"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"
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION DAY IN UKRAINE
THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT" Year 04, Number 225
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, SUNDAY, November 21, 2004
-----INDEX OF ARTICLES-----
"Major International News Headlines and Articles"
1. "RUSSIA'S IMPERIAL FUTURE HINGES ON UPCOMING
VOTE IN UKRAINE"
Op/Ed - By Georgie Ann Geyer, Yahoo! NEWS
Washington, D.C., Saturday, November 20, 2004
2. BUSH WARNS UKRAINE TO CONDUCT FAIR ELECTION
RFE/RL, Prague, Czech, Republic, Saturday, Nov. 20, 2004
3. "UKRAINE'S LIVELY ELECTION CONTEST IS A
REBUKE TO AUTOCRACY"
By Chrystia Freeland, Financial Times
London, UK, Saturday, November 20, 2004
4. CHALLENGER IN UKRAINE WARNS AGAINST VOTE FRAUD
Reuters, Agence France-Presse, Kiev, Ukraine, Sat, Nov 20, 2004
5. "SHOW TIME IN KIEV"
OP-ED by Ariel Cohen, Washington Times
Washington, D.C., Friday, 19 November 2004
6. "IN UKRAINE, ORANGE RIBBONS SIGNAL A DESIRE
TO CUT TIES WITH SOVIET PAST"
By Mark MacKinnon, Globe and Mail
Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Sat, Nov 20, 2004 - Page A21
7. "OLD GEOPOLITICAL REVALRY CAST SHADOWS
OVER UKRAINE ELECTION BATTLE"
By Tom Warner in Kiev, Financial Times
London, UK, Saturday, November 20, 2004
8. U.S., EUROPE WILL SCRUTINIZE TOMORROW'S ELECTION
By Natalia A. Feduschak in Kiev, The Washington Times
Washington, D.C., Saturday, November 20, 2004
9. A UKRAINIAN-AMERICAN TECHNOLOGY GROUP MOBILIZES
THOUSANDS OF UKRAINIANS TO HELP REDUCE FRAUD AND
ABUSE IN THE UPCOMING PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
Article Editor: Carly Zander, News from Send2Press Newswire
Torrance, CA, Friday, November 19, 2004
10. THE CHOICE: RUSSIA'S FATE IS BEING DECIDED IN UKRAINE
by Boris Berezovsky, Vedomosti, Friday, 19 November 2004
11. VIKTOR YUSHCHENKO AHEAD IN POLLS BY 8 POINTS
Backed by a broad coalition
Our Ukraine Update, Kyiv, Ukraine, Issue 56, Fri, Nov. 19, 2004
12. THE INTELLIGENTSIA IS GETTING ITS ACT TOGETHER
Now that writers and artists are emerging from their esthetic cocoons,
maybe they'll actually play a role in Ukrainian political and social life
OP-ED: by Oleh Sharma, Kyiv Post, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thu, Nov 18, 2004
13. THE LOGIC BEHIND PUTIN'S INTERVENTION IN UKRAINE
By James Sherr, Conflict Studies Research Centre
Defence Academy of the United Kingdom [1]
Nezavisimaia Gazeta, Moscow, Russia, Thu, Nov 18, 2004
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 225: ARTICLE NUMBER ONE
========================================================
1. RUSSIA'S IMPERIAL FUTURE HINGES ON UPCOMING
VOTE IN UKRAINE
Op/Ed - By Georgie Ann Geyer, Yahoo! NEWS
Washington, D.C., Saturday, November 20, 2004
WASHINGTON -- Next week, the world will have the answer to a
fascinating geopolitical question: whether the pivotal post-Soviet state of
Ukraine will choose to return eastward, toward Russia, or to move
westward, toward Europe.
This is far from a random choice, for around it flow political torrents that
will decide whether Vladimir Putin's Russia can again be
a formalized, or informalized, empire -- or whether it will be forced by
Ukraine's action to turn itself toward Europe, and toward becoming more
European than Asian. Seldom has a moment in recent history been more
potentially decisive -- and seldom has such a moment been less attended to
in America, now obsessively sidetracked by Fallujah, Mosul and Ramadi.
The moment of truth comes on Sunday, when 50 million citizens of Ukraine,
who have had the historical bad luck of being so far from God and so close
to Moscow, vote for a new president. The results should be known early
next week. After 14 years of the corrupt, sinister, old-Leninist hand of
Leonid Kuchma, the Ukrainians have a clear choice.
They can vote for Viktor Yuschenko, the reformist candidate who stands
for joining the European Union, the World Trade Organization and NATO
as soon as possible, for strengthening Ukrainian nationalism, and for the
interests of Western Ukrainian Christians and the Ukrainian diaspora in
the West.
His people talk about a "Chestnut Revolution" in honor of the chestnut trees
that line the famous Kreshchatik Street in Kiev -- mirroring the idea of the
"Velvet Revolution" that freed the Czech Republic from its Soviet era.
Or they can vote for Viktor Yanukovych, the candidate of the Eastern
Ukraine, where many Ukrainians speak a language called Surzhik, a
bastardized combination of Ukrainian and Russian. Here, the huge Soviet-
era enterprises like Donetz steel still dominate the economic state, and
Moscow still dominates the mind-set.
Yanukovych, the current prime minister, has shown his colors, and they are
all shades of red. Russian intervention in the campaign has been intense,
public and utterly clear. President Putin traveled pointedly to Kiev,
reviewed troops with "his" Viktor, and set up Potemkin groups to support
Moscow's candidate, like the now-famous and mysterious "Russian Club."
The Russians have also used this fall's elections in Ukraine, and the far
more problematic ones in totalitarian Belarus, to challenge the kind of
institutional European election-watching that had given some hope to these
elections. These attempts to cut back on European influence, particularly in
the sensitive areas of elections, show the extent to which President Putin
is trying to isolate the remnants of the Soviet empire from the West.
For his part, Yanukovych vowed to introduce Russian as a co-language
with Ukrainian, to offer dual Ukrainian-Russian citizenship to his fellow
citizens, and to give Moscow special rights to the oil pipeline in the south
near Odessa.
When I was in Kiev earlier this fall to report on this important election, I
was struck by one overwhelming factor in this new geopolitical equation:
President Putin's dreams of a renewed Russian empire cannot be fulfilled
without the Ukraine. It's the pivotal piece in that puzzle of nations, the
linchpin between East and West -- and it could be the revolt of the
borderlands against the metropole, should Yuschenko win.
In an odd sense, the way Ukraine goes today is the way Russia will go. For
centuries, Moscow has dominated Kiev. This week, the decision-making
capacity has reverted to Kiev.
It would seem that the pro-Western Yuschenko is in place to win. This
election is, in fact, a run-off; in the first elections on Oct. 31, the two
candidates were so close that it was always assumed there would have to be
a run-off. In the October elections, Yuschenko came out ahead -- but only
by 39.9 percent of the vote to his opponent's 39.3 percent. Meanwhile, the
strange dialectic of the development of the East continues.
Ukraine is doing well economically, with an average growth over the last few
years of 9 percent and a predicted growth this year of 13.4 percent -- but
there is no civic society, no economic or social justice, no true sense of
nation.
Russia, comparatively, is doing poorly, dependent wholly upon oil and gas
income, losing population at a staggering rate, nursing its ethnic
problems -- but still dreaming of lost empire. Long gone are the days of the
1990s with the dream of a "common European home" from Europe to the
Urals. Today, the Kremlin puts forth curious ideas such as there being "two
Europes," one in Brussels and a "Euro-East" in Moscow, of which Ukraine
must be a cultural, political and military part.
