"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 274
morganw@patriot.net, ArtUkraine.com@starpower.net
FROM: KYIV, UKRAINE, WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 29, 2004
-----INDEX OF ARTICLES-----
"Major International News Headlines and Articles"
1. UKRAINIANS HAVE WON THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE THEIR DESTINY
OP-ED: By Viktor Yushchenko
Financial Times, London, UK, Tuesday, December 28 2004
2. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL
REPUBLICAN INSTITUTE (IRI) ON THE DECEMBER 26, 2004
UKRAINIAN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
Stephen B. Nix, International Republican Institute (IRI)
Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, December 27, 2004
3. "YUSHCHENKO'S MASSIVE VICTORY"
I'd bet the real figure of the vote for Yushchenko was more than 60%
From: George Knysh, knysh@cc.umanitoba.ca
To: politics@infoukes.com
Toronto, Canada, Tuesday, December 28, 2004
4. "CHALLENGES FOR THE ORANGE REVOLUTION"
LEAD EDITORIAL: Financial Times
London, United Kingdom, Tue, December 28 2004
5. RECONCILIATION IN THE AIR AS YUSHCHENKO CLAIMS VICTORY
By Stefan Wagstyl and Tom Warner in Kiev
Financial Times, London, UK, Tue, December 28 2004
6. "FROM AMERICA WITH LOVE"
Ukraine's new first lady knows what freedom really means.
JOHN FUND ON THE TRAIL
OpinionJournal, Wall Street Journal Online
New York, NY, Monday, December 27, 2004
7. WEST GREETS VICTORY FOR YUSHCHENKO IN UKRAINE
By Stefan Wagstyl and Tom Warner in Kiev
Financial Times, London, UK, Tue, December 28 2004, Front Page
8. "REPORTERS PAVED WAY FOR A FREER UKRAINE"
Democratic Drama Unfolds Today With Range of Heroes
By Nadia Diuk and Michael McFaul
San Jose Mercury News, San Jose, CA, Sun, Dec 26, 2004
9. SUBURBAN COUPLE REMEMBERS UKRAINE'S
SOON-TO-BE FIRST LADY
By Michael Puente, Daily Herald Staff Writer
Daily Herald, Suburban Chicago's Information Source
Arlington Heights, Illinois, Wednesday, December 29, 2004
10. ENERGY NEEDS FORGE UKRAINE'S LINK TO RUSSIA
By Judy Dempsey, International Herald Tribune (IHT)
Europe, Monday, December 27, 2004
11. POLISH PRESIDENT CONGRATULATES UKRAINE'S
VIKTOR YUSHCHENKO ON PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION WIN
AP, Warsaw, Poland, Monday, December 27, 2004
12. DENMARK SAYS UKRAINE'S POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC
TIES WITH EUROPE CAN NOW BE STRENGTHENED
Denmark To Open Embassy Now In Kiev
AP, Copenhagan, Denmark, Mon, December 27, 2004
13. UKRAINE'S PEACEFUL REVOLUTION IS A DEFINING
MOMENT FOR ALL EUROPE
LETTER-TO-THE-EDITOR: By Michael Maltzoff
Financial Times, London, UK, Tue, December 28 2004
14. "THE EU'S RESPONSE TO UKRAINIAN TURMOIL".
By Ktaryna Wolczuk and Roman Wolczuk
RFE/RL Belarus and Ukraine Report, Vol. 6, No. 47
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty,
Prague, Czech Republic, Thu, 23 December 2004
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 274: ARTICLE NUMBER ONE
=========================================================
1.UKRAINIANS HAVE WON THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE THEIR DESTINY
OP-ED: By Viktor Yushchenko
Financial Times, London, UK, Tuesday, December 28 2004
In Ukraine's repeat presidential election run-off on Sunday, voters gave the
vibrant opposition movement that I lead a mandate to change the way our
country is governed.
Official poll counts show that a majority voted for change. Three exit polls
point to even greater margins between my opponent and me. The difference
suggests that vote-tampering occurred but not enough to reverse a clear
victory.
For the third time in as many months, Ukrainians cast ballots unwaveringly
for a future committed to freedom, democracy and the rule of law. When the
incumbent regime interfered by censoring the mass media and falsifying
November's election results, millions of voters took to the streets to
defend the most fundamental of all civil rights - the right to choose one's
own destiny.
In doing so, they forced corrupt authorities that were planning to resort to
force to stand down. More important, in an elegant display of democracy,
they unleashed a public cleansing of society's civic institutions. The
atmosphere of fear and intimidation instilled by the government and
tolerated by the public for a decade was lifted.
There is no doubt that Ukrainians want change. They want an end to
government corruption. They want decent jobs at honest wages. And they want
a president whom they trust to make the changes needed in government and
society. When the outgoing government refused to acknowledge the volatile
public mood, it became clear that citizens, businesses, elected officials
and the courts - the institutions of civil society - had to take matters
into their own hands. And they did.
Since November 21, when the first, corrupted, run-off took place, democracy
has reaffirmed itself daily in demonstrations in Kiev and in city centres
throughout the country. A new Ukraine has emerged from this "Orange
Revolution", one of which people at home and abroad have high expectations.
I will move quickly to close the gap left by the outgoing government by
implementing popular measures that will improve lives and strengthen social
institutions.
During the past month, four fundamental changes have taken place in Ukraine.
First, by saying "no" to election fraud and autocracy, the country put a
definitive end to its post-Soviet period. By rejecting managed democracy,
Ukraine has affirmed itself as a free European country that shares the
political values of modern democratic states. Its well-informed citizenry,
empowered with a right to choose, will make the correct choice in guiding
elected officials. This will be the cornerstone of my public policy agenda.
Second, Ukraine's nascent civil society is more mature than many had earlier
believed. During the past few weeks, it has bridged the divide between
government lawlessness and civic disenchantment by asserting itself without
violence.
In spite of officials overstepping their authority, society rose up in
defence of those civil servants and law enforcement officials who carried
out their duties honestly. It ridiculed publicly those who did not.
Investigations into government corruption will certainly go forward. This
will be done objectively within the spirit and letter of the law. Society
has spoken against political revenge by insisting that elected officials
pursue national reconciliation and unity, which I intend to do.
Third, Ukraine's state institutions, emboldened by street protests, were
quick to reassert their political authority against the executive's efforts
to steal the election. The Supreme Court stood up against corruption by
ruling objectively on election fraud and calling for a repeat run-off
election.
In Ukraine's parliament, the pro-presidential bloc disintegrated. MPs could
no longer tolerate being held hostage by a ruler who sought to use the
courts and law enforcement agencies to sustain an authoritarian regime. They
rose to amend their country's constitution and laws to ensure that abuse of
state power and voting manipulations were minimised.
Some of Ukraine's media elite recognised that censorship, propaganda and
political intolerance, if left unchecked by objective journalism, could tear
apart Ukraine's diverse communities. The result was more balanced coverage
of the election that allowed society to recognise its heroes and to push
aside those who threatened Ukraine's national integrity with separatism.
Finally, through voluntary corporate contributions that funded weeks of
civil strikes, businesses and entrepreneurs demonstrated their readiness to
work with government. Business has shown that it too is part of the
community and is willing to pay reasonable taxes to a transparent government
that provides basic social services.
With election politicking over, I shall endeavour to reach out to all
sections of society and establish order in Ukraine's international economic
affairs. Our country's long-term commitments will be honoured and I shall
strive to maintain good relations with neighbouring states.
I would like to assure our Russian and European partners that the stable and
dependable transportation of energy is guaranteed. Free trade initiatives
with our eastern and western partners will move forward, including those
that confirm Ukraine's status as a market economy and its readiness for
World Trade Organisation membership. We shall soon announce our plans
for ramping up Ukraine's relations with the European Union.
The democratic transformation that began in Europe 15 years ago has extended
eastward to Ukraine. We are poised to make our contribution to a unified and
stable Europe. -30- [The Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The writer, a former prime minister, is Ukraine's president-elect.
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.274: ARTICLE NUMBER TWO
========================================================
2. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL
REPUBLICAN INSTITUTE (IRI) ON THE DECEMBER 26, 2004
UKRAINIAN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
Stephen B. Nix, International Republican Institute (IRI)
Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, December 27, 2004
IRI's election observation mission has determined that the repeat runoff
election of December 26 demonstrated significant progress in Ukraine's
democratic development. Improvements in election administration, as well
as legislative efforts to prevent fraud, contributed to demonstrative
increases in transparency and fairness in the voting process, and the
election campaign overall. These improvements resulted in a more
orderly process, and an atmosphere which allowed voters and officials
to generally act without fear or intimidation. In addition, they helped
establish the legitimacy of the process for the election of the President.
