"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"
An International Newsletter
In-Depth Ukrainian News, Analysis, and Commentary
"The Art of Ukrainian History, Culture, Arts, Business, Religion,
Sports, Government, and Politics, in Ukraine and Around the World"
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION DAY IN UKRAINE
Sunday, October 31, 2004
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT" Year 04, Number 205
The Action Ukraine Coalition (AUC), Washington, D.C.
Ukrainian Federation of America (UFA), Huntingdon Valley, PA
morganw@patriot.net, ArtUkraine.com@starpower.net (ARTUIS)
Washington, D.C.; Kyiv, Ukraine, SUNDAY, OCTOBER 31, 2004
-----INDEX OF ARTICLES-----
"Major International News Headlines and Articles"
1. "THE EMPIRE SNEAKS BACK"
OP-ED by Nina Khrushcheva
International Herald Tribune, Europe, Saturday, October 30, 2004
2. "FAREWELL, UKRAINE"
Russia: Do not come here! Run away from here!
OP-ED: by Valery Panyushkin, Mosnews.com
Moscow, Russia, Friday, Oct 29, 2004
3. "AFTER UKRAINIAN ELECTION, BACK IN THE U.S.S.R.?"
POINT OF VIEW: By John Hall
The Richmond Times-Dispatch, Richmond, VA, Oct 28, 2004
4. "WHO LOST UKRAINE? WESTERN POLICY HAS BEEN CONFUSED,
MISUNDERSTOOD, AND UNCOORDINATED"
By Taras Kuzio, Eurasia Daily Monitor
Volume, 1, Issue 116, The Jamestown Foundation
Washington, D.C., Friday, October 29, 2004
5. UKRAINE VOTE LETS RUSSIA FLEX ITS EMERGING
POLITICAL MUSCLE
Moscow Puts Spin on Election Seen as Test of Its Influence
By Peter Finn, Washington Post Foreign Service
The Washington Post, Washington, D.C., Sun, Oct 31, 2004
6. "WHERE THE COLD WAR NEVER DIED"
Ukraine's elections are attracting a high level of American interest.
COMMENTARY by Jonathan Steele in Kiev
The Guardian, London, United Kingdom, Thu, Oct 28, 2004
7. "A WASHINGTON PERSPECTIVE"
COMMENT: By Michael McFaul
Moscow Times, Moscow, Russia, Friday, Oct 29,2004
8. PUTIN HAS AN EYE ON THE FUTURE AS HE LOOKS BACK
ON SOVIET GLORY VICTORY
By Julius Strauss in Moscow
Daily Telegraph, London, UK, Friday, Oct 29, 2004
9. TOP POLISH SPY WARNS OF RUSSIAN OIL IMPERIALISM
Adam Jasser, Reuters, Warsaw, Poland, October 2004
10. "PUTIN: THE RETURN OF THE RUSSIAN IMPERIALIST?"
OP-ED by David Marples
Edmonton Journal, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, Sat, Oct 30, 2004
11. UKRAINE'S PRESIDENTIAL VOTE: A TEST OF DEMOCRACY
AND BELLWETHER OF RELATIONS WITH RUSSIA AND WEST
Jim Heintz, AP Worldstream, Kiev, Ukraine, Thu, Oct 28, 2004
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 205: ARTICLE NUMBER ONE
========================================================
1. "THE EMPIRE SNEAKS BACK"
OP-ED by Nina Khrushcheva
International Herald Tribune, Europe, Saturday, October 30, 2004
.
The question used to be "Who lost Russia?" In a few years, it may be
"Who rebuilt the Soviet empire?"
.
Ukraine's presidential election on Sunday could determine whether Russia
remains a national state or begins to resurrect its empire. Should President
Vladimir Putin succeed in his heavy-handed intervention in favor of his
preferred candidate, Viktor Yanukovich, Ukraine's current prime minister,
Ukraine's fragile democracy is likely to suffer and its efforts to join the
West will be set back.
.
The Ukrainian presidential campaign reads in outline like a story by John Le
Carré. Viktor Yushchenko, Ukraine's opposition candidate for president,
who is leading in the polls, dines with his country's secret police chief.
Next morning, the candidate is gravely ill and is rushed to a specialist
hospital in Vienna. Allegations of poisoning erupt, with the old KGB
favorite ricin blamed.
.
These allegations are soon contradicted by the doctors from the Vienna
hospital. But wait a minute: The real doctors step forward to say that they
had not contradicted Yushchenko's claims. Soon it is discovered that an
Austrian public relations firm, reportedly paid by Viktor Pinchuk, the
son-in-law of Ukraine's incumbent president, Leonid Kuchma, put out the
press release without ever speaking to the doctors.
.
The paranoid skullduggery does not end with Yushchenko's poisoning. As
Yushchenko lay in Vienna, Russia's military prosecutors sought to issue an
international arrest warrant for the second leading figure in Ukraine's
opposition, the former deputy prime minister Yuliya Tymoshenko. Just last
year a Moscow regional military court acquitted two officers of the Russian
Defense Ministry of charges of abuse of power and graft in a deal with the
industrial financial group United Energy Systems of Ukraine - the very
charges now being leveled at Tymoshenko.
.
Putin has allowed hundreds of millions of dollars to be funneled through
Russian state companies, most prominently Gazprom, to fund the Yanukovich
campaign. He has sent his political technologists to Kiev to assist
Ukraine's government. This week, he went himself to Kiev to embrace
Yanukovich on the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Kiev from the Nazis.
.
And where is President George W. Bush as Russia seeks to bend Ukraine to its
will? Why would Bush consent to this prospect of a revived Russian empire?
Why would he let his State Department spokesmen offer weak protests about
the nastiness of the Ukrainian campaign, yet also send Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld to the Crimea to praise the government in the heat of the
campaign?
.
The answer is Iraq. Ukraine's corrupt president, Leonid Kuchma, has sent
1,000 troops to serve under the Polish command in Iraq. So Bush now turns
a blind eye on what is happening in Ukraine.
.
Eventually, our eyes will turn back to Russia and Ukraine. We will find a
Ukraine unable to extricate itself from Russia's embrace.
.
Let us be clear about the meaning of that embrace. A Russia determined to be
an empire cannot be a democracy. To absorb Ukraine, Russia will inevitably
have to become a remilitarized state. This transformation won't be
noticeable. Just as Putin's creeping authoritarianism has gone largely
uncriticized by a President Bush keen to have the Russian leader onboard for
his war on terror, Russia's revived empire will sneak up on us. -30-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------.
Nina Khrushcheva teaches international affairs at New School University
in New York, NY.
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.205: ARTICLE NUMBER TWO
=======================================================
2. "FAREWELL, UKRAINE"
Do not come here! Run away from here! Stay as far away as you can from us!
