"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 219
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., WEDNESDAY, November 17, 2004
-----INDEX OF ARTICLES-----
"Major International News Headlines and Articles"
1. "GROWING DEMOCRACY"
COMMENTARY: by Viktor Yanukovych
The Wall Street Journal Europe, Europe, Tue, Nov 16, 2004
2. SPEAKER VOLODYMYR LYTVYN ASSURES US OFFICIALS
IN WASHINGTON OF UKRAINE'S DEMOCRATIC PATH
TV 5 Kanal, Kiev, in Ukrainian, 16 Nov 04
BBC Monitoring, UK, in English, Tue, November 16, 2004
3. UKRAINE'S BOXING ICONS VITALI AND WLADIMIR
KLITCHKO BACK VIKTOR YUSHCHENKO FOR PRESIDENT
Era TV via UT1, Kiev, in Ukrainian, 15 Nov 04
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Mon, Nov 15, 2004
4 UKRAINIAN CANADIAN CONGRESS (OCC): REPORT FROM
FIRST ROUND OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN UKRAINE
Ukrainian Canadian Congress (UCC)
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, Mon, Nov 15, 2004
5. UKRAINE NEEDS POLAND, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE
YUSHCHENKO TELLS POLISH FOREIGN MINISTER
PAP news agency, Warsaw, in English, 14 Nov 04
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Mon, Nov 15, 2004
6. YANUKOVYCH CALLS FOR MORE ACTIVE ATTRACTION
OF FOREIGN LOANS BENEFICIAL TO UKRAINE
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tue, Nov 16, 2004
7. "BLACK DOG, WHITE DOG"
Whatever the result of Ukraine's presidential elections, the
country needs Europe's special attention, and a special deal.
EDITORIAL: Transitions Online (TOL)
Prague, Czech Republic, Mon, November 15, 2004
8. "YUSHCHENKO GAINS AN EDGE"
The hard-fought and highly controversial presidential race in Ukraine
nears the finish line with the opposition candidate taking a tenuous lead.
By Ivan Lozowy, Transitions Online (TOL)
Prague, Czech Republic, Mon, 15 November 2004
9. "POLITICIANS ARE NOT CHEAP"
The American delegation, consisting of the
ex-Congressmen and five political campaign consultants.
By Vladimir Kravchenko
Zerkalo Nedeli On The WEB, Mirror-Weekly
International Social Political Weekly
Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, 13-19 November 2004
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 219: ARTICLE NUMBER ONE
========================================================
1. "GROWING DEMOCRACY"
COMMENTARY: by Viktor Yanukovych
The Wall Street Journal, New York, NY, Tue, Nov 16, 2004
KIEV -- The first round of the Ukrainian presidential election is over,
with the vote totals accurately reflecting of the collective sentiment of
our nation. Which is not to say there were no incidents whatsoever when
our people voted on Oct. 31. Ours is still an infant democracy, only 13
years removed from Soviet subjugation, without the ingrained habits and
the infrastructure of more-established republics.
That said, I think the irregularities were the exception rather than the
rule. And they were the work of local officials with no connection to, and
receiving no support from, my campaign or the national government. No
democracy is infallible; no election is without some transgressions. One
need only look at the recent campaign in the world's mightiest democracy --
to read the American newspapers was to discover reports of electoral
mischief throughout the United States on and leading up to its Election
Day. I have every confidence that Ukraine's Nov. 21 runoff will, like the
initial vote, be imperfect, but hardly tainted.
Ukrainians now face a clear choice between two men. But it is not a choice
between the two Cold War caricatures drawn by many in the Western media.
It is not a choice between instant European integration and annexation by
Russia.
Throughout this campaign, I have promoted a pragmatic course for Ukraine's
economic future, one that closes itself off to no one and seeks commercial
partners from Israel to the United States. I believe stronger ties with
Europe -- and eventual accession to the European Union -- are inevitable
and desirable. But not today and not at any cost. Not a minute before it
will be clear how it could be done in the best interests of Ukraine's
economy and its people.
As a nation, we have come far in building a free-market economy. During
my years as prime minister, we have experienced strong growth, stabilized
our currency, attracted foreign investment, cracked down on money
laundering and pushed intellectual-property-rights reform (a policy opposed
by my opponent, Viktor Yushchenko).
But while we will continue to cultivate our relationship with the European
Union and its member states, we are simply not ready to become a member.
Given the economic speed bumps faced by Hungary, the Czech Republic
and other newly accepted EU members, it is not at all clear that a hasty
embrace is a prudent step for Ukraine.
For better or for worse, Ukraine's economic destiny is very much tied to
Russia. It is plain political populism and shortsightedness to suggest that
we should ignore and discriminate against a nation of more than 140 million
people with whom we share a border. Such an impulsive step would
destabilize our entire region and throw the Ukrainian economy into upheaval.
I have met with Russian President Vladimir Putin, just as I have met with
U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney and other U.S. leaders, just as I will meet
with anyone who is interested in mutually beneficial alliances with
Ukraine. At the same time, I would never forfeit Ukraine's sovereignty to
any ally or neighbor. On issues like the troop deployments in Iraq, I part
company with Russia, and I would continue to do so as president. In a move
that would destabilize Iraq, Mr. Yushchenko recent said he would withdraw
Ukraine's troops from Iraq within two weeks, if he's elected.
To frame this election as Ukraine's decision to tilt westward or eastward
is to set up a false choice. We can and must do both. If I am president, we
will. I believe that a free, fair election on Nov. 21 will provide a
mandate for my centrist philosophy, which can provide prosperity and
security at this pivotal moment in Ukrainian history. -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Yanukovych is Ukraine's prime minister and a candidate for president.
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.219: ARTICLE NUMBER TWO
=======================================================
2. SPEAKER VOLODYMYR LYTVYN ASSURES US OFFICIALS
IN WASHINGTON OF UKRAINE'S DEMOCRATIC PATH
TV 5 Kanal, Kiev, in Ukrainian, 16 Nov 04
BBC Monitoring, UK, in English, Tue, November 16, 2004
KIEV - Excerpt from report by Ukrainian television TV 5 Kanal on
16 November:
[Presenter] The Ukrainian presidential election will determine the future of
the whole of Central Europe. That was the essence of a statement by US
Senator John McCain made during a meeting with the Supreme Council
[parliament] speaker, Volodymyr Lytvyn.
