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 244
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, FRIDAY, December 3, 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. "OUR UKRAINE"
COMMENTARY: By Viktor Yushchenko
The Wall Street Journal, New York, New York
Friday, December 3, 2004; Page A18

2. "UKRAINE, VLADIMIR AND GEORGE"
REVIEW & OUTLOOK: The Wall Street Journal
New York, NY, Friday, December 3, 2004; Page A18

3. "UKRAINE ISN'T THE ONLY TARGET"
EAST OF THE ODER: By VLADIMIR SOCOR
The Wall Street Journal, New York, New York
Friday, December 3, 2004

4. DON'T WOBBLE NOW,
UKRAINIAN RADICALS TELL YUSHCHENKO
Andrew Osborn in Kiev, The Independent
London, United Kingdom, Friday, Dec 03, 2004

5. UKRAINIAN PRO-GOVERNMENT PARLIAMENT GROUP
FALLS BY NEARLY THIRD
TV 5 Kanal, Kiev, in Ukrainian 0800 gmt 3 Dec 04
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Friday, Dec 03, 2004

6. YUSHCHENKO'S TOP ALLY INSPIRES PROTESTORS
The passionate Ukrainian opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko
By Anna Melnichuk, AP Online, Kiev, Ukraine, Fri, Dec 03, 2004

7. IN HARD-LUCK MINING REGION, YANUKOVYCH WINS
LOYALTY FOR PROVIDING MODEST, YET STABLE,
SALARIES AND PENSIONS
By Yuras Karmanau, AP Worldstream, Fri, Dec 03, 2004

8. NEW CANDIDATES ARE WAY FORWARD, SAYS
UKRAINE STRONGMAN VIKTOR PINCHUK
>From Jeremy Page in Kiev, Times, London, UK, Fri, Dec 3, 2004

9. OUR MAN AT UKRAINE'S ORANGE REVOLUTION
By MEGHAN CLYNE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
The New York Sun, New York, New York, December 2, 2004

10. EUROPE WARNED OVER GROWING DEPENDENCY
ON RUSSIAN PIPED GAS
By Kevin Morrison & Javier Blas in London & Paivi Munter, in Moscow
Financial Times, London, United Kingdom, Friday, December 3 2004

11. "A TIPPING POINT FOR DEMOCRACY"
Political Changes in Russia Highlight Tenuous Nature
Of Relationship With U.S.
THE MACRO INVESTOR: By STEVE LIESMAN
The Wall Street Journal, New York, NY, Friday, Dec 3, 2004

12. "VOTE OF CONFIDENCE"
IN THE LOOP: by Al Kamen, The Washington Post
Washington, D.C., Friday, December, 3, 2004

13. "ORANGE BOOM"
OBSERVER: Financial Times, London, UK, December 3 2004

14. "NO CHICKEN KIEV"
By Clay Harris, Financial Times, London, UK, Friday, Dec 3 2004
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 244: ARTICLE NUMBER ONE
========================================================
1. "OUR UKRAINE"

COMMENTARY: By Viktor Yushchenko
The Wall Street Journal, New York, New York
Friday, December 3, 2004; Page A18

KIEV -- For months, Ukraine's democratic forces warned officials in Kiev
and other European capitals that our autumn presidential election would be
neither free nor fair. Two of the main reasons for this conclusion were the
incumbent government's unprecedented interference in the pre-election
campaign and its censorship of the mass media.

During the first election round on Oct. 31, regional governors colluded
with police and other state officials to stuff ballot boxes, falsify vote
counts and intimidate election commissions. Ukraine's central and
territorial election commissions turned a blind eye and overlooked our
well-documented official complaints. In the end, despite massive
falsifications by my opponent, the central election commission was
forced to concede that I won the first round of voting.

During the Nov. 21 runoff vote, polling stations in the eastern regions
remained open two hours after they were supposed to close officially.
Some reported voter turnout exceeding 100%, while in other regions
up to 35% of the ballots cast were from people's homes. Election
observers were prevented from monitoring voting and counting procedures
at thousands of polling stations, as permitted by Ukrainian law. Thousands
of poll watchers from democratic parties together with average citizens
witnessed traveling thugs with police escorts harassing election
commissioners, destroying polling stations, stuffing ballots, abusing
absentee voter certificates and switching commission protocols, to name
just a few of the 11,000 violations officially filed by us in the courts. We
are now patiently awaiting the Supreme Court's review of these complaints
in the hope that justice will prevail.

The last straw in the government's election fraud efforts came Monday
morning, Nov. 22, when the central election commission's voting results
showed Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych winner of the election,
despite two independent exit polls showing otherwise.

Official Kiev did not anticipate that hundreds of thousands of voters
would take to the streets to defend their constitutional right to vote and
peacefully protest against falsified election results. They couldn't,
because since the March 2002 parliamentary election, Ukraine's leaders
have turned a deaf ear to voter calls for real political and economic
change.

They failed to recognize that two-thirds of Ukraine's citizens are
dissatisfied with their leaders and their policies. They failed to recognize
that no longer will people tolerate the gap between declared and real
rights. They thought they could get away with staying in power by illegal
means. They wanted the international community to remain silent.

Now, they are forced to recognize that citizens have taken matters into
their own hands. The last vestiges of remaining public trust in official
Kiev, both at home and abroad, were permanently severed when the
corrupt and blind government unashamedly stole from its people the
most fundamental of all rights -- the right to choose one's destiny.

Ukraine's people have spoken, and I am confident that we will find a
solution to the complex political crisis that has developed as a result of
the regime's efforts to steal the election. The most logical way out of the
crisis is for repeat voting to be held speedily within the next two weeks.
Talks involving international mediators this week reaffirmed this.

For European and other observers, I believe there are four important
conclusions that should be made with regard to current events in Ukraine .

* This year Europe has witnessed two fundamental political changes: In
the first half of the year, the enlargement of the European Union to include
eight countries from the old Soviet bloc, and in the second half -- the
presidential elections in Ukraine . What will happen in my country after
the election will not only impact Ukraine's future, but, to a great extent,
the future of Europe and Russia.

* Thanks to television, the world today has seen a genuinely different
Ukraine . Observers will no longer associate Ukraine with just Chernobyl,
or corrupt regimes, or another scandal involving high-ranking officials. The
world is witnessing a noble European nation, one that embraces genuine
democratic values and, even more importantly, one that will stand up to
defend these values with dignity.

The world has seen how millions of people took to the streets and squares.
For nearly two weeks, in biting cold, hundreds of thousands bravely,
steadfastly and at the same time gracefully demonstrated their unwavering
opposition to a corrupt, authoritarian regime. The world has looked into
the eyes of millions of good people of various ages, confessions, different
ethnic backgrounds -- all peacefully, as is their right under their own
Constitution -- fighting for their rights. All without unrest, violence and
blood: This is what the world community has seen.

