US-Ukraine Business Council

"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"

YANUKOVYCH SAYS BUSINESS PEOPLE IN EAST UKRAINE
MORE CIVILIZED THAN WEST UKRAINIANS

He announced this in his speech at the House of Trade Unions in Kherson.
"You are not afraid of Donetsk entrepreneurs, you are afraid of those in
Ternopil and Ivano-Frankivsk. Those guys from glens are hungry,"
Yanukovych said and added that entrepreneurs from Donetsk region are
doing business in a more civilized manner.

The candidate noted that West Ukrainian businesspeople also work mainly
lawfully, but they commit more violations. "And unlawfulness is larger than
in the east," he said. [article number four]

"THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT" Year 04, Number 261
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, THURSDAY, December 16, 2004

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

1. UKRAINE JUDGES UNDER PRESSURE OVER RULING
ON DEPUTY OF THE SBU SECRET POLICE
Tom Warner in Kiev, Financial Times, London, UK, Thu, Dec 16 2004

2. RUSSIAN LIBERAL ATTACKS KREMLIN UKRAINE STANCE
By Chrystia Freeland in London and Arkady Ostrovsky in Moscow
Financial Times, London, UK, Wed, December 15 2004

3. "PUTIN IS A VICTIM OF HIS OWN ERRORS"
By Quentin Peel, Columnist, Financial Times, London, UK, Dec16 2004

4. YANUKOVYCH SAYS BUSINESSPEOPLE IN EAST UKRAINE
MORE CIVILIZED THAN WEST UKRAINIANS
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thu, December 16, 2004

5. YANUKOVYCH'S EX-PRESS SECRETARY, HANNA HERMAN,
TO CONTINUE WORKING ON HIS BEHALF
UNIAN news agency, Kiev, in Ukrainian, 11 Dec 04
BBC Monitoring Service,UK, in English, Sat, Dec 11, 2004

6. "THE $65 M QUESTION"
Timothy Garton Ash, Columnist
The Guardian, London, UK, Thu, Dec 2004

7. DUTCH DEPUTY PM CASTS VOTE FOR YUSHCHENKO
Comments are rebuff to EU neutrality
By Graham Bowley and Judy Dempsey
International Herald Tribune, Europe, Thursday, Dec 16, 2004

8. "THE UNITED STATES STAKE IN UKRAINE"
OP-ED By William R. Hawkins, The Washington Times
Washington, D.C., Thu, December 16, 2004

9. CHOCOLATE KING PUTS MARK ON UKRAINE VOTE
By Natasha Lisova, Associated Press Writer
AP, Kiev, Ukraine, Thu, December 16, 2004

10. ROMANIA: ON COURSE FOR EU
Success of Viktor Yushchenko...helped galvanise the campaign
EDITORIAL: Financial Times, London, UK, Wed, Dec 15, 2004

11. UKRAINIAN PARLIAMENT ADOPTS PRESIDENTIAL
INAUGURATION PROCEDURE
Interfax-Ukraine news agency, Kiev, in Russian, 14 Dec 04
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Tue, Dec 14, 2004

12. DIVIDING THE UKRAINE, PUTIN'S IMPERIAL DREAM
By Vytautas Landsbergis, Project Syndicate
Jakarta Post, Jakarta, Indonesia, Thu, December 16, 2004

13. 'NEVER SAY NEVER'
The Ukrainian revolution and the renaissance of democracy.
OPINION: By Claudia Rosett
The Wall Street Journal, NY, NY, Wed, Dec 15, 2004

14. "THE STAKES IN UKRAINE"
Jim Hoagland, Columnist, The Washington Post
Washington, D.C., Thursday, December 16, 2004; Page A37
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 261: ARTICLE NUMBER ONE
========================================================
1. UKRAINE JUDGES UNDER PRESSURE OVER RULING
ON DEPUTY OF THE SBU SECRET POLICE

Tom Warner in Kiev, Financial Times, London, UK, Thu, Dec 16 2004

KIEV - Ukrainian judges were under pressure to reverse a decision stripping
Volodymyr Satsyuk, deputy chief of the SBU secret police, of parliamentary
immunity, Volodymyr Lytvyn, the speaker of Ukraine's parliament, said
yesterday.

Mr Satsyuk hosted a meeting with Viktor Yushchenko, the opposition leader,
hours before the latter's poisoning symptoms appeared in early September. An
investigation by Ukraine's prosecutor-general into the poisoning of the
presidential candidate is under way.

The Kiev city appellate court ruled on Tuesday that Mr Satsyuk should be
stripped of his status as an MP, which had the effect of lifting his
immunity to prosecution, on the grounds that members of parliament are not
allowed to hold other executive positions.

But Leonid Kuchma, the outgoing president, is pushing to restore his
immunity, which could block any investigation of his conduct. Mr Lytvyn,
speaking in parliament yesterday, said the court's judges were being
"pressured" to reverse their ruling and reinstate Mr Satsyuk's parliamentary
status after Mr Kuchma had signed a decree dismissing Mr Satsyuk from his
SBU job. Mr Lytvyn said the decree was dated Monday but had come to light
only after the court ruling.

Mr Lytvyn's speech provoked outrage from Mr Yushchenko's supporters in
parliament, who called for an investigation of the presidential decree.

Mr Yushchenko had met SBU chief Igor Smeshko and Mr Satsyuk at the latter's
villa outside Kiev on the night of September 5-6 to discuss the SBU's role
in the presidential elections. Mr Yushchenko fell ill the next day and his
condition gradually deteriorated until he was flown to the Rudolfinerhaus
clinic in Vienna three days later.

Mr Kuchma's move to shield his ally follows earlier attempts by his family
members to combat allegations that Mr Yushchenko was poisoned. The
allegations were confirmed only last weekend when the Rudolfinerhaus clinic
said it had found concentrations of dioxin in Mr Yushchenko's blood more
than 1,000 times greater than normal levels.

Dr Michael Zimpfer, president of the clinic, said: "As far as I understand,
[dioxins] can be produced by almost any laboratory." Abraham Brouwer, a
Dutch professor who is analysing Mr Yushchenko's blood samples, said the
concentration of dioxin in his blood was the second-highest ever recorded in
a human and more than 6,000 times higher than normal levels.

But Mr Brouwer said tests would identify the precise type of dioxin and take
a chemical "fingerprint" that could be compared to particular production
batches.

Dr Zimpfer said he expected to have the results by the end of this week.
John Henry, a British professor who suggested the dioxin diagnosis in the
journal Nature last month, said people exposed to large dioxin doses could
live full, healthy lives with proper care and treatment. But he said Mr
Yushchenko's facial rash would last "at least two or three years".
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Mr Yanukovich yesterday threatened to bring tens of thousands of
supporters to Kiev to "prevent a coup" after the December 26 elections. He
said he had signed up 30,000 volunteers during a campaign stop at
Sevastopol.
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.261: ARTICLE NUMBER TWO
========================================================
2. RUSSIAN LIBERAL ATTACKS KREMLIN UKRAINE STANCE

By Chrystia Freeland in London and Arkady Ostrovsky in Moscow
Financial Times, London, UK, Wed, December 15 2004

MOSCOW - Yegor Gaidar, the architect of Russia's market reforms and
one of the country's leading liberals, condemned the Kremlin's policy
towards Ukraine as "stupid" and said the triumph of the opposition
there would be a catalyst for democratic changes in Russia.

