AUR#743 Aug 2 Decision Day In Ukraine?; Independent Media; NATO; Legal Uncertainties Fuel Crisis; Hope & Chaos In Ukraine By Carlos Pascual;

=========================================================
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

DECISION DAY IN UKRAINE?

ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR – NUMBER 743

Mr. E. Morgan Williams, Publisher and Editor
PUBLISHED IN WASHINGTON, D.C., WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 2, 2006

Help Build the Worldwide Action Ukraine Network
Send the AUR to your colleagues and friends, urge them to sign up.

——- 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. UKRAINE: COUNTRY OUTLOOK
EIU Economy-Outlook, The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited
New York, New York, Monday, July 31, 2006

2. ENGEL EUROPE TO CONSTRUCT TWO MALLS IN UKRAINE
One in Odessa and one in Nikolayev for NIS 550 million
Roee Bergman, Globes Online, Rishon Le-Zion, Israel, Tue Aug 1, 2006

3. TRANSPORT MINISTRY PLANS TO BUILD PRIVATE BUSINESS
AIRCRAFT TERMINAL AT BORYSPIL AIRPORT BY 2008
Ukrainian News-on-line, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tue, August 1, 2006

4. INTERNEWS LAUNCHES COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM TO
SUPPORT UKRAINE’S INDEPENDENT MEDIA
Media Law Reform, Financial Viability of Media & Journalism Training
Internews, Kiev, Ukraine, Sunday, July 30, 2006

5. SHELL IN UKRAINE RE-BRAND DEAL WITH ALLIANCE GROUP
By Roman Olearchyk in Kiev, Financial Times
London, United Kingdom, Tuesday, August 1 2006

6. NAFTOHAZ UKRAINY AND ROSUKRENERGO JOINT VENTURE
ATTRACTS RAIFFEISENBANK (UKRAINE) AND RAIFFEISEN
ZENTRALBANK LOAN WORTH USD 110 MILLION
Ukrainian News – on-line, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, Aug 1, 2006

7. WORK OPPORTUNITIES FOR UKRAINIANS IN POLAND?
Special Polish-Ukrainian working group to be established
Polish News Bulletin, Warsaw, Poland, Tuesday, Aug 01, 2006

8. POLISH GOVERNMENT SAID PLANNING TO ALLOW MORE
UKRAINIANS TO TAKE UP LEGAL JOBS IN POLAND
PAP news agency, Warsaw, in English 0848 gmt 1 Aug 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Tue, Aug 01, 2006

9. POLISH FOREIGN MINISTRY APPOINTS MAN EXPERIENCED IN
UKRAINIAN ISSUES AS DEPUTY FOREIGN MINISTER FOR THE EAST
Polish News Bulletin, Warsaw, Poland, Tuesday, Aug 01, 2006

10. UKRAINIAN HEALTH & BEAUTY RETAIL CHAIN SOLD
Hutchison unit to buy Ukraine chain stake, Health and beauty retail chain
UNIAN, Kyiv, Ukraine, Wednesday, 19 July, 2006

11. UKRAINE’S HOPES OF JOINING NATO ‘UNDER THREAT’
By Roman Olearchyk in Kiev, Financial Times
London, United Kingdom, Wednesday August 2 2006 03:00

12. A RUSSIAN VIEW: UKRAINE SHOULD NOT JOIN NATO
COMMENTARY: By Sergei Karaganov in Moscow
Published in the International Herald Tribune (IHT)
Paris, France, Wednesday, July 19, 2006

13. UKRAINE AND NATO
LETTER-TO-THE-EDITOR: By Adrianna Melnyk, New York
Director of Research and Outreach, The Orange Circle
International Herald Tribune, Paris, France, Sunday, July 23, 2006

14. UKRAINE AND NATO
LETTER-TO-THE-EDITOR: By John Kornblum, Berlin
International Herald Tribune, Paris, France, Sunday, July 23, 2006

15. LEGAL UNCERTAINTIES FUEL UKRAINE GOVERNMENT CRISIS
President has until midnight on 2 August to decide on Yanukovych
BBC Monitoring research in English 31 Jul 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Monday, Jul 31, 2006

16. HOPE AND CHAOS IN UKRAINE
OP-ED: By Carlos Pascual, Vice President and Director,
Foreign Policy Studies, The Brookings Institution
Washington, D.C., Tuesday, August 01, 2006

17. THE COUNTRY OF DOUBLE STANDARDS
ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: By Oleh Shevchuk
Original article in Ukrainian for UP, translated by Irena Yakovina
Ukrayinska Pravda website, Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, July 31, 2006

18. THE ORANGE REVOLUTION’S SLOW DANCE OF DEATH
It is time for the president to make a choice
OP-ED: By Jim Davis, Editor-In-Chief, Ukrainian Observer magazine
The Willard Group, Kyiv, Ukraine, Issue 222, August, 2006

19. YUSHCHENKO: STARING INTO A VOID
His failed presidency means that Viktor Yushchenko faces a choice
of committing political suicide quickly, or slowly
ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY
: by Ivan Lozowy
Transitions Online (TOL), Prague, Czech Republic, Mon, 31 July 2006

20. RUSSIAN ANALYST SAY YUSHCHENKO SEEKING UKRAINE’S
DISASSOCIATION FROM RUSSIA
Interfax, Moscow, Russia, Monday, July 31, 2006

21. BETTING ON DEMOCRACY
Reversals for Fragile New Governments Mean Hard Choices for Bush
OP-ED: By Jackson Diehl, Columnist, The Washington Post
Washington, D.C., Monday, July 31, 2006; Page A15

22. UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT YUSHCHENKO, PRO-RUSSIAN PARTY
LEADER YANUKOVYCH HOLD MARATHON TALKS
Interfax-Ukraine news agency, Kiev, in Russian 1752 gmt 1 Aug 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Tuesday, Aug 01, 2006

23. UKRAINE’S YULIYA TYMOSHENKO HOPES TO UNITE WITH
PRESIDENT’S BLOC IN REPEAT ELECTION
ICTV television, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1545 gmt 1 Aug 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Tuesday, Aug 01, 2006

24. UKRAINE: DEADLINE FOR GOVERNMENT NEARS
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL)
Prague, Czech Republic, Tuesday, August 2, 2006

25. UKRAINE’S FACTIONS DRAFT UNITY AGREEMENT THAT
COULD POINT TO END TO POLITICAL STALEMATE
Natasha Lisova, AP Worldstream, Kiev, Ukraine, Tue, Aug 01, 2006

26. UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT FACES TOUGH CHOICE TO
END POLITICAL STALEMATE
Anna Melnichuk, AP Worldstream, Kiev, Ukraine, Tuesday, Aug 01, 2006

27. 2004 EUROVISION WINNER RUSLANA PERFORMS IN TURKEY
Turkish journalists interested in the Ukrainian political activities of Ruslana
Ruslana.com.ua website, Kiev, Ukraine, Friday, July 28, 2006

28. REGARDING CURRENT POLITICAL SITUATION IN UKRAINE
Ukrainian Congress Committee of America (UCCA)
Washington, D.C., Monday, July 31, 2006

29. SIXTH ANNUAL COMPETITION OF PUPILS’ RESEARCH AND
ART WORKS “HISTORY AND LESSONS OF HOLOCAUST”
Ukrainian Center for Holocaust Studies, Kyiv, Ukraine, Mon, Jul 31, 2006

30. BOOK: THE GERMANS UNDER THE TSARS, LENIN AND HITLER
Author grew up in a German Colony in what is now southern Ukraine
The Germans From Russia Heritage Collection
North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND, Tue, Aug 1, 2006
========================================================
1. UKRAINE: COUNTRY OUTLOOK

EIU Economy-Outlook, The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited
New York, New York, Monday, July 31, 2006

OVERVIEW: Parliament’s new majority coalition, which unites the
Party of Regions and the parliamentary left, is expected to secure Viktor
Yanukovych’s return to the post of prime minister.

He will bring with him many figures from the former administration
headed by Leonid Kuchma, as well as priorities that differ from those
of the current president, Viktor Yushchenko.

Combined with disputes over recent constitutional changes to reduce
presidential powers, this will ensure tense inter-institutional relations.
These will continue even if the pro-presidential Our Ukraine faction joins
the majority, which is still possible.

The Economist Intelligence Unit expects real GDP growth to recover to
around 5.5% in 2006 and then to rise slightly to 5.8% in 2007. Annual
inflation is forecast to average around 8-9% in 2006-07.

The currency will weaken only moderately in nominal terms against the
US dollar. The current account is expected to record a small deficit this
year, and a larger one in 2007.

DOMESTIC POLITICS: Mr Yanukovych–the former presidential candidate
implicated in the vote fraud that sparked the “Orange Revolution” in late
2004–is poised to return to the prime minister’s post. This surprise
development followed the defection in early July of a junior partner from
the “orange” coalition, which had formed in June and seemed set to govern.

It represents a clear setback for Mr Yushchenko, who now faces the return of
many of the old elites that his presidential election victory had appeared
to sweep from power. These elites are clustered in Mr Yanukovych’s Party of
Regions, which has formed a governing coalition alongside two small,
left-wing factions.

Representatives of the old order will now dominate the cabinet and
parliamentary committees, and could prove difficult to dislodge: the Party
of Regions is disciplined and wealthy, which will allow it to ensure the
support of a majority of parliamentary deputies even if the current
composition of the governing coalition changes.

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS: The Yanukovych cabinet is expected
to adopt a generally pro-Western tone, and the country will continue
implementing the EU-Ukraine Action Plan. This will reflect the Party of
Regions’ interest in appearing legitimate in the eyes of the West (not least
because the party’s business wing is keen to expand its ties within the EU).

It will also reflect the fact that a pro-Western president remains in charge
of foreign policy and will continue to appoint the foreign and defence
ministers. The make-up of the new governing coalition nevertheless raises
concerns over the future of Ukraine’s Western-oriented foreign policy.

Particularly if Our Ukraine does not end up joining the Yanukovych-led
coalition, it is very likely that–even if the general policy tone remains
pro-Western–Ukraine will achieve less progress towards deeper integration
with Europe than it would have under an “orange” coalition.

POLICY TRENDS: Although a sharp shift away from generally pro-reform
policies seems unlikely, the formation of a governing alliance between the
“oligarchic” centre and the anti-market left gives cause for concern.

Although Our Ukraine could still join the government, at present it is in
opposition, having been at the centre of policy formulation since early
2005.

So too is the eponymous bloc led by Yuliya Tymoshenko, who, among
Ukraine’s political leaders, would have been most serious about bringing
the shadow economy into the open.

The strength of oligarchic business interests within the Party of Regions
suggests little scope for progress on sensitive reforms such as energy
sector restructuring, and greater risk that privatisations will return to
the insider deals witnessed in the past.

The presence of left-wing parties within the coalition is also a concern.
Although the left will have limited leverage owing to its small size, it
will succeed in slowing certain reforms that it has long opposed–such as
lifting the moratorium on agricultural land sales.

INTERNATIONAL ASSUMPTIONS: World GDP growth is expected
to average an extremely robust 5.2% in 2006–measured using purchasing
power parity (PPP) weights–slightly faster than in 2005. Growth in OECD
markets will accelerate slightly, as an improvement in the euro zone offsets
an expected slowdown in the US. Growth in emerging markets will slow
only slightly.

A modest deceleration in global economic performance is forecast in 2007,
with growth moderating to 4.8%. Economic expansion in Russia, which is still
the single most important export destination for Ukraine, will be stronger,
but is nevertheless set to slow to 5.7% in 2007.

ECONOMIC GROWTH: The economy has recently shown signs of picking
up, with real GDP growth in the first half of the year accelerating to 5%
year on year, up from 2.6% in 2005 and 2.4% in the first quarter of 2006.

We had already been expecting real GDP growth rates to exceed those forecast
by the government and multilateral institutions. We have now raised our
growth forecast even further owing to the stronger than expected
second-quarter results.

INFLATION: Year-on-year consumer price inflation proved less considerable
in the second quarter of the year than had previously been expected, but is
still forecast to accelerate in the second half of 2006. In part, the slower
price rises reflected Russia’s restrictions on livestock imports from
Ukraine, which kept food prices down on the domestic Ukrainian market.

