5.2. “Associated” membership in the Commonwealth of Independent States

The first integration project, in whish creation independent Ukraine took part, was the Commonwealth of Independent States – CIS, which arosed from the former Soviet republics. This project hasn’t become a classic example of international economic or politic integration and was ineffective.

Ukraine’s membership in the Commonwealth of Independent States is still ineffective for it and for other newly independent countries, except the Russian Federation. Such conclusion confirmed by a long-term functioning of this post-Soviet group, that was created not for partnership integration cooperation, but for “Civilized estrangement of former Soviet republics”.

The main precondition of origin the Commonwealth of Independent States was collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as a result of deep system administration planned Soviet political and socio-economic system. The collapse of the Soviet Union occurred in short terms and became irreversible. In September 1991, using its constitutional right, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania seceded from the USSR and Moscow was forced to confess its sovereignty.

Countries-founders of CIS: Azerbaijan Belarus Armenia Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Moldova Russia Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Ukraine

In conditions of feverish search the ways of saving Soviet Union by Moscow, there was the opposite process – the process of elimination. The beginning of this process occurred by Puszcza meeting of the heads of Supreme Councils: L. Kravchuk (Ukraine), B. Yeltsin (Russia) and S. Shushkevych (Belarus) on the 8 of December 1991, on which was made an unprecedented historic decision to dissolve the USSR.

December 21, 1991 in Alma-Ata was meeting of 11 representatives of just proclaimed sovereign states that appeared on the ground of USSR. On this meeting was established CIS and decisions of this meeting became the final act on the way to elimination of USSR.

Founders of CIS were Azerbaijan, Moldova, Russia, Belarus, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Ukraine.

First two years Azerbaijan didn’t take part in CIS work, and only in 1993 the new head of the state H. Aliyev signed the Alma-Ata Declaration.

Georgia joined the CIS in 1994 after the change of political regime in the country and after E. Shevarchadze came to the leadership.

Today 11 independent sovereign states – former Soviet republics except the Baltic countries – take part in the Commonwealth of Independent States activity. Baltic countries clearly identified their negative attitude to the CIS from the outset.

After Moscow’s threat in 2009 Georgia withdrew from the Commonwealth.

From the first steps of the CIS foundation Ukraine adheres to its own position in it. Ukraine hasn’t signed the decision about The Charter acceptance in January 1993. At the Commonwealth Head Summit the delegation of Ukraine has motivated that decision by the fact that some clauses of the document were unacceptable as they claim the creation of the supernatural bodies which brake Ukraine's status as a non-aligned state.

In September 1993 Ukraine claims about its’ intention to cooperate with the economic community as an "associate member" under separate agreement. That way Ukraine has avoided joining the Economic Union Creation Treaty on the base of CIS.

In general there appeared such situation in CIS when the development of the integration processes in it became a straight reflexion of the entire politic, social and economic problems of the integrating states. The effective partner integrating cooperation hasn’t still been created firstly because of the uncertainty or lack of common interests that should be optimally combined with national ones; secondly because of Moscow ignore the defining principles of international economic and politic integration; thirdly because of the policy due to which Moscow see the CIS as a zone of its influence that is subordinated exclusively to the interests of the Russian Federation.

Despite the fact that the countries have “disintegrated” one union the level of their economic, politic & social development was totally different and the hasty post-Soviet integration gave no positive results. Moreover, Ukraine politicians regarded the CIS as a short-term mechanism of civilized disintegration or “divorce”.

In fact the choice and the level of social & economic and military & politic cooperation is determined by these contrasts in the economic structure and in the level of its reforming, in socio-economic situation and the geopolitical orientation of the Commonwealth member countries.

It happened that really acceptable and valid model of integration became the integration “by interests” of the member states groups. As a result that form of the participation doesn’t require any duties from the member state.

There are two tendencies in the CIS: the first is based on the bilateral economic relations; the second one is based on the creation of the separate CIS member countries groups such as

• The Union of Belarus & Russia – “The Two”,

• Central Asian Economic Community – “Asian Four”,

• Custom Union– “The Five”,

• GUUAM alliance.

These different format & speed integration processes define the reality of the post-Soviet countries relations.

Of course more attention attracts “The Two” as a Union of Russia & Belarus.

The Treaty on the commonwealth creation was singed by the presidents of the Belarus Republic and The Russian Federation on April 2, 1996. It has been proclaimed the readiness for the deep economic & politic integrating commonwealth creation of these two countries.

On December 25, 1998 the two sides have singed

• The Declaration on the further unity of Russia & Belarus;

• The Treaty on the equal civil rights;

• The Treaty on the creation of the equal conditions for the entities.

Specialists variously estimate the creation of the “Union of the two”. The most severe point was recognition of “the further intention to unification” as anti-corruption and illegal that acts against the national Belarus security.