* The people of Ukraine have shown the world that we are much more
ready to integrate into the European community than the ruling regime.
Our path to Europe is not obstructed by formalities -- the absence of a
formal application or a joint-action plan. No one saw a civil society in
Ukraine and the desire to live according to EU standards and values.
Now -- you've seen.

It is important to recognize that people's demands made from the street are
supported by the entire system of popularly elected representatives -- local
councils, mayors, and Ukraine's Parliament, the Verkhovna Rada. Only
those officials appointed by the president have adopted a position to the
contrary.

* Currently the outgoing regime is menacing Europe with the threat of
separatism and the dissolution of Ukraine . I state with full responsibility
for my words: This is a fictional, artificial threat. It does not exist. The
people of Ukraine recognize that an economically prosperous nation-
state tolerant of its bilingualism and multiethnic society, and respectful
of all religious confessions, is Ukraine's strength and not her weakness.

It is true that today, leading officials in regions which resorted to the
largest number of election falsifications are now frightened when faced with
taking responsibility for their crimes. They are trying to play the card of
regional separatism, by adopting illegal decisions and threatening us with
referendums. This process will be halted immediately. We will not allow
three governors appointed by the president to tear apart our united country.
And, besides, those officials will face a penalty even greater than that for
election falsification from three to 15 years in prison.

Ukraine's democratic opposition movement stands for a peaceful resolution
to the current political crisis. We oppose the use of force and will not
allow anyone to smother our freedom by force. We are a genuine force, a
wise one, which will lead our people to legitimate victory based on law.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Yushchenko, Ukraine's prime minister from 1999-2001, leads the
country's democratic opposition movement and is a candidate for the
presidency of Ukraine .
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.244: ARTICLE NUMBER TWO
========================================================
2. UKRAINE, VLADIMIR AND GEORGE

REVIEW & OUTLOOK: The Wall Street Journal
New York, NY, Friday, December 3, 2004; Page A18

If you have a longish political memory, maybe you were struck by the
spectacle this week of Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma rushing off to
Moscow -- at the height of a great domestic political upheaval -- for a
hastily arranged conference with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin.
Where have we seen that before?

Oh, right: It was just like those emergency summits Leonid Brezhnev used to
hold with the likes of East Germany's Erich Honecker or Poland's Wojciech
Jaruzelski whenever the proletariat misbehaved. The only thing missing this
time was the smooch.

The crisis in Ukraine following the November 21 presidential election is
being portrayed as a key test in that country's political evolution. It is.
The most reasonable compromise in the current standoff is a re-run vote in
the coming days -- non-fraudulent, this time -- between opposition leader
Viktor Yushchenko and Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich. If, however, Mr.
Kuchma and his cronies force the country into brand new elections, perhaps
with new candidates, at a date some months off, they will have dealt
themselves the political equivalent of a Mulligan with further opportunities
for manipulation, media suppression and other dirty tricks.

But this crisis is more than a test for Ukrainians. It is a test for those
in the West who claim to favor democracy. Will the West sell out the
Ukrainians? Does the West accept the notion that Ukraine belongs in
Russia's sphere of influence, if not its actual empire? And will the West
hold Mr. Putin to account if his ally Mr. Kuchma is allowed to steal the
election for his designated successor?

On present evidence the answers are not encouraging. The Europeans were
quick to call the November 21 ballot a fraud, and some EU governments --
particularly those formerly in the Soviet orbit, like Poland -- have stood
tough. But Mr. Putin has cultivated close ties with European leaders,
particularly German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and French President
Jacques Chirac; their line grows softer by the day. Mr. Schroeder told the
German parliament that Mr. Putin had assured him he would respect "the
result of the democratic process." This about the Russian who endorsed the
election result even when Mr. Kuchma had not and while the rest of the
world was denouncing it.

The Bush Administration has not been much better. President Bush has said
he opposes foreign intervention in the election, an implied jab at Mr.
Putin, and that he supports the idea of "any election." But the problem in
Ukraine is not "foreign intervention." It is Russian intervention. Without
Russian meddling, the Ukrainian show of "people power" in the past week
would have already found Mr. Yuschchenko the rightful winner. And while
supporting elections is fine in theory, eliding the distinction between Mr.
Kuchma's and Mr. Yushchenko's concept of an election only plays into
Mr. Kuchma's corrupt hands.

Mr. Bush's larger problem is that after four years of trying to placate Mr.
Putin he now finds there may be no choice but to confront him. Perhaps this
is just as well. In the past four years, Mr. Putin has responded to American
conciliation by being notably unhelpful over Iraq, Iran and North Korea,
while engaging in an increasingly repressive brand of politics at home.

We realize Mr. Bush may be trying to give Mr. Putin a graceful way out
of a confrontation. But this is no time to speak quietly. The most helpful
thing the President could do now is to be as outspoken in his defense of
Ukrainian democracy as he has been of democracy elsewhere. At the least
we hope someone has explained privately to Mr. Putin that there will be
sharp
consequences for Russia's relationship with the West if he continues to seek
dominion in his near-abroad. Expelling Russia from the Group of Eight would
be one place to start.

A final note: We hear that Mr. Bush has been reading Natan Sharansky's
fine new book on democracy. It includes the following passage: "More than
15 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the free world continues to
underestimate the universal appeal of its own ideas. Rather than place its
faith in the power of freedom to rapidly transform authoritarian states, it
is eager to achieve 'peaceful coexistence' and 'detente' with dictatorial
regimes."

Mr. Bush has taken this lesson to heart in his policy promoting freedom in
the Middle East. Let's hope he does the same in Ukraine. -30-
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.244: ARTICLE NUMBER THREE
========================================================
3. "UKRAINE ISN'T THE ONLY TARGET"

EAST OF THE ODER: By VLADIMIR SOCOR
The Wall Street Journal, New York, New York
Friday, December 3, 2004

The Kremlin-led assault on democracy in Ukraine , ongoing these past
few months, is the latest and most visible move in a strategy that extends
to the entire EU/NATO neighborhood, even targeting incipiently some
countries in the Euro-Atlantic community. A new type of threat to
international security has taken clear shape across the entire area from
the Baltic states to Georgia. This new threat stems from Kremlin efforts
to attack or distort electoral processes and constitutional setups, with a
view to regaining influence and control through the use of local
antidemocratic clients.

While this threat must count as a new one in the typology of threats to
national and international security, the strategy itself began emerging
almost two years ago. The West has yet to conceptualize this problem
and adopt a proactive approach -- as opposed to reacting late or being
blindsided altogether by the Kremlin's moves in one country or another
of this vast area, where variations of the overall strategy can be seen
operating according to local circumstances.