Consumer prices are nevertheless expected to rise moderately over the
remainder of the year and to remain higher in 2007 as well, compared with
the first half of 2006.

This will reflect the further rise expected in gas prices, as well as the
loose fiscal stance. It will also be a function of the adjustments to
administered utility and passenger transportation prices, as well as to
fixed-line telephone tariffs, that are already under way.

Moreover, currency inflows resulting from increased investment are expected
to rise. This will offset part of the reduction in trade-related currency
inflows, ensuring that the money supply continues to expand moderately
quickly, which will limit the extent of disinflation possible.

EXCHANGE RATES: The National Bank of Ukraine (NBU, the central bank)
has kept the hryvnya steady against the US dollar since April 2005. It has
indicated that it intends to prevent the currency diverging much from its
current rate, and we still expect the hryvnya to remain broadly stable
against the US dollar in nominal terms, with only moderate weakening
expected during the latter part of the forecast period.

This will translate into a gradual real effective appreciation. However, the
risk of greater currency weakening against the US dollar has recently
increased.

In 2005 the trade balance posted a large deficit, which widened rapidly
towards the end of the year and is set to expand further now that the price
paid for Russian gas imports has doubled. Political pressure on behalf of
exporters seeking a weaker currency is likely to rise, and the supply of
foreign currency is now less likely than in the past to exceed demand.

EXTERNAL SECTOR: Ukraine’s trade in goods returned to deficit in 2005,
as rising incomes and high oil prices pushed up import expenditure, and the
steel sector suffered from a less favourable external environment.

As gas import prices are rising, and average annual steel prices are
unlikely to return to the record-high levels registered in early 2005, the
trade deficit is expected to expand sharply during the forecast period,
which will push the current-account back into deficit.

Strong growth in import volumes, linked to a continued rise in incomes and a
pick-up in investment, will contribute to this trend. The current-account
deficit will nevertheless be contained to around 1% of GDP in 2006 and 3.5%
in 2007.

Ukraine will record a larger surplus on its services trade than in the past,
owing to an increase in the price charged to Russia for large-scale transit
of energy exports westwards. The transfers surplus is also expected to
remain substantial, owing to rising remittances from Ukrainians working
abroad. The combined surplus on services and transfers is therefore forecast
to equal almost 7% of GDP in 2006-07. -30-
————————————————————————————————-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
2. ENGEL EUROPE TO CONSTRUCT TWO MALLS IN UKRAINE
One in Odessa and one in Nikolayev for NIS 550 million

Roee Bergman, Globes Online, Rishon Le-Zion, Israel, Tue Aug 1, 2006

Engel Europe, a subsidiary of Lagna Holdings Ltd., announced today the
launch of two further mall construction projects, after it announced last
week the signing of an MOU for the construction of a large shopping mall
in Romania.

The company said it had signed an MOU for the construction of two malls
in Ukraine, at an estimated investment of NIS 550 million.

The new projects form part of the Engel Europe’s strategy of constructing
malls in key cities in Eastern Europea and the CIS countries. The company
said it was in talks for the construction of additional malls in Russia and
a third country.

In the latest deal, Engel Europe signed an agreement under which it will
purchase the shares of two companies and will hold a 77.2% stake in
each of them once the transaction is complete.

One of the companies intends to construct a mall on a 48,000 sq.m. lot
(excluding parking space) in the center of Odessa, while the other will
construct a mall on a 35,000 sq.m. lot in Nikolayev.

Engel Group chairman Yaakov Engel said, “The construction of the malls in
Ukraine, plus the mall in Romania that we announced last week and our talks
for the construction of more malls in Russia and other countries in the
region are part of our strategy, which will see us investing billions of
shekels in key cities in Eastern Europe, mainly in the CIS countries.

We are considering bringing in strategic partners for these malls, in the
same manner as the partnerships we entered in our residential property
projects in Eastern Europe.” -30-
——————————————————————————————–
Published by Globes [online], Israel business news
http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=1000118301&fid=942

—————————————————————————————————-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
3. TRANSPORT MINISTRY PLANS TO BUILD PRIVATE BUSINESS
AIRCRAFT TERMINAL AT BORYSPIL AIRPORT BY 2008

Ukrainian News-on-line, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tue, August 1, 2006

KYIV – The Ministry of Transport and Communications plans to build the
business terminal at Boryspil state international airport by 2008. Viktor
Bondar, the acting Minister of Transport and Communications, told the
journalists about this.

“A large number of people in the world has private airplanes, but they don’t
arrive here, because there are no either adequate service or favourable
conditions for the maintenance of small airplanes. That’s what we are
building now,” he said.

According to Bondar, the project of the business terminal is being designed
now, and it’s expected to be put into operation by 2008. Besides, the
designing of the construction of hangars, servicing Boeing and Airbus
airplanes is being carried out. As the acting Minister put it, they are planned
to be built by the end of 2008.

“We don’t want our airplanes to be maintained in Europe. The aircraft
companies spent a lot of money on this,” he said.

As Ukrainian News earlier reported, about UAH 1.5 billion is planned to be
used for the development of the airport in 2006. In 2005, the airport
increased passenger transportation by 23.2% or 740,000 people, compared
to 2004 to 3.93 million people.

The airport ended 2005 with a net profit of UAH 69.258 million increasing
net revenues by 32% or UAH 95 million, compared to 2004 to UAH 392
million. The airport intends to become the international transit transport hub
for the regional purposes by 2010. -30-
————————————————————————————————
[ return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
4. INTERNEWS LAUNCHES COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM TO
SUPPORT UKRAINE’S INDEPENDENT MEDIA
Media Law Reform, Financial Viability of Media & Journalism Training

Internews, Kiev, Ukraine, Sunday, July 30, 2006

KIEV – Internews has launched a comprehensive program to support
independent media in Ukraine.

Under a recently awarded five-year grant, from the U.S. Agency for
International Development, Internews will work for fair media laws in
Ukraine, strengthen the financial viability of independent media, and train
Ukrainian journalists in the standards and practices of professional news
coverage.

“Independent media in Ukraine have endured many political and economic
challenges over the past decade,” said Marjorie Rouse, Internews’ Regional
Director for Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova. “Through this project Internews
will work with local organizations to promote sustainability for Ukraine’s
independent media,” she said.

Based at Internews’ offices in Kiev, the project will be headed by Susan W.
Folger, who has experience in TV news, academic program development and
capital giving. She also brings nine years of experience in the region.

Having worked in Ukraine since 1993, Internews is quite familiar with the
problems confronting independent media there. Internews Network will join
with the following core partners to implement the Ukraine project:

[1] the International Research and Exchanges Board (IREX), which
will take the lead on print support activities and jointly implement the
legal programs with Internews Network;

[2] the International Renaissance Foundation (IRF), which will manage
the competitive grants programs under an Open Media Fund for Ukraine;

[3] Internews-Ukraine, a local Ukrainian media support NGO and affiliate
of Internews International, which will manage the bulk of the broadcast
media training, technical support and in-house productions;

[4] the Independent Association of Broadcasters of Ukraine (IAB), and

[5] the Ukrainian Newspaper Publishers Association (UNPA), both of
which have proven track records in media representation and development.

In addition to these core partnerships, Internews will work with other
resource partners which will contribute to joint objectives, such as
promoting women’s issues in Ukraine, supporting the financial viability of
commercial media, and reforming academic journalism curricula. -30-
———————————————————————————————-
Internews® Network is 501(c)(3) non-profit organization that supports open
media worldwide. The organization fosters independent media in emerging
democracies, trains journalists and station managers in the standards and
practices of professional journalism, produces innovative television and
radio programming and internet content, and uses the media to reduce
conflict within and between countries.

Internews projects currently span the former Soviet Union, Central Asia,
Eastern and Western Europe, the Middle East, Asia, Africa and the United
States. Internews Network is a founding member of Internews International,
whose members work in 45 countries.

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) administers the U.S.
foreign assistance program providing economic and humanitarian assistance in
more than 80 countries worldwide.
————————————————————————————————–
CONTACT: Susan Folger, Chief of Party, Internews Network Representative
Office in Ukraine +380 44 458-4440, SueFolger@Internews.org.
Marjorie Rouse, Regional Director, Internews Network 1-802-257-8042.
Marjorie@Internews.org.
—————————————————————————————————-
http://www.internews.org/prs/internews%20offices/ukraine_contract_20030729.html
=====————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
Send in names and e-mail addresses for the AUR distribution list.
========================================================
5. SHELL IN UKRAINE RE-BRAND DEAL WITH ALLIANCE GROUP

By Roman Olearchyk in Kiev, Financial Times
London, United Kingdom, Tuesday, August 1 2006

Royal Dutch Shell has reached a marketing accord with Moscow’s Alliance
Group, which has agreed to re-brand some of the 100 petrol stations it
operates in Ukraine under the Shell name.

The trademark licensing agreement will bring Ukraine its first petrol
filling stations operating under the brand of a western oil major. Ukraine’s
petroleum market is dominated by Russian oil giants, which supply Kiev
with a majority of its crude needs and control the largest oil refineries in the
country.

BP has a share in Ukraine’s petroleum market through its interest in
TNK-BP, which supplies a franchise of 1,000 petrol filling stations in
Ukraine operating under the TNK brand.

The re-branding of petrol stations in Ukraine is a continuation of an
existing partnership between Shell and Alliance Group, which have
co-operated in the Russian market since 2001.

“Shell believes Ukraine is an attractive market for us and a country with a
high potential for economic growth,” said Les Lastoweckyi, the company’s
representative in Ukraine. -30-
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
6. NAFTOHAZ UKRAINY AND ROSUKRENERGO JOINT VENTURE
ATTRACTS RAIFFEISENBANK (UKRAINE) AND RAIFFEISEN
ZENTRALBANK LOAN WORTH USD 110 MILLION

Ukrainian News – on-line, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, Aug 1, 2006

KYIV – Joint venture Ukrhaz-Energo has attracted Raiffeisenbank (Ukraine),
one of the largest banks, and Raiffeisen Zentralbank credit worth USD 110
million. Company’s representative has disclosed this to Ukrainian News.

According to the informational source, average weighted credit rate constitutes
LIBOR+3.05%.

As Ukrainian News earlier reported the Ukrhaz-Energo supervisory board at a
meeting on July 6 allowed the company to attract USD 1 billion credit from
Credit Suisse First Boston (CSFB). The attracted funds will be directed to
the pumping of gas into the underground gas storages.

On February 2, Naftohaz Ukrainy and RosUkrEnergo created a joint venture
closed joint stock company Ukrhaz-Energo to supply gas to Ukraine.
————————————————————————————————
[ return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
7. WORK OPPORTUNITIES FOR UKRAINIANS IN POLAND?
Special Polish-Ukrainian working group to be established

Polish News Bulletin, Warsaw, Poland, Tuesday, Aug 01, 2006

WARSAW – On 31 July, Polish Labour and Social Policy Minister Anna
Kalata met with Ukrainian Ambassador to Poland Oleksandr Motsyk in
order to discuss the issue of drafting a new agreement regarding mutual
employment opportunities for the citizens of the two countries.

According to Kalata, a special Polish-Ukrainian working group will be
established to elaborate the possible solutions in this area. The minister
went on to say that the new agreement would concern hiring employees for
longer periods in all sectors of the economy.

During the meeting, the two officials also discussed the prospects for
facilitating the employment of Ukrainian citizens as seasonal workers in
Poland.

Kalata stressed that her ministry is currently drafting an ordinance on the
abolishment of permits for seasonal work in the agricultural sector for
foreigners. The new regulations are to come into effect in September. -30-
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
NOTE: Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
========================================================
8. POLISH GOVERNMENT SAID PLANNING TO ALLOW MORE
UKRAINIANS TO TAKE UP LEGAL JOBS IN POLAND

PAP news agency, Warsaw, in English 0848 gmt 1 Aug 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Tue, Aug 01, 2006

WARSAW – Poland is slowly opening to Ukraine, the government is planning
steps to allow more Ukrainians to take up legal jobs in Poland, the Dziennik
daily writes on Tuesday [1 August].

This year, Poland’s neighbours will find jobs in the agricultural sector,
with plans to expand the list of branches next year. The daily writes that
the idea came out from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and adds that the
scheme includes offers for simple jobs but also for well-educated
Ukrainians.