How this can all work out is difficult to see, regardless of what happens
this week. Meanwhile, in Brussels recently, a spokesman for the European
Union, while acknowledging that Ukraine might eventually become formally
part of Europe, was hesitant. "We tell the Ukrainians, 'You will be getting
everything the E.U. can offer -- except institutions. You will get trade,
support for entry into the WTO, a political dialogue and common programs --
but at this point, we don't see you being in our institutions.'"
In the next breath, an economist argued to me, as did so many of the
progressive Ukrainians, that the economic sense of the world is such that
eventually Ukraine will have to enter the world organizations because of its
sensitive commodities, such as steel, chemicals and agricultural products.
For now, the only clear fact is that, while so many in power in Washington
are dreaming of empire, other parts of the world are busily working out
their dreams. We might pay attention. -30-
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.225: ARTICLE NUMBER TWO
=======================================================
2. BUSH WARNS UKRAINE TO CONDUCT FAIR ELECTION
RFE/RL, Prague, Czech, Republic, Saturday, Nov. 20, 2004
PRAGUE - U.S. President George W. Bush is warning Ukraine that the
United States will have to review its relations with Kyiv if tomorrow's
presidential election is not fair.
In a letter to outgoing President Leonid Kuchma released today, Bush
thanked Kuchma for sending Ukrainian troops to Iraq. But Bush said that
if tomorrow's run-off vote is unfair, Washington "will be obliged to review
our relations with Ukraine and with individuals who participated in fraud
and manipulation."
Kuchma is due to deliver a national address today ahead of the runoff
between pro-Moscow Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych and Western-
leaning opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko.
High-profile observers are in Kyiv to monitor the vote, including Russian
State Duma speaker Boris Gryzlov and Richard Lugar, the chairman of
the U.S. Senate's Foreign Relations Committee. -30-
(AFP/ITAR-TASS/AP/Reuters) [Action Ukraine Monitoring Service]
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.225: ARTICLE NUMBER THREE
=======================================================
3. "UKRAINE'S LIVELY ELECTION CONTEST IS A
REBUKE TO AUTOCRACY"
By Chrystia Freeland, Financial Times
London, UK, Saturday, November 20, 2004
Politics in Ukraine, where voters will choose a new president tomorrow,
remains an esoteric subject in western capitals. But in Moscow it is a hot
topic. A few weeks ago, at a party at one of the hotels glittering on the
edge of Red Square, I listened as Mikhail Zadornov, a reformist member
of parliament and a former finance minister, described his recent Kiev visit
to an avid Russian journalist.
Mr Zadornov explained that the Ukrainian political and business
establishment was uncertain whether Viktor Yanukovich, the pro-Russian
prime minister backed by the current regime, or Viktor Yushchenko, a
pro-western former prime minister, would win. The journalist was puzzled:
if the state was supporting Mr Yanukovich, how could he lose?
"You don't understand," Mr Zadornov replied, "Ukraine is not like here.
It's not all already decided. It's a real race."
Today it is still not decided, and that is why Ukraine's election is so
important. The past few years have been depressing for those who believed
the collapse of the Soviet Union meant democracy could finally come to that
great swath of the globe inhabited by eastern Slavs and their eastern and
southern former Soviet neighbours. The initial promise of the early 1990s
has given way to increasingly authoritarian regimes; first in central Asia,
then in Belarus and, most recently, in Russia. Instead of calling
the-end-of-history - the simplistic but also generous view that the whole
world would soon be democratic and capitalist - students of the former
Soviet Union have started to revert to bleaker theories about Russian
cultural uniqueness; its historical unpreparedness for democracy; and even
the alleged craving of its people for the strong hand of an autocrat.
Ukraine's lively democratic contest is a powerful rebuke to that school of
thought. It is not that the Ukrainian regime has been innocent of creating
the sort of "managed democracy" that allowed Boris Yeltsin to pass the
presidential mantle to a hand-picked, previously obscure, successor, and
that Vladimir Putin has used to exclude everyone apart from his henchmen
from the Russian political space.
Kiev has practiced the usual tricks - using the media controlled by the
state and by friendly business oligarchs relentlessly to promote its
candidate; finding administrative pretexts, especially in the provinces, to
block opposition rallies; harassing businesses and media outlets friendly
to the opposition through the tax authorities and other government agencies.
However, these techniques have not quite worked. In the first round of
voting last month, irregularities prompted stiff protests from western
observers, including the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in
Europe. But voter turnout was an enthusiastic 75 per cent. Moreover,
ordinary Ukrainians did not just vote, they seemed committed to making
sure each vote counted.
"What I encountered were plumbers, teachers, pensioners, students,
doctors, housewives and farmers all working together very hard to ensure
that the elections in their polling stations were free and fair," reported
Daniel Bilak, a Canadian lawyer who officially observed the first round
of voting in Kherson, a depressed industrial city in southern Ukraine.
"They knew that the results would likely be 'corrected' at the territorial
level or higher. They didn't care. Most were determined to provide their
neighbours with an opportunity to cast their ballots, regardless of whom
they supported."
That grassroots determination is having a real effect on the Kiev elites.
As a Russian oligarch with strong personal ties to Ukraine told me, the
difference between Russia and Ukraine is that the Ukrainian authorities are
scared - scared of western opinion, but most of all, scared of their own
people. Their fear manifested itself most clearly late last month when the
Central Electoral Commission publicly conceded, albeit after an unseemly
delay, that in the first round of voting Mr Yushchenko narrowly won.
For Moscow, Ukrainian pluralism has a powerful demonstration effect. It
is easy for Russians, both the enfeebled liberals and the triumphant
authoritarians, to shrug off the examples of Poland, the Baltic states and
even Georgia - countries separated from Russia by a huge historical,
religious and cultural gap.
Comparisons with Ukraine are harder to dismiss. "The building of real
democracy, with real choice in Ukraine, gives a chance for democracy in
Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan," Mr Zadornov told me on the eve of
the final ballot. "If the rules of the game are followed in Ukraine, that is
a strong example that this is possible in the post-Soviet space."
Most observers see Mr Putin's aggressive support for Mr Yanukovich
as the latest Russian reassertion of its historical suzerainty over the
territories once controlled by the Russian empire then the Soviet Union.
But Mr Putin is also defending the political system he has done much to
create and on which his power depends: increasing centralised state control
over politics and the economy, underpinned by an emotive campaign to
restore Russian greatness abroad. The Ukrainian vote could offer an
alternative: pluralism, fed by a vibrant civil society at home, and a drive
to rejoin the western, and particularly European, family of nations abroad.
No one can predict how dirty the voting and vote counting will be in
Ukraine tomorrow, or whether violent confrontations erupt from a contested
official result. But it is a real race, and, in a region that was starting
to seem doomed to authoritarianism, that is a hopeful sign in itself. -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The writer is the FT's deputy editor.
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.225: ARTICLE NUMBER FOUR
Your comments about the Report are always welcome
========================================================
4. CHALLENGER IN UKRAINE WARNS AGAINST VOTE FRAUD
Reuters, Agence France-Presse, Kiev, Ukraine, Sat, Nov 20, 2004
KIEV - The liberal challenger in a closely fought presidential election in
Ukraine threatened Friday to take his supporters to the streets if the
authorities tried to deny him victory by cheating. Viktor Yushchenko also
made an issue of Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich's criminal convictions,
saying they would embarrass Ukraine if Yanukovich were elected in a runoff
vote Sunday.
.
