"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"
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"
PART II
"UKRAINE'S FUTURE AND UNITED STATES INTERESTS"
Committee on International Relations
Subcommittee on Europe Hearing
Representative Doug Bereuter, (R) Nebraska, Chairman
Representative Robert Wexler, Florida, Ranking Democrat
U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT" Year 04, Number 79
Action Ukraine Coalition (AUC), Washington, D.C.
morganw@patriot.net, ArtUkraine.com@starpower.net
Washington, D.C.; Kyiv, Ukraine, FRIDAY, May 14, 2004
INDEX OF ARTICLES
"Major International News Headlines and Articles"
1. "UKRAINE'S FUTURE AND U.S. INTERESTS"
Subcommittee Hearing Notice
Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on Europe
Doug Bereuter, (R) Nebraska, Chairman
Robert Wexler, Florida, Ranking Democrat
U.S. House Of Representatives
Washington, D.C., Wednesday, May 12, 2004
2. "UKRAINE'S FUTURE AND U.S. INTERESTS"
Representative Doug Bereuter (R-NE), Chairman
Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on Europe
U.S. House Of Representatives, Wash, D.C., Wed, May 12, 2004
3. "UKRAINE'S FUTURE AND U.S. INTERESTS"
Steven Pifer, Deputy Assistant Secretary
Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, U.S. Department of State
Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on Europe
U.S. House Of Representatives, Wash, D.C., Wed, May 12, 2004
4. "UKRAINE'S FUTURE AND U.S. INTERESTS"
Written Testimony of Ihor Gawdiak, President
Ukrainian American Coordinating Council (UACC)
Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on Europe
U.S. House Of Representatives, Wash, D.C., Wed, May 12, 2004
=========================================================
THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 78 ARTICLE NUMBER ONE
Politics and Governance, Building a Strong, Democratic Ukraine
http://www.artukraine.com/buildukraine/index.htm
=========================================================
1. "UKRAINE'S FUTURE AND U.S. INTERESTS"
Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on Europe
Subcommittee Hearing Notice
Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on Europe
Doug Bereuter, (R) Nebraska, Chairman
[Cong. Doug Bereuter's statement is published below]
Robert Wexler, Florida, Ranking Democrat
U.S. House Of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DATE: Wednesday, May 12, 2004
TIME: 1:30 PM
SUBJECT: Ukraine's Future and United States Interests
WITNESSES: PANEL I
Mr. Steven Pifer, Deputy Assistant Secretary
Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs
U.S. Department of State
[Pifer's entire testimony is published below]
PANEL II
Anders Aslund, Ph.D., Director
Russian & Eurasian Program
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
[Aslund's testimony was published in The
Action Ukraine Report #78, May 13, 2004,
LINK: http://www.artukraine.com/buildukraine/uafuture1.htm]
Nadia Diuk, Ph.D., Director
Europe & Eurasia Program
National Endowment for Democracy
[Diuk's testimony was published in The
Action Ukraine Report #78, May 13, 2004,
LINK: http://www.artukraine.com/buildukraine/uafuture2.htm]
WRITTEN
TESTIMONY: Michael Sawkiw, President
Ukrainian Congress Committee of America (UCCA)
[Sawkiw's testimony was published in The
Action Ukraine Report #78, May 13, 2004]
LINK: http://www.artukraine.com/buildukraine/uafuture3.htm
Ihor Gawdiak, President
Ukrainian American Coordinating Council (UACC)
[Gawdiak's written testimony is published below]
==========================================================
THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 78: ARTICLE NUMBER TWO
The Genocidal Famine in Ukraine 1932-1933, HOLODOMOR
Genocide Gallery: http://www.artukraine.com/famineart/index.htm
==========================================================
2. "UKRAINE'S FUTURE AND UNITED STATES INTERESTS"
Statement of Honorable Doug Bereuter (R-NE)
Chairman, Subcommittee on Europe, Committee on International Relations
U.S. House Of Representatives, Wash, D.C., Wed, May 12, 2004
Today, the Europe Subcommittee will receive an assessment of the current
political and economic environment in Ukraine and why Ukraine's future
should be of interest to the United States.
There are three areas we should explore when thinking of Ukraine today.
Geostrategically, Ukraine's position in Europe places it in a unique and
yet, challenging, neighborhood which has become a source of competition
between Russia and the West.
Ukraine now shares borders with the European Union and NATO as a result
of the recent enlargements of both organizations to include Poland, Hungary,
Slovakia and Romania. With its resources and economic potential, a strong,
stable, independent, and democratic Ukraine can be seen by many as an
important element in the stability of Europe and a natural future candidate
for the European Union. Similarly, many feel Ukraine could play a positive
role as a neighbor to, and perhaps eventual member of, NATO.
Ukraine also shares a border with Russia which is currently in an uncertain
transition. Ukraine's location, along with Belarus, is seen by Russia as a
natural barrier to an expanded EU and NATO and an important element in
Russia's Black Sea interests. A weak or unstable Ukraine, or one which is
shunned by the West, could again result in a Ukraine falling under the
domination of Russia.
Finally, Ukraine borders Moldova and Belarus which, by many standards,
represent the unstable pieces of that neighborhood. It would be far better
to have a stable Ukraine in that context which might play a useful role in
shaping the future of those two nations
Domestically, the country seems to be split over its aspirations for western
democracy and a free-market economy and its long linguistic, cultural,
religious and historic ties to Russia. At the very same time President
Kuchma has expressed his desire to bring Ukraine closer into the western
community of democracies, and perhaps one day into the EU itself, the
Ukraine Rada - Parliament - ratified an accord creating a single economic
zone establishing a free trade area and customs union with Belarus,
Kazakhstan and Russia which seems to present a contradictory economic
orientation.
Similarly, while Ukraine government leaders are trying to mend fences with
the U.S. and Europe, a recent survey conducted by the Oleksandr Razmunkov
center for economic and political research suggests that up to 40 percent of
Ukrainians believe relations with Russia should be a priority; 28 percent
gave preference to the EU and although the U.S. appears to be well liked, a
mere 2 percent said that relations with the USA should be foreign policy
priority. Another survey suggested that almost 2/3rds of the population
could consider supporting a political union with Russia.
If these surveys are even remotely accurate, they paint a picture that
suggests the West has a lot of work to do.
Finally, the political environment in Ukraine has been the source of
constant irritations in Ukraine's relations with the United States.
Some suggest that Ukraine's political system could be described as a mix
of democracy, authoritarianism, and oligarchy.
However one wishes to describe it, the transition to democracy in Ukraine
over the past 13 years seems to have been slow, difficult and in many
instances, flawed. By any measure, however, no issue will be more important
to Ukraine's future standing with the West than the strength of its
democracy.
The United States Congress attaches great importance to the success of
Ukraine's transition to a democratic state, with strong institutions and
with a flourishing market economy. Bilateral relations with the Kuchma
government over the past ten years have vacillated between rocky and
cooperative.
Bi-lateral economic and security relations such as in the case of Ukraine's
commitment to send more than 1500 troops to Iraq seem to work well.
Political relations, however, have been difficult such as with the case of
the Kolchuga radar issue and examples of Kuchma's abuse of authority.
U.S. policy must remain focused on promoting and strengthening a stable,
democratic, and prosperous Ukraine, more closely integrated into European
and Euro-Atlantic structures.
The next major political event in Ukraine involves the upcoming Presidential
elections in October. Based on the numerous problems of past elections in
Ukraine, concerns have already been raised about the openness and fairness
of the election.
The Congress, like the Bush Administration, has made the Presidential
election a litmus test of Ukraine's commitment to democracy. Several high
level officials of the Administration, such as Assistant Secretary Armitage,
have recently visited Kiev and have tried to stress the importance of free
and fair elections.
