Integration Mechanisms

Application of an effective reintegration model shall not be limited to revision of conceptual principles of formation and reproduction of Ukraine’s social integrity. A successive reintegration policy shall be based on a technology of forming and reproducing single spaces (in the economic, socio-political, cultural, information and civil security areas).

- Completion of the Single Economic Market

First and foremost, it is necessary to complete the Ukrainian single economic space. Available tools of control allow the government to stop the practice of placing artificial administrative and trade barriers in relations between the Ukrainian regions and territories. This does not require large financial resources and new legislative acts. Understanding of importance of the problem and political will of national authorities would be enough. National business associations could join the government because they suffer the heaviest losses from the shadow “feudal” barriers.

At the same time, administrative and political actions would be insufficient, if they are not attended with institutional changes. Only completion and institutionalization of the national capital,

commodity and labor markets could guarantee establishment and development of the single economic space in Ukraine. The government shall assume a function of market maker and support business and public initiatives for creation of national infrastructure of the stock, land, real estate and freelance markets.

- Model of Regional Reinvestment and Capital Mobility

The socio-economic disintegration evoked by the two-sector model cannot be overcome without intentional interference of the state. Recent events evidenced that existent quasi-market instruments alone cannot reestablish macro-economic balance. The government and large capital shall jointly look for tools and guarantee mechanisms that would ensure free mobility of surplus capital between the regions and industries. This would help to eliminate confrontation between exporters and manufacturers oriented to domestic market development. The government shall be the key actor in initiating, elaborating and implementing national development programs and projects with involvement of private and state-owned enterprises, banking institutions and investment companies.

- New Macro-Regions and Macro-Economic Clusters

The split of the Soviet system of industrial cooperation entailed disintegration of Ukrainian macro-economic division. For the time being, the Donbas is the only industrial macro-region. Over the period of Ukraine’s independence, no new powerful economic cluster, which could be the pillars of for new macro-regions, has been created.

Hence, a new regional policy must simultaneously set two objectives: create the new economic clusters as a basis for new macro-regions and establish infrastructure of macro-regional governance.

Should the government fail to form 3-5 economic clusters, it would be able to diversify sources of budget revenues and bridge gaps in economic development of the regions. Therefore, creation of the new economic clusters shall help to alleviate tension between the donor and recipient regions in the process of distribution of the national budget.

National authorities shall determine the number, type (industrial, scientific and technological, transport and communication) and regional geography of the new clusters. Regional state administrations shall mobilize resources for participation of economic entities in inter-regional (national) projects. Needless to say, none of administrative and territorial units (regions) will be able to independently create an economic cluster (industry) compliant with requirements of international competition. Even should a region launch a new cluster project, it would have to cooperate with other regions and be dependent upon public support both on the domestic and foreign markets.

- New Priorities of Ukraine’s Spatial Development

Ukraine is characterized by economic and socio-cultural discrepancies between the village and the city. Regional imbalance inherited from the former USSR is caused by existence of the quasi-urbanized and rural (industrial and agricultural) regions. Application of market and management instruments will not suit to bridge these gaps. Apparently, Ukraine will not be able to develop, if it fails to apply new approaches to placement of the production forces. Given the situation, traditional approaches of the period of industrial modernization either do not work or have the adverse effect.

It is necessary to put into practice up-to-date models of spatial development so that to redress regional imbalance.

First, Ukraine shall reject the extensive urbanization model based on the principle of internal colonialism. The village can no longer be the resource supplier and the market for the industrial city.

Second, city-millionaires shall lose their monopoly as the centers of location and development of science and technology due to Ukraine’s involvement in globalization processes and creation of post-industrial economic sectors. Not only city-millionaires but also other cities and regions will have a chance to be a basis for formation of any post-industrial and high technology sectors, if they are able to create favorable business and investment climate on their territories.

Finally, in view of interests of internal geo-policy, it is recommended to apply the spatial development strategy to Vinnytsya, the Kherson-Mykolaiv agglomeration, Poltava and Sevastopol.

These cities have high infrastructure and manpower potential to become the equalizers of Ukraine’s spatial development. Priority development of the triangle Vinnytsya-the Kherson-Mykolaiv agglomeration-Poltava and Kyiv-Sevastopol would enable the government to equalize quasi-urbanized cities in the southeastern regions, develop the Crimea and the northern Trans Black Sea territory.

- Infrastructure of Inter-Regional Socio-Cultural Exchanges

The government shall promote inter-regional cooperation and partnership between educational and cultural institutions.

Seeking to develop the single socio-cultural space, Ukraine must maintain and promote horizontal associative relations, national and international inter-regional cooperation in the humanitarian area.

Decentralization and development of the multidimensional socio-cultural space provide for creation of a prestigious nomination system. Specifically, it is necessary to elaborate and give socio-political definitions for “theatrical capital”, “silicon valley”, “festival pavilion”, “cross-cultural dialogue center”, “architectural museum” and “folk capital”. In Ukraine, there are enough cities and towns ready to compete for these nominations.