During his youth, Yanukovich, who is backed by Moscow, was convicted twice
of robbery and assault and jailed. His aides say the charges were later
struck from the record. Yushchenko's combative talk on the last day of
campaigning increased the tension before the second-round ballot, which many
analysts say will decide whether post-Soviet Ukraine tilts toward the West
or toward its big neighbor, Russia.
.
"If we encounter large-scale falsification, we will lead people on to the
streets and we will defend our rights," Yushchenko, an economist and former
prime minister, told a final news conference. Yushchenko, an advocate of
gradual moves toward integration with Europe, beat Yanukovich by the tiniest
of margins in the first round on Oct. 31. Yanukovich has the support of both
Ukraine's outgoing president, Leonid Kuchma, and Vladimir Putin of Russia.
.
The vote on Sunday is also considered a referendum on Kuchma's
scandal-plagued 10 years in power. Kuchma refused to sign into law on
Friday a bill approved by Parliament that would outlaw absentee ballots in
an effort to forestall fraud in the voting Sunday. "No clause in this law
conforms to the Ukrainian constitution," Kuchma was quoted by the
Interfax-Ukraine news agency as saying.
.
He also said, "These changes are impossible in such a short time span." The
electoral authorities have already issued one million absentee ballots to
enable people to vote away from home. He branded the legislation a
"provocation" by the opposition to "make the situation in the country more
tense" and to "worry the voters." The law needed to be signed by the
president and published in the official press to take effect. -30-
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.225: ARTICLE NUMBER FIVE
========================================================
5. "SHOW TIME IN KIEV"
OP-ED by Ariel Cohen, Washington Times
Washington, D.C., Friday, 19 November 2004
Sunday is the show time in Kiev. Presidential elections will define
Ukraine's political course. Moreover, they will decide whether Ukraine faces
the West or Russia for years to come. The United States has a lot at stake
in the outcome.
In the first round of voting Oct. 31, the Kremlin's preferred candidate,
former Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych lost by one-half of 1 percent to
opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko - according to the government-
controlled Central Electoral Commission. Western observers and independent
pollsters gave a stronger victory to Mr. Yushchenko, of between 4 percent to
6 percent. The most recent opinion poll gave Mr. Yushchenko a 5 percent
lead.
The race is tight, but due to widespread election fraud instigated by
Yanukovych supporters and Mr. Yushchenko's inadequate access to
government-controlled TV, Mr. Yanukovych might steal the second round
set for Nov. 21.
The United States has a strategic interest in keeping Ukraine's sovereignty
and democracy on track while preventing increased Russian influence. The
U.S. government has warned that, in the future, selective visa bans may
apply to Ukrainian officials involved in election fraud. This may not be
enough to prevent such fraud in the second elections, since the Yanukovych
circle has much at stake and Russian influence is powerful.
The biggest geopolitical challenge for the United States is to keep Russia
in the antiterror coalition and assure access to Russian energy resources,
while ensuring the former Soviet states' global economic integration,
sovereignty and independence. The tools in the U.S. diplomatic box are
limited. Russia, flush with cash from oil sales, no longer needs Western
economic assistance, and advanced technology for oil exploration is widely
available in open markets.
The Russian, Soviet-educated, elite, which often views the U.S. as a
strategic adversary, may challenge sovereignty or increase control of the
post-Soviet states, such as Ukraine, by overtly supporting pro-Moscow
political candidates.
There are two reasons for the Kremlin's ascendancy in Ukraine. The first,
say sources in Moscow and Kiev, is that Russia poured unprecedented
resources into the election: at least $300 million from sympathetic Russian
and Ukrainian businessmen. The second reason is more sinister: Russia has
access to the Soviet-era criminal files of Mr. Yanukovych, jailed twice on
criminal charges of aggravated assault and robbery.
Ukraine is a crucial test of the changing geopolitics in Eurasia. It is a
large-scale trial run of Russia re-establishing control in the former empire
and expanding its access to the Black Sea and Southeastern Europe. Ukraine
should be viewed in the larger context of recent negative regional dynamics.
Before the elections, on Moscow's request, President Leonid Kuchma and
Mr. Yanukovych engineered Ukraine's move away from NATO and European
Union integration. On Oct. 17, President Alexander Lukashenka pulled off an
unconstitutional power grab in Belarus, and the stalemate continues in
Moldova over secession of the trans-Dniester region.
Greater Russian activity in the Caucasus also is evident. There, Moscow
deliberately undermines Georgian independence by creeping annexation of
Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
Russia deliberately focused its policy on detaching Ukraine from its Western
ties and creating a codependent relationship with Kiev. According to Moscow
experts, for Russian President Vladimir Putin, Viktor Yanukovych's criminal
past creates a relationship of a case officer and an "asset." Such a
relationship by definition creates Ukrainian dependence.
If Russia consolidates control over Belarus and Ukraine, Moscow may also
pursue a greater say over the Caspian oil. It will do so by increasingly
pressuring Kazakhstan, possibly utilizing its Russian-speaking minority as a
conduit of influence. Russia eventually will move to secure Azerbaijan's
compliance with the Kremlin regional policy. Beyond that, it may move to
further undermine pro-American Mikhail Saakashvili's presidency in Georgia
and pressure Uzbekistan to return to the fold of the Russia-led bloc in the
former Soviet Union.
However, as the Beslan school-hostages tragedy showed, Russian military
power remains limited in countering real security threats as opposed to
largely imaginary U.S. influence. Such an ambitious policy may create
imperial hubris for Russia - with unpredictable consequences.
Ukraininan forces committed to democracy, free markets and Euro-Atlantic
integration should be boosted through diplomatic, financial and media
support by the Bush administration. Washington should support the
sovereignty and territorial integrity of all post-Soviet states. The United
States should further expand cooperation with these countries via NATO's
Partnership for Peace and bilateral military-to-military ties, exchanges,
train-and-equip programs and, where necessary, limited troop deployment.
Washington should maintain and expand dialogue with Moscow over
contentious issues, such as South Ossetia and Abkhazia, as well as the
U.S. presence in Central Asia.
The latest developments in Iraq, Iran and elsewhere in the Middle East
require more attention from the Bush administration and are likely to limit
U.S. freedom to maneuver in Eurasia. If Russia consolidates its control over
Ukraine and Belarus, and the U.S. does not challenge Moscow's growing
influence, the true independence of the post-Soviet states may prove only an
interlude before the Kremlin reasserts control.
The region's geopolitical outcome depends on Washington's engagement in
Eurasia, including with the Kremlin; a U.S.-Russian agreement on "traffic
rules"; and on Moscow abandoning an aggressively anti-American policy
within and beyond the territory of the former Soviet Union. -30-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ariel Cohen is a research fellow at the Heritage Foundation and the editor
of "Security Changes in Eurasia After 9/11" (Ashgate, forthcoming).
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.225: ARTICLE NUMBER SIX
Additional names for the distribution list are always welcome
========================================================
6. "IN UKRAINE, ORANGE RIBBONS SIGNAL A DESIRE
TO CUT TIES WITH SOVIET PAST"
By Mark MacKinnon, Globe and Mail
Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Sat, Nov 20, 2004 - Page A21
LVIV, UKRAINE -- Tamara Vujtusik has travelled widely enough in the
European Union to know something is wrong in her native Ukraine. The
orange ribbon tied to her knapsack represents her hope that it can be
fixed, starting tomorrow.
Orange is the colour of opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko's campaign, and
this city of 800,000 people on Ukraine's western edge, just 70 kilometres
from the Polish border and the European Union, is awash in it on the eve of
a presidential vote that is seen as critical to the country's future.
