"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 257
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, December 12, 2004
-----INDEX OF ARTICLES-----
"Major International News Headlines and Articles"
1. YUSHCHENKO HEADS HOME AFTER TREATMENT
Doctors Said Saturday That Ukrainian Candidate Was Poisoned
Associated Press, Vienna, Austria, Sunday, December 12, 2004
2. YUSHCHENKO WAS POISONED, DOCTORS SAY
Ukrainian's Illness Caused by Dioxin
By Peter Finn, Washington Post Foreign Service
The Washington Post, Washington, D.C.
Sunday, December 12, 2004, Front Page Story
3. COLOR US ORANGE
Ukrainains Fight For Liberty
EDITORIAL: National Review
New York, NY, December 06, 2004.
4. EUROPE MUST OPEN ITS EYES AND LOOK TO THE FUTURE
By Philip Stephens, Financial Times, London, UK, Dec 10 2004
5. A TIDE OF DEMOCRACY IS SWEEPING THE GLOBE
By Amity Shlaes, Financial Times
London, UK, Monday, December 6 2004
6. UKRAINE ROCKERS SET PROTEST TO THEIR UNIQUE BEAT
Daniel Williams, Washington Post Foreign Service
The Washington Post, Washington, D.C., Sat., Dec 11, 2004
7. UKRAINE PROTESTERS HAIL POLL BREAKTHROUGH
Askold Krushelnycky in Kiev
Belfast Telegraph, Belfast, Friday, Dec 10, 2004
8. THE STUDENTS WHO SHOOK UKRAINE - PEACEFULLY
By Fred Weir, Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
The Christian Science Monitor, Boston, MA, Wed, December 8, 2004
9. ELECTION IN A HOMELAND LEAVES UKRAINIANS
IN AN ORANGE STATE
By Jennifer Bleyer, New York Times
New York, New York, Sun, December 12, 2004
10. UKRAINE EXPERIENCING GROWING PAINS OF FREEDOM
COMMENTARY: By Susan Parker, Ph.D
Special to The Daily, The Decatur Daily,
Decatur, Alabama, Sunday, December 12, 2004
11. "WALTZING YUSHCHENKO"
OP-ED by Ivan Lozowy
THE UKRAINE INSIDER, Vol. 4, No. 6
Kyiv, Ukraine, December 11, 2004
12. IN PUTIN'S KREMLIN, IT'S ALL ABOUT CONTROL
Why the Kremlin's long reach into Ukraine should come as no surprise
COMMENTARY: by Yevgenia Albats
The Washington Post, Washington, D.C., Sun, Dec 12, 2004
13. REVOLUTIONARY LOVE
Amid Chill Political Winds in Kiev,
Young Protesters Demonstrate Their Affection
By Daniel Williams, Washington Post Foreign Service
The Washington Post, Thursday, December 9, 2004; Page C01
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 257: ARTICLE NUMBER ONE
========================================================
1. YUSHCHENKO HEADS HOME AFTER TREATMENT
Doctors Said Saturday That Ukrainian Candidate Was Poisoned
Associated Press, Vienna, Austria, Sunday, December 12, 2004
VIENNA, Austria -- Ukrainian presidential candidate Viktor Yushchenko
left a Vienna clinic on Sunday after being diagnosed with dioxin poisoning,
saying he was just "happy to be alive."
Speaking at a brief press conference before checking out of the elite
Rudolfinerhaus clinic, Yushchenko lauded the decision of thousands in
Ukraine to take to the streets to protest the outcome of presidential
elections there.
"We haven't seen anything like that for the past 100 years," he said. "I
think it would be appropriate to compare this to the fall of the Soviet
Union or the fall of the Berlin Wall."
Yushchenko thanked the medical staff, who determined he had been
poisoned, which caused his dramatic facial disfigurement.
"They've spent many days and nights with me and I am very happy
to be alive in this world today," he said. "I thank these people for this."
Doctors say he will be able to return to the campaign trail, but that it
could be two to three years before his face heals. -30-
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.257: ARTICLE NUMBER TWO
========================================================
2. YUSHCHENKO WAS POISONED, DOCTORS SAY
Ukrainian's Illness Caused by Dioxin
By Peter Finn, Washington Post Foreign Service
The Washington Post, Washington, D.C.
Sunday, December 12, 2004, Front Page Story
KIEV, Ukraine, Dec. 11 -- The illness that disfigured the face of opposition
presidential candidate Viktor Yushchenko resulted from poisoning by the
toxic substance dioxin, which might have been placed deliberately in his
food, Austrian doctors who treated him told reporters in Vienna on Saturday.
"The criminal investigation does not fit within our purview but . . . there
is suspicion of third-party involvement," said Michael Zimpfer, director of
Vienna's private Rudolfinerhaus clinic, where the candidate went for
treatment in September after falling ill while campaigning.
The face of the once youthful-looking Yushchenko, 50, was mysteriously
transformed into a blotch of lesions after he reached Austria. He also
suffered severe abdominal and back pain and paralysis on the left side of
his face. His appearance has continued to worsen, raising public concern
about his health despite his claims he is fully recovering.
Yushchenko contends he was poisoned in an assassination attempt by
"government officials" who feared that he would defeat Prime Minister Viktor
Yanukovych in elections. His opponents have dismissed the charge, saying he
got sick after gorging himself on bad sushi and too much alcohol.
Yanukovych was officially declared the winner of a Nov. 21 runoff vote. The
country's Supreme Court soon overturned the result, citing widespread poll
fraud, and a new election will be held on Dec. 26.
The Austrian doctors said on Saturday that Yushchenko's long-term prognosis
was good, though it could take several years for his face to heal. For now,
Yushchenko is "fully capable of working," said Nikolai Korpan, another
doctor.
"If this dose had been higher, it may have caused death," Zimpfer said,
noting the dioxin could have been administered through food such as soup.
Dioxins are a group of organic compounds that contain chlorine. They are a
common byproduct in the manufacture of many industrial chemicals, and are
also a common contaminant from waste incineration. They are a component of
the Vietnam-era defoliant Agent Orange and many researchers have labeled
them a cause of cancer and other diseases among people living in areas where
the defoliant was used.
Debate over dioxins' potency as a poison, as opposed to a cancer-causing
agent, has swirled for decades. But the compounds are known to cause
reproductive and developmental problems, in addition to extreme skin
eruptions known as chloracne.
Documented cases of acute dioxin poisoning are rare.
One notable case occurred in Seveso, Italy, in 1976, when an explosion at a
Hoffman-LaRoche chemical plant released a cloud of the herbicide 2,4,5-T,
exposing several thousand people to the chemical and an estimated 45 pounds
of dioxins, which typically arise as a byproduct in the synthesis of
2,4,5-T.
Many people near the plant developed severe skin problems within hours. In
the months that followed, many who experienced heavy exposures developed
chloracne. Another case occurred in 1997 in Vienna, where two employees of
a textile institute developed chloracne on their bodies, according to Olaf
Paepke, a scientist at a Hamburg institute, who conducted chemical analysis
for the investigation. The employees had levels of dioxin in their systems
thousands of times higher than normally found. Police were never able to
determine how the poisoning occurred, including if it was deliberate or
accidental, Paepke said. The employees survived.
Dioxins are not commercially available, Paepke said, but can be obtained
through industry contacts or made in a laboratory by people with the proper
skills. A tiny, unnoticeable amount placed in food is sufficient to cause
severe illness, he said.
Arnold Schecter, a dioxin expert at the University of Texas School of Public
Health at Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, said dioxins can be highly
effective poison in people who are sensitive to their effects. If Yushchenko
was deliberately given dioxin, it was done by someone who "was very clever
and very knowledgeable," Schecter said.
"If someone put a drop of pure dioxin in his food, he wouldn't taste it, he
wouldn't see it and a few days later he'd start to get sick," Schecter said.
"If you are trying to kill someone quickly, it's not the way to go," he
said. "But if you want to disable someone and want to do it subtly and have
it happen days or weeks or months after you have contact with someone,
this can do it," Schecter said. "Plus there are very few labs in the world
that can accurately detect dioxin in the blood."