In two weeks this Member will travel to Ukraine. While discussions will
focus on overall U.S.-Ukraine relations, the importance of fair and
transparent elections in the fall will be one of my strongest messages.
We have a distinguished group of witnesses here with us today and I look
forward to hearing their views. (END)
==========================================================
THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 78: ARTICLE NUMBER THREE
Check Out the News Media for the Latest News >From and About Ukraine
Daily News Gallery: http://www.artukraine.com/newsgallery.htm
=========================================================
3. "UKRAINE'S FUTURE AND UNITED STATES INTERESTS"
Testimony by Steven Pifer, Deputy Assistant Secretary
for European and Eurasian Affairs, U.S. Department of State
Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on Europe
U.S. House Of Representatives, Wash, D.C., Wed, May 12, 2004
Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, I am pleased to be here today
to discuss with you U.S. policy towards Ukraine.
As requested, I shall provide an assessment of the current state of
U.S.-Ukrainian relations; the U.S. view of current political and economic
developments in Ukraine, including the critical presidential campaign and
October election; U.S. assistance to Ukraine; and the status of Ukraine's
relationship with NATO and the European Union.
I shall also update you on recent interactions we have had with senior
Ukrainian officials, including the visit to Kiev by Deputy Secretary
Armitage at the end of March. I had the opportunity myself to spend three
days in Kiev at the end of April to assess Ukraine's progress on democracy
and the presidential election. I hope this information will provide useful
background for your upcoming visit to Ukraine, which the State Department
very much welcomes.
U.S. Vision for Ukraine
The U.S. vision for Ukraine has remained constant for more than ten years.
The U.S. Government wants to see Ukraine develop as a stable, independent,
democratic, economically prosperous country, a country that increasingly
draws closer to Europe and to European and Euro-Atlantic institutions, that
promotes human rights and abides by the rule of law, that maintains
positive, mutually-beneficial relations with its neighbors, and that
actively contributes to strengthening peace and security in the
international community.
We believe that the majority of the Ukrainian people shares this vision. We
support this vision because we believe such a Ukraine will be good for its
people, will contribute to a more stable and secure Europe, will be a
partner with the United States in meeting today's new challenges, such as
countering proliferation and defeating terrorism, and will be a country with
which we can have robust and mutually beneficial economic and trade
relations. Many Americans understand that helping Ukraine to realize this
vision is in our own national interest.
It is important to recall that the road to Ukrainian independence during the
past century has not been an easy one. In 1917, the Central Rada proclaimed
Ukrainian autonomy and in 1918, following the Bolshevik seizure of power in
St. Petersburg, the Ukrainian National Republic declared independence.
After three years of conflict and civil war, however, the western part of
Ukraine was incorporated into Poland, and the central and eastern regions
were incorporated into the Soviet Union in 1922.
The Ukrainian national idea persevered throughout the Soviet period, but
Ukraine suffered immeasurably. In 1932-33, the Soviet authorities waged a
campaign of terror that ravaged the Ukrainian elites and created an
artificial famine (called the Holodomor in Ukrainian) that took the lives of
many millions of innocent Ukrainians. The Second World War was another
heavy blow; estimates are that some 10 million Ukrainians lost their lives.
In 1986, Ukrainians again suffered a tragedy of historic proportions with
the explosion of Reactor Number Four at the Chernobyl nuclear power station.
Ukraine and its neighbors recently marked the 18th anniversary of the
Chernobyl explosion, and the country continues to feel the effects of that
disaster.
Post-Communist Achievements and Problems
Ukraine began a new chapter in its history in 1991, when it regained
independence with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Ukraine has changed
dramatically since independence - as you will see when you visit later this
month. Long gone are the breadlines and dour expressions that characterized
the Soviet period. Ukraine now is a vibrant, dynamic country that is
carving out an important place in Europe.
Ukraine has not made as much progress as we had hoped it would in the early
1990s. In part, this reflects choices that the Ukrainian leadership made,
or did not make. But in retrospect, it is also fair to say that our
expectations for rapid progress were somewhat unrealistic. Ukraine has had
to undergo three transformations: from a Communist political system to
democratic structures; from a command economy to the market; and from a
part of the Soviet Union to an independent state with its own foreign
relations. Ukraine has had to manage these transformations simultaneously.
I want to highlight in particular several important Ukrainian achievements
in the post-Soviet era. The first is strengthened statehood. There were
some - including in Ukraine itself - who doubted that the country, after so
many years of imperial Russian, then Soviet domination, could stand on its
own. But now, more than a dozen years since the fall of the USSR, Ukrainian
statehood is stronger than ever. Whereas a National Intelligence Estimate
in 1994 entitled "Ukraine: A Nation at Risk" postulated that there might be
no Ukraine in five-ten years, few serious analysts would pose that question
today.
A second major achievement was Ukraine's de-nuclearization. When the Soviet
Union broke up, Ukraine had on its territory the third largest strategic
nuclear arsenal in the world - greater than those of the United Kingdom,
France and China combined. Ukraine agreed in January 1994 to return the
strategic nuclear warheads located on its territory to Russia for
dismantlement in exchange for security assurances, compensation for the
nuclear material in the warheads, and expanded Western assistance. Ukraine
acted on its commitment by returning strategic nuclear weapons to Russia,
completing the transfer in the middle of 1996. In addition, Ukraine acceded
to the Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear weapons state on December
5, 1994.
Since 1993, Ukraine has been a recipient of U.S. assistance in dismantling
its nuclear arsenal, including delivery systems and the infrastructure
associated with strategic nuclear systems under the Cooperative Threat
Reduction (CTR) (Nunn-Lugar) Program. This assistance included missile,
silo and bomber elimination. Building upon this success, the CTR Umbrella
Agreement also allows for activities such as upgrading an automated export
control system in order to prevent weapons of mass destruction
proliferation, and a Proliferation Prevention Initiative designed to offer
assistance with border security, again to thwart proliferation.
A third achievement is that Ukraine has built increasingly stronger
relations with Europe and Euro-Atlantic institutions. At the NATO summit in
1997, NATO and Ukraine launched the Distinctive Partnership, defining a
special relationship between the Alliance and Ukraine. Conclusion of a
NATO-Ukraine Action Plan in 2002 charted the way forward for Ukraine to
strengthen further its relations with NATO. Ukraine has a Partnership and
Cooperation Agreement with the European Union and a regular dialogue on
issues of mutual interest.
Ukraine's recent strong economic performance represents a fourth important
achievement. After a decade of decline, Ukraine's economy began to expand
in 2000, spurred in part by reform of the energy and agricultural sectors,
and has continued at a strong pace since then. Last year, Gross Domestic
Product grew by a remarkable 9.4 percent. Exports of manufactured goods
drove the growth, and construction is booming. The government met its
budgetary targets, kept inflation under control, and accumulated substantial
foreign exchange reserves. Ordinary Ukrainians are beginning to feel the
benefits: household income and consumption have risen dramatically. This
impressive performance continued in the first quarter of 2004. Ukraine has
even managed to repair its sometimes-troubled relations with the IMF and
World Bank.
However, while Ukraine has made progress on economic reform, much remains
to be done. Tax reform is incomplete, and the problem of arrears in refunds
of the Value Added Tax persists. Energy sector reform is stalled. Many in
the government appear not to trust market mechanisms, as was evident during
last year's grain shortages when the government implemented informal price
controls. The investment climate remains hampered by a cumbersome and
opaque regulatory framework, corrupt and illicit business practices, and an
arbitrary judicial system. Intellectual property protection is weak, with
piracy and counterfeiting of U.S. products at unacceptably high levels.
