On March 16, Ukrainian
President Petro Poroshenko approved the “Concept for the Development of the
Security and Defense Sector” (President.gov.ua, March 16). The document lays out the “Western”
vision for Ukraine’s security and defense sector reform and specifies the goals
for this process. The concept paper also shows that security sector reform is
likely to develop at a slow pace and that it will take substantial time to be
implemented. The paper further details the inherent risks to reform from
problems arising from economic solvency and sustainability.
The concept paper suggests a centrally managed and
coordinated system of reforms for the security and defense sector. Yet, some
reform plans for specific institutions laid out in this paper look as if they
have different designs, showing that the overall reform process is at different
stages across several institutions. The document itself is also uneven in its
coverage. Its section on the Ministry of Interior appears most comprehensive,
while the parts covering the Ministry of Defense and Ukraine’s intelligence and
counterintelligence institutions appear to be less developed.
The slow pace of Ukraine’s defense and security sector
reforms is obvious. The Ukrainian National Guard—the military–law enforcement
“dual force” under the Ministry of Interior—leaves a better impression of
overall readiness than the actual Armed Forces under the Ministry of Defense.
The stumbling blocks that have popped up along the way toward defense reform
generally include issues of culture and mentality, which are slow to change, as
well as a lack of political will and senior leadership issues in the government
and presidential administration.
Ukraine’s defense and security reform process has been
rather sporadic since the 2013–2014 “Revolution of Dignity” (EuroMaidan). As
early as spring 2014, the emergent post-Maidan parties that formed the
“European Ukraine” coalition jointly pledged to reform the security and defense
sector .
A comprehensive security sector
review also started that spring but soon fell behind schedule. Security
institutions thus proceeded with reforms on their own. On March 3, 2015, a new
National Security Strategy and Military Doctrine of Ukraine (NSDCU) came into
force, which mentioned the Russian Federation as a military threat and stated
that Ukraine’s goal is to meet the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO)
specific membership criteria .
The new concept paper recently approved by President
Poroshenko builds on last year’s NSDCU in several
ways. First, it provides a detailed “Threat Assessments” section, in which it
identifies the main sources of security threats to Ukraine. These include:
· Russia’s subversive economic, societal, military and
hybrid warfare measures.
· Temporary occupation of Crimea and selected areas in
Donbas.
· Destabilization of the situation in the
Baltic–Caspian–Black Sea region.
· Sabotage and subversive operations by Russia and
unspecified “other states” to stir up interethnic, religious, social,
separatist and terrorist activities.
· Moscow’s support for the breakaway “statelets” in
Russian-occupied areas of Donbas.
· Militarization of borders and the possibility of
Russia’s deployment of tactical nuclear weapons to Crimea.
· Ukraine’s territory being used as a battleground for
an armed conflict between NATO and Russia.
Furthermore, the March 2016 document defines security
challenges that currently exist below the level of a threat, but which could
elevate into a more robust military threat. Most of these challenges are also
related to Russia and include:
· The destabilization of the international security
system due to the Russian Federation’s aggressive actions and the insufficient
effectiveness of world security structures.
· Russia’s subversive interference in Ukraine’s domestic
affairs and other similar issues.
· Unfinished border demarcation processes in the Black
Sea and the Sea of Azov as well the unfinished delimitation of borders with
Russia, Belarus and Moldova.
· Global-level security challenges such as terrorism and
transnational crime.
Aiming to explain the need for reform, the concept
paper pinpoints several “unresolved issues” in the security and defense sector.
Among such issues are inefficiencies in the “mechanism of prevention and
neutralization of contemporary threats to Ukraine’s national security,” a
legacy of insufficient resources devoted to this sector, coordination issues,
as well as imperfect crisis management and defense planning among central and
local governments. Importantly, the document attempts to clarify the roles and
chains of command within Ukraine’s security and defense sector. In particular,
it seeks to address the problematic idiosyncrasies of Ukraine’s
parliamentary-presidential system in which the Cabinet of Ministers also has
autonomous command of portions of the security forces—mainly through its
control over the Ministry of Interior—thus forming an unwieldy “three-headed
dragon.”
The concept paper proposes overcoming these problems
by introducing a “unified system of planning and resource management,” based on
modern European and Euro-Atlantic practices. Also importantly, in its
“Strategic Analysis” section, the concept paper specifies the following
strategic goals, to be accomplished in the “medium term”: the restoration of
Ukraine’s territorial integrity and the creation of a national crisis
management system.
The reform of Ukraine’s security and defense sector
has been slow. But the ever-present Russian threat, unrelentingly high
expectations from domestic civil society and international donor countries, as
well as the need to reassure the Ukrainian public and maintain internal
security all apply pressure on the government to keep moving forward.
Meanwhile, financial solvency and the continued sustainability of Ukraine’s
reform efforts remain in doubt. Specifically, the government has increased
military expenditures and legally stipulated to spend no less than 5 percent of
GDP on the security sector as a whole; and the new concept paper calls for
defense spending to reach 3 percent. But Ukraine’s GDP actually fell by 10
percent in 2015. And the economy is not set to resume sound growth this year
due to persistently low global commodity prices, the continued occupation of
Donbas, as well as Ukraine’s military and economic conflict with Russia. For
now, the fiscal situation is still manageable. But rising populist politics in
Ukraine could, at some point, increase pressure on the government to freeze
military expenditures in favor of social spending.
Σχόλια
Δημοσίευση σχολίου