"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"
An International Newsletter
In-Depth Ukrainian News, Analysis, and Commentary
"The Art of Ukrainian History, Culture, Arts, Business, Religion,
Sports, Government, and Politics, in Ukraine and Around the World"
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT" Year 04, Number 212
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, TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2004
-----INDEX OF ARTICLES-----
"Major International News Headlines and Articles"
1.UKRAINIAN CENTRAL BANK RAISES DISCOUNT RATE TO 9%
Korrespondent.net web site, Kiev, in Russian 8 Nov 04
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Tue, Nov 09, 2004
2. NATIONAL BANK OF UKRAINE DECIDES TO HOLD TRADING
SESSIONS TO SELL CASH DOLLARS TO BANKS ON NOV 10 & 15
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Mon, November 8, 2004
3. WILL THE BOOM LAST IN UKRAINE?
Investors are praying that Ukraine's tumultuous election
won't stifle its superhot economy
By Jason Bush, with Roman Olearchyk in Kiev
Business Week Online, New York, NY, Mon, November 8, 2004
4. CANADA: ANNUAL UKRAINIAN FAMINE LECTURE
Toronto, Canada, Friday, November 12, 5-7 p.m.
Roman Senkus, r.senkus@utoronto.ca
Toronto, Ontario, Canada , Monday, Nov 08, 2004
5. ELECTION OBSERVERS NEEDED FOR ROUND TWO
You Must Call Today....Tuesday !!!!!
Ostap Skrypnyk, ostap.skrypnyk@ucc.ca
Executive Director, Ukrainian Canadian Congress
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, Mon, 8 Nov 2004
6. INTERNATIONAL ELECTION OBSERVERS NEEDED NOW
FOR UKRAINE'S PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION RUN-OFF
UCCA, New York, NY, Mon, Nov. 8, 2004
7. UKRAINE: "RESISTANCE DOES WORK"
The old, beaten path to power through fraud and intimidation
did not lead to the much-desired goal
By Olga Dmitricheva, Zerkalo Nedeli on the Web
Mirror-Weekly, International Social Political Weekly
Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, 6-12, November 2004
8. SOME UKRAINIAN POLICE IN KHARKIV SAID TO PROTEST
ELECTION ABUSES IN ANONYMOUS LETTER TO RADA LYTVYN
UNIAN news agency, Kiev, in Ukrainian, 8 Nov 04
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Tue, Nov 09, 2004
9. UKRAINE: "MIXED REACTIONS TO BUSH'S RE-ELECTION"
Kuchma quick to congratulate Bush on second term
By Oleg Varfolomeyev, Eurasia Daily Monitor
Volume 1, Issue 122, The Jamestown Foundation
Washington, D.C., Monday, November 8, 2004
10.US ELECTIONS: A CERTAIN VICTORY BUT AN UNCERTAIN FUTURE
Two Major Issues for Ukraine
By James Sherr, Conflict Studies Research Centre
Defence Academy of the United Kingdom [1]
Zerkalo Nedeli, Mirror-Weekly in Russian and Ukrainian
English version obtained from the author by The Action Ukraine Report
Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, 6-13 November, 2004
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 212: ARTICLE NUMBER ONE
========================================================
1. UKRAINIAN CENTRAL BANK RAISES DISCOUNT RATE TO 9%
Korrespondent.net web site, Kiev, in Russian 8 Nov 04
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Tue, Nov 09, 2004
KIEV - The National Bank [of Ukraine, NBU] raised its discount rate
by 1 per cent up to 9 per cent in November, the Ukrayinski Novyny
news agency reported.
The NBU had kept the discount rate at the level of 7 per cent from
December 2002 until June 2004, when it raised the discount rate by
0.5 per cent to 7.5 per cent, and in October the discount rate was
raised by a further 0.5 per cent, to 8 per cent. -30-
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.212: ARTICLE NUMBER TWO
=======================================================
2. NATIONAL BANK OF UKRAINE DECIDES TO HOLD TRADING
SESSIONS TO SELL CASH DOLLARS TO BANKS ON NOV 10 & 15
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Mon, November 8, 2004
KYIV - The National Bank (NBU) has decided to hold nearest trading
sessions on November 10 and 15 for sale of the dollar cash to banks at
the rate of 5.3150 UAH/USD. The NBU informed banks about this in
a telegram.
"We inform that the trading sessions to sell foreign currency cash will take
place on November 10 and 15," reads the statement. The volume of sales
of currency cash by the National Bank during earlier cash interventions
constituted USD 69.38 million on October 15, USD 83.61 million on
October 20, USD 136.85 million on October 25, USD 132.16 million
on October 27, USD 198 million on November 2 (total of about USD
620 million).
Besides that, on November 5, NBU sold up to another USD 100 million
to banks (volume of interventions on November 5 fell due to twofold
reduction of the relevant limit from 40% to 20% of the total permitted
daily limit of transactions between banks and NBU on interbank).
As Ukrainian News earlier reported, the shortage of foreign currency
emerged on the cash exchange market in recent weeks because of the
increasing demand from the public.
The National Bank is taking measures to stabilize the cash exchange
market by selling cash dollars at the rate of 5.3150 UAH/USD.
At the same time, the National Bank introduced a 2% limit on the
deviation of the selling and buying rates of cash foreign currency from
the official currency exchange rate (presently 5.2004-5.4126
UAH/USD). -30- [Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.212: ARTICLE NUMBER THREE
=======================================================
3. WILL THE BOOM LAST IN UKRAINE?
Investors are praying that Ukraine's tumultuous election
won't stifle its superhot economy
By Jason Bush, with Roman Olearchyk in Kiev
Business Week Online, New York, NY, Mon, Nov 8, 2004
It's the fastest-growing economy in Europe, in the fifth year of a
boom that has seen gross domestic product climb by over a third
since 1999. This year, GDP is set to expand by an amazing 11% to
13%. Bank lending is growing by more than 50% a year, while the
stock market is up 100% in the past 12 months. In the increasingly
colorful and cosmopolitan capital, the rising prosperity is
tangible: from the brand-new shopping complexes in the city center
to the blocks of luxury apartment buildings under construction on
the outskirts. "Now everyone is driving around in foreign cars and
having new apartments built. In the last few years the city has come
alive," says Slavic Petrenko, a taxi driver. Welcome to Europe's
tiger economy: Ukraine.
Incredible but true. And the boom is continuing despite one of the
wildest political scenes in the former Soviet bloc. Since gaining
independence in 1991, the nation of 47 million has been beset by
one scandal after another. President Leonid Kuchma has been cold-
shouldered by the West ever since an aide released tapes in 2000
that seemed to implicate the President in the murder of an
opposition journalist. Kuchma denied any involvement.