During the parliament speaker's official visit to Washington, he also met
the US president's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, and US
Secretary of State Colin Powell. Official Washington has once again
highlighted its careful attention in the transparency of the presidential
election in Ukraine.
The head of US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Richard Lugar,
who is Bush's personal observer of the election runoff, said that the
United States has been and will be Ukraine's friend.
[Lugar, in English translated into Ukrainian] My mission is not to be an
advocate of either of the candidates. It is to stress the need for a free
and transparent election process.
[Lytvyn] We are unanimous that Ukraine should develop democratically,
should build up its democratic potential, and the second round of the
Ukrainian presidential election should be testimony of this. -30-
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.219: ARTICLE NUMBER THREE
=======================================================
3. UKRAINE'S BOXING ICONS VITALI AND WLADIMIR
KLITSCHKO BACK VIKTOR YUSHCHENKO FOR PRESIDENT
Era TV via UT1, Kiev, in Ukrainian, 15 Nov 04
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Mon, Nov 15, 2004
KIEV - [Presenter] Ukraine's superheavyweight boxer Vitali Klitschko
is getting ready for his next fight. Klitschko Sr. will defend his WBC title
against Danny Williams of the UK in Las Vegas on 11 December.
Vitali and his brother Wladimir had a news conference in New York a
few days ago. They talked about sport, their future fights and politics.
As for the latter, Vitali Klitschko said that he and his brother will
support [opposition candidate] Viktor Yushchenko at the presidential
election.
[Vitali Klitschko, in Russian, speaking at a social event] I call on
everyone to put aside their daily things on 21 November, come to polling
stations and cast their vote. Vote with your heart and conscience. We,
Wladimir and I, have given our vote to the candidate who we think
deserves it, Viktor Yushchenko. [Applause from the audience]
[Yushchenko and Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych will have a runoff
round of the presidential election on 21 November. After the first round,
both candidates have just under 40 per cent of the vote. Yanukovych is
also the head of Ukraine's State Olympic Committee, and some Ukrainian
athletes, including Olympic champion swimmer Yana Klochkova, have
appeared in Yanukovych's TV ads and outdoor advertising campaigns.]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
STATEMENT ISSUED BY VITALIY & VOLODYMYR KLITCHKO
Dear Compatriots!
In this, Ukraine's fateful hour, we address our words to you not only as
sports fans, but also as fellow-citizens in an appeal to your civic
conscience.
Today Ukraine is preparing for the second round in the presidential
election. On November 21, you and your family, friends, neighbours and
tens of millions of your fellow countrymen, whom you may not know by
name or face, will go to polling stations to vote for our future.
November 21 is not just a day to elect the new president of Ukraine. It
is a day of choice for Ukraine. It is a day to which our people have aspired
for more than a thousand years: through Tatar-Mongolian invasions, through
Polish-Lithuanian enslavement, through oppression of the monarchy and
through the blood and hunger-stricken twentieth century.
Put aside your affairs and go to the polling stations to cast your vote for
the future of Ukraine - for Viktor Yushchenko!
We believe in victory!
Vitaliy & Volodymyr Klitchko -30-
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.219: ARTICLE NUMBER FOUR
Your comments about the Report are always welcome
========================================================
4. UKRAINIAN CANADIAN CONGRESS (OCC): REPORT FROM
FIRST ROUND OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN UKRAINE
Ukrainian Canadian Congress (UCC)
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, Mon, Nov 15, 2004
OVERVIEW
The Ukrainian Canadian Congress (UCC), the representative body for
the 1.1 million Canadians of Ukrainian descent, expresses its admiration
for the people of Ukraine who, in large numbers (over 75% of eligible
voters), came to the polls on October 31, 2004 to take advantage of
their hard earned right to vote democratically in the Presidential elections
and by this action to take control of their destiny.
61 observers from Canada were in Ukraine for the October 31 election
in the role of both long and short term observers. Long term observers
were sponsored by the University of Alberta. Short term observers were
volunteers who generously donated their time, experience and financial
resources to monitor the election process.
Delegations of observers were sent to monitor the elections in the following
oblasts: Cherkasy, Chernihiv, Chernivtsi, Dnipropetrovsk, Kharkiv, Kyiv,
Luhansk, Lviv, Odesa, Poltava, Sumy, Vinnytsia, Zaporizzhia, Zhytomyr
Over 300 polling stations were visited with observers monitoring not only
the voting process during the day, but both opening and closing procedures
at polling stations. Observers also witnessed the submission of reports to
regional election commissions.
OBSERVATIONS
Unfortunately, the UCC is forced to note with concern, that the right to
vote has been compromised by a large number of irregularities during the
election campaign and during the voting itself on Election Day. These
serious and systematic problems negatively affect the Ukrainian people's
ability to control their future and incorrectly reflect the true will of the
electorate. The major problems are highlighted below. All the violations
noted by UCC election observers at the over 300 polling stations at
which they were present, have been compiled and are available through
the UCC for use by government and non-government agencies.
A universal problem, highlighted by all monitoring organizations, was the
inaccuracy of voters' lists. These inaccuracies were revealed in many
regions visited by the Canadian observers. For example, in the Odesa
region a voters' list revealed names of non-existent individuals as well as
voters with non-existent addresses.
Many individuals came to vote whose names did not appear on the voters'
list. These individuals were directed to the local court, which could amend
the voters' list. Observers noted that the courts, although open, were not
adequately prepared to handle requests, did not provide accurate
information or did not have the correct forms available.
There were cases in which UCC observers noted levels of pressure
exercised on voters by people in authority, ie. workplace supervisors,
local elected officials, post-secondary institution instructors. In the
regions of Sumy and Kharkiv students of the Agrarian University were
told by instructors how to exercise their vote with observers witnessing
instructors checking students' ballots before they were deposited in the
ballot box. In Dnipropetrovsk, observers reported an instance of a
local election commission and observers consisting of directors and
managers of one factory which had instructed their personnel how
to vote.
Reports from Luhansk and Odesa indicated that certain local election
commissions were denying access to the poll on election day to their
members representing the opposition candidate.
Irregularities were also witnessed at polling stations in different regions
of the country during the counting of the votes, as well as during the
submission of reports to regional election commissions.