The act on the Belarus & Russia Union creation has been solemnly signed in 1999.

The Union of the two Slavic nations is constantly used as a factor of political pressure on Ukraine (the third Slavic nation).

Integration groups “by the interests” in the CIS “The Slavic Two” (“The Union of the Two”) Russian Federation Belarus Republic “The Five” (Custom Union, Euro Asian Economic Community) Belarus Kazakhstan Kirgizstan Russian Federation Tadzhikistan “The Fourth” (Central Asian Economic Community) Kazakhstan Republic Kirgizstan Republic Tadzhikistan Republic Uzbekistan Republic GUUAM Georgia Uzbekistan Ukraine Azerbaijan Moldova

“The Five” – Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kirgizstan, Russian Federation & Tadzhikistan Custom Union. The beginning of this union was established on January 6, 1995 after signing by Russia & Belarus The Custom Union Treaty. The Custom Union Treaty between Russia, Belarus & Kazakhstan was singed on January 20, 1995. Kirgizstan Republic joins these Treaties by signing the quadripartite Treaty on the Deeping of the economic & humanities spheres integration. On February 26, 1999 Tadzhikistan Republic joins the Custom Union Treaty and the Treaty on the Deeping of the economic & humanities spheres integration. “The Treaty of Five” became one more attempt to intensify he process of economic integration by the creation of the common economic area between the Commonwealth states which tend to the deeper economic collaboration.

The contract had a framework and had a long-term basis between countries that signed it. It proclaimed goals of economic, social and cultural cooperation is quite broad and diverse and require a long time for their implementation.

Further development of integration of the “five” have found an unexpected extension and entered a "new momentum" as the "Moscow initiative."

October 12, 2000 Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan declared the creation of the Eurasian Economic Community - EEC.

This event was interpreted in different ways by the rest of the CIS and the President of Ukraine Leonid Kuchma has assessed it as evidence that the CIS has exhausted its possibilities.

However, experts noted that the formation of a new Eurasian alliance, united on a "soft" (economic) and "hard" (military-political) spheres of security (again recall that the creation of the Eurasian Economic Community was accompanied by additional measures to strengthen the collective security of the Member States 'new' Commonwealth) suggests a new phase of fundamental restructuring of relations within the post-Soviet geopolitical platforms.

As for Ukraine, its relations with Member States, EEA regulated as a number of multilateral agreements within the CIS and bilateral agreements. In fact EurAsEC largely repeated agreements within the CIS, but at the subregional level. Therefore it can be argued that the relationship between the five and Ukraine in international legal terms, pretty well settled. A potential agreement is far from exhausted. In particular, the Agreement on the establishment of the CIS free trade area and its Protocol of October 15, 1994 and remained not ratified by the Russian Federation.

At the same time Moscow had it in 2002 on the "appropriateness" of Ukraine's accession to EurAsEC that such a move is in Ukraine's interests. President Putin argued that "joining the Eurasian Economic Community - in fact, a zone of free trade" that "in case of entry tax major Russian export commodities (especially oil and gas) will be at the place of destination, and it will bring Ukraine $ 400 - 450 million savings. It was noted that the Eurasian Economic Community - a purely economic and not political organization.

In Ukraine, in many ways, was perceived ambiguously such offer, despite the fact that President Kuchma stated unequivocally that "the cooperation of the EurAsEC Ukraine need more than other countries that are in the community. Ukraine may have the EEA a huge market for its products.

In May 2002 the decision was made president of Five "to Ukraine's observer status in EurAsEC. The same status with Armenia and Moldova.

"Four", the Central Asian Economic Community was formed through the signing of the Treaty establishing the Common Economic Space February 10, 1994 post-Soviet Central Asia - Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan. March 26, 1998 to the said agreement joined by the Republic of Tajikistan.

Given the most common in the history, culture, language, religion in Central Asia such a union could be influential in finding solutions for common problems of regional development.

In addition, the integration projects of the Central Asian subregion are not limited to the economic sphere. They cover other aspects: political, humanitarian, information, and regional security. Although it forms the basis for integrating the economy, and it is very vulnerable and weak, because the economy is still agrarian and commodity type.

Therefore, the pace of the concept of a single economic space will be determined by structural reform and national economies depend on the level of socio-economic development of member countries.

And not surprisingly, the countries of Central-Asian Four "are not limited integration between them, deepen relationships with partners from the CIS and abroad. Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan's membership in EurAsEC. Kazakhstan actively supports Moscow's initiative to create within the CIS and EurAsEC single economic space and on the basis of its customs union, in cooperation with Russia and Belarus. Outside the four Central Asian CIS in full went into the relatively new Eurasian scale groupings - the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

Project SCO was founded June 15, 2001, when the Heads of the six countries - Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan - in Shanghai at the meeting agreed on going consolidation of cooperation in economic, infrastructural, cultural, defense, security and other areas. From January 2004 the SCO has begun to function as full-fledged international organization.