Protection of private property is still inadequate, and privatizations are
executed with little transparency for investors. As a result, foreign
investment remains low compared with other countries in the region (a
cumulative $6.7 billion at the end of 2003, compared to about $70 billion
in neighboring Poland). Ukraine needs to correct fundamental legal and
business infrastructure problems in order to stimulate the investment needed
to sustain economic growth over the long term.
Ukraine has had other problems, and these have complicated U.S.-Ukrainian
relations. Ukraine's democracy and human rights record reflects significant
problems, and the country lags in this area behind its Central European
neighbors. Application of the rule of law can be arbitrary. Government
authorities interfere with the press by harassing, intimidating, and, in
some cases, violently attacking journalists, censoring material, and
creating a climate of self-censorship. The murder of the journalist Heorhiy
Gongadze in 2000 was one of the most notorious cases.
The lack of a credible and transparent investigation into the Gongadze
murder, particularly in light of indications of involvement by Ukrainian
government officials, is troubling and has had a detrimental impact on
U.S.-Ukraine relations. We likewise have been concerned about other deaths
of journalists, including the July 2001 beating and subsequent death of
Donetsk regional television director Ihor Aleksandrov and the incredible
"suicide" hanging of journalist Volodymyr Karachevtsev on his refrigerator
door last December. We have continued to press for a full and transparent
investigation of the Gongadze case and other cases of violence against
journalists, but Ukrainian authorities have been largely unresponsive.
Although Ukraine made a historic decision to support nuclear
non-proliferation in 1994, the proliferation of other dangerous weapons
systems has been another factor complicating U.S.-Ukrainian relations. In
the summer of 2001, the Ukrainians gave assurances to the United States and
NATO that Ukraine would not transfer heavy arms to Macedonia. But no more
than a month after these assurances, Ukraine supplied such weapons to the
Macedonians, complicating the search for peace and stability in the Balkans.
Ukraine eventually terminated such transfers, but the slow implementation of
that decision created a problem for Ukrainian relations with the United
States and NATO.
Bilateral relations suffered a further setback in September 2002 when a
recording of President Kuchma's July 2000 approval to transfer a Kolchuga
early warning system to Iraq was authenticated as genuine. We have not
located Kolchuga systems in Iraq, and the transfer might not have taken
place. But we could not understand why such a transfer was approved.
The fall of 2002 could be said to represent the nadir in U.S.-Ukraine
relations. During the past 16 months, however, both sides have tried to
find ways to improve the relationship, and we have resolved some problems.
The high-level dialogue resumed last fall, especially during a visit by
Prime Minister Yanukovych to Washington.
As the war on terrorism has intensified, the United States and Ukraine have
found new avenues for cooperation. Ukraine has contributed one of the
largest contingents of troops to the stabilization effort in Iraq. We very
much value the important contribution that Ukraine is making to the
stabilization effort in Iraq. Their brigade operates in the region of Al
Kut as part of the Polish-led division and recently suffered three combat
fatalities. There have been calls in Ukraine for the withdrawal of the
troops, but President Kuchma has stood firm in his commitment, and we are
very grateful for Ukraine's efforts and sacrifices. The Ukrainians have
also rendered valuable assistance in Afghanistan, providing thousands of
overflight clearances for American aircraft and donating weapons and
equipment to the Afghan National Army. And Ukrainian troops have
performed admirably in peacekeeping operations in Kosovo and in Africa
under the auspices of the United Nations.
Democracy and the 2004 Presidential Election
Looking forward, the single most important issue now on our bilateral agenda
is the conduct of the Ukrainian presidential campaign and election. We
believe that the upcoming presidential election - scheduled for October 31
this year - will affect Ukraine's strategic course for the next decade.
Ukraine has set itself the goal of integration into European and
Euro-Atlantic institutions, including NATO. These institutions are, above
all, communities of shared democratic values. The presidential campaign and
election provide Ukraine an opportunity to demonstrate that it, too, shares
Western democratic values and a respect for human rights.
How well Ukraine does in holding a free and fair election will have a major
impact on how quickly it can become integrated into European and
Euro-Atlantic institutions and will also affect the direction and pace of
U.S.-Ukrainian relations.
The Ukrainian president serves a five-year term. President Kuchma was first
elected in 1994 - in an election that was widely applauded as generally free
and fair, and which represented the first time in a former Soviet state when
a leader yielded power to another as the result of a free election.
President Kuchma was re-elected in 1999, in an election where the balloting
process itself went generally well but in which there were concerns about
the campaign, including pressure on the media and abuses of "administrative
resources."
President Kuchma has not officially endorsed a successor. He has, however,
repeatedly said, privately to U.S. officials and publicly, that he will not
run for a third term, which a December 2003 ruling of the Constitutional
Court of Ukraine claimed would be constitutional despite the past and
current constitutions' two-term limit. On April 14, pro-presidential forces
in the Rada (parliament) chose the current Prime Minister, Viktor
Yanukovych, as their candidate, but it is unclear whether he will enjoy the
support of all of the various pro-presidential factions throughout the
campaign. Former Prime Minister Viktor Yushchenko is the leading opposition
candidate and still the most popular politician in Ukraine. Ukrainian
political observers anticipate a number of other candidates will enter the
campaign, which officially begins in July.
The U.S. Government does not back any particular candidate in the election;
our interest is in a free and fair electoral process that lets the Ukrainian
people democratically choose their next president. We would be prepared to
work closely and eagerly with whomever emerges as president as the result of
such a process.
Unfortunately, there have been discouraging signs in recent months. First,
Ukrainian authorities continue to harass opposition politicians and those
that support them. Starting with the disruption of an opposition rally in
the eastern city of Donetsk last October, Ukrainian authorities have put
various obstacles in front of members of the opposition - who have a right
to be able to compete on a level electoral playing field. More than 100
businesses have reportedly been subject to harassment by the tax police with
the goal of putting the firms out of business or getting them to sever their
ties with the opposition. One recent - and particularly brutal - example of
the harassment was the March 7 beating of an independent trade-union leader
and oppositionist's son, who suffered a severe concussion and head wounds.
Recent local and regional elections have been marred by severe problems.
For example, in a March 7 Donetsk by-election for a seat in the Rada,
regional tax administration head Vasylyev was elected in a supposed
landslide following a campaign characterized by extensive abuse of
"administrative resources" to his advantage. In the March 28 mayoral
election in Romny (Sumy Oblast), pro-government candidate Kalyshnyk won
following a campaign of administrative abuses and disqualification of the
opposition front-runner. And in the most blatant example of manipulation,
in the April 18 mayoral election in Mukacheve, the territorial election
commission disqualified 6,000 of 19,000 votes for opposition candidate
Baloha and declared the pro-presidential candidate Eduard Nuser the victor.
The U.S. Government does not believe that the result announced by the
Mukacheve territorial electoral commission reflects the will of the voters
of Mukacheve; we have welcomed President Kuchma's call for an investigation
and hope for a rapid, transparent review that will lead to rectification of
the fraudulent result.
Harassment of the press has included closures of critical media outlets for
alleged tax violations or for licensing problems. Most recently, the
authorities took steps to end Radio Liberty broadcasting in Ukraine. Radio
Dovira, which had broadcast Radio Liberty for the previous five years, ended
its contract February 17 after a new pro-presidential director assumed
control; the grounds for ending the contract seemed spurious. Radio
Kontynent, which offered to begin broadcasting Radio Liberty, had its
transmitter confiscated March 13 because of alleged license problems. In
mid-March, President Kuchma ordered a moratorium on tax inspections of
media outlets, but Embassy reports indicate the authorities have not fully
implemented the order.