In Lithuania last year, for example, elements of Russia's intelligence
services and organized crime (intertwined factors in Russia) infiltrated the
electoral staff of presidential candidate Rolandas Paksas and then his staff
when he became president. Mr. Paksas, and after him several other
Russian-connected politicians, led a populist challenge to Lithuania's
free-market economics, parliamentary democracy and staunch Euro-Atlantic
orientation. The country experienced months of political turmoil before its
democrats and democratic institutions proved their strength this year by
impeaching and removing that president from office.

Moscow plays the "ethnic Russian card" against Estonia and Latvia in
attempting to change these countries' legal setups. It would like to turn
them into binational states with parallel societies -- by deepening and
legalizing the ethno-linguistic divide -- instead of promoting integration
of local Russian communities into these Baltic countries.

Notwithstanding the fact that the European Union finds Latvia's and
Estonia's legislation on citizenship, language, and education fully in
compliance with the EU's criteria, Moscow continually attacks these Baltic
states in international forums -- as well as though propagandizing to local
Russians -- to pressure Latvia and Estonia into changing that legislation.
It hopes that preserving and codifying those ethnically-based societal
divisions would provide scope for manipulation of these countries' internal
politics.

A distinct variation on Moscow's strategy can be observed in Belarus, as
well as in the satrapies of Transdniester in Moldova and Abkhazia and
South Ossetia in Georgia. While in other countries of the region, Russia is
an anti-status-quo power, seeking to roll back democratic gains, in these
places, Russia is a status-quo power, defending the dictatorships. Although
the dictator Alyaksandr Lukashenka of Belarus irritates President Vladimir
Putin and the Russian government by milking Russia's economy, the Kremlin
is content to subsidize the loyal dictatorship, and rallies to its defense
in international forums.

The Kremlin's solidarity with those dictatorships is on every-day display,
in a common antidemocratic front. When President Putin congratulated
Ukraine's presidential candidate Viktor Yanukovych a few days ago on his
phony "victory," Mr. Lukashenka followed suit immediately. So did Igor
Smirnov of Transdniester.

It is a measure of Western incomprehension or obliviousness that, even
after such moves, Mr. Smirnov's Russian-armed regime is still considered
by U.S. diplomats and the European Union as eligible for legalization and
official empowerment in a "federalized" Moldova.

Russian policy planners have developed "federal" projects of this sort as
a means to set up Russian-protected "federal units" on the territories of
target countries. The next step is to absorb those units unofficially,
though effectively, into Russia's orbit, and arbitrate the relations between
the "federalized" state's center and its units, playing them off against
each other. Without formally violating the target country's territorial
integrity, the country would be reduced to a satellite, and its democratic
prospects killed. This is the recipe officially on the table for Moldova and
being planned unofficially for Georgia by Kremlin advisers.

A similar scenario is being held over Ukraine 's head now. Once it became
clear that the democratic candidate Viktor Yushchenko had actually won
the Nov. 21 presidential election runoff, Mr. Yanukovych and his Moscow
handlers raised the specter of "federalizing" Ukraine by carving out some
Russia-oriented enclaves in the east and south of the country. This sort of
federalism is simply the redoubt from which Mr. Putin's protégés would
resist and even plot to roll back the democratization of these countries.

Few have noticed that a drama eerily similar to Ukraine 's is now unfolding
in Abkhazia. In a presidential election there in October, the Moscow-backed,
KGB-veteran candidate for president, Raul Khajimba, has been defeated by
the economist Sergei Bagapsh.

Mr. Putin had made a big show of endorsing Mr. Khajimba, while Russian
political operatives and media smothered Abkhazia with propaganda for their
candidate. (While Ukraine 's Mr. Yushchenko is suspect in Moscow's eyes
for having an American wife, Mr. Bagapsh is suspect to the same vigilant
eyes for having a Georgian wife.)

After all this, and despite official fraud in the vote-counting, Mr. Bagapsh
won narrowly. For the last six weeks, Bagapsh supporters defied all odds
in swaying local bodies of authority to recognize their leader as
president-elect. They have now scheduled his inauguration for Dec. 6.

Infuriated, the Russian government on Dec. 1 announced an economic
blockade on Abkhazia. Having conferred Russian citizenship on Abkhazia's
residents en masse, Moscow has until now used this fait accompli to claim
rights of protection over them.

Now, however, Moscow uses the citizenship argument in claiming a right
to impose sanctions on "its" citizens. In sum, Russia reserves the right to
deal with "its" citizens as it sees fit. The message to Abkhazia is that Mr.
Bagapsh's election must be overturned as a condition for lifting the Russian
sanctions. Moscow's Abkhaz clients, including those with arms, are publicly
vowing to stop the local populace from emulating the ongoing events in
Ukraine . To be sure, Abkhazia is under Russian military control and can
thus be kept on a tight leash.

Indeed, Russian military presence can be decisive to the success of
antidemocratic strategies. Traditional, "old-type" military threats to
security persist in the new Euro-Atlantic neighborhood. Additionally, the
"new-type" threats associated with terrorism, illicit arms and drug
trafficking, and mass-destruction weapons proliferation must be dealt with.

Beyond these "new-type" threats, however, it is time to recognize and resist
the newest type of threat. That is the organized attack on democracy, and it
requires even better organized and coordinated Western and local
counterstrategies. -30- [The Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Socor is a senior fellow of the Washington-based Jamestown
Foundation, publishers of the Eurasia Daily Monitor.
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.244: ARTICLE NUMBER FOUR
========================================================
4. DON'T WOBBLE NOW, UKRAINIAN RADICALS TELL YUSHCHENKO

Andrew Osborn in Kiev, The Independent
London, United Kingdom, Friday, Dec 03, 2004

KIEV - THE HANDSHAKE between the two men at the centre of Ukraine's
political crisis was too much for the young activists to take, as was the
sheet of A4 brandished by the outgoing President that represented a
compromise deal signed by all parties pledging to work out a negotiated
solution.

"Mudak!" cursed one, meaning someone who is stupid and uncultured. Activists
among the shivering crowd in Kiev's Independence Square were also
unimpressed. Some started chanting "shame" while others booed and whistled.

Yet the target of their anger was not Viktor Yanukovych, the pro-Russian
Prime Minister accused of rigging last month's presidential elections. It
was his rival, Viktor Yushchenko, the leader of the so-called Orange or
Chestnut Revolution and the man the crowds and activists have - until now -
treated like a modern-day messiah.

Twelve days after thousands of Ukrainians poured onto the streets to bring
their man to power in a dramatic display of people power, the radicals - who
orchestrated the military-style operation in the first place - are growing
frustrated.

"Yushchenko should not feel that he can do whatever he wants. He can't," one
activist from the Pora - It's Time - youth group who declined to be named,
told The Independent. "There was always a feeling that he might go wobbly on
us." Mr Yushchenko owes a lot to Pora.