The ribbons are tied to lampposts, strung from car antennas and worn by
young and old as fashionable armbands or hair ties. Yesterday afternoon on
the city's main boulevard, a group of students tied a bright orange skirt
around a statue of Taras Shevchenko, the country's most famous writer.
In the first round of the election, on Oct. 31, the Western-leaning Mr.
Yushchenko nudged out his main rival, Russian-backed Prime Minister Viktor
Yanukovich, by the slimmest of margins, 40 per cent to 39 per cent, with
both sides falling short of the majority necessary for victory in the
crowded field. Each side accused the other of widespread voter intimidation
and ballot-box fraud.
The first round revealed a country split in half, roughly along the line of
the Dniepr River. Those to the east voted heavily for Mr. Yanukovich, who
has campaigned on closer ties to Russia, while in Lviv and across western
Ukraine it was a landslide for Mr. Yushchenko, who captured upward of
80 per cent of the vote in some districts.
The second-round face-off between the two men is now seen as deciding
what direction Ukraine will take in the coming years: whether it will
gravitate toward the EU or fall back into the Kremlin's orbit. For Ms.
Vujtusik and other students at Lviv National University, it's an easy choice
to make. They blame Mr. Yanukovich and outgoing President Leonid
Kuchma for Ukraine's high unemployment and limits on freedom of speech.
"Definitely, it would be better for us to be in Europe. The EU has a good
economy and we don't," the 18-year-old applied mathematics student said in
slow, precise English. She said that Ukraine can join Europe only if Mr.
Yushchenko wins the election, since the EU will never admit a country run by
"criminals."
Ms. Vujtusik's friends, also decked out in orange as they gathered around
her in a tight semi-circle, nodded their heads in unanimous agreement.
Several complained about Russia's heavy-handed interference in the
election, including a two visits by President Vladimir Putin that many saw
as campaign stops for Mr. Yanukovich.
"If Yanukovich wins, Putin will treat Ukraine as a buffer between Europe and
Russia," said Oksana Oreshchin, another applied math student. "We can't go
back to the Soviet Union."
The tug of war for Ukraine was joined recently by the foreign ministers of
Poland and Germany, who said that if the election is seen as free and fair,
they will make an "extremely enticing" proposal to the new president.
The Lviv region is lost territory for Mr. Yanukovich's campaign, and its
headquarters in the city was all but deserted yesterday. Staffers talked
hopefully of trying to win 10 per cent of the vote by focusing their efforts
on pensioners nostalgic for the Soviet era.
Lviv has long been the centre of Ukrainian nationalism and, since Soviet
troops seized the region from Poland in 1939 under the Molotov-Ribbentrop
pact, of anti-Russian sentiment. It's a very different story than the
pro-Russian east side of the Dniepr.
"The main problem is that democracy in the eastern part of Ukraine is not
developed as much as it is here," said Roman Shust, dean of history at Lviv
National University. He had a Yushchenko flag jammed into the penholder
on his desk. "The majority of the people there don't identify themselves
even as Russian or Ukrainian. They call themselves Soviets."
Broadcasts from Channel 5, the country's lone independent television
station, are blocked in the east, Prof. Shust noted. As a result, he said,
residents get distorted information about the election, particularly about a
poisoning incident that hospitalized Mr. Yushchenko for three weeks in the
middle of the campaign. Mr. Yushchenko's face was left seriously disfigured
by what he says was an attempt to assassinate him.
Democracy may yet turn nastier in Ukraine, although such talk before the
first round quickly petered out on voting day. Mr. Yushchenko has called for
a "nationwide vote count" on Kiev's Independence Square tomorrow night,
code for a mass rally to put pressure on the central election commission
against fixing a vote the opposition leader is confident he can win fairly.
Lviv National University's halls are plastered with photographs of Mr.
Yushchenko, and students talk openly of trying to bring down the regime
through street demonstrations if they see tomorrow's results as falsified.
Barricades made of broken furniture have been erected in front of the
university since the first-round numbers were announced, and are manned 24
hours a day by bandanna-wearing members of Pora, a youth group with ties to
similar organizations that led street demonstrations that brought down
Slobodan Milosevic in Serbia in 2000 and Eduard Shevardnadze in Georgia
last year. The barricades are covered in spray-painted graffiti about the
need to fight dictatorship, alongside tributes to the rap group Wu-Tang Clan
and heavy rock group Iron Maiden.
"We won't let them steal the election," said Oleh, a 19-year-old economics
student who declined to give his last name. He and a handful of other
students have been sleeping in a tent behind the barricade for three weeks
to make sure the police don't take it down. "If there's a falsification, the
whole of Ukraine will be in the streets."
A friend added quietly: "We hope the East will be too." -30-
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.225: ARTICLE NUMBER SEVEN
Suggested articles for publication in the Report are always welcome
========================================================
7. "OLD GEOPOLITICAL REVALRY CAST SHADOWS
OVER UKRAINE ELECTION BATTLE"
By Tom Warner in Kiev, Financial Times
London, UK, Saturday, November 20, 2004
Ukraine votes tomorrowin what political analysts are calling one of the most
pivotal elections in eastern Europe since the fall of the Soviet Union. The
closely matched contest for Ukraine's presidency pits the Russian-backed,
centrist prime minister Viktor Yanukovich against the western-leaning,
liberal opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko. Foreign interest is intense,
with western governments and election observers attacking official bias in
Mr Yanukovich's favour, while Russian officials accuse the west of backing
Mr Yushchenko.
Ukraine's outgoing president, Leonid Kuchma, yesterday received high-powered
guests from Washington and Moscow. Richard Lugar, head of the US Senate's
foreign relations committee, said he was delivering a personal message to Mr
Kuchma from George W. Bush, US president, stressing the importance
Washington places on the election's fairness. Javier Solana, the European
Union's foreign policy chief, telephoned Mr Kuchma on Thursday with a
similar message. President Kuchma yesterday also received Boris Gryzlov, the
speaker of Russia's lower house of parliament and a close ally of President
Vladimir Putin.
The vote will determine whether Ukraine seeks to imitate its neighbours in
central Europe by committing to economic and political liberalisation and
the goal of EU membership, as Mr Yushchenko promises, or whether the
second-largest country in eastern Europe will throw its weight behind a
Russian-led bloc made up of the former core members of the USSR, which
Mr Yanukovich favours.
Mr Putin is strongly backing Mr Yanukovich, and has made two trips to
Ukraine during the final weeks of the campaign, most recently last weekend,
when he was shown on television kissing Mr Yanukovich on the cheek and
wishing him success.
"Ukraine has become an object of a geopolitical struggle between Russia and
the west," said Alexander Rahr, an expert on Russia and Ukraine at the
German Council for Foreign Relations. "Geopolitical rivalries that we
thought were finished 13 years ago are now coming back in a very dramatic
way." The elections have also created an unprecedented enthusiasm for
politics among millions of Ukrainians. Turnout in the first round of
elections was 75 per cent and is expected to be even higher on Sunday.
Last month's vote revealed a sharply polarised nation, with central and
western regions voting overwhelmingly for Mr Yushchenko, while the east
and south backed Mr Yanukovich. Mr Yushchenko led nationwide by a
margin of less than 200,000 votes out of more than 28m cast.
The vote is being held against a backdrop of growing mistrust between
Russia and the west - a relationship aggravated by Mr Putin's increasingly
authoritarian hand in domestic politics and his attempts at staking a claim
to a sphere of influence on Russia's southern perimeter.
Mr Rahr said Mr Putin appeared to be betting on Mr Yanukovich to reverse
the recent trend of setbacks to Russian influence in Georgia and Moldova.