Pro-presidential forces have attempted to change Ukraine's constitution to
protect and extend their power and positions. The constitutional changes
proposed last year were originally two-fold in nature: 1) popular election
of the president would be replaced by election of the president by the Rada
(which is controlled by pro-presidential forces); and 2) the presidency
would cede many powers (particularly those having to do with appointments)
to the prime minister chosen by the Rada.
In February, the constitutional provisions dealing with election of the
president were dropped following polls showing that 80-90 percent of
Ukrainians favored direct presidential election and strong critical messages
by the United States, European Union and others. On April 8, the provisions
dealing with strengthening the powers of the prime minister narrowly failed
to obtain the two-thirds Rada majority required by the Ukrainian
constitution. While Rada Speaker Lytvyn stated on April 14 that the
constitutional change issue was dead until at least 2005, there are
indications that forces close to President Kuchma may continue to push for a
new vote on what they label "constitutional reform" before the October
election. The U.S. Government believes that such changes are best left
until after the election.
The U.S. Government is committed to supporting a free and fair election
process in Ukraine. We have worked very hard in bilateral and multi-lateral
fora, press statements and speeches, and in diplomatic exchanges - indeed,
in all possible contexts - to press home the message that a free and fair
election is key to Ukraine's integration with the West. In late March,
Deputy Secretary Armitage carried a letter from President Bush to President
Kuchma on the importance of a free and fair election for U.S.-Ukraine
relations, Kuchma's political legacy, and the future of Ukraine. Secretary
Powell has strongly conveyed the same point to senior Ukrainian officials.
I double-tracked the democracy message in meetings with senior Ukrainian
officials April 26-27.
Ambassador Herbst meets with Ukrainian officials, legislators, and others on
a daily basis to discuss the issue. He also works very closely with other
members of the Kiev diplomatic corps to coordinate our message. We have
cooperated with the Europeans and other allies on the issue. The European
Union, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the European
Parliament, and the OSCE have all taken strong stands on democracy and
election issues in Ukraine, and we expect to work closely with them through
election day and beyond.
We have kept our investment in promoting democracy and civil society a
strong one. For example, the proportion of democracy programs within the
FREEDOM Support Act (FSA) budget for Ukraine has been increasing (even
though the overall FSA budget for Ukraine has dropped), reflecting the
priority we place on these goals. Over the past two years, democracy
assistance has gone from one-fifth of the FSA budget for Ukraine to nearly
one-third. We are making $10 million available in direct support for a free
and fair presidential election process through support for election
administration, independent media and voter education, election monitoring
and training, and opinion and exit polling.
We believe that this type of support reinforces what is already a very
encouraging trend in post-independence Ukraine: namely, the growth of civil
society. Civic groups are playing more and more of a role in Ukraine's
political and economic life, extending their reach to every sector:
business, environment, human rights, media and health care. Everything that
we do to strengthen this bottom-up, positive force for change reinforces the
ability of Ukrainians to take control of their own lives and make the right
choices for their country and their leadership.
NATO-Ukraine Relations
Our message to Ukraine on democracy and the election stresses the importance
of a free and fair process for Ukraine's integration into Euro-Atlantic
structures, including NATO. President Kuchma and other members of the
Ukrainian leadership have set NATO membership as a goal for Ukraine.
The United States is prepared to support Ukraine drawing closer to, and
ultimately entering, the Alliance, provided that Ukraine takes and
implements the decisions needed - for defense, economic and political
reform - to meet the standards of NATO. By virtue of its deployment to
Iraq, Ukraine has already demonstrated that it has the political will and
the capability to make a serious contribution to meeting global security
needs.
NATO has conducted a dialogue with Ukraine about the requirements for
membership within the framework of the Charter on a Distinctive Partnership
between NATO and Ukraine (signed July 9, 1997) and has advised Ukraine
on the content of its 2002 Action Plan goals on defense, economic, and
political reform. It is important to note that the Action Plan is a
Ukrainian-generated document, which is reviewed by NATO member countries,
though the Ukrainians are not obliged to accept suggestions.
In terms of defense reform, Ukraine has been receptive to our suggestions
and has done well in beginning the process of reforming its military to make
it interoperable with NATO forces. Ukraine has developed new national
security objectives and outlined its goals for military reform through 2015,
which were recently published in a Strategic Defense Bulletin which Defense
Minister Marchuk briefed to NATO representatives in mid-April. The Bulletin
is a serious and realistic document. Reform of Ukraine's military will be a
difficult process, requiring a massive and costly reduction, retraining and
re-equipping of Ukraine's forces. Despite the obstacles that lie ahead, we
believe Ukraine is committed to seeing the military reform process through
to completion, and we look forward to assisting Ukraine's military meet its
goals for interoperability with NATO.
Another critical aspect of Ukraine's NATO membership requirements is
political reform. We have stressed to Ukrainian officials repeatedly that
Ukraine's NATO aspirations can only be realized by Ukraine demonstrating
that it shares the community's core democratic values. The United States
and our European allies advised the Ukrainians that the latest draft of the
Action Plan lacked goals on democratic reform and ensuring a free and
presidential election, and that the Ukrainians had to go beyond the Plan -
especially on elections - to advance their NATO aspirations.
Ukraine-EU Relations
As part of its "European Choice" policy, Ukraine has expressed its ambition
to join the European Union. This ambition has recently intensified as
Ukraine saw three of its neighbors - Poland, Hungary, and Slovakia - become
part of the European Union on May 1. On several occasions, the Ukrainian
government has spoken of seeking compensation for the losses its economy
will suffer as a result of EU expansion. The fact that the new members will
now require Ukrainians to obtain visas has also generated concern of a new
divide being built along Ukraine's western border.
President Kuchma has acknowledged that Ukraine is not ready at this time for
EU membership, but he has argued fervently for an association agreement.
Such an agreement suggests the issue of ultimate EU membership is a question
of when, not if, and the European Union has not been ready to take that
step. The European Union, however, is in the process of developing a
European Neighborhood Policy, which will address relations with Ukraine.
The Ukrainian government had hoped to be granted market economy status by
the European Union prior to expansion, but the European Union, while not yet
issuing a formal decision, has expressed concern about several aspects of
Ukraine's economy, especially with respect to the government's regulation of
prices.
Ukrainian-Russian Relations
Ukraine has an important and complex relationship with Russia. On the one
hand, the two countries are drawn together by overlapping histories and
cultural identities, and a significant proportion of Ukraine's citizens -
particularly in the east and in Crimea - are ethnic Russians. Most
Ukrainians realistically understand the importance of maintaining good
relations with Russia. On the other hand, many are wary of domination by
Moscow and increasingly look Westward. They want good relations with
Moscow, but also want to maximize their options with the West. We support
this; we see no contradiction between Ukraine strengthening its relations
with the West and having stable and positive relations with Russia.
Ukraine's balancing act between the West and Russia is evident in a number
of policy decisions by the Ukrainian leadership. For example, last month
Ukraine ratified the Framework Agreement for the creation of Single
Economic Space (SES). This is a framework agreement, signed at Yalta last
September, between Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan, intended to
promote economic integration. Many Ukrainian officials insist that
Ukraine's only interest in the SES is in obtaining a free trade agreement
with Russia, whereas Russia and the other SES signatories speak more
ambitiously of customs, tax and monetary union.
In ratifying the SES framework agreement, the Rada attached a reservation
saying that Ukraine would not participate in any parts of the SES that are
inconsistent with the Ukrainian constitution. Our view is that Ukraine
needs to be careful that, as SES mechanisms are developed, Ukraine does not
compromise its goal of entry into the World Trade Organization.