I. BACKGROUND
IRI fielded a forty-person delegation of observers for the repeat runoff
election for Ukraine's presidency. Like the IRI delegations deployed
during the first and second rounds, the current one consisted of
representatives of a number of political parties in the United States and
Europe, and was comprised of election experts who have observed multiple
elections in numerous countries around the world. The delegation was
co-chaired by United States Federal Judge Bohdan Futey and Michael
Trend, Member of the United Kingdom Parliament and Vice-Chairman
of the Westminster Foundation for Democracy.
During the first and second rounds of observation IRI found a systematic and
coordinated use of government "administrative" resources in support of the
government-backed candidate. IRI also found at that time systemic fraud in
the management of voter lists, vote tabulation and reporting of results.
During the second round of elections, IRI identified numerous problems
including:
1. The voter list contained substantial inaccuracies;
2. Busing of voters among oblasts and polling stations for the purpose
of multiple voting;
3. Expelling local and international observers, as well as journalists,
from polling stations;
4. In a number of polling stations, the percentage of votes certified by
the Central Election Commission ("CEC") was greater than 100% of total
voters;
5. The CEC failed to provide the appropriate leadership and regulatory
oversight of lower level commissions, resulting in extensive falsification
and disregard of election law and procedure. Finally, the official
election results, as reported by the CEC, did not accurately reflect the
will of the voters of Ukraine.
The Ukrainian people reacted to allegations of massive fraud and peacefully
demanded to have their votes properly counted. Over the course of the last
several weeks, Ukraine and the world have witnessed the Orange Revolution.
The people are demanding merely what they are entitled to under the
Constitution and the laws of Ukraine.
On November 24, based upon evidence of massive fraud and violations of
the election law, the Supreme Court of Ukraine overturned the CEC's vote
count of November 21, effectively voiding the results, and ordered the CEC
to conduct a repeat of the second round vote.
Having agreed with the Court that the second round voting did not reflect
the will of the people, the Ukrainian Parliament amended the election law
and set a date for a new run-off. The amended election law sought to
restrict fraud by limiting the use of absentee ballots and mobile voting, as
well as changing the composition of territorial and polling station
commissions. In addition, the parliament voted no-confidence in the
Central Election Commission, after which new members were elected to
that body.
In a significant ruling, only one day prior to the December 26 run-off, the
Constitutional Court restored the right to vote via mobile ballot box to all
handicapped voters. All other provisions of the amended election law
remained intact.
II. FINDINGS
1. There existed some confusion over the terms and rules of
eligibility for the use of mobile ballot boxes for the handicapped. These
issues arose largely due to the Constitutional Court's ruling on mobile
ballot eligibility only one day before voting took place. Notwithstanding
the importance of voting for handicapped persons, mobile balloting was a
small percentage of the national vote, and therefore is not likely to affect
the overall result of the election.
2. The reduction of use of absentee balloting was a positive step,
given the level of fraud committed through their use during the first two
rounds. However, there was some confusion among voters in certain areas
over eligibility and the procedure for application and registration to vote
absentee on Election Day. This was due partially to the fact that the
amendments to the election law reduced the number of absentee ballots
from four percent to one-half percent. Again, these issues are not likely
to affect the outcome of the election.
3. The Central Election Commission, as well as lower commissions,
did take steps to improve the accuracy of voters lists, resulting in a much
smoother process of checking eligibility before the issuance of ballots to
voters. However, some voters still found errors on the list, and were
unable to resolve inaccurate information in time to vote.
4. In most election commissions observed, both candidates were
represented. Both campaigns should be commended for successfully
undertaking this massive organizational effort in a very short amount of
time.
III. SUMMARY
IRI acknowledges the significance of the role of the courts in ensuring a
more fair election process. The Supreme Court ruling calling for a new
election, signaled judicial concern for election fraud, and underlined the
Court's Constitutional role as an independent, co-equal branch of
government.
Similarly, IRI acknowledges the positive role that parliament played during
the electoral process. In adopting critical amendments to the election law,
the legislative branch acted promptly and effectively on the public's demand
for new regulations designed to provide a more transparent and democratic
electoral process.
Finally, IRI recognizes the role that civil society played in demanding the
right to have their votes properly counted. The Ukrainian people are to be
applauded for rising to the occasion and exercising their constitutionally
protected right of peaceful assembly throughout the political, judicial and
legislative processes cited above.
In summary, the courts, the parliament and the people have not only spoken,
but have acted accordingly. They should be saluted for their democratic
actions geared toward preserving the sacred right to vote, and protecting
that right from infringement. -30- [Action Ukraine Report Monitoring]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Web site: www.iri.org
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 274: ARTICLE NUMBER THREE
========================================================
3. "YUSHCHENKO'S MASSIVE VICTORY"
I'd bet the real figure of the vote for Yushchenko was more than 60%
From: George Knysh, knysh@cc.umanitoba.ca
To: politics@infoukes.com
Toronto, Canada, Tuesday, December 28, 2004
The "official" figures currently prepared by the Central Election
Commission (CEC) will show that the margin of victory was relatively
narrow, 52 to 44, and geographically worrisome, with nine provinces
east of the Vinnytsia-Kirovohrad-Poltava-Sumy line allegedly voting
for the bandits.
With the conclusion that Yushchenko should "compromise", "unify the
country" etc etc "not go too fast" and the like. That is bunkum.
Yushchenko's statistician Hrytsenko has contended that the real margin
of victory was that of the exit polls, with a 5% "falsification" factor.
In my opinion the 5% is too low an estimate. I have done some preliminary
analyses of the results by polling stations as reported by the CEC and can
see some pretty interesting evidence for massive fraud (even in the third
round!). I'm not sure what the real figure of the vote for Yushchenko was,
but I'd be willing to bet sound money that it was considerably more than
60%.
What made these major falsifications possible is simple incompetence on
the part of Yushchenko's campaign staffers. They tended to concentrate
their resources on the major cities of the Southeast, and left most of the
countryside either unattended or poorly organized. Even though the
representation of the two candidates was supposed to be equal at the
polling station level, a very large number of so-called "Yushchenko reps"
were in fact Yanukovych people (!!) and did what they did.
And many actual Yushchenko reps were it seems easy to fool. Take the
results in the Odesa Province. The population of the northern portion is
faitly homogeneously Ukrainian speaking, and a natural continuation of
the Vinnytsia settlements. But if you examine the voting results you get
an extraordinarily schizophrenic picture. It's not simply that immediately
past the Vinnytsia border you start getting big Yanukovych majorities
where there are no objective reasons for this.
It's the nature of the distribution that is suspicious. In the
Balta-Ananijiv-Ivanivka area, rural and small city as it is, Yushchenko
captured majorities in 124 stations, and Yanukovych in 385. I don't find
it believable that adjoining stations should give a 70% result for
Yushchenko and then a 70% result for Yanukovych (in the same homo-
geneous little city?!), and that the whole area is chequerboarded in this
way.
What this suggests is simply that in those places where Yanukovych got
big figures you had the "right people" counting the votes, Stalin style. The
same situation can be observed in the northern portion of Mykolaiv
Province: in the Bashtanka-Pervomajsk-Voznesensk area, a continuation
of the Kirovohrad settlement pattern, you get the same schizophrenic
results: 92 polling stations are for Yushchenko (sometimes with very big
majorities) and 515 are for Yanukovych. Again the whole thing is
chequerboarded, as in Odesa.
The same process is observable in the western portion of Kharkiv Province.
In Dnipropetrovsk on the other hand, you have a different "approach": in
the rural and small city complexes not one polling station has been won by
Yushchenko (whereas he won over a dozen in Dnipropetrovsk city itself!),
and everywhere you have relatively narrow "wins" for Yanukovych, some-
times by only five or six votes. No chequerboard here: just this obviously
contrived "continuity".
Kherson is less obvious, the monitoring situation was better here.Even in
the Donbas Provinces you have oddities: The "official" results give
Yushchenko 4% in Donetsk and over 6% in Luhansk. And these low
figures are everywhere noticeable. Then you get "anomalies". In the Donetsk
Artemivsk district (territorial electoral commission n.84) you suddenly get
polling stations which give Yushchenko 31%, 20%, 27%. It's as if someone
were sending a message.
