ACTION UKRAINE REPORT (AUR)
An International Newsletter,The Latest, Up-To-Date
In-Depth Ukrainian News, Analysis and Commentary
Ukrainian History, Culture, Arts, Business, Religion, Economics,
Sports, Government, and Politics, in Ukraine and Around the World
VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDENAFFIRMS
STRONG U.S. COMMITMENT TO UKRAINE
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT(AUR),Number938
Mr.Morgan Williams,Publisher and Editor, SigmaBleyzer Emerging
Markets Private Equity Investment Group, www.SigmaBleyzer.com
WASHINGTON, D.C., THURSDAY,JULY 23,2009
INDEX OF ARTICLES ------
Clicking on the titleof any article takes youdirectly to the article.
ReturntoIndexby clicking on Return to Index at the end of each article
1. U.S. VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN MAKES A STRONG AND CLEAR
COMMITMENT TO UKRAINE FROM THE UNITED STATES
"More than anything else, I’m here to say this to the Ukrainian people: Ukraine, as it continues
on the path to freedom, democracy, and prosperity, the United States will stand by Ukraine.....
The Obama administration will not waver in its support of a strong and independent Ukraine."
U.S.-Ukraine Business Council (USUBC), Kyiv, Ukraine, Wed, July 22, 2009
2. STATEMENT BY VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN AFTER MEETING
WITH PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE VIKTOR YUSHCHENKO
The White House,Office of the Vice President, Washington, D.C.
House with Chimaeras, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, July 21, 2009
3. TYMOSHENKO GOVERNMENT NEAR SOLUTION OF UKRAINE'S OPIC PROBLEMS
PR Newswire-USNewswire, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, Jul. 21, 2009
4. BIDEN REASSURES UKRAINE OF U.S. SUPPORT
Urged Ukrainians to choose path of democracy and free markets
By Ellen Barry, The New York Times, NY, NY,Wed, July 22, 2009
5. UKRAINE ON THE END OF BIDEN BROADSIDE
By Daniel Dombey in Washington and Roman Olearchyk in Kiev
Financial Times, London, UK,Thursday, July 23, 2009
6. BIDEN: ENERGY INDEPENDENCE KEY TO UKRAINE'S ECONOMIC HEALTH
By Peter Fedynsky, Voice of America (VOA), Kyiv, Ukraine, 22 July 2009
7. UKRAINE WANTS RUSSIA-US RELATIONS TO DEVELOP,
IF THEY DON'T HARM UKRAINE, SAYS YUSCHENKO
Issues official invitation to U.S. President Barack Obama to visit Ukraine.
Interfax Ukraine News, Kyiv, Ukraine,Tuesday, July21, 2009
8. PRESYUSHCHENKO PRAISES RELATIONS BETWEEN UKRAINE AND USA
Ukrainian leader hails ties with US, says energy, security top agenda
UT1, Kiev, Ukraine, in UkrainianTue, 21 Jul 09
BBC MonitoringService, UK, in English,Tue, July 21, 2009
9. BIDEN REBUKES UKRAINIAN LEADERS
By Peter Spiegel, The Wall Street Journal, NY, NY, Thu, July 23, 2009
10. BIDEN REASSURES KYIV, MEETS WITH PM TYMOSHENKO
INFORM, newsletter for the international community providing
views and analysis from the Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko (BYuT)
Kyiv, Ukraine, Wednesday, July 23, 2009
11. DAMON WILSON ON SIGNIFICANCE OF BIDEN TRIP TO UKRAINE AND GEORGIA
Interview with Damon Wilson by Myroslava Gongadze
Voice of America (VOA),Ukrainian Service, Washington, DC, Sunday,July 19, 2009
12. AN OPEN LETTER TO THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION FROM
LEADERS IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE
Gazeta Wyborcza, Warsaw, Poland, Thursday, July 16, 2009
13. UKRAINE NEEDS ENERGY PLAN TO REDUCE RUSSIA TIES: U.S. OFFICIAL
Reuters, Kiev, Ukraine, Tue Jul 21, 2009
14. STOP INFIGHTING, BIDEN TELLS UKRAINE'S LEADERS
By Sabina Zawadzki, Reuters, Kiev, Ukraine, Wed, July 22, 2009
15. EU'S RESPONSE TO CENTRAL EUROPE'S ENERGY SECURITY
AHA! Network Presents Presentation and Live Video Webcast, July 24
AHA! Network, Washington, D.C., Wednesday, July 23, 2009
16. BIDEN TO GEORGIA, UKRAINE: US WILL NOT RECOGNIZE RUSSIAN
'SPHERE OF INFLUENCE' CLAIM
By Douglas Birch, The Associated Press (AP), Tbilisi, Georgia, Wed, July 23, 2009
================================================================
1.U.S.VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN MAKES A STRONG AND CLEAR
COMMITMENT TO UKRAINE FROM THE UNITED STATES
"More than anything else, I’m here to say this to the Ukrainian people: Ukraine, as it continues
on the path to freedom, democracy, and prosperity, the United States will stand by Ukraine.....
The Obama administration will not waver in its support of a strong and independent Ukraine."
U.S.-Ukraine Business Council (USUBC), Kyiv, Ukraine, Wed, July 22, 2009
KYIV - U.S. Vice President Joe Biden made a very strong and clear commitment from the United States to the government and people of Ukraine in a major speechtoday in Kyiv. Vice President Bidensaid, "More than anything else, I’m here to say this to the Ukrainian people: Ukraine, as it continues
on the path to freedom, democracy, and prosperity, the United States will stand by Ukraine......The Obama administration will not waver in its support of a strong and independent Ukraine......Let me say this as clearly as I can. As we reset the relationship with Russia, we reaffirm our commitment to an independent Ukraine."
Biden told Ukraine,"The United States wants to work with you to improve the investment climate, expand trade and investment between our two countries, and help in any effective way we can..."
"A largecrowd of business and other leaders greeted the Vice President on a beautiful summer morningin Kyiv and were obviously pleased with the strong and clear commitment he made on behalf of he United States," according to Morgan Williams, SigmaBleyzer,President of the U.S. Business Council (USUBC) in Washington, D.C.,"The commitment from the United States outlined by VP Bidensends a very positive signal to the business and investment community as it makes plans for future activities in Ukraine during this time of financial crisis."
"U.S. businesses are not leaving Ukraine, they are standing firm and adjusting to the present business climate," Williams said, "they are not interested in leaving a market of 47 million people, the largest emerging market in Europe.U.S. businessesplan to expand their work in Ukraine as soon as theeconomy improves. The strong and positive statement today by the U.S. Vice President only reinforces their faith in the future of Ukraine."
The complete text of Vice President Biden's speech in Kyiv today:
REMARKS BY VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN IN UKRAINE
Office of the Vice President, The White House
Ukraine House, Kyiv, Ukraine, Wednesday, July 22, 2009
VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Thank you very much. Thank you, Jorge, Reverend, clergy. Ladies and gentlemen, it's an honor to be here. I want to thank you for your coming today. And I want to thank the people and the government of Ukraine for their warmth and hospitality they've shown me the last two days.
It's a special honor to be here in Kyiv.
I know times are difficult for many today, but I’m inspired, and still inspired, as many Americans are, by what happened here less than five years ago. That sea of orange that flooded Independence Square, the hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians who poured into Kyiv demanding peacefully that their votes be counted and that their voices be heard, is something that will not be forgotten for a long, long time.
Forty years before that momentous event, the momentous events of 2004, a former President of the United States and general, Dwight D. Eisenhower, stood in the center of Washington, DC, and unveiled a monument to a great Ukrainian poet, Shevchenko. It was 24 feet high, the statue, and it bears these words: "Dedicated to the liberation, freedom, and independence of all captive nations."
Back in 1964, we looked at Shevchenko for hope because he never stopped dreaming of a free Ukraine. And 40 years later, in 2004, we saw what the power of a free people demanding justice could accomplish.
Today, Ukrainians should take pride in what they have achieved. Free and fair elections have become the norm, freedom of speech is exercised vigorously, as you're all learning and observing, and freedom of the press, as witnessed by the number of cameras that are here today, is well respected in your country.
Ukraine today is one of the most free and democratic nations in this region.
Near the end of his life, one of the authors of America’s freedom, Thomas Jefferson, who is credited with writing the Declaration of Independence, wrote a letter to his old friend and political foe, John Adams -- Adams had been the second President of the United States and Jefferson the third -- and they were great friends but political competitors. And he wrote a letter to Adams -- there was a long correspondence for decades. He wrote a letter to Adams about 35 years after our revolution. And in the letter, he said, "The generation which commences a revolution rarely completes it. The generation which commences a revolution rarely completes it."
In any true democracy, freedom is the beginning, not the end. Freedom is merely the beginning, not the end. And here in Ukraine, yours is a revolution still in progress whose promise remains to be fulfilled.
More than anything else, I’m here to say this to the Ukrainian people: Ukraine, as it continues on the path to freedom, democracy, and prosperity, the United States will stand by Ukraine. These are your choices, not ours. But rest assured that we stand with you as you make those choices.
The Obama administration will not waver in its support of a strong and independent Ukraine. Charting the future course of Ukraine is, of course, a decision to be made by all of you, not by anyone outside.
Based on my discussions yesterday with the bulk of your political leadership, we want for Ukraine what it appears Ukrainians want for themselves -- a democratic and prosperous European nation.
My visit to Kyiv comes soon after President Obama’s visit to Moscow.
As a matter of fact, they were planned simultaneously. And I know there was some speculation that our decision, as I said in a speech in Munich at the front-end of our administration -- to press the reset button with Moscow -- I know it created some speculations that improving relations with Russia would somehow threaten our ties with Ukraine.
Let me say this as clearly as I can. As we reset the relationship with Russia, we reaffirm our commitment to an independent Ukraine.
And we recognize no sphere of influence, or no ability of any other nation to veto the choices an independent nation makes as to with whom and under what conditions they will associate. We also do not believe in zero-sum thinking. We do not believe that a partnership with one nation must come at the expense of another. It has not. It does not, and it will not.
As I said, referencing the Munich Security Conference just weeks after taking office, it holds true again -- I want to reemphasize it. We reject the notion of spheres of influence as 19th century ideas that have no place in the 21st century. And we stand by the principle that sovereign states have a right to make their own decisions, to chart their own foreign policy, to choose their own alliances.
President Obama, in his speech in Moscow two weeks ago, strongly affirmed this principle. He said, and I quote, "State sovereignty must be the cornerstone of international order. Just as all states should have the right to choose their leaders, states must have the right to borders that are secure, and to their own foreign policies. Any system that cedes those rights will lead to anarchy. That is why this principle must apply to all nations, including Ukraine."
We also re-affirmed the security assurances that the United States, Russia and the United Kingdom provided Ukraine in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum.
Our commitment to Ukraine is evidenced through our aid program -- $120 million this year to bolster peace and security, strengthen democratic institutions, promote economic growth, modernize your military, secure Chernobyl, fight AIDS and HIV, and improve child health.
We also strongly supported, and continue to support, the IMF’s decision to provide $16 billion to help Ukraine make it through what is an incredibly difficult time as a consequence of a worldwide recession.
We have worked with Ukraine to transform your military, so that you can protect your homeland and contribute to global security. Young Ukrainian officers have studied in our military academies. American officers have come here to take part in education, training, planning, and organization and exercises. And we’re grateful to Ukraine for its contributions to international security. Ukraine’s armed forces have been committed peacekeepers from the Balkans to Iraq, even as far afield as Liberia.
And we mourn -- we mourn along with you -- the six Ukrainians who perished in last week’s helicopter crash in Afghanistan. We have, unfortunately, significant experience in mourning.
Ukraine has also been a leader in what President Obama and I believe is our greatest security challenge -- the greatest security challenge that is facing the world -- and that is reducing the world’s arsenal of nuclear weapons, renewing the non-proliferation system, and securing vulnerable nuclear fissile material.
Last December, the United States and Ukraine agreed to a center on strategic -- excuse me, a Charter on Strategic Partnership. And today, your president and I agreed that the U.S. and Ukraine Strategic Partnership Commission would begin meeting this fall in Washington to deepen our cooperation in areas of security, economy, trade, energy, and the rule of law.
The United States also supports Ukraine’s deepening ties to NATO and to the European Union. But again, we recognize they are your decisions, your choices, not ours whether you choose the EU or seek to, or NATO. We recognize that how far and how fast to proceed on your choices is, again, a uniquely Ukrainian choice -- it is not ours.
