PRESIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE: The candidates on Ukrainian issues (10/13/96)

PRESIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE: The candidates on Ukrainian issues

As the campaign for the 1996 presidential election enters its final weeks, many domestic and international issues have taken center stage, most notably, the continuance of America's leading role in world events and the strengthening of the U.S. economy. On behalf of the Ukrainian American community, the Ukrainian National Information Service prepared a presidential questionnaire dealing with five major points of interest: U.S. foreign assistance to Ukraine, the effectiveness of the U.S. Agency for International Development, Russian foreign policy and aggression, security guarantees for Ukraine and consequences of the Chornobyl nuclear accident.

UNIS initiated this campaign to determine the positions of the presidential candidates regarding topics of interest to the Ukrainian American community. Included in the questionnaire are statements on the issues followed by questions posed to the two presidential candidates.

The questionnaires were sent out on July 29. Sen. Bob Dole's response arrived on September 18 (thus, his responses appear first), and President Bill Clinton's response arrived on October 3. The candidates did not respond personally; instead, their campaign directors provided the responses.

1. U.S. Foreign Assistance to Ukraine

Statement: Prior to Fiscal Year 1996, the majority of U.S. foreign assistance to the newly independent states (NIS) was delivered to Russia. In the past five years, despite adverse circumstances, Ukraine has taken major steps in political and economic reform. The continued development of democratic and free-market institutions in Ukraine and the other NIS nations cannot but help encourage similar developments in Russia. Unfortunately, the international affairs budget (Function 150) had been significantly reduced in the previous years, thereby jeopardizing U.S. interests in Ukraine and other nations of the NIS.

Q: In your opinion, how long do you foresee the continuance of foreign assistance to Ukraine, and what efforts should the United States undertake to develop more effective assistance programs for Ukraine that promote political and economic reform which are specific to the needs of that country?
As stated above, drastic cuts to the international affairs budget would be detrimental to the continued development of the Ukrainian reform process. To guarantee the advancement of the reform movement, would your administration propose and actively support an earmark for Ukraine?

DOLE: The inadequate efforts and attention of the Clinton administration from 1992 to 1994 gave the appearance of assigning Ukraine to Russia's sphere of influence. Fortunately, the Republican control of Congress led to immediate increases in U.S. assistance and attention to Ukraine. I was pleased to work closely with Sen. Mitch McConnell in leading a bipartisan effort to force President Clinton and his Russia policy advisors to recognize the importance of a sovereign, independent Ukraine. I will continue to support specific, targeted assistance to Ukraine as president of the United States, and I will lead the Congress in ensuring continued support for reform in Ukraine.

The measure of success for United States assistance programs will not be found in the duration of our programs, but rather in the speed with which Ukraine succeeds in its reform efforts. As president I will lead a foreign policy that engages Ukraine at every level in order to advance this effort. I will mobilize the energy and initiative of American entrepreneurs, civic organizations and educators to build bridges with their counterparts in Ukraine. I will look to citizens first and government last to provide the most effective assistance possible to advance reform in Ukraine.

The Republican Congress has reduced expenditures in virtually every category of the federal budget in order to put our fiscal house in order. These reductions applied to foreign aid, as they applied to domestic programs as well. I strongly believe that our nation must live within its means. But while Republicans reduced foreign aid expenditures, we also assigned new priorities to the program. We dramatically increased the amount of money available to countries such as Ukraine that are critical to our foreign policy interests, we cut the fat out of the Clinton budget, and perhaps most important, we rebuilt public support for a foreign aid program that addresses our nation's priorities in a cost-effective manner.

CLINTON: Ukraine is the third largest recipient of U.S. assistance. In 1996, we will provide Ukraine with $330 million in grant assistance and up to $860 million in trade and investment credits.

With its independence in 1991, Ukraine ended seven decades of Soviet domination and undertook the challenge of building Europe's fourth most populous state into a market economy. President Clinton has led an international effort to promote a democratic and market-oriented Ukraine, secure within its borders and at peace with its neighbors - by mobilizing $2.1 billion in international pledges to support Ukraine's first steps to stabilize its economy, reduce inflation, encourage entrepreneurship and diversify exports.

Under the Clinton administration, the United States has also provided timely support for Ukraine's young democracy, including assistance for free and fair parliamentary and presidential elections in 1994 and which established the principles of democracy and choice as the bedrock of Ukraine's political system. Such support has enabled Ukraine's leaders to pursue bold reforms to stabilize the economy, and adopt a new Constitution that wipes away the vestige of a Soviet past.

