AUR#769 Oct 6 Ukraine’s Choice:Toward Europe; Kyiv Not Kiev; Georgian President On Crisis; Genocide (Holodomor) Memorial Authorized In Washington, D.C.

                  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       

Mr. E. Morgan Williams, Publisher and Editor  
                   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’S CHOICE: TOWARD EUROPE
OP-ED: By Viktor Yanukovych
The Washington Post, Washington, D.C.
Thursday, October 5, 2006; Page A33

UNIAN news agency, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1824 gmt 4 Oct 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Wed, October 4, 2006


                            PLANS TO BUILD NEW FACILITY
Business Digest, Sofia, Bulgaria, Tue, October 3, 2006


Morgan Williams, Publisher and Editor
Action Ukraine Report (AUR) #769, Article Four
Washington, D.C., Friday, October 6, 2006

THE EAR: By Jim Davis, Ukrainian Observer, Issue 224
The Willard Group, Kyiv, Ukraine, October 2006

Business Digest, Sofia, Bulgaria, Wed, October 4, 2006

                     New store is expected to hire a full-time staff of 400
Business Digest, Sofia, Bulgaria, Tue, October 3, 2006

Polish News Bulletin, Warsaw, Poland, Tuesday, Oct 03, 2006

By Roman Olearchyk in Kiev, Financial Times
London, United Kingdom, Wed, October 4 2006

Centre TV, Moscow, in Russian 1345 gmt 2 Oct 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Monday, Oct 02, 2006

           “Firstly, I want to say that certainly, relations between Ukraine and

        Georgia are not only warm but hot. I think these relations are so warm
          and so hot that I think this will inevitably rub off on our neighbours.”
By Mikheil Saakashvili, President of Georgia
Rustavi-2 TV, Tbilisi, in Georgian 0615 gmt 5 Oct 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Thursday, Oct 05, 2006

                        Tbilisi spells out principles of conflict resolution
: by Vladimir Socor
Eurasia Daily Monitor — Volume 3, Issue 180
The Jamestown Foundation, Wash DC, Friday, Sep 29, 2006


               Kyiv’s and Tbilisi’s European prospects, never too promising
                         in the first place, can now be regarded as illusory.
Eurasia Daily Monitor, Volume 3, Issue 180
The Jamestown Foundation, Wash DC, Friday, Sep 29, 2006

               I cannot evaluate our relations with Ukraine as we practically

                            have no relations, no relations whatsoever.
With Aleksandr Ankvab, Abkhaz Prime Minister
Regnum, Moscow, Russia, in Russian 1631 gmt 2 Oct 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Wed, Oct 04, 2006
The Ukrainian Observer magazine, Issue 224
The Willard Group, Kyiv, Ukraine, October 2006

                  Party of Regions misjudges Ukrainian national interests
By Vladimir Socor
Eurasia Daily Monitor, Volume 3, Issue 177
The Jamestown Foundation, Wash DC, Tuesday, September 26, 2006


U.S. Congress, Washington, D.C. Friday, September 29, 2006
Action Ukraine Report (AUR) #769, Article 17
                                           BY U.S. CONGRESS
Ukrainian National Information Service (UNIS)
Washington, D.C., Wednesday, October 4, 2006

                              HOW WILL HISTORY JUDGE US?
Full-page advertisement, The Washington Post
Washington, D.C., Wednesday, October 4, 2006, page A5


By: Jason Burt, The Independent, London, UK, Wed, Oct 04, 2006
From Nika Belyaev,

Action Ukraine Report (AUR) #769, Article 21
Washington, D.C., Friday, October 6, 2006

                                               You Are Invited:              
             Ukraine’s Quest for Mature Nation Statehood – Roundtable VII
            October 17-18, 2006, Ronald Reagan Building, Washington, D.C
Center for U.S.-Ukrainian Relations (CUSUR)
New York, New York, Tuesday, October 3, 2006
                        You Are Invited: Georgetown University presents
          Ukraine’s Prospects: Assessing the Orange Revolution after Two Years
      Thursday, October 12, 2006 – 3:00 PM, Georgetown University, Wash, DC
Office of Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Member of Parliament
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, Thursday, October 5, 2006
            Crushing poverty, defenseless kids drive pastor to 2-year mission
By Jim Haug, Staff Writer, Daytona Beach Journal On-Line

Action Ukraine Report (AUR) #769, Article 26
Washington, D.C., Friday, October 6, 2006

OP-ED: By Viktor Yanukovych
The Washington Post, Washington, D.C.
Thursday, October 5, 2006; Page A33

Throughout European history, my country, Ukraine, has been badly
misunderstood in Western capitals. Until the middle of the past century, it
was referred to as “the Okraina,” literally the borderlands between European
civilization and a distant and unfathomable Russia. There are perhaps many
in Europe who still see us that way, but in fact things have changed in
Ukraine, to an extent that surprises even those of us who played a part in
bringing about those changes.

On Aug. 2, Ukraine’s president, Viktor Yushchenko, and I, along with other
political leaders, signed a statement of principles that we believe will
serve as the foundation for modern Ukraine. This statement will provide a
blueprint for the government and a guide to reforms to which we are
committed. Among the key points:

* Economic reform. Our citizens have been left behind by the economic
“shock therapy” and subsequent wave of prosperity that has swept over
Eastern Europe since 1989. We have seen what lowering taxes, securing
private prosperity and liberalizing trade have done for our neighbors in
Europe. Our government is going to be pro-business and committed to
building an economy that will be competitive in world markets. Our first
step on this path will be passage of legislation required for entry into the
World Trade Organization.

* Political pluralism. The powers of our government are divided fairly and
are faithful to the results of our parliamentary elections in March. The
party of Yushchenko — Our Ukraine — continues to hold the presidency and
ministerial positions in foreign affairs, defense, interior and the National
Security Council. My party, the Party of Regions, holds the prime
ministerial post and the majority of ministerial posts overall (they are
heavily focused on the economy). The leader of the Socialist Party,
Oleksander Moroz, is speaker of the parliament and a member of the
governing coalition. My political opponent Yulia Tymoshenko is head of
the largest opposition bloc in parliament and is already a candidate in the
2009 presidential elections. Parliament may at times be more raucous than
the U.S. Congress, but it is no less representative.

* Constructive relations with Russia and, where possible, a broadening of
cooperation. We believe that the core principle of both liberal trade theory
and diplomacy is a respect for the political character and sovereign
independence of other states. We believe these principles will guide our
relations with Russia on a range of bilateral issues, including our
discussions of energy security and cross-border investment.

President Yushchenko and I also agree that Ukraine has made a choice for
Europe and will pursue closer relations with all European and Euro-Atlantic
institutions. With the European Union, we are working on an action plan of
reforms under the auspices of the European Neighborhood Policy, which
we hope will lead to the beginning of negotiations on an E.U.-Ukraine
free-trade agreement. With the United States, we are developing an action
plan of anti-corruption measures and judicial reform under a grant from the
Millennium Challenge Corp. And we are committed to continuing active
cooperation with NATO.

As our relations with NATO have been a source of some confusion, let me
be clear. The president and I have secured legislation that allows Ukrainian
troops to participate in NATO exercises, in Ukraine and elsewhere. We
intend to pursue defense reforms.

But when an invitation is extended, we will hold a referendum in which the
Ukrainian people can make their choice. Whatever happens in this regard,
however, there should be no doubting our nation’s European direction.

Finally, Ukraine is and will remain a country of great diversity. We have
the largest Jewish population in Europe. I have many close friends of the
Islamic faith, and we have countless Christian denominations, including at
least three Orthodox ones.

Like Canada and Switzerland, we speak two languages, Ukrainian and Russian.
I come from Eastern Ukraine, where the first language of the majority of
people is Russian. This, too, has been a source of misunderstanding. Some
have suggested that the cultural influence of Russia and the linguistic
origins of people such as myself are proof that the Party of Regions is

It is not. The presence of Spanish-speaking Americans in the Republican and
Democratic parties does not make those parties pro-Spain or “pro” any other
country. By the same token, the American people should not think that my
party, or for that matter any party in Ukrainian politics, is less than
completely committed to the cultural unity and political independence of a
sovereign Ukrainian nation.

Be assured, Europe and America need not look for Ukraine somewhere out
on the borderlands anymore. After we have completed our reforms and built
our economy, Ukraine will be found at the very center of the Euro-Atlantic
world.                                               -30-
The writer is prime minister of Ukraine.

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

UNIAN news agency, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1824 gmt 4 Oct 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Wed, October 4, 2006

KIEV – The Ukrainian government will be a predictable and reliable partner
of the USA, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych said during a meeting today
with US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State David Kramer.

The press service of the Cabinet of Ministers told UNIAN that during the
meeting they discussed the prospects for bilateral cooperation and the basic
aspects of Ukraine’s foreign policy.

In particular, they discussed the deepening of Ukraine’s course towards
European and Euro-Atlantic integration. In this context, Yanukovych said
that Ukraine wants to build future relations with the European Union and
NATO in a goal-directed and yet pragmatic manner, taking into account
national interests and public opinion.

Yanukovych said that his statement on the format of Ukraine’s future
cooperation with NATO, which he made during his visit to Brussels [on

14 September], was agreed with the coalition council.

During the conversation, Kramer said that the USA is interested in
strengthening of relations between Ukraine and Russia.

The sides discussed issues of implementation of reforms in Ukraine, in
particular, the fight against corruption and formation of a
innovation-investment model for the development of the economy.

Yanukovych and Kramer also exchanged views about the timeframe for
Yanukovych’s visit to the USA.                          -30-

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

                        PLANS TO BUILD NEW FACILITY  
Business Digest, Sofia, Bulgaria, Tue, October 3, 2006

KYIV – The embassy of the United States in Ukraine bought a 27.104 mln

Ukrainian hryvnias ($5.4 mln/4.2 mln euro) land plot in the capital Kyiv, local
media reported on October 2, 2006.
The Kyiv city council approved the purchase at a session on September 28,
2006. The embassy will build facilities for the staff accommodation needs of
its diplomatic mission. (
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

Morgan Williams, Publisher and Editor
Action Ukraine Report (AUR) #769, Article Four
Washington, D.C., Friday, October 6, 2006
WASHINGTON – According to information in Washington this week
the U.S. State Department will most likely soon begin using the spelling
‘Kyiv’ instead of ‘Kiev’ for the capital of Ukraine in their written
The U.S. Government Board on Geographic Names (BGN) was
reported to have recently approved a request from several high-level
U.S. government officials, who are involved with Ukraine, to change
the BGN standard transliteration of the name of the Ukrainian capital
to ‘Kyiv’.
Reports indicate ‘Kiev’ remains the BGN conventional name for the
capital of Ukraine but that agencies of the U.S. government now have
the option to use ‘Kiev’ or ‘Kyiv’. The U.S. State Department is said to
have made a decision to now use “Kyiv” and other agencies of the
U.S. government are expected to follow the lead of the State Department. 
I hope all U.S. agencies will adopt the newly approved spelling ‘Kyiv.’
Kyiv is the English translation directly from Ukrainian. Kiev is the 
translation from Ukrainian to Russian to English.     -30-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
    Send in names and e-mail addresses for the AUR distribution list.