The daily recalls that Ukrainians already have legal jobs as English
teachers, qualified welders, etc. Each year some 300,000 Ukrainians receive
work permits. Additional tens of thousands work illegally.

According to experts of the Institute of Public Affairs, foreigners do not
take away jobs from Poles. The total number of foreigners working in Poland,
including those employed in the grey zone, does not exceed 1 per cent of all
employed Poles. -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[ return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
9. POLISH FOREIGN MINISTRY APPOINTS MAN EXPERIENCED IN
UKRAINIAN ISSUES AS DEPUTY FOREIGN MINISTER FOR THE EAST

Polish News Bulletin, Warsaw, Poland, Tuesday, Aug 01, 2006

WARSAW – Over a week ago, Pawel Kowal, Law and Justice (PiS) MP and
one of the Sejm’s stars, became the deputy foreign minister responsible for the
East. According to experts, the nomination shows that PM Jaroslaw
Kaczynski’s government regards the Eastern direction of Poland’s foreign
policy as a very important element.

It seems the appointment of the media-savvy Kowal, a man experienced in
Ukrainian issues, means that the PiS in now on the offensive. The new deputy
foreign minister said he is ready to co-operate with the pro-Russian “blue”
camp, if it is to share power with the “orange” President Yuschenko.

He gave assurances that Poland will not withdraw from supporting Ukraine’s
aspirations in Europe and the US. Yesterday, President Lech Kaczynski talked
to Ukrainian President Viktor Yuschenko on the phone. Yuschenko informed
Kaczynski about the current political situation and his hopes concerning
Ukraine’s future. -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
10. UKRAINIAN HEALTH & BEAUTY RETAIL CHAIN SOLD
Hutchison unit to buy Ukraine chain stake, Health and beauty retail chain

UNIAN, Kyiv, Ukraine, Wednesday, 19 July, 2006

KYIV – The retail arm of Hong Kong tycoon Li Ka-shing’s conglomerate,
Hutchison Whampoa Ltd., said Wednesday it has agreed to buy a controlling
stake in a Ukrainian health and beauty retail chain, marking its first foray
into the country, AP reports.

A.S. Watson Group said in a statement it will acquire 65 percent of Ukraine
company DC, the country’s largest retail chain by number of stores. The
statement did not disclose the acquisition price. A spokeswoman for A.S.
Watson declined to comment.

The deal follows A.S. Watson’s purchase of Russian health and beauty retail
chain Spektre Group in St. Petersburg in October, and the acquisition of
U.K. perfume retailer Merchant Retail Group PLC in May.

DC has 99 stores throughout Ukraine, and A.S. Watson aims to double that
number in the near future, said Ian Wade, managing director of A.S. Watson,
in the statement. DC Ukraine Ltd. is selling household chemical goods,
personal hygiene products, perfumes and cosmetics.

“DC presents strong potential for the group’s long-term development in
Central and Eastern Europe,” Wade said. “We foresee a very healthy
economic growth in Ukraine in the coming years.”

Anatoliy Strogan, president of Asnova Holding, the owner of DC, said in the
statement, “We are looking forward to the international expertise that A.S.
Watson will bring to DC, and to further developing the chain into a
world-class health and beauty retail brand.”

Ukraine, which has a population of 46.8 million, posted a 40 percent rise
in total retail sales in the past two years, the statement said. A.S. Watson
said it operates over 7,400 retail stores in 36 markets worldwide including
the U.K., South Korea and Turkey. -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
11. UKRAINE’S HOPES OF JOINING NATO ‘UNDER THREAT’

By Roman Olearchyk in Kiev, Financial Times
London, United Kingdom, Wednesday August 2 2006 03:00

KIEV – Ukraine’s hopes of entering Nato’s Membership Action Plan, the
first step towards fully joining the military alliance, are being undermined
by the political turmoil in Kiev, senior western diplomats have warned.

The warning came as cross-party negotiations intensified yesterday ahead
of a deadline this evening for Viktor Yushchenko, Ukraine’s pro-western
president, to end months of political stalemate and either accept his
arch-rival Viktor Yanukovich as the country’s next prime minister or
dissolve parliament.

The two men, who faced each other in the bitter presidential election in
2004 when the “Orange Revolution” propelled Mr Yushchenko into office,
were yesterday reportedly locked in talks for at least six hours.

Mr Yanukovich and his Regions party emerged as front-runners to head a
future coalition government last month after attempts to establish an
“Orange” coalition of parliamentary forces collapsed.

Western diplomats said Mr Yushchenko’s inability to end the crisis that has
gripped Ukraine since elections in March, make his plans for greater
integration with the west “more difficult as time goes by”.

“There are a lot more Europeans now questioning whether or not Ukraine ought
to be starting down this Membership Action Plan path,” one senior western
diplomat told the Financial Times.

Mr Yushchenko hopes that Ukraine will be accepted into the MAP programme
at a Nato summit in Latvia in November. But diplomats fear that the ongoing
political uncertainty will make that impossible.

Earlier this year the Regions party was at the centre of a successful
protest campaign aimed at stopping joint international military exercises
involving Ukrainian forces and troops drawn from some Nato member
countries.

In recent negotiations, Mr Yushchenko has pressed Mr Yanukovich to accept
Ukraine joining the MAP programme and broader integration with the west. He
has also called for the Communist party to be ejected from Mr Yanukovich’s
proposed coalition.

Mr Yanukovich, who draws much of his support from the largely
Russian-speaking east Ukraine, has so far resisted giving any explicit
written commitments.

The upheaval has been complicated by constitutional reforms implemented
this year that shift the right to form the government from the presidency to
parliament. -30-
————————————————————————————————–
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/b1c8318e-21c2-11db-b650-0000779e2340.html
———————————————————————————————–
[ return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
If you are receiving more than one copy of the AUR please contact us.
========================================================
12. A RUSSIAN VIEW: UKRAINE SHOULD NOT JOIN NATO

COMMENTARY: Sergei Karaganov in Moscow
Published in the International Herald Tribune (IHT)
Paris, France, Wednesday, July 19, 2006

MOSCOW – More and more, we hear talk about putting Ukraine on a fast
track for membership in NATO. Let me be clear: Ukraine, like every other
nation, has the right to join any alliance it wishes to. But elites
sometimes tend to be irrational, or even suicidal.

The pro-NATO faction in Ukraine is clearly composed of people who have
neither confidence in nor a vision of Ukrainian statehood; do not want to
compete with a robust and often rough Russia, and would like to control
their country by putting on the ball and chain of a military and political
alliance with Washington.

Some – not all – Western motives are also clear enough. They include a drive
to secure the Western trajectory of an unstable and fence-straddling Ukraine
and to create another pro-American foothold in Europe. Securing the votes of
East European immigrants in an American election year could also come in
handy.

However, most Americans and Europeans simply do not think about the grave
repercussions of expanding NATO to Ukraine.
To begin with, Russia and Ukraine have little formal border to speak of. It
exists mostly on paper and in the minds and pockets of shrewd customs
officers.

A NATO-driven Ukraine will naturally push for a real frontier, with barbed
wire and all, and that is where real problems will begin.

Any hill will become strategic; any ravine will acquire some historic
significance. Transborder employment and trade, which currently involves
millions of people on both sides, will stop; millions of families will be
divided, millions will lose jobs. Russia will stop cooperating on many
important projects; scores of conflicts will inevitably raise the
so-far-dormant ghost of a divided- nation syndrome.

Another Yugoslavia? Very likely, though in a milder version. Who needs it?
Some in the pro-NATO faction in Ukraine understand this well enough. Most,
though, seem to be too light- minded about the lessons of recent history.

What they fail to understand is that Russia is not Serbia. Ukraine will
suffer many times more damage than Russia, losing a partner that has not
always been sweet but has never really played against Kiev.

This, however, is not the main point. A new artificial “arc of instability”
along the Russian-Ukrainian frontier will revive a farcical version of the
old bloc rivalry, scrapping the very idea of a union of great nations
addressing new challenges – including radical Islamic terrorism.

This new farce will end in lose-lose for many and win-win for those few
longing for destabilization and weapons of mass destruction – terrorists and
radicals, the very community that civilized and developed nations so vocally
claim to be fighting against.

If part of that community makes the misguided step of granting NATO
membership to Ukraine, at least one comfort will be that we will finally
find out who among them should not be referred to as genuinely civilized and
reasonable.

I still hope, however, in common sense and rationalism, the core values of
what has come to be known as European or Euro-Atlantic civilization.
———————————————————————————————-
Sergei Karaganov is the chairman of the nongovernmental Council on
Foreign and Defense Policy in Moscow.
———————————————————————————————-
LINK: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/07/19/opinion/edkara.php
———————————————————————————————–
[ return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
========================================================
13. UKRAINE AND NATO

LETTER-TO-THE-EDITOR: By Adrianna Melnyk, New York
Director of research and outreach, The Orange Circle
International Herald Tribune, Paris, France, Sunday, July 23, 2006

Regarding the commentary “Ukraine should not join NATO” by Sergei
Karaganov (Views, July 20): Karaganov correctly states that Ukraine, like
every other nation, has the right to join any alliance it wishes.

However, Ukraine’s desire to join NATO reflects the country’s longing to
become part of a community of civilized nations and a wish to distance
itself from an increasingly undemocratic and despotic Russia.

Karaganov’s claim that in joining NATO Ukraine would be “losing a partner”
– referring to Russia – “that has not always been sweet but has never
really played against Kiev” shows his poor understanding of history.

Josef Stalin’s man-made famine in 1932-33, which resulted in the deaths of
millions of people, mostly Ukrainians, subsequent policies of
Russification in Ukraine, and most recently, the Kremlin’s botched attempt
to control the outcome of Ukraine’s 2004 presidential election, are but a
few examples of Russia “playing” against Ukraine.

The pro-NATO faction in Ukraine is comprised of those who understand
that Ukraine’s only hope for successful statehood is in creating a clear
demarcation from Russia.

The only “arc of instability” that will result from Ukraine’s membership in
NATO will be one created by those in Russia who fail to accept that the
western portion of their empire has dissipated, and that its nations are
choosing a more hopeful and liberal democratic path. -30-
———————————————————————————————
LINK: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/07/23/opinion/edletmon.php
———————————————————————————————
Contact: Adrianna Melnyk, amelnyk@orangecircle.org
———————————————————————————————–
[ return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
14. UKRAINE AND NATO

LETTER-TO-THE-EDITOR: By John Kornblum, Berlin
International Herald Tribune, Paris, France, Sunday, July 23, 2006

I do not know when, or even if, Ukraine will become a member of NATO or
the European Union. I am, however, certain that Sergei Karaganov’s arguments
against NATO membership are exactly the sort that can only damage the search
for a peaceful and prosperous future along Russia’s borders.

Karaganov’s ideal of an open border with Ukraine does little to comfort
Ukrainians, who recall a history of Russian economic and political pressure
on their people. If it is to feel secure enough to build truly cooperative
ties with Russia, Ukraine must gain some level of political and economic
independence by integrating with the West, as well as with the East.

Yugoslavia could perhaps have escaped the tragic conflict of the 1990s had
NATO moved fast to maintain order as the Communist-era structure began to
collapse.

A system of relationships based on Russian domination has been breaking
apart for more than 15 years. Since the Yugoslav debacle, NATO and the
European Union have better understood the dangers and have actually helped
Russia by bringing stability and democracy to societies that otherwise would
not be secure enough to risk close cooperation with Moscow.

Karaganov’s dark vision of NATO membership comes from an era that
thankfully is long past. He does not take into account the progress already
achieved by Russia in building more open relations with the West.

Rather than conjuring up new threats, he would do better to help Russia
profit from the many opportunities made possible by cooperation with
organizations such as NATO and the European Union. -30-
———————————————————————————————–
LINK: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/07/23/opinion/edletmon.php
———————————————————————————————–
[ return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
15. LEGAL UNCERTAINTIES FUEL UKRAINE GOVERNMENT CRISIS
President has until midnight on 2 August to decide on Yanukovych

BBC Monitoring research in English 31 Jul 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Monday, Jul 31, 2006

Ukraine’s President Viktor Yushchenko has until midnight on 2 August to
decide whether to accept the nomination by parliament of his erstwhile
election rival Viktor Yanukovych as prime minister.