Other issues noted by the UCC observers included:
the inadequate set up of many polling stations;
voters being allowed to vote without the required identification;
Local Election Commissions being uninformed about voting procedures.
Finally, persistent reports during the election campaign of misuse of
government resources for overt political ends by certain forces as well as
direct meddling in the expression of free speech through the mass media
are true, concluded the UCC observers. The campaign-style visit of the
President of the Russian Federation to Ukraine in the days before the
election is a gross deviation from accepted international norms.
A second round will take place on November 21, 2004 there is an
opportunity to address the issues highlighted by international monitors.
The Ukrainian people are entitled to express their vote freely and the
efforts of observers become more significant in ensuring that the second
vote is truly a transparent one.
The UCC will have over 50 election observers on the ground in
Ukraine for this second round of Presidential elections. -30-
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.219: ARTICLE NUMBER FIVE
========================================================
5. UKRAINE NEEDS POLAND, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE
YUSHCHENKO TELLS POLISH FOREIGN MINISTER
PAP news agency, Warsaw, in English, 14 Nov 04
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Mon, Nov 15, 2004
KIEV - Ukraine needs a strategic partner such as Poland for the victory of
democratic principles, said presidential candidate of the opposition Viktor
Yushchenko during a meeting with [Polish Foreign] Minister Wlodzimierz
Cimoszewicz, who arrived in Ukraine on Friday [12 November] as head
of the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers.
Welcoming the Polish foreign minister, Yushchenko said that elections in
Ukraine can be termed as a "clash of two worldviews". "We want democratic
principles to win but to achieve this we need a strategic partner such as
Poland," he explained.
Cimoszewicz's meetings with President Leonid Kuchma and outgoing Prime
Minister Viktor Yanukovych had been cancelled due to a visit of Russian
President Vladimir Putin that took place at the same time.
At a news conference in Kiev, Cimoszewicz said he wanted to meet both
candidates to underline impartiality of Poland, the Council of Europe and
all who closely monitor elections in Ukraine.
Cimoszewicz admitted that irregularities were disclosed by Yushchenko's
electoral committee after the 1st part of presidential elections. He said
that elections result will determine Ukraine's future and its relations with
other countries.
The minister's visit takes place a week before the second round of elections
scheduled for 21 November. "I would like to tell Ukrainian people during
this visit that presidential elections in their country are important to
them and to all their partners," Cimoszewicz told the news conference at
the end of his visit.
He appealed on behalf of the Council of Europe for keeping to democratic
standards during the second round of presidential elections. He said that
critical evaluation of elections would hamper Ukraine's cooperation with its
European partners.
He expressed the hope that there would not be grounds for a negative
evaluation of elections and stressed that Poland persistently opts for a
"positive reply of European institutions to Ukraine aspirations".
The Polish minister also met with Speaker of the parliament Volodymyr
Lytvyn and head of the Central Electoral Commission Serhiy Kyvalov.
Ukraine joined the Council of Europe in 1995. -30-
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.219: ARTICLE NUMBER SIX
Additional names for the distribution list are always welcome
========================================================
6. YANUKOVYCH CALLS FOR MORE ACTIVE ATTRACTION
OF FOREIGN LOANS BENEFICIAL TO UKRAINE
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tue, Nov 16, 2004
KYIV - Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, who is a candidate in this
year's presidential elections, has called for more active attraction of
foreign loans on terms beneficial to Ukraine. Yanukovych made the call
at a roundtable conference at the National Academy of Sciences. "We
need to attract credit resources more actively, more aggressively. However,
this mechanism should be beneficial," Yanukovych said.
According to him, the balanced and predictable policy of the government and
the prompt payment of external debts in recent years have enabled Ukraine to
increase the confidence of investors in it. For example, according to
Yanukovych, Ukraine managed to obtain its most recent loans at the interest
rate of 5.3% per annum for seven years compared with 18% per annum in
2000 and 11.8% per annum in 2002.
Yanukovych also said that the gold and currency reserves of the National
Bank of Ukraine have increased from USD 4.5 billion in 2002 to USD 12.5
billion in 2004 under his leadership of the Cabinet of Ministers. According
to Yanukovych, this was made possible by, among other things, a 37%
increase in the volume of foreign trade operations.
During the November 15 televised election debate between Yanukovych
and the Our Ukraine coalition's leader and presidential candidate Viktor
Yuschenko, Yuschenko criticized the Yanukovych-led Cabinet of Ministers
for the accelerated attraction of foreign loans that has resulted in an
increase in Ukraine's external debt despite the National Bank of Ukraine's
sufficiently large gold and currency reserves.
As Ukrainian News earlier reported, Ukraine's external debt rose by 2.3%
from USD 8,554 million to USD 8,750.7 million while its internal debt rose
by 4.56% from UAH 20,523 million to UAH 21,458.6 million in the
January-September period of this year.
The total size of Ukraine's national debt rose by 2.68% from UAH 66,133
million to UAH 67,904.5 million in the January-September period of this
year.
Ukraine floated USD 600 million in seven-year Eurobonds at the yield rate of
6.875% per annum in February 2004 and sold five-year Eurobonds worth USD
500 million at a floating yield rate equal to six-month LIBOR + 3.375% in
July 2004. -30- [The Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.219: ARTICLE NUMBER SEVEN
Suggested articles for publication in the Report are always welcome
========================================================
7. "BLACK DOG, WHITE DOG"
Whatever the result of Ukraine's presidential elections, the
country needs Europe's special attention, and a special deal.
EDITORIAL: Transitions Online (TOL)
Prague, Czech Republic, Mon, November 15, 2004
It could have been a scene out of an Emir Kusturica film. Just before the
first round of Ukraine's presidential elections, in late October, the
Belarusian service of Radio Liberty visited the village of the Belarusian
ancestors of Viktor Yanukovych, Ukraine's prime minister. Asked what
they thought of Yanukovych, they praised his appearance, lauded his
ability, were enchanted by his charm, and said they would vote for him
if they had the chance. At the end, the correspondent asked: "Is it true
that Viktor Fedorovych gave you each $100 when he visited you in
2001?"
"Yes," one old woman crowed. "A very nice man."