They were the ones who rushed to set up a tent city in the centre of Kiev,
they were the ones who had stockpiled all of the necessary supplies and warm
clothing, and they are still the ones overseeing the operation. The
organisation is loosely modelled on similar youth groups in Georgia and
Serbia that played key roles in bringing about bloodless revolutions.

However, the source of its funding is controversial. Although Pora insists
its money comes from non-governmental organisations and Ukrainians living
abroad, there are persistent reports that Washington channels money to them.

While Mr Yushchenko, a mild-mannered former banker, talks of negotiations,
legal decisions and votes, they talk a more radical game. Hunkered down in
their well-hidden basement headquarters near the imposing foreign ministry,
the activists surround themselves with the paraphernalia of would-be
revolutionaries. The entrance hall is decorated with a poster of Che Guevara
and the walls are plastered with stickers and posters that scream action,
not talk.

One shows a giant jackboot representing Pora crushing a cockroach, while
another shows a pair of hands beneath the slogan: "It's time to choose!"
Anastasia Bezverkha, the head of Pora's press service, says the activists
are sick of prolonged talks. "We don't know if the people will tolerate the
process of negotiations. It means nothing. We want action."

Pora opposes negotiations, regarding Mr Yanukovych and Leonid Kuchma,
the outgoing President, as common criminals who should be put on trial for
staging an illegal "coup d'etat". Ms Bezverkha says the activists will give
the negotiations two days to bear fruit, but if there is no progress by
Monday she says they will act.

Going by their past actions that means they will try to occupy key
buildings. A plan to occupy the presidential administration building, which
is ringed by riot police, was supposed to be executed last Tuesday but was
called off at the last minute after Mr Yushchenko publicly revealed the
plan, infuriating the activists. Calling the Pora activists "provocateurs",
he urged his own mainstream supporters to prevent the move. Pora backed
down.

For many Pora activists, the MP Julia Tymoshenko is the opposition figure
who embodies their struggle. "Many people think she is the goddess of the
revolution and that we would should give her orange wings," explains Ms
Bezverkha.

Dressed in a severe orange sweater, Ms Tymoshenko laid out her stall
yesterday in uncompromising style, delighting activists. She stressed the
importance of people power, said that a legal case had been launched against
Mr Kuchma, accusing him of treachery and dereliction of duty, and suggested
Mr Yushchenko himself is not in control of the crowds.

If Mr Kuchma refused to swiftly sign a series of changes to the country's
election law, she predicted the crowds would take matters into their own
hands. "People will not tolerate it and if Mr Yushchenko tries to stop the
people on Maidan [Independence Square] he will fail. They won't listen to
politicians."

She also said that an opposition government would be set up in the next few
days regardless of external events. She poured scorn on an EU-brokered
compromise deal.

If the Supreme Court, which is still sitting, refuses to accept that last
month's elections were falsified, she also warned of trouble ahead. "The
people would take such information in a very negative way. Nobody could
predict what would happen. If people feel that their will is not being
respected, nobody will be able to stop or manage them."

Pora and Ms Tymoshenko represent the radical side of the Orange Revolution.
Mr Yushchenko embraced their support in the beginning but, in doing so, he
may have unleashed a force which is more powerful than he bargained for.
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.244: ARTICLE NUMBER FIVE
Please send us names for the free distribution list
========================================================
5. UKRAINIAN PRO-GOVERNMENT PARLIAMENT GROUP
FALLS BY NEARLY THIRD

TV 5 Kanal, Kiev, in Ukrainian 0800 gmt 3 Dec 04
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Friday, Dec 03, 2004

KIEV - Nine Ukrainian MPs, including the parliamentary faction leader Ihor
Sharov, have left the pro-government Working Ukraine faction. Parliament
speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn announced this at the start of the parliament
session on 3 December.

In addition Oleksandr Kuzmuk, Oleksandr Buryak, Serhiy Buryak, Tariel
Vasadze, Oleksandr Yedin, Anatoliy Klymonenko, Dmytro Rudkovskyy
and Leonid Serhiyenko left Working Ukraine. Yedin joined the independent
United Ukraine faction, which is associated with Kiev Mayor Oleksandr
Omelchenko. Lytvyn also said Viktor Kyrylov had left the independent
Union faction. The parliamentary session was relayed live on Ukrainian
television TV 5 Kanal.

As a result, the line-up of MPs is as follows: Working Ukraine - 21;
opposition Our Ukraine - 100; pro-government Regions of Ukraine - 63;
Communist Party - 59; pro-government United Social Democratic Party -
34; Democratic Initiatives 14; Union - 17; Centre - 15; opposition Yuliya
Tymoshenko Bloc - 19; Socialist Party - 20; People's Agrarian Party - 20;
National Democratic Party/Party of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs - 16;
United Ukraine - 17; unaffiliated - 35. -30-
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.244: ARTICLE NUMBER SIX
Your comments about the Report are always welcome
========================================================
6. YUSHCHENKO'S TOP ALLY INSPIRES PROTESTORS
The passionate Ukrainian opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko

By Anna Melnichuk, AP Online, Kiev, Ukraine, Fri, Dec 03, 2004

KIEV- Side by side with Viktor Yushchenko, the passionate Ukrainian
opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko has probably done more than anyone
else to inspire hundreds of thousands of protesters to stay out in force in
the aftermath of a disputed election. Elegant but fiery, Tymoshenko has
many detractors among the establishment - and a sea of worshippers
among the protesters. Some have even taken to calling the former deputy
prime minister a "goddess of revolution."

She is the top ally of opposition leader Yushchenko, who favors closer ties
with the West. "She knows how to cheer people up, to make them believe in
what they are doing, believe in their victory," said Andriy Bilous, a
23-year-old doctor who came from Lviv to help treat protesters in tent
camps. "They say: 'Just give me some drug for my throat and I'll come back,'
rejecting advice to stay in a warm place," Bilous said.

Tymoshenko credits the people as the "main player" in nearly two weeks of
mass street protests following the disputed presidential run-off election
between Yushchenko and Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, who was
declared the winner. "They won't give up their will to finally transform the
country," she said Thursday. Tymoshenko warned "the people's actions will
be unpredictable" if the Supreme Court does not rule to cancel the official
results of the runoff. The court's verdict is expected Friday.

Before joining President Leonid Kuchma's foes, the 44-year-old Tymoshenko
headed the now-defunct Unified Energy Systems (UES), Ukraine's
predominant gas dealer and then served as deputy prime minister. Western
observers praised her for pushing through energy sector reforms that angered
influential tycoons. Tymoshenko was ousted from government in 2001 and
turned against Kuchma, forming a faction in the 450-seat parliament.

Volodymyr Kulyk, a political scientist at the Institute of Political and
Ethnic Studies at the National Academy of Sciences, called Tymoshenko "the
most radical participant of Ukrainian opposition movement." Since 2001,
prosecutors have opened several probes against her, and she was jailed
briefly on charges of bribery, money-laundering, corruption and abuse of
power while working for UES. She has dismissed the charges as politically
motivated.

