Search site
Action Ukraine Report

"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"
An International Newsletter
In-Depth Ukrainian News, Analysis, and Commentary

"The Art of Ukrainian History, Culture, Arts, Business, Religion,
Sports, Government, and Politics, in Ukraine and Around the World"

"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT" Year 04, Number 209
The Action Ukraine Coalition (AUC), Washington, D.C.
Ukrainian Federation of America (UFA), Huntingdon Valley, PA
morganw@patriot.net, ArtUkraine.com@starpower.net (ARTUIS)
Washington, D.C.; Kyiv, Ukraine, SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2004

-----INDEX OF ARTICLES-----
"Major International News Headlines and Articles"

1. "THIS IS A SEASON OF HOPE IN UKRAINE"
Opposition supporters should take hope: Slowly but surely, they're winning
OP-ED: by Valentyna Kolesnyk
Kyiv Post, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thursday, Nov 4, 2004

2. UKRAINE: "WHY YANUKOVYCH LOST ROUND ONE
AND WHY HE WILL LOSE IN ROUND TWO"
By Taras Kuzio, Eurasia Daily Monitor
Volume 1, Issue 121, The Jamestown Foundation
Washington, D.C., Friday, November 5, 2004

3. SOCIALIST PARTY TO SUPPORT VIKTOR YUSHCHENKO
FOR PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE
Party leader Oleksandr Moroz will take part in campaigning
TV 5 Kanal, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1600 gmt 5 Nov 04
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Friday Nov 05, 2004

4. NUMEROUS CASES OF VIOLATIONS AND FALSIFICATIONS
OCCURRED DURING FIRST PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ROUND
Conducting honest elections of the President of Ukraine
STATEMENT: Freedom of Choice Coalition of Ukrainian NGOs
Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, November 5, 2004

5. "HAS THE WEST LOST UKRAINE?"
Jane's Intelligence Digest, UK, Friday, November 5, 2004

6. "GEORGE BUSH WINS US ELECTION: WHAT DOES THIS
MEAN TO THE WORLD AND UKRAINE?"
COMMENTARY: By Lyuba Shara
Washington Correspondent, Ukrayinska Pravda
Ukrayinska Pravda web site, Kiev, in Ukrainian 4 Nov 04
BBC Monitoring, UK, in English, Thu, November 4, 2004

7. UKRAINE: YUSHCHENKO DENIES ANTI-RUSSIAN LEANING
Interfax-Ukraine news agency, Kiev, in Russian, 5 Nov 04
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Fri, Nov 5, 2004

8. UKRAINE PRIME MINISTER REJECTS PRESIDENTIAL
ELECTION TV DEBATES AGAINST VIKTOR YUSHCHENKO
By Ron Popeski, Reuters, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thu, Nov 4, 2004

9. HARD CURRENCY JITTERS CONTINUE IN WAKE OF ELECTION
National Bank spends billions in hard currency reserves
to beef up shaky hryvnya
By Roman Olearchyk, Kyiv Post Staff Writer
Kyiv Post, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thursday, Nov 4, 2004

10.THE FUTURE OF DEMOCRACY IN UKRAINE HINGES ON ELECTION
GUEST COLUMNIST: By Markian Dobczansky
The Daily Pennsylvanian, Independent Student
Newspaper of the University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Friday, November 5, 2004
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 209: ARTICLE NUMBER ONE
========================================================
1. "THIS IS A SEASON OF HOPE IN UKRAINE"
Opposition supporters should take hope: Slowly but surely, they're winning

OP-ED: by Valentyna Kolesnyk
Kyiv Post, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thursday, Nov 4, 2004

When I was a child, I remember, Election Day always brought with it a bright
sense of holiday. Festively-dressed Soviet families went to polling stations
together to vote for the single Communist candidate on the ballot. Since the
election procedure was a mere formality, they came to see their relatives
and friends, to talk and to knock back a couple of glasses at the
traditionally well-stocked election buffet.

On Oct. 31, the atmosphere was similar to the one I remember from the old
days - festive and exciting. The difference was that now people were really
going to make a choice - they were going to choose their president, and
their country's future.

I saw crowded polling stations, numerous observers sent by the presidential
candidates and the watchdog groups treading on each other's feet, and an
old man with a stick in one hand and the Ukrainian Constitution in the
other, arguing with commission members to let him vote. Another guy
begged to be allowed to vote again, since he'd spoiled his ballot by
circling
the name of his candidate and putting a big exclamation point next to it.

In such an optimistic environment one could even believe that opposition
candidate Viktor Yushchenko would win the election. After the sudden blast
of disappointment on Nov. 1, when the Central Election Commission announced
that Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych was ahead, my optimism returned.
Later, when the CEC drop by drop - as if unwillingly - squeezed out
percentage points in favor of Yushchenko, my feelings became even stronger:
Yushchenko was eventually going to win the election, whatever the results of
the first round. He was going to win on the basis of the clear historical
logic that was informing the moment; on the basis of a clear demand being
articulated by Ukrainian society.

With its high turnout and level of civic awareness, this election testified
to a strong expectation and desire for change in the population. Most
Ukrainians understood that, as a populace, they are developing into a
powerful force in this country, and that the corrupt Ukrainian authorities
aren't almighty.

Despite all the irregularities in the voter lists (many of which managed to
get corrected), the seemingly purposeful disorder the local authorities
stirred up, and the sporadic violence and intimidation at the polls, people
still ensured that the authorities didn't get away with large-scale fraud or
violence.

Even if Yanukovych officially wins the first round, Yushchenko still has the
psychological and moral advantage. And despite the unequal conditions under
which Yushchenko was forced to campaign, and all the dirty tricks and
underhanded methods used against him, he still managed to pull off a tie
with the boss man with the big guns. Yanukovych's .66 percent lead, which
the martyrs of the CEC are heroically managing to maintain, looks artificial
and ridiculous to many Ukrainian voters. It even inspires their contempt.

The main struggle in this campaign is unfolding not in the space defined by
economic and social issues, where Yanukovych has acquitted himself with a
certain demagoguery, as was evident when he recently raised pensions. It's
rather unfolding in the sphere of ideas. The candidates' economic and social
programs do not radically differ, after all, and the prime minister's
pre-election "economic miracle" and distribution of economic goodies to
voters didn't do him much good.

No, it's about ideas. Yushchenko embodies the idea of change, and
Yanukovych embodies the idea of preserving the status quo. His relative
success in the first election round proves that a corrupt and dishonest
power can fight skillfully for its life when it finds itself cornered.