Yanukovych has continued in similar fashion during his bid for the
Ukrainian presidency. The prime minister has showered oldsters (and
others) with manna, prompting pensioners to rush out to the shops to
turn his $1.3 billion largesse into lard (or perhaps even some chocolate-
covered lard, apparently something of a delicacy in Ukraine these days).
Reprehensible maybe, but such pork-barrel politics is relatively par for
the course. And at various points, this campaign has seemed quite low-key.
Maneuverings by different oligarchs have even raised questions about just
how bad a Yanukovych victory might be.
But there have always been dark ominous tones, starting back last November
when the opposition candidate, Viktor Yushchenko, was greeted by baying
muscleheads and militia with machine guns in Donetsk. Similar tones were
heard in April when mayoral elections in Mukacheve, deep in Yushchenko
country, were stolen from the opposition. In the run-up to the first round,
the picture steadily became darker with a huge effort to discredit
Yushchenko, silence the opposition media, and dominate election
commissions. And always there was the worry that in a country where an
oddly high number of politicians die mysterious deaths, something truly
ugly might happen.
And something ugly and mysterious did happen in early September when
Yushchenko was rushed to an Austrian hospital. He re-emerged looking 20
years older, a once-handsome face turned into the aftermath of plastic
surgery on a burn victim. Yushchenko claims he was poisoned. The burden
of finding proof lies with him.
But whatever the explanation of Yushchenko's misfortune, a heavy burden of
suspicion for many other crimes lies at the feet of President Leonid Kuchma
and Yanukovych, in the form of hundreds of hours of apparently
incriminating, secretly recorded tapes. So far, only a few hours of those
tapes have been released, but those are enough to implicate the outgoing
president in illegal arms deals and, possibly, murder. In October, the
taper of those tapes, Mykola Melnychenko, re-emerged with a recording in
which a voice "similar to that of Prime Minister Yanukovych" talks of
buying parliamentary votes and smashing the heads of disobedient
journalists against the wall.
So, days ahead of the first round, bloodshed seemed possible. Ukraine
had seen its largest demonstration since independence, another huge
demonstration was planned, and vast numbers of law-enforcement officers
were on alert.
Suddenly, there is now relative calm. Against many expectations,
Yushchenko seems to be pulling ahead. But this time next week, the
picture could again be completely different.
Ukraine, in short, takes observers on a rollercoaster ride, lurching from
alarm to phlegmatism. All the time, though, it is a disturbing sight. This
is no Black Cat, White Cat, but more like watching a dog fight.
So what explains the lurching, and what can outsiders do to steady Ukraine?
THE UNITED STATES OF UKRAINE
When the second-round results are known, they are likely again to show what
the first round made clear--the perceived "Ukrainian nationalist" winning
in the Ukrainian-speaking west (Yushchenko) and the pro-Russian candidate
winning in the Russian-speaking east (Yanukovych). Even in fair elections,
most analysts believe this would be the basic picture. Thanks to this
fundamental division, Ukraine enjoys what political scientists call
"pluralism by default," ensuring constant political competition. It also
enjoys pluralism thanks to divisions within the elite, with the clans
around the pro-government clans still unable to coalesce into a solid bloc.
In these circumstances, the second round of the elections is likely to be
decided by a few percentage points. And, with the stakes high and the
candidates very different in personality and approach, we can again expect
to see voters queue for hours.
Which all sounds rather American. Talk of a "culture war" between "Metro
America" (Democrat) and "Retro America" (Republican)--or numerous other
variations--has now been a commonplace in the United States for at least a
decade. Whatever, the divisions run deep and virtually fifty-fifty, just as
they do in Ukraine.
So, as outsiders, we can watch and worry about the policies of the next
Ukrainian president but breathe a sigh of relief that there is a natural
stabilizing factor, a factor that gives some confidence that Ukraine will
not go the way of Belarus or Russia. And we can watch the size of the
turnout and the size of the demonstrations and take hope that each vote
and each demonstration reinforces Ukrainians' desire to have a say in
who rules them.
But unfortunately, some outsiders are unwilling to stay as mere observers.
Russia has done more or less whatever it could to make plain its support
for Yanukovych, from open endorsements to hosting voter centers for
expatriate Ukrainians and making it easier for Ukrainians to stay in Moscow
for three months than it is for Russians. There have even been blatant
propaganda "documentaries" on Russian TV (coupled with throwbacks to
imperialist sentiment, such as the claim that Ukrainian is a language "not
very well suited for management, technology, and politics"). There are late
signs that Moscow is being more circumspect, but it has made a determined
bid to pull Ukraine toward it--which also means in a less democratic
direction.
Again, though, there are reasons to be phlegmatic. Just as Ukraine is torn
between its own east and west, its foreign policy is torn between the East
and the West. Unable to decide where to head, it has pursued a
"multivector" policy ever since independence, facing both Europe and
Russia, and occasionally taking a few steps in either direction. In other
words, it hasn't moved very far. Not particularly beneficial for Ukraine
perhaps, but, for the time being at least, this history of indecision means
that Yanukovych's lurch towards Russia can be viewed as a political gambit,
not a geopolitical decision.
A SPECIAL CASE, A SPECIAL DEAL
But being phlegmatic shouldn't be a reason not to worry or to do nothing.
Russia's economy has a magnetic pull. If Russia could offer Ukraine more
than simply being a younger brother to be pushed about, Russia could also
make itself attractive to Ukraine's leaders. And, as the very big changes
in the U.S. political map over the past decades suggest, a changing world
and clever politicians can change the political landscape. More importantly
in the immediate term, having an internal stabilizer does not mean Ukraine
is stable. It does not mean Ukraine is not a weak state.
The Central Election Commission's late decision to slash the number of
voting centers in Russia could be seen as a sign of institutional strength
(though it was made under opposition pressure). But the Constitutional
Court's decision to change the constitution and allow Kuchma to stand
for a third term shows just how fragile Ukraine's institutions are.
The weakness of these institutions may be partly a Soviet legacy, and
partly Ukraine's inability to fix its eyes on building stronger, more
independent Western-style institutions. But the West is also to blame--for
not fixing its own attention on Ukraine more. NATO does what it can,
working with Ukraine's military as part of the Partnership for Peace
program. The European Union offers something modest, in the form of the
inclusion in its Neighborhood Policy. But Ukrainians who claim that this
puts the country on a par with Tunisia are right. Ukraine is a special
case, with a striking similarity to another special case, Turkey.