"The processes in Ukraine are a hugely important factor which will
influence Russian politics," Mr Gaidar, a former acting prime
minister, said in an interview with the Financial Times. "This is the
first stone thrown at the edifice of Russia's managed democracy."

Mr Gaidar said that the popular support for Ukraine's democratic
opposition had re-ignited interest in politics among Russians,
particularly young people.

"The events in Ukraine have inspired a level of politicisation among
the Russian youth I haven't seen in years," he said.

However, Sergei Markov, a political adviser to the Kremlin who
worked in Ukraine for the government's candidate, warned that popular
protests "orchestrated by some western institutions" could lead to a
clampdown on the activities of international non-governmental
organisations in Russia.

"Unfortunately there are people [in the Kremlin] who think that
international organisations are playing a subversive role in Russia
and undermining the county's independence," Mr Markov said.

Mr Markov said that the results of the Ukrainian elections "could
become a strategic defeat" for Russia if Viktor Yushchenko, the
opposition leader, won the rerun of the elections.

Mr Markov said the responsibility for Russia's failure in Ukraine
rested with the country's political elite, including the Kremlin.
"Ukraine has shown that our ruling elite is incompetent and badly
prepared for resolving big strategic tasks," he said.

Vladimir Putin, Russia's president, aggressively supported Viktor
Yanukovich, the prime minister and candidate of the authoritarian
Ukrainian regime in the election. Mr Putin's support and the
instrumental role Russian advisers played in his campaign have hurt
Russia's standing with the west and could complicate its relations
with Ukraine.

Mr Yanukovich now looks almost certain to be defeated by Mr
Yushchenko when Ukrainians return to vote on December 26.

Mr Markov said the Kremlin's objective was not to back Mr Yanukovich,
but to prevent Mr Yushchenko coming to power. "Yushchenko himself is
not a threat. But he is a weak politician surrounded by nationalists
and radicals who want to root out our Russian language and culture and
sacrifice Russia's economic relations to nationalistic ideology."

Mr Yushchenko has insisted he is keen to establish good, productive
relations with Russia.

Mr Gaidar said he thought Mr Yushchenko would be a good neighbour
and that the Kremlin now should admit to having made a mistake and
seek to normalise relations.

Mr Gaidar said: "It is hard to conceive of a more stupid way of
conducting policy towards your closest and most important neighbour."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/b8e09158-4ecb-11d9-9488-00000e2511c8.html
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.261: ARTICLE NUMBER THREE
========================================================
3. "PUTIN IS A VICTIM OF HIS OWN ERRORS"

Quentin Peel, Columnist, Financial Times, London, UK, Thu, Dec16 2004

The image of Vladimir Putin as the strong man of Russia, reimposing the
control of the Kremlin over the country's chaotic regions, is not one that
has endeared him to the west. His concept of "managed democracy" sounds like
an oxymoron, and his tough measures to clip the wings of the wealthiest
oligarchs have alarmed foreign investors in their companies.

Yet the received wisdom remains that he has brought back order where his
predecessor, Boris Yeltsin, left chaos, while his ringing rhetoric in
defence of the Russian Motherland has ensured his continuing popularity.

That image has taken a severe knock from Mr Putin's miscalculation of the
popular revolt in Ukraine. He threw all his weight behind the presidential
candidacy of Viktor Yanukovich, the prime minister, only to find the
elections annulled for rampant rigging. Some even suspect the Kremlin of
having had a hand in the poisoning of Viktor Yushchenko, the rival
candidate who is now widely expected to win the rematch on December
6. Suddenly the strong man in the Kremlin seems to have backed a loser.

"In Ukraine, he tried to show the west that Russia still has all the
instruments to defend its legitimate sphere of influence," says Fyodor
Lukyanov, editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs, a leading foreign
policy magazine. "Instead we see the biggest defeat since the beginning of
the new Russia."

It is certainly a terrible blow to Mr Putin's own ideal of a "post-Soviet
space" in which Russia would be the dominant political force and arbitrator
of all disputes: Moscow's version of the Monroe doctrine. Instead, it was
Aleksander Kwasniewski, Poland's president, and Javier Solana, the European
Union foreign affairs supremo, who negotiated a deal for both contenders in
Ukraine to back the new elections.

On the very day Mr Kwasniewski arrived in Kiev, the Russian Duma was
debating the date for a new National Day to replace the present celebration
of the Russian Revolution on November 7. The most popular choice was
November 4, to commemorate the day in 1612 when Polish armed forces
were expelled from the Kremlin. The bitter irony was not missed in Moscow.

The successful Polish arbitration is even more traumatic for the Russian
political establishment than the earlier expansion of the Nato alliance to
take in most of the former Warsaw Pact members. Suddenly the political
consequences of EU enlargement, including the reality that Poland and its
neighbours will have a big say in relations with Russia, have been brought
home to Mr Putin's team.

Yet the miscalculation in Ukraine is not the first time Mr Putin has put a
foot wrong in his "near-abroad". It marks the culmination of a series of
blunders. He failed to force a deal on Moldova that would have given
widespread powers to the crime-ridden Russian-speaking enclave of Trans
Dnestr. He misread the popular rebellion in Georgia that led to the
overthrow of Eduard Shevardnadze, the former Soviet foreign minister. He
also tried to persuade Aleksandr Lukashenko, the populist autocrat in
Belarus who is supposed to be a loyal ally, not to hold a referendum to
change the constitution so that he could run for a third term in office: his
strong advice was ignored.

The Kiev debacle coincided with another in Abkhazia, the Russian-backed
enclave that is demanding independence from Georgia. Once again, Moscow
backed the loser in the recent presidential election there, even though
there was no apparent reason to choose between two pro-Russian candidates.
When they decided it would be politic to hold another vote, Russia objected
(it was resisting a similar decision in Ukraine), only to be told to get
lost.

For most ordinary Russians, such nonsenses in tiresome parts of the former
Soviet Union are irrelevant (although Ukraine is special: it is a Slav
republic). People are largely indifferent, focusing instead on far more
relevant questions of deteriorating healthcare, crumbling schools and lack
of investment in public infrastructure. Those who have benefited from the
oil price boom are a small minority of conspicuous consumers, and very
little of the cash has reached the provinces.

At least ordinary wage-earners and pensioners are being paid, which is a
considerable improvement on the bad days under Mr Yeltsin. The trouble is
that, by pulling all the reins of power into his own hands, Mr Putin risks
taking all the blame when things go wrong. That could happen in the next two
years, if oil prices fall and there is a popular backlash against shrinking
pensions and social spending.

Mr Putin presides over what is still a largely incompetent bureaucracy,
overstaffed, corrupt and underpaid. Although his campaign against the
oligarchs (including the jailing of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, Yukos head) has
been popular it has been erratically executed, sending conflicting signals
to investors. The latest imposition of a huge tax bill on Vimpelcom, the
telecommunications operator, has only aggravated the impression of a
vengeful state bent on personal vendettas. Now the same incompetence seems
to have affected the political advisers on the near-abroad.