The United States does not seek a sphere of influence. We are trying to build a multi-polar [sic*] world, in which like-minded nations make common cause of our common challenges -- the stronger our partners, the more effective our partnerships.
And in that spirit of partnership, I'm also here to offer my honest opinion. Friendship requires honesty. And the honest truth is that the great promise of the 2004 -- of 2004, has yet to be fully realized. Again, if the poet Shevchenko were here today, what would he be writing? What would he write about this moment? I’m sure he would be heralding the openness and pluralism, the freedom of the press –- a model for your neighbors. I'm sure he would take pride in Ukraine’s vibrant civil society and marvel at your competitive elections.
And to those cynics who have asserted for centuries that this part of the world could never practice democracy because its culture and values are different, Ukraine today stands as resolute rebuttal to that centuries old assertion.
But I think he would also be wondering why the government was not exhibiting the same political maturity as the people, why communications among leaders has broken down to such an extent that political posturing appears to prevent progress.
Especially now, especially in difficult economic times, Ukraine, in my humble opinion, must heed the lessons of history -- effective, accountable government is the only way to provide stable, predictable, and a transparent environment that attracts investment, which is the economic engine of development. That's why this Chamber of Commerce, I suspect, exists.
Functioning democracies are more capable of committing to and implementing economic reforms, sometimes even painful reforms that are necessary to stimulate economic recovery and economic growth. And I would note parenthetically, can you name me a place where democracy has flourished where the economic system has failed?
Mature democracies survive because they develop institutions such as a free press, a truly independent court system, an effective legislature -- all of which serve as a check on the corruption that fuels the cynicism and limits growth in any country, including yours. And in a democracy, compromise is not a sign of weakness; it is evidence of strength.
In my meetings yesterday, there was a clear recognition that much work remains to be done to make Ukraine more competitive and attractive to investors, from reforming your tax code to acting against corruption.
The path to renewed prosperity runs through the International Monetary Fund, which is offering now a way out of the current crisis. But as you might guess, there are strings attached. My mother says, out of every crisis comes an opportunity. This may be your opportunity.
The Fund requires that your government, and your government agreed to critical reforms to cut the budget deficit, revive a striving [sic*] banking system, and phase out energy subsidies, which I know from experience is a very difficult thing to do. Carrying out this agreement requires very hard choices and tough action, but it will help put you on the road to growth and competitiveness.
And as a politician, I understand how difficult these decisions are.
But sometimes one has to ask why one is involved in politics in the first place. Whenever a young man or woman asks me about what they should be thinking about if they wish to enter public life, I say, ask yourself the first and most important question: What is it you care about that is worth losing over? What is it that you care about that is worth losing over? If you can't figure that out, then it's merely ambition that's driving you. Every country needs politicians who know what is worth losing over.
As you take action, you will not stand alone. The United States wants to work with you to improve the investment climate, expand trade and investment between our two countries, and help in any effective way we can, knowing full well we do not have the answers. We are struggling economically, as well; a different struggle, but a real struggle.
Ultimately, democracy and free markets will flourish when they deliver on what people want most -– honesty, the elimination of corruption, a decent job, the ability to care for their parents and educate their children, physical security and economic opportunity, a chance to build a better life. No one wants anything more than a chance.
When democracy and free markets deliver on these basic desires, then those promoting alternative forms of government, whether from within or without, are never able to gain a foot hold.
Nowhere is the relationship between democracy, development and security clearer than when it comes to energy. Right now, in the United States, we’re making significant efforts at some political expense, I might add, to diversify our energy supply, to invest in efficiency, and to make some very difficult decisions about how to deal with the carbon footprint we're leaving our children and our grandchildren and our great-grandchildren. None are without cost.
Just as it is in our interest to diversify our sources of energy and reduce the influence of those we depend on for our energy, I might add so too it -- so too is it in your overwhelming interest. Your economic freedom depends more, I suspect, in this country on your energy freedom than on any other single factor.
Ukraine has abundant reserves of energy, and reform of your energy sector should reduce your dependence on foreign suppliers. Moving toward market pricing for energy is brave, but also absolutely necessary pre-condition.
Promoting energy efficiency and conservation also will go a long way toward increasing your independence.
Ukraine uses energy about three times less efficiently than the EU average, including your next-door neighbor, Poland. If you lift Ukraine to European standards, your need for energy imports will dramatically decline, dramatically decline -- just that one single action, none other. That would be a boon to your economy and an immeasurable benefit, I respectfully suggest, to your national security.
The time for inertia and neglect is long past. It's time for action, as I know you know better than I.
I’m pleased that Ukraine and the United States have agreed to hold our first meeting of our working group on energy security, so that we can look together for solutions to some of today’s biggest challenges.
The leaders of this country come together -- came together once, in 2004, because they knew that a free and prosperous Ukraine was more important than any one political -- any one politician, or any one political party. I have no doubt the Ukrainians can, and will, come together again.
When Shevchenko imagined freedom, he looked to the United States and its young revolution. In the words of a poem he wrote in 1858, he said, "When will we greet our own George Washington at last with the new law of righteousness? Today's American revolution is not so young. And when the Shevchenkos of today imagine freedom, they don't have to look to the United States, they can rightfully look to Ukraine.
The idea and promise of Ukraine’s peaceful resolution -- revolution, remains an inspiration for the world and for this region. Just as your Orange Revolution did not end in 2005, it did not stop at Ukraine’s borders. We hear its echoes wherever people peacefully stand and demand their voices to be heard, a cacophony of voices, and they refer back to your Orange Revolution.
I have never met a Ukrainian -- my very good friend, John Hynansky, a very prominent businessman from Delaware is here. I had breakfast with him the other day. And I come from a city -- where I was born, Scranton, Pennsylvania, has a large Ukrainian-American population.
I've never met a Ukrainian who doesn’t think in terms of centuries.
Centuries from now, what will Ukrainians say of this time? Will they say that their leaders? Will they say they returned to the past?
Will they say that the beginning of the 21st century launched a new era of prosperity, freedom and independence, and hope for all Ukrainians?
I hope you choose the progress -- the path of progress, for the people of Ukraine, for your children, and for a watching world -- for literally, you are standing at a moment in history that you have never stood at before -- literally. It sounds like hyperbole to suggest this, and we politicians have a tendency to hyperbole, but the God's truth is you have never been at this place before, the chance for your people to establish a truly independent, free and prosperous country with defined borders for the 21st century.
When your children look back, what will they say of us? What will they say of what the United States did to help or not help? And what will they say of all of you. My sincere prayer is they will say that it was the beginning, the beginning of a dream we have dreamt for over 400 years. I pray to God that happens, because quite frankly, your success will bear on the success or failure of many peoples in this part of the world.
I thank you for giving me the honor of being here, for listening. And I sincerely hope that you understand I know we don't have all the answers, but I know your answer lies in freedom. And freedom lies in the development of genuine democratic institutions. I wish you the best, and we stand ready to walk that path with you.
Thank you very, very much.
END
LINK: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-By-Vice-President-Biden-In-Ukraine/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
2. STATEMENT BY VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN AFTER MEETING
WITH PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE VIKTOR YUSHCHENKO
The White House,Office of the Vice President, Washington, D.C.
House with Chimaeras, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, July 21, 2009
VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Mr. President, thank you very much for your hospitality. And on behalf of President Obama, I want to express our admiration, as well as our thanks -- our admiration for what you and your colleagues began in what was an inspiration to other parts of the world and your neighbors, the Orange Revolution, and also thanks for your cooperation and help in the Balkans and Iraq and Afghanistan. And I agree with you, I think we had a very productive meeting.
I come to Kyiv, Mr. President, with one simple, straightforward message that I don't want anyone to misunderstand. That is, the United States is committed to a strong, democratic and prosperous Ukraine.
Your success, Mr. President, we believe will be our success. We in the United States are trying to build a multi-partner world in which we work with like-minded countries to make common cause on common challenges. And quite frankly, the stronger our partners, the more effective that partnership will be.
We worked together to tackle, as I referenced earlier, common security problems -- threats in the Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan -- and we meet what President Obama and I believe is one of humanity’s greatest challenges, and that is reducing nuclear arsenals and securing nuclear materiel.
We consider, Mr. President, Ukraine to be a vital European partner for advancing stability, prosperity and democracy on the continent. And the President and I agreed that the United States and Ukraine will work together in the months and years to come to strengthen the strategic partnership.
It is not for the United States to dictate what that partnership will be but to reiterate. And President Obama and I have stated clearly that if you choose to be part of Euro-Atlantic integration -- which I believe you have -- that we strongly support that.
We do not recognize -- and I want to reiterate it -- any sphere of influence. We do not recognize anyone else's right to dictate to you or any other country what alliances you will seek to belong to or what relationships you -- bilateral relationships you have.
I reaffirmed to the President what I said in Munich, as I said, in the earliest days of our administration, and it's worth repeating again in a brief statement, and that is -- and President Obama, I might add, made it clear in his visit to Moscow this month -- the United States supports Ukraine’s sovereignty, independence and freedom, and to make its own choices -- its own choices -- including what alliances they choose to belong.
We're working, as you know, Mr. President, to reset our relationship with Russia. But I assure you and all the Ukrainian people that it will not come at Ukraine’s expense. To the contrary, I believe it can actually benefit Ukraine. The more substantive relationship we have with Moscow, the more we can defuse the zero-sum thinking about our relations with Russia’s neighbors.
We also talked about many important challenges facing Ukraine today, made more difficult by the economic crisis the world is facing. And we discussed ways in which the United States can help Ukraine undertake what are obviously tough reforms needed to build its democracy and economy and to strengthen its energy sector.
To that end, I was pleased to learn that the government has taken the final decision necessary to bring the Overseas Private Investment Corporation back to Ukraine. That will make it easier for American companies to reinvest in Ukraine, and invest in the first place, which will help both our economies in the current downturn.
I know it's hard, I know it's hard, and these are tough decisions that your government has to make. And I also know from experience of being in public life for a long time, it's harder to make tough decisions in election years. It's a difficult time in any democracy. I told the President what I will tell other officials with whom I'll be meeting today, that working together, especially in times of crisis, is not a choice, it’s an absolute necessity. And compromise, I might add, is not a sign of weakness, it is evidence of strength.
Ukraine has come a long way in the short time since declaring independence in 1991. And Ukraine’s vibrant civil society -- and it is vibrant -- its engaged and free media, as we witnessed here today -- and its lively democracy show the world that Ukraine will continue on its chosen path toward a prosperous future as an integral part of Europe.
The United States, Mr. President, is committing to walking that path with Ukraine to see to it that it becomes a vital part of Europe.
And again, Mr. President, I want to thank you for your hospitality. I look forward to continuing the discussions we had today at a working group level, and I am -- I'm confident that Ukraine's democracy will take deep root in the 21st century.
Thank you, Mr. President.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
U.S.-Ukraine Business Council (USUBC): http://www.usubc.org
From 22 to over 100 Members in Two Years, Join Today
========================================================
3.TYMOSHENKO GOVERNMENT NEAR SOLUTION
OF UKRAINE'S OPIC PROBLEMS
PR Newswire-USNewswire, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, Jul. 21, 2009
KYIV, Ukraine, July 21 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A resolution pushed through the Ukrainian Cabinet of Ministers on July 17, 2009 is expected to lead to a final solution of the long-standing political risk insurance claim by the U.S. Government's Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC).
"This breakthrough should open an exciting new window for expanded U.S.-Ukraine business, particularly for support of alliances between small and medium-sized businesses in both countries," said E. Morgan Williams of SigmaBleyzer, President of the U.S.-Ukraine Business Council (USUBC)
[http://usubc.org].
"We appreciate the outstanding leadership of Prime Minister Tymoshenko and Vice Prime Minister Nemyria that led to the developments that seem certain to result in breaking this years-long log jam. Their persistent efforts, along with former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine William Taylor and former U.S. Embassy Economic Counselor William Klein, made this progress possible," Williams added.
Reopening of OPIC guaranteesis one of the most important agenda items during the current visit of U.S. Vice President Joseph Biden to Ukraine, the first important high-level visit of the Obama administration.
"Previous governments have promised progress on this troublesome issue, but Prime Minister Tymoshenko and her government have demonstrated their ability to bring the Ministries of Defense, Finance, and Economy to an agreement. This shows a level of leadership missing in previous governments," Williams added.