OP-ED: by Valery Panyushkin, Mosnews.com
Moscow, Russia, Friday, Oct 29, 2004
Vladimir Vladimirovich Pozner, a prominent television journalist who hosts
the political talk-show Vremena on the state-run First Channel, assured me a
year ago that he would never abandon his journalism ethics. He promised that
should the First Channel executives attempt to force him, Pozner, to forgo
the principles of journalism, he, Pozner, would not forgo those principles,
but would leave the channel and leave it with a bang.
I am not a judge of Vladimir Vladimirovich Pozner, perhaps, he had good
reason to act the way he did, but in my opinion he deceived me. Last Sunday
his Vremena show focused on the elections in Ukraine. So all the sides were
represented in his show, Pozner had invited Kiev-based supporters of the
Ukrainian presidential candidate Viktor Yanukovich and…Moscow-based
supporters of the Ukrainian presidential candidate Viktor Yanukovich.
Supporters of Viktor Yushchenko, Yanukovich’s rival, who has neither the
Kremlin’s nor the outgoing Ukrainian president Leonid Kuchma’s backing,
did not take part in the show. Of course, I am not judging Vladimir
Vladimirovich Pozner, but in my opinion, this was a disgrace.
Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, the president of my country, headed to Ukraine
to throw his support behind candidate Yanukovich. He addressed the nation
with a speech broadcast by three leading Ukrainian television networks, and
attended a military parade.
And here I am, again feeling like an invader. When I lived in the Soviet
Union I felt like an invader in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Ukraine… I used
to go to Vilnius or Tallinn and saw that people there did not welcome me,
they did not like me because I represented a nation that robbed them of
their national flag and their mother tongue.
As of next Monday, when president-elect Viktor Yanukovich opens up the
borders and lifts custom barriers, I will again feel like an invader
whenever I go to Ukraine, because the streets of my city were adorned with
billboards urging people to vote for a presidential candidate of a foreign
country; because our best TV host openly campaigned for a presidential
candidate from a foreign country; because the president of Russia went to
that foreign country to introduce order in his style, as if Ukraine were not
a foreign country but just another Russian province. In my opinion, this is
a disgrace.
In my opinion, I, being a citizen of Russia, must apologize to Ukraine for
the disgusting conduct of my country. I want to say that not all Russians
think that Russia has the right to meddle in the affairs of a neighboring
state. I, for one, do not think so. I would rather see Ukraine free, even if
a free Ukraine hates me as a former invader.
In the wake of the presidential poll in Abkhazia, the Belarussian referendum
and the shameless Ukrainian campaign, in my eyes, in the eyes of its
citizen, Russia seems to resemble a city hit by the plague, a city whose
rulers urge their neighbors to come and bring food and medicine, while I
know that if the neighbors do come, their cities, too, will soon be infected
with the plague.
So I climb the city walls, waving the black flag of the plague and shout: Do
not come here! Run away from here! Stay as far away as you can from us! Only
a month ago Ukraine still had independent television. Ukraine’s opposition
still holds 40 per cent of the seats in parliament. The corruption rate in
Ukraine remains so low Russia can only dream of anything like it. There is
still no war in Ukraine. Don’t come here! Get away! Stay away from us!
If a miracle happens despite Russia’s campaigning and Ukraine still elects
Viktor Yushchenko its president, I will feel relief similar to what a doctor
in a plague-hit city would feel on seeing a wagon from a neighboring town
notice the black flags on the city walls and turn homewards.
If a miracle happens despite all the Russian propaganda and Viktor
Yushchenko becomes the president of Ukraine, I, being a Russian citizen,
will gain nothing from that victory, nothing but a clear conscience.
If I happen to be in Ukraine, all right, I will stand in queue at customs.
In Kiev or Lvov, I will somehow manage to explain to a waiter in a cafe what
I want in Ukrainian. I will be a bit confused with hryvnias, but a few hours
later I will get used to the foreign currency. I may even put up with the
Ukrainians’ nationalist arrogance and rather indelicate reminders about how
my country used to meddle in the affairs of their country.
I am ready to put up with that as long as I don’t feel like an invader.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.mosnews.com/column/2004/10/29/panushkin.shtml
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.205: ARTICLE NUMBER THREE
=======================================================
3. "AFTER UKRAINIAN ELECTION, BACK IN THE U.S.S.R.?"
POINT OF VIEW: By John Hall
The Richmond Times-Dispatch, Richmond, VA, Oct 28, 2004
WASHINGTON - The last thing the world needs to worry about is the
reconstitution of the Soviet empire.
Who cares? The war on terrorism and the bloody insurgency in Iraq, not to
mention the gripping drama of the American election, leave little oxygen
for any other subject, much less a Ukrainian election.
For those who haven't read a single Ukrainian story this week, take a
break from the red and blue American political map and follow me to Kiev.
Russian President Vladimir Putin visited the ancient capital this week,
days before voters choose a successor to President Leonid Kuchma.
Viktor Yanukovich, Ukraine's prime minister, is running for president
against Viktor Yuschenko, who wants to take the country along a pro-
Western path. Still not fascinated? Stick with me.
The likelihood, if polls hold, is that Yuschenko will win a plurality but
that Yanukovich will win a December runoff that may be marred by
allegations of fraud and possibly violence. Putin is doing everything he
can to make sure Yanukovich wins. Some analysts believe Putin intends
to lead an authoritarian bloc of nations with Belarus and Kazakhstan that
will brake NATO military power as well as European Union economic
expansion. None of this has attracted much American attention. It should.
Ukraine is a huge country with nearly twice the population of Iraq. And
the concentration of weapons of mass destruction in Russia including
nuclear stockpiles and "loose nukes" that could be stolen by terrorists is
acknowledged by the Bush administration as a fearsome national security
problem.
Russia is a virtual petri dish for production of biological weapons. A
study by the British Medical Association out this week warned that
deliberately spread epidemics pose one of the world's biggest terrorist
threats. The Bush administration has resisted strengthening an outdated
treaty to control biological weapons, which is said to be little more than
a handshake and a prayer.
The effort to get a grip on the former Soviet Union's big and dirty
nuclear program still is funded in this country under the Nunn- Lugar Act,
but the Bush administration has cut back on a program to make nuclear
stockpiles more secure against theft and invasion.
A cleanup of nuclear installations by U.S. technicians has been brought to
a halt by hard-nosed negotiators. American insistence that Russians accept
100 percent liability in any accident has been met with a stern "nyet"
from Putin.
Most of these actions haven't been noticed except by a small group of
specialists. And the consequences aren't very visible, at least now. But
the failure of Washington and Moscow to follow through on the promises
of nuclear arms control after the collapse of the Soviet Union could be a
tragedy in the making. Terrorists want to get their hands on a weapon.
After independence in 1991, the Soviet nuclear arsenal that was on
Ukrainian soil was transferred to Russia for destruction. Later, a
long-delayed treaty of friendship was signed along with a settlement of a
dispute over ownership of the Black Sea fleet.
These were sensible acts between two neighbors. But now Yanukovich
clearly wants to turn friendship into romance. He has agreed to make
Russian the second language in Ukraine and end Ukraine's policy of
seeking membership in NATO as its neighbor, Poland, has done.