Same oddity in Luhansk Province. In a series of polling stations (14 in all)
from districts 114 and 115, practically on the Russian border, you have
stations that give Yushchenko 25%, 26%, and even 40% (twice!!) It's not
just explainable by the fact that this northern part of the Province is less
industrialized and less Russified (everywhere else in that area you get the
usual "6%". So this too is a kind of message.
So Ukraine is far less "divided" and the bandit share of the vote far less
important than the "official" results. If I were to hazard a guess on the
basis of preliminary analysis, I would suggest that three of the provinces
of the Southeast (Dnipropetrovsk, Mykolaiv, Kherson) were actually won by
Yushchenko, that in another three the vote would have been very close
(Kharkiv, Zaporizhja, Odesa), and that only three (Donetsk, Luhansk, and
the Crimea) were comfortably won by Yanukovych, though not with the
overwhelming majorities recorded (Yushchenko probably got around 30%
in the Donbas, and some 20 to 25% in the Crimea).This should be kept in
mind when planning strategy.
A POSTSCRIPT ON ZAPORIZHJA PROVINCE
Allegedly one of the Southeastern provinces where Yanukovich "won big".
But did he really? In fact did he win at all there? As to the latter, some
doubt may be offered. But there is no doubt at all that if he did win it
wasn't by anything even remotely close to the "official figures". Which are
as follows:
TOTAL BALLOTS CAST: 1,129,884
For Yanukovich: 792.500 (70.13%)
For Yushchenko: 277.055 (24.52%)
Here as elsewhere in the Southeast the Yushchenko forces largely
neglected genuine monitoring of the rural and small cities areas (with
some happy exceptions). They concentrated on the capital, with some
beneficial results, as we gather from the following CEC figures:
TOTAL BALLOTS CAST: 468,000
For Yanukovich: 295.337 (63.0%)
For Yushchenko: 145.038 (30.94%) Which is not too bad for a
strongly Russified and Sovietized city
But what about the neglected Ukrainian hinterland? Well quite
outrageous figures really:
TOTAL BALLOTS CAST: 661.084
For Yanukovich: 497.163 (75.24%)
For Yushchenko: 132.017 (19.97%)
But here too we get "messages". In Territorial Election Committee area n.
84, polling station n. 212 (Tokmak region) we have Yushchenko winning
by 53% to 43%. Out of the blue, with no apparent justification demographic,
ethnic, or otherwise... And in area . 84 (Polohy) [both Tokmak and Polohy
BTW are to the southeast of the capital city, in the very center of the
Province...] we have Yushchenko winning polling stations n. 44 and 46
(where fairly substantial numbers voted). Again there is absolutely no
reason for the existence of these Yushchenko '"islands" in a sea of
Yanukovych "big wins" other than those I suggested earlier.
There is also some evidence of Yushchenko activity in two other polling
stations where the results were nullified (perhaps the Yanukovych's refused
to register Yushchenko wins). It is impossible to say who really won
Zaporizhja Province. But it puts that "44%" nation wide for Yanukovych
in an entirely different perspective. -30-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: Article published with the permission of George Knysh.
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 274: ARTICLE NUMBER FOUR
========================================================
4. "CHALLENGES FOR THE ORANGE REVOLUTION"
LEAD EDITORIAL: Financial Times
London, United Kingdom, Tue, December 28 2004
Viktor Yushchenko's victory in the Ukrainian presidential election is a
welcome triumph for democracy in a troubled world. At a time when the world
faces an unprecedented challenge from fundamentalist terrorists, it is worth
celebrating the peaceful overthrow of an authoritarian regime by democratic
means. Just as the anti-Communist revolts of 1989 advanced the flags of
freedom from the Elbe to the Bug, so the Orange Revolution has unfurled them
on the Eurasian steppes.
The events in Ukraine show that neither history nor geography condemns a
people to live without democracy. After decades of repression, many
Ukrainians had believed they were too passive to rebel against an oppressive
government. There were also deep-rooted fears of big brother Russia, which
supported Mr Yushchenko's rival, prime minister Viktor Yanukovich. People
power has exploded this myth. As Mr Yushchenko said early yesterday: "We
have been independent [from Russia] for 14 years. Today we became free."
The Ukrainian outcome may not easily be replicated elsewhere in the former
Soviet Union. President Leonid Kuchma's rule was marked by widespread abuse
of power but it was by no means the worst post-Soviet regime. Mr Kuchma lost
mainly because he never established complete command, even over his inner
circle. There was no unifying ideology, only self-interest. The emergence of
Mr Yushchenko as a charismatic leader was also vital for attracting
supporters, including defectors from Mr Kuchma's top aides.
The position is quite different in Russia, where president Vladimir Putin
has united most of the political elite with the help of increasingly
strident nationalist ideology. Those who hope that the Orange Revolution
will promote genuine democracy in Russia may therefore have a long wait.
But the precedent has at least been set.
Yet it is one thing to win an election and quite another to consolidate
victory. Mr Yushchenko has generated such high hopes that some
disappointment is inevitable. The new president must now focus on his
priorities.
First, he must try to repair the political divide between Ukraine's west and
centre, which supported his campaign, and the east and south which backed
Mr Yanukovich. The defeated prime minister won 44 per cent of the vote,
reflecting genuine support that Mr Yushchenko cannot ignore. While fears of
separatism are overblown, there is a danger that Mr Yanukovich and his
allies will seek to run his wealthy Donbas heartland as a private fiefdom.
Next, Mr Yushchenko must deal reasonably with the legacy of Mr Kuchma's
rule. Those guilty of serious crime must be brought to justice and big
financial wrongs must be put right - notably the untransparent privatisation
of the Kryvorizhstal steel mill. But there must be no witch-hunts:
experience in other former communist states shows that many people keep
their ill-gotten gains - which is unpleasant but preferable to debilitating
arguments about the past. Mr Yushchenko should instead implement quickly
planned economic reforms to reduce the scope for future corruption.
Mr Yushchenko has repeatedly called for good relations with Moscow.
This will be difficult: Kremlin-sponsored spokesmen have portrayed the
president-elect as a western stooge and some of Mr Yushchenko's supporters
have accused Russia of involvement in the poisoning that left him scarred.
However, Mr Putin has in recent days spoken positively about Mr Yushchenko.
Given the extensive mutual economic and social ties between the two
countries, a strong working relationship is important but must be based on a
genuine respect for Ukraine's independence.
Mr Yushchenko's intentions for the west are clear. He wants
integration, especially closer links with the European Union including, in
the long term, membership. With the EU struggling to absorb 10 new members,
expecting to admit Romania and Bulgaria in 2007, and starting accession
talks with Turkey next year, Brussels is bound to respond cautiously. But it
must do as much as it can in developing trade and investment and easing visa
regulations.
Increased aid alone will not be enough. Ukraine has money. What it needs
above all is real friends in the democratic world. -30-
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.274: ARTICLE NUMBER FIVE
=========================================================
5. RECONCILIATION IN THE AIR AS YUSHCHENKO CLAIMS VICTORY
By Stefan Wagstyl and Tom Warner in Kiev
Financial Times, London, UK, December 28 2004
Yulia Tymoshenko, a firebrand ally of the Ukrainian opposition leader Viktor
Yushchenko, celebrated his election victory in a custom-made orange outfit
bearing the word "Revolution". The political message was clear. The stylish
Ms Tymoshenko wants election success to be followed by a judicial assault on
the regime of outgoing president Leonid Kuchma, including investigations of
the economic interests of Mr Kuchma and his associates.
There is no doubt about the intentions of Ms Tymoshenko, who declared after
Sunday's poll that she would make "a perfect prime minister" and would not
want "any old faces in the government". She has considerable support within
the opposition, especially among younger politicians in Mr Yushchenko's
team. But Mr Yushchenko is not among nature's radicals and may prefer to
stick to the path of compromise he has followed in recent dealings with Mr
Kuchma.
"Yushchenko says he wants to achieve reconciliation in the country. I think
he means it," says Hryhoriy Nemyria, head of Renaissance Foundation, a
liberal think-tank. Ms Tymoshenko and other radicals in the Yushchenko camp
argue that without a serious attempt to punish Mr Kuchma and his allies, the
democrats' victory in Ukraine will be incomplete and the officials and
businessmen who prospered under Mr Kuchma will still be strong enough to
fight back. They claim the democratic camp should enforce the law by
bringing to justice those responsible for abuses of power, including
government officials allegedly involved in the murder of the investigative
journalist Georgy Gongadze.