Yanukovych, like him or not, is perceived as the heir to the current power
structure, one that has its roots in the Soviet era and was modified during
the respective presidencies of former Communist party ideologist Leonid
Kravchuk and the Soviet factory boss Leonid Kuchma - without losing its
corrupt and abusive character.

Yanukovych's contribution has been to add a strong criminal flavor to that
power, for which Ukrainians long ago lost their respect. For many
Ukrainians, the idea of Yanukovych as president is hardly conceivable. It
sounds like a nightmare. This election indicated that society is ready to
take another step away from its Soviet past and old-style bosses; and that
the Communist and Socialist candidates took little more than five percent
each of the vote shows that the phenomena that they represent are receding
into history.

So it's Yushchenko who embodies the Ukrainian demand for change, for
a real civil society, for the development of a specifically Ukrainian type
of democracy.
LINES ON THE MAP
But if Yushchenko has an advantage over his rival, the situation shouldn't
be glossed over. Sixteen oblasts voted for Yushchenko - but nine voted for
Yanukovych, and commandingly. If the line that separates Ukraine into
separate Yushchenko and Yanukovych camps was ultimately drawn more to
the north and east than the prime minister would have liked it to be, it is
nonetheless a reality.

Yes, many voters in Donbas and Luhansk oblast were intimidated or forced
into voting for Yanukovych. But it's also true that many willingly voted for
him. That means that for the electorate in the east, Yanukovych is easier
to digest than Yushchenko. The opposition leader obviously failed to
change that. For whatever reasons, he didn't manage to become the leader
of the whole nation.

As the stakes in this election are high, it's likely that the authorities
will try to falsify the results again, but next time in a more subtle and
sophisticated way, concentrating all their energy on the areas that proved
"problematic" in the first round. Still, Yushchenko has a powerful advantage
on his side. That advantage is hope, and his team still has the chance to
turn it into real political energy. It's time to take the readiness to stand
up for themselves that people demonstrated on Oct. 31 and intensify it. It's
time to mobilize all opposition supporters, and give them clear signals that
they should defend their rights in the courts, at peaceful and legal
demonstrations, and at the polls.

A Yanukovych political consultant once admitted that under a President
Yanukovych, Ukraine might be politically stable and economically thriving,
but it wouldn't be happy. For many Ukrainians, it would mean that they had
again failed to achieve their freedom. But one should fight for one's
happiness. And the opposition, along with their sympathizers, have three
weeks to do exactly that - with some anxiety, but a lot of hope. -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valentyna Kolesnyk is the Post's Opinion Editor and can be
contacted at e-mail: kolesnyk@kyivpost.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINK: http://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/oped/21749/
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.209: ARTICLE NUMBER TWO
=======================================================
2. "UKRAINE: WHY YANUKOVYCH LOST ROUND ONE
AND WHY HE WILL LOSE IN ROUND TWO"

By Taras Kuzio, Eurasia Daily Monitor
Volume 1, Issue 121, The Jamestown Foundation
Washington, D.C., Friday, November 5, 2004

Five days after the election, the final results are still not declared in
Ukraine's presidential election. Nevertheless, as opposition candidate
Viktor Yushchenko declared: "Whatever the authorities might say to us,"
he won the first round. "And, in the second round we shall finalize this
victory," he added (Ukrayinska pravda, November 4). Final results from
exit polls showed Yushchenko in the lead over Prime Minister Viktor
Yanukovych by 6.8% in one poll, and by 0.9% in another.

Western governments and election-monitoring organizations have criticized
the four-month-long election campaign, with its massive abuse of state
administrative resources, biased media, voter intimidation, and vote
tabulation fraud. All of these factors worked in Yanukovych's favor,
enabling him to increase his core support in his home region of Donetsk
and among state officials from 20-25% to 40%.

Another source of support for Yanukovych came from Communist Party
pensioners bribed by a doubling of pensions in early October. They were
also attracted by his new policies in favor of dual citizenship and Russian
as a second state language. A vicious smear campaign depicting
Yushchenko as an American stooge also attracted some left-wing voters.

Having lost round one, there is little the Yanukovych camp can do to win the
second round on November 21. They deployed a full range of electoral
malpractices in the first round, but many of these attempts failed because
of the mass mobilization of opposition supporters. It will be difficult to
use the same tactics in round two. The opposition will be better prepared to
prevent fraud and international observers will be more vigilant.

If additional votes cannot be obtained from voter fraud, what other tactics
are possible? Bribing pensioners will be impossible as Ukraine's budget,
hryvnia exchange rate, and inflation rate are still reeling from the
doubling of pensions last month. Playing the "Russian card," which Russian
political advisors so hoped would bring Yanukovych a massive majority, also
failed. Those voters already pro-Russia (i.e. Communist pensioners) have
already switched to Yanukovych. The "Russian card" attracted few
non-communist voters for three reasons.

First, today's Ukraine is very different from 1994, when Leonid Kuchma
successfully used the "Russian card" against incumbent Leonid Kravchuk.
Despite massive attempts to portray Yushchenko in a Soviet-style campaign
as a pro-American "nationalist," this failed to produce the same results as
in 1994 when Kuchma labelled Kravchuk as a "nationalist."

Second, Russia's heavy-handed intervention -- including President Vladimir
Putin's ill-timed appearance at a military parade in Kyiv brought forward by
a week -- backfired, especially in Kyiv where Yushchenko won by a landslide.
Interestingly, one day after the elections, Russian Security Council
Secretary Igor Ivanov said Russia would be willing to work with either
candidate. This was a clear signal that Russia is less than confident of a
Yanukovych victory.

Third, the attempt to repeat Kuchma's 1994 success by making this year's
race also a contest between "nationalists" and "Russophiles" failed. A
decade later, the issues are different and Yushchenko does not come across
as a "nationalist" to most Ukrainian voters.

Two reasons why this year's elections are different from 1994 are the
results from central Ukraine and the role of the left. In 1994 Kuchma won
more of central Ukraine than did Kravchuk. In this year's elections,
Yushchenko swept central Ukraine and, according to exit polls, also won
the southern Ukrainian Kherson oblast.

The left (Communist Petro Symonenko, Socialist Oleksandr Moroz, and
Progressive Socialist Natalie Vitrenko) received a combined vote of 13%. In
the 1994 elections, Kuchma won all of the left vote in round one. In this
year's elections only Vitrenko tried the nationalist argument (Ukrayinska
pravda, November 3). Vitrenko's 1.5% support for Yanukovych will be
offset by the 1% won by Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs head
Anatoliy Kinakh, which will now go to Yushchenko.