"If Russia loses Ukraine as well, it will be a heavy, heavy blow to Putin's
policy," he said.
Mr Yanukovich is campaigning on a platform of "peace and stability", which
he contends would be threatened by Mr Yushchenko's "extreme" proposal to
re-orient economic and foreign policy towards Europe.
Mr Yushchenko told a press conference yesterday that his campaign was
continuing to uncover evidence of vote-rigging in the first-round vote and
called for volunteers to bring their video cameras to polling stations to
help document any foul play. -30- [Action Ukraine Monitoring Service]
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 225: ARTICLE NUMBER EIGHT
Letters to the editor are always welcome
========================================================
8. U.S., EUROPE WILL SCRUTINIZE TOMORROW'S ELECTION
By Natalia A. Feduschak in Kiev, The Washington Times
Washington, D.C., Saturday, November 20, 2004
KIEV — Ukraine will choose a successor to President Leonid Kuchma
tomorrow amid extraordinary scrutiny from the United States and Europe,
with many observers already saying the governing party can win only
through fraud.
First-round balloting on Oct. 31 ended in a virtual dead heat, with pro-
Kuchma Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych and opposition candidate
Viktor Yushchenko within a half-percentage point of each other, despite
widespread questions about the fairness of the campaign.
About 1,000 foreign observers will fan out across the country for the
vote, sponsored by the European Network of Election Monitoring
Organizations (ENEMO), which is cooperating with Freedom House
and the Washington-based National Democratic Institute for International
Affairs [NDI].
U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard G. Lugar,
Indiana Republican, arrived in Kiev yesterday to observe the election on
behalf of President Bush. It is the first time a U.S. president has sent an
envoy to oversee a Ukrainian election. Mr. Lugar met with Mr. Kuchma to
urge him to ensure a fair vote and convey a message from Mr. Bush that
Ukraine's relations with the United States would depend on the vote's
legitimacy.
"I will indicate personally to the leadership of this country what is at
stake, to instruct their followers and those who may have some influence to
take seriously the fact that the world is watching," Agence France-Presse
quoted Mr. Lugar as telling reporters.
The Washington Times reported Thursday that several allies of Mr.
Yanukovych have been placed on a U.S. visa watch list under a law that
permits the United States to bar foreigners suspected of corruption and
undermining their country's election processes. People on the list include
Kuchma chief of staff Viktor Medvedchuk, the president's son-in-law and
parliament member Viktor Pinchuk, General Prosecutor Gennadiy Vasyliev
and Minister of Internal Affairs Mykola Bilokon.
A State Department official in Washington also said the first round of
elections was not free and fair and that "we remain quite concerned that
they are not going to meet that requirement" in the second round.
Mr. Kuchma, who is retiring after 10 years as president and two as
prime minister, responded Thursday by accusing "some" opposition leaders
of undermining democracy but said he did not think the U.S. Congress
would pass sanctions against Ukrainian officials. "Serious men sit in [the
U.S.] Congress," he said. "I am convinced that Congress won't make any
decision for a very simple reason, because ... the Ukrainian people will
elect a new president in keeping with our constitution and in keeping with
our laws.
"The president will become who the Ukrainian people elect," he said.
"Ukraine needs absolutely honest elections and an absolutely legitimate
president like [it needs] the air."
U.S. and European observers, however, said a dirty-tricks campaign
against Mr. Yushchenko's supporters has cast doubt on the integrity of the
second round. "The numerous irregularities identified by our mission before
Oct. 31 and during the interelection period have the potential to undermine
the integrity of the electoral process," said Edil Baisalov, co-leader of
ENEMO.
ENEMO co-leader Peter Novotny said the group also was concerned
about "pressure on students and state workers to support the government
candidate or face repercussions." Threats and physical assaults against
election commissioners, campaign workers, election observers, students
and the press have increased since the first round of the elections.
Mr. Yushchenko said yesterday that he would bring "millions" of
followers into the streets to defend the constitution if the government
tried to falsify tomorrow's results.
Mr. Lugar, before leaving Washington, said "a fraudulent or illegal
victory would leave Ukraine's leadership and country crippled. ... The
new president would lack legitimacy with the Ukrainian people and the
international community."
The United States has provided about $13.6 million in assistance to
support democratic elections in Ukraine. The aid is part of a broader,
multiyear effort to further democracy by promoting an independent press,
local government reform, rule of law, civil society development, and an
open and transparent political process. -30-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINK: http://www.washtimes.com/world/20041119-102441-4885r.htm
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.225: ARTICLE NUMBER NINE
========================================================
9. A UKRAINIAN-AMERICAN TECHNOLOGY GROUP MOBILIZES
THOUSANDS OF UKRAINIANS TO HELP REDUCE FRAUD AND
ABUSE IN THE UPCOMING PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
Article Editor: Carly Zander, News from Send2Press Newswire
Torrance, CA, Friday, November 19, 2004
KYIV, Ukraine - With onset of the second round in Ukraine's 2004
presidential election, Maidan (http://eng.maidanua.org) - the leading on-
line provider of political news in Ukraine - has become critical catalyst
drawing thousands of its readers directly into Ukraine's election process.
These readers have become civic activists having signed up online to
serve as election workers, independent observers and field reporters.
"People usually learn about us from the Internet, but later they quickly get
involved with like-minded people throughout the country," says one of
Maidan's co-founders, Mr. Mykhaylo Svystovych.
The website was established four years ago in Ukraine - a country where
only ten percent of its citizens has Internet access. Immediately, the site
became widely popular with its monthly audience growing to 250,000.
Maidan provides continuous and timely political reports and analysis along
with topical forums and regional civic organizational initiatives for the
site readers' participation.
During 2004, Maidan's network of volunteers increased in number
dramatically and continues to grow. Dozens of volunteers living in Ukraine,
the U.S., Canada, Great Britain, Germany, the Czech Republic, Poland,
Australia, and Russia, gather field reports, translate real-time news,
conduct interviews and analyze data.
Maidan is one among the very few free media enterprises in Ukraine that
has survived the government's ongoing repressions of independent press,
TV and radio stations, which intensified following the murder of prominent
investigative journalist and Internet publisher Georgiy Gongadze in 2000.
Following Georgiy Gongadze's death hundreds of thousands of previously
indifferent Ukrainians started seeking ways to actively engage in the
political process. They looked for contact with political and civic interest
groups eager to bring the country closer to democracy.
"Maidan provides a virtual meeting place for individuals where they could
find expression for their social and political energy. When they are ready
for more substantial involvement in politics, we refer them to various local
NGOs, PACs, and political parties depending on their interest," says Mr.
Volodymyr Martyniuk, a co-founder of Maidan.
"We have substantial support in many communities, as people often trust us
more than brick-and-mortar NGOs, PACs, and political parties. Our NGO
serves the public with individual attention over the long-term, assisting
them to help their local communities by using world class technology to
support the processes we have," Mr. Stefan Seitz, Maidan's project
manager claims. Online civic activism is booming in Ukraine.
For more information, please visit us at http://eng.maidanua.org or email
us at forum@maidanua.org Contacts for Grassroots Info Center Maidan:
Mr. Stefan Seitz, Tel: 380 (066) 243-5008; (English, Ukranian, Russian)
Mr. Myhaylo Svystovych, Tel: 380 (50) 310-4698
(Ukrainian or Russian language only)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINK: http://www.send2press.com/PRnetwire/pr04_111901-maidan.shtml
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.225: ARTICLE NUMBER TEN
Your financial support is needed, please send a check.
