Search site
Action Ukraine Report

"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 241
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, WEDNESDAY, December 1, 2004

NOTE: The Action Ukraine Report has increased its production
schedule because of the extraordinary events happening in Ukraine.
We are now publishing two Report's each day, whenever possible,
to try and keep up with the huge flow of very important articles.

-----INDEX OF ARTICLES-----
"Major International News Headlines and Articles"

1. "UKRAINIANS WILL NOT BE BROKEN"
OP-ED By Yuliya Tymoshenko
Daily Times, Pakistan, Thu, November 25, 2004
Jerusalem Post, Jerusalem, Israel, Mon, Nov 29, 2004

2. "THE ORANGE REVOLUTION WILL CHANGE EUROPE"
Polish News Bulletin, Warsaw, Poland, Wed, Dec 01, 2004

3. HERE THE CROWD IS THE KINGMAKER: THE PROTEST IS NO
LONGER ABOUT THE US OR RUSSIAN CANDIDATE, BUT
ENDING 12 YEARS OF MISRULE
COMMENT & ANALYSIS: Nick Paton Walsh in Kiev
The Guardian, London, United Kingdom, Mon, Nov 29, 2004

4. FAMILY PRESSURE ON KUCHMA TO END THE CRISIS:
BILLIONAIRE SON-IN-LAW BROUGHT INTO THE UKRAINIAN
FRAY AS SIGNS POINT TO A COMPRISE CANDIDATE
IN A RE-RUN PRESIDENT ELECTION
Nick Paton Walsh in Kiev
The Guardian, London, United Kingdom; Wed, Dec 01, 2004

5. POWELL USES QUIET DIPLOMACY TO INDUCE A NEW
RUSSIAN ATTITUDE TOWARD UKRAINE
George Gedda, AP Worldstream, Wednesday, Dec 01, 2004

6. RUSSIA'S OIL AND GAS POWER PUTIN'S AMBITIONS
WORLD BRIEFING: by Simon Tisdall
The Guardian, London, United Kingdom, Wed, Dec 01, 2004

7. UKRAINE POWER GAME MAKES LONDON
ENERGY INVESTORS SHUDDER
By Steve Hawkes, Evening Standard
London: KRTBN, UK, Tue, Nov 30, 2004

8.UKRAINE: POLITICAL DIVIDE TOOK ROOT CENTURIES AGO
Ukraine's east, west long pulled in opposite ways
BRIEFING By Anna Dolgov, Globe Correspondent
Boston Globe, Boston, Massachusetts, Wed, December 1, 2004

9. UKRAINE AT THE BRINK OF A BREAK-UP?
Talk of an east-west split in Ukraine is oversimplified and highly unlikely
ANALYSIS: By Gwendolyn Sasse, The Guardian
London, UK, Tuesday November 30 2004

10. "OLD RUSSIAN BEAR IS STIRRING AGAIN IN UKRAINE,
AND IT'S WEARING PUTIN'S FACE"
By Michael Grove, Irish Independent, Ireland, Tue, Nov 30, 2004

11. GO ORANGE!
"The people of Ukraine now control their destiny."
Interrogatory: Q&A by Kathryn Jean Lopez
With Bob Schaffer, former U.S. Congressman (R-CO)
National Review, NY, NY, Tue, November 30, 2004.

12. SECURITY FORCES BEGIN TO DEFECT TO YUSHCHENKO
By Taras Kuzio, The Eurasia Monitor
Volume 1, Issue 137, The Jamestown Foundation,
Washington, D.C., Wednesday, December 1, 2004
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 241: ARTICLE NUMBER ONE
========================================================
1. "UKRAINIANS WILL NOT BE BROKEN"

OP-ED By Yuliya Tymoshenko
Daily Times, Pakistan, Thu, November 25, 2004
Jerusalem Post, Jerusalem, Israel, Mon, Nov 29, 2004

The old axioms are true: Firmness can pay; resolution can see you through.
We who are struggling to maintain our democracy in Ukraine believe this.

Now more than ever we must believe this, for Russian troops wearing
Ukrainian uniforms have entered our country because Ukrainian soldiers
are refusing to carry out orders to crush those demonstrating to defend
our democracy.

We will need the solidarity of our neighbors, and of freedom-loving
peoples around the world, to assure that our democratic dreams are
realized in peace.

The struggle to secure the victory of Viktor Yushchenko - the true winner
in last Sunday's presidential election - as Ukraine's new president is not
one that we sought. But, that battle for our freedom having been imposed
upon us, we will not be found wanting in either courage or resolve.

The days and nights ahead will be difficult, and the secret presence of
Russian troops will make them all the more dangerous.

The forces of Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich foolishly stuffed ballots
and intimidated the country's electoral commission to an absurd degree.

They then tried to force the Ukrainian people to swallow this sham -
threatening to ban public gatherings, close our borders to new visa
seekers, and silence any word of our protests on television.

MORE AND more members of a governmental machine that thought it
could impose a fraudulent election on Ukraine's people are shying away
from imposing that choice by force. Members of the army, the security
services, and government officials are all balking at doing the bidding
of the Yanukovich clique.

Such a volatile ruling elite cannot be counted on to be consistent from
now on. The way ahead is a minefield. We recognize that an unstable
government can swing back to uncompromising intransigence.

It will try to erode our support by infiltrating our protests with loyalists
who will carry the virus of defeatism, and it will seek to outflank us by
appealing to ordinary, hard-working Ukrainians, worried about feeding
and clothing their children, telling them that a tottering economy needs
stability to be saved.

It will try to divide the country between Russian and Ukrainian speakers.
But it is too late for divide and misrule strategies to work.

Ukrainians know that the choice they make now - their decision to stand
firm with Viktor Yushchenko today - will determine their freedom forever,
as well as the health of their nation; its independence as well as its
economic strength.

So we will stand firm in the cold and the snow to see that our democratic
choices are respected. To do otherwise is to surrender not only our
freedom, but our hopes for better lives.

We defy those who seek to corrupt our democracy; but we stand with
the hand of friendship extended to all of our neighbors, including Russia.

It has no reason to intervene. A vibrant Ukrainian democracy will need
the comradeship of Russia and of Europe to build the kind of society our
people desire.

Our boldness is tinged with realism. By securing our democracy, we help
secure Russia's own. For we are engaged not in revolution, but in peaceful
democratic evolution.

Ukrainians have endured the worst man can do to his fellow man: Stalin's
orchestrated famines of the 1930s and the Nazi slaughterhouse of World
War II. So do not doubt our ability to endure and stand firm. We shall
persist, and our democracy shall prevail.

Stand with us.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yuliya Tymoshenko, a former deputy prime minister of Ukraine, is the
co-chairman with Viktor Yushchenko, of Ukraine's political opposition
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_26-11-2004_pg3_7
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.241: ARTICLE NUMBER TWO
========================================================
2. "THE ORANGE REVOLUTION WILL CHANGE EUROPE"

Polish News Bulletin, Warsaw, Poland, Wed, Dec 01, 2004

Kiev sings, Kiev chants, Kiev waves flags. It is history in the making, seen
by the eyes of Europe. Thanks to the orange revolution, Ukraine, a
forgotten, peripheral country on Europe's fringes has been transformed into
a battlefield for democracy, where the world's superpowers try to mark out
their political and cultural influence. It appears that a number of
politicians have suddenly realized a fact which in Warsaw has been clear for
years that Ukraine is not a dilapidated post-Soviet province attached to a
huge Russia but a crucial, culturally rich area whose independence is worth
struggling for.

No matter how this revolution will end, it is certain that after it Europe
will have changed. Russia's attitude towards Ukraine, relations between the
states of the "old" and the "new' EU, and most of all Ukraine itself, will
all be entirely different.