OPIC programs [http://www.opic.gov] are of extraordinary importance because they make it possible for small and medium-sized U.S. companies to expand from the domestic market into the world economy, particularly emerging markets, by providing financing, investment funds, and political risk insurance. This provides great opportunities for SMEs in the United States and Ukraine to forge profitable partnerships that help both countries.
In addition, OPIC is able to support long-term projects for larger companies requiring large amounts of capital in such diverse areas as telecommunications, power, water, housing, airports, hotels, high-tech, financial services and mining. This flexibility will allow OPIC to become a driving force in meeting Ukraine's overall development goals.
"The reopening of OPIC programs will be a win-win situation for both Ukraine and the United States. We urge both governments to keep working together to move this issue to settlement now," Williams concluded.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: For more information, contactmwilliams@usubc.org; Tel: 380 50 689 2874, http://www.usubc.org.
LINK: http://news.prnewswire.com:80/DisplayReleaseContent.aspx?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/07-21-2009/0005063109&EDATE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
4. BIDEN REASSURES UKRAINE OF U.S. SUPPORT
Urged Ukrainians to choose path of democracy and free markets
By Ellen Barry, The New York Times, NY, NY,Wed, July 22, 2009
KIEV, Ukraine — Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. on Wednesday urged Ukrainians to choose the path of democracy and free markets, saying that to do otherwise would betray the promise of the 2004 Orange Revolution.
Later Wednesday, he received an enthusiastic reception in Georgia, where strong American support for the government of President Mikheil Saakashvili has inflamed tensions with Russia.
Though his visit in the region was intended mostly to reassure Ukraine and Georgia that American support for them will not diminish, Mr. Biden sounded grander notes in his speeches. In Ukraine, which will probably elect a new president in January, he noted that the country is at a decision point as critical as any in its history.
His trip comes at a time of exhaustion with democratic and economic reforms throughout the post-Soviet space, and as Russia seeks to restore its old regional dominance. Acknowledging the difficulty of the path the country is following, Mr. Biden urged Ukrainians to think “in terms of centuries.”
“Centuries from now, what will Ukrainians say of this time?” he said, in a speech billed as an address to the Ukrainian people. “What will they say of their leaders? Will they say they returned to the past, or will they say the beginning of the 21st century launched a period of prosperity, freedom and independence?”
Mr. Biden encouraged Ukraine to pursue its future through economic means, saying the country’s independence “depends more in this country on your energy freedom than on any single factor.”
Last year, as part of a charter on strategic partnership, the United States promised to look for ways to improve and secure Ukraine’s pipeline network, which could directly challenge Russia’s control over exports of energy to Eastern Europe. Ukraine serves as a transit point for 80 percent of Russian gas exports to Europe, but it extracts virtually none of the large profit earned from the gas crossing its territory.
Mr. Biden said the strategic partnership commission would begin meeting in Washington this fall.
On Wednesday, as he did on Tuesday, Mr. Biden said that the United States would back Ukraine’s entry into NATO, an initiative under the Bush administration that Russia regards as a direct threat on its borders. But he emphasized that Washington did not seek to force its allies’ hand, seemingly acknowledging that much of the population is not enthusiastic about the move.
“We recognize that they are your decisions,” he said. “They are your choices, not ours. Whether you choose to join the European Union or seek to join NATO, we recognize that how far or how fast to proceed with your choices is your choice, not ours.”
Mr. Biden tempered his speech with sharp criticism of Ukraine’s leading politicians, whose infighting has sunk the government into a state of paralysis.
As the country struggles to negotiate the economic crisis, President Viktor A. Yushchenko and Prime Minister Yulia V. Tymoshenko — the heroes of the Orange Revolution movement that replaced a pro-Russia government — have squabbled so bitterly that at times they were not on speaking terms. The deadlock has so frustrated voters that they have swung toward the opposition leader, Viktor F. Yanukovich, who has close ties to the Kremlin.
Mr. Biden cast this as a serious disappointment, saying that if the Ukrainian poet Taras Shevchenko were alive today, “I’m sure he would be heralding the openness and pluralism and freedom of the press” of contemporary Ukraine.
“But I think he would also be wondering why the government is not exhibiting the same political maturity as the people,” he said.
In Tbilisi, Georgia’s capital, Mr. Biden’s motorcade was greeted by hundreds of people lining the streets, many of them waving flags or holding signs either praising American support for their country or condemning Russia for interfering in the nearby breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
Mr. Biden has been perhaps the most outspoken public supporter of Georgia within the Obama administration and has harshly criticized Russia for its hostility toward Mr. Saakashvili’s government. But in comments as he prepared to go to Georgia, he seemed to be imparting a personal lesson — almost a soft rebuke — to the first generation of post-Soviet leaders like Mr. Saakashvili.
Acknowledging that his prescriptions for economic and political reform, such as ending popular subsidies for energy, are not likely to be popular with voters in the former Soviet sphere, he repeated the advice he said he always gives young people interested in running for public office.
“What is it you care about that is worth losing over?” he said. “If you can’t figure that out, then it’s merely ambition that is driving you. Every country needs politicians who know what is worth losing over.”
LINK: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/23/world/europe/23biden.html?_r=1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
U.S.-Ukraine Business Council (USUBC): http://www.usubc.org
Promoting U.S.-Ukraine business relations & investment since 1995.
========================================================
5. UKRAINE ON THE END OF BIDEN BROADSIDE
By Daniel Dombey in Washington and Roman Olearchyk in Kiev
Financial Times, London, UK,Thursday, July 23, 2009
Joe Biden, US vice-president, subjected Ukraine’s rancorous coalition government to a barrage of criticism in a speech on Tuesday that highlighted Washington’s break with the former Bush administration’s support for allies such as Kiev and Tbilisi.
On a trip intended to reassure both Ukraine and Georgia of support in the wake of the US push to re-engage with Russia – and President Barack Obama’s visit to Moscow this month – Mr Biden, nevertheless, spelled out the new administration’s concerns about Kiev’s political direction.
“Communications among leaders has broken down to such an extent that political posturing appears to prevent progress,” he said, recalling the expectations stirred by Ukraine’s 2004 Orange revolution, hailed at the time as a decisive break with Moscow but followed by prolonged political infighting.
“Friendship requires honesty,” he said. “The great promise of 2004 has yet to be fully realised.”
Referring to Ukraine’s economic problems, Mr Biden asked: “Can you name me a place where democracy has flourished where the economic system has failed?”
He continued: “Mature democracies survive because they develop institutions such as a free press, a truly independent court system, an effective legislature – all of which serve as a check on the corruption that fuels the cynicism and limits growth in any country, including yours.”
Mr Biden’s speech, in which he also called on Ukraine to reduce its reliance on outside suppliers such as Russia by improving its energy efficiency, contrasted sharply with an address given by Dick Cheney in Lithuania in 2006. On that occasion, the former vice-president said that “from Freedom Square in Tbilisi to Independence Square in Kiev, and beyond, patriots have stepped forward to claim their just inheritance of liberty and independence”.
While Mr Cheney also denounced Russian use of its energy resources for “intimidation or blackmail”, Mr Biden stressed the Obama administration’s goal of pressing the “reset” button with Moscow – a goal he set out in February.
Obama administration officials express the hope that if Moscow and Washington co-operate in a number of areas including arms control, Russia will have more incentive to join the US’s bid to increase pressure on Iran over its nuclear programme.
But Mr Biden was quick to emphasise the US’s continued rejection of any Russian claims of a sphere of influence over its “near abroad” – the message intended to be the centrepiece of his trip.
“As we reset the relationship with Russia, we reaffirm our commitment to an independent Ukraine,” he said. “Ukraine today is one of the most free and democratic nations in this region.”
Ukraine and Georgia have both pushed for security guarantees from the west in the light of last year’s Georgian-Russian war. But the political strife in Ukraine and charges that Georgia’s government acted recklessly in the run-up to last year’s conflict have delivered a big blow to their hopes of joining Nato.
Mr Biden arrived last night in Georgia. While he rallied to the country’s cause during last year’s US presidential election, his message this year is more nuanced, focusing on mutual restraint between Moscow and Tbilisi and democratic reform within Georgia itself.
LINK: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2d786708-76f8-11de-b23c-00144feabdc0.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
6. BIDEN: ENERGY INDEPENDENCE KEY TO UKRAINE'S ECONOMIC HEALTH
By Peter Fedynsky, Voice of America (VOA), Kyiv, Ukraine, 22 July 2009
Tbilisi is the second and final stop on Vice President Joe Biden's current trip to demonstrate American support for Georgian and Ukrainian sovereignty. Before his departure for Georgia, Biden told an audience of businesspeople, politicians and students in Kyiv that Ukraine's economic well-being depends on energy independence from Russia.
Vice President Biden delivered his address at Kyiv's Ukrainian House, a culture and arts center that was formerly a Lenin Museum. He reiterated earlier statements about strong U.S. support for Ukrainian sovereignty and again rejected Russian notions about a sphere of influence in countries of the former Soviet Union.
Biden said Ukrainian democracy depends considerably on the energy security of the nation and urged his audience to work toward energy efficiency.
"Nowhere is the relationship between democracy, development, and security clearer than when it comes to energy. Right now, in the United States, we are making significant efforts - at some political expense I might add - to diversify our energy supply, to invest in efficiency, and make some very difficult decisions about how to deal with the carbon footprint," he said.
In his meeting Tuesday with Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, Biden discussed ways to revive the Ukrainian economy, which has been hit hard by the global economic crisis. In his address, he noted that the Ukrainian government has agreed to economic and banking reforms and also to phase out energy subsidies. "Carrying out this agreement requires very hard choices and tough action, but it will help put you on the road to growth and competitiveness," he said.
Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko told a Kyiv news conference her meeting with Biden focused on ways to continue Ukraine's relationship with the International Monetary Fund. The IMF set conditions when it extended a $16 billion credit to Ukraine in November to help the country deal with the global economic crisis.
DISCUSSED DELIVERY OF U.S. NUCLEAR FUEL
Ms. Tymoshenko said she also discussed delivery of U.S. fuel to her country's nuclear power plants and issues related to its gas-pipeline system.
OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT CORPORATION
Ms. Tymoshenko said she considers all discussions with Biden about investments to advance her government's energy efficiency program to have been very important. She says they also discussed risk protection offered by the Overseas Private Investment Corporation to small and medium size American entrepreneurs who invest in Ukraine.
AMERICAN BUSINESSMAN
American businessman Morgan Williams told VOA he welcomes Vice President Biden's reaffirmation of Ukrainian sovereignty. Williams heads an association of investors in Ukraine.
"It was very important to get this clarified for the business community and for everybody else, as people worry about their money, their investments and what the United States is going to do. I think it was a strong and clear as it could be and needed to be," he said.
The final stop on Biden's itinerary this week is Georgia, where he has scheduled meetings with President Mikheil Saakashvili, members of the opposition and civil society, the country's parliamentary speaker, and also an address to lawmakers.
LINK: http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-07-22-voa24.cfm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
7. UKRAINE WANTS RUSSIA-US RELATIONS TO DEVELOP,
IF THEY DON'T HARM UKRAINE, SAYS YUSCHENKO
Issues official invitation to U.S. President Barack Obama to visit Ukraine
Interfax Ukraine News, Kyiv, Ukraine,Tuesday, July21, 2009
KYIV -Kyiv wants to see the development of Russian-U.S. relations, as long as Ukraine's national interests are not damaged, Ukrainian President Viktor Yuschenko said at a joint press conference with U.S. Vice President Joe Biden on Tuesday. "It is really important for us that these relations develop in a constructive atmosphere," he said. "We want to see these relations [develop], as long as they don't affect Ukrainian [interests]," Yuschenko added.
Ukrainian President Viktor Yuschenko has said that Ukraine's strategic relations with the United States have strengthened in recent years. The Ukrainian president said this at a meeting with U.S. Vice-President Joe Biden, Yuschenko's press service reported. Yuschenko welcomed Biden, who was visiting Ukraine for the first time.
"I would like you to bring home strong impressions from Ukraine. You are in a democratic European state, where very important processes are going on," the president said. He also noted that Ukraine was making progress in domestic reforms.
The Ukrainian president noted the strategic character of the bilateral relations stipulated in the Ukraine-U.S. charter on strategic partnership signed in December of 2008.
Yuschenko and Biden are expected to discuss ways to invigorate bilateral dialogue, as well as the Ukrainian security and Euro-Atlantic integration policies, the development of the energy sector and cooperation with international financial institutions, including the International Monetary Fund.