Ahead of the presidential vote, Russian prosecutors demanded her extradition
on charges of bribing Russian defense officials. Tymoshenko has described
the move as part of the Kremlin's efforts to smear the opposition and
ensure the victory of Russia-backed Yanukovych.

She has sought to prevent Yushchenko from forging a compromise with the
government, and tirelessly worked to keep up protesters' spirits during the
round-the clock street vigil that entered its 12th day Friday. Many
supporters say if Yushchenko compromises with the authorities, they will
follow Tymoshenko.

"If not Yushchenko, there will be Tymoshenko," said Serhiy Lebed, a
28-year-old resident of the giant opposition tent camp in central Kiev.
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.244: ARTICLE NUMBER SEVEN
Your comments about the Report are always welcome
========================================================
7. IN HARD-LUCK MINING REGION, YANUKOVYCH WINS
LOYALTY FOR PROVIDING MODEST, YET STABLE,
SALARIES AND PENSIONS

By Yuras Karmanau, AP Worldstream, Fri, Dec 03, 2004

Yevgeny Dogadin's face is that of an old man _ its weary lines carved by
work as difficult as this mining town's troubled past. But Dogadin is just
39. For the past eight years, he has worked at the Ukraina mine, risking his
health and life each time he steps into the elevator for the 500-meter trip
down the shaft where he gouges out the ore that keeps eastern Ukraine's
industries chugging. Two years ago, 35 of his colleagues were killed in a
mine fire. "I'm lucky," he said. "I not only have a job, I get a regular
salary."

Dogadin, who earns 840 hryvna (US$155) a month, attributes his good
fortune to Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych _ the would-be president
whom Ukrainian opposition leaders accuse of vote-rigging. But for Dogadin,
ho carries a small plastic calendar with a portrait of Yanukovych like a
talisman, the premier is the reason why this weary miner has drawn a
regular salary for the past two years.

Like Dogadin, Yanukovych hails from the same coal-producing region of
eastern Ukraine known as the Donbass. In Ukrainsk, Yanukovych defenders
are many, and their passionate support for him stems from the region's
tumultuous economic history. Mine closures in the 1990s prompted an exodus
that whittled down the town's population from 28,000 to 12,000 in just a
decade. Only the Ukraina mine remained open.

Boarded-up windows and doors dot Ukrainsk's five-story, prefabricated
buildings. At night, people take their place in the line that winds around
bonfires near the entrance to the town's only bank where anxious residents
_ fearful that opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko may become president
_ are trying to cash out their savings.

"I'm really afraid that the times of the fascist Yushchenko will return,
when we didn't see money for two or three years," said Maria Basak,
referring to the opposition candidate's tenure as Central Bank head and
prime minister in the 1990s. Those were the years when Ukraine underwent
painful reforms including mine closures that put whole towns out of work.

Basak, who was No. 346 in line to pick up her monthly pension of 280 hryvna
(US$51), said she voted for Yanukovych "because he gave the miners the
possibility to feel a bit like people." Sixty-six-year-old Yegor Sidorenko
lost his job 10 years ago, when the Selidovskaya mine was closed. "Had I
been younger, I would never have set foot here," said the former miner, who
lives on a pension of 300 hryvna (US$55) a month. His is a common refrain.

The majority of apartment buildings in Ukrainsk have not had heating for
that last four years. No one can remember when they last had hot running
water; even the cold water runs just four or five hours a day. "My husband
mines coal for the electric system, but we're freezing," said Svetlana
Matrik, 39, who was huddling with her three children around a wood-burning
stove built into the kitchen.

Still, she has no plans to leave _ unless Yushchenko comes to power. "Then
we'll start packing our bags," she said. "The only question is, where will
we go?" -30- [The Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.244: ARTICLE NUMBER EIGHT
=========================================================
8. NEW CANDIDATES ARE WAY FORWARD, SAYS
UKRAINE STRONGMAN VIKTOR PINCHUK

>From Jeremy Page in Kiev, Times, London, UK, Fri, Dec 3, 2004

UKRAINE'S opposition leader, Viktor Yushchenko, must choose
between becoming President of a divided and bankrupt nation or
severing links with radical allies and sharing power with a compromise
figure, according to one of the country's most powerful men.

Viktor Pinchuk, son-in-law of Leonid Kuchma, the outgoing President,
told The Times that a new presidential election, with some new
candidates, was the only way out of the crisis.

"If he is a patriot, he has to understand the real situation: we must
find a compromise," Mr Pinchuk, a billionaire and member of the
Ukrainian parliament, said. "The best way is for the country to have
new elections as fast as possible. I think Yushchenko has a good
chance to win, but we'll probably see some new candidates."

As he spoke, President Kuchma held talks in Moscow with President
Putin, who backed Mr Yushchenko's opponent, Viktor Yanukovych,
the Prime Minister, and initially recognised his victory in an attempt to
fend off Western encroachment on Moscow's backyard.

In a hurried airport meeting, Mr Putin supported Mr Kuchma's proposal
to hold a new election in the next three months, rather than a quick
repeat of the November 21 run-off between Mr Yushchenko and Mr
Yanukovych.

But Mr Putin said: "A re-vote could be conducted a third, a fourth, a
twenty-fifth time, until one side gets the results it needs. It would
yield nothing."

Mr Kuchma said that after a Supreme Court ruling on the election
results - expected today - the constitution would be changed so that a
government could be formed to organise the new poll. He said that he
was willing to speed the electoral process if parliament agreed to
reforms boosting the powers of the Prime Minister.

Mr Putin and Mr Kuchma want a completely new election so that they
can replace the discredited Mr Yanukovych. The most likely candidate is
Volodymyr Lytvyn, the parliament's speaker. He met Mr Yushchenko
yesterday and is expected to be appointed head of an interim
government. On Wednesday, Mr Yanukovych's Government lost a
no-confidence vote in parliament.

If Mr Yushchenko refuses the compromise offer, he risks splitting the
nation between the Ukrainian-speaking west and the Russian-speaking
east. The heavily industrialised east and south, which account for two
thirds of the nation's GDP, could also refuse to pay taxes or cut off
gas and coal supplies.

Mr Pinchuk said: "If we see this separatist tendency, some regions may
stop payment to the budget - then how will the Government pay
salaries?" If Mr Yushchenko accepts the offer, however, he risks
losing the support of radical opposition allies and the hundreds of
thousands of supporters he has gained over the past 11 days.

Mr Pinchuk said that he had walked through the protesters' tent camp
near Independence Square. "I have nothing against these people, but
some of their leaders are very dangerous," he said. "Some people don't
want compromise, because there would be no role for them in this process."

In particular, Russia and President Kuchma want Mr Yushchenko to ditch
his coalition partner, Yuliya Tymoshenko, who has been the driving
force of the protests and is said to want to be Prime Minister.