The orange revolution is Ukraine's success but at the same time it has had
a great impact on relations within the European Union. It is highly possible
that Poland's position will strengthen. Warsaw has advocated Europe's
openness to Ukraine for years. These efforts frequently encountered
criticism from the "old" union, for whom the term "eastern policy" was a
synonym of contacts with the Kremlin. The Ukrainian protest must have
made a number of sceptics aware that Poland's belief in Ukraine's
significance in the east was not a mere fantasy.

Secondly, the Kremlin's policy of blatantly interfering in Ukraine's
internal affairs and supporting undemocratic forces there, have weakened the
credibility of arguments, which can often be heard on the west, that Poland
and Lithuania's attitudes are dictated by anti-Russian grudges and
obsessions. Yet on Friday, which is the same day that Poland's diplomatic
efforts involving the former president Lech Walesa and the incumbent
president Aleksander Kwasniewski had a huge success leading to round-table
talks in Kiev, the Italian "La Republica" wrote: "Europe should not allow to
be driven by the diplomatic strategies of Warsaw and Vilnius, because these
capitals of the new Europe see any crisis which may further reduce Russia's
influence on a neighbouring country, in a positive light."

Meanwhile, Warsaw turned out to be the main mediator and efficient arbiter
in the Ukrainian conflict. It is vital for Poland, which aspires to the role

of a crucial player in the EU's eastern policy and demands Brussels to
acknowledge its competence in this field. Mediation success in Kiev proves
this is not merely a premature ambition. Thus, the European Union has a new
significant player in the pursuit of Europe's stability. This is a Poland
which Brussels is not familiar with. This is not the Poland, which against
the majority of the "old" union supported the United States and set off for
war in Iraq.

Neither is it that Poland, which hysterically demanded war reparations from
allied Germany or threatened to die for the Nice Treaty. All these were
against the stance of most EU's countries and Poland's own public opinion.
So far, critics have claimed that Poland enjoys the status of a big country
because of its area and population. Now, it has become politically mature.

It seems doubtful that many people in Brussels have heard of Jerzy Giedroyc.
Therefore the west may not know that the events of the last week were the
triumph of a thought expressed by him over half a century ago. Giedroyc was
the first to break the taboo and say that Poles, in their own interest,
should abandon their claims to Poland's former eastern lands. Although Lvov
and Vilnius are dear to the hearts of Poles, he said it is necessary to give
them up for the sake of good relations with Ukraine and Lithuania.

Friendly relations with those countries are the best safeguard against the
expansionist ambitions of Russia. Giedroyc's idea initiated years ago, now
bears fruit in the form of a huge crowd of Ukrainians on Kiev's streets
chanting "Poland, Poland!"Giedroyc was right. Poland lost its lands in the
east but gained allies and friends there. It is a rewarding exchange, not
only for Poland, but for the whole continent. -30-
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.241: ARTICLE NUMBER THREE
========================================================
3. HERE THE CROWD IS THE KINGMAKER: THE PROTEST IS NO
LONGER ABOUT THE US OR RUSSIAN CANDIDATE, BUT
ENDING 12 YEARS OF MISRULE

COMMENT & ANALYSIS:
Nick Paton Walsh in Kiev
The Guardian, London, United Kingdom, Mon, Nov 29, 2004

Who could want to be a revolutionary these days? For a start, your task
is to bring down some of the world's most resiliently corrupt and dirty
regimes. Secondly, you have to court an expansionist White House, or
dissidents with their own agenda, to stump up the cash. And once you have
the critical mass on the streets, you have to fend off a broad onslaught on
your financing and motives.

Such should not be the lot of the hundreds of thousands who, in temperatures
of minus 10, have stood out for a week to try and bring about change.
Ukraine's political elite has barely changed since independence from the
Soviet Union in 1992. These people are tired of the old post-Soviet ways.

The past week in Kiev has ignited the imagination of the international media
about a renewed spat between Russia and the west. In the opening days, the
crowds were fuelled by the alleged dirty tricks that had deprived the west's
clear favourite, Viktor Yushchenko, of the presidency. Yet since the
government declared its prime minister, Viktor Yanukovich, to be the winner,
their mood has changed. This protest is no longer about America's or
Russia's candidate, but an end to the past 12 years of misrule.

This change partly undermines complaints that Yushchenko has strong links
with Washington (true), or that the US state department has poured millions
into the "Free Election" campaign (true), which can only really benefit the
opposition.

The crowd has become the kingmaker, not Washington. Yushchenko is
just the opportunist profiting from that awakening. In fact, the two
Viktors, before Moscow and Washington hijacked their campaigns, were
not proposing radically different programmes. Both, for example, said
they would pull Ukrainian troops out of Iraq very soon. The main
difference is that Yushchenko is more free-market than Yanukovich,
who prefers Soviet-style command economics.

Yet given how Ukraine is slowly heading west in terms of the speed of its
economic growth, and how perilously reliant on natural resources Moscow's
budget now is, Ukraine needs Yushchenko's approach if it is to reform.

But still the anti-opposition campaign continues. Elements of the liberal
western media - most recently John Laughland, on these pages - have hinted
at the nascent nationalism and antisemitism of the crowds that have gathered
on Kreshatik. But standing in the centre of Kiev amid an enormously chaotic,
often drunk, yet always peaceful, crowd, it is hard to feel the hot breath
of extremism down your neck.

It is true that Ukrainian nationalists in the west have tried to ride on the
coat-tails of the opposition movement. Some, like the ultra-nationalist
Una-Unso group, have been distanced. Others have been told to modify their
statements. In Britain, we do not write off as racist Michael Howard because
of a Tory backbencher's backward views on immigration.

There is also a bizarre belief that Ukraine, which has been occupied or
controlled by Moscow since the 17th century, does not have the right to
independent status; that Yushchenko's pro-Ukrainian rhetoric is dangerous
"nationalism". But is being Ukrainian really such a bad thing? Ethnic Tatars
in the Crimea do not seem to think so. They have backed Yushchenko.

The genuine popular backing for Yanukovich has been woefully overestimated.
The only real sense of conviction from his side comes from miners who fear
Yushchenko will shut the old, dangerous mines (he probably will and should).

Otherwise it's hard to get into a discussion with many in the Yanukovich
crowd about his policies. I tried to once with Seriozh, 23, a driver from
Dnipropetrovsk. He was led away by a drunken superior as he struggled to
find an answer.

The pro-opposition media is ridiculously partisan, but Yanukovich took over
the national media to boost his electoral campaign. He has hired DBC, a PR
firm headed by an ex-Washington lobbyist, to spam journalists on his behalf.
They circulated a report by the British Helsinki Human Rights Group that,
contradicting most countries bar China, Russia, Belarus and the central
Asian states, said the election was fair.

It is hard, particularly since the grotesque abuse of the democratic cause
witnessed in the occupation of Iraq, to retain any respect for the western
export or support of democracy. Uzbekistan, a brutal US-backed regime, is
testimony to how fickle American values can be in the former Soviet Union.

Yet Independence Square is a warming experience. People are, for the first
time, realising how they could one day have a government whose main interest
is not stealing from state coffers and protecting favoured oligarchs, but
actually representing the people who elected them. For most people, this is
a first taste of real self-determination.

