Denmark takes point in UkraineJanuary 30, 2017
With effect from 1st February The Kingdom of Denmark takes the EU lead when it comes to anti-corruption initiatives in Ukraine.
Naturally a reader wishes the Danish well in this endeavour. It will have obvious allies in civil society, some in the media, and government members such as Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze – and it will face obstructionism and populism in equal measure from the usual quarters within domestic politics, State institutions, some in the media, and big business too.
Where the EU Ambassador (and staff) to Ukraine figure in all this by way of leadership – if anywhere – remains somewhat unclear. Similarly the EEAS.
Clearly a decision within the EU has been made for Gov Denmark to officially take the anti-corruption lead within Ukraine – perhaps rightly. Just how to mark the EU”s scorecard when it comes to its physical presence in Ukraine, and by extension its accomplishments and/or failures on the ground?
What programmes are active? How are they benchmarked? Which have concluded? Were the goals achieved or partially achieved? What about failures? Why did they fail, and could they be tweaked to work within their scope?
Surely the results will not be as bad as many will think, but neither will it be as good as it could have been. C’est la vie!
Has Gov Denmark agreed to take on this lead role as it is felt that Gov DK to Gov UA will garner more results than EU Ambassador to Gov UA?
If this works, is it possible that other governments will then take EU backed lead roles on other specific Ukrainian sectors (outside of corruption and military issues) to push a reticent and feckless elite along the Association Agreement path a little more swiftly? Certainly some have already tried unilaterally, but perhaps an EU appointed lead focuses the minds of those in Kyiv a little more and makes excuses a little harder.
Let’s see how (a normally very capable) Denmark does.