Paul M. Wax, with the American College of Medical Toxicology, said two
scientists he met in Volgograd, Russia, in 2002 told him that during the
Soviet era they had investigated the potential of developing dioxin as a
chemical weapon.
Wax expressed doubts that dioxin could be used in that way. "It was never on
anyone's list," said Wax, a physician who now teaches courses on chemical
terrorism. "We don't think about it as an acute poison that can kill you. .
. . It's not going to cause someone to keel over on a battlefield," but
could cause long-term illness.
A Russian government specialist challenged the Vienna doctors' findings. "It
is impossible to get a dose of dioxin today and get poisoning tomorrow,"
said Yury Ostapenko, head of the Toxicology Information Center at the
Russian Health Ministry, speaking on the Echo Moskvy radio station. "Dioxins
do not belong to immediate-effect poisons: Poisoning develops for years and
decades."
Doctors at the Austrian clinic had declined for weeks to issue a finding on
the cause of the illness but said Saturday that tests conducted in an
Amsterdam hospital had confirmed the presence of dioxin. Yushchenko flew
to Austria on Friday for further tests at the clinic. "What happened to me
was an attempt to politically destroy a politician with opposing views," he
said at a news conference in Kiev on Friday, shortly before his departure.
"The aim was to kill me."
Speaking to 5,000 supporters in the city of Luhansk before the announcement
in Vienna, Yanukovych said of Yushchenko: "He certainly is ill and I
sympathize. Let him get well soon. As for the reasons, I know nothing. Let
the specialists work on that."
After the statement was issued, there was no immediate response from the
Yanukovych campaign, whose press secretary resigned Friday night, the latest
in a series of defections. But Yanukovych's attorney before the Supreme
Court, Stepan Havrysh, said: "I'm afraid, two weeks before the vote, it's
all political technologies," the Associated Press reported.
Yushchenko supporters said the finding bore out what they had long believed.
"This official confirmation is another opportunity to speak the truth to the
Ukrainian people and to show one more time the dirty methods that were used
by the authorities," said Yuri Yekhanurov, a member of parliament, in a
telephone interview.
In Vienna, Yushchenko struck an upbeat note Saturday. "I plan to live for a
long time and I plan to live happily," he said. "I am getting better . . .
every day." -30- [The Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Staff Writers Rob Stein, Rick Weiss, Juliet Eilperin, Joby Warrick and John
Burgess in Washington contributed to this report.
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.257: ARTICLE NUMBER THREE
========================================================
3. "COLOR US ORANGE"
Ukrainians Fight For Liberty
EDITORIAL: National Review
New York, NY, December 06, 2004.
What can one say about the Orange Revolution, so successful in its initial
aim of forcing another presidential vote in Ukraine, except - "hurrah"?
This is an awe-inspiring victory of nonviolent action. There have been a
dozen days of protests, with hundreds of thousands of protesters and not one
violent incident. Amazing. Credit goes to the cheated opposition candidate
Viktor Yushchenko, who has, for instance, insisted on a policy of sobriety
at the rallies (NBA, take note), and to the demonstrators themselves, who
have behaved in a way explicitly designed to forge a better politics in
Ukraine. As Vaclav Havel, among others, has observed, the nature of the
revolution says much about what will be the nature of the resulting
government. In that regard, the conduct of Yushchenko' supporters bodes
well for the future. They have wedded Ukrainian patriotism to a democratic
politics, putting to rest the old smear (a favorite of the KGB) that any
gathering of Ukrainians nationalists is a proto-fascist rally. They have a
chance to create a country that has an entirely valid claim to join the
institutions of the West.
If forcing a new vote, scheduled for December 26, is a victory in a major
battle, the broader war still goes on. Outgoing President Leonid Kuchma
wants immunity for his crimes and those of his cronies, who made
privatization a synonym for high-level looting. The electoral commission
that certified the fraud has yet to be dismissed and the elections laws that
facilitated the fraud still need reform. Kuchma wants to pressure Yushchenko
into accepting a reduction in the powers of the presidency he is almost
certainly going to win. Yushchenko and his supporters should continue the
fight on these important points.
For the U.S., there has been a nice alignment of foreign-policy idealism and
realism in this crisis. Spreading freedom is a good in its own right, and in
this case, accorded with the cold geopolitical imperative of keeping Ukraine
and Russia separate, thus securing Europe from Russian ambitions. Without
Ukraine (and other former imperial appendages) Russia is a country of
roughly 140 million, a major power, but hardly a colossus.
Russian President Vladimir Putin obviously badly mishandled the crisis,
creating a self-inflicted defeat for his creeping authoritarianism. He
thought he could still treat Ukraine as a colony (meddling there as he has
in Moldova, Georgia, and Belarus), and sided with history's losers in recent
weeks. The ham-fisted way Putin and the Kremlin put in play the idea of
Ukrainian separatism only created more sympathy for Yushchenko among
Ukraine's security services, which have no interest in participating in the
break-up of their country. Meanwhile, Putin's eagerness to rubberstamp the
Ukrainian election served to highlight the bogusness of his own "53
percent" - yes, those are sneer quotes - margin in 2000.
All of this is an alarm bell about Putin's intentions. But there is a limit
to our direct influence over Russia. If both the Clinton and Bush
administrations have tilted too far toward the Kremlin, it is also the case
that Russia's true democrats have so far shown few marketable political
skills (although one hopes the last few weeks will provide them an
invigorating jolt). The administration should be firm with Putin, but not
aggressive. Its conduct during the Ukraine crisis is a kind of model. It was
absolutely clear about its principles and its policy, but was careful not to
deliberately humiliate Putin. Yuschenko's prudence is worth noting here. He
has gone out of his way to say that he wants good relations with the West
and with Russia.
A note on the EU: It was a great help to the U.S. in this crisis, thanks
influence of the former captive nations Lithuania and Poland, but it would
be a mistake to read too much into that (as Robert Kagan did in Sunday's
Washington Post). This does not mean the dawning of a new era of U.S.-EU
cooperation, based on entirely coterminous interests and values. During the
Cold War, after all, the U.S. occasionally had common interests in specific
crises even with the Soviet Union. The influence of the EU over the last few
weeks is a signal of its growing power, and it is still dominated by a
Franco-German axis that wants its new continent-wide creation to
counterbalance American power. The haze of good feeling over the Orange
Revolution shouldn't obscure that important geopolitical fact.
But make no mistake, good feeling should rule the day. We say to the
democratic demonstrators of Ukraine: We are proud of what you have
wrought, and in recent weeks, everyone around the world who truly prizes
liberty has been Orange. -30- [The Action Ukraine Monitoring Service]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nationalreview.com/editorial/editors200412060921.asp
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 257: ARTICLE NUMBER FOUR
========================================================
4. EUROPE MUST OPEN ITS EYES AND LOOK TO THE FUTURE
By Philip Stephens, Financial Times, London, UK, Dec 10 2004
Stand perfectly still, close your eyes tight and the world will stop
turning. John Kerr, a distinguished former British diplomat, this week
recalled that this was a game once played by his young children. Now, he
sees in it an apt characterisation of Britain's view of the European Union.
He is right. He might add, though, that such self-delusion sometimes also
serves as a fair description of Europe's approach to the world.
Valery Giscard D'Estaing played the same game in his recent decrial of
negotiations to admit Turkey to the EU. To allow this vast Islamic nation to
join the club, the former French president declared in an article on these
pages, "would change the nature of the European project".
Europe's pervasive religious heritage, the creative enthusiasm of the
Renaissance, the cultural lineage from ancient Greece and Rome, the
philosophy of the Enlightenment: all were absent in Turkey. Worse, by
opening the doors to a country whose geography was largely Asian, the
Union would invite other non-European applicants. The "original rationale"
of Europe, Mr Giscard lamented, would be lost.
The present leaders of the Union seem set to decide otherwise. The
indications are that next week's EU summit in Brussels will fix a starting
date in 2005 for negotiations on Turkey's eventual admission. But the
leaders will do so grudgingly: many secretly and not-so-secretly sharing Mr
Giscard's misconceptions about the origins of European civilisation, and
almost all emphasising that, even if Ankara meets the tough conditions for
entry, it will be a decade or more before it joins.