The radicals also argue that an economy dominated by a handful of oligarchs
who profited from close ties with the state cannot function properly. They
are particularly concerned about the privatisation of Kryvorizhstal,
Ukraine's top steel mill, which was sold this year for $800m (Euro 590m,
Lbs. 416m) to Viktor Pinchuk, Mr Kuchma's son-in-law, and Rinat Akhmetov,
another oligarch. Foreign offers of up to $1.5bn were excluded.
Mr Yushchenko agrees that reviewing the Kryvorizhstal case is essential.
He also wants serious Kuchma era crimes such as the Gongadze murder
investigated. But he is not keen on wholesale reviews or sweeping
renationalisation of former state-owned assets. "I do not like words like
nationalisation or re-privatisation," he said recently. "It is very
important not to throw the baby out with the bath water." As a former
central banker and prime minister who worked for Mr Kuchma, Mr
Yushchenko understands officials must balance risks and rewards.
Others in Mr Yushchenko's camp would also make reluctant revolutionaries.
They include Anatoly Kinakh, a former prime minister who defected from Mr
Kuchma but retains useful links with his camp; Petro Poroshenko, chairman of
the parliamentary budget committee; Olexander Zinchenko, Mr Yushchenko's
campaign manager and a former confidant of Mr Kuchma; and Olexander
Moroz, Socialist party leader.
Ms Tymoshenko made a fortune trading in the gas market in the 1990s. She
has dismissed corruption charges levelled against her as political.
Mr Yushchenko gained a revolutionary aura when he sent his supporters into
the streets after the November 21 election. But he has since opted for
compromise, notably in agreeing constitutional changes that will see much of
his presidential power transferred to parliament in the next 15 months. Mr
Yushchenko also lacks the skilled manpower to replace swathes of top
administrators.
In addition, he will be forced to compromise because of the scale of voters'
backing of Viktor Yanukovich, the current prime minister and former Kuchma
ally. The forces he represents cannot be ignored, especially as his support
is concentrated in the east and south. Oleg Soskin, the head of the
Institute for Social Transformation, says the Yushchenko and Yanukovich
camps could even team up against Mr Kuchma.
The choice of prime minister will be crucial. Mr Yushchenko is not expected
to opt for Ms Tymoshenko but, if he did, Mr Kuchma would have every reason
to fear the consequences. The choice of Mr Poroshenko or another moderate
would reassure the old order that not everything is under threat. -30-
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 274: ARTICLE NUMBER SIX
========================================================
6. "FROM AMERICA WITH LOVE"
Ukraine's new first lady knows what freedom really means.
JOHN FUND ON THE TRAIL
OpinionJournal, Wall Street Journal Online
New York, NY, Monday, December 27, 2004
In the most peaceful revolution since South Africa ended its apartheid
regime by electing Nelson Mandela president in 1994, Ukraine has just
elected opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko president of the former Soviet
satellite republic. The victory comes for the pro-Western leader after a
dirty campaign that saw him poisoned and only after hundreds of thousands of
demonstrators filled the streets to protest voter-fraud. "We peacefully,
beautifully, elegantly and without any drops of blood changed Ukraine," Mr.
Yushchenko told cheering supporters.
What many Westerners do not realize, however, is when Mr. Yushchenko takes
the seat of power, at his side will be a tough minded, savvy American-raised
businesswoman. His wife, Kateryna Chumachenko Yushchenko, is the daughter
of Ukrainian immigrants who grew up steeped in the traditions of her
ancestral homeland.
Mrs. Yushchenko was raised in suburban Chicago as the daughter of an
electrician and seamstress. During World War II, her parents were forced to
immigrate to Germany and work as slave labor. They came to the U.S. in 1956
at the invitation of a Ukrainian Orthodox church. She grew up speaking
Ukrainian at home, learning the national dances and attending a Ukrainian
school and Orthodox church. "My parents felt they had to keep alive the
culture and traditions they thought were being suppressed by the Soviet
Union," she told me.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s she worked in the human rights office of
the U.S. State Department. She also worked for the first President Bush in
the Treasury Department. But her dream was always to help Ukraine become
independent. So after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 she moved to
Kiev. Her business degree from the University of Chicago helped her land a
job with KPMG, the U.S. international auditing company, and she prospered
training the country's economists in Western practices.
She met Viktor Yushchenko when he was part of a delegation of central
bankers she brought to Chicago. "He understood free markets, had a firm
faith in God and knew what the right path for the country should be," she
told me. The two married in 1998, and they now have three children.
It is the strong bond he has with his wife that has helped Mr. Yushchenko
through the tough campaign and it will likely be his relationship with her
that will help him have a successful presidency. Perhaps the darkest moment
for Mr. Yushchenko came this fall when he was poisoned. At first it seemed
to be a case of the flu. His wife recalls him coming home one night during
the presidential campaign and saying he felt sick. She noticed a strange
metallic taste in his mouth when she kissed him. It turned out to be dioxin,
a chemical compound found in Agent Orange and a well known poison.
Mr. Yushchenko has largely recovered, although the poison has left his face
disfigured and the government has continued a three-year campaign to
discredit him and his wife. After he was poisoned, the state prosecutor
opened an investigation into the incident and then tried smearing Mr.
Yushchenko by claiming he had a disfiguring case of herpes.
Tape recordings made by a disgruntled bodyguard for President Leonid Kuchma
show that the president personally ordered a disinformation campaign against
the Yushchenkos. Mr. Yushchenko was portrayed as a fascist puppet of Western
bankers and Kateryna as an active CIA agent. She responded by winning a
libel judgment against a Russian television station that accused her of
disloyalty to Ukraine. But the government has refused to process her
application for Ukrainian citizenship.
Now that Mr. Yushchenko is to become president, it's likely he'll be able to
push through more than his wife's citizenship application. He helped
implement some free-market reforms when he served as prime minister for
16 months between 1999 and 2001 before being ousted by hard-liners in
Parliament. Now he has a popular mandate at his back as well as
international support, which has only increased with the success of his
"orange revolution." His wife has also proved invaluable by introducing him
to contacts in the West.
All this adds up to a rare opportunity for Mr. Yushchenko. Since its
independence in 1991, Ukraine's 48 million people have seesawed between
forming greater ties with the West or lurching back into becoming a vassal
state of Russia. One out of six people are ethnically Russian. Still, a
clear majority of voters now want the corrupt, pro-Moscow clique surrounding
outgoing President Kuchma out of the government. Yulia Timoshenko, a
charismatic ally of Mr. Yushchenko, says their time is up. She told
reporters: "I think the key word for them in Sunday's exit polls was
'exit.'"
The challenge will be to move Ukraine towards a free-market economy. Mrs.
Yushchenko makes clear that her husband makes all of his own political
decisions, but she will no doubt be a valuable asset to him. "She is one of
the brightest, most dedicated conservatives I have ever known," says Bruce
Bartlett, a former official in the Treasury Department under the first
President Bush. "Anyone who met Kathy quickly discovered that creating a
free, successful Ukraine was her primary mission in life, to the exclusion
of almost everything else."
Now the challenge facing Ukraine is to make the leap towards becoming a
democratic society truly governed by the rule of law. Mrs. Yushchenko is
realistic about the obstacles facing her husband and his team. "[Some]
people are making a lot of money off the current system," she told ABC News.
"The last thing they want is for the system to change and for the economy to
be a free market economy where the general population benefits rather than a
small group of people at the top."
Cynics may say that since Ukraine has never been a true democracy, reforming
it will be impossible. But those are the same people who never predicted
that hundreds of thousands of people would fill the streets of Kiev and
other cities and force a new election. Nonetheless it happened. What happens
next is now up to Mr. Yushchenko. -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINK: http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110006076
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 274: ARTICLE NUMBER SEVEN
========================================================
7. WEST GREETS VICTORY FOR YUSHCHENKO IN UKRAINE
By Stefan Wagstyl and Tom Warner in Kiev
Financial Times, London, UK, Tue, December 28 2004, Front Page
KIEV - Viktor Yushchenko, the Ukrainian opposition leader, yesterday
established an unassailable lead in the presidential contest as the election
commission counted the last few votes and parliament started preparations
for his inauguration.
Western governments welcomed the results. Colin Powell, US secretary of
state, said it was "a historic moment for democracy", while Jose Manuel
Barroso, European Commission president, promised "strengthened co-
operation" with Kiev.
