Monthly Archives: January 2007

AUR#810 Jan 29 Tons of Grain Rotting & Being Thrown Into Black Sea Due To Government Grain Export Quotas, Hundreds Of Millions Lost; Kyiv Mohyla Academy

=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR           
                 An International Newsletter, The Latest, Up-To-Date
                     In-Depth Ukrainian News, Analysis and Commentary

                      Ukrainian History, Culture, Arts, Business, Religion,
         Sports, Government, and Politics, in Ukraine and Around the World       

 
TENS OF THOUSANDS OF TONS OF UKRAINIAN GRAIN ROTTING
           AND BEING THROWN INTO BLACK SEA BECAUSE OF
                       CABINET OF MINISTER’S GRAIN QUOTAS
              Hundreds of millions of dollars lost through government policies.
               It is a paradox situation that this country has never seen before.
                                            [Articles 1 through 11]
                        
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR – Number 810
Mr. E. Morgan Williams, Publisher and Editor, SigmaBleyzer
WASHINGTON, D.C., MONDAY, JANUARY 29, 2007
 
                  KYIV MOHYLA FOUNDATION OF AMERICA 
                                                   [Article 20]

               –——-  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
    INTO BLACK SEA BECAUSE OF GOVERNMENT GRAIN QUOTAS
           Hundreds of millions USD lost through bad government policies
             It is a paradox situation that this country has never seen before
UT1 TV, Kiev, Ukraine, in Ukrainian 1300 gmt 26 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, Friday, January 26, 2007

2.UKRAINIAN GRAIN ASSOCIATION CALLS FOR BOOSTING WHEAT
       EXPORT QUOTAS AND BANNING ALL EXPORT QUOTAS FOR
   FEED WHEAT, BARLEY AND CORN FOR THE 2006/2007 CROP YEAR
        Over 200 million USD lost just in grain damaged and handling charges
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, January 23, 2007

3. UKRAINIAN GRAIN ASSOCIATION SAYS BREAD WHEAT EXPORT
         QUOTA SHOULD BE INCREASED AND BARLEY AND MAIZE
                       EXPORT QUOTAS SHOULD BE CANCELED
Interfax Ukraine Economic, Kyiv, Ukraine, Wed, Jan 24, 2007

4.      UKRAINE: EXPORT COMPANIES HAVE NOT SHIPPED ONE
 TONNE OF GRAIN FROM UKRAINE IN FIRST TWO WEEKS OF 2007

                     ACCORDING TO EXPORT QUOTAS FOR 2007
AgriMarket.Info, APK-Inform Information Agency
Dnipropetrovsk, Ukraine, Monday, January 15, 2007

5UKRAINIAN GRAIN PORT TERMINALS HAVE BEEN BLOCKED,

   NO GRAIN MOVEMENT, COMPANIES’ LOSSES MULTIPLY DAILY
Outline of Speech delivered by Volodymyr Klymenko, President
Ukrainian Grain Association (UGA) during the meeting of the
President of Ukraine, Viktor Yushchenko, with the business community
Kyiv, Ukraine, November 30, 2006
Action Ukraine Report (AUR) # 810, Article 5
Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, January 29, 2007

6                   UKRAINE ECONOMY: GRAIN OF TRUTH
Government actions jeopardises Ukraine’s WTO entry & investment prospects.
Country Briefing: EIU Economy – News Analysis
The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited
New York, New York, Thursday, November 16, 2006

7.            THE QUOTAS ON GRAIN EXPORTS IN UKRAINE:
         INEFFECTIVE, INEFFICIENT AND NON-TRANSPARENT

 Recommendation is therefore to abolish quota system as soon as possible.
By Stephan v. Cramon, German Advisory Group and
Professor of Agricultural Economics, University of Goettingen
Martin Raiser, Economic Advisor, World Bank Country Office, Ukraine
Institute for Economic Research and Policy Consulting In Ukraine
German Advisory Group on Economic Reform
The World Bank, Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, November 27, 2006

8IMF RECOMMENDS UKRAINIAN CABINET OF MINISTERS CANCEL
QUOTAS FOR EXPORT OF GRAIN, HURTING INVESTMENT CLIMATE
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Wednesday, October 25, 2006

9. GERMAN, DUTCH AND UNITED STATES AMBASSADORS SLAM
                     UKRAINE FOR LIMITING GRAIN EXPORTS
Associated Press (AP), Kiev, Ukraine, Thursday, November 9, 2006

10.   EBRD BELIEVES UKRAINE’S NEW GRAIN QUOTA SYSTEM
ERRONEOUS – STATE SHOULD LIVE UNDER MARKET CONDITIONS

Interfax-Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, October 27, 2006

11. SERIOUS NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES OF THE YANUKOVYCH
       GOVERNMENT’S DECISION TO RESTRICT GRAIN EXPORTS
Ukrainian International Agricultural Newsletter
Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, January 29, 2007

12. UKRAINE: INVESTORS COUNCIL SET UP UNDER CABINET OF
       MINISTERS, TO BE HEADED BY PM VIKTOR YANUKOVYCH
Liudmyla Martynova, Ukrainian News Agency, Thu, January 25, 2007

13UKRAINIAN NSDC SECRETARY VITALIY HAIDUK DISCUSSES
                 ENERGY AND DEFENSE ISSUES IN WASHINGTON
                          U.S. President Bush invited to visit Ukraine
Interfax Ukraine Business Express, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tue, Jan 23, 2007

14. U.S. AMB TO UKRAINE SAYS ANTI-MISSILE BASES IN POLAND
& CZECH REPUBLIC NEEDED TO PROTECT EUROPEAN COUNTRIES
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, January 23, 2007

15RUSSIA MUST OBEY COURT ORDER AND RETURN CRIMEAN

                  LIGHTHOUSES FOREIGN MINISTRY DEMANDS
Associated Press (AP), Kiev, Ukraine, Thu, January 25, 2007 8:40 a.m.

16.    IMF SAYS A MORE FLEXIBLE CURRENCY WOULD HELP
                            UKRAINE CONTROL INFLATION
Dow Jones Newswires, Washington, DC, January 22, 2007.

17.   PROPOSED MONOPOLISTIC MEGA ALUMINUM MERGER 

       SEEMS TO BE TAKING UKRAINE OFFICIALS BY SURPRISE
By John Helmer, Mineweb.com
Cape Town, South Africa, Tuesday, January 23, 2007

18.   UKRAINE: PLANS UNDERWAY TO INVEST $60 MILLION IN

ALPINE SKIING TOURIST COMPLEX IN CARPATHIAN MOUNTAINS
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 19, 2007

19.           NEW PUBLIC HEALTH FOR THE NEW UKRAINE
    National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy School of Public Health
ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY: By David L. Nordstrom
The Ukrainian Observer magazine, Issue 227
The Willard Group, Kyiv, Ukraine, January 2007

20KYIV MOHYLA ACADEMY SEEKS SUPPORT OF UKRAINIAN
          AMERICAN COMMUNITY AND FRIENDS OF UKRAINE
                                     IN THE UNITED STATES
   One-million dollar 2007 fundraising program to be launched in five cities
Marta Farion, Executive Director
Kyiv Mohyla Foundation of America, Chicago
Action Ukraine Report (AUR) #810, Article 20
Washington, D.C., Monday, January 29, 2007
========================================================
1
 TONS OF UKRAINIAN GRAIN ROTTING AND BEING THROWN

   INTO BLACK SEA BECAUSE OF GOVERNMENT GRAIN QUOTAS
          Hundreds of millions USD lost through bad government policies
        It is a paradox situation that this country has never seen before.

UT1 TV, Kiev, Ukraine, in Ukrainian 1300 gmt 26 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, Friday, January 26, 2007

KYIV – [Presenter] Up to 10,000 tonnes of grain of Ukrainian origin is
thrown out into the Black Sea every night. It was loaded into portal
elevators last summer.

It should have been exported, but the cabinet [PM Yanukovych’s Cabinet
of Ministers] introduced quotas on grain exports from Ukraine. The
cabinet’s reason was that there could be not enough wheat for domestic
needs.

Having been stored for six months, the grain spoiled, germinated and was
attacked by insects. The volume of unusable grain amounts to some
270,000 tonnes and more grain of the same volume may spoil soon.

Farmers say the grain market in Ukraine is satiated with 6m [tonnes] of
excess grain, which could be sold for 4bn hryvnyas [792m dollars].

However, rural residents will not receive this money due to the cabinet’s
policy. They asked the cabinet to revise it [to no avail].

[Leonid Kozachenko, chairman of the Ukrainian Agrarian Confederation]
It is a paradox situation that this country has never seen before.

Every night 5,000-10,000 tonnes of grain is thrown out into the

Black Sea, feeding fish. At the same time, we are looking for funds
for the agricultural sector.                            -30-
———————————————————————————————–
FOOTNOTE:  Some Ukrainian grain storage operators are selling
the spoiled, rotting grain to alcohol producers at massive discounts
according to reports out of Ukraine over the weekend. The Ukraine
government is still holding up the export of barley and has not yet
made the case for barley or explained how barley can be used as a
substitute for bread wheat. AUR Editor
———————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
2. UKRAINIAN GRAIN ASSOCIATION CALLS FOR BOOSTING WHEAT
      EXPORT QUOTAS AND BANNING ALL EXPORT QUOTAS FOR
   FEED WHEAT, BARLEY AND CORN FOR THE 2006/2007 CROP YEAR
        Over 200 million USD lost just in grain damaged and handling charges

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, January 23, 2007

KYIV – The Ukrainian Grain Association (UGA) is calling for an increase in
quotas for bread wheat exports that would unblock port terminals, saying
quotas for exports of fodder wheat, barley and corn should be banned in
2006/2007 year. UGA President Volodymyr Klymenko told this at a press
conference.

As he said, at present there are round 300,000 tons of wheat (bread and
fodder grain) in Ukrainian ports, and it is necessary to remove this cargo
from ports by assigning additional quotas.

According to Klymenko, under the current situation seen on the grain market,
it is important to unblock port terminals by issuing additional quotas for
exports of bread wheat, to prevent damaging of grain and to ban quotas for
exports of fodder wheat, barley and corn.

He also noted it would be necessary to raise the question on lifting quotas
for exports of bread wheat this March, when the situation with winter crops
was clearer.

Klymenko said that in 2006/2007 marketing year, Ukraine would export 5
million tons of barley (3 million tons exported since the marketing year’s
beginning), 3.5 million tons of wheat (2.4 million tons) and 1.5 million
tons of corn (0.2 million tons).

Thus, the country may still export 2 million tons of barley, 1.1 million
tons of wheat and 1.3 million tons of corn.
  EXPORTERS LOST USD 200 MILLION DUE TO GRAIN QUOTAS
The UGA President noted that exporters lost USD 100 million from
demurrage in Ukrainian ports due to [Ukraine government] introduced
export quotas.

The losses from grain damaged [while stored] in transfer facilities that had
no technical capabilities for the long-term storing of grain, as well as for
its shipment to land transport, would total around USD 100 million.

As Ukrainian News earlier reported, on December 8, 2006, the Cabinet of
Ministers endorsed a quota of 1.106 million tons for grain exports in
2006/2007 marketing year (July 2006 – June 2007).          -30-
————————————————————————————————

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
3. UKRAINIAN GRAIN ASSOCIATION SAYS BREAD WHEAT EXPORT
         QUOTA SHOULD BE INCREASED AND BARLEY AND MAIZE
                     EXPORT QUOTAS SHOULD BE CANCELED

Interfax Ukraine Economic, Kyiv, Ukraine, Wed, Jan 24, 2007

KYIV – The Ukrainian Grain Association, which unites grain traders in
Ukraine, has said that bread wheat export quota should be increased

and the barley and maize export quota should be canceled.

“The Ukrainian Grain Association believes that an additional bread wheat
export quota should be given out. and that the barley and maize export
quotas should be canceled,” Ukrainian Grain Association President
Volodymyr Klymenko said at a press conference in Kyiv on Wednesday.

He said that the measures should be taken to unload the ports. In
particular, Klymenko said that at present, over 400,000 tonnes of barley
and around 300,000 tonnes of wheat are stored at Ukrainian ports.
       GRAIN IS SPOILING IN STORAGE AT THE PORTS

He said that some of the grain is spoiling due to the long period of storage
at the ports. The association said that the losses of Ukrainian grain
traders due to grain spoilage will be around $100 million, on top of the
$100 million that have been already lost due to the imposition of grain
quotas.

He said that Ukraine in the 2006/2007 marketing year could export 5 million
tonnes of barley, 3.5 million tonnes of wheat and 1.5 million tonnes of
maize, according to exports. Klymenko said that the association recommends
that the government consider canceling bread wheat export quotas in the
middle of March 2007.                            -30-
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
4.     UKRAINE: EXPORT COMPANIES HAVE NOT SHIPPED ONE
 TONNE OF GRAIN FROM UKRAINE IN FIRST TWO WEEKS OF 2007
                          ACCORDING TO QUOTAS FOR 2007

AgriMarket.Info, APK-Inform Information Agency
Dnipropetrovsk, Ukraine, Monday, January 15, 2007

According to market operators from the beginning of 2007 export-oriented
companies have not shipped any tonne of grain according to quotas
distributed for 2007. All market participants are waiting for confirmation
of received quotas.

At that many companies intensively take out accumulated shipload lots from
port elevators and grain storage facilities in order to sell it on domestic
market. Once steady and stable cargoflow of wheat bran notably decreased
because of low trading activity.

For two weeks of new year one shipped only two lots of wheat bran with
volume 5.700 tonnes. This volume was single bread cargo export from

Ukraine. (Link: http://www.agrimarket.info/showart.php?id=42387)
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
    Send in names and e-mail addresses for the AUR distribution list.
========================================================
5.  UKRAINIAN GRAIN PORT TERMINALS HAVE BEEN BLOCKED,
      FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE INDEPENDENCE 15 YEARS AGO
   NO GRAIN MOVEMENT, COMPANIES’ LOSSES MULTIPLY DAILY

Outline of Speech delivered by Volodymyr Klymenko, President
Ukrainian Grain Association (UGA) during the meeting of the
President of Ukraine, Viktor Yushchenko, with the business community
Kyiv, Ukraine, November 30, 2006
Action Ukraine Report (AUR) # 810, Article 5
Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, January 29, 2007

 
[The presentation below by the president of the Ukrainian Grain
Association (UGA) is more relevant and timely for today then it was
two months ago when it was delivered in Kyiv.  AUR Editor]

This is the first time in a 15-year-old history of Ukrainian Independence
that such an unprecedented situation on grain market happens to occur.
For two months port terminals have been blocked, there’s no grain
movement, companies’ losses multiply day by day.

Because grain is kept in facilities unsuitable for long-term storing, its
quality spoils. Self-warming of grain in transshipment facilities is another
big problem that can cause not only losses of grain but also heighten risks
of flammability in Ukrainian ports, which can have not only economic
consequences.

Losses caused by administrative limitation of grain exports from Ukraine
introduced by Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine are incurred by all
participants of the grain market, including:

     [1] 11,000 grain producing companies,
     [2] 43,000 farmers,
     [3] Ports,
     [4] Transshipment terminals,
     [5] Transporters of grain,
     [6] Shipping agencies,
     [7] Insurance companies, to say nothing of more than
     [8] 600 exporters of grain, which used to sell grain to 80
          countries of the world.

 CANCEL INVESTMENT PROJECTS AND DISMISS STAFF
At present, companies that work on the grain market have nothing left
to do but cancel investment projects and dismiss staff.

Ironically enough, the situation is going on amid news of record grain
outputs, announced just before the start of this marketing year.

According to the Ministry of Agrarian Policy in June, 2006, grain production
was estimated at 40 m t, including 17 m t of wheat, 2/3 of which expected to
be food wheat. Export was forecasted to reach last year’s number, which is
more than 13 m t.

Considering it, exporters of grain in the beginning of MY concluded
contracts with their overseas partners, opened credit lines in domestic and
foreign banks, started purchasing grain to fulfill the contracts and
transporting it to port elevators.

After that, with no significant weather factor influence noted, Ministry of
Agrarina Policy lowered grain production estimate to 34.7 m t, wheat – to
14.3 m t. Other estimates were also reviewed downwards. Export forecast
was reduced to 9 m t (-45%).

So, it’s possible to make a conclusion that in Ukraine there’s no
trustworthy information about planting area, neither there’s a technique for
harvest forecasting or trustworthy information on directions and amounts

of grain use, it’s virtually impossible to detect real carryover stocks
numbers.

This leads to disinformation of all market participants, making planning of
business activities impossible, and, as a consequence, causing significant
losses for them.

It’s notable, that whatever balance indicators are, State has all necessary
tools to influence grain market, including those specified by Laws of
Ukraine “On Grain and Grain Market of Ukraine” and “On State Support
of Agriculture in Ukraine”.

Conditions for “state regulation of prices on organized commodity markets”
were created, there is a system of crediting of commodity producers with
mortgage prices, state enterprises operate on a grain market as well.