Ukraine as one of the founding of the CIS is developing cooperation with CIS countries, according to the Resolution of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine "On foreign policy priorities of Ukraine on July 2, 1993, which requires one of the key foreign policy cooperation with the Commonwealth of Independent States and secured the following provisions:

"... The participation of Ukraine in the CIS provides an opportunity to resolve on the basis of international legal issues relating to the succession of former Soviet Ukraine is an important factor in stabilizing the international development of Ukraine and ensuring political security.

Ukraine considers the Commonwealth as an international mechanism for multilateral consultations and negotiations ...

Ukraine supports the development of trade relations and other relations between the CIS countries based on sovereign partnership, equality and mutual benefit.

... Recognizing the need for closer economic cooperation within the CIS, Ukraine believes that the imperative is to review the current stage of transition to old and new forms of integration ...

Ukraine to avoid participation in the institutionalization of forms of international cooperation within the CIS framework, able to convert the Commonwealth of the super structure of the federal and continental character. "

Ukraine emphasizes that the development and deepening of relations with CIS countries should be clotting through linkages with developed countries. The extent, nature and depth of Ukraine's participation in social activities must not conflict with the Constitution of Ukraine, the Declaration on State Sovereignty and the Act of Independence, the current legislation.

Despite this, Ukraine has chosen the model associated, but not full participation in the Commonwealth. This gives her the opportunity to work in the major organs of the CIS, including in meetings of Heads of Government and Heads of State, and at the same time, distancing from those bodies and decisions that do not meet their own interests of Ukraine or its international obligations on other States and organizations.

The concept states that create conditions for effective trade and economic ties in the relations with these countries to provide access to resources to reform the economy of Ukraine is an essential factor in stabilizing domestic production.

Hence the need for Ukraine's participation in the Economic Union (according to the status of associate membership) with emphasis on its focus on building free trade area, the development of mutually beneficial cooperation, cooperation on the creation of facilities in third countries, increasing competitiveness in the markets of these countries, joint ventures, financial-industrial groups.

Ukraine in relation to the CIS comes primarily from the economic feasibility of the existence of the Commonwealth. This indicates that CIS is a key region in the world, which makes Ukraine trade and economic relations, although their share in the trade balance over the last five years has decreased. If in 1991 85% of Ukrainian exports accounted for the republic of the USSR, in 1998 the share of CIS and Baltic States in Ukraine's exports amounted to 35%, among them 33% - to the Commonwealth. And the main trading partner is Russia (23% of total exports and 48.1% of imports).

In 2009, the CIS was exported 33,9% of all goods imported from CIS countries 43.3% of all imported goods. Russia remained the largest trade partner of Ukraine: 21.4 percent of exports and 29.1 percent of imports.

Following the warnings and statements of the Supreme Council of 1991 on Establishing the Commonwealth of Independent States, Ukraine object of CIS status of a subject of international law and its agencies - supranational functions, and avoids taking part in the institutionalization of the Commonwealth, its transformation of the super structure of the confederate or federal character.

Ukraine supports the introduction of relations with the CIS free trade regime under an agreement on free trade zone from April 15, 1994 without any tariff or tariff exemptions nature, considering it a prerequisite for further economic integration, such as the creation of the CIS Customs Union, bilateral and multilateral relations. The agreement on free trade zone status in 2011 and is not achieved, indicating a lack of common interests in this matter. Therefore, Ukraine pays special attention to cooperation with CIS countries on a bilateral basis.

Ukraine first ratified the Agreement on the promotion of industrial cooperation enterprises and sectors of the CIS, concluded in December 1993, which provides for mutual non-use of import and export duties, taxes, excise duties and quantitative restrictions on goods supplied by cooperatives. The need for implementation of this agreement due to the structure of cooperation, which inherited a legacy from the former USSR.

In February 2003 the President of the Russian Federation (the author), Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan signed an agreement on a new stage of economic integration and the launch of negotiations on measures necessary for the formation of single economic space. However, Ukraine in 2005, ceased to participate in this project because of fundamental differences in the parties determine its content. Kyiv insisted on the creation of SES on the basis of free trade, Moscow defended the SES on the basis of a customs union. After the project was implemented in late 2009, the Russian Federation, Belarus and Kazakhstan at CEA / customs union. Ukraine meanwhile obtaining full membership of the World Trade Organization.

Alliance of five former Soviet countries, representing different subregions of the CIS - Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia - is quite peculiar. He appeared in October 1997 when during a meeting in Strasbourg, president of Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Moldova in the joint communique announced the establishment of political consultation forum - GUAM. The main goal of the alliance - the effect of combining use to find new arguments in their dialogue with Russia.

