“OLVIA-PRESS”

GHENNADY UDOVENKO: “DNIESTRIA WILL BE RECOGNIZED”.

From August 31^st to September 2^nd, the DMR celebrates its anniversary. Participation of the experienced Ukrainian diplomat, the people’s deputy Ghennady Udovenko is sensation of this celebration; the journalist Vasily Kizka had a meeting with him.

- Mr. Udovenko, you are a very fastidious man, careful in such situations: the former minister of foreign affairs, a diplomat with great experience. And for the first time you suddenly come to such a complicated and disputable place like Dniestria… Is your visit casual, is it your own initiative or is it taking place by decision of the party “Narodny Ruh” (The People’s Movement)?

- Yes, it is really my first visit to Dniestria. Though… yesterday, when before I was arriving here, my wife reminded me of a long-ago story connected with Dniestria. In 1957, I was chairman of a kolkhoz in Skvir district of Kiev region, and she was working as agronomist in a neighboring sovkhoz. Then she was sent to Tiraspol to buy seedlings for sovkhozes of Kiev region. That time those seedlings had all-Soviet glory. Being the minister of foreign affairs, I had been in Kishinev for several times, where I held negotiations on issue of resolving the Dniestrian conflict, but I have never been to Tiraspol.

- You were opening the Ukrainian Embassy in Kishinev …

- Yes, I was opening our embassy there. Then the major objective of our diplomacy in the region was to confirm the Ukraine as participant of the negotiation process. After all, there were numerous attempts of certain forces to discharge our country from the negotiation process on the Dniester. And the situation in Dniestria is vitally important for us. That’s why, when being the minister of foreign affairs in 1994-1998, I paid much attention to that matter. And when I became parliamentarian, since then, I have been regularly keeping a dossier on situation in this region, on resolution of the conflict. I arrived here by invitation of the President of the Dniester Moldavian Republic Igor Smirnov and the DMR Supreme Council Chairman Grigory Marakutsa, and of course by Association of the Dniestrian Ukrainians. By the way, I am not the only Ukrainian people’s deputy here. Once in Kiev, I was receiving the delegation of Dniestria headed by Mr.Marakutsa, when they were coming for negotiations with the Government and Parliament of the Ukraine. Igor Smirnov was visiting Kiev very seldom. We were meeting there in official and unofficial situation, that’s why it was very pleasant to meet him in Tiraspol today, and to discuss very serious issues connected with resolution of the conflict, and with extension of co-operation between the Ukraine and Dniestria. By the way, at the Political council of ‘Narodny Ruh’ of the Ukraine, that invitation of the Dniestrian side was discussed, and it was decided that I would represent the party here, at celebration of the 12^th anniversary of independence, or more exactly, proclamation of the Dniester Moldavian Republic.

- That is, at official solemn actions in Dniestria, you represent the Ukrainian party?

- Yes.

- Aren’t you afraid that in the Ukraine, political opponents of the party ‘Narodny Ruh’, it is said, you departed to the region, which was pro-Moscow, pro-Communist? Can’t it lead to escalation of even inter-Ruh conflicts in the Ukraine?

- Really, political opponents of our party will take advantage of everything, of any pretext for escalating the political struggle. One may criticize me that I have arrived here, but I could as well be criticized for ignoring the invitation and non-arrival. So I see no problem here. Position of ‘Narodny Ruh’ of the Ukraine consists in the fact that for the party, which had led the Ukraine to independence, the fate of Dniestria is not indifferent, and first of all, the fate of Ukrainians of Dniestria, whose number id over 300 thousand, what is there future?

- By the way, this land is historically ours, Ukrainian.

- Yes, yes. Undoubtedly, we have no territorial claims, we are not going to violate agreements from Helsinki, but there are a number of practical questions, to resolution of which the ‘Narodny Ruh’ of the Ukraine should contribute. At sittings of the party’s central committee, we often take political decisions and address the President, government, and ministers, with proposal to take them into account. And there are responds to that. Recently, we have made a very topical declaration about what had been standing behind tragic events in the Ukraine, and have sent it to the President. And I have already got an answer from the President’s administration deputy chairman that our declaration had been considered and sent to the General prosecutor for taking concrete actions. The same way, by results of that visit to Tiraspol, ‘Narodny Ruh’ of the Ukraine will raise few questions concerning settlement of the conflict. Though Dniestria is formally a part of Moldova, it is not a communist region. On the contrary, here both the President and the Speaker have no communist beliefs. In the Dniestrian parliament, there is a single communist, and he entered there not by the list of communists. So we cannot say about Dniestria as a about a communist region. I’ll tell you that it’s a region where there is real interethnic accord. There are three state languages: Ukrainian, Moldavian, and Russian. It’s very important for interethnic calm. I even have and idea: to recommend the ministry of economy to arrive here and study the experience. Today 12 Dniestrian enterprises, which consisted unite military-industrial complex, were revived and have international certificates. Today Dniestria is developing in the economic domain. Here a referendum is going to be undertaken, devoted to the land reform. There is economic revival so that even the Ukraine would better study it. But I don’t want my participation in celebration in Dniestria to be politicized. I just would like to have explicit understanding of what is happening. As many as 12 years have passed. Existence of the Dniester Moldavian Republic is a fact already and no one can ignore it.

- Iraq is a recognized state, and Dniestria is not. But the USA is going to declare war to it, and as for the second, its diplomats have meetings very often, they hold negotiations, sign different documents within international organizations. I mean that the main argument of Dniestria’s rivals – is its unrecognized status in the world – already has no effect in practice, hasn’t it?

- Yes. It goes so that the world community will recognize Dniestria sooner or later. It cannot go on this way. But the position of Kishinev, Moscow, and Kiev is very important here. It’s necessary that a new impulse to the negotiation process should be given. I am for peaceful resolution, not for taking separate decisions. Dniestria declared that it would agree only for association of equal states with Moldova.

- What do you think: is such a variant of settling the conflict viable?

- I think it is. It is namely the way out of the existing situation. And Moldavian-Dniestrian relationship should be built on that very basis. But the mentality is so that it impedes such a way of resolving the conflict. One should resolve problems of simplified trespassing our border by the citizens of the Ukraine and Dniestria, of improvement of frontier co-operation.

- Citizens of the Ukraine study in the Dniestrian University named after Shevchenko.

- They are positive moments, too. There is very fruitful co-operation of that higher education institution with ours. It’s needed to open general consulate of the Ukraine in Dniestria, to deepen interaction of parliaments of the Ukraine and Dniestria, to resolve many other problems. We discussed these questions here with Mr. Smirnov and Mr. Marakutsa.

- Mr. Udovenko, the USA offers to resolve that Dniestrian conflict by the end of 2002. Is it possible?

- Washington should not define the fate of Dniestria. There is a tetragon: Moscow, Tiraspol, Kishinev, Kiev, to some extent we can add Washington and Bucharest, but we can as well resolve that problem without Washington. The tetragon is the major thing. One should not put time limits to the negotiation process. Because it is a process but not a single-time action. Everything depends on good will of four parties about which I have already told.

September 1^st 2002.