On November 4, 127 out of 130 delegates at a Communist Party Central
Committee plenum voted to not back either of the two remaining candidates.
If the Communists had backed Yanukovych, they might have only discredited
themselves ahead of the March 2006 parliamentary elections. Yanukovych had
already bribed most Communist voters in round one, and there were only 5%
left who could have still defect in round two. This is now not the case,
despite desperate attempts to court the left by Yanukovych.

The Communists were also perplexed because the Socialists bested them for
the first time. The Socialists have always ruled out backing Yanukovych and
do not recognize his claim to victory in round one. The Socialists are in
the midst of what are likely to be very fruitful negotiations with the
Yushchenko camp. Their demands include Yushchenko's promise, if elected,
to support constitutional reforms, halt the sale of land, and support social
welfare policies.

The second round will also be decided by defections from the
pro-presidential camp. Here there are more similarities to the 1994
elections. One reason for Yanukovych's poor performance in round one is the
lack of full support given to him by some regional officials and members of
political parties who are his allies on paper. In reality, many have sat on
the fence, preferring to remain neutral. Many of them do not feel threatened
by a Yushchenko victory.

The creeping defection of ruling elites from the Yanukovych camp could be
seen in the collapse of the parliamentary majority in September. On election
day, Yushchenko ally Yulia Tymoshenko announced that agreement had already
been reached by 233 deputies to create a new pro-Yushchenko majority.

Parliamentary speaker and head of the Agrarian Party Volodymyr Lytvyn stated
that he would be happy with either of the two leading candidates. Lytvyn's
relations with the Yanukovych camp declined in September-October after he
prevented them from adjourning parliament until after the elections in a
failed attempt to deprive the opposition of a public platform. Lytvyn was
also instrumental in supporting the creation of a parliamentary committee to
investigate election violations.

Other former members of the pro-presidential camp were personally insulted
by their coarse treatment from Viktor Medvedchuk, head of the presidential
administration. Former Kuchma adviser Oleksandr Volkov, who was heavily
involved in Kuchma's 1999 re-election campaign, began courting Yushchenko.
Another was Yevhen Marchuk who was angered after he learned from the media
that he had been removed as Defense Minister. His first interview was then
deliberately given to Yushchenko's Our Ukraine Channel 5. Kinakh was also
angered by the manner in which he was removed as prime minister to give the
post to Yanukovych.

Outgoing President Kuchma will also play an important role. He is unlikely
to support the extreme position advocated by Medvedchuk, namely to use all
available means, including violence, to guarantee that Yushchenko is not
elected. This extremism has little support among the Kuchma camp except for
Medvedchuk, because he has no future in Ukraine if Yushchenko is elected
president.

An alternative path devised by Kuchma's son-in-law, Viktor Pinchuk, is for
Kuchma to become an international statesman, which a violent end to his
decade in office would not permit. Pinchuk has brought many American VIPs to
Ukraine to meet Kuchma. One such visit by former President George H. W.
Bush paid off when Kuchma met President George W. Bush during the 2004
Istanbul NATO summit. The former Foreign Ministry building close to the
presidential administration has been renovated to be Kuchma's new
international foundation, where Pinchuk envisages him following in former
Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev's footsteps as an international
statesman.

Taken together, these factors suggest that, short of Medvedchuk being
allowed to use violence to prevent a Yushchenko victory in round two, the
odds are heavily stacked against Yanukovych. The tide is therefore flowing
towards a Yushchenko victory in round two. -30-
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Taras Kuzio is a Visiting Professor at the Institute for European Russian
and Eurasian Studies, Elliott School of International Affairs, George
Washington University, Washington, DC, tkuzio@gwu.edu;
www.ieres.org; www.taraskuzio.net; www.jamestown.org.
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.209: ARTICLE NUMBER THREE
=======================================================
3. SOCIALIST PARTY TO SUPPORT VIKTOR YUSHCHENKO
FOR PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE
Party leader Oleksandr Moroz will take part in campaigning

TV 5 Kanal, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1600 gmt 5 Nov 04
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Friday Nov 05, 2004

KIEV - [Presenter] The political highlight of Friday [5 November] is
the news that the political executive committee of the Socialist Party [of
Ukraine, SPU, led by Oleksandr Moroz] has supported [opposition
candidate] Viktor Yushchenko's proposal and decided to sign an
agreement to support him in the second round [of the presidential
election]. The decision has to be approved by the SPU political council
tomorrow.

[Oleksandr Zinchenko, head of Yushchenko's election campaign,
speaking at a news conference] This means that the Socialist Party of
Ukraine will support one candidate, Viktor Andriyovych Yushchenko,
in the election on 21 November.

[Petro Poroshenko, Yushchenko's associate, interrupting] And Oleksandr
Moroz will take part in campaigning ahead of the second round [in which
Yushchenko is facing Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych].

[Presenter] As regards other candidates, it is already known that
Progressive Socialist leader Nataliya Vitrenko has stated her support for
Viktor Yanukovych. The leader of the Party of Industrialists and
Entrepreneurs, Anatoliy Kinakh, will not back Yanukovych for sure.
Communist leader Petro Symonenko and Unity party leader Oleksandr
Omelchenko have said that they will support neither of the candidates.
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.209: ARTICLE NUMBER FOUR
Your comments about the Report are always welcome
========================================================
4. NUMEROUS CASES OF VIOLATIONS AND FALSIFICATIONS
OCCURRED DURING FIRST PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ROUND
Conducting honest elections of the President of Ukraine

STATEMENT: Freedom of Choice Coalition of Ukrainian NGOs
Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, November 5, 2004

KYIV - Freedom of Choice Coalition of Ukrainian NGOs expresses
its concern over the numerous cases of violations and falsifications
that occurred during the first round of the elections of President of
Ukraine 2004.

Among them, we emphasize first of all: inaccuracies in the voter
lists, errors in the ballots, machination with the ballots,
illegitimate stuffing of the ballots, illegal intrusion into the work
of the district and territorial elections commissions. Additionally it
should be emphasized that one of the most wide spread technologies
of the elections' falsification was the repeated voting on the basis of
the certificates that allow voting in another place than the one of
residence.

Freedom of Choice Coalition points out the problems in organization
and conducting voting on the polling stations abroad, due to which
the predominant part of Ukrainian citizens that stay abroad didn't
have a possibility to realize the Constitutional right to vote in the
first round of elections.