In September 1996, President Kuchma and Vice-President Gore announced the creation of a U.S.-Ukraine Binational Commission. One of the functions of this commission will be to review and assess our assistance programs. The first such review will take place in Kyiv in October 1996.

The Clinton administration will continue to mobilize international support for Ukraine's transition to a democratic, market-oriented state. The foundation for a strong and sovereign Ukraine has been laid. The challenge for tomorrow is to secure the renewal of Ukraine's economy, advance the prosperity of its people, and consolidate its pivotal role in Europe.

To continue to help Ukraine build on its progress, the United States will target technical support to help Ukraine tackle barriers to investment and growth, such as revamping the tax and commercial codes and breaking the state's grip on Ukraine's rich agricultural sector. Americans will continue to provide assistance that will foster the growth of Ukrainian entrepreneurship, particularly the emergence of a vibrant small-business sector that will create jobs and promote economic security.

2. U.S. Agency for International Development

Statement: While U.S. foreign assistance to Ukraine has been beneficial to jump-start the reform process, the inefficient administration of these programs by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has raised an alarm within the Ukrainian American community. Unlike Ukrainian American organizations that have an intimate understanding of the political, economic and social aspect in Ukraine, USAID continually incorporates organizations that have a limited scope, knowledge and commitment to Ukraine. By not insuring an open process for awarding grants or simplifying the contracting process, it is unrealistic to assume that 75 years of Communist doctrine could be changed by several large consultant agencies within a few years. The need for a more active involvement of ethnic organizations is necessary to ensure the continuance of properly distributed funds to Ukraine.

Q: What steps, if any, do you believe are necessary to restructure the technical assistance provided to Ukraine, now and in the future?
How would your administration plan to reorganize the inefficient operations of USAID?

DOLE: The Republican Congress approved legislation this year to enact sweeping reforms in the way in which United States technical assistance programs are administered, including abolishing the inefficient and anachronistic Agency for International Development (AID). Unfortunately, President Clinton vetoed the legislation because he is satisfied that foreign assistance is best run by government bureaucrats. As president I will lead the effort to abolish AID.

I will direct my administration to initiate a robust aid program streamlined to allow citizen initiative to replace the insider deals of the Clinton administration when it come to advancing political and economic reforms abroad. My administration will not create programs to build government-to-government exchanges, but rather I will promote citizen-to-citizen exchanges.

My administration will certainly tailor programs to countries such as Ukraine that draw upon the rich ethnic fabric of our own people. Finally, appropriate language skills and a knowledge of the country at hand will be greater assets than insider ties to the federal bureaucracy when it come to the design and implementation of technical assistance programs.

CLINTON: Our assistance programs are developed in close consultation with our Ukrainian counterparts. The mission of the newly formed U.S.-Ukrainian Binational Commission (see question No. 1) will be to improve the coordination and effectiveness of U.S. assistance to Ukraine.

(See also answer to question No. 3.)

3. Russian foreign policy and aggression

Statement: Following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the independence gained by its republics, the increased fears of a restoration of a "union" with Russia are paramount. Much evidence suggests that the combination of Russian nationalism, even following the post-Yeltsin victory, the resurgence of communism, and the integration of the states within the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) pose a serious challenge to Ukrainian independence. Treaties that Russia has signed with Belarus and Kazakstan have restored Moscow's ambitions in pursuing an imperialistic policy clearly aimed at usurping the independence of its present neighbors.

Q: In view of an escalation of Russian military threats (both physical and verbal), would you support a declaration by the U.S. and its allies that any challenge to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine would be opposed by means considered adequate to ensure peace and stability?

DOLE: The United States and Ukraine face a common challenge in the growing influence of hard-line politicians in Russia. President Clinton's misguided romanticism has rendered him incapable of guarding against the nationalist turn in Russian foreign policy that has already occurred. As president of the United States I will stand ready to help Ukraine in meeting these challenges.

Post-Soviet Russia has proven able and willing to repeat old patterns, challenging the independence and sovereignty of nations with which it shares borders. As president, my foreign policy will reinforce the independence of all the states of the former Soviet Union, will support the new democracies of Europe, will lead to the enlargement of the North Atlantic Alliance, and will make clear that Russian economic blackmail or military meddling in their former empire will carry costs with the United States. Anything less sends a signal that the collapse of the Soviet Union is reversible and that the hard-fought freedom of the formerly Captive Nations is not our concern.

CLINTON: President Clinton has made clear that the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine forms the bedrock of U.S. policy both toward Ukraine and the NIS region. We have encouraged the development of stable, friendly relations between Ukraine and Russia on the basis of mutual respect of sovereignty and territorial integrity. The political leadership in both countries has consistently acted with prudence to defuse crises.