Though none would admit it, the present upheavals in Ukraine have
intensified the unease. Sure, we must all applaud the victory of peaceful
protest over the Russian-backed attempt to fix Ukraine's election. But a
victory in the re-run election for the (relatively speaking) pro-western
Viktor Yushchenko would be double-edged. Might not a vibrantly democratic
Ukraine join Turkey in knocking on Europe's door? What then of Mr Giscard's
vision of a single European identity?
Perhaps I am overly cynical, but it can scarcely be an accident that
France's Jacques Chirac and Germany's Gerhard Schroder have not missed
the opportunity to keep quiet about Ukraine's orange revolution.
Others, across the political spectrum, share the nostalgia. We can see it in
the hankering of politicians from the original Messina six for the
recreation of a core Europe that would reclaim the integrationist dream of
the Union's founding fathers. This month's, albeit failed, attempt by some
French socialists to persuade their party to reject the Union's
constitutional treaty was a similar attempt to reclaim the past. Why could
not the EU remain as it had always been, unburdened by its neighbours in the
east and cosseted from the chill winds of global competition? Life was so
much simpler when the Berlin Wall defined the Union's eastern boundary
and Europe could build a single, and social, market behind the walls of its
political fortress.
Old Europe's angry falling-out with Washington about Iraq fits much the same
template. To say there were real differences about the wisdom of removing
Saddam Hussein should not be to miss France's effort to reclaim Charles De
Gaulle's dream of a Europe defined in opposition to US power.
No one doubts that absorbing Turkey would be an immense challenge:
political, economic and social. But the objections are as much about what
has already happened as with the future of the Union. Just as the end of the
cold war changed irrevocably the nature of the transatlantic relationship,
so the unification of Europe has recast the purpose of the EU. On both
counts, many still prefer to live in the past.
When Mr Giscard warns that the Union's original rationale would be lost if
Turkey were admitted, he is wrong for the simple reason that the nature of
the European project has already been transformed. The change that the
former French president fears has already happened. Franco-German
rapprochement was a noble cause; the creation of a prosperous market
economy as a bulwark against the Soviet Union was a sensible one. But these
post-second world war goals cannot describe the ambitions of a Union of 25
that now stretches from Lisbon to Tallinn and from Stockholm to (Asian)
Nicosia.
The Union's present purpose seems obvious enough: to entrench democracy and
build prosperity among its newest members and to project stability beyond.
Somehow, though, this does not have quite the cachet of Jean Monnet's vision
of an ever closer union, a recreation of ancient Christendom. The new task
is costly and grinding work, promising neither immediate rewards nor much
thanks from domestic electorates. So many of today's leaders close their
eyes and stand perfectly still.
The world still turns. The Union sees itself as a global actor; and rightly
so, if for no other reason than that most of the world's serious trouble
spots lie just beyond its borders. But its influence on the international
stage in coming years will rest above all on its willingness or otherwise to
recognise the transformation in its own position. For the moment, it is weak
and divided, neither a credible partner nor rival to the US. Talk of a
common foreign and security policy is just that.
None of the above, lest any of my friends among Britain's eurosceptics
should be misled, denies the achievements of the Union or its relevance to
the future. I cannot think of a single serious challenge facing the
continent's politicians - from ensuring economic prosperity to reducing
cross-border crime and managing migration, to safeguarding the environment
and building energy security - that would be better addressed on a national
rather than a European stage.
The Union works, however, only to the extent that its leaders want it to.
The enduring paradox of all international institutions is that they depend
for their energy and effectiveness on strong nation states. In recent years,
many of Europe's leaders have had their eyes open to a past they would
like to reclaim rather than to a future they cannot avoid. An unconditional
commitment at next week's summit to begin accession talks with Turkey
would signal that, at the very least, they are stepping back into the
present.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-mail: philip.stephens@ft.com)
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.257: ARTICLE NUMBER FIVE
Please send us names for the free distribution list
========================================================
5. A TIDE OF DEMOCRACY IS SWEEPING THE GLOBE
By Amity Shlaes, Financial Times
London, UK, Monday, December 6 2004
The news from Ukraine is that Viktor Yushchenko's side is probably going to
win. Things were already looking good last week. But the supreme court's
weekend decision to order an election rerun tells us that, whatever the fate
of Mr Yushchenko and his pro-European "Our Ukraine", the prospects for true
democracy are strengthening in yet another of the globe's nations.
Nor is the Ukrainian outlook rare. That is the theory of Adrian Karatnycky
of the democracy advocacy group Freedom House. Mr Karatnycky, an
American, has worked at democratising nations since the period when that
meant smuggling Mimeograph machines from Brussels to Gdansk. In the
summer issue of the magazine National Interest, Mr Karatnycky lays out
a simple thesis. Chaos, violence and great uncertainty often follow
political
disruption, especially the toppling of dictators.
And certainly democratisation happens very slowly - indeed, more slowly
now than at other points. Nonetheless, it does happen. Countries that hold
relatively free elections once tend to repeat the effort. This shift to
democracy transcends political party and individual regimes.
Two things make us overlook this pattern. The first is what might be called
our Marshall McLuhan problem. Television and computers have strengthened
our craving for instant positive outcomes. Anything gradual we label a
failure.
The second is the aversion of the western intelligentsia to finding
themselves in the same camp as the White House. The virtue of anything that
the Bush administration supports - and democracy is a big Bush objective -
must therefore not be recognised. Even if that means downplaying a revolt
that would free a large country from a post-Stalinist regime. Hence a recent
headline in the Guardian: "US behind turmoil in Ukraine." And Britain is
not?
Consider the period of 2000-04 - a period which, we are being told, is a
foreign policy disaster. Serbia saw the democratic overthrow of Slobodan
Milosevic; in Peru, Alberto Fujimori fell. So did Liberia's Charles Taylor,
and, in March this year, Jean-Bertrand Aristide in Haiti. Eduard
Shevardnadze resigned in Georgia's "Rose Revolution". The Taliban's Sheikh
Omar was removed, so was Saddam Hussein. Afghanistan had elections. Iraq,
for all its anguish, plans them.
In its 2004 survey, Freedom House found that 25 of the world's nations had
made significant steps towards democracy, while 13 slid back towards
despotism. The ratio of "free" to "not free" countries has been more
favourable each decade: in 1973, there were more unfree countries than free
ones and in 2003 the "frees" dominate. The truth is that free countries - ie
not China - account for 89 per cent of global output.
The push for democracy comes from a variety of places. Sometimes it comes
from the White House - Democratic or Republican. Sometimes it comes from
rebels at home or the governments of neighbouring states. Australia and New
Zealand suspended aid when there was a coup in Fiji. They then provided help
for new elections. Nigeria's Olusegun Obasanjo travelled to São Tomé and
PrÃncipe to dress down the officers who had staged a coup there.
But there are setbacks and exceptions. Egyptian politicians talk about
slowly democratising, but their schedule refers to millennia, not years. On
occasion - Hitler's Germany, Algeria in the early 1990s - democracies create
dictators. More often, coups halt the democratic march (the Middle East).
The central Asian "Stans" - Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, for example - moved
more or less directly from communism to one-man rule. The populations of
China and the Muslim nations grow faster than in the west, pushing up the
population in unfree places. Then there is the threat of a contest between
the west and fundamentalist regimes that support terror.
Still, the trend of state-by-state democratic expansion tells us that
terrorism does not necessarily halt freedom's momentum. Even deeply flawed
war strategies can be followed by good results. The west failed Yugoslavia
yet it also helped bring about a democratic outcome. Such records inspire
the Ukrainian opposition. The events in Ukraine for their part may in turn
inspire Russia to create its own opposition hero, a Russian Yushchenko.
The trend ultimately tells us something important (albeit obvious): that the
democratic cause is not the brainchild of three Republican guys in the
Pentagon. Democracy is rather a non-partisan global movement that antedates
both George W. Bush and his father - and, one can argue, the modern French,
British and American states. (Liberals rush across the globe to aid
liberals: "Lafayette, we are here.") The philanthropist George Soros backs
Mr Yushchenko, although - or because - Mr Soros spent the rest of the year
trying to unseat Mr Bush.