THE EAR: By Jim Davis, Ukrainian Observer, Issue 224
The Willard Group, Kyiv, Ukraine, October 2006

Over the 15 years of Ukrainian independence, the United States has appointed
a number of ambassadors to Ukraine. However, I would contend that some
unofficial ambassadors have done the most good and ultimately will be the
most fondly remembered.

One of those ambassadors that you may never have heard about is named
Basil Tarasko, a member of the Ukrainian Diaspora who is a fanatic about
kids and baseball.

For many years, Tarasko has collected and stored donated baseball and
softball equipment in his garage in Bayside, New York to help provide
equipment for developing a Little League (LL) program in Ukraine.

The donated equipment has come from LL communities in California,
Michigan, Florida, Iowa, Virginia, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Connecticut,
New York City area, Long Island, Upstate New York and Little League
Baseball, Inc.

Not only has he collected and managed to ship the equipment, all from
donated sources, he has personally made many trips to Ukraine to assist by
acting as administrator of the new Little League system and the setting up
of teams, particularly in orphanages.

Thanks to Tarasko and his devoted volunteer helpers, baseball has found

a niche and is becoming more widely accepted.

With the help of former Ambassador John Herbst, who was also a bit of a
baseball fanatic, ways have been found to take care of some of the very
expensive shipping costs to bring more of the donated equipment to Ukraine.

Baseball is still a rather exotic sport for Ukraine but this year the
seventh annual Ukraine Little League Baseball Championship was held in
Kyiv, clearly indicating that all the time and efforts are beginning to pay

There is still equipment arriving and available, and there is a continuing
need for ex-pat and Ukrainian volunteers to help set up new teams and

In the years ahead, long after most American and other ambassadors to
Ukraine are long forgotten, thousands of young people are likely be playing
baseball all over Ukraine.

In addition to a new sport, they will learn cooperation, teamwork and fair
play, all of which will be a living memorial to Basil Tarasko, one member of
the Ukrainian Diaspora who has probably made more difference than some
of the most expensive government programs.

If you’d like to know more about Little League in Ukraine, how it works and
how you could help, go to the following link:      

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

Business Digest, Sofia, Bulgaria, Wed, October 4, 2006

KYIV – French company Produits Laitiers Frais Est Europe, part of French
food group Danone, has finalised the 100 pct purchase of Ukrainian fresh
dairy company Molochnyi Zavod Rodich, Kiev-based Master & Partners law
firm reported. No further details about the purchase were disclosed.

The purchase of Rodich is Danone’s first acquisition of a Ukrainian dairy
market producer and Danone plans to keep the products currently made under
the Rodich and Vesely Pastushok brands. The contract about the acquisition
was signed in July 2006.

Danone ( doubled its net profit in the first half of 2006 to
704 mln euro ($892.8 mln). Sales totalled 7.22 bln euro ($9.157 bln) for
January to June 2006, a 9.0 pct year-on-year increase.

(Editor’s note: Danone has been selling imported products such as Activia,
Actimel, Rastichka and Danissimo in Ukraine since 1999, the French News
Digest reported.) (Alternative name: Rodych, Kyiv)          -30-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
                   New store is expected to hire a full-time staff of 400

Business Digest, Sofia, Bulgaria, Tue, October 3, 2006

KYIV –  Metro Cash & Carry Ukraine, the local arm of German wholesaler

Metro AG, is looking to open an outlet in the Crimean capital Simferopol,
local media reported on October 2, 2006.

The German retail group delivered a presentation to the Council of Ministers
of the autonomous republic, outlining the parameters of the planned

Small and medium-sized producers in the Crimea will benefit from a market
for 20,000 articles offered by Metro outlets, Crimean Prime Minister Viktor
Plakida said at the presentation. The new store is expected to hire a
full-time staff of 400.

Since it introduced building materials units to its outlets earlier this
year, Metro Cash & Carry now competes with large Ukrainian do-it-yourself
(DIY) store operators Oldi, Epicenter-K and Novaya Linia.

In addition, German rivals OBI and bauMax recently revealed expansion plans
in Ukraine.

[Editor’s note: Metro Cash & Carry Ukraine ( opened its
second store in the eastern city of Donetsk and the 11th in Ukraine on
September 26, 2006, according to information from the company’s website.

The outlet is situated on a 5.3 ha plot and covers an area of 14,000 sq m,
including a parking lot for 400 cars. Metro Cash & Carry ended 2005 with a
net profit of 67.54 mln Ukrainian hryvnias ($13.4 mln/10.5 mln euro) and a
net revenue of 2.282 bln hryvnias ($453 mln/356 mln euro), up 188.1 pct
year-on-year, the Ukrainian News Digest reported.]

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
     NOTE: Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.

Polish News Bulletin, Warsaw, Poland, Tuesday, Oct 03, 2006

WARSAW – Two major Polish banks, PKO BP and Pekao, plan to

increase their presence on the Ukrainian market this autumn.

However, their approach is different, as the first wants to concentrate on
expanding the activity of the dependant Kredobank, while the latter seeks
takeover opportunities.

Both aim to find a place on the list of the top ten banks in Ukraine.
According to Jacek Oblekowski, deputy president of PKO BP, Kredobank

will increase the number of its branches from 80 to 350, while the headquarters
of the bank will be moved from Lviv to the capital city Kiev.

The aim is to achieve a 3-percent market share, which would mean doubling
the current share. Pekao, on the other hand, plans to invest $125m in its
Ukrainian UniCredit Bank Ukraina and achieve a 10-percent market share in
the market of financial services.

Pekao targets to take over HVB Ukraina which, together with other
investments, would provide the company with 150 branches.         -30-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]


By Roman Olearchyk in Kiev, Financial Times
London, United Kingdom, Wed, October 4 2006

KIEV – Ukraine’s Supreme Court on Tuesday created a setback for Telenor,
Norway’s state-controlled telecomscompany, in its long-standing dispute with
Moscow-based Alfa Group over shared ownerships in Ukrainian and Russian
mobile phone assets.

The court ruled in favour of Altimo, the telecoms arm of Alfa, which is
controlled by Ukrainian-born oligarch Mikhail Fridman, concluding that a
company charter at Ukraine’s Kyivstar mobile service operator provided
unfair advantages to Telenor.

According to the court, clauses in Kyivstar’s charter, yielding Telenor
exclusive rights over a top management post and five out of four board
seats, violate Ukrainian law. Both sides will now have to revise Kyivstar’s
charter at a shareholder meeting.

Telenor said it planned to retain its majority presence on Kyivstar’s board,
but feared that Altimo, which has refused to take part in shareholder
meetings for nearly two years, would continue employing stalling tactics by
blocking shareholder meetings.

The Ukrainian ruling could strengthen Alfa’s position in upcoming
negotiations over management control at Kyivstar. It also provides Alfa with
increased leverage in a related dispute at VimpelCom, Russia’s largest
mobile phone operator.

Telenor owns 56.5 per cent of Kyivstar, Ukraine’s largest mobile provider
with 17.5m subscribers, and 29.9 per cent of VimpelCom. Altimo owns 32.9

per cent of VimpelCom and 43.5 per cent of Kyivstar.

Relations between Telenor and Alfa sank into a bitter dispute over expansion
plans for Ukraine after Alfa backed VimpelCom’s $230m acquisition of a
smaller Ukrainian operator. Telenor opposed the acquisition.

Both groups have been caught up in see-saw legal battles in Ukrainian and
Russian courts ever since.

Earlier this year, both sides sought a settlement. Altimo proposed that
VimpelCom buy Kyivstar; Telenor proposed an all-cash takeover worth in
excess of $5bn, allowing one of the two to buy out the other’s interest in
both firms.                                        -30-

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

Centre TV, Moscow, in Russian 1345 gmt 2 Oct 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Monday, Oct 02, 2006

MOSCOW – [Presenter] Georgian wine might never again return to the

Russian market, Russia’s chief public health officer Gennadiy Onishchenko
said today. In our country there are not yet any grounds for lifting the ban on
alcohol from Georgia, he said.

He said that the reason is only the question of the quality of the products;
it still does not meet Russian standards. Wines from other countries could
fill these niches in the Russian market, he believes.

Meanwhile, Russia has already introduced a ban on wine products from
Ukraine. Rodion Tuninskiy reports.

[Correspondent] Russia has banned several wine products from Ukraine. The
reason is that they do not meet quality standards of Rospotrebnadzor [the
Federal Service for Consumer Rights Protection]. Wines produced by state
enterprises have been included on the blacklist. Losses incurred have
already topped 1m dollars.

[Valeriy Romanovskiy, captioned as deputy director of the Kiev Champagne
Wine Plant] The Russian market is interesting for Ukraine in all spheres.
And the wine market is very important and interesting. Of course we would
like Ukrainian wines to be available on the Russian market. In any case,
this is a blow – a very severe blow, I think.

[Correspondent] The Ukrainians themselves regard their own alcohol products
with caution. Alcohol poisoning is not uncommon, and that is from products
from major wine producers. Many prefer imported wines, although they are
more expensive.

[Yevgeniya Smolyatskaya, young woman standing on the street] I had sediment
in the glass – granules like washing powder. I don’t know whether that’s a
problem with the plant, or in fact someone is using their name. Generally
speaking, that’s not real wine. So I don’t trust our national wine producers
very much.

[Correspondent] Some Ukrainian wine makers admit that the wine they produce
is made from Georgian surrogate alcohol. The joint Ukrainian-Georgian
business is profitable for both sides.

[Aleksandr, captioned as owner of a private wine plant, standing with his
back to the camera] I think it’s no secret that we occasionally buy wine
from Georgia. We bring in the surrogate alcohol and we bottle it here. And
in principle, the wine is supplied to you across our border. That way we
have fewer problems with raw materials and processing.

[Correspondent] Most plants in Ukraine have not changed their equipment

for decades. Wine is still bottled in rustic ways. The ingredients for the
drinks often come from fruit of doubtful quality.

Recently the plant has had problems with the delivery of raw materials.
Apples are taken from its own garden in order to maintain production.

In Ukraine, the cultivation of grapes, transport of raw materials and
production of wine are carried out by different organizations. The lack of a
single system of control from the first to the last stage of the cycle means
that it is practically impossible to monitor the quality of the product. -30-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]


           “Firstly, I want to say that certainly, relations between Ukraine and

        Georgia are not only warm but hot. I think these relations are so warm
          and so hot that I think this will inevitably rub off on our neighbours.”

COMMENTS: By Mikheil Saakashvili, President of Georgia
Rustavi-2 TV, Tbilisi, in Georgian 0615 gmt 5 Oct 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Thursday, Oct 05, 2006

President Mikheil Saakashvili has said that he voted today for Georgia to
continue its development and restore its territorial integrity. Saakashvili
took questions from local and international media representatives after
voting in central Tbilisi.

He described the 5 October local elections as the first fully-fledged local
elections in Georgia and expressed his hope that voter turnout would be

Asked if Georgia was scared by threats from Russia, Saakashvili said that
Georgia would respond by continuing to rebuild the country. Saakashvili also
described Georgian-Ukrainian relations as “a striking example of cooperation
and mutual understanding between a big country and a small country”.