Freedom of Choice Coalition expresses its indignation about the
attacks on the sites of the information service Hotline
(www.hotline.net.ua {http://www.hotline.net.ua/}),, civic campaign
PORA (www.pora.org.ua (http://www.pora.org.ua/) and the
Freedom of Choice Coalition (www.coaliton.org.ua)
(http://www.coaliton.org.ua/}) on election day and the following
night. These attacks blocked the operative delivery of the
information on the course of elections.

We express our anxiety about the activities of the Central Election
Commission that without justifications keeps delaying the
announcement of the official results of the first round of the
elections of President of Ukraine 2004.

With the purpose of ensuring transparent, democratic and legitimate
process of voting during the second round of the elections of
President of Ukraine 2004 and eliminating the grounds for the
large-scale falsification of the elections, Freedom of Choice
Coalition of Ukrainian NGOs demands from the state authorities,
law-enforcement bodies, local administrations and councils to take
all necessary steps towards not allowing those violations that
occurred during the first election round.

We insist upon the necessity of the thorough checking of the voter
lists, ensuring absence of pressure on the members of elections
commissions of all levels, creating conditions for the efficient work
of observers during voting.

Freedom of Choice Coalition demands to draw to all the guilty in
committing violations during voting the first round of the elections
to administrative and criminal liability according to the Ukrainian
legislation currently in force.

We suppose that it is necessary to introduce necessary amendments
to the electoral legislation of Ukraine so that the voting conditions
will be improved and the violations of electoral process will be
prevented.

Namely, we support the idea of introducing the procedure of putting
stamps into a voter's passport after receiving a ballot, which was
suggested by the speaker of Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. We consider
that putting a stamp with indication of the voting date into a state
passport right after a voter receives a ballot represents an
efficient mechanism of repeated voting by the same persons, which
use certificates that allow voting in another place than the one of
residence. This is also a necessary step in the direction of
improving the elections standards.

Freedom of Choice Coalition expresses the firm belief that approving
the respective law drafts still before the run-off expresses the
interests of the civil society of Ukraine and of all without
exception political forces that aspire the honest and transparent
elections.

Moreover, we emphasize the need of holding live TV-debate between
the candidates for Presidency before the run-off. We consider such
TV-debate a key guarantee for ensuring the conscious self-will of
voters in the second round and democratic process of elections of the
President Ukraine. -30- [Action Ukraine Monitoring Service]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
press@coalition.org.ua; info@coalition.org.ua; www.Coalition.org.ua
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.209: ARTICLE NUMBER FIVE
========================================================
5. "HAS THE WEST LOST UKRAINE?"

Jane's Intelligence Digest, United Kingdom
Friday, November 5, 2004

As Ukraine heads for a second round run-off in its presidential election on
21 November, a JID regional correspondent investigates allegations of
widespread fraud and examines the sinister role the Kremlin has played in a
bitter campaign. The stakes are high for both Russia and the West.

Ukraine's elections closed on 31 October with exit polls giving the
opposition candidate, Viktor Yushchenko, a six-per-cent lead over his main
rival, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, who is outgoing President Leonid
Kuchma's chosen successor. The Communist and Socialist candidates were
trailing far behind.

These exit polls conflict with declared official results from 94 per cent of
constituencies which show Yanukovych in the lead by a 0.9 per cent. Parallel
vote counting by the opposition had given Yushchenko a 20 per cent lead.

The opposition is challenging these results and thousands of its supporters
have rallied in Kiev to protest against alleged election fraud. Meanwhile,
Interior Ministry troops and riot police are deployed throughout the capital
in an effort to thwart a repeat of the democratic revolutions that took
place in Serbia in 2000 and in Georgia last year.

JID sources suggest that Ukrainian authorities have decided against
declaring Yanukovych the winner of the first round of voting out of fear of
mounting unrest. The remaining six per cent of constituencies that still
need to provide results are from regions where Yushchenko is expected to
dominate.

The trouble has not been confined to the streets. Yushchenko and
parliamentary deputies from his Our Ukraine bloc fought with special riot
police who prevented their entrance to the Central Election Commission
(CEC). Yushchenko sought to enter the CEC to intervene in a meeting
organised to establish additional voting stations for Ukrainians living in
Russia. They feared that the votes would be fraudulently collected for
Yanukovych. Although the CEC agreed to establish 41 additional stations,
this decision was subsequently overturned by the Supreme Court.

Besides mobilising large numbers of troops and special forces, the
authorities have also recruited thousands of local 'enforcers' and militant
coal miners. Members of these groups have been sent to Yushchenko's twin
strongholds of western and central Ukraine allegedly to intimidate voters
and vote more than once.

Violence has already broken out at a large number of election stations and
there has been fighting between Yushchenko's supporters and his opponents,
who in some cases have used weapons. So-called 'enforcers' were first used
on a wide scale during the April mayoral elections in the Trans-Carpathian
town of Mukachevo.

The Kuchma-Yanukovych camp fear the election of Yushchenko. He has
promised to overturn some privatisations of state enterprises, which may
have been sold for less than half their real market value.

Meanwhile, the Ukrainian parliament has yet to vote on a law granting Kuchma
immunity from prosecution. The out-going president's critics are making a
wide range of allegations against him and victory for Yushchenko would be
likely to lead to a major investigation of these accusations.

In the event Yushchenko wins the poll, the outlook for Kuchma's supporters
is equally bleak. Viktor Medvedchuk would probably be forced into exile and
his Social Democratic United party risks being banned. Yushchenko blames
Medvedchuk for what he claims was an attempt to poison him in the run-up to
the election.

As predicted by JID, Russia has been interfering in the elections. Russia's
President Vladimir Putin arrived in Kiev before the poll in a highly visible
show of public support for Yanukovych. Meanwhile, Russian 'political
technologists' have been actively involved in the election campaign. They
have been based in the Russian Press Club and are led by a key Putin
adviser, Gleb Pavlovsky. Russian intelligence officer Sergei Markov heads
the club's analytical division, while diplomatic support is provided by
Russian ambassador Viktor Chernomyrdin, a former Russian premier.

Pavlovsky's 'political technologists' have worked closely with Medvedchuk in
printing anti-US posters depicting Yushchenko as an American stooge and
preparing television and media attacks. More than 16 of the 24 registered
presidential candidates are 'technical', their only purpose being to fill
election commissions with Yanukovych allies in order to manipulate the vote.