They will also discuss the implementation of the Ukraine - U.S. strategic partnership charter, and the road map plan of priorities in Ukrainian-American cooperation, including the status of the inter-agency coordinating group.
The talks involve Ukraine's delegation participating in the meeting with the U.S. vice-president includes presidential secretariat head Vira Ulianchenko, National Security and Defense Council Secretary Raisa Bohatyriova, Temporary Acting Foreign Minister Yuriy Kostenko, Temporary Acting Defense
Minister Valeriy Ivaschenko, deputy head of the presidential secretariat Andriy Honcharuk, Ukraine's Ambassador to U.S. Oleh Shamshur, president's representative for international and energy security issues Bohdan Sokolovsky and head of Yuschenko's office Ruslan Demchenko.
Ukrainian President Viktor Yuschenko has once again stressed the importance of Ukraine's joining the European Union and NATO for the country's development. The president gave this opinion during a joint press conference with U.S. Vice President Joe Biden after their meeting on Friday.
"We live in a complicated world, and such things as territorial integrity, sovereignty, independence and political freedoms are very important to Ukraine. And these things will depend on how Ukraine forms its relations with its neighbours, the states of the continent, and the world," Yuschenko said. The president added that he was grateful to the United States for its clear stance on supporting Ukraine's integration plans.
Ukrainian President Viktor Yuschenko has confirmed an official invitation to U.S. President Barack Obama to visit Ukraine. "Our talks proceeded in a new, constructive atmosphere. I have confirmed my invitation to U.S. president [Barack Obama] to visit Ukraine whenever he has time," Yuschenko told the press after meeting U.S. Vice President Joe Biden. The president said that the meeting focused on the issues of bilateral cooperation as well as the regional and world policies of the country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
========================================================
8. PRESYUSHCHENKO PRAISES RELATIONS BETWEEN UKRAINE AND USA
Ukrainian leader hails ties with US, says energy, security top agenda
UT1, Kiev, Ukraine, in UkrainianTue, 21 Jul 09
BBC MonitoringService, UK, in English,Tue, July 21, 2009
KIEV - Speaking at a joint news conference with US Vice-President Joseph Biden in Kiev, broadcast live by the state-owned Ukrainian television channel UT1 and the news channel 5 Kanal on 21 July, he said: "I would like to say that relations between Ukraine and the USA have been developing as relations of strategic importance." "Our relations are developing actively," he added. "They have steady heredity".
Yushchenko described Biden's visit to Ukraine as "very important" and said that their talks, held in "a constructive and business-like atmosphere", focused on security and energy issues.
"We are not living in a simple world. Ukraine's territorial integrity and its sovereignty, independence and political freedoms are sacred to us, and of course these things depend on how Ukraine will develop relations regarding these matters with its neighbours, with countries of the continent and of the entire world," he said.
Yushchenko noted that NATO membership was "the best answer" and thanked the USA for supporting Ukraine's bid to join it. He also pointed out that Ukraine was the only non-NATO member participating in all peacekeeping operations carried out by the alliance, which he described as "a pleasant rule". He added that the decision to allow NATO to transport non-military cargoes via Ukraine for International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan was "absolutely well thought-out and right".
The president said he and Biden discussed reforms, especially in the energy sector, and called for "implementing a deep policy of reforms" on the Ukrainian gas market.
"We must learn to use energy resources rationally. We must learn to use them carefully and, to achieve this, it is necessary to carry out radical reforms of the sector," he said, adding that this would help Ukraine achieve prosperity and protect its independence.
The talks also focused on energy transit, including setting up new transit routes and attracting investment to upgrade Ukraine's gas transport system, Yushchenko continued.
He thanked the USA for its support in Ukraine's cooperation with the International Monetary Fund: "I would like to express gratitude to the USA for the support we feel in the context of cooperation with the IMF."
Yushchenko said he and Biden also discussed non-proliferation issues and the participation of both countries in global nuclear security initiatives. He welcomed Ukraine's recent deal with the USA on the purchase of American nuclear fuel for Ukrainian nuclear power plants.
The president said that the Obama administration's plans to reset ties with Russia were among the subjects broached during his talks with Biden.
"I will not conceal that our talks also focused on the new relationship between the USA and Russia. It is really important to us that this relationship should develop in a constructive and business-like atmosphere. We want to see this relationship as one holding prospect but of course not at the expense of the Ukrainian factor or forming some new zones of someone's special interests," he said. Yushchenko invited Obama to visit Ukraine.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[return to index][Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
9. BIDEN REBUKES UKRAINIAN LEADERS
By Peter Spiegel, The Wall Street Journal, NY, NY, Thu, July 23, 2009
KIEV, Ukraine -- U.S. Vice President Joe Biden chastised Ukraine's political leadership on Wednesday, saying Kiev risks squandering its celebrated Orange Revolution through continuous governmental infighting that has stalemated urgently needed economic reforms.
As he has throughout his three-day visit to Kiev, Mr. Biden reiterated the Obama administration's commitment to strengthen ties with Ukraine and rejected Russian claims that the former Soviet republic was part of Moscow's "sphere of influence."
But in sometimes harsh tones, Mr. Biden said the 2004 revolution, in which pro-democracy protesters overthrew a Russian-backed leadership accused of electoral fraud, was one "whose promise remains to be fulfilled" by Ukraine's current leaders.
Mr. Biden cited 19th century Ukrainian poet Taras Shevchenko, whose literary support for Ukrainian independence prompted a Cold War-era monument in his honor in Washington, D.C., arguing Mr. Shevchenko would today be proud of Ukrainian newfound freedoms, but not its political leadership.
"I think he would also be wondering why the government is not exhibiting the same political maturity as the people, why communications among leaders has broken down to such an extent that political posturing appears to prevent progress, especially now, especially in difficult economic times," Mr. Biden said in a speech billed as an address to the Ukrainian people.
Ukraine's political paralysis has dragged on for months, with former Orange Revolution allies President Viktor Yushchenko and Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko trading accusations and preventing key energy and government reform measures from moving through Parliament.
Despite the stalemate, the Obama administration has refrained from public criticism in the past and U.S. experts on the region expected Mr. Biden to address
the issue with leaders only behind closed doors.
But in a significant departure reflecting Washington's growing frustration with Kiev, Mr. Biden cast the infighting in both historical and national security terms, saying future generations would hold the current leadership accountable if it didn't take needed but painful steps to overhaul an economy and political system sputtering in the wake of a brutal economic recession.
"The time for inertia and neglect has long passed," Mr. Biden said in the 20 minute speech at the Soviet-era Ukraine House. "The leaders of this country came together once in 2004 because they knew a free and prosperous Ukraine was more important than any one politician and any one political party. I have no doubt Ukrainians will come together again."
The Ukrainian stalemate has been exacerbated by upcoming presidential elections in January, in which both Mr. Yushchenko and Ms. Tymoshenko are expected to compete. But U.S. officials insisted the reforms must come before any change in government. "The world doesn't wait for elections," said a senior administration official traveling with Mr. Biden. "These problems are immediate."
Mr. Biden saved his toughest criticism for the government's handling of the energy sector, where large subsidies on imported natural gas exist that analysts argue have contributed to a black market susceptible to corruption and Russian manipulation.
Twice in the last three years, disputes between Russia and Ukraine over gas payments have shut down a key gas pipeline that transits Ukraine to the rest of
Europe, leaving parts of Eastern and Central Europe shivering during the winter.
Although he didn't mention Russia by name, Mr. Biden said reform of the energy sector was essential to Ukraine's independence and national security, saying only if the country rationalized its gas market would it be free of dependence on foreign powers and their suppliers.
"Your economic freedom depends more, I suspect in this country, on your energy freedom than on any other single factor," Mr. Biden said, urging conservation as well as reform. "That will be a boon to your economy and an immeasurable benefit, I respectfully suggest, to your national security."
Mr. Biden also announced the establishment of a joint U.S.-Ukrainian working group on energy security, which is scheduled to meet later this year.
Ukraine has already implemented some painful economic reforms, including an agreement to gradually increase energy prices, as part of an emergency $16.4 billion aid deal with the International Monetary Fund.
During Mr. Biden's visit, Mr. Yushchenko publicly asked for additional U.S. assistance to overhaul its energy infrastructure, but the senior administration official said the White House believed the IMF loan, coupled with the government's ability to borrow in international markets, is sufficient.
Write to Peter Spiegel at peter.spiegel@wsj.com
LINK: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124826011542371735.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
10. BIDEN REASSURES KYIV, MEETS WITH PM TYMOSHENKO
INFORM, newsletter for the international community providing
views and analysis from the Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko (BYuT)
Kyiv, Ukraine, Wednesday, July 23, 2009
KYIV - US Vice President Joseph Biden swept into Kyiv on Tuesday, with a strong message to the Ukrainian people that US moves to reset relations with Russia “will not come at Ukraine’s expense.” During his whistle-stop visit Mr Biden met the four main presidential candidates and had a tête-à-tête meeting with Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko lasting more than an hour.
Mr Biden’s visit to Ukraine and Georgia – two prospective candidates for NATO membership – follows the visit earlier this month by US President Barack Obama to Moscow. The new White House administration’s desire to reset relations with the Kremlin raised concerns that Ukraine could become sidelined as both superpowers tried to patch up their differences. The unfulfilled position of US ambassador to Ukraine appeared to some to confirm a shift in attitude. But not so, according to Mr Biden who said that the US would continue to support Ukraine’s push to integrate with the West.
Following talks with President Viktor Yushchenko, Mr Biden was both emphatic and upbeat. "We're working, as you know, Mr President, to reset our relationship with Russia. But I assure you and all the Ukrainian people that it will not come at Ukraine's expense. To the contrary, I believe it can actually benefit Ukraine."
The US Vice President backed strongly the right for Ukraine to choose its own allies and expressed support for Ukraine’s accession to NATO. And in what was clearly a reference to Russia exerting its influence in the region, he emphasised that the US does “not recognise any sphere of influence.” He drove home the point by saying. "We do not recognise anyone else's right to dictate to you or any other country what alliance you will seek to belong to or what relationships, bilateral relationships, you have."
Yesterday afternoon Prime Minister Tymoshenko had a productive meeting with Mr Biden in the Club of the Cabinet of Ministers. They discussed the economic situation in Ukraine, energy, bi-lateral trade and Euro-Atlantic integration issues. This was the second meeting between the two leaders who first met at the 48th Munich Security Conference last February.
Following their tête-à-tête there was a meeting between Ukrainian and US delegations led on the Ukrainian side by Deputy Prime Minister Hryhoriy Nemyria. “Vice President Biden imparted a reassuring message during his visit,” said Mr Nemyria. “We see new opportunity for bilateral cooperation and – just like the US – we too seek to improve relations with our largest neighbour. While our European trajectory is not in question, good relations founded upon equality, respect and trust are important.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
U.S.-Ukraine Business Council (USUBC): http://www.usubc.org
Promoting U.S.-Ukraine business relations & investment since 1995.
========================================================
11. DAMON WILSON ON SIGNIFICANCE OF BIDEN TRIP TO UKRAINE AND GEORGIA
Interview with Damon Wilson by Myroslava Gongadze
Voice of America (VOA),Ukrainian Service, Washington, DC, Sunday,July 19, 2009
Atlantic Council International Security Program director and former ranking Bush administration official Damon Wilson spoke to VOA Ukrainian on the significance of Vice President Joseph Biden’s trip to Ukraine and Georgia. The interview was conducted by Myroslava Gongadze on July 16 at the Voice of America in Washington, DC.
MG: As a former high-ranking official of the Bush administration do you see a shift in U.S. foreign policy towards Ukraine and the region with President Obama coming to power?
DW: I think it’s hard to answer that question right now. I think the administration hasn’t taken the time or had the opportunity to really articulate its positive agenda for a country like Ukraine. And that’s why Vice President Biden’s upcoming trip is so important, because it is an opportunity to do that. The administration has spent the early months focused on how to change the rhetoric, change the tone of the relationship with Russia, resetting the policy button with Russia, if you will. And that’s driven a lot of the work inside the government, inside the agency, to prepare Obama’s trip to Moscow.