How much longer can the US and EU carry on tolerating the prickliness of Mr
Putin? No one wants to alienate Russia, but the president seems to be
hell-bent on doing it himself. If he chooses to cover up his mistakes in
Ukraine with another crackdown on civil liberties at home, it may well be
time to consider if it is wise to let him preside over next year's Group of
Eight summit in Moscow. (E-mail: quentin.peel@ft.com) -30-
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 261: ARTICLE NUMBER FOUR
========================================================
4. YANUKOVYCH SAYS BUSINESSPEOPLE IN EAST UKRAINE
MORE CIVILIZED THAN WEST UKRAINIANS

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thu, December 16, 2004

KYIV - Presidential candidate, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych has
said that entrepreneurs in East Ukraine are more civilized than those
doing business in the western parts of the country.

The candidate noted that West Ukrainian businesspeople also work mainly
lawfully, but they commit more violations. "And unlawfulness is larger than
in the east," he said.

As Ukrainian News earlier reported, Yanukovych left for Mykolaiv and
Kherson to campaign on Wednesday morning. -30-
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.261: ARTICLE NUMBER FIVE
Please send us names for the free distribution list
========================================================
5. YANUKOVYCH'S EX-PRESS SECRETARY, HANNA HERMAN,
TO CONTINUE WORKING ON HIS BEHALF

UNIAN news agency, Kiev, in Ukrainian, 11 Dec 04
BBC Monitoring Service,UK, in English, Sat, Dec 11, 2004

KIEV - Hanna Herman [press secretary of Prime Minister and presidential
candidate Viktor Yanukovych] has said from 11 December to the end of the
presidential campaign she will not perform the duties of the prime
minister's press secretary, but would remain a member of Viktor Yanukovych's
team in order to "provide the high-quality unbiased journalistic service
that current coverage of this politician lacks so much".

She said in a statement forwarded to the UNIAN news agency that she wanted
"to communicate this once again to the citizens of Ukraine, political
organizations, parties, news agencies and foreign diplomatic missions and
all journalists".

"I was forced to take this step because of the extremely biased climate in
the mass media. The majority of mass media provide biased and unfair
coverage of events in Ukraine, presidential candidate Viktor Yanukovych and
his campaign. Given this situation, I believe it is my duty to uphold the
standards of journalism, professional ethics and journalistic duty to be
fair, independent and provide society with unbiased information," said Hanna
Herman.

She said that "this, and nothing but this" has made her resign as the prime
minister's press secretary and to become an independent journalist.
"During my employment with Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych I had a chance
to find out and assess his professional and human qualities, which gave me
reason to believe that he is an official and politician of the highest
quality," said Herman.

She said that she wanted her "fellow journalists to make this statement
known and not to treat it as yesterday's statement to the same effect. This
would give them a chance to demonstrate their impartiality towards me and
Prime Minister Yanukovych".

The UNIAN agency reports that yesterday, 10 December, it did not receive any
statements from Hanna Herman. That is why it had to refer to the Ukrayinska
Pravda web site in breaking the news that Hanna Stetsiv-Herman was no longer
Yanukovych's press secretary. -30- [Action Ukraine Monitoring Service]
===========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.261: ARTICLE NUMBER SIX
===========================================================
6. THE $65 M QUESTION

Timothy Garton Ash, Columnist,
The Guardian, London, UK, Thu, Dec 2004

When, how - and where - should we promote democracy? First we
need the facts

Would you rather have democracies next door, or dictatorships?
Democracies, right? If they are genuine liberal democracies, they are
better for the people who live in them and for their neighbours. So, why
not promote democracy in neighbouring countries? Or do you think we
have obligations only to compatriots, and interests only within the
frontiers
of our nation-state? If you consider it a matter of complete indifference
whether another country's rulers oppress, torture, poison and murder
political opponents or ethnic and religious groups within the boundaries
of their state, then you need read no further. You will save five precious
minutes of your time. Have a nice day.

Oh, you're still there? Then let's get to the real question: how? We know
the wrong way: Iraq. But what's the right way? Which means of promoting
democracy are effective and justified? There's a whole library on the
criteria for military intervention; almost nothing on those for promoting
democracy.

The question is prompted by controversy about the role of western money
in Ukraine's orange revolution, but it goes far beyond that. The Bush
administration has put "the democratisation of the wider Middle East" at
the top of its foreign policy agenda for the next four years. Do we disagree
with the end or simply Washington's proposed means?

To kick-start this important debate, here's a very preliminary attempt to
lay out a few first principles:

1. War is not justified simply to promote democracy. So, the Iraq war was
wrong. It would have been justified, in my view, if Saddam Hussein had been
committing a genocide against his people at the time we went to war, or if
he really was on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons, but he wasn't, so
it wasn't. Using the promotion of democracy as the main justification for
that war risks giving democracy a bad name.

2. Spies keep out! Whether or not you think intelligence services are a
necessary evil in a dangerous world, they should have nothing to do with
supporting democrats in other countries. CIA involvement can be the kiss
of death - sometimes literally - for dissidents. And there's nothing the
enemies of democracy-promoters like more than to tar them with the "spy"
brush.

3. Maximum transparency. Those who give money to would-be democrats
in non-democratic places are sometimes reluctant to say where the money is
from and who they've given it to: perhaps because they are embarrassed by
the source (which again raises the "spy" spectre); because the source is
entirely respectable but prefers anonymity (as some old-fashioned
millionaires still do); or, most legitimately, because revealing where the
money went can threaten the freedom and even the lives of those who
receive it. But, subject to that constraint, funders should reveal as much
as possible as soon as possible.

For example, in the last years of the cold war I was active, with the
sociologist Ralf Dahrendorf, the historian François Furet, the Swedish
writer Per Wastberg and others, in a charity that supported central and east
European publishing, including samizdat journals and books. The project
clearly identified the western foundations that funded it. Wherever it would
not endanger the recipients, we asked them to acknowledge our support in
the publication. We subsequently reported the whole story, including the
previously untellable parts, in a book entitled Freedom for Publishing,
Publishing for Freedom.

Today, with a little digging, you can find the list of Ukrainian NGOs
supported by the American National Endowment for Democracy, and by
George Soros's foundation in Kiev. The problem here is only partly the
habits of discretion; it's also the plethora of givers and takers. I would
like to read a comprehensive, independent study of funding flows into
Ukraine. But it would have to look at both sides: Russian and western.
And the Russian side doesn't publish many reports.

4. Context is all. So much depends on the kind of regime you are dealing
with. What would plainly have been justified against Adolf Hitler was
definitely not against Salvador Allende. Working to topple Milosevic in
Serbia is not the same as toppling Mossadeq in Iran. As a country moves,
one hopes, from outright dictatorship to full liberal democracy, the rules
change. For example, in most western democracies, including the US, foreign
funding of political parties and campaigns is banned or severely limited.
(Britain may be something of an exception - indeed, our referendum on the
European constitution will most likely be decided by the single absentee
ballot of an Australian American, Rupert Murdoch.)