Several days of frantic talks have so far failed to bridge the gap between
the pro-Yushchenko camp and Yanukovych’s Party of Regions on key
foreign and domestic policies, such as NATO accession, the status of the
Russian language, relations with Russia and indeed Yanukoych’s candidacy
itself.

The situation is compounded by conflicting interpretations of the
constitution, and the dysfunctional state of the Constitutional Court, the
sole adjudicator on constitutional matters.
15-DAY TERM
Under the constitution, Yushchenko has 15 days to consider the parliamentary
majority’s nomination for prime minister and to submit it back to parliament
for a formal vote. The term expires on 2 August, but the president and
parliament disagree on whether the president has the right to reject
parliament’s nomination.

The constitution does not explicitly say whether the president can reject
the nomination or what should happen if he does. Yanukovych’s supporters
argue that this means the president has no choice but to submit the
nomination to parliament by 2 August, and failure to do so would be a
violation of the constitution.

On 31 July, senior Party of Regions MP Taras Chornovil went as far as saying
that his party will demand the impeachment of Viktor Yushchenko if he fails
to submit Yanukovych’s candidacy to parliament.

But the president’s supporters argue that the constitution gives the
president the 15-day term to consider parliament’s nomination for a reason,
and that since the president has the right to consider the nomination, he
also has the implicit right to reject it.

“The president is not a mailbox that automatically sends the answer on the
same day to the same address,” Yushchenko said at a news conference on 26
July. “It is evident that the authors of the constitution did not mean this
by giving the president the right to consider the candidate for prime
minister for 15 days.” (ICTV, 1618 gmt 26 Jul 06).
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT
The conflict obviously falls under the jurisdiction of the Constitutional
Court, in which the president, parliament and the congress of judges each
have a quota of six members. But the court has not had a quorum since
October, when the term of several judges expired.

President Yushchenko has appointed the new judges under his quota, but
under the constitution the judges need to be sworn in at a special ceremony
in parliament. Ukraine’s previous parliament refused, up until the end of its
term and despite Yushchenko’s protestations, to swear in the judges.

Analysts believe that the refusal was aimed at preventing Yushchenko from
asking the court to overrule the constitutional reform, which transferred
some of the president’s powers to parliament starting from 2006.

Yushchenko has repeatedly asked the new parliament to swear in the judges,
and parliament speaker Oleksandr Moroz at one point indicated parliament’s
readiness to do so. But in an added twist, the swearing-in ceremony requires
the presence of the prime minister, which Ukraine does not have since Yuriy
Yekhanurov’s cabinet is working in an acting capacity. It is not clear
whether parliament is able or willing to circumvent this obstacle.
60-DAY TERM
In the meantime, another key deadline expired on 24 July. On that day, the
president apparently received the formal right to dissolve parliament
because it has failed to form a new cabinet within 60 days of the dismissal
of the previous cabinet.

The president has repeatedly indicated that he would be reluctant to
exercise this option, but he has refused to rule it out.

But parliament appears to believe that the president has no right to
dissolve it. In an address to the nation on Ukrainian television on 24 July,
Moroz said parliament can form a new cabinet within two days if only the
president formally submits Yanukovych’s candidacy for the vote, and that the
legislature would not obey the president’s order to dissolve. (Ukrayina TV,
1800 gmt 24 Jul 06).

Again, the conflict falls under the jurisdiction of the Constitutional
Court, which is not functioning at the moment.

Parliament, in the meantime, made an apparent attempt to remove the grounds
for its possible dissolution by voting on 25 July to cancel the previous
parliament’s decision in January to sack the Yekhanurov cabinet.

The cabinet continued to work despite the January parliamentary vote, and
President Yushchenko said at the time that the vote was unconstitutional and
had no legal force. On 25 May, the Yekhanurov cabinet formally resigned
before the new parliament and continued to work in an acting capacity.

A Ukrainian TV channel said that after the 25 July vote it could now be
argued, using the wording of the Ukrainian constitution, that the cabinet
resigned on its own as opposed to being dismissed, and that therefore the
60-day term does not apply. Again, the Constitutional Court appears to be
the only body that could adjudicate on the matter.

But should the president choose to dissolve parliament, he would appear to
be in a stronger legal position if he did so before 2 August – that is, at a
time when the 60-day term for forming the cabinet has expired but the 15-day
term for submitting the prime minister’s candidacy to parliament has not.
———————————————————————————————–
[ return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
16. HOPE AND CHAOS IN UKRAINE

OP-ED: By Carlos Pascual, Vice President and Director,
Foreign Policy Studies, The Brookings Institution
Washington, D.C., Tuesday, August 01, 2006

The collapse of Ukraine’s Orange Coalition-once an inspiration to others-has
deflated democratic forces around the world. It has also heartened those in
Russia, Vladimir Putin included, who hate and fear the “colored”
revolutions. Yet there is some good news in the current political mess.

Multi-party democracy is alive in Ukraine. It can be bare-knuckled and, at
times, ugly and corrupt. But it also involves give-and-take negotiations
over how to advance Ukraine’s development as a unitary state that has both
growing ties to Euro-Atlantic community and decent relations with Russia.

For that to happen, however, Ukraine’s principal political actors have to
give more weight to national interests and less to the politics of
personality and personal power.

On the surface, developments over the past two years are a story of failure.
During fall 2004, the Orange Revolution brought millions to Kiev’s
Independence Square to fight against electoral fraud and for the candidate
they chose. This public outpouring lifted Viktor Yushchenko to the
presidency in January 2005.

Nine months later, allegations of corruption between Yushchenko and populist
Premier Yulia Tymoshenko brought down the “Orange government.” When
parliamentary elections were held in March 2006, public frustration with
Yushchenko produced a first place finish for the party of Viktor Yanukovych,
the loser in the 2004 presidential race.

As of mid-July 2006, Ukraine’s political parties are still bickering about
forming a government while WTO membership and an invitation to NATO’s
Membership Action Plan hang in abeyance.

Less visible but no less important is the welcome demise in Ukraine of what
in Russia is called “managed democracy”: no longer can elections be won by
the party in power dictating the results. Voters have learned that power and
accountability come out of the ballot box, not from the office of the
sitting president.

In championing the ability of the people to challenge leaders through an
opposition movement, the Orange Revolution secured a future for political
opposition.

The mixed results of the parliamentary elections also produced paralysis.
Yushchenko, Tymoshenko, Yanukovych and other figures still have not formed
a functioning government. They have spent more time trying to destroy, or at
least marginalize each other, than in bringing about the stability, economic
prosperity, political openness, accountable governance, and social
responsibility that voters want. No wonder many who flocked to the Orange
cause have a sour taste in their mouths. This is not the democracy they
hoped for.

Ukraine now faces three prospects: 1) a coalition of Yanukovych’s party with
Communists and Socialists; 2) Yushchenko and Yanukovych forge a coalition
that unites the country; or 3), if a government is not formed, another round
of elections that would extend the period of political turmoil another four
to six months.

Ukrainian politicians will ultimately decide, but they might consider two
questions: Will anything change in a few months with a new round of
elections? What “brand” of governance do they want to market to the nation
and internationally?

The political crisis has already dragged into its fourth month. Recent polls
suggest that if there is another election, voters will punish Yushchenko
with yet a smaller share of the vote. That would give Yanukovych an even
bigger margin. Yet some form of coalition between Yushchenko and
Yanukovych would be needed to govern credibly.

Alternatively, the Orange team may try to reunite in opposition and block
Yanukovych. That carries the risk that the “politics of no” could thwart
progress for the country and leave President Yushchenko looking yet more
ineffectual. It’s hard to be a president in opposition.

The question of branding is fundamentally tied to perception. Do Ukrainian
politicians want a government that is perceived as moving to the future or
rooted in the past? If the latter, then bring the Communists into a
coalition. Do Ukrainian politicians want a country that is perceived as
uniting or torn between East and West? I

f the latter, then put Yushchenko or Tymoshenko in the prime minister’s
slot. Right or wrong, the main political figures have become identified with
geopolitical agendas, even if their published programs are copied from one
another. Boring as it may seem, this is a time for technocrats to address
the business of governance.

As these politics sort themselves out, policy-makers need to remember that
they have lost public trust as politics have become perceived as an
extension of business interests. Any new gas deals with Russia, including
talk of a consortium to manage Ukraine’s pipelines, should be subjected to
public scrutiny and conducted through formal tenders when relevant.

Leaders must counter perceptions that the quest for governance is merely a
contest for the right to steal from the gas sector. In the international
community we should accept that this is Ukraine’s mess to fix.

Ukraine’s friends should certainly make clear that the door to NATO is
open and that the EU will still contemplate expanding, as such prospects
shape incentives for cooperation among political parties.

Finally, there is Russia. Russia should not be an issue in this domestic
drama. Ukraine should have good relations with all its neighbors-and its
neighbors should recognize that a sovereign, democratic and prosperous
Ukraine is an asset, not a threat.

Even with its political growing pains, Ukraine’s economy surged ahead in May
at an annual rate of 8.5%. Ukraine’s 47 million people, Russia and Europe
would all be better off with the political accountability that could sustain
such performance. -30-
———————————————————————————————–
LINK: http://www.brookings.edu/views/op-ed/pascual/20060801.htm
———————————————————————————————–
AUR NOTE: Carlos Pascual is a former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine.
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
17. THE COUNTRY OF DOUBLE STANDARDS

ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: By Oleh Shevchuk
Original article in Ukrainian for UP, translated by Irena Yakovina
Ukrayinska Pravda website, Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, July 31, 2006

The Ukrainian politics has no moral authority, ideological principles,
eternal alliances and permanent tastes. It has just eternal interests,
situational cooperation, constant compromises and attempts to find the
best in the worst. These are the realities of the democratic Ukraine.

During any election campaign the voter is not only disoriented – he is
straightly and deliberately deceived. And, unfortunately, both politicians
and spin doctors take it for granted.

If earlier we could complain of ineffective election legislation securing
the mechanism of political responsibility and the lack of the ideological
component in the activity of political parties, today we speak about the
devaluation of all possible instruments of the civil society in modern
Ukraine.

A Ukrainian voter is severely disoriented. The value system is radically
ruined. Earlier the ordinary voter concentrated on the moral values,
charisma, political platform, ideological views, professional qualities,
slogans and declarations both of individual politicians and the team in
general.

Today the voter has no other choice but just to listen to empty
declarations. Ukrainian politicians easily switch sides, at that they keep
neither ideological aims nor own words, juggling with notions, promises
and accusations.

Such are objective conditions of conducting the political struggle in
Ukraine: less ideological discussions and more backstage intrigues.
Ukrainian politics is extremely pragmatic. No wonder the society does not
appreciate moral politicians any more.

Principles, which the political parties have to consider while enrolling MPs
as well as methods of political struggle, great business profound effect on
formation of the party’s political strategy – all these factors fired time
bomb which had detonated only nowadays.
BUSINESS INFLUENCE ON ADOPTION OF THE POLITICAL
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
While scanning the lists of the people’s deputies of different factions,
it’s easy to distinguish the influence groups which never endure the outer
pressure and break up under strained confrontation. Today each faction has
MPs unable to withstand the test of opposition or administration squeeze.

These are the people trusted by authorities or a dominant party. A people’s
deputy falls under influence depending on his political conscience,
experience, political weight, business.

Our Ukraine always differed from others by having several political centers
of influence as well as some groups of deputies-businessmen who refused to
submit to the tough faction discipline. No wonder the politicians who joined
this political bloc under the quota of the Party of Industrialists and
Entrepreneurs (PIEU) became the renegades.

This group’s destructive position prevented attempts to form a single
coalition of the democratic forces. PIEU deputies were the first who
supported the broad coalition with Party of Regions.

As for the Socialists, their weak links in a chain were the agents of the
big business: Boyko, Buhayets, Derkach, Honcharov, Polyakov, Rudkovskiy
and others. We may call them a pragmatic component of Socialist Party.

These are people who most probably dislike being in a tough opposition. And
they evidently initiated the negotiations of their party with Party of
Regions on formation of the anti-crisis coalition.

Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc (BYuT) is also very vulnerable from the point of view
of the business-interests, although it is quite homogeneous for everything
is spinned around its leader.