But I think the administration is learning that in order to get its policy right towards Russia it must also have as robust and developed of a policy direction for Europe’s East, including countries like Ukraine and Georgia. And we haven’t yet seen that. To some degree that’s understandable. It’s part of a transition and a new administration getting up to speed. And part of it is a reflection that some think that you have a little bit more time, that issues like Ukraine and Georgia are not necessarily on the front burner. I think there are others inside the administration that recognize that they really are a priority. And this is why
I think the vice-president’s trip is both an important signal, but it’s also important substantively, because it forces the administration to work through what its strategy is, what its policy will be. So I think it’s still too early to say whether you’re seeing a policy shift. You’ve certainly seen an effort to calm the waters with Russia. But remember, that’s exactly the same kind of approach that President Bush took at the beginning of his term. It seems to me that we sometimes repeat that cycle with our Russian colleagues, only to become more frustrated down the line. But it certainly makes sense for them having taken this approach.
Now, I think the onus is on the administration to articulate a very clear and strong policy towards a country like Ukraine. And I think there is some good hope for those watching this, because it’s important to remember that U.S. policy towards Europe’s East, towards Ukraine in particular, has enjoyed pretty strong bipartisan support in the United States. This hasn’t been an issue of Democrats or Republicans.
In fact, all of the presidential candidates in the elections last year were quite strong on Ukraine, quite strong on Ukraine and NATO. And I think we wouldn’t expect that to change. But we are still waiting for a clear policy out of the administration, a positive agenda, not just how to think about Ukraine through the prism of Moscow, but how to deal with Ukraine directly and bilaterally from a United States perspective.
MG: It’s not a secret that for years there was a lot of frustration with Ukraine’s lack of reforms and democracy development. Still, you are arguing that the U.S. should not give up on Ukraine. Why is Ukraine important for the United States and why should US-Ukraine relations be important for Ukraine?
DW: First of all, Ukraine is an incredibly important country. It’s a large country. Geostrategic issues are at play. It’s significant in terms of its size, its population, its location. But the more important reason is what’s been happening in Ukraine. Since the Orange Revolution, and since independence, Ukraine has really been struggling with the process of reform. And it’s been two steps forward, one step back. All of us who are supporters of Ukraine have been frustrated that we haven’t seen as much progress as we would have liked to have seen.
But the reason Ukraine is important is because the Ukrainian people essentially stood up and said, ‘We’re tired of business as usual. We’re tired of a corrupt government here that doesn’t represent really the will of the people.’ And it’s incumbent upon countries in the West, democracies, along with the United States to say, ‘We support you in your right to determine your own future.’
When I was in government that was a very strong rationale for the basis of our policy towards Ukraine. We didn’t just pick Ukraine and say, ‘OK, Ukraine is strategically important.’ Or we didn’t pick and say, ‘Yushchenko is the man we want to back.’ We watched what happened internally. We watched the evolution of Ukrainian society. And while we have been frustrated, it certainly has developed dramatically in a democratic fashion. In some respects Ukrainian politics is very messy, and that can be very frustrating. On the other hand, it is a reflection of the fact that here is no authoritarian control, there is no centralized control.
There really is a plurality of voices, a plurality of views. There really is open competition. And while that can be frustrating because it doesn’t lead to as clear a policy direction as many of us would like to see, in many respects I say ‘Thank goodness that it’s been messy, that it has been a democratic process.’ And think as Ukraine goes through what is a very difficult process of continuing transition, that it’s incumbent upon democracies to stand with the Ukrainian people with this process.
We’ve gone through this process in Eastern and Central Europe. It was not easy. It takes leadership, first of all from Ukrainians. But because of the risk that I think many Ukrainians have taken on this front, they deserve the support both from the United States, from Europe, in this quest to really build a Ukrainian nation, a Ukrainian state that is democratic, that is integrated into the world economy and is drawing closer to Europe.
MG: What can the United States give Ukraine? What kind of leverage does the US have in this relationship, in support of Ukraine?
DW: I think what the United States has to do is approach it from two directions. One, we need to be unequivocal about our support of Ukraine as an independent, sovereign country, as a democracy, as a free-market economy. And we need to do everything we can from our perspective to be able to support the evolution of democratic institutions, solidification of free-market economics, and the development of civil society, an independent media. And I think that’s where you see U.S. policy continuing. It’s a question of support, not for any particular individual. This is not about choosing particular political figures in Ukraine.
This is about supporting the process, the painful process, sometimes, of the democratic evolution of a country. And that’s where you need a clear, strong policy from the United States, that it supports internal reforms, and that it supports the aspirations of the Ukrainian leadership to draw closer to Europe. And that is where you need a clear message and a clear policy to back it up. At the same time it takes a little bit of tough love, if you will, as we often say here, because Ukraine is in a crisis.
Ukraine is in a deep economic crisis, it’s a very serious situation and a very difficult political climate, a lot of tension, as you well know. And I think that the Ukrainians in private need to hear tough messages from their friends about the importance of not putting difficult decisions to the side, but taking some difficult decisions to continue to move the country forward, to ensure that Ukraine comes out of this economic crisis stronger rather than weaker. And to ensure that its political development isn’t affected, isn’t retarded by the economic crisis.
There are some difficult decisions looming on the horizon for Ukraine, as it heads into yet another election cycle and I think Ukrainian leaders need to hear both a very public message of support from the United States, but also a very private message of the responsibilities that they have as good stewards of the Ukrainian nation.
We can’t tell Ukrainians what their own national interests are. That is for Ukrainians to determine. But we can point out where we think that the policies, the goals they have articulated, we can sometimes question whether they have put the policies in place, whether they’ve taken the tough decisions to actually help the country reach that point. Corruption is a good example.
You hear most of the political class with a pretty uniform message on the importance of transparency and anti-corruption efforts. And yet, we still have some very serious concerns. And maybe in private meetings Ukrainian leaders need to hear a tough message from their friends in the West. Because, at the end of the day, if issues like that go unaddressed, they’re very damaging to Ukraine’s economy, and over time certainly to Ukraine’s sovereignty and even its independence.|
MG: You’ve already mentioned the visit of Vice President Biden. He’s going to Ukraine next week. What kind of signal does the United States want to send to Ukraine and other countries?
DW: I think it sends a very important sign. I think the administration is trying to signal that Ukraine does matter to the Obama administration, it does matter to Washington. And it is a sign of reassurance that while the administration has been focused on resetting policy with Russia, and President Obama’s visit to Moscow was the most visible element of that, that it isn’t taking for granted its relationship with countries like Ukraine. And I think that’s important. I think that it’s both a sign to the Ukrainian people of the enduring support and solidarity of the United States and the democratic evolution that the country is going through.
It’s also an opportunity to have some tough conversations and some direct talks with a range of political leaders – the president, the prime minister, the leader of the opposition, the speaker of the Rada – the range of political figures that need to be able to be engaged with the American leadership on these issues.
Because we recognize the importance of a range of political actors in Ukraine. But even as important I think this is an important signal to Moscow that just because the administration has been focused very much rhetorically, publicly, substantively on the relationship with Russia, it’s not at the expense of our relationship with Ukraine.
Many of us that have been in government before and are on the outside now have pushed to see the administration takes clear positions along these lines. And I think that the administration has listened to the concerns of its friends in Ukraine, the concerns of its friends in Central and Eastern Europe and those on Capitol Hill and Congress here in Washington as well as of the outside community that it needed to take some steps to reassure its friends and to make clear that the United States would have a strong policy of support for Ukraine. And that this is not just a function of Russia. It also sends an important message to some of our friends throughout Europe.
It helps those who are policymakers in Paris and Berlin and London, it helps them see that the United States still values very much the relationship with Ukraine and is still very much supportive of Ukraine’s aspirations to move towards Europe. So, first and foremost a message to the Ukrainian people of support, a message to Moscow that we don’t recognize a privileged sphere of interest, and a message to our friends in Europe that Ukraine is still high on the American agenda and that [the US] expects it to remain high on their agenda as well.
MG: Mr. Biden, in addition to visiting Ukraine, is also going to Georgia. Does this mean that the United States views these two countries as reliable partners of the US in the region?
DW: In some respects – yes. I mean, obviously Ukraine and Georgia are dramatically different countries in dramatically different situations. But what brings them together is that over the recent years both of these countries have stood up and said, ‘We want to strengthen our democracy, we want to strengthen our free market economy, as we make these reforms at home we want to move towards Europe, we want to move toward the institutions of Europe and the Euro-Atlantic community.’
And that’s what brings them together in this message. And, frankly, the other issue that brings them together is Russian policy. Russia, in some respects, has had a policy of containment and rollback, if you will. Very clearly, with Russian leadership articulating its interest in a privileged sphere of interest.
I mean something that is so 19th century policy in thinking about the region. And so, unfortunately, Russian policy has put them into the same type of category. And I think that is something we can’t accept and won’t accept. So it’s clear that the trip does represent our view of Ukraine and Georgia as important partners, as partners where there is a lot of work to be done. And they have been reliable partners over the years. Sometimes not quite as reliable as we would have wanted on some issues. But they have been tremendous allies and partners on a lot of issues on the international agenda. And I think this trip will hopefully be able to cement that fact.
MG: You described the similarities between the two countries. One of the similarities is that both expressed a wish to become members of NATO. How do you see the relationship with NATO for both countries at this point?
DW: I am a strong supporter of the aspirations of Ukraine and Georgia to move towards the alliance. I helped to craft and advocate that policy when I was in government and I’m still a strong proponent of it now. And I think that we’ve left the relationship in a strong position, where we have a NATO-Ukraine Commission and a NATO-Georgia Commission that is positioned to use the Bucharest decision, where Alliance leaders decided that one day Ukraine and Georgia would be part of the Alliance, that you’ve got the structures to be able to pursue that objective and implement it.
It’s incumbent upon the Ukrainians and the Georgians to ensure that they are developing plans, concrete and specific plans with the Alliance, that, frankly, are the type of plans that we would have been doing if there had been a Membership Action Plan in any case.
But at the same time I think, you can’t take this for granted. And, honestly, that’s where some of my concerns are in that some in the West are saying that, OK, you’ve had Bucharest, you’ve had that decision, it’s taken. But it riled the waters, if you will, it complicated our relationship with Russia. So we need to enter a period of calming the waters, where we might put this issue on the backburner, and we sort of set it aside for a couple of years, while we put our focus elsewhere. And I think that’s a mistake. I mean, it’s true that, first of all, the process of integration has to be driven from Kyiv and driven from Tbilisi.
It’s incumbent upon Ukrainian leaders and Georgian leaders to advocate what they want, to communicate their aspirations, and to do the work and the reforms to underpin this process of moving closer to the Alliance. But I also think we are invested in that process with you and we can’t say we’re going to put this on the backburner for two years, because you have a lot of work anyways.
We need to be there, rolling up our sleeves, being partners with the Ukrainian people, the Georgian people, and helping them to address these tough reforms, whether it’s defense reform, whether it’s anti-corruption efforts.
What you do domestically, what Ukraine does domestically, has a direct impact on its foreign policy agenda. And I think we need to be very cognizant of the role that we can play in being an active partner with Ukraine and Georgia on this front. It’s not time to put this on the backburner and say, ‘We’ll come back to the NATO issues in a couple of years. But let’s keep things quiet for a while.’ It risks an opportunity of drift. It risks an opportunity of falling back in some of the reform processes. And that’s, frankly, where my biggest concern right now is.
I think you need a clear policy from the West that we do continue to support the aspirations of Georgia and Ukraine to move towards Europe, to move towards the Alliance. We’re going to be partners with the people and with their governments in making the reforms necessary to do that. And we all know the issue of NATO membership is not an imminent issue, it’s not an imminent question. There’s a lot of hard work behind us. But you can’t put it on the backburner and expect that hard work to be done. You’ve got to stay focused on that, both in the West and in Ukraine and Georgia.
MG: Do you have partners in Europe who share the same view?
DW: Absolutely, we certainly do. But I think your question is probably hinting at something that is also a concern. We certainly have partners that are very clear, very strong on where they see Ukraine and its future, how they see Ukraine as part of Europe. But, frankly, we have a lot of other allies in Europe that are much more cautious and much more skeptical. And on the one hand they have reason to be concerned and cautious, because they see some of the disarray in the Ukrainian political situation.
They understand the continuing questions that loom from further election cycles. And many of them are concerned, very concerned, about the depth of public support for some of these objectives as well. And I do not dismiss any of those issues. I do draw some different conclusions sometimes. And so I think it is that some of our partners are quite cautious, quite skeptical and it means that Ukraine continually has to make the case that, one, it really wants to be a part of this community, two, that it does share the values that bring this community together. And that means what Ukraine does at home can over time help change the minds of those who are skeptical about this in other capitals in Europe. And, frankly, here in Washington, as well.
MG: When you say ‘over time’, what do you mean by that? How many years?