========================================================
10. THE CHOICE: RUSSIA'S FATE IS BEING DECIDED IN UKRAINE
by Boris Berezovsky, Vedomosti, Friday, 19 November 2004
On Sunday, November 21 the people of Ukraine will make a historic
choice:whether to continue restructuring their society in a liberal way, or
to follow Russia's example into a new spiral of authoritarianism leading not
only to stagnation, but to a loss of independence.
The outcome of Ukraine's presidential election is no less important for
Russia. Vladimir Putin's regime depends on who wins in Ukraine: Viktor
Yushchenko the democrat or Viktor Yanukovich the authoritarian. That is
precisely why Putin and Co. have shown unprecedented aggression and
persistence in their attempts to impose a fear-based regime on independent
Ukraine. Current events in Ukraine need to be viewed in two contexts: the
changes across post-Soviet territory since the break-up of the USSR, and
the changes worldwide since September 11, 2001.
FIRST CONTEXT: CHANGES ACROSS THE FORMER SOVIET UNION
In 1991, Russia led the liberal revolution across all of post-Soviet
territory. All former Soviet states followed Russia's example - each in its
own way, of course, based on differences in ways of thinking and resources.
Until 2000, Russia was the undisputed leader in democratic change across the
collapsed empire. But when Vladimir Putin came to power, a restoration of
the authoritarian model began - hesitantly at first, then on a large scale.
It aimed to rebuild an administration system which had already disintegrated
once - a centralized political system, then a centralized economic system -
first in Russia, then across Eurasia.
Yet the great momentum created by the Yeltsin-era revolution had not failed
to make its mark, in Russia and elsewhere.
There has been a breakthrough in Georgia, Russia's vassal for centuries. The
"revolution of roses" is nothing less than a response to the Putin regime's
attempts to subordinate Georgia; it is another natural - and thus
essential - step towards strengthening Georgia's political and economic
independence from Putin's Russia.
It is particularly important to note that this breakthrough came from below,
not from above: that is, it originated solely in the will of the Georgian
people. The current situation in Ukraine is very similar. These days, it's
Ukraine and Georgia - not Russia - that are becoming the leaders in
democratic change across the former Soviet Union.
SECOND CONTEXT: CHANGES AROUND THE WORLD
The reaction to September 11 highlighted the crisis in contemporary
democracies - above all, the crisis in the United States, the leader of the
community of democracies. Some indirect signs had become apparent even
earlier. A particularly significant example was the undermining of the
democratic institution of executive branch elections. The election of George
W. Bush as president of the United States in 2000 bore clear signs of
authoritarian, monarchical regimes - bearing no resemblance to democracy.
The global crisis experienced by the democracies of the United States and
Europe created additional problems for the peoples of the former Soviet
Union who had decided to take the path of liberal reforms. It became clear
that no help was forthcoming from abroad. What's more, for the sake of
transient and dubious gains, the West has chosen to actively cooperate with
the Putin regime, thus encouraging it to be even more aggressive.
The shameless stance taken by Western political leaders on the issues of
Chechnya and Abkhazia is continuing in the case of Ukraine. The troops sent
to Iraq by Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma have proved to be sufficient
payment for the Bush administration to turn a blind eye to government abuses
and Russia's unlawful interference in Ukraine's election campaign. The voice
of Europe has also been inappropriate to the significance of current events.
These two contexts - the persistence of the authoritarian Putin regime and
the self-isolation of the West, along with abuses by the authorities in Kiev
and Donetsk - add up to the harshest test faced by the people of Ukraine
in their recent history. It's quite clear that the decision made by the
Ukrainian authorities and the Putin administration to rely on Russian
political techniques has failed. Ukraine may be "similar" to Russia, but it
is not Russia. There is no doubt that the question of who holds political
power in Ukraine has now gone beyond the polling stations; it is being
decided on the streets and squares of this huge country.
"Not enough blood was shed to win freedom - that's why there's been a
retreat." A leading Russian politician said this about the Yeltsin-era
revolution and the subsequent reactionary period of the Putin regime.
God grant that Ukraine can follow its path to freedom and independence
without bloodshed. -30- [Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boris Berezovsky is the president of the Civil Liberties Foundation
in London; in 1998-99 he served as executive secretary of the
Commonwealth of Independent States. [Translated by Gregory Malyutin]
[Translated by What The Papers Say]
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.225: ARTICLE NUMBER ELEVEN
Your financial support is needed, please send a check.
========================================================
11. YUSHCHENKO AHEAD IN POLLS BY 8 POINTS
Backed by broad coalition
Our Ukraine Update, Kyiv, Ukraine, Issue 56, Fri, Nov. 19, 2004
KYIV - "With me are strong and courageous worthy people," Viktor
Yushchenko said in his final statement of the campaign. "We do not trust
this government and we will not allow it to usurp power," the presidential
favorite added.
He faces incumbent Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych in the November
21 presidential run-off vote. Opinion polls taken by two research firms
show Yushchenko going into the election with a comfortable 8-point lead
nationwide against the government-backed candidate.
Since the first round 31 October presidential vote, Yushchenko - already
supported by center-right political parties - won additional backing from
the country's socialist, industrialist and green parties. Women's groups,
literary figures and the country's Kyiv-based intelligentsia also threw
their support behind Yushchenko. His campaign effort was joined in its final
days by a number of world-renowned sports figures and celebrities such as
boxing champions Vitaliy and Volodymyr Klitchko, chess master Ruslan
Ponomaryov, and Ruslana, the energetic singer who won the 2004
Eurovision song competition this past May.
Putting ideological differences aside, what unites the broad Yushchenko
coalition is a growing public movement to rid the country of discredited
and corrupt rulers. Nationwide public opinion polls show two-thirds of
Ukrainians are unhappy with the country's direction. They distrust the
ruling regime and strongly believe government corruption is the root cause
of the country's political and economic problems.
"Ridding Ukraine of bandits" has become the main theme of the Yushchenko
campaign, which research shows cuts across ideological, geographic, age,
gender, religious, economic and other demographic measures. The theme
particularly struck a chord with Ukrainian students, many of whom have
little hope for decent jobs after graduation. They've mobilized a protest
movement against repressive local government that censors mass media,
illegally searches and seizes property, and limits constitutional freedoms
of movement and assembly.
"Victory is within reach," Yushchenko said at his final campaign press
conference today. "However, we must protect our victory on 21 November
by returning to local polling stations after they close at 8:00 PM and await
until poll results are made public," Yushchenko urged.
"We want all of Ukraine and the entire world to see how people voted so
that our central election commission does not again distort the will of the
citizens," Yushchenko said. His coalition plans a nationwide public vote
count to be held on Sunday evening after polls close in downtown Kyiv's
independence square.
During the vote count following the 31 October first round presidential
poll, Ukraine's central election commission spent ten days counting ballots
from 225 territorial election districts. The final count gave Yushchenko
11,125,395 votes compared to 10,969,579 for Yanukovych, which
placed the two into a final run-off vote.
"The entire government today has been transformed into a machine for vote
falsifications." Yushchenko said. Public opinion polls taken after the first
round poll indicate Yanukovych falsified seven percentage points through
abuse of absentee ballots, vote rigging, switching election commission
protocols and other means. Ukraine's Socialist Party yesterday filed a
complaint with the Supreme Court demanding a recount of the first round
ballots in 36 districts. Yushchenko supports the effort.
