{"id":43160,"date":"2021-09-09T14:24:19","date_gmt":"2021-09-09T12:24:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/libmod.de\/?p=43160"},"modified":"2021-09-14T15:05:17","modified_gmt":"2021-09-14T13:05:17","slug":"zelenskys-us-visit-reaffirmes-partnership-but-much-work-lies-ahead-zelenskyys-long-awaited-us-visit-reaffirms-partnership-but-much-work-lies-aheadzelenskyys-long-awaited-us-visit-re","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/libmod.de\/en\/zelenskys-us-visit-reaffirmes-partnership-but-much-work-lies-ahead-zelenskyys-long-awaited-us-visit-reaffirms-partnership-but-much-work-lies-aheadzelenskyys-long-awaited-us-visit-re\/","title":{"rendered":"Zelenskyy\u2019s US visit reaffirms partnership. But much work lies ahead."},"content":{"rendered":"

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row css=\u201d.vc_custom_1508251598805{margin-top: 30px !important;}\u201d][vc_column width=\u201c2\/3\u201d css=\u201d.vc_custom_1508252250311{padding-right: 20px !important;}\u201d][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n

The reactions in Ukraine to President Volodymyr Zelenskyy recent visit to the United States vary widely and are often politi\u00adcized. They range from state\u00adments that the visit lifted relations to a new level to those saying that it was a failure and that Zelenskyy returned empty-handed. In reality, however, there neither is reason for euphoria nor for doom. Perhaps the most important thing is that the visit took place at all. The backstory is not rosy.<\/h2>\n

Read this article in German<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

On the Ukrainian side, Zelenskyy expressed a strong wish for a US visit early on in his presi\u00addency in 2019, only to get a very lukewarm reaction from then President Donald Trump. It got worse when Trump orches\u00adtrated a blackmail operation pressing Kyiv to take steps that would hurt his political opponent Joe Biden. This culmi\u00adnated in the now infamous phone conver\u00adsation between the presi\u00addents on 25 July 2019 and the blocking of US security assis\u00adtance to Ukraine until autumn of that year. This further led to acute political crisis in the US, culmi\u00adnating in Trump\u2019s impeachment by the House of Representatives.<\/p>\n

\"Portrait<\/p>\n

Volodymyr Dubovyk <\/a> is an Associate Professor in the Department of Inter\u00adna\u00adtional Relations at the Odesa I. I. Mechnikov National University. His areas of expertise are Ukraine, transat\u00adlantic telations, the U.S. and Black Sea security.<\/p><\/div>For the remaining part of the Trump presi\u00addency, Ukraine policy became somewhat toxic and remained in limbo. Trump\u2019s actions left a lingering traumatic effect on Zelenskyy\u2019s team and its trust in bilateral relations. Little wonder that Zelenskyy had high hopes for the new American President and an eagerness to visit the US.\n

Another driving factor for Zelenskyy personally was his deep antipathy towards his prede\u00adcessor Petro Poroshenko, who visited the US several times and even addressed<\/a> a joint session of Congress in September 2014.<\/p>\n

On the U.S. side, President Joe Biden has been preoc\u00adcupied with an array of serious domestic challenges, which resulted in a number of foreign policy tasks being put on the back burner. Plus, Washington did not feel urgency in addressing specif\u00adi\u00adcally Ukraine. One exception was during the massing of Russian forces on Ukraine\u2019s borders in spring 2021, when Biden himself engaged in active diplomacy in support of Ukraine. But apart from that, the new US admin\u00adis\u00adtration thought that policies towards and cooper\u00adation formats with Ukraine estab\u00adlished by the two previous admin\u00adis\u00adtra\u00adtions are working fine and need no urgent overhaul.<\/p>\n

This was coupled with a certain appre\u00adhension in Washington that Zelenskyy was not doing enough domes\u00adti\u00adcally in order to press for much needed reforms. Perhaps the Biden admin\u00adis\u00adtration decided to give Kyiv more time to do more homework before actually moving forward with the visit.<\/p>\n

Moreover, the Covid pandemic clearly upended plans as well. The frequency of foreign leaders\u2019 visits to the White House has been really low. Zelenskyy was only the eighth to be received there since Biden\u2019s inaugu\u00adration, and the second European leader right after German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Seen in this way, Zelenskyy\u2019s visit actually took place rather quickly, despite the wait.<\/p>\n

It is through this prism of circum\u00adstances, background and context that this visit should be viewed and its results must be assessed. It drives us to conclude that the very fact of the visit taking place was a success in itself. Even the sudden crisis in Afghanistan, which led to the visist\u2019s postponement by one day, did not alter its contents.<\/p>\n