The controversy over Tuzla Island and the Kerch Strait is another topical
issue in Ukraine-Russia relations. Last September, Russian engineers
unexpectedly began construction of a causeway between the Taman Peninsula
of the Russian Krasnodar territory and the Ukrainian island of Tuzla in the
Kerch Strait. The Russians eventually halted construction just short of the
island. Then Kiev and Moscow began negotiations on delimiting a maritime
border in the Kerch Strait, as well as establishing the status of the Sea of
Azov. Last December, Presidents Kuchma and Putin announced that they had
signed an agreement, which was recently ratified by both the Rada and the
Russian Duma, though the precise location of the border has yet to be worked
out by experts.
The interplay of U.S., Russian and Ukrainian interests has been one of our
most complicated and delicate policy concerns for the region in the
post-Soviet era. On the one hand, we have stressed to Russia that our aim
is to cooperate, not to compete, with Russia in the former Soviet space. At
the same time, we have emphasized that Russia must respect the sovereignty
and independence of its neighbors, and that we intend to have normal
relations with those countries. We do not view our relationships in the
region in zero-sum terms, and our hope is that our interlocutors in Moscow
and Kiev will share a similar view. We believe Ukraine's good relations
with Russia and Euro-Atlantic integration can be complementary, rather than
competing, goals.
Non-Proliferation
Historically, Ukraine's record on non-proliferation has been strong, albeit
with some serious lapses. Ukraine's decision in 1994 to transfer nuclear
weapons to Russia was a very positive step in the nuclear non-proliferation
effort. Ukraine has cooperated with efforts to limit proliferation of
weapons and technologies of mass destruction (WMD) and participates actively
in numerous international non-proliferation regimes. For instance, Ukraine
supported the Wassenaar Arrangement's successful efforts to establish more
stringent standards for the export of Man-Portable Air Defense Systems. In
1998, Ukraine agreed to end its participation in the construction of a
nuclear power plant at Bushehr, Iran.
At the same time, there remain some serious questions on arms export
controls and containing illicit arms sales. We have noted improvement over
the past year, as Ukraine has made some significant efforts to strengthen
its export control system. Ukraine passed a new export control law in March
2003. The law codified and clarified a body of decrees and regulations that
had served as Ukraine's basis for export controls. Through our Export
Control and Border Security program, we are supporting Ukraine's efforts to
identify additional legislation that may be necessary for effective
enforcement of this law.
The Ukrainian government has reinforced the role of the Committee for
Military Technical Cooperation and Export Control (CMTCEC), a licensing
review body that considers sensitive export cases. In early 2004, the
Ukrainian government improved the CMTCEC's oversight of the transport of
military and dual-use goods by air transportation companies. These changes
support parallel efforts to bolster the effectiveness of Ukraine's State
Service for Export Control, the chief export licensing body. The Ukrainian
government has also welcomed visits by foreign (including U.S.) experts to
discuss export control issues, and later this month Ukraine will hold its
first non-proliferation discussions with NATO.
Continued efforts are necessary if Ukraine is to establish fully effective
export controls. Ukraine needs to encourage greater transparency about its
arms exports, broader information-sharing among the agencies involved, and
thorough oversight of the activities of arms exporters. Stricter
enforcement and vigorous punishment of violators would also send a clear
message of Ukrainian seriousness in implementing its export control laws.
We continue to monitor arms transfers and military cooperation between
Ukrainian entities and countries of proliferation concern. We seek more
cooperation from the Ukrainian government to prevent such transactions, and
continue to work with Ukraine to improve Ukrainian enforcement and
enactment of structural reforms.
Economic Issues
We remain strongly engaged with the Ukrainian government on economic issues.
We strongly support Ukraine's efforts to accede to the World Trade
Organization (WTO). WTO membership would help boost Ukraine's economic
growth, diversify trading partners, and strengthen its ties to Europe. The
U.S. funds assistance programs to help Ukraine develop legislation to bring
its trade regime into conformity with WTO requirements. We are working
closely with the Ministry of Economy and European Integration and other
agencies, but we have stressed that Ukraine's progress towards accession
will depend on its commitment to effect needed changes in its trade rules
and practices.
We have also advised the Ukrainians that a particular prerequisite to our
concluding a bilateral market access agreement is improved protection of
intellectual property. Ukraine is designated under Special 301 as a
Priority Foreign Country, is subject to U.S. trade sanctions, and has lost
its GSP benefits due to deficiencies in intellectual property rights
protections. Ukraine has improved its performance on curtailing optical
media piracy, but it has yet to fulfill its commitment made in the 2000
Joint Action Plan to enact legislation to protect optical media.
The government has several times proposed amendments to the Optical Disc
Licensing Law, but the Rada has so far failed to pass it. We hope they will
be successful. Although the government has improved its enforcement of IPR
and reduced production of pirated optical media, it needs to do more to
combat distribution of pirated products.
In the course of our bilateral dialogue, our Ukrainian interlocutors often
raise the question of Ukraine's status as a non-market economy (NME) country
under the U.S. antidumping law. There are six statutory factors that guide
the Department of Commerce in determining a country's status. These are:
the extent of currency convertibility; wage determination; openness to joint
ventures and foreign investment; government ownership of and/or control over
means of production; government control over prices and the allocation of
resources; and other factors deemed appropriate.
When the Commerce Department last conducted a formal review into Ukraine's
NME status, it decided in August 2002, in consultation with the Ukrainian
government, to defer indefinitely its final decision. As Commerce explained
to Ukrainian government officials at the time, in order for Commerce to
resume its inquiry, the Ukrainian government must submit a new formal
request on the basis of changed circumstances. In so doing, it should
consider its progress in the statutory areas. We have provided information
to the government on the process it needs to follow and have advised that no
further action on NME can occur until it submits its request.
We are continuing our efforts to resolve a number of long-standing disputes
involving U.S. investors. These cases are symptomatic of problems with
Ukraine's investment climate. On several occasions, the Ukrainian
government has failed to enforce arbitral awards, contracts, and court
decisions involving U.S. companies, including three business initiatives
involving FREEDOM Support Act funds. These cases form part of the agenda
of the biannual U.S.-Ukraine Committee on Economic Cooperation. We have
made progress on several of the cases, but we will need to continue to press
the Ukrainian government to keep its commitments and obligations until all
the cases have been resolved.
Ukraine has complied with the provisions of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment to
the Trade Act of 1974. In principle, we support Congressional action to
"graduate" Ukraine from Jackson-Vanik and to grant normal trade relations
with Ukraine.
Another key issue on the economic agenda is the Odesa-Brody pipeline. Late
in 2001, construction was completed on the Odesa-Brody oil pipeline linking
the Black Sea to the southern Druzhba pipeline system in western Ukraine.
The Ukrainian government asked for our help in marketing the pipeline as a
Eurasian Oil Transportation Corridor. We remain convinced that the best use
of the pipeline is to transport Caspian crude to refineries in central
Europe, enabling the oil to bypass the increasingly crowded and
environmentally sensitive Bosphorus Straits. This option would help Ukraine
integrate into European energy structures and to diversify its own supply of
oil.
As we have told the Ukrainian government, reversing the flow of the pipeline
to facilitate export of Urals crude through the Black Sea, as some have
proposed, could undercut Ukraine's interests. Even a "temporary" reversal
would lead shippers to develop other land-based routes from the Caspian to
Europe, essentially shutting Ukraine out of this potentially profitable
transport business. It is our understanding that U.S. oil companies are
interested in using Odesa-Brody, and we have urged the Ukrainians to try to
negotiate a transparent commercial agreement with potential suppliers,
customers, and transit countries.
