No “Reset” for Canada!

By Dr. Myron Kuropas

In contrast to the ill-advised U.S. Obama Administration “reset” with Russia, Canada’s policy towards Russia has not changed.

This was made clear by the Honourable Andrew Robinson, Canada’s former Ambassador to Ukraine, at a conference titled “Assessing Ukraine/NATO Relations” in Chicago’s Ukrainian Village on May 19, 2012.

Speaking to a largely Ukrainian audience, Mr. Robinson stressed the strategic importance of Ukraine for Canada, acknowledging the significant role played by Ukrainian Canadians in making Ottawa aware of Ukraine and its aspirations.  In 2000 and 2001, there was hope in Canada that the Russian Federation would finally become a democratic country.  Instead, Russian assertiveness increased, a development which brought significant changes in the global environment.  As a result, Canada has had no “reset” with Russia, Ambassador Robinson declared clearly and unequivocally.

Also speaking at the Chicago conference was Dr. Lubomyr Luciuk, professor of Political Geography in the Department of Politics and Economics at the Royal Military College of Canada. He once believed the West was truly interested in Ukraine’s independence, but was forced to change his views once he read the archives.  A 1931 British intelligence report, for example, described Ukrainian nationalist leaders as “only emerging from the status of ‘semi-intellectual’ and have a decidedly oriental kink in their brains.”  Another British report described Ukrainian leaders as “scallywags”.

Prof. Luciuk’s major focus was on America’s Russian reset.  A concept originally put forth by Harvard’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, the idea was adopted by the Bipartisan Commission on U.S. Policy Toward Russia, co-chaired by former U.S. Senators Gary Hart and Chuck Hagel.  It was this commission which pushed U.S. President Barrack Obama to cozy up to then Russian Prime Minister (now President) Vladimir Putin.

Dr. Luciuk also underscored Putin’s clever strategy with European leaders.  While urging Ukraine to shy away from Europe, Putin was playing kissy-kissy with the likes of Italian leader Silvio Berlusconi and France’s Jacques Chirac.  Putin’s most significant coup was with then German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder who vigorously opposed NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia. Schroeder’s reward was the Gazprom chairmanship of the NORD Stream Project which pumps gas through the Baltic Sea to Germany.  “Keeping NATO disunited was always Putin’s goal,” Dr. Luciuk concluded.  “It worked.  Ukraine’s door to NATO is closed.”

The Chicago NATO conference of Ukrainians was a phenomenal success.  In addition to Mr. Robinson, other  luminaries speaking at the conference included: Ukrainian-born Ihor Kozak, a graduate of Canada’s Royal Military College, and a former student of Dr. Luciuk; the U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, John Herbst; Amanda Paul, Programme Executive at the European Policy Centre and policy analyst on programs of the EU’s Eastern Neighbourhood (Brussels); James Sherr, Senior Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Programme, Royal Institute of International Affairs (London); Jan Pielko, Director of the Polish Ukrainian Cooperation Foundation (Warsaw).

Speakers from Ukraine included: Dr. Oleksandr Sushko, Research Director at the Institute for Euro-Atlantic Cooperation; Dr. Volodymyr S. Ohryzko, former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine; and Dr. Serhiy Kvit, President of National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy.

Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, former Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine and chairman of the political council of Our Ukraine, also participated in the conference. It is interesting to note that on May 24, soon after his return to Ukraine, Mr. Nalyvaichenko resigned from his position in Our Ukraine, noting his displeasure with his party’s reticence to join the united opposition to the Yanukovych regime.

Was the conference worth the effort? Absolutely. Two major reasons come to mind. The conclave was shown in Ukraine on Channel 5.  People there were able to see that Ukrainians here are organized, and that they have many important friends in the world who are aware of their plight under the Yanukovych regime.  Although it probably wasn’t obvious in the official Ukrainian coverage of the NATO conference, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych was all but ignored by the NATO leaders meeting in Chicago.

The second reason making the conference significant is that it was a united effort of the Ukrainian community in North America to send a message to the World that we haven’t forgotten Ukraine.  We care.  And we will continue to be heard until Ukraine’s leaders understand that Ukraine can only move forward if it becomes a truly democratic nation committed to the rule of law.  I am confident that the current oligarchic domination of Ukrainian affairs will eventually disappear and that President Yanukovych will end his days in disgrace.

Those Ukrainian Canadian organizations involved in the development of the Chicago event included the Ukrainian Canadian Congress and the League of Ukrainian Canadians, headed by Borys Potapenko who was especially diligent in organizing and promoting the conference.

It is reassuring to know that Ukrainians in North America are still alive and well. Those who believe that our community has become irrelevant need to undergo a “reset” of their own.