It may not be entirely and absolutely correct, but I would describe the situation in the following manner. The concentration of militant national radical Russophobes in Ukrainian politics and the government, and the chauvinists in Russia has already reached a critical level. Should we fail to stem this trend, our countries and people, though preserving ostensibly decent neighbourly relations, will become more and more alienated.

The entry into NATO (which may happen as early as 2007-2008 or even earlier) will move the Eastern frontiers of the Alliance out to our border with Russia. This will transform our country into an outpost of the American empire. I should hope that Ukraine would not become a country hostile to Russia, though it can be so. 1 need not say more what this could mean mainly for Ukraine, but for Russia as well.

According to the plans of creating a "Great Europe" developed by western strategists, which if fulfilled should result in the entry of Ukraine, Trans-Caucasian republics, and Moldova into NATO, Brace Jackson, one of authors of this plan, observed in a September 2003 conversation with me, "As a matter of fact, this would include Belarus". The "Great Europe", as a result, would consolidate the entire European continent, except Russia.

And here is how the chief of the Ukrainian foreign policy department explains Ukraine's refusal from multi-vector policy and orientation of its foreign policy solely towards European and Euro-Atlantic integration. Like earlier, Ukraine should have built up its defence on all perimeters, while after joining the NATO this would not be required any more. Against whom will Ukraine build up its defence? And why in the given conditions are our western neighbours Poland, Slovakia, others, reinforcing their borders with Ukraine as they never did before, even during the "cold war"?

Obviously, it leads to serious complications in the functioning of Ukraine's and Russia's military-industrial complexes, which are closely integrated. Many high technologies will be lost, while the major highly organised industrial and scientific institutions will be destroyed. We already have irretrievably lost and will sustain losses to our highly qualified workforce, including workers, experts, designers, and scientists.

Do I have to explain that this is just what the West needs?

Will our leaders have the desire and political will to give this an objective assessment, proceeding from the national interests, considering that no one in the West, especially in the EU, is seriously awaiting Ukraine and that all the West, including NATO, needs is the huge territory, a springboard under Russia's soft belly, a huge source of cheap labour, a seller's market of goods, and a dangerous waste storing ground? I am convinced: we must place every effort to curb the further dangerous succession of events.

We must develop and deepen economic, scientific, cultural relations to give a more businesslike and con-structive character to our inter-parliamentary co-operation. We have good experience in establishing co-operation between regions. We must capitalise on this.

One must also not forget about the almost 13 million Ukrainian citizens who definitely voted, not for Viktor Yanukovych, but for strengthening ties with Russia, against the surrender to the dictatorship of the West, and its transformation into a puppet of the USA and NATO. I am convinced that these issues will be in the spotlight during the upcoming parliamentary elections. This too must be taken into consideration.

PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS OF СО-ОРЕІ ATION BETWEEN UKRAINE AND RUSSIA IN THE ASSESSMENTS OF UKRAINIAN CITIZENS

1. Russia in the system of geopolitical priorities of Ukrainian citizens

Judging by the dynamics of assessments, co-operation along two lines, with Russia and the EU countries, are the two priorities that Ukrainian society steadily supports.

In 2004, compared to the previous years, the overall number of those who give priority to co-operation between Kyiv and Moscow has increased. By contrast, the level of support for ties with EU countries fell during the election campaign (summer-autumn, 200і!), as the state propaganda machine unleashed its massive anti-Western campaign. But at the end of 2004 and the beginning of 2005, this indicator rose as a result of the change in the Information climate and a sharp political and diplomatic surge of the country's new leadership towards co-operation with the EU. Apparently, the growth of European sympathies in Ukrainian society happened mainly due to a decline in the number of proponents of co-operation with the CIS. In February 2005, the "index cf priority" of ties with the commonwealth states fell to a record low of 7.7%. The reasons for this include the ineffectiveness of commonwealth activity (discussed below).

The steadily cautious attitude of Ukrainian citizens to co-operation with the USA has not changed. The level of support for the priority of Ukraine-U.S. co-operation over the period under survey did not exceed 7%, in the past two years — 4%. The long period of "coldness" in the Ukraine-U,S. relations explains such scepticism. Obviously, the priority of ties with the U.S.