Now, the controversial President is preparing to step down. Under
the constitution, he can serve no more than two five-year terms. But
the campaign to elect Kuchma's replacement on Oct. 31 is keeping the
drama at a fever pitch. The Kuchma government is throwing its weight
behind Viktor Yanukovych, currently prime minister. The leading
opposition candidate, Viktor Yushchenko, is recovering from a sudden
and mysterious illness, which his supporters claim was a deliberate
poisoning, a charge denied by the authorities.
Western governments are watching the race closely for fairness, and
international organizations are sending 4,000 observers. "We are
deeply disappointed that the campaign to date has fallen short of
international standards," the U.S. State Dept. said in an Oct. 14
statement that criticized "the disruption of opposition rallies,
muzzling of independent media, misuse of 'administrative resources,'
and other serious violations." Russian President Vladimir V. Putin,
meanwhile, openly backs Yanukovych, who supports closer relations
with Russia. Opinion polls show the two candidates running neck-and-
neck, and there may have to be a November runoff.
With Ukraine's economy booming, it's not only governments but also
investors who have an interest in the poll. If Yushchenko, a
strongly pro-Western politician who jump-started Ukraine's boom
when he was Prime Minister from 1999 to 2001, pulls off a victory,
Ukraine could see major reforms that will put the country on the
international investor map like never before. But if the ruling
elite rigs the election to ensure a Yanukovych win, as some foreign
governments fear, Ukraine faces the risk of international isolation
and serious political unrest. The Yanukovych team denies any
misdoing. "I think that these allegations of violations are not true
in most cases, and that many are exaggerations," Stepan Havrysh,
coordinator of the Yanukovych Presidential campaign, told
journalists on Oct. 21.
NICE WORK
So far, Ukraine's interminable political scandals have not derailed
its remarkable growth. But what's behind it? A combination of good
luck and good macroeconomic policy. The luck is that metals,
particularly steel, make up 60% of Ukraine's exports. Global prices
have been high recently, thanks largely to demand from China and
other Asian markets. The sound macroeconomic policy has been
followed by successive governments since a financial crisis in 1998.
The country has a 9.7% current account surplus, public debt is a
low 24% of GDP, and inflation is in single digits. The wide-ranging
privatization of the 1990s is bearing fruit: Some two-thirds of GDP
is produced by the private sector, the main engine of Ukraine's
growth. True, much of that is owned by a small number of tycoons.
But these oligarchs -- the same term used in Russia -- are investing
serious money in sectors such as agriculture, telecom, and
banking. "Yes, privatization was dirty, but it has shown its
effectiveness," says Olexander Paskhaver, president of the Center
for Economic Development in Kiev.
There's a risk that a big fall in metals prices might unhinge
Ukraine's growth. But the risk is mitigated by the healthy
macroeconomic picture and rapid growth in noncommodity sectors.
Machine-building grew 34% year-on-year in the first half of 2004,
and construction rose 31%.
The bigger question is whether Ukraine can achieve the political
stability needed to keep investment flowing. Foreign investment
would be particularly helpful by injecting useful competition into
Ukraine's oligarch-dominated economy and integrating Ukraine with
the huge export market to the West. But so far, foreign direct
investment has been minimal. Since independence, Ukraine has
managed to attract just $7 billion, compared with around $50 billion
in Poland. Besides the political strife, potential investors are
deterred by Ukraine's mind-boggling bureaucracy and the rampant
corruption that goes with it. But those who have already put their
money down say such problems are manageable.
"It's a challenging environment. But at the end of the day we can
do business here, we're satisfied with our investment, and we're
looking to make further investments," says Garry Levesley,
Ukrainian director for Arlington (Va.)-based power company AES
Corp. AES invested $70 million in 2001 to acquire two Ukrainian
electricity distribution companies and is investing $10 million to
$15 million each year in upgrades.
What's really needed are big manufacturers. Last year automotive
suppliers Leoni from Germany and Yazaki Corp. from Japan opened
plants in western Ukraine, investing $50 million and $40 million,
respectively. Singapore electronics giant Flextronics Corp. (FLEX )
plans a $50 million auto-electronics plant in the region -- a vote
of confidence from a world-class manufacturer. Flextronics and the
others are drawn by a highly educated, cheap work force.
Labor costs are below $160 a month per worker, including all taxes
and social levies, vs. around $400 a month in Poland. And as wage
costs in European Union accession countries spiral upward, nearby
Ukraine looks ever more tempting. "EU enlargement has brought the
borders of Europe to Ukraine, so from a strategic point of view, a
logistical point of view, and a cost point of view, it makes much more
sense right now to manufacture in Ukraine," says Jorge Intriago, partner
of PricewaterhouseCoopers in Kiev.
Western investors in Ukraine prefer Yushchenko but say they could
also live with Yanukovych, provided his election is aboveboard.
"Whoever wins, the country will continue to move forward
economically, reform, and normalize. The only question is the pace
of improvement," says Levesley of AES.
A former governor of the Donetsk region in eastern Ukraine,
Yanukovych is linked to that area's powerful coal and steel barons.
His government has openly favored the interests of these oligarchs,
who are allied with Kuchma. In May it privatized Kryvorozhstal,
Ukraine's largest steel producer, awarding the company to a business
group headed by Kuchma's son-in-law, Viktor Pinchuk, even though
the winning bid of $800 million was far less than a $1.5 billion offer
from U.S. Steel Corp. .
Still, the Yanukovych government has its share of economic
achievements. It has slashed the top income-tax rate from 40% to
a flat 13%, passed laws to facilitate land privatization, firmed up
protection for intellectual-property rights, and pursued membership
in the World Trade Organization, which is expected by 2006.
The one outcome that could scare investors is if authorities
manipulate the count or resort to even more drastic measures to keep
the opposition from power -- such as canceling the election. A
rigged election could well prompt Yushchenko's numerous supporters
to take to the streets, as voters did in the ex-Soviet republic of
Georgia in November, 2003, with unpredictable, and possibly violent,
results.
As polling day approaches, the situation is growing tense, with
rumors of army units being deployed around the capital. Which is it
to be? A Ukrainian civil war, or more of the Ukrainian economic
miracle? That's a question voters in the 2004 U.S. presidential race
have never had to worry about. -30- [Action Ukraine Monitoring]
------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_45/b3907086_mz054.htm
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.212: ARTICLE NUMBER FOUR
Your comments about the Report are always welcome
========================================================
4. CANADA: ANNUAL UKRAINIAN FAMINE LECTURE
Toronto, Canada, Friday, November 12, 5-7 p.m.