Mr Yushchenko is himself no fan of Mr Bush, having called for immediate
troop withdrawal from Iraq. A significant share of the money flowing into
the pro-Yushchenko comes not from Washington but anti-Putin Russians. What's
more, we can safely wager that this very morning dazed US administration
officials are trying to square their support of Mr Putin and their sympathy
for Mr Yushchenko.
All of which makes the accusation that Washington puppeteers are running the
"Orange Revolution" sound odd. Once again, anti-Americanism trumps reality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail: amity.shlaes@ft.com
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.257: ARTICLE NUMBER SIX
Your comments about the Report are always welcome
========================================================
6. UKRAINE ROCKERS SET PROTEST TO THEIR UNIQUE BEAT
Daniel Williams, Washington Post Foreign Service
The Washington Post, Washington, D.C., Sat., Dec 11, 2004
KIEV, Ukraine -- Musician Dmitro Bohush, his hair dyed gold, makes videos
that feature snarling dogs, vinyl-clad women with smeared mascara and verses
like "Life is going nowhere."
When he went to Kiev's Independence Square a few weeks ago to observe
protests against fraudulent elections in Ukraine, new lyrics began to
gestate in his head. "I said to myself, the time has come," he recalled the
other day in his hybrid apartment-studio.
In a few hours, accompanied by his three-member heavy metal group De Shifer,
he recorded "Chas Pryjshol," which means "As the Time Has Come." It became
a throbbing, defiant anthem. "My heart told me to do this. I had to do
something to support the spirit of the crowd. The time had come, period," he
said.
Rock, pop and hip-hop were the soundtrack of the unprecedented 15 days of
protests in Kiev that ended Wednesday. The protesters claimed the Nov. 21
presidential runoff was a fraud. Their hero: Viktor Yushchenko. Their
villain: Viktor Yanukovych, a favorite of the neighboring Russian
government, which backed him.
Ukraine's Supreme Court said the elections were loaded with violations,
annulled them and set a Dec. 26 date for a revote. Without the hundreds of
thousands of demonstrators who filled the huge square and blockaded
government buildings, it is unlikely that the court would have thrown out
the vote.
Students and young workers provided the big numbers as well as the stamina
to withstand Kiev's slushy and windy late autumn. They moved in and out of
the square in shifts, slept on floors in private homes, theaters and in tent
cities sprinkled around Kiev. They decorated themselves and the square in
orange, the color of Yushchenko's campaign: orange scarves, hats, ribbons,
shirts, jackets and balloons, overcoats, sweaters and boots.
A horde of Ukraine's popular musicians rushed to the square to entertain and
rouse them. The "orange revolution" was arguably the longest rock concert in
history -- music alternated with speeches and even prayers day and night.
Some of the singers are big stars in Ukraine. Ruslana, whose dance numbers
can make Britney Spears look like Mother Teresa, made several undulating
appearances. She was flanked by a couple of lean, athletic women whose job
was to twirl their long, shiny hair, and a big, blond, square-jawed guy
whose job was to be a big, blond, square-jawed guy.
Mandri, a group that combines rock, reggae and blues with Ukrainian folk,
revived a tune called "Don't Sleep My Native Land." "For most rock
musicians, the decision to participate was simple," said Serhiv Fomenko,
Mandri's leader. "We're on the democratic side, not the totalitarian."
For all the marquee attractions, relatively unknown groups and amateur bands
provided the bulk of the background music. Unknowns paraded on the central
stage wearing street clothes and the ubiquitous orange. Lots relied on
shouts as much as twists of lyric and melody. Their rawness matched the
cries of "shame, shame" during the protests.
An obscure band called Sleigh, from the provincial town of Ivano-Frankivsk,
created an instant sensation by stringing together the chants of the crowd
and laying them onto a hip-hop beat. They called the piece "Together We
Are Strong and Can't Be Beat," a main catchphrase of the revolt. A chorus
repeats, "Yushchenko, yes! Our president, yes!"
"It was totally accidental," said Sleigh singer Roman Kalin. "It became
clear to me that the vote numbers were totally wrong. We went to the main
plaza in our home town and started to entertain the protests there. We
realized quickly that the crowd didn't need love songs. Normally, we're
mellow. We had to think of something else.
"We heard slogans and saw them on the walls and on signs. We own a recording
studio at a radio station, and workers at the station helped us to remember
them all. We started at 8 a.m. on Nov. 23. It was finished by noon." By 1
p.m., it was being played at Independence Square, initially delivered
online. "Before this, we were totally apolitical. We mostly produced
advertising jingles and songs for local artists," Kalin said. "With all this
going on, we couldn't just sit home and drink coffee."
Artists big and small said they had nothing to lose by protesting. They
complained that the Ukrainian music industry is dominated by powerful
producers in Moscow who promote Russian pop and get most of the radio
play. Yanukovych is regarded as Russian-friendly. For a while the
Yushchenko-Yanukovych matchup was also a battle of the geopolitical bands.
Yushchenko used homegrown talent while Yanukovych, advised by strategists
from Moscow, imported Russian pop groups.
In some ways, the rockers' motives matched the rationales of the
demonstrators. Protesters commonly expressed fears that Ukraine would be
dominated by Russia if Yanukovych won and that Ukraine would adopt the
tight authoritarian rule developing in the Kremlin. Moreover, they roundly
expressed a preference for ties with the European Union, a westward-looking
approach that is fundamental to their yearning for a Yushchenko victory.
"The musicians and the crowd shared a desire to reconquer Ukraine for
Ukrainians," said Volodymyr Tsybulko, a political analyst. "The fact that
everyone was performing for free added a certain dignity to their
participation."
Heavy metal musician Bohush, 32, began playing guitar in his home town near
the Polish border. He worked as a sound producer and played in a local band.
For the past six years, he has focused on De Shifer, whose name he said has
no meaning. "The band gets some play on Polish radio, some in Ukraine and
none in Russia," he said.
His apartment is in a Soviet-era apartment block. The interior is classic
Soviet style: old wallpaper, tatty sofas covered with blankets, and flimsy
furniture. During the interview, Bohush wore an orange sweatshirt. "I lived
on the border when I was a kid and had direct access to Western music.
Obviously, it changed my life," he said. "We are all living on the border
now. We know about the world. Yushchenko backers know what Russia is
like and they know what is next door in Europe. They want Europe."
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.257: ARTICLE NUMBER SEVEN
Your comments about the Report are always welcome
========================================================
7. UKRAINE PROTESTERS HAIL POLL BREAKTHROUGH
Askold Krushelnycky in Kiev
Belfast Telegraph, Belfast, Friday, Dec 10, 2004
KIEV - Thousands of haggard, shivering and determined opposition protesters
danced and sang in triumph yesterday after Ukraine's parliament approved
amendments to ensure a fair ballot in the presidential rerun later this
month. The breakthrough came after weeks of political turmoil in the country
that brought it to the brink of ethnic conflict.
Ukraine's opposition leader, Viktor Yushchenko, urged tens of thousands of
supporters to leave the barricades and work for victory in this month's
rerun of a rigged presidential election. He said that the opposition had won
what it had demanded.
"We have a few days left until final victory. I call on you to be extra
active in the days to come," he said. "Everyone should know his role,
everyone should take part in the event we know as the 26 December
re-election." After days of meetings with the opposition that brought the
capital, Kiev, and other cities to a standstill for more than a fortnight,
the parliament agreed to measures which the pro-Western opposition
believes will help their candidate win.
New changes on electoral rules are designed to eliminate scope for the
massive election fraud that triggered the demonstrations. The opposition,
backed by Western election monitors, said that the government had used
ballot-stuffing, falsification, intimidation and bribery to skew the results
in favour of their candidate, the pro-Russian Prime Minister Viktor
Yanukovych, in the election on 21 November.
Mr Yushchenko declared that events in parliament were a victory for the
opposition. He thanked people for braving threats by the government and for
transforming Ukraine into a real democracy, saying its rightful home was in
in Western Europe. "When it was cold, when it snowed, when there was rain,
you remained here," he said. "You have ensured we will not be ruled by
bandits anymore where gangster rules operated. "You demonstrated a
confidence in what you were doing and have given the opportunity for tens
of millions of other Ukrainians to see that another kind of Ukraine was
possible.
