AUR#664 Bush-Yushchenko April 2005 Joint Statement Progress Report; Orange Revolution At Yellow Speed; Crop Damage; 100,000 Tulips Soon In Kyiv

THE 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,
Sports, Government, and Politics, in Ukraine and Around the World

THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR – Number 664
Mr. E. Morgan Williams, Publisher and Editor
Washington, D.C., Kyiv, Ukraine, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2006

——–INDEX OF ARTICLES——–
Clicking on the title of any article takes you directly to the article.
Return to the Index by clicking on Return to Index at the end of each article

1. BUILDING A NEW CENTURY AGENDA: UNITED STATES AND
UKRAINE MAKE GOOD PROGRESS ON IMPLEMENTING
APRIL 2005 BUSH-YUSHCHENKO JOINT STATEMENT
Foreign Policy and National Security Task Force
U.S.-Ukraine Policy Dialogue
The Atlantic Council of the United States, Washington
Razumkov Centre for Economic & Political Studies, Kyiv
U.S.-Ukraine Foundation (USUF), Washington
Washington, D.C., Friday, February 17, 2006

2. U.S. HAS GRANTED UKRAINE MARKET ECONOMY STATUS
In what way can Ukraine benefit from this status?
By Oleh Malsky, Master of Law, Georgetown University
The Day Weekly Digest in English, #5, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tue, Feb 21, 2006

3. MARKET ECONOMY STATUS BY USA CREATES CONDITIONS
FOR OBJECTIVE CONSIDERATION OF ANTIDUMPING CASES
Ukrinform, Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, February 18, 2006

4. UKRAINIAN ENTERPRISES REPORTED ENTITLED TO DEMAND
REVISION OF ANTI-DUMPING PROCEDURES IN USA
Ukrinform, Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, February 20, 2006

5. UKRAINIAN CINEMATOGRAPHERS AWARDED TECHNICAL
OSCAR PRIZE BY AMERICAN CINEMATOGRAPHY ART ACADEMY
The award presentation ceremony was held in Beverly Hills, CA.
Natatiya Bukvych, Ukrinform, Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, February 20, 2006

6. UKRAINIAN GENOCIDE MEMORIAL SITE BILL BEFORE
U.S. SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE

Ukrainian National Information Service (UNIS)
Washington, D.C., Friday, February 17, 2006

7. ORANGE REVOLUTION, AT YELLOW SPEED
Reality in Ukraine.
COMMENTARY:
By Ethan Wallison in Kiev
NationalReviewOnline (NRO), NY, NY, Wed, Feb 15, 2006

8. UKRAINIAN ICE DANCERS WIN BRONZE: 2006 OLYMPIC GAMES
First ice dancing Olympic medal ever for Ukraine, congratulations from Pres
Ukrinform, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, February 21, 2006

9. ICE DANCING REMAINS A MYSTERY
Tatiana Navka, who was born in Ukraine, and Roman Kostomarov,
shockingly born in Russia, skate for Russia and win the gold medal.
Ruslan Goncharov, who is from Ukraine and actually skates for
Ukraine, with partner, Elena Grushina, won bronze.
By Phil Sheridan, Philadelphia Inquirer Columnist
Philadelphia, PA, Tuesday, February 21, 2006

10 . CZECH PREMIER SEES UKRAINE AS KEY STRATEGIC PARTNER
Czech Republic counting with Ukraine as an important source of labour force.

CTK news agency, Prague, in English 2048 gmt 17 Feb 06
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Sunday, Feb 19, 2006

11. CENTRAL EUROPEAN NEIGHBOURS BACK UKRAINE’S NATO
AND EUROPEAN UNION BID, THE VISEGRAD FOUR
TV 5 Kanal, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1800 gmt 21 Feb 06
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Tue, Feb 21, 2006

12. UKRAINIAN PRES MEETS NORWEGIAN TELECOM EXECUTIVES
UNIAN news agency, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1558 gmt 21 Feb 06
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Tuesday, Feb 21, 2006

13 . LARGE FOREIGN BANKS IN UKRAINE IMPROVE UKRAINE’S
INVESTMENT ATTRACTIVENESS, SAY EXPERTS
Interfax-Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, February 21, 2006

14. FDI’S IN UKRAINE IN 2005 HIT A RECORD HIGH OF $7.33 BN
Steel mill brings in $4.8 billion, Aval Bank brings in $1.03 billion

Interfax-Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, February 21, 2006

15. EBRD MAY LEND TO DNIPROPETROVSK, KHARKIV, DONETSK,
HEATING NETWORKS & KHARKIV WATER TREATMENT UTILITY
Interfax-Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, February 21, 2006

16. DOUBTS RAISED ON UKRAINE’S ECONOMIC GROWTH
By Stefan Wagstyl, Financial Times, London, UK, Wed, February 22 2006

17. YUSHCHENKO VETOES LAW BANNING PRIVATIZATION
OF 50%+1 SHARE IN NIKOPOL FERROALLOY PLANT
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv,Ukraine, Monday, February 20, 2006

18. CIS BANKS REVIEW ISSUED – COMPARISON OF ALL MAJOR
BANKS CIS COUNTRIES IN TERMS OF ASSET VALUE
Ukraine’s largest bank, Privatbank, is ranked number 14.
Interfax Center for Economic Analysis (Interfax-CEA)
Moscow, Russia, Thursday, February 16, 2006

19. UKRAINE: WINTER GRAIN CROPS SUFFER MAJOR DAMAGE

AgriNews, AKP-Inform, Dnipropetrovsk, Ukraine, Mon, Feb 20, 2006

20. PROFILE OF UKRAINIAN INDUSTRIALIST VITALY HAYDUK
BBC Monitoring research in English 21 Feb 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Tue, Feb 21, 2006

21. UKRAINE TRIES TO DEFEND DEPORTATION OF UZBEKS
LINKED TO UPRISING
Human rights watchdogs do not agree with Ukraine’s decision
Associated Press (AP), Kiev, Ukraine, Tue, February 21, 2006

22. UKRAINE: OUR UKRAINE BLOC AGAINST EXTENDING
MORATORIUM ON FARMLAND SALES
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, February 20, 2006

23. “APPLICATION FOR EU MEMBERSHIP LIKE REQUEST
FOR POLITICAL ASYLUM”
Seek EU membership to avoid Russian control
Russia will not “adopt” Ukraine – it will take advantage of Ukraine.
ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY:
By Oleh Runak
Glavred, Kiev, in Russian 0000 gmt 6 Feb 06
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Tue, Feb 21, 2006

24. 100,000 TULIPS APPEAR IN KYIV’S FLOWER BEDS THIS SPRING
Kyiv is a city of annuals and perennials,” Kyiashko insists. Kyiv is
also a city of begonias, ageratums, and especially marigolds.
By Viktoria HERASYMCHUK, The Day
The Day Weekly Digest in English, #5, Tuesday, 21 Feb 2006

25. ORANGE REVOLUTION BOOK: “CONSCIENCE CALLS”
Proceeds from Orange Revolution book helps orphans in Ukraine
Article By Orest Deychakiwsky from the foreword of
“Conscience Calls” – by Roksolana Tymiak-Lonchyna DDS
Washington, D.C., Winter, 2005-2006
========================================================
1
. BUILDING A NEW CENTURY AGENDA: UNITED STATES AND
UKRAINE MAKE GOOD PROGRESS ON IMPLEMENTING
APRIL 2005 BUSH-YUSHCHENKO JOINT STATEMENT

Foreign Policy and National Security Task Force
U.S.-Ukraine Policy Dialogue
The Atlantic Council of the United States, Washington
Razumkov Centre for Economic & Political Studies, Kyiv
U.S.-Ukraine Foundation (USUF), Washington
Washington, D.C., Friday, February 17, 2006

Joint Press Release on the Occasion of the First
Anniversary of Viktor Yushchenko’s Presidency

WASHINGTON, DC – The U.S. and Ukrainian governments have made
considerable progress on implementing the April 4, 2005 joint statement
agreed by Presidents Bush and Yushchenko, according to an assessment
released today by the Foreign Policy and National Security Task Force
of the non-governmental U.S.-Ukraine Policy Dialogue.

This progress has added new substance and depth to the U.S.-Ukraine
bilateral relationship over the past nine months and it has substantially
strengthened Ukraine on its path toward Euro-Atlantic integration.

“The two governments have fully accomplished several key commitments –
such as launching an Intensified Dialogue between NATO and Ukraine,
granting Ukraine market economy status, and ending or easing visa
requirements – and they are progressing on others,” stated Steven Pifer a
and Yuriy Scherbak, the Task Force co-chairs. They urged Washington
and Kyiv to fulfill all remaining tasks by April 4, 2006, the joint
statement’s one-year anniversary, as some key issues still need to be
resolved.

“It is particularly important that both sides complete a bilateral protocol
on Ukraine’s accession to the World Trade Organization and that the U.S.
Congress enact long overdue legislation to remove Ukraine from the
provisions of the Jackson-Vanik amendment,” noted Pifer and Scherbak.

The joint statement was signed during President Yushchenko’s first U.S.
visit following the Orange Revolution. Both governments described the
document as a road map for developing bilateral ties. The Task Force
identified 20 tasks in the statement.

The Dialogue’s Foreign Policy and National Security Task Force monitors
U.S.-Ukraine relations, as well as Ukraine’s links with NATO and the
European Union. The Task Force is co-organized by the Atlantic Council
of the United States (Washington, DC) and the Razumkov Centre (Kyiv).
Although the Policy Dialogue is funded in part by the U.S. Department of
State [through the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation, USUF], the Task Force’s
conclusions are its own.

The Task Force Co-Chairs are Ambassador Steven Pifer (former U.S.
Ambassador to Ukraine) and Ambassador Yuri Scherbak (former
Ukraine Ambassador to the United States). -30-
————————————————————————————————–
JOINT STATEMENT BY U.S. PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH
AND UKRAINE PRESIDENT VIKTOR YUSHCHENKO, APRIL 4, 2005

Washington, D.C.

“A NEW CENTURY AGENDA FOR THE UKRAINIAN-AMERICAN
STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP”

Today, the United States and Ukraine affirm a new era of strategic
partnership between our nations and friendship between our peoples. We
commit our nations to working together to advance freedom and security
grounded in democratic principles and institutions, which form the
foundation of our relationship.

We salute the people of Ukraine who claimed their right to elect freely
their leadership. Their brave stand was a victory for democracy inspiring
those throughout the world who yearn for freedom and dignity in the face
of tyranny, isolation and oppression.

The territorial integrity, security, and political and economic transformation
of Ukraine are essential to building a Europe whole, free and at peace. We
will work together to strengthen democratic institutions in Ukraine and to
advance freedom in Europe, its neighborhood and beyond.

We will work to defeat terrorism wherever it occurs and to advance economic
development, democratic reforms and peaceful settlement of regional
disputes. We are grateful to the men and women of those nations who have
served and sacrificed for Iraqi freedom.

Today, we pledge ourselves anew to assist the Iraqi people to secure liberty,
peace and prosperity, and we join our efforts to assist Iraq in its economic
reconstruction. Fear and resentment, the breeding ground of terrorism, must
be replaced with freedom and hope.

We also commit to work together to back reform, democracy, tolerance and
respect for all communities, and peaceful resolution of conflicts in Georgia
and Moldova, and to support the advance of freedom in countries such as
Belarus and Cuba. Citizens in our open societies value the freedom to
practice their faiths, and we are committed to promoting religious tolerance
globally.

As Ukraine undertakes far-reaching reform at home, it can count on the
United States for support. We applaud Ukraine’s commitment to curb
corruption, promote the rule of law and improve the business climate.
Progress on reforms will allow Ukraine to realize its aspirations to move
closer to, and ultimately join European, Euro-Atlantic and international
institutions.

We will further integrate Ukraine into the world economy and promote
investment and trade between our two countries. As a first step, the
Ukrainian Government seeks expeditious U.S. recognition as a market
economy. We agree to continue our close cooperation to ensure a process
that recognizes the evolution of Ukraine’s economy.

We are committed to working together to achieve Ukraine’s accession to the
World Trade Organization (WTO). For its part, the Ukrainian Government
will seek to secure, on an urgent basis, approval of legislation and enact
regulations that will facilitate accession and contribute to lasting
economic reform, including in agriculture, manufacturing, services and the
protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights.

The United States and Ukraine are committed to working together to complete
our bilateral negotiations for Ukraine’s accession to the WTO in 2005. We
will also cooperate on the outstanding multilateral work that must be
concluded for Ukraine’s WTO accession. We also support immediately
ending application of Jackson-Vanik to Ukraine.

The United States supports Ukraine’s NATO aspirations and is prepared to
help Ukraine achieve its goals by providing assistance with challenging
reforms. The United States supports an offer of an Intensified Dialogue on
membership issues with Ukraine at the meeting of Alliance Foreign Ministers
in Vilnius, Lithuania later this month. Our cooperation will also deepen
through the U.S.-led, largest-ever NATO trust fund to destroy obsolete and
excess weaponry.