Some of the crowd come out with pro-freedom epithets that would make
White House speechwriters proud. The difference is that they seem genuinely
to believe in them. Our loss of faith in these values should not condemn
their enjoyment of them. -30- [Action Ukraine Monitoring Service]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nick Paton Walsh is the Guardian's Moscow correspondent. He can be
contacted at nick.walsh@guardian.co.uk.
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.241: ARTICLE NUMBER FOUR
========================================================
4. FAMILY PRESSURE ON KUCHMA TO END THE CRISIS:
BILLIONAIRE SON-IN-LAW BROUGHT INTO THE UKRAINIAN
FRAY AS SIGNS POINT TO A COMPROMISE CANDIDATE
IN A RE-RUN PRESIDENT ELECTION

Nick Paton Walsy in Kiev, The Guardian
London, United Kingdom; Wed, Dec 01, 2004

KIEV - Opposition protesters forced their way into the parliamentary
building before a scheduled vote of no confidence in the government
yesterday in an attempt to break the 10-day political deadlock which has
paralysed the country. About 100 protesters burst into the lobby, urged by
the opposition MP Yulia Tymoshenko to blockade government buildings.
"We are here to make Yushchenko our president," said Igor, 23.

Yena, 42, stood at the doors and said: "We've stood in the ice for two
weeks and will not leave until we get the [no confidence vote]. If not, we
will storm the building. The police will not stop us, and if they use force,
we will use force too."

Close relatives of the outgoing president, Leonid Kuchma, were asked to
intervene to persuade him to end the crisis. Oleg Ribachuk, head of the
Ukrainian opposition campaign, said he took Viktor Pinchuk, Mr Kuchma's
billionaire son-in law and a key backer of the prime minister Viktor
Yanukovich, for a walk through streets crammed with anti-government
protesters early yesterday morning. "I walked with him through the streets
of Kiev last night to show him that the protesters are not children or
drunks," he told the Guardian.

"Kuchma is becoming more aware about what is really happening out there."
He said there was growing pressure on Mr Kuchma, and described last night's
presidential statement, in which he acknowledged that there might have to be
a new election, as a remarkable climb-down.

He said: "I have been talking to close members of his family. They asked me
how we would react if the supreme court said Mr Yanukovich was the clear
winner. I said that the president, who created this system, would have the
finger pointed at him." Mr Pinchuk is thought to be open to negotiations on
a Yushchenko presidency.

The attempt to sway Mr Kuchma's family coincided with signs that Mr
Yanukovich's campaign was splitting. The head of the campaign, Sergey
Tyhypko, resigned on Monday and declared that the crowd consisted of
"volunteers" who "needed as much assistance as possible". He said the
attempts by Mr Yanukovich's backers to stir talk of secessionism in the east
were "insanity". "He was abandoning a sinking ship," the pro-opposition
analyst Markian Bilynskyj said.

Mr Tyhypko has suggested that he rather than Mr Yanukovich might stand
against Mr Yushchenko if another election were held. Some analysts have
suggested that if it were agreed to re-run the election with the previous
candidates barred Mr Tyhypko might emerge as a consensus candidate
to end the crisis.

Mr Bilynskyj said Mr Yanukovich's extraordinary suggestion yesterday that
if he became president Mr Yushchenko could be his prime minister was
"bizarre". He added that Mr Yanukovich had also promised to institute
constitutional reform that would make the prime minister more powerful
than the president.

Mr Ribachuk said the prime minister was "talking nonsense that no one
understands. His wife has been coming up with some crazy stuff about
oranges having a psychotropic effect. "It's getting crazy here [in
parliament]. I couldn't stand it a few hours ago and had to leave the
building for a coffee."

Mr Kuchma's acceptance of the need for a new election came hours after
he spoke to the US secretary of state, Colin Powell. The US is considering
blacklisting Mr Kuchma and key members of his government, according to
a Kiev source close to the process. That would limit their freedom to travel
and freeze their assets in the US. "At the moment the list is a negotiating
tool," the source said. The US embassy declined to comment.

But Petro Poroshenko, an MP, confectionery millionaire and one of Mr
Yushchenko's moderate advisers, said the US had not swayed Mr Kuchma.
He told the Guardian: "I do not know what Mr Powell said, but I do not think
that [the acceptance of the need for a new election] was connected to it.

He had already shown signs yesterday morning and the day before that he
had a way out of the crisis." A new election was "the only way to make the
authority of the government legitimate". -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINK: www.guardian.co.uk/ukraine
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.241: ARTICLE NUMBER FIVE
Please send us names for the free distribution list
========================================================
5. POWELL USES QUIET DIPLOMACY TO INDUCE A NEW
RUSSIAN ATTITUDE TOWARD UKRAINE

George Gedda, AP Worldstream, Wednesday, Dec 01, 2004

One can only wonder what Secretary of State Colin Powell thinks of the
Russian attempt to tilt the Ukraine election toward the pro-Moscow prime
minister, Viktor Yanukovych. While decrying what he considers widespread
fraud in the elections, Powell has said nothing about Russia's position. His
view is that quiet diplomacy is the best hope to induce the Russians to
shift course and contribute to a democratic outcome in Ukraine, a former
republic of the Soviet Union.

Former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski is less constrained.
"The stakes are of truly historic proportions," Brzezinski said last week in
discussing what he sees as a Russian power grab in Ukraine. "If Ukrainian
democracy prevails, Russia has no choice but to go to the West and to be
a democracy," Brzezinski told a gathering at the American Enterprise
Institute. "If Ukraine democracy fails, Russia and imperial ambitions are
awakened."

Much like Brzezinski, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger believes
Moscow's propensity for acquiring client states was undiminished by the
collapse of the Soviet empire 15 years ago.

Secretary of State-designate Condoleezza Rice will have no trouble picking
up on Russia policy where Powell leaves it. Russia has been a passion of
hers for years. A Russian-speaker, Rice spent two years working at the
National Security Council on Soviet issues for the first President George
H.W. Bush.

Powell and his administration colleagues play down the idea that Ukraine
represents a sphere-of-influence contest between Washington and Moscow.

Dan Fried, a former U.S. ambassador to Poland and now a top NSC
official, said, "It is not for us to make this an East-West issue. This is a
fight about democracy. "We are not going to make this about Russia or
any other country. I think that all democratic nations should support the
principle and practice of democracy in Ukraine."

Russian President Vladimir Putin has made clear all along his preference for
Yanukovych over his Western-oriented opponent, Viktor Yushchenko.
Buoyed by the Ukrainian electoral commission's ruling on Nov. 21 that
Yanukovych had won, Putin sent him a congratulatory note. He ignored
findings by American and European monitors of massive election-day fraud
and abuse.

Russian state television, seen by many in Ukraine, campaigned relentlessly
for Yanukovych. The Ukrainian opposition claims that Russia provided
some $300 million (Euro 225 million) to Yanukovych's campaign.

Still, Russia is showing signs that it is not interested in having a
political crisis on its western border in one of Europe's largest countries.
State Department officials say Russia seems interested in a peaceful,
democratic end to the crisis, now in its 10th day.

Russia already plays a dominant role in neighboring Belarus, where voters
extended the term of pro-Moscow President Alexander Lukashenko in
October in a referendum that European monitors said was neither free nor
fair. Lukashenko wants to reunite his country with Russia. Yanukovych
seeks an open borders policy with Russia as part of a broader eastward
orientation.

Russia's defenders reject the notion the country acts not much differently
from the Soviets. They note that Moscow put up little fuss when former
East Bloc nations joined NATO. Nine have done so since 1998.

Russia also has shown a cooperative spirit on a number of issues of keen
interest to Washington. Like the United States, Moscow supports a
denuclearized North Korea and is involved in six-party talks to get it. It
also has trimmed nuclear cooperation with Iran and is a partner with the
United States in seeking an Israeli-Palestinian settlement.