Increasingly, these days, democracy-promotion takes place in states
somewhere in-between, with semi-authoritarian, semi-democratic regimes
of the kind that are known in Latin America as democradura. Gangsterish
practices of blackmail or intimidation and biased television channels owned
by friendly oligarchs are as important as formal instruments of state. In
this grey zone, it's difficult to lay down clear rules of the road, but a
starting point might be:

5. Proportionality. As with the "just war" arguments for humanitarian
intervention, so with democracy-promotion. But what is proportionate? The US
state department recently said it spent some $65m in Ukraine in the past two
years. Other western governments and independent donors made significant
contributions. I have before me an October 2004 report from the Soros
foundation in Ukraine that says it allocated $1,201,904 to NGOs for
"elections-related projects". The donors say this western money went to help
create conditions for free and fair elections, not directly to the
opposition; that, too, should be carefully examined. Meanwhile, it has been
suggested that as much as $200m came from Russia for the government side.
Modern elections are usually won or lost on television, and most of the
channels were clearly biased to the government. How much makes a level
playing field?

6. Supporting, not manufacturing. Promoting democracy should be about
encouraging people who want democracy, not dollars. Often those who have
least democracy want it most. Comparative data suggests that people in Arab
countries are more enthusiastic about democracy than we are. But it's
obvious that pumping in large sums where there are few local initiatives can
be distorting. Solidarity in Poland was a wholly authentic, home-grown
movement that then got western support. Some subsequent east European
initiatives seemed to start at the other end. One east European friend
commented wryly: "We dreamed of civil society and got NGOs." In Arab
countries, it will be even more vital, and difficult, to identify
initiatives that are authentic and home-grown.

This is, I repeat, just a first attempt to rough out a few first principles.
Before we go any further, we need more facts. "Facts are subversive," said
the great American journalist IF Stone - and they can also be subversive of
myths about subversion.

In the meantime, we must keep a basic sense of proportion. In the last week,
Austrian doctors have put it beyond reasonable doubt that an attempt was
made to poison the Ukrainian opposition candidate, Viktor Yushchenko.
Anyone who thinks there is any moral equivalence between funding an exit
poll and poisoning a political opponent needs their head examined.
www.freeworldweb.net -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1374859,00.html
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.261: ARTICLE NUMBER SEVEN
Your comments about the Report are always welcome
========================================================
7. DUTCH DEPUTY PM CASTS VOTE FOR YUSHCHENKO
Comments are rebuff to EU neutrality

By Graham Bowley and Judy Dempsey
International Herald Tribune, Europe, Thursday, Dec 16, 2004

THE HAGUE - In the strongest backing yet by a European country, the
Netherlands has stepped into the controversy surrounding the Ukrainian
elections with a robust show of support for Viktor Yushchenko, the
opposition candidate.

In an interview Tuesday, Gerrit Zalm, the Dutch deputy prime minister
and finance minister, described Yushchenko as "a person of high
integrity." "It will be good for Ukraine when he is president-elect,"
he added.

The Dutch view is important because the Netherlands holds the European
Union's rotating presidency, and thus speaks on behalf of the EU.

EU leaders start a two-day summit meeting in Brussels on Thursday,
with attention focused on trying to reach agreement over when to start
accession talks with Turkey.

Zalm's comments will be a rebuff to those in the EU who think Brussels
should remain neutral on events in Ukraine, where Prime Minister
Viktor Yanukovich, backed by Russia, will face the Western-leaning
Yushchenko in a runoff election Dec. 26.

Zalm's high regard for Yushchenko stems from the time when the two
worked closely together during IMF and World Bank meetings when
Yushchenko was president of Ukraine's central bank in the late 1990s.
Ukraine was in the Netherlands' grouping within the IMF and World
Bank. Zalm, who has a reputation for being outspoken, said: "I met him
several times. He was an excellent economist."

Yushchenko, the favorite to win the restaged presidential elections,
has challenged the EU to take steps to recognize political changes in
Ukraine, following weeks of protests that forced the rerun of the
disputed elections. He wants Brussels to offer Ukraine the long-term
prospect of EU membership.

The EU mediated during the standoff between the government and
Yushchenko's forces. But until now it has steered clear of commenting
directly on the election, reflecting a debate within the EU about how
much support Brussels should offer to Yushchenko.

Some member nations, like France, Germany and Italy, have been wary
of alienating Russia and of being seen as interfering. Other countries
like Poland, a member of the EU since May, have been criticized within
Brussels for taking an anti-Moscow line.

There is also division within the EU about whether the Union can cope
with further enlargement, following the latest accession in May, which
brought in 10 new countries. And with mounting skepticism if not
opposition to starting talks with Turkey, Brussels is not prepared to
make any commitments to Ukraine.

Last week, the European Commission published an "action plan" to
deepen economic and political links between Ukraine and the EU, but it
has insisted that greater integration depends on further reform by Kiev.

The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry said in a written statement this week
that the EU's action plan, which is designed to improve economic and
political cooperation, had in fact failed to take into account changes
inside the country over the past few weeks.

"We believe that the document of such importance for our country has
to be considered only after the end of the national electoral process
when the new government of Ukraine is established," a ministry
statement said.

In response to the protests, the outgoing president, Leonid Kuchma,
dismissed the government this month.

EU foreign ministers on Monday rubber-stamped the action plan, which
had been drawn up well before the demonstrations. Commission officials
admitted that the detailed 29-page plan was actually similar in style
and content to the conditions countries negotiating to join the EU
have to meet. The big difference is that the prospect of joining the
EU is not an option, even if Ukraine did meet all the conditions.

When she presented the action plan, the EU commissioner for external
relations, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, appeared to create more confusion
than clarity over the aims of the plan.

"It does not close any doors to European countries that may at some
future point wish to apply for membership, but it does not provide a
specific accession prospect either," she said.

Olli Rehn, the enlargement commissioner, was more direct.
"Ukraine is a European country," he said. "Never say never." -30-
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.261: ARTICLE NUMBER EIGHT
=========================================================
8. "THE UNITED STATES STAKE IN UKRAINE"

OP-ED By William R. Hawkins, The Washington Times
Washington, D.C., Thu, December 16, 2004

The 18th century saw a number of "wars of succession," in which struggles
for the throne in key states profoundly affected the international balance
of power.

The most notable was the War of Spanish Succession (1701-1714), in which the
alignment of Madrid, still the capital of a global empire, was at stake. The
French monarch Louis XIV and the Holy Roman Emperor Leopold I both had
dynastic claims. England and Holland opposed the union of French and Spanish
dominions, which would have made France the leading world power. They allied
with Leopold in a struggle that made the Duke of Marlborough famous and
started the Churchill family on its road to fame.

The War of Polish Succession (1733-35) saw France's Louis XV back his
father-in-law, while the Holy Roman Emperor Charles VI and Queen Anna of
Russia backed the deceased Polish king's son. In the War of Austrian
Succession (1741-1748), France tried to weaken the Hapsburgs by supporting
rival claimants.

Today, politics revolves around presidential elections rather than royal
bloodlines, but the stakes can be just as high for outside powers as for
domestic factions. The current crisis in Ukraine is a case in point.
Ukrainian internal issues make those between the "red" and "blue"
American states seem trivial.

Ukraine is among the oldest nations in Europe, with a rich cultural
tradition of literature, architecture and religion. Yet, because of its
tragic history of conquest by neighboring states, it finds itself now
engaged in nation-building. It needs a government that reflects its
society's strength. Ultimately, that is what the Orange Revolution of Viktor
Yushchenko is about.