Mr Kuchma sacked her as Deputy Prime Minister in 2000 and she was
later accused of taking part in embezzling £1.17 billion while heading
the energy company UES. -30- [Action Ukraine Monitoring]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-1385409,00.html
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.244: ARTICLE NUMBER NINE
Suggested articles for publication in the Report are always welcome
=========================================================
9. OUR MAN AT UKRAINE'S ORANGE REVOLUTION

By MEGHAN CLYNE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
The New York Sun, New York, New York, December 2, 2004

NEW YORK - To many New Yorkers following Ukraine's "Orange
Revolution," recent victories for democracy in Kiev, however welcome,
seem far-removed from their daily lives. Not to Adrian Karatnycky.

As a senior scholar at the pro-democracy organization Freedom House, Mr.
Karatnycky has worked doggedly to ensure that democracy and free, fair
elections emerge as the principal victors from Ukraine's current struggle.
Born 50 years ago in Manhattan to Ukrainian immigrants, Mr. Karatnycky also
represents a community of Americans of Eastern European origin involved with
their ancestral lands and committed to fostering democracy in those
countries. For Mr. Karatnycky, helping Ukrainian democracy is a way of
appreciating family history.

"My grandmother fled the famine," he said. "She got as far as Vienna, where,
exhausted, she decided to turn back. Fortunately, she took the wrong train,
and ended up in Western-controlled territory." "I've always felt a kinship
with these brutalized people," he said, "because if not for an accident
of history, it could've been me."

Over the past year, that sense of kinship has led to heavy involvement in
Ukraine's presidential election. Since the beginning of the campaign there,
Mr. Karatnycky has periodically made the 9,300-mile round-trip to meet
with candidates, other members of Ukraine's political elite, civic groups,
and recipients of grants from Freedom House. His itinerary typically
included
meetings with key aides to Mr. Yushchenko, and when the opposition
candidate visited New York, Mr. Karatnycky often acted as his liaison,
arranging meetings with American groups interested in his campaign, such
as the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.

Also in the past year, Mr. Karatnycky and Freedom House, along with the
National Democratic Institute, have assembled 1,023 election monitors from
countries of Central and Eastern Europe to form the European Network of
Election Monitoring Organizations, which observed the vote in Ukraine and
documented fraud there.

He was also involved in a training camp for Ukrainian pro-democracy
activists that took place in August. "Croatians, Romanians, Slovakians,
and Serbians - leaders of the group that led civic opposition to Milosevic -
taught Ukrainian kids how to 'control the temperature' of protesting
crowds," Mr. Karatnycky said.

They were told how to confront pressure from the government and
how to show that pro-democracy civic groups are not "part of an evil
Western conspiracy." They were also taught techniques for conducting
street theater, poking fun at leaders to reduce fear of them among the
general population, and establishing connections with the militia.

The results of that education, Mr. Karatnycky said, can be seen today
on the streets of Kiev. Although many of his pro-democracy efforts will
benefit Mr. Yushchenko, Mr. Karatnycky said, he added that he
"scrupulously tried to include both sides" in his Ukraine meetings.

"If Yanukovich had won honestly, it would have meant a more corrupt
government," Mr. Karatnycky said, "but I understand that people could
have supported him honestly."

He added: "I like Yushchenko. He's pro-Western, with an American wife.
His father was a prisoner in Auschwitz, and the family helped save Jews
in World War II. He's a good man who will bring reform." Mr.
Karatnycky's work, however, is nonpartisan, he said, and he is "really
on the side of the democratic process."

His efforts in behalf of that process took Mr. Karatnycky back to Kiev as
an election monitor for the second-round runoff Nov. 21. There, he said, he
personally witnessed widespread fraud, particularly abuses of absentee and
mobile ballots.

Before Thanksgiving, Mr. Karatnycky said, he also witnessed the protests in
the capital's main square, where he saw activists, ranging from young girls
to university students to Eastern Rite Catholic nuns, demanding that Mr.
Yuschenko be declared the legitimate president.

Since his return to New York, Mr. Karatnycky's involvement has scarcely
lagged. Tuesday afternoon - a typical one, for Mr. Karatnycky - his
schedule was filled with Ukraine-related activities.

At 2 p.m., he met with other Freedom House scholars to revisit Ukraine's
civil-liberties ranking in the institution's 2005 "Freedom in the World"
survey, in light of the fallout from the presidential runoff. After fielding
several journalists' inquiries in his unofficial role as a go-to authority
on Ukrainian democracy, it was off to Manhattan's heavily Ukrainian and
Polish East Village, where Mr. Karatnycky makes his home, and where
the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America has its headquarters.

At 4:30, Mr. Karatnycky met with Tamara Gallo, the committee's executive
director, who is another Ukrainian-American heavily involved in the
electoral process. She, like Mr. Karatnycky, went to Ukraine as an election
monitor, and she has been mobilizing the Ukrainian-American community in
support of the Orange Revolution since her return. According to Ms. Gallo,
it hasn't required extraordinary effort.

Ukrainian-Americans have become a more cohesive and active group
since last year, she said. "The 70th anniversary of the famine, and the
campaign to get Duranty's Pulitzer rescinded, really brought people out
of the woodwork," she said. Walter Duranty was a Moscow
correspondent for the New York Times whose work has been largely
discredited as Stalinist propaganda. This year's election, Ms. Gallo
added, was another example of Russian interference in Ukraine that
mobilized immigrants and descendants of immigrants.

These two descendants of Ukrainian immigrants, Ms. Gallo and Mr.
Karatnycky, spent the hour coordinating their immediate pro-democracy
efforts. Those include getting the top of the Empire State Building
illuminated in orange; tying orange ribbons across New York tonight in
solidarity with protesters in Kiev, and seeking to arrange a meeting of
leaders of the Ukrainian community with President Bush.

To Mr. Karatnycky, the international outpouring of Ukrainian pro-democracy
sentiment is the fruit of seeds planted long ago. Mr. Karatnycky served as
president of Freedom House from 1996 to 2003 and as executive director from
1993 to 1996. In those capacities, he helped create in Ukraine a network of
think tanks, civic organizations, and other organs necessary for a
functioning democracy - including exit polling, media monitoring, and
votereducation organizations. Without that framework, he said, it is much
less likely that Mr. Yanukovich's fraud would have been revealed, or that
millions of Ukrainians would have taken such a vocal interest in their
country's political destiny.

In a speech Tuesday evening at the Knickerbocker Club, which was sponsored
by the Hudson Institute, Mr. Karatnycky speculated as to what that destiny
might be. Ukraine, he said, "is a real test case for democratic hegemony."
President Putin of Russia, he said, "was sold a bill of goods that he could
reconstitute his own mini-KGB empire." A victory for Mr. Yanukovich,
another ex-KGB agent, in Ukraine, Mr. Karatnycky explained, would
be a "Putin miracle."