I am pleased to report significant success in working with Ukraine in the
fight against money-laundering. The international Financial Action Task
Force (FATF) placed Ukraine on its list of Non-Cooperating Countries and
Territories (NCCT) in September 2001 due to inadequacies in its
anti-money-laundering régime.
The U.S. Government worked closely with the Ukrainian government to help
develop a comprehensive anti-money-laundering law consistent with
international standards. The new law entered into force in June 2003, and
the Ukrainian government has made a serious investment in its
implementation. As a result, FATF was able this past February to remove
Ukraine from the NCCT list. We continue to work with the Ukrainian
government to address remaining deficiencies, such as lack of progress on
criminal prosecution for money-laundering.
U.S. Assistance
Transforming Ukraine - building a modern market economy, consolidating
democratic structures, and building other institutions of a 21st century
European state - is a task first and foremost for the Ukrainians themselves.
The United States, however, can help, and it is in our interest to do so.
Therefore, during the years since Ukraine achieved independence, we have
provided $3.328 billion in assistance through the Cooperative Threat
Reduction Program, the FREEDOM Support Act and other assistance programs.
These transfers have contributed significantly to achieving important U.S.
foreign policy goals with respect to Ukraine, and there are numerous
examples.
• Nuclear Threat Elimination - U.S. CTR assistance has eliminated the
missiles, missile silos and bombers that once targeted some 2000 nuclear
warheads against the United States.
• Nuclear Safety - Much progress in the area of nuclear safety
already has been achieved, including the installation of and training of
specialists in operating full-scope simulators. For example, vital upgrades
for sabotage protection were completed at the Khmelnytskyy nuclear power
plant and are being implemented at the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant,
thus improving nuclear reactor security.
• Military Restructuring - U.S. Government assistance has contributed
to Ukraine's increasing capacity to promote regional stability through its
growing involvement in peacekeeping activities. For example, in FY-03, $1
million in Enhanced International Peacekeeping Capability funding helped
Ukraine establish its own multinational-staff course to enhance the
interoperability of Ukrainian peacekeepers with U.S. and NATO forces. These
types of programs have helped prepare Ukraine for deployments such as Iraq.
• Exchanges - In FY-03, some 1,480 Ukrainian citizens traveled to the
United States on USG-funded training and exchange programs implemented by
USAID and the U.S. Departments of Agriculture, Commerce and State, bringing
the cumulative number of Ukrainian participants to over 19,570.
• Democracy Achievements - U.S. Government-supported legal programs
have provided media professionals with training in media law and legal
defense, helping to achieve a 63% success rate in media-related legal cases.
As another example, USG assistance helped to develop election-related
amendments which in 2003 were added to the Criminal Code to deal with
so-called "dirty election technologies."
• Election Assistance - The U.S. Government is funding over $10
million in assistance for the election and coordinating with other bilateral
and multilateral donors on assistance programs.
• Economic Achievements - In 2003, a successful U.S.
Government-funded deregulation program facilitated the streamlining of 210
regulatory procedures by regional authorities and city councils: a total of
20 "one-stop-shops for business registration reduced registration time from
30 to 14 days, and additional one-stop shops are being established
nationwide in FY-04. Under a U.S. Government-funded agriculture reform
program, by the end of 2004 more than one million individuals will have
received land titles, providing the recipients with twice the rental income
as those without land titles, plus solid proof of private ownership.
• Health - U.S. Government health-care reform programs continued to
support a shift in health-care services from costly tertiary care to
community-based primary health care and family-medicine clinics. A total of
18 demonstration centers in six regions were established under a
U.S.-Ukraine partnership.
• Law Enforcement - U.S. law enforcement agencies worked closely with
senior Ukrainian officials to help them develop an anti-money laundering law
and related regulatory framework that met international standards.
• Anti-Trafficking - To fight trafficking in persons, the U.S.
Government improved the Ukrainian government's ability to combat trafficking
by helping to beef up investigations, prosecutions and regional cooperation
with law enforcement agencies in destination countries. Prosecution numbers
have steadily increased. We also supported a crisis center that provides
training and counseling to victims.
Looking to the Future
It is clear that there is significant potential for further development of
U.S.-Ukraine relations, to the advantage of both countries. We have a broad
and robust agenda, and hope to work to advance individual bilateral issues,
expand cooperation on global challenges, and increasingly integrate Ukraine
into Euro-Atlantic and global institutions.
As I have noted, the most important issue now on the agenda is the conduct
of Ukraine's presidential election. During his March visit, Deputy
Secretary Armitage delivered an unambiguous message to President Kuchma
and others about the importance of a free and fair election. We have tried
to make as clear as possible what we see at stake in the conduct of the
presidential campaign and election, and we now wait to see if the Ukrainian
leadership will create the conditions for a good election. If that election
process is free and fair, it will provide an important boost to U.S.-Ukraine
relations and to Ukraine's effort to draw closer to Europe. It will also,
most importantly, be a true victory for the Ukrainian people.
Thank you very much for this opportunity today to discuss our Ukraine
policy. I would be happy to address your questions. (END)
==========================================================
THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 78: ARTICLE NUMBER FOUR
Major Articles About What is Going on in Ukraine
Current Events Gallery: http://www.artukraine.com/events/index.htm
Become a financial sponsor of The Action Ukraine Program Fund
===========================================================
4. "UKRAINE'S FUTURE AND UNITED STATES INTERESTS"
Written Testimony of Ihor Gawdiak, President
Ukrainian American Coordinating Council (UACC)
Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on Europe
U.S. House Of Representatives, Wash, D.C., Wed, May 12, 2004
Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the committee, I am Ihor Gawdiak,
President of the Ukrainian American Coordinating Council. The Council began
as an umbrella organization made up of numerous organizations within the
Ukrainian American community focused on cultural and social issues of
interest to the entire community. Since Ukraine's independence the Council'
s focus has turned primarily toward fostering democracy, the rule of law and
economic prosperity in Ukraine and facilitating closer ties between the
United States and Ukraine.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to submit this statement and
thank you sincerely for holding this hearing on the situation in Ukraine. I
will be clear; we believe the United States' national interests require
immediate focused attention to events in Ukraine and a major change in
American policy. If our policies and approach to Ukraine do not change and
those changes are not implemented now, our interests in Eastern Europe most
likely will be damaged for years to come.
It would not be alarmist to say that if Ukraine's election can be
manipulated a reconstituted "union" will not be far off with all of its
complications and challenges to peace and harmony in Europe and beyond.
Action is needed now! And there are actions that can be taken.
As this committee knows, this is a year of consequence in Ukraine. Ukraine's
presidential election campaign ends with balloting on October 31 and the
outcome could set the course for Ukraine and for U.S. interests in the
region for generations to come. At this critical stage in the election
campaign we are alarmed by our country's approach to this election. What
is our cause for alarm?
The President of Ukraine, his administration, his assorted colleagues and
the interests vested in Ukraine's current stagnant and corrupt government
apparatus, are rigging the entire election process and they are deaf to the
cautious, diplomatic eloquence of American statements of concern.
Essentially these people are immune to Foreign Service niceties.
Why are the vested interests so afraid of openness and fairness, so
antagonistic to free elections? They cringe at the reality of public
opinion. In the last parliamentary election, despite the manipulations of
official Ukraine, opposition reformers won the largest contingent in the
Ukrainian parliament. This was not expected or hoped for. The reality set
in that the citizens of Ukraine want what we Americans know all people
want - - freedom and opportunities - - opportunities the vested interests
currently in control of Ukraine are determined not to provide.
