"We cannot forget that present time is the time of giant corporations, and privatization is the process of elimination of our big corporations and transformation of them into little private oligarchic "firms". Under our conditions the large-scale privatization is a process, that thrusts us back (has already thrust back) to the early 20th c.”

The few-in-number dominant states are for status quo; it permits them to control one or more sectors of influence. The rest are doomed to live in poverty. The modern trend is the parasitism of powerful; in the circumstances it is both easy, and difficult to foretell the future of integration.

The modern world is multiform, and it means the following: if you make no decision, someone else will make it for you. And you may be sure, that it isn’t to your advantage, it will be for the benefit of decision-maker.

A great deal is up to Ukraine. Either it will be the EU neighbor for good, maintaining relations with it like Mexico with the United States of America, and will participate in processes as a “minor partner”. Or Ukraine will prove itself as an actor and will deal with the European Union at least like Canada and the USA, retaining possibility to join this structure in the future.

“Ukraine as a territory attracts world political players. Therefore I agree with those, who take no interest in Russian elections and takes a keen interest in the elections in the United States and Ukraine. The matter concerns two countries, which, on the one hand, can determine the landscape of world order (U.S.A.), and, on the other hand, determine the vector of conduct of Russia in the post-Soviet space (Ukraine)."

At first Ukraine proclaimed its integration into the EU, and then made a u-turn to Russia. It is the very essence of our hermetic policy: instead of stepping into the external markets, we close a considerable part of economic resources within the limits of the FSU. This means the new isolationism of Ukraine.

Today we should choose between our traditional commodities or cast aside our past and take priority of our competitive advantages. The CEA is the first track requiring deeper relations with Russia, because there is a lure of cheap energy resources. Another track consists in going into world markets and hi-tech development.

The globalization should not mean standardization. Global civilization will look nice only if it has the appearance of varicolored blanket, instead of “Black Square” of Malevich. There fore the main challenge is as follows: either we want to assimilate without identity which we failed to obtain, trying to trick history, or try and find our national individuality.

They tell that if Ukraine joins the CEA— association of four countries in which only Ukraine aspires to enter into the EU— it may be at variance with its Eurointegration intentions; it is nothing but nonsense! Quite the contrary, the entrance into the EU is the certain guarantee that Europe will not leave us on the roadside of civilization.

The concrete terms of entering into the EU are not that important. Certain economic standards are far more important for us. If we are a rich country, we will be asked to integrate.

There is no need to demonize buffer-zone issues; in fact the latter condition can strengthen the state system. If there is a choice—buffer or subjugated donor—let it be buffer which will create possibility of certain historical and cultural and economic breathing space.

We can not break from the world integration processes. As the saying goes, “the destiny guides the wise man and drives the unwise one.” Up to now we were driven by the destiny.

Ukraine shouldn’t stick its policy to somebody’s moods on the world scale. Until Ukrainians learn to effectively use external resources, Ukraine will not become a global state. But if it accepts and develops global values, it will be able to leave Europe behind.

The competitive conveniences need to be created in the process of technical development, retooling, education and training. The production value in ten new EU members will grow, and a part of investors already looks narrowly at the Ukrainian and Russian markets. But will Ukraine be able to take advantage of this "window of possibilities"? If zillion investments come tomorrow, will they find the necessary number of adequate laws, experienced managers and skilled hands?

One couldn’t find elsewhere in the world such public, intellectual or business elite, only 7% to 10% of which master English. The level of readiness of the Ukrainian elite for external communications is below that in African or Latin-American countries.

Today Ukraine has unfavorable terms for the entry into the WTO. We have already signed most protocols about the entry into the WTO, however, neither producers, nor researchers, nor even officials have any idea about the content of these agreements; only a limited circle of people knows, what positions Ukraine really "yielded" in these negotiations.

The world free market is endangered neither by the antiglobalists’ movement, nor by isolationist frame of mind, but by the lingering global depression being the inevitable result of two decades of Neoliberal globalization. It will but put an end to the present market order like the depression of 1929-32 put an end to classic capitalism.

It does not look like Ukraine becomes a mother country for a great number of TNCs. The world is split among the multinational corporations, and we have better chances to become a battle-field for TNCs striving to dominate on our territory.

If Ukraine aspires to become the valuable subject of global economic activity, go beyond the market of products of ferrous metallurgy or elementary chemistry, it has to create its own transnational structures.

Today globalization is an accomplished fact. However, both for Russia and for Ukraine the entry into the EU would be a sad blow. The newest EU members are sufferers. Prices have skyrocketed while the income of population has remained at the former level.

If we analyze the most widespread negative consequences of globalization, it is possible to speak about prevalence of richer countries in economic and even cultural spheres, as well as about commercialization of cultural values and submission to the interests of powerful TNCs.

Creation of real national corporations, and own TNCs in the long run is the main target of private business and state. The objective indexes show that the potential of the world usury is becoming exhausted, and the world economic paradigm will change in 10 to 15 years.

The alterglobalists stand for the globalization of the markets of knowledge, for the rating of the country in the new millennium to be determined by talent and intellect of its citizens. The innovative economy and knowledge will determine the competitiveness of a country, instead of military might and stick.