DAVOS, Switzerland -- Is Ukraine's president undermining democracy? That has been a concern for human rights advocates and U.S. officials since current president Viktor Yanukovych took office nearly a year ago. "We don't want Ukraine to become Russia," said a senior U.S. diplomat.
His chief opponent, former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko, is under investigation, and there is a question as to whether corruption or revenge lurks behind her case. Washington Post senior associate editor Lally Weymouth spoke with the Ukrainian president in Davos, Switzerland, last week.
An ambition of the previous regime was to join the European Union. Is that still your ambition? How do you think it is going?
Something you need to know is that the Party of Regions, which is the leading party of the Ukraine today, which I still chair, in its very first political statement adopted in 1997, said that the priority of the party is integration of Ukraine with the European Union.
The other important thing - for the first time, in May of last year, the parliament of Ukraine adopted a law which clearly stated that the goal of Ukraine is to join the European Union. The law was the president's initiative.
Some say that your government is moving this country closer to Russia than to the E.U., and they cite the deal you made last April, when you extended the lease on the port in Sevastopol in exchange for getting lower gas prices from Russia. In retrospect, do you feel this was a good deal?
Ukraine and Russia have had traditional strategic relations. There was just one period in the history of our countries - during my predecessor's rule - when those good relations deteriorated. Trade between our countries fell from 40 billion U.S. dollars to 13 billion dollars in 2009.
The confrontation between Ukraine and Russia led - at least two times - to the inefficient delivery of energy through Ukraine to the European Union. At least twice Ukraine violated its obligations to the European Union when gas deliveries from Russia which cross Ukraine were cut down significantly, and Europe suffered.
I thought Russia cut the gas off?
It was the consequence of the fact that relations between Russia and Ukraine had deteriorated. We are speaking about the results, rather than the fact. Ukraine's policy in 2010 was to improve relations with Russia. And Europe is happy today because it doesn't feel [it has] any problems with the natural gas. Those developments have led to more stability and an improved security situation in the European continent.
You won an election that was regarded as one of the most free and fair. S ince that time, there is concern in the West that there has been backsliding on democracy in your country. Experts and officials talk about whether the local elections held i n October were free and fair. How do you see this situation? Do you plan to do something about it?
I have publicly recognized that the Ukrainian election law has some problems.
I also tried to improve the election law on the eve of the elections as much as I could . . . at the request of the opposition. After the elections, I launched a special working group with international experts. Today this working group is trying hard to develop a new election law in Ukraine.
Your critics also speak of selective prosecutions, and they claim that the current investigations [against politicians] are politically motivated. Why is your government only investigating the opposition?
I would strongly disagree with that suggestion. It is just not true.
The U.S. government says it is true.
In reality, one perhaps should pay less attention to what is said by whom. One has to use the facts. I can give you some of these facts. The country has started a broad campaign against corruption and violation of the law. It is not a selective approach based on political reasons. This campaign affects representatives [regardless of] political party.
Has anyone in your party been investigated?
Yes, by all means.
But the famous names are former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko and the former minister of the economy, Bohdan Danylyshyn, who fled to the Czech Republic and was given asylum under NATO rules.
Let me answer that. As examples, a member of my party, the former chairman of the parliament of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea - and his position today is an adviser to me - he has been detained on charges of corruption. His last name is Hrytsenko.
Getting back to the former minister of the economy - Mr. Danylyshyn - he had never been involved in politics. He was a minister in the previous government. He is accused of committing some acts of corruption against Ukrainian law.
I believe the Czech decision to grant him political asylum was not based on any specific facts that they received from Ukraine's law enforcement agencies.
What Mr. Danylyshyn should be doing is trying to use his own legal experts to prove that he is innocent instead of hiding and trying to avoid responsibility.
But the U.S. government said that, with few exceptions, the only senior officials being targeted have connections with the previous government. Do you plan to put Yulia Tymoshenko on trial?
It is a controversial issue. With regards to the opinion of the U.S. government, it is an issue to be discussed. We believe that position is not really based on facts. I am sure that if everybody just tried to use the facts and the information that has already been provided by the prosecutor general's office - the information shows that we are in the midst of a major fight against corruption.
Those people that you have referred to have really violated Ukrainian laws. As an example, the member of my party, Mr. [Anatoliy] Hrytsenko, he made those illegal actions back in 2007. So this is also a past deed. Only in 2010, quite a large number of people have been brought to criminal responsibility for acts of corruption.