There was no immediate reaction from Moscow, which backed Mr
Yushchenko's rival, prime minister Viktor Yanukovich, and saw the pro-
west liberal Mr Yushchenko as a threat.
In the Yushchenko camp associates were already manoeuvring for position,
with Yulia Tymoshenko saying she would make "a perfect prime minister".
With 99.8 per cent of ballots counted, Mr Yushchenko had 52 per cent to Mr
Yanukovich's 44 per cent. Mr Yushchenko claimed victory but Mr Yanukovich
condemned the results as fraudulent, said he would not concede defeat and
demanded a review by the Supreme Court.
International observers said Sunday's election was largely free of the fraud
that marred the previous two rounds of the poll. The rerun was held after Mr
Yushchenko challenged the previous round, in which Mr Yanukovich was
declared winner.
On Sunday, Mr Yushchenko increased his vote from 14.2m to 15.1m, while Mr
Yanukovich's vote fell from 15.1m to 12.8m, with losses mainly in areas Mr
Yushchenko's supporters claimed in November had produced most fraudulent
votes.
* Georgy Kyrpa, the transport minister and a close associate of outgoing
president Leonid Kuchma, was yesterday found dead in his dacha outside Kiev.
The circumstances were unclear. -30-
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.274: ARTICLE NUMBER EIGHT
Your comments about the Report are always welcome
========================================================
8. "REPORTERS PAVED WAY FOR A FREER UKRAINE"
Democratic Drama Unfolds Today With Range of Heroes
By Nadia Diuk and Michael McFaul
San Jose Mercury News, San Jose, CA, Sun, Dec 26, 2004
For anyone looking for inspiration, heroes or a feel-good story this holiday
season, Ukraine has it all.
This date -- Dec. 26, 2004 -- will likely be remembered generations from now
as one of the most pivotal days in Ukrainian history. Unless the old guard
in Kiev has planned some last-gasp measures to try to hold on to power or
an unforeseen turn of events occurs, a majority of Ukrainian voters will
elect opposition leader Victor Yushchenko their next president.
Some day, presidential elections in Ukraine will become such normal,
ordinary events that we in the West will not even be aware of their
outcomes.
Ukraine's presidential election this fall, however, was anything but
ordinary. The incumbent president, Leonid Kuchma, and his chosen successor,
Prime Minister Victor Yanukovych, deployed all available state resources,
national media and private funding from both Ukrainians and Russians to
defeat opposition candidate Yushchenko. Russian President Vladimir Putin
even traveled to Ukraine twice to campaign for Yanukovych. When this effort
to win the vote failed, Kuchma's government apparently tried to steal the
election, allegedly adding more than 1 million extra votes to Yanukovych's
tally.
INCUMBENT'S GRIP
This kind of election fraud happens frequently in some post-Soviet
countries, and incumbents often get away with it.
Not this time.
Ukraine's democratic movement had prepared for this moment for years. Within
hours after the fraudulent results were announced, tens of thousands were on
the streets prepared to stay for the long haul, fully equipped with hundreds
of foam pads and tents to help fight the cold. For over two weeks,
Ukrainians stood together in the freezing cold to demand from their
government what we citizens of established democracies take for granted --
a free and fair election.
These mobilized masses put pressure on parliament and the Supreme Court to
do the right thing and annul the election. Their numbers also raised doubts
among Ukrainian leaders about whether the armed forces would remain loyal
to the state or side with the people should an order be given to quell the
rebellion. After a tense negotiation, mediated by European diplomats and
heads of states, Kuchma relented and agreed to rerun the second round of the
presidential election. That vote, taking place today, might very well be the
pivotal event that consolidates democracy in Ukraine and forever anchors
this country of nearly 50 million in Europe.
Yushchenko is a true hero of the so-called Orange Revolution. Even after
his enemies poisoned him with life-threatening dioxin, he soldiered on
throughout the fall campaign with a catheter in his spine pumping
painkillers into his body.
Yushchenko is not the only hero of the democratic drama unfolding in Ukraine
today. He also stands with many lesser-known human rights activists,
students, workers and journalists who have labored years to make this day
happen. One of them, Olena Prytula, was a Knight journalism fellow at
Stanford University last year. Like the mild-mannered central banker
Yushchenko, Prytula did not aspire to become a revolutionary, but tragic
events at her Internet publication, Ukrainska Pravda, compelled her to
become one.
In the first years of Ukrainian independence, Prytula embarked on what she
hoped might be a normal career in journalism. In the mid-1990s she was a
freelancer for Reuters and also worked for the Interfax News Agency, which
had been created out of the Ukrainian section of the old Soviet official
news service after independence. For a couple of years in the second half of
the 1990s, she was detailed to cover the president and his entourage for
Interfax.
At that time she was very much a part of the new community of young
journalists and reporters who had emerged in post-Soviet Ukraine.
Many of them honed their skills by freelancing for Western media outlets
such as Reuters, United Press International and Associated Press as well as
Radio Liberty, BBC, Voice of America and Deutsche Welle. The practice of
independent reporting was both new and constrained by economic conditions,
yet a new class of investigative, truth-seeking journalists did seem to be
emerging in Ukraine, and Prytula was part of this movement. After decades
of propaganda being published under the banner of Pravda (literally,
"truth''), the vibrancy of Ukraine's media was encouraging.
So it came as a surprise to many seasoned Ukraine watchers that Prytula
arrived in Washington, D.C., in December 1999 with two colleagues. One
was fellow journalist Heorhiy Gongadze. The other was Serhii Sholokh, the
director of the independent radio station Kontynent, who now has
political-refugee status in the United States. Their message: The Ukrainian
authorities were systematically clamping down on the media, independent
journalists were being harassed, and government control over the media was
having a dramatic impact on access to objective news and information.
Gongadze already had made a name for himself as an investigative journalist
who had worked to expose the corruption and scandals around Kuchma and
his close circle of fundraisers and supporters. On this visit, Gongadze
claimed that there was no longer any publication or media outlet that would
publish him. And so, with some Western assistance, the independent Internet
publication Ukrainska Pravda (Ukrainian Truth) was launched in early 2000,
with Gongadze as editor in chief and Prytula as his associate.
The Web site maintained a simple format that was easy to operate and easy
to access for the growing number of Internet users in Ukraine. It was also
difficult for the security services to block. Even though other Web sites
were established, Ukrainska Pravda soon became the flagship Internet
publication -- a must-read for anyone who was interested in the political
situation in Ukraine.
The Web site published Gongadze's hard-hitting and incisive exposés of
corruption in high places and featured articles by other reporters and
analysts who could no longer be published in the mainstream press. An
hourly stream of political news supported the analytical articles. No other
Web site provided such comprehensive coverage of Ukrainian politics.
SECRET TAPES
As Gongadze's main partner and collaborator in this groundbreaking endeavor,
Prytula was also the last of his friends to see him alive on the evening of
Sept. 16, 2000. Nearly two months later, his headless corpse was found
half-buried in the woods some distance from Kiev. Soon after, a prominent
Ukrainian parliamentarian announced the existence of tapes secretly recorded
in the office of the president of Ukraine, where top officials allegedly
discussed, among other things, how to ``get rid'' of Gongadze.
For the past four years, Prytula's life has been a roller coaster of events
and emotions as the high-profile murder pushed her into the spotlight of
attention from the world press community and also Ukrainian authorities.
Determined not to give up, Prytula continued to publish Ukrainska Pravda,
despite threats to her life and financial difficulties.
Assistance from pro-democracy foundations in the West helped her to carry
on her efforts. During especially tense periods, she traveled in the company
of bodyguards, a condition of her work situation in Ukraine that thankfully
did not follow her to Stanford. In fact, at Stanford, Prytula had the chance
to decompress, recharge and gear up for the presidential campaign in
Ukraine this fall.
INTERNET VANGUARD
Gongadze's murder galvanized the community of independent Ukrainian
journalists, who understood that the major TV channels and most newspapers
were systematically keeping them out unless they wrote and reported
according to the rules issued by the president's administration. The
Internet became the last refuge for publishing the truth.
Under Prytula's management, Ukrainska Pravda remained the leader and
inspiration for a small but growing number of Internet sites and print
holdouts like Dzerkalo Tyzhnia, an independent Ukrainian weekly that
maintained a steady editorial policy of objective criticism of all political
tendencies throughout the past four years, when other newspapers were
harassed, closed down or threatened with lawsuits.