Nevertheless business-interests of some BYuT MPs (from 5 to 20) may split
its ranks as neither Hubskiy nor such fellows as Yedin, the Buryak brothers,
Khmelnitskyi, Zhivaho, Verevskiy, Abdulin and Vasadze got used to do
business in the opposition.

Evidently, today BYuT is the most prepared political force as it has enough
technologies, resources, moral strength and intellectual potential to be in
opposition. But despite its ambitious businessmen the party oppositional
status may result in its ‘losing weight’.

Yet this fact will hardly upset the strategic plans of BYuT leadership,
moreover Tymoshenko herself called her MPs to make choice as to their
membership as quickly as possible.

However, Party of Regions which primarily consists of entrepreneurs,
surprises by its integrity. Its businessmen keep strict discipline. If
anyone switches to, say, BYuT it will look like mini-sensation.
MORAL FACTOR IN MODERN POLITICS
Lately the Ukrainian society pays much attention to moral factor in
politics. It was certainly Yushchenko who rested upon morality during his
presidential campaign-2004.

Political analysts reckoned on contraposition of the corrupt power and the
honest, fair, just opposition. So, Yushchenko’s rivals were antipodes of
panhuman values and living pictures of amorality.

But what is happening now? Former opponents of the Orange Revolution
dispute corruption referring to morality and panhuman values. It means that
either the system of moral values has been drastically changed or morality as
a factor does not exist in the political orbit any more.

From this point of view Moroz’s behavior cannot be interpreted as a
treachery or immoral move. Moroz, being one of the best political
strategists, disclosed no more, no less than a political wisdom.

He is a leader of the political party seeking power. He is an embodiment of
the certain potential of his political force, that’s why Socialist Party
looks so strong.

But Moroz was the ‘last moral politician in Ukraine’ for the modern elite,
yet he appeared to be ‘overburdened’ by social expectancies.

Therefore, Moroz’s behavior, which pretty much resembles Yushchenko,
Tymoshenko, Yanukovych and other politicians, astonishes conscientious
part of the society

But Moroz’s move looked like betrayal only because it made Tymoshenko
lose her trump card in trade with ‘dear friends’.
ROLE OF THE IDEOLOGICAL FACTOR
The ideology as a motivation mechanism was considered ineffective in
Ukrainian reality. What if we analyze the realization of the promising party
programs?

We can easily find some ideological contradictions in different coalitions.
The anti-crisis coalition disclosed some unnatural power distribution
between extreme Left Communists, moderate Left Socialists and liberal
Regionals.

Nevertheless these parties resemble each other from the viewpoint of the
voters’ tastes, priorities in foreign policy, language issues, etc.

Meanwhile the anti-crisis partners are as close ideologically as BYuT and
‘dear friends’ are conflict-free.

Ideological discords between the Socialists, BYuT and Our Ukraine Bloc
(which consisted of several ideologically different parties) rest on a very
serious ground. These contradictions came out during the row of crises
(petrol, bread, sugar) and during hot debates on WTO membership.
INSTEAD OF THE EPILOGUE
Ukraine is now experiencing one of the greatest political clashes for the 15
years of its independence. Overt greed of some political forces deepens the
civil conflict. State and individual interests strictly depend on ambitions
and corporate interests of national leaders.

Political elite of the democratic countries manages to consolidate under the
slightest threat of the civil conflict. Ukrainian political opponents, on
the contrary, follow the principle: so much the worse – the better.

Today it’s vitally important to prevent split in the society until it did
not reach the point of no-return with reversal of democratic processes and
escalation of violence.

It’s quite clear that one should drop the language of ultimatums and
demands, empty declarations and mutual intimidations, which becomes
more and more habitual for Ukrainian politicians.

Current situation reminds a well-known phrase of Ulyanov-Lenin concerning
decembrist attempts to democratize Russian society: “they are too far from
the people.”

Still we hope the Ukrainian society will never fall into the ‘revolutionary
situation’, when, according to the same source (Lenin), the “masses don’t
want to obey while the heads cannot rule.”
————————————————————————————————
LINK: http://www2.pravda.com.ua/en/news/2006/8/1/5968.htm
———————————————————————————————–
[ return to index] Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
You are welcome to send us names for the AUR distribution list.
========================================================
18. THE ORANGE REVOLUTION’S SLOW DANCE OF DEATH
It is time for the president to make a choice

OP-ED: By Jim Davis, Editor-In-Chief, Ukrainian Observer magazine
The Willard Group, Kyiv, Ukraine, Issue 222, August, 2006

When we went to press with the July edition of the Observer, all signs
pointed to a high probability of Yulia Tymoshenko returning as prime
minister, heading an Orange coalition government. In the month since that
premature and erroneous conclusion, the clumsy maneuvering of the apparent
winners has turned the Orange coalition into an orange frappe’.

With the loss of Oleksandr Moroz and the Socialists, an Orange scenario
turned Blue and Ukraine’s political world turned upside down.

By simply ceding to Moroz his most desired prize, the speaker’s chair of the
Verkhovna Rada, the Party of Regions accomplished several goals — control
of a majority coalition in the parliament, chairmanships of most
parliamentary committees and probably the eventual seating of Yanukovych as
prime minister.

In the face of the seemingly inevitable, President Viktor Yushchenko has
engaged in endless rounds of meetings with the apparent aim to avoid the
appointment of Yanukovych as prime minister and in some way overturning the
constitutional revision that he agreed to earlier but finds so odious today.

On Thursday, July 27, a six-hour public talkathon accomplished nothing other
than making the weakness of the president’s position even more manifest.

The Regions forces have the votes required since making their coalition deal
with Oleksandr Moroz and the Socialists. There have been unsuccessful
attempts to tempt Moroz back into some approximation of the original Orange
coalition, but logic suggests that, having once again become speaker of the
parliament, Moroz is extremely unlikely to be tempted by any other prize
possible.

If one assumes that Moroz is unshakeable, it is hard to see any set of
circumstances that gives the president even the slightest bit of wiggle
room. The fact that some of the more portable members of the parliament have
already switched membership to Regions tends to reinforce this conclusion.

The president’s only choices appear to be reluctantly agreeing to see Viktor
Yanukovych again become prime minister, or dissolving the parliament and
hoping for a better result in new parliamentary elections.

Strange to say, but the latter option is probably least attractive for
Yushchenko since there is a very broad consensus among political observers
that pre-term parliamentary elections would be likely to see both Regions
and the Tymoshenko bloc strengthen their vote turnout at the expense of Our
Ukraine.

There has been a certain amount of play acting in Ukraine’s great political
theater district, Independence Square. As soon as it became clear that the
Orange coalition was a thin and imploding façade, tents of all colors began
to appear.

First, there was PORA, the youth-oriented group that played such a major
role in 2004. But now, rather than having some clear central direction, PORA
is split into Pink Pora and Yellow Pora and maybe even more groups and
colors before it’s over.

Tymoshenko has tents and booths too but she insists they are strictly for
informational purposes as she continues to lean on Yushchenko to dissolve
the parliament.

The tents, booths and banners are colorful fodder for the television
cameras, although they have taken on the appearance of a children’s crusade
with most of their inhabitants in their teens and early 20’s.

Behind all the hot weather hoopla, the problem remains the lack of a
decision by the president. Just how long this current impasse might continue
is uncertain, but coming as it does in the heat of normal summer holiday
time gives the president some limited running room – not much, but some.

Who could imagine that barely 18 months after what appeared to the world as
one of the great people’s revolutions, the president and his administration
could have dithered and dallied to the point that Yushchenko’s political
poll ratings are on a level with those of President Leonid Kuchma in the
latter days of his regime.

It is unfair and unreasonable to ask the people of Ukraine to muddle along
without a government and the time has now come for the president to
understand that no amount of talking can avert the inevitable. It’s time
for him to make a choice. -30-
————————————————————————————————
FOOTNOTE: Jim Davis is editor-in-chief of the Ukrainian Observer magazine.
The comments appearing above are exclusively his own and reflect neither the
views of the magazine nor The Willard Group. People wishing to comment
should send mail to jim@twg.com.ua. Letters submitted for possible
publication are subject to normal editing constraints so far as language and
length and should not exceed 250 words.
————————————————————————————————-
[ return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
19. YUSHCHENKO: STARING INTO A VOID
His failed presidency means that Viktor Yushchenko faces a choice
of committing political suicide quickly, or slowly

ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY: by Ivan Lozowy
Transitions Online (TOL), Prague, Czech Republic, Mon, 31 July 2006

KYIV, Ukraine Ukrainian politics is the show to watch in Eastern Europe.
Here, what was unimaginable a year ago is today reality.

Viktor Yushchenko, who in late 2004 was ushered in as Ukraine’s president
following a popular uprising known as the Orange Revolution, is close to
nominating his arch-rival and former opponent in the presidential race,
Viktor Yanukovych, as prime minister. Battered by a series of crises, his
poll ratings near rock-bottom, Yushchenko now appears finished as a
politician.

The story of Yushchenko’s demise begins with this year’s general elections.
Yushchenko’s political party, Our Ukraine, suffered a humiliating defeat in
March, receiving a measly 14 percent of the vote. The result was acutely
embarrassing, since Yushchenko himself had won 52 percent in the
presidential race only a year earlier.

Now, his main opponent in that race, Yanukovych, had taken the lead in the
parliamentary elections heading the Party of Regions (formed by Ukraine’s
largest financial-industrial grouping, the “Donetsk clan”) with 32 percent
of the vote. Worse yet for Yushchenko, the political bloc headed by his
one-time ally, Yulia Tymoshenko, also surpassed Our Ukraine, with 22 percent
of the vote.

During his time in office, Yushchenko has appeared completely detached from
governing and politics in general. He has ignored policy, waiting until the
last minute, sometimes later, to respond to national crises.

The standoff with Russia over natural gas imports last winter dragged on for
two weeks, coming to a head when Russia lowered gas supplies to Ukraine on
New Year’s Day, and ending in a new agreement with Russia several days
later, all without a word from the Ukrainian president.

When he has acted, Yushchenko has often been incomprehensible. In September
2005, Yushchenko fired Tymoshenko from the post of prime minister, only two
weeks after calling her government Ukraine’s best to date.

The Orange Revolution’s main promise, repeated many times by Yushchenko,
that “the bandits will sit in prison,” fell by the wayside and not a single
prominent representative of the former regime has been brought to trial.

The joke in the streets now is that since Yushchenko has nothing to do, why
not give him some clay so he can make the pottery he famously admires?

Oles Doniy, the former student who led the 1990 demonstrations which brought
down the government, says of Yushchenko: “The president has failed not just
in fulfilling any of his campaign promises, he has failed to act on them.”

Our Ukraine’s 2006 election campaign itself was one of the worst on record,
with regional party organizations squabbling over the boons the elections
were supposed to bring to local leaders and plaintive appeals in national
campaign ads to the ideals of the Orange Revolution.

Our Ukraine’s main slogan, “Don’t Betray the Revolution,” may have been
interpreted by some voters as a call not to vote for Yushchenko’s party. In
response, voters spoke loud and clear in the March elections, which
Yushchenko and his team trumpeted as Ukraine’s “freest and fairest” ever,
affirming the depth of their own defeat.

Left in the dust of the election campaign, Yushchenko was at a distinct
disadvantage when coalition talks opened in early April. His chief
representative, Roman Bessmertny, adopted delaying tactics. The talks
dragged on between Our Ukraine, Tymoshenko, and the Socialist Party
chairman, Oleksandr Moroz, who had reluctantly completed the trio of
political forces standing behind the Orange Revolution.

Moroz remains very close to the Communist Party, even though he left in
1991 to found his own party, which continues to hew closely to the
Marxist-Leninist creed. He served as parliamentary speaker from 1994 to

1998 and from this post opposed, unsuccessfully, the adoption of a new
constitution, and, more successfully, land and other reforms.

He was a rural Communist Party functionary and his calm demeanor hides a
deep nostalgia for Soviet times. Moroz was to be the key to unraveling the
orange coalition for good.
A TICKING BOMB SPARKS BETRAYAL
Coalition talks between Our Ukraine, Tymoshenko’s bloc, and Moroz’s
Socialists lasted over three months. The main sticking point was
Tymoshenko’s candidacy for prime minister. Although Yushchenko had
fired her from this post half a year before, she was the top contender
because her party had gained the most votes, by far, of the three orange
coalition parties.