Joint Statement is good news<\/h2>\n

Among the agree\u00adments signed the Joint Statement on US-Ukraine Strategic Partnership<\/a> stands out. It lays down the state of relations, addresses major aspects and even suggests a very concrete road map of what needs to be done next. It is both a guideline and a checklist of things to be accomplished.<\/p>\n

Naturally, given the ongoing aggression against Ukraine, the joint statement starts with security and defense. It is here where US support for Ukraine perhaps manifests itself most visibly. Since 2014 the U.S. has provided Ukraine with security assis\u00adtance worth 2.5 billion dollars. It was on track to provide 400 million dollars this year alone, when Washington added another 60 millions on top, just days before the visit.<\/p>\n

The Strategic Defense Framework agreement was signed during the visit as well. While it is hardly moving bilateral relations in this domain to a quali\u00adta\u00adtively new level, it can serve as a useful mechanism to facil\u00aditate more cooper\u00adation in this field.<\/p>\n

The good thing for Ukraine is that Crimea is mentioned frequently in the joint statement, including Washington\u2019s pledge to support the Crimea Platform, Kyiv\u2019s latest initiative to raise inter\u00adna\u00adtional awareness for the peninsula\u2019s occupation. More generally, the Black Sea region is recog\u00adnized as an area where many threats remain for Ukraine\u2019s security and where the US is deter\u00admined to offer assistance.<\/p>\n

Future US role in Donbas negoti\u00ada\u00adtions unclear<\/h2>\n

As for Donbas, where fighting actually rages on a daily basis, there was no break\u00adthrough of any sort during the visit. However, this does not mean, that there will be no news on this front in the coming months. Zelenskyy appar\u00adently asked Biden to consider a greater US role in the negoti\u00ada\u00adtions for a resolution. This may take the form of Washington joining the so-called Normandy format \u2014 even though it is not our expec\u00adtation that it will do so \u2013 or the launch of another format or simply a doubling down of the US efforts in this regard. Whether Biden will fill the position of Special Repre\u00adsen\u00adtative for Ukraine (respon\u00adsible for Donbas), which has been vacant since Kurt Volker\u2019s resig\u00adnation in September 2019, remains to be seen.<\/p>\n

The Joint Statement also reiterates American support for Ukraine\u2019s Euro-Atlantic aspira\u00adtions. This means that Washington believes that Ukraine should be in NATO some day \u2013 but not any time soon. By only supporting a perspective, the current admin\u00adis\u00adtration (like the two before it) refrains from promoting the prospect of Ukraine receiving a Membership Action Plan (MAP) as of now. This is based on the under\u00adstanding that multiple NATO states still oppose such a move. This is the long legacy of the 2008 NATO Bucharest summit, when the admin\u00adis\u00adtration of George W. Bush pushed for granting MAP to Ukraine only to find itself without proper support from other alliance members.<\/p>\n

The Joint Statement becomes most specific where it speaks about the future of Ukraine\u2019s reform effort, specif\u00adi\u00adcally in the judiciary. Here it actually resembles a homework with clearly stated particular tasks. This makes this document rather unprece\u00addented in the history of US-Ukrainian relations, really putting Kyiv on the spot. Ukraine\u2019s leaders no longer can allow themselves to say or pretend that they did not know what is expected of them.<\/p>\n

Prevent Nord Stream 2 from becoming a permanent bone of contention<\/h2>\n

Finally, the critical issue of energy is also addressed. The Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline has become a major point of contention between Kyiv and Washington in recent months. The Biden administration\u2019s decision to waive sanctions against the pipeline\u2019s construction, which will deal a severe blow to Ukraine\u2019s position as a transiter of Russian gas, caused quite an uproar in Ukraine, with Zelenskyy adding his voice to it. This was a moment when Ukrainians were bluntly reminded that the US has other vital interests and prior\u00adities, some of which may not coincide with Ukraine\u2019s. It is our view that every\u00adthing should be done to prevent Nord Stream 2 from becoming a permanent bone of contention between both partners, preventing cooper\u00adation in many other vital areas.<\/p>\n

All in all, this was an intensive meeting, which somewhat jolted Ukraine-US relations in a positive way, reaffirmed the strategic partnership (along with reviving the Strategic Partnership Commission), showed that common interests are many and left us cautiously optimistic for the future of bilateral relations.<\/p>\n

\n

Dr. Volodymyr Dubovyk is Associate Pro\u00adfes\u00adsor at the Inter\u00adna\u00adtional Relations Department of the I. I. Mech\u00adnikov National University in Odesa<\/em><\/i><\/p>\n

\"Textende\"[\/vc_column_text][vc_separator][vc_column_text]Did you like thike this article? If yes, you can support the independent editorial work and journalism of LibMod via a simple donation tool.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]