Despite these advantages, the Kuchma-Yanukovych camp has never been
totally confident of success. Although numerous obstacles have been placed
in their path, the opposition has mobilised around 100,000 volunteers to
oversee the election results.

Young people have been especially active in election monitoring groups.
After the mid-October student rally in Kiev in support of Yushchenko, the
police and Security Service raided the offices of many youth groups. Their
concern was the inspiration that groups such as Pora! ('It's Time!') were
receiving from groups such as Serbia's OTPOR and Georgia's Khmara,
which were at the forefront of the democratic revolutions in their
respective countries.

The threat of violence remains high with protests called by Yushchenko,
the presence of thousands of riot police and internal troops, as well as
organised 'enforcers' and coal miners. The opposition has accused the
authorities of seeking to destabilise the situation in order to annul the
elections, thereby allowing Kuchma to remain in power under cover of
a state of emergency. -30- [The Action Ukraine Monitoring Service]
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.209 ARTICLE NUMBER SIX
Additional names for the distribution list are always welcome
========================================================
6. "GEORGE BUSH WINS US ELECTION: WHAT DOES THIS
MEAN TO THE WORLD AND UKRAINE?"

"America's focus on the Iraq problem will push Ukraine onto the
sidelines of US foreign policy. If Russian President Putin behaves in a
gentlemanly way and continues to support the US "war on terror", the
Bush administration will turn a blind eye to Russia's imperial ambitions.
Ukraine will slide into "my friend Vladimir's" sphere of influence."

COMMENTARY: By Lyuba Shara
Washington Correspondent, Ukrayinska Pravda
Ukrayinska Pravda web site, Kiev, in Ukrainian 4 Nov 04
BBC Monitoring, UK, in English, Thu, November 4, 2004

George Bush's re-election means that the USA will be turning a blind eye
to possible rights abuses in Ukraine, an opposition web site has said. In
exchange, Washington will expect the Ukrainian authorities to keep their
troops in Iraq, the web site added. It said the USA would also allow Russia
to pursue its "imperial ambitions" regarding the former Soviet republic. As
a result, Ukraine will be further distanced from Europe, which was
"shocked" by Bush's victory, and more influenced by Russia, the web site
concluded.

The following is an excerpt from the article by Lyuba Shara, entitled
"George Bush wins US election: what does this mean to the world
and Ukraine?" posted on the Ukrainian Ukrayinska Pravda web site
on 4 November:

A presidential election was held in the USA on 2 November. The
incumbent president, Republican George Bush, won a comfortable
victory. European capitals are shocked. The progressive part of America
is crying, and an acquaintance of mine even went to work today dressed
in black. Bush got 252 Electoral College votes against 250 for Democrat
John Kerry. [Passage omitted: Bush and Kerry's manifestos]

So what will Bush's victory mean for the world and Ukraine?

FIRST, that the war in Iraq will go on until "the victorious end". The US
president's naive efforts to create a democracy in a matter of a year where
it never existed are reminiscent of a Soviet slogan on developing Central
Asian republics: "Out of feudalism and right into socialism".

The war will continue until US taxpayers get fed up paying for it. In other
words, given the outcome of the 2 November vote, it will continue for a
long time.

SECOND, the Bush administration will continue making efforts to keep
the mock antiterror coalition, of which Ukraine is a part, together. In this
connection, it will turn a blind eye to Kiev's human rights abuses,
violations of freedom of speech, etc.

If [Prime Minister] Viktor Yanukovych wins the second round of the
[presidential] election in Ukraine, it will be enough for him to keep
Ukrainian troops in Iraq in order to continue receiving US visas without
any problems. Well, Uzbekistan is considered to be one of the most
important of America's partners in the war on terror despite the fact that
political opponents are tortured there. So why shouldn't Yanukovych's
Ukraine remain America's strategic partner?

THIRD, a continued war in Iraq will put an end to Euroatlantic unity and
worsen the crisis in relations between the USA and Europe, in particular,
between the USA on one side and Germany and France on the other.
They have not been lovers anyway, and now they will cease to be friends.

Anti-American sentiment round the globe will reach a climax and will
transform from the political views of thousands into a religion for
millions.

Ukraine's presence in Iraq will push it further away from Europe without
bringing it closer to America. As the saying goes, "as I emerge from a
restaurant, it's too late to get married and too early to die".

FOURTH, America's focus on the Iraq problem will push Ukraine onto
the sidelines of US foreign policy. If Russian President Putin behaves in a
gentlemanly way and continues to support the US "war on terror", the
Bush administration will turn a blind eye to Russia's imperial ambitions.
Ukraine will slide into "my friend Vladimir's" sphere of influence.

FIFTH, the Iraq war costs a lot. During Bush's first term of office,
foreign aid to Ukraine shrunk by almost 100m dollars as it is, and it will
shrink further. This will mean fewer exchanges between students, teachers,
members of the military, MPs, etc.

The US Agency for International Development will disburse the remaining
funds to the so-called beltway bandits - big American consultancies which
spend the lion's share of the aid on salaries for their US staff.

Of course, a Kerry victory would not have stopped the Iraq war overnight,
but it would surely have softened [the perception of] the US image in the
world and made a positive impact on relations between Europe and the
USA. America's friends round the world would have felt much better
without Bush's "moral values". But what we see is what we get.

If Yanukovych wins in Ukraine, he will try to do what Americans call
"milking two cows at the same time". On the one hand, introducing double
citizenship with Russia to please Russia. On the other hand, keeping the
Ukrainian troops in Iraq to please America.

[Opposition presidential candidate] Viktor Yushchenko, should he win the
election, must withdraw the troops from Iraq as soon as possible before it
gets too "hot" there.

To others democracy, you need to sort it out at home.

This is not our war and we do not have anything to do there. -30-
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.209: ARTICLE NUMBER SEVEN
Suggested articles for publication in the Report are always welcome
========================================================
7. UKRAINE: YUSHCHENKO DENIES ANTI-RUSSIAN LEANING

Interfax-Ukraine news agency, Kiev, in Russian, 5 Nov 04
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Fri, Nov 5, 2004

MOSCOW - Representatives of the opposition will not allow the
authorities to manipulate the second round of presidential elections in
Ukraine, opposition presidential candidate Viktor Yushchenko has said.

"This is not a race of two Viktors (Yushchenko and Yanukovych). We
have absolutely different beliefs, support bases and even biographies. But
one has to be able to defend their choice when needed. If the authorities
allow any manipulations, one has to be ready to act accordingly," said
Viktor Yushchenko in an interview to the Moskovskiy Komsomolets
newspaper, responding to the question whether the "Georgian scenario"
is possible in Ukraine.