The results of the parliamentary election and the overwhelming evidence that
the most popular politician in Ukraine is the reformer Viktor Yuschenko
frighten Ukraine's entrenched powers. Now that Yuschenko is running for the
Presidency, the authorities have become paranoid and aggressive to the point
of clumsy outrages in their efforts to rig the election. But, no matter how
obvious, blatant and clumsy they are, they will succeed in denying the
people of Ukraine their honest election unless it is made crystal clear that
those in power will suffer unequivocal and adverse consequences if the
election campaign is not immediately made fair and transparent.
Fair elections are critical to Ukraine and to American interests in the
region. Fairness will only come when the United States recognizes the
nature of the people with whom it is dealing and takes aggressive action to
assert its stated policy of wanting the election to be open and free.
Ukrainian authorities will only modify their despicable behavior when they
know the United States is serious and feel the reality that their corruption
will have serious adverse consequences on their government's and their
personal interests with the West.
Mr. Chairman, we do share the Administration's view that the United States
should not have a "favorite" candidate in Ukraine's presidential election,
that our national interest is in a free, fair and transparent election.
Whoever is to be elected should be the choice for the people of Ukraine.
However, we do believe the United States must take the lead in pressing for
a fair election process through an American policy that makes this year's
crucial election the top priority in U.S.-Ukrainian relations.
Elections, as we all know, are more than just the day on which ballots are
cast. While the beginning of the presidential campaign in Ukraine has not
officially started, it has in fact already begun, and I want to underscore
the fact that the election campaign so far has been anything but free, fair
and open.
I present here but a few items attesting to the campaign realities in
Ukraine.
According to the Country Report on Human Rights Practices released by the
Department of State on February 25, 2004, the human rights situation in
Ukraine remains "poor." The report particularly notes "authorities
interfere with the news media by harassing and intimidating journalists,
censoring material, and pressuring them into applying
self-censorship.Arbitrary arrest and detention from what appeared to be
political motivation, were problems at times, as was lengthy pretrial
detention in very poor conditions." In light of the presidential campaign,
the government of Ukraine continues to use its administrative resources
selectively to target individuals, media outlets, labor and trade unions and
other entities associated with the opposition. It continues to abridge its
citizens' basic freedoms of speech, press, and assembly.
On March 3, 2004, Ukrainian affiliates of U.S.-funded Radio Free Europe
and Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) in Kyiv were taken off the air, arrested and
had their stations raided by the police. Fearing for his life, the former
owner of the station fled to Poland and is awaiting political asylum.
Further attempts made by the U.S. side to discuss this issue were turned
down by Ukrainian government officials. The same day that the RFE/RL
was shut down, Yuriy Chechnyk, a former director of Radio Yuta in the
city of Poltava, was killed in a highly suspicious car accident after he
announced his decision to rebroadcast RL short-wave programs on his
radio station.
Unfortunately, these are not simply isolated events. They illustrate only
one facet of an increasingly authoritarian tendency of repression against
individuals and media in Ukraine. Numerous reports indicate that Ukrainian
authorities are using their tax and other powers to harass journalists,
suppress fact-based news, and even physically eliminate their opponents.
These facts must not go unnoticed by the Members of this Committee, this
Congress or the Administration.
On April 18, 2004, we witnessed the so-called practice of "democracy in a
social-democratic way" in a town of Mukacheve in southwest Ukraine.
Overwhelming evidence has demonstrated that the local mayoral election there
was the dirtiest election campaign in the history of independent Ukraine.
Orchestrated by Ukrainian President Kuchma's Chief of Staff, Viktor
Medvedchuk, who heads the Social-Democratic Party United (SDPU), authorities
employed what appears to be unprecedented techniques of physical violence,
intimidation, harassment, manipulation and forgery. Four deputies of the
Ukrainian parliament were severely beaten by the police in attempt to obtain
the final vote recount. Several election observers were hospitalized after
being assaulted.
In addition to this, on May 5, a local court refused even to accept
documents for an appeal in the case of Viktor Baloha (the winner) vs. the
Territorial election commission. This election in Mukacheve has sparked
sharp criticism in the international community. According to Ambassador
Steven Pifer, "It is more than doubtful that the results that were announced
matched the way people voted." Moreover, I wish to suggest to the Members
of this Committee that these events are more than likely merely a rehearsal
before the upcoming presidential election. Let us be real-the U.S.
Government's hopes for "free, fair, and transparent pre-election process in
Ukraine" were ruthlessly destroyed along with the choice of Mukacheve's
voters.
Time is running out; it is late in the season but it is not too late.
So far, the Administration has expressed concerns about the election
irregularities. It reports having had tough and direct private
conversations with President Kuchma and other Ukrainian officials. The
Administration has a tag-team of officials traveling to Kyiv to raise
concerns and all of this will surely be covered in Ambassador Pifer's
testimony today.
However, Ukrainian reality is not changing. Nothing is changing for a
number of reasons. These include the Ukrainian Administration's belief that
President Kuchma's having sent 1,650 troops to Iraq allows them to continue
to carry out the outrages of blatant election manipulation and to safely
ignore any negative American reaction. For instance, many of the power
brokers in Ukraine are not particularly concerned about American or Western
reaction, their interests lie in mutually beneficial financial relationships
within the old Soviet Bloc. There are those in Ukraine who feel they can
have it both ways-good relationships with the repressive elements of the Old
Soviet bloc and with the West.
So far, the calculations of these thugs has proved to be accurate. Private
admonishments and erudite press releases mean nothing to them. So far, they
see our policy regarding the election as a joke--maybe something said to
placate the Diaspora but nothing that directly has a negative impact on
them.
The Diaspora is not satisfied so easily. All Americans, in fact, should
also realize that the United States national interests lie in having a free,
strong, independent, and democratic Ukraine, with a mutually beneficial
relationship with the U.S. Such a Ukraine could be a critical, strategic
linchpin for peace and cultural understandings in Eastern Europe.
We - - the United States - - have too much at stake to tolerate the current
marginalized policies toward Ukraine.
As Jackson Diehl wrote in his op-ed piece, "Ukraine's Tipping Point" in The
Washington Post on March 1, 2004, "The regime is afraid of one thing: the
reaction of the West to what is happening in Ukraine. If they hear more of
it in the coming months, democracy might still be saved." That statement
was made over two months ago and the fear Diehl refers to is the fear that
the United States will be serious about pressuring the regime unilaterally
and through all of its available bilateral avenues, none of which has
happened to date. 72 days have passed. The polling day is now 172 days
away. Time is running out. I have attached a copy of Mr. Diehl's piece and
ask that it be included in the record.
But the question is, what types of things can the United States do to expose
the thieves who would steal the election, sanitize the process by shining
the klieg lights of international attention on those who are now acting with
impunity? What can be done to drive the corrupt elements back into their
shadows and allow the people of Ukraine to vote freely?
Among other things--and we emphasize that there have been a number of
very thoughtful proposals submitted to U.S.A.I.D. for funding that, if
funded, would have created a very different atmosphere in Ukraine--I outline
a few possible action items:
• The Administration--through the White House and Department of
State--and the Congress--should increase the volume of public statements
denouncing the election law and civil rights violations.
• The Administration should abandon the practice of saving its
harshest criticisms for closed door sessions. The Administration should
make its criticisms clear to the people of Ukraine. Currently, well-worded
statements have been issued but are never carried in the controlled
Ukrainian media. As far as the citizens are concerned, nothing of
consequence has ever been said and that must mean everything is OK with
the United States.
• The Administration criticisms must make it clear that the United
States wants free and fair elections, and the criticism must include the
entire campaign season and that at this point the campaign/election process
is corrupt and must be fixed immediately.
• High level and continuing delegations should be sent to Ukraine by
the Administration and Congress--and maybe others like the Association of
Former Members--to deliver clear and unequivocal messages about the election
and that the way this current election is run will determine the course of
U.S.-Ukrainian relations and relations with international organizations in
which the United States participates. These delegations should, upon their
return, publicly brief this Committee and maybe other committees so that the
American public record is clear and current about the election situation in
Ukraine.