When called upon, President Clinton is willing to be of assistance to help resolve Russian-Ukraine differences.

4. Security guarantees for Ukraine

Statement: Since NATO's announcement in 1993 that it foresees the eventual enlargement of the alliance to countries in Central and Eastern Europe, many newly democratic states of the former Warsaw Pact and the former Soviet Union have been vying for NATO membership. Left in the middle, however, is the country of Ukraine, which, for the current period, has proclaimed itself to be a non-aligned or neutral state. As the NATO Alliance eventually enlarges to the states on Ukraine's western border, Ukraine feels this could isolate the country and bring it within a Russian sphere of influence within that region of the world. Ukraine does not oppose NATO enlargement, though it is concerned about security guarantees from the Western world, and the alliance itself.

Q: What type of relationship, if any, should Ukraine have with the NATO Alliance, above and beyond the Partnership for Peace (PFP) program, and secondly, what type of strategy would you plan for establishing closer relations between Ukraine and individual NATO states (not necessarily with NATO as an organization) to provide Ukraine the necessary security guarantees of its independence?

DOLE: The enlargement of NATO will strengthen security and peace in Europe. It will secure the gains of democracy in Central Europe. It will demonstrate to post-Soviet Russia that the freedom that Eastern and Central Europe won in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union is permanent, and it will be an unmistakable safeguard against a reversal of democratic trends in Russia.

Many nations across the region rightly aspire to the goal of full NATO membership. Some nations, such as Ukraine, see the benefit of this initiative in terms of increased regional stability but remain unprepared to seek full membership in NATO at this time. As president I will ensure that Ukraine has the confidence and security to develop its international relations free from the pressure or coercion of other countries, and under the Dole administration, Ukraine will remain a dedicated and welcome participant in cooperative activities with NATO.

As one of my last acts in Congress I was pleased to author legislation in the Senate that would expand support for regional military exercises and peacekeeping initiatives between Ukraine, its neighbors and members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization as a permanent policy of the United States.

CLINTON: President Clinton is working to advance Ukraine's integration into a Europe free of the divisions imposed after World War II. He drew Ukraine into Europe's evolving security system, helping it to become an active member in the Partnership for Peace and an important partner in peacekeeping in Bosnia. Ukraine has sponsored military exercises where American, Ukrainian, Russian and European troops, once staunch enemies, work side-by-side in peacekeeping and humanitarian missions.

The United States has consistently supported a strong relationship between Ukraine and NATO. We look to Ukraine to take initiative in defining that relationship based on its objective of maintaining sound relations with its neighbors to the East and West.

5. Consequences of Chornobyl

Statement: Historians acknowledge that the Chornobyl accident was a result of a totalitarian political system which eliminated accountability even as it degraded the rights of the individual. Chornobyl underscores the importance of the continuing struggle for democratic reform as the most important safeguard for nuclear safety and security. Following the G-7 Nuclear Safety and Security Summit in April, the issue of the decommissioning of Chornobyl remains high on the G-7 agenda, however, little progress has been made towards establishing a mechanism or timetable for carrying out the proposed G-7 pledges. The Ukrainian American community is concerned at the glacial approach of assistance guaranteed to close the remaining Chornobyl reactors by the year 2000.

Q: While this crisis has gained a place on the world agenda during the 10th anniversary of the Chornobyl disaster, what further steps would you take to encourage that the aforementioned issues prove to be substantial and concrete?
If you agree that the costs of acting now to contain a new environmental disaster would be far less than the costs of letting it continue, what programs would you support for the development of alternative non-nuclear energy sources for Ukraine?

DOLE: I was pleased to co-author with Sen. Frank Lautenberg a bipartisan Senate Resolution commemorating the 10th anniversary of the terrible accident at Chornobyl. During discussion of this legislation, I recalled how the Chornobyl accident on April 26, 1986, signaled the inhumanity of the totalitarian system of government. The Soviet government feebly attempted to deny the incident - with the effect of causing further harm to those who lived in the vicinity. Ultimately the full-scale disaster became known, but only after millions had been exposed to radioactive fallout.

CLINTON: Over the past year, my administration has led the international community to mobilize over $3 billion for the G-7 program with Ukraine to support Chornobyl closure and to create a viable sustainable energy sector. Over $2 billion from this program will focus on non-nuclear power investments: hydro-power, rehabilitation of thermal plants and energy efficiency investments that will reduce the demand for power. Over all, the impact of this program will be to help Ukraine curtail its dependence on imported fuel and increase its energy security. Significant sums have already been provided under this program and based on our efforts, over $500 million will be available to Ukraine by the end of this year to jump-start many energy projects.