We are initiating an energy dialogue to cooperate in the restructuring and
reform of Ukraine’s energy sector to encourage investment, diversify
Ukraine’s energy supplies, reduce its energy dependence, bolster commercial
competition in Eurasian energy sectors and promote nuclear safety. To
advance this dialogue, we are establishing an Energy consultative mechanism
between our Energy Ministries. United States Secretary of Energy Bodman
will travel to Ukraine in the near future to initiate the consultative
mechanism and to promote our energy and nonproliferation cooperation.

Building on our cooperation through the G-8 Global Partnership, the
Cooperative Threat Reduction Program and the Proliferation Security
Initiative, we pledge to begin a new chapter in the fight against the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery.

We will deepen our cooperation on nonproliferation, export controls, border
security and law enforcement to deter, detect, interdict, investigate and
prosecute illicit trafficking of these weapons and related materials;
enhance the security of nuclear and radiological sources; and dispose of
spent nuclear fuel.

We also agree on the importance of addressing the growing threat posed by
the proliferation of ballistic missiles. In this regard, we will explore how
we can work together on missile defense, including beginning negotiations on
a framework to facilitate such cooperation and closer industry-to-industry
collaboration.

The security and stability of nations increasingly depends on the health,
well-being and prosperity of their citizens. We therefore commit to
cooperate on a broad agenda of social and humanitarian issues, including
halting the spread of HIV/AIDS and TB; fighting the scourge of organized
crime, trafficking in persons and child pornography; and completing the
Chornobyl Shelter Implementation Plan.

To help complete the Chornobyl Shelter, the United States will provide an
additional $45 million to the Shelter Fund. Ukraine will also provide an
additional financial contribution and facilitate prompt completion of the
Shelter. U.S. assistance to Ukraine will particularly focus on solidifying
democratic advances through anti-corruption and rule of law programs,
media and NGO development, nonpartisan party and election monitor
training and other steps to improve electoral institutions and practices.

We also support a bold expansion of contact between our societies. To this
end, Ukraine will eliminate visa requirements for Americans, and the United
States will reduce visa fees for Ukrainians. We aim to enhance citizen
exchanges, training opportunities and cooperation between business
communities of both countries.

We commit our two nations to stand together as global partners for freedom,
security and prosperity in the 21st century. -30-
—————————————————————————————————-
MONITORING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE APRIL 4, 2005
JOINT U.S.-UKRAINE STATEMENT
The identified 20 specific tasks agreed by the two governments.

Foreign Policy and National Security Task Force
U.S.-Ukraine Policy Dialogue
Washington, D.C., Friday, February 17, 2006

Presidents Bush and Yushchenko on April 4, 2005 issued a joint statement on
“A New Century Agenda for the Ukrainian-American Strategic Partnership”
during President Yushchenko’s visit to Washington. Both governments
described the joint statement as a road map for developing and deepening the
U.S.-Ukraine bilateral relationship in the aftermath of Ukraine’s Orange
Revolution.

The Foreign Policy and National Security Task Force is part of the
non-governmental U.S.-Ukraine Policy Dialogue, which was launched in June
2005. The Task Force has taken on as one of its key assignments monitoring
the U.S.-Ukraine relationship, including implementation of the April 4 joint
statement. Task Force members reviewed the joint statement and identified
20 specific tasks agreed by the governments.

What follows below is our assessment of the progress the two governments
have made as of January 31, 2006 in implementing those 20 tasks.

TASK #1: To work together to back peaceful resolution of conflicts in
Georgia and Moldova.
Status: The Ukrainian government launched a new plan to press for a
settlement of the Transnistrian dispute (Moldova) in May 2005. The U.S.
government has expressed support for this effort and has joined the
multilateral talks on Transnistria as an observer. The Ukrainian government
agreed on October 7, 2005 with the European Union and Moldova on
deploying EU border monitors along the Ukraine-Moldova border, and the
monitors began operating in December 2005.

TASK #2: To support the advance of freedom in Belarus.
Status: The U.S. and Ukrainian governments supported a resolution on
Belarus at the April 2005 session of the UN Commission on Human Rights.
The Ukrainian government has participated in Belarus donor coordination
meetings (which include coordination of democracy assistance).

TASK #3: To support the advance of freedom in Cuba.
Status: The U.S. and Ukrainian governments supported a resolution on
Cuba at the April 2005 session of the UN Commission on Human Rights.

TASK #4: The U.S. government to proceed with a process on Ukraine’s
market economy status.
Status: The U.S. Department of Commerce has extended its review of
Ukraine’s application for market economy status; a decision is to be
announced on or before February 16, 2006. (Although this assessment
covers only the period through January 31, 2006, it was announced on
February 17, 2006 that the U.S. government has granted Ukraine market
economy status.)

TASK #5: The Ukrainian government to secure approval of necessary
legislation and enact regulations to facilitate accession into the World
Trade Organization (WTO).
Status: The Rada passed intellectual property rights/optical disc
legislation on July 7, 2005, President Yushchenko signed it into law, and it
was promulgated on August 2, 2005. The Rada has passed a number of
other laws to bring the Ukrainian trade regime into compliance with the
WTO regime and is considering additional laws; as of January 2006, the
Rada still needs to pass nine or ten laws.

TASK #6: To complete bilateral negotiations for Ukraine’s WTO
accession by the end of 2005.
Status: The end of 2005 deadline was missed, but the sides report that
the negotiations are down to a handful of final issues. The U.S. side has
suggested options for resolution of these issues, and is awaiting the
Ukrainian response.

TASK #7: The U.S . government to support immediately ending
application of the Jackson-Vanik amendment to Ukraine.
Status: The U.S. Senate passed on November 18, 2005 a resolution to
graduate Ukraine from Jackson-Vanik; action is now with the House of
Representatives.

TASK #8: The U.S. government to support an offer of an Intensified
Dialogue on membership issues for Ukraine at the April 2005 NATO-

Ukraine Ministerial meeting.
Status: Done. An Intensified Dialogue was launched at the April 21,
2005 NATO-Ukraine Ministerial.

TASK #9: To cooperate through a U.S.-led NATO trust fund to destroy
obsolete and excess conventional weaponry.
Status: The NATO/Partnership for Peace Trust Fund implementing
agreement was signed on November 23, 2005, and implementation has
begun.

TASK #10: To initiate an energy dialogue to address restructuring/reform
of Ukraine’s energy sector and to establish a bilateral energy consultative
mechanism.
Status: Done. The energy dialogue was initiated and consultative mechanism
established during Secretary of Energy Bodman’s May 26-27, 2005 visit to
Kyiv. The U.S. government sent two energy experts to examine Ukraine’s
energy strategy and report to the U.S. Department of Energy on areas of
possible bilateral cooperation. The Bilateral Consultative Group, which met
in Kyiv on January 24, 2006, addressed energy security issues, particularly
in the aftermath of the Ukraine-Russia gas dispute.

TASK #11: To deepen cooperation on non-proliferation, export controls,
border security and law enforcement.
Status: An agreement on the prevention of illicit trafficking of nuclear
and other radioactive materials was signed in April 2005.
An implementing agreement on securing radioactive materials was signed
on May 27, 2005. An agreement on countering the threat of bioterrorism
was signed on August 29, 2005.

TASK #12: To explore bilateral missile defense cooperation.
Status: Preliminary exchanges have taken place on a research, development,
testing and evaluation agreement, which would provide the legal framework
for bilateral missile defense cooperation. The first formal discussions are
scheduled for March 2006.
The U.S. Missile Defense Agency and National Space Agency of Ukraine
conducted missile defense workshops in July and October 2005. Contacts
are ongoing between U.S. firms and Ukrainian companies to establish
industry-to-industry relationships.

TASK #13: To cooperate on halting the spread of HIV/AIDS and TB.
Status: The U.S. government has increased assistance to more than double
the coverage of information and services to target populations at high risk
of HIV/AIDS.

TASK #14: To cooperate against organized crime.
Status: The U.S. government is providing support for Ukraine’s reform
of the criminal justice system.

TASK #15: To cooperate to halt trafficking in persons and child
pornography.
Status: To facilitate the Ukrainian Ministry of Interior’s decision to
create an anti-trafficking in persons department, the U.S. government
provided $250,000 worth of vehicles, computers and other technical
equipment. The U.S. government facilitated contacts between the new
department and the Southeastern European Cooperative Center for
Combating Transnational Crime.

TASK #16: The U.S. government to contribute an additional $45 million
to the Chornobyl Shelter Fund.
Status: The U.S. government allocated $13 million toward this pledge in
2005 and intends to allocate a minimum of $20.5 million more in 2006.

TASK #17: The Ukrainian government to make an additional financial
contribution to the Chornobyl Shelter Fund.
Status: Done. The Ukrainian government pledged to increase its financial
contribution to an equivalent of $22 million at the EBRD Donor
Conference held in London on May 12, 2005.

TASK #18: The Ukrainian government to end visa requirements for
American citizens.
Status: Done. The Ukrainian government dropped visa requirements for
American citizens effective July 1, 2005 on a provisional basis; this was in
full effect by September 1, 2005.

TASK #19: The U.S. government to reduce visa fees for Ukrainian citizens.
Status: Done. The U.S. government eliminated visa issuance fees for
Ukrainian citizens, leaving only visa application fees, effective July 6,
2005.

TASK #20: To enhance exchanges between citizens and business communities.
Status: The U.S. government plans to use FY 2005 FREEDOM Support
Act supplemental funds to increase exchanges, with a focus on eastern and
southern Ukraine. -30-
———————————————————————————————–
For more information on the U.S.-Ukraine Policy Dialogue please contact
Marta Matselioukh at the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation at (202) 223-2228 or
martam@usukraine.org; or Jan Neutze at the Atlantic Council of the United
States at (202) 778-4990 or jneutze@acus.org. Links to the program:
http://www.acus.org/docs/06-02-US-Ukraine_Relations_Press_Release.pdf
http://www.acus.org/programs-relations-projects-US-Ukraine.asp
http://www.usukraine.org/dialogue.shtml
———————————————————————————————
[return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
2. U.S. HAS GRANTED UKRAINE MARKET ECONOMY STATUS
In what way can Ukraine benefit from this status?

By Oleh Malsky, Master of Law, Georgetown University
The Day Weekly Digest in English, #5, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tue, Feb 21, 2006

Ukraine has been expecting the US to recognize Ukraine as a market economy
since 2001. It is only after longtime concerted efforts of the government
and private business, conclusions of Ukrainian and American lawyers, and the
EU decision last December that the US agreed to meet Ukraine halfway and
grant it market economy status.

To assess “marketness,” the US adhered to the following criteria in
accordance with its trade law: convertibility of the national currency,
setting wages on the basis of collective bargaining between employees and
employers, restrictions to foreign investments, governmental ownership of
and control over the means of production, governmental control of resources
distribution, price formation and the choice of businesses to produce items
at their own discretion. The US confirmed last Friday that Ukraine meets
these criteria and can be considered a market economy.

In what way can Ukraine benefit from this status? The notion “market economy
country” is usually used during antidumping investigations and is thus of
great importance for international trade relations and particularly for the
countries to which Ukraine is or will be exporting its goods.

Now that Ukraine has been recognized a market economy, it may be expected
that antidumping actions against our country will be more transparent. To
prove the fact of dumping, a commodity’s export price is compared with its
intrinsic value or the price at the exporter’s domestic market.

The common perception is that market forces do not work in non-market
economy: prices, distorted by governmental intervention, are not set under
the law of demand and supply and, therefore, cannot be subjected to
comparison. Under the US antidumping law, in the case of import from a
non-market-economy country, the intrinsic value is set on the basis of a
price or a construed value in a third market-economy country (the so-called
analogue or surrogate country).

In other words, a third country was usually chosen for Ukraine and
calculations were made with reference to it. Obviously, it was next to
impossible to avoid manipulations and errors during this kind of assessment.
Granting a country market economy status considerably reduces opportunities
for such manipulations.

The absence of manipulation opportunities will force the US industry to
think twice before launching expensive antidumping investigations. This will
in turn make the US market more accessible and interesting for Ukrainian
exporters.

Besides, when dumping by a non-market-economy country is being investigated,
the antidumping duty is assessed not individually for each exporters but for
the entire country because it is considered that all producers work in the
same conditions and with the same prices.

When the market economy status has been granted, each exporter will have an
individual duty assessed for him, which will provide a true picture of his
production facilities and price formation.

Moreover, the status in question may produce a positive effect, when it
comes to cutting antidumping duties owing to a more transparent process.

The market economy status will not stop antidumping investigations
altogether but will help reduce their potential number as well as the
antidumping duty rate.

For most manufacturers, a 10-% antidumping duty is not a serious obstacle
for export, but the US antidumping duty on Ukrainian goods was at least 40%
and 120% on the average up to now, which practically closed the market.