The candidate described statements about his so called "anti-Russian"
position as a myth. "Not a single political force which supports me is
against developing normal relations with Russia. When this government
swears it wants good relations with Russia while in fact conducting a
different policy and intimidating Russia by a `threat of Ukrainian
nationalism', it makes me laugh. Yes, a serious asymmetry in our relations
does exist, but one should not complicate it by made-up problems.
Russia was, is and will be our strategic partner anyway," Viktor
Yushchenko said.

The "asymmetry" in relations [with Russia], in his viewpoint, exists
because of the "different trade conditions and different vision of the
defence policy". Besides, "the majority of Ukrainians are confused by
the government's policy toward Russia".

Viktor Yushchenko considers it unjustified to make Ukrainians choose
between accession to the EU and to the Single Economic Space [common
market with Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan] and says the language issue is
contrived. The status of the Russian language, in his view, will naturally
resolve itself in the process of economic integration between the two
countries.

"Yushchenko as a politician was formed a long time ago, without anyone's
assistance, and nobody but the people of Ukraine is behind me. I am not a
pro-European or a pro-Russian politician. I am a Ukrainian politician, and
this says it all," the presidential candidate said. -30-
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 209: ARTICLE NUMBER EIGHT
Letters to the editor are always welcome
========================================================
8. UKRAINE PRIME MINISTER REJECTS PRESIDENTIAL
ELECTION TV DEBATES AGAINST VIKTOR YUSHCHENKO

By Ron Popeski, Reuters, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thu, Nov 4, 2004

KIEV - Ukraine's prime minister said on Thursday he would
not take part in televised debates against a liberal challenger for the
presidency who he accused of waging a dirty campaign of mud-slinging.

Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich, an advocate of closer ties with Russia,
finished the election's first round this week in a virtual dead heat with
West-leaning Viktor Yushchenko.

Each scored about 40 percent, below the 50 percent threshold for outright
victory. A run-off, seen by many as a turning point in the ex-Soviet
state's outlook, is set for Nov. 21.

The challenger accuses authorities and election officials of rigging and
intimidation. Western observers, citing a long list of shortcomings, said
the poll fell short of accepted standards. Yanukovich saw no point in
staging the debate.

"My opponents call themselves democrats, but even before the campaign
opened they were heaping dirt on me. Now they propose sitting at the same
table. What for?" Yanukovich said in remarks shown on Ukrainian television.

"Am I to use the same language? I could do so, but only one on one. To do
it from the rooftops -- I will never allow this."

Yushchenko's aides said the prime minister was dodging discussion.
"Whatever argument Yanukovich produces, we believe Ukraine's people
know all too well that the candidate representing those in power fears any
discussion with Yushchenko," the challenger's spokeswoman, Iryna
Gerashchenko, said on his Web site.

The European Union, the United States and Canada urged Ukraine to
correct problems before the run-off, including media bias and lists that
omitted large numbers of voters.

New EU member Poland, a supporter of Ukraine's integration with the West,
urged the 25-nation bloc to be tougher on Kiev. "We would like the EU to
speak up about Ukraine ... to state openly the reservations we have,
especially about the campaign which did not meet our standards,"
Foreign Minister Wlodzimierz Cimoszewicz told reporters in Brussels.
EAST-WEST SPLIT
The first round exposed a centuries-old split between Ukraine's nationalist
west, which backed Yushchenko, and the industrial Russian-speaking east,
solidly behind the premier.

Yanukovich, far from a brilliant speaker, blamed poor work by officials
outside Kiev for his mediocre first-round score. As the campaign proceeded,
he doubled pensions, increased public sector wages and pointed to high
growth figures.

Yushchenko, a former prime minister and central banker, electrifies crowds.
He pledges to entrench private enterprise and liberal reforms to eliminate
corruption and ensure good ties with both Moscow and the West.

The challenger's supporters plan a rally on Saturday in Kiev, clad in their
trademark orange colours. Much attention now focuses on candidates
who finished further back in the first-round field of 24.

Socialist candidate Oleksander Moroz, third with nearly six percent, has
yet to offer advice to supporters, but has been sympathetic to Yushchenko.
Communist Petro Symonenko, just behind in fourth place, said he would
support neither. "They both represent clans of oligarchs," he said,
referring to businessmen who made quick fortunes in 1990s privatisations.
(Additional reporting by Marcin Grajewski in Brussels) -30-
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.209: ARTICLE NUMBER NINE
========================================================
9. HARD CURRENCY JITTERS CONTINUE IN WAKE OF ELECTION
National Bank spends billions in hard currency reserves
to beef up shaky hryvnya

By Roman Olearchyk, Kyiv Post Staff Writer
Kyiv Post, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thursday, Nov 4, 2004

KYIV - With the outcome of the presidential elections uncertain, worried
citizens and enterprises are dashing to convert their hryvyas to hard
currency, triggering a dollar and euro shortage on the nation's money
market.

The government, headed by presidential candidate and Prime Minister Viktor
Yanukovych, is struggling to keep the snowballing currency problem under
control before the second round of voting, scheduled for Nov. 21. Rising
inflation is complicating their efforts, economists say.

In recent weeks it has become increasingly difficult to buy U.S. dollars and
other foreign currencies at exchange bureaus nationwide. In an effort to
avoid panic and keep the hryvnya at around Hr 5.30 per U.S. dollar, the
National Bank of Ukraine has dug deep into its reserves, in recent weeks
selling about $1.5 billion of its nearly $11 billion in amassed foreign
currency. The rising currency panic started about two months ago, but has
escalated in recent weeks, forcing the NBU to sell $770 million in foreign
cash reserves between Oct. 25 and Oct. 29 alone.

As of Oct. 29, the central bank's foreign currency reserves stood at $9.15
billion. The foreign currency buyers include ordinary citizens who doubt the
stability of Ukraine's currency, banks, and other enterprises that have
accumulated foreign debt obligations through recent syndicated loans and
Eurobond placements.

Serhy Tihipko, who took a leave of absence from his chairmanship of the
NBU to lead Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych's presidential campaign,
said the priority of the government and the Yanukovych campaign are to
keep inflation and currency worries under control during the election
campaign.