Like Ukraine, Turkey is split, in Turkey's case between Asia and Europe,
between secularism and Islam. What makes it of special interest to the EU
and the United States, though, is its key strategic position, which is why
the United States has always placed such emphasis on it, now as part of its
"greater Middle East initiative." Geography also makes Ukraine special.
Part of Turkey's strategic attraction is the Black Sea. The second-largest
country on the Black Sea is Ukraine. Europe has a "wider Europe" policy.
The country that could best link "wider Europe" with the "greater Middle
East" is Ukraine. In other words, stabilizing Ukraine would help
significantly to stabilize an important region.
But more important than the geopolitics, though intertwined, is that these
elections show that there is genuine political competition in Ukraine and
that most Ukrainians want to have a vote. That democratic desire needs
better support. A country as large in size as France and with a population
of nearly 50 million (one-third the population of Russia) deserves special
attention. If Turkey deserved a special deal in the EU's eyes, so does
Ukraine. The EU should state clearly that Ukraine could one day become
a member. -30- Transitions Online: www.tol.cz
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 219: ARTICLE NUMBER EIGHT
Letters to the editor are always welcome
========================================================
8. "YUSHCHENKO GAINS AN EDGE"
The hard-fought and highly controversial presidential race in Ukraine
nears the finish line with the opposition candidate taking a tenuous lead.
By Ivan Lozowy, Transitions Online (TOL)
Prague, Czech Republic, Mon, 15 November 2004
KIEV, Ukraine--Ukraine's cliffhanger of a first-round presidential vote
was resolved on 10 November when the Central Electoral Commission
(CEC) announced that the opposition candidate Viktor Yushchenko had
won a very narrow victory over the serving prime minister, Viktor
Yanukovych.
Yuschenko took 39.87 percent of the vote, a fraction more than
Yanukovych's 39.32 percent. Both now enter the second-round run-off,
on 21 November, knowing that the gap in votes--just under 156,000--
could be easily overturned in a country of 48 million.
While there was never any doubt that both would compete in the second
round--the remaining 20 percent of the electorate was divided among 22
other candidates--the actual result was keenly awaited and 10-day gap
between the vote and the final count produced some bitter exchanges.
The CEC took as long as it was legally allowed before it announced the
results of the 31 October poll. That might partly have been because a
significant number of violations were reported, prompting international
monitors to say that the elections did not meet international standards. In
the end, the CEC's key decisions were to invalidate the vote in two
districts in the centrally located region of Cherkasy. In both, Yushchenko
had come out ahead. In one, it disbanded the regional election commission.
Ukraine has 225 voting districts.
Throughout the election campaign, there have been fears that a tight race
could be tilted in Yanukovych's favor by the election commissions, which
are weighted in favor of Yanukovych. Such fears had prompted Yushchenko,
even before the first round, to call for demonstrations outside the CEC
building in central Kiev if the vote went against him. His campaign team
called off the demonstration before Ukrainians went to the polls. In the
event, the biggest clash between the opposition and the authorities has
perhaps been in the northeastern city of Sumy. On 13 November, six people
were sentenced to 10 days in prison for allegedly resisting police on
election day. They had been trying to find out the results in their
district, which the local election commission had not yet released. After
the sentence was announced, special Interior Ministry (OMON) riot police
waded into a crowd outside the courthouse, using tear gas and riot sticks.
Forty-five local students have gone on hunger strike in protest at the
sentences.
Both candidates have accused the other of trying to manipulate the results.
Yanukovych's supporters, for example, has claimed Yushchenko MPs
hacked into the CEC's computer network. Yushchenko's camp responded
by asserting that the real count was being conducted on a computer server
in the Presidential Administration.
The CEC itself has received its share of criticism, and not just for
dragging out the vote counting process. Journalists working for Ukrayinska
Pravda, a pro-opposition news website that has nonetheless not endorsed
Yushchenko and that has posted a series of articles during the election
campaign by Yanukovych supporters, noted on 3 November that the CEC
had counted 100 percent of the districts where Yanukovych had come out
on top and only 80 percent of those in which he was losing to Yushchenko.
YUSHCHENKO GAINS AN EDGE
The actual result is a disappointment for Yanukovych's camp. His
representative in the CEC, Stepan Havrysh, said that that victory for his
candidate, which required gaining over 50 percent of the vote, was
"stolen," though he failed to say who by. The sense that the Yanukovych
campaign had suffered a setback was compounded by the decision by
President Leonid Kuchma to fire the heads of 11 local district
administrations on 9 November, the day before the final first-round results
were announced. Yanukovych's campaign manager, Serhiy Tyhipko, declared
he would be happy to fire another 200 because the first round of voting
"shows the level of faith in our local government."
Ten of the 11 regions were areas in which Yushchenko came first on 31
October, which has fueled belief among the opposition that the officials'
real failing was not to ensure Yanukovych won.
For the opposition, the result was both better than the expected and worse
than the result it claims it achieved. Yushchenko's supporters point to
exit poll results indicating that their candidate led in the first round by
between 5.6 and 7.5 percent as evidence to support their contention that
the government was responsible for mass falsifications in the first round.
Opinion polls showed that many Ukrainians also expected the elections
to be unfair. They had discounted the possibility of defeat for the powerful
government machine backing Yanukovych. An official result showing
Yushchenko in the lead was therefore a surprise.
The significance of that surprise--and an indication of why the final count
was so important--was perhaps apparent in the immediate aftermath of the
announcement. Within days, Yushchenko had been boosted by support
from other candidates.
First and most important, Yushchenko won the backing of the man who
came third in the first round, the leader of the Socialist Party Oleksandr
Moroz. If his first-round supporters all transfer to Yushchenko, the
challenger could add 5.81 percent to his total. Moroz clearly indicated
that his support for Yushchenko was not based on "ideological" grounds.
However, he also demonstrated how keen he is to help keep Yanukovych
from coming to power by explicitly instructing his local campaign staff
across the country to work for Yushchenko in the run-up to 21 November.
Moroz's support allows Yushchenko to expand his support base into a new
voter segment, left-leaning Ukrainians. Since Yushchenko fared very badly
in a number of eastern districts (oblasts), where the left vote is
strongest, he badly needed Moroz's support.