The public demand for the truth has been readily apparent during the
tumultuous weeks of the Orange Revolution this fall. Ukrainska Pravda and
other Web sites played a major role in informing and guiding the ``orange''
protesters on Independence Square in downtown Kiev through the 17 days
of occupation and tent-city protests that finally brought down the corrupt
system that had stymied Ukrainian democracy and Western integration for
the last decade.
On the day Ukraine's Supreme Court condemned the fraudulent election
that had led to days of protest, Prytula said from her office in the center
of Kiev: `I'm so happy, there are people dancing in the streets. It's
unbelievable what's happened.''
Prytula's role in the revolution was tacitly acknowledged in the first few
days of protest by Alexander Moroz, the politician who had announced the
existence of the secretly recorded tapes four years earlier, when he called
from the podium to the hundreds of thousands of protesters in Independence
Square for a moment of silence in memory of Gongadze. No one did more or
gave more than Gongadze and his family to make today's historical moment in
Ukraine come to be. In Ukrainska Pravda, however, Gongadze's legacy lives
on at http://www2.pravda.com.ua/en, as it fights to remain an independent
source of news and a critic of those in power and Prytula and her staff work
toward being normal journalists in a normal democratic country.
Today is a joyous moment for freedom lovers in Ukraine and around the
world, but tomorrow will be the beginning of the long and arduous process
of consolidating democracy. -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NADIA DIUK is program director for Europe and Eurasia at the National
Endowment for Democracy. MICHAEL MCFAUL is a senior fellow at
the Hoover Institution and an associate professor of political science at
Stanford University. They wrote this article for Perspective.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/editorial/10501435.htm
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 274: ARTICLE NUMBER NINE
========================================================
9. SURBURBAN COUPLE REMEMBERS UKRAINE'S
SOON-TO-BE FIRST LADY
By Michael Puente, Daily Herald Staff Writer
Daily Herald, Suburban Chicago's Information Source
Arlington Heights, Illinois, Wednesday, December 29, 2004
As a teenager growing up in Mount Prospect, she was just like all the other
kids. Today, she's poised to become the first lady of Ukraine, and those who
know her are excited. "I feel great, especially because Katy is from here,"
Palatine resident Eugenia Luszczak said Monday of the 41-year-old Kateryna
Chumachenko Yushchenko, wife of Ukraine's president-elect Viktor Yushchenko.
While growing up in the Northwest suburbs and graduating from Prospect High
School, Kateryna Yushchenko spent considerable time at the Ukrainian Youth
Center in Palatine. Eugenia's husband, Myron, was a counselor at the center
and remembers her fondly. "I'm very happy for her. She's very smart and a
pretty strong person," Myron Luszczak said.
Viktor Yushchenko is the declared winner in Ukraine's presidential election
held Sunday. About 5,000 Ukrainians living in the Chicago area were expected
to vote in Sunday's election. Viktor Yushchenko lost in the November runoff
vote to Ukraine Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych for the presidency, but
allegations of fraud forced another election.
This time, Viktor Yushchenko was running a campaign while recovering from
dioxin poisoning. Yanukovych intends to challenge Viktor Yushchenko's
victory in the courts.
Eugenia Luszczak said it's been at least two years since she last spoke to
Kateryna Yushchenko. She remembers "Katy" singing with the youth center's
choir.
"We used to sing in the choir, too. We knew her parents," Eugenia Luszczak
said. "Katy was very active and very smart. She was always the leader."
Kateryna's parents, Mykhailo and Sofia Chumachenko, met in Germany, where
both were in forced labor before leaving for Ukraine. A daughter, Lydia, was
forced to live in orphanages as her mother tried to make ends meet while Myk
hailo suffered from tuberculosis.
In 1956, the family moved to Chicago and lived in the Humbolt Park
neighborhood. In the late 1960s, the family moved to Mount Prospect.
Kateryna was born in 1961. Lydia Moll now works as a hairdresser in
Woodstock, Ga., an Atlanta suburb.
Kateryna Yushchenko graduated from Georgetown University in Washington,
D.C. She later earned an M.B.A. from the University of Chicago. She worked
for the State Department and the White House during Ronald Reagan's tenure,
concentrating in Eastern European ethnic affairs.
Friends say Kateryna Yushchenko always loved the Ukrainian culture, and she
moved to the country and worked in finance. In 1993, she met Viktor, an
accountant who headed the country's national bank. Kateryna's ties to the
United States have made her a target for criticism, according to European
media reports.
Eugenia Luszczak said Kateryna's father died years ago, while her mother,
now 77, lives in Florida. In having to deal with another election and the
near-death of her husband, Eugenia Luszczak said Kateryna is handling
everything very well. "She looks very, very brave, after all she went
through," Eugenia Luszczak said. "I'm very proud of the way she handles
herself." "She's a pretty strong person," Myron Luszczak said. -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.dailyherald.com/cook/main_story.asp?intID=3835091
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.274: ARTICLE NUMBER TEN
Suggested articles for publication in the Report are always welcome
=========================================================
10. ENERGY NEEDS FORGE UKRAINE'S LINK TO RUSSIA
By Judy Dempsey, International Herald Tribune (IHT)
Europe, Monday, December 27, 2004
BERLIN: No matter who wins the presidential election in Ukraine on Sunday,
the next president will oversee an economy pulled between Russia and the
European Union, almost a mirror of the election campaign itself, economists
say. Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich has pledged to maintain close ties
with Russia while the opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko has vowed to bring
Ukraine closer to the European Union.
Yet neither candidate can afford to choose one at the expense of the other.
Ukraine depends on its giant eastern neighbor for energy while, to the west,
it increasingly relies on the European Union as its largest export partner
and a bloc poised to become a major investor once reforms are introduced.
But it is Ukraine's relationship with Russia that is more important and
complicated. Consisting of a web of mutual dependencies, the relationship
could be broken only if both countries believed they could prosper without
it, analysts say. The deciding factor is energy.
"Ukraine is crucial for any Russian export strategy," said a recent report
by the International Energy Agency, the energy division of the Paris-based
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. "Ukraine transits
about 80 percent of Russian gas exports to Europe."
Yet as Igor Burakovsky, director of the independent Institute of Economic
and Policy Consulting in Kiev, points out, Ukraine needs Russia for its
energy supplies.
"Ukraine is a net importer of gas and of oil as well," he said. "Ukraine
imports approximately 80 percent of its gas from Russia or Turkmenistan and
imports about 90 percent of its oil from Russia." The result is that Russia
and Ukraine are highly dependent on each other and, for the moment, neither
can break that dependence.
Ukraine's dependence on Russian energy gives President Vladimir Putin
immense political and economic leverage - he could stop the flow of gas to
his western neighbor, if he chose.
Russia had no qualms about such action in the past. Gazprom, the state-owned
Russian gas monopoly, stopped deliveries to Belarus last February, including
all transit volumes destined for Western Europe through a new Belarus
pipeline. Belarus had questioned the transit fees and contracts for
transporting gas across Belarus to Poland.
Until the breakup of the former Soviet Union in 1991, transit fees were
never an issue for Moscow. But once Belarus and Ukraine gained their
independence, Gazprom found itself in the unprecedented position of having
to negotiate new transit terms. When Belarus challenged the fees last year,
Russia used its political and economic muscle to stop supplies, knowing
Belarus had no alternate sources of energy.
Gazprom's action sent ripples across Europe. Poland and Lithuania were
affected; deliveries to Germany and the Netherlands were met by dipping into
storage facilities in Germany owned by Wingas, a gas company owned 35
percent by Gazprom and 65 percent by the German energy group Wintershall.
Gazprom has not had a smooth ride with Ukraine either.
The International Energy Agency said that, after the dissolution of the
Soviet Union, "relations between Ukraine and Russia became tense over
allegations of authorized siphoning, payments problems and other issues" by
Ukraine. According to the agency, by 2000 Ukraine owed Russia $1.4 billion
for previous supplies. The debt was settled after both sides agreed to a
long-term transit contract.
Putin, who openly supported Yanukovich as president, has been careful not to
threaten Ukraine with any cuts although he did warn of the economic
consequences of strikes during a wave of anti-government demonstrations
earlier this month. Western diplomats in Kiev said that any threat by Putin
to cut energy supplies would have a devastating impact on Gazprom's
credibility as a reliable partner for European markets.
Nevertheless, Russia's dependency on Ukraine as a major transit country has
forced Gazprom to look for alternate routes. It recently started using the
Yamal pipeline, bypassing Ukraine, for some of its deliveries. It has also
built the Blue Stream pipeline to Turkey, although even this pipeline has
its problems as Turkey and Russia haggle over handling charges.
