshest critics of Ukraine say – well, it’s the old thing that [Russian Prime Minister Vladimir] Putin told [U.S. President George W. Bush] on the sidelines of a NATO conference a few years back: ‘George, Ukraine is not a real country.’ Some see Ukraine as failed state, not fully sovereign…
KG: Well, do give me any example of who is saying that.
KP: Putin for one.
KG: Well, I am not sure. I was not there. And it’s not something he has ever said publicly. Who else?
KP: Numerous critics.
KG: Failed state?!
KP: Yes. The harshest critics are talking…
KG: Harshest critics from where?
KP: From the West, from inside.
KG: Oh, come on. Give me a name that will resound in my ears as some authority. Come on… A failed state. It’s so ridiculous. I do not believe that it would even meet the minimum standards for a reply.
KP: Isn’t lack of economic independence a sign of a failed state?
KG: Economic independence is something which does not exist in an interdependent world any more.
If China would stop sending shirts and other things which are important to the hygienic health of everyone, the U.S. would totally be at loss what to do. Is it economically independent? It isn’t.
We are independent in a sense that we have ability and we have not the ideal, but still a sustained growth in the economy based on the human potential of this country first and foremost.
We obviously need to mobilize agricultural potential, transit potential and many other things. But the fact that we are essentially moving forward is something that I believe most or all of Ukraine should be proud of.
KP: Some of your critics feel that private business interests – RosUkrEnergo part-owner Dmytro Firtash, Energy Minister Yuriy Boyko, Security Service of Ukraine chief Valeriy Khoroshkovsky, presidential chief of staff Serhiy Lyovochkin – allegedly the members of the energy group, are dominating state policy. And you are right in there as an ally. How do you respond to criticism that you are their foreign minister and not Ukraine’s?
KG: I must say that I was born in the family of diplomats. My father came from World War II, entered the university in 1949. [He then joined the] diplomatic service.
I work for the president, for the president of Ukraine, who was elected through fair and free elections.”
– Kostyantyn Gryshchenko, Ukraine’s foreign minister.
I am not an ally of anyone. I work for the president, for the president of Ukraine, who was elected through fair and free elections.
KP: What about your membership in the Boyko’s Republican Party?
KG: I am not a member of a party.
KP: Any more?
KG: For a long time. I was an adviser to the prime minister in my professional capacity. I know people in Europe, in the U.S. back from 1990s. Look at my biography at least.
KP: We have … closely.
KG: Well, your question. I would simply pass it. Because it is ridiculous.
I don’t think that I need to answer that because my credentials and my CV show that I became foreign minister the first time when it was the most difficult challenge, that is Ukrainian foreign policy, and not because the president knew me or was my buddy.
It was because I could deliver on the diplomatic mission as it was formulated at that time.
KP: If Ukraine is democracy now, did you consider it a democracy when you were Ukraine’s ambassador to the U.S. under [President Leonid] Kuchma?
KG: There was criticism and a substantial part of it was grounded in facts. But to say that it was not a democracy, I am convinced, would be a mistake. And now, it’s clearly much better.
KP: You’ve talked about the difference between consolidation and monopolization of power. Most people would say that, when one party controls the executive, legislative and courts, that’s monopolization.
KG: In most parliamentary systems, if you get a majority in parliament, you can push the country along the path that you promised the electorate.
The judiciary is separate, but essentially the executive and legislative branches are together. So, what we have right now is not inconsistent with European tradition at all. It’s a very competitive system.
We do have [Fatherland party leader and ex-Prime Minister] Yulia Tymoshenko at the weekly shows and we all know that from the point of view of political influence, it’s mostly TV that is the most efficient tool.
KP: You made great points in response to our question about a failed state. And I go back to that. One measure of a successful state is solving crimes…
KG: Do not confuse the two notions – successful state and failed state, because I totally disagree and cannot accept the whole notion of a failed state, except in few very limited corners of the world.
If you start talking about combating crimes, a successful state, I have been to the [United] States the first time in my adult life in the 1970s. I could not walk the streets. You are telling me that the U.S. was a failed state then?
KP: We are talking about politically tinged crimes. Are you tired of representing Ukraine and having diplomats ask you ‘who killed journalist Georgiy Gongadze?’ (in 2000) and ‘who poisoned ex-President Viktor Yushchenko?’ (in 2004) and ‘what about privatizations?’ Are you tired of these questions?
KG: Frankly … I am not hearing that many times when I am traveling.
KP: The diplomats don’t bring it up any more?
KG: No. Because the expectation of solving many unresolved famous crimes, incidents, mysteries is something which is always a concern and always creates serious emotions in that sense. Gongadze… we know who killed him. [Former Interior Ministry General Oleksiy] Pukach was arrested at last.