Putin has done everything but endorse Yanukovich, and his trip there is
nothing but blatant interference in a sovereign country's internal affairs.
The 60th anniversary of the liberation of Kiev from Nazi control was the
official reason for Putin's visit. However, since the anniversary itself
is not until next week, the celebration simply was moved up to coincide
with the election.
If an American president did to any foreign country from Mexico to Iraq
what Putin is doing, he would be branded all over the world as an
imperialist and political aggressor. But Putin has thrown his weight
around in Ukraine without creating much of a stir at all.
The opposition is getting almost no air time, while government networks
and a private station owned by a top government official carried Putin's
every movement live with his beaming man in Kiev, Yanukovich, beside
him. Just like old times. -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Hall is the senior Washington correspondent of Media General News
Service. E-mail jhall@mediageneral.com
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.205: ARTICLE NUMBER FOUR
Your comments about the Report are always welcome
========================================================
4. "WHO LOST UKRAINE? WESTERN POLICY HAS BEEN CONFUSED,
MISUNDERSTOOD, AND UNCOORDINATED"
By Taras Kuzio, Eurasia Daily Monitor
Volume, 1, Issue 116, The Jamestown Foundation
Washington, D.C., Friday, October 29, 2004
Throughout 2004 Western delegations to Ukraine and statements by
governments and international organizations have repeatedly asked the
Ukrainian authorities to conduct free and fair elections. During the summer
both houses of the U.S. Congress voted for resolutions in support of free
and fair elections, as did all sides in the Canadian House of Commons
on October 27.
The heads of EU members' diplomatic missions in Kyiv issued the latest
appeal, which asked the authorities to end their infringement of democratic
and election norms (Ukrayinska pravda, October 27). The statement was
released after the OSCE issued its fourth critical report on the impending
October 31 presidential election
(www.osce.org/odihr/elections/field_activities/?election=2004ukraine).
On the basis of these four reports, the U.S. Mission to the OSCE issued a
statement late on October 28 that raised the temperature surrounding Western
attitudes toward the election. As usual, the United States is leading the
way in its criticism, with Canada and the EU following behind.
The U.S. Mission to the OSCE warned that if the elections are not deemed to
be free and fair, then the United States will ensure that those Ukrainian
officials responsible for these violations will be held accountable. As with
the mid-October State Department statement, the U.S. Mission to the OSCE
also warned that U.S. relations with Ukraine would suffer. In the Financial
Times (October 29) Deputy US Secretary of State Richard Armitage warned
that, 'A bad election...will force us to re-examine our relationship (with
Ukraine), especially with individuals who engage election fraud and
manipulation'.
Despite these numerous entreaties and diplomatic meetings, the Ukrainian
authorities have ignored the message for four reasons.
FIRST, the call for free and fair elections was accompanied by an offer to
speed up Ukraine's Euro-Atlantic integration. This, of course, assumed that
President Leonid Kuchma and his allies remain interested in NATO membership
or that the EU was even offering membership (which it never had).
In other words, the Faustian bargain of free and fair elections in return
for integration only applied to NATO. But even then, NATO never offered
Ukraine a Membership Action Plan. The Ukrainian authorities quickly
understood that there was no "carrot" on offer and acted accordingly by
replacing pro-NATO Defense Minister Yevhen Marchuk.
In reality, the offer of Euro-Atlantic integration to Ukrainian officials
was completely misplaced. In 2003-2004 the only issue that concerned
Kuchma and his close allies was their personal security during the
presidential succession -- not national or state interests.
SECOND, the United States sent confusing signals, the EU sent tepid
ones, and the Canadians sent one signal only late in the day. Although the
Ukrainian diaspora in Canada is often touted as very influential, its
members are largely absent from Canada's contribution to the OSCE
Election Observation Mission in Ukraine.
The most confusing signal was over Iraq. There is speculation that U.S.
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld reached a "deal" with Kuchma that
would guarantee Ukraine keeping its troops in Iraq in return for Washington
only moderately criticizing election violations (as it did after the 2003
Azerbaijani elections). The Ukrainian authorities have acted as though a
"deal" was in fact reached and thereby remain unconcerned about U.S.
sanctions while the Bush administration is in power.
Another dimension to these confusing signals was the willingness of U.S.
VIPs to travel to Ukraine in visits sponsored by Kuchma's son-in-law, Viktor
Pinchuk. Since May former President George H.W. Bush, former U.S.
Ambassador to the UN Richard Holbrooke, former NATO Commander
Wesley Clark, and most recently former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger
have all participated.
Pinchuk was rewarded for these invitations to Ukraine by successfully
lobbying President George W. Bush to agree to finally meet Kuchma at
NATO's Istanbul summit. The outcome of these badly timed visits to Ukraine
and Bush's first meeting with Kuchma has been to reinforce the Ukrainian
belief that a "deal" over Iraq is in place. Ukraine's support for the U.S.
operation in Iraq and against international terrorism has been used, as seen
in the recent arrests of youth activists, to crack down on "extremists" who
are equated with "terrorists."
THIRD, the West misunderstood Kuchma's strategic game plan. Publicly, the
West believed the pronouncements made by Kuchma and Prime Minister
Viktor Yanukovych that they promised to "guarantee" to hold free and fair
elections.
In reality, they had never intended to hold free and fair elections and had
begun planning accordingly since April, when the parliamentary vote for
constitutional changes failed and Yanukovych was first advanced as Kuchma's
successor. In the spring the pro-Kuchma camp removed the right of Ukrainians
to be election observers from the election law and began to prepare large
numbers of "technical" (i.e. fake) candidates whose election officials would
support a vote count in Yanukovych's favor.
FOURTH, Western threats have been weak and confusing. On October 4
U.S. Congressmen Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) and Howard Berman (D-CA)
proposed a Ukraine Elections Bill that would introduce sanctions against
certain high-level Ukrainian officials
(www.house.gov/rohrabacher/Ukraine.htm).
But, the Ukrainian authorities have dismissed the bill as unlikely to be
adopted (Ukrayinska pravda, October 8).
Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, now chairman of the National
Democratic Institute, which is sending observers for the second round of
Ukrainian voting on November 21, threatened Ukrainian officials with denial
of visas and access to their offshore bank accounts if they failed to hold
free and fair elections (New York Times, March 8). This message shocked
many within the Ukrainian authorities, because it came six months prior to
the elections. But her message was forgotten until half a year later when
the Republican administration began to finally follow Albright's line. As
Democratic nominee John Kerry stated, "Already a few months ago we
should have agreed with the European Union on how to support
democracy in Ukraine" (Ukrayinska pravda, October 26).
On October 14 the State Department issued a relatively critical statement
saying that if the elections failed to "meet democratic standards," then
U.S.-Ukrainian relations would not improve. The statement added, "We would
also need to reexamine our relationship with those who engaged in election
fraud and manipulation" (Financial Times, October 16/17).