The following is the text of Saakashvili’s comments broadcast by Rustavi-2
TV on 5 October; subheadings have been inserted editorially:

[Saakashvili] I want to tell you that today I voted for the continuation of
the building and rebuilding process and for the continuation and successful
completion of the process of Georgia’s becoming whole.

This is the main purpose of these elections. It is also important for us
that the elections be held throughout the country in a disciplined and
organized manner.

We have a big problem in our family because there are four of us, but we
only have one vote [laughter]. These guys are too young [points to his
sons], according to the constitution and the law, while Sandra [Roelofs, the
first lady] is not a Georgian citizen.

Therefore, I want to call on all other Georgian families to help out our
family. Since our family has only one vote, other families with more votes
should be more active in the elections.
There has been a lot of name-calling and criticism about Georgia heard over
the past few days from certain people, yet at the same time there has been a
great deal of support from the rest of the world. This is nothing but a sign
of the helplessness of those who think ill of us and of the fact that they
do not know what to do.

They can no longer stop Georgia’s progress toward freedom and a better
future. We must respond to those forces by being disciplined, organized and
united and show the rest of the world, which supports us, that we are an
organized, disciplined and civilized people with confidence in our own
abilities. And I am sure that we will do this today.

[Switches to English, as spoken] I think the elections – this is first ever
full-scale local government elections in Georgia, so in a way it is a big
democratic step forward.

It is significant because we are developing a new system, we are developing
new kind of phenomenon here in Georgia in order to transform Georgia in
full-fledged liberal, European-style democracy.

And from that point of view, I think the way this election is conducted
means significant step forward for Georgian democracy and for our freedom
agenda in my country and, I guess, wider in the region. That’s it. [Question

We are confident that the elections will go well, that’s all I can tell you.
[Switches to Russian] All I can say is that these are the first
fully-fledged local elections in Georgia where the people will elect
practically all heads of local government bodies. I think that this is a
very important step forward.

Georgia is now on the rise, Georgia is developing, Georgia is developing
much faster than even we thought it would. I think this will be reflected
not only during the elections but also in the post-election development of
our country. My family and I are very optimistic.
[Question, in English] Can you say that Georgia is not scared by the threats
from Russia?

[Saakashvili, in English] No, I mean, the way we have been responding to
some overreaction and irrational statements has been to move on, to move on
with our development. Over the last few days nobody broke our schedule here,
nobody reacted in any special way. I have been opening hospitals, I have
been opening schools.

We are continuing to develop and that’s how we are going to continue because
we are not [changes tack]. There is nothing new for us in that. We have seen
it for years and that has not stopped us from developing and regaining
confidence in our force, in our future, in our own selves.
[Question, in Russian] [Sentence indistinct] When is the Ukrainian media to
hear again about the warming of relations between Russia and Georgia?

[Saakashvili, in Russian] Firstly, I want to say that certainly, relations
between Ukraine and Georgia are not only warm but hot. I think these
relations are so warm and so hot that I think this will inevitably rub off
on our neighbours.

I think relations between Ukraine and Georgia are a vivid example of the
fact that relations between big countries and small countries in the
region – Ukraine is truly a big country, a great country – can be equal,
warm, friendly and fraternal and that any big country can be friends with a
small country and stride together with it along the path to development,
along the path to Europe, along the path of common movement into the


In this regard, I believe Ukraine and Georgia are a striking example of
cooperation and mutual understanding. Thank you. [Question indistinct]
[Saakashvili, in Russian] You know, to the best of my knowledge, our party’s
rating has been very high this whole time. And at the same time, as far as I
remember, regrettably, relations over the past years and months could have
been better. There is nothing new in what has been happening over the past
few days. I think that all of these things are not connected to each other.

All politics is local. In particular, local elections are very much local
politics. In Georgia this year we have built more hospitals, more schools
and more roads than were built in Georgia in total over the past 25 years,
including the Soviet period, including the Soviet period.

So, I think that all of this will be reflected in the results of the
elections. You can tour our cities, not only Tbilisi. I had the opportunity
yesterday to see what has changed in Telavi [in eastern Georgia]. A lot has
changed. This is the essence of our policy.

The more pressure there is, the more statements are made – this is all
simply a sign of the weakness of those who do all of this. We react to this
with absolute calm, as you can see.                    -30-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

 If you are receiving more than one copy of the AUR please contact us.
                           Tbilisi spells out principles of conflict resolution

ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: by Vladimir Socor
Eurasia Daily Monitor — Volume 3, Issue 180
The Jamestown Foundation, Wash DC, Friday, Sep 29, 2006

Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili’s September 22 address to the United
Nations General Assembly has transformed the terms of international
discussion on the post-Soviet “frozen” conflicts.

After Saakashvili’s address, hardly any international actors other than
Moscow’s ad-hoc supporters could any longer defend Russia’s

“peacekeeping” and “mediation” or its prescriptions for political settlement
of these conflicts.

Saakashvili’s address has — for the first time in many years at this
level — clearly set down the basic parameters for dealing with these

1. The conflicts in Abkhazia and South Ossetia are “territorial conflicts,”
conducted by Russia against Georgia. Saakashvili outlined the process by
which “these regions are being annexed” through military force and handover
of Russian citizenship to local residents, directly violating international

This part of Saakashvili’s speech implicitly underscores the long-ignored
change in the nature of these conflicts: from local ethnic conflicts
(Moscow-orchestrated in the first place) into a Russian assault on Georgia.

2. All ethnic communities suffer in the secessionist enclaves: the Georgians
through ethnic cleansing and denial of native-language education, the others
through rule by “sponsors of organized crime, fear, and lawlessness. Such
suffering must come to an end.” Implicitly but clearly, the grounds for
international humanitarian intervention are shown to exist.

3. “Proxies” underscore Russia’s primary role in the conflict.  Saakashvili
called attention to the heavy arming of Abkhaz and South Ossetian forces by
Russia and frequently held joint exercises of secessionist and Russian

4. Russia’s conduct poses a clear case of aggression: “Few examples are more
blatant of a state seeking to annex the internationally recognized territory
of another state.” Thus, Russia is shown to challenge the foundations of the
international system as well.

5. Georgia holds the right of self-defense based on international law:
Saakashvili wondered aloud “whether any members in this great hall would
tolerate such intervention on their own soil.” Russia, he noted, expects the
international community to accept this situation with regard to Georgia.

If accepted, then “lawlessness and indifference to it [become] the new rules
of the international game.” The ultimate stake transcends Georgia: “There is
a vital interest to reject the unraveling of sovereign statehood.”

6. Resolution of these conflicts must be integrated with the agenda for rule
of law and democracy: “The residents of our disputed territories are under a
form of gangster occupation. The Rose Revolution and democracy in Georgia
will remain unfinished until all citizens of Georgia have the right to
participate in the life and decisions of the state.”

7. On their track record, Saakashvili noted, “The inherited peacekeeping
frameworks and negotiating formats neither promote peace nor encourage any
genuine negotiation.…They have served to perpetuate, rather than resolve the

In the course of 12 years, Russia’s “peacekeepers” have failed to facilitate
the return of Georgian refugees to Abkhazia. Russian peacekeeping operations
have “abused and made a farce of the principles of neutrality, impartiality,
and trust.”

8. Georgia calls for international action to “replace and transform the
current frameworks for negotiation and peacekeeping in Abkhazia and South

It seeks demilitarization of both areas and the deployment of
internationally mandated police units, backed by active engagement of the
UN, OSCE, and the European Union. Russia’s ‘peacekeeping’ forces
“themselves, by their own choice, not by ours, have in effect annulled their
own mandate.”

The negotiating formats must be reconfigured to focus on “direct dialogue on
the ground between Georgians and Abkhaz, Georgians and South Ossetians” as
well as opening the prospect of economic rehabilitation: “Why should our
citizens be reduced to such miserable economic conditions?”

9. Thus, Georgia serves notice that it intends to exercise “the sovereign
right to request the removal of foreign military forces. We make no secret
of our intentions to fulfill this sovereign right and solemn duty.”

Saakashvili was alluding to plans by the Georgian government and parliament
to issue in October an evaluation of more than a decade of Russian
“peacekeeping” and, based on that track record, to demand the termination of
those operations.

10. The onus for a peaceful resolution rests not only on Georgia, but on the
international community as well: “Let no one ever say that Georgia was not
clear as to how it would protect its democracy and its State, let no one
ever say that we did not seek to do so by peaceful means alone.…All nations
that share these values are willing to sacrifice for them.”

In the run-up to the Georgian parliament’s vote, some governments and
international organizations that have over the years grown comfortable with
the Russia-created status quo were beginning to discourage Georgia from
trying to change that situation.

Saakashvili’s UN address — a consensus product of Georgia’s presidency,
leading parliamentarians, and its government — has rendered those attempts
to protect the Russian-made status quo unsustainable from now on.

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
             Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
             Kyiv’s and Tbilisi’s European prospects, never too promising
                      in the first place, can now be regarded as illusory.

Eurasia Daily Monitor, Volume 3, Issue 180
The Jamestown Foundation, Wash DC, Friday, Sep 29, 2006

An imminent halt in the European Union’s eastward expansion will create a
new geopolitical reality in Russia and the EU’s overlapping neighborhoods.

This week Brussels made two key decisions. [1] First, Romania and Bulgaria
were reluctantly green-lighted to join the EU in January. (The possible
alternative was a humiliating delay by a year of their accession date.)

[2] Second, the Union appeared to put any further enlargement on hold.
Speaking on September 26 in the European Parliament, José Manuel Barroso,
the European Commission president, clearly indicated that the fifth
enlargement since 1957 might have to be the last for a long time.

An “institutional settlement” must now precede any further increase in EU
membership, Barroso said. “This is the way to ensure that our enlarged

union will function in an efficient and harmonious way.”

In practice, the call for the EU to adjust itself before it can start
expanding again means that the member states will have to return to the
tangled and potentially divisive constitutional issues addressed in the
draft treaty that was all but killed by the French and Dutch “no” votes at
the 2005 referendums.

Indeed, the 2004 big-bang accession of the 10 new predominantly East
European entrants — a development that was never terribly popular with the
West European public — created significant strains within the organization
that it cannot further ignore.

The decision-making process inside EU institutions has become even more
unwieldy, voting more complicated, and national interests too complex to be

So, the announcement of a “pause” in EU expansion in order to concentrate

on “reflection and reform” is seen by many analysts as a prudent decision.

But other commentators rightly point out that this pause may well last
indefinitely, as any prospects of reaching consensus on the EU
constitution — either through changing its form or merely adjusting its
contents — are extremely slim. Thus the time-out taken by Brussels may
spell the “end of EU enlargement,” as one recent commentary suggests.

Such a prospect poses a serious question about EU foreign policy — in
particular, Brussels’ interaction with the former Soviet republics. So far,
“United Europe” has failed to turn itself into a global center of power.

Despite its huge potential, the EU could not function due to the inability
of its members to find common ground on crucial policy issues. But being
unable to project its power globally, the bloc was fairly successful
locally, in what can be called the EU’s “near abroad.”

Arguably, enlargement was the EU’s most effective policy tool. As the
“European model” remains very attractive for the less fortunate states
living on Europe’s eastern and southern periphery, the mere prospect of
joining the rich club helped export European values and institutions to the
former Soviet bloc countries.