Ukraine's highly unpopular President Leonid Kuchma will leave office in
the coming weeks after the 21 November election results are announced
officially. He leaves behind a mixed legacy that includes an improved,
albeit corrupted, economy as well as a number of highly publicized unsolved
murder mysteries. Combined, these two factors caused most Ukrainians to
lose faith in government and instead back an opposition movement trusted
to manage change. -30-
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.225: ARTICLE NUMBER TWELVE
Your financial support is needed, please send a check.
========================================================
12. THE INTELLIGENTSIA IS GETTING ITS ACT TOGETHER
Now that writers and artists are emerging from their esthetic cocoons,
maybe they'll actually play a role in Ukrainian political and social life
OP-ED: by Oleh Sharma, Kyiv Post, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thu, Nov 18, 2004
The current election campaign obviously mobilized the Ukrainian cultural
elite and the intellectual circles. Singers divided into two opposing camps,
prominent writers announced their support for one of the candidates and a
group of "creative intelligentsia" called on citizens to exercise their
civic awareness. Yet society, it seemed, didn't hear their voices, and the
authorities ignored them. Why is that?
VOLUNTARY GHETTO
"I'm taking my bull terrier for castration/ And that's why I'll miss the
demonstration." That poem was written by the Ukrainian poet Oleksandr
Irvanets seven or eight years ago. Around that time the prominent Ukrainian
writers Yuriy Andrukhovych, Ihor Rymaruk, Taras Feduk and others left the
bureaucratic Writers' Union and founded the Association of Ukrainian
Writers, the goal of which was to free Ukrainian literature from the
nomenclatura. Cult writer Andrukhovych refused the Shevchenko Award,
the country's highest prize.
And, after the ten years of hope, people were finally beginning to lose
their patience and respect for those in power. Sharp, sarcastic attacks on
the corrupt authorities and state institutions on the part of the
intelligentsia became commonplace. A group of writers called themselves the
"new degeneration." They distanced themselves from the unclean political
environment with heavy irony and sarcasm. It was considered bad taste to
talk and write about politics. There even appeared a new type of character
in literature: the witty nihilist who withdraws from all politics, traveling
around the country, experimenting with his sexuality and a bit snobbily
neglecting social life.
In 1998, flamboyant writer Oksana Zabuzhko described one of her heroine
in the following way: "[She] had a biography behind her, the biography worth
of some criminal or political leader (the border between these two is, as we
know, shaky and determined not by character but by circumstances)." The
flirtation with criminal topics in literature and art also highlighted the
asocial cultural atmosphere, which only intensified during President
Kuchma's second term in office.
These tendencies reached their peak in 2000 after the disappearance of
muckraking journalist Georgy Gongadze. A group of Ukrainian intellectuals
wrote an open letter titled "From the Remains of the Young Ukrainian
Intelligentsia." They criticized Viktor Yushchenko, then the prime minister,
for being "a political amoeba" and demanded President Kuchma's immediate
resignation. Around 2,000 people signed the letter, expressing their
distrust and condemnation of the current authorities.
The reaction of those in power was noteworthy: they demonstratively ignored
the letter as if its authors lived in another country, or were complete
social outcasts.
However, one of the reasons why that gesture failed was that none of those
representatives of the state cultural institutions who had direct access to
the president joined the petitioners. For instance, Myroslav Popovych, the
well-known philosopher and head of the Ukrainian Institute of Philosophy,
quietly received the Shevchenko Award from the hand of the Guarantor of the
Constitution only days after the brutal harassment of opposition supporters
by law-enforcement forces. It seemed the respected professor felt
uncomfortable refusing that state honor.
Several months later, in May 2001, when the authorities of the western town
of Drohobych gave away the precious murals of the acclaimed writer Bruno
Schulz, the Ukrainian intelligentsia again addressed the president and prime
minister with a demand that these cultural treasures be returned to Ukraine.
Again, the response was silence.
But then, the authorities' reaction was appropriate given the way the
cultural elite conducted itself vis-as-vis the authorities. They ignored the
intellectuals' indignation in the same way those intellectuals ignored
politics, considering it beneath their dignity.
Then, little by little, the irony started to wear off, and "the
degeneration" started to refer to themselves as an "intellectual ghetto."
Since the ghetto differed from, say, the Warsaw or Krakow ghettos of the
Nazi era, its residents didn't put much effort into freeing themselves.
SLAP IN THE FACE
I have been always annoyed by the fact that our intelligentsia's open
letters are mainly published in such intellectual journals as Krytyka and
Ji, which don't have a wide readership.
Moreover, they seem to be the productions of a mental minority. Members of
minorities write the texts for those periodicals, and read them. I doubt
that the president's or prime minister's advisors ever held copies of them
in their hands. What's the point of reading someone go on about how Russia
interferes with Ukraine's affairs, or how Russian pop dominates the radio,
or prison mythology dominates television? I also experience these phenomena,
and suffer from them. Can such concerns affect the social situation at all?
Very little, I'm sure.
So it looks like we should thank Prime Minister Yanukovych for making our
cultural elite more engaged. Almost at the last moment, when it became clear
that the man had a real chance of winning the presidency, Ukrainian writers
and artists solidified their attitude towards the possible future leader of
the country.
Before the first round of the elections, Oksana Zabuzhko said in an
interview with Channel 5 that the authorities had slapped the nation in the
face by appointing Yanukovych prime minister. Nevertheless, the Ukrainian
people (including Citizen Zabuzhko) had already lived with that slap for the
two years during which the former Donetsk governor had led the government.
And it wasn't really a slap, but an ordinary gesture from the authorities,
which was initially considered a joke or an ironic amusement by many of our
intellectuals. During the election campaign, however, irony turned into
absurdity - "the theater of the absurd," as the well-read President Kuchma
once said.
LITTLE IMPACT
Finally, voices emerged from the "intellectual ghetto" - 12 writers
announced their support for Yushchenko in a letter this fall. But again,
the impact of their letter is doubtful, as it was mainly published on the
Internet. In Ukraine, if anyone wants to attract the attention of the
masses, he needs either to seriously confront the authorities, or to
tragically die.
This is all to say that during those long periods of its forced or voluntary
passivity the Ukrainian cultural elite had lost its skill at influencing the
society. And as it currently attempts to influence it, it looks a bit like
Don Quixote fighting with windmills.
But it's not to say that the era in which Irvanets cared only about his dog,
and so didn't go to demonstrations, was totally without value. In that
"intellectual ghetto" a very valuable cultural life, marked by freedom of
expression, high aesthetic standards and intelligence, was unfolding. It's
precisely that life that shouldn't get hermetically sealed off again from
the rest of society.
I think that after the democratic forces win the election, the
ghetto-dwellers should take the next step: they should begin to lead their
followers, and not only educated youths from the big cities or those from
the narrow intellectual circles. Then, in the future, about two generations
from now, we will see a student revolution like the one in France in 1968,
in which young people will demand power not only for honest people, but
alsofor people with good imagination and taste. -30-
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Oleh Shama is a journalist in Kyiv. Translated from Ukrainian by
Valentyna Kolesnyk and Lika Kuptsova.
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.225: ARTICLE NUMBER THIRTEEN
Your financial support is needed, please send a check.