To establish itself as an independent state, Ukraine must orient away from
its former semicolonial status within the Soviet/Russian empire and form new
alignments with both Western Europe and the United States. The example of
Poland is useful.

Poles and Ukrainians both suffered under the czars, but their situations
became intolerable under the Soviets. Stalin tried to destroy Ukraine as a
community and even used genocidal famine in the 1930s. Ukrainians were
inspired by the Solidarity movement in Poland that spearheaded the process
that brought down the Berlin Wall and liberated Eastern Europe from Soviet
puppet regimes. Both lands found strength in their Roman Catholic faith and
its role in shaping their identities.

After the aborted 1991 coup in Russia, Ukraine declared its independence as
the Soviet Union disintegrated. But in recent years, Russia has tried to
pull the Ukraine back into its orbit, using the ethnic Russian population of
the eastern Don Basin and southern border region. Those among the elite who
profited from the rampant corruption under outgoing President Leonid Kuchma
also back the status quo. The authentic Ukrainians nationalists in the
western provinces and Kiev backed Mr. Yushchenko against Mr. Kuchma's
chosen successor, Viktor Yanukovych, who was actively backed by Russian
President Vladimir Putin.

The Ukraine crisis further discredits the liberal notion, popular in the
1990s, of a "democratic peace" ending international conflict via the voting
booth. Too many countries have parties and factions with very different
ideas on what their proper alignments and foreign policies should be based —
whether ties of ethnicity, religion or ideology.

Elections are thus part of the perennial global struggle, not the end of its
history. It is not enough to champion democracy in the abstract. Statesmen
must be prepared to wage political warfare as they would a military
campaign.

For the United States, it is important that the Ukrainian patriots win the
redo election set for Dec. 26. Ukraine is as large and populous as France.
It was the largest and most developed part of the Soviet empire to break
away. In doing so, it insured post-Soviet Russia would lack the resources to
regain superpower status. The National Endowment for Democracy, USAID,
Freedom House, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and other
American groups have worked in Ukraine in progressive ways helpful to Mr.
Yushchenko. These efforts need to be redoubled to ensure a favorable outcome
in the next vote and offset what the Kuchma regime and its Russian backers
do to reproduce the rigged vote of Nov. 21.

Washington, in concert with European allies, must also make clear that any
Russian pressure endangering Ukrainian independence will be countered.
Russia and its client state Belarus blocked a statement supporting the new
election at a meeting of the Organization of Security and Cooperation in
Europe on Dec. 7. Secretary of State Colin Powell only responded indirectly,
by assailing Russia's failure to remove its troops from two other
independent border states, Georgia and Moldova, and criticizing Belarus for
trampling human rights and democracy. Let us hope the Bush administration
has used more direct language in private to deter Moscow.

It is completely proper for the United States to shape events in foreign
capitals to maintain its preeminent position in the global order. It is how
great powers have always played the game. And if a West-leaning Ukrainian
government emerges, it should be offered NATO membership, as was Poland,
to secure its independence. -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R. Hawkins is senior fellow for national security studies at the
U.S. Business and Industry Council.
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No.261: ARTICLE NUMBER NINE
Suggested articles for publication in the Report are always welcome
=========================================================
9. CHOCOLATE KING PUTS MARK ON UKRAINE VOTE

By Natasha Lisova, Associated Press Writer
AP, Kiev, Ukraine, Thu, December 16, 2004

KIEV, Ukraine - When opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko needed to spread
the word on the Orange Revolution, he couldn't depend on Ukraine's censored,
state-run media. Instead, he turned to the Chocolate King.

Confectionary tycoon and legislator Petro Poroshenko has used his TV5
television channel to promote Yushchenko's campaign. He is the most
prominent of a host of business leaders — known here as oligarchs — who
have lined up on each side of Ukraine's political divide and dug deep into
their pockets to support political activities.

The cash infusions have fueled allegations among some that the bitterly
fought presidential campaign is merely a clash of the millionaires against
the billionaires — a fight between the new generation of financiers trying
to wrest control of this former Soviet republic's vast resources from richer
tycoons who had backed outgoing President Leonid Kuchma.

While Yushchenko enjoys Poroshenko's backing, his rival, Prime Minister
Viktor Yanukovych, can claim the support of Rinat Akhmetov, who, together
with Kuchma's son-in-law Viktor Pinchuk, owns a 93 percent stake in
Krivoryzhstal — Ukraine's most profitable steel mill.

"Yushchenko is supported by businessmen ... who are not satisfied with the
current rules of the game with business," said Oleksandr Lytvynenko, an
analyst at the Kiev-based Razumkov Center of Political Studies.

The rewards could be immense, in large part because contracts here have been
won or lost in the past based on influence within the ruling regime. The
rich outsiders are hoping to win access to lucrative contracts in the
natural gas, food and shipping sectors.

Among those with much at stake are Poroshenko, though he is among those
who say they are fighting for a system that is more fair — and transparent.
"I'm
convinced that one should never use state power to realize one's own
interests," he said in an interview with The Associated Press. "I think it's
more moral to act as I do: declaring my income to the tax administration,
living in a pretty modest apartment."

Poroshenko, 39, is one of Yushchenko's closest allies, a legislative whip
for the Our Ukraine party who also serves as chairman of the parliament's
budget committee and deputy presidential campaign manager.

Markian Bilynskyj, an analyst with the U.S.-Ukraine foundation, described
Poroshenko as a "very influential person" who enjoys Yushchenko's trust. He
said Poroshenko had contributed significantly to the negotiations aimed at
reaching a compromise with Yanukovych's backers after the bitterly disputed
Nov. 21 runoff that the Supreme Court ruled was fraudulent.

"Poroshenko is the most educated oligarch and a moderate politician in
Yushchenko's circle, " said Mikhail Pohrebinsky, another political analyst,
who is closely associated with Kuchma.

He was one of the first to respond to the opposition's call last month for a
"political strike" to underline protesters' demands, closing down four
production plants in his Roshen candy company for a week, and he opened bank
accounts to collect donations from rank-and-file opposition supporters who
wanted to help feed and clothe the protesters in the capital.

Poroshenko's most potent contribution to the opposition cause no doubt is
TV5, the independent channel of which he is chairman and a founder. The
International Federation of Journalists credited the channel with "breaking
with government propaganda and introducing some balance to the election
coverage." Pohrebinsky said the channel had upped the pressure on the
parliament and Supreme Court.

Once pro-opposition protesters hit the streets after the fraudulent
second-round vote, TV5 ran round-the-clock coverage, broadcasting the
demonstrators' demands across the nation. The channel also broadcast
Yushchenko's speeches and was immune to government censorship. "I'm proud
that as a manager and investor, I helped create a channel of honest news,"
Poroshenko said.

Poroshenko studied international law and economics at Kiev State University
and made his first big money importing cocoa to Ukraine. He started out at
the head of a small-business association in 1990, on the eve of the Soviet
collapse, then amassed holdings in dozens of businesses — carrying some from
the brink of bankruptcy to profitability. He went into politics in 1998 at
age 32.

"I had these romantic notions that if I, a person who knows the real
economy, who knows real problems that real entrepreneurs face, simply
explain everything in a comprehensible way to the legislators, then they'll
definitely vote for the right laws," he said. They often didn't, in his
estimation — but that didn't sour him on politics.