Many of them are either members of my own party or are members of other parties that are members of the governing coalition. This very fact proves that it is not a one-way road in terms of criminal persecution.
Going back to Yulia Tymoshenko - are you planning on putting her on trial?
I am not planning anything. There are laws, there is a code of criminal procedures in the Ukraine vis a vis which every citizen of Ukraine is equal. Which directions the investigators will take now, it is hard for me to know in advance. Of course I very much want to see Mrs. Tymoshenko prove that she is innocent if she is innocent.
People in the United States are also worried about pressure applied to civil society offices and journalists in your country. They say that they believe the pressure is to suppress any opposition activity. Is this fair?
Perhaps you are aware of some specific facts. What civil organizations are we talking about? What officers?
One journalist disappeared, didn't he?
Many journalists disappear all over the world.
That is something to worry about.
By all means that does worry us, but that was many years ago. The investigation is underway.
I was told that there is a lot of pressure by your security organization on civil societies and human rights organizations. Freedom House downgraded Ukraine from free to partly free. What's going on?
I always react very harshly to any violations of human rights. If I hear that any member of the government or official of the government is involved in any pressure, I look into the issue very carefully, trying to find answers.
I still believe that in many ways, such allegations are an attempt to exercise pressure upon the government - the government which has started this large-scale fight against corruption.
You are saying [the report] is an attempt to go after this government because this government is going after corruption?
Yes, I do think so. Let me give you another fact. Today the level of confidence and trust of Ukraine is growing in the world. Almost all the credit agencies have upgraded Ukraine's rating today.
Yet another important fact, the United Nations has four categories for countries: the first group is the most developed nations, the second group is for countries with a medium level of development, the third group is the countries with prospects, and the fourth group is countries with a low level of development and all sorts of deficiencies.
In 2004, Ukraine ranked 70th, and it was in group three. In the past five years, the country came down to the 85th position. That is how we were ranked in 2009.
During the last year Ukraine climbed 16 positions up, so now we are ranked 69th.That was the highest leap in the world in the course of one year. Today Ukraine finds itself in group two. That's an international evaluation.
There is one other important factor that one has to take into account when thinking about Ukraine today. For the previous 20 years of its independence, Ukraine practically did not modernize itself. No serious reforms were undertaken.
Why?
Because throughout those years of independence, Ukraine saw a fierce political fight. There was no stability. When the new president took office in 2010, we finally started global, large-scale reforms. We started the judicial reform, reform of criminal justice, tax reform, public administrative reform.
We are trying to streamline and improve the public finance system. The government's policy is for deregulation of the economy and making the climate for investors more attractive. Clearly this process cannot be completely smooth.
Ukraine has never had a more stable situation than it has today.
How do you see Ukraine's relationship with the United States evolving?
Our relations with the United States are strategic, and on very many issues we are of the same opinion and we support each other.
All of the agreements that were reached last year including at the nuclear summit between President Obama and myself are being implemented almost 100 percent. This is true for the highly enriched uranium program.
The same is true about the removal and destruction of missile fuel and so on. We have a broad agenda between our two countries, and this broad agenda shows that relations between us are good and stable.
Saturday, 29 January 2011
Hryschenko: Quality Of Association Agreement With EU More Important For Ukraine Than Date Of Its Signing
KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukrainian Foreign Minister Kostiantyn Hryschenko has said that Kiev will make every effort to reach a compromise during talks on an association agreement with the European Union.
He said in an exclusive interview with Interfax-Ukraine that in general, certain progress had already been made in this direction.
"We expect that the mutual understanding that has been reached, and the fact that the EU presidency will be held by Hungary and Poland, which are consistently defending Ukraine's interests in the EU, will help us complete these negotiations this year," Hryschenko said.
He added that Ukraine expected the EU to adopt political decisions concerning the gradual opening of its market, first and foremost, access to the agricultural market, the services market, particularly transport and energy, as well as the spread in Ukraine of the freedom of entrepreneurial activities and the freedom of the movement of persons.
"Thus, we are currently focusing, first and foremost, on the quality of the future agreement, rather than the date when the negotiations are completed. We will make every effort to reach a respective compromise in the shortest period of time," the minister said.