========================================================
13. "THE LOGIC BEHIND PUTIN'S INTERVENTION IN UKRAINE"
By James Sherr, Conflict Studies Research Centre
Defence Academy of the United Kingdom [1]
Nezavisimaia Gazeta, in Russian
Moscow, Russia, Friday, November 18, 2004
[English version sent to The Action Ukraine Report by Mr. Sherr]
Most Russian 'insiders' understand two things about Ukraine's presidential
candidates. First, despite campaign rhetoric reminiscent of Kuchma's in
1994, Viktor Yanukovych has no more desire to become a 'vassal of Russia'
than Leonid Kuchma did ten years ago. Neither does the so-called Donetsk
clan, which has emerged as a tough and often brutal foil to other economic
interests in Ukraine, including Russian interests. Second, as Prime
Minister, Viktor Yushchenko presided over a significant expansion of trade
with Russia and the halting of theft from its gas pipelines. He also viewed
agreements as settlements, rather than raw material for the next struggle -
a rare exception in 'former Soviet space'. President Putin is the ultimate
insider, and he surely knows these things. Then why is he expending
economic, political and personal capital to ensure Yushchenko's defeat?
The answer is that Yanukovych would preserve a system that has afforded
Russia dominance in the CIS and afforded Putin a congenial backdrop to the
construction of the 'administrative vertical' in Russia. This is still a
'post-Soviet' system: post-Cold War but pre-twenty-first century and, for
both good reasons and bad, out of tune with the post-modernist standards and
ethos of the enlarged European Union. Yushchenko seeks to demolish this
post-Soviet system and embrace this EU ethos. Moreover, despite the
fecklessness of Western policy towards Ukraine in recent years, it is also
possible that the EU (and NATO) will embrace him.
What reinforces this answer is the fact that, for Russia, Ukraine is not (in
Trotsky's celebrated phrase) 'a country like any other'. Its formal
independence, its nezavisimost', has been eminently acceptable to Russia's
largely pragmatic elites. But its samostoiatel'nost'- its ability to diverge
from the Russian path of development - has always been a far more
controversial matter, both as a point of principle and as a basis for
practical discussion. A Yushchenko victory would make it a basis of
practical discussion. It would also call into question the general scheme
of policy put into place by Vladimir Putin since he became Acting President
in December 1999.
>From the start, the essence of Putin's celebrated 'pragmatism' has been a
disciplined effort to bring the ambitions and resources of Russia into
balance. Towards NATO, the EU and the United States, this has meant
accepting the limits of Russian power. Towards Ukraine and other CIS
countries, it has meant the methodical employment of Russian power - and, in
particular, the employment of economic power - to achieve geopolitical ends,
both inside the CIS and beyond it. The strength of the project lay in the
fact that the harder elements of economic power were complemented by softer
elements: a similar political culture with 'parties of power' in the CIS, a
similar working culture across much of the state bureaucracy and security
sector and, not least important, a business culture largely unreconciled to
EU norms of transparency, competition and contract enforcement. For 13
years, post-Soviet norms and the power structures sustaining them rendered
Ukraine's 'European choice' devoid of substance. Indeed, it was
Yushchenko's attempt to introduce EU norms in the energy sector that got him
sacked as Prime Minister. But as President? Even his partial success
would raise two important issues and two overarching ones.
The first important issue would be Russia's future as an energy superpower.
Russia is almost certain to remain an energy superpower even in the event
that Ukraine becomes a full member of the Euro-Atlantic community. But
on what terms? Today, a large proportion of CIS energy resources are in
Central Asia, and a large part of its European transport infrastructure is
in Ukraine. Not surprisingly, Central Asian suppliers are interested to
discover what will happen in Ukraine. What will happen with Odessa-Brody
once the current contract with TNK-BP expires in three years time? How
will the evolution of TNK-BP affect Ukraine's energy sector and Russia's?
Today, most Ukrainians simplistically view TNK-BP as an injection of
British capital into a Russian company, whilst ignoring the fact that it
also represents the injection of British business methods into a Russian
company. Will this process not be conducive to Yushchenko's broader efforts
to reform the Ukrainian energy market? If so, what lessons will be drawn by
players in the Russian energy market? If they draw no lessons, will this
maintain their established dominance or will it encourage suppliers and
customers in Central Asia, the Caucasus and Ukraine to look elsewhere?
The second important issue would be Russia's geostrategic position in
Europe. President Putin understands that NATO is not a military threat to
Russia. But by and large, Russia's Armed Forces do not understand this.
Even if there were no war in Chechnya, the views of this pre-eminent power
structure would matter. If Ukraine joins NATO, they will matter more than
they do today, and President Putin knows it. He also knows that in resource
terms alone, the implications of pandering to their views will be very
damaging to Russia.
The first overarching issue would be Russia's future role in Eurasia. The
culmination of Putin's CIS policy has been the Single Economic Space (SEP),
which was established not in order to complement the EU, but 'mirror' it on
the basis of its own distinctive mechanisms, laws and standards. As a
result, the EU has begun to realise that there is more than one integration
process unfolding in Eurasia. But without Ukraine, could the SEP survive,
and why on earth should it? Would Russia's energies not be better focused
on its biggest trading partner, the EU - and, instead of 'mirroring' it,
would it not be better to complement it?
Would Russia's role in Eurasia not also be challenged from a different
quarter? Within the past several weeks, many citizens in CIS countries have
seen glimpses of a vigorous election process - and with it, images of a
competent and self assured opposition, an increasingly resilient and
determined civil society, presidential debates and even judges, electoral
officials and police prepared to defy authority and uphold the law. What
resonance will this have in Moldova, Belarus, Armenia and Kazakhstan?
None at all? Would the emergence of a fully fledged democracy in the
CIS become a democratic model in the CIS? What is the future for a
region in which Russia is no longer a model, but merely a power?
And to raise the second overarching issue, what would be the future of
Russia? Can the 'administrative vertical' survive as the exception rather
than the rule? If Russia 'cannot live according to the schéma Western
values', then why has Ukraine embraced them? On the morrow of
Yushchenko's victory, it would be surprising if many raised these questions.
But if Yushchenko began to succeed, it would be surprising if many did not.
THE LESSER AND THE GREATER REALISM
Throughout his tenure as President, Vladimir Putin has accommodated to
the strengths of others and played to the strengths of Russia. On this
basis, he established a strategic partnership with the United States and a
business led scheme of integration in the CIS. This emphasis on economics
has set him apart from Russia's traditionalists and endeared him to Western
economic 'liberals'. But as much as any traditionalist, Putin has a
remorselessly geopolitical view of the world and equates security with
well defined 'zones of interest'. It is a focus that overlooks the real
threats
to security in the former USSR: the gulf between state and society, the
arrogance of public authorities, the infirmity of public institutions, the
criminalisation of the state and the powerlessness and anger of ordinary
people. Given this focus, it is not surprising that many Ukrainians have
perceived (pace Oleksandr Sushko) _ linkage between Ukraine's
dependency on Russia, its isolation from Europe and the 'dominance of
authoritarian tendencies in the system of political power'. The fruits of
this policy have been bitter-sweet: influence without security,
'neighbourliness' without affection.
Where Ukraine is concerned, this is a most unnatural state of affairs. The
majority of Ukrainians are incapable of anti-Russian sentiment. Yet a
majority have been wary of the Russian state and apprehensive about its
policy, and these perceptions have deepened - even in the wake of Putin's
October visit, which was judged (even by many Yanukovych supporters) as
unwelcome interference in Ukraine's internal affairs. Ukrainians do not
have a kto-kogo 'zero sum' view of partnership, and they are aware that they
cannot afford to have one. Whether Russia can profit from this morsel of
Ukrainian wisdom remains to be seen. -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Disclaimer: The views expressed are the author's and not necessarily
those of the UK Ministry of Defence. james.sherr@lincoln.oxford.ac.uk
========================================================
ARTICLES ARE FOR PERSONAL AND ACADEMIC USE ONLY
Articles are Distributed For Information, Research, Education
Discussion and Personal Purposes Only
========================================================
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.
========================================================
"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
========================================================
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
========================================================