Poroshenko said his political activity was motivated by a dream that his
four children could live in a country where their rights and freedoms did
not depend on one leader but on a whole foundation of democratic
institutions. "I'm ready to go to the barricades," he said. "My sons and
daughters' lives shouldn't depend on who the president of the country is."
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 261: ARTICLE NUMBER TEN
Names for the distribution list always welcome
=========================================================
10. ROMANIA: ON COURSE FOR EU
Success of Viktor Yushchenko...helped galvanise the campaign

EDITORIAL: Financial Times, London, UK, Wed, Dec 15, 2004

The surprise victory of Traian Basescu, mayor of Bucharest, over Adrian
Nastase, prime minister, in the final round of Romania's presidential
election has fortuitously come just when the country needed a change of
political guard to speed its entry into the European Union. For corruption
has been the biggest bugbear in Romania's accession negotiations, and
nothing unsettles the patterns of corruption like a change of power at the
top. As president, Mr Basescu is also likely to name a new government. This
former sea captain turned politician therefore looks well-placed to steer
Romania to its EU destination on its due arrival date of 2007, alongside
Bulgaria.

But for a country that first made official contact with Brussels 30 years
ago - way before any other communist state in eastern Europe - the voyage
has been long and idiosyncratic. Under its long time dictator, Nicolae
Ceausescu, it became semi-detached from the Soviet empire institutions of
the Warsaw Pact and Comecon.

But the vicious internal repression of the Ceasescu years kept it distant
from the west, while its non-Slav culture helped insulate it from any reform
trends in the rest of east Europe. Even post-Ceausescu Romania has tended to
be complacent about the inevitability of its eventual place in Europe and
seen little need to break old Balkan habits, such as the greasing of palms
and scratching of backs.

However, the success of Viktor Yushchenko in upsetting the established order
in neighbouring Ukraine appears to have helped galvanise the campaign of Mr
Basescu; by happy coincidence, the colour of both their campaigns was
orange. Mr Basescu's centre-right Alliance party came second to Mr Nastase's
Social Democrats in recent parliamentary elections but, in the presidential
poll, he was able to come from behind in the first round to triumph in the
final round. As president, Mr Basescu has few powers, but one of them is to
nominate a government, and the new one is likely to be Alliance-led.

Ironically, Mr Basescu has come to power on an anti-corruption platform,
only days after Brussels negotiators more or less wrapped up Romania's
accession negotiations by agreeing that Bucharest had done enough in
reforming the judiciary and state subsidy system, two areas where corruption
has been rampant. Even if it has done enough, Mr Basescu will have to ensure
the reforms stick.

If not, Brussels must not shy away from delaying Romania's entry, as it can
for a year under a new safeguard clause introduced into these latest
enlargement negotiations. For, as the unravelling of the eurozone's
stability pact has shown, the point of maximum leverage over countries is
when countries join the EU or one of its sub-clubs, not after. If the EU
were seriously to threaten Romania with delayed entry, it might shame
Bucharest into better behaviour and show that, when it comes to relations
with Brussels, the first must sometimes be last. -30-
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 261: ARTICLE NUMBER ELEVEN
Letters to the editor are always welcome
=========================================================
11. UKRAINIAN PARLIAMENT ADOPTS PRESIDENTIAL
INAUGURATION PROCEDURE

Interfax-Ukraine news agency, Kiev, in Russian, 14 Dec 04
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Dec 14, 2004

KIEV - The Supreme Council [parliament] has established the procedure for
the inauguration of the president-elect, which will be held in parliament.
Today, 260 of 428 MPs voted for the relevant decision. Earlier today 257 of
430 MPs voted for the decision in the first reading.

According to the document, the ceremony, during which the president-elect
will take an oath, will be held in the parliament's assembly hall after the
Central Electoral Commission had announced the official results of the
presidential election, on the day proposed by the speaker and approved by
the parliament.

The president-elect, the speaker and the head of the Constitutional Court
will agree upon the time, guest list and other logistics. The ceremony is to
be broadcast live by all nationwide TV and radio channels.

The parliamentary speaker opens the ceremony. Then the national anthem is
played. The speaker reads names of those in attendance and lets the head of
the Central Electoral Commission to announce the results of the presidential
election.

The head of the Constitutional Court announces that the president-elect
fulfils all constitutional requirements relating to not combining the
position of head of state [with any other posts] and that there are no other
obstacles, which impede his taking an oath. After this the president-elect
proceeds to the rostrum, where he is reads the oath, the text of which is
defined by the constitution.

The president-elect lays his right hand on the constitution, and, if he
wishes so, on the Peresopnytsia Gospel [one of Ukraine's most precious
national treasures, owned for some time by Ukrainian Hetman Ivan Mazepa]
swears himself in, signs the oath and hands it over to the head of the
Constitutional Court, who, in his turn, declares that the president has
taken an oath and, in accordance with Article 104 of the Constitution of
Ukraine, has been inducted the president of Ukraine.
After this, the head of Constitutional Court hands the signed oath over to
the speaker. The head of the Central Electoral Commission presents the
president with the head of state certificate. The head of Constitutional
Court presents the president with the official symbols of power.

The president addresses Ukrainian people from the parliament's rostrum
(delivers an inauguration speech). After this, he takes a seat in the
Supreme Council's assembly hall next to the president's flag (standard).

The speaker introduces the prime minister, who, in accordance with Article
115 of the constitution, announces his cabinet's resignation. According to
today's decision, this point will remain in force until the constitutional
amendments adopted on 8 December come into effect.

The speaker declares the inauguration ceremony closed. The national anthem
is played. According to procedure, the Supreme Council will not deal with
any other issues on the inauguration day. The decision comes into force on
the day adopted.

The incumbent president, Leonid Kuchma, was sworn in at the Ukrayina
national palace on 30 November 1999 after been re-elected the president of
Ukraine. -30- [The Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 261: ARTICLE NUMBER TWELVE
Letters to the editor are always welcome
=========================================================
12. DIVIDING THE UKRAINE, PUTIN's IMPERIAL DREAM

By Vytautas Landsbergis, Project Syndicate
Jakarta Post, Jakarta, Indonesia, December 16, 2004

To divide a people in order to conquer them is an immoral strategy that has
endured throughout recorded history. From Alexander the Great to Stalin the
Cruel, variants of that strategy have been used to keep nations in thrall
to the will of an emperor.

We are now seeing this strategy at work again as President Vladimir Putin
stealthily seeks to restore Kremlin supremacy over the lands treated as
"lost" when the USSR imploded in 1991. In so overplaying his hand in
Ukraine's recent election, however, Putin clearly revealed to the world his
neo-imperialist designs.

In the wake of the euphoric mass protests in Kyiv, Russia's president has
since said that he can work with whatever government Ukraine's people
choose. These are mere words, for in mind and action Putin does not want
anyone to rule Ukraine that he has not put in place. No price is too high
to achieve that end, so traditional threats about dividing Ukraine have
been used.

I speak as someone who has been on the receiving end of Russian imperialist
designs. When Lithuania and then the other Baltic States -- Estonia and
Latvia -- which were occupied by Stalin early in World War II, seized their
opportunity for freedom in 1990-1991, the Kremlin did not sit on its hands.
It knew that the rest of Russia's colonies -- the so-called "Soviet
republics" -- would want to follow the ungrateful Baltic countries into
freedom.