He said in an exclusive interview with Interfax-Ukraine that in general, certain progress had already been made in this direction.
"We expect that the mutual understanding that has been reached, and the fact that the EU presidency will be held by Hungary and Poland, which are consistently defending Ukraine's interests in the EU, will help us complete these negotiations this year," Hryschenko said.
He added that Ukraine expected the EU to adopt political decisions concerning the gradual opening of its market, first and foremost, access to the agricultural market, the services market, particularly transport and energy, as well as the spread in Ukraine of the freedom of entrepreneurial activities and the freedom of the movement of persons.
"Thus, we are currently focusing, first and foremost, on the quality of the future agreement, rather than the date when the negotiations are completed. We will make every effort to reach a respective compromise in the shortest period of time," the minister said.
Interview: Exiled Ukrainian Minister Says West Can’t Let Ukraine Become Isolated
PRAGUE, Czech Republic -- Earlier this month, the Czech Republic gave political asylum to a former Ukrainian minister wanted at home on charges of abuse of office.
One of many top officials from the previous, pro-Western government to have come under investigation since the election of pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych last year, Bohdan Danylyshyn says the accusations are part of a drive to stifle opposition in Ukraine. He sat down with RFE/RL's Gregory Feifer in Prague.
RFE/RL: Can you explain the charges the Ukrainian government has made against you?
Bohdan Danylyshyn: I've been accused of approving government purchases involving the Defense Ministry and the Boryspil international airport through a single agent. The years 2008 and 2009, during the global financial crisis, were difficult ones for Ukraine. I was doing everything I could to reduce the number of deals through that one broker.
In 2007 [before I took office], deals worth 133 billion hryvnia ($16.5 billion), or 52 percent of all government procurements, were made through him. In the first quarter of 2008, it was 61 billion hryvnia, or more than 77 percent of all deals.
When the Economy Ministry began dealing with the issue [after I took office], the amount dropped to 21 percent in 2008, and around 30 percent in 2009. In those years, especially in 2008, I had conflicts with the former managers of the agency overseeing tenders, especially members of the Regions and Communist parties from the former government led by Yanukovych.
I want to stress that there wasn't a single criminal case launched into activities during the period 2007 to 2008 [when President Viktor Yanukovych was prime minister]. We don’t even have documents showing spending from that time because they’ve disappeared and law enforcers aren’t even interested in them. It shows Ukraine has a system of selective justice.
In any case, the Economy Ministry could only approve procedures and issue permission letters. It didn’t make final decisions about deals. That was taken by other ministries or executive agencies -- in my case, the Defense Ministry.
One of many top officials from the previous, pro-Western government to have come under investigation since the election of pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych last year, Bohdan Danylyshyn says the accusations are part of a drive to stifle opposition in Ukraine. He sat down with RFE/RL's Gregory Feifer in Prague.
RFE/RL: Can you explain the charges the Ukrainian government has made against you?
Bohdan Danylyshyn: I've been accused of approving government purchases involving the Defense Ministry and the Boryspil international airport through a single agent. The years 2008 and 2009, during the global financial crisis, were difficult ones for Ukraine. I was doing everything I could to reduce the number of deals through that one broker.
In 2007 [before I took office], deals worth 133 billion hryvnia ($16.5 billion), or 52 percent of all government procurements, were made through him. In the first quarter of 2008, it was 61 billion hryvnia, or more than 77 percent of all deals.
When the Economy Ministry began dealing with the issue [after I took office], the amount dropped to 21 percent in 2008, and around 30 percent in 2009. In those years, especially in 2008, I had conflicts with the former managers of the agency overseeing tenders, especially members of the Regions and Communist parties from the former government led by Yanukovych.
I want to stress that there wasn't a single criminal case launched into activities during the period 2007 to 2008 [when President Viktor Yanukovych was prime minister]. We don’t even have documents showing spending from that time because they’ve disappeared and law enforcers aren’t even interested in them. It shows Ukraine has a system of selective justice.
In any case, the Economy Ministry could only approve procedures and issue permission letters. It didn’t make final decisions about deals. That was taken by other ministries or executive agencies -- in my case, the Defense Ministry.
Ukraine To Boost Military Cooperation With Russia In 2011
KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukraine plans to expand its cooperation with Russia in the military sphere, Chief of General Staff Lt. Gen. Hryhoriy Pedchenko said on Saturday.He said the agreement was reached at the meeting with his Russian counterpart, Army Gen. Nikolai Makarov, in Brussels on January 27.