Under the US antidumping law, in case of an essential change of the
circumstances, for example, granting market economy status, the exporters
against whom antidumping duties are in force may request the US government
to revise them.

As of today, the US is now investigating seven antidumping cases against
Ukraine – mainly with respect to hot-rolled sheet metal, concrete
reinforcements, silico-manganese, ammonium nitrate, carbamide, rods and
wires made of high-carbon and some other varieties of carbonized steel, in
one of which Ukraine has undertaken certain commitments.

All exporters of these goods can plead for revising the existing duties
because Ukraine has been granted market economy status and thus obtain
individual, by all accounts lesser, antidumping duties.

Recognizing Ukraine a market economy also has many other economically
positive effects.

[1] First, the recognition of Ukraine as a market economy by the US (as well
as the recent recognition by the EU) will be a signal for many states,
important trade partners of Ukraine, to make a similar decision. As of
today, Brazil, Mexico, India and some other countries still consider Ukraine
a non-market economy. After making this kind of decision, these countries
will reduce the number of antidumping investigations, revise their existing
attitudes, and, in general, make their markets more accessible.

[2] Secondly, this access to the markets of developed states will bring
about reorientation of export from the countries of Asia and Africa to more
economically developed countries. This will in turn boost the development
and technological progress of export-oriented industries and increase
employment and cost-effectiveness, which will eventually improve this
country’s overall well-being.

[3] Thirdly, this will considerably improve Ukraine’s image on the arena of
international trade and investments.

Market economy status is undoubtedly a positive thing. Yet this status also
has a drawback: application to Ukraine of the compensation measures that are
nor applicable to non-market economies (actions against the goods whose
production is heavily subsidized by the state).

The Ukrainian exporters that enjoy governmental support, exemptions and
subsidies may well become the object of such investigations in the US. It
should still be noted that in practice compensation investigations and
duties in general are resorted to much more seldom than antidumping
measures. -30-
————————————————————————————————
LINK: http://www.day.kiev.ua/157622/
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
3. MARKET ECONOMY STATUS BY USA CREATES CONDITIONS
FOR OBJECTIVE CONSIDERATION OF ANTIDUMPING CASES

Ukrinform, Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, February 18, 2006

KYIV – A decision of the US Department of Commerce on granting Ukraine
the market-economy country status means that the USA has acknowledged to
democratic changes in Ukraine and real steps toward accedence to the WTO,
diminishing export limitations for Ukrainian commodities, improvement of
bipartite trade-investment relations, the Economy Ministry’s press service
told Ukrinform.

The market economy country status enables Ukrainian enterprises to
compete with other countries’ companies and to assert their rights during
antidumping procedures. This will also predetermine holding new
investigations and creating conditions for objective consideration of
antidumping cases on the basis of information, submitted by enterprises,
the Economy Ministry believes.

The USA finally recognized that hryvnia is a freely-converted currency,
Ukraine is open for foreign investors and provides protection of investors’
rights. A business is developing separately from authorities and the
Government doesn’t intrude into relations between employers and employees,
who are working on contracts, the Economy Ministry believes. -30-
——————————————————————————————–
[ return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
4. UKRAINIAN ENTERPRISES REPORTED ENTITLED TO DEMAND
REVISION OF ANTI-DUMPING PROCEDURES IN USA

Ukrinform, Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, February 20, 2006

KYIV – According to Oleh Riabokon, a member of the Magister & Partner
legal film, now that the USA has recognized Ukraine as a market economy,
Ukrainian enterprises are entitled to demand that anti-dumping procedures be
revised in the USA.

As Mr Riabokon noted, the USA’s decision to his effect, which was made
on February 17, 2006, took effect on February 1. This means, he noted, that
whatever anti-dumping procedures were launched after February 1, 2006 will
be subject to revision.

As Oleh Riabokon stressed, anti-dumping duties, which are levied on
Ukrainian commodities, imported into the USA, and which amount to 43
percent to 168 percent of their value, will be revised. Ukrainian enterprises or
a group of enterprises will have just to approach the US Commerce
Department to petition it for revising the anti-dumping duties, Oleh Riabokon
said. -30-
——————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
Send in names and e-mail addresses for the AUR distribution list.
========================================================
5. UKRAINIAN CINEMATOGRAPHERS AWARDED TECHNICAL
OSCAR PRIZE BY AMERICAN CINEMATOGRAPHY ART ACADEMY
The award presentation ceremony was held in Beverly Hills, CA.

Natatiya Bukvych, Ukrinform, Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, February 20, 2006

WASHINGTON, DC – Ukrainian cinematographers have been awarded the
Technical Oscar Prize for the list time by the American Academy of
Cinematography Art for their concept of improving operators’ techniques.

The award presentation ceremony was held in Beverly Hills. The prize was
presented to Kyiv-based FilmoTekhnika operators Anatoliy Kokush, Yuriy
Popovskiy, Aleksei Zolotarev.

The Ukrainian cinematographers were awarded the prize for having designed
the AutoRobot crane with the panoramic Flight Head, which can be mounted
on virtually every kind of road vehicles. The remotely-controlled crane and
camera are capable of smoothly rotating 360 degrees and operating at any
speeds of the vehicle.

Anatoliy Kikush was also awarded a prize for creating the Cascade operating
cranes and for the Trevelling Cascade System.

These designs are superlight and alone to place cameras in hitherto
inaccessible places. The company FilmoTekhnika develops and makes
telescopic operator cranes, stability panoramic tips for shooting moving
objects. The company incorporates over thirty enterprises.

The Ukrainian company’s devices were successfully demonstrated at
exhibitions in Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Cologne, New York City. Its
equipment was used in shooting over a hundred films, recording over a
thousand concerts by such known performers as Chris Norman, Sting,
Julio Iglesias, the Scorpions, Deep Purple, Bad Boys Blue.

The award presentation ceremony was attended by Ukrainian Ambassador to
the USA Oleh Shamshur. During his stay in Los Angeles Oleh Shamshur met
with members of the Hollywood Trident Foundation, composed of ethnic
Ukrainians, who are engaged in the movie industry.

During the meeting the parties discussed Ukrainian – American cooperation in
the movie industry and establishing contacts between Ukrainian and American
film studios.

The Ukrainian Ambassador participated in a service at the Ukrainian Catholic
Church in Los Angeles and met with members of the city’s Ukrainian
community. He laid flowers at the Monument to 1932 – 1933 Famine Victims,
which was erected in Los Angeles in the early 1970s and which was designed
by Ukrainian architect Taras Kozbur.

Oleh Shamshur also met with Beverly Hills vice mayor Beck Berkie and
West Hollywood mayor Abbe Land. He also held an informal meeting
with California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. -30-
——————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
6. UKRAINIAN GENOCIDE MEMORIAL SITE BILL BEFORE
U.S. SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE


Ukrainian National Information Service (UNIS)
Washington, D.C., Friday, February 17, 2006

WASHINGTON, DC – After the successful unanimous passage last year in
the U.S. House of Representatives of a bill to [allow the construction of a]
construct a [privately financed] monument on federal land in Washington, DC
to honor the victims of the Ukrainian Genocide of 1932-1933, the U.S. Senate
Subcommittee on National Parks of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources
Committee held a hearing on HR562 on Thursday, February 16, 2006.

Chairing the hearing was Sen. Craig Thomas (R-WY) with oral testimony
provided by John Parsons, Associate Regional Director for Lands, Resources,
and Planning for the National Park Service (NPS). Written testimony was
submitted to the Subcommittee by Rep. Sander Levin(D-MI), Co-Chair of the
Congressional Ukrainian Caucus and sponsor of HR562; H.E. Oleh Shamshur,
Ambassador of Ukraine to the United States; and, Michael Sawkiw, Jr.,
President of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America (UCCA).

In an opening statement, Sen. Thomas mentioned the bills to be examined
including HR562. With that, Mr. Parsons commenced his verbal testimony by
stating that HR562 would “duplicate the efforts of the Victims of Communism
(VOC) memorial,” which is to be built by the end of 2006 in Washington, DC.

Unfortunately, the VOC monument will be a generalized memorial and will not
specify the atrocities endured by various nations under the yoke of
communism. When questioned by the Chairman about how the other groups
feel about the general VOC monument, Mr. Parsons accurately portrayed the
sentiments: “I don’t think it [the VOC memorial] represents what they [the
Ukrainians] are trying to tell.”

Other testimony provided to the Subcommittee elaborated on the necessity
to build such a monument to the victims of the Ukrainian Genocide of
1932-1933.

Rep. Levin, sponsor of the bill, enumerated the enormous sacrifice the
Ukrainian people made during the Ukrainian Genocide and noted that “this
memorial will not only honor the victims of this horrible period of history,
but also serve as a reminder to all of us that we must work together to
prevent such tragedies in the future. This reminder is particularly
poignant given the renewed commitment of Ukraine to freedom and
democracy during last year’s Orange Revolution.”

H.E. Oleh Shamshur, Ukraine’s newly-appointed ambassador to the United
States, also delivered written testimony to the National Parks Subcommittee.
The ambassador highlighted the sheer brutality of the 1932-1933 Ukrainian
Genocide.

Referring to the Genocide by its Ukrainian word “Holodomor,” Amb.
Shamshur highlighted its sheer brutality, stating that “the unparalleled
disaster in the history of my nation, [is] similar to the Holocaust in scale,
cruelty, and cynicism of its perpetrators.”

Poignant in his remarks, the ambassador’s testimony related the “pain and
bitter memory of the Holodomor are alive in practically every Ukrainian
family; they make our hearts ache.”

Also providing testimony was the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America.
In his written remarks, the UCCA President quoted the 1986 U.S. Congress
Commission on the Ukraine Famine, which concluded in its findings that
“Joseph Stalin and those around him committed genocide against the
Ukrainians in 1932-1933.”

In the broader context of memorializing the innocent victims of the
Ukrainian Genocide, Mr. Sawkiw reiterated that a monument in Washington,
DC “would enhance the scope and message of a true victim of communism.
Their ultimate sacrifice was as a result of an inhumane ideology – food as a
weapon.Though other atrocities have afflicted many nations of the world, the
sheer magnitude and gravity of the Ukrainian Genocide remains little know to
the world.”

The next step towards final passage of HR562 is to bring it to a vote in the
U.S. Senate during the 2nd Session of the 109th Congress. Rep. Levin is to
be commended for his sponsorship of HR562 and his advocacy of this very
important issue to the Ukrainian American community, as well as H.E. Oleh
Shamshur for the Ukrainian government’s support and testimony.
———————————————————————————————–
Contact: Serhiy Zhykharev, Ukrainian National Information Service
311 Massachusetts Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20002
tel: (202) 547-0018; fax: (202) 543-5502; e-mail: unis@ucca.org
LINK: http://www.ucca.org
———————————————————————————————–
[ return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
7. ORANGE REVOLUTION, AT YELLOW SPEED
Reality in Ukraine.

COMMENTARY: By Ethan Wallison in Kiev
NationalReviewOnline (NRO), NY, NY, Wed, Feb 15, 2006

KIEV, UKRAINE – A British acquaintance here learned a few months ago,
much to his dismay, that a gleaming new residential complex was about to
go up – on his doorstep, on land deeded to his building. He mustered the
paperwork and made the usual appeals to the usual authorities, but this led
to an even bleaker discovery: The developers were the authorities, more or
less.

That is to say, they were close associates of President Viktor Yushchenko,
and nowadays his people are making the rules. “I should want [Viktor]
Yanukovich to win,” this acquaintance now says, referring to the former
presidential candidate who could soon become prime minister. Different
crooks, different crimes, he figures.

Even Ukrainians with somewhat less exposure to the new elite seem to have
concluded that Yushchenko is like all the others, or at least is no better.
His political party fetches no more than 15 percent in national polls ahead
of critical parliamentary elections next month. And as Yushchenko goes, so
goes the Orange Revolution that he once embodied.

The deputies elected to the next session of the Verkhovna Rada will have the
choice of prime minister, and if Yushchenko’s pathetic numbers stay where
they are now, this selection is bound to cost him dearly. At the farthest
end of unthinkable scenarios is the elevation of Yanukovich, the goat of the
revolution – now with greater power than if he had been elected president in
the first place and the protests had never happened.

Only mildly less distressing would be the re-appointment of ousted prime
minister Yulia Tymoshenko, the most dynamic and untrustworthy politician
this side of Edwin Edwards. Though it was the pretext for her dismissal,
corruption was perhaps the least of her problems.

An inept administrator with no economic program except populism, she moved
to sharply increase social spending while crusading to “re-privatize” former
government holdings that were sold off by the previous government under
questionable circumstances.

This became a circus, as Tymoshenko estimated that “thousands” of properties
may need to be redistributed. Investors fled. One year on, Ukraine’s gross
domestic product has gone from twelve-percent annual growth to near zero.
Yet if Yanukovich does not emerge as prime minister after the balloting in
late March, it very likely will mean that Tymoshenko gets the nod instead.