Although Russia's rulers were by then communists in name only, they didn't
hesitate to reach for the old Leninist recipes. They began to foster and
incite splits and confrontations. They stoked supposed resentments among
different national or ethnic communities based on Lenin's idea that even
small groups of villages could demand territorial autonomy.

Note the word "territory." The demands were never about normal cultural
autonomy as a means of continued identity and supposed self-protection.
Only territorial autonomy, it seems, would do.

This way, minorities become easily manipulated majorities. Divide enough,
stoke enough resentment, and a nation becomes nothing more than a ruined
society within a national territory. Arm some of these manufactured
minority structures so that they can demand autonomy at the barrel of a
gun, and you get the kind of chaos the Kremlin can use to reassert its
control.

Fortunately, Lithuanians -- as well as Estonians and Latvians -- understood
this game. It failed also in Crimea when Russia sought to deploy its old
strategy of divide and rule there in 1991. But these defeats did not
inspire the Kremlin to abandon the basic strategy. On the contrary,
Russia's imperial ambitions persisted, and persistence has paid off.

Around the Black Sea, Russia has called into being a series of artificial
statelets. Georgia and Moldova have both been partitioned through the
creation of criminal mini-states nurtured by the Kremlin and which remain
under its military umbrella. Indeed, in the very week that Putin was
meddling in Ukraine's presidential election, he was threatening to blockade
one of those statelets, Georgia's Abkhazia region, after it had the
temerity to vote for a president the Kremlin did not like.

Moldova has been particularly helpless in the face of the Kremlin's
imperial designs. A huge Russian garrison remains deployed in
Transdneister, where it rules in collaboration with local gangs. Proximity
to this lawless territory has helped make Moldova the poorest land in
Europe. To the east, Armenia and Azerbaijan were pushed into such bloody
confrontation at the Kremlin's instigation that the only way for them to
end their ethnic wars was to call in the Russians -- as in Transdneister --
for a kind of "Pax Ruthena."

Now Ukraine's people may face a similar test after supporters of Viktor
Yanukovich threatened to seek autonomy should the rightful winner of the
country's presidential vote, Viktor Yushchenko, actually become president.
Who can doubt that the hand of Russia is behind this? Would Moscow's mayor
Yuri Luzkhov, a loyal creature of Putin, have dared to attend the rally
where autonomy was demanded without the sanction of the Kremlin's elected
monarch? Indeed, Putin openly claims this part of Ukraine as a Russian
"internal matter."

It is to be hoped that Ukraine's Russian-speaking citizens, having
witnessed the economic despair -- and sometimes the bloodshed -- caused by
the Kremlin's manufactured pro-autonomy movements, will realize that they
are being turned into Putin's pawns. The test for Viktor Yushchenko and his
Orange revolutionaries, as it was for Lithuania's democrats in 1990-1991,
is to show that democracy does not mean that the majority suppresses any
minority. Lithuania passed that test; I am confident that Viktor Yushchenko
and his team will do so as well.

But Europe and the world are also being tested. Russia is passing from
being the Russian Federation of Boris Yeltsin to a unitary authoritarian
regime under Vladimir Putin and his former KGB colleagues. Europe, America,
and the wider world must see Putin's so-called "managed democracy" in its
true light, and must stand united against his neo-imperialist dreams.

The first step is to make Russia honor its binding commitment to the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, as well as to the
Council of Europe, to remove its troops from Moldova and Georgia. Any plans
to "defend" Yanukovich and the eastern part of Ukraine by military force
must be confronted. -30- [Action Ukraine Report Monitoring Service]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vytautas Landsbergis, Lithuania's first President after independence
from the Soviet Union, is now a Member of the European Parliament.
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 261: ARTICLE NUMBER THIRTEEN
Letters to the editor are always welcome
=========================================================
13. 'NEVER SAY NEVER'
The Ukrainian revolution and the renaissance of democracy.

OPINION: By Claudia Rosett
The Opinion Journal, Editorial Page
The Wall Street Journal, NY, NY, Wed, Dec 15, 2004

Orange, rose, yellow. These are the colors not just of sunrise, but of a few
of the many "people power" revolutions that over the past generation have
been by increments changing the world. Yellow was the Philippines in 1986.
Rose was the former Soviet republic of Georgia last year. Now we see an
exuberant orange in Ukraine, where despite election fraud, poisoning and the
displeasure of the Kremlin, democratic candidate Viktor Yushchenko looks
poised to win a revote Dec. 26.

I'll get to the caveats in a minute. But first, despite the perils of our
time, despite the terrorists and bombs and war, despite the inevitable
erosion of high ideals and disappointments of daily political practice, I
will hazard the prediction that if we of the free world stick to our
principles--and, where necessary, defend them with our guns--we stand
on the verge of a global renaissance.

This was driven home in an interview Sunday with Mr. Yushchenko's close
aide, Ukrainian legislator Oleh Rybachuk, who has just completed a whirlwind
trip to the U.S. A tall, athletic-looking man, Mr. Rybachuk reportedly
radiates energy at the worst of times. Right now, he is surfing a tidal wave
of hope. To sit down with him over coffee in New York is to catch a whiff of
the vitality with which the people of Ukraine have stood up to demand
government of, by and for the people.

Fluent in English, and sporting the same kind of bright orange scarf that
has become Mr. Yushchenko's trademark, Mr. Rybachuk had a great deal to say
about his party's plans. He stressed such gritty basics as monetary
stability, unhooking Ukraine from Big Brother in Moscow, and joining the
European Union. He described the inspiration Ukraine's democratic opposition
has drawn from Poland--once a Soviet vassal state, now a member of the EU.

All these matters are important, and if Mr. Yushchenko becomes president,
there will no doubt be plenty of devil in the details. But what came through
most clearly in Mr. Rybachuk's conversation, the point to which he returned
again and again, was his pride that the people of Ukraine have stood up for
their freedom. Not so long ago, there were few believers that this could
happen. Ukraine achieved independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, only to
be written off in short order as a basket case. The country has been run for
the past 10 years by a former Soviet party boss, President Leonid Kuchma;
sunk in corruption and lamed by generations of subservience to Moscow. When
Mr. Yushchenko set out upon his campaign for the presidency, says Mr.
Rybachuk, there were people "laughing in my face, saying we are idiotic, or
romantic, or naive."

As it turned out, the voters of Ukraine thought otherwise, and when Mr.
Kuchma tried to steal the election, they spoke up. With their flags and
vigils and calls for fellowship from the democratic nations of the world,
they have been insisting on their right to choose freely and fairly who will
govern their country. "This is real independence day," Mr. Rybachuk told me,
"because we have kids who will never be slaves again."

In such statements is a world of promise for the people of nations where the
moment of democratic truth has not yet arrived. Ukraine is telegraphing
around the globe a reminder that freedom brings with it the great gift of
dignity. That is precisely why it is so stirring to watch such revolutions.
They speak to the best part of the human spirit, because we are witnessing
people, often against big odds and at great risk, recovering their
self-respect.