Yet Mr. Karatnycky continued to express optimism that the eastern parts of
Ukraine, now holding autonomy referendums, would not secede. Nor does
he envision the "Putin miracle" materializing. Mr. Yanukovich's best hope of
staying in power, Mr. Karatnycky said, will be to try to wear down the
protesters through various stalling tactics. But Mr. Karatnycky said, "The
protesters have paralyzed the government. There are no ministries open for
business. There are a million-and-a-half people demonstrating in rotating
shifts. They can always assemble swarming crowds."

Those signs, he said, point to a victory for Mr. Yushchenko. "He has already
sworn an oath of office," Mr. Karatnycky said. "And there are no indications
that the military will act. They have said, 'We want a peaceful resolution,
it's not our place to intervene.'"

Mr. Karatnycky also reported that the KGB is "cooperating nicely" with
Mr. Yushchenko, in that it has turned over evidence on tapes and wiretaps
demonstrating collaboration between the Yanukovich campaign and
Moscow in an attempt to rig the vote count. "I think the 'orange revolution'
will win this time, and I can't conceive of a set of circumstances under
which Yushchenko won't be president of the country," he said.

Similarly optimistic is Radek Sikorski, executive director of the New
Atlantic Initiative at the American Enterprise Institute. Mr. Sikorski, too,
was an election observer, with the International Republican Institute. Born
in communist Poland, he is another longtime advocate of democracy for
Eastern Europe, particularly through his work with the Polish Solidarity
movement.

"When I was in Kiev last month," he said, "the atmosphere very much
reminded me of Solidarity in the 1980s - people rising up to their feet,
saying, 'We won't give in to your corrupt schemes any more.'" Ukrainians,
he said, "are full of hope and foreboding at the same time." He added
that they look for backing from the West, and that even symbolic
gestures help.

"That's why it was so beautiful to have Lech Walesa there, giving them
support," Mr. Sikorski said. "It says, 'If he can do it, we can.'"
If they indeed "can" - if democracy triumphs in Kiev, and if Mr. Yushchenko
is victorious - Mr. Karatnycky said he will by no means stop observing
events in his parents' homeland.

"I think for the next few years it will be very important to build support
for this reformist regime, and to help civil society keep even a reformist
government honest - because even they can drift from their agenda," he said.
"It is always important to help civic life, to ensure that the media deepen
their independence, professionalism, and objectivity," Mr. Karatnycky said.
"These are the things I'd like to keep doing." -30-
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 244: ARTICLE NUMBER TEN
Names for the distribution list always welcome
=========================================================
10. EUROPE WARNED OVER GROWING DEPENDENCY
ON RUSSIAN PIPED GAS

By Kevin Morrison and Javier Blas in London and Paivi Munter, in Moscow
Financial Times, London, United Kingdom, Friday, December 3 2004

LONDON - The European Union's growing dependence on Russian gas piped
through Ukraine and the monopoly ambitions of Gazprom, the state-controlled
company, are threatening EU energy security, the International Energy Agency
warned yesterday.

At a time when China and Japan are increasingly looking to Russia to meet
their rising energy demands, Claude Mandil, the director of the IEA, the
energy adviser to the industrialised countries, warned: "Governments have
been too early in thinking there would never be supply issues with natural
gas and electricity."

Russia is the world's largest gas producer. EU countries, excluding the 10
new members, buy 40 per cent of their gas imports from the former Soviet
Union, most of which is supplied by Gazprom. Some new members depend
entirely on Russia.

The IEA's alert about Russian supplies came after German Gref, Russian
economy minister, warned that Gazprom's proposed purchase of Yugansk,
Yukos's main oil producer, would erode its efficiency and could invite legal
action from Europe.

The IEA said Russian support for the merger of Rosneft, another state-owned
oil company, and Gazprom "lends credence to the view that the Russian
government is interested in clawing back interest and control in the oil
sector". Fatih Birol, the IEA's chief economist, said this week: "We are
concerned that Gazprom takes over many responsibilities and we want to
see more competition."

This is the first time that the IEA has warned so strongly about the risk of
gas supplies from Russia, although the EU had previously identified
dependence on Russian gas as a concern. The IEA said the diversification
of gas supply from Russia and Algeria was essential for the EU's energy
security. It also pointed out the risks of unrest in Ukraine.

The IEA's call for diversification follows confirmation by the German
government this week that Berlin was actively encouraging energy companies
to invest in the Russian oil sector.

* Oil prices fell heavily for the second consecutive day with US benchmark
crude futures $2.24 lower, at $43.25 a barrel, extending the $3.64 slide the
previous day. The oil price has fallen about 15 per cent in the past three
days as inventories have begun to rise ahead of the Organisation of
Petroleum Exporting Countries meeting in Cairo next week.

The IEA yesterday urged Opec to keep production unchanged and allow
inventories to be replenished this winter in spite of the recent sharp
decline in oil prices. -30- [The Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 244: ARTICLE NUMBER ELEVEN
Letters to the editor are always welcome
=========================================================
11. "A TIPPING POINT FOR DEMOCRACY"
Political Changes in Russia Highlight Tenuous Nature
Of Relationship With U.S.

THE MACRO INVESTOR: By STEVE LIESMAN
The Wall Street Journal, New York, NY, Friday, Dec 3, 2004

Whether looking at the proposed end of gubernatorial elections in Russia,
the press clampdowns in Belarus or the allegedly fraudulent Ukrainian
election, we clearly are at a critical tipping point for democracy in the
former Soviet Union.

These developments are worrisome on their face; in the former Soviet Union,
some 202 million people seem adrift away from democracy. But they also
are troubling for the future of free trade and foreign investment in the
region, and less obviously, for their effects on big U.S. multinational
businesses.

The collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical development
since the end of World War II. The benefits flowed in the form of freedom to
the people of Eastern Europe and Asia, and to average Americans, who saw
the burden of their Cold War defense budgets reduced by tens of billions of
dollars.

Are we about to lose those benefits? Can we join with Germany and France
and others in Europe to put democracy back on track in that part of the
world, or has the Iraqi war divided us so that we can no longer work
together toward what used to be a common goal?

At this point, we seem on the verge of an equally dramatic development:
The spread of a China-style model to big chunks of the former Soviet Union,
with an open economy but a closed or semiclosed political system? In
Moscow this summer, I asked World Bank economist Christof Ruhl about
whether this would work in Russia.

"For a limited period this may be beneficial," he told me. "But one has to
recognize that, in the long term, nobody goes without having the kind of
freedom and debate, this sort of productive chaos, which generates change."

What got me thinking about this question were comments from many foreign
businessmen I spoke with who welcomed the stability offered by Russian
President Vladimir Putin. Mr. Ruhl went on, "For a while, the most
benevolent dictator . may be able to do good things. I just don't know of
anyone who did it forever. I don't think this will be different in this
respect."