DW: I wish I could answer that. And, frankly, I would love to see this be much sooner rather than later. But the United States doesn’t control the answer to that question. The United States can help shape the environment in which that question is answered. But Ukraine is really going to determine that question. Because if you think about the issue of the Baltic states and their aspirations to join NATO and the EU, it was a very, very controversial issue many years ago. And many in the West, including here in Washington, were very skeptical that one day we could envision that that would be a real possibility.
And yet, as you watched with time the reforms and the dedication that the leadership in the Baltic states undertook were dramatic and quite far-reaching and significant in such a way, that when we began to look at those countries that said they wanted to be a part of the Alliance. And we started looking at various indicators and seeing how they were doing on economic reforms, financial reforms, defense reform issues, reform of the intelligence services, as well as a whole range of other issues, we started to say, ‘Well Lithuania and Estonia, frankly, are doing better than some other countries.’ And it changed the nature of the debate.
How could we say, ‘No. No. We’re not going to talk to Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, when the reality was they were making more progress on a set of issues that NATO cared about than some other countries. So they helped change the debate, they helped shape that debate. Now, it still took some dedication and conviction in the West that this was the right thing to do. It still took a lot of diplomacy from Washington to work with Moscow.
But because of what the Baltic states did, we had a different debate than what we thought we were going to have. And I think that’s the power that Ukraine has to control its own destiny here. It really can help determine its own future by what it does at home. And, frankly, many in Europe are skeptical. Many have very low expectations of where Ukraine is going on the domestic front.
If Ukrainian leaders could put together a coherent program and stick to it, emerge from an economic and financial crisis, emerge from an election cycle, with a very decisive reform agenda and begin to implement that decisively, people would notice. And it would begin to impact this debate in Europe. And some of those skeptics today would certainly over time become more favorable to Ukraine’s aspirations for NATO and the EU. That could shorten the years. That could make it a few years, rather than many years. So, it’s hard to predict an answer to that question.
MG: Yes, there is a lot of work to be done in Ukraine. But Russia is a serious question here. And is the Russian government ready to give up on Ukraine, as they see Ukraine and Georgia in their sphere of influence. They probably gave up on Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, small countries and closer to Europe. How would Russia react if Ukraine and Georgia would be really close to becoming members?
DW: First of all, remember, many Russian policy makers have not given up. We’ve been in a dispute with Russia over missile defense in Poland and the Czech Republic not because of missile defense, but because they’re Poland and the Czech Republic. It’s important to think, if that debate, if we were moving forward with new facilities in Denmark and Italy and Turkey, we wouldn’t be talking about this.
So, we’re talking about Poland and the Czech Republic – NATO members, EU members – because the Russians are trying to project their sense that they do see this part of the world differently and they don’t want to accept the fact that Poland and the Czech Republic can take decisions that impact their security without Russia being a factor in determining the outcome of that.
So I think it is important to remember – we can’t accept that, we can’t accept that Russia has a say over the future of what Ukraine does. It’s been a core principle of European security that a country has a right to determine its own future and to determine the alliances and institutions that it would like to belong to. So, do the Russians have concerns? Do they object?
Do they absolutely hate when Ukrainians say they want to be a part of the Alliance? Sure. But that’s an argument that we can’t accept. We can’t allow that. And I think it’s important to be clear with the Russians, in private discussions, as I think and believe that President Obama probably was, in Moscow. I’m saying that we really do believe and know that Ukraine and Georgia are sovereign, independent countries.
The era of 19th Century diplomacy, the era of Yalta, where great powers come together and can determine the future of small states – that’s not a game that the United States is going to play in. And so we hear these concerns, we hear these arguments. We need to respect the concerns of our Russian colleagues to some degree so that we engage them in dialogue, that we listen to them. But it doesn’t mean we accept their arguments.
So I think that’s something we need to be cognizant of, we need to have smart diplomacy in how we deal with Moscow on some of these issues. But it’s a very dangerous line if we allow Moscow’s concerns to creep over into determining what U.S. policy is towards Ukraine. If we do that, it really is a major step back for what Ukraine has achieved since its independence.
MG: Do you think the Russians are listening?
DW: They may not listen, they may not want to listen. But it’s important that we continue to be clear and firm in our views of the importance of Ukraine’s sovereignty and independence and do what we can to stand by that.
NOTE:Damon Wilson is the Director of the International Security Program at the Atlantic Council of the United States, focusing on NATO transformation, European defense, emerging global security challenges and transatlantic defense and intelligence cooperation. From December 2007 to January 2009 he was Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for European Affairs at the National Security Council.
LINK: http://www.voanews.com:80/ukrainian/2009-07-19-voa1.cfm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
12. AN OPEN LETTER TO THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION FROM
LEADERS IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE
Gazeta Wyborcza, Warsaw, Poland, Thursday, July 16, 2009
The following open letter to the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama appeared in the Polish newspaper "Gazeta Wyborcza" on July 16:
We have written this letter because, as Central and Eastern European (CEE) intellectuals and former policymakers, we care deeply about the future of the transatlantic relationship as well as the future quality of relations between the United States and the countries of our region. We write in our personal capacity as individuals who are friends and allies of the United States as well as committed Europeans.
Our nations are deeply indebted to the United States. Many of us know firsthand how important your support for our freedom and independence was during the dark Cold War years. U.S. engagement and support was essential for the success of our democratic transitions after the Iron Curtain fell twenty years ago. Without Washington's vision and leadership, it is doubtful that we would be in NATO and even the EU today.
We have worked to reciprocate and make this relationship a two-way street. We are Atlanticist voices within NATO and the EU. Our nations have been engaged alongside the United States in the Balkans, Iraq, and today in Afghanistan. While our contribution may at times seem modest compared to your own, it is significant when measured as a percentage of our population and GDP. Having benefited from your support for liberal democracy and liberal values in the past, we have been among your strongest supporters when it comes to promoting democracy and human rights around the world.
Twenty years after the end of the Cold War, however, we see that Central and Eastern European countries are no longer at the heart of American foreign policy. As the new Obama Administration sets its foreign-policy priorities, our region is one part of the world that Americans have largely stopped worrying about.
Indeed, at times we have the impression that U.S. policy was so successful that many American officials have now concluded that our region is fixed once and for all and that they could "check the box" and move on to other more pressing strategic issues. Relations have been so close that many on both sides assume that the region's transatlantic orientation, as well as its stability and prosperity, would last forever.
That view is premature. All is not well either in our region or in the transatlantic relationship. Central and Eastern Europe is at a political crossroads and today there is a growing sense of nervousness in the region. The global economic crisis is impacting on our region and, as elsewhere, runs the risk that our societies will look inward and be less engaged with the outside world. At the same time, storm clouds are starting to gather on the foreign policy horizon.
Like you, we await the results of the EU Commission's investigation on the origins of the Russo-Georgian war. But the political impact of that war on the region has already been felt. Many countries were deeply disturbed to see the Atlantic alliance stand by as Russia violated the core principles of the Helsinki Final Act, the Charter of Paris, and the territorial integrity of a country that was a member of NATO's Partnership for Peace and the Euroatlantic Partnership Council -all in the name of defending a sphere of influence on its borders.
Despite the efforts and significant contribution of the new members, NATO today seems weaker than when we joined. In many of our countries it is perceived as less and less relevant - and we feel it. Although we are full members, people question whether NATO would be willing and able to come to our defense in some future crises. Europe's dependence on Russian energy also creates concern about the cohesion of the Alliance.
President Obama's remark at the recent NATO summit on the need to provide credible defense plans for all Alliance members was welcome, but not sufficient to allay fears about the Alliance´s defense readiness. Our ability to continue to sustain public support at home for our contributions to Alliance missions abroad also depends on us being able to show that our own security concerns are being addressed in NATO and close cooperation with the United States
We must also recognize that America's popularity and influence have fallen in many of our countries as well. Public opinions polls, including the German Marshall Fund's own Transatlantic Trends survey, show that our region has not been immune to the wave of criticism and anti-Americanism that has swept Europe in recent years and which led to a collapse in sympathy and support for the United States during the Bush years.
Some leaders in the region have paid a political price for their support of the unpopular war in Iraq. In the future they may be more careful in taking political risks to support the United States. We believe that the onset of a new Administration has created a new opening to reverse this trend but it will take time and work on both sides to make up for what we have lost.
In many ways the EU has become the major factor and institution in our lives. To many people it seems more relevant and important today than the link to the United States. To some degree it is a logical outcome of the integration of Central and Eastern Europe into the EU. Our leaders and officials spend much more time in EU meetings than in consultations with Washington, where they often struggle to attract attention or make our voices heard. The region's deeper integration in the EU is of course welcome and should not necessarily lead to a weakening of the transatlantic relationship. The hope was that integration of Central and Eastern Europe into the EU would actually strengthen the strategic cooperation between Europe and America.
However, there is a danger that instead of being a pro-Atlantic voice in the EU, support for a more global partnership with Washington in the region might wane over time. The region does not have the tradition of assuming a more global role. Some items on the transatlantic agenda, such as climate change, do not resonate in the Central and Eastern European publics to the same extent as they do in Western Europe.
Leadership change is also coming in Central and Eastern Europe. Next to those, there are fewer and fewer leaders who emerged from the revolutions of 1989 who experienced Washington's key role in securing our democratic transition and anchoring our countries in NATO and EU. A new generation of leaders is emerging who do not have these memories and follow a more "realistic" policy.
At the same time, the former Communist elites, whose insistence on political and economic power significantly contributed to the crises in many CEE countries, gradually disappear from the political scene. The current political and economic turmoil and the fallout from the global economic crisis provide additional opportunities for the forces of nationalism, extremism, populism, and anti-Semitism across the continent but also in some our countries.
This means that the United States is likely to lose many of its traditional interlocutors in the region. The new elites replacing them may not share the idealism - or have the same relationship to the United States - as the generation who led the democratic transition. They may be more calculating in their support of the United States as well as more parochial in their world view. And in Washington a similar transition is taking place as many of the leaders and personalities we have worked with and relied on are also leaving politics.
And then there is the issue of how to deal with Russia. Our hopes that relations with Russia would improve and that Moscow would finally fully accept our complete sovereignty and independence after joining NATO and the EU have not been fulfilled. Instead, Russia is back as a revisionist power pursuing a 19th-century agenda with 21st-century tactics and methods. At a global level, Russia has become, on most issues, a status-quo power. But at a regional level and vis-a-vis our nations, it increasingly acts as a revisionist one.
It challenges our claims to our own historical experiences. It asserts a privileged position in determining our security choices. It uses overt and covert means of economic warfare, ranging from energy blockades and politically motivated investments to bribery and media manipulation in order to advance its interests and to challenge the transatlantic orientation of Central and Eastern Europe.
We welcome the "reset" of the American-Russian relations. As the countries living closest to Russia, obviously nobody has a greater interest in the development of the democracy in Russia and better relations between Moscow and the West than we do. But there is also nervousness in our capitals. We want to ensure that too narrow an understanding of Western interests does not lead to the wrong concessions to Russia. Today the concern is, for example, that the United States and the major European powers might embrace the Medvedev plan for a "Concert of Powers" to replace the continent's existing, value-based security structure.
The danger is that Russia's creeping intimidation and influence-peddling in the region could over time lead to a de facto neutralization of the region. There are differing views within the region when it comes to Moscow's new policies. But there is a shared view that the full engagement of the United States is needed.
Many in the region are looking with hope to the Obama Administration to restore the Atlantic relationship as a moral compass for their domestic as well as foreign policies. A strong commitment to common liberal democratic values is essential to our countries. We know from our own historical experience the difference between when the United States stood up for its liberal democratic values and when it did not.
Our region suffered when the United States succumbed to "realism" at Yalta. And it benefited when the United States used its power to fight for principle. That was critical during the Cold War and in opening the doors of NATO. Had a "realist" view prevailed in the early 1990s, we would not be in NATO today and the idea of a Europe whole, free, and at peace would be a distant dream.
We understand the heavy demands on your Administration and on U.S. foreign policy. It is not our intent to add to the list of problems you face. Rather, we want to help by being strong Atlanticist allies in a U.S.-European partnership that is a powerful force for good around the world. But we are not certain where our region will be in five or ten years time given the domestic and foreign policy uncertainties we face. We need to take the right steps now to ensure the strong relationship between the United States and Central and Eastern Europe over the past twenty years will endure.