Back in Ukraine, energy-intensive heavy industry has started to seek
alternative and cheaper energy suppliers, mainly because it cannot compete
on an even playing field with Russian industry which, like its domestic
consumers, pays less than marker prices for its energy.
Seventy percent of Gazprom's sales are to the domestic market in Russia, but
they produce only 30 percent of its revenues. The remaining 30 percent of
its sales, which are exports - at world prices - to Europe and Ukraine,
account for 70 percent of Gazprom's revenues. As a result, Ukraine has
sought to diversify its energy supplies.
"Ukraine started importing from Turkmenistan, paying around $50 per 1,000
cubic meters while Russia charges Ukraine $80 for the same amount," said
Burakovsky. Ukraine believed it had struck a bargain with Turkmenistan until
it became clear that the energy from Turkmenistan had to be transported via
Russia. "There was no other way to avoid Russia," Burakovsky said, implying
the advantages were being eroded by transit charges. -30-
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 274: ARTICLE NUMBER ELEVEN
Names for the distribution list always welcome
=========================================================
11. POLISH PRESIDENT CONGRATULATES UKRAINE'S
VIKTOR YUSHCHENKO ON PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION WIN
AP, Warsaw, Poland, Monday, December 27, 2004
WARSAW (AP)--Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski Monday
congratulated Ukrainian opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko on winning
his country's presidency, describing his victory as a "good and important
choice" for Ukraine 's relations with Europe, Kwasniewski's office said.
Kwasniewski, whose country joined the European Union in May, helped
mediate in the standoff that developed in neighboring Ukraine after the
disputed first presidential runoff in November.
In a telephone conversation with Yushchenko Monday, Kwasniewski
"congratulated the newly elected president, wishing him success in working
for his country," his office said in a statement.
"Poland's president expressed his conviction that the Dec. 26 decision of
the Ukrainian nation was a good and important choice for Ukraine , for
relations between Poland and Ukraine and for relations between Ukraine
and Europe," it added.
Kwasniewski expressed his joy that Ukraine 's political crisis "ended in
success, proven by high voter turnout and an efficient and a peaceful voting
process," the statement said.
Kwasniewski's office said he invited Yushchenko to commemorations next
month of the 60th anniversary of the Auschwitz death camp's liberation,
which Russian President Vladimir Putin and other leaders also are scheduled
to attend. -30- [The Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 274: ARTICLE NUMBER TWELVE
=========================================================
12. DENMARK SAYS UKRAINE'S POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC
TIES WITH EUROPE CAN NOW BE STRENGTHENED
Denmark To Open Embassy Now In Kiev
AP, Copenhagen, Denmark, Mon, December 27, 2004
COPENHAGEN - Denmark will open an embassy in the Ukrainian capital
Kiev, Foreign Minister Per Stig Moeller said Monday as he welcomed the
outcome of the country's election. Opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko
appeared to have won Sunday's repeat of the November runoff that was
annulled because of fraud. "The course of Ukraine 's rerun election means
that Ukraine's political and economic ties with Europe now can be
strengthened," Moeller said. "That's why I want to open an embassy."
Three exit polls gave Yushchenko a 15-20 percentage point lead over
Kremlin-backed Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych. The official count gave
the Western-leaning Yushchenko a narrower, 8.6% lead with ballots from
97% of precincts counted in Sunday's election. Moeller praised opposition
protesters for holding rallies that remained peaceful throughout the
election crisis.
Moeller also said Denmark would support Ukraine 's membership in the
World Trade Organization. The foreign minister said he expects to travel to
Kiev in the new year. -30- [The Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 274: ARTICLE NUMBER THIRTEEN
Letters to the editor are always welcome
=========================================================
13. UKRAINE'S PEACEFUL REVOLUTION IS A DEFINING
MOMENT FOR ALL EUROPE
LETTER-TO-THE-EDITOR: By Michael Maltzoff
Financial Times, London, UK, Tue, December 28 2004
Sir, I wrote (Letters, November 27) that it would be a miracle if the next
few days passed without loss of life. Well, the miracle happened, although
the general belief here is that, behind the scenes, we came very close to
orders being given to shoot. With victory for Viktor Yushchenko confirmed,
here are some reflections.
First, it may have puzzled many observers outside Ukraine why the previous
administration backed such an unelectable figure as Viktor Yanukovich, with
his criminal record, poor articulation, and so forth. The answer is, in my
view, that he was, to a large extent a pawn in a complex political game,
serving the business and political interests of "the family" around outgoing
president Leonid Kuchma. He would have remained "controllable". It is also
testimony to the outrageous arrogance of the Kuchma administration that it
felt it could get away with a rigged election.
There is much talk that Mr Yanukovich will form the focus of a new
opposition movement in parliament. I do not agree. He simply does not have
the intellectual calibre. My prediction is he will fade away from the centre
stage rather quickly.
There has been much debate about the merits of Mr Yushchenko agreeing to
the political reform that will next year reduce the powers of the
presidency.
This was the breakthrough in parliament that paved the way for Sunday's
rerun election. Some observers have argued that Mr Yushchenko will need all
the current presidential powers to fix the country.
My view is that this was a political masterstroke by Mr Yushchenko. This was
not a Bolshevik revolution in which loss of life had no significance and
where only the ultimate objective mattered. Rather, it was a revolution
whose very essence was that of peace and the rule of law. That it has proven
to be successful in the context of the Kuchma regime is one of the defining
moments in Europe's recent history.
With Mr Yushchenko as president, it will no longer be morally acceptable
that countries of the Balkans and even Turkey should rank ahead of Ukraine
in their relations with the European Union. All the election observers I
have spoken to have been surprised to see just what a "European" country
Ukraine is.
Among those to watch out for are Pyotr Poroshenko, who drove the 2005
budget through parliament, Boris Tarasiuk, who has relentlessly worked on
relations with Europe, and Alexander Zinchenko, chief of Mr Yushchenko's
election campaign.
One can already sense the changes to the business climate in the country.
Whereas before, large groups such as ours were at risk when we invested in
our companies (which could later be taken away), that has now changed. We
will now see massive investment. I would encourage western business leaders
to come here early. I know for a fact that the big Russian business groups,
which have switched their relative risk assessments of Russia versus
Ukraine, will be investing substantial amounts in Ukraine in the coming
months. -30- [The Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Maltzoff, Partner, Energy Standard Group, Kiev, Ukraine
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 274: ARTICLE NUMBER FOURTEEN
=========================================================
14. "THE EU'S RESPONSE TO UKRAINIAN TURMOIL".
By Ktaryna Wolczuk and Roman Wolczuk
RFE/RL Belarus and Ukraine Report, Vol. 6, No. 47
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty,
Prague, Czech Republic Thu, 23 December 2004
As Ukraine became embroiled in the "Orange Revolution," the European
Union once again denied the prospect of EU membership to Ukraine.
This is hardly surprising. Since outgoing President Leonid Kuchma first
proclaimed his desire for EU membership for Ukraine in 1996, the EU
has shown little inclination to examine this ambition in a favorable light.
On the contrary, the institution rebuffed any initiatives on the part of
Kyiv that might have helped turned this ambition into a reality. As a
result, Ukraine's desire to "return to Europe" took on a hollow
ring, and the authorities were able to reject the need for political
and economic reforms (as insisted on by the EU) on the grounds that
"nobody wants us in Europe." This somewhat dismissive stance of
Europe undoubtedly emboldened Ukraine's authorities to falsify
the November presidential election results to the extent that they
did.
The history of relations between Ukraine and the EU is
instructive. Although Ukraine has continuously failed to introduce
much of the necessary political and economic reform, it did institute
a series of measures designed to promote its chances of EU
membership. For example, in 1998, Borys Tarasyuk, a pro-Western
career diplomat, was appointed to the post of foreign minister to
boost membership prospects. However, any illusions Kyiv had about its
chances of joining were dispelled at the 1999 EU summit in Helsinki,
when no offer of the much-vaunted 'prospect' was forthcoming
from EU leaders. Instead, the EU's relations with Ukraine were to
be strengthened by the "Common Strategy," a symbolic document that
failed to add a new impetus to relations. Tarasyuk's sacking
followed soon thereafter.
