Ukraine After the Orange Revolution: Can It Complete Military Transformation and Join the U.S.-Led War on Terrorism?

Authored by Dr. Deborah Sanders.

November 2006

49 Pages

Brief Synopsis

Ukraine can make two important contributions to the U.S.-led war on terror. It can consolidate its democracy and thereby be a force for peace and stability in the Eurasian region, and, second, through its military transformation, it can provide peacekeeping forces to zones of instability. In order to be an effective contributor to peacekeeping operations and to consolidate its democracy, Ukraine needs to engage in comprehensive military transformation. This will necessitate the reform of all security stakeholders--all those organizations responsible for the provision of security. Effective military transformation in Ukraine also will be dependent on the development of military professionalism, democratic political control, and democratic professionalism. Ukraine has made some notable progress in all these areas, though much remains to be done. Paradoxically, military transformation will make Ukrainian peacekeeping forces more deployable, but democratic consolidation is likely to place severe limits on how these forces are used in the future. In addition, Ukraine’s desire for Euro-Atlantic integration also will speed up and add a qualitative element to Ukraine’s military transformation, but this could damage relations with its largest neighbor, the Russian Federation, which could lead to the reemphasis of traditional definitions of defense rather than the development of niche capabilities.

Summary

Located at the crossroads of Europe between east and west, Ukraine’s pivotal location and recent path towards democracy mean that this state has the potential to play an important role in the global coalition in combatting both regional and international terrorism. Ukraine can contribute to the U.S.-led struggle against international terrorism in two ways. First, the consolidation of democracy and democratic control over its armed forces will allow Ukraine to be a force for stability in the Eurasian region. It will give Ukraine the authority and credibility to play a diplomatic and peacekeeping role in frozen conflicts in the former Soviet Union—where conflict resolution has yet to take place. Ukraine can make a second contribution to the U.S.-led defeat of international terrorism through the development of niche capabilities—in particular its peacekeeping forces.

The author argues that, if Ukraine is to realize its potential as an effective U.S. ally in the war on terror, it needs to engage in comprehensive military transformation. This will necessitate the reform of all security stakeholders—all those organizations responsible for the provision of security in Ukraine. Effective military transformation in Ukraine will be dependent on the development of military professionalism, democratic political control, and democratic professionalism. Professional militaries are efficient, well-equipped, and highly motivated modern forces whose institutions and internal structures reflect democratic civilian control. Democratic control would ensure that all security stakeholders are accountable through the democratic structures in Ukraine; this would include both constitutional limits and accountability to the executive branch, legislative branch, and Ukrainian society. Democratic professionalism is an important benchmark used to determine progress in military transformation and the extent to which Ukraine can contribute to the war on terror. Democratic professionalism is the development of new styles of leadership and promotion in Ukraine so that military commanders have the confidence and flexibility to make timely decisions in a complex battlespace such as stabilization operations in Iraq. The author argues that Ukraine has made considerable progress in developing military professionalism, democratic political control, and democratic professionalism in the military sphere, but has made far less progress in reforming its security services.

Successful military transformation will allow Ukraine to provide niche capabilities, in particular well-trained and equipped peacekeeping troops able to contribute to the international struggle for peace and stability. Ukraine has made considerable progress in developing effective and professional peacekeeping forces. However, it is clear that, at present, Ukrainian peacekeeping forces lack the training and capability to perform strategic or more complex peacekeeping operations. Stabilization operations in Iraq have demonstrated that there is a need for future coalition members to develop the capability for full-spectrum military activities beyond traditional peacekeeping. The changing nature of contemporary conflicts means that members of the international community have to be able to deploy forces that are able to engage simultaneously in all aspects of strategic peacekeeping—peace building, peace enforcement, and traditional tasks related to maintaining the peace. A case study of Ukrainian peacekeepers in Iraq suggests that these forces currently lack the capability and training for anything more than rigid adherence to traditional as opposed to strategic peacekeeping tasks. The author argues that effective and well-funded military transformation in Ukraine will give the Ukrainian forces the capability to perform more complex tasks in support of the war on terror.

The author argues that Ukraine’s ability to perform future military tasks in support of the war on terror also will be contingent on the consolidation of democracy and the development of good relations with neighbors. Ukraine has made some notable progress in the consolidation and building of its democratic and electoral institutions since the Orange Revolution at the end of 2004. Ukraine has a flourishing civic society and increasingly a free press. Democratization in Ukraine, which will provide one of the key catalysts for progress in military transformation, may mean, however, that Ukraine lacks the political commitment and domestic support necessary to deploy forces into high-risk environments. Increased democratic political control, accountability, and oversight could limit the discretion of the Ukrainian Government to deploy its military in support of the war on terrorism. More democratic and inclusive political control over peacekeeping activities could limit the range of activities and the type of operations Ukraine will commit to in the future.

Ukraine’s geo-strategic environment also affects the pace and shape of military transformation and the consolidation of democracy. The author argues that the parameters and possibilities of military change will be affected by the degree to which Ukraine maintains good relations with its neighbors—not least of which the Russian Federation. Russian interference in Ukraine’s presidential election in 2004 and disagreement over the price of Russian-supplied gas in early 2006 have strained relations between these two states. Russia and Ukraine also have a number of unresolved and contentious legacy issues that hamper the prospects for the normalization of relations in the short to medium term. These include the speed and shape of the Single Economic Space and the conditions under which the Russian fleet remains in Ukraine’s Black Sea port, Sevastopol. Ukraine’s foreign policy objectives connected with Euro-Atlantic integration will facilitate military transformation, but this ultimately could damage relations further with Russia. Deterioration in relations could lead to the reemphasis of traditional definitions of defense rather than the development of niche capabilities such as peacekeeping forces, thus hampering Ukraine’s ability to contribute to the war on terror.

Access Full Report [PDF]: Ukraine After the Orange Revolution: Can It Complete Military Transformation and Join the U.S.-Led War on Terrorism?