On my trip to Moscow, the country looked better than ever economically.
The oil boom had filtered, to an extent, down to the street level. But
politically it seemed to have taken many steps backward.

Television was under firm state control. Mikhail Khodorkovsky, founder of
the Russian oil giant OAO Yukos, was in jail on what everyone was openly
calling a trumped-up tax charge. The government is about to settle part of
Yukos's reported $24 billion tax bill by selling the company's main
production unit at an auction where the starting price is just $8.65
billion.

Is that the stability that foreign business executives were applauding? If
Mr. Ruhl is right about the limited benefits of the China model, then these
businessmen had a short-sighted view. From a strictly "brass tacks" point of
view for business, the chaos engendered by democracy provides stability for
regime change.

Note the plight of Mr. Khodorkovsky. Whatever his "contract" was with the
Yeltsin regime, it didn't survive the change to the Putin regime. And the
prosecution of him and Yukos for tax fraud raises serious questions about
the rule of law in the country -- even while Russian government officials
try to sell it as just the opposite.

"Certainly, pretending that the Yukos case is an example of the rule of law
cannot fool the Russians any longer," said Sergei Guriev, rector of the New
Economic School in Moscow, wrote recently in the Moscow Times daily
newspaper. "We all lived in the Soviet Union, and we all learned how to
decipher official propaganda."

Foreign companies aren't fooled either. The fall of the Soviet Union was a
watershed for American multinationals like Coca-Cola, Boeing and Deere,
potentially opening up to the companies a market the size of the U.S. True,
the ensuing decade wasn't easy for those plying the new market, but some
found success and others held out hope. It isn't surprising now that no
multinational oil companies have lined up to bid on the Yukos unit soon to
be on the block.

Within days of the Ukrainian election's disputed outcome, Mr. Putin, through
a spokesman, called it "open and honest." The U.S. certainly doesn't feel
the same way, and has bounced around between taking hard and soft lines
with Mr. Putin on the issue.

I don't envy the Bush administration for its choices here. Unlike the 1990s,
we seem to need Russia now more than it needs us. Russia has become a far
more important supplier of oil to the world. We have enlisted Russia's help
in the war on terrorism and are keen not to see the Putin government take an
active role opposing our war in Iraq. Part of Mr. Putin's popularity draws
in part from his image as a man who stands up to Western pressure and who
provides stability. The harder we push, the further away we might push him,
meaning we could be faced with giving in on Ukraine for the sake of our
Russia relationship.

How does all this stand up against our foreign policy objectives of
spreading democracy around the world? Would it not be a fool's bargain to
sacrifice democracy for some 202 million in Ukraine , Russia and Belarus,
for 25 million people in Iraq? [If you'd like to reach Steve Liesman, write
to him at steve.liesman@nbcuni.com, and place "Attn: Macro Investor"
in the subjectline.] -30- The Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 244: ARTICLE NUMBER TWELVE
Letters to the editor are always welcome
=========================================================
12. "VOTE OF CONFIDENCE"

IN THE LOOP: by Al Kamen, The Washington Post
Washington, D.C., Friday, December, 3, 2004

In these unsettled times, it's refreshing to know you can count on some
things. So in late October, when former Michigan representative Milton
Robert "Bob" Carr led a group of Democratic ex-congressmen to Ukraine
to monitor the first round of elections -- a trip paid for by Aleksei
Kiselev, a lobbyist for the government-backed candidate -- it could only
be hoped they would find everything went reasonably well. And, sure
enough, that's what they found.

Carr led a second delegation of observers in the final round of the hotly
contested elections. The members included Norman E. D'Amours (N.H.),
Michael P. Forbes (N.Y.), Michael D. Ward (Ky.) and David W. Evans
(Ind.).

The same lobbyist apparently picked up expenses, business-class airfare
and fine hotels, plus a $500-per-day stipend for each observer.

Even so, at a news conference after the voting, in which the government-
backed candidate was declared the victor, it was not certain what Carr's
observer group would do. After all, pretty much every other monitoring
group -- from the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe,
the European Network of Election Monitoring Organizations, Ukrainian
monitors and the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs --
all came to the same conclusion: To wit, there was widespread fraud by
the government.

On the other hand, former KGB thug, now Russian president, Vladimir
Putin, a stranger to democratic ways and pal of Ukraine's strongman
government, thought the elections were fine.

But President Bush's representative in Kiev, Senate Foreign Relations
Committee Chairman Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), blasted "illegal
expulsions of opposition members of election commissions; inaccurate
voter lists; evidence of students, government employees and private
sector workers being forced by their deans and supervisors to vote for
one candidate . . . busloads of people voting more than once with
absentee ballots; representatives of the media being beaten and their
equipment stolen or destroyed. . . ." Lugar condemned "corrupt
authorities [who] tried to disrupt, frighten and intimidate citizens."

So what did Carr's delegation conclude?

"Were there problems?" Carr asked at a post-election news conference.
"Definitely." But his group had gone to 48 -- of 33,000 -- polling places
and generally "found minor and non-material violations." So we should
"congratulate" the elections officials, he said, for their "hard work and
dedication and for a job well done."

Good to see some people still know how to dance with them that
brung 'em. [Rest of Post column not shown, it is not about Ukraine]
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 244: ARTICLE NUMBER THIRTEEN
Letters to the editor are always welcome
=========================================================
13. "ORANGE BOOM"

OBSERVER: Financial Times, London, UK, December 3 2004

The European parliament usually has difficulty organising a roll call, so
how to explain the mass appearance of hundreds of orange scarves
as MEPs debated the crisis in Ukraine yesterday? Step forward
Jacek Saryusz-Wolski and his fellow members of the centre-right
Civic Platform from Poland.

The MEP sent an assistant out to find 1,000 scarves and paid for
half of them himself, the rest coming from a whip-round of colleagues.
Nevertheless, Observer hears some of the more couture-conscious
MEPs went out to buy their own, designer, brands. observer@ft.com
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 244: ARTICLE NUMBER FOURTEEN
=========================================================
14. "NO CHICKEN KIEV"

By Clay Harris, Financial Times, London, UK, Friday, Dec 3 2004

Perhaps bravely, considering the turmoil in his homeland, Ihor Mitiukov,
Ukraine's ambassador to the UK, kept his appointment yesterday to
speak at a British-Ukrainian Chamber of Commerce lunch.

His remarks were covered by Chatham House rules, but Mudlark
understands he steered a neutral course. A photo of the occasion,
however, might have sent a different message. By coincidence, the
backdrop at the London Chamber of Commerce was bright orange,
the campaign colour of Viktor Yushchenko, under whom Mitiukov
served as finance minister. -30- [Action Ukraine Monitoring Service]
=========================================================
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
========================================================