Relations limped on, despite the efforts of the Ukrainian
foreign ministry to imbue them with more substance, in the hope that
'Europe' would be become a stimulant to reform in the
country. However, not only did these efforts fail, but EU enlargement
in May 2004, as a result of which Ukraine became a direct neighbor,
deepened its disillusionment with the EU. This is because relations
with new neighbors were to be based on the EU's European
Neighborhood Policy' (ENP). And while the ENP has the worthy and
ambitious objective of "promoting prosperity and stability" among the
neighbors along the EU's newly enlarged borders, in practice, it
fuelled the sense of exclusion from Europe.
>From the Ukrainian point of view, the ENP suffered from a
number of flaws. First, the policy covered all EU neighbors, whether
European or not (e.g. Morocco). All "neighbors" had been lumped into
one general category, with no differentiation between them. Worse was
the fact that no distinction was made between aspirant states such as
Ukraine, and non-aspirants such as Russia. Second, the ENP added
little that was new and relied instead on the existing agreement to
guide relations -- the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) --
which had long exhausted its potential for moving relations forward.
Third, the ENP offered few real motivating incentives, at least in
the short term.
The offer of extending the EU's "four freedoms" (of movement of
people, capital, goods, and labor) to neighbors was generous but
unrealistic. This is because it failed to take into account Ukraine's
impoverishment, making them an enticing but elusive prospect. In
addition, the EU refused to make even relatively minor trade
concessions to the neighbors, even though economic incentives
represent the linchpin of the ENP. Fourth, and perhaps most
important, the document made no reference to any possibility of
Ukraine eventually joining the EU. The prospect of membership
was effectively excluded.
Up to a point, the stance adopted by Brussels was
understandable. Too often Ukraine has paid scant attention to the
EU's insistence on the need to implement reform. In addition, the
union had been concerned about Kuchma's regime for some time.
There were real question marks over the validity of his reelection in
1999 and his increasingly authoritarian undertones. These concerns
reached their peak when Kuchma was implicated in the murder of a
journalist critical of his regime in late 2000 -- and have scarcely
declined since.
At the same time, the big EU member states put a premium on
relations with Russia, which perceives the former Soviet Union as
its own backyard. So relations with Ukraine were played down
for the sake of better relations with the Kremlin. In light of these
problems, it is hardly surprising that the EU has not been eager to
enhance ties with Ukraine.
However, by failing to build stronger ties, the EU deprived
itself of an important lever to influence developments in Kyiv and to
empower the pro-reform forces there. Worse, it bolstered Viktor
Yanukovych, the authorities' candidate, who could justify his
decision to abandon EU membership ambitions (and with them the need
to implement reform) and instead promote closer ties with Russia. The
recent visits of EU High Representative for Common Foreign and
Security Policy Javier Solana to Ukraine to mediate was a welcome
sign of EU's belated interest in Ukraine, but it simultaneously
exposed the vacuousness of Brussels' policy toward that country.
Ironically, had Ukraine experienced the type of conflict that plagued
the Western Balkans, and which the West is now trying to help
prevent, Ukraine would have been higher up on the EU's agenda a
lot earlier.
However, it is not too late for the EU to exert influence in
Ukraine without actually committing itself to offering membership.
Above all, it could formally recognize Ukraine's European
aspirations without explicitly ruling membership out or in. Second,
the EU could make greater trade concessions to Ukraine, an issue
which has long hindered relations. In particular, the bloc has not
allowed Ukrainian goods to compete openly with its agriculture and
steel sectors. Third, the EU could ease its stance on the visa regime
with Ukraine. Owing to enlargement, travel to the Schengen area has
become an even more expensive and time-consuming undertaking for
impoverished Ukrainians. This has not only resulted in a sense of
alienation among them but has caused real hardship for those in
border regions.
The recent decision by the EU to once again deny the prospect
of membership but approve its Action Plan for Ukraine (finalized in
2004) does not augur well for future relations. The Action Plan, far
from leading to membership, merely delineates a series of political
and economic criteria according to which relations are expected to
develop; Ukrainians are deeply dissatisfied with it. Negotiated
before the "Orange Revolution," the plan relies on "old solutions" to
a new situation and thus hardly brings a new lease on life to
relations. The EU is in danger of once more failing to support
Ukraine's population, which has already demonstrated that it is
willing to bear the sacrifices of democratizing and Europeanizing
itself.
If the EU is to achieve its long-term goal of having a stable
and prosperous neighbor on its Eastern border, as outlined in the
ENP, it will need to develop a vision and ambition for Ukraine it has
thus far lacked. At the same time, it will need to offer reformists
the tools they need to create a society imbued with European
standards and values. Brussels must deprive the authorities of their
argument that "nobody wants us in Europe." Only in this way might
Ukraine implement the political and economic reforms to realize its
pro-European ambitions -- and the EU might just end up with the
prosperous and stable neighbor it wants and needs. -30-
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kataryna Wolczuk is senior lecturer in East European Politics at
the University of Birmingham. Roman Wolczuk is a research
fellow at the University of Wolverhampton, U.K.
========================================================
ARTICLES ARE FOR PERSONAL AND ACADEMIC USE ONLY
Articles are Distributed For Information, Research, Education
Discussion and Personal Purposes Only
=========================================================
Ukraine Information Website: http://www.ArtUkraine.com
=========================================================
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-2004 MAJOR SPONSORS:
"Working to Secure Ukraine's Future"
1. THE BLEYZER FOUNDATION, Dr. Edilberto Segura, Chairman;
Victor Gekker, Executive Director, Kyiv, Ukraine; Washington, D.C.,
http://www.bleyzerfoundation.com.
2. BAHRIANY FOUNDATION, INC., Dr. Anatol Lysyj, Chairman,
Minneapolis, Minnesota,
3. KIEV-ATLANTIC GROUP, David and Tamara Sweere, Daniel
Sweere, Kyiv and Myronivka, Ukraine, 380 44 295 7275 in Kyiv.
4. ODUM- Association of American Youth of Ukrainian Descent,
Minnesota Chapter, Natalia Yarr, Chairperson.
5. THE ACTION UKRAINE COALITION (AUC): Washington, D.C.,
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;
Huntingdon Valley, Pennsylvania.
C. U.S.-UKRAINE FOUNDATION (USUF), Nadia Komarnyckyj
McConnell, President, Washington, D.C., Kyiv, Ukraine.
6. UKRAINE-U.S. BUSINESS COUNCIL, Kempton Jenkins,
President, Washington, D.C.
=========================================================
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"
A Publication Supported Financially By Its Readers
Please add your name to our list of financial contributors!
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-04, is an in-depth news and
analysis international newsletter, produced as a public service by the
www.ArtUkraine.com Information Service (ARTUIS) and The Action
Ukraine Report Monitoring Service (TAURMS). The report is now
distributed to several thousand persons worldwide FREE of charge
using the e-mail address: ArtUkraine.com@starpower.net. This is
the 273nd Report issued so far this year, out of the more than 280
to be issued in 2004.
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT" is supported through The Action
Ukraine Program Fund. Financial support from readers is essential to
the future of this Report. You can become a financial sponsor of The
Action Ukraine Program Fund. Individuals, corporations, non-profit
organizations and other groups can provide support for the expanding
Action Ukraine Program by sending in contributions.
Checks should be made out to the Ukrainian Federation of America,
(UFA), a private, not-for-profit, voluntary organization. The funds should
be designated for the Action Ukraine Program Fund (AUPF), and
mailed to Zenia Chernyk, Chairperson, Ukrainian Federation of
America (UAF), 930 Henrietta Avenue, Huntingdon Valley, PA
19006-8502.
For individuals a contribution of $60-$100 is suggested. Your contribution
to help build The Action Ukraine Program to support Ukraine and her
future is very much appreciated. -30-
=======================================================
If you would like to read "THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-04
please send your name, country of residence, and e-mail contact information
morganw@patriot.net. Additional names are welcome. If you do not wish to
read "THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-04, around five times per week,
let us know by e-mail to morganw@patriot.net.
========================================================
PUBLISHER AND EDITOR
Mr. E. Morgan Williams, Ukrainian Federation of America (UFA);
SigmaBleyzer Investment Banking Group;
Coordinator, The Action Ukraine Coalition (AUC);
Senior Advisor, U.S.-Ukraine Foundation (USUF);
Advisor, Ukraine-U.S. Business Council, Washington, D.C.;
Publisher and Editor, www.ArtUkraine.com information website
P.O. Box 2607, Washington, D.C. 20013,
Mobile in Kyiv: (3) 8 050 689 2874; E-mail: morganw@patriot.net
========================================================