Pedchenko said Ukraine and Russia will hold a series of command-staff exercises and tactical maneuvers in 2011.
"We have considerably expanded our military cooperation. If last year we had 40 such exercises, this year we will have 81. This is a great step forward," Pedchenko was quoted by UNIAN agency as saying.
He said such cooperation is very important for Ukraine as Russia has great experience in this sphere.
"They have many well trained officers, specialists and this is very important for us," he said.
Pedchenko said Ukraine and Russia will hold a series of command-staff exercises and tactical maneuvers in 2011.
"We have considerably expanded our military cooperation. If last year we had 40 such exercises, this year we will have 81. This is a great step forward," Pedchenko was quoted by UNIAN agency as saying.
He said such cooperation is very important for Ukraine as Russia has great experience in this sphere.
"They have many well trained officers, specialists and this is very important for us," he said.
Sunday, 23 January 2011
Russian Black Sea Fleet Strengthens Presence In Ukraine
WASHINGTON, DC -- The Russian Navy plans to increase its presence on Ukrainian territory by adding urban infrastructure and civilian manpower to its naval assets in Sevastopol.
he command of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet intends to build a housing estate (“mikrorayon”) for 20,000 personnel of the fleet, their dependents, and civilian service providers to the Russian fleet in that city.
The housing estate and associated service infrastructure is planned to occupy both sides of Kazachya Bay, alongside the base of a Russian “marine infantry” (amphibious landing troops) regiment.
The government of Russia will finance this program from a fund dedicated to the socio-economic development of Sevastopol. That fund currently stems from the 2010 arrangements to subsidize Ukraine’s consumption of Russian gas.
The socio-economic fund’s value is deducted from the value of that subsidy. This portion, consequently, helps to consolidate Russia’s military foothold on Ukrainian territory.
The head of the Sevastopol city administration (by law a Ukrainian government appointee), Valery Saratov, has expressed gratitude in announcing this Russian building program.
On April 21, 2010, Presidents Viktor Yanukovych and Dmitry Medvedev signed the agreement to prolong the Russian Fleet’s basing rights in Ukraine beyond the 2017 expiration date, by another 25 years, with a further five-year extension option to 2047.
In return, Russia agreed to grant a 30 percent discount on the price of Russian natural gas to Ukraine, if that price exceeds $336 per one thousand cubic meters (tcm).
It now turns out, however, that an implementation mechanism and even a common understanding of that arrangement are lacking. On April 18, 2010 in Moscow, the Russian and Ukrainian Finance Ministers, Aleksei Kudrin and Fedir Yaroshenko, respectively, started negotiations on implementing the April 21, 2010 agreements.
The Russian side seems more interested in quibbling and stalling, than in delivering. Kudrin insisted that “a new agreement” must be negotiated to define “concrete terms and parameters, on which implementation would depend.”
For his part, Yaroshenko seemed to plead for overcoming a deadlock: “For us it is important to reach a common interpretation, define a common methodology for implementing this agreement in real life”.
While Kiev sounds anxious about Moscow delivering “in real life,” Moscow may well turn its side of the bargain into a dead letter. The price of gas seems unlikely to stay above $300 per tcm (unless Moscow decides to practice overt extortion and by the same token subsidize its own extortion of Ukraine).
Below that price level, Russia can still pressure Ukraine into further concessions, in return for further discounts on the gas price. This would probably be that “new agreement” to which Kudrin is alluding.
Moscow is well placed to implement the naval base extension agreement while bargaining over implementation of the gas price agreement. The April 2010 arrangements are asymmetrical in that the naval base agreement is self-enforcing while the gas agreement is not.
Ukraine lacks the power to withhold implementation or the former, while Russia has ample means to set conditions for implementing the latter.
Since those agreements were signed, Moscow has announced plans to replace old warships of its Black Sea Fleet with new ones, increase that Fleet’s tonnage in net terms, and upgrade the fleet’s weaponry.
Modernization plans as announced during 2010 envisage adding one cruiser, several frigates, and several submarines by 2015.
In addition, one Mistral-class amphibious attack ship (out of four planned for procurement from France) is supposed to be allocated to Russia’s Black Sea Fleet.