The incentive of membership served as an instrument for transforming the

EU’s neighborhood, bringing stability and security to the territories on the
Union’s eastern frontiers.

It is broadly accepted that, but for the “carrot” of EU membership, most
East European newcomers would not have been able to successfully complete
the series of complex and painful reforms that they started implementing at
the beginning of the 1990s.

So long as the promise of eventual membership is out there — irrespective
of how distant actual membership might be — the EU has powerful leverage
and is able to pursue its strategic interests in the adjacent territories.

But if the enlargement process is put on hold and the “membership lever”
removed, some analysts argue, there will be a completely different ball game
where the poorly defined “European Neighborhood Policy” cannot serve as a
viable alternative to full-blown membership.

Thus, a new geopolitical situation is likely to emerge in the “gray zone”
between the seemingly ossified eastern borders of the 27 states of United
Europe and the western borders of Russia.

[1] First, the nature of the relations between Brussels and such
European-leaning post-Soviet countries as Ukraine and Georgia will likely
become even fuzzier.

Following the EU leadership’s decision to pause the enlargement process to
sort out the bloc’s internal affairs, Kyiv’s and Tbilisi’s European
prospects, never too promising in the first place, can now be regarded as

The EU’s reluctance to engage Ukraine and Georgia in a meaningful way will
play into the Kremlin’s hands, as Russia is keen to restore its influence in
the countries that radically changed their geopolitical orientation in the
course of the pro-European “color revolutions.”

[2] Second, Europe’s participation in the mediation and settlement of the
“frozen” conflicts in the post-Soviet space will likely be negligible. The
only exception is possibly Transnistria, due to the lobbying efforts of

[3] Third, as EU enlargement grinds to a halt, the role of the United
States, as sole superpower and leader of the Western world, in post-

Soviet Eurasia will inevitably grow.

[4] Fourth, since Moscow and Washington continue to have diverging

strategic outlooks on the post-Soviet space, the U.S.-Russia rivalry in
the region will likely become more intense.        -30-
(, September 28; Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, September
27; RFE/RL, September 26)
The Jamestown Foundation,
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
             I cannot evaluate our relations with Ukraine as we practically
                            have no relations, no relations whatsoever.

INTERVIEW: With Aleksandr Ankvab, Abkhaz Prime Minister
Regnum, Moscow, Russia, in Russian 1631 gmt 2 Oct 06
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Wed, Oct 04, 2006

Abkhaz prime minister Aleksandr Ankvab has spoken out against the mooted
replacement of Russian peacekeepers in Abkhazia with a mixed peacekeeping
force that would include Ukrainian troops.

He said in an interview with a Russian news agency that Abkhazia remembered
how Ukrainians fought alongside Georgian troops during the 1992-93
Georgian-Abkhaz war.

In addition, Ankvab expressed his approval of Abkhazia’s strengthening ties
with other unrecognized regions in the former Soviet Union and praised
Russia for its continuing support for the Abkhaz people. The following is an
excerpt from Ankvab’s interview with the Russian Regnum news agency:
     Abkhazia’s common history with South Ossetia, Crimea, Dniester
[Question] On 30 September Abkhazia marked its independence day. Who

else took part in the celebrations?

[Ankvab] Representatives of civic organizations from Crimea, South Ossetia
and the Dniester region visited us to express their solidarity. We share a
common history with these peoples, not just a common present.

Crimeans say that every inch of the Crimean soil is red with the blood of
Russian soldiers, but I would like to rephrase that and say that it is red
with the blood of the Soviet soldier.

Many of our compatriots and residents of other republics of the Soviet Union
lost their lives in Crimea, though certainly, the Russian people bore the
brunt of that war. [Passage omitted]
Contacts among young people from unrecognized republics “praiseworthy”
[Question] Representatives of public youth organizations of the unrecognized
republics and Crimea who have decided to unite in a common front, Proryv
[Russian: breakthrough] visited Sukhumi for the first time. What do you
think of these young people’s aspiration to see the unification of these

[Ankvab] Their contacts are praiseworthy. It is very important that they
have found opportunities to meet, come to better know each other as well as
the past and present of our regions. [Passage omitted]

The contacts which such youth organizations establish are very valuable for
us in our efforts to restore our relations, which have been disrupted. We
welcome these contacts and will by all means support them.

Regardless of how difficult it may be, we will always be able to find the
financial resources to organize such meetings in Abkhazia. [Passage omitted]
                        “Yankees arrive and dictate their terms”
I do not know much about the aspirations and the activities of the Crimean
youth organization Proryv. I know them only from the events that took place
when foreign troops were deployed in Feodosia. But I should say it was very
impressive. It took a lot of determination. At times when I was watching
“the tube”

I had a feeling that I was one of them, one of the rally participants,
amidst the picketers. There is a grain of our common history in me too.
That’s why the arrival of the Yankees touched me strongly, too.

They come and dictate their terms to us. After they have directed the scene,
fraternal peoples start finding out whose lighthouses are where, whose
harbours are where, whose territories are where, or how Russian sailors
should behave in Crimea. And all of a sudden they got, as we say in Russian,
a kick in the pants.

It is noteworthy that people of all age groups and all generations showed
their assertiveness and staged rallies, not sparing themselves.
                “Heroism” of people of Dniester “worthy of respect”
I get information from our colleagues and am also well aware what inspires
the youth in South Ossetia, and how that manifested itself not long ago when
they were defending their independence. I know how high the spirit of
patriotism is in South Ossetia. Certainly this is to be respected.

We also have similar special relations with the people of Dniester. This
place is close to us because these people are close to us. When we were
defending ourselves from Georgia’s aggression, the people of Dniester showed
heroism on our soil. There were only a few of them, but this fact is still
due much respect.

I personally know many citizens of the republic of Dniester who followed the
call of their hearts and came out to defend their fraternal people of
     PM says ties with Dniester to be strengthened, praises referendum
[Question] What are your relations with the republics at present?

[Answer] A summit of the three republics’ presidents took place recently and
proved to be quite interesting and fruitful. We signed important documents
on cooperation.

Recently a delegation of ours paid a working visit to the republic of
Dniester, where it held quite interesting meetings with the republic’s
leadership and toured enterprises and met staff.

We sent observers to the referendum in the republic of Dniester. We know how
well-organized the referendum was, and how enthusiastic the people of the
republic of Dniester were to express their will.

The figures speak for themselves – more than 97 per cent voted to join
Russia. And perhaps it is worth considering for Moldova that not a small
number of those who voted in the referendum were Moldovans. Representatives
of the parliament and the ministry of education of the republic of Dniester
will soon be visiting us.

We are going to sign an agreement on cooperation in science, culture, sport
and education. We will certainly strengthen such relations further.
                     “Russianness” best preserved in Abkhazia
[Question] Today considerably fewer Russians live in Abkhazia. Does that
mean that the attitude towards this or that manifestation of “Russianness”
or that Russia itself has changed?

[Answer] Certainly a lot has changed in post-Soviet territory. Nonetheless,
the number of Russian schools has practically not gone down at all. Of 170
schools, 51 are Russian, and 17 are Russo-Abkhaz. I give you my word there
is no other place in the whole of the former Soviet Union where everything
is so well-preserved.

You can hear Russian speech everywhere throughout Abkhazia. There is no
problem in ours relations and there is demand to preserve these traditions.

We maintain very close ties with Russia. Since the demise of the Soviet
Union we have done our best not to sever these relations.

Today these relations are quite close. And this is happening when there are
so many problems because of certain documents that have placed Abkhazia
under blockade since the war. Many of these are no longer in force. The
demand for maintaining and strengthening relations with Russia has always
been obvious.
                               Russian assistance appreciated
In turn, the Russian leadership has been doing a great deal for Abkhazia,
especially recently. For example each month Russia allocates a total of R40m
for our pensioners. We would not be able to bear the burden of dealing with
such amounts on our own.

Our annual budget is only R901m. In addition, Russian assistance foundations
annually allocate substantial amounts of money for various social programmes
for their compatriots. You have seen that asphalt is being laid on the road
into Abkhazia.

Such high-quality roads have already been laid towards Gagra. All this is
done with the money of the Russian Compatriots Assistance Foundation and

it is quite a lot of money. We would hardly be able to do such work

This year we received 200,000 textbooks for our schools from the Russian
government with the support of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other
agencies. In terms of market prices, textbooks cost families some R180 each.
This can be quite expensive for families with several children. Russia’s
assistance in this area has been significant.

We have good contacts with the government of Moscow and with [Moscow

Mayor] Yuriy Mikhaylovich Luzhkov. We have received essential help consistently
over the past few years, including two thousand tonnes of bitumen, which is
worth over a million dollars. Trolleybuses and equipment have been donated.
The Moscow healthcare department has yet to deny us any of our requests.

This all adds up to a lot of money. I can name examples of other regions
helping us as well, such as Rostov Region, Krasnodar Territory and others. I
should point out that their assistance is essential, especially that from
the Kuban region, which provides us with grain. We receive this assistance
with great gratitude.

We recently had a meeting with Abkhaz young people who graduated from
Russian higher education institutions. There are very many of them. They
received an excellent education in Russia, many of them study in graduate
courses, many of them have already “defended” their dissertations.

Many of them have gone on to other countries to continue their studies based
on the recommendations of Russian higher education institutions. And every
year we continue to be granted quotas for study programmes. This year we
sent 52 people. All of this is free of charge for us.

This is great support for our future. As you can see, these examples of our
relations with the Russian Federation are very impressive. In the future we
will only strengthen such contacts.

Ukraine should not interfere in Georgian-Abkhaz relations – Ankvab
[Question] What are your relations like with Ukraine?

While talking with young people from the unrecognized republics and from
Crimea, I said that I thought they should establish contacts, keep in touch,
exchange information and visit each other (if the border guards let them

I know a lot of examples where Ukrainian border guards would hassle Abkhaz
citizens with Soviet passports when the Moscow-Adler train travelled through
Ukraine. The problems were very serious.

We have often expressed our indignation at this. I always recommended to my
friends and acquaintances that they not take that train, but rather take a
direct route. Now what can be done?

I cannot evaluate our relations with Ukraine as we practically have no
relations, no relations whatsoever. But we remember how representatives of
Ukrainian organizations fought alongside troops of the Georgian State
Council who invaded us and tried to take our land. We remember this.

That’s why when we hear calls for replacing the Russian peacekeeping force
with a mixed peacekeeping force that would include Ukrainian troops, we say:
pardon us, but nothing will come of this. We know how the Ukrainians behaved

But many of them got what they deserved. And now the hotheads are saying
that they are ready to fight us again. But we have asked Crimeans to tell
them that it is better to eat wholesome borshch at home than to find
yourself in some dangerous situation.

After all, we do not interfere in Ukrainian conflicts and the political
processes under way there. Why do they need to interfere in our relations
with Georgia? This is our business. We will clarify our relations ourselves!
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

The Ukrainian Observer magazine, Issue 224
The Willard Group, Kyiv, Ukraine, October 2006

Ukraine has led the way in the CIS with its deep levels of cooperation with
NATO, and in seeking EU and NATO membership.