Not coincidentally, five days later Senator John McCain (R-AZ), chairman
of the International Republican Institute, which is sending observers for
the first round of the election, argued for visa bans and limiting the
ability of Ukrainian officials to do business if the elections were deemed
to be not free and not fair (Washington Post, October 19).
One week after the State Department announcement, the United States
undermined its policies on Ukraine by publicizing the denial of a U.S. visa
to Ukraine oligarch Hrhoriy Surkis, a corrupt and close ally of Viktor
Medvedchuk, the head of the Presidential Administration. A State Department
official commented that this step showed that sanctions would be targeted
against "individuals" and "not against Ukraine" (Reuters, October 21).
But this step was poorly crafted, as it was not a new policy. Surkis had, in
fact, been denied U.S. visas for the last year -- and not as a response to
on-going election violations (Ukrayinska pravda, October 22). The Ukrainian
authorities again refused to take the U.S. threat seriously, as seen in
comments made by Serhiy Tyhipko, head of the Yanukovych campaign
(Ukrayinska pravda, October 25).
As election day looms on October 31, Western governments and international
organizations need to understood three aspects of the Byzantine nature of
Ukrainian politics.
FIRST, the Ukrainian authorities never intended to hold a free and fair
election, because challenger Viktor Yushchenko would have won in the first
round. Hence, Kuchma understands the West's call for free and fair elections
as tantamount to Western support for a Yushchenko victory.
SECOND, the Ukrainian authorities would prefer that Yanukovych win through
relatively moderate violations; ideally the vote in favor of Yanukovych on
election day would be "massaged" in the region of 5-7%. One indication of
this is that local state administrations have been ordered to ensure
Yanukovych's victory in the first round on October 31 by 6-7% (Ukrayinska
pravda, October 27).
Most within the pro-presidential camp prefer this scenario, as they believe
that the U.S. reaction will be muted, partly because they remain confident a
"deal" over Iraq is in place. Kuchma and most oligarchs do not wish to see
Ukraine isolated. On the eve of election day, the Washington-based DBC
public relations firm (dbcpr.com) began a public relations campaign to
portray Yanukovych as a budding liberal.
THIRD, if moderate "massaging" fails to secure a Yanukovych victory, then
some within the pro-presidential camp, such as Medvedchuk who cares little
if Ukraine is internationally isolated, would repeat the April Mukachevo
mayoral election scenario, where the authorities' candidate was declared
winner despite evidence to the contrary. In this event, the West would be
forced to adopt a harsher tone. Of Ukraine's oligarchs, Medvedchuk is
promoting Russian President Vladimir Putin's interests to the greatest
extent in Ukraine. Putin, not surprisingly, is most interested in such an
outcome. -30- [The Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.205: ARTICLE NUMBER FIVE
========================================================
5. UKRAINE VOTE LETS RUSSIA FLEX ITS EMERGING
POLITICAL MUSCLE
Moscow Puts Spin on Election Seen as Test of Its Influence
By Peter Finn, Washington Post Foreign Service
The Washington Post, Washington, D.C.
Sunday, October 31, 2004; Page A25
KIEV, Ukraine -- At a convention center in this capital city, the Russian
Club, a Kremlin-funded group whose official purpose is to promote
Russian-Ukrainian relations, last week hosted a forum for the news media on
electoral abuses in Ukraine's presidential campaign.
Several election monitors from a private Russian-backed organization, the
Commonwealth of Independent States Election Monitoring Unit, laid out a
long list of misdeeds -- nearly all of them allegedly committed by the
campaign of leading opposition candidate Viktor Yushchenko.
Observer Alexey Kochetkov of Russia spoke of "screaming abuses" in the
western parts of Ukraine, from which Yushchenko draws much of his support.
Many political analysts depicted Sunday's election as critical to the
strategic direction of Ukraine, which lies between Russia and the European
Union. But it is also showcasing Russia's emerging ability to use campaign
consultants, electioneering and political spin beyond its borders to pursue
its long-term objective of retaining influence in former Soviet republics.
"Look at what the U.S. is doing here -- supporting foundations, analytical
centers, round tables," said Sergei Markov, a Kremlin political consultant
and head of the Russian Club's Information Center. "It's how contemporary
foreign policy is pursued. And it's exactly what we're doing."
In Ukraine, Russia sees clear national interests at stake. It views
Yushchenko, a former prime minister, as likely to tilt firmly to the West if
he wins, potentially taking Ukraine into the NATO alliance and undermining
Russia's security and influence in the region.
"For the Kremlin, this is a very, very important election," said Markov. "We
don't want to dominate Ukraine. We want to develop together. But
Yushchenko is very dangerous. He is surrounded by these crazy people
with a Cold War mentality who hate Russia."
In an interview, Yushchenko dismissed such fears, saying he wanted a close
and respectful relationship with Russia.
The Russian Club was opened in August by Viktor Yanukovych, Russia's
favored candidate for the presidency, and Dmitry Medvedev, chief of staff
to Russian President Vladimir Putin. At first, officials said the club's
opening had nothing to do with the election, but lately it has been involved
in little else.
On Friday, the club held a round table with deputies from the lower house of
Russia's parliament who had come to observe the election. On Saturday, the
club planned to discuss exit polls, including one it had commissioned for
Sunday's elections. On election day itself, a team of "experts" is to be
available for the press to discuss the day's events.
For years, the U.S. government has helped bankroll grass-roots organizations
and other private groups in Ukraine that it said will foster rule of law and
democratic rights, and many analysts said the groups tend to gravitate
toward the opposition. The State Department recently announced plans to
spend $13 million on programs to promote free and fair elections.
In the weeks leading up to the vote, the club issued press releases accusing
the United States of meddling in Ukraine's internal affairs. "Unfortunately,
the Russian Club is forced to state that, in actuality, the discussion is
not about providing free and democratic elections, but of actions geared
toward deliberately denying free will to the Ukrainian people," said a club
statement issued after the State Department's announcement.
The club's leadership also points to visits by U.S. politicians and
dignitaries such as Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and former secretary of
state Henry Kissinger as examples of U.S. efforts to influence the vote.
Critics of Russia's efforts said that unlike the United States or the
European Union, Moscow is openly supporting a single candidate.
"This is not about Russian-Ukrainian dialogue, Russian-Ukrainian
understanding, it's about electing Yanukovych, and everything the Russians
are doing here serves that purpose," said Iryna Bekeshkina of Ukraine's
Democratic Initiatives Foundation.
Bekeshkina said she suspects that seemingly neutral activities by the
Russian Club, such as commissioning an exit poll on election day, are
designed to confirm a Yanukovych victory, not cross-check the actual vote.
"They say they're going to poll 50,000 people," she said. "Who's going to do
the work? We have no idea."
Bekeshkina's group is coordinating another opinion poll that is being funded
by four Western foundations and eight embassies, including those of the
United States, Britain and Switzerland. The group said it invited the
Russian Embassy to participate but got no response.
Mykhailo Pohrebinsky, director of the Kiev Center for Political Research
and Conflict Studies, denied opposition allegations that Russia has poured
tens of millions of dollars into Yanukovych's campaign as "a lie, a pure
lie."