Roman Senkus, r.senkus@utoronto.ca
Toronto, Ontario, Canada , Monday, Nov 08, 2004
RE: Friday, Nov. 12, 5-7 p.m., Annual Ukrainian Famine Lecture
Mark von Hagen (professor of history at Columbia University, and
president of the International Association for Ukrainian Studies)
"The Holodomor and the State of Ukrainian Studies"
Room 108, North Building, Munk Centre for International Studies (1
Devonshire Place), University of Toronto
Co-sponsored by the Ukrainian Canadian Congress, Toronto Branch;
the Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, Toronto Office; and the
Petro Jacyk Program for the Study of Ukraine, Centre for Russian and
East European Studies, University of Toronto. -30-
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.212: ARTICLE NUMBER FIVE
Your comments about the Report are always welcome
========================================================
5. CANADA: ELECTION OBSERVERS NEEDED FOR ROUND TWO
You Must Call Today....Tuesday !!!!!
Ostap Skrypnyk, ostap.skrypnyk@ucc.ca
Executive Director, Ukrainian Canadian Congress
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, Mon, 8 Nov 2004
Dear Ukrainian Community:
It is still possible to register as an observer for the second round of
elections to the President of Ukraine. The deadline for applications,
however, is Wed, 10 November 2004. To ensure that the Ukrainian
Canadian Congress can register you, we need to know by the evening
of 9 November 2004 [TODAY] (to take into account the time
difference with Kyiv).
There are two forms that we need to have filled out. that can be found
on the UCC website: http://www.ucc.ca/election_observer_project/
Please consider going to Ukraine as an observer. Those Canadians
that went for the first round will tell you that it was an unforgettable
experience. You will see Ukraine as few have seen it and be doing
some good in helping Ukrainians decide on their future.
Call me with any questions that you may have.
Ostap Skrypnyk, Executive Director
Ukrainian Canadian Congress, Winnipeg, 866 942 4627
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.212: ARTICLE NUMBER SIX
Your comments about the Report are always welcome
=========================================================
6. INTERNATIONAL ELECTION OBSERVERS NEEDED NOW
FOR UKRAINE'S PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION RUN-OFF
UCCA, New York, NY, Mon, Nov. 8, 2004
NEW YORK - The Ukrainian Congress Committee of America is
calling for volunteers to act as observers during the second round
of voting in Ukraine's presidential election which are to take place
on Sunday, November 21, 2004. All travel costs are covered by
the volunteer. Training will be provided by UCCA. Interested
parties must contact UCCA by Thursday, 11 November.
New York, NY Office: Ukrainian Congress Committee of America
203 Second Avenue, New York, NY 10003, tel: (212) 228-6840;
fax: (212) 254-4721; e-mail: ucca@ucca.org
Washington, DC Office: Ukrainian National Information Service
311 Massachusetts Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20002
tel: (202) 547-0018, fax: (202) 543-5502; E-mail: unis@ucca.org
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.212: ARTICLE NUMBER SEVEN
Your comments about the Report are always welcome
============================================================
7. UKRAINE: "RESISTANCE DOES WORK"
The old, beaten path to power through fraud and intimidation
did not lead to the much-desired goal
By Olga Dmitricheva, Zerkalo Nedeli on the Web
Mirror-Weekly, International Social Political Weekly
Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, 6-12, November 2004
Anastasio Somoza, who was an expert in elections, used to say to his
opponents, "You won the election? And I won the ballot count." He still has
worthy disciples. It is rumored that banquets were booked for November 1
in Kyiv, Donetsk, and Dnipropetrovsk to celebrate Viktor Yanukovych's
victory in the presidential election. These rumors may be just rumors, but
utter disappointment and the blues were too conspicuous on the faces of the
Prime Minister's high-ranking supporters, who came to Parliament on
Tuesday wearing white-and-blue kerchiefs.
The old, beaten path to power through fraud and intimidation did not lead to
the much-desired goal, despite an unprecedented employment of modernized
vote-stealing techniques and very favorable environments for counting the
votes "correctly". Somoza would be dissatisfied with his disciples, even
though they surpassed him in inventiveness. But Viktor Yushchenko's team
and supporters hoped for his landslide victory in the first round, too, and
they can count on success in the runoff only if they learn some lessons,
which the authorities taught them on October 31.
LESSON NUMBER ONE. This country had never experienced such
multitudinous distortions in voter lists. There was, probably, not a single
family, apartment block, or street where a voter did not find an error in
the name, the date of his or her birth or the place of residence as written
in the voter list. Those who distorted the voter lists went even further
than misspelling or omitting letters. A voter from Precinct #29 in the
Dnipropetrovsk region found her maiden name in the list, although she had
changed it when she got married twenty years ago. The voters were simply
shocked, because in all the previous elections and referendums their
personal data were written in lists correctly. Why were they "corrected"
now?
It is not an idle question, if the Criminal Code of Ukraine is not to be
just a book on the shelf. Article 158 classifies falsification of electoral
documents as a criminal offense punishable by a prison term between three
and five years. Ukrainian citizens are also criminally liable if they enter
distorted data on electoral documents and wittingly use the thus forged
documents. All the voter lists were compiled by local authorities, as
required by the current electoral legislation. However, according to many
witnesses who were involved in this process, village, township, city, and
district executives sent voter lists to the Central Election Commission
before approving them.
The lists that arrived back from the CEC were simply "mutilated": houses,
apartment blocks, and even streets were missing, deceased voters were
"resurrected", names were misspelled, dates were changed. However, the
total number of voters remained practically unchanged, because in place of
the deleted voters, houses, and streets, other names were entered. For
example, according to one voter list, as many as 200 people reside at 1
Sadova street, Kyiv, the office premises of the State Guard Service - an
outrageous but not singular case.
According to Yushchenko's representatives, the Yanukovych campaign staff
deliberately induced them into a signature collection race [a candidate for
presidency was required to collect 500,000 signatures in his support]. They
enthusiastically collected as many as 1,600,000 signatures - an ample
database, which the authorities used very cleverly. It was mostly supporters
of Yushchenko, [Socialist Party leader] Moroz, and [Communist Party leader]
Symonenko whose names and other personal data were distorted in voter lists.
But they were not the only victims. There were also attempts to bar "unknown
quantities" from the polls.
It should be noted that the victims of "corrections" in voter lists
displayed commendable activity and persistence. There is a graphic example
of Klavdia Shitova, 72, whose "odyssey" was described to our Dnipropetrovsk
correspondent Vladimir Ovdin. In the 2002 parliamentary election, the old
woman cast her ballot without problems. But ten days before this election,
she received an invitation to the polling station, in which her surname was
spelled as Titova. On October 24, the concerned woman came to her election
precinct, where she was advised to write a petition, and got a promise to
correct the error in the list. Five days before the election, the unquiet
woman turned up again and found the same error. At her insistence, it was
corrected in her presence.
But how surprised she was when she came to the polling station on October
31 and found the same misspelling! She was advised to come again in an hour.
So she did. The precinct election commission chairman told her that the
constituency election commission had turned down her petition and advised
her to turn to the court. So she did. But the local court sent her back to
the precinct commission for a reference note, which would state the fact of
misspelling and confirm her place of permanent residence. Shitova went back
to the polling station, got the document, and presented it to the court.