• Oligarchs and other manipulators of the election should be
identified and be made to understand that their actions will have personal
consequences. People who see to it that candidates and political parties
are denied access to the media, for example, will be on the visa blacklist.
It is critical that these malfeasants understand the U.S. reaction will be
personal.
• Everything possible should be done to discourage prominent
Americans, certainly public officials, from accepting invitations from
Ukrainian sources prior to election day. It has been the practice of people
in power to seek legitimacy by association with prominent Americans. This
"use" of well intentioned people is, among other things, terribly
disheartening to the true Ukrainian democrats who have their message
undercut by manipulation. In this regard the Committee might offer at least
a word of caution to former President George H.W. Bush who apparently
has accepted an invitation later this month to visit Ukraine as a guest of
Viktor Pinchuk, President Kuchma's son-in-law.
We do not necessarily here question Mr. Pinchuk's motives. We do
however, believe that our President's father being hosted in Ukraine by a
prominent member of President Kuchma's family could be a symbolic disaster
and certainly undercut the democratic opposition's message to the people of
Ukraine.
• Although Ukraine is qualified for the lifting of the Jackson-Vanik
restrictions, this Committee and the Congress might indicate that such
restrictions and other standards of an improved bilateral relationship will
only be available to Ukraine if the current, on-going election campaign and
the conduct of election day are deemed to be free, open and fair.
Mr. Chairman, I conclude noting that Ukraine's future as a democratic nation
hangs in the balance. We know the choice on October 31 belongs to the
people of Ukraine, their right to vote freely after a fair campaign is the
entire issue. For their interests and for our own national interests we
must do everything we can to ensure that the people of Ukraine receive full
and fair coverage of the candidates and the national political parties, and
that they have the opportunity to cast their votes free of oppression,
intimidation and interference.
The Iron Curtain fell. It is time the people of Ukraine have a fair
opportunity to vote on the direction they want their country to take. This
will not happen if current U.S. policies and practice toward Ukraine
continue.
Thank you.
===========================================================
ARTICLES ARE FOR PERSONAL AND ACADEMIC USE ONLY
===========================================================
Become a financial sponsor of The Action Ukraine Program Fund
Support "The Action Ukraine Report" to Expand Around the World
Send a check today to the Ukrainian Federation of America!
===========================================================
INFORMATION ABOUT "THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-04
"Raising the Awareness, Visibility and Information
About Ukraine and Ukrainian Issues---Around the World"
A Reader Financially Supported Publication
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-04, is an in-depth news and analysis
newsletter, produced by the www.ArtUkraine.com Information Service (ARTUIS)
The report is distributed worldwide free of charge using the e-mail address:
ArtUkraine.com@starpower.net. Please make sure this e-mail address is
cleared for your SPAM filter. All our incoming and outgoing e-mails are
scanned for viruses. Our e-mail addresses and subscriber information is not
shared with or sold to anyone. Suggestions and "Letters-to-the-editor" are
always welcome. LINK: http://www.artukraine.com/aur/aur1.htm.
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT" is financed through The Action
Ukraine Program Fund. 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.
The program includes THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT, the Action
Ukraine Information Service (AUIS), the www.ArtUkraine.com website,
and the Ukrainian information and briefing program, in Washington, D.C.
for the U.S. Congress,Administration, international business and
other organizations, which supports the building of an independent,
democratic and financially strong Ukraine operating under the rule of law.
Checks should be made out to the Ukrainian Federation of America,
(UFA), a private, not-for-profit, voluntary organization. The funds should
be designated for the Action Ukraine Program Fund (AUPF), and
mailed to Zenia Chernyk, Chairperson, Ukrainian Federation of
America (UAF), 930 Henrietta Avenue, Huntingdon Valley, PA
19006-8502. For individuals a contribution of $45-$100 is suggested.
Your support to help build The Action Ukraine Program to support
Ukraine and her future is very much appreciated.
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-04 SPONSORS:
.
1. 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,
Huntingdon Valley, Pennsylvania. http://www.artukraine.com/ufa/index.htm
C. U.S.-UKRAINE FOUNDATION (USUF), Nadia Komarnyckyj
McConnell, President; John A. Kun, VP/COO; Markian Bilynskyj, VP, Dir.
of Field Operations; Kyiv, Ukraine and Washington, D.C., website:
http://www.usukraine.org .
2. UKRAINE-U.S. BUSINESS COUNCIL, Kempton Jenkins, President,
Washington, D.C.
3. UKRAINE BUSINESS INTERNATIONAL (UBI), Chicago,
Washington, New York, London, Brussels, Prague, Kyiv
4. KIEV-ATLANTIC UKRAINE, David and Tamara Sweere, Founders
and Managers; Kyiv, Ukraine; Myronivka, Ukraine
5. POTENTIAL, the launching of a new business journal for Ukraine.
http://www.usukraine.org/potential.shtml
6. INTERNATIONAL MARKET REFORM GROUP (IMRG),
Washington, D.C.; Brussels, Belgium; Kyiv, Ukraine
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"DR. JAMES E. MACE MEMORIAL HOLODOMOR FUND"
A special "Dr. James E. Mace Memorial Holodomor Fund" has been
established by the Ukrainian Federation of America (UFA), Zenia Chernyk;
Chairperson and Vera Andryczuk, President.
Donations to the "Dr. James E. Mace Memorial Holodomor Fund" can
be made by making out a check or other financial instrument to the
Ukrainian Federation of America, in U.S. dollars, designating the donation
for the "Dr. James E. Mace Memorial Holodomor Fund," and mailing the
check to:
Zenia Chernyk, Chairperson, Ukrainian Federation of America (UFA)
930 Henrietta Avenue, Huntingdon Valley, Pennsylvania 19006-8502
For additional information about the special "Dr. James E. Mace
Memorial Holodomor Fund" contact morganw@patriot.net.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
KYIV vs. KIEV--SPELLING POLICY--CHORNOBYL vs. CHERNOBYL
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT" uses the spelling KYIV (Ukrainian)
rather than KIEV (Russian), whenever the spelling decision is under our
control. We do not change the way journalists, authors, reporters, the news
media spell these words or the other words they use in their stories.
TO SUBSCRIBE (FREE)
If you know of one or more persons you think would like to be added to
the distribution list for "THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-04 please
send us their names, country of residence, and e-mail contact information.
We welcome additional names. To subscribe please send a subscription
request e-mail to Morgan Williams, morganw@patriot.net. Past issues of
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-03 (125 reports) and UR-04 will
be sent upon request. Let us know if you want the Report sent to a different
e-mail address. Please let us know if you are receiving more than one copy
of the Report. LINK: http://www.artukraine.com/aur/aur1.htm
TO UNSUBSCRIBE
UNSUBSCRIBE: If you do not wish to receive future editions of
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-04, up to five times per week,
please be sure and notify us by return e-mail to morganw@patriot.net.
PUBLISHER AND EDITOR
Mr. E. Morgan Williams, Coordinator, Action Ukraine Coalition (AUC)
Publisher and Editor: "THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-04,
www.ArtUkraine.com Information Service (ARTUIS), and the
http://www.ArtUkraine.com Ukrainian News and Information Website.
Senior Advisor, Government Relations, U.S.-Ukraine Foundation (USUF);
Advisor, Ukraine-U.S. Business Council, Washington, D.C.
CONTACT: P.O. Box 2607, Washington, D.C. 20013,
Tel: 202 437 4707, morganw@patriot.net
====================================================