During the demonstrations, in which where the presidential administration
and other government buildings were surrounded by Yushchenko supporters
sporting flags, ribbons and clothes in the orange colour of his election
campaign, there were several days when it looked likely that the government
would launch an attack using thousands of paramilitary police troops.
However, many police and army officers said that they would not attack the
demonstrators and some appeared publicly alongside Mr Yushchenko. The
Yushchenko loyalists warned that they would protect the opposition
supporters against any attack. Referring to them, Mr Yushchenko said: "I
thank the people in uniform that proved that when there was a test before
them they showed they were with the people."
One of the methods used to fraudulently hand Mr Yanukovych several million
votes was abuse of an absentee voting system that allowed his supporters to
vote multiple times at different polling stations. The number of absentee
votes for the re-run election on 26 December has been cut from 4 per cent to
0.5 per cent.
Other measures that have been agreed include a new composition of the
central election commission, the body that was perceived as aiding the
electoral fraud, and the sacking of the general prosecutor, who was
condemned by the opposition for corruption and took no action to
investigate complaints about breaches of electoral law. -30-
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.257: ARTICLE NUMBER EIGHT
=========================================================
8. THE STUDENTS WHO SHOOK UKRAINE - PEACEFULLY
By Fred Weir, Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
The Christian Science Monitor, Boston, MA, Wed, December 8, 2004
KIEV, UKRAINE - For more than two weeks, a few thousand students
hunkered in a sprawling military-style encampment planted in the heart of
Kiev have left the world gasping in wonder and Ukraine's leaders quaking in
their boots. They've been here since Nov. 21, protesting the results on the
country's questionable presidential election.
But as they were ordered by leaders to begin folding tents and prepare to
leave the barricades Wednesday, many of those radical, mostly youthful
protesters wondered about the fate of their "orange revolution" - part
street carnival, part urban revolt - and whether it was ending in victory or
defeat. A compromise package of reforms overwhelmingly passed Wednesday
by Ukraine's Rada, the parliament, ensures there will be new elections on
Dec. 26 governed by tough new antifraud rules, as demanded by opposition
candidate Viktor Yushchenko. But the same deal, signed by outgoing President
Leonid Kuchma, also mandates sweeping constitutional changes that will
weaken the next president, strengthen parliament, and give more power to
Ukraine's rebellious eastern regions.
Mr. Kuchma praised the deal as a triumph of compromise over conflict. "Over
the past century Ukraine has often fallen into political crisis, but there
was always enough common sense and determination to find the right
solution," he said.
But critics, including many street protesters, view the changes as a cynical
attempt by Kuchma to hang onto power by using his strong political base in
parliament. "We've been robbed," says Roman Kolesnyk, from the central
Ukrainian region of Zhitomir, who's been in the street camp for two weeks.
"We came here to make Yushchenko our president, but now the Rada has just
arranged that when Yushchenko wins he'll have no power. He'll be a symbolic
leader, like the Queen of England."
Amid a lukewarm celebration - cake was passed around - some students
indicated they would accept the compromise and go home. Others said they'll
stay put until after the new elections safely put Yushchenko in power. Still
others said they would go to the Russified eastern Ukraine, which voted
heavily for pro-Moscow candidate Viktor Yanukovich, to win votes for
Yushchenko. "The eastern Ukraine is like a totalitarian state," says Mr.
Kolesnyk. "They have no information, and without that they can't make
a free choice."
The tent city on Kreshatik, Kiev's main avenue, may have looked like a
two-week rock festival, with its hordes of unshaven youth, graffiti-covered
tents, and constant blaring music. But underneath, it throbbed with serious
purpose. The gates were guarded by paramilitaries, who checked everyone's
ID. Students inside were sworn to abstain from drugs, alcohol, and sex, and
they conducted military-style patrols around the camp's perimeter. They were
fed regularly by local volunteers, who brought pots of steaming borsch,
loaves of black bread, and platters of steamed potatoes.
"We have a commandant who keeps discipline here," says Bogdan Todchuk, a
physics student from Uman, in western Ukraine, who drove to Kiev the day
after the fraud-tainted Nov. 21 polls. "It's the only way we could keep this
going, keep it peaceful and focused."
Mr. Todchuk says his dream is a Ukraine that would finally be free from
Russian influence after nearly four centuries of domination. "Now we have a
chance to become a truly independent country," he says. "Moscow is trying to
build a new empire, but without Ukraine it can't succeed. On the contrary,
if we build democracy here, it means Russia will eventually have to become
democratic, too."
The camp has its own uniformed but unarmed paramilitary force - called the
Sons of Independent Ukraine - made up of former Ukrainian soldiers. They
kept the peace, ejected hecklers and, perhaps, prepared to defend the camp
in case of assault by security police. "We don't have guns. Our only weapons
are words," says Serhei Kashuba, an officer in the force.
Most participants insist the "orange revolution" happened spontaneously,
drawing on experience of previous anti-Kuchma protest movements, but
propelled by outrage over evidence the election had been stolen. "On the
night of the elections, people just drifted to the maidan [Kiev's central
square], wondering what to do about this terrible fraud that had taken
place," says Margarita Razumova, an associate professor of math at Kiev's
Shevchenko University. "There was a stage there, and people began getting up
and making suggestions. One Rada deputy remembered that there were 1,600
tents left over from [a 2002 protest] and someone was delegated to go and
get them. That's how it started."
Russian commentators have accused the West of planning and financing the
revolt to overturn the election of Mr. Yanukovich. Some point to a shadowy
student group called Pora (It's Time) which, they say, looks suspiciously
like similar movements that powered recent Serbian and Georgian democratic
upheavals. Pora, which claims to have about 10,000 members, says it's just a
civic group that promotes "national democratic ideas" and mobilizes people
to defend their rights. It's leaders deny any foreign sponsorship.
"We never had a student movement on this scale in Ukraine before - politics
was always the arena for older people," says Andrei Yusov, a spokesman for
Pora. He says the recent "Rose Revolution" in Georgia was an inspiration,
but Ukrainian students acted on their own to combat vote-rigging and power
abuse. "We have got some experience now, and if there is any falsification
of elections again, we'll be back in the streets immediately," he says.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINK: http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1209/p01s04-woeu.html
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.257: ARTICLE NUMBER NINE
Suggested articles for publication in the Report are always welcome
=========================================================
9. ELECTION IN A HOMELAND LEAVES UKRAINIANS
IN AN ORANGE STATE
By Jennifer Bleyer, New York Times
New York, New York, Sun, December 12, 2004
At the Ukrainian National Home on lower Second Avenue, the auditorium
was so saturated with orange on Wednesday that it looked as if
Halloween had come late this year. There were orange balloons and
orange tablecloths. Women wore orange scarves, and men donned bright
orange ties. The few people who walked in without any orange promptly
had a swatch of it pinned to their clothing.
They were there to raise money for Viktor A. Yushchenko, the Ukrainian
opposition leader whose campaign is symbolized by the color orange,
and whose contentious defeat in the Nov. 21 presidential election has
prompted thousands to protest. Members of New York's Ukrainian
community have been just as jittery and exuberant, and obsessed with
every bit of news from Kiev.
The buzz at the party was all about traveling to Ukraine to volunteer
as international observers during the new runoff election on Dec. 26;
about 60 New Yorkers had already signed up. Zenia Helbig, a Columbia
University graduate student, elatedly explained that even those who
could not go were helping finance others' trips. "My godmother is
sponsoring my friend," she said. "My dentist and his wife are
sponsoring another friend. And this is just in the last 24 hours."
Yurko Pylyp, 24, who has signed up to go, noted with a worried
expression that election observers were told they might have to travel
to areas where previous observers had reported violence and voter
intimidation. "It's exciting, and it's scary," he said. "This is
basically a cultural draft for us. We have to go back."
Most of the 20-somethings chattering excitedly about events unfolding
in their motherland were, in fact, born in the United States. But
having been raised within a tight network of Ukrainian-American summer
camps, scouting troops and language schools, they have developed a
strong cultural identity, and it was that identity that has flared up
in recent weeks.
Onstage, a woman performed an anti-Communist anthem over a perky
Europop beat. A high school teacher offered CD's of a song he had
written, called "Freedom Isn't Free," and, in another room, a dozen
teenage girls from a local Ukrainian folk choir got ready for their
appearance, wearing traditionally embroidered blouses and chunky
black platform shoes.