In the very beginning of this MY [Marketing Year], all grain market experts
were aware of tight world wheat balance. It was necessary to form state
reserves of food grain in a timely manner to make sure unwanted speculations
caused by a lack a grain in the future will be avoided.

Moreover, in the beginning of MY grain prices reached their historical lows,
which created favorable conditions for its purchasing. In fact, such
purchases would support revenues of Ukrainian commodity producers.

But, instead of this, money allocated was not enough; moreover, it didn’t go
where it had to go. Instead of forming state reserves, State took grain as
collateral, which seemed illogical amid rising prices.
REASON WRONG DECISION WAS MADE IS IGNORANCE
The reason why such a wrong decision was made is ignorance and
unwillingness to take part in learning what world grain market is and
inability to make domestic grain balances.

To have an effect on grain market, State had to purchase grain at market
prices. Decisions on purchases of grain and financing of such purchases
had to be made well in advance.

Money needed for interventional purchases should be allocated in June/July,
amounts of such purchases should be determined by experts.

Instead of this, Government, for insurance reasons introduced non-market
licensing followed by imposing quotas for grain exports amid balances
showing that Ukraine this year may and must export significant amounts of
grain.

Limitation of exports was immediately conversed into a “hand-held” regime.
  GRAIN TERMINALS IN UKRAINIAN PORTS BLOCKED
As a result, grain terminals in Ukrainian ports have been blocked by grain
for two months now, because of congestion of railcars of “Ukrzaliznytsya”,
bans on shipment of any grain to certain ports were introduced, and even
rail cars loaded with Kazakh transit grain stand idle.

The whole infrastructure of grain market remains blocked.

NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES OF GOVN’T DECISIONS
There may be the following consequences of such decisions:

     [1] Mass defaults for Ukrainian exporters caused by non-
          fulfillment of export contracts.
     [2] Loss of trust in world markets for Ukrainian exports;
     [3] Discounting of export prices for grain in the next MY;
     [4] Loss of investment attractiveness for agrarian sector of Ukraine;
     [5] Failure of grain producers to return credits in time;
     [6] Mass losses incurred by carriers (Ukrzaliznytsya), ports,
          state institutions;
     [7] Negative impact on the amount of currency revenue, foreign
          trade balance, national currency exchange rate.

Authors of licensing and quotation resolutions in official analytical
materials pointed out that introduction of licensing and quotation of grain
exports will have no negative impact on social and economic indicators and
budget.

How was the question of possible influence of introduction of licensing and
quotation of grain exports analyzed?

Was it possible to anticipate reaction of IMF, EBRD, other international
institutions, appeal by the Ambassadors of the USA, Germany, Netherlands,
and how it would impact country’s image? Was it even possible to predict how
considerably lower incomes budget would have?

We don’t object to Verkhovna Rada’s decision to impose quotation for wheat
exports till the end of MY [Marketing Year] in amounts that are in fact
necessary to secure food safety of the country, but it’s important to point
out that limitation of feed grain exports is simply economically illogical
and clearly contradicts WTO requirements.

Balances of grain market prepared both in Ukraine and by overseas experts
prove that Ukraine has considerable export potential.

Ukraine cannot and doesn’t have to decline grain export activities. Today
producers of grain have a choice whether to sell grain on domestic market or
send it abroad, which creates competition.

In 2006/2007 MY [Marketing Year], Ukraine exported 13.2 m t of grain,
including 6.5 m t of wheat, 4.0 m t of barley, 2.6 m t of corn.

The value of exported grain, according to State Statistics Committee
amounted to $705 m for wheat, $520 m for barley, $253 m for maize, $1,5
billion all grains total.

This money makes up revenues for 11,000 agrarian companies, 43,000

farmers, 600 Ukrainian exporters, transporters, shipping agencies, ports,
state inspections etc. State acquires tax, agrarian sector receives investments.
Ukrainian market is gradually becomes saturated with latest technologies.

If our country didn’t export grain:
     [1] Thousands of grain producers and workers of numerous
          agrarian companies would go bankrupt,
     [2] Country would be deprived of multimillion foreign currency
          incomes;
     [3] Social situation in rural areas would go worsen.

The grain industry of Ukraine is export-oriented and to develop it both
production and export figures should go upward.

Domestic grain consumers (milling, cereal, meat and alcohol industries) are
interested in lower prices for grain and they can’t consume all grain. They
don’t compete with each other because they need different grain.

Lowering competition due to lower export would take domestic grain prices
to minimal level (as supply exceeds demand). Purchases of grain for export
prevent domestic prices from falling.
          ENERGY FROM AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
At present, boosting of grain production is viewed not only as means to
produce more food. New priority is the boosting of energy production on the
basis of agricultural products. Ukraine may use tens of millions tones of
grain on biofuel production in the future.

Biofuel production is nowadays fastest developing industry in the world,
which outpaces development and introduction of biotechnologies.

Development of biofuel market facilitates energetic independence of
countries, development of agriculture, and the reduction of green house
gasses emission.

Ukraine, considering its climatic peculiarities and international experience
in functioning of agricultural production can boost grain output numbers up
to 100 m t per year. This should be taken as a goal. It will secure domestic
needs and facilitate increasing of export availabilities.

Reaching such goals requires balanced state policies, viable economic
incentives, legal support, fulfillment of laws, predictability of the
market, absence of non-market influence, incentive tariff policies,
development of land market etc.

State should elaborate program for gradual buildup of grain output to
100 m t.
  UKRAINE SHOULD INCREASE GRAIN PRODUCTION
Ukraine has to increase grain production rather than endanger grain
producers with overprotecting and creating too favorable conditions
for some certain processing industries.

The question arises whether it’s necessary to restrict exports of steel,
cast iron etc, according to the logic of the Government?

Is it vitally important to limit exports of meat and meat products, domestic
prices for which are also rather high? Or maybe it’s more reasonable to let
market determine amounts of products to export, especially for feed grain?

If agrarian policy of the country is aimed at increasing of grain
production, government decisions have to be analyzed whether they meet
interest of producers. Resolutions passed by the Government so far
evidence that they clearly contradict interests of producers.
    WORKING TO CREATE EFFICIENT GRAIN MARKET
Thousands of businessmen over 15 years of Independence of Ukraine have
been tediously working on creation of efficient grain market in Ukraine.

Our grain is nowadays sold all around the world, which shows that Ukraine
is acknowledged as a prominent grain-exporting country. Latest events,
unfortunately, may liquidate all these accomplishments.

Decisions to restrict grain exports will have long-term consequences for
grain industry, which is strategic for Ukraine, while high risks of
explosions in ports due to self warming of grain may cause casualties,
that’s why we think it’s vitally important to address this issue to the

meeting of National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine.    -30-
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================      
6.           UKRAINE ECONOMY: GRAIN OF TRUTH
Government actions jeopardises Ukraine’s WTO entry & investment prospects.

Country Briefing: EIU Economy – News Analysis
The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited
New York, New York, Thursday, November 16, 2006

Ukraine, the world’s sixth-largest grain exporter, has halted all exports in
order to keep down bread prices, following forecasts for a reduced harvest
this year.

The government’s actions in the grain market since mid-year underline
several problems: [1] a lack of strategic planning; [2] administrative
opacity; and a [3] tendency to overreaction.

Yet the most serious problem is the government’s instinctive tendency to
intervene in the economy, rather than allow markets to work. This
jeopardises Ukraine’s WTO entry and investment prospects.

Ukrainian grain exports in the first half of November have been a fraction
of their usual level, owing to administrative obstacles in the wake of a
government-introduced export quota.

Speaking on November 17th, President Viktor Yushchenko said that vessels
with 200,000 tonnes of grain were stuck in ports, with a further 1.4m tonnes
waiting to be loaded.

He called on the government to take action to resume the grain trade, noting
that the current situation threatened to deprive Ukraine of its traditional
markets and to create tension with trading partners. Underlying his comments
is a fear that the government’s interventionism could impeded accession to
the WTO.
                                BREAD IN EVERY MOUTH
The government of Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych-the oligarchic rival of
Mr Yushchenko-has intervened in the grain market following forecasts of a
weaker harvest this year.

In 2004 Ukraine’s grain harvest was 41.8m tonnes; in 2005 it was 38m tonnes
and is forecast to be 35.1m tonnes this year. Wheat production is forecast
to fall to 14.4m tonnes, from 18.7m tonnes in 2005, according to the
agriculture ministry.

Data from the state statistics committee show that grain stocks as of
October 1st were down 23% year on year.

In response, prices have risen to HRN534/tonne in the first nine months of
this year, compared with HRN474/t in the corresponding period of 2005;

wheat prices have risen to HRN551/t from HRN485/t over the same period.

Indeed, global prices have risen in response to poor harvests in many
countries in the last two years.

Consequently, Ukrainian grain producers have increased exports: according

to data from the agriculture ministry, grain exports in the first four months
of the marketing year (which began in July) amounted to 5.7m tonnes, which
is up 30% year on year.

The rise in prices frustrated the government’s belated efforts to build a
strategic grain reserve, comprising 400,000 tonnes of bread-quality wheat.
The responsible state agency was unable to make the purchases at the target
price.

According to a Financial Times report, state officials then sought to force
grain traders to sell their stocks at a US$20/tonne discount, but were
rebuffed.

Instead of agreeing to pay more, the government on September 28th introduced
without warning a new licensing regime for exports; its complexity and the
lack of preparation time sharply curbed grain exports.

Following industry protests, this was replaced on October 11th by export
quotas to the end of the year. The overall grain export quota was set at
1.6m tonnes, comprising: 600,000 tonnes of maize; 600,000 tonnes of barley;
400,000 tonnes of wheat; and 3,000 tonnes of rye.

The quotas have been successfully challenged in court but remain in place.

Indeed, confusion over the legality of shipments under the new arrangements,
and the required licensing, have all but halted grain purchases for export.

Seaport grain shipments during November 1st-15th fell by 79% to 77,600
tonnes, from 373,850 tonnes during October 1st-19th. There is also
considerable confusion over the method by which quotas are to be allocated.

                 PM YANUKOVYCH IS UNAPOLOGETIC
Mr Yanukovych is unapologetic for the losses inflicted on Ukrainian and
foreign investors in the agricultural sector-which are likely to be around
several hundred million dollars.

He insists that the government had to act, in order to prevent bread prices
from doubling. Nor is the end necessarily in sight: Deputy Agriculture
Minister Petro Verbytskiy said on November 15th that the government might
impose an export quota of 1.8m tonnes for the first half of 2008.
                                   CLUMSY AND OPAQUE
Several aspects of the grain-quota affair are noteworthy.

[1] First, the government has acted in an opaque manner. The licensing
requirements were introduced without warning, let alone any consultation,
leading to huge confusion.

Business plans have been wrecked by the cabinet’s decisions, and the
paralysis of exports since the start of November is squarely a consequence
of confusion within the state customs service over how the new export

regime is to work in practice.

Perhaps most importantly, there is little or no clarity over how mechanism
for distributing quotas. Nor is it certain that the cabinet is moving
determinedly to resolve this problem-the longer it goes on, the lower
domestic grain prices will go.

On November 15th the authorities formally authorised the customs service to
resume exports, but simultaneously it suspended licenses that cover
approximately half the wheat and barley quotas.

[2] Second, it can be argued that the government has engaged in overkill. In
a joint public statement, the US, Dutch and German ambassadors to Ukraine
described the intervention as unnecessary because there are credible
estimates that the 2006/07 harvest will be in line with historical averages.
They added that there was insufficient clarity over the level of reserves
held by the government.

Even if action on wheat was necessary, to keep bread prices down, the
restrictions on barley and other grains are questionable. Volodymyr
Klimenko, the president of the Ukrainian Grain Association (UGA), has said
that his organisation is prepared to accept a 1.3m tonne quota for wheat
exports to mid-2007, but argues that barley and maize production this year
is sufficient to satisfy both domestic and foreign demand.

The UGA estimates that Ukraine can export 5m tonnes of barley and 1.5m
tonnes of maize in the 2006/07 marketing year without risking shortages on
the domestic market.
                                 SAME OLD MEDDLERS
Most significantly, the affair reveals the economic philosophy of Ukraine’s
current government-which is little different to that of most previous
Ukrainian governments. Nearly every Ukrainian administration has struggled
to establish and run the strategic grain reserve in an efficient manner.

Equally, they have failed to develop strategies and institutions to bring
stability to the grain market; instead, when faced with a crisis, they have
intervened directly. This mode of operating is not limited to Mr Yanukovych’s
government, nor to the agricultural sector.

In 2005 the “Orange” government led by Yulia Tymoshenko responded to

rising oil prices in the country by blocking fuel exports and forcing the
country’s oil companies to accept price caps.

If there was a hope that Mr Yanukovych’s administration-with much more
experience of running the country-would be better at managing such crises,
it has been disappointed. The Ukrainian state’s instinct to interfere, and
its inability to plan strategically or build effective institutions, remains
the same.

The implications of this are manifold, but two stand out: the highly
negative signal sent to [1] domestic and foreign business, and to [2] the
countries whose support Ukraine needs to join the WTO.

For businesses, the fact that a Ukrainian government has once again
intervened directly in the market, at the first sign of political trouble,
highlights the risks of investing the country.

No investor, foreign or Ukrainian, is likely to be reassured by the content
and tone of Finance Minister Mykola Azarov’s justification for government
action.

Having claimed that traders wanted to buy grain “for nothing”, he continued:
“The price that was set now is a normal market price, which covers all of
the expenses of the producers and creates a certain profitability. The state
cannot allow itself to buy grain at unrestricted prices.”

Nor has the grain market intervention done Ukraine any favours in its WTO
bid. As the three Western ambassadors noted, foreigners have invested nearly
US$1bn in the Ukrainian agricultural sector but will probably lose several
hundred million dollars as a result of export restrictions.

Mr Yanukovych has expressed a hope that Ukraine’s trade partners be
understanding and says that “in the future we will build normal relations.”

However, Ukraine’s governments have such an established track record of
interventionism, that it is not clear why anyone should give the current
prime minister the benefit of the doubt.

If Mr Yanukovych is forced to choose between keeping bread prices low and
bringing Ukraine into the WTO, it seems he will opt for the former without
hesitation.                                        -30-

————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
7.       THE QUOTAS ON GRAIN EXPORTS IN UKRAINE:
     INEFFECTIVE, INEFFICIENT AND NON-TRANSPARENT
     Recommendation is therefore to abolish quota system as soon as possible.

By Stephan v. Cramon, German Advisory Group and
Professor of Agricultural Economics, University of Goettingen
Martin Raiser, Economic Advisor, World Bank Country Office, Ukraine
Institute for Economic Research and Policy Consulting In Ukraine
German Advisory Group on Economic Reform
The World Bank, Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, November 27, 2006

            The Quotas on Grain Exports in Ukraine: ineffective,
                              inefficient, and non-transparent*

                              EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On September 28, 2006, the Government of Ukraine introduced a system of
licenses for grain exporters. This system was subsequently replaced with a
quota system.

In both cases, the argument made to support these market interventions is
that they are needed to guarantee food security and protect domestic
consumers from rising international wheat prices. This short policy note
argues that:

[1] The introduction of the quota is not justified, because domestic grain
supply is amply adequate to cover all domestic needs and allow considerably
higher grain exports than estimated by the government.

This year’s grain production is well above the average of the last ten years
and high beginning stocks contribute to the good the supply of grain in the
2006/07 marketing year.

Furthermore, if the quota was implemented to keep bread prices stable, there
is no justification at all for the introduction of a corn and barley quota.
Finally, if stabilising consumer prices is such a concern, why does Ukraine
maintain import tariffs on grains?

[2] Ukrainian food consumers gain very little from the quota. Although wheat
prices have been constant, prices for flour and bread have actually
increased since the quota’s introduction.

In fact, wheat prices contribute only to a certain percentage to the final
bread price. The impact of lower feed prices on the prices of meat and dairy
is expected to be very limited.

[3] At the same time, the quota system imposes large losses on grain
producers and significantly affects export revenues.

Total lost export revenue until the end of 2006 are estimated at US$300
million, while the estimated reduction in farmgate prices by around
US$25/ton could lead to cumulative revenue losses in wheat production
alone of US$350 million during the 2006/2007 marketing year.

The proportion of the poor engaged in agriculture in Ukraine is larger than
the average for the country, hence this reduction in revenues for grain
producers may actually increase rather than decrease poverty.

[4] The quota system also hurts grain traders, who have invested significant
amounts of money in grain storage and other logistics to facilitate exports.

Traders incur additional storage costs, financing costs, costs of hiring
shipping tonnage that remains unused, and potential loss of market share
because delivery times cannot be kept.

As a result, an industry that has generated close to US$300 million in
Foreign Direct Investment in recent years may scale back. Even if the quota
was to remain only temporary, the loss of Ukraine’s reputation as a reliable
host for foreign investment could cause lasting damage.

[5] The administration of the quota system so far has been highly
non-transparent, and thus creates opportunities for corruption. Companies
able to secure an export quota can presently cash in a profit of US$ 25/ton
(the equivalent to the lost revenue for producers).