Ukraine has always supported intensive levels of cooperation multilaterally
within NATO’s “Partnership for Peace” (“PfP”) and bilaterally “In the Spirit
of Partnership for Peace” programs.

Ukraine helped to facilitate the enlargement of NATO into Central and
Eastern Europe by supporting the broadening of the alliance eastwards to the
borders of the Western CIS, looking upon an enlarged NATO as enhancing
Ukraine’s national security.

Following Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych’s visit to NATO headquarters in
September, 2006 he was heavily criticized by the presidential secretariat
and Our Ukraine for his call for a “pause” in the seeking of a NATO
Membership Action Plan (MAP).

Two issues arise.
[1] Firstly, it is not Ukraine’s prerogative to request, or not to request,
a NATO MAP, since it is NATO that does the inviting into the MAP process

as a preparatory phase before membership.
[2] Secondly, NATO had already unofficially moved away from its intention to
offer Ukraine a MAP following the collapse of the brief Orange coalition;
already two months prior to Prime Minister Yanukovych’s visit to NATO.

The lack of an invitation into a MAP is more a result of the failed strategy
pursued by the presidential secretariat, President Viktor Yushchenko and Our
Ukraine following the March 2006 elections, rather than Prime Minister
This does not absolve the Party of Regions from the accusation of blatant
opportunism in its stance towards NATO, and foreign policy in general, as
seen in the following survey.

In government in both 2002-2004 and in 2006, Prime Minister Yanukovych and
the Party of Regions supported intensive cooperation with NATO and even
membership. Briefly outside government in 2005-2006, Yanukovych and the
Party of Regions opposed the very same policies.

Ukraine has held annual “PfP” and “In the Spirit of PfP” exercises since
1997 at Yaroviv, a military training ground near Lviv. Other exercises were
held near Odesa and in Crimea. Centrist political forces, such as the Party
of Regions, never opposed these exercises during Kuchma’s decade in power.
The first Yanukovych government supported the holding of these exercises.

Following NATO’s signing of a Charter on a Distinctive Partnership with
Ukraine on July 9, 1997, Ukraine supported the first and second rounds of
NATO enlargement in 1997-1999 and 2002-2004. This position contrasted

with that of Russia, which opposed NATO enlargement.

Ukraine first declared its intention to join NATO in July 2002, four months
before Yanukovych became Prime Minister.

The first Yanukovych government never rescinded the official position of
seeking to join NATO, and never publicly stated that such a step would be
impermissible because of low public support or because it would harm
relations with Russia, two of the main arguments used by Yanukovych during
his September 2006 visit to NATO headquarters.

During the 2004 presidential elections, Yanukovych introduced opposition to
NATO membership in the last month of the campaign alongside raising the
Russian language to a second state language and dual citizenship with

All three issues, following the doubling of state pensions, were aimed at
attracting Russian speaking and Communist Party voters.

The introduction of opposition to NATO membership into the election campaign
by Yanukovych, when his government still officially supported NATO
membership, smacked of opportunism.

Following Yushchenko’s election victory on December 26, 2004, the Party of
Regions and the Social Democratic United Party (SDPUo) initiated steps to
hold a referendum on NATO membership.

The SDPUo is led by Viktor Medvedchuk who headed the presidential
administration during the same two-year period that Ukraine had an official
policy of seeking NATO membership in 2002-2004. Medvedchuk never called

for Ukraine to hold a referendum on NATO membership under Kuchma.

The Party of Regions and SDPUo’s strategy of campaigning for a referendum

on NATO membership aimed to use anti-NATO sentiment to undermine the
Yushchenko administration in Russian speaking Eastern and Southern Ukraine.

These two regions had largely voted for Yanukovych in all three rounds of
the 2004 elections and it was hoped that this would be repeated in the 2006
parliamentary elections.

Former pro-Kuchma centrists, such as the Party of Regions and the SDPUo,
also backtracked from their support for cooperation with NATO (as well as
seeking NATO membership).

During the last fifteen months of the 2002-2006 parliament, both parties
voted against legislation that supported Ukraine’s military cooperation with
“PfP” and “In the Spirit of PfP”.

Between 1997-2004, this legislation had been routinely approved by
pro-Kuchma centrists and the then center-right opposition (with only the
left voting against).

Yet, in 2005-2006, the Ukrainian parliament was unable to adopt legislation
permitting foreign troops to exercise in Ukraine and for NATO to lease
Ukrainian transportation aircraft because the center aligned with the
traditionally anti-NATO left.

The anti-NATO/Yushchenko alliance of the Party of Regions and the SDPUo
disintegrated following the March 26, 2006 parliamentary elections. Of the
former pro-Kuchma centrists, only the Party of Regions entered parliament
with 32 percent of the vote.

The campaign to hold a referendum on NATO membership became less important
to the Party of Regions than entering government. Former pro-Kuchma allies,
such as the SDPUo, were ditched in favor of holding negotiations with Our
Ukraine on establishing a parliamentary Grand Coalition.

The Party of Regions successfully capitalized on internal disquiet in the
Orange camp, and on weak presidential leadership. Anti-NATO and
anti-American rallies in the Crimea in May-June 2006, orchestrated by the
Party of Regions and its extreme left and Pan-Slavic allies, led to the
first ever cancellations of “PfP” and “In the Spirit of PfP” exercises.

The rallies ended following the creation of the Anti-Crisis parliamentary
coalition between the Party of Regions, Socialist and Communist Parties on
July 5, 2006.

President Yushchenko’s Our Ukraine had opted to join an Orange coalition
over a Grand coalition between Our Ukraine and the Party of Regions, but the
Orange coalition rapidly collapsed after the Socialist Party defected. The
Socialists, together with the Party of Regions and Communist Party,
established the Anti-Crisis coalition and government.

The signing of the Universal of National Unity by President Yushchenko, the
Our Ukraine pro-presidential bloc and the three members of the Anti-Crisis
coalition reduced the need for the Party of Regions to continue its
opportunistic anti-NATO activities. The Universal continues to support
cooperation with NATO while ignoring the issue of membership.

On the same day that Yanukovych was confirmed by parliament as Prime
Minister, parliament also voted to support the holding of “PfP” and “In the
Spirit of PfP” military exercises, the very same legislation that parliament
had failed to adopt in 2005-2006.

Our Ukraine and the Party of Regions voted for the legislation, with the
left voting against and the Yulia Tymoshenko bloc boycotting parliament.

The Party of Regions had never opposed Ukraine’s cooperation under “PfP” and
“In the Spirit of PfP” during the Kuchma era, including when Yanukovych
first headed the government in 2002-2004.

Following Yanukovych’s return as Prime Minister, the Party of Regions
returned to its Kuchma era support for cooperation with NATO.

The Party of Regions opposed cooperation with NATO and fanned anti-NATO
sentiment only when it was briefly in opposition in 2005-2006. In other
words, opportunism, rather than ideological principles, guided the Party of
Regions attitudes towards foreign policy.
                               YANUKOVYCH IN BRUSSELS
During Prime Minister Yanukovych’s visit to NATO headquarters in September
2006, he reiterated Ukraine’s desire to deepen cooperation based on
Intensified Dialogue on Membership Issues and yearly Action Plans (in place
since 2003).

“Ukraine highly values the level of cooperation with NATO. We value
continued support for our Euro-Atlantic aims, support for military reform
and democratic and market transformations”, Yanukovych told a closed
Ukraine-NATO Commission.

Yanukovych promised to improve information work on NATO, a step that NATO
should hold him to as the NATO Information and Documentation Center, which
was established in Kyiv in 1997, has traditionally had little support and
cooperation from the Ukrainian authorities.

The main criticism of Yanukovych’s visit to NATO focused on his disinterest
at this current moment in time on Ukraine being invited into a NATO MAP.
During his speech to the Ukraine-NATO Commission, he said that he had strove
to separate membership issues from, “normal, mutually beneficial cooperation
with the alliance”.

Our Ukraine and the Tymoshenko bloc had earlier accepted Prime Minister
Yanukovych’s linkage of membership to the holding of a referendum. With
support for membership having declined to twenty percent, Ukraine differed
from Georgia, which had seventy per cent support for membership.
                                DISINGENUOUS CRITICISM
Criticism from President Yushchenko’s Secretariat and Our Ukraine was an
attempt at deflecting blame from their own lack of a strategy since the
March 2006 elections.

Ukraine could have been invited into a MAP during NATO’s meeting in New York
in September, on the eve of the November 27-28 Riga summit, but this would
have required a pro-reform coalition government to have been quickly
established following the elections.

The failure to create a pro-reform coalition and government, and the
creation instead of the Anti-Crisis coalition with two members opposed to
NATO membership (i.e. the Socialist and Communist Parties), ruled out
Ukraine being invited into a MAP already prior to Yanukovych’s visit to

Following the Orange Revolution, Ukraine’s integration into Euro-Atlantic
structures has been focused upon the WTO and NATO where membership is

on offer. Ukraine had two major hurdles to pass in its quest to receive a MAP;
the first was to hold a free and fair parliamentary election.

Ukraine passed this hurdle after the OSCE, Council of Europe and EU,
declared them to have been held in a “free and fair” manner. The second
hurdle was to transform free elections into a pro-reform parliamentary
coalition and government, an obstacle that Ukraine failed to vault.

Following the 2006 elections, the Bush administration, and some other NATO
countries, linked Ukraine’s invitation into a MAP at the Riga summit to the
creation of a pro-reform parliamentary coalition and government.

“Pro-reform” was clearly understood as drawing on those political forces who
had supported the Orange Revolution and who had entered the 2006 parliament
(i.e. the president’s Our Ukraine, the Tymoshenko bloc and the Socialist

While supporting pro-reform forces the United States did not have a position
on who should become prime minister from within the Orange camp.

The MAP-pro-reform government linkage was undermined by presidential
inaction and lack of leadership, personal conflicts within the Orange camp
and duplicitous negotiation tactics.

As the Tymoshenko bloc’s Mykola Tomenko noted, throughout the three-

month coalition negotiations, Our Ukraine had “negotiated” with its Orange
partners in the morning and “consulted” with the Party of Regions for a
Grand coalition in the afternoon.

President Yushchenko and Our Ukraine had rightly taken credit for holding
free elections while not accepting the election results, with Our Ukraine
coming third after the Party of Regions and the Tymoshenko bloc.

In the end, neither an Orange nor a Grand coalition emerged as the Socialist
Party defected to the then opposition Party of Regions and Communists. This
paved the way for the Anti-Crisis coalition, return of Yanukovych and no
offer from NATO to enter the MAP process.
An important change following the summer 2006 crisis will be in Ukraine’s
attitudes towards NATO membership. Two members of the Anti-Crisis coalition,
the formerly pro-Orange Socialists and anti-Orange Communists, are both
opposed to NATO membership.

Indeed, Ukraine is the first country seeking NATO membership where the
entire left spectrum is against membership. The Communist Party is a
marginal force in Georgia, which is also seeking an invitation into the MAP
process and eventual membership.

In the Ukrainian parliament two political forces support NATO membership,
Our Ukraine and the Tymoshenko bloc, who together control 210 out of 450
deputies. The two left-wing parties, who control 54 seats, oppose NATO

The remaining 186 seats are controlled by the pragmatic Party of Regions,
which has an opportunistic stance towards cooperation with, and membership
in, NATO depending on whether it is in government or in opposition.