In 2002, the United States and Russia agreed to reduce their stockpile of
deployed strategic nuclear weapons by two-thirds within 10 years, to between
1,700 and 2,200 each. Powell wants nothing to jeopardize these examples of
Russian cooperation. But the warmth is not what it was three years ago when
Bush said of Putin after a meeting in Slovenia: "I was able to get a sense
of his soul, a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of
his country." -30- [The Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.241: ARTICLE NUMBER SIX
Your comments about the Report are always welcome
========================================================
6. RUSSIA'S OIL AND GAS POWER PUTIN'S AMBITIONS

WORLD BRIEFING: by Simon Tisdall
The Guardian, London, United Kingdom, Wed, Dec 01, 2004

Plans by the Moscow-based company Gazprom to provide 10% of Britain's
natural gas requirements by 2010 underline Russia's growing international
importance as an energy supplier. Oil and gas bring political and economic
clout. And they are fuelling a revival in Russia's great-power ambitions.
Governments in western Europe inclined to criticise President Vladimir
Putin's interference in neighbours such as Ukraine or abuses in Chechnya
may have second thoughts in future as their energy dependency grows.

American qualms about the Kremlin's authoritarianism or its support for
Iran may be more readily suppressed when Russia's position as the
world's largest gas exporter and second largest oil exporter is factored in.
At the launch of the UK's international energy strategy last month, the
foreign secretary, Jack Straw, made no bones about Britain's vulnerability
in this field.

"As North Sea reserves are run down, we are likely to become net
importers of gas by 2006 and of oil by 2010," Mr Straw said. "By 2020
we will probably be importing three-quarters of our primary energy needs."
Britain's economy, public services and security relied on "secure and
affordable energy supplies", he said.

What holds true for Britain holds true for its main allies. While Russia is
12th in the list of US oil suppliers, its output and proven reserves of 60bn
barrels give it enormous leverage in the international marketplace.
Any serious reduction of Russian exports in the fore seeable future would
send benchmark prices, already at record levels this year, to fresh highs,
with damaging results for US and global growth.

Ironically, the unreliability of oil supplies from Iraq, caused by the US
occupation, has increased American reliance on alternative sources such as
Russia. The same applies to other big economies dependent on imported
energy such as Japan and India.

Russia is not the only energy exporter whose political fortunes have
improved as a result of high demand and rising prices. Iran is currently
building an alliance with China, having become Beijing's second-largest
oil supplier. Tehran said this week that China has promised to block any
punitive UN action over its nuclear programmes.

After recent political upheavals, Venezuela, America's fourth biggest
supplier of crude oil in 2003, is undergoing an economic boom. Its
left-leaning president, Hugo Chavez, has raised public spending by 50%
this year. This is taking the political heat away from him at home and in
Washington.

But if energy is synonymous with confidence, then Russia is the prime
example. Mr Putin is benefiting from soaring receipts which have boosted
Russia's foreign reserves this year to a record $112bn and produced a
fifth consecutive budget surplus.

This windfall places Mr Putin's moves to centralise power and expand
state control over the industrial sector, including the oil giant Yukos, in
a different context. From this confidence comes a growing expectation
that Mr Putin will change the constitution to allow him to stay in power,
although not necessarily as president.

After what he saw as the national humiliations of the Yeltsin era, Mr
Putin's aim, since his election in 2000, has been to restore Russia's
great power status.

His claim earlier this month to be developing a world-beating nuclear
missile system fits the bill. So, too, do Moscow's attempts to direct events
in Ukraine, which depends largely on Russia for its energy supplies. Mr
Putin is also using discounted sales of oil and gas to former Soviet
republics in central Asia as a means of maintaining Russia's sway over
its "near abroad".

A petition signed by more than 100 international VIPs in September,
including the former Czech president Vaclav Havel and US senator
John McCain, accused Mr Putin of undermining Russian democracy.
His foreign policy, it said, was characterised by "a threatening attitude
towards Russia's neighbours" backed by "the rhetoric of militarism and
imperialism". But empires do not run on air.

If the petitioners' fears are justified, it may be that black gold,
converted to red gold, is to blame. (www.guardian.co.uk/russia)
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.241: ARTICLE NUMBER SEVEN
Your comments about the Report are always welcome
========================================================
7. UKRAINE POWER GAME MAKES LONDON
ENERGY INVESTORS SHUDDER

By Steve Hawkes, Evening Standard
London: KRTBN, UK, Tue, Nov 30, 2004

The City is watching the political crisis in Ukraine with bated breath as
the fallout over the Presidential election draws attention to the pivotal
role the country plays in the European energy market.

More than 100 billion cubic metres of gas -- enough to supply the whole of
Britain -- criss-crosses Ukraine every year, as well as one million barrels
of oil a day. The majority comes from Russia and heads to the West.

The outcome of the struggle between the rival political camps could have
a huge outcome on the expansion plans of Russian energy giant Gazprom,
which wants a stake in Ukraine's pipeline system.

Observers claim a ruling party hostile towards the Kremlin could choose to
ramp up transit fees for Russian exports or switch to running oil and gas
from the Caspian and such countries as Azerbaijan.

Erik Mielke, analyst at Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein, said: "If there was
to be a regime change, the challenge for Gazprom would be to re-establish
connections with a new ruling class."

The political element to the energy sector has already emerged, with reports
that State-owned energy firm Naftogaz Ukrainy bussed staff around the
country to vote for disputed winner Viktor Yanukovich on election day.

More worryingly for investors in London, the crisis may also have
far-reaching repercussions for quoted oil minnows Regal Petroleum and
JKX Oil & Gas. Regal is sheltered, to an extent, by the size of its
operations in Greece this year, but JKX is centred almost exclusively
on Ukraine.

Shares in JKX have rocketed this year, but wobbled last week after the
announcement of a new licence deal sparked fears among investors about
the company's exposure to the crisis.

JKX has suffered a series of spats over late payments and three years ago
had to fight off an attempt by a State agency to expropriate its assets. Its
main operation is Poltava Petroleum, 350 kilometres to the south of Kiev,
which has reserves of more than 260 billion cubic feet of gas.

A spokesman for chief executive Paul Davies insisted the economy was
"ticking over" despite the political row, but analysts are more concerned,
given outgoing President Leonid Kuchma's warning that Ukraine's financial
system may collapse "like a house of cards" within days.

One analyst said: "All the risks are currently on the downside." -30-
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.241: ARTICLE NUMBER EIGHT
=========================================================
8. UKRAINE: POLITICAL DIVIDE TOOK ROOT CENTURIES AGO
Ukraine's east, west long pulled in opposite ways

BRIEFING By Anna Dolgov, Globe Correspondent
Boston Globe, Boston, Massachusetts, Wed, December 1, 2004

KIEV -- The roots of Ukraine's political crisis lie in a centuries-old
divide between the country's east and west, a split between two cultures,
two languages, and two histories within the same nation.

Ukraine's east as been dominated by Moscow for centuries, as part of the
Russian Empire and later the Soviet Union, and the Kremlin modeled the
region after Russian provinces. Its people speak Russian, though with a
Ukrainian accent, often consider themselves Russians, and voted
overwhelmingly for a Moscow-backed candidate, Viktor Yanukovych, in
last month's presidential election.

Ukraine's west has always looked toward Europe. The region was part of
Poland from the 14th to the late 18th century, and of the Austro-Hungarian
empire, which took it over and held it until the end of World War I. Since
then, what is now western Ukraine went through a swift succession of rulers
and governments: a brief period of independence, then Polish control again,
a Soviet invasion, a Nazi occupation, and then the Soviets retook the region
despite strong resistance and held it until the Soviet Union collapsed in
1991. In the presidential balloting, the region largely voted for
Western-leaning challenger Viktor Yushchenko.