Based on the existing wheat quota alone, this amounts to a pure profit of
US$ 10 million until end 2006. Additional losses due to incentives to
smuggle grain out of the country are likely.

[6] Domestically, the main beneficiaries of the quota are flour millers and
animal feed producers, whose profit margins increase as a result of falling
grain prices on the domestic market.

[7] Thus, the quota is an ill-advised and poorly targeted measure to protect
the poor in Ukraine. Alternative measures exist that would protect the poor
from rising food prices, including the use of means tested cash transfers
.

The quota system is both ineffective (does not reach the poor), inefficient
(imposes large cost for very limited gain), and prone to corruption.
                   PAPER’S MAIN RECOMMENDATION
The paper’s main recommendation is therefore to abolish the

quota system as soon as possible.                     -30-
————————————————————————————————
* The note has benefited from comments and contributions by: Riccardo
Gucci, Oleg Nivyevskiy, and Heinz Strubbenhoff (all IER, German Advisory
Group) and Asad Alam, Matthias Grueninger, Ruslan Piontkivskiy, Lee
Travers and Peter Thomson (all World Bank).
————————————————————————————————-
[1] IS THE QUOTA JUSTIFIED TO ENSURE DOMESTIC FOOD
SECURITY?
The imposition of a quota only affects prices if the quota is in fact
binding. The quota for grain exports introduced in October amounts to a
total of 1.603 million metric tons (MMT), with 0.6 MMT respectively for
barley and corn, 0.4 MMT for wheat and 0.003 MMT for rye. The quota is
currently valid for the remainder of 2006.

A new draft Cabinet of Ministers resolution published 22 November would
bring the quota for the year to 2.873 MMT for the 2006/2007 marketing year,
with 0.73 MMT for wheat, 1.3 MMT barley, 0.84 MMT for corn, and 0.003
MMT for rye. Government sources expect Ukrainian grain exports in the
2006/07 marketing year to amount to 9.5 MMT. What this implies for further
relaxation of the quota during the course of 2007 remains unclear.

How do these numbers compare with production and net export data in recent
years? Official data on wheat production, net exports and in particular
storage are incomplete, often published with considerable lags and
considered unreliable by many market participants.

This lack of quality statistics is in itself a significant hurdle for the
operation of grain markets. A series of private data sources are available,
as well as data from the United States Department of Agriculture. In this
paper, we use data from the private market information agency
UkrAgroConsult.

Table 1 tracks the supply and demand (S&D) estimate for Ukraine for the last
three marketing years plus the current 2006/07 marketing year. The S&D
estimate for wheat is attached in Table 2. The total 2006/07 grain crop of
Ukraine is estimated to amount to approximately 35 MMT. This is below last
year’s crop of 36.6 MMT, but nevertheless well above the ten year average
and much higher than the low 2003/04 crop. (NOTE:  To see the tables
referred to in the article click on: http://www.worldbank.org.ua]

Moreover, grain stocks at the end of the 2005/06 marketing year were large.
Thus, the total supply of grain in Ukraine – ending stocks of the last
marketing year plus the year’s crop and grain imports – is very large: 37.8
MMT. The total domestic use of grain is expected to increase to 24.4 (last
year: 23.3) MMT, especially due to growing demand from the livestock sector.

This would, however, still allow for total exports considerably above the
Government’s forecast of 9.5 MMT. Indeed, assuming exports stayed at the
levels of 2006/2006, which was a record year, there would still not be any
shortage on the domestic market, while taking a more conservative export
forecast of 10.2 MMT provided by UkrAgroConsult endyear stocks of grain
would actually increase.

The situation is quite similar for the wheat S&D statistics, which are part
of the total grain S&D statistic. The 2006/07 wheat harvest was well below
previous years due to the dry autumn last year and some winter kill, which
reduced both harvested acreage and yield.

However, a wheat crop of close to 14 MMT is still an average crop and
clearly much higher than the crop of 2003/04. Taking total supply and
forecast domestic demand (with a slight increase in the share of fodder
wheat due to insect damage), exports of close to 5 MMT would still be
possible. In fact, UkrAgroConsult forecasts wheat exports to total only
2.8 MMT, which is still well above the currently allocated quota. (1)

The lack of justification of the quota is most obvious for the case of
barley. The 2006/07 barley harvest reached a ten year high. And despite a
very large increase in domestic use to 6.4 MMT(last year: 5.3), exports
could increase by over 50% without exhausting stocks. Note in addition that
barley is mainly used for feedstock and thus a quota on barley exports has
no direct impact on food security.

However, the distinction between feed wheat and milling wheat is ultimately
a question of degree and price rather than kind. In bad years, millers will
accept lower quality wheat and can if necessary make up the difference
through purchasing supplements.  Moreover, the quota makes no distinction
between flour and fodder wheat.

Until the end of September, when Ukrainian grain exports were stopped, the
country had exported 1.62 MMT of wheat and almost 2.2 MMT of barley.

Exports in October, which were already within the quota, amounted to 0.388
MMT of wheat and 0.496 MMT of barley. Thus, total exports for the 2006/07
marketing year to date are 2 MMT for wheat and 2.7 MMT for barley.

Adding the unallocated amount of the proposed revised quota (0.35 MMT for
wheat and 0.8 MMT for barley), the resulting figures are still well below
the numbers which would lead to a decline in wheat and barley stocks. The
quota is therefore clearly unjustified from a domestic food security point
of view and very clearly highly binding.

[2] THE COSTS OF THE QUOTA: LARGE LOSSES FOR GRAIN
PRODUCERS, LOWER EXPORT REVENUES, POTENTIAL
NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON FUTURE INVESTMENT, INCREASED
RISK OF CORRUPTION
The imposition of quantity controls is under any circumstances a very
inefficient and blunt policy tool to achieve a stated objective. The losses
to an economy and society are always greater than the gains.

This basic principle is a widely accepted result in trade economics, and has
influenced the strong position taken for instance in the GATT Article IX,
paragraph 1, against the imposition of quantitative restrictions. Annex 1
explains the economic argument with the help of a simple diagram, which
shows that the losses suffered by domestic producers are always larger than
the gains to consumers.

How much are grain producers in Ukraine losing as a result of the quota? The
size of these losses depends on the impact of the export quota on farm gate
prices. Chart 1 provides information on wheat price developments since the
beginning of 2006 in Ukraine and on world markets.

Since mid-2006, FOB prices (Free On Board, in the US and the EU), which
represent the world market price level, have increased from roughly 140 to
200 US$/t.

These price movements have been driven by indications that world grain
production will fall short of consumption in the 2006/07 marketing year.
Rising demand for food production and biofuel together with lower than
expected grain production in the US and the EU and the devastating drought
in Australia have fuelled the sharp price rises. The Ukrainian export quota
has also contributed to higher world market prices in other countries.

Chart 1 shows that prior to the implementation of the quota, Ukrainian EXW
prices tended to mirror world market prices minus a margin of roughly 25
US$/t. Since the imposition of the quota, however, this margin has increased
to roughly 50 US$/t as Ukrainian grain price developments have been divorced
from corresponding world market price developments, and Ukrainian EXW
prices have remained essentially constant. (2)

The result is that 25 US$/t less is being paid for grain at the EXW level
than would be the case without the export quota system. It is safe to assume
that the resulting reduction in farm gate prices is at least as large.

Assuming that this reduction in farm gate prices is maintained over the
entire marketing year, wheat producers stand to lose a total of US$ 350
million in revenues (25 US$/t over 14 million t). If farm gate prices for
all grains fall by a similar amount, revenue losses of US$ 875 million could
result. (3)

At the same time, Ukraine as a whole is losing export revenues and the
corresponding foreign currency earnings as a result of the quota.

If the price relations prevailing in the first 8 months of 2006 are taken as
a guideline, FOB prices for Ukrainian wheat would have followed the
international trend and would be in the neighbourhood of 190-200 US$/t at
the moment, if not for government interference in the form of the export
quota.

Using this price, and a (conservative) average monthly export volume for
wheat before the quota in the order of 0.5 MMT (which corresponds to
slightly less than the average monthly wheat exports during the previous
four seasons), Ukraine is currently foregoing export revenues for wheat in
the range of USD 100 million per month.

For barley, similar calculations based on average exports of 0.4 MMT and a
FOB price in the neighbourhood of 140 US$/t suggest additional forgone
monthly export revenues of another USD 60 million. For corn, losses would
range around US$ 30-40 million.

Until mid November, these losses accrued fully because effectively no
official exports were taking place. Since then, limited exports have resumed
under the quota system. Nonetheless, based on the estimates in section 1,
we can safely assume that the current quota for grain exports until end 2006
effectively cuts grain exports to 1/3 or so of their level without quota.

The estimated total reduction in export earnings until year end would
thus amount as a minimum to approximately to US$ 300 million and

increase the current account deficit by 0.3% of GDP all else equal. (4)

Proponents of the export quota might object to these calculations by
pointing out that these export revenues are only temporary and can be
recouped later on, if the quota was to be lifted or relaxed and exports
re-allowed. This reasoning misses two important points, however.

First delayed exports result in a number of costs. The grain in question
must be stored in the interim, which leads to financial losses in the form
of bound capital, and quality losses in storage. Moreover, real economic
losses accrue to grain traders, who have hired transport ships, at the cost
of several tens of thousands of US$ per day.

Second, there are obvious limits to Ukraine’s storage capacity, and given
the S&D statistics presented above, not all producers will be able to wait
things out. The opportunity costs of not being able to export today could
thus be significant, particularly for smaller producers without access to
their own storage.

In fact, if the purpose of the export quota – to lower consumer prices for
grain and grain-based products – is taken seriously, then over the marketing
year there must be some significant net reduction in exports (so that
domestic supply is significantly increased and prices are effectively
reduced). Hence, a reduction in net export revenues is the inevitable price
that Ukraine pays for implementing a binding quota.

These are only the immediate financial damages caused by the export quotas.
The indirect damages due to corruption, loss of investment and damage to
Ukraine’s reputation could be significantly higher in the long term:

   CORRUPTION: As a result of the difference between the domestic and
world market price, there is a great incentive to obtain export quotas.

For instance, if the difference between the domestic and international price
for wheat is around US$ 25/ton and if the allowable quota is 0.4 MMT for
wheat, then the value of this quota is US$ 10 million until the end of 2006.

This is a pure profit transferred directly to the enterprise that was able
to obtain the quota and represents a significant incentive for corruption.

If the government allocates the quota on a competitive basis, some of these
profits could be recouped through an auction. However, so far, the quota
system has been administered in a largely non-transparent way. (5)

   LOSS OF INVESTMENT: The export quotas for grain make mockery
of government claims that it welcomes and wants to attract foreign
investment in agriculture. The total stock of FDI in agriculture amounted
to US$294 million as of April 2006, with significantly higher numbers in the
downstream food industry.

The de facto export ban hits firms that have been at the forefront of
efforts to modernize and transform Ukrainian grain production and marketing,
and have invested in upgrading grain storage, transportation and port
infrastructure.

This investment, the corresponding jobs and transfer of know-how are at
risk, if Ukraine’s Government is perceived to be an unreliable partner.

   LOSS OF REPUTATION: Ukraine is an important European grain
exporter. For international grain traders, reliability of supply is
important.

The introduction of the quota and the subsequent complete stop to grain
exports for a couple of weeks have not only imposed direct financing,
storage and shipping tonnage costs on producers and grain traders, but also
meant that some traders were unable to fulfill delivery orders at the other
end on time.

This has a price, too, and means that Ukrainian grain may henceforth be
traded at a discount to compensate for export and delivery risk.

The loss of reputation is naturally highest in the grain market, but it
could extend to other sectors where foreign investors may ask for a risk
premium to compensate them for the uncertainty surrounding government
policy.

This creates the risk that the grain is purchased by a trader and stored but
the quota is not obtained. This is clearly not in line with international
practices.

   WTO MEMBERSHIP AT RISK: A final economy-wide cost of the
quota is that it may cause complications to Ukraine’s WTO accession bid.
As noted above, under paragraph 1 of Article XI of the GATT, quantitative
restrictions are in principle ruled out.

Since this concerns an agricultural commodity, the rule can be waived if
the quantitative restriction is needed to support domestic agricultural
policies.

In fact, however, Ukraine would have a hard time justifying its stance on
acceptable principles. First, with the grain harvest at 35 MMT in 2006,
there is no real issue over food security that would justify an export
limitation.

In fact, Ukraine still applies an import tariff of 20 Euro per ton on corn
(6), rye and barley and of 40 Euro per ton on wheat. WTO members could
reasonably ask for this to be removed first, if the issue was one of
immediate food security (as provided for in the so called “safeguard
clause”).

Second, from the point of view of supporting agriculture, the present quota
makes no sense at all, since the bulk of the costs are in the end borne by
grain producers.

However, we use the cautious formulation “may cause complications” above
because WTO members tend to be far more sensitive about import than
export restrictions.

Indeed, if anything, Ukraine is as a result of its export restriction
subsidizing grain exporters from Russia and Europe, who are gaining
market share and benefiting from marginally higher prices given the lack of
supply from Ukraine.

[3] WHO GAINS FROM THE QUOTA? FLOUR AND FEED
PRODUCERS, NOT CONSUMERS
Despite its large costs, proponents of the quota may still argue that these
costs are only borne by international grain traders and hence don’t really
hurt average Ukrainians, whereas the benefits of lower domestic food prices
are widely shared and particularly welcome for the poor. This argument is
not borne out by evidence.

As Chart 2 suggests food prices have on the whole tended to dampen rather
than push consumer price inflation over the most recent 12 months. Flour and
bread represent 0.54% and 3.87%, respectively, of the consumer price basket.

Thus while the price of bread has an important symbolical value in a country
that experienced one of the worst famines ever recorded in the 1930s, it is
not a major contributor to the cost of living.

Even if the recent rise in international grain prices had been fully passed
through to domestic consumers this would have led only to an increase of
1.75 percentage points in the CPI.

In fact, since the imposition of the grain quota, flour and bread prices
have increased, by 2.3% and 2% respectively in the month of October. This
has happened although the domestic price of wheat has been constant since
the summer. Hence, whatever benefit has been derived from keeping grain
prices low has not been passed on to consumers so far.

One reason why this is the case is that the price of flour and bread
reflects a host of factors, including the price of energy, wages,
transportation to market and a retail margin.

Energy prices, for instance, have increased significantly in the domestic
market since the summer and this may account for higher flour and bread
prices.

In some instances, even abstracting from other cost factors, the impact of
lower grain prices on consumer food prices will be effectively nil in the
short run. Take the livestock feeding sector as an example. Since the stock
of animals to be fed is more or less fixed in the short run, the demand for
feed grain is also more or less fixed.

Thus should feed grain prices fall, this will have no immediate impact on
the supply of meat and cattle and hence no immediate impact on meat and
dairy prices (a somewhat price elastic supply curve may exist in the poultry
sector).

Furthermore, in particular in the pig and poultry industry meat and
feedstock production are vertically integrated and relatively highly
concentrated.

In the absence of competition there is no reason why meat or feed
producers should pass lower costs on to their customers.

There is every reason to fear, therefore, that the net impact of export
quotas will largely be to tax farmers at one end, and inflate the profits of
meat producers and feed and flour mills at the other, with little or no
noticeable impact on consumer prices, at least in the short run. (7)

At the conceptual level, export quotas are an exceedingly ill-targeted tool
to help consumers who are truly threatened by food price inflation.

To the extent that export quotas for grain really do result in a measurable
reduction in food price inflation, all consumers benefit; rich and poor.
There is no denying that increasing food prices could represent a
significant burden to poor Ukrainians.

But certainly not to all Ukrainians, many of whom have benefited from
increasing real incomes over the last five years of economic growth. A
significant share of whatever benefits the export quotas generate will not
go to help poor consumers but rather be ‘wasted’ on consumers who can
actually afford to pay more for food.

In summary, the argument that export quotas are designed to support
consumers is weak. Experience with similar interventions in Ukraine and
elsewhere shows that it is often instructive to consider whether perhaps
there are other ‘hidden’ beneficiaries, who are using populist arguments as
a cover for other motives.

In particular, anyone who manages to export despite the export quota system
(i.e. smugglers or those who succeed in bribing officials) will profit
handsomely. Based on the price data presented in Chart 1 above, the margin
between the world market price for wheat and the corresponding EXW price in
Ukraine is currently roughly 25 US$/t higher than is usually the case.

We noted above that for wheat alone this provides a pure profit to anyone
able to export totaling US$10 million until end 2006. This profit provides
both a powerful incentive to get around the export quota system, and the
financial means of ‘persuasion’ to do so.

Indeed, many observers suggest that the underlying purpose of the export
quota system is not to reduce exports but rather to make them more lucrative
(at the expense of Ukrainian farmers) and to redirect the proceeds into
certain pockets.
4. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
The grain quota is a costly tax on producers and investors in the
agricultural sector. It is an ill-advised policy instrument, giving rise to
fears of corruption and damaging Ukraine’s reputation.