CORRUPTION-WEARY COUNTRY
As an outsider, it is difficult to know what Ukrainians expected to find in
their country one year after the revolution. Sure, everyone wants to live in
a country with a strong economy and no corruption. But looking at Ukraine,
who would even know where to start?

Public institutions have been debased to the edge of rot by decades of abuse
and official cynicism. The courts are rife with graft, and will probably
need to be rebuilt from the ground up. Like HAL the supercomputer in 2001:
A Space Odyssey, Ukraine’s bureaucracy manages nothing so well as its own
survival.

Yet battling corruption in Ukraine without first attacking the vast and
impenetrable bureaucracy is an impossible task. When even the simplest
projects can take years to get the necessary approvals, bureaucracy becomes
big business.

What’s more, who will enact the reforms? The safest place in Ukraine for a
criminal is still the country’s parliament, where membership confers
absolute immunity from prosecution. It’s anyone’s guess how many crooks are
hiding out there, but several of the country’s more brazen “oligarchs” have
seats, just to be safe. (And seats can literally be purchased, under the
chamber’s absurd rules of appointment.)

In 2004, one of these deputies, Viktor Pinchuk, purchased the country’s
premier steel mill at a bargain-basement price from the government of Leonid
Kuchma, who happens to be his father-in-law. Perhaps a blind trust is too
much to ask, but what about basic shame? Deputies in parliament own banks,
which in Ukraine collect taxes and utility payments, among other receipts.
Who will mess with that arrangement?

Add to this the unique illogic and disorder of the Soviet system – lovingly
preserved since independence in 1991 like an embalmed Lenin – and it’s a
wonder that Ukraine’s revolutionaries were ever illusioned enough to be
disillusioned now. The problems Ukraine faces are going to take years –
perhaps generations – to correct. They don’t get swapped out with a change
of government.

Yushchenko has not been ideal, by any measure. He has introduced
corruption-wearied Ukrainians to the wearying possibilities of feebleness.
He has failed to mediate a dispute between Tymoshenko and his close
personal friend Petro Poroshenko, the state security chief, which led to
the collapse of the first post-revolution government.

More egregiously, he has been suckered into a written agreement with
Yanukovich that, among other things, extends the immunity of the Rada to
more than 2,000 other politicians across Ukraine. (This was the price he
paid to win the approval of Yuriy Yekhanurov, the current prime minister,
after dismissing the Tymoshenko government in the fall.)

Episodes such as these have prompted Pora, the youth-led reform movement
that played a key role in the revolution, to form its own party ahead of the
parliamentary elections. Its “list” – topped by retired boxer Vitaliy
Klitschko – will need to break three percent at the polls in order to be
represented in the Rada. Otherwise, all Pora will likely do is take votes
from Our Ukraine, Yushchenko’s party, at the ballot box.

All the same, it is important to bear in mind that Yushchenko is not “like
all the others.” (Although some of his courtiers may be a different story.)
He is attacked in newspaper editorials that could not have been written in
the climate of fear and intimidation that preceded him.

Part of his problem, in fact, is that Ukrainians have already, for better
and for worse, internalized the victories of the revolution: They have their
new rights, and they’re done thanking Yushchenko for them. Now they are
worried about the sputtering economy, high inflation, the country’s tetchy
relationship with Mother Russia – and, of course, signs that official
corruption endures.

Some Ukrainians I’ve spoken to are perfectly willing to acknowledge the new
freedoms and yet remain ambivalent about the possibility they may wind up
saddled with Yanukovich, who combines the grace of a thug – he was jailed
twice for assault and robbery as a young man – with a Russian accent and the
predictable blessing of Vladimir Putin.

His appointment as prime minister would certainly be an odd conclusion to
the Orange Revolution’s narrative arc: He sought permission to order the
military to open fire on the protestors in Independence Square.
A TIME FOR CHOOSING
“People in Ukraine will never believe any government!” a schoolteacher
assured me recently in the town of Malin, about 90 miles north and west of
Kiev. Malin is reasonably near Chernobyl, and the woman recalled how the
Soviets denied reports of a disaster there for days while people sat in
harm’s way.

On television, the same old movies played. They heard something vague
about a fire, but it was “under control.” Many had relatives who lived
nearer and knew different, though. Finally, days into the crisis, she was
relocated to Latvia.

It is not really a question of whether Ukrainians want change. It is more
useful to ask how long they are willing to pursue it before they revert to
the usual choruses of doubt.

The difficulties of the post-revolution period have awakened the old spirit
of fatalism in Ukrainians, who take almost an anti-pride in their centuries
of suffering and betrayals. (The country’s slogan – no joke – is “Ukraine
has not yet died.”) This is, after all, the land of the Holodomor, the
Stalin-era famine which claimed as many as 10 million lives. Trust at your
own peril.

The country’s history helps make sense of the speed with which
disillusionment took hold here after the revolution. Why be a chump? But
that’s not really the choice anymore, of course. The choice, just like in
American politics, is one of whose chump you would prefer to be. You
cannot elect a perfect politician. But you can choose defeat. -30-
——————————————————————————————
NOTE: Ethan Wallison is a journalist living in Kiev and the publisher of
http://Room12A.com . Wallison, is a ten-year veteran of Washington
political reporting, most recently with Roll Call, where he was White
House Correspondent. ( ethan@Room12A.com)
——————————————————————————————–
LINK: http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/wallison200602150830.asp

——————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
========================================================
8 . UKRAINIAN ICE DANCERS WIN BRONZE: 2006 OLYMPIC GAMES
First ice dancing Olympic medal ever for Ukraine, congratulations from Pres

Ukrinform, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, February 21, 2006

KYIV – Ukrainian ice dancers Elena Grushina and Ruslan Goncharov have
won bronze in the 20th winter Olympic games in Torino with 195.85 score.
No Ukrainian ice dancers have ever managed to win Olympic medal before.
Elena Grushina and Ruslan Goncharov started dancing together in 1990.

President Viktor Yushchenko congratulated Ukrainian ice dancers Elena
Grushina and Ruslan Goncharov, “Your athletic mastery, harmony, and
spiritual power of your dance brought Ukraine this coveted victory. Your
achievement is a wonderful example for other athletes to follow and a
valuable contribution to the gains of our team”, the President said.
——————————————————————————————-
[ return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
9. ICE DANCING REMAINS A MYSTERY
Tatiana Navka, who was born in Ukraine, and Roman Kostomarov,
shockingly born in Russia, skate for Russia and win the gold medal.
Ruslan Goncharov, who is from Ukraine and actually skates for
Ukraine, with partner, Elena Grushina, won bronze.

By Phil Sheridan, Philadelphia Inquirer Columnist
Philadelphia, PA, Tuesday, February 21, 2006

TURIN – The Russian who is really from Ukraine but lives in New Jersey
had a gold medal. The Canadian who lives in Michigan had a silver one, in
spite of the wobble in her twizzle. The California woman who skates for
Azerbaijan, but has never been there, finished 19th.

And we can report with some certainty that neither member of the Italian
ice-dancing pair murdered the other one – at least not before they finished
their free dance. Any questions? Maybe the most pressing one is, what is up
with this ice dancing, anyway?

The fourth most interesting strain of figure skating – after women’s, pairs
and men’s, in that order – grabbed a rather uneventful Winter Olympics by
the throat and shook hard on Sunday night. First, there were more crashes
than the average NASCAR race. Four of the top pairs took nasty tumbles
during their original dances.

“That was the first time in my life so many skaters fell,” said Ruslan
Goncharov, who is from Ukraine and actually skates for Ukraine.

The signature image of these Games may well prove to be Italy’s Barbara
Fusar Poli staring holes through her partner, Maurizio Margaglio, after she
tumbled. When their program was done, she gave him a look so nasty, you
half expected him to burst into flames.

The pair, who won a bronze medal in this event in 2002, did not speak to
reporters after that performance. The buzz about the meltdown attracted
dozens of reporters, who would normally avoid ice dancing like a bird flu
sandwich, to the Palavela last night.

NBC, which is getting drubbed in the ratings, had to be thrilled. If the
Winter Olympics cannot compete with contrived drama like American Idol,
then a little contrived drama is just what Dr. Nielsen ordered. There proved
to be precious little drama, but a little bit of precious history for the
United States. Well, sort of.

First, let’s all relax and exhale. Barbara was not angry with Maurizio,
honest she wasn’t. “No, no, never,” she said after the pair finished sixth
overall. “He is like my brother. We do not speak on the ice. We communicate
with our eyes.” And what were her eyes saying? “Crap, we did a mistake,”
Fusar Poli said. Margaglio told the same tale. (What? You were thinking he’d
contradict her? After that?) “It was a mistake of both of us, not one
person,” Margaglio said.

Meanwhile, the pair who live in Montclair, N.J., won the gold medal, as
expected. Nevertheless, the Russian national anthem was played – not, say, a
Springsteen song. Tatiana Navka, who was born in Ukraine, and Roman
Kostomarov, shockingly born in Russia, skate for Russia.

But the big news was the silver medal won by Tanith Belbin and Ben Agosto,
an absolutely delightful duo. It was the first U.S. medal in the event since
Colleen O’Connor and James Millns took bronze in 1976. It was the first
figure-skating medal of these Games for the United States, with the women’s
competition starting today.

Belbin and Agosto gave thanks to the American officials who made their
appearance in these Games possible. Belbin, who was born in Canada, was
not an American citizen until a special amendment was appended to an
appropriations bill. When President Bush signed the bill into law, she
became eligible to take her citizenship test.

Belbin became an American citizen on New Year’s Eve. She retains
Canadian citizenship, which makes her, what? Canerican? Ameradian?
“She’s lived in the U.S. for eight years now,” Agosto said. “So really,
this was more of a formality.”

Belbin is only 21, which means she was 13 when she moved here. That makes
her at least as American as Denis Petukhov, who is married to his partner,
Melissa Gregory. And it makes Belbin at least as American as Kristin Fraser,
who obtained citizenship in Azerbaijan just to skate in the Olympics –
without bothering to visit the country itself.

This is a very strange sport in that way. OK, this is a very strange sport
in every way. It is not as athletic as pairs figure skating, which involves
throws and jumps. It really is more like ballroom dancing on ice, a
combination of two difficult skills, which is then judged on required
elements as well as grace in performance.

Belbin said she “wobbled” while performing a “twizzle.” When someone
asked exactly when in the program it happened, she smiled brightly. “You
didn’t [see it]?” Belbin asked. “Then I’m not going to tell you. What
wobble?”

She and Agosto, 24, have definite star power in this sport, and are young
enough to compete for gold in Vancouver in 2010. And who knows? Maybe
they’ll still be skating for the United States. That would be something.
——————————————————————————————-
[ return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
10. CZECH PREMIER SEES UKRAINE AS KEY STRATEGIC PARTNER
Czech Republic counting with Ukraine as an important source of labour force.

CTK news agency, Prague, in English 2048 gmt 17 Feb 06
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Sunday, Feb 19, 2006

PRAGUE – [Czech] Prime Minister Jiri Paroubek today met his Ukrainian
counterpart Juriy Yekhanurov with whom he discussed future Ukrainian
membership in the EU, military cooperation and cooperation in the energy
industry.

The two prime ministers signed inter-governmental agreements on cooperation
in the defence industry and tourism. Paroubek described Ukraine as a key
strategic partner and said that Czech-Ukrainian relations were satisfactory.

According to Paroubek, there are about 90,000 Ukrainians working in the
Czech Republic. “They are help for medium-sized and small businesses,” he
said. Paroubek told CTK that the question of legalization of the presence of
Ukrainian citizens who have stayed in the Czech Republic illegally was not
discussed during the talks. [Passage omitted] Paroubek said that the Czech
Republic was counting with Ukraine as an important source of labour force.

At a press conference after the talks, Paroubek said that the Czech Republic
had a strong interest in the development of the Ukrainian energy industry.
[Passage omitted] He described as promising cooperation in saving energy
sources.

Paroubek said that Ukraine could rely on the Czech Republic’s support after
its parliamentary elections that are due at the end of March. He said that
the Ukrainian prime minister assured him that his country would continue its
pro-European orientation and gradual integration with Trans-Atlantic
organizations. Yekhanurov said that the Czech Republic’s support for Ukraine
in its rapprochement to the EU was very important. [Passage omitted]

Paroubek described the question of the Ukrainian debt to the Czech Republic
as the only long-term open question in Czech- Ukrainian relations. “We have
agreed on a system how to proceed in this question,” he said.

The Ukrainian parliament should ratify by the end of the current election
term an agreement on cooperation in the industry, science and technologies.
A mixed commission will be established as part of the agreement that will
deal with the problem of the debt, he said. According to the Ukrainian prime
minister, the amount of the debt has not yet been calculated precisely.

——————————————————————————————-
[ return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
11.CENTRAL EUROPEAN NEIGHBOURS BACK UKRAINE’S NATO
AND EUROPEAN UNION BID, THE VISEGRAD FOUR

TV 5 Kanal, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1800 gmt 21 Feb 06
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Tue, Feb 21, 2006

KYIV – [Presenter] The European Union is waiting for Ukraine, the member
states of the Visegrad Four are convinced. Representatives of neighbouring
Poland, Hungary and Slovakia promise Ukraine to support its European
integration efforts.

