The Ukrainian Military And Civil Military Relations In The Post Cold War Era

This book examines how civil-military relations have been transformed in Russia, Poland, Hungary and Ukraine since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact in 1991. It shows how these countries have worked to reform their obsolete armed forces, and bring them into line with the new economic and strategic realities of the post-Cold War world, with new bureaucratic structures in which civilians play the key policy-making roles, and with strengthened democratic political institutions which have the right to oversee the armed forces.

Fifteen new independent entities were propelled by national security imperatives to create their own armed forces once the Soviet Union was dissolved. That process varied from state to state because of differences in interests and resources. An instructive example is Ukraine, perhaps the most important of the emergent states after Russia. A country of 52 million people, the size of France, and rich in natural resources, it could be destined to play a central role in the new geopolitical environment of eastern and central Europe. The speed of the Soviet Union's breakup left its forces practically intact where they were deployed. While Russia proper retained the second-rate forces that were previously part of the central strategic reserve, the former republics on the western frontier, especially Ukraine and Belarus, inherited first-class force packages which were part of the second strategic echelon of the Warsaw Pact. Each of the newly independent states has dealt differently with its military inheritance. Ukraine decided to nationalize former Soviet forces stationed on its territory, the first former Soviet republic to do so. Over 700,000 ground, air, and air defense forces along with 500,000 paramilitary troops were based in Ukraine. Motivated by national (regional) patriotism and economic considerations, most remained and swore allegiance to the new state. Only 20,000 officers departed to Russia or other former republics. As approved by the Supreme Rada, the major tenets of military doctrine are preventing war, building the armed forces, and repelling aggression. This article discusses Ukraine's actions to reform the military in the areas of force reduction, military reeducation, force conversion and quality of life, ethnic relations, language of command, civil-military relations, force structure, readiness, and Ukraine-U.S. relations. (1 figure, 5 photographs).

From the earliest times of its post-Soviet independence, Ukraine has been open to security cooperation with the United States. In the beginning, there were significant differences in political, security and even bureaucratic cultures between the two countries, which formed some obstacles to building bridges quickly. Many of these obstacles remain, especially in the political dimension of relations between the two countries. But in the absence of their former ideological differences and united by common interests in preserving international peace and fighting terrorism, Ukraine and the United States have established constructive and mutually beneficial military cooperation. The United States has been interested in engaging post-Soviet Ukraine in security cooperation and clearly articulated what it wanted to achieve from this cooperation. It was in U.S. interests to have a strong, independent, stable, and democratic Ukraine as a partner in Eastern Europe. Guided by such a vision, the United States consistently has demonstrated initiative in supporting Ukraine in building its national military by engaging it in peacetime military- to-military contacts. The Ukrainian government unhesitatingly accepted U.S. leadership in bilateral military cooperation, which has provided it with an opportunity to learn useful approaches to defense reform, raised Ukraine's international prestige, and strengthened the country's position vis-a-vis the pressure for regional influence exerted by its neighbor (and regional dominant power), Russia.

This thesis analyzes three case studies that chronologically review the main factors that influence the creation of the system of civil control over the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The first case analyzes the period of time before the collapse of the Soviet Union. The second case examines the creation of the Armed Forces of Ukraine from 1991 until 2000. The third case reviews the present system of civil-military relations in Ukraine, The conclusion summarize all findings of the three case studies and states that neglect of the defense issues today will lead to the risk of losing statehood tomorrow or shifting responsibility and financial burden to the future generations, Only a well funded and well-defined program of reform can help to build modern, highly capable, professional western type Armed Forces with good quality civil control over the military, Ukraine has great experience of building and reforming its military structure and system of civil control, The best proof of this is that Ukraine prevented involvement of the army in politics.

This thesis analyses the strategy of modern Ukrainian - U.S. defense and military relations in three areas: Defense Relations; Military Relations; and Civil-Military Relations. These relations are assessed in terms of their adequacy to obtain Ukraine's overall strategic goals. The quantity and complexity of the U.S. defense and military engagement programs towards Ukraine have made the entire coordination process fragmented. The thesis concludes that the recent goals and objectives of existing relations should be concentrated on the Ukrainian Armed Forces transition to democratic civil-military relations. The transformation of the Ukrainian Armed Forces is essential to maintaining progress toward the development of stable and democratic civil-military relations in Ukraine and its armed forces that are prepared to assume their place within European and Transatlantic Security.

From the earliest times of its post-Soviet independence, Ukraine has been open to security cooperation with the United States. In the beginning, there were significant differences in political, security and even bureaucratic cultures between the two countries, which formed some obstacles to building bridges quickly. Many of these obstacles remain, especially in the political dimension of relations between the two countries. But in the absence of their former ideological differences and united by common interests in preserving international peace and fighting terrorism, Ukraine and the United States have established constructive and mutually beneficial military cooperation. The United States has been interested in engaging post-Soviet Ukraine in security cooperation and clearly articulated what it wanted to achieve from this cooperation. It was in U.S. interests to have a strong, independent, stable, and democratic Ukraine as a partner in Eastern Europe. Guided by such a vision, the United States consistently has demonstrated initiative in supporting Ukraine in building its national military by engaging it in peacetime military- to-military contacts. The Ukrainian government unhesitatingly accepted U.S. leadership in bilateral military cooperation, which has provided it with an opportunity to learn useful approaches to defense reform, raised Ukraine's international prestige, and strengthened the country's position vis-a-vis the pressure for regional influence exerted by its neighbor (and regional dominant power), Russia.

America's new allies in Central and Eastern Europe have been struggling with defense reform since the end of the Cold War. Only recently, since the Orange Revolution, has Ukraine's national political and military leadership seriously engaged the process of radical and comprehensive defense reform. Dr. Marybeth Ulrich applies the various roadmaps for reform developed in the post-communist states of Central European states to the emerging Ukrainian case. She draws upon this mixed picture to suggest a framework focused on key areas in need of reform, as well as key conditions that will facilitate the achievement of reform objectives. The result is a richly developed case study revealing Ukraine's main strengths as well as obstacles limiting the improvement of its military capabilities.