Moreover, taxing farmers to help consumers (even if it were more effective
than we show to be the case presently) is clearly inconsistent with the
stated policy goal of supporting agriculture in Ukraine.

Indeed, according to the draft 2007 budget, 7.3% of total public expenditure
will be channeled towards agriculture, the equivalent of 1.8% of Ukrainian
GDP.

It is contradictory to give this money to agriculture with one hand, and
take it away via export quotas with the other. Clearly, it would make more
sense to reduce farm subsidies and use the resulting fiscal space to reduce
taxes (thus helping consumers) and/or provide consumers with direct income
transfers to help them cope with increased food prices.

The main policy recommendation that follows from the analysis in this short
note is to abolish the export quota as soon as possible. Time counts,
because of the costs that even a temporary quota imposes both financially to
grain producers and traders and by damaging Ukraine’s reputation.

The gains, as this note argues, are skewed to the benefit of flour and feed
mills as well as meat producers rather than consumers at large, and in any
case an export quota is a particularly blunt and distortive instrument to
shield consumers from the effects of rising world grain prices.

Nonetheless, it is important to realize that grain prices may play an
important political role. Indeed, interventions into the grain market are
not new in Ukraine and have been justified in the name of food security in
the past.

Should the government be genuinely concerned about the impact of rising
grain prices on the poor, the first best policy would be to a cash transfer
system targeted to the poorest segments of the population.

As the government deals with the social impact of administrative price
increases for energy and municipal utilities, adding a small cash transfer
program calibrated on developments in domestic food prices would not
represent a significant additional difficulty.

Such transfers should ideally be funded from general government revenue
(and, indeed, fiscal space for them could be easily created by limiting and
reorienting wasteful agricultural subsidies).

In the extreme case of an acute revenue shortage, an export tax on grain
would still be preferable to the quota system since it does not create the
same risks of corruption, whilst generating the same effect of lower
domestic prices.

However, because Ukraine has no market power in the international grain
market, it will still lose significant export revenues from an export tax,
which will translate into lower producer incomes. As we have argued in this
note, the current supply and demand situation in Ukraine’s grain market
hardly justifies any government intervention.

The abolition of the grain export quota is one way for the Ukrainian
government to reconfirm its market orientation and reformist credentials.
The sooner this happens the better for average Ukrainians.
———————————————————————————————–
ANNEX 1 THE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF QUOTAS
A quota is essentially an intervention into the market through quantity
controls with the aim to affect the domestic price. In the case of an export
quota, the government aims to lower domestic prices below the world market
price, which is taken as given in most instances – this is certainly the
case for grain. If the quota is binding, domestic prices should fall to the
benefit of domestic consumers of grain.

At the same time, however, producers of grain (and those companies involved
in the export of grain since Ukraine is a net grain exporter) lose out. How
do these gains and losses compare? This section shows using a simple diagram
that the imposition of a quota generates overall welfare losses – in other
words, the losses of producers are larger than the gains of consumers.

Chart 3 explains why. The diagram shows the supply and demand for wheat in

a price quantity space. The supply curve is vertical, since grain is an annual
crop the supply of which in the short run cannot be altered by policy.

Before the imposition of a quota, the demand curve is downward sloping (the
lower the price, the more is demanded), but kinked at the world market price
P(world). This is because at the world price, producers are indifferent
between selling domestically or abroad and the demand curve becomes the
world demand curve. The domestic economy consumes at a, and total exports
are ae.

If the government introduces an export quota, ab, then domestic producers
will supply domestic demand a, then export the amount allowed by the quota
ab, and after this will be forced to sell the remainder of the harvest on
the domestic market. Hence, after b, the demand curve slopes downward again,
until it cuts the supply curve at point d. This corresponds to a domestic
equilibrium price P(dom) below the world market price.

The welfare effects are simply calculated. As a result of the quota, the
consumer surplus (the area below the demand curve and above the domestic
price level) increases by abcd. However, the producer surplus (the area to
the left of the supply curve and below the domestic price level) falls by
acde. A net welfare loss is created by the imposition of the quota, equal to
bde.

We provide approximate estimates of the size of this welfare loss in the
next section. Suffice to note here, that the size of the area bde is a
function of the gap between the domestic and the international price for
grain, which in turn depends on the size of the quota relative to exports
under free trade and the elasticity of demand (which is represented
graphically by the slope of the demand curve).

However, here it is important to note that there are additional welfare
losses associated with the quota system. This is because, as a result of the
difference between the domestic and world market price, there is a great
incentive to obtain export quotas. Every exporter has an incentive to
allocate additional resources to obtain the quota (the literature calls this
“rent seeking behavior”) and these additional resources are a net loss to
social welfare.

The size of this welfare loss depends on the mechanism for allocating the
quota. If this is through competitive and transparent auction, then rent
seeking is minimized. However, usually other means of allocation (nepotism,
patronage, discretion etc.) dominate, and the size of rent seeking expenses
may in fact far exceed the total value of the quota and thus welfare losses
multiply.                                      -30-
————————————————————————————————-
                                            FOOTNOTES:
(1) The argument is sometimes made that due to the lower quality of the
wheat harvest, available milling wheat may not exceed domestic demand by

much and hence the quota on wheat exports (particularly if increased to 0.73
MMT) is adequate.
(2) The Ukrainian FOB price in Chart 1 is, since the implementation of the
quota, essentially a fictional price, as no (official) trade is taking place
at the moment.
(3) The impact on poverty would depend on the distribution of agricultural
revenues across the rural population, on which we know little. The household
budget survey does show that the poor are more likely to live in rural
areas, and average agricultural salaries are well below the national
average.
How revenues are distributed within farms is something that would require
deeper analysis, but it is plausible that the reduction in revenues could on
balance hurt the poor in rural areas and thus may actually increase overall
poverty.
(4) Estimated exports from Oct-Dec without quota 1.5 MMT wheat, 1 MMT
barley. Losses if quota is fully utilized are 1.1 MMT of wheat * USD200, 0.4
MMT barley * USD140, totals USD 304 million.
(5) Initially, the Ministry of Economy favored an allocation on a
first-come, first-served basis. Later, the idea of an auction was floated.
In the event, general regulations were issued in mid-November, which would
appear to leave significant room for discretion and also require any
applicant to have grain in storage by the time of the application.
(6) The tariff on corn is 20 Euro/ton or 25% ad valorem, whichever is the
lower.
(7) Note that one of the stabilizing factors for meat and poultry prices in
2006 has been the export ban on Ukrainian meat imposed by Russia. However,
no one has argued so far for keeping this ban in place to stabilize domestic
meat prices.
————————————————————————————————–
NOTE:  To see the several charts referred to in the article click on:
http://www.worldbank.org.ua
—————————————————————————————————
Institute for Economic Research and Policy Consulting in Ukraine
German Advisory Group on Economic Reform
Reytarska 8/5-A, 01034 Kyiv, Tel 38044 278-6342, 278-6360, Fax 278-6336
E-mail: institute@ier.kiev.ua, http://www.ier.kiev.ua
World Bank Country Office Ukraine
1, Dniprovskiy Uzviz St., 01010 Kyiv, Ukraine
Tel: (+38044) 490 6671/72/72, Fax 490 6670, http://www.worldbank.org.ua
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
    NOTE: Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
========================================================
8. IMF RECOMMENDS UKRAINIAN CABINET OF MINISTERS CANCEL
QUOTAS FOR EXPORT OF GRAIN, HURTING INVESTMENT CLIMATE

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Wednesday, October 25, 2006

KYIV – The International Monetary Fund has recommended that the Cabinet

of Ministers cancel the quotas for export of grain. The IMF announced this
in a statement.

“The temporary introduction of a quota for export of grain and the
reappearance of the problem involving timely refund of VAT are negative
signals that need to be reversed in order to persuade investors that the
business climate is being corrected,” the statement said.

The IMF stresses that despite the Cabinet of Ministers’ declared intention
to create a market economy that is open and really works, several of the
steps that have been taken in the past few months do not correspond to the
declared intentions.

The IMF believes that improvement of the investment climate in Ukraine is
one of the main tasks of the government. In this context, the IMF believes
that adoption of non-market decisions in various sectors is inappropriate.

As Ukrainian News earlier reported, the Cabinet of Ministers recently
introduced a mechanism for setting quotas for export of grain. The

mechanism came into effect on October 17.

The total export quotas for 2006 are 400,000 tons for wheat and
wheat-and-rye mixture, 600,000 tons for barley, and 600,000 tons for

corn, and 3,000 tons for rye.

Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych has said that the Cabinet of Ministers
intends to cancel the restrictions on export of grain after completing grain
purchases into government and regional government reserves.

The Cabinet of Ministers introduced licenses for export of wheat and
wheat-and-rye mixtures in September until the end of 2006.

Grain-market experts have said that grain prices are falling on the domestic
market due to the introduction restrictions on grain exports.     -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
9. GERMAN, DUTCH AND UNITED STATES AMBASSADORS SLAM
                   UKRAINE FOR LIMITING GRAIN EXPORTS

Associated Press (AP), Kiev, Ukraine, Thursday, November 9, 2006

KIEV – Three Western ambassadors to Ukraine, including the U.S. envoy,
criticized this ex-Soviet republic Thursday for putting limits on grain
exports, saying they could harm its bid to join the World Trade Organization
and discourage foreign investment.

“Our view (is) that it is not necessary to intervene in the market,” U.S.
Ambassador William Taylor said during a news conference with the German

and Dutch ambassadors. Taylor said the “damage is being done to WTO
prospects, to (the) investment climate, not just in the food sector.”

Ukraine, once known as the breadbasket of the Soviet Union, is the world’s
sixth largest grain exporter. In September, Ukraine’s government put limits
on how much wheat could be exported.

A court has frozen the export limits, but authorities continue to defend the
restrictions, saying they must ensure the country has enough wheat to supply
Ukrainians with bread. Rising bread prices in the past have sparked strong
public protests in Ukraine.

The Agriculture Ministry forecasts wheat yield this year at 14.4 million
tons, compared with 18.7 million tons in 2005. Bad harvests have been
reported worldwide, increasing demand for wheat.

The ambassadors argued, however, that credible estimates indicated Ukraine’s
wheat harvest this year was in line with normal historical averages and was
nothing to be concerned about. They also said it was unclear how much grain
the State Grain reserve currently has in storage.

Additionally, the diplomats complained that the restrictions were not
enacted in a transparent manner. “In fact, we are talking about the
cessation of grain exports from this country,” German Ambassador Reinhard
Schafers said.

The ambassadors said that grain traders from their countries had invested
nearly US$1 billion (EUR790 million) in the Ukrainian economy and were

now facing losses in excess of hundreds of millions of dollars (euros).

“Investors…will think twice if they see the government intervene in the
market,” Taylor said.  President Viktor Yushchenko has made joining the
WTO a priority, and Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych said he hoped
Ukraine could join by February.                       -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
10.   EBRD BELIEVES UKRAINE’S NEW GRAIN QUOTA SYSTEM
ERRONEOUS – STATE SHOULD LIVE UNDER MARKET CONDITIONS

 
Interfax-Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, October 27, 2006

KYIV – The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) is
alarmed by the introduction of quotas on the export of grain in Ukraine.

“We are alarmed with [the introduction of quotas on the export of grain] and
believe that the state should live under market conditions,” Kamen Zahariev,
EBRD Country Director for Ukraine has told Interfax-Ukraine.

He said that Ukraine needs, in particular, to develop sales of grain via
auctions and the systems for controlling rapid changes of prices of grain
when the state reserve is being formed.

Recently, the head of the IMF’s mission in Ukraine, Albert Jaeger, said that
the introduction of quotas on the export of grain in Ukraine is a bad signal
for investors.                                  -30-

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
11. SERIOUS NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES OF THE YANUKOVYCH
       GOVERNMENT’S DECISION TO RESTRICT GRAIN EXPORTS

Ukrainian International Agricultural Newsletter
Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, January 29, 2007

KYIV- Some of the very serious negative consequences for Ukraine
of the Yanukovych governments decision to restrict grain exports are:

[1] Diminishing of the profits of agricultural producers, impossibility
     to pay back loans;
[2] Expected decline of purchase prices in spring 2007,
[3] Lowering influence of transitional stocks on prices in July, 2007;
[4] Discounting of export and internal purchase grain prices in a next
     marketing year;
[5] High probability of insufficient sowing in spring in 2007 of barley
     and corn, which is basis for the development of biofuels;

[6] Loss of investment attractiveness of agrarian sector of Ukraine, in
     which exactly grain exporters are bigger investors;
[7] Loss of trust on world markets to the supplies of commodities
     from Ukraine;
[8] Negative influence on the volumes of currency yield, foreign trade
     balance and course of currency, that already confirmed the National
     Bank of Ukraine;
[9] Defaults on export contracts and payments of considerable fines
     by Ukrainian exporters;
[10] Grain losses from heating and damage by pests in connection
      with its stay in port silos;
[11] An increase of grain explosiveness possibilities in port terminals;
[12] Blocking of infrastructure of grain market which does impossible
       work with other commodities, e.g. transit;
[13] Losses from the reduction of services of ferrymen, dispatch, ports,
       syurveyeriv, state inspections;
[14] Sharp reduction of amount of grain exporters due to small
       companies with the Ukrainian capital;
[15] Producing a negative image of Government of Ukraine by critical
       statements from the side of the World bank, IMF, EBRD,
      Ambassadors of the USA, Netherlands, Germany, plenty of national
      and overseas organizations of agrarian direction;
[16] Court claims against Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine in part of
       violation them of Laws of Ukraine, to which in a prospect after
       lining of losses numerous foreign companies can be attached
      (importers, insurers, frakhtuval’niki et al);
[17] Influence on the negotiation process in relation to accession of
       Ukraine to WTO.
[18] Introduction of quota and licensing of export of grain did not
       help to attain the announced aims:
       [a] Bread prices grew and are growing, reduction of meat prices
        is not observed;
       [b] Agrarian Fund, State Reserve, and millers have not formed
       food grain stocks in the amounts to work till the end of MY
       [Marketing Year].                               -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
If you are receiving more than one copy of the AUR please contact us.
========================================================
12. UKRAINE: INVESTORS COUNCIL SET UP UNDER CABINET OF
       MINISTERS, TO BE HEADED BY PM VIKTOR YANUKOVYCH

Liudmyla Martynova, Ukrainian News Agency, Thu, January 25, 2007

KYIV – Premier Viktor Yanukovych has become the head of the Investors
Council under the Cabinet of Ministers. Economy Minister Volodymyr
Makukha made this statement to the press on January 24, citing the Cabinet
resolution on creation of the Investors Council, adopted at a Wednesday
meeting.

He said the Council is needed to ensure constant dialogue between business
and power. Thanks to the work of the Council, investors will be able to take
part in formulation of government decisions and improve investment climate.

According to Cabinet of Ministers resolution No.37 of January 24 “On
Creation of the Investors Council under the Cabinet of Ministers,” text of
which Ukrainian News has, being council chairman, the Premier endorses its
members.  The resolution does not endorse members of the council.

According to provision On the Investors Council endorsed by the resolution,
the Council is a permanent advisory agency under the Cabinet of Ministers.
The Council has to hold meetings at least once a quarter.

The Council’s crucial tasks are:

     [1] drafting proposals concerning formation of state investment policy;
     [2] participation in working out and holding of expertise in bills on
     investment policy;
     [3] submission of grounded proposals on implementation of investment
     projects directed to development of priority economy sectors.

The Council’s decisions bear recommendation character and are obligatory
for consideration by local governments, enterprises, institutions and
organizations.

The Council Secretariat, headed by Economy Minister, provides organizational
and information activity. Secretariat of the Cabinet of Ministers provides
financing of the council activity.

As Ukrainian News earlier reported, the Premier had said that the Council
would include leading representatives of Ukrainian and foreign business, and
state representatives of different levels.

According to Yanukovych, the council will take part in drafting bills
protecting investments in Ukraine, improve relations between investors and
the government, and fight corruption in the investment area.

The Premier said the council would allow the government to bring in life its
idea of innovation and investment model of state development.     -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
         Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
========================================================
13. UKRAINIAN NSDC SECRETARY VITALIY HAIDUK DISCUSSES
              ENERGY AND DEFENSE ISSUES IN WASHINGTON
                          U.S. President invited to visit Ukraine

Interfax Ukraine Business Express, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tue, Jan 23, 2007

KYIV – Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council Secretary Vitaliy
Haiduk has discussed with representatives of the U.S. administration the
coordination of actions to ensure Ukraine’s energy security and its
accession to the World Trade Organization, the NSDC press service said on
Tuesday.

A meeting between Haiduk and U.S. national security advisor Stephen J.
Hadley and national security advisor to the U.S. Vice-president John Hannah
took place on Monday.

During the meeting with Hadley, Haiduk handed over a personal message from
Ukrainian President Viktor Yuschenko to his U.S. counterpart George Bush

and confirmed the invitation to the U.S. president to visit Ukraine.