Another ex-candidate, Anatoliy Kinakh, has also thrown his support behind
Yushchenko and is now travelling with him on the campaign trail. As a
former prime minister and chairman of the powerful Ukrainian Union of
Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, Kinakh brings to Yushchenko's campaign
a measure of clout among Ukraine's well-heeled business elite. Some local
organizations of Kinakh's party have rebelled, however, and the Donetsk
and Luhansk chapters have declared that they will instead support
Yanukovych in the second round.
The mayor of Ukraine's capital, Kiev, Oleksandr Omelchenko, has not
endorsed either of the two remaining candidates. However, in a surprise
move, his campaign staff declared they would work for Yushchenko's
campaign.
In addition, two ex-candidates who were already allied to Yushchenko,
Leonid Chernovetsky and Mykahilo Brodsky, publicly declared their
support for Yushchenko.
Of the ex-candidates, only Natalia Vitrenko, a leftist fire-brand who
received 1.53 percent on 31 October, has come out in support of
Yanukovych.
In another sign that Yushchenko's advantage in the first round may be
tilting the balance in his favor, 10 MPs from the Center faction, which
contains at least two Yanukovych supporters, signed a statement calling on
Ukrainians to turn out on 21 November to vote Yushchenko into office.
A major disappointment for Yanukovych is the decision by the Communist
Party, whose candidate came in fourth with 4.97 percent, to instruct its
supporters to vote against both candidates in the second round. This
despite the Communists' affinity with Yanukovych--both support an increased
role for the Russian language in Ukraine and dual citizenship--and contrary
to advice from their Russian comrade, Gennady Zyuganov, the leader of
Russia's Communist Party, who publicly advised Ukraine's Communists to
vote for Yanukovych.
Although the race remains close by any measure, the most recent opinion
polls show Yushchenko with an advantage greater than the statistical margin
for error. Results from a 8-11 November poll conducted by the Kiev
International Institute of Sociology and the Razumkov Center give
Yushchenko 45.5 percent and Yanukovych 40.0 percent.
PRESSURE FROM CIVIL SOCIETY
Interest in the first round was high, with turnout put at an impressive 74
percent. The campaign continues to be animated by some important sections
of civil society, including the student movements around both of the main
candidates.
Some of the key campaigns aim specifically to highlight voting problems.
The most widespread problem on election day were errors in the electoral
roll listing who is entitled to vote. The independent Committee of Voters
of Ukraine announced that at least 10 percent of voters had been denied the
right to vote on 31 October. A non-partisan initiative, Znayu ("I Know"),
has mounted a campaign to get voters to check their local voting lists well
before the second-round vote. The CEC has also ruled that minor errors in
the voting lists can be corrected on the spot. Even so, the possibility
that voters might be turned away because of inaccuracies on the list looks
like a potentially big problem in the second round.
Developments since the first round have been mixed. Yanukovych's control of
the media has been undermined by a revolt among journalists working at the
state-run UT-1 as well as STB, ICTV, Novy Kanal (all three of which are
controlled by Viktor Pinchuk, Kuchma's son-in-law) and two channels, 1 1
and Inter TV, that are controlled by the Social Democratic Party of
Ukraine-United, which is headed by Kuchma's chief of staff Viktor
Medvedchuk. The revolt against stilted news coverage of the election
campaign erupted just three days before the election and within days, over
300 journalists had signed a declaration demanding more balanced and fairer
reporting. Over a dozen journalists have also resigned from their jobs in
protest. Since then, there has been a clear, marked change on in coverage
of the campaign by all the major TV channels, with more airtime given to
Yushchenko's campaign than before and with more balanced reports.
Even the church has been dragged into the fray. Several cases in which
priests from the Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Moscow Patriarchate
(UOC-MP) asked parishioners to vote for Yanukovych have been registered
in the Poltava and Kirovohrad oblasts. Yushchenko's representative in the
Rivne oblast, MP Vasyl Chervoniy, discovered 1.5 tons of campaign materials
for Yanukovych and against Yushchenko stored in a local church.
Yushchenko has tried to redress the balance, meeting Bishop Wolodymyr
Sabodan of the of the UOC-MP. However, the meeting backfired after
Yushchenko's campaign manager, Oleksandr Zinchenko, told the press that
the bishop had blessed Yushchenko. An irritated UOC-MP described
Zinchenko's statement as "dirty political trick."
In terms of the number of parishes, the UOC-MP, the post-independence
successor to the Russian Orthodox Church, remains the most powerful
Orthodox church in central, eastern, and southern Ukraine. (The breakaway
Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Kiev Patriarchate has remained largely silent
during the campaign, though its head, Metropolitan Filaret, indicated
several months ago that Yanukovych deserved to be supported.)
The more open media coverage and intense public discussion was probably
what prompted Yanukovych to change his mind and agree to a live, televised
debate with Yushchenko on UT-1, the national TV station with the widest
coverage. The debate, which lasted 100 minutes, was held on the evening of
15 November.
Yanukovych looked more presidential than Yushchenko, whose face has been
pock-marked by a bout of serious illness that he claims was the result of a
poisoning attempt by the authorities. But Yushchenko packed harder punches,
particularly when he read through a list of food products indicating how
much the average household could afford on their average income during
Yanukovych's tenure and during his own stint as prime minister, in
2000-2001.
The candidates discussed social policy, the economy, internal, and foreign
affairs. On several occasions, Yanukovych and Yushchenko interrupted each
other in exasperation, but overall the debates were calm. This was partly
due to the format, which had each of the candidates speak in turn, four
times, for about 10 minutes each.
With control of the media less secure and having to failed to win some key
endorsements, Yanukovych may also have wanted to make a direct appeal to
Communist Party supporters to vote for him as well as to shore up his
support among Russophones and the elderly, two of his major constituencies.
Yanukovych seemed to lean in this direction during the debate, switching to
Russian in the last five minutes and lamenting the disappearance of the
USSR. Yushchenko, for his part, also strove to win over the Communist vote,
claiming he would include Communists in the government he would form when
president.