Electoral officials announced that Yushchenko lost, but after Western
observers and governments dismissed the vote as rigged, Yushchenko
supporters have taken to the streets. Now Ukraine is torn along its
geographical divide, and Russian officials have been adding fuel to
suggestions that Ukraine may break up.

Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov attended a political congress Sunday in eastern
Ukraine, where leaders of several provinces had declared secession plans,
and said that he saw "constructive forces" at work in the region, Russian
news agencies reported.

"Moscow is eager to preserve its influence over Ukraine, and a Ukraine
without its western parts would be much more pro-Russian," said
independent Russian political analyst Alexander Pikayev.

Moscow has intervened heavily throughout the presidential race, fighting to
gain the East's vote for Kremlin-backed Yanukovych. Russian President Putin
flew to Ukraine ahead of each round of voting to openly back Yanukovych,
and Moscow sent top political consultants to Kiev. State-controlled Russian
television networks unabashedly promoted Yushchenko and accused his
challenger of radical nationalism and plans to discriminate against Russian
speakers.

Russia has strong reasons for wanting Ukraine under its control. Ukraine is
bigger in size than France, has a population of 48 million, and a strategic
position between Russia and the rest of Europe. It's a huge market for
Russian businesses, and an especially valuable one for the weaker of
Russia's industrial giants, such as its car makers, whose models haven't
improved much since the Soviet days. These firms can find few customers in
Europe and are even losing customers in an increasingly demanding Russia,
where buyers opt for foreign models despite huge import taxes that bloat the
price.

To many Ukrainians, Yanukovych epitomizes Ukrainian corruption and its
clan-based economy. He is a native of the eastern Donetsk region. The
departing president, Leonid Kuchma, had close ties with Russia and managed
a factory that made SS-20 missiles during the Soviet era. He had to learn to
speak Ukrainian after he became president of Ukraine in 1994. Kuchma's
presidency became linked in the minds of many Ukrainians with corruption
and clannish crime rings.

While Russian campaigning for Yanukovych may have paid off in the east,
it appears to have backfired in western Ukraine, where people resent the
Kremlin's penchant for treating their country as if it were Moscow's
backyard. Western Ukrainians want their country to be truly independent
of the giant to the east that has dominated Ukraine since the Middle Ages.

They see Western-oriented Yushchenko as a chance for integration into the
economic processes of Europe and the United States, even though they
expect to be treated as inferior partners.

"It's better to be a colony of America than of Russia," said a Kiev cab
driver, Oleg Ostapenko, adding a few expletives for emphasis.

Eastern Ukraine, meanwhile, worries about a rise of sentiments against
ethnic Russians or Russian-speakers -- a fear that the Kremlin-controlled
media has tried to boost, even though they failed to present any evidence
of anti-Russian attitudes among the opposition.

The east also pins its economic hopes on Russia. The Soviets did more than
impose their language and culture on eastern Ukraine, they turned it into a
heavily industrialized region, a land of coal mines and metallurgical
plants.

In contrast with the drab Soviet architecture of the east, the cobble-stoned
streets of western Ukraine's cities are still lined with Hapsburg facades
and Roman Catholic cathedrals. The West is graceful and elegant, but also
underemployed and poor, and taking pride in its European-influenced culture.
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.241: ARTICLE NUMBER NINE
Suggested articles for publication in the Report are always welcome
=========================================================
9. UKRAINE AT THE BRINK OF A BREAK-UP?
Talk of an east-west split in Ukraine is oversimplified and highly unlikely

ANALYSIS: By Gwendolyn Sasse, The Guardian
London, UK, Tuesday, November 30 2004

The mass protests following the second round of the presidential elections
on November 21 have brought Ukraine to the most decisive moment since
gaining independence in 1991. Much of the discussion surrounding the
disputed election portrays an image of the east-west political split of the
country along ethno-linguistic lines or a Russian-western conflict over
Ukraine. A violent break-up of the country is presented as the worst-case
scenario.

These views are reminiscent of the debates over the future of Ukraine in the
early 1990s. We seem to have come full circle. The circularity of the
analysis on Ukraine is epitomised by the revival of cold war rhetoric among
Western observers, depicting Ukraine as the battleground for US-EU and
Russian influence and interests. This polarised image is underpinned by
over-simplistic representations of Viktor Yushchenko as "pro-western" and
his opposite, Viktor Yanukovych, as "pro-Russian".

Moreover, the cold war rhetoric overestimates western leverage in Ukraine.
After all, the west has been hesitant in its engagement with Ukraine for
most of the last 13 years, and the EU has kept Ukraine at arm's length in
the debates over enlargement.

Most importantly, much of the recent discussion about Ukraine misses the
key point about the current impasse in Kiev, namely that this is a political
standoff over domestic political issues (the Kuchma regime, corruption,
oligarchic influence, media controls etc).

The country's potential disintegration, however, is a more complex issue. It
raises the prospect of major instability on the EU's new eastern border.
Again, however, the prospect of an actual partition of Ukraine - along the
lines of support for Yushchenko and Yanukovych - is overblown and is as
unlikely now as it was in the early to mid-1990s.

In its 1991 borders, independent Ukraine is a historical novelty. Four
empires - Habsburg, Russian, Ottoman and Soviet - left their mark on
different parts of Ukraine and made regional differences one of its most
prominent characteristics. They include ethno-linguistic, religious,
socio-economic and political differences.

However, a necessary emphasis on the regional factor in Ukrainian politics
neither calls Ukraine's territorial integrity into question, nor precludes
successful state- and nation-building. In fact, the regional factor has also
had a stabilising effect, given that whoever rules in Kiev has had to
balance diverging regional political and economic interests and search for
compromises. Ethno-linguistic differences between Russians and Ukrainians,
or Russian speakers and Ukrainian speakers, tend to be overemphasised by
western observers. These categories are not mutually exclusive and do not
make for clear-cut political allegiances. Nor is religion a clear ethnic or
political marker.

Socio-economic differences, heightened by the legacies of Soviet-era
economic planning, provide for the most potent divisions in Ukraine. While
it is hard to describe Ukraine's eastern regions as an economic powerhouse,
the west is clearly dependent on the east. The north-western and central
regions are primarily agricultural, whereas the east is Ukraine's old
industrial heartland where the coal mines, steel industry and the once
powerful military-industrial complex are located.

The eastern regions are also the home base of many of Ukraine's influential
oligarchs who have supported outgoing president Leonid Kuchma and
Yanukovych. The oligarchs themselves, however, are not a united force.
Their clashing interests will undermine the political cohesion of any
greater south-eastern region.

The regional political elite of Donetsk, the stronghold of ex-governor
Yanukovych, has threatened to hold a referendum on regional autonomy in
early December if what they call a "constitutional coup" succeeds and the
election result is overturned. This announcement is primarily an attempt to
regain some of the political momentum in view of the high visibility and
strength of the pro-Yushchenko demonstrations.

The timing of this call for a referendum, which is now echoing in other
south-eastern regions such as Luhansk and Crimea, reveals its main aim. It
is an attempt to influence the Supreme Court hearings, which could result in
a re-run of the elections. Given that it is hard to gauge the actual
strength of Yanukovych's support base, his political allies are attempting
to reframe the issue at stake. The image of Ukraine's east-west split is a
powerful political weapon, and it attracts attention abroad. It is, in fact,
a last-resort strategy by the Yanukovych camp.

Fortunately, the prospect of the split materialising is extremely slim. If
the Supreme Court rules in favour of Yushchenko, several regions in the
south-east might stage a referendum on autonomy or secession. But any
secessionist initiative will stop at this point, as there is no coherent
south-eastern political agenda, and neither Russia nor the west would
encourage a split.