"The Ukrainian groups that support Yanukovych have more than enough
money," said Pohrebinsky, a consultant to current President Leonid Kuchma,
who is backing Yanukovych.
Yanukovych's campaign is also helped by at least three teams of Russian
political consultants, many of them from Russia's Kremlin-created Motherland
party. They are offering advice to the campaign on subjects as diverse as
which themes to stress and how the candidate should be groomed.
A Russian makeup artist flew in to improve Yanukovych's appearance,
according to a Russian working on the campaign who spoke on condition of
anonymity.
The Yanukovych campaign dismissed the importance of its Russian political
advisers. "The election headquarters is run by Ukrainians," said Sergei
Tigipko, Yanukovych's campaign manager. "I know who is leading this
campaign, and they are Ukrainians." -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12519-2004Oct30.html
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.205 ARTICLE NUMBER SIX
Additional names for the distribution list are always welcome
========================================================
6. "WHERE THE COLD WAR NEVER DIED"
Ukraine's elections are attracting a high level of American interest.
COMMENTARY by Jonathan Steele in Kiev
The Guardian, London, United Kingdom, Thu, Oct 28, 2004
Cries of election fraud, furious crowds in the street, nervous police
pondering mutiny as a beleaguered government wonders whether to impose
a state of emergency - the dramatic first round of the upheavals which led
to a change of power in Georgia last autumn and in Serbia four years ago
may be about to re-emerge in Ukraine.
When voters cast their ballots on Sunday to choose a new president,
everybody expects the day itself will be calm. But the two main candidates'
camps are talking up the danger of violence in the hours after the close of
polls. Each side claims its man is ahead and the other will resort to dirty
tricks or mass protests rather than accept defeat.
Six months ago few Ukrainians predicted such tension. One reason is that
the contest is unusually close, with opinion polls suggesting that neither
Viktor Yanukovych, the current prime minister who is the establishment
candidate, nor his challenger, Viktor Yushchenko, has a clear lead.
The more significant factor is the extraordinary degree of foreign
intervention in the campaign. One might have thought the US would have
had enough on its plate not to be interested in Ukraine. But the cold war
has never really died, and Ukraine is still seen as a powerful prize. Henry
Kissinger was in Kiev last weekend, the latest in a recent string of
high-level American visitors that included the republican senator John
McCain and Richard Holbrooke, the potential next secretary of state if
John Kerry wins.
They were aroused, it seems, by the outgoing president Leonid Kuchma's
sudden change of line on Nato. Eventual entry into the alliance has been a
key part of Ukraine's national strategy, approved by parliament, for some
years. In July, shortly after meeting George Bush at Nato's summit in
Istanbul, Kuchma reversed it.
Observers initially thought he was piqued by Bush's advice to him not to try
for a third presidential term. But Yanukovych, Kuchma's favoured successor,
is campaigning on the new anti-Nato posture and the Americans are angry.
They always preferred Yushchenko, who was identified during his time as
central bank governor several years ago as a pro-American neo-liberal. He
was bound to be Washington's favoured candidate in this year's election. But
it is mainly because of the Nato factor that the US has become much more
engaged in recent weeks in denouncing the dangers of fraud, funding the exit
polls which will be done on Sunday and financing the groups of activists who
may take to the streets.
Ostensibly, the US says it has always merely wanted to promote democracy,
and nothing has changed. The Kuchma government certainly has a record of
intolerance towards critics. Several crusading journalists have been
murdered. But Ukraine's political observers note that US complaints fell
silent after Ukraine sent troops to Iraq last year.
They also wonder how much of a democrat Yushchenko is. He publicly
compared supporters of one murdered journalist, Georgy Gongadze, to
fascists. Like his rival, Yanukovych, he has links to oligarchic clans and
served as a prime minister under Kuchma. So some of Ukraine's grassroots
democrats believe the election is only the latest round in the struggle to
divide state property, with the current in-group fearing the outsiders will
take away what it stole. In Russia the oligarchs are safe under Putin. In
Ukraine insecurity still reigns.
Ordinary Ukrainians are in a difficult position. When Poland and Slovakia
joined the EU this spring, they were left outside the fortress. Thirteen
years after the euphoria of independence, it was inevitable that Ukrainians
would rethink their future. This comes as Russia, after a period of neglect
in Yeltsin's second term, has revived its interest in Ukraine. It has
settled Ukraine's massive energy debts and made a long-term agreement on
supplying low-priced oil and gas.
Russia is also starting to create a "common economic space" with Ukraine,
Belarus, and Kazakhstan which could lead to a free trade area. Whether this
conflicts with Ukraine's original hopes of entering the EU is not clear, but
Ukrainians feel the EU switched its priorities this year, with the focus of
enlargement going to the Balkans and Turkey. Brussels needs to correct the
message. The Turkish experience has shown EU programmes to strengthen
civil society can make a real contri- bution to a country's transition from
authoritarianism.
Nato is a different case. The alliance has become nothing more than a tool
of Washington's global policy, with an expansionist agenda that still
includes a strong anti-Russian component, in spite of various programmes
for cooperating with Moscow.
Ukrainians are right to turn against it. Whatever economic and diplomatic
support their country needs can be got much better from the EU and, unlike
with Nato, at no cost in international tension.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Steele was a guest of the Russian Club in Ukraine at an
expenses-paid conference in Kiev last weekend, j.steele@guardian co.uk
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: LETTER-TO-THE-EDITOR: Sat, October 30, 2004
Dear Mr. Morgan,
I think we need to alert the entire Ukrainian community and its
supporters to serious lapses of ethical behaviour on the part of
western journalists.
Attached is an example of a piece written by Jonathan Steele of the
Guardian in which Yuschenko is painted with the same brush as
Yanukovich. The piece was written after an all expenses paid trip to
Kiev supported by the Russian Club. Though the disclosure is
appropriate, most people reading the article will be unfamiliar with
the Russian Club and its blatant support for Yanukovich. On the
other hand this will not have escaped the attention of Mr. Steele.
In my view, this represents a flagrant transgression of professional
ethics and a more relevant aspect of the story than the article itself.
This behaviour should be widely publicized-western journalists who
act responsibly in attempting to provide unbiased and objective
coverage of news events should not go on business trips fully paid
for by parties whose primary motivation is clearly to influence the
news that is being covered. I fully intend to pursue this matter further
with the British Press Council by launching an official complaint.