[Correspondent] An international meeting was dedicated to the 15th
anniversary of the Visegrad Four. Nowadays this union is considered to be
one of the most successful in Europe. Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia
and Hungary are members of the two biggest blocs at the same time – NATO
and the EU. They protect their interests as a group because the four
neighbouring state have similar problems and their solutions.

[Rafal Wisniewski, Polish Undersecretary of State, in English, overlaid with
Ukrainian] At the beginning of the 1990s no-one in Poland could think of its
becoming a member of NATO or the EU. Then we were beyond Europe and
even joked that Asia starts 40 km to the south of Krakow. But these stereotypes
were ruined under the pressure of political and economic progress.

[Correspondent] Ukraine considers the Four’s way to the EU as a paragon.
During its long way to the EU Ukraine will also need to start from NATO
membership. Ukrainian Foreign Minister [Borys Tarasyuk] is convinced that
the most important thing is the integrity of political elites, and if they
change, the chosen course should remain unchanged.

[Tarasyuk] If we speak about the Visegrad group as a group of countries that
are members of the EU and NATO, I can say without any exaggeration that this
is a group of friends of Ukraine with all ensuing consequences.

[Correspondent] The Visegrad Four has been demonstrating its friendly
intentions for several years so far. They cooperate in several fields at
once. The most active cooperation is in the military and defence sector with
regard to the closest prospects for NATO.

The members of the Visegrad Four would like to see Ukraine as an equal
neighbour, but they hint that this will happen when most people in Ukraine
strive for this.

[Magda Vasaryova, Slovak Secretary of State, in English, overlaid with
Ukrainian] We are ready to help you because we see Ukraine as an equal
member of both NATO and the EU. We want our closest neighbours to move
along the same road with us, however what is most important here is your
willingness. If today’s course remains unchanged, I think Ukraine will soon
become a member of both NATO and the EU.

[Correspondent] Ukrainian officials want to improve the partnership with the
Visegrad Four by increasing the number of its members to five, however the
format of cooperation remains the same. The Visegrad Four members still do
not see Ukraine even as an observer country. -30-
——————————————————————————————-
[return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
If you are receiving more than one copy of the AUR please contact us.
========================================================
12. UKRAINIAN PRES MEETS NORWEGIAN TELECOM EXECUTIVES

UNIAN news agency, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1558 gmt 21 Feb 06
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Tuesday, Feb 21, 2006

Kiev, 21 February: President Viktor Yushchenko and representatives of the
Norwegian company Telenor, [Executive Vice-President] Jan Thygesen and
[Senior Executive Vice-President] Torstein Moland, have discussed the
company’s plans on the Ukrainian investment market. The presidential press
service said that during the meeting the issue of Ukraine’s socio-economic
development over the last year was discussed.

Thygesen and Moland gave a high assessment of Ukraine’s economic
achievements, in particular, the improvement in the investment climate.
Yushchenko said that he supports Telenor’s plans to expand its range of
services and increase their quality.

The meeting was also attended by Transport and Communications Minister
Viktor Bondar, Kyivstar director Ihor Lytovchenko, and the acting head of
the main service for social-economic policy, Pavlo Haydutskyy.

Telenor specializes in cellular, satellite and fixed-line communications, as
well as TV broadcasting. The company is one of the biggest investors in the
domestic cellular communications market, and owns a 56.5-per-cent stake in
Kyivstar GSM. [Passage omitted: more about Kyivstar] -30-
——————————————————————————————-
[ return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
========================================================
13. LARGE FOREIGN BANKS IN UKRAINE IMPROVE UKRAINE’S
INVESTMENT ATTRACTIVENESS, SAY EXPERTS

Interfax-Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, February 21, 2006

KYIV – The presence of foreign banking capital increases the investment
attractiveness of Ukraine, according to the coordinator of projects by the
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) Viktor
Marchenko. “The more direct foreign investments we have, the better it is
[for Ukraine],” Marchenko told the press in an interview.

“Everybody knows such banks as BNP, Intesa, and Raiffeisen. When others
see how these banks buy something here, in Ukraine, and pay large sum of
money to be represented here, it confirms that these banks see the investment
attractiveness of our country.”

Marchenko said that among other positive results of foreign capital’s
presence in the Ukrainian banking sector are the raising of assets and the
guarantee of access to the international financial markets, as well as
better management, from credit issuing to software, which will allow the
more effective issuing of credits and management of risk and expenditures.

“These banks will propose new services for individuals, primarily, through
new credit products. Everybody expects attractive interest rates. Other
banks, taking the leaders of the market as an example, will improve their
procedures and processes.

Competition will rise, which will lead to more attractive conditions for
issuing credits to individuals,” the expert said.

The member of the financial committee in the parliament, MP Dmytro
Sviatash said that in the long-term perspective, foreign banking capital is
profitable both for industry and the population.

“The reliability of the banking system will grow considerably, interest
rates will fall to some extent, so one will be able to receive credit
resources at less interest rates and for longer period,” he told the press.

“New banking products will appear – those which are not at present developed
enough in Ukraine, for example, the financing of export agreements with
small tariffs and the financing of import agreements.” According to him, tax
payments from activity of such banks will grow. “Such banks always pay all
taxes. There will be another standard in paying taxes by these banks,” he
said.

Sviatash said that the Ukrainian banks that are not prepared to operate to
the new standards won’t be able to compete with foreign banks. “Other
banks will enter the top ten and top twenty of Ukraine’s banks,” he said.

“The public and business will win if large foreign banks come to Ukraine.
Domestic and Western banks will compete, and it could lead to a fall in
interest rates,” according to the head expert of the department for economic
policy of the Ukrainian Manufacturers and Entrepreneurs Union, Serhiy
Pukas. -30-
——————————————————————————————-
[ return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
14. FDI’S IN UKRAINE IN 2005 HIT A RECORD HIGH OF $7.33 BN
Steel mill brings in 4.8 billion, Aval Bank brings in 1.03 billion

Interfax-Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, February 21, 2006

KYIV – The growth of foreign direct investments (FDIs) in Ukraine in 2005
hit a record high of $7.328 billion, which was 4.7 times up on 2004, the
State Statistics Committee reported on Tuesday.

The overall amount of FDIs in Ukraine by January 1, 2006, had amounted to
$16.375 billion, which was 81% up on the figure registered by January 1,
2005, or $349 per capita.

As the State Statistics Committee reported, in 2005 foreign investors
injected $7.868 billion in direct investments into Ukraine’s economy, while
withdrew $375.2 million in direct investments from Ukraine.

The FDI growth in the fourth quarter of 2005 alone was estimated at $6.843
billion, while in the third – $440.9 million, in the second – $264 million,
and in the first – $227.2 million.

The experts explain the high pace of the FDI growth in the fourth quarter
of 2005 by the privatization sale of Kryvorizhstal steel mill to Mittal Steel
Germany GmbH for $4.8 billion and the private sale of Aval Bank to
Raiffeisenbank of Austria for $1.03 billion in October 2005. -30-
——————————————————————————————-
[ return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
15. EBRD MAY LEND TO DNIPROPETROVSK, KHARKIV, DONETSK,
HEATING NETWORKS & KHARKIV WATER TREATMENT UTILITY

Interfax-Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, February 21, 2006

KYIV – The Board of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development
(EBRD) Directors plans to consider loans in 2006 to heating networks in
Kharkiv, Donetsk and Dnipropetrovsk and a Kharkiv water treatment utility,
the EBRD said.

In particular, Kharkivski Teplomerezhi, Donetsk-based Teplomerezha,
Dnipropetrovsk municipal heating networks and KharkivKommunOchystVod
may get from EUR 10 million to EUR 20 million each.

The EBRD Board will consider a EUR 10 million loan under the EUR 14
million project to KharkivKommunOchystVod and a EUR 15 million loan
under the EUR 18.6 million project to Kharkivski Teplomerezhi on April 25.

A EUR 20 million loan to Donetsk-based Teplomerezha under a EUR 26
million project will be considered on May 16, 2006, and a EUR 15 million
loan to Dnipropetrovsk municipal heating network under a EUR 17 million
project will be considered on September 5.

The loans to the thermal suppliers will finance the rehabilitation and
modernization of existing district heating distribution network and the
introduction of new, compact Individual Heating Sub-stations in residential
apartment buildings equipped with meters. The investments and institutional
reforms are expected to achieve significant cost savings and greater
efficiency.

The proceeds of the loan to be provided to KharkivKommunOchystVod
would be used to finance priority capital investments to improve the municipal
wastewater infrastructure and services in the city, which will contribute
significantly to decreasing the level of polluting discharges into the
Siverskyi Donets River and the Azov Sea basin.

Anton Usov, the press secretary of the EBRD representative office in Kyiv,
told Interfax-Ukraine on Monday that the loan projects for Kharkiv’s heat
networks and water treatment utility, as well as to Donetsk’s heat networks,
are nearing completion and are most likely to be approved in the first half
of 2006. -30-
——————————————————————————————-
[ return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
16. DOUBTS RAISED ON UKRAINE ECONOMIC GROWTH

By Stefan Wagstyl, Financial Times, London, UK, Wed, February 22 2006

LONDON – Oleksandr Savchenko, deputy governor of Ukraine’s central
bank, said at a Financial Times conference in London yesterday that the gas
price dispute with Russia and hotly disputed upcoming parliamentary
elections were raising fears over the country’s growth prospects.

He said there would be no official growth forecasts for 2006 until later in
the year. Ukraine has seen a sharp increase in gas import prices since a new
Russian deal at the start of the year, which led to parliament sacking the
government in a move president Victor Yushchenko ignored.

Mr Savchenko said his estimate for gross domestic product growth in 2006
was 4 to 5 per cent, up from 2.4 per cent last year.

But Volodymyr Ignasenko, deputy economy minister, said he expected
2.5 to 3 per cent. Other ministers have put the figure at 2 per cent and the
World Bank has predicted 1.5-2 per cent. -30-
——————————————————————————————-
[return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
17. YUSHCHENKO VETOES LAW BANNING PRIVATIZATION
OF 50%+1 SHARE IN NIKOPOL FERROALLOY PLANT

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv,Ukraine, Monday, February 20, 2006

KYIV – President Viktor Yuschenko has vetoed the law banning privatization
of 50%+1 share in the Nikopol ferroalloy plant (Dnipropetrovsk region). The
presidential press service made the statement.

According to the president’s suggestions, opinion of the Cabinet of
Ministers was not taken into account in the parliament’s decision to ban
privatization of the plant, while, according to article 5 of the law of
privatization of state property, the list of state-owned facilities not
subject to privatization is to be approved by the Verkhovna Rada upon the
suggestion of the Cabinet of Ministers.

Yuschenko also notes that, according to the state privatization program, if
sales and purchase agreements on privatization are terminated because of
failure to meet the terms or if these agreements are declared invalid by
court, the funds paid by the purchaser should be returned to him. However,
the national budget for 2006 does not envisage the costs for return of this
sum to the former owner of 50%+1 share in the Nikopol ferroalloy plant.

As Ukrainian News reported earlier, on February 9, the Verkhovna Rada
passed a bill banning privatization of 50%+1 share in Nikopol ferroalloy plant.
Bill 9041 on amendments to the law of the list of state-owned facilities not
subject to privatization received support of 287 MPs with a necessary
minimum of 226 votes required to pass it.

Acting Prime Minister Yurii Yekhanurov ordered the State Property Fund to
draft and submit to the Cabinet of Ministers by February 25 a project for
the sale of 50%+1 share in the Nikopol ferroalloy plant, which under a court
verdict must be returned to the state.

Meanwhile, State Property Fund’s Chairwoman Valentyna Semeniuk said that
this order cannot be implemented because the plant’s shares have not yet
been transferred into the accounts of the State Property Fund.

The Cabinet of Ministers won a lawsuit in which it argued that the
privatization of the NFP was illegal and a procedure has been launched with
the aim of returning to the state the 50%+1 share of the plant that earlier
belonged to the Prydniprovia concern.

Prydniprovia’s shares in the Nikopol ferroalloy plant are presently frozen
in accounts with Ukrsotsbank, which performs the function of a depository
for the shares. Interpipe, which controls Prydniprovia, holds about 73% of
the shares in the NFP, while the Pryvatbank group controls about 26% of the
shares. -30-
——————————————————————————————-
[ return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
You are welcome to send us names for the AUR distribution list.
========================================================
18. CIS BANKS REVIEW ISSUED – COMPARISON OF ALL MAJOR
BANKS CIS COUNTRIES IN TERMS OF ASSET VALUE
Ukraine’s largest bank, Privatbank, is ranked number 14
.