The current political polarisation, including an east-west dimension, will
persist beyond the decision about the country's new president. Any new
president will have to continue balancing regional interests. It is feasible
that current events in Ukraine will provide new momentum for a discussion
about the decentralisation of local and regional decision-making powers in
Ukraine, but these issues will only be addressed after the current standoff
has been resolved. -30- [The Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Gwendolyn Sasse is a lecturer in eastern European politics at the
London School of Economics and Political Science
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
To see this story with its related links on the Guardian Unlimited site,
go to http://www.guardian.co.uk
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 241: ARTICLE NUMBER TEN
Names for the distribution list always welcome
=========================================================
10. "OLD RUSSIAN BEAR IS STIRRING AGAIN IN UKRAINE,
AND IT'S WEARING PUTIN'S FACE"

By Michael Grove, Irish Independent, Ireland, Tue, Nov 30, 2004

TWO YEARS ago who had heard of Fallujah? Twelve years ago what
resonance did Srebrenica have? Two weeks ago how many of us had a
view on the relative merits of Viktor Yushchenko or Viktor Yanukovych?
It's in the nature of international crises that they tend to occur in parts
of the globe that have escaped the world's close attention. A hundred
years ago crises in Fashoda and Port Arthur, flashpoints on the fringes
of British empire, dominated the thoughts of statesmen.
Today, our sleeves are tugged by an insistent media, anxious that we should
take an interest in the historic events unfolding between Lviv and Donetsk.
It is, however, in the nature of the busy newspaper reader to wonder just
which crisis in distant lands really is momentous enough to demand close
attention. Who now remembers Nagorno-Karabakh? With each new story,
the pundits bark and then the camera crews move on.
The drama in Ukraine does, however, deserve even closer attention than it
has enjoyed so far. For the conflict between the two Viktors is more than
just a regional power struggle. It is a contest between two visions for the
world. And a grim reminder that foreign policy is, underneath everything,
still a Darwinian struggle for power.
The battle between the Western-inclined, democratically-conscious Mr
Yushchenko and the Eastern-backed, authoritarian Mr Yanukovych matters
hugely for the 50 million people of the Ukraine. But it also matters to us
because it reflects the broader battle going on across the former Soviet
Union.
Russia's leadership has been following an increasingly anti-democratic
course over the past few years, a choice which poses a particular challenge
for the West. Internally, President Putin has been moving towards the
establishment of a secret police state. Externally, he has been conducting a
campaign against liberal nationalist movements, designed to consolidate and
extend the reach of Moscow's power. Both threaten Western interests and
values.
Within Russia, Putin has rigged elections, using puppet parties, just as the
communists did, to mask the extent of his effective dictatorship. He has
closed independent media, driven opponents into exile and imprisoned those,
such as the businessman Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who might organise effective
opposition.
Some of these manoeuvres have undoubtedly been popular, and the
anti-Semitic flavour of Putin's campaign against the oligarchs has certainly
been calculated to play to street prejudice.
But, however much public support some of Putin's acts may have won, his
intention has been decisively anti-democratic. His authoritarian populism is
intended to be an alternative to democracy, as it is in a different way in
China, not a path to democracy, as it was in, say, Chile.
Putin's distaste for democracy does not end at Russia's borders. Indeed,
his borders don't even end at Russia's borders. Russia's leadership has
consistently tried to forestall, undermine and crush democratic movements in
its near-abroad. It has troops on the far western border of Ukraine,
"policing" the gangster state of Trans-Dniester, a breakaway territory which
has consistently undermined the integrity of the Romanian-speaking republic
of Moldova.
Russia has also supported secessionist movements in Georgia and Azerbaijan,
in an effort to undermine the independence of those former Soviet republics.
Additionally, Putin has provided backing for those former communist
leaderships, such as Alexander Lukashenko's in Belarus, which have been
happy to reject democratisation and cluster under Moscow's umbrella.
In Ukraine, Putin is trying all his old tricks. He has signalled his backing
for the anti-democratic strongman, Yanukovych, even campaigning for him
during the election. Russia's military strength in the region has been
not-so-subtly advertised. And, unsurprisingly for any student of the Putin
manual of state subversion, secession of one half of the country has been
floated.
These manoeuvres reflect Putin's background and ideology. Although
raised in the Soviet system, and using tactics to destabilise and control
neighbours which were familiar to Stalin, it would be wrong to think of
Putin as a born-again communist.
He is instead heir to an older, continuing, tradition in Russian politics.
As a former KGB man, who has surrounded himself with other old
comrades from the bureau, he is a believer in the rule of an enlightened
elite of grimly efficient patriots who will safeguard Russia from the
corruption of Western thought and the consequent risk of disintegration.
>From the Tsarist Okhrana through Lenin's Cheka to the KGB and today's
FSB, there has existed among Russia's secret police elite a determination to
maintain Great Power status by ensuring the state is not debilitated by
liberalism. The battle in the Ukraine is therefore crucial for the
prestige, power and above all, ideology, of Putin's leadership.
If Western liberalism can be beaten back, or contained, there, then he will
be strengthened not just in his influence over a key neighbour but also in
his belief that Russia can maintain a viable, non-Western, alternative path
of development.
In Europe it has become fashionable to believe that, in the EU, we have
developed a new, collaborative, model of international relations that
supercedes the old power politics. But the reality of foreign policy is
that our security cannot be defended by international law and conventions
alone.
For Moscow, and for that matter Beijing, Pyongyang and Tehran, Western
liberalism is certainly a threat to their systems, if it ever takes root in
their soil - but it is also a weakness to be exploited.
While we place our faith in treaties, they regard them as evidence of our
unwillingness to risk confrontation, and therefore a licence to cheat,
subvert and undermine.
The outward forms of diplomacy will be respected, negotiations entertained,
but all the time there will be a drive to acquire new influence over
neighbours, new military strength, new opportunities to destabilise and new
openings to reclaim "lost" territories.
Unless the West realises what is at stake in Lviv and Donetsk, then we will
continue to live in a world where there will, inevitably, be more Fallujahs
and Srebrenicas. -30- [The Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 241: ARTICLE NUMBER ELEVEN
Letters to the editor are always welcome
=========================================================
11. GO ORANGE!
"The people of Ukraine now control their destiny."

Interrogatory: Q&A by Kathryn Jean Lopez
With Bob Schaffer, former U.S. Congressman (R-CO)
National Review, NY, NY, Tue, November 30, 2004.