We believe this is a time both the United States and Europe need to reinvest in the transatlantic relationship. We also believe this is a time when the United States and Central and Eastern Europe must reconnect around a new and forward-looking agenda. While recognizing what has been achieved in the twenty years since the fall of the Iron Curtain, it is time to set a new agenda for close cooperation for the next twenty years across the Atlantic.
Therefore, we propose the following steps:
First, we are convinced that America needs Europe and that Europe needs the United States as much today as in the past. The United States should reaffirm its vocation as a European power and make clear that it plans to stay fully engaged on the continent even while it faces the pressing challenges in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the wider Middle East, and Asia. For our part we must work at home in our own countries and in Europe more generally to convince our leaders and societies to adopt a more global perspective and be prepared to shoulder more responsibility in partnership with the United States.
Second, we need a renaissance of NATO as the most important security link between the United States and Europe. It is the only credible hard power security guarantee we have. NATO must reconfirm its core function of collective defense even while we adapt to the new threats of the 21st century. A key factor in our ability to participate in NATO's expeditionary missions overseas is the belief that we are secure at home.
We must therefore correct some self-inflicted wounds from the past. It was a mistake not to commence with proper Article 5 defense planning for new members after NATO was enlarged. NATO needs to make the Alliance's commitments credible and provide strategic reassurance to all members. This should include contingency planning, prepositioning of forces, equipment, and supplies for reinforcement in our region in case of crisis as originally envisioned in the NATO-Russia Founding Act.
We should also re-think the working of the NATO-Russia Council and return to the practice where NATO member countries enter into dialogue with Moscow with a coordinated position. When it comes to Russia, our experience has been that a more determined and principled policy toward Moscow will not only strengthen the West's security but will ultimately lead Moscow to follow a more cooperative policy as well. Furthermore, the more secure we feel inside NATO, the easier it will also be for our countries to reach out to engage Moscow on issues of common interest. That is the dual track approach we need and which should be reflected in the new NATO strategic concept.
Third, the thorniest issue may well be America's planned missile-defense installations. Here too, there are different views in the region, including among our publics which are divided. Regardless of the military merits of this scheme and what Washington eventually decides to do, the issue has nevertheless also become -- at least in some countries -- a symbol of America's credibility and commitment to the region. How it is handled could have a significant impact on their future transatlantic orientation. The small number of missiles involved cannot be a threat to Russia's strategic capabilities, and the Kremlin knows this.
We should decide the future of the program as allies and based on the strategic plusses and minuses of the different technical and political configurations. The Alliance should not allow the issue to be determined by unfounded Russian opposition. Abandoning the program entirely or involving Russia too deeply in it without consulting Poland or the Czech Republic can undermine the credibility of the United States across the whole region.
Fourth, we know that NATO alone is not enough. We also want and need more Europe and a better and more strategic U.S.-EU relationship as well. Increasingly our foreign policies are carried out through the European Union - and we support that. We also want a common European foreign and defense policy that is open to close cooperation with the United States. We are the advocates of such a line in the EU. But we need the United States to rethink its attitude toward the EU and engage it much more seriously as a strategic partner. We need to bring NATO and the EU closer together and make them work in tandem. We need common NATO and EU strategies not only toward Russia but on a range of other new strategic challenges.
Fifth is energy security. The threat to energy supplies can exert an immediate influence on our nations' political sovereignty also as allies contributing to common decisions in NATO. That is why it must also become a transatlantic priority. Although most of the responsibility for energy security lies within the realm of the EU, the United States also has a role to play. Absent American support, the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline would never have been built. Energy security must become an integral part of U.S.-European strategic cooperation.
Central and Eastern European countries should lobby harder (and with more unity) inside Europe for diversification of the energy mix, suppliers, and transit routes, as well as for tough legal scrutiny of Russia's abuse of its monopoly and cartel-like power inside the EU. But American political support on this will play a crucial role. Similarly, the United States can play an important role in solidifying further its support for the Nabucco pipeline, particularly in using its security relationship with the main transit country, Turkey, as well as the North-South interconnector of Central Europe and LNG terminals in our region.
Sixth, we must not neglect the human factor. Our next generations need to get to know each other, too. We have to cherish and protect the multitude of educational, professional, and other networks and friendships that underpin our friendship and alliance. The U.S. visa regime remains an obstacle in this regard. It is absurd that Poland and Romania -- arguably the two biggest and most pro-American states in the CEE region, which are making substantial contributions in Iraq and Afghanistan -- have not yet been brought into the visa waiver program.
It is incomprehensible that a critic like the French anti-globalization activist Jose Bove does not require a visa for the United States but former Solidarity activist and Nobel Peace prizewinner Lech Walesa does. This issue will be resolved only if it is made a political priority by the President of the United States.
The steps we made together since 1989 are not minor in history. The common successes are the proper foundation for the transatlantic renaissance we need today. This is why we believe that we should also consider the creation of a Legacy Fellowship for young leaders. Twenty years have passed since the revolutions of 1989. That is a whole generation. We need a new generation to renew the transatlantic partnership. A new program should be launched to identify those young leaders on both sides of the Atlantic who can carry forward the transatlantic project we have spent the last two decades building in Central and Eastern Europe.
In conclusion, the onset of a new Administration in the United States has raised great hopes in our countries for a transatlantic renewal. It is an opportunity we dare not miss. We, the authors of this letter, know firsthand how important the relationship with the United States has been. In the 1990s, a large part of getting Europe right was about getting Central and Eastern Europe right. The engagement of the United States was critical to locking in peace and stability from the Baltics to the Black Sea. Today the goal must be to keep Central and Eastern Europe right as a stable, activist, and Atlanticist part of our broader community.
That is the key to our success in bringing about the renaissance in the Alliance the Obama Administration has committed itself to work for and which we support. That will require both sides recommitting to and investing in this relationship. But if we do it right, the pay off down the road can be very real. By taking the right steps now, we can put it on new and solid footing for the future.
NOTE: [Signed] by Valdas Adamkus, Martin Butora, Emil Constantinescu, Pavol Demes, Lubos Dobrovsky, Matyas Eorsi, Istvan Gyarmati, Vaclav Havel, Rastislav Kacer, Sandra Kalniete, Karel Schwarzenberg, Michal Kovac, Ivan Krastev, Alexander Kwasniewski, Mart Laar, Kadri Liik, Janos Martonyi. Janusz Onyszkiewicz, Adam Rotfeld, Vaira Vike-Freiberga, Alexandr Vondra, Lech Walesa.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
13. UKRAINE NEEDS ENERGY PLAN TO REDUCE RUSSIA TIES: U.S. OFFICIAL
Reuters, Kiev, Ukraine, Tue Jul 21, 2009
KIEV -Ukraine could change its entire relationship with Russia if it takes tough decisions on energy that would make it less dependent on gas from its former Soviet master, a senior U.S. administration official said on Tuesday.
"If Ukrainians were able to get to the level of Poland in terms of energy efficiency then they would be able to significantly cut their needs for gas imports," said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Ties between the ex-Soviet neighbors sank after Ukraine's 2004 "Orange Revolution." Kiev has sought closer integration with the West and has accused Russia of exerting power over the region through its grip on the energy sector.
"If that (reduce gas imports) were to happen, then that would significantly change Ukraine's relationship with Russia," the official said. Ukraine has had repeated rows with Russia over increasingly expensive gas prices and the latest disputes led to supply cuts to millions of Europeans in winter earlier this year.
The European Union, Russia and international financial organizations are in talks with Ukraine to provide what the official described as "significant investments" to help upgrade its gas transit system and pay for storage gas in advance.
The EU gets a fifth of its gas needs from Russia via Ukraine and in wintertime Ukraine must store extra gas to ensure smooth transit toward the bloc.
But in return the EU wants Ukraine to modernize and make transparent its energy sector and to increase prices for Ukrainians to ensure the viability of state energy firm Naftogaz, frequently at the center of spats with Russia.
"If all this goes forward, the entire nature of the energy system will change here (in Ukraine)," the official said. (Reporting by Sabina Zawadzki)
LINK: http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE56K6DU20090721
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
14. STOP INFIGHTING, BIDEN TELLS UKRAINE'S LEADERS
By Sabina Zawadzki, Reuters, Kiev, Ukraine, Wed, July 22, 2009
KIEV - U.S. Vice President Joe Biden chided Ukraine's political leaders on Wednesday, telling them they had to stop "posturing" if the country was to seal its post-Soviet independence and economic development.
In a speech marked by a sharper tone that contrasted with previous expressions of unflinching support from Washington, Biden said Ukraine stood at a historic moment in building on the gains of the 2004 pro-Western "Orange Revolution."
"Literally, you are standing in a moment in history that you have never stood at before, literally," Biden said. "Frankly, your success will bear on the successes or failures of many people in this part of the world."
Infighting has pitched Ukraine into non-stop political turmoil since a heady week of street protests in 2004 against electoral fraud swept President Viktor Yushchenko to office.
The protests -- and a re-run of a rigged election -- caught the world by surprise and opened the way for Yushchenko to move Ukraine away from its former Soviet master, Russia.
Initial euphoria and pledges to secure membership of the European Union and NATO, staunchly supported by the administration of former U.S. president George W. Bush, gave way to bickering and stalled reforms as Ukraine plunged into recession.
"Ukraine, in my humble opinion, must heed the lesson of history. Effective, accountable government is the only way to provide a stable, predictable and transparent environment that attracts investments ... the economic engine of development," he said.
Biden suggested 19th century poet Taras Shevchenko, a national hero who opposed centuries of Russian dominance, would be critical of rows pitting
Yushchenko against Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, his estranged ally from the revolution.
"I think he would also be wondering why the government is not exhibiting the same political maturity as the people," he told the gathering of prominent Ukrainians.
"Why communications among leaders have broken down to such an extent that political posturing appears to prevent progress, especially now, especially in difficult economic times.
Biden's sharper tone is part of a changed U.S. policy since President Barack Obama took over from Bush, who aggravated ties with Russia by his push for NATO expansion to Russian borders.
Biden said Washington would support any decision Ukraine might make on membership of NATO, which is vehemently opposed by Moscow. Most Ukrainians remain opposed to joining NATO, despite Yushchenko's drive to seek membership.
Biden encouraged Yushchenko, Tymoshenko and other leaders to resolve differences ahead of a January 17 presidential election. "In a democracy, compromise is not a sign of weakness, it is evidence of strength," he said.
Disputes have exasperated the IMF, which has delayed the release of some of the $16.4 billion it has agreed to loan Ukraine to withstand the economic crisis.
"The path to renewed prosperity runs through the International Monetary Fund which is offering a way out of the current crisis," Biden said. A senior U.S. official said late on Tuesday that Washington would not offer Ukraine any extra loans.
The IMF wants authorities to raise domestic gas prices to right the finances of state energy firm Naftogaz, often at the center of rows with Russia, including a three-week New Year cutoff of flows. But that would be unpopular before an election.
Many analysts say Russia has used its vast gas resources to keep control over its Western-leaning ex-Soviet neighbors. But Biden suggested Ukraine could cut Russia out of national security concerns by moving to reduce energy consumption, now three times less efficient than in European countries.
"If you lift Ukraine to the European standards, your need for energy imports will dramatically decline, dramatically," he said. "That would be a boom to the economy and an immeasurable benefit, I respectfully suggest, to your national security." (Editing by Richard Balmforth)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
UkraineMacroeconomic Report From SigmaBleyzer:
http://www.sigmableyzer.com/index.php?action=publications
========================================================
15. EU'S RESPONSE TO CENTRAL EUROPE'S ENERGY SECURITY
AHA! Network Presents Presentation and Live Video Webcast, July 24, from Washington
AHA! Network, Washington, D.C., Wednesday, July 23, 2009
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The AHA! Network presents a roundtablepresentation and live video webcast entitled "EU's Response to Central Europe's Energy Security" with Alexandros Petersen, Atlantic Council, and Ambassador Keith Smith, Senior Associate, Energy and National Security Program at Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). The moderator isRoman Kupchinsky.
WHEN: Friday, July 24 at 10:00 a.m. (EST)
WHERE: U.S.-Baltic Foundation / U.S.-Ukraine Foundation
1701 K Street NW - Suite 903, Washington, D.C., (Note: Bldg entrance is on 17th Street, between K & L Streets)
Limited seating. Please RSVP your attendance for a chosen event(s) to: rsvp@usukraine.org or by calling (202) 223-2228
TOWATCH:the webcast live, please go to: http://usukraine.org/events/eu_response_energysecurity072409.shtml
ALEXANDROS PETERSEN
Alexandros Petersen is Dinu Patriciu Fellow for Transatlantic Energy Security and Associate Director of the Eurasia Energy Center at the Atlantic Council of the United States. He came to the Council from the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, where he served as Southeast Europe Policy Scholar and the Center for Strategic and International Studies, where he was an Adjunct Fellow with the Russia and Eurasia Program.