"We need to bring down prices for meat, for meat products, to bring down
the cost of hard currency during this time, because there are no grounds for
the high rate of the dollar," Tihipko said during a Nov. 1 interview on the
"Samy Toi" program, aired on the state's national television channel UT-1.
Bankers say the panic is unfounded, but they also caution that the
government's response is too expensive.

"I don't see a systemic crisis. What we have is a lack of confidence in the
hryvnya," one economist who advises the Ukrainian government said. "But
it is damn expensive to defend that exchange rate this way for populist
reasons. They are doing it only to keep confidence up ahead of elections,"
the economist said. "If they didn't spend all this reserve money, the
hryvnya would depreciate and that would harm Yanukovych's chances."

Mel Brown, a former advisor to the NBU who resides in Kyiv, said the
NBU's currency intervention policy has been unnecessarily costly and the
current rise in the exchange rates could have been at least partially
avoided by adopting a more liberal currency policy. Brown said there is
no need to panic for now and there shouldn't be in the future as the
economy is running smoothly. But things could get more complicated if
the political situation in the country worsens.

"Historically Ukrainians have been hammered with a loss of savings through
currency depreciation and inflation and their memories are strong. Many of
them still remember how entire family savings were lost when the Soviet
Union broke up and from the impact of the Russian financial crisis of 1998,"
he said. "In reality, there is no reason for panic, as Ukraine's economy is
doing well, but this situation shows how fragile trust is in economies and
banking systems."

Jacques Mounier, head of Calyon Bank Ukraine, described the situation in
a Post article last week as serious and unnecessary. He said a "snowball
effect" had been created by poor management, including risky pension
increases two months ago, bad NBU policies and growing public hysteria.
"Except for some panic on the population's side, there is no reason at all
to speak about hysteria or a banking crisis," Mounier told the Post on Nov.
3. He said the turmoil was intensified by the government's pre-election
payouts, which added to inflation.

"The situation is still manageable, though harmful, in terms of general
impact to the economy; we will see substantial CPI growth by the end of
this year," Mounier said.

Brown said the minor depreciation of the hryvnya exhibited in recent weeks
is the result of the NBU's longstanding currency policy, according to which
reserves keep the hryvnya stable within a defined corridor. It has worked,
but the strategy can fail under pressure, forcing the government to
unnecessarily spend large sums of its reserves. Giving more liberty to the
hryvnya would be a better monetary policy, according to Brown, but that
policy could be risky for incumbent candidates during elections.

"People have believed in the hryvnya in recent years and started putting
their money in the banks. Additionally, they have not, for the most part,
put their savings in dollars or borrowed in dollars. But now they have
jitters," Brown added.

Brown said the NBU could, if it continues to sell dollars at its current
pace, deplete reserves down to between $5 billion and $6 billion within
a couple of weeks. That alone would pose no major damage to most
Ukrainians, unless the rate of inflation skyrockets. But it could mean
trouble for Ukrainian banks and companies that have tapped into the
foreign debt market and have rising foreign currency obligations abroad.

"They need to pay these obligations in foreign currency," Brown said,
adding that they could end up defaulting on their debts if the panic
persists. If that happens, their credit ratings would worsen, the cost of
borrowing throughout the country would go up, and economic growth
could slow down significantly.

"That is the spiral effect that happens if you get a financial sector
meltdown," he said. "They are not at that point yet, but it could go that
way" if the government poorly manages the economy and political instability
worsens. "This situation is not unique to Ukraine. It happens in other
countries; the only difference is that Ukraine is not a deep economy,"
Brown said.

"Little changes make quicker and more drastic changes. In the United
States it takes months before an interest change affects an economy. In
Ukraine, a shallow simple economy, it can happen quickly," Brown added.

Mounier insisted the situation is manageable, as reserves are still large
and the fundamentals of Ukraine's economy remain strong.

Although it has not managed this situation well so far, the NBU has the
capacity and the instruments to manage liquidity in the hryvnya or in
foreign currencies, Mounier said.

"More importantly, the balance of payment of Ukraine for the first nine
months of this year is positive by $5.2 billion," Mounier added. "Even if $1
billion or more disappeared in October, it is not a big deal."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Roman Olearchyk can be contacted at romchyk@kyivpost.com.
LINK: http://www.kyivpost.com/business/bank_fin/21758/
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.209: ARTICLE NUMBER TEN
Your financial support is needed, please send a check.
========================================================
10.THE FUTURE OF DEMOCRACY IN UKRAINE HINGES ON ELECTION

GUEST COLUMNIST: By Markian Dobczansky
The Daily Pennsylvanian, Independent Student
Newspaper of the University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Friday, November 5, 2004

In case you missed it, another very important presidential election took
place this week. Voters went to the polls in Ukraine on Sunday to select
their third president since declaring independence from the Soviet Union in
1991. The leading candidates were current Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych
and former Prime Minister and West-leaning reformer Viktor Yushchenko, who
were locked in a close race.

Ukrainian voters, however, will have to wait a bit longer to find out who
their next president is. A runoff vote has been scheduled for Nov. 21, as
neither candidate received a majority of the votes in the first round. After
the Central Election Commission had counted 97.67 percent of the vote --
with 39.88 percent for Yanukovych and 39.22 percent for Yushchenko -- it
hasn't bothered to count the remaining 2.33 percent.

The commission claims it needs more time, but Yushchenko's campaign manager,
Oleksandr Zinchenko, alleges the CEC "simply [does] not have the courage to
declare Viktor Yushchenko the winner." The uncounted votes are from the
western and central regions of Ukraine -- where Yushchenko has large
majorities -- and many observers say the uncounted votes are enough for him
to pass Yanukovych and officially win the first round.

It is hard to overstate the importance of this election for Ukraine, a
country of 48 million people. Since independence in 1991, Ukraine has been
balancing between the European Union and Russia. Domestically, as the state
has slowly been turned into an instrument with which corrupt officials and
mafia bosses can enrich themselves, like neighboring Belarus and Russia.

Vladimir Putin of Russia won re-election this year with 70 percent of the
vote, and Alyaksandr Lukashenka of Belarus recently falsified a referendum
to amend the constitution and allow him to run for a third term. The
situation in these countries is not encouraging for democracy.

Ukraine, however, is different. There is a strong opposition. Yushchenko's
Our Ukraine coalition holds more seats in Parliament than any other party.
He has consistently been the most popular politician in Ukraine. Many
predicted he would win easily in free and fair elections. Unfortunately, in
spite of calls from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe,
NATO, the European Union and dozens of American politicians for free and
fair elections in Ukraine, the authorities have not allowed such a campaign.
And there are indications that last Sunday's voting continued this pattern
of corruption.