Whether Yushchenko can hold on to his lead and turn his current edge into a
winning margin is anyone's guess. And if he cannot, the fear lingers that
there may be street clashes between opposition supporters. -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ivan Lozowy is a TOL correspondent and also runs an Internet newsletter,
the Ukraine Insider. Transitions Online: www.tol.cz
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.219: ARTICLE NUMBER NINE
========================================================
9. "POLITICIANS ARE NOT CHEAP"
The American delegation, consisting of the ex-Congressmen
and five political campaign consultants
By Vladimir Kravchenko
Zerkalo Nedeli On The WEB, Mirror-Weekly
International Social Political Weekly
Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, 13-19 November 2004
"Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych could have accepted Olexander Moroz'
assistance, but rejected it for ideological reasons," - said Edward Prutnik,
advisor to the head of Ukrainian government, on Monday at a conference in
Washington. "The Prime Minister will ensure that the Ukrainian contingent
stays in Iraq until the situation there stabilizes, and he will not change
his intentions in order to get support from any ex-presidential
candidates," - continued Yanukovych's advisor. Besides, Prutnik told the
audience that Yushchenko, pursuant to his agreements with Moroz, promised
to forbid land privatization. Yanukovych, on the contrary, promotes land
privatization, which, in fact, was one of major points in contention between
him and the Socialists' leader.
It is amazing how the Yanukovych men's declarations vary in different parts
of the world. Having revealed double standards maintained by the candidate's
crew, Prutnik's statement testified to the grave concerns of official Kyiv
over the image that the Premier has projected in the USA and to its
willingness to improve this image. In order to understand how Kyiv is going
to do that, one should first look at the recent visit to Ukraine of a
delegation of former US Congressmen and PR experts.
"For a politician, it is more humiliating to be fooled than to be
corrupted," - said an American following our elections with genuine, and
somewhat astonished, interest. I do not know what the seven ex-Congressmen
felt while leaving Kyiv upon observing the voting in the first tour of the
Ukrainian presidential elections. They might regret getting engaged in the
whole thing. As new details of the visit emerge, it becomes evident that its
organizers and sponsors did not want the former Democratic Members of
the House to watch the official Kyiv observe the national election law and
honour its international commitments vis-a-vis fair, free and transparent
elections.
The American delegation, consisting of the ex-Congressmen and five
political campaign consultants, had a different role to play. Its members
were expected to neutralize, at least in part, the negative assessment of
the first tour by the OBSE and US observers. Upon their return to the
USA, whose political elite is worried about the turn that the Ukrainian
presidential race is taking, the delegation members were to comfort the
American public that the Ukrainian elections are free and fair, conducted
in full compliance with the democratic standards and without major
irregularities.
At first, some of them might have no idea whatsoever as to their real
mission in Kyiv, and when they guessed about it - it was too late to turn
back. Thus, seven former Congressmen played into the visit sponsors' hands.
Having broken into three groups, they set out to Kyiv, Donetsk and Odessa.
On 31 October, they visited 40-50 polling stations and observed the voting.
Their conclusions about the free and fair Ukrainian elections were
immediately broadcast by the central TV channels: Inter, "1+1" Studio,
Novy and First National Channel.
"We have concluded that in the regions where we were present the elections
were free, open and fair. All election officials did their best to follow
the law and established procedure. I think you can rest assured that the
results were not falsified. Of course, there were problems but they were not
systematic," - said the delegation leader Robert Karr at a press conference
on 1 November. Some Ukrainian TV channels kept referring to him, as well
as to his colleagues, as "experts of the Institute for Eastern Europe and
NIS".
"I believe a lot of my fellow citizens would be impressed with the fair
elections in Ukraine," - seconded Jay Johnson. "When I go back to the
United States, I will tell the people there that I witnessed one of the best
forms of democracy in action, and I hope your system will get spread
throughout the world, including the USA," - echoed Norman D'Amours,
lavishing compliments on the Ukrainian authorities.
On the next day, the website http://www.temnik.com.ua
published an official report of a delegation representing the "Union for
Democracy and Transparency". The Central Election Commission website,
in particular its registry of official observers from foreign countries and
international organizations, provides no data on the Union. We could not
have managed to identify this mysterious entity, but for the list of the
delegation members included into the above report. The latter mentioned that
the delegation was made up of seven ex-Congressmen (Robert Karr, Jay
Johnson, Norman D'Amours, Peter Barka, Jim Moody, Ronald Coleman,
Michael Word) and five political campaign experts (Michael Arno, President
of Arno Political Consultants; Mark Meissner, Vice President of Quorum;
Bernie Campbell, Richard Pollock and Bernard Whitman, owner of a New
York-based company Whitman Strategies).
The report is a remarkable document. Whereas at the press conference the
former Congressmen contented themselves with establishing the fact of fair
and free elections in Ukraine, the report, published on their behalf,
censures other international observers: "The delegation members were taken
aback at a prejudiced attitude of most international observers whom we met.
We got an impression from our sporadic meetings and talks with those
observers that they had come with the following preconceptions: massive
irregularities are inevitable, one campaign favourite's failure to receive
the majority of votes will, in and of itself, attest to the existing
pressure on the part of his contender and the forces behind him".
Yet did the former Congressmen write the report on behalf of the "Union for
Democracy and Transparency" or were their names used to add credibility
and weight to the text prepared well in advance? Another former Democratic
Congressman John Conlan asked himself the same questions. Shocked with
the opinion purportedly voiced by his former colleagues from the House of
Representatives, Mr Conlan tried to get in touch with them and find out who
paid for their trip to and sojourn in Ukraine, whether they knew the purpose
of their visit, etc. According to John Conlan, the delegation members either
responded evasively or declined to comment at all. He thinks some of the
ex-Congressmen were misled with the window-dressing at the selected polling
stations. He also thinks the report of the Union delegation was a fraud.
"When I worked as an observer at the previous elections, it took us two to
three weeks to draft the report, sort out all controversial points and
finalize the document. The volume of our report was comparable with that
of the Union's five-page paper. The difference is, however, that in this
case the report was written overnight. An unusual promptness with which it
was placed on the Russian-language website (and, mind you, the document
must have appeared in English first and then translated into Russian) leaves
no doubt as to its authorship. The ex-Congressmen did not write it. Most
likely, the report was compiled beforehand in order to forestall the
critical statements of the OSCE and Council of Europe and to justify the
elections in general," - told John Conlan to a ZN correspondent.