But Bessmertny and Our Ukraine had plans of their own. They procrastinated,
dithered, and kept issuing new demands. A memorandum of understanding that
the top vote-getting party would nominate the new prime minister had been
drafted by the coalition participants prior to election day, but not signed.

For Tymoshenko, regaining her lost post was an all-or-nothing proposition.
She had spent too much time in the political wilderness, opposing the former
regime of Leonid Kuchma for seven years, to be satisfied with a brief
seven-month stint in the country’s top executive post.

In the end, Our Ukraine finally agreed to accept Tymoshenko. Meanwhile,
however, in her negotiations with Bessmertny and his henchmen, Tymoshenko
had engaged the support of Moroz, whom she in turn backed as parliamentary
speaker, the next most-desired post after that of prime minister.

But the Socialists had fared badly in the elections as well, winning only
5.7 percent of the votes. When the coalition was finally formed, Moroz was
left out in the cold, forced to console himself with the chance to appoint
his right-hand man, Yosyp Vinsky, first deputy prime minister.

The formation of the orange coalition between Our Ukraine, Tymoshenko, and
Moroz was announced on 22 June and the parties signed a 100-page platform
statement. After lengthy, grueling, and at times acrimonious negotiations,
the newly born coalition looked very fragile indeed.

Although Tymoshenko would be allowed to resume the top post, her long-time
personal rival in Our Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, was the main candidate for
parliamentary speaker. Since constitutional changes which took effect in
January of this year passed much of the president’s power to parliament, the
new speaker could wield inordinate influence.

Speculation was rife as to how long the coalition would last, but nearly all
observers agreed: not long. Tymoshenko had been removed from office because
she had been too successful, as prime minister, at advancing her own agenda
and image, behavior which contrasted sharply with Yushchenko’s dissociated
approach.

She had very few supporters in Our Ukraine’s 120-strong leadership council,
many detractors, and not a few enemies. An informal poll on the Maidan
Internet site showed 58 percent believed the coalition would last less than
a year, with 30 percent giving it less than three months.

For his part, Moroz knew that his chances to gain power were slipping away.
He had run for the presidency three times – in 1994, 1999, and 2004 – coming
in third each time.

He and his Socialist Party were facing a slow march to oblivion along the
same track as their ideological allies, the Communists, who had, in three
elections, gone from 25 percent of the vote in 1998 to 20 percent in 2002
and to 3.7 percent this year.

Prodded by the fear of lifetime also-ran status, Moroz opened secret
negotiations with Yanukovych’s Party of Regions, apparently just before the
orange coalition was announced.

In the meantime, the Party of Regions, possibly sensing a chance to turn the
political configuration around, delegated their deputies in parliament to
block the presidium and the podium by an around-the-clock guard in the
chamber and the massing of deputies during the day. Scuffles and fighting
ensued. And in the back rooms Yanukovych’s people and Moroz kept talking.

The result of the talks was a complete about-face by Moroz, sprung on his
unsuspecting allies during the first attempt to elect the speaker of
parliament on 6 July. On this day, Our Ukraine nominated Poroshenko, but he
withdrew as it became apparent that all was not well in the orange
coalition.

A vote was then held between two candidates, Moroz and Mykola Azarov, a
Party of Regions stalwart. Not a single vote, not even that of Azarov
himself, was cast for Azarov and Moroz was elected by 238 votes, 12 more
than needed, in a pre-arranged show meant to blow apart t
he orange coalition.

Moroz, Yanukovych, and the Communists formally announced the formation
of a new parliamentary coalition on 10 July.
YUSHCHENKO’S SCYLLA AND CHARYBDIS
Moroz’s action in abruptly leaving the orange coalition earned him
accusations of “traitor” from his former allies and independent groups, such
as the youth-based Pora movement, which helped spearhead the Orange
Revolution. Moroz has tried to fend off attacks by pointing to the
generally-acknowledged instability of the coalition formed with Our Ukraine
and Tymoshenko.

Now it was Our Ukraine’s turn to try to block parliament, which it more or
less accomplished with its deputies shouting through loudspeakers and using
wailing sirens to drown out parliamentary sessions. In the meantime, to
consolidate his hold over parliament, on 11 July Moroz pushed through the
election of Communist Party member Adam Martyniuk as first deputy speaker
of parliament.

On 18 July, the new coalition submitted Yanukovych’s candidacy for the
premiership to Yushchenko. According to the constitution, the president
submits to parliament a candidate nominated by the parliamentary coalition.

Yushchenko’s interpretation of this provision leaves the decision up to him,
because, as he says, “The president is not a post office box.” The Party of
Regions is understandably insisting that Yushchenko submit Yanukovych’s
candidacy.

Yushchenko now faces a Hobson’s choice. If he submits Yanukovych’s
candidacy, he will return his principal rival to power. Behind Yanukovych
stands the Party of Regions and behind it the Donetsk clan, a colossal
pyramid of businessmen, politicians, and shady dealers who have unchallenged
economic, political, and even social control over their home base in the
eastern region of Donetsk.

At the top of the pyramid sits Ukraine’s richest man, Renat Akhmetov, whose
appetites have turned outside Ukraine’s borders, with his companies
searching for acquisitions in Central Europe and launching public share
offerings. The Donetsk clan needs the central government in order to support
and fuel such expansion – a process that would quickly erode Yushchenko and
Our Ukraine’s remaining power and authority.

If Yushchenko does not submit Yanukovych’s candidacy, the constitution gives
him the right to dissolve parliament, because no government was formed
within 60 days of the resignation of the old. In a wry attempt to forestall
such a move, the new coalition headed by the Party of Regions voted on 25
July to annul its previous vote, held in January this year, of no confidence
in the government headed by Yushchenko’s ally Yuriy Yekhanurov.

But a dissolved parliament means new elections. Since Our Ukraine’s poll
ratings have dipped well into the single digits, it would have no choice but
to try and form a joint party list with Tymoshenko.

Tymoshenko is not known for her forgiving nature and, after giving her a
hard time during the three-month-long coalition negotiation process, Our
Ukraine would be lucky to get 10 percent of the spots on her list.

Tymoshenko herself has been pushing for just such a scenario and
parliament’s dissolution. On 24 July, the deputies in her faction signed a
letter stating their intention to resign from parliament. They also boycotted
parliament, draping a huge national flag over their seats in the chamber,
presumably as a visual deterrent to defections.

Since Tymoshenko’s faction counts 125 deputies, however, and at least 150
resignations are needed in order to force parliament’s dissolution,
Tymoshenko needs the help of Yushchenko and his supporters, including those
serving in parliament.

On 28 July, Yushchenko convened a round table with all parties concerned. He
proposed a “national unity pact,” which found scant support among the
participants. Most of the session was taken up by squabbling over policy
questions such as Ukraine’s stance on NATO, Russia, and the European Union.

As one Tymoshenko deputy remarked privately, “All Yushchenko did was
provide [communist leader Petro] Symonenko with a national TV audience.”

At times the rhetoric has been harsh. Moroz has hinted that if Yushchenko
dissolves parliament, its members may not comply, and the current
parliamentary coalition headed by the Party of Regions has voted that
parliament will convene in extraordinary session on the day the president
issues a decree dissolving it.

In response, true to Soviet tradition, Yushchenko convened a meeting of
regional governors and the heads of the “power” ministries, such as the
military, in order to formally apprise them of the situation, but in fact to
issue a veiled threat that attempts to resist a dissolution would be dealt
with by force.

On balance, however, the participants in this political struggle understand
that an accommodation of sorts is likely. If the Party of Regions withdraws
Yanukovych’s candidacy, Our Ukraine could countenance joining the coalition.

In order to save face, the resulting coalition would be labeled “new” and
Our Ukraine is reportedly insisting that the Communists be excluded from it.

This position has drawn fire from Yanukovych’s supporters, who believe,
with some cause, that Our Ukraine is seeking to hold the minority, but
controlling, share, thus allowing it to dictate its terms. But both sides
realize that they have no real options.

A new coalition between the Party of Regions, Our Ukraine, and the
Socialists would revive the “Grand Coalition” much ballyhooed during the
drawn-out negotiations with Tymoshenko.

For their part, some in Tymoshenko’s party are already setting their sights
on the next presidential elections, due in 2009. -30-
———————————————————————————————–
Ivan Lozowy is a TOL correspondent and also runs an Internet newsletter,
the Ukraine Insider. LINK: http://www.tol.cz/
———————————————————————————————-
[ return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
20. RUSSIAN ANALYST SAY YUSHCHENKO SEEKING UKRAINE’S
DISASSOCIATION FROM RUSSIA

Interfax, Moscow, Russia, Monday, July 31, 2006

MOSCOW – Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko’s key goal at negotiations
with the Party of Regions is to lay the groundwork for Ukraine’s complete
disassociation from Russia, said Sergei Markov, director of the Political
Research Institute, a Russian think tank.

“Yushchenko has set an ultimatum to (Party of Regions leader Viktor)
Yanukovych: the Party of Region can gain control over the economic
segment of the government and partial control over law enforcement
agencies.

In exchange, they are supposed to agree to betray their voters through
cutting ties with Russia. This is the main condition Yushchenko is putting
forth,” Markov told Interfax Monday.

The current negotiations between Yushchenko and Yanukovych are dealing
with the terms and conditions for a compromise and “conditions on
which Our Ukraine could in fact join the coalition with Yanukovych.”

“The main things on which Yushchenko is insisting are that Ukraine join
NATO and that equality between the Russian and Ukrainian languages and
the parts of the country oriented toward the Russian and Ukrainian cultures
be prevented,” he said.

If the Party of Regions rejects this ultimatum, then the president will
disband the parliament, Markov said. If it accepts it, “this will be political
suicide for Yanukovych, but this is a tempting proposal for the billionaires
surrounding him,” Markov said. -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[ return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
Please contact us if you no longer wish to receive the AUR
========================================================
21. BETTING ON DEMOCRACY
Reversals for Fragile New Governments Mean Hard Choices for Bush

OP-ED: By Jackson Diehl, Columnist, The Washington Post
Washington, D.C., Monday, July 31, 2006; Page A15

A year ago the jewels of President Bush’s democracy policy were the Cedar
and Orange revolutions of Lebanon and Ukraine, which had ousted autocratic
regimes backed by Russia and Syria and seemingly ushered in pro-Western
democracies.

Last week their unforeseen and unpleasant consequences presented Bush with
a critical pair of choices. He could abandon his faith in a new democratic
order — or double his bet on it.

The crisis that has the world’s attention is Lebanon; though most people
don’t perceive it as a test of Bush’s democracy agenda, that is how the
administration sees it.

Oddly, Hezbollah’s astute leader, Hasan Nasrallah, also gets it: “The main
obstacles in the path of the new Middle East are the resistance movements in
Palestine and Lebanon, and, on the level of the regimes, mainly Syria and
Iran,” he said in a television interview last week, accurately summarizing
Bush’s view. “What is required, then, is to eliminate these obstacles and to
remove them from the path of the historic American plan for this region.”

The parallel crisis in Ukraine — yes, there is one — is far from American
television screens. The fight there is being waged in smoke-filled rooms,
and is as obscure as Lebanon is dramatic. But the essential problem for Bush
is similar: The new democratic system he so strongly supported has been
skillfully exploited by the revolution’s erstwhile losers.

After months of Byzantine maneuvering, the thuggish politician Moscow tried
to install as Ukraine’s president though electoral fraud in 2004, Viktor
Yanukovich, is on the point of taking office this week as prime minister —
with powers that equal or exceed those of President Viktor Yushchenko, the
leader of the Orange Revolution.

From the viewpoint of traditional U.S. interests, Yanukovich is still a
menace. He opposes Ukraine’s integration into NATO, a step the Bush
administration has been pushing, and he may well be willing to sacrifice his
country’s sovereignty to Vladimir Putin’s Kremlin. He favors the Russian
language over Ukrainian.

But, in contrast to 2004, Yanukovich won his votes fairly in March’s
parliamentary elections, drawing on the disaffected Russian-speakers of
eastern Ukraine. So far he’s done nothing to undermine the democratic
system — in fact, he’s trying to persuade Yushchenko’s party to join his
government.