Kind regards,
Dr. Walter P. Maksymowych F.R.C.P.(C), F.A.C.P., F.R.C.P. (UK)
Senior Scholar Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research
Professor of Medicine, University of Alberta
562 Heritage Medical Research Building
Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2S2, Canada -30-
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.205: ARTICLE NUMBER SEVEN
Suggested articles for publication in the Report are always welcome
========================================================
7. "A WASHINGTON PERSPECTIVE"
COMMENT: By Michael McFaul
Moscow Times, Moscow, Russia, Friday, Oct 29,2004
Sergei Markov is right to worry about potential unrest and instability in
Ukraine after the upcoming presidential vote. What his "view from Moscow,"
laid out in an op-ed in The Moscow Times earlier this week, fails to see,
however, is the source of this unrest. The necessary, though not
sufficient, condition for unrest is a clearly documented falsified vote. If
"Moscow" is concerned about instability on Russia's border, then the
Kremlin should be doing all that it can to ensure that the vote is free and
fair. To date, there are few signs that Moscow is committed to facilitating
such an outcome.
Of course, the playing field for all presidential candidates in the
Ukrainian election has never been level, and the Kremlin has done much to
tilt the context in favor of Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych. Millions of
Russian rubles have bankrolled Yanukovych's campaign. Public relations
specialists like Markov have set up shop in Ukraine for the duration of the
campaign. Most amazingly, President Vladimir Putin has decided to spend
several days in Ukraine in what can only be viewed as active campaigning on
behalf of Yanukovych. Imagine the international outcry if a U.S. president
spent three days traveling in Mexico in support of a presidential
candidate. Yet somehow, in Ukraine, this kind of campaign assistance from
the regional hegemon is considered standard practice.
Russia's meddling in Ukraine's internal affairs is disappointing, but at
this stage, these are already facts on the ground about which little can be
done. A stolen election, on the other hand, is still something that can be
avoided. Unlike Russian involvement in the election, a stolen election is
also the kind of event that could trigger unrest -- an outcome that neither
Washington nor Moscow should want to see.
The examples of Serbia and Georgia are important to remember. OTPOR and
KMAR were only successful in mobilizing Serbians and Georgians to fill the
streets because both groups could produce undisputable evidence that the
official results of the presidential election in Serbia in 2000 and the
parliamentary election in Georgia in 2003 did not correspond with the
actual vote totals. Professionally executed exit polls and parallel vote
tabulations confirmed the gap between the real will of the people and the
claimed will of the voters offered by government authorities. Without these
data, there would have been no protests in Serbia or Georgia.
So if Moscow truly desires stability on its Western border, then Putin
should state unambiguously that he is only interested in the process, not
the outcome, of the election; that he looks forward to reading the results
of Ukrainian exit polls and election monitors; and that he looks forward to
working with whoever wins a legitimate election. U.S. President George W.
Bush or a President-elect John Kerry should make a similar pledge.
Judging from Markov's view from Moscow, however, such a pledge from Putin
seems highly unlikely. Markov states bluntly that "Moscow does not consider
Yushchenko a democrat" because presidential candidate Viktor Yushchenko
holds different policy positions from the Kremlin regarding international
relations and the status of the Russian language in Ukraine. Someone should
be judged a democrat or not based on the procedures he embraces in deciding
who governs, not by which policy positions he takes. Such statements about
Yushchenko's democratic credentials suggest that Moscow is not really
interested in observing the democratic process in Ukraine's presidential
vote, but rather is only concerned with who wins, by whatever means
necessary.
Markov makes this clear when he writes, "Moscow is certain that a
pro-Russian candidate will always be victorious in any democratic
election." In fact, the essence of democratic elections is that the
procedures are certain, but the outcome is not. At this stage in this very
competitive election, the only way Moscow can be certain of a Yanukovych
victory is if the Kremlin already knows how the votes will be counted.
No one in Moscow or Washington or anywhere else should desire unrest in
Ukraine. Whether by design or accident, such highly charged moments can
quickly turn peaceful protests into violent conflicts. A free and fair
election is the best guarantee against unrest. Rather than trying to
influence the outcome of the vote, Moscow and Washington should be joining
together to help provide such a free and fair process. -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael McFaul is a Hoover fellow and professor of political science at
Stanford University. Among other books, he is co-author, with Sergei
Markov, of "The Troubled Birth of Russian Democracy" (1993). He
contributed this comment to The Moscow Times.
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 205: ARTICLE NUMBER EIGHT
Letters to the editor are always welcome
========================================================
8. PUTIN HAS AN EYE ON THE FUTURE AS HE LOOKS BACK
ON SOVIET GLORY VICTORY
By Julius Strauss in Moscow
Daily Telegraph, London, UK, Friday, Oct 29, 2004
In scenes eerily reminiscent of the Cold War, President Vladimir Putin
joined President Leonid Kuchma of Ukraine to watch a military parade
goose-step through Kiev yesterday.
They stood on a raised platform as thousands of soldiers, sailors and a
Second World War T-34 tank moved down the main street of the Ukrainian
capital behind the red Soviet flag that was raised over the Reichstag in
Berlin in 1945.
The parade could give a boost to Viktor Yanukovich's election
The parade was ostensibly to celebrate victory over the Nazis nearly 60
years ago, but it was brought forward to try to give a boost to Viktor
Yanukovich, the regime's candidate for the Ukrainian presidential election
this weekend.
For Mr Putin, a Yanukovich victory would be a big step towards realising
plans to reconstitute a mini-Soviet Union by forming a common economic
zone constituting Belarus, Russia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan.
Mr Yanukovich, a businessman from the coal-mining region of Donetsk with
an unsavoury past, has promised closer ties with Russia, dual citizenship
and making Russian a second state language.
According to Jane's Intelligence Report, he has also promised to hand over
the port of Sevastopol in the Ukrainian region of Crimea to the Russian
Black Sea Fleet. At present, the facilities are shared under a deal reached
in the 1990s.
Mr Kuchma, who is retiring after two terms in office, is also anxious for a
Yanukovich win, otherwise he and his cronies could face prison over a series
of scandals.
Viktor Yushchenko, the pro-western candidate whose face was badly
disfigured after he was allegedly poisoned, has threatened to take Ukraine
out of the Russian orbit and seek membership of the European Union and
Nato. Polls show that victory for Mr Yanukovich is far from certain.
Recently several pro-democracy and opposition activists have been arrested.
Last weekend provocateurs attacked a crowd of 100,000 people protesting
at government attempts to influence the vote.
Volodymyr Polokhalo, an independent analyst, said: "This election is the
dirtiest, most immoral and most dishonest of all post-Soviet campaigns in
Ukraine. "The Russian factor is present everywhere."
Mr Putin's increasingly Soviet-era style was also on display in Russia
yesterday as the Kremlin bused in thousands of students and schoolchildren
for a "spontaneous" pro-Putin demonstration.
The rally was said to be a protest against terrorism but critics say it was
timed to undermine simultaneous opposition demonstrations against Mr
Putin's plans to abolish gubernatorial elections. (www.telegraph.co.uk)
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.205: ARTICLE NUMBER NINE
========================================================
9. TOP POLISH SPY WARNS OF RUSSIAN OIL IMPERIALISM
Adam Jasser, Reuters, Warsaw, Poland, October 2004
WARSAW -- Russia is seeking to re-establish its grip on ex-communist
countries in Central Europe through its near monopoly on oil and gas, a
former Polish chief spy says.