And right there is the basic remedy for the miseries of the Middle East.
There has been plenty of debate about the humiliations of the Muslim world,
and how to redress or contain the rage and hate this breeds. There have been
endless disquisitions on the complicated politics, the complex cultural and
religious divides, and the--how did Mr. Rybachuk put it?--the idiocy,
romanticism and naivete of the idea, put forward as policy by President
Bush, that living under the rule of some of the world's most corrupt thugs
are vast silent majorities who given any room to maneuver would prefer to
create free societies.

The bottom line is simple, and universal. Freedom brings with it a degree of
dignity that repression can never confer. No amount of handouts from the
likes of the Saudi royals, or Libya's terrorist tycoon, Moammar Gadhafi, or
United Nations-sanctioned rations under a Saddam Hussein, can make up for
the self-respect that comes with the self-determination of free people.
The caveats are obvious. People-power revolutions do not always succeed with
a first try. In some cases--Nazi Germany, say, or Iraq--democrats stand no
chance at all unless someone wages war to remove the tyrant. And democracy
depends on institutions that need time to evolve. They cannot be unpacked
overnight from a kit. The Philippines in 1986 got rid of Ferdinand Marcos,
but has yet to live up to the full hopes that swept the country when he
left. In Burma in 1988, thousands died in protests that led to the election
of democratic leaders who were never allowed by the junta to take power. In
China in 1989, the Tiananmen uprising ended with army gunfire. In Russia,
the great moment in 1991 of Boris Yeltsin atop an armored personnel carrier,
waving the red-white-and-blue Russian flag, has given way to a rough 13
years marred most recently by President Vladimir Putin's increasingly
authoritarian rule. Ukraine itself is now in round two of the contest for
liberty and justice, and from there may yet face round three or four.

But even with the setbacks, the general direction is progress. One heroic
act encourages the next. Every time people stand up for their rights, they
send the kind of message we are now hearing from Ukraine. Freedom matters.
Democratic rule matters. The Philippine revolution may have fallen short of
the mark, but the country is freer today than under Marcos, and that
uprising 18 years ago became a shot heard round the world. Within the
decade, Taiwan and South Korea went democratic. The people of Burma and
China flashed the message that they desire the same. The Baltics broke free;
the Berlin wall fell; Eastern Europe shook loose. Russia today may be a
deeply troubled country, but it's a big step up from the Soviet Union. And I
would place my bet that there are plenty of people in Russia--and in
dismally repressed neighboring Belarus--watching quietly but intently right
now Ukraine's second run at the democratic prize.

Likewise, in Iraq, even in a society still suffering a violent Baathist
hangover, there is finally room for voters in January to choose something
other than a 99.9% show for Saddam--and there begins the real recovery.
Afghanistan is already embarked on the democratic trail. From Ukraine comes
this latest beacon, and I promise you, it is being observed not only with
applause in America, but with yearning in places such as China, Cuba and
Iran.

Before saying goodbye to Mr. Rybachuk, I asked if he had any advice for
people living in nations where rule of liberty and law still seems a dream
beyond hope. He answered, "Never say never." -30-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. Rosett is a fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and
the Hudson Institute. Her column appears here and in The Wall Street Journal
Europe on alternate Wednesdays.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/cRosett/?id=110006028
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT-04, No. 261: ARTICLE NUMBER FOURTEEN
=========================================================
14. "THE STAKES IN UKRAINE"

Jim Hoagland, Columnist, The Washington Post
Thursday, December 16, 2004; Page A37

If they succeed in throwing the bums out of office in Kiev on Dec. 26,
Ukraine's reform politicians will be doing the world an enormous service.
For a decade, Leonid Kuchma's regime has been an important cog in a loosely
connected international criminal enterprise that has operated behind a cloak
of national sovereignty and banking secrecy to traffic in weapons,
commercial corruption and political murder.

Dismantling the Kuchma organization would help further expose the
international dimension and connections of lawbreaking lawmakers who are
losing ground as nations shake off the lingering inhibitions of the Cold War
environment that excused official criminality in the name of ideology.
The struggle in Ukraine is important as a political confrontation between
democrats and autocrats and because of the potential for secessionist
battles between pro- and anti-Kremlin factions in that former Soviet
republic.

But at its most fundamental level, this struggle is between organized crime
as practiced by and on behalf of officeholders and a citizenry's desire for
the protections and benefits of an impartial legal system.

The poisoning attempt on the life of reform candidate Viktor Yushchenko has
made the criminal component of this political struggle crystal clear. The
public revulsion it has created should add impetus to the quest to make
rulers, national governments and international institutions accountable.
>From Chile to Ukraine and elsewhere, the rule of law is having a good
December:

* Augusto Pinochet is finally being brought to account in Santiago and in
Washington, where an investigation into the dictator's secret bank accounts
has exposed one of the essential tools of high-level international
chicanery.
* Traian Basescu, a former sea captain who campaigned on promises to end
endemic corruption and malfeasance in Romania, won Sunday's presidential
election against the establishment candidate.
* Controversy over the U.N. oil-for-food program, which lined the pockets of
Iraq's dictator and his foreign helpers, is focusing a useful spotlight on
lax management and inherent conflicts of interest at the United Nations,
where much flagrant criminal behavior by member governments is routinely
ignored.

The crooks and their protectors are not likely to go quietly. But some of
those involved in what I hope is becoming a global wave of reform see
themselves as both consolidating and benefiting from a permanent change in
international relations that was triggered by the global reaction to Sept.
11, 2001.

Oleh Rybachuk, Yushchenko's chief of staff, is one the reformers who believe
just that. "After September 11th, there is no effective banking secrecy any
more for these guys to hide behind," Rybachuk said during a visit to
Washington
last week. A new emphasis on law enforcement to fight terrorism will hamper
other cross-border skullduggery, he said, adding even more optimistically:
"Evil always destroys itself."

It is good to hope so. But let us take it for granted no more than do
Rybachuk and Yushchenko, who have been tirelessly campaigning to win the
Dec. 26 runoff that replaces last month's fraudulent vote, which triggered
the massive street protests in Kiev.

In the former Soviet Union's former sphere of influence, criminality remains
the primary function of government for those unable to break the habits of
totalitarianism. Illegal radar shipments from Ukraine to Saddam Hussein's
Iraq provided one example of the tightly knit arrangements that survived the
collapse of communism. The unsolved killing of opposition journalist Heorhiy
Gongadze in 2000 in Ukraine also bore the marks of Soviet-era secret police
tactics -- as does the dioxin poisoning this year of Yushchenko.

Bringing an effective system based on the rule of law to Ukraine's eastern
border, with Russia, could have unsettling consequences for President
Vladimir Putin, who sought unsuccessfully to intimidate Ukrainians into
staying with the Kuchma machine. Again, Rybachuk surprised me with his
optimism, saying that the Russian leader is pragmatic and that the time for
change is right.

"We have good relations with Russian businessmen, who see that it is in
their interests to have stability and predictability in our relations. These
guys are past the wild capitalism stage," he said. Like the robber barons of
American history, they are now interested in legal structures that will
protect the fortunes they have amassed.

It is a leap of faith to believe these Russian business interests can
pressure Putin into accepting deep reform in Ukraine. But they should
certainly try. More important will be international pressure from the United
States, the European Union, Japan and others that must seize this
opportunity to fight crime even when it operates under the flag and
trappings of office. -30- [Action Ukraine Report 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
========================================================