Russia’s naval presence in Ukraine underscores the Ukrainian government’s lax interpretation of the country’s non-bloc status.
Ukraine’s current authorities have legislated for this status, and drastically curtailed cooperation with NATO, without developing a clear definition of the non-bloc status, or an international legal-political framework to ensure its observance.
Within this grey area, Russia suggests that it would consider modernizing and operating itself the Ukrainian radars in Sevastopol and Mukacheve, as contribution to a common anti-missile defense system.
Russia’s entrenchment in the Crimea has caught NATO, the United States, and the European Union distracted and wrong-footed. Some other actors now seek to develop a soft-security answer.
On January 20 in Strasbourg, the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee adopted a resolution on the full range of security challenges in the Black Sea region.
Inspired by Romanian MEP’s, and intended for submission to the European Parliament’s plenum, the resolution expresses particular concern about the extension of the Russian Black Sea Fleet’s lease on Ukrainian territory.
The resolution suggests that the EU should develop a conflict-prevention and early-warning system. This would serve to build confidence throughout the region and help prevent threat of force, its use or escalation.
Such a system would focus on arms transfers and naval activities. The proposal regards Russia as a desirable partner in such a system, alongside the EU and the Black Sea region’s countries (members or non-members of the EU). This area today faces key challenges that the EU cannot ignore.
he command of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet intends to build a housing estate (“mikrorayon”) for 20,000 personnel of the fleet, their dependents, and civilian service providers to the Russian fleet in that city.
The housing estate and associated service infrastructure is planned to occupy both sides of Kazachya Bay, alongside the base of a Russian “marine infantry” (amphibious landing troops) regiment.
The government of Russia will finance this program from a fund dedicated to the socio-economic development of Sevastopol. That fund currently stems from the 2010 arrangements to subsidize Ukraine’s consumption of Russian gas.
The socio-economic fund’s value is deducted from the value of that subsidy. This portion, consequently, helps to consolidate Russia’s military foothold on Ukrainian territory.
The head of the Sevastopol city administration (by law a Ukrainian government appointee), Valery Saratov, has expressed gratitude in announcing this Russian building program.
On April 21, 2010, Presidents Viktor Yanukovych and Dmitry Medvedev signed the agreement to prolong the Russian Fleet’s basing rights in Ukraine beyond the 2017 expiration date, by another 25 years, with a further five-year extension option to 2047.
In return, Russia agreed to grant a 30 percent discount on the price of Russian natural gas to Ukraine, if that price exceeds $336 per one thousand cubic meters (tcm).
It now turns out, however, that an implementation mechanism and even a common understanding of that arrangement are lacking. On April 18, 2010 in Moscow, the Russian and Ukrainian Finance Ministers, Aleksei Kudrin and Fedir Yaroshenko, respectively, started negotiations on implementing the April 21, 2010 agreements.
The Russian side seems more interested in quibbling and stalling, than in delivering. Kudrin insisted that “a new agreement” must be negotiated to define “concrete terms and parameters, on which implementation would depend.”
For his part, Yaroshenko seemed to plead for overcoming a deadlock: “For us it is important to reach a common interpretation, define a common methodology for implementing this agreement in real life”.
While Kiev sounds anxious about Moscow delivering “in real life,” Moscow may well turn its side of the bargain into a dead letter. The price of gas seems unlikely to stay above $300 per tcm (unless Moscow decides to practice overt extortion and by the same token subsidize its own extortion of Ukraine).
Below that price level, Russia can still pressure Ukraine into further concessions, in return for further discounts on the gas price. This would probably be that “new agreement” to which Kudrin is alluding.
Moscow is well placed to implement the naval base extension agreement while bargaining over implementation of the gas price agreement. The April 2010 arrangements are asymmetrical in that the naval base agreement is self-enforcing while the gas agreement is not.
Ukraine lacks the power to withhold implementation or the former, while Russia has ample means to set conditions for implementing the latter.
Since those agreements were signed, Moscow has announced plans to replace old warships of its Black Sea Fleet with new ones, increase that Fleet’s tonnage in net terms, and upgrade the fleet’s weaponry.
Modernization plans as announced during 2010 envisage adding one cruiser, several frigates, and several submarines by 2015.
In addition, one Mistral-class amphibious attack ship (out of four planned for procurement from France) is supposed to be allocated to Russia’s Black Sea Fleet.