European energy supplies were a central subject of the conversation between
Haiduk and Senator Richard G. Lugar. The senator confirmed the readiness of
the U.S. Congress to help Ukraine bolster its energy security.

In talks with U.S. Deputy Energy Secretary Clay Sell, the sides discussed
issues related to the energy security of the Eurasian region, joint projects
in nuclear energy, U.S. experience in introducing energy saving
technologies, as well as prospects for attracting U.S. investment into
Ukraine’s oil sector.                              -30-

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
14. U.S. AMB TO UKRAINE SAYS ANTI-MISSILE BASES IN POLAND
& CZECH REPUBLIC NEEDED TO PROTECT EUROPEAN COUNTRIES

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, January 23, 2007

KYIV – United States Ambassador to Ukraine William Taylor has attributed
the possible construction of American missile defense bases in Poland and
the Czech Republic to the need to defend European countries. Taylor was
addressing journalists at a press conference.

According to him, negotiations on possible location of such bases on the
territories of Poland and the Czech Republic are only just starting.

“The operations of these systems are not aimed against any European country.
The designation of these systems is to ensure protection of European
countries, including Ukraine, against possible attacks by countries located
in the Middle East, as well as by other countries that could have access to
military nuclear technologies,” Taylor said.

As Ukrainian News earlier reported, Ukraine and the United States intend to
step up their cooperation in the area of nonproliferation of weapons of mass
destruction.                                        -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
15. RUSSIA MUST OBEY COURT ORDER AND RETURN CRIMEAN

                LIGHTHOUSES FOREIGN MINISTRY DEMANDS

Associated Press (AP), Kiev, Ukraine, Thu, January 25, 2007 8:40 a.m.

KIEV – Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry demanded Thursday that Russia obey a

court order and return to Ukraine control the Crimean lighthouses and
navigation systems being used by Russia’s Black Sea Fleet.

Russia and Ukraine have been arguing over 100 lighthouses along the Black
Sea coast for nearly a decade. After years of court battles, an appeals
court in the Black Sea port of Sevastopol last year upheld an earlier
decision ordering Moscow to return 77 lighthouses to Ukraine’s Transport
Ministry.

Moscow vowed to ignore the order, saying the 1997 agreement that divided the
Soviet Union’s Black Sea Fleet between Russia and Ukraine took precedence.

Under that agreement, the Russian navy was allowed to remain in the Crimean
port of Sevastopol until 2017, paying an annual rent of $93 million.

Ukraine insists the lighthouses weren’t part of the deal, and the Foreign
Ministry warned that it would take unspecified action “based on
international legal norms” if Russia continued to disregard the court order.

On Tuesday, a Ukrainian bailiff tried to gain access to a radio navigation
system on the Crimean Peninsula but was barred by officials of Russia’s
Black Sea Fleet, the Interfax news agency reported. Last year, Ukraine also
tried to take over control of some of the lighthouses, prompting Moscow to
accuse Kiev of trying to seize Russian property.

The presence of the Russian troops on Ukrainian territory has sparked anger
among Ukrainian nationalists, and given rise to a number of disputes between
Ukraine and Russia since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Ukraine’s Foreign
Ministry said it would again raise the issue of the lighthouses at an
upcoming intergovernmental meeting in Moscow next month.     -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
16. IMF SAYS A MORE FLEXIBLE CURRENCY WOULD

                 HELP UKRAINE CONTROL INFLATION

Dow Jones Newswires, Washington, DC, January 22, 2007.

WASHINGTON – A more flexible currency would help Ukraine control

consumer prices, the International Monetary Fund said Monday.

Ukraine’s economy should grow about 4.5% this year, or just slightly faster
than in 2006. Inflation is picking up, projected to average 13.6% in 2007
after 12.9% last year, the IMF said in a press summary of its annual review
of the economy.

Intervention to maintain a currency peg is now building foreign currency
reserves and expanding the money supply, the IMF said.

The IMF “considered that a gradual move toward greater exchange rate
flexibility would facilitate external adjustment and help improve control of
inflation,” it said.

More currency flexibility would also curb dollarization of the financial
system and encourage development of markets to hedge foreign exchange

risk, the IMF said. The government could support exchange rate flexibility
by eliminating the foreign-exchange transaction tax, the Fund said.

The IMF praised the government for meeting a series of tight budget deficit
targets which has reduced public debt as a share of the economy to an
estimated 17% of GDP at the end of 2006. This compares with more than

60% in 1999.

The IMF also urged the government to step up regulation and oversight of the
banking system. A long-lived credit boom, with real credit growth averaging
more than 40% for the past five years, has made banks and households more
vulnerable to financial market shifts.

Meanwhile, Ukraine’s economic outlook has become more uncertain,
dependent on the direction of steel export prices, imported energy costs,
and capital flows, the IMF said.

Raising growth and living standards over the long term will require Ukraine
to improve its investment climate, the IMF said.

The IMF “particularly noted the need to adopt legislation to strengthen
investor rights, clarify inconsistencies between the economic and civil
codes, reactivate a transparent and fair privatization process, and reform
the energy sector.”                               -30-

———————————————————————————————–
Elizabeth Price, Dow Jones Newswires; Elizabeth.Price@dowjones.com
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
17. PROPOSED MONOPOLISTIC MEGA ALUMINUM MERGER 
    SEEMS TO BE TAKING UKRAINE OFFICIALS BY SURPRISE

By John Helmer, Mineweb.com
Cape Town, South Africa, Tuesday, January 23, 2007

MOSCOW – Ukrainian government officials acknowledged this week that

they had not realized that the proposed merger of Russia’s two bauxite,
alumina and aluminium producers, Russian Aluminium (Rusal) and SUAL,
will also create an aluminium monopoly in the Ukraine, combining the
Nikolaev Alumina Refinery (NGZ) and the Zaporozhiye Aluminium
Combine (ZALK).

Nikolaev was taken over in the year 2000 by Rusal’s local subsidiary,
Ukrainian Aluminium (Ukral). ZALK was bought in stages by SUAL.

The Ukrainians may not have time to do anything to register their concerns,
either with Moscow or with the European Union. Nor, it appears, will anyone
else, if the uncharacteristically swift anti-trust bureaucrats in Brussels
can arrange matters.

A review of the mega-merger, creating the world’s largest vertically
integrated bauxite, alumina and aluminium conglomerate, is being undertaken
at the moment by the competition policy division of the European Commission
(EC).

The haste is unprecedented. When the much smaller merger between Canada’s
Alcan and Alusuisse of Switzerland was proposed in August 1999, the EC
delayed until March 2000 — eight months — before giving the deal qualified
approval.

The qualifications included the requirement for several asset divestments by
Alusuisse, and the withdrawal by Alcan of its attempt to merge
simultaneously with Pechiney, the French producer.

According to an EC press release at the time on March 14, 2000: “a second
transaction involving Alcan’s acquisition of Pechiney, was cancelled today
by the parties. The Commission was about to block this merger as it would
have created dominant positions in a number of markets.”

Alcan returned for EC authority to take over Pechiney in mid-2003; at the
time, the combination would be the second largest aluminium producer in the
world, after Alcoa of the US. The Alcan bid was resisted by Pechiney. But
after three months it was cleared by the EC, the French and US
governments — with substantial asset divestment conditions.

The EC announcement noted: “The Commission’s review highlighted serious
concerns in a number of markets, but Alcan was able to address such concerns
by offering to divest a number of businesses. The divestments and other
conditions will ensure a comparative level of competition in the supply of
aluminium sheets for the beverages and cosmetics industries after the
merger.

This is not the first time that the Commission makes a competitive analysis
of a merger between Alcan and Pechiney. A similar deal was notified 1999,
but at the time the companies could not agree on clearance conditions.”

Rusal and SUAL, joined by Swiss-based Glencore’s alumina assets, announced
their merger proposal on October 9. They then delayed notification to the
anti-trust regulators in Moscow until the end of November. The Russian
Federal Anti-Monopoly Service (FAS) told Mineweb before the holidays that

it expected to take months.

Then, on January 16, less than a week after the New Year break, Rusal
induced the FAS chief, Igor Artemyev, to announce that he would approve
the merger within two weeks.

The notification to the EC in Brussels was delayed a month longer than in
Moscow. According to Linda Cain, a spokesman for the EC’s anti-trust
division, it was not received until December 19, just before Christmas.

The EC gazetted the notice on December 29, allowing just ten days for public
comments to be lodged. The timing suggests an intention to minimize public
notice during the New Year holiday period.

Cain claims that EC rules provide that “the Commission has 25 days from
notification to reach a conclusion. The deadline for a decision is therefore
1 February.” Subtracting 10 days of weekends, but ignoring the New Year
vacation period, the EC is rushing to decide on the creation of the world’s
largest bauxite, alumina and aluminium combine.

The last anti-trust review to be completed by the EC of a Russian company’s
links with a European company was the review of the diamond trading
agreement between Alrosa and De Beers.

That took more than two years, and ended with the EC regulators accepting a
unilateral offer from De Beers to cancel trading, which was not disclosed to
Alrosa at the time. Alrosa has challenged the ruling in the European Court,
and expects to quash it.

Asked why the Rusal decision has been accelerated faster than the EC’s
review of the mergers involving Alcan, Alusuisse and Pechiney, Cain was
evasive. She told Mineweb “the time periods are identical for every case we
look at.” She said that a 10-day extension (to 35 days) had been used in the
Alcan-Pechiney case, but not this time for Rusal.

Cain’s response implies also that the EC anti-trust division will decide to
extend its study of the Rusal mega-merger for what is called, in the
Brussels argot, a Phase-2 review. This requires 95 days. The earliest that
could be completed would be by May 7. Rusal claims it will have its
regulatory clearances to close the deal by April 1.

At this stage, no-one engaged in the EC’s review is willing to say if a
ruling from Brussels will require divestment of assets.

Officials in the Ukrainian government were polled to see if they are
pressing to have their aluminium and alumina plants kept out of the merger,
with the possibility of their being returned to Ukrainian control. However,
no-one in Kiev is able, or willing, to say.

In 2003 and 2004, Rusal’s control over the Nikolaev alumina refinery was
challenged in a court case by the Ukrainian state property agency. It
charged that the privatization of the plant carried three investment and
tax-related conditions which Rusal and its Ukrainian affiliate, Ukral, had
failed to honour.

One was the abandonment of a tax minimization scheme of tolling contracts,
swapping bauxite imports for alumina exports, without paying internal tax. A
second was to double the production of the refinery. And a third was to
establish a new aluminium smelter in the Ukraine.

The pressure of the government’s claims, and the risk of losing Nikolaev —
the single most important supplier of alumina, at below market prices, to
Rusal’s Russian smelters — caused Oleg Deripaska, Rusal owner, to negotiate
with high-ranking Ukrainian officials through 2004.

He conceded on the first two conditions, but insisted that high electricity
costs in eastern Ukraine made a new smelter economically unviable — unless
the government in Kiev promised cut-rate power tariffs. When these were
refused, Deripaska offered instead to substitute other investments instead
of the smelter.

This was accepted by Victor Yanukovich, the pro-Russian official who was
then, and is again now,Prime Minister of Ukraine. According to official
sources in Kiev, the terms “were changed to what suited Deripaska and
Yanukovich both, and signed by Yanukovich when he was the prime minister
for the first time.”

The signing was on August 20, 2004, and the detailed terms are not
available. No attempt has been made since then by the anti-Russian
governments of President Victor Yushchenko or former Prime Minister Yulia
Timoshenko to see if Deripaska has honoured his commitments. The State
Property Agency told Mineweb it plans such a check sometime in the next
three months.

Property agency officials say they have not realized that Deripaska’s merger
of Rusal assets with Victor Vekselberg’s SUAL assets will merge under a
single management Nikolaev and Zaporozhiye.

Nikolaev is confirmed as a Rusal asset in company releases. First built by
Pechiney during the Soviet period, it was designed to take bauxite from
Soviet-developed bauxite mines in Guinea. It continues to rely on Guinean
bauxite, but also imports the material from Australia, Brazil, Guyana, and
India.

Expansion of its output capacity beyond 1 million tonnes has been slow, and
is currently just 30% above the initial design level. Rusal now claims to
have invested $37 million to meet the six-year old obligation.

Zaporozhiye is also confirmed by SUAL as its asset. Apart from identifying
its start-up date in 1933, and the range of production, no details of
current output or financial performance are available.

If the EC were to order the new Rusal to sell these assets in order to
preserve limited competition in the Ukrainian aluminium sector, the loss of
Nikolaev would be the more serious in its impact.

Rusal’s Russian smelters could easily source alumina from elsewhere,
including alumina produced at the moment by SUAL. But transfer pricing
between Nikolaev and Rusal’s Russian operations would eliminate the
profitability of the present raw material supply chain.

It remains to be seen whether Ukrainian metal proprietors would see enough
profitability in bidding for Nikolaev and Zaporozhiye to justify their
prodding the government in Kiev to see the divestment order from Brussels.

For the time being, those in charge of aluminium under Prime Minister
Yanukovich claim they know nothing. Bogdan Yakimyuk, spokesman for the
Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine, said he hadn’t heard of a monopoly review
related to the Rusal merger, but confirms that his agency should conduct the
review. He added that this has not been done.

An official at the Metallurgy Department in Kiev’s Ministry of Industry, who
declined to give his full name, said he had come across nothing about the
merger, and requested a request by fax.

The Ukrainian delegation to the European Union in Brussels has been unable
to respond to calls, because its telephone is out of order. The Ukrainian
Foreign Ministry says the disruption is temporary.

Leonid Vasiyuta, a non-ferrous metals specialist in the Ukrainian Embassy in
Moscow, told Mineweb: “These plants are not competing against each other.
These plants supplement each other, so as I understand no investigation is
necessary.

The Ukrainian aluminium industry is not self-sufficient and full cycle, as
we have no rolling capacities and have no own bauxites.”         -30-
————————————————————————————————-
LINK: http://www.mineweb.net/base_metals/596575.htm
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
     You are welcome to send us names for the AUR distribution list.
========================================================
18.    UKRAINE: PLANS UNDERWAY TO INVEST $60 MILLION IN

  ALPINE SKIING TOURIST COMPLEX IN CARPATHIAN MOUNTAINS

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 19, 2007

KYIV – The Chornohora Company (the village of Bystrets of Verkhovynsky
district) has plans to invest UAH 300 million [$60 million] in the
construction of the Alpine skiing tourist complex in the Carpathians near
the village of Bystrets of Verkhovynsky district in Ivano-Frankivsk region.

Ukrainian News learned this from Yurii Romaniuk, the deputy chairman of
Ivano-Frankivsk regional council. “Investor intend to invest between UAH 200
million and UAH 300 million in the construction of the tourist complex
alone,” he said.

He said the company had plans to build six kilometers of access road from
Verkhovyna to the village of Bystrets. The cost of the project is assessed
at UAH 60 million.

He said the investors were also planning to erect a high-voltage power line
from Chernivtsi region, which is not far from the village of Bystrets.

“The cost of the project is UAH 170 million, plus another several millions
for the construction of a waste disposal plant,” he said. According to

Romaniuk, Chernohora has purchased 65 hectares of land from locals.

The company has also applied to the regional council with a request to allot
another 200 hectares on the flank of a hill. Romaniuk said the tourist
complex, according to the plans of the investors, was to host first tourists
in two years.

“They plan to complete the whole complex in four years,” he said. Romaniuk
specified that the investors would start construction works this year.

According to Romaniuk, Chornohora Ltd. was registered in the village of
Bystrets in July 2005. A married couple from Kyiv is a co-founder, who
totally own 50% of the company. Another 50% of the company is owned by

an offshore company, which was registered in the city of Nicosia on Cyprus.
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
19.    NEW PUBLIC HEALTH FOR THE NEW UKRAINE
    National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy School of Public Health

ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY: By David L. Nordstrom
The Ukrainian Observer magazine, Issue 227
The Willard Group, Kyiv, Ukraine, January 2007

When I learned that the second largest nation of Europe had graduated the
first class from its only school of public health, I wanted to see this
school myself.

Trained and experienced in medicine and public health, I wanted to observe
the development of this new actor first-hand.  Coincidentally the school had
an opening for a visiting Fulbright Scholar from August through December
2006.

In a bold new step, the National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy

School of Public Health enrolled its first students in 2004.

The two-year master degree program is a “work in progress” that prepares
students for professional positions in teaching, research, and consulting.
The program is an official partner of the School of Public Health at
University of Maastricht, Netherlands.

It is significant that this new school is located at a general university
rather than at one of Ukraine’s 15 medical universities. This decision has
certain advantages.

The course content is not focused on disease diagnosis and treatment but
also emphasizes the study of disease causation and prevention. Both health
professionals and others are included in the student body.

This new graduate study program functions despite uncertainty regarding the
career prospects for graduates.  Master degrees in general are new in the
country.  As a “post-communist” or “transition” nation, Ukraine has few
positions for citizens with such training.

Neither the current Ministry of Public Health staff nor Sanitary and
Epidemiologic Service staff has such education. The managers of hospitals,
clinics, and research institutes in Ukraine are usually physicians without
training in either public health or management.