Interfax Center for Economic Analysis (Interfax-CEA)
Moscow, Russia, Thursday, February 16, 2006

MOSCOW – The Interfax Center for Economic Analysis (Interfax-CEA) has
issued the Interfax-1000 – CIS Banks review, which for the first time
enables a comparison of all the major banks in Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan
and other CIS countries in terms of asset value and other financial indicators.

“Banking systems in CIS countries are becoming less disconnected and the
flow of bank capital from one country to another is becoming stronger,”
Interfax-CEA General Director Mikhail Matovnikov said. “The time has come
when for many banks it is a mistake to view them solely within national
borders and without an understanding of the wider context it is impossible
to understand the development trend of different banking systems,” he said.

The top three banks in the Interfax-1000 are Russia’s Sberbank,
Vneshtorgbank and Gazprombank and the top ten includes two Kazakh banks
(Kazkommertsbank and Bank TuranAlem). Ukraine’s largest bank, Privatbank,
is ranked number 14.

The list has information on assets, capital, loan portfolios and funds
raised for 1,000 CIS banks (815 Russian and 185 banks from other CIS
countries) as of July 1 2005 and January 1 2005. The review also contains a
short description of banking systems in Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan,
Belarus, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Moldova.
———————————————————————————————
The Center for Economic Analysis is an analytical center, which is part of
the Interfax International Group and provides macroeconomic forecasts,
analyses the situation on financial markets and regional economies, and
reports on tendencies in the money market in Russia and the Commonwealth
of Independent States.

The CEA’s most popular editions are rankings of Russia’s largest banks and
insurance companies, known as Interfax-100, highly reputed among players
on the financial market.

Contacts: Interfax-CEA, 2 Pervaya Tverskaya-Yamskaya Ul., Moscow,
127006, Russia, Tel. +7 (495) 250-8036, E-mail: cea@interfax.ru, General
Director: Mikhail Matovnikov.

——————————————————————————————-
[ return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
19. UKRAINE: WINTER GRAIN CROPS SUFFER MAJOR DAMAGE

AgriNews, AKP-Inform, Dnipropetrovsk, Ukraine, Mon, Feb 20, 2006

Over 30 percent of winter wheat and some 50 percent of winter barley in
Ukraine will have to be re-seeded, head of agro-meteorological dept. at
Ukrainian weather centre Tetyana Adamenko said to media on Friday. The
conclusion has been made after obtaining monolith growing tests of the
plant samples, taken from fields after the first wave of frosts on January 27.

The researchers have also notes a considerable loss rate of winter rye,
which is uncharacteristic for this crop of rather high frost-resistance. “It
(rye) is frost-resistant in case of normal development. But if the planting
was late or if the plants are on the seed-sprouting or the initial shooting
stages, the frost-resistance is considerably hurt,” Adamenko said.

She said that January’s frosts had been extremely destructive for the
frost-sensitive rapeseeds, but the weather centre did not have the exact
data because no observation of this crop was being made.

The crop losses are registered nearly all over the territory of the country.
“The damaged fields are everywhere. It can be said now that the winter crops
development will be extremely uneven. When the snow had fallen, there were
strong winds, and the snow cover turned to be patchy,” Ms. Adamenko said.
She said that the crop condition was a little bit better in the west and
north-west of the country.

The weather centre specialists say these data are not the final ones. The
next monolith growing test results will most probably display further
increase of the crop loss rate. According to statistics data, winter cereals
for grain and green feed uses (rapeseeds not included) for the 2006 crop
were sown in Ukraine on 6.194 million hectares – down 18.8 percent from the
year before. The drop in the sown area is accounted to extremely dry
conditions in autumn 2005. -30-

——————————————————————————————-
[ return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
20. PROFILE OF UKRAINIAN INDUSTRIALIST VITALY HAYDUK

BBC Monitoring research in English 21 Feb 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Tue, Feb 21, 2006

Vitaliy Hayduk is a wealthy Ukrainian industrialist and former deputy prime
minister in the administration of president Leonid Kuchma. Hayduk appears
to be the owner of a 49.99-per-cent stake in the Industrial Union of Donbas
(IUD), a diversified holding company that controls around 40 industrial
assets in Ukraine and abroad.

He served as Ukrainian deputy prime minister for energy in the Viktor
Yanukovych cabinet from November 2002 to December 2003. His sacking
was widely linked to his opposition to Russian-backed energy projects in
Ukraine, including the creation of the gas transit consortium and the
reversal of the Odessa-Brody pipeline.

After his dismissal, Hayduk reportedly built ties with the then opposition
led by Viktor Yushchenko. After Yushchenko’s victory in the presidential
election in 2004 it was rumoured that IUD had helped finance his campaign,
and in early 2005 Hayduk was widely viewed as a likely contender for a top
cabinet post or the Donetsk regional governorship.

At the launch of a new casting machine at the Alchevsk steelworks in August,
Yushchenko praised IUD as a positive example of open and transparent
investment policy.

On 30 December 2005, in the middle of the gas crisis with Russia, President
Viktor Yushchenko announced that he would appoint Hayduk deputy prime
minister for fuel and energy.

In a TV interview, Yushchenko described Hayduk as a “very gifted person”,
and said he would be put in charge of the energy sector, the Fuel and Energy
Ministry, the coal industry and energy saving, with a goal to make sure that
Ukraine “has an independent energy balance in four years’ time”.

However, the decree to this effect was never published. IUD co-owner Serhiy
Taruta, who vehemently opposed the new gas deal signed with Russia on 4
January 2006, has said that an “energy lobby” including Fuel and Energy
Minister Ivan Plachkov and Naftohaz Ukrayiny state oil and gas company
chairman Oleksiy Ivchenko persuaded Yushchenko not to sign the decree.

In an interview with the BBC in January 2006, Hayduk criticized the gas deal
with Russia, saying Ukraine should have insisted on keeping the gas price
unchanged based on existing contracts. He suggested that the Ukrainian
negotiators had mishandled the talks and failed to secure gas transit rights
from Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, effectively cutting off the Turkmen gas
option.

He predicted heavy economic fallout from rising gas prices, and said he had
no explanation for the fact that despite the presidential announcement the
decree on his appointment had never been released. He added though that
following the signing of the gas deal with Russia, he considered himself
free of any obligations regarding his work in the government.

Following the rise in gas prices, Hayduk said IUD steel plants would invest
heavily in energy-saving technologies and replace gas with coal in its
blast-furnace production cycle.

The web site Ukrayinska Pravda reported rumours that Hayduk has fine
relations with Yushchenko’s former secretary and trusted aide Very
Ulyanchenko, who was said to have lobbied for Hayduk’s appointment.

In September 2005, a Ukrainian paper said Hayduk was the deputy head of
a working group in the Ukrainian government negotiating gas supplies with
Russia’s Gazprom at the time, but he does not appear to have had any role
in subsequent negotiations.

On 9 February 2006, the specialist energy web site www.pek.com.ua quoted
sources in Hayduk’s Evolution Media holding as saying that Hayduk was
harbouring presidential ambitions. The source added that Hayduk had been
showing keen interest in various political projects over the previous two
months.

It said six people close to Hayduk, including former Energy Minister Serhiy
Yermilov, were running for parliament on the list of the Eco+25 party (which
has little chance of clearing the 3-per-cent threshold but could win some
seats in regional councils in eastern Ukraine), and his allies were on the
lists of several other parties.
IUD
IUD’s core activities are the production of steel, pipes and coke, and heavy
engineering. In addition, it is active in the power engineering,
construction, telecommunications, leisure and agricultural sectors. It also
trades metal products, coal, coke and natural gas.

For 2004, the company reported revenues of 12bn hryvnyas ( 2.4bn dollars) and
a profit of 2bn hyrvnyas. Another 49.99-per-cent stake in the IUD is owned
by Serhiy Taruta, who is also the chairman of the board of directors,
through his company Azovimpeks.

Hayduk is also the president of the Industrial Group consortium, an asset
management company set up by IUD in 2004. The remaining 0.02 per cent of
IUD is controlled by the Donetsk company Oniks-Don, the ownership of
which is unclear.

Hayduk has tended to be seen as the senior partner in the corporation, and
Taruta was for a long time largely invisible in the post of executive
director. Formerly highly secretive, IUD gradually became more open after
Taruta was appointed board chairman in 2002. He has since become its public
face.

Set up in 1995, IUD appears to have been initially intended to supply gas to
Donbass plants through highly-lucrative barter arrangements. In 1996, IUD
delivered 5.5bn cu.m. of gas to industrial consumers, and arranged a closed
production cycle encompassing coal, coke, steel and pipes. The pipes were
delivered to Russia in exchange for gas.

As Taruta put it in a 2003 interview, “IUD gradually became an enormous
clearing centre, which solved problems in the commercial life of many
industrial enterprises in the region.”

It has been suggested that the formation of IUD was initiated by Donetsk
businessmen Akhat Brahin (who had been assassinated in October 1995) and
MP Yevhen Shcherban to resist encroachment on Donbass industry by gas
suppliers from neighbouring Dnipropetrovsk region. IUD was reportedly
protected by Donetsk governor Volodymyr Shcherban.

In the summer of 1996, IUD and its backers came into direct conflict with
then Prime Minister Pavlo Lazarenko. Volodymyr Shcherban was dismissed
as governor and replaced by a Lazarenko loyalist. Yevhen Shcherban was
assassinated in November 2006. Meanwhile, the Dnipropetrovsk-based trader
United Energy Systems of Ukraine, then headed by Yuliya Tymoshenko,
squeezed IUD out of the Donbass gas market.

However, Kuchma appears to have been frightened by Lazarenko’s growing
power. After dismissing him in summer 1997, Kuchma restored the local elite
to power in Donetsk Region, granting them virtual economic autonomy in
exchange for political loyalty.

Meanwhile, IUD survived and shifted to a coal-coke-metal production cycle,
the foundation of all the corporation’s business. IUD was also gaining
control over many of the region’s plants by buying shares from the State
Property Fund or through debt-for-equity swaps.

By 2000, IUD and its partner firms Dongorbank, ARS and Danco had acquired
control over Azovstal, Khartsyzsk pipe plant, Mariupol coke plant
(Markokhim), and the Alchevsk, Makiyivka and Kostyanivka steelworks, plus
most of the region’s profitable coal mines. By 2003 the IUD had gradually
moved away from barter and by that time all settlements were in monetary
form.

The company was for a long time associated with Donetsk businessman Rinat
Akhmetov, who succeeded Brahin as president of the Shakhtar football club
and appears to have inherited his business empire. However, Akhmetov has
always denied being a shareholder in IUD, though he has been a partner of
the corporation in operating a number of plants.

From 2002, a company set up by Akhmetov, System Capital Management,
began to take control over some of IUD’s most lucrative assets. These included
Azovstal, Khartsyzsk pipe plant (in which Taruta said IUD had invested 80m
dollars), Markokhim, Dongorbank and the coal mines. IUD was left with
Alchevsk steelworks, stakes in a number of engineering plants, and some
foreign assets including Uzbek oil and gas construction company
Uzneftegazstroy.

IUD appears to have used the cash windfall from these deals to acquire
numerous assets in Ukraine and abroad, including the Dniprodzherzhynsk-
based Dzherzhynskyy steelworks, the Dunaferr and Diosgyori Acelmuvek
steelworks in Hungary, and the Huta Czestochowa steelworks in Poland.

In 2004, IUD took part in the first tender for Kryzorizhstal steelworks,
losing out to a consortium formed by Akhmetov and Kuchma’s son-in-law,
Viktor Pinchuk. IUD also made a bid for Kryvorizhstal in the repeat tender
in October 2005 in alliance with Luxembourg-registered Arcelor, but lost to
Mittal Steel.

IUD reportedly owns a stake in the moderately pro-opposition NTN television
channel – which is linked to Eduard Prutnyk, a former adviser to Party of
Regions leader Viktor Yanukovych. It is also reported to control the ProUA
web site and the English language newspaper Kiev Weekly through the
Evolution Media holding.

Hayduk is also said to be financing the PRT (Praym Taym) communications
group (Ukraina Kriminalnaya website, Kiev, in Russian 11 Nov 05).

IUD is involved in philanthropic and cultural projects, including
sponsorship of opera productions in Donetsk.
RECORD IN GOVERNMENT
Hayduk was appointed to the pro-Kuchma coalition government of Viktor
Yanukovych on 26 November 2002, formally under the quota of the United
Social Democratic Party but representing Donetsk business interests.

He was distinctly unenthusiastic about Russian-sponsored joint energy
projects, and was spectacularly fired by Kuchma on 5 December 2003,
apparently bypassing proper procedure, within a few hours after giving a
news conference. In it he said there was no economic justification for using
the Odessa-Brody pipeline, originally built for carrying Caspian oil to
Europe, to pump Russian crude to Odessa instead.

He said there were other ways to meet Russia’s increased demand for oil
transit capacity, and argued that the pipeline should serve its original
purpose of reducing Ukraine’s dependence on Russian oil. He also said there
was no need for a joint Russian-Ukrainian consortium to manage the Ukrainian
gas transit system, as Ukraine was perfectly capable to do that on its own.
Russia reacted swiftly, saying Hayduk’s statements were his “private
opinion”, and Kuchma’s decree sacking him was released on the same day.