The Party of Regions dominates Eastern and Southern Ukraine where support
for NATO membership is lowest. Therefore, Ukraine’s NATO membership
aspirations can only become realistically achievable if the Party of Regions
is encouraged to gradually move from opportunism to support; that is, the
position of Our Ukraine and the Tymoshenko bloc.

Whether this will prove possible only time will tell but in the short term
the Party of Regions should not be blamed for undermining Ukraine’s
invitation into the MAP process in 2006. The fault for this clearly lies
elsewhere.                                           -30-
Taras Kuzio, Ph.D., is a Senior Transatlantic Fellow, German Marshall Fund
of the US (GMFUS), Washington DC, and Adjunct Professor, Elliott School

of International Affairs, George Washington University. The views expressed
herein do not represent those of the GMFUS. (
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
                  Party of Regions misjudges Ukrainian national interests

Eurasia Daily Monitor, Volume 3, Issue 177
The Jamestown Foundation, Wash DC, Tuesday, September 26, 2006

The accustomed division of prerogatives in Ukraine, whereby the president
handles foreign policy while the prime minister oversees the economy, is no
longer operational. The constitutional reform has shifted the balance of
power in prime minister’s favor.

By turning down a NATO-Ukraine Membership Action Plan, and receiving the
support of parliament and government against the president over this issue,
Viktor Yanukovych has just demonstrated that the prime minister can and will
conduct foreign policy in a hands-on style.

President Viktor Yushchenko’s team seemed not to recognize this new reality
when it opted for a governing arrangement with Yanukovych’s Party of
Regions. The presidency continued describing its authority to conduct
foreign policy as the holy of holies of presidential powers.

However, it now seems unable to defend that authority in practice from the
prime minister’s and parliamentary majority’s far-reaching forays.

Following the Cabinet and Rada resolutions in his favor, Yanukovych felt
emboldened enough to tell foreign journalists in Kyiv, “Viktor Andriyovich’s
[Yushchenko] wishes sometimes exceed his possibilities” (Interfax-Ukraine,
September 20).

He also cautioned the presidentially appointed ministers of defense and
foreign affairs to “act more correctly,” stop mounting the “political
tribunes,” coordinate their positions with him and the government, and limit
themselves to expressing consensus views when going public.

Yanukovych tersely ruled out Defense Minister Anatoliy Hrytsenko’s
suggestion to implement MAP reforms de facto, without a formal MAP, on the
basis of presidential authority. “That can’t be and won’t be,” Yanukovych
retorted, warning that he would impose “strict discipline” in that regard
(Interfax-Ukraine, September 20).

The beleaguered presidency now seems to realize that the vaguely worded
National Unity Declaration — ostensibly the basis of the governing
coalition — is no defense against Yanukovych’s and Regions’ expansion of

Blindsided by Yanukovych’s move in Brussels, Yushchenko initially issued
a “first political warning” to the prime minister, which the latter
demonstratively ignored.

The presidency then considered calling a special meeting of the National
Security and Defense Council (NSDC) to reaffirm Yushchenko’s supreme
authority on foreign and defense policies and to instruct all branches of
power to follow the presidential line.

Moreover, a statement by Viktor Baloha, newly appointed head of the
Presidential Secretariat, rebuffed the Rada’s resolution as “provocative,”
“confrontational,” and encroaching on the president’s prerogatives
(Interfax-Ukraine, September 19). However, the presidency was quick to
retreat from a confrontation.

The NSDC’s session, held on September 20, introduced a note of realism to
the presidency’s discourse on NATO membership and Yushchenko “would
not like Ukraine to be drawn into senseless discussions about NATO
membership, as the issue is not on the agenda at this stage,” he told the
country after the session.

The president redefined the issue as involving a determination of whether
Ukraine will be ready for MAP in a follow-up stage of cooperation with NATO
(UNIAN, September 20).

The pro-NATO ministers of foreign affairs and defense, Borys Tarasyuk and
Anatoliy Hrytsenko, have fallen back on the position that Yanukovych’s
renunciation of Ukraine’s MAP has no long-term consequences, but only
slowed down Ukraine’s advance toward NATO for the short term (UNIAN,
Interfax-Ukraine, September 22-24).

However, the presidency’s would-be coalition partners have quickly found
mechanisms to offset or bypass the president’s formal authority over foreign

On the legal side, these mechanisms include:
[1] the hitherto overlooked constitutional Article 85, paragraph 5;
[2] the prime minister’s responsibility to a newly empowered parliament;
[3] his ability to demand cabinet discipline; and
[4] the parliament’s ability to raise legislative obstacles to Ukraine’s bid
for NATO membership.

On the extralegal side,
[5] the method just seen consists of ignoring or even excluding pro-NATO
ministers from key deliberations and delegations.
[6] Not used or tested as yet is the circumvention of presidential policy by
under financing military reforms (although public information funding is
already threatened). This can be applied even in the absence of rhetorical
opposition to NATO.

Thus, the debate needs to be substantially recast with account taken of the
shift of political power in the country. It must begin by recognizing that
MAP was no longer available to Ukraine this year after the thwarting of
joint military exercises in early summer, the formation of the Ukrainian
government in its present form, and the full if belated realization of
NATO’s low popularity rating in Ukraine.

Ultimately — as Bruce Jackson, president of the U.S.-based Project on
Transitional Democracies, points out (Interfax-Ukraine, September 20) —
Yanukovych’s stance in Brussels could not have been different and becomes
in that way comprehensible.

The situation underscores the need to change perceptions in Ukraine’s public
opinion and, equally, to work patiently with the Party of Regions
leadership, educating it to a better understanding of law-based governance
and national interests.                              -30-
The Jamestown Foundation,

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

U.S. Congress, Washington, D.C. Friday, September 29, 2006

Action Ukraine Report (AUR) #769, Article 17
Washington, D.C., Friday, October 6, 2006

To authorize the Government of Ukraine to establish a memorial on Federal
land in the District of Columbia to honor the victims of the manmade famine
that occurred in Ukraine in 1932-1933. (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by
Both House and Senate)

One Hundred Ninth Congress of the United States of America
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
the third day of January, two thousand and six

An Act
To authorize the Government of Ukraine to establish a memorial on Federal
land in the District of Columbia to honor the victims of the manmade famine
that occurred in Ukraine in 1932-1933.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled,

(a) In General- The Government of Ukraine is authorized to establish a
memorial on Federal land in the District of Columbia to honor the victims
of the Ukrainian famine-genocide of 1932-1933.

(b) Compliance With Standards for Commemorative Works- The establishment
of the memorial shall be in accordance with chapter 89 of title 40, United
States Code (commonly known as the `Commemorative Works Act’), except
that sections 8902(a)(1), 8906(b)(1), 8908(b)(2), and 8909(b) shall not
apply with respect to the memorial.

The United States Government shall not pay any expense for the establishment
of the memorial or its maintenance.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Vice President of the United States and
President of the Senate.
[return to index] Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
     You are welcome to send us names for the AUR distribution list.

                                      BY U.S. CONGRESS
Ukrainian National Information Service (UNIS)
Washington, D.C., Wednesday, October 4, 2006

WASHINGTON – On Friday, September 29, 2006, the United States Senate
passed by unanimous consent HR562, a resolution authorizing the Government
of Ukraine to construct a monument to the victims of the Ukrainian Genocide
of 1932-1933.

The longtime effort of the Ukrainian American community led by the Ukrainian
Congress Committee of America (UCCA) and its Washington, D.C. office, the
Ukrainian National Information Service (UNIS), has come to a successful

The Ukrainian American community promoted this issue in the U.S. Congress
for several years.  A long-time champion of the Ukrainian American
community, a strong supporter of Ukraine’s democratic development and a
co-chair of the Congressional Ukrainian Caucus (CUC) Sander Levin (D-MI)
introduced HR562 in the House of Representatives on February 2, 2005.

UNIS closely monitored the progression of the bill and advocated its passage
to other Members of Congress. Thirty-six Members of the House of
Representatives sponsored the resolution.  A complete list of co-sponsors is
available at

On February 17, 2005, HR562 was referred to the Subcommittee on National
Parks of the House Resources Committee and on June 9, 2005, the Sub-

committee held a hearing, where the UCCA testified in favor of this legislation
along with Rep. Levin.

Rep. Levin’s testimony found a lot of support within the Subcommittee
members; many of them felt that the magnitude, significance, and “inhumane
malice” of the Ukrainian Famine-Genocide should be memorialized.

UCCA president, Michael Sawkiw Jr., stated at the hearing: “The sheer
magnitude, scope and significance of this human calamity merits historians
to surmise that food was, and can, be used as a political weapon.

These lessons are as important today as in the future.  This lesson alone
should signify the importance of the Ukrainian Famine-Genocide Memorial.”

On November 16, 2005, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), moved to put this
legislation to a vote and the House of Representatives passed the bill by
unanimous consent.  “Known by historians as the ‘Harvest of Sorrow,’ the
Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933 was the result of.grain seizures in order to
neutralize the Ukrainian population,” stated Rep. Gohmert on the House

“Over 7 million people died of starvation as Russians stopped Ukrainians
from entering Russia to obtain food.  Attempts by the United States to
intercede were stalled by Stalin’s regime,” he continued.  “Proponents of
HR562,” concluded the Committee Chairman, “hope that building a memorial

in the District of Columbia will bring awareness to the event and honor its

The bill was then referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
of the United States Senate, which held a hearing on February 16, 2006.
Chairing the hearing was Sen. Craig Thomas (R-WY) with oral testimony
provided by John Parsons, Associate Regional Director for Lands, Resources,
and Planning for the National Park Service (NPS).

Written testimony was submitted to the Subcommittee by Rep. Sander Levin
(D-MI), Co-Chair of the Congressional Ukrainian Caucus and sponsor of HR562;
H.E. Oleh Shamshur, Ambassador of Ukraine to the United States; and, Michael
Sawkiw, Jr., President of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America

Following the introductory remarks by Sen. Thomas, Mr. Parsons commenced

his verbal testimony by stating that HR562 would “duplicate the efforts of the
Victims of Communism memorial,” which is to be built in Washington, DC.

Unfortunately, the VOC monument will be a generalized memorial and not
specify the atrocities endured by various nations under the yoke of
communism.  When questioned by the Chairman about how the other groups

feel about the general VOC monument, Mr. Parsons accurately portrayed the
sentiments:  “I don’t think it [the VOC memorial] represents what they [the
Ukrainians] are trying to tell.”

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

Rep. Levin, sponsor of the bill, enumerated the enormous sacrifice the
Ukrainian people made during the Ukrainian Genocide and noted that “this
memorial will not only honor the victims of this horrible period of history,
but also serve as a reminder to all of us that we must work together to
prevent such tragedies in the future.

This reminder is particularly poignant given the renewed commitment of
Ukraine to freedom and democracy during last year’s Orange Revolution.”