Bob Schaffer, a former United States congressman from Colorado,
recently returned to the U.S. from Ukraine, where he was an election
observer. On Monday he talked to NRO about the election there and
the "Orange Revolution" currently in the Kiev air.
National Review Online: How did you come about going over to Ukraine
as an election observer?
Bob Schaffer: My mother is Ukrainian. She immigrated to the U.S. from
Canada as a child. In Congress, I was co-chairman of the Congressional
Ukrainian Caucus which became one of the largest international caucuses
in the House.
I have made several official visits to Ukraine since 1997. The US/Ukraine
Foundation invited me to be part of its delegation which it selected through
a partnership with the Association of Former Members of Congress. The
Former Members sent five delegations to Ukraine throughout the entire
election process. Our purpose was to observe election-day activities for
Ukraine's run-off election on November 21st.
NRO: Did you yourself witness vote fraud?
Schaffer: Former Michigan Congressman Dennis Hertel (D) and I were
deployed to the city of Brezyn, a city of about 40,000 located about an
hour-and-a-half northeast of the Ukrainian capital of Kiev. We did not
witness any episodes of fraud on election day. There were some
irregularities, however, similar to those that occurred throughout Ukraine.
For example, Ukraine allows prisoners to vote. We observed voting at several
sites including the city's medium-security prison. Voting inmates cast their
ballots in clear Plexiglas voting boxes under observation of their captors.
A mobile ballot box was taken to the cells of inmates held in solitary
confinement. All 40 solitary inmates at Brezyn cast their votes for
candidate Viktor Yanukovich, current prime minister of the same government
that placed these inmates in solitary confinement - implausible. We received
various reports of foul play in Brezyn. Examples: Inmates being offered tea
and cigarettes to vote for Yanukovich; buses of people from other regions
of Ukraine being transported from polling station to polling station, and;
people using false documentation to vote. However, we did not directly
observe any of this. The Ukrainian voting process is low-tech using paper
ballots, hand counting, mobile ballot boxes for the infirm or confined, and
transportation of ballots by car to central counting stations for regional
ballot tallies.
There are many hands touching ballots after a voter drops his ballot into
the (clear) ballot box. There is no guarantee of ballot secrecy for anyone,
which makes the whole system vulnerable to intimidation and bribery.
Vote counting and ballot collecting does not occur in the light of day.
There are too many occasions when observers and opposing parties
lose contact with the ballots. Furthermore, in several oblasts (similar to
U.S. states) observers were denied access to polling stations and the
opposition party was denied participation in local polling committees. In
these areas, Yanukovich "won" overwhelmingly.
NRO: Do you have any confidence that the supreme-court proceedings
will be fair?
Schaffer: No. The supreme-court proceedings would only be remarkable if
the supreme court surprises everyone by agreeing with the opposition and
international observers that the election was fraudulent. Ukrainian courts,
despite the government's claims, are not independent jurisdictions like in
the United States.
NRO: Do you believe it is possible that Yanukovich won? Could you
envision him fairly winning in a new election?
Schaffer: It is unlikely Yanukovich won. If he did, his government made it
impossible to determine. The incumbent government has the highest duty
and responsibility to guarantee fair, transparent, and free elections. This
would have worked to Yanukovich's advantage if he indeed truly did enjoy
the popular support of Ukrainian voters. The high incidence of voting
irregularities consistently reported from throughout Ukraine is
overwhelming. Moreover, the vast majority of reported episodes were to the
advantage of Yanukovich. Also, violations occurred throughout the election
process, not just on election day. I do not believe he would fairly win any
nationwide election in Ukraine.
NRO: You were among the demonstrators, is revolution in their air?
Schaffer: Absolutely! The revolution has been dubbed "The Orange
Revolution," orange being the campaign color of Viktor Yushchenko. The
demonstrators say they are tired of living under a corrupt government and in
a corrupt society. They are totally convinced Yushchenko won the election
and that the will of the people has been thwarted by the government and by
Moscow. They intend to stand their ground until their victory is recognized
in Ukraine and throughout the world.
NRO: What most impressed you about the protesters?
Schaffer: One cannot help being impressed by the protesters. They have
begun each day of the protest in Kiev in prayer and all activities are
accomplished with a collective sense of respect, kindness, and an intention
to conduct a peaceful revolution. The demonstrators have refrained from
taunting or challenging armed police or the military. In fact, the objective
of the demonstrators is to win the affection of the armed agents of the
government.
This is being accomplished with remarkable frequency. In fact,
most of the Kiev police have now pledged their support for the people and
even have expressed their intentions to protect the people from any possible
conflict with military (including Russian) personnel. Kievians are opening
up their small apartments and homes to out-of-town protesters. I met a guy
who told me he was hosting seven strangers in his two-bedroom apartment.
The demonstration is very well organized. There is a clear understanding
among the crowds that they are unarmed, yet they are prepared to do what-
ever it takes to remain in the streets even die as martyrs in the democracy
movement if need be. Finally, the media has dramatically understated the
magnitude of the demonstration as in the "tens of thousands." In the late
afternoons and early evenings, the crowd is easily over one million. That
many people simply can't fit in Independence Square. At its peak, the
demonstration spills in to the streets for several blocks in all directions.
NRO: What most scared you about the situation there?
Schaffer: There is a very large military presence in and around Kiev. Tanks
and artillery were being offloaded from railcars as early as last Monday
(11/22). Though there is growing division among the Ukrainian military
ranks as to loyalty in this revolution the possibility of violence looms
over the entire situation.
NRO: Do Ukrainians commonly believe that Yushchenko was poisoned
by.Yanukovich/Russia?
Schaffer: Few people doubt Yushchenko was poisoned. Ukraine is a rough
place for anyone who challenges the governing authorities. The recent
history of Ukraine is replete with dead journalists, beaten journalists,
news agencies being shut down, and politicians being injured or killed.
Most are killed in mysterious auto accidents. Ukrainian Journalist
Heorhiy Gongadze's headless corpse was found partially buried on the
outskirts of town and was the most noted journalist murder. His body
had been dipped in acid to remove evidence and hasten decomposition.
Yushchenko's popularity among the people is a clear threat to the
government. Most Ukrainians expect assassination attempts.
I've known Yushchenko for many years and could barely recognize
him when I saw him this time. Not until he spoke and I recognized his voice
did I believe I was looking at the same man his face being so disfigured by
the poisoning. No common virus could have done such a thing. In fact, his
medical analysis indicates he had been simultaneously exposed to as many as
five unlikely viruses. Who would have done this? While several parties have
clear motivation it will likely never be proven who the culprit is.
NRO: When did you arrive back in the U.S.? How closely have you been
able to keep in touch with sources on the ground since you got back?
Schaffer: I returned about 2:30 A.M. Thanksgiving Day - and with plenty for
which to be thankful. I have been maintaining contact with a wide network
of journalists, activists, and friends since returning. Based upon the
sporadic success of e-mail transmissions, I have some reason to believe
e-mail traffic in and out of Ukraine is somewhat impaired perhaps monitored
and sanitized.
NRO: Do you have any predictions as to how this will all play out?
Schaffer: The Western media tends to place a lot of emphasis on "official"
institutions in Ukraine such as its supreme court, the central election
commission, and the parliament. In reality, the people of Ukraine now
control their destiny, in my opinion. The demonstrators will persevere and
succeed, or grow tired, cold and fade. Based upon the many conversations
and interviews I conducted with demonstrators, I'm betting the crowds stand
their ground for as long as it takes.
If Ukraine's election had been conducted during a more temperate time of
year, the Orange Revolution would have been successfully accomplished
within days. The winter conditions are working to the government's
advantage. Pressure from foreign governments and independent pro-
democracy groups is critical right now. As long as the opposition believes
the world will stand with Ukraine's democrat reformers they will have the
leverage and the courage to establish a legitimate republic under the
leadership of Viktor Yushchenko. However, the Russians have a lot at
stake, too, and the power of Moscow pride should never be underestimated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nationalreview.com/interrogatory/schaffer200411300829.asp
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 241: ARTICLE NUMBER TWELVE
Letters to the editor are always welcome
=========================================================
12. SECURITY FORCES BEGIN TO DEFECT TO YUSHCHENKO

By Taras Kuzio, The Eurasia Monitor
Volume 1, Issue 137, The Jamestown Foundation
Washington, D.C., Wednesday, December 1, 2004