Hayduk’s position was praised by opposition figure Yuliya Tymoshenko,
although Hayduk appeared to have played a role in her own dismissal from the
post of deputy prime minister for fuel and energy in the Yushchenko cabinet
in 2000.

Russia eventually succeeded in pushing though its proposal to reverse the
flow of oil in Odessa-Brody, but failed to make any progress on the gas
transit consortium.

Prior to his appointment as deputy prime minister he served as deputy energy
minister and then minister of fuel and energy in January 2000-November 2002.

BIOGRAPHY
Hayduk was born in 19 July 1957 in the village of Khlibodarivka, Volnovakha
District, Donetsk Region. In 1980 he graduated from the Donetsk
Polytechnical Institute with a diploma in machine-building. In 1997-2000 he
was the head of the closed joint stock company Vizavi.
In 1994-1997 he served as the deputy head of the Donetsk Regional council,
and then deputy head of the Donetsk Regional State Administration (deputy
governor) in charge of industry, transport and communications. In 1988-1994
he was the director of the Zuyevsky power-engineering plant.
In 1981-1988 he worked for the Donetsk regional service centre of the VAZ
car manufacturer, working his way up to deputy director.
Hayduk has a PhD in economics, and is a member of the Academy of
Economic Sciences of Ukraine. He is married, and has a son and a daughter.
——————————————————————————————-
[ return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
Please contact us if you no longer wish to receive the AUR
========================================================
21. UKRAINE TRIES TO DEFEND DEPORTATION OF UZBEKS
LINKED TO UPRISING
Human rights watchdogs do not agree with Ukraine’s decision

Associated Press (AP), Kiev, Ukraine, Tue, February 21, 2006

KIEV – Ukraine Tuesday defended the deportation of 10 Uzbeks allegedly
involved in last year’s uprising in Uzbekistan, a move that human rights
groups said called into question the government’s democratic credentials.

Ukrainian authorities detained the 10 earlier this month in two Crimean
cities as a part of an operation to fight illegal migration. They were
deported last Tuesday. Friday, the U.N. refugee agency slammed the
deportation and demanded urgent clarification from Ukraine.

Vasyl Filipchuk, a spokesman for Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry, said the Uzbeks
were deported because they violated Ukraine’s law on migration and on the
status of foreigners. The Uzbeks, who arrived in Ukraine last May, only
applied for asylum earlier this month and refused to appeal a local court
decision to send them home, Filipchuk said.

Ukrainian human rights watchdogs claimed Ukraine deported the Uzbeks at
Uzbekistan’s request. “Ukraine committed a crime against human rights,
violated international standards and its international obligations,” said
Natalia Dulneva, head of Amnesty International’s Ukrainian mission.

“Ukraine should have defended those people, but it sent them (to a place)
where they can face torture and, perhaps, death,” she added. Dulneva said
that the Uzbeks were arrested in Uzbekistan after being deported and nobody
knows their exact location.

Analyst Serhiy Taran of the Kiev-based International Institute of Democracy
said that it was a “democracy exam which Ukraine didn’t pass.”

The May 2004 uprising in the eastern Uzbek city of Andijan erupted when
militants seized a prison and freed 23 businessmen on trial for alleged
Islamic extremism. Rights groups and witnesses said hundreds were killed
during the crackdown that ensued. The government accused Islamic militants
of instigating the violence, and said 187 people died.

In the past four months, Uzbek courts have convicted 151 people in
closed-door trials criticized by human rights groups as a
government-orchestrated show using evidence coerced by torture.

——————————————————————————————–
[ return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
22. UKRAINE: OUR UKRAINE BLOC AGAINST EXTENDING
MORATORIUM ON FARMLAND SALES

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, February 20, 2006

KYIV – The Our Ukraine Election Bloc is against prolonging the moratorium
on farmland sales. Ukrainian News has learned this from bloc representative
and MP Ksenia Liapina. “The sooner we open the land market, the better it
will be,” she said.

Liapina noted the cancellation of the farmland sale moratorium does not mean
that foreign investors will start buying land on a large scale. “The market
of non-agricultural land was opened a long time ago, nevertheless it’s not
occupied by foreign investors, and domestic owners are dominating on the
market,” she said.

Liapina said the formation of the farmland market would stimulate the inflow
of private investments into agriculture. “It is private investments that
will allow raising the agrarian industry ‘from knees’ and will give a chance
to Ukrainian farmers to effectively compete on the world market,” she said.

As Ukrainian News earlier reported, the Socialist Party is speaking out in
support of extension of the moratorium on farmland sale until 2012.

In November 2005, President Viktor Yuschenko ordered the Cabinet of
Ministers to work out a concept for the formation and development of land
market. Former President Leonid Kuchma signed the law on amendments to
the Land Code of Ukraine in late 2004, which envisaged extension of the
moratorium on the sale of farmland by January 1, 2007. -20-
——————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
23. “APPLICATION FOR EU MEMBERSHIP LIKE REQUEST
FOR POLITICAL ASYLUM”
Seek EU membership to avoid Russian control
Russia will not “adopt” Ukraine – it will take advantage of Ukraine.

ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY : By Oleh Runak
Glavred, Kiev, in Russian 0000 gmt 6 Feb 06
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Tue, Feb 21, 2006

Ukraine has done little to realize its eight-year-old priority of joining
the EU, and it missed the chance to apply for EU membership when it was in
a more advantageous position, an article posted on a website has suggested.

Citing figures showing Ukrainian commodity exports to the EU had dropped
while EU imports had risen, the website said that despite the Orange
Revolution bringing a European mood to Ukraine, the country had gained
little from partnership with the EU.

However, the report urged Ukraine to apply for EU membership immediately,
suggesting that the alternative was control by Russia.

The following is an excerpt from the article by Oleh Runak entitled
“Application for EU membership like request for political asylum” posted on
the Ukrainian website Glavred on 6 February; subheadings have been inserted
editorially; ellipsis as received:

A year ago Ukraine had every chance of competing with Turkey over who
would be first to become a full member of the EU.

Captivated Europe, for whom the fall of the Berlin wall and the velvet
revolutions of the end of the 1980s made history, observed Ukrainian
Maydan [Square protests leading to the Orange Revolution] spellbound.

[Passage omitted: some Europeans came to join the protests; European
newspapers wrote a lot about the Orange Revolution, polls show Europeans
are keen to see Ukraine as EU members]

The main achievement of the Orange Revolution so far (in many ways
justifiably) is considered the radical multi-level Europeanization of
Ukraine, the desire of the Ukrainian people to live in a European way, which
is embodied in real steps.

Following the logic of the European Neighbourhood Policy, it would appear
that the EU should be assisting Ukraine materially, or in any case actively
contributing to boosting our relations, primarily economic.
UKRAINE LOSING OUT IN TRADE WITH EU
What do we see from the State Statistics Committee results up to the end of
November 2005, which have been published? Exports of Ukrainian commodities
to Europe fell by more than 6.5 per cent, while as a whole they (imports [as
received; presumably exports]) rose by more than 5.5 per cent, with a rise
of 26.1 per cent to CIS states, 28.18 per cent to Russia, 60 per cent to
Belarus and 7.61 per cent to Kazakhstan.

This is in a situation when commodities make up 83 per cent of all Ukrainian
exports. A question springs to mind: in what direction did we really
integrate last year? Towards the EU? Or in the other direction?

To be fair, we should note that imports of commodities from Europe to
Ukraine grew by 27.9 per cent, with a total growth in commodity imports of
24.6 per cent and a growth in imports from the CIS of just 12.1 per cent.
This is the asymmetry that we are getting. What does it indicate?

The EU has signed agreements on free trade zones with Balkan and
Mediterranean states allowing European markets to be opened to commodities
from those states as soon as these agreements come into force, with a
gradual, phase-by-phase opening of these countries’ markets to commodities
from the EU. (When I say opening the markets, I mean abolishing import
duties.)

This “preferential asymmetry” in the EU’s trade relations was practised in
the 1990s and towards states in the last wave of expansion. This made it
possible for the economies of EU partner states to avoid shocks as they
integrated with one of the most powerful world markets, to attract
investment (rather than commodities) and in the long run it boosted the
competitiveness of the national economies.

In Ukraine the neighbourhood policy has so far borne results which are the
direct opposite: an exporting state is turning into an importer. Even with
an increase in quotas in 2005 for the main category of goods Ukraine exports
to the EU – non-precious metals and goods made from them – our commodity
balance with the EU has turned from slightly positive to very negative.

The trade asymmetry with the EU is plainly not going Ukraine’s way: in 2005
we significantly liberalized import duties, including for European goods,
but the EU is not hurrying to respond with a liberalization for Ukrainian
goods.

The situation is somewhat reminiscent of the visa situation, incidentally:
Ukraine has abolished visas for EU citizens, but the EU has not even eased
visa requirements for Ukrainians, demanding in exchange for the abolition of
visas a fairly tough agreement on readmission.

All that has been said indicates that the EU still does not view Ukraine as
a potential member of the Union. Or if it does, then only theoretically. One
clear illustration of this is the volume of EU assistance to Ukraine and to
our neighbour, Poland, which has a population of nearly 10m and a territory
just over half the size of Ukraine.

The combined assistance of the EU to Ukraine over the last 10 years has been
1.072bn euros. Financial plans recently adopted by the EU for 2007-13 (for
eight years) set out 59.6bn euros for Poland to receive from EU structural
funds. The figures are too eloquent to comment on.
MISSED OPPORTUNITIES
Nevertheless, all the “asymmetry” in relations with the EU would be no
tragedy if Ukraine was a strong, independent state, capable of taking a
tough stance in standing up for its national interests – like Ataturk’s
Turkey, for example.

At the end of the day, Turkey – over whose future membership of the EU there
is still a big question mark – is showing growth in GDP that is unattainable
not only for EU veterans but also for the new EU members, who are literally
pumped up with investment and financing from structural funds.

This is in a situation when from 1 January 2006 the minimum wage in Turkey
became 332.26 euros, which indicates foundations of the Turkish economic
miracle which are very different from the Chinese ones!

The Ukrainian economy – taking advantage of gas prices which were at dumping
level by European standards and which were enshrined until recently in
medium-term agreements with Russia and Turkmenistan – used to be in a
well-founded position to think out and carry out a strategy of expansion
into certain sectors of the European market.

Understanding and making use of all the advantages of its unique
geopolitical position, the ideology of the European Neighbourhood Policy
outlined above and also the weak points of the sluggish EU bureaucracy
machine, Ukraine could have achieved a lot – on condition that it had a
clear idea of what it was aiming for and was ready to fight effectively for
its interests.

Unfortunately, it has to be stated that Ukraine does not today need strong
sparring partners but a sick nurse and some stretcher bearers. January’s gas
policy on the part of the “pro-European” Ukrainian authorities surprised
even those who had already seen all kinds of adventurers under [former
President Leonid] Kuchma.

Decisions which are crucial to the country are not being taken either in
Europe or in China – or even in Belarus [but in Russia]. What is telling is
that there has not been a single move or a single statement about stepping
down from any ministers, whose position the gas dealers washed their hands
of. What kind of Europe can we talk about, then?
URGE TO APPLY FOR EU MEMBERSHIP
On the other hand, the EU is Ukraine’s only chance of not being decisively
embroiled in Eurasian “bondage”. The incapable need a guardian. A minor
needs a tutor. The weak need a defender. A drowning man needs a straw.

A year ago the trade-off for EU membership could have been a beautiful move
by the Ukrainian authorities, saying that they had taken a well-thought-out
strategic decision which would entrench forever the gains of the “dignity
revolution”, but now this can be nothing more than the cry of a drowning
man, a request for political asylum or a plea for adoption.

By all appearances, pro-European forces in the Ukrainian establishment (not
to be confused with pro-Swiss, already integrated into the economy of Zug
canton [where Rosukrenergo, the intermediary company in a gas deal signed in
January between Russia and Ukraine, has offices]!) have only just enough
time left.

Russia will not “adopt” Ukraine – it will take advantage of Ukraine. It will
take advantage not as a European power but “as a simple voracious victor”.

Understanding that, we should forget about standoffishness, about Brussels’s
requests not to pronounce the word “membership” until 2010 at the earliest,
about the fact that the EU now has a bellyful of its own problems – we have
to overcome the complex of flirting with Brussels and grasp at the European
straw – a drowning man does not care about the rules of etiquette.

This is all the more the case since we have a legal basis for putting in an
application to request membership: “Any European state which respects the
principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental
freedoms, and the rule of law may apply to become a member of the Union”
(Articles 6 and 49 of the Treaty on European Union).

[Article 6 states: “The Union is founded on the principles of liberty,
democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule
of law, principles which are common to the Member States.” Article 49
states: “Any European State which respects the principles set out in Article
6(1) may apply to become a member of the Union.”]