The campaign up to this point has not even been in the neighborhood of free
and fair; it has been downright murderous. The incumbent prime minister,
Viktor Yanukovych, who has the support of outgoing President Leonid Kuchma
and of Russian President Putin, has taken full advantage of state resources,
funneling some $300 million into his campaign. He has turned most of the
nationwide media, owned by the state or by oligarchs close to the
authorities, into a propaganda machine.

Yushchenko, on the other hand, has faced several possible assassination
attempts, including a run-in with one of the infamous Kamaz lorries, in
which his car was run off the road. More than a few high-level officials
have been killed in similar car accidents since 1991, including former
Soviet dissident and presidential candidate Vyacheslav Chornovil and former
head of the National Bank Vadim Hetman. In early September, Yushchenko
almost died from acute food poisoning and was forced from the campaign trail
for a few weeks. The authorities' cynical response? "Watch what you eat."

As for campaigning, Yushchenko's rallies in eastern and southern Ukrainian
cities have been disrupted by violent bands of thugs with leather jackets
and shaved heads that many say are linked with the authorities. And how's
this for negative campaign advertising -- billboards in the eastern city of
Donetsk have been put up, showing Yushchenko in a Nazi uniform -- an
obscene allegation considering his father fought the Nazis in World War II.

To add to the outrage, Ukraine's giant northern neighbor has not kept its
distance. Russia has been openly tampering with these elections, sending in
Russian spin doctors, opening a Russian cultural club in Kiev and, most
outrageously, scheduling a visit from Putin in the week preceding the
election, ostensibly to commemorate the liberation of Kiev from Nazi forces
in World War II. It is noteworthy that this particular anniversary has never
been celebrated in this fashion before.

So while the United States and Europe have called for a free and fair
election and have consistently refrained from endorsing a particular
candidate, Russia has openly cast its lot with Yanukovych.

Where is the criticism of this obvious meddling in the affairs of another
sovereign state? Maybe Europe and America have written Ukraine off as a
sphere of Russian influence. Or maybe President Bush has simply given
Putin a blank check. It would be interesting to know what he received for
it, however. It is, after all, Ukraine that has sent troops to Iraq and not
Russia.

This is not a choice between two legitimate candidates. Ukraine stands at
the edge of the abyss -- a victory for Yanukovych will surely bring the
country closer to the Belarussian model of authoritarianism. If President
Bush were serious about spreading democracy around the world, he should
be paying closer attention to the elections in the former Soviet Union and
Ukraine in particular. Regardless, if the results of the runoff election are
falsified, look to the streets of Kiev on Nov. 21. -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.dailypennsylvanian.com/vnews/display.v/ART/418b2af9c01cb
========================================================
ARTICLES ARE FOR PERSONAL AND ACADEMIC USE ONLY
Articles are Distributed For Information, Research, Education
Discussion and Personal Purposes Only
========================================================
Ukraine Information Website: http://www.ArtUkraine.com
========================================================
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"
A Publication Supported Financially By Its Readers
Please add your name to our list of financial contributors!

"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-04, is an in-depth news and
analysis international newsletter, produced by the www.ArtUkraine.com
Information Service (ARTUIS) and The Action Ukraine Report
Monitoring Service (TAURMS). The report is now distributed to several
thousand persons worldwide FREE of charge using the e-mail address:
ArtUkraine.com@starpower.net. This is the 209th Report issued so
far this year, out of the more than 240 to be issued in 2004.

"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT" is supported through The Action
Ukraine Program Fund. Financial support from readers is essential to
the future of this Report. You can become a financial sponsor of The
Action Ukraine Program Fund. Individuals, corporations, non-profit
organizations and other groups can provide support for the expanding
Action Ukraine Program by sending in contributions.

Checks should be made out to the Ukrainian Federation of America,
(UFA), a private, not-for-profit, voluntary organization. The funds should
be designated for the Action Ukraine Program Fund (AUPF), and
mailed to Zenia Chernyk, Chairperson, Ukrainian Federation of
America (UAF), 930 Henrietta Avenue, Huntingdon Valley, PA
19006-8502.

For individuals a contribution of $45-$100 is suggested. Your contribution
to help build The Action Ukraine Program to support Ukraine and her
future is very much appreciated. -30-
========================================================
If you would like to read "THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-04
please send your name, country of residence, and e-mail contact information
morganw@patriot.net. Additional names are welcome. If you do not wish to
read "THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-04, around five times per week,
let us know by e-mail to morganw@patriot.net.
========================================================
PUBLISHER AND EDITOR
Mr. E. Morgan Williams, Executive Director, Ukrainian Federation of America
(UFA); Coordinator, The Action Ukraine Coalition (AUC);
Senior Advisor, Government Relations, U.S.-Ukraine Foundation (USUF);
Advisor, Ukraine-U.S. Business Council, Washington, D.C.;
Publisher and Editor, www.ArtUkraine.com Information Service (ARTUIS),
P.O. Box 2607, Washington, D.C. 20013,
Tel: 202 437 4707, E-mail: morganw@patriot.net
========================================================
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-2004 SPONSORS:
"Working to Secure Ukraine's Future"
1. THE ACTION UKRAINE COALITION (AUC): Washington, D.C.,
http://www.artukraine.com/auc/index.htm; MEMBERS:
A. UKRAINIAN AMERICAN COORDINATING COUNCIL,
(UACC), Ihor Gawdiak, President, Washington, D.C., New York, NY
B. UKRAINIAN FEDERATION OF AMERICA (UFA),
Zenia Chernyk, Chairperson; Vera M. Andryczyk, President; E.
Morgan Williams, Executive Director, Huntingdon Valley, Pennsylvania.
http://www.artukraine.com/ufa/index.htm
C. U.S.-UKRAINE FOUNDATION (USUF), Nadia Komarnyckyj
McConnell, President, Washington, D.C., Kyiv, Ukraine .
2. UKRAINE-U.S. BUSINESS COUNCIL, Kempton Jenkins,
President, Washington, D.C.
3. KIEV-ATLANTIC GROUP, David and Tamara Sweere, Daniel
Sweere, Kyiv and Myronivka, Ukraine, 380 44 295 7275 in Kyiv.
4. BAHRIANY FOUNDATION, INC. Dr. Anatol Lysyj, Chairman,
Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA,
5. ODUM- Association of American Youth of Ukrainian Descent,
Minnesota Chapter, Natalia Yarr, Chairperson
========================================================