Maya Lev, 29, darted around in a stylish scoop-necked orange shirt,
offering raffle tickets (orange, of course) for sale. "I'm more alive
than I ever have been in my whole life," she said. The previous week,
she and a few dozen friends had tied orange ribbons to the trees along
Second Avenue.
Having exhausted the orange already in her wardrobe, Ms. Lev has
recently bought a few new pieces. "I've been wearing orange for two
weeks straight," she said with a shrug. "I will wear it until
Yushchenko is president." -30-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/12/nyregion/thecity/12ukra.html
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 257: ARTICLE NUMBER TEN
Names for the distribution list always welcome
=========================================================
10. UKRAINE EXPERIENCING GROWING PAINS OF FREEDOM
COMMENTARY: By Susan Parker, Ph.D
Special to The Daily, The Decatur Daily,
Decatur, Alabama, Sunday, December 12, 2004
Watching the people of Ukraine brave the cold, harsh winter conditions
day after day to protest their fraudulent election, one cannot help
but be filled with admiration and respect. But, at the same time, it
is puzzling that even if you discount abuse of the voting process,
there are still hundreds of thousands of voters who chose the more
oppressive government. To many outsiders, this seems so unbelievable.
Recently, I was privileged to attend a dinner sponsored by Brandt
Ayers, publisher of The Anniston Star, one of only two family owned
newspapers left in Alabama (The Decatur DAILY being the other). The
speaker for the evening was Alexander Pumpyansky, a renowned
journalist from Russia. Pumpyansky's magazine, New Times, has been
at the forefront of the struggle to establish democratic institutions in
the former Soviet Union. During the past 20 years, Pumpyansky, like
many other Russians, suffered for his outspoken opposition to the
Communist Party leadership. It was heartwarming to hear his story of
courage and sacrifice - just as it is to watch the Ukrainians.
After his remarks, someone asked Pumpyansky a very important question.
"How, after all the years of oppression under the communist regime,
could the Ukrainians even think of voting for the more authoritarian
government?" He told the crowd that when the change came, everyone
thought things would dramatically improve overnight. Some things did,
but most did not. Expectations were high. People were disappointed and
some have become disillusioned. The basic necessities of life, like
food and shelter, are no longer guaranteed and people are frightened.
It makes sense. The free world is not nearly as simple as it is
portrayed on television and in the movies. Freedom and free enterprise
are not easy. They require sophisticated financial systems, a fair and
just legal system, well-connected transportation systems, and checks
and balances between the branches of government. They also require
integrity and trust, which takes years to build.
This election dispute in Ukraine caused me to recall our own election
in 2000. Millions of Americans who voted for Al Gore sat quietly
watching the process unfold rather than demonstrating in the streets.
Some might ask why we were not protesting when the U. S. Supreme
Court said no to further counting and declared George W. Bush as
president.
I put these questions to my husband, a man whose judgment I do not
question (at least when it comes to choosing women). His answer made
sense to me. He said, "In America, we have a history of over 200 years
of elections. We have systems in place and we have great trust in
those systems. We might not always like the results, but we respect
the process - a process that has worked well for us for a long time."
Let us hope our process continues to work and earn the respect of the
American people, no matter who is president. Let us also hope the
Ukrainians, in time, can develop a fair, just process they can trust.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Susan Parker, Ph.D, is former state auditor and Democratic Party
nominee for U.S. Senate.
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 257: ARTICLE NUMBER ELEVEN
Letters to the editor are always welcome
=========================================================
11. "WALTZING YUSHCHENKO"
OP-ED by Ivan Lozowy
THE UKRAINE INSIDER, Vol. 4, No. 6
Kyiv, Ukraine, December 11, 2004
With the "People Power" revolution behind him and following several key
changes to the rules of the game, Viktor Yushchenko looks set to sweep into
the President's seat on December 26. His momentum is tremendous and some
in his camp see no course other than victory.
Largely thanks to spontaneous mass demonstrations, the Supreme Court voted
in Yushchenko's favor on December 3 and set a repeat of the second round of
voting, which had been held on November 21 with massive falsifications in
favor of the pro-government candidate, Viktor Yanukovych.
On December 8 parliament voted through changes to the election law designed
to minimize falsifications. That same day, the composition of the Central
Election Commission, the "top of the pyramid of evil" according to the
opposition, was modified and its Chairman, Serhiy Kivalov, was sent
packing. At least three out of the four new Commission members back the
opposition and, when combined with the four members who had refused to sign
the official results showing a Yanukovych victory promulgated on November
24, they may form a majority out of the Commission's 15 members needed to
make key decisions objectively. The new Chairman, who wields inordinate
power according to Ukrainian practice, Yaroslav Davydovych, is a careful
man, but he was among those who did not sign on November 24. The
Commission, however, is unlikely to be sufficiently pro-active to
reconstitute numerous election commissions which can be compared to SWAT
teams, assembled with the sole purpose of falsifying election results.
The key change which works to Yushchenko's benefit, however, has not been
legal or even one directly instigated by Yushchenko's camp. Yanukovych has
broken with Kuchma and is now trying to pose as the "real" opposition
candidate. This Yanukovych-in-Wonderland scene extends to his appointment
of Taras Chornovil as campaign manager. Chornovil, who has a disconcerting
tick to his face and a nervous manner when talking, has ticked off many
people in western and central Ukraine by betraying the heritage of his
famous father, a Soviet-era dissident. That East and West do not mix is
demonstrated by the recent resignation of Yanukovych's Press Secretary, a
former Radio Liberty journalist Hanna Herman, who once compared her boss
to Africa. The Chornovil appointment is a disaster that is happening and
about which more will doubtless be heard soon.
In this respect the December 8 vote makes possible Yushchenko's negotiating
with Kuchma, who does not have any realistic favorable scenario left.
Yanukovych, who never really got on board the Kuchma bandwagon (See the
Ukraine Insider, vol. 4, no. 1 from June 10, 2004), has cut adrift
entirely, castigating Kuchma in his recent speeches.
Yanukovych was reportedly enraged that the acting President Leonid Kuchma
could not control the demonstrators who began to pound the Kyiv streets
after November 21 and his exasperation was evident as early as last week
(See the Ukraine Insider, vol. 4, no. 4 from November 30, 2004). Reports
persist that some time on or about November 25 Kuchma did actually issue an
order, possibly through his chief of staff Viktor Medvedchuk, to use force
against the opposition's demonstrators, but the militia delayed and then
disobeyed. Yanukovych has said that he had to remove his family from Kyiv
out of fears for their safety, but forgot to mention that he removed his
wife Ludmilla - she of the "injected oranges" fame - to France.
Since the Ukrainian tendency is to avoid having the "barbarians" who stood
at the gates storming the palace, the current government will be looking
for a compromise "way out." Such a process would be smoothed by
intermediaries such as Acting Prime Minister Mykola Azarov, who had good
contacts with Yushchenko before the Donetsk disaster a year ago. However,
negotiations, if they take place, will be complicated because Kuchma is
unlikely to receive firm guarantees from Yushchenko that would restrain
those howling for Kuchma's blood, those like Yulia Tymoshenko, whom
Kuchma had imprisoned, twice.
The regional bosses, some of whom more so than Kuchma never really wanted
Yanukovych as presidential candidate, are discombobulated and some will be
seeking rapprochement with Yushchenko after their separatist rhetoric
backfired badly. If Yushchenko's supporters are smart, they will encourage
this kind of behavior and a windfall of defections to Yushchenko's side may
put paid to the pre-election campaign.
In the meantime, a Zen-like confusion continues to rein in Yushchenko's
camp. When the Our Ukraine parliamentary faction met this past week to
decide how to vote on a package of constitutional and election changes,
Yushchenko was absent. The MPs were split, with the majority favoring
voting for the package and, in order to break the impasse, the deputies
decided to . vote in favor of sending a note to their leader asking him "to
resolve" the situation. No response was forthcoming.