In the long run, it is the absence of political will that over 15 years prevented Ukraine from developing a system of youth and student inter-regional exchanges. We could hardly overcome regional isolation without expanding geography of youth exchanges, i.e. unless there are people, who live in the Crimea but have never been in the Transcarpathia, or those, who traveled all over Central Europe but have never seen the Black Sea. National identity requires personal experience and knowledge of Ukrainian regions: from the Transcarpathia to Luhansk, from the Black Sea to the Polissya etc.

- The Single Information Space and Information Security

Public information policy supported by the media plays the major role in implementation and promotion of reintegration policy. Its strategic tasks include creation and reproduction of the single information space and establishment of an effective system of information security in Ukraine. According to experts, Ukraine is the only state without the single information space.

Encouragement of the single information space and creation of the information security system shall prevent the use of the national information space by foreign entities (states, international organizations and multinationals) as a tool of influence on the course of internal economic and political developments.

Protection of Ukraine’s information space provides that the government shall assume responsibility for:

• Secure the right of citizens to receive unbiased, up-to-date and detailed information about the course of developments in Ukraine and in the world;

• Protect mass consciousness from information and psychological aggression against Ukrainian citizens;

• Prevent the use of the national information space for eroding national identity;

• Prevent the use of the national information space for fomentation of interethnic, inter-confessional and inter-regional hostility;

• Liquidate areas and territories generating and disseminating biased and misleading information about activities of national authorities.

Given limited time and money, the government shall meet the following challenges impeding consistent actions in the field of information security:

1. Political will and programs for enhancing effectiveness of the use of information infrastructure, which is directly or indirectly controlled by the government, are absent. The government shall resume its function of key actor on the market for creation, promotion and dissemination of information and knowledge . Implementation of public information and reintegration policies requires a network of state-owned and private media promoting these policies.

2. A system of monitoring and evaluation of the level of Ukraine’s information security, the role of the media in reintegration policy and reproduction of national identity is absent. The Ukrainian information space is especially vulnerable at the regional level because national authorities and politicians pay little attention to the course of events and their coverage in the local media. So, inter-regional and inter-ethnic stereotypes and distorted mentality of the population are formed and developed under the regional media’s influence.

3. A model of liberalization of infrastructure markets of the Ukrainian information and cultural spaces is deficient. As there is no legislative act on the foreign media in Ukraine, many media projects erode national identity and legitimacy of governmental agencies. It is necessary to organize and hold parliamentary hearings and a session of the National Security Defense Council on the current situation and perspectives of information security.

4. The absence of public control of information content poses the most serious problem of the Ukrainian information space. Specifically, Ukraine lacks policy geared toward support of the system of production, distribution and promotion of Ukrainian information products. Some regional authorities de facto pursue policy of information autarchy towards Ukrainian information products.

5. To make the Ukrainian content competitive in the national information space, the government shall create information infrastructure provision of first-hand information about world developments. Incidentally. Most Ukrainian media suffer from the absence of an effective network of journalists abroad. The Ukrainian media are not accredited at the international organizations. For this reason, even the national media have to report what others have said, use others’ videos and voice opinions about events they often do not share.

Instead of Conclusion

It is necessary to emphasize that the electoral split during the 2004 presidential elections was not evoked by historical and cultural differences of the Ukrainian regions. An accent on historical predestination of the election split and regional disintegration does not explain their reasons but implicitly substantiates a fatalistic perspective for Ukraine. As a matter of fact, the election split and growing interethnic (languages and religious) conflicts are not historical consequences but the results of the reintegration model’s collapse.

Reintegration shall mean the process of maintenance and management of a dynamic balance

between integration and disintegration elements or rightist and leftist tendencies of development of a state, nation and society. Reintegration is a result of public purpose policy and therefore cannot be achieved spontaneously or traditionally.

Consequences of the electoral split cannot be eliminated by means of campaigns or mottos in support of social peace and understanding. It is necessary to study and analyze socio-political mechanisms regulating economic, political and social reintegration/disintegration processes.

Internal factors of leftist trends and splits in Ukraine include the two-sector model of economy, regional autarchy, the centralist model of regional subsidiarity, influences of the neo-imperial status of the Ukrainian capital etc.

Disintegration may be eliminated by means of transition from the clan to the socio-political model of reintegration. It is not bureaucracy or political and economic clans but parties, civil society institutions and local self-government bodies that are the major promoters of the socio-political model of reintegration.

A new reintegration policy shall be based on a technology of forming and reproducing single spaces in Ukraine (in the economic, socio-political, cultural, information and civil security areas) Specifically, the following actions must be taken:

• Completion of the single economic market

• Application of the model of regional and industrial reinvestment

• Creation of new macro-economic clusters and implementation of inter-regional cooperation programs and projects

• Application of new priorities of Ukraine’s spatial development

• Establishment of infrastructure of inter-regional socio-cultural exchanges

• Formation of the single information space and the system of information security

• Implementation of socio-cultural projects towards integrating local (regional) identities into Ukraine’s national identity.

Analysis of Issues of Considering Soviet Heritage