H.E. Oleh Shamshur, Ukraine’s ambassador to the United States, highlighted
the sheer brutality of the 1932-1933 Ukrainian Genocide.  Referring to the
genocide in the Ukrainian word “Holodomor,” Amb. Shamshur noted “the
unparalleled disaster in the history of my nation, similar to the Holocaust
in scale, cruelty, and cynicism of its perpetrators.”

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

The UCCA President quoted the 1986 U.S. Congress Commission on the

Ukraine Famine, which concluded in its findings that “Joseph Stalin and
those around him committed genocide against the Ukrainians in 1932-1933.”

In the broader context of memorializing the innocent victims of the
Ukrainian Genocide, Mr. Sawkiw reiterated that a monument in Washington,

DC “would enhance the scope and message of a true victim of communism.

Their ultimate sacrifice was as a result of an inhumane ideology – food as a
weapon. Though other atrocities have afflicted many nations of the world,
the sheer magnitude and gravity of the Ukrainian Genocide remains little
know to the world.”

On April 20, 2006, this bill was placed on Senate Legislative Calendar and
on September 29, 2006 it passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous
Consent. The bill was presented to President George W. Bush for his
signature on October 2, 2006.

When asked to comment on the passage of HR562 in the Senate, H.E. Oleh
Shamshur enthusiastically stated: “Immediately following United States
President’s signing of the bill into law, the task at hand will be to find
an appropriate plot of land in the capital, where the monument could be

Simultaneously, the Embassy of Ukraine in the United States hopes to
cooperate with the Ukrainian American community in order to find the best
artistic solution for this monument.”  In turn, UCCA president Michael
Sawkiw, Jr. also remarked:  “This is a proud day in the Ukrainian America

It has been a long road and we are very grateful to both Chambers of
Congress for their immeasurable support for passage of this bill.  Now the
world will have a monument in Washington, DC dedicated to the victims of
the Ukrainian Genocide of 1932-1933.  Let us never forget their sacrifice!”
Washington, DC Office: Ukrainian National Information Service
311 Massachusetts Avenue, NE; Washington, DC 20002
tel:  (202) 547-0018; fax:  (202) 543-5502; mail:
Visit us on the web at: 

FOOTNOTE: The success of this bill in Congress was basically the
work of Michael Sawkiw, Jr., President of the Ukrainian Congress
Committee of America (UCCA). He has worked to get this bill passed
by the U.S. Congress for several years. 
I assume UCCA will now be working to raise the necessary funds from
private sources and the Ukraine government to build the memorial. The
goal, as I understand it, is to have the memorial built by November of
2008 for the 75th commemoration of the 1932-1933 Ukrainian genocide
(Holodomor, induced starvation, death for millions, genocide). 
Our congratulations to Michael Sawkiw for his work over a long period
of time to accomplish this achievement.   AUR Editor Morgan Williams
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
                               HOW WILL HISTORY JUDGE US?

Full-page advertisement, The Washington Post
Washington, D.C., Wednesday, October 4, 2006, page A5

                            HOW WILL HISTORY JUDGE US?

Genocide is happening right now in Darfur. You can end it.

Tell President Bush America must be a strong voice for immediate
international action to:

       [1] Deploy UN peacekeepers to Darfur
       [2] Support African Union troops in the interim
       [3] Deliver sufficient humanitarian aid
       [4] Establish a no-fly zone

Send President Bush a message. Log on to
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

By: Jason Burt, The Independent, London, UK, Wed, Oct 04, 2006

Despite the prolonged courtship, the friendship between their wives and the
fact that it was Roman Abramovich who personally conducted the negotiations
to bring him to Chelsea, Andrei Shevchenko has insisted that he has not
received any special treatment from the club’s owner.

“I am not Abramovich’s golden boy,” the striker stated yesterday. “I am just
a player and he is my president, he takes care of all his players.” Which,
given the stellar salaries enjoyed at Stamford Bridge, and the use of one of
the billionaire’s yachts which has been extended to John Terry and Frank
Lampard in the past, may well be true.

But none of the squad surely has the kind of close relationship Shevchenko
enjoys with Abramovich, even if the Ukrainian has been at pains to state
otherwise ever since he arrived in England following his pounds 31m from
Milan during the summer. Indeed, he claimed he had not even had dinner with
Abramovich – which raised a few eyebrows among those who are aware of their

The two men had remained in touch, mainly by phone, ever since Abramovich
bought Chelsea in 2003 and made clear that he had set his heart on one day
bringing “Sheva” to the club. It was not until the end of last season that
Milan agreed to a deal, feeling it impossible to turn down such a fee for a
player who turned 30 last week.

Added to that, Shevchenko, influenced by his American wife Kirsten Pazik,
who was keen for her husband, and their children, to move away from Italy
and learn English, had made up his own mind that it was time for a change
after seven years in Serie A. A four-year contract worth approximately
pounds 6m a year (pounds 124,000 a week) no doubt also helped to concentrate
that mind.

Shevchenko will return to Italy this week, for Ukraine’s European
Championship qualifier at the Stadio Olimpico in Rome on Saturday, and
yesterday gave an interview to the sports newspaper Gazzetta dello Sport in
which he insisted he was unconcerned at the apparently slow start to his
Chelsea career.

“Players go through difficult times and it happens to everyone,” Shevchenko
said before dismissing suggestions that he did not have the same desire to
succeed, especially as he had moved to Chelsea for personal more than
sporting reasons. “I feel young and full of energy,” he said.

After scoring so impressively in the Community Shield, Shevchenko has struck
only once in seven League games for Chelsea. However, it should not be
forgotten that Thierry Henry did not score in any of his opening eight games
for Arsenal, although there have been misgivings, expressed by those within
Abramovich’s own circle, as to Shevchenko’s desire.

Back in Italy there have been suggestions in the media that Milan, who have
struggled for goals in the absence of the striker who scored 173 times for
them in 296 games, may try to take him back. But there is no likelihood of
that happening.

“I chose Chelsea and I will continue on this path,” Shevchenko said.
“Nothing can change my choice. Life goes beyond football. I feel more free
here [in London] than in Italy. The life of a footballer in London is more
simple, football is a show that finishes once the game is over. I understand
the foreigners who speak English and then Lampard and Terry help me out.”

Within the Chelsea dressing-room, however, the talk is that both Shevchenko
and Michael Ballack, who also joined this summer from Bayern Munich, are
growing in influence, especially among the club’s foreign players and new
arrivals. No longer do Terry and Lampard hold sway and the new dynamics

will take some getting used to.

Both – along with Ballack – were at a 30th birthday party held for
Shevchenko at the Pan-Asian restaurant Cocoon in Piccadilly, London, on
Sunday evening.

Abramovich, and his wife Irina, were also there – as was the Milan
vice-president, Adrian Galliani, general manager, Ariedo Braido, and
Shevchenko’s former team-mate Clarence Seedorf, which may have fuelled

the rumours that the Serie A club want him back.

Indeed, Abramovich and Shevchenko could have walked to the restaurant. The
billionaire still has a house in Lowndes Square, Knightsbridge, and has also
arranged for the striker to live close by until he and his wife, who is
pregnant, find a suitable home for themselves and their two-year-old son,

The Chelsea manager, Jose Mourinho, who did not oppose the arrival of either
player, has also admitted that it will take time for Shevchenko, and
Ballack, to settle. I

In an interview with the Portuguese newspaper Correio daManha he said: “They
haven’t yet played 90 completely good minutes this season. Preseason was
terrible because we hardly had time to train and only played two practice
matches before starting to compete.

“But we like Ballack and Shevchenko and we’re very happy that they’re with
us – to help us win more trophies. Michael and Andrei are serious
professionals and are ambitious, with prestige to defend.”            -30-

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
      Please contact us if you no longer wish to receive the AUR    
21.                       UKRAINE IS WAITING FOR YOU!
Action Ukraine Report (AUR) #769, Article 21
Washington, D.C., Friday, October 6, 2006

Kyiv, Odessa, Yalta, Sevastopol, Balaclava and other cities of Crimea &
Ukraine waiting for YOU!  Enjoy picturesque nature of our country and the
history we are proud of.

For information about Crimea, weather forecast, currency exchange rates,
schedule of flights and accommodation, apartment rent, excursion and
transport services from Crimea Consulting Project visit our website.
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
22.                  UKRAINE AND NATO MEMBERSHIP

                                            You are invited!
          Ukraine’s Quest for Mature Nation Statehood – Roundtable VII
         October 17-18, 2006, Ronald Reagan Building, Washington, D.C

Center for U.S.-Ukrainian Relations (CUSUR)
New York, New York, Tuesday, October 3, 2006

Dear Friend of the UA Quest RT Series:

You are respectfully invited to be a participant at the seventh annual
roundtable of the Ukraine’s Quest for Mature Nation Statehood series, to
beheld in Washington, DC on October 17/18, 2006. This year, the forum
will be entitled “Ukraine and NATO Membership”.

The two day conference will bring together government and key non-
government representatives of Ukraine, the United States and Ukraine’s
several neighbors as well as experts from the world of academia to examine
and evaluate Ukraine’s readiness to assume a place in the Euro-Atlantic
world in one of its two critical dimensions, or more precisely, to accede
to the historically singular security alliance known as NATO.

To facilitate the said examination, the event will run four regular sessions
featuring eight panels, six highlight focus sessions, two working lunches
and two conference receptions. In total, more than seventy speakers are
expected to address the conference proceedings.

The complete program of this year’s forum and list of invited speakers is
provided below.  You are welcome to attend all of the specified plenary
sessions.  Your presence will certainly enhance the proceedings you may
choose to join. In addition, you are welcome to partake in both of the
Roundtable’s traditional evening receptions.

Due to the time constraints involved with organizing such a large forum, we
kindly ask that you respond by October 6, 2006 concerning your acceptance
to participate.  [Use the response material attached below]. For further
information, kindly contact Mykola Hryckowian, UA Quest RTS Technical
Coordinator, by phone: (212) 473 0839, fax: (212) 473 2180, or e-mail:, at your convenience.

Yours truly, William Miller, Co-Chair
Bob Schaffer, Co-Chair; Walter Zaryckyj, Program Coordinator

                                REGISTRATION INFORMATION
RTVII registration and sponsorship information can be found online at the
Center for US-Ukrainian Relations,

For additional information, please contact Mark Romaniw, UA Quest RTVII
Media Coordinator, by phone: (202) 412 6883, fax: (212) 473 2180, or e-mail:                         -30-

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
                        You Are Invited: Georgetown University presents
         Ukraine’s Prospects: Assessing the Orange Revolution after Two Years
                           Thursday, October 12, 2006 – 3:00 PM
                         Georgetown University, Washington, DC

[1] Ambassador John Herbst —–
Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization,
US Department of State
[2] Dr. Kornelija Jurgaitiene —–
Chargé d’Affaires a.i., Embassy of Lithuania
[3] President Aleksander Kwasniewski —–
Former President of Poland and Distinguished Scholar in the
Practice of Global Leadership, Georgetown University
[4] Ambassador Oleh Shamshur —–
Ambassador of Ukraine to the United States
[5] Moderated by Dr. Angela Stent, Director, CERES

Thursday, October 12, 2006, 3:00 PM; ICC Auditorium,

Georgetown University, A reception will follow the panel.

RSVP to 202.687.6080 or
Please include name, title, affiliation, and email with RSVP.