By integrating prompted the desire for common approaches in the formation of the strategically important transport corridor Europe-Caucasus-Asia. It is in this - the essence of geopolitical alliance. Yet the main factors of economic cooperation advanced at another club interest "should be considered, firstly, the CIS integration inefficiencies, particularly long delay in implementation in practice of free trade agreements, and second, fragmentation (crushing) of economic CIS integration - kvaziintehratsiya and thirdly, limited exports of goods noncompetitive CIS countries in general and the GUAM countries, in particular, to world markets.

Further adjustment of contacts gave advice to form a common position in the UN and OSCE, to identify solutions and concerted joint action on international issues. In April 1999, Uzbekistan joined the alliance and he recruited a new format - GUAM.

Deepening cooperation contributed to the Yalta summit, held in June 2001, the Yalta GUUAM Charter, signed at the summit, defined the basic goals, principles and ways of cooperation, the organizational structure of the alliance, the priority direction of economic integration and openness of the union, irrationality and inability to meet Russia and the CIS. It was emphasized categorical separation of the prospects for transforming GUUAM military-political structure.

At the Yalta summit the process of further institualization has been continued: supreme, executive and operational bodies of association, periodicity of meetings, and the decision-making mechanism.

April, 24th 1999 Washington Uzbekistan joins GUUAM The statement for the basic directions of cooperation inside the GUUAM September 2002 New York The New York memorandum of GUUAM proclaimed "a new phase of development" June, 6-7th 2001 Yalta The Yalta Charter of GUUAM defines purpose, principles, cooperation directions, organizational structure

But the Yalta summit hadn`t solved main contradictions inside the “group of five” such as creation of free trade zone, deepening of institualization, and also about possible expansion of alliance and subjects of such expansion. One of the driving forces for GUUAM could be successful implementation of the idea of Eurasian corridor as a strategic transnational oil-transporting project. It would be a good chance for all state-members for realizing their goals in the energetic sphere.

GUUAM had to transform political dialog into practical steps, first of all in the economic sphere. It could be realized by:

• encouraging trade and economic relations on the basis of a phased liberalization of bilateral trade;

• coordination of the structural concepts of national economies;

• active foreign policy to investment attracting, the implementation of major international cooperative projects, primarily in energy and development of international transport infrastructure.

Experts affirm that for durable development of GUUAM it was necessary to create common strategy, solving of contradictions inside the organization. The results of Yalta summit showed that GUUAM had a big potential for the integrative development.

However, further developments of events refuted this optimistic conclusion. The next summit of GUUAM in Yalta (19-20 July 2002) was conducted with the absence of Uzbekistan, which suspended its participation in the activities of the organization. At the Yalta Summit 2002, Uzbekistan submitted by an ambassador in Ukraine, had not joined to documents signing.

The main document of “the Yalta package of 2002" was the Agreement on free trade zone`s creation. The strategic importance of this Agreement is that its implementation was designed to allow Ukraine and other participants to start talks about the collective union signing of a free trade agreement with the EurAsEC. This possibility could affect the position of Uzbekistan and become more realistic in comparison with one-way Ukraine's attempts to initiate the process of forming a free trade zone in the CIS, blocked by Moscow.

Thus, the integration process on the draft GUUAM was not effective because of inadequate expectations and real possibilities, lack of clear, equally interesting, appealing to all member countries goals and mechanisms to achieve them. It was the main reason of leaving of Uzbekistan.

Some instability in the development of the GUAM caused the initiatives of President Yushchenko and Saakashvili about the creation of an Baltic-Black Sea-Caspian Community of Democratic Choice, to which might include the GUAM member-states, Lithuania, Poland and perhaps some other countries.

Another GUAM summit in May 2006 didn`t solve problem of future of integration associations. However, in May 2006 the participants agreed on changing the format into Organization of Democracy and Economic Development, GUAM, that the ODED/GUAM. But this step did not change the situation. After the Russian aggression against Georgia in 2008 and Georgia`s leaving of the CIS in 2009 GUAM finally lost the prospect of effective development.

August 2008 events in Georgia show that Russia moved to outright demonstration of dominative foreign policy in the CIS, strengthening policy in the status of a single host in post-Soviet space, completely subordinated to the interests of the Russian Federation. Moscow's aggression against Georgia has become an unprecedented case in international relations when issues of integration within the union resolved by military means. And there was this case for a passive position and the CIS and GUAM.

Russia-dominative foreign policy - it is a complete disregard of international law, introducing the use of force and law of the jungle in the relationship with post-Soviet independent, sovereign country. For example the USA, based in Moscow leadership policy in Russia put the global projection of force in the sphere of privileged geopolitical interests of Russia. Russia-dominative foreign policy – it`s a failure of the CIS as a constructive and effective integration association.