For her part, Yulia Tymoshenko was livid following the December 8 vote
and publicly chastised Yushchenko, saying he had failed to consult the
"Maidan" ("plaza"), as Kyiv main square has become simply known after
the revolution. Tymoshenko senses that victory is tickling the palm of
Yushchenko's hands and giving away the so-called "constitutional reform"
at the last minute constitutes an unacceptable withdrawal for her.
Having largely dispersed the "Maidan," Yushchenko has eased pressure in
anticipation of a victory, predicting at least 60 percent in his favor.
But the election falsification machine along with hundreds of thousands of
police forces are still in place. Whether it is really all over but the
shouting depends largely on how desperate the oligarchs, first and foremost
Renat Akhmetov and Hryhoriy Surkis, feel. -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correspondence should be addressed via the Internet to: lozowy@i.com.ua
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 257: ARTICLE NUMBER TWELVE
Letters to the editor are always welcome
=========================================================
12. IN PUTIN'S KREMLIN, IT'S ALL ABOUT CONTROL
Why the Kremlin's long reach into Ukraine should come as no surprise
COMMENTARY: by Yevgenia Albats
The Washington Post, Washington, D.C., Sun, Dec 12, 2004
The Kremlin's rough intrusion into the Ukrainian elections, including its
heavy-handed lobbying on behalf of a convicted criminal, has startled the
West on both sides of the Atlantic. Yet for those who have been paying
attention to Vladimir Putin's Russia, this should not have come as a
surprise. Quite the contrary. The Kremlin's approach to Ukraine's elections
is a logical extension of Putin's policies at home over the past four years.
Allow me to remind you of what Putin has accomplished since Boris N. Yeltsin
left the presidency on Dec. 31, 1999, and anointed Putin as heir apparent.
While declaring himself and Russia a friend of democracy and of the West,
Putin has slowly and systematically extended the state's control over
society and tightened its grip on Russia's most important institutions.
He has obliterated the media, leaving almost no room for criticism or
dissent. All the national television networks are under strict government
control. Just as under the Soviets, editors are summoned to the Kremlin on a
weekly basis to be given outlines of what news should be covered and what
should not, which guests should be invited to appear on which (pre-recorded)
shows and for how many seconds, and which should not. Nothing goes live;
spontaneity would be dangerous. Even Kultura, the cultural affairs channel,
was recently given a list of unwelcome guests, according to people inside
the station.
The slightest deviation can result in punishment. The Kremlin decided that
Raf Shakirov, the editor of the national daily Izvestia, covered the hostage
crisis in Beslan too emotionally in September because he ran a photo of a
dead child on the front page, and he was promptly fired.
No one dares criticize Putin or his politics to a nationwide audience. Thus,
the Kremlin can prevent the emergence of an alternative to Putin who might
challenge his politics. This absence of an alternative, by the way, is an
important reason for Putin's high popularity rating inside the country.
Putin has abolished the system of checks and balances, turning the
parliament into a body of yes men, by exploiting Russia's weak party system
and manipulating media campaign coverage, determining which candidates get
favorable news coverage and which do not. Dominating parliament was not
enough for him. He used the fear sown by the Beslan attack to abolish the
democratic election of governors. Now, he is going to appoint leaders of the
88 regions, violating the essence of the federation making up Russia.
The academic community has also been targeted, with the jailing of
scientists Igor Sutyagin (15 years of hard labor for analyzing publicly
available information) and Valentin Danilov (14 years in a high-security
labor camp, without the possibility of pardon, for selling scientific
information that his defenders say is in the public domain). Both were
charged with treason.
Business is under attack as well. Putin has been at the forefront of an
assault intended to redistribute the nation's most lucrative properties and
cow any businessmen who might fancy too much power and independence
for themselves. We are reminded of this when we periodically see Mikhail B.
Khodorkovsky, Russia's richest man, sitting in a cage in a courtroom.
Khodorkovsky, head of Yukos Oil, was arrested more than a year ago on
charges of tax evasion. He has been in prison ever since, and his trial --
on most days a farcical reading of charges -- winds interminably on, as
Yukos, the nation's biggest and most successful company, is slowly
destroyed. In a matter of two weeks, its major assets are to be acquired for
one-third their market value by the state gas monopoly Gazprom.
Much of this bears the shadowy but unmistakable imprint of the security
forces. Putin has saturated the bureaucracy with former and current officers
of the FSB, the Federal Security Service and successor to the KGB. Many
people thought that these new strong hands would do something about the
corruption of the Yeltsin years. They did. Things got worse: The cost of
bribes went up by at least 30 percent. "They even charge us [former
colleagues] more than Yeltsin's guys did," a retired KGB general who is now
in a financial business told me in astonishment. Apparently, he expected his
former pals at arms to offer him a discount. They haven't.
This record can be summed up in one word: Control.
By training, Putin is a man of control. He spent a major part of his life in
the KGB, which was entrusted by the Communist Party with safeguarding
the regime. The KGB taught its soldiers well; its institutional culture has
not been easily thrown off and its imperatives have proved stronger than
Putin's leanings toward democracy.
Democracy, which requires a ruling party to submit to the inevitable loss of
an election, represents an unacceptable threat. A successful people's
revolution in Ukraine is a threat twice over, serving as a dangerous example
to the people of Russia. Putin and his entourage are perfectly aware of this
danger. Regardless of what Putin says in public (or to President Bush in
private) about his vision of the special way of democratic development in
Russia, he is taking every precaution to ensure that true democracy never
exists in his land.
Putin intends to reassert control over all aspects of life, turning the
country back into "an ultra bureaucratic state," where bureaucrats are
answerable to no one but themselves, in the time-honored Soviet tradition.
Why should national borders limit an obsession with control, when the
Kremlin desires dominance over the former Soviet republics? Komsomolskaya
Pravda, a widely circulated newspaper closely connected to top officials,
states the goal clearly: "to reinstitute a great empire feared by everyone
in the world," just as the U.S.S.R. was.
Why should a twice-sentenced criminal, current Ukraine Prime Minister Viktor
Yanukovych, deserve such fierce support from Putin, who visited Ukraine on
two occasions to publicly promote his presidential campaign? Because
Yanukovych is easy to manipulate and control precisely because of his
criminal record. His rival, Viktor Yushchenko, on the other hand, has
proclaimed his intention to draw Ukraine closer to the European Union and
NATO and would obviously resist the expansion of Kremlin-type politics
into Ukraine. He would be difficult for "Big Brother" Russia to control.
Why do Russia's state-owned media relentlessly portray the democratically
elected president Mikheil Saakashvili of Georgia as an enemy of Russia while
the Belarusan dictator, Alexander Lukashenko, comes across as a good friend
(if a little bit out of his mind)? Because Saakashvili became a president as
a result of popular revolution against a fatally corrupt bureaucracy. His
first reforms have been aimed at broad change in administration, and a purge
of old communist officials.
Saakashvili and Yushchenko are real threats to Putin -- leaders capable of
inspiring democratic development beyond their borders, across the lands of
the former U.S.S.R.
So, what is in the cards for us? If my reading of Russian politics is any
good, we should expect much tougher policies coming from the Kremlin,
both domestically and internationally, and a growing resistance to them in
Russian society.
The former is already under way: A planned law on terrorism will allow for
suspension of constitutional freedoms for as long as 60 days. As Ludmila
Alekseeva, who leads the Moscow Helsinki Group, a human rights watchdog,
says, "Russian authorities are taking precautions in case anything like the
orange revolution in Kiev should come to Moscow."
A month ago, Mikhail Yuriev, chairman of the board of the Evrofinance group,
a financial institution believed to be closely connected to the Kremlin's
bureaucrats in epaulets, outlined the program for Russia. Two major goals
lie ahead, he wrote in Komsomolskaya Pravda: The reconstitution of the
Russian empire, and turning a multi-ethnic, multi-religious country into one
nation, ethnically Russian and religiously Orthodox. "The interests of other
nations should be of little concern to us," he said.
Both goals require a clear definition of "enemies of the state" (the
euphemism widely used under Stalin). Such enemies are: those who speak in
favor of negotiations to end the war in Chechnya; those who are receptive to
the advice of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund as well as
"to the teaching of the West as to how we should construct our politics and
economics." Russia's enemies also include those who speak in favor of a
professional army; and those who are against the teaching of the Russian
Orthodox religion in public schools; those who are in favor of a free media;
and those who are against the scapegoating of business. To put it bluntly,
anyone who stands against the regime and its politics should be pronounced
an enemy of the state.
