Kiev rocks as WTO rolls out $1tn deal

Jonathan Lindsell, 9 December 2013

Prince Grigory Potemkin-Tavricheski was a favourite of Empress Catherine, the Russian leader who brought about the golden age of expansion in the eighteenth century. After the annexation of Ukraine and the Crimea, Catherine appointed Grigory as governor-general of the new provinces with orders to modernise and rebuild the war-torn region. Unfortunately Grigory wasn’t very good at rebuilding the land, being primarily a military man, so when the Empress visited he simply erected fake villages along her route to give the impression of progress. Rumour has it, he even employed cheerful, healthy actors to play happy peasants along the Dnieper River.

The term ‘Potemkin Village’ has entered the English language as a hollow or false construct. The people of Ukraine would do well to remember its origins in their homeland. Protests in Kiev have entered their third week, with over 500,000 occupying Independence Square and City Hall, agitating for the resignation of the Azarov-Yanukovych government, the freedom of jailed opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko, and closer ties with the European Union.  As a symbolic rejection of Russian power they toppled a longstanding statue of Vladimir Lenin, encouraged by ‘Dr Ironfist’ Vitali Klitschko, boxing champion, PhD and opposition MP.

‘Revolution!’ chant the protesters. Why, then, such enthusiasm for the EU? Many Ukrainians believe that membership would guarantee them human rights or stability, but this is a false promise. The EU might represent progress, but won’t actually do much good: prospective member states need to already meet certain democratic and human rights ‘benchmarks’ before they’re allowed in. Putin’s influence has to go. If Ukraine can achieve this alone, there’s no need for to actually make the final step. Indeed, doing so would be to transfer one external influence for another.

Nor is there economic need for any closer association with Brussels than a free trade deal, as All-Ukranian Fatherland leader Arseniy Yatsenyuk claims. Just this weekend, the 159 countries of the World Trade Organisation concluded the ‘Bali Package’. Director-General Roberto Azevêdo announced that this agreement would develop infrastructure and focus on ‘non tariff barriers’ which block developing nations, such as customs bureaucracy and quotas. Washington thinktank PIIE estimates the deal will be worth $1 trillion to the world economy, and 20 million jobs. Meanwhile David Cameron hailed a ‘historic’ agreement worth £600 million to Britain.

If a country is committed to free-trade principles, this represents true ‘globalism’ – unlike the EU’s customs union and external tariff, which is essentially regional favouritism on a large scale. Future WTO goals include reductions in farming subsidies, industrial goods tariffs, and liberalisation/recognition of services trade. Here both the Ukraine and a post-EU Britain could advance their causes at the top table. As it is, Britain is represented as one twenty-eighth of the European Union’s seat. The Commission calls the shots.

So EU membership is actually worse than a Potemkin Village – it isn’t just the absence of independence and influence, but a distinct diminution of it.