Then the court confirmed her right to vote.
Of course, only the staunchest and strongest were able to follow through on
such a trying procedure. The majority of others only used the foulest
language, cursing the commission and the whole government, and went back
home, feeling humiliated and unneeded. Such people are surely a valuable
potential reserve for Yushchenko's team, and it would be very wasteful not
to use them. That is why it is so important to patch the holes that remain
in the voter lists before the runoff. Otherwise, Yanukovych may get a
substantial number of extra votes.
It would be good to introduce a rule (which would not necessarily need the
parliament's approval): each page of a voter list should be signed by
representatives of both candidates. That would prevent possible replacements
of voter lists (or their parts) with the old ones, alive with errors. And it
is certainly important to create precedents for penalizing intentional
distortions. In any civilized country, prosecutors would immediately bring
charges. Here in Ukraine, the Prosecutor General's Office doesn't seem to
care. But legal action on the most outrageous and demonstrable cases would
be a strong warning against bedeviling the runoff voter lists.
LESSON NUMBER TWO. Groups of "roving voters", mainly from the
eastern regions, have become the talk of all Ukrainian towns. Although most
observers noted their insignificant contribution to the makeweight on
Yanukovych's scale, even minor factors may decide the runoff, in which
either candidate is likely to win by a nose. The most enigmatic thing is
that every "roving voter" had several absentee voter certificates [with
which they were able to cast ballots at several different polling stations].
Such certificates also belong to the category of electoral documents which
must be duly registered, numbered, used, and controlled. According to
Yushchenko's election staff in Lviv, the absentee voter certificates, which
were used there by a great number of visitors from the Donetsk and Lugansk
regions, were printed by the local tax administration.
The opposition MPs tried to make an amendment to the election law: they
proposed that upon receipt of an absentee voter certificate, a citizen must
get a special stamp in his or her passport. Then it would be impossible to
get more than one certificate. The proposal was not supported. However,
according to [Yushchenko's proxy] Yuri Klyuchkovsky, it would not help
much, because the "roving voters" did not even present their certificates:
they knew which member of the commission to approach and carried out
their mission without problems. "No amendments to the law can prevent its
non-observance," Klyuchkovsky admits. So Yushchenko's team had better
learn one more lesson.
LESSON NUMBER THREE. According to some sources, a total of $150
million was spent to "buy" members of election commissions and observers.
About $5000 was spent per commission - quite a big sum for poor provinces.
Those who resisted the temptation were "persuaded" by other means - threats
of physical force. Besides, those who gave the money warned members of
election commissions that if they did not "furnish" the necessary number of
votes, they would have to return the money plus interest. So there they come
again, those pioneers of racket!
None of those who cast hundreds of fake ballots or those who took ballots
from boxes was caught red-handed. Not a single "chain" was broken. (A
"chain" is a simple technique: one voter takes his or her unfilled ballot
slip out of the polling station and hands it over to another person, for a
certain reward. Then that person fills the ballot the "right way", casts it,
takes a blank one outdoors, and hands it over to another person.
And so the chain may continue for hours on end.) Also, figures in the vote
protocols differed from the actual number of votes given for the candidates.
It is quite easy to guess where the cars with ballot boxes made a stopover
on the way from polling stations to constituency election commissions: at
district state administrations, where the returns must have been studied and
"corrected".
And if the figures in the vote protocols did not coincide with the target
ones, the documents were replaced. How? According to some sources, on
the eve of the election, police officers were ordered to collect samples of
signatures from all members of precinct election commissions. Then, wherever
it was necessary, protocols were supplied with all signatures and stamps but
without figures. The blank spaces were just filled with the "corrected"
returns. One of these blank protocols was displayed at a press conference
by MPs Taras Stetskiv and Volodymyr Filenko.
The bribed members of election commissions were issued ballot slips where
the space opposite Yanukovych's name was marked with a dot. If a voter
ticked any other space, the extra mark in ballot slip made it invalid. The
variety of underhanded tricks and manipulations with ballots, vote
protocols, absentee voter certificates, voter lists, and ballot boxes is
practically boundless.
But all those falsifications are possible only if all the members of
election commissions and observers are in league. That is why the opposition
candidate's election staff is so concerned about replacing compromised
representatives in election commissions. A candidate for presidency has
the legal right to call off and replace his representatives, and such
replacements can help minimize garbling in the runoff.
LESSON NUMBER FOUR. The authorities did the best they could to feed
the public with the tale of their candidate's advantage for as long as
possible. Voter protocols from the eastern regions [where Yanukovych's
popularity rating was the highest] were the first to be processed. The
returns, which the CEC made public immediately, showed Yanukovych's
clear advantage. But as soon as the CEC started processing protocols from
other regions, the gap between them began to narrow quite visibly.
And it took the CEC longer and longer to update information on its website.
What was that, if not manipulating public opinion? But it was far more
important to influence civil servants of all levels - from clerks to
ministers, who are very sensitive to any changes in the compass on Ukraine's
political map. If the CEC had disseminated objective and timely information,
the balance would have hardly been in Yanukovych's favor.
The computer system, which was meant to ensure the most objective
counting of votes and which the CEC advertised so widely, discredited itself
completely. The official explanations of numerous discrepancies between
figures in vote reports gave rise to rumors about possibilities of remote
control of the computer system. The experts we consulted did not rule out
such possibilities.
And the Yushchenko election staff must be strongly against any other means
of counting votes but the traditional manual technique, after their central
server was hacked into and disabled on the morning of November 1. And
many couriers, who were supposed to deliver wet-sealed vote protocols
from polling stations to constituency election commissions, never turned up.
There must have been some insurmountable hurdles on their way.
Therefore, it is best to collect vote protocols and compare their data with
the official ones. Any discrepancy can substantiate a subsequent lawsuit.
Lesson number five. This lesson is the most important of all, and it was the
people who taught the authorities this lesson, not vice versa. The people
did not give in to bullying and provocations. The voters put up a strong
resistance to boorish pressure from the authorities and from hired mobsters.
At the Rivne airport, where "fellas" were going to land with "corrected"
protocols, local opposition activists managed to block the landing, so the
unwanted visitors had to make a U-turn. Observers from Donetsk were
welcomed so warmly in the Khmelnytsky region that they did not even drop
in at polling stations after a fat meal and plenty of strong drinks. And
where guys with a definitely criminal appearance threatened voters
physically, resistance groups of local sport school students rebuffed their
attempts to infringe on the voters' rights.