It is hard to say if the statement of the ex-Congressmen and PR specialists
has contributed to shaping the US public opinion about the fairness and
openness of Ukrainian elections. It seems unlikely, given that George W.
Bush is sending his personal envoy, Senator Richard Lugar, to observe the
run-off. The White House has various sources of information, including the
ex-Congressmen delegation and the US Embassy to Ukraine. And yet the
delegation's statement did not go unheeded. It aroused indignation of those
who had visited Ukraine during the election campaign. You will remember
that starting last summer four delegations of the Former Congressmen and
Congresswomen Association were in Ukraine and determined that the election
campaign was marred with multiple irregularities and abuses. On 10 November,
they published an angry article in the Washington Times listing all of the
abuses witnessed by them in Ukraine and blaming their ex-colleagues for the
lack of thorough analytical substance behind their conclusions.
The twelve American's trip to Ukraine within the delegation of the "Union
for Democracy and Transparency" is part of the Yanukovych team's strategy
for forging the Ukrainian Prime Minister positive reputation amongst the
American political and business elites. One of the focal points in this
strategy implementation is Alex Kiseliov, who was born in Odessa but
emigrated to the USA in 1992. According to the American Internet outlet
Washington Jewish Week, Alex Kiseliov, posing as an "investment manager",
works for a small broker firm North Atlantic Securities. He also calls
himself a "strategy consultant to the Ukrainian Prime Minister Viktor
Yanukovych in the United States".
In America, Mr Kiseliov is perceived as an intermediary link between the
Yanukovych crew and local PR companies. He must be something more than
a mere intermediary, given the considerable financial resources available to
him for paying the American PR companies' bills and the statements he makes
to slander Viktor Yanukovych's political opponents. For instance, in an
article published by the Washington Jewish Week, Mr Kiseliov maintains: "I
am positive he [Viktor Yanukovych] will make a formidable president." At the
same time he argues that Yushchenko is notoriously disrespectful of the
minorities' rights. Kiseliov complaints that "Yanukovych has no chance to be
heard in the USA" and that the Ukrainian Diaspora groups backing up and
lobbying for Yushchenko "came to America after WWII from the areas where
the population collaborated with the Nazi".
According to the Washington Jewish Week, it was Alex Kiseliov who organized
and headed the above group of international observers. In an interview to
the Kiev Post newspaper Kiseliov acknowledged that he covered 50% of the
delegation's expenses. The other 50% of the money came from private American
donors. By and large, the visit cost its sponsors about USD 170 thousand!
Our sources report that Robert Karr, an official organizer, intents to
arrange for another team of ex-Congressmen to go to Ukraine for observing
the run-off.
The question is where and how Alex Kiseliov raised the funds required for
this fairly expensive undertaking? Moreover, his expenses, amounting to
hundreds of thousands, go beyond the cost of sending delegations to Ukraine.
On Monday, a press conference by Edward Prutnik, advisor to Yanukovych,
was held in Washington. Alex Kiseliov, who accompanied the latter, admitted
to the journalists that he hired the DCS Company to provide PR services to
Viktor Yanukovych in the USA. And according to the Ukrainska Pravda, over
the last year Mr Kiseliov contracted many other companies to festoon and
filigree the Ukrainian Premier's public image in the USA. Amongst them are
Venable LLC and DBC Public Relations Experts, which is properly documented
in the FARA Department of the US Ministry of Justice. Since March 2003,
Kiseliov has paid USD 1,041,395.50 to several PR companies in Washington.
Interestingly, at least one of the five political campaign experts whom Alex
Kiseliov brought to Ukraine for the first tour of presidential elections -
Bernard Whitman - was engaged in designing Viktor Yanukovych's campaign.
Whutmen, together with DBC Public Relations Experts, subcontracted an
esteemed company GfK Research to conduct surveys for the Yanukovych team.
When the survey showed low ratings, Whitman readjusted the numbers a bit, in
the incumbent Premier's favour, and published them in the Western press
without authorization on the part of GfK Research. As soon as the dodge was
exposed, GfK Research refused to ever deal with Whitman and the Yanukovych
people.
The Ukrainska Pravda reports that in August 2004 Alex Kiseliov signed a
contract with Jefferson Waterman International. His client is the
aforementioned Edward Prutnik who had a fairly busy trip to Washington last
week. The officially formulated aim of this Ukrainian official's visit to
the USA remains unknown. So is its source of funding. Radio Freedom
qualifies Prutnik's mission as the last try to refine his boss' image in the
USA in the run-up to the second tour of the presidential elections. On
Monday, Prutnik held a press conference "Ukraine between West and East" in
the National press Club, on Tuesday he gave an interview to the conservative
Washington Times, and on Wednesday he discussed 'the US interests in
Ukraine" in a small and low-profile Nixon Centre. It is noteworthy that
another person accompanying Edward Prutnik on his visit to Washington was
Kempton Jenkins, consultant from Jefferson Waterman International, who used
to expedite Leonid Kuchma, Hryhoriy Surkis and Viktor Medvedchuk's interests
in the USA, which is yet another proof that the Donetsk clan and SDPU(o)
have joint effort in promoting Yanukovych in the Unites States.
The main messages Edward Prutnik was trying to send out to the American
public and leaders were as follows. Over the time of Viktor Yanukovych's
premiership, the Ukrainian GDP has grown dramatically, pensions and salaries
have been raised several times. Viktor Yanukovych stands for the development
of Ukraine's equal and mutually beneficial relations both with Russian and
with the Western countries. He is not responsible for the anti-American bent
in the election campaign. At the meeting with the Washington Times reporters
Prutnik argued that George Soros was funding a project geared towards Viktor
Yanukovych's losing the elections.
The management of the International Renaissance Foundation disavowed
Prutnik's statement as contrary to the fact: "By equalling the assistance
rendered by the International Renaissance Foundation in securing free and
fair elections with the support to the opposition, the incumbent authorities
demonstrate either ignorance or deliberate denunciation of democratic
electoral standards". However, the Yanukovych team seems prepared to
spare no effort and means, to recruit any allies in order to cultivate their
candidate's image in the USA. -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Vladimir Kravchenko, editor@mirror.kiev.ua
LINK: http://www.mirror-weekly.com/ie/show/521/48358/
========================================================
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 219th 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
========================================================