The new school’s location is important for another reason.  As noted at the
recent annual conference of Ukrainian Association of Fulbright Alumni, Kyiv
Mohyla Academy is one of the very few institutions in Ukraine where student
admission and promotion decisions are based on the applicant’s ability
rather than on bribery, plagiarism, or cheating.
                             WHAT IS PUBLIC HEALTH?
“Public health” has different meanings in Ukraine and in the United States.
In Ukraine, the phrase seems to mean the government hospitals and clinics
where doctors diagnose and treat illnesses in individual patients.

In the U.S., public health means collective action to abate hazards and
prevent disease in whole groups of people.

Indeed, Soviet era health spending favored hospital and clinic construction,
operation, and services. The budget for surveillance and control of disease
and hazards to health was limited.

The newly selected head of the WHO Country Office in Ukraine recently told
an audience at Kyiv Mohyla that the Ministry of Public Health priorities for
its current work with WHO are HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Mental Health.

These choices were apparently based on the size and severity of the burden
in Ukraine, the risk of diseases spreading to more people, and the
availability of international assistance.

In western countries, much of the improvement in life expectancy occurred in
the 19th century as a result of rising standards of living, including better
housing and sanitation, etc.  For many people in Ukraine, this increase in
living standards has not yet arrived.

According to a 2000 nationwide survey by Kyiv International Institute of
Sociology, only 8 percent of rural dwellings had central heating, 10 percent
had an indoor toilet, and 30 percent had a bath or shower.  One-quarter of
the total population of this country lives below the official poverty line.

What are some examples of public health achievements in contemporary
Ukraine?
     [1] Distribution of free clean needles to drug users to limit
          spread of HIV infection,
     [2] ban on alcohol in workplaces,
     [3] ban on alcohol in blood of motor vehicle drivers,
     [4] minimum age of 18 to buy cigarettes,
     [5] underground walkways for pedestrians,
     [6] ratification of the international treaty for tobacco control, and
     [7] mass transit.
                     IS THE SOVIET LEGACY RELEVANT?

“Whereof what’s past is prologue, what to come
In yours and my discharge.”
WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE,
The Tempest, act II, scene i

Public health work is to some degree culture-bound in all societies.  Kyiv
Mohyla faculty held a panel discussion on the USSR legacy and how it may
still influence medicine and public health in this old-new country.

When a student asked what to read to prepare for this panel discussion, she
was told to talk with her parents about the past.  Her response was that the
past was too painful to discuss.

A young nation-state, Ukraine still shows signs of its Soviet legacy.

Marxist-Leninists viewed many health threats as transient in the transition
to communism and as problems that would be resolved spontaneously without
public health action.

The government that came to power in the October 1917 revolution was wary
of the professional autonomy of physicians.  It disbanded private medical
associations and kept the salaries and status of most doctors low.

Fifteen years after attaining statehood, Ukraine still lacks a national,
professional organization of physicians.

Perhaps as important to the advancement of medicine and public health,
Ukraine lacks trusted journals, such as The Lancet in England or JAMA in
the United States, which can serve as channels of communication among
physicians, scientists, public health specialists, policymakers, and
patients.

In the Soviet era, epidemiology was concerned almost exclusively with
detection and control of infectious diseases – even after noninfectious
diseases such as heart disease became the leading causes of death.

Medical universities lacked full-fledged departments of epidemiology or
biostatistics.  Government outlawed the teaching or research of genetics, a
decision with bad consequences for both science and health.

Another legacy of the Soviet period is a tendency for individuals to rely on
the state to care for them rather than to take responsibility for their own
health.

Deeply embedded cultural practices from the Russian Empire such as drinking,
smoking, poor diet, and lack of physical activity worsened under communism.

Among the first 14 countries from four continents to complete a World Health
Organization (WHO)-coordinated national mental health survey, Ukraine has
the highest rates of alcohol abuse (20 percent) among men and of major
depression (20 percent) among women.

Rates of alcohol and drug disorders are six times higher in Ukraine than in
Germany, and rates of mood disorders are two and one-half times higher.

While statistical and epidemiologic data were state secrets in the USSR, a
series of health interview and examination surveys in Ukraine have provided
important information on people’s health status and their health knowledge,
attitudes, and practices.

Students and faculty of Kyiv Mohyla Academy have compiled an inventory
and collection of 20 such surveys conducted during the past decade.

  WHAT CAN KYIV MOHYLA STUDENTS DO IN PUBLIC HEALTH?
Public health students also must choose their priorities for study and work.

A thesis is required for the master degree, and students are exploring a
wide variety of subjects in medicine and public health.

Examples are the:
     [1] reasons for the declining rate of breastfeeding;
     [2] quality of nutrition in meals in kindergarten;
     [3] smoking cessation by pregnant women;
     [4] risky behaviors among university students;
     [5] quality of screening, diagnosis and treatment for tuberculosis
          in prisons;
     [6] the supply and efficiency of blood transfusion services; and
     [7] the effectiveness of continuing education for hospital and
          clinic administrators.

 LEARN TWO ESSENTIAL TASKS OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Kyiv Mohyla students are learning to perform two essential tasks of public
health specialists: to estimate risk and to communicate risk. Risk
estimation is taught in epidemiology, which is the scientific study of the
frequency and determinants of disease in human populations.

To illustrate risk estimation, the example of suicide can be used. Suicide
is the most frequent type of injury death in Ukraine, and the nation’s
suicide rate is one of the world’s highest. The Ukrainian risk of suicide is
six times higher in men than women.

In men, the annual risk of suicide is 45 per 100,000 population, while the
annual risk of motor vehicle injury death is 25 per 100,000.  For
comparison, the annual risk for Ukrainian men of HIV/AIDS death is 5 per
100,000.

Many of the students at Kyiv Mohyla hope to become managers in health
care facilities or in government planning or administrative agencies. In
this role, they will need to communicate risk to their superiors, staff, and
patients.

For example, how will they communicate the risk of hospital-acquired
infections?  They also will function in a complicated environment of finance
and services during periods of changing roles of national, regional, and
local levels.

At the school of public health, students are learning modern principles and
practices of health promotion from dedicated and experienced instructors.
Posting messages on clinic walls is no longer regarded as an effective
method of changing patient behaviors.

This approach does not even work with highly educated and motivated western
doctors.  Observers at a major American hospital recently reported that
doctors there rarely wash their hands even though soap and water are readily
available.

Kyiv Mohyla students learn that medical care, which can be useful after
illness appears, is no guarantee of population health.  Although individuals
choose their behaviors – both safe and risky – they choose them within a
specific social and environmental context.

The two in five Ukrainian adults who smoke do so in a country whose tax and
other policies allow the widespread availability of cheap cigarettes but do
not cover drug treatment for smoking cessation.

Opinions differ about the appropriate role of the state in influencing
health behavior and status. Ukrainian history is filled with examples of
malign behavior by state actors: World Wars I and II, mass famine and
starvation, the Nazi occupation, and the Chernobyl nuclear power plant
explosion.

Consequently the level of trust between citizen and state is highly
strained. Given this background, it is not surprising that Kyiv Mohyla
students express doubt the prospects for passage of effective public
health legislation and implementation of existing laws.
                                LOOKING FORWARD
Countries with the best health indicators are the ones that modify the
conditions that lead to health hazards and resources in their populations.

After seeing the faculty, staff, and students of Ukraine’s school of public
health in action, I believe that this proud and independent nation is poised
to make substantial progress in the years ahead.
———————————————————————————————
David L. Nordstrom, PhD, MPH, was a Fulbright Scholar at Kyiv Mohyla
Academy School of Public Health from August through December 2006.
The views and opinions expressed above are exclusively his own and do
not necessarily reflect those of the Fulbright Scholar Program, the U.S.
Department of State, or the National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy.
———————————————————————————————
LINK: http://www.ukraine-observer.com/articles/227/982
———————————————————————————————
NOTE:  Edits in style of the text and subheadings have been inserted

editorially by the Action Ukraine Report (AUR).
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
20.  KYIV MOHYLA ACADEMY SEEKS SUPPORT OF UKRAINIAN
            AMERICAN COMMUNITY AND FRIENDS OF UKRAINE
                                    IN THE UNITED STATES
     One-million dollar 2007 fundraising program to be launched in five cities

Marta Farion, Executive Director
Kyiv Mohyla Foundation of America, Chicago
Action Ukraine Report (AUR) #810, Article 20
Washington, D.C., Monday, January 29, 2007

CHICAGO – The Kyiv Mohyla Foundation of America announced today
a series of fundraisers for the benefit of the National University of Kyiv
Mohyla Academy (NUKMA) to be held in five American cities during the
month of February.

Kyiv Mohyla Foundation president, Chicago businessman and longtime
supporter of higher education, Ihor Wyslotsky, stated in his announcement
of the fundraising programs, “A distinguished institution of higher learning
in Ukraine, the National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy essentially

remains a private institution and therefore depends on the continuing moral
and financial support of the North American Ukrainian diaspora and other
private personal and corporate donors.

“The Kyiv Mohyla community has turned to us for help, and we are
committed to further encouraging and sustaining the dramatic rebirth of
this unique institution, a remarkable effort undertaken by Dr. Viacheslav
Briukovetsky in 1991, and to help facilitate the university’s important role
in educating Ukraine’s next generation of leaders.”
                 KYIV MOHYLA’S RECENT PROGRESS
Mr. Wyslotsky noted the NUKMA’s growth in recent years. “Since its first
class graduated in 1995, Kyiv Mohyla has graduated 4,147 students with
undergraduate or graduate degrees.

“Most of these English-speaking Ukrainian students are now employed at
various Western companies that are doing business in Ukraine, in Ukrainian
media outlets, and at a number of Ukrainian government agencies in and
outside of Kyiv.”

“It is especially rewarding to see that graduating from Kyiv Mohyla means
something important in Ukraine, and elsewhere, and that the university’s
graduates are regarded highly in the private and government sectors,” Mr.
Wyslotsky added.

Since 1991, Kyiv Mohyla Academy has become Ukraine’s premier institution
of higher education with stringent admission criteria, anonymous admission
testing, and quality Ukrainian and English instruction in 16 disciplines.
Courses are taught by more than 100 professors and over 500 instructors.

In addition, the university operates 25 research centers and laboratories
and recently completed construction of a library that houses more than
400,000 volumes and a thousand periodicals.

Mr. Wyslotsky further noted, “The quality of Kyiv Mohyla Academy
graduates is shown also in the number of its graduates who pursue
doctoral and other advanced degrees in western universities, especially
those in the U.S. and Canada.

“Over 100 students have received grants and are now studying at American
universities such as Boston College, Columbia University, Iowa State
University, Johns Hopkins University, Georgetown University, Indiana
University, Rutgers University, SUNY, University of Houston, University
of Kentucky, University of Wisconsin, University of Virginia and the Rand
Corporation.

A significant number of students are currently pursuing graduate degrees
at several Canadian universities.”

Since 2001 the Kyiv Mohyla Foundation of America has collected
approximately 1.3 million dollars for the benefit of the university.
    GOAL FOR YEAR 2007 IS ONE MILLION DOLLARS
The goal for the 2007 year is to raise one million dollars. “We are grateful
to the Ukrainian community and others in the United States for their
generous support the last five years and in the past, when fundraising
efforts were initiated and led by Professor Ivan Fizer in New Jersey.

“We also recognize the significance of the numerous universities in the
United States who embraced joint programs with the Kyiv Mohyla
Academy and contributed their own resources to such cooperative
programs.

“As for 2007, I believe that this goal of one million dollars is
attainable,” stated Mr. Wyslotsky.

The funds collected in 2007 will be earmarked toward an endowment

fund in order to provide NUKMA with a secure future, as well as for
uses specifically designated by donors, such as library collections,
scholarships, and academic departments.

Furthermore, the Foundation will also provide seed money for the Electronic
Library of Ukraine, a project which the foundation is developing and one
which will require significant financial support from various foundations,
corporations and other sources.
         THE PRICE OF POLITICAL INDEPENDENCE
When Dr. Briukovetsky reopened the Kyiv Mohyla Academy in 1991, he
sought to rebuild not only a quality educational institution, but an
institution that was politically independent of governmental involvement
and committed to the fostering of democratic ideals, including respect
for human rights and ethical norms.

“As a result,” Mr. Wyslotsky noted, “Kyiv Mohyla, at the time, found itself
a few steps ahead of the prevailing conduct and views of the Ukrainian
government. To this day, the university continues to confront a complicated
relationship with government entities in this current, politically unstable,
environment.

This complicated relationship is due, in part, to the university’s visibly
active role during the Orange Revolution.  Unlike several other
universities, Kyiv Mohyla disregarded government pressure to ignore the
massive street protests of 2004, now known as the Orange Revolution, and
allowed demonstrations in pursuit of political independence and democratic
values.”

The strong stand taken by the university’s leadership in promoting
democratic processes, was most dramatically shown by its students and
faculty on the Maidan two years ago.

This is only one of the reasons that Kyiv Mohyla continues to be of personal
interest to former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine William G. Miller, as well as
former U. S. National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski and former U.S.
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.
  WILLIAM MILLER & BORYS TARASIUK: CO-CHAIRMAN
Former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, William Miller and Ukraine’s Ambassador
Borys Tarasiuk are co-chairmen of the Kyiv Mohyla Foundation of America.

The National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy is strengthened by its
institutional relationships with more than 80 universities worldwide and by
the Union of European Universities, to which it was admitted as a member in
2005.

The NUKMA has established several joint programs with foreign universities,
including a business program with Northwestern University’s Kellogg School
of Management; a program in public health with the University of Illinois;
and one in Oriental studies with the University of Chicago.

“Academic freedom, as freedom in general, often carries a price tag. This is
one important reason why our foundation now seeks moral and financial
support from the Ukrainian diaspora in North America,” Mr. Wyslotsky
said today in announcing the upcoming series of fundraisers.

The Kyiv Mohyla Foundation’s fundraisers for the university will be held
during the month of February in the following five Ukrainian-American
communities: Washington DC; Whippany, New Jersey; Chicago, Illinois,
Warren, Michigan; and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
PRESIDENT BRIUKOVETSKY SPEAKS AT FUNDRAISERS
Each city’s program will feature remarks by Kyiv Mohyla Academy president
Dr. Briukhovetsky, as well as by academicians and leaders from each
community. A new film about the university and its progress will be shown
and Dr. Briukhovetsky looks forward to answering questions about the work
of the university.

In particular, the foundation encourages parents with high-school and
college-age students to attend with their children and consider the
possibility of a summer or semester abroad in Kyiv at the Kyiv Mohyla
Academy.
  SCHEDULE OF KYIV MOHYLA FUNDRAISERS IN U.S.
The dates and locations of the fundraising events are as follows:

[1] Sunday, February 11, 1:00 pm
St. Andrew Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral, Silver Spring, Maryland,
Reservations/information: 301-593-5316, 301-873-2035.

[2] Saturday, February 17, 5:30 pm
Ukrainian American Cultural Center of New Jersey, Whippany,
New Jersey; Reservations/information: 973-585-7175.

[3] Sunday, February 18, 1:00 pm
Ukrainian Cultural Center in Chicago, Illinois
Reservations/information: 773-384-6400.

[4] Saturday, February 24, 5:30 pm
Ukrainian Cultural Center in Warren, Michigan
Reservations/information: 586-757-8130.

[5] Sunday, February  25, 2:00 pm
Ukrainian Educational and Cultural Center in Jenkintown, Pennsylvania,
Reservations/information: 215-663-1166.

Ticket prices are $40 per person; $20 for students 18 and under.
Reservations also may be made by contacting the Kyiv Mohyla Foundation
of America at 773-685-1828, or by email at mail@kmfoundation.com or by
electronic reservation and payment by credit card through PayPal on the
Foundation’s website at http://www.kmfoundation.com.        -30-

———————————————————————————————–
             KYIV MOHYLA FOUNDATION OF AMERICA
The Kyiv Mohyla Foundation of America is a 501 (c)(3) nonprofit
organization established to support and assist the National University of
Kyiv Mohyla Academy and institutions of higher learning in Ukraine.

Support and assistance will be given to reach excellence in education,
innovative research, personal and intellectual growth of its students and
faculty, in an academic environment that will facilitate and further
Ukraine’s democratic reforms, with a focus on the rule of law, free market,

business development and sustained economic growth within the global
community of nations.

The National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy was founded in 1615 by
its first donor, Halushka Hulevychivna, and organized as a Collegium by
Petro Mohyla in 1630.

Graduates, donors and teachers include Hetman Petro Konashevych
Sahajdachnyj, Bohdan Khmelnyckyj, Ivan Samojolovych, Ivan Mazepa,
Hryhorij Skovoroda, and many of Ukraine’s leading historical figures and
intellectuals.

After the Kyiv Mohyla Academy was forcibly closed by Russian Czar
Alexander in 1817, the buildings remained unoccupied until 1920, when
the institution was converted into a military naval academy by the
Bolsheviks.