The people felt their strength, which is proven by the fact that even the
whole arsenal of means of pressure and falsifications did not help
Yanukovych win by a landslide in the first round. According to the official
returns of opinion polls before the election, 60 percent of Ukrainians
believed he would win, while Yushchenko was supposed to count on a mere
20 percent. Now the entire country can see that the two rivals' chances are
at least equal, all forces need to be consolidated to prevent and
effectively resist any dirty tricks. -30- [Action Ukraine Monitoring]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact: Olga Dmitricheva, editor@mirrow.kiev.ua
LINK: http://www.mirror-weekly.com/ie/show/520/48305/
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.212: ARTICLE NUMBER EIGHT
========================================================
8. SOME UKRAINIAN POLICE IN KHARKIV SAID TO PROTEST
ELECTION ABUSES IN ANONYMOUS LETTER TO RADA LYTVYN
UNIAN news agency, Kiev, in Ukrainian, 8 Nov 04
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Tue, Nov 09, 2004
KIEV - A number of police officers from Kharkiv region have reportedly
sent an anonymous letter to parliament speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn alleging
that violations occurred during the first round of the presidential election
on 31 October and calling on him to intervene to resolve the situation.
Among the abuses listed were ballot rigging, pressure on police officers to
vote for Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych by their superiors, extortion,
planting explosives on an opposition activist, and surveillance of
opposition MPs.
The signatories said that if they received adequate safety guarantees for
themselves and their families, they would reveal their identities and make
their allegations publicly. The following is the text of a report by
Ukrainian news agency UNIAN:
KHARKIV - Law enforcement officers from Kharkiv Region, who
wished to remain anonymous, have sent a letter to parliament speaker
Volodymyr Lytvyn, in which they list violations of election laws in the
region that occurred during the presidential election on 31 October.
The regional headquarters of [opposition presidential candidate] Viktor
Yushchenko told UNIAN that the authors of the letter, acting in accordance
with their duty and conscience, called on Lytvyn - as a representative of
the highest legislative authority in Ukraine - to intervene to resolve the
situation in the region.
AMONG THE VIOLATIONS LISTED IN THE LETTER ARE:
"The number of ballot papers brought to Kharkiv Region was 50 per cent
more than the total number of voters in the region. The day before the
election, on 30 October 2004, a sealed room was found in the executive
committee building in the town of Lozova (Kharkiv Region), where un-
counted ballot papers marked for presidential candidate Prime Minister
Viktor Yanukovych were stored. This room was sealed with the stamp
of the executive committee and was guarded by police officers. When
NGO representatives demanded that the room be opened, executive
committee employees refused. These ballot papers were later distributed
to polling stations and included in the vote count."
The police officers say that "the heads of the Kharkiv Region directorate
of the Interior Ministry played an active role [in this episode], and the
orders came from Kharkiv regional state administration".
The authors of the letter say: "Passport departments have form No 1, which
contains precise data on all voters, and the lists prepared there were sent
to territorial electoral commissions and, as a result, were deliberately
distorted. It was members of the territorial electoral commission who
introduced the errors."
"A large number of students from the Interior Ministry University were
sent to regions of Western Ukraine, all of them with at least 10 absentee
ballots. Travel and board were paid for each student, and they received
guarantees that they would pass their exams."
"In voting at psychiatric hospitals and old people's homes, ballots were
filled out by electoral commission officials or medical personnel, who
were ordered to vote for Viktor Yanukovych."
The authors of the letter say that ahead of the election, the heads of the
regional state administration "called in the heads of district
administrations in the city and region, and law enforcement officials, and
told them that if Viktor Yanukovych did not receive at least 60 per cent of
the vote in their areas there would be no need for them to go to work the
next day".
The authors of the letter also say that one of the heads of the Interior
Ministry directorate in Kharkiv Region "ordered the creation on the basis
of the Interior Ministry directorate of a group of police officers for
combating the election campaign of presidential candidate Viktor
Yushchenko". They were assigned to "find and destroy campaign
materials at warehouses and in vehicles".
In particular, the authors say that, on the orders of the heads of the
Interior Ministry directorate, "an operation was carried out in which an
explosive device was planted in the car of Viktor Yushchenko's proxy
Yuriy Potykun, which was then discovered in the presence of pre-arranged
witnesses".
"As a result, a criminal case was opened against an innocent person and an
arrest warrant was obtained," the law enforcement officers told Lytvyn.
[For this episode, see - TV 5 Kanal, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1400 gmt 20 Oct 04]
The authors of the letter report that ahead of the vote, one of the heads of
the Interior Ministry directorate and one of the heads of the Kharkiv city
police department "gathered personnel and ordered them to vote for Viktor
Yanukovych, requiring each police officer to fill out forms with their
personal data and that of their relatives, and of at least 15 people whom
they were ordered to persuade to vote for Yanukovych. All the forms were
collected by department heads and delivered to the personnel department."
"During the conduct of the election campaign, heads of the Interior Ministry
directorate repeatedly warned that if anyone was discovered not to have
voted for Viktor Yanukovych, they would immediately be dismissed," the
police officers say.
They go on to say: "On the orders of management, all operatives carried out
measures for financing Viktor Yanukovych's election campaign, and these
personnel in effect extorted money from businesses and transferred it to...
(a list of funds - UNIAN). These actions were carried out jointly with the
tax police."
The authors also state that they "possess information" that ahead of the
election, MP Sh. [as received] "organized groups of criminals and sent them
to Kiev where they were to carry out mass acts of provocation pretending
to be supporters of Viktor Yushchenko".
The authors also state that the leaders of the Interior Ministry directorate
ordered surveillance of [opposition] MPs Anatoliy Matviyenko and
Volodymyr Filenko, the heads of district headquarters, the leaders of
regional branches of opposition parties, and this "has continued until now".
The authors of the letter say that, in the region, "police have in effect
been turned into an instrument for suppressing the expression of voters'
choice", adding that "without additional safety guarantees" for their
families, they cannot make their statement "openly", since "democracy
and legality do not exist in Ukraine".
"However, if we receive guarantees, we are ready to publicly confirm all
that is said above in any place", the "employees of the law enforcement
bodies of Kharkiv Region who have signed the letter" say.
The head of the public relations centre of the Interior Ministry directorate
in Kharkiv Region, Larysa Volkova, told UNIAN: "Everything written in
the letter is completely untrue."
Volkova said that the employees of Kharkiv Region law enforcement bodies
who "allegedly wrote" to parliament speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn with a
request "to intervene in the name of the Ukrainian people in the situation
that has arisen in Kharkiv Region" would be "guaranteed safety if they have
the courage to give their names and not hide behind their anonymity". -30-
=======================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.212: ARTICLE NUMBER NINE
Additional names for the distribution list are always welcome
========================================================
9. UKRAINE: "MIXED REACTIONS TO BUSH'S RE-ELECTION"
Kuchma quick to congratulate Bush on second term
By Oleg Varfolomeyev, Eurasia Daily Monitor
Volume 1, Issue 122, The Jamestown Foundation
Washington, D.C., Monday, November 8, 2004
The news of George W. Bush's re-election has drawn scant comment from
Ukrainian policymakers. This is not surprising, given the fact that the U.S.
elections took place just two days after Ukraine's own crucial presidential
poll, whose first round ended in a draw between opposition leader Viktor
Yushchenko and Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych. The lack of comment
on the U.S. elections from Yushchenko's camp has been no surprise.