Previously, he served as Program Director of the Caspian Europe Center in Brussels and Senior Researcher at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. In 2006, he was a Visiting Scholar at the Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies in Tbilisi. He has also provided research for the U.S. National Petroleum Council’s Geopolitics and Policy Task Group and the Council on Foreign Relations Task Force on Russian-American Relations.
Petersen regularly provides analysis for publications such as The Economist, Wall Street Journal, International Herald Tribune, Washington Times, Moscow Times, Kyiv Post, Hurriyet, and Georgia Today, among many others. He is also a frequent contributor to journals such as Europe’s World, Insight Turkey, and the Journal of International Security Affairs. He serves on the Board of Young Professionals in Foreign Policy and the Editorial Board of Millennium: Journal of International Studies. Petersen received a BA in War Studies with First Class Honors from King’s College London and an MSc in International Relations from the London School of Economics.
AMBASSADOR KEITH SMITH
From 2003 to the present, Ambassador Smith has been a Senior Associate at CSIS, first in the center’s Russia/Eurasia Program and now in the Energy and National Security Program. At CSIS, he specializes in European and Russian energy issues. He is also a consultant to American energy companies. Until the year 2000, Ambassador Smith was in the diplomatic service, where he specialized predominantly in European affairs. He retired after being U.S. Ambassador to Lithuania. He also served at U.S. embassies in Hungary (twice), Norway, and Estonia.
He was also Director of Policy for Europe, Senior Adviser to the deputy secretary of state for support of East European democracy (SEED Program), and Director of Foreign Area Studies at the Foreign Service Institute. Since joining CSIS, his articles have been carried in the International Herald Tribune, Financial Times, and several European newspapers and journals on international affairs. He discussed Russian-European energy issues on BBC World, CNN, CNBC and French, Polish, Estonian, Hungarian, Ukrainian, Belgium and Norwegian television.
ROMAN KUPCHINSKY
Roman Kupchinsky was born in Vienna, Austria and immigrated to the United States in 1949. He graduated with a degree in Political Science from Long Island University; served in the US Army as a rifle platoon leader in Vietnam. From 1978-1988 was President of Prolog Research Corp., a Ukrainian language publishing house and research company. From 1990-2002 was Director of the Ukrainian service of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. From 2002-2008 was a senior analyst at RFE/RL.
He is the author of numerous articles on Ukrainian affairs, Russian energy and international politics. He edited RFE's Organized Crime and Corruption Watch as well as two collections of samizdat articles The Nationality Problem in the USSR and Pogrom in Ukraine. He lives in Arlington, Virginia and can be contacted at Romkp@aol.com.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
16. BIDEN TO GEORGIA, UKRAINE: US WILL NOT
RECOGNIZE RUSSIAN 'SPHERE OF INFLUENCE' CLAIM
By Douglas Birch, The Associated Press (AP), Tbilisi, Georgia, Wed, July 23, 2009
TBILISI, Georgia - U.S. Vice-President Joe Biden on Wednesday pledged support for efforts by Ukraine and Georgia to break free of Russia's orbit, saying Washington would not recognize Kremlin claims to an exclusive sphere of influence over former Soviet states.
Biden's assurances in visits to both countries bluntly addressed the most volatile issue dividing Russia and the West, and were offered just two weeks after President Barack Obama was in Moscow seeking to heal U.S.-Russia relations.
"As we reset the relationship with Russia, we reaffirm our commitment to an independent Ukraine, and we recognize no sphere of influence or no ability of any other nation to veto the choices an independent nation makes," Biden declared in Kyiv, Ukraine's capital.
Biden's comments underlined the U.S. commitment to encouraging Western-style democracies among former Soviet states, despite Russia's open hostility to what it considers meddling in its back yard.
At a banquet in the Georgian capital of Tbilisi on Wednesday evening, Biden said he wanted to send "an unequivocal, clear message to all who will listen and some who don't want to listen, that America stands with you and will continue to stand."
Russian troops crushed Georgia's military in a brief war in Georgia last August, about five years after the country's 2003 Rose Revolution brought President Mikhail Saakashvili to power and ousted a Soviet-era leader.
For weeks this spring, tens of thousands of Georgians jammed central Tbilisi demanding Saakashvili's resignation, accusing him of strengthening his power at the expense of democratic rights. Those protests gradually waned.
Hundreds of demonstrators who lined Biden's route from the airport Wednesday waved flags and held signs saying "Don't Forget Us," sounding a note of defiance. One sign declared "No to occupation" - a reference to the Russian troops stationed in two breakaway Georgian regions.
Biden's motorcade also passed George W. Bush Street, marked by a large sign with the former U.S. president's picture. Because of Bush's steadfast support for Georgia, many revered him at a time when he was widely disliked abroad, and he drew huge crowds on a 2005 visit.
Before Biden's arrival in Tbilisi, police removed from in front of parliament dozens of metal cages blocking traffic that the opposition had erected to symbolize what they called Saakashvili's increasing authoritarianism.
No arrests were reported, and no resistance from opposition activists was visible along leafy Rustaveli Avenue, which remained closed to vehicles after police set up portable metal fencing. About 3,000 opposition demonstrators rallied a short distance away.
Biden, a former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, last visited Georgia shortly after the war with Russia in August.
At Wednesday's banquet, he called the Rose Revolution "a clarion call for freedom-loving people around the globe," but he also urged the Georgian president to "plant the roots of democracy deep," alluding to criticism of Saakashvili's rule. He said the U.S. encouraged the growth of civil societies that "hold all governments accountable, yours and mine accountable." At one point, Biden said in a joking manner: "You mentioned protesters. Welcome to democracy."
Saakashvili called Biden "Joe, my dear friend," and thanked him for his support and "all your belief in us and our cause." He rejected allegations that he has engaged in authoritarian rule. "For us there is no trade-off between democracy and security," he said.
Saakashvili announced a series of political reforms Monday meant to address his critics' charges.
He predicted Wednesday that sooner or later, the Russians would leave their bases in the two breakaway regions of Georgia, just as Soviet troops left
Afghanistan in 1989. After Georgia used military force to try to seize one of the regions from Moscow-backed separatists in August, Russia sent tanks and warplanes deep into Georgian territory, crushing the country's army. "The Georgian people stand proudly in their resistance, and we will never, ever surrender," he said.
On Thursday, Biden was to meet with leading members of the Georgian opposition.
Shortly after the Georgian war, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev declared that Moscow has a "zone of privileged interests" among former Soviet and Eastern European satellites. The U.S. and Europe have rejected sphere-of-influence geopolitics, which give great powers sway over their smaller neighbours.
Russia and the West are also divided over Ukraine and Georgia's efforts to join NATO. In Ukraine, Biden reiterated Washington's support for the country's
NATO membership, if Ukrainians decide to pursue that goal.
The U.S. has pledged to support NATO membership for Georgia, where popular support for the idea is much greater. But Germany and other European member states are skeptical.(Associated Press Writer Maria Danilova contributed to this report from Kyiv, Ukraine.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
If you are receiving more than one copy of the AUR please contact us.
Please contact us if you no longer wishto receive theAUR.
You are welcome tosend usnamesfor the AUR distribution list.
If you are missing some issues of the AUR please let us know.
========================================================
"ACTION UKRAINE REPORT - AUR"
A Free, Private, Not-For-Profit, Independent, Public Service Newsletter
With major support from The Bleyzer Foundation
Articles are Distributed For Information, Research, Education, Academic,
Discussion and Personal Purposes Only.Additional Readers are Welcome.
AUR ARCHIVE, 2006-2009:http://www.usubc.org/AUR/
=======================================================
SigmaBleyzer/The Bleyzer Foundation Economic Reports
"SigmaBleyzer - Where Opportunities Emerge"
The SigmaBleyzer Emerging Markets Private Equity Investment Group and The Bleyzer Foundation offers a comprehensive collection of documents,
reports and presentationspublished by its business units and organizations.
All publicationsare grouped by categories: Marketing; Economic Country Reports; Presentations; Ukrainian Equity Guide; Monthly Macroeconomic
Situation Reports (Romania, Bulgaria, Ukraine).
LINK: http://www.sigmableyzer.com/index.php?action=publications
"UKRAINE - A COUNTRY OF NEW OPPORTUNITIES"
=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE PROGRAM- SPONSORS
Action Ukraine Report (AUR),"Holodomor: Through The Eyes of Ukrainian Artists"
and the"Faces of the Gulag: Through the Eyes of Ukrainian Artists" program.
"Working to Secure & Enhance Ukraine's Democratic Future"
1. THE BLEYZER FOUNDATION, Dr. Edilberto Segura,
Chairman; Oleg Ustenko,Executive Director, Kyiv, Ukraine;
Washington, D.C., http://www.bleyzerfoundation.com.
2. UKRAINIAN FEDERATION OF AMERICA (UFA), Zenia Chernyk,
Vera M. Andryczyk,Huntingdon Valley, Pennsylvania
3. KIEV-ATLANTIC GROUP, David and Tamara Sweere, Daniel
Sweere, Kyiv and Myronivka, Ukraine,E-mail: david@kau.kiev.ua
4.RULG - UKRAINIAN LEGAL GROUP, Irina Paliashvili,
President; Kyiv and Washington, general@rulg.com, www.rulg.com.
5. VOLIA SOFTWARE, Software to Fit Your Business, Source your
IT work in Ukraine. Contact: Yuriy Sivitsky, Vice President, Marketing,
Kyiv, Ukraine, yuriy.sivitsky@softline.kiev.ua; Volia Software website:
http://www.volia-software.com/
6. U.S.-UKRAINEBUSINESS COUNCIL (USUBC),
Washington, D.C., For information about USUBCplease write to
mwilliams@usubc.org,USUBC website:http://www.usubc.org.
7. UKRAINIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH OF THE USA,Archbishop
Antony, South BoundBrook,New Jersey,http://www.uocofusa.org
8. WJ GROUP ofAg Companies, Kyiv, Ukraine, David Holpert, Chief
Financial Officer, Chicago, IL; http://www.wjgrain.com/en/links/index.html
9.EUGENIA SAKEVYCH DALLAS, Author, "One Woman, Five
Lives, Five Countries," 'Her life's journey begins with the 1932-1933
genocidal famine in Ukraine.' Hollywood, CA, www.eugeniadallas.com.
10.SWIFT FOUNDATION, San Luis Obispo, California
11.DAAR FOUNDATION,Houston, Texas, Kyiv, Ukraine.
http://www.DaarFoundation.org/home.htm.
12. ArtUkraine.com; www.ArtUkraine.com, to purchase Ukrainian
magazines,books, etc.write to ArtUkraine@voliacable.com.
13. DUNWOODIE TRAVEL BUREAU, Specializing in Ukraine travel,
Alesia Kozicky, Owner/Travel Agent, http://www.DunwoodieTravel.com;
Dunwoodie@vacation.com
14. LAND OF DILEMMAS, Would You Risk Your Life To Save Your Enemy?
Documentary by Olha Onyshko & Sarah Farhat, www.LandOfDilemmas.org.
===========================================================
TOBEON OR OFF THE FREE AUR DISTRIBUTION LIST
If you would like to readthe ACTION UKRAINE REPORT- AUR, several times a month,please send your name, country of residence, and e-mail contact information to morganw@patriot.net.Information about your occupation and your interest in Ukraine is also appreciated.
If you do not wish to readthe ACTION UKRAINE REPORTplease contact us immediately by e-mail to morganw@patriot.net. If you are receiving more than one copy please let us know so this can be corrected.
========================================================
PUBLISHER AND EDITOR - AUR
Mr. E. Morgan Williams, Director, Government Affairs
Washington Office, SigmaBleyzer, The Bleyzer Foundation
Emerging Markets Private Equity Investment Group;
President, U.S.-UkraineBusiness Council (USUBC)
1701 K Street, NW, Suite 903, Washington, D.C. 20006
Tel: 202 437 4707; Fax 202 223 1224
mwilliams@SigmaBleyzer.com; www.SigmaBleyzer.com
mwilliams@usubc.org; www.usubc.org
Needed:'Vice Presidents in Charge of Revolution'
To move thepower & spirit of the 'Orange Revolution' forward
Power Corrupts &Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely.
========================================================
return to index[Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================