I would say that, with this particular case, we would like a full, clear picture, but it’s moving. I cannot say that it is not moving.
Maybe everyone would like it to have been resolved two, three, four, five years ago.
Many people in the U.S. that would reflect on what happen to [U.S. President John Kennedy, assassinated on Nov. 22, 1963].
My father died with full conviction that something else happened rather than what was an official version. And so millions also share this view.
KP: As a citizen, would you say there is enough evidence to try [ex-President Leonid] Kuchma for ordering the murder of Gongadze?
KG: As a citizen, I am convinced that one cannot simply easily throw things along these lines as it was done in 2005, 2006.
People who were floating these kinds of notions, easily passing accusations, now have to face serious fact-based accusations themselves.
KP: Do you think there are enough facts to try these two for ordering the murder?
KG: As I said, I believe it’s not up to me or up to you for that matter to pass these judgments. It’s up to the courts and people who are qualified to do so.
KP: And you have faith that the system will follow the evidence where it goes?
KG: Yes, I do. Because there is tremendous expectation to have these issues brought to a logical end, but based on law and the very strict application of the judicial procedures.
KP: Who is the most recent foreign diplomat that asked you about that?
KG: I think that all the diplomats know the facts and know that the Ukrainian government, within the limit is provided by legislation, the investigative bodies are doing their utmost.
So, what should they ask me? It is the job of investigators. And it’s not done in public. It’s done in a manner that reflects the standards and expectations of any legal system in a democratic society.
KP: What is the most Ukrainians can expect from the EU-Ukraine summit in Brussels? You said many times that joining the EU was important. Now membership seems further away than ever. Would you agree with that?
KG: No.
KP: Why does it matter that Ukraine is part of the European Union?
KG: I am fully convinced that the situation is changing, and for the better. Europe is comparatively becoming smaller.
But we do know that the model for us is the European one. We need to find an efficient way of making this nation competitive, proud and comfortable with itself.”
– Kostyantyn Gryshchenko, Ukraine’s foreign minister.
It is not a group of nations that imposes on the rest of the world the model which is the only successful one. We now have different models of economic development.
But we do know that the model for us is the European one. We need to find an efficient way of making this nation competitive, proud and comfortable with itself.
There is only one way of doing it. That is to fully integrate European attitudes and values.
But Europe is also a variable kind of structure. The Swedes and Sicilians are of a different nature. But they are still all Europeans. Romanians and British are as different as we are from any Asian nation for that matter.
KP: What agreements will you bring back from the Brussels summit?
KG: First and foremost, our relations with the EU are less dependent on any or every summit. The summits are a regular feature.
What is important about this is that this is the first summit with President Yanukovych president. It is the first summit when the configuration of leadership of the EU is also different.
We are looking forward to progress on the visa free dialogue.
KP: Will something be signed on that?
KG: As I said, we are looking forward to progress. I believe it will happen. Second, we have had impressive forward movement on the deep and comprehensive free trade agreement.
But it will also take time. The issues are difficult. Such negotiations, by definition, are not easy for certain sectors of the economy.
Even if you have full political will to move ahead, we still need to address the issues of employment of thousands of people, of the compensating mechanisms and other important technical issues.
But we have good experience from the World Trade Organization negotiations.
Energy [relations will also be discussed]. We recently joined the European energy community. It brings us much closer to European Union standards.
We have had seven visits to Ukraine by European commissioners in the last half year. It’s unprecedented.
We have never had such intensity of our exchanges with the EU. Why? Very simply. They know that they can deal with the team here, that they do not waste their time by coming here.
Because after five years of repeated sirens, appeals or songs, they simply want to have very rough negotiations — something to agree upon and then to implement. That’s something we are offering.
All businesses want free trade for their exports, but none want free trade for imports that compete with them.”
– Kostyantyn Gryshchenko, Ukraine’s foreign minister.
KP: Jose Manuel Pinto Teixeira, the EU ambassador to Ukraine, last year said it looks like business does not want free trade here. Have you changed his mind? And is that the biggest obstacle to the free trade agreement?
KG: All businesses want free trade for their exports, but none want free trade for imports that compete with them.
There is nothing Ukraine specific, nothing unique to our country. One needs to engage them not simply on a regular but on a permanent basis, to explain, and if they have to suffer, then you need to have certain compensation provided for these particular sectors.
KP: When do you think Ukrainians will travel to Europe without a visa? Any expected date?
KG: No expected date. Ask the Europeans about that…we are doing our utmost.
We are pushing so many laws to parliament that are prerequisites for this. It will be done in a very short time frame.
Kyiv Post chief editor Brian Bonner can be reached at [email protected] and staff writer Yuriy Onyshkiv at onyshkiv @kyivpost.com.