Zbigniew Siemiatkowski, a senior figure in the ruling left, told a
parliamentary inquiry that as part of this drive Russian oil firms were
seeking control of their peers in ex-Soviet satellites, many of which are
now European Union members.
"I agree that we are facing a restoration of the Russian Empire through
economic means and with the principle of 'yesterday tanks, today oil',"
Siemiatkowski told the inquiry on Wednesday, according to a transcript
released by parliament.
The Russian Embassy declined to comment on Siemiatkowski's remarks,
which may hurt tense relations between the former Cold War allies.
Poland's Foreign Ministry also declined to comment.
Polish newspapers seized on the testimony, with the top daily Gazeta
Wyborcza reporting on it on the front page under the headline "The
Empire Strikes."
Fear of Moscow is acute across Central Europe 15 years after it escaped
Soviet clutches and reorient itself toward the West, a process crowned
with the countries' EU entries this year.
Such fears are reinforced by signs that Russia under President Vladimir
Putin may be trying to regain influence in the region it had controlled for
centuries and which many Russian politicians still refer to as their "near
abroad."
In Ukraine, for instance, Russia is openly siding with a pro-Kremlin
candidate for president in this weekend's election.
Russia remains the main supplier of oil and gas to Central Europe, much
of it delivered over Soviet-era pipelines. The Russian energy giants that
have emerged from the Soviet oil monopoly have unsuccessfully bid for
a number of refineries and petroleum distribution chains in the region,
reflecting widespread suspicion of Russian investment.
Poland, the biggest economy among the former Soviet satellites, in 2002
blocked a bid by LUKoil to buy the country's second-largest refinery,
Rafineria Gdanska.
In recent weeks, the circumstances surrounding that episode have surfaced
as part of a highly charged parliamentary inquiry probing whether the then
Polish government used the secret service to exercise undue control of the
fuel sector.
The most shocking revelation the inquiry has produced so far was that
Poland's richest man, industrialist Jan Kulczyk, held secret talks in Vienna
about the future of the Polish energy sector with a former KGB agent
resident in Poland. According to declassified intelligence reports, made
public by a special parliamentary committee leading the inquiry, Kulczyk
had offered to use his political influence to help Russian firms make
another try for the Gdansk refinery. Kulczyk denies the accusations. -30-
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.205: ARTICLE NUMBER TEN
========================================================
10. "PUTIN: THE RETURN OF THE RUSSIAN IMPERIALIST?"
OP-ED by David Marples
Edmonton Journal, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, Sat, Oct 30, 2004
Russian president Vladimir Putin, firmly established in power after the
2004 presidential election in Russia, has earned a reputation for careful
diplomacy. He is the man who avoided participation for his country in the
war in Iraq, and yet maintained friendly relations with US president George
W. Bush. He is the leader who charmed British Prime Minister Tony Blair,
despite clearly defined policy differences between the two countries.
However, his actions of the past three weeks have undermined four years of
careful diplomacy. He has interfered blatantly in the contentious election
campaign in Ukraine, while sanctioning the prolonged dictatorship of
Alexander Lukashenko in Belarus.
The Belarus issue can be dealt with briefly. Putin did not intervene last
weekend when citizens of Belarus went to the polls in a referendum to
decide whether the president could seek a third term in office (his current
mandate expires in 2006) and amend the current Constitution to do so.
The vote more than 79% in favor was largely engineered by a government
that controlled the media, harassed opponents, and forced most voters to
take part in an advance poll on 12 October, five days before the election.
Sausages and beer were provided for voters, while the president's portrait
adorned most voting booths.
Alone among the major world powers, Russia recognized the vote as free and
fair. Cynics observed that Putin himself may seek a third term in 2008 and
could hardly criticize his western neighbor for similar sentiments.
In Ukraine, relations between current president Leonid Kuchma and Putin
have been very warm for the past six months. Kuchma, bereft of
international friends and shunned by the EU, has turned to Russia as a
desperate resort. The Russian leader has responded with the unambiguous
embrace of a bear for a honey pot.
In an earlier visit to Ukraine, he suggested that the two countries had an
identical history and stressed the importance of Kyiv in Russia's heritage.
More recently the subtleties have been dropped in favor of an all-out
attempt to drag Ukraine into the Russian sphere.
Two weeks ago, during a televised visit of Kuchma and his presidential
nominee, Viktor Yanukovych to Moscow, Putin openly endorsed Yanukovych's
candidacy. Like Kuchma he stressed the significance of continuity of good
relations, and the stability of the Ukrainian economy under Yanukovych.
Currently Putin is in Kyiv, this time for the commemoration of the
liberation of Ukraine by Soviet troops from German occupation 60 years ago.
However, the event has been brought forward by a week so that it precedes
the 31 October election. Together with Kuchma, Putin, and Yanukovych (as
well as Lukashenko and Ilkham Aliyev of Azerbaijan) are taking part in
official ceremonies on a grand scale. No observer could miss the inference:
that Russia and Ukraine will be in step, as long as Yanukovych wins the
election on Sunday.
Ukraine meanwhile is replete in mass demonstrations largely of students in
support of contender Viktor Yushchenko, who allegedly wishes to take
Ukraine closer to the West, by means of the elusive and thus far
unresponsive EU.
Putin is prepared to open the Russian border to Ukrainians. Thousands of
Ukrainian expatriates in Russia have been encouraged to vote for
Yanukovych. The two countries have every possibility of forming a union,
just as Russia has done with Belarus.
But why would residents of Ukraine wish to base their future on a
commitment to Russia? Why would they pay heed to Putin today, in contrast
to the way they ignored Boris Yeltsin's threats thirteen years ago during
the dissolution of the Soviet Union?
The results of Putin's policies not to mention the callous disregard for
democratic procedures by the Ukrainian authorities and Kuchma have been
to elevate Yushchenko to the rank of a national hero, one transformed ipso
facto into a candidate for democracy and the preservation of independence.
One Ukrainian writer has declared that a Yanukovych victory will turn the
country into a thuggish dictatorship with the curtailment of hard-won
freedom.
There is little real substance to Yushchenko's campaign. Absent through
illness for long periods, he has tried to emulate Kuchma's early notion of
a multi-vectored foreign policy that would hold dialogues with East and
West. There is little to indicate how he would persuade the EU to permit
Ukraine to join, or how he would end the endemic corruption that pervades
political and economic life.
It is of no electoral consequence; more important is that Yushchenko is not
a Russian puppet, nor is he likely to bow before pressure from Moscow, no
matter what the issue.
What has Putin to gain from his intervention in Ukraine? At best, he would
gain a reliable partner with important economic and security links to
Russia. There would be no danger of a Ukraine in NATO or isolated from
Russia through the economic curtain of the EU.