At the end of the day, what are we basically losing if we are refused (which
is unlikely) or if Brussels drags out examining our application for a long
and tedious time? Basically nothing! The UK was twice turned down for EEC
membership; Spain and Turkey also had to listen to a categorical “no” from
Brussels.

The UK and Spain have nevertheless long been in the EU, Turkey is holding
membership talks and Ukraine, which declared EU membership a main priority
in its domestic and foreign policy eight years ago, has still not got around
to taking even the first step to achieve its dream – formally declaring to
Brussels the content of that dream.
———————————————————————————————
[return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
24. 100,000 TULIPS APPEAR IN KYIV’S FLOWER BEDS THIS SPRING
Kyiv is a city of annuals and perennials,” Kyiashko insists. Kyiv is
also a city of begonias, ageratums, and especially marigolds.

By Viktoria HERASYMCHUK, The Day
The Day Weekly Digest in English, #5, Tuesday, 21 Feb 2006

Spring is just around the corner. Although weather forecasters are avoiding
long-term forecasts, promising only a slight increase in temperature for the
next days, there is no escaping spring. What will it be like in our capital?
Landscape developers know the answer to this question.

“I can assure you that spring will be wonderful as always,” The Day heard
from Valentyna Kyiashko, deputy chief of the landscaping department at
Kyiv’s municipal enterprise Kyivzelenbud. Contrary to what you might expect,
February is not the low season for landscape designers but a very hectic
period.

Before spring they have to plan all the details of the coming flower season.
Landscape developers get busy as the temperature rises in the city: they
have to clean up the flower beds and get the plants back into shape after
their winter sleep.

Some plants never wake after the winter because of the large amount of sand
mixed with salt on the roads. Salt leeches from sidewalks onto flower beds,
killing dormant flowers. Salt also kills linden and chestnut trees.

Although Kyivans love the fact that the chestnuts in their city bloom more
than once a year, that is actually a sign that these trees are in bad shape.
Every year Kyivzelenbud has to plant countless new trees to preserve Kyiv’s
status as a “green capital.”

Tulips will be the first to appear in Kyiv’s flower beds. Kyiashko says that
every year her department plants at least 100,000 tulips
. Often they have to
plant additional flowers, as the city residents and guests of the city are
not above stealing a few flowers or entire flower beds. They not only cut
the flowers, but dig out the bulbs. “It’s horrible.

When the country was better off economically, nobody would steal flowers.
We used to plant roses, and they would still be there the next day. Now they
steal no matter what you plant, even the most inconspicuous flowers. Let’s
hope that someday we will have economic prosperity, and people will stop
stealing,” says Kyiashko. This is quite an indicator of well-being.

On the other hand, the residents of Kyiv are eager to lend a hand in
cleaning up and planting flowers on lawns adjacent to their apartment
buildings. Spring is a season of community drives, including Environment
Day, Earth Day, and the “Sapling of the Future” holiday, which was
introduced by presidential order. “This is a time of joint community
efforts. People take to the streets en masse to clean up,” says Kyiashko.

But let us return to flowers. Hyacinths and crocuses appear at the same time
as tulips. Kyivans will also have an opportunity to enjoy traditional
springtime flower exhibits in parks and gardens. The themes and sketches
for these exhibits are already in the works.

“Unfortunately, Kyiv has no chief landscape architect, who could develop a
general concept for the city’s appearance,” says Oksana Dzhun, a famous
Kyiv landscape architect and the organizer of exhibits held on the hills
overlooking the Dnipro.

“Still, Kyiv is upholding its fine old traditions, such as patterned flower
beds, which are maintained the same way for years. It is much more difficult
to create a regular flower bed than one intended for an exhibition. My dream
is to decorate Independence Square with flower beds based on well
thought-out plans.”

Incidentally, the famous slogan “Kyiv is the city of tulips” is not entirely
accurate. “We are not a city of tulips! Kyiv is a city of annuals and
perennials,” Kyiashko insists. Kyiv is also a city of begonias, ageratums,
and especially marigolds.

Only the most absent-minded resident of Kyiv has not noticed that marigolds
are Kyiv’s main flower, which is Mayor Oleksandr Omelchenko’s favorite.
They bloom in any weather and are resistant to rain and cold. Marigolds
appear in Kyiv’s flower beds only in the summertime, so in springtime Kyiv
is truly a city of tulips. -30-
———————————————————————————————
LINK: http://www.day.kiev.ua/157880/

——————————————————————————————–
[ return to index] [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
25. ORANGE REVOLUTION BOOK: “CONSCIENCE CALLS”
Proceeds from Orange Revolution book helps orphans in Ukraine

Article By Orest Deychakiwsky
From the Foreword of “Conscience Calls” – Poklyk Sumlinnia
Washington, D.C., Winter, 2005-2006

RE: “CONSCIENCE CALLS”
Book by Roksolana Tymiak-Lonchyna
Privately Published, $30

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The word “historic” has become overused of late,
but there can be no doubt that Ukraine’s Orange Revolution was a triumphal
historic event for Ukraine.

It showed, beyond the shadow of a doubt, the determination of the people
of Ukraine to achieve their rights in a peaceful manner and to live in a
democratic, free and independent country. It was, indeed, an idea whose
time had come!

Throughout much of the last century, the Ukrainian people were subjected
to tremendous suffering, most notably the genocidal Ukrainian famine of
1932-33, perpetrated by foreign dictatorships and invaders.

The euphoria of long-awaited independence in 1991 did not bring with it full
freedom. Ukraine’s post-communist regimes were not able – or willing – to
shed the legacy of the past. Unrestrained corruption, including at the
highest levels, the suppression of media freedoms, the killing of
journalists, were all manifestations of the Kuchma regime’s contempt for the
people of Ukraine, and potentially exposed Ukraine’s vulnerability as an
independent state.

Numerous international observers, including the author of this manuscript,
observed the fair and transparent run-off elections which were held on
December 26 – the third nationwide election in two months. This election
stood in sharp contrast to the runoff held just 5 weeks earlier, an election
that was marked by widespread manipulation and outright falsification.

After that November 21 election, something unanticipated, something
monumental, something truly unprecedented occurred in Ukraine. The
Ukrainian people had had enough. I witnessed just one of many examples
of this as an OSCE international observer during the November 21 elections.

I was observing in the infamous Territorial Electoral Commission #100 in
Kirovohrad, in central Ukraine, which rightly earned the reputation as one
of the worst places with respect to election fraud in the first-round,
October 31 elections. It was there that I saw ordinary people standing up
for their rights, voicing their fervent desire “to live in a civilized
country.”

The very next day, in Kyiv, in reaction to the widespread fraud, I witnessed
the streets of the capital rapidly filling with thousands upon thousands of
men, women and children bedecked in orange. Clearly, the spirit of democracy
inspired Ukrainians of all ages. Within a few weeks, the will of the people
prevailed.

Nobody present will ever forget what happened in Independence Square in
Kyiv in the days and weeks following the fraudulent November runoff. The
dignified presence and determination of those in Kyiv – and, for that
matter, others elsewhere in Ukraine — provided the strength to seek freedom
and fair elections.

It gave strength to Ukraine’s institutions, and on December 3, the Supreme
Court invalidated the November 21 election and ordered a repeat of the
runoff vote between Prime Minister Yanukovich and opposition leader Viktor
Yushchenko to be held on December 26. A few days later, the Verkhovna
Rada approved a new law on presidential elections, paving the way for a
freer, more transparent voting process.

The support from Western governments and international organizations such
as the OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe), which
insisted that the Ukrainian authorities comply with standards for fair and
transparent elections, also helped, as did the many thousands of
international observers, including many from Ukraine’s far-flung diaspora,
who observed all three rounds, particularly the successful, free and fair
December 26 elections.

With the success of the Orange Revolution, Ukraine is on the path to fulfill
its quest to become a thriving democracy in which human rights are respected
and the rule of law prevails. As we have seen it is not an easy path, but it
is one worth taking and one that Ukraine’s leadership seems determined to
follow.

Roksolana Tymiak-Lonchyna, a Chicago dentist and Ukrainian-American
community activist, has written a highly-readable, personal account of her
experiences as an international election observer during this historic
period for Ukrainians everywhere.

She provides not only a fascinating account of what it was like to observe
the elections in a difficult environment – the stronghold of Prime Minister
Yanukovich – but also offers a glimpse into Ukrainian life in three distinct
Ukrainian cities – Lviv, Kyiv, and Donetsk.

Her observations of the election process, but also her experiences with and
perceptions of people and places throughout Ukraine provide interesting
insights to life in Ukraine – the country of her parents’ birth — during
this historic time. -30-
————————————————————————————————-
TO BUY THE BOOK “CONSCIENCE CALLS”
PRICE: $30 (postage included US/Canada)
CHECK: made out to: Sts. Volodymyr and Olha “Starving for Color”
MAIL: to Roksolana Tymiak-Lonchyna DDS
828 S Washington St., Hinsdale, IL 60521 USA
————————————————————————————————-
Proceeds from the sale of “Conscience Calls” are used to purchase infant
formula for orphanages in Ukraine though the “Starving For Color” program.

“Starving for Color” was started by Roksolana Tymiak-Lonchyna with the
opening of the Black and White photo exhibit of orphaned, neglected and
abandoned children of Lviv, Ukraine, in October of 2002 at the Ukrainian
National Museum in Chicago, IL. With the help of Sts. Volodymyr and Olha
Parish an account was established to nourish the orphaned newborns.

Dr. Tymiak-Lonchyna has been traveling to Ukraine every 4-6 months at her
own expense, visiting orphanages and buying formula as needed in 6 month
increments. The amount of formula purchased varies depending on the number
of newborns residing at the orphanages.

Prices are negotiated with a local distributor, and Dr. Tymiak-Lonchyna
remains until the formula is delivered, at which point the payment is made.

Until 2005, Dr. Tymiak-Lonchyna worked with one orphanage in Lviv since
it was the only one that housed newborn orphans. As a result of her trip to
Ukraine during the Orange Revolution, she also supports infant formula
supplies at an orphanage in Donetsk.

It is the author’s goal to bring more orphanages into the program. But this
has to be done responsibly with an eye on the available funds, primarily so
that the orphanages where the program was initiated do not suffer as a
result.

It takes about 7.24 hryvni (5.12 hryvni – $1.00) a day to feed a child. Each
book sold provides approximately 17 days of sustenance for one child.

One of the orphanages cares for between 9 to 14 newborns at any given
time, and they require formula through the first 8 months. -30-
——————————————————————————————-
[ return to index] [The 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 wish to receive the AUR.
You are welcome to send us names for the AUR distribution list.
========================================================
“THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR”
A Free, 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.
========================================================
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 presentations published by its business units and organizations.

All publications are 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

You can be on an e-mail distribution list to receive automatically, on a
monthly basis, any or all of the Macroeconomic Situation Reports (Romania,
Bulgaria, Ukraine) by sending an e-mail to mwilliams@SigmaBleyzer.com.
“UKRAINE – A COUNTRY OF NEW OPPORTUNITIES”
========================================================

UKRAINE INFORMATION WEBSITE: http://www.ArtUkraine.com
========================================================

“WELCOME TO UKRAINE”- “NARODNE MYSTETSTVO”

(Folk Art) and ContempoARTukraine MAGAZINES
For information on how to subscribe to the “Welcome to Ukraine” magazine
in English, Ukrainian Folk Art magazine “Narodne Mystetstvo” in Ukrainian,
or ContempoARTukraine in English please send an e-mail to
ArtUkraine.com@starpower.net. Complete information can be found at
========================================================
“THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT- AUR” – SPONSORS
“Working to Secure & Enhance Ukraine’s Democratic Future”
1. THE BLEYZER FOUNDATION, major sponsor

Additional supporting sponsors for the Action Ukraine Report (AUR) are:
2. UKRAINIAN FEDERATION OF AMERICA (UFA)
3. KIEV-ATLANTIC GROUP
4. ESTRON CORPORATION
5. UKRAINIAN LEGAL GROUP,
6. BAHRIANY FOUNDATION, INC
7. VOLIA SOFTWARE
8. UKRAINE-U.S. BUSINESS COUNCIL
9. UKRAINIAN AMERICAN COORDINATING COUNCIL (UACC),
10. U.S.-UKRAINE FOUNDATION (USUF)
11. WJ EXPORT-IMPORT
12. EUGENIA SAKEVYCH DALLAS
========================================================
TO BE ON OR OFF THE FREE AUR DISTRIBUTION LIST
If you would like to read THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT- AUR,
around five times a week, 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 read THE ACTION UKRAINE REPORT please 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
Emerging Markets Private Equity Investment Group
P.O. Box 2607, Washington, D.C. 20013, Tel: 202 437 4707
Mobile in Kyiv: 8 050 689 2874
mwilliams@SigmaBleyzer.com; www.SigmaBleyzer.com
========================================================
Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely.
========================================================
return to index [The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s