For Bush, the question is: Should the United States accept a democratic
Ukrainian government that turns its back on the West, or encourage its
allies to twist the political system to prevent that outcome? Was the Orange
Revolution about installing democracy or shifting Ukraine from Moscow’s
orbit to that of Washington and Brussels?

Yushchenko is being urged by some pro-Western politicians to dissolve the
parliament, a technically legal but democratically questionable maneuver. By
some scenarios, he would then postpone new elections — which Yanukovich
would probably win — and rule the country on his own.

Last week the president demanded that Yanukovich accept a number of
conditions, including continued steps toward integration with the West, in
exchange for being designated as prime minister. That left open both the
option of parliament’s dissolution, and that of a national unity government.

The Bush administration has been working for months to keep Yanukovich out
of power. A few weeks ago it urged Yushchenko not to seal a pact he was
about to make with his pro-Russian rival.

But by the end of last week, officials were saying that Bush had decided to
accept any democratic outcome in Ukraine — including a government that
rejects the West — as long as that government preserves free elections and
free markets.

If he takes office, there’s a risk that Yanukovich could once again try to
turn Ukraine into an autocratic Russian satellite or that a country the size
of France, with a population of nearly 50 million, will be stranded for
years outside an integrating Europe.

Ukraine, like Lebanon, could be lost. But then, this year’s reversals have
already demonstrated that the color revolutions of 2004 and 2005 were the
beginning, rather than the end, of the transformation Bush seeks. -30-
———————————————————————————————–
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/30/AR2006073000547.html
——————————————————————————————————————-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
22. UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT YUSHCHENKO, PRO-RUSSIAN PARTY
LEADER YANUKOVYCH HOLD MARATHON TALKS

Interfax-Ukraine news agency, Kiev, in Russian 1752 gmt 1 Aug 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Tuesday, Aug 01, 2006

KIEV – The closing stage of the round table is most likely to take place on
Wednesday [2 August]. Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko and the leader
of the [pro-Russian] Party of Regions, Viktor Yanukovych, are continuing
consultations this evening, while the working group is working out the text
of the declaration of national unity, the presidential press secretary,
Iryna Herashchenko, has said.

“Only a working group will meet today. Most likely, the round table is on
the next day’s agenda,” she said.

She added that Yushchenko and Yanukovych have been talking for about seven
hours. She said Yanukovych brought the version of the declaration approved
by his party’s political council, which differs notably from the one that
was proposed at the round table on Thursday [27 July].

The fundamental differences concern the unity of Ukraine, its integration
into the EU and NATO, the single state language and the advancement of
constitutional reform.

Participants of the working group are currently arriving in the presidential
secretariat “to work out the final text of the declaration”. She said Yushchenko
and Yanukovych are continuing their meeting now.
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
23. UKRAINE’S YULIYA TYMOSHENKO HOPES TO UNITE WITH
PRESIDENT’S BLOC IN REPEAT ELECTION

ICTV television, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1545 gmt 1 Aug 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Tuesday, Aug 01, 2006

KIEV – [Presenter] We are all waiting now for the outcome of consultations
between the president and leaders of parliamentary factions on the possible
dissolution of parliament.

Today Viktor Yushchenko discussed such a development of events with leaders
of [propresidential] Our Ukraine bloc and the Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc.

The leader of the Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc told journalists that, in her view,
the president is leaning towards the dissolution of the Supreme Council
[parliament]. Under such circumstances, her bloc will unite with Our Ukraine
and other patriots to take part in a repeat election as one political force.
[Passage omitted: repetition]

[Tymoshenko] After such betrayals and bribes, people need a repeat
parliamentary election to confirm their choice once again. The president and
I have discussed the issue of taking part in this election. And we have
taken a firm decision to form one powerful political force, one fist, and,
as they say, form one list.

We will gather together all Ukraine’s political forces regardless of whether
they overcame the 3-per-cent threshold or they failed to overcome it. We
will not let them ruin the democratic forces once and for all and send us
into the opposition forever.

[Passage omitted: A meeting between Yushchenko and Yanukovych is
still in progress.] -30-
————————————————————————————————-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
24. UKRAINE: DEADLINE FOR GOVERNMENT NEARS

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL)
Prague, Czech Republic, Tuesday, August 2, 2006

KYIV – Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko has one day left until
the deadline to submit to parliament the name of his Orange Revolution
rival Viktor Yanukovych as the country’s new prime minister.

Ukraine has passed countless such deadlines in the four months of political
paralysis that have followed the country’s March 26 elections, and it
remains unclear if this time will be any different.

Ukraine’s pro-Russia parliamentary majority began the week with confident
predictions that the country would have a working government by August 2.
But just a day before the deadline, it is still unclear what will happen in
Ukraine.
LOSING POPULAR CREDIBILITY
It’s a situation that has left many ordinary citizens exasperated.

“Everybody, absolutely all of the Ukrainian people, are sick and tired of
this [situation],” one man told RFE/RL. “Our government and Yushchenko
have allowed such chaos that now they can’t do anything properly, they
can’t divide [their] power.

They are not fighting to improve the life of the people; they are fighting
for posts in which they will be able to rob [the people]. This is what they
are fighting for.”

“They are not fighting to improve the life of the people; they are fighting
for posts in which they will be able to rob [the people].”

It’s a fight, it seems, that will continue until the bitter end.

Yushchenko, for his part, is looking at the unpalatable option of approving
his main political rival, Viktor Yanukovych, as prime minister. It’s a deal
he might be able to tolerate if he can keep his pro-Western policies on the
agenda of a grand coalition that includes his Our Ukraine bloc.

Yushchenko would also like to see Our Ukraine lawmakers hold a number
of key cabinet posts. The constitution grants the president the right to
name appointees to key ministerial posts, including defense and foreign
affairs. But Yushchenko is eager to see Our Ukraine hold even more posts.

The Ukrainian president’s popularity, however, is shrinking rapidly. Many
politicians and ordinary Ukrainians say he has turned his back on the values
of the Orange Revolution that brought him to power in 2004.
ROCK AND A HARD PLACE
So, with little in the way of leverage, Yushchenko is spending the day
brandishing his most powerful weapon: the threat to dissolve parliament and
call for fresh elections.

Viktor Yanukovych has said he can work with Yushchenko (Ukrinform, file
photo)The Ukrainian leader is meeting today with parliamentary faction
leaders to discuss the possibility. The president has the legal right to
dissolve parliament for failing to form a government within a prescribed
term.

Few believe he will carry out his threat. Our Ukraine would likely fare
poorly in a fresh election, leaving Yushchenko even weaker than he is now.
But that hasn’t stopped majority lawmakers from countering with threats of
their own.

Taras Chornovil of Yanukovych’s Party of Regions today called for
Yushchenko to be impeached if he calls for new elections.

“As of today, it is only my personal position,” he said. “But if the
president violates the constitution, this will be subject to serious
consideration by the [Party of Regions] caucus. I have simply expressed
my opinion — but this opinion may become an official stance.”

Ukraine currently has no established procedure for impeachment. Chornovil’s
threat, like Yushchenko’s, is likely more about rhetoric and less about
reality.
SIGNS OF COOPERATION
Behind the heated words, there are signs of cooperation. Yushchenko’s office
said today the parliamentary majority had drafted a national-unity agreement
with Our Ukraine. The draft has been submitted to the president, Verkhovna
Rada speaker Oleksandr Moroz, and parliamentary faction leaders for
consideration.

There are few details about the terms of the agreement or how it deals with
points of contention like Yushchenko’s drive for Ukraine to join NATO and
the European Union. But the deal could pave the way for Yushchenko’s bloc
to join the new coalition rather than languish in the opposition.

Some observers worry that Ukraine’s four-month political impasse has cost
the country dearly in terms of international esteem and support. Others,
however, see a bright side. One Ukrainian business magazine, noting the
country’s crisp growth in gross domestic product this year, suggests that
“when politicians are only busy amongst themselves…the economy functions
well.” (RFE/RL’s Ukrainian Service, news agencies) -30-
————————————————————————————————-
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/8/c1c22871-a7d7-414f-89ee-a398fba6caf4.html
————————————————————————————————————-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
25 UKRAINE’S FACTIONS DRAFT UNITY AGREEMENT THAT
COULD POINT TO END TO POLITICAL STALEMATE

Natasha Lisova, AP Worldstream, Kiev, Ukraine, Tue, Aug 01, 2006

KIEV – Ukraine’s pro-Russian parliamentary majority drafted a unity
agreement with President Viktor Yushchenko’s bloc, the president’s office
said Tuesday, which could lead to the combination of their forces in a
new governing coalition.

Yushchenko has been pushing for the agreement as a way to ensure that his
pro-Western and reformist policies remain unchanged even if his former
Orange Revolution foe, Viktor Yanukovych, were to become premier in a
government made up of his pro-Russian party, Communists and Socialists.

Wrangling such an agreement from Yanukovych could also pave the way for
Yushchenko’s bloc, Our Ukraine, to join the new coalition in parliament and
the government, rather than being stranded in opposition.

Yanukovych, who needs the president to approve his nomination to be
premier, has suggested he is eager to find a compromise.

But in an apparent bid to increase the pressure on the Kremlin-backed
politician to give way, the president started consultations regarding the
dissolution of parliament.

Yushchenko’s spokeswoman Iryna Gerashchenko noted, though, that “the
president considers dissolving only as a last measure in case the
politicians fail to find a compromise.”

Yanukovych’s Party of Regions won the most seats in March parliamentary
elections, but not enough to form a majority. The three parties that were
key to the Orange Revolution – the massive protests that broke out after
Yanukovych’s fraud-riddled grab for the presidency in 2004 – together had
enough seats to form a majority coalition, but one of the parties, the
Socialists, defected in June.

The new majority coalition nominated Yanukovych to be premier. But
Yushchenko, who faces a Wednesday constitutional deadline to act on the
nomination, dislikes the idea of working with the old opponent he defeated
in a court-ordered rerun of the presidential election.

But Yushchenko also has said he is reluctant to use his other option _
dissolving parliament and calling new elections. Such a move could thrust
this nation into more political uncertainty and confusion, potentially
leaving it without a fully functional government until 2007.

The president has billed the “national unity” agreement as way out of the
political stalemate. The dispute has emphasized the divide between the
Russian-speaking east and south, which favor closer ties with Moscow, and
the more nationalistic, Ukrainian-speaking west, which wants to shed any
last vestiges of Kremlin influence.

But talks on what will go into the five-page document have been strained,
with Yanukovych’s allies complaining that they were being asked to disavow
their election program, which opposed NATO membership and called for
making Russian a second state language.

Gerashchenko said another main stumbling block centered on disputes over
whether power should be concentrated in a strong central government or in
the regions as Yanukovych prefers. -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[ return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
26. UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT FACES TOUGH CHOICE TO
END POLITICAL STALEMATE

Anna Melnichuk, AP Worldstream, Kiev, Ukraine, Tuesday, Aug 01, 2006

KIEV – President Viktor Yushchenko faces a difficult decision Wednesday –
allow his Orange Revolution arch foe to become prime minister, or throw
Ukraine into more political paralysis.

As the deadline looms for the Western-oriented reformer to decide whether to
sign off on Viktor Yanukovych’s nomination, Yushchenko swung between
compromise and confrontation Tuesday _ promoting a “national unity”
agreement with his rival, but still dangling the prospect of dissolving
parliament and calling new elections.

The president’s apparent indecision angered the Party of Regions, which won
the most votes in the March parliamentary election and successfully put
together the pro-Russian parliamentary majority last month that proposed
Yanukovych as prime minister.

“Why should the country and the Ukrainian people be held hostage to the
constantly changing mood of one diffident person who is burdened by endless
scandals and conflicts among his allies, a person who is permanently
exhausted?” said Evhen Kushnaryov, one of Yanukovych’s top allies.

Yushchenko’s decision is critical for the country, where political leaders
have been trying to form a government for more than four months. Initially,
the three parties that were key to the Orange Revolution – the massive
protests that broke out after Yanukovych’s fraud-riddled grab for the
presidency in 2004 – pooled their seats and formed a majority coalition, but
one of the parties, the Socialists, defected last month and teamed up with
Yanukovych.