During yesterday's parliamentary hearings on Ukraine's post-election crisis,
speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn promised not to use force against demonstrators.
Similarly, during Sunday's meeting of the National Security and Defense
Council, Security Service (SBU) chairman Ihor Smeshko argued against
using force, as it would lead to greater unrest and constitute a threat to
national security.
Do these statements reflect concern for democratic rights or an indirect
admission that the security forces would not back the authorities? Most
likely the latter. The Yushchenko camp was buoyed by secret negotiations
with the Interior Ministry (MVS) and military, elements of whom stated their
willingness to defend protestors in Kyiv if the authorities launched
repression. An MVS statement guaranteeing to put down "threats to the
constitutional order" was therefore largely hollow (Reuters, November 22).
On election night (November 21) MVS officers appeared on Channel 5 stating
their unwillingness to act against the narod (people). Kyiv Berkut (riot
police) Maj. Hennadiy Abramchuk, who appeared in one of these appeals, was
removed one day later. Since November 25-26, when the political situation in
Kyiv began tipping in challenger Viktor Yushchenko's favor, the reality has
been that the SBU, armed forces, and MVS did not have the stomach to
repress hundreds of thousands of protestors.
Their reluctance is based on the widespread public doubt that Prime Minister
Viktor Yanukovych won the presidential runoff. During the first three days
after the November 21 vote, a breakdown in command and control left most
MVS officers confused as to who was in charge. When asked this question, a
Berkut officer guarding the presidential administration replied, "I don't
know whether Kuchma or Yushchenko is now president" (Kyiv Post,
November 25).
On November 26-27, MVS cadets and officers were seen arguing with Berkut
policemen guarding the presidential administration. Six hundred cadets from
the MVS Academy were telling Berkut officers that the elections had been
completely fraudulent and encouraging them to join the opposition (Zerkalo
nedeli, November 20-26).
President Leonid Kuchma's distrust of Kyiv's elite special forces was
handled in two ways. First, his office flew in Crimean detachments, which
were thought to be personally hostile to the "nationalist Yushchenko."
Second, Russian "Vityaz" special forces from Bryansk flew into Irpin, near
Kyiv, on November 23 to provide safe passage for Kuchma, his allies, and
incriminating documents, should the situation deteriorate.
On BBC World News (November 28) leading Kyiv MVS officers admitted
that the majority of Kyiv's MVS officers were pro-Yushchenko. Different
rayon departments of Kyiv's MVS, such as Sviatoshyn, have begun to defect
in domino fashion to Yushchenko (razom.org.ua, November 27). The Kyiv
Prosecutor's office has also declared its support for Yushchenko.
The seriousness with which these MVS defections were taken could be seen in
Interior Minister Mykola Bilokin's demand that his officers obey the law and
not declare their support for either candidate (Ukrayinska pravda, November
26). This is rich coming from Bilokin, who had bragged that the MVS would
"get drunk for three days" after Yanukovych won the elections. Bilokin
dragged the MVS into supporting Yanukovych during the elections through
KGB-style surveillance of the opposition and providing escorts for busloads
of absentee-ballot voters for Yanukovych. A decree by Yushchenko's
Committee for National Salvation is set to divide the MVS further by
replacing the discredited Bilokin with a more neutral individual.
Although the Berkut may be standing firm, this is not the case with other
MVS special force units. In western Ukraine large numbers of officers and
lower ranks from the directorate to combat organized crime (UBOZ) have
defected to Yushchenko's Committee for National Salvation. MVS personnel
in other units in Trans-Carpathia also defected to the Committee
(maidan.org.ua, November 26). By the second day after round two, Lviv's
MVS officers were wearing Yushchenko-orange armbands.
The SBU had largely stayed out of politics during the election campaign, but
since round two the SBU's sympathies lie with Yushchenko. Large numbers of
audio files made in Yanukovych's election headquarters, which reveal plans
for blatant election fraud, were leaked by the SBU to the Yushchenko camp.
General Oleksandr Skybynetsky, an adviser to SBU chairman Smeshko, and
four other senior SBU officers issued an appeal to the security forces to
not use force against the opposition and to not obey "illegal" orders. "The
Ukrainian people refuse to recognize the legitimacy of the presidential
elections," the statement read (Ukrayinska pravda, November 25). Skybynetsky
and SBU General-Lieutenant Oleksandr Skypalsky had already issued a
statement on the eve of round two calling upon their fellow SBU officers to
not be dragged into the elections.
The military has also been showing support for Yushchenko. Defense Minister
Oleksandr Kuzmuk reassured demonstrators that they should, "Have no doubts
that the army will always defend the interests of the people" (Financial
Times, November 25). Kuzmuk's concern could be seen when he warned the
opposition against attempts at winning over the military. He complained
about deputies visiting military garrisons and agitating officers to not
obey any "criminal orders" issued against the Yushchenko camp (Inter TV,
November 26).
General Mykhailo Kutsyn, commander of Ukraine's Western Operational
Command, stated his unwillingness to use his military units against the
narod. Since the runoff, there have been daily reports of Western
Operational Command units declaring their loyalty for Yushchenko. They were
backed up by appeals from Yushchenko on November 24 and by an appeal
from a special congress of local government deputies who support Yushchenko
to soldiers and officers in the security forces a day later.
On November 25 Kuzmik's predecessor, General Yevhen Marchuk (a former
SBU chairman and secretary of the National Security and Defense Council)
made a stunning statement to Channel 5, calling upon the SBU, MVS, and
military to not obey "orders given by word of mouth" that would presumably
be directed against demonstrators. General Vitaliy Radetsky, defense
minister in the 1990s, told opposition crowds, the "Slogan for today is the
Army is with the people!" (razom.org.ua, November 29).
Both Marchuk and Radetsky have called upon President Kuchma to admit
widespread vote rigging. The independent Armed Forces trade union issued an
appeal calling upon their fellow military officers to demand the removal of
the Yanukovych government and the appointment of a new Defense Minister.
Not to ignore other branches of the security forces, Yushchenko issued a
statement addressed to Customs Service and Border Troops and calling upon
them to stop "oligarchs" fleeing Ukraine with various ill-gotten goods and
funds (yuschenko.com.ua, November 26). In western Ukraine the State Tax
Administration, which has its own militia units, defected quite early on to
Yushchenko. Military units of the Ministry of Emergency Situations have also
declared their support for Yushchenko as president. -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.
========================================================
"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT"-2004 SPONSORS:
"Working to Secure Ukraine's Future"
1. THE ACTION UKRAINE COALITION (AUC): Washington, D.C.,
http://www.artukraine.com/auc/index.htm; MEMBERS:
A. UKRAINIAN AMERICAN COORDINATING COUNCIL,
(UACC), Ihor Gawdiak, President, Washington, D.C., New York, NY
B. UKRAINIAN FEDERATION OF AMERICA (UFA),
Zenia Chernyk, Chairperson; Vera M. Andryczyk, President; E.
Morgan Williams, Executive Director, Huntingdon Valley, Pennsylvania.
http://www.artukraine.com/ufa/index.htm
C. U.S.-UKRAINE FOUNDATION (USUF), Nadia Komarnyckyj
McConnell, President, Washington, D.C., Kyiv, Ukraine .
2. UKRAINE-U.S. BUSINESS COUNCIL, Kempton Jenkins,
President, Washington, D.C.
3. KIEV-ATLANTIC GROUP, David and Tamara Sweere, Daniel
Sweere, Kyiv and Myronivka, Ukraine, 380 44 295 7275 in Kyiv.
4. BAHRIANY FOUNDATION, INC. Dr. Anatol Lysyj, Chairman,
Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA,
5. ODUM- Association of American Youth of Ukrainian Descent,
Minnesota Chapter, Natalia Yarr, Chairperson
========================================================
PUBLISHER AND EDITOR
Mr. E. Morgan Williams, Executive Director, Ukrainian Federation of America
(UFA); Coordinator, The Action Ukraine Coalition (AUC);
Senior Advisor, Government Relations, U.S.-Ukraine Foundation (USUF);
Advisor, Ukraine-U.S. Business Council, Washington, D.C.;
Publisher and Editor, www.ArtUkraine.com Information Service (ARTUIS),
P.O. Box 2607, Washington, D.C. 20013,
Tel: 202 437 4707, E-mail: morganw@patriot.net
========================================================