In 1991, the Academy was reopened as an institute of higher learning, as the
Kyiv Mohyla Academy under the initiative and leadership of Viacheslav
Briukhovetsky.

Today, during a time of unprecedented changes in Ukraine, the Kyiv Mohyla
Academy continues its historic role as Ukraine’s premier center of academic
education and research, as well as a bastion of Ukrainian culture and
thought.
———————————————————————————————-
CONTACT: Marta Farion, Attorney, Executive Director-Kyiv
Mohyla Foundation of America, (773-685-1828), marta@farion.org

or Oksana Khanas (773-297-4401)
———————————————————————————————-
NOTE:  Edits in the style of the text and some subheadings have
been inserted editorially by the Action Ukraine Report (AUR).
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
   If you are receiving more than one copy of the AUR please contact us.
    Please contact us if you no longer wish to receive the AUR.    
       You are welcome to send us names for the AUR distribution list.
   If you are missing some issues of the AUR please let us know.
========================================================
         “ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR”
         A Free, Not-For-Profit, Independent, Public Service Newsletter
                With major support from The Bleyzer Foundation
 
      Articles are Distributed For Information, Research, Education
                Academic, Discussion and Personal Purposes Only
                                  Additional readers are welcome.
========================================================
      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 mwilliams@SigmaBleyzer.com.
               “UKRAINE – A COUNTRY OF NEW OPPORTUNITIES”
========================================================
               ACTION UKRAINE PROGRAM – SPONSORS
                              Action Ukraine Report (AUR)
               Holodomor Art and Graphics Collection & Exhibitions
          “Working to Secure & Enhance Ukraine’s Democratic Future”
1.  THE BLEYZER FOUNDATION, Dr. Edilberto Segura,
Chairman; Victor Gekker, Executive Director, Kyiv, Ukraine;
    Additional supporting sponsors for the Action Ukraine Program are:
2. UKRAINIAN FEDERATION OF AMERICA (UFA), Zenia Chernyk,
Chairperson; Vera M. Andryczyk, President; Huntingdon Valley,
Pennsylvania
3. KIEV-ATLANTIC GROUP, David and Tamara Sweere, Daniel
Sweere, Kyiv and Myronivka, Ukraine, 380 44 298 7275 in Kyiv,
kau@ukrnet.net
4.  ESTRON CORPORATION, Grain Export Terminal Facility &
Oilseed Crushing Plant, Ilvichevsk, Ukraine
5. Law firm UKRAINIAN LEGAL GROUP, Irina Paliashvili, President;
Kiev and Washington, general@rulg.com, www.rulg.com.
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, yuriy.sivitsky@softline.kiev.ua; Volia Software website:
http://www.volia-software.com/ or Bill Hunter, CEO Volia Software,
Houston, TX  77024; bill.hunter@volia-software.com.
8. ODUM– Association of American Youth of Ukrainian Descent,
Minnesota Chapter, Natalia Yarr, Chairperson
9. UKRAINE-U.S. BUSINESS COUNCIL, Washington, D.C.,
Morgan Williams, SigmaBleyzer, Acting-President & Chairman,

Executive Committee, Board of Directors; John Stephens, Cape
Point Capital, Secretary/Treasurer; Shannan Herzfeld, ADM, Chair,
Agribusiness Working Group; John Rauber, Deere & Co, Vice-Chair,
Agribusiness Working Group; Irina Paliashvili, Ukrainian Legal
Group, Chair, Legal Affairs Working Group; Jack Heller, Heller &
Rosenblatt, Vice-Chair, Legal Affairs Working Group.
10. UKRAINIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH OF THE USA, Archbishop
Antony, South Bound Brook, New Jersey, http://www.uocofusa.org
11. UKRAINIAN AMERICAN COORDINATING COUNCIL (UACC),
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: http://www.USUkraine.org
13. WJ GROUP of Ag Companies, Kyiv, Ukraine, David Holpert, Chief
Financial Officer, Chicago, IL; http://www.wjgrain.com/en/links/index.html
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, www.eugeniadallas.com.
15. ALEX AND HELEN WOSKOB, College Station, Pennsylvania
16. SWIFT FOUNDATION, San Luis Obispo, California
17. TRAVEL TO UKRAINE website, http://www.TravelToUkraine.org,
A program of the U.S-Ukraine Foundation, Washington, D.C.
18. BUYUKRAINE.ORG website, http://www.BuyUkraine.org.
A program of the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation, Washington, D.C.
========================================================
 TO BE ON OR OFF THE FREE AUR DISTRIBUTION LIST
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 morganw@patriot.net. Information about
your occupation and your interest in Ukraine is also appreciated.
 
If you do not wish to read the ACTION UKRAINE REPORT please
contact us immediately by e-mail to morganw@patriot.net.  If you are
receiving more than one copy please let us know so this can be corrected
 
  SPAM & BULK MAIL BLOCKERS ARE A REAL PROBLEM                 

If you do not receive a copy of the AUR it is probably because of a
SPAM OR BULK MAIL BLOCKER maintained by your server or by
yourself on your computer. Spam and bulk mail blockers are set in very
arbitrary and impersonal ways and block out e-mails because of words
found in many news stories or the way the subject line is organized or
the header or who know what.
 
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, The Bleyzer Foundation

Emerging Markets Private Equity Investment Group
President (Acting) and Chairman, Executive Committee of the
Board of Directors, Ukraine-U.S. Business Council
P.O. Box 2607, Washington, D.C. 20013, Tel: 202 437 4707
mwilliams@SigmaBleyzer.com; www.SigmaBleyzer.com
========================================================
       Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely.
========================================================
return to index [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

AUR#809 Jan 28 Labor Migration Changing Ukraine; Plaited Lady; Lesser Of Two Evils; Ban On Desertion; Return To Ukraine; Living History Of Their Elders

=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR           
                 An International Newsletter, The Latest, Up-To-Date
                     In-Depth Ukrainian News, Analysis and Commentary

                      Ukrainian History, Culture, Arts, Business, Religion,
         Sports, Government, and Politics, in Ukraine and Around the World       

 
                                    LOOKING BACK TO GET
                     A CLEARER PICTURE OF THE FUTURE
        The ‘living history” of their elders that is part of their Ukrainian heritage.
                                                  [Article 22]
                        
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR – Number 809
Mr. E. Morgan Williams, Publisher and Editor, SigmaBleyzer
WASHINGTON, D.C., SUNDAY, JANUARY 28, 2007

               –——-  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.             HOW LABOR MIGRATION IS CHANGING UKRAINE
 Traditionalists fear workers’ migration is undermining Ukrainian society and
liberals emphasize the advantages, but serious debate about the issue is lacking.
COMMENTARY: By Kerstin Zimmer, Transitions Online (TOL)
Prague, Czech Republic, Monday, January 22, 2007

2.           MIGRATION: AN IMPORTANT TEST OF TOLERANCE
By Stefan Wagstyl, Financial Times, London, UK, Tuesday, Jan 23 2007
 
3.      PACE MAY HOLD MIGRATION CONFERENCE IN UKRAINE 
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thu, January 25, 2007

4. UKRAINIAN WORKERS IN RUSSIA TO HAVE MIGRANT STATUS
Interfax Information Agency, Moscow, Russia, Thu, January 25, 2007

5.           UKRAINIAN PRIVATBANK EXPANDS IN EUROPE TO

                      SERVICE UKRAINIAN MIGRANT WORKERS
Kommersant, Moscow, Russia, Tue, January 23, 2007

6.    WORLD BANK SAYS BENEFITS CAN RISE FROM MIGRATION

                    IF IT IS COORDINATED BETWEEN COUNTRIES
          Ukraine is the fourth largest migrant-receiving country in the world
By Finfacts Team, Finfacts Business News Centre
Finfacts Ireland, Tuesday, Jan 16, 2007

7.        WORLD BANK REPORT RECOMMENDS A FRESH LOOK

                  AT MIGRANT WORKERS BY RICH COUNTRIES
By Judy Dempsey, International Herald Tribune (IHT)
Paris, France, Wednesday, January 17, 2007

8.        WHERE HAVE ALL OUR MIGRANTS GONE? COUNTRIES

                     IN EASTERN EUROPE WANT THEM BACK.
By Michael J. Jordan, Correspondent, The Christian Science Monitor
Boston, Massachusetts, Wednesday, January 10, 2007

9.        UK: WHY NORFOLK FARMS NEED MIGRANT WORKERS
       We have had people from Bulgaria, Belarus, the Ukraine and Romania.
By Naomi Canton, Norwich Evening News 24
Norwich, United Kingdom, Wednesday, 24 January 2007

10CRIMEAN TATARS RALLY, DEMAND RETURN OF ANCESTRAL

            LAND SEIZED BY STALIN MORE THAN 60 YEARS AGO
Associated Press (AP), Kiev, Ukraine, Monday, January 22, 2007

11.    UKRAINIAN CABINET FORMS COMMISSION FOR RETURN

                OF PROPERTY TO RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Wed, January 24, 2007

12.     FOREIGN FILMS FOR CHILDREN WILL ALL BE DUBBED

                          INTO UKRAINIAN BY END OF 2007
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, January 22, 2007

13.                 PLAITED LADY OUT ON THE OFFENSIVE
OP-ED: by Myron Wasylyk, Kyiv Post, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thu, Jan 25 2007

14.                           THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS
           Why Tymoshenko Bloc (BYuT) voted against the president
INFORM Newsletter #27, Newsletter for the international community
providing views and analysis from the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc
Kyiv, Ukraine, Wednesday, January 24, 2007

15.                       BAN ON POLITICAL DESERTION
             Opponents and supporters of the ‘imperative mandate bill.’
 Bondage, serfdom, totalitarianism or a restoration of justice, a step forward
ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: By Serhii Rakhmanin
Zerkalo Nedeli On The Web, Mirror-Weekly No. 2 (631)
International Social Political Weekly
Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, 20 – 26 January 2007

16.    UKRAINE: 11,000 RALLY IN SUMY TO SUPPORT PEOPLE’S

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thu, January 25, 2007

17.   UKRAINIAN OPPOSITION LEADER, YULIYA TYMOSHENKO,
                            SEEKS FRIENDSHIP WITH ISRAEL
NRG Ma’ariv website, Tel Aviv, in Hebrew 16 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service. United Kingdom, Thursday, Jan 18, 2007

18.          TYMOSHENKO BLOC ASKS ISRAEL TO RECOGNIZE 
     UKRAINIAN FAMINE OF 1932-1933 GENOCIDE OF UKRAINIANS
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tue, January 16, 2007

19POLISH MEP CALLS ON EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT TO RECOGNIZE
     UKRAINIAN FAMINE OF 1932-1933 AS OUTRAGE UPON HUMANITY
Interfax Ukraine News, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thu, January 11, 2007

20UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT YUSHCHENKO CALLS RECOGNITION

      OF FAMINE OF 1932-1933 AS GENOCIDE MAIN EVENT OF 2006
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, January 1, 2007
 
21.                                  RETURN TO UKRAINE
   In an emotional trip, Sentinel columnist Greg Dawson finds the tragedy and
   miracle of years past, as well as a modern nation that opens its heart to him.
Greg Dawson, Sentinel Staff Writer, Orlando Sentinel
Orlando, Florida, Sunday, January 21, 2007
 
22LOOKING BACK TO GET A CLEARER PICTURE OF THE FUTURE
        The ‘living history” of their elders that is part of their Ukrainian heritage.
By Kristina Gray, Ukrainian Observer magazine, Issue 227
The Willard Group, Kyiv, Ukraine, January, 2007
========================================================
1
    HOW LABOR MIGRATION IS CHANGING UKRAINE
  Traditionalists fear workers’ migration is undermining Ukrainian society and
liberals emphasize the advantages, but serious debate about the issue is lacking.

COMMENTARY: By Kerstin Zimmer, Transitions Online (TOL)
Prague, Czech Republic, Monday, January 22, 2007

All sides agree that labor migration is changing Ukrainian society, but
serious debate on the issue is absent.

Several years ago Ukraine’s then-president, Leonid Kuchma, referred to
Ukrainian women working in Italy as prostitutes. Ever since, the public
discourse on the role of labor migrants has become more intense and
splintered.

In recent years, Ukraine has become one of the major labor exporting
countries in Europe. This has left its mark on Ukrainian society and changed
the perception of the labor migrants, the zarobitchany.

As both Russia and Ukraine’s European Union neighbors developed their own
policies on temporary emigration and immigration, Ukraine remained trapped
in a zone of indecision.

Its two biggest neighbors, Poland and Russia, see the need to attract
workers from Ukraine and elsewhere to mitigate problems of aging populations
and the shrinking pool of workers, but Ukraine seems unprepared to counter
its own demographic crisis.

Debate on migration in the media and politics is fragmented and tendentious,
as proponents of different views prefer to deliver monologues on the topic
rather than engage in real dialogue.

When they do talk about it, what Ukrainian experts and politicians alike
often focus on is the number of migrants actually working abroad – estimates
range from 2 million to about 7 million. While most scholars put forward
rather conservative estimates, politicians seem to overstate the numbers of
labor migrants.

The argument over the “real” number of zarobitchany develops into a
political fight, in which the zarobitchany become pieces in games played by
competing forces.

The political opposition uses high numbers as a hammer to bash government
social and labor policies that fail to prevent people from (temporarily)
leaving Ukraine, and it presents itself as the advocate of “normal”
Ukrainians.
                         THE MODERN WAY TO MIGRATE
Under this surface, the public debate on labor migrants reveals the
divergent orientations and development agendas politicians or groups have
ready for Ukraine.

While the Polish political and intellectual elite engages in a rather
“modern” debate on the current demographic and the growing labor-market
crisis, and Russia oscillates between modern and traditional ideas and
politics, the dominant Ukrainian discourse is characterized by traditional
and “anti-modern” elements.

People talk and think about labor migration largely in terms of people
traveling west to work, yet the main recipient of such migration, Russia,
hardly figures in public discussion.

Official and permanent migration from Ukraine to Russia has dropped after
peaking in the 1990s, but much undocumented migration continues.

These migrants can easily and legally travel to Russia thanks to a visa-free
policy, but most are illegally working without a permit.

Workers in this group, estimated at about 1 million, come from all regions
of Ukraine. Most are men who work predominantly in construction, especially
in and around Moscow and other industrial centers.

One reason for the lack of concern with migration to Russia could be its
perceived and unchallenged “normality,” because these zarobitchany are doing
nothing new.

Ukrainians have long worked in Russia on a temporary basis, mostly in the
form of entire brigades, and well-established networks exist that facilitate
this process. Some of these networks have a business character and some are
intertwined with organized crime.

What is largely unnoticed in the media is that most Ukrainians in Russia
work in the shadow economy and that the present migration often takes place
under much worse conditions than in Soviet times.

In contrast, labor migration to the countries of the European Union receives
much more attention, thanks not only to its considerable extent but also to
its distinct features and relative novelty.

The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry estimated several years ago that about
300,000 Ukrainians worked in Poland, 200,000 in Italy, up to 200,000 in the
Czech Republic, 200,000 in Spain, and 150,000 in Portugal.

In all these countries, they have only limited opportunities to work
legally, despite some recent legal changes, legalization campaigns, and
intergovernmental agreements.

Westward labor migration is more evenly balanced between women and men

– in some regions, women are even over-represented – and involves
disproportionately more people from central and western Ukraine.

These facts influence the tone of the discussion about westbound migration
in a way that reflects Ukrainians’ view of their relationship to the West,
especially the EU.
                         WOMEN AND CHILDREN FIRST
Ukraine faces a severe demographic crisis as its population rapidly shrinks
and ages. According to the last Soviet census, in 1989, Ukraine had about

52 million inhabitants. By 2002 the population had fallen to 48 million, and
according to some forecasts it will keep falling to about 38 million in
2050.

Permanent emigration after the breakup of the Soviet Union contributed to
the decline, but only moderately, and was partly offset as ethnic
Ukrainians, Crimean Tatars, and other “traditional” nationalities returned
to Ukraine from other parts of the fragmenting USSR. High mortality and low
fertility rates are the main drivers of the crisis. In addition, HIV/AIDS is
a ticking time bomb.

Concerns over demographic and social change, added to facts such as the high
share of women workers in the West – in Ukraine’s western regions, between
60 percent and 70 percent of labor emigrants are female – and the rural or
small-town origin of many emigrants strengthen the claims of those who argue
migration is helping undermine Ukrainian traditional life.

The absence of so many women – mothers and future mothers – from Ukraine

is often painted by traditionalists as the main reason for the declining
birthrate and as a cause of the decay of the traditional Ukrainian family.
In this view, mothers abandon their children, and wives their husbands.

In addition, it is bemoaned that Ukrainian women abroad are forced into
prostitution, thus losing the moral right or even the physical ability to
bear children.

The traditionalists often cast as irresponsible and selfish the women who
leave their husbands and children at home in search of a new life.

They also blame recent labor migration for a perceived social decay in
Ukraine. Many traditionalist social critics juxtapose Ukraine, represented
by disenfranchised but decent labor migrants, against the – to say the
least – morally suspect societies of the European Union. Behind this kind of
argument lies a belief in the pernicious influence of the West that emerges
from leftist and rightist thinking alike.