Russia’s naval presence in Ukraine underscores the Ukrainian government’s lax interpretation of the country’s non-bloc status.
Ukraine’s current authorities have legislated for this status, and drastically curtailed cooperation with NATO, without developing a clear definition of the non-bloc status, or an international legal-political framework to ensure its observance.
Within this grey area, Russia suggests that it would consider modernizing and operating itself the Ukrainian radars in Sevastopol and Mukacheve, as contribution to a common anti-missile defense system.
Russia’s entrenchment in the Crimea has caught NATO, the United States, and the European Union distracted and wrong-footed. Some other actors now seek to develop a soft-security answer.
On January 20 in Strasbourg, the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee adopted a resolution on the full range of security challenges in the Black Sea region.
Inspired by Romanian MEP’s, and intended for submission to the European Parliament’s plenum, the resolution expresses particular concern about the extension of the Russian Black Sea Fleet’s lease on Ukrainian territory.
The resolution suggests that the EU should develop a conflict-prevention and early-warning system. This would serve to build confidence throughout the region and help prevent threat of force, its use or escalation.
Such a system would focus on arms transfers and naval activities. The proposal regards Russia as a desirable partner in such a system, alongside the EU and the Black Sea region’s countries (members or non-members of the EU). This area today faces key challenges that the EU cannot ignore.
Thousands Denounce Ukraine President
KIEV, Ukraine -- Thousands of supporters of Ukraine's former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko massed in downtown Kiev Saturday to denounce her arch rival, President Viktor Yanukovych, accusing him of being a Russian stooge
ome 6,000 protesters gathered in St Sophie square, answering a call by several opposition parties to mark the 92nd anniversary of the reunification of east and west Ukraine, according to an AFP correspondent at the scene.
Many carried banners calling for the dismissal of both Yanukovych and his Prime Minister Mykola Azarov.
Tymoshenko herself asked the crowds: "Are you ready to take to the streets?" before being greeted by resounding cries of "Yes".
"Those who are in power take their orders from the Kremlin," Dmytro Pavlytchko, a well-known poet, told the gathering.
Ukraine, a former Soviet republic, is deeply divided between the largely nationalist west and the traditionally pro-Russian east, from where Yanukovych hails.
The president, who came to power after elections in February last year, has been frequently accused by his detractors of being too close to Moscow and of persecuting his political opponents.
The protests passed off peacefully after an earlier warning by the interior minister against any use of violence.
ome 6,000 protesters gathered in St Sophie square, answering a call by several opposition parties to mark the 92nd anniversary of the reunification of east and west Ukraine, according to an AFP correspondent at the scene.
Many carried banners calling for the dismissal of both Yanukovych and his Prime Minister Mykola Azarov.
Tymoshenko herself asked the crowds: "Are you ready to take to the streets?" before being greeted by resounding cries of "Yes".
"Those who are in power take their orders from the Kremlin," Dmytro Pavlytchko, a well-known poet, told the gathering.
Ukraine, a former Soviet republic, is deeply divided between the largely nationalist west and the traditionally pro-Russian east, from where Yanukovych hails.
The president, who came to power after elections in February last year, has been frequently accused by his detractors of being too close to Moscow and of persecuting his political opponents.
The protests passed off peacefully after an earlier warning by the interior minister against any use of violence.
Yanukovych: Ukraine Will Restore Its Combat Capability
KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukraine should create new national armed forces, President Viktor Yanukovych said on Saturday at a grand meeting on the occasion of Ukrainian Unity Day.
"Our task is to create new national armed forces practically, as they say, from scratch," the presidential press service quoted him as saying.
Yanukovych said that the state would worry about military security, raising the social status of servicemen, reviving morale, forming a qualitatively new army structure, modernizing weapons and adapting a military doctrine to the challenges of the modern world.
"We will strengthen the power of our defense potential. We will resume investment in the development of the scientific, technological and personnel component of the military and industrial complex," the president said.
"Our task is to create new national armed forces practically, as they say, from scratch," the presidential press service quoted him as saying.
Yanukovych said that the state would worry about military security, raising the social status of servicemen, reviving morale, forming a qualitatively new army structure, modernizing weapons and adapting a military doctrine to the challenges of the modern world.
"We will strengthen the power of our defense potential. We will resume investment in the development of the scientific, technological and personnel component of the military and industrial complex," the president said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)