Yuriev's article would not be worth mentioning if it didn't reflect the
thinking that exists in the Kremlin, according to those who have access to
it. Yet as frightening as this sounds, the idea beneath all those harsh
proclamations is a simple one: to prepare public opinion for the forceful
redistribution of property from those not completely loyal to the Kremlin to
those who are. (Some hawks suggest a variant, taking all "non-Orthodox"
companies -- owned by Jews and Muslims -- and giving them to those who
belong to the religious and ethnic mainstream.)
How far this politics of property redistribution will go depends upon Putin
himself: whether he will be willing to resist pressure from the bureaucrats
in epaulets -- affiliated with the security forces -- or whether he chooses
to submit to the interests of the corporation that groomed him, the KGB.
As for the possibility that political resistance will spread from Ukraine to
Russia, the odds are harder to predict. Unlike Ukraine, Russia stretches
along nine time zones, which makes it much harder to mobilize the nation
around an alternative politician if all electronic media are in the hands of
the state. New and restrictive laws on political parties, as well as new
rules for parliamentary elections, don't make the task any easier.
Still, I feel restiveness among listeners of Echo Moskvy radio, where I have
a Sunday political talk show. Middle-sized businesses wonder whether they
will be seized next. Intellectuals are unhappy about restrictions imposed on
the press. The abolition of many state services, the trimming of the old
welfare state, which hit the poorest the hardest, the luxuries provided to
state officials, has made many formerly fierce Putin supporters think again.
Despite what Westerners may think, Russians are not averse to democracy;
time and again polls show that a majority of Russians would like to live in
what they call "a normal country," meaning European-type prosperity and
democracy.
Clearly, change won't come from the outside. Russians should not expect any
help from big or small brothers in the West. The task of making the country
free is in our own hands. I need to believe we can do it. -30-
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Yevgenia Albats is a professor of political science at the Higher School
of Economics, a Moscow-based university. She has a doctorate in
government from Harvard University. Author's e-mail:
albats@post.harvard.edu
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 257: ARTICLE NUMBER THIRTEEN
Letters to the editor are always welcome
=========================================================
13. "REVOLUTIONARY LOVE"
Amid Chill Political Winds in Kiev,
Young Protesters Demonstrate Their Affection
By Daniel Williams, Washington Post Foreign Service
The Washington Post, Thursday, December 9, 2004; Page C01
KIEV, Ukraine -- Lithe, petite Sofia Kirichuk, wrapped in a thin leather
overcoat, spotted tall, angular Vasili Folosov across the rows of pup tents
and right away saw something she liked.
"It was his revolutionary eyes," she says. Never mind that he and she were
in the middle of a vast and tense political demonstration. Never mind that
they were living in a tent city on a main boulevard of slushy, windy Kiev
subsisting on bologna sandwiches. Love had struck.
A few days later, on Nov. 27, they were married by an Orthodox priest
presiding over a brief, unorthodox sidewalk ceremony among well-wishing
strangers. They spent their first night as husband and wife in one of dozens
of little tents sheltering supporters of insurgent presidential candidate
Viktor Yushchenko. Later, they moved to a large tent housing 28
demonstrators, many of them fellow lovebirds considering exchanging vows.
The tale of Sofia and Vasili lit up the already jolly atmosphere of the
protests aimed at overturning fraud in the Nov. 21 runoff election and
getting Yushchenko into power instead of his rival, Prime Minister Viktor
Yanukovych.
Scores of local reporters have sought them out to tell their story.
Television cameras have recorded their kisses. There have been several other
weddings and many more engagements in the tent city, although some of the
newlyweds have apparently decamped for more conventional honeymoons.
"We were married the same day as two other couples, but they disappeared,"
says Vasili.
The lack of violence and the carnival air surrounding the rallies have been
factors in gaining outside support for Yushchenko's claims and making it
difficult for President Leonid Kuchma, Yanukovych's political patron, to
crack down, Western diplomats say.
Kuchma and his supporters have tried to paint the demonstrators alternately
as drug-crazed rabble and Bolshevik-style radicals. But when mingling with
the thousands of revelers in Kiev's Independence Square, the center of the
protest, it is hard to regard them as either. They have been orderly,
despite the deafening beat of Ukrainian rock-and-roll and hip-hop. They
have been peaceful, even while shouting "Down with Kuchma!" whenever
his name comes up.
And they have been tough, resisting the sleet, snow and windy cold of Kiev.
The drug charge is especially spurious: In a country where vodka is almost
like soda pop, a ban on drinking has been widely observed.
That's not to say there is no anger. Crowds that gather at the parliament
building have been aggressive in blocking the exits when representatives
inside delay in reaching key agreements on electoral reform. Whether this
controlled militancy pays off will be tested in a new runoff election on
Dec. 26, a date set by Ukraine's Supreme Court.
In any event, the demonstrators have perhaps set new standards for what
some observers here called postmodern protest. The color theme -- orange
-- is itself a departure. It had no real political meaning; it is not
really
associated with any single political party, like the red of Vladimir Lenin's
communists. Rather, orange was selected by Yushchenko's aides as his
campaign color because it matched the colors of a soccer team from his
opponent's hometown.
It soon became a kind of fashion statement in the monochromatic Kiev winter.
Orange ribbons soon gave way to orange caps, scarves, pants, parkas,
bandannas, suspenders, socks, hair and face paint. A new tribe was born.
"This was one of the successes of the election campaign. People could
recognize each other, and this gave everyone a feeling of support," said
Vira Nanivska, head of the International Center for Policy Studies, a local
think tank.
Young people formed the backbone of the protests. And like the setting for
some sort of midwinter night's dream, Independence Square became a place for
romance. Boys and girls held hands across barricades, shivered in embraces
during windy political speeches and cuddled under tents or on apartment
floors offered them by thousands of Kiev residents.
The newlywed Vasili, 20, works in a jewelry store and belongs to a small
party that supports Yushchenko. He rushed down when the rallies began.
He is a perimeter security guard at the tent city. "I am fighting for the
truth," he says. "Really, we can't just accept this kind of thing anymore.
We
want to have a real future."
Sofia, 19, had never been involved in politics. She studies economics at a
Kiev university. When she heard the election results, she cried, she says.
Some friends headed for the square and she followed. "This is a first for
me," she says. "I didn't expect it of myself. My patience just ran out."
For four days, she circulated among the demonstrators and settled into
one of the tents. So did Vasili. "I liked everything I saw," he says of his
first impression of Sofia.
They shared borscht sent to the camp by Vasili's mother. They listened to
guitar music together at late-night hootenannies. Talk got around to
marriage. One of the political operatives in charge of the camp said they
ought to go ahead and get hitched.
They lined up with the other two couples under the tent of Radio Gala, which
set up a remote studio outside the perimeter. The priest blessed them. They
exchanged borrowed rings. Later, the editor of a newspaper gave them a pair
of thin gold rings as a present. "We can't afford anything bigger right
now," Vasili says.
They told their parents -- after the fact. Hers came down and embraced the
couple. "They liked him!" says Sofia. His haven't traveled to the square
yet. "Mine were shocked," he says.
The couple organized a formal wedding ceremony at a Baptist prayer tent
inside the encampment. A little wedding party included soft drinks and
sandwiches. "No champagne," says Vasili. "It's forbidden."
They have moved into a large, military-type tent because it is warmer --
there is no heater, but the occupants' body heat warms up the place to the
point that by morning, the walls are dripping with moisture. They sleep on
thick Styrofoam mats covered with blankets. They eat at a canteen that
serves dumplings on plastic plates. The tent's interior is decorated with a
single orange balloon. The occupants are careful not to break it. It is the
only one that has survived since the beginning of the demonstrations.
They haven't figured out their future housing arrangements. "We're not
worried. If we can stand this together, we'll have a long life together,"
Sofia says.
"Why wait?" asks Vasili, and jokes, "We can always hang a 'Do Not
Disturb' sign on the tent if we have to." -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49699-2004Dec8.html
=========================================================
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
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
========================================================