The leader of the Communist Party, Petro Simonenko, for example, not long
ago attacked the “orange camp” that came to power with President Viktor
Yushchenko for portraying labor migrants as active people and investors.

Such people are damaging Ukrainian society, he claimed, accusing them of
spreading alcoholism, drug abuse, and AIDS. In encouraging women migrants

in particular, the government was undermining their true role – to bear and
raise healthy children.
                                    ONE-SIDED DEBATES
Survey research in Ukraine suggests that the migrants themselves have quite
a different view and shows just how wide is the gap between what others say
about migrants and how migrants see themselves.

Although many had negative experiences abroad, labor migrants perceive
themselves as much more actively involved in shaping their own lives than do
nonmigrants.

What political recommendations and claims do the traditionalists derive from
these arguments? While in Western Europe, and increasingly in Poland and
even in Russia, regulated immigration is viewed as a means to counter the
demographic crisis and “rejuvenate” both the labor force and the population
at large, such opinions are exceptional in Ukraine.

Instead, a number of ideas are in the air. Some argue that the state should
encourage the labor migrants to return to Ukraine by creating new jobs, if
necessary from the state budget.

Those concerned with the decay of the family call for all things detrimental
to the flourishing of the traditional Ukrainian family to be combated:
divorce, pornography, prostitution, birth control, and abortion.

At the same time, the countryside – where the largest share of labor
migrants comes from – should be given a boost, again by budgetary means.
While these are essentially ideas based on traditional views, the proposed
means are rather technocratic and reminiscent of Soviet policies.

The traditionalists do not have a monopoly on public debate over migration
and all the social processes associated with it.

Other politicians and commentators see the trends and contradictions
underscored by the phenomenon of labor migration as an inevitable part of
modernization and globalization. Work abroad can bring many material
advantages to individuals and to wider Ukrainian society, they say.

One of those advantages is sorely needed cash: by rough estimates, migrants
remit several billion dollars annually to their families in Ukraine. Even
though this view does not deny the social problems caused by labor
migration, it emphasizes that labor migration is an individual response to
economic and social hardship.

Some liberal experts and politicians favor a program to boost immigration.
But this weakly developed debate has not yet resulted in political programs,
let alone policy.

Missing from the public discussion of labor migration is serious debate
between traditionalists and liberals. The zarobitchany become depersonalized
figures in one faction or another’s overall development proposals.
Curiously, the views and experiences of the labor migrants themselves go
largely unheard.   (http://www.tol.cz)
————————————————————————————————-

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
2.   MIGRATION: AN IMPORTANT TEST OF TOLERANCE

By Stefan Wagstyl, Financial Times, London, UK, Tuesday, Jan 23 2007

Migration is the most sensitive element of globalisation. Almost everywhere
people are on the move, primarily from the developing world to the rich
nations of Europe and North America. And almost everywhere in the host
countries there are growing concerns about the impact of migration on native
lives.

Liberal economists argue that migrants bring benefits all round. Migrants
themselves gain by moving from low-productivity jobs in poor regions to more
productive work in wealthier states; the host countries profit from the
money the immigrants spend and the taxes they pay; the countries of origin
benefit from the cash many migrants send back to their families.

However, immigrants have long been viewed with suspicion. Once accused of
arson and child-snatching, they are today blamed for stealing jobs, welfare
scrounging and involvement in international terrorism. While mainstream
political leaders mostly reject these claims, they are generally trying to
impose limits on migration.

Migration is nothing new in human experience but today’s waves are bigger
than before. People in poor countries are responding to the fundamental
changes caused by economic globalisation combined with an unprecedented

drop in birth rates in developed countries.

They are finding it easier to move thanks to the spread of
telecommunications, the expansion of low-cost travel and the weakening in
border controls that followed the collapse of the Soviet Union.

“International migration is likely to be with us as long as human societies
continue to develop,” the United Nations said in a global migration report
released last year. “In all probability, it will continue to rise in the
decades ahead.”

The UN estimates that the number of migrants has doubled in the last 50
years to about 191m in 2005. While this is still only a small percentage of
the world population (2.9 per cent in 2000), it is heavily concentrated in
the developed world. Of the 36m who migrated between 1990 and 2005, 33m
moved to industrialised regions, headed by Europe and North America.

From the point of view of the developed world, the most startling fact is
that UN calculations show immigration accounted for no less than
three-quarters of the population growth of developed nations in 2000-5.

Immigrants have contributed significantly to the generally healthy level of
economic growth seen in this period (notably in the US) – and to the growing
concerns of native populations.

A key element is the slowing birth rate in the developed world, which both
increases the need for immigrant labour and increases the fears about its
social impact. The rate in the developed rate is below 1.6, compared with
the 2.1 required for stable populations.

The UN forecasts that, over the next five decades, the world’s population
growth rate will slow but it will still increase from about 6.6bn today to
more than 9bn by 2050.

By then, the population of the developed world will be declining slowly by
1m a year, while that of the developing world will still be increasing by
35m, according to the UN’s central forecast.

No fewer than 50 countries, including Japan, Germany, Italy, Russia and most
other former Soviet republics, face steady population declines, with birth
rates already well below replacement rates.

The problem is particularly acute in Japan, which has traditionally been
very resistant to immigration, and in small states which fear their native
populations might become minorities in their own countries, such as the
Baltic states.

Among the developed states, the countries which are forecast by the UN to
grow are headed by the US, Canada and the UK – all high-immigration
countries.

However, even high inflows of immigrants will not prevent the ageing of
populations in the developed world – especially as falling birth rates are
combined with longer life expectancy. The UN forecasts that by 2050 about

80 per cent of the world’s over-60s could live in developed states.

The dependency ratio – the ratio of pensioners to those in work – will
increase rapidly, contributing to a growing financial burden on the workers.

Today there are about 30 pensioners for every 100 workers in the developed
world. By 2050, according to UN data, there could be 80. In Japan and much
of Europe it could be more than 100.

Governments in developed countries have begun to tackle the problem by
trying to raise retirement ages, increase lifetime contributions of workers
to pensions and reduce pension benefits.

However, they face serious resistance from older workers who have been
looking forward to earlier retirements and better benefits than may be
offered in future. Employers too often push for early retirement to
rejuvenate their workforces or to switch production to lower-cost developing
countries.

The challenges are especially acute in Europe, with its combination of low
birth rates and generous welfare states. CSIS, the US think-tank, estimates
that with no big policy change the UK’s public benefits to the elderly as a
percentage of gross domestic product will rise from 12 per cent in 2000 to
18 per cent in 2040, and from 13 per cent to 33 per cent in Spain.

Pro-birth policies can help. For more than 100 years, France has encouraged
large families with generous child allowances and other subsidies – with
moderate success.

More recently, Sweden has developed a model of generous allowances

combined with comprehensive child care allowing parents to return to work.

Compared with a European average of 1.5, the French fertility rate is 1.8
and the Swedish 1.7. However, there are limits. In both countries, as
elsewhere, women are postponing having children. The biological time
available to give birth to three or more children is declining rapidly.`

In Europe as a whole, there is some evidence that the ideal family – which
has long been two parents and two children – is now declining, with more
adults saying they only want to have one child.

Immigrants from outside Europe tend to want and to have larger families. But
the history of migration tends to show that immigrant communities move
towards the national norms.

Immigration cannot prevent the ageing of societies but it can slow the
process and provide more time to make adjustments.

This could ease tensions between workers and pensioners and between
generations. But it can only be achieved if host countries are ready to
accept the presence of much larger numbers of immigrants and descendents

of immigrants than in the recent past.                       -30-
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
3. PACE MAY HOLD MIGRATION CONFERENCE IN UKRAINE IN 2008

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thu, January 25, 2007

KYIV – The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) may

hold an international conference for migration issues in Ukraine in 2008. The
parliament’s press service announced this to Ukrainian News.

According to the statement, during the January 25 PACE meeting the speakers
noted this conference is scheduled for the next year. At the meeting PACE
adopted recommendations as to agriculture, illegal employment in Europe and
state of illegal emigrants in impermanent employment agencies.

Speaking at the meeting, head of the permanent Verkhovna Rada delegation
Vitalii Shybko stressed that the European Council has always put the problem
of employment and migration into the spotlight.

He proposed to bring the legislative base, concerning social security of
hired agricultural workers and their interrelations with employers, in line
with that of the PACE member-countries.

In Shybko’s opinion, it is important that all the European Council
member-countries sign and ratify the Convention of Migrant Workers.

He also mentioned bad approach to performing bilateral agreements on mutual
employment between Ukraine and some other countries. By this he noted, that
not all the countries want to sign such agreements though they need work
hands.

As Ukrainian News earlier reported, in May 2006 the State Committee for
Nationalities and Migration initiated debate of the draft concept for
Ukraine’s migration policy.

Earlier, in the frames of the 2006 Ukraine-NATO target plan, Ukraine assumed
the commitment to endorse fundamentals of the state migration policy and
pass a law on the State Migration Service.              -30-
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

========================================================
4. UKRAINIAN WORKERS IN RUSSIA TO HAVE MIGRANT STATUS

Interfax Information Agency, Moscow, Russia, Thu, January 25, 2007

MOSCOW – According to a new Russian law in effect as of mid-January,
Ukrainian workers will be regarded as migrants, just as other foreigners
working in Russia.

“Ukrainian citizens will no longer have to be registered and will, like
other foreigners coming to work in Russia, be regarded as migrants, which
means the responsibility will rest with the party that hosts them, be it an
organization or an individual,” Federal Migration Service (FMS) press
secretary Konstantin Poltoranin told Interfax on Wednesday evening.

He said the agreement that allowed Ukrainian citizens to stay in Russia
without registration for up to 90 days is no longer valid.

“There is no longer such a thing as registration. Migration rules are now
much easier and are a matter of notification only. Now the receiving party –
an organization or an individual – will have to notify the federal migration
bodies within three days of the presence of a foreign national,” Poltoranin
said.                                                       -30-
————————————————————————————————

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
    Send in names and e-mail addresses for the AUR distribution list.
========================================================
5.   UKRAINIAN PRIVATBANK EXPANDS IN EUROPE TO SERVICE
                            UKRAINIAN MIGRANT WORKERS

Kommersant, Moscow, Russia, Tue, January 23, 2007

Ukrainian PrivatBank plans to open branches in Spain, Italy, Greece and
Germany through its Latvian subsidiary Paritate Banka to service Ukrainian
migrant workers in Europe, PrivatBank said.

It is easier to set up a branch in the European Union (EU) through an bank
registered in an EU member country, PrivatBank’s vice-president Yurii
Pikush said. Latvian Paritate Banka has already transformed its
representative office in Portugal into a branch.

According to the World Forum of Ukrainians, over seven million Ukrainians
work abroad and make up 10 pct of the migrant workers in the world.

They work mainly in Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Germany and annually
transfer about 19 bln euro to Ukraine ($24.7 bln). PrivatBank, based in
Dnipropetrovsk, eastern Ukraine, is one of the biggest Ukrainian banks with
30.652 bln Ukrainian hryvnias ($6.061 bln/4.659 bln euro) in assets as of
December 1, 2006.

According to Fitch rating agency, the bank is 94 pct owned by Genadyi
Bogolyubov, Igor Kolomoiskyi and Alexei Martynov and 6.0 pct by the
bank’s top managers.                              -30-
————————————————————————————————

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================      
6.   WORLD BANK SAYS BENEFITS CAN RISE FROM MIGRATION
                  IF IT IS COORDINATED BETWEEN COUNTRIES
         Ukraine is the fourth largest migrant-receiving country in the world

By Finfacts Team, Finfacts Business News Centre
Finfacts Ireland, Tuesday, Jan 16, 2007

Migration can benefit both sending and receiving countries and reduce
poverty among migrants if it is better coordinated between countries,
according to a new World Bank report.

Migration within and from the transition economies of Europe and Central
Asia has been large and will likely continue to increase as declining birth
rates across much of the region will lead to an increased demand for a young
labour force, according to “Migration and Remittances: Eastern Europe and
the Former Soviet Union.” [see link below]

The report says that it has been well publicized that migration to Western
Europe has increased significantly over the past 15 years, with Western
Europe receiving 42 percent of migrants from Central and Eastern Europe, as
well as growing numbers of migrants from the former Soviet Union.

What is less known is that on a global level, Germany and France are the
only Western European nations in the top-ten migrant-receiving
countries.Russia is number two, and Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Poland are
also in the top ten.

TOP 10 MIGRANT-RECEIVING COUNTRIES WORLDWIDE
Top 10 Migrant-Receiving Countries Worldwide: United States 1; Russia 2;
Germany 3; Ukraine 4; France 5; India 6; Saudi Arabia 7; Australia 8;
Kazakhstan 9; Poland 10.

Russia attracts migrants from the rest of the former Soviet Union, primarily
from the Caucasus and Central Asia, and poorer Central Asian workers migrate
to resource-rich Kazakhstan. Ukraine and Poland both serve as transit points
for migrants on their way to Western Europe.

Remittances are one consequence of migration that benefit both the migrants’
families and their home countries. For many of the poorest countries in
Eastern Europe and Central Asia they are the largest source of outside
income and have served as a cushion against the economic and political
turbulence of the past 15 years.

Remittances represent over 20 percent of GDP in Moldova and Bosnia and
Herzegovina and over 10 percent in Albania, Armenia, and Tajikistan.

To ensure that migration benefits both sending and receiving countries and
the migrants themselves, countries could more closely coordinate their
policies so that the supply of migrant labour can meet demand through legal
channels that respect the rights of migrants and are politically and
socially acceptable to migrant-receiving countries.

“Existing bilateral agreements can be improved to facilitate migration in
the region by matching the supply of migrant labour with the demand through
economic incentives,” explains Bryce Quillin, World Bank Economist and
co-author of the report.

There are no ready-made solutions for effective migration policy, yet one
possible route might be to combine short-term migration with incentives for
return or circular migration. Circular migration could allow migrants to
spend short periods of time abroad without creating new amounts of permanent
migration.

“New approaches, such as circular migration, and the use of economic
incentives could strengthen bilateral agreements,” says Willem van Eeghen,
World Bank Lead Economist. “If these approaches work, they will yield a
‘Triple Win’ for migrants and sending and receiving countries.”

Potential benefits of circular migration include:
[1] Receiving countries could fill labour shortages, increase revenue, and
reduce social tensions related to undocumented and unmanaged migration;
[2] Sending countries would accumulate human capital that might otherwise be
lost; and
[3] Migrants could increase their income, build human capital and financial
savings, maintain links with their families, pay lower remittance costs, and
create trade/investment linkages between countries.
————————————————————————————————–
http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_10008703.shtml
—————————————————————————————————
Migration and Remittances: Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union.
http://web.worldbank.org
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
7.  WORLD BANK REPORT RECOMMENDS A FRESH LOOK

              AT MIGRANT WORKERS BY RICH COUNTRIES

By Judy Dempsey, International Herald Tribune (IHT)
Paris, France, Wednesday, January 17, 2007

BERLIN: The money that migrants around the world send to their families
back home is well known to alleviate poverty. But many of these workers,
usually from poor countries, face enormous legal and social barriers to
working in wealthier nations.

A report published this week by the World Bank lays out why the rich
countries, often with low birth rates and labor shortages, should coordinate
their efforts so that migrant workers can help them meet labor demand
legally.

The report, entitled “Migration and Remittances: Eastern Europe and the
former Soviet Union,” also examined the impact of remittances on local
economies and ways of encouraging greater stability in the labor markets.

Since some formerly Communist countries of Eastern Europe joined the
European Union, hundreds of thousands of Poles and many others from the
Baltic countries have moved to Britain, Ireland, Belgium and Germany to find
work.

In some cases, this has led to labor shortages in their home countries,
particularly Poland. The report says that such shortages are being partly
filled by migrants from Ukraine and Belarus.

For most countries in Eastern Europe and Central Asia, the World Bank said
that only foreign aid and direct investment exceed remittances as sources of
external financing.

“For many of the poorest countries in the region, they are the largest
source and have served as a cushion against the economic and political
turbulence brought about by transition” to capitalism, it said. Among the
world’s largest recipients of remittances, as a percentage of gross domestic
product, are Moldova, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Albania, and Armenia.

In 2004, officially recorded remittances to Eastern Europe and Central Asia
amounted to more than $19 billion, about 8 percent of the global total of
$232.3 billion, according to the report.

Remittances sent in 2004 to Moldova accounted for nearly 30 percent of
gross domestic product. The figure was 24 percent for Bosnia and
Herzegovina and about 17 percent for Albania.

Despite the importance of remittances, the World Bank said that both
receiving and sending countries were failing to coordinate them.

Countries could, for example, cooperate more closely in filling labor
shortages, increase the revenue from remittances (in part by cutting the
sometimes exorbitant fees charged for sending money abroad) and reduce
the social tensions often associated with undocumented migration.

“New approaches, such as the use of circular