At worst, he has created new enemies among the Ukrainian electorate, and
engendered a political divide within Ukraine at a time when it needs to be
united. That political divide is between a Ukrainian-speaking West and
Russian-speaking East, with the former in the Yushchenko camp and the
latter for Yanukovych. -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. David R. Marples is Professor of History, Department of History
& Classics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.205: ARTICLE NUMBER ELEVEN
Additional names for the distribution list are always welcome
========================================================
11. UKRAINE'S PRESIDENTIAL VOTE: A TEST OF DEMOCRACY
AND BELLWETHER OF RELATIONS WITH RUSSIA AND WEST
Jim Heintz, AP Worldstream, Kiev, Ukraine, Thu, Oct 28, 2004
KIEV - After a tense campaign superheated by allegations of fraud and
official interference, Ukraine's weekend presidential election shapes up as
a stern test of the ex-Soviet republic's democracy _ and of whether it will
move closer into Russia's sphere of influence.
The main candidates are Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, lavishly praised
by the Kremlin and seen as likely to continue lame-duck President Leonid
Kuchma's heavy-handed rule, and Viktor Yushchenko, a former prime minister
who touts reforms and is seen as favoring Ukraine's closer integration with
the West.
With 23 candidates on Sunday's ballot, neither Yanukovych nor Yushchenko
is expected to get the simple majority needed for a first-round victory. The
question overshadowing platform issues has been whether the voting will be
free and fair and whether voters have been manipulated and pressured by
authorities.
"It is hard to see this campaign as having met basic standards," said Iryna
Bekeshkina of Ukraine's non-governmental Democratic Initiatives Foundation.
"Ukraine could lose its rank as an electoral democracy."
Observers including the European Union note the disruption of opposition
rallies, and state television channels' giving extensive coverage to
Yanukovych and much less to Yushchenko.
"Ukrainian voters haven't received sufficient information to make for a
conscious election," Oleksandr Chekmyshev of the Equal Access Committee
watchdog group contended.
Yushchenko supporters say the Central Elections Commission has printed
unnecessary extra ballots that could be used to forge votes.
Yushchenko's campaign suspended work in the capital Kiev this week amid
claims that opponents were preparing to increase tensions by masquerading in
pro-Yushchenko campaign memorabilia and intimidating people.
Yanukovych on Thursday accused the opposition of trying to destabilize the
country, saying it "threatens the society with warnings about the vote's
falsification" and "organizes violence and public disorder."
Tensions also are aggravated by unanswered questions about the mysterious
illness that took Yushchenko out of action for weeks and left his face
swollen and riddled with lesions. His supporters alleged he was poisoned by
opponents, while rival backers claim it was a viral illness that could
render him unfit for office.
Yushchenko is fighting contentions _ made overtly in the television ads of
some minor candidates _ that he is a tool of the United States and that he
aims for the so-called "Georgia scenario:" a post-election mass uprising
like the one in Georgia last year that drove out President Eduard
Shevardnadze.
Others allege that he is at heart a Ukrainian nationalist who could induce
discrimination against Ukraine's sizable ethnic Russian population and
alienate neighboring Russia, the country's biggest trade partner and main
supplier of its oil and natural gas.
Yushchenko rejects the claims, telling a campaign rally this week that "I am
not pro-American, I am not pro-Russian" and adding that he values Russia's
cultural role in Ukraine: "I hope that my children will remember Russian
fairy-tales."
His platform focuses on economic development, including a grandiose promise
to create 5 million new jobs in the country of 48 million; battling the
corruption that keeps wealth concentrated in a few hands despite the
country's recent economic upswing; and reducing and simplifying taxes.
Yanukovych makes similar economic promises, bolstered by the government's
raising of monthly pensions last month by 70 percent, to an average 285
hryvnya (US$52, A€43). The pension increase "is Yanukovych's main weapon,"
said his campaign manager Serhiy Tyhipko.
"Building a new and strong independent Ukraine presupposes the development
of democratic society, with freedom of speech, independent media, and
public-state consensus ... That's what I will do," Yanukovych said Thursday.
But Yanukovych is clearly more pro-Russia. Although his platform briefly
promises to advance European integration, it also calls for deepening
cooperation with Russia "and other states that are our traditional
partners."
With Russia appearing increasingly eager to reassert regional dominance,
including forming a joint economic space with Ukraine, Belarus and
Kazakhstan, Yanukovych is seen as likely to bring Ukraine closer to its
eastern neighbor, perhaps giving short shrift to the NATO and EU countries
that border Ukraine's west.
Yanukovych has also proposed making Russian an official language, a popular
idea in Ukraine's eastern regions where many Russian-speaking residents
struggle with Ukrainian. Russian President Vladimir Putin strongly praised
Yanukovych this week in a visit that many saw as a tacit endorsement and as
Kremlin pressure on voters. -30-
========================================================
ARTICLES ARE FOR PERSONAL AND ACADEMIC USE ONLY
Articles are Distributed For Information, Research, Education
Discussion and Personal Purposes Only
========================================================
Ukraine Information Website: http://www.ArtUkraine.com
========================================================
If you would like to read "THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-04
please send your name, country of residence, and e-mail contact information
morganw@patriot.net. Additional names are welcome. If you do not wish to
read "THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-04, around five times per week,
let us know by e-mail to morganw@patriot.net.
========================================================
PUBLISHER AND EDITOR
Mr. E. Morgan Williams, Executive Director, Ukrainian Federation of America
(UFA); Coordinator, The Action Ukraine Coalition (AUC);
Senior Advisor, Government Relations, U.S.-Ukraine Foundation (USUF);
Advisor, Ukraine-U.S. Business Council, Washington, D.C.;
Publisher and Editor, www.ArtUkraine.com Information Service (ARTUIS),
P.O. Box 2607, Washington, D.C. 20013,
Tel: 202 437 4707, E-mail: morganw@patriot.net
========================================================
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-2004 SPONSORS:
"Working to Secure Ukraine's Future"
1. THE ACTION UKRAINE COALITION (AUC): Washington, D.C.,
http://www.artukraine.com/auc/index.htm; MEMBERS:
A. UKRAINIAN AMERICAN COORDINATING COUNCIL,
(UACC), Ihor Gawdiak, President, Washington, D.C., New York, NY
B. UKRAINIAN FEDERATION OF AMERICA (UFA),
Zenia Chernyk, Chairperson; Vera M. Andryczyk, President; E.
Morgan Williams, Executive Director, Huntingdon Valley, Pennsylvania.
http://www.artukraine.com/ufa/index.htm
C. U.S.-UKRAINE FOUNDATION (USUF), Nadia Komarnyckyj
McConnell, President, Washington, D.C., Kyiv, Ukraine .
2. UKRAINE-U.S. BUSINESS COUNCIL, Kempton Jenkins,
President, Washington, D.C.
3. KIEV-ATLANTIC GROUP, David and Tamara Sweere, Daniel
Sweere, Kyiv and Myronivka, Ukraine, 380 44 295 7275 in Kyiv.
4. BAHRIANY FOUNDATION, INC. Dr. Anatol Lysyj, Chairman,
Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA,
5. ODUM- Association of American Youth of Ukrainian Descent,
Minnesota Chapter, Natalia Yarr, Chairperson
========================================================