Yushchenko's rivals portray him as an American puppet, never missing an
opportunity to mention that his wife is a U.S. citizen. Consequently, he
very rarely speaks about the United States, seemingly to avoid supplying
his enemies with any pretext to accuse him of excessive sympathies with
America.
Outgoing President Leonid Kuchma, however, hurried to congratulate Bush
on his re-election. An official report on the congratulatory message, posted
on Kuchma's official web site, is dated 12:30 am Kyiv time on November
4, which means that Kuchma offered his congratulations to Bush before
Democrat John Kerry had conceded. "I am sure that under your active
guidance the U.S. will continue to be the global leader guarding peace,
stability, and democracy," Kuchma said. "No matter which complications
the current world faces, Ukraine will remain a reliable strategic partner of
America." But apart from Kuchma's congratulations, the Ukrainian
government ventured no comment on the U.S. election result.
Ukraine's mass media offered ample coverage of the U.S. elections, but
most newspapers and television news programs confined themselves to
quoting U.S. and European media, offering little or no editorial comment of
their own. Even the notoriously anti-Western 2000 and Kievsky Telegraf
weeklies did not go further than merely listing facts and figures about the
U.S. elections.
This was hardly a sign of a change to their editorial line, but rather the
consequence of their heavy focus on Ukraine's own elections. The
notoriously anti-American Inter TV, which is linked to Kuchma
administration chief Viktor Medvedchuk, offered its viewers a rather
curious bit of information: "Following Bush's victory, Australia and
Canada are bombarded with applications for asylum coming from the
U.S.," it said, quoting European media's sympathies with all the
"progressive" Americans, meaning those who voted for Kerry.
Ukrainian commentators concentrated on predicting the consequences of
Bush's victory for Ukraine's relations with the United States. "Relations
between America and Ukraine depend not on who becomes the U.S.
president, but on what will happen in Ukraine soon," cautioned Yevhen
Fedchenko of the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, a university known for its pro-
Western and pro-opposition sympathies, apparently meaning the outcome
of the November 21 presidential runoff. The parliamentary newspaper Holos
Ukrayiny offered comments by Volodymyr Malynkovych, a former editor
at the U.S.-financed Radio Liberty who is close to the Kuchma camp.
"There will be the same president and the attitude to Ukraine will remain
the same," he predicted.
"This is a superficial attitude, in my opinion, based on scarce knowledge of
Ukrainian realities. The U.S. will continue to be guided by the principle
according to which those who support them are good," he said. Oleksandr
Sushko, director of the Kyiv-based think tank Center for Peace, Conversion
and Foreign Policy, was less pessimistic. "If Ukraine's new government earns
a good reputation and avoids scandals, one can, without a doubt, expect
improvements in bilateral relations," Holos Ukrayiny quoted him as saying.
The pro-Yushchenko web site Ukrayinska pravda, however, openly mourned
Kerry's defeat, predicting that Bush's re-election would only make matters
worse for Ukraine. "The Bush administration will continue making efforts to
keep the mock anti-terror coalition, which Ukraine has joined, together. And
it will turn a blind eye to human rights abuses and encroachments on freedom
of speech in Ukraine," the website speculated. This gloomy prediction is in
line with the jealous mistrust of Bush's administration that is widespread
among Ukraine's liberal and nationalist opposition.
Many of those Ukrainians who oppose Kuchma's government believe that
Bush tacitly agreed to overlook corruption and undemocratic practices in
Kyiv in exchange for Kuchma's support for the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq.
"Ukraine's presence in Iraq will push it further away from Europe bringing
it closer to America. America's focus on Iraq will push Ukraine onto the
sidelines of U.S. foreign policy," Ukrayinska pravda continued. "During
Bush's first term, foreign aid to Ukraine shrunk by almost $100 million, and
it will shrink further. This will mean fewer exchanges between students,
teachers, military personnel, and parliamentarians," the opposition website
warned. (President.gov.ua, Ukrayinska pravda, Glavred.info, November 4;
Holos Ukrayiny, November 5; Inter TV, November 6). -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oleg Varfolomeyev is an editor with BBC Monitoring in Kyiv.
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.212: ARTICLE NUMBER TEN
Suggested articles for publication in the Report are always welcome
=========================================================
10.US ELECTIONS: A CERTAIN VICTORY BUT AN UNCERTAIN FUTURE
Two Major Issues for Ukraine
By James Sherr, Conflict Studies Research Centre
Defence Academy of the United Kingdom [1]
Zerkalo Nedeli, Mirror-Weekly in Russian and Ukrainian
English version obtained from the author by The Action Ukraine Report
Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, 6-13 November, 2004
The second term of an American president is invariably different from the
first. So the world hopes. The radical and audacious policies that
President Bush has thus far pursued might be good for the world, but there
are very few in the world who perceive this as yet. Forty-eight percent of
American voters do not perceive it, and in contrast to most previous
elections, a large proportion of this 48 percent voted against the incumbent
with foreboding and a resentment bordering on fury.
Even some who are congenitally to the right of centre voted for Bush with
apprehension or voted against him after the most wrenching of struggles with
their conscience. David Brooks, the thoughtful, conservative columnist of
The New York Times, wrote that he views Bush 'with a mixture of admiration,
frustration and anger'. In an endorsement of John Kerry that sounded more
like an indictment of him, the British weekly, The Economist (which sells
three times as many magazines in the United States as in Britain) said of
Bush, 'our confidence in him has been shattered'. Rarely have the policies,
the methods and the tone of a US president so polarised his own country and
the world.
The fact is that President Bush has secured a convincing victory in terms of
the states' 'electoral' votes (which constitutionally elect a president),
the numerical 'popular' vote (which confers legitimacy) and the two houses
of Congress (who decide whether many of the president's wishes become
reality). Before we think about the future, we need to ask why this
occurred. According to exit polls, the answer had little to do with
terrorism or the US economy (the two themes of the campaign) but nearly
everything to do with traditions and moral values.
Whilst opinion polls might reveal what people think, even the best of them
are notoriously poor at revealing why they think it. The newest 'data' are
but the latest indication that in this respect, exit polls are even worse
than other polls. The events which we have come to call '9/11' connected
the issues of terror, tradition and values in a way that few outside the
United States comprehend.