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

Office of Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Member of Parliament
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, Thursday, October 5, 2006

OTTAWA – Liberal M.P. Borys Wrzesnewskyj today condemned Conservative

cuts to the Canadian Embassy in Kyiv. Since July of this year, the Conservative
government of Stephen Harper has cut three positions at the immigration
section of Canada’s embassy in Kyiv.

“This summer I was receiving increasing numbers of calls and emails from
frustrated constituents and Canadians across the country who were unable to
get their relatives and friends to come to Canada for family visits,
weddings, christenings, and regrettably even funerals.

It turns out that this is a consequence of aggressive cuts to the staff at
Canada’s embassy in Ukraine by Stephen Harper’s Conservative government.

In July and September 2006, three positions, or thirty percent of the
immigration section in Kyiv have been eliminated leaving a skeletal staff of

With tens of thousands of family ties between our two countries this creates
unnecessary aggravations. At a time when Portugal has accepted over 250,000
hard-working immigrants from Ukraine, the cutting of three immigration
officers further demonstrates Immigration Minister Solberg’s attitude when
it comes to potential immigration from Ukraine ,” stated Wrzesnewskyj.

For further information contact: Borys Wrzesnewskyj, M.P. (613) 947-5000
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

         Crushing poverty, defenseless kids drive pastor to 2-year mission

By Jim Haug, Staff Writer, Daytona Beach Journal On-Line
Daytona Beach, Florida, Tuesday, October 3, 2006

DAYTONA BEACH — Homeless street children seek shelter in the under-

ground sewers of Odessa, Ukraine, but the camera lens of the Rev. Bob
Gamble is bringing their stories to light.

Gamble, the pastor of First Presbyterian Church, left after Sunday’s sermon
for a two-year mission there. The former communist nation has been wracked
with economic instability ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Social workers estimate there are 140,000 homeless street children. Gamble,
55, will try to provide relief through his camera’s viewfinder.

He hopes portraits of street children will encourage donors to sponsor a
child for $30 a month and form relationships.

For a Florida minister who is not fluent in Ukrainian, his camera is also a
way to build rapport with socially alienated street kids.

“All kids love to have their picture taken,” said Nancy Gard, an elder of
First Presbyterian Church. “Wherever (Gamble) goes, he takes their picture.
It’s a good connection.”

Gamble’s photography has been featured in Ukrainian galleries. He has left
discs of digital photos at youth shelters so kids can see their pictures. He
also distributed disposable cameras so youths can take their own photos.

After 10 years as pastor of First Presbyterian, Gamble said doing something
“new, risky and meaningful” is necessary for his personal sense of renewal.

His interest in child-welfare issues in developing countries was stoked when
Gamble took local church youth on trips to Nicaragua for “both work and

They would go surfing and volunteer in an orphanage. He was so impressed
with the personal care there that he wishes he could take Nicaraguan
grandmothers to Ukraine to cuddle the orphaned babies.

Through Jim Leary, a New Smyrna Beach lawyer with business and philanthropic
experience in Ukraine, Gamble learned about the plight of the street kids.
Ukraine is undergoing a “big transition to a market economy,” Leary said.

For many Ukrainians, regular employment and social welfare programs ended
with communism. “In the scramble that followed (the end of the Soviet
Union), a few individuals made high profits but most were immediately poor,”
Gamble wrote in his fundraising letter.

“Families broke up; alcohol took over. I regularly meet professors driving
taxis and nurses working cash registers in convenience stores.” There are no
foster families in Ukraine “because no one can afford another child,” he

Street children are often fleeing from abusive families or became orphans as
a result of the AIDS epidemic. They try to survive through begging, washing
cars, stealing and becoming prostitutes. For escapism, “many sniff glue,”
Gamble said.

Gamble first went to Ukraine in 2004 with the original idea of coordinating
church trips to orphanages there. The plight of street kids moved him to get

He works with a charity in Odessa called the “The Way Home” that has a
day-care center and dormitory for full-time residents.

Besides being a volunteer, he wants to help by writing grants in English and
raising money to supplement the staff salaries.
To support his own efforts in Ukraine, Gamble has formed his nonprofit
called “This Child Here.”

Parishioners say they have mixed feelings about Gamble’s departure. “I don’t
want to him to leave,” said Gard, a church elder who accompanied Gamble

on a trip to Ukraine last year. “(But) I truly feel, as Bob does, that God is
calling him to the streets of Odessa for the children.”

She knows Gamble will stay in touch. “E-mail is a wonderful thing.” -30-

E-Mail Jim Haug:
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
                       Graduated from Pepperdine University in psychology, Redlands, CA, Mon, October 2, 2006

REDLANDS – Brittany Lyn Kay, 21, daughter of Steven and Debbie Kay of
Redlands, has been accepted into the Peace Corps.

Kay left for Ukraine Sept. 28 to become a secondary education volunteer.

Her work will include developing and implementing new English language
teaching methods and materials as well as helping her Ukrainian colleagues
improve their English language skills.

She will also have the opportunity to work on community projects that
address issues such as HIV/AIDS education and prevention.

A graduate of Redlands High School, she attended Pepperdine University
and earned a bachelor’s degree in psychology, graduating in 2006. She also
worked as a coordinator for the Spiritual Life Advisors Program at
Pepperdine University.

This past May and June she traveled to Heidelberg, Germany, on a mission
trip to give conversational English lessons.

Kay joined the Peace Corps because it has “a perfect balance of service,
experience and benefits for someone just out of college and not ready to
settle down.” She said her Christian faith, education and experiences have
encouraged her to better the world through service.

During the first three months of her service, Kay will live with a host
family in Ukraine to become fully immersed in the country’s language and

After acquiring the language and cultural skills necessary to assist the
community, she will serve two years in her host community, living at the
same level as the local people.

More than 1,200 Peace Corps volunteers have worked in Ukraine since 1992.
Since achieving independence in 1991, Ukraine has taken significant steps
toward democracy, political pluralism, entering the European Union and a
free-market economy.

In an effort to address these goals, Peace Corps volunteers work in the
areas of business development, English language education and environmental
protection and management. There are 370 Peace Corps volunteers in Ukraine.

The Peace Corps is celebrating a 45-year legacy of service at home and
abroad, and a 30-year high for volunteers in the field. Since 1961, more
than 182,000 volunteers have helped promote a better understanding between
Americans and the people of the 138 countries where volunteers have served.

Peace Corps volunteers must be U.S. citizens and at least 18 years old.
Peace Corps service is a 27-month commitment.           -30-


FOOTNOTE:  Our sincere congratulations to Brittany Lyn Kay for
joining the Peace Corps and having the opportunity to serve in Ukraine.
We wish her the best during her time in Ukraine.    AUR EDITOR
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
27.                   WELCOME TO BUYUKRAINE.ORG

Action Ukraine Report (AUR) #769, Article 27

Washington, D.C., Friday, October 6, 2006

WASHINGTON – Welcome to This online store,

sponsored by the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation, features a selection of unique
products for specialized needs.

Sale proceeds go to support the Foundation’s activities that focus on
facilitating democratic institutions, a free market, and human rights.

The U.S.-Ukraine Foundation invites all Ukraine-related non-profits
(museums, church groups, civic and professional organizations) to join

in selling their products.                          -30-
——————————————————————————————-; US Phone:, Fax:,
[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.
         A Free, Not-For-Profit, Independent, Public Service Newsletter
                With major support from The Bleyzer Foundation
      Articles are Distributed For Information, Research, Education
                Academic, Discussion and Personal Purposes Only
                                  Additional readers are welcome.
      SigmaBleyzer/The Bleyzer Foundation Economic Reports
                “SigmaBleyzer – Where Opportunities Emerge”
The SigmaBleyzer Emerging Markets Private Equity Investment Group
and The Bleyzer Foundation offers a comprehensive collection of documents,
reports and presentations published by its business units and organizations.
All publications are grouped by categories: Marketing; Economic Country
Reports; Presentations; Ukrainian Equity Guide; Monthly Macroeconomic
Situation Reports (Romania, Bulgaria, Ukraine).
You can be on an e-mail distribution list to receive automatically, on a
monthly basis, any or all of the Macroeconomic Situation Reports (Romania,
Bulgaria, Ukraine) by sending an e-mail to

                                   (Folk Art) MAGAZINES
For information on how to subscribe to the “Welcome to Ukraine” magazine
in English, or the Ukrainian Folk Art magazine “Narodne Mystetstvo” in
Ukrainian, write to Complete information is
                              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.,
   Additional supporting sponsors for the Action Ukraine Program are:
Chairperson; Vera M. Andryczyk, President; Huntingdon Valley,
3. KIEV-ATLANTIC GROUP, David and Tamara Sweere, Daniel
Sweere, Kyiv and Myronivka, Ukraine, 380 44 298 7275 in Kyiv,
4.  ESTRON CORPORATION, Grain Export Terminal Facility &
Oilseed Crushing Plant, Ilvichevsk, Ukraine
5. Law firm UKRAINIAN LEGAL GROUP, Irina Paliashvili, President;
Kiev and Washington,,
6. BAHRIANY FOUNDATION, INC., Dr. Anatol Lysyj, Chairman,
Minneapolis, Minnesota
7. VOLIA SOFTWARE, Software to Fit Your Business, Source your
IT work in Ukraine. Contact: Yuriy Sivitsky, Vice President, Marketing,
Kyiv, Ukraine,; Volia Software website: or Bill Hunter, CEO Volia Software,
Houston, TX  77024;
8. ODUM– Association of American Youth of Ukrainian Descent,
Minnesota Chapter, Natalia Yarr, Chairperson
Dr. Susanne Lotarski, President/CEO; E. Morgan Williams,
SigmaBleyzer, Chairman, Executive Committee, Board of Directors;
John Stephens, Cape Point Capital, Secretary/Treasurer
Antony, South Bound Brook, New Jersey,
Ihor Gawdiak, President, Washington, D.C., New York, New York
12. U.S.-UKRAINE FOUNDATION (USUF), Nadia Komarnyckyj
McConnell, President; John Kun, Vice President/COO; Vera
Andruskiw, CPP Wash Project Director, Washington, D.C.; Markian
Bilynskyj, VP/Director of Field Operations; Marta Kolomayets, CPP
Kyiv Project Director, Kyiv, Ukraine. Web:
13. WJ GROUP of Ag Companies, Kyiv, Ukraine, David Holpert, Chief
Financial Officer, Chicago, IL;
14. EUGENIA SAKEVYCH DALLAS, Author, “One Woman, Five
Lives, Five Countries,” ‘Her life’s journey begins with the 1932-1933
genocidal famine in Ukraine.’ Hollywood, CA,
15. ALEX AND HELEN WOSKOB, College Station, Pennsylvania
16. SWIFT FOUNDATION, San Luis Obispo, California
17. TRAVEL TO UKRAINE website,,
A program of the U.S-Ukraine Foundation, Washington, D.C.
18. BUYUKRAINE.ORG website,
A program of the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation, Washington, D.C.

If you would like to read the ACTION UKRAINE REPORT- AUR,
around four times a week, please send your name, country of residence,
and e-mail contact information to 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  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;
    Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely. 
return to index [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s