Yushchenko faces a constitutional deadline on Wednesday to act on
Yanukovych’s nomination. As the clock ticked down, he has been scrambling to
persuade Yanukovych to sign off on a unity agreement, seen as a way to
ensure that Yushchenko’s pro-Western and reformist policies continue, even
under a Yanukovych government.

Wrangling such an agreement from Yanukovych could also pave the way for
Yushchenko’s political bloc, Our Ukraine, to join the new coalition in
parliament and the government, rather than being stranded in opposition.

Taras Chornovil of the Party of Regions said the party was eager for
compromise because the coalition would be strengthened by the addition of
Yushchenko’s 80-person bloc. Its presence would ensure that even if the
Socialists or Communists bolted, the coalition would not collapse.

Chornovil also acknowledged that the new coalition isn’t popular in
Ukraine’s nationalistic west and support from Yushchenko could help change
some opinions of the coalition, led by the man who was seen as a Kremlin
stooge in the 2004 election.

This ex-Soviet republic remains deeply divided between the Russian-speaking
east and south, which favor closer ties with Moscow, and the
Ukrainian-speaking west, which wants to shed any last vestiges of Kremlin
influence.

But talks on cooperation have hit one road block after another, as Party of
Regions accused Yushchenko of trying to force them to disavow their election
promises – opposition to NATO membership, calling for closer ties with
Russia and promoting Russian as a second state language.

Yushchenko spokeswoman Iryna Gerashchenko said another main stumbling block
centered on disputes over whether power should be concentrated in a strong
central government or in the regions as Yanukovych prefers.

The parties initially appeared closer to agreement early Tuesday after a
working group said it had hammered out a draft accord. As the day wore on,
though, Yushchenko’s hopes of securing a signing appeared to dim.

In an apparent bid to increase the pressure on Yanukovych to give way, the
president started consultations regarding the dissolution of parliament.
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
27. 2004 EUROVISION WINNER RUSLANA PERFORMS IN TURKEY
Turkish journalists interested in the Ukrainian political activities of Ru
slana

Ruslana.com.ua website, Kiev, Ukraine, Friday, July 28, 2006

KIEV – The 2004 Eurovision Song Contest Winner Ruslana has visited
Turkey in the last few days. It is the first time that the singer has been to
Turkey as a Member of Parliament of Ukraine, and after her Eurovision
win in Turkey. Her visit to the country includes political events as well as
a tight concert program.

Ruslana’s new political status was met by vivid curiosity in Turkey, taking
into account general interest to the situation in Ukraine. The Turkish
journalists were mostly interested in the political activities of Ruslana.

Her press conference started with the appeal to stop the humanitarian
crisis, taking place in Lebanon these days. During the press conference she
appealed to keep silence for a minute to honor the innocent victims in
Lebanon. She condemned any violence to solve the Middle East conflict.

Ruslana considers her political activities will be of more use on the
international level since she can hardly influence the situation in Ukraine.
“I am convinced that my international activities can promote good
relationships with other countries, Turkey in particular”, she says.

Ruslana has met the Turkish mayors and governors several times and is
planning to meet the Prime Minister and other Ministers of the country in
future.

During Ruslana’s visit the international charity projects the singer is
involved in were announced. In particular, Ruslana emphasized that human
trafficking remains one of the most serious problems for both countries.
Within the frames of the OSCE Ruslana is carrying out an extensive anti
trafficking campaign.

Ruslana also believes that neither Ukraine nor Turkey will refuse the
democratic way of development of their countries and will successfully pass
all stages to the European integration.

Recently Ruslana has been appointed chairperson of the sub-committee for
spreading information about the European integration. “I can hardly
influence the current political situation in Ukraine which is very chaotic,
but I can do a lot for promoting the European values in our country”,
Ruslana says, commenting her appointment.

Each of Ruslana’s visits abroad attract a lot of attention both of mass
media and her fans. The four big concerts planned in Turkey include a widely
advertised performance at the ancient amphitheater Aspendos – a stage for
world famous stars only. -30-
———————————————————————————————–
LINK: http://www.Ruslana.com.ua
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
28. REGARDING CURRENT POLITICAL SITUATION IN UKRAINE

Ukrainian Congress Committee of America (UCCA)
Washington, D.C., Monday, July 31, 2006

WASHINGTON – In light of the political crisis now gripping Ukraine, the
Ukrainian Congress Committee of America, the largest umbrella organization
of the Ukrainian American community, issued the following statement:

“The Ukrainian Congress Committee of America is disheartened that Ukraine’s
elected officials have been unable to form a lasting coalition government
since the March 2006 elections.

As a result of the constant changes in alliances, political infighting, and
the lack of will to compromise and put national interests above personal,
the Ukrainian nation is suffering by not having a functioning government to
represent its interests.

Instability of Ukrainian politics and political leaders’ fickle loyalties
damage Ukraine’s image in the international arena and encumber Ukraine’s
integration into the Euro-Atlantic community.

The ongoing crisis highlights the rift in the Ukrainian society, which is
exploited by the politicians as a means of achieving their personal
ambitions.

Rather than working toward a compromise, which would bring stability to the
country and help enhance Ukraine’ economic development and prosperity,
Ukrainian politicians exchange ultimatums and continue to exacerbate this
serious situation.

The UCCA urges the Ukrainian political elite to remember their
responsibilities before the Ukrainian people and move away from senseless
argument toward a constructive dialogue.

All political forces in Ukraine should look for a way to create a unified,
strong, democratic and prosperous Ukrainian nation rather then struggle to
prevail in this conflict strictly on their terms.

Therefore, for the sake of the Ukrainian people and the integrity of Ukraine
as an independent nation, the UCCA calls upon all political leaders in
Ukraine to act in the interest of their electorate, uphold the Constitution
and adhere to democratic principles at a time when Ukraine most needs the
rule of law.

We urge the Ukrainian leadership to:

[1] maintain the current foreign policy objectives, including
integration into EuroAtlantic structures;
[2] preserve Ukraine’s national identity and the primacy of the
Ukrainian language and culture; and,
[3] defend the democratic ideals and reforms, which were brought

on and continue to be supported by the Ukrainian voters.

The Ukrainian Congress Committee of America sends its heartfelt support to
the Ukrainian people during these trying times and asks God to guide Ukraine’s
political leadership and provide it with the strength and foresight it needs
to make the right decisions for the future of the Ukrainian nation.

On behalf of the UCCA Executive Board,

Michael Sawkiw, Jr., President
Marie Duplak, Executive Secretary
Orest Baranyk, External Affairs Commission Chair
———————————————————————————————–
Washington, DC Office: Ukrainian National Information Service
311 Massachusetts Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20002
tel: (202) 547-0018, fax: (202) 543-5502
e-mail: unis@ucca.org; on the web at: http://www.ucca.org
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
29. SIXTH ANNUAL COMPETITION OF PUPILS’ RESEARCH AND
ART WORKS “HISTORY AND LESSONS OF HOLOCAUST”

Ukrainian Center for Holocaust Studies, Kyiv, Ukraine, Mon, Jul 31, 2006

Dear Colleagues: We are happy to tell you that the web-site of Ukrainian
Centre for Holocaust Studies has been updated. Important material is to
be found in the following options “news”, “publications” and “seminars”.

We would like to attract your special attention to the information on the
Sixth Annual Competition of Pupils’ Research and Art Works “History
and Lessons of Holocaust.”

With all the best wishes,
Ukrainian Centre for Holocaust Studies
8 Kutuzova str., office 109, 01011, Kyiv, Ukraine
tel/fax: +38 044 285-90-30,
E-mail: uhcenter@binet.com.ua; Web: www.holocaust.kiev.ua
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
30. BOOK: THE GERMANS UNDER THE TSARS, LENIN AND HITLER
Author grew up in a German Colony in what is now southern Ukraine

The Germans From Russia Heritage Collection
North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND, Tue, Aug 1, 2006

“The Germans Under the Tsars, Lenin and Hitler”
By John (Johannes) Philipps
Translated from German to English by Alex Herzog
Edited by Stephen M. Herzog, Ph.D.
Germans from Russia Heritage Collection, North Dakota State University
Libraries, Fargo, North Dakota, 2006, 103 pages, softcover

FARGO, NORTH DAKOTA – The Germans from Russia Heritage
Collection is pleased to publish “The Germans Under the Tsars, Lenin,
and Hitler” by John Phlipps.

In the “Introduction by the Historical Editor” written by Steven Herzog,
Ph.D., he states: “The value of this book, therefore, lies in the
perspective of its author, John Philipps. Even though he is not a

professional historian, he is admirably conversant in the basic outlines
of Russian history.

In particular, he leans heavily on the iconic works of Conrad Keller and Dr.
Karl Stumpp for discussion of immigration into Russia [and into what is

now southern Ukraine] and the formation of the German colonies.

More importantly, as an eyewitness to conditions in German-Russian
communities, John Philipps adds texture and detail to the framework that
Keller and Stumpp and others have provided.

His account, supplemented with an array of photos and maps, adds
immediacy to these infamous benchmarks of Soviet history and gives us
a sense of how they impacted German communities specifically.”

“John Philipps’s book provides a unique and important contribution: the
bird’s-eye view of a historical narrative coupled with the on-the-ground
perspective of someone who lived his formative years in a German-Russian
community.”
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
As German-Russian, John (Johannes) Philipps was born in the Beresan colony
of Landau [this area was then called South Russia but now it is in Southern

Ukraine not too far from Odessa] and grew up in a farming family who,
however, was already expelled early from their home. He studied agronomy
and later worked at the MTS-Waterloo.

His youth was overshadowed by poverty and hunger even though he came from
a well-to-do farming family. He experienced the deprivation of citizen
rights and wrenching deportation of his family, was captured by British troops

and finally uprooted without a country, petitioned for emigration to the United
States of America.

After he had conquered initial difficulties, he arrived finally in New York,
in 1952. He moved to California in 1955, where he accepted U.S. citizenship.
John Philipps experienced Stalin’s destructive politics and after World War
II, Philipps came to America where he could build a new home in a new

homeland.

Philipps is the author of these other books:
1) Tragedy of the Soviet Germans (1984, English language)
2) The Germans by the Black Sea Between the Bug and Dnjestr Rivers
(2000, English language)
3) Die deutschen Bauern am Schwarzeen Meer (1994, German language)
4) Speyer im Beresaner Tal der Sdukraine: 1809/1810 – Mrz 1994 heut
Pestschanyi Brod (1996, German language)
———————————————————————————————-

Michael M. Miller, Bibliographer, Germans from Russia Heritage
Collection (GRHC), Marie Rudel Portner Germans from Russia Room
North Dakota State University Libraries, P.O. Box 5599
1201 Albrecht Blvd., Fargo, ND 58105-5599 USA
Tel: 701-231-8416, Cell: 701-306-3224, E-mail: Michael.Miller@ndsu.edu
———————————————————————————————-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================

If you are receiving more than one copy of the AUR please contact us.
Please contact us if you no longer wish to receive the AUR.
You are welcome to send us names for the AUR distribution list.
If you are missing some issues of the AUR please let us know.
========================================================
“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.
========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE PROGRAM – SPONSORS

Action Ukraine Report (AUR)
Holodomor Art and Graphics Collection & Exhibitions
“Working to Secure & Enhance Ukraine’s Democratic Future”
1. THE BLEYZER FOUNDATION, Dr. Edilberto Segura,
Chairman; Victor Gekker, Executive Director, Kyiv, Ukraine;
Washington, D.C., http://www.bleyzerfoundation.com.
Additional supporting sponsors for the Action Ukraine Program
will be listed again later this week.
========================================================
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.

SPAM BLOCKERS ARE A REAL PROBLEM

If you do not receive a copy of the AUR it is probably because of a
SPAM BLOCKER maintained by your server or by yourself on your
computer. Spam blockers are set in very arbitrary and impersonal ways
and block out e-mails because of words found in many news stories.
Spam blockers also sometimes reject the AUR for other arbitrary reasons
we have not been able to identify. If you do not receive some of the AUR
numbers please let us know and we will send you the missing issues. Please
make sure the spam blocker used by your server and also the one on your
personal computer, if you use a spam blocker, is set properly to receive
the Action Ukraine Report (AUR).

========================================================
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 [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