In the end, Senator Kerry did not make this connection with voters, and it
is unclear whether he ever really grasped it. His pronouncements on 'the
war on terror' and the war in Iraq were judicious and at times eloquent, but
there was little clarity or consistency to be found in them. His 20-year
Senate voting record - against many of the weapons systems employed in
the Iraq war; in favour of many of the restrictions which, prior to 9/11,
hampered the sharing of intelligence information - was nothing to boast
about, and he wisely decided not to boast about it.
He recently stated that terrorism could be reduced from a threat to a
'nuisance' by strengthening domestic and international law enforcement (it
can't) and by more investment in the security of government buildings,
waterways, bridges, airports and power plants (in short, by a new Maginot
line). In words that he must have regretted as soon as he uttered them, he
compared the control of terrorism to the control of prostitution and drugs.
As the British military historian, Sir Michael Howard once observed,
liberals find it difficult to believe that there is really an enemy. But as
Sir Michael knows better than most, this was not true of the post-Second
World War Democratic Party: the party of the Marshall Plan, the Berlin
Airlift, NATO, the US nuclear 'triad' and, fatefully, Vietnam. Yet it has
been all too true of the post-Vietnam Democratic Party, and it is not
incidental in this connection that John Kerry, a decorated soldier in the
Vietnam War became, to the incandescent indignation of many veterans, a
far more celebrated anti-war activist. In this election, the Democratic
Party desperately needed to prove to the voters that it had overcome
this legacy. It failed.
Its failure has secured the return of a Republican administration
far-reaching in its goals but limited in its perspective, alert to risk but
blind to complexity and apparently unwilling to accept that it has anything
of value to learn from people who think differently. Even before these
things became so apparent, Bush was branded as 'stupid' by many of his
detractors: a charge that is not only unthoughtful, but that misses the
point. By most accounts, he is highly intelligent and like many intelligent
politicians, shrewd. But he is unworldly and, in the literal meaning of the
term, simple-minded. As he famously remarked, 'I don't do nuance'. Yet
nuance has not always been thought of as one of the core virtues of a
commander, let alone a Commander-in-Chief in time of war. Incompetence
is a more damning charge, recently put by The Economist, and it has been
displayed on several occasions since Bush declared 'mission accomplished' in
Iraq in May 2003.
But whilst we have seen something of our elusive enemies' competence, we
know little of their incompetence, and it would not be the first time that
ignorance and uncertainty have led democracies to overestimate their enemies
at the height of war. A yet more dangerous deficiency than incompetence is
hubris (defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as 'insolent pride and
presumption'), for which Bush administration has been faulted by many,
including this writer (see ZN 41(466), 25 October 2003). Yet even this
needs to be put in perspective. The radical Islamists who carried out 9/11,
the Bali and Madrid bombings, the siege in Beslan and the beheadings in Iraq
suffer not only from hubris, but from fanaticism and sadism.
The recent video of the Anglo-Iraqi hostage, Margaret Hassan, was reportedly
so sadistic that even the coldly news conscious Arab television network, Al
Jazeera, refused to show it. Does all of this suggest that arrogance,
narrowness and brazenness are the necessary complements of courage, tenacity
and strength? The examples of Abraham Lincoln and Winston Churchill suggest
otherwise. But Lincoln and Churchill were not offered to the American
voters on 2 November 2004. Kerry and Bush were on offer. And so, 'we
have what we have'.
A DEAD END OR A FRESH START?
On the morrow of Bush's victory, it will not be surprising if the prevailing
counsels in Europe are counsels of despair. After all, if a flawed and
self-righteous government is rewarded by its electorate - and by a vastly
more healthy majority than it had before its flaws became apparent - won't
it be even less likely to correct these flaws than it was before? The first
thing that is wrong with such counsels is that they lead nowhere. The
second thing is that they simply are likely to prove wrong.
Even when things are going well in an American president's first term, no
decision of consequence can escape the scrutiny of those whose first concern
is ensuring that the president is re-elected for a second term. When things
go badly towards the end of the term, the imperatives of re-election narrow
everyone's focus, warp nearly every decision and distort almost every
judgement. During the past twelve months at least, too many things have
gone badly for the Bush administration, particularly in Iraq, and they
overshadowed the things that went well (e.g. the elections in Afghanistan,
which in defiance of nearly all the media punditry, took place without
intimidation or bloodshed and with widespread, intense voter participation).
As from 3 November, the pressure of re-election has lifted and these
distorting mirrors can be removed. So, at least, we have grounds to hope.
The second change and second basis for hope is that the balance of foreign
policy successes and failures can be looked at in foreign policy terms - and
in terms of the national interest of the United States - rather than in
terms of domestic policy. The third basis for hope is that the
administration knows that its foreign policy is in trouble. It has pushed
American 'hyperpower' to the limits, and it is feeling them. Taken in the
round, all three changes provide an opportunity for the major European
powers to regain their influence as serious partners.
To do this, however, they will have to be partners. They will also need to
conduct their own reassessments of how Bush's re-election changes the
international landscape, and they will need to do this without passion or
prejudice. The error that lay behind the arguments of several European
powers against war in Iraq was not that the arguments were necessarily
wrong, but that they were put in the context of 'multipolarity' and
opposition to the 'hyperpower' of the United States. Is the goal to
influence the United States or counter it? If the latter, then even with a
Democratic administration in power in Washington, it is questionable
how many European arguments would be listened to constructively.
There is a deeper issue. What is the practical alternative to American
'hyperpower'? Has the European Union presented such an alternative?
Who would seriously propose turning the EU into an alternative basis of
collective security and defence, and which European electorate would be
prepared to finance it? Is the conclusion not inescapable: that where
defence and security are now at stake - i.e. outside Europe - it is only the
United States that can provide the core of collective security and defence
for the foreseeable future
If these questions are of concern, then it stands to reason that Europe
should wish to ensure that Iraq does not become a quagmire for the United
States and a calamity for the Iraqi people. To ensure this and secure
influence, it also follows that Europe needs to help. The solution sought
by Kerry and by some Republicans - a further internationalisation of
Coalition forces - is yesterday's answer to yesterday's problem. Today's
problems are defeating the core of the insurgency (which, for practical
reasons, must fall on American and British shoulders) and ending the
occupation.
Within this schéma, would it not be advisable for Europe to strengthen
NATO's means of implementing its mandate to train Iraqi military and
security forces - and also establish, within the framework of the EU,
programmes designed to enhance the capacity of Iraqi law enforcement
and civil administration? Is it also not time to honour commitments to
Afghanistan?
Such steps would put old and new allies of the United States in a position
to make two cardinal points. First, a superpower is strongest when it acts
in accordance with collective interests, even when it makes compromises in
order to secure them, and it is wisest when it seeks external advice.
Second, a superpower, by definition, has a number of vital interests that
must engage its attention, not just one. No issue, no matter how grave, can
be allowed to become a cataract obstructing sight. Where Eurasia and
Ukraine are concerned, two issues have obstructed sight, and Ukraine might
need to play a role in restoring it.
ISSUES FOR UKRAINE
The FIRST is the Bush administration's far too inadequate appreciation of
the Black Sea region as an increasingly important strategic corridor
connecting the 'wider Europe' (of which Ukraine is a part) and the 'greater'
and more democratic Middle East, whose emergence the Bush administration
wishes to foster. The encouraging fact is that this burden can be shared,
because other members of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC),
some with easier access to key administration figures than Ukraine, are
capable of doing this effectively - and, not incidentally, documenting areas
where the interests of the Russian Federation differ from BSEC members
and documenting the methodology of Russian policy as well.
Yet sharing this burden will be delicate for Ukraine: not so much with
Georgia (whose interests are convergent and where cooperation needs to
expand) but with Romania (given the apparent immobility of current disputes)
and Turkey (some of whose Islamist political forces appear to see Crimea as
a potential base of influence).
The SECOND issue is Ukraine's own strategic role in the region. Even after
the preoccupation with Iraq diminishes, this could be more difficult with a
Bush administration than a Kerry administration, because President Bush
still views Putin narrowly through the prism of partnership in the 'war on
terror'. What is more, President Putin has done everything possible to
encourage him. He publicly endorsed Bush in the current election, and other
prominent Russians have spoken warmly of the administration's respect for
Russian interests, and, in contrast to Democrats, its lack of the
meddlesomeness in Russia's backyard and internal affairs.
In Ukraine as in Russia, serious misperceptions lie behind these views. Yet
here, too, there are delicacies. Bush does not like hearing ill of Putin,
and his current National Security Adviser (and possible future Secretary of
State), Condoleeza Rice, is believed to respect his wishes on this point.
Although she is not the advocate for Putin that she is sometimes made out to
be, she has had a long and obvious engagement with Russian affairs. Not all
of her interlocutors in Ukraine perceive that she approaches their country
with similar interest and understanding.
Nevertheless, at mid level in the National Security Council, the State
Department, Department of Defence and CIA, there are individuals who
come closer to doing so, and there are Republicans in Congress with a
similar cast of mind. Russia has long had a core of people able to engage
intelligently and persuasively with people in all branches and levels of the
US government. So, surprisingly, has Ukraine, but a large number of them
are outside government, and some are quite critical of it. Is the
government willing to enlist their services in the interests of the country?
In the answer to this question, much more is at stake than Ukraine's
relationship with the Bush administration.
Important as these issues are, the immediate issue is whether some forces in
Ukraine will see Bush's victory as a sign that Ukrainian democracy no longer
matters in the United States, only geopolitics. Some will point to
Rumsfeld's recent visit to Ukraine as evidence. They will forget, however,
that Rumsfeld's chief concern, Ukraine's commitment in Iraq, is a commitment
that they themselves threaten to terminate. The safest conclusion to draw
about any US administration is that the end of democracy in Ukraine would
bring an end to everything that Ukraine's authorities wish to strengthen in
the Ukraine-U.S. relationship.-30- [The Action Ukraine Monitoring]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Disclaimer: The views expressed are the author's and not necessarily
those of the UK Ministry of Defence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Sherr, Conflict Studies Research Centre, Defence Academy of
the United Kingdom, Camberly, Surrey, England; e-mail:
james.sherr@lincoln.oxford.ac.uk
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Sherr has worked on Ukrainian issues for many years especially
in the defence area, including NATO. He is an outstanding analyst and
speaker. He is in much demand as a speaker on issues related to Ukraine.
The Action Ukraine Report appreciates the assistance received from Jame
Sherr regarding the publication of his articles.
========================================================
ARTICLES ARE FOR PERSONAL AND ACADEMIC USE ONLY
Articles are Distributed For Information, Research, Education
Discussion and Personal Purposes Only
========================================================
Ukraine Information Website: http://www.ArtUkraine.com
========================================================
If you would like to read "THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-04
please send your name, country of residence, and e-mail contact information
morganw@patriot.net. Additional names are welcome. If you do not wish to
read "THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-04, around five times per week,
let us know by e-mail to morganw@patriot.net.
========================================================
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-2004 SPONSORS:
"Working to Secure Ukraine's Future"
1. THE ACTION UKRAINE COALITION (AUC): Washington, D.C.,
http://www.artukraine.com/auc/index.htm; MEMBERS:
A. UKRAINIAN AMERICAN COORDINATING COUNCIL,
(UACC), Ihor Gawdiak, President, Washington, D.C., New York, NY
B. UKRAINIAN FEDERATION OF AMERICA (UFA),
Zenia Chernyk, Chairperson; Vera M. Andryczyk, President; E.
Morgan Williams, Executive Director, Huntingdon Valley, Pennsylvania.
http://www.artukraine.com/ufa/index.htm
C. U.S.-UKRAINE FOUNDATION (USUF), Nadia Komarnyckyj
McConnell, President, Washington, D.C., Kyiv, Ukraine .
2. UKRAINE-U.S. BUSINESS COUNCIL, Kempton Jenkins,
President, Washington, D.C.
3. KIEV-ATLANTIC GROUP, David and Tamara Sweere, Daniel
Sweere, Kyiv and Myronivka, Ukraine, 380 44 295 7275 in Kyiv.
4. BAHRIANY FOUNDATION, INC. Dr. Anatol Lysyj, Chairman,
Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA,
5. ODUM- Association of American Youth of Ukrainian Descent,
Minnesota Chapter, Natalia Yarr, Chairperson
====================================================
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"
A Publication Supported Financially By Its Readers
Please add your name to our list of financial contributors!
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-04, is an in-depth news and
analysis international newsletter, produced by the www.ArtUkraine.com
Information Service (ARTUIS) and The Action Ukraine Report
Monitoring Service (TAURMS). The report is now distributed to several
thousand persons worldwide FREE of charge using the e-mail address:
ArtUkraine.com@starpower.net. This is the 212th Report issued so
far this year, out of the more than 240 to be issued in 2004.
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT" is supported through The Action
Ukraine Program Fund. Financial support from readers is essential to
the future of this Report. You can become a financial sponsor of The
Action Ukraine Program Fund. Individuals, corporations, non-profit
organizations and other groups can provide support for the expanding
Action Ukraine Program by sending in contributions.
Checks should be made out to the Ukrainian Federation of America,
(UFA), a private, not-for-profit, voluntary organization. The funds should
be designated for the Action Ukraine Program Fund (AUPF), and
mailed to Zenia Chernyk, Chairperson, Ukrainian Federation of
America (UAF), 930 Henrietta Avenue, Huntingdon Valley, PA
19006-8502.
For individuals a contribution of $45-$100 is suggested. Your contribution
to help build The Action Ukraine Program to support Ukraine and her
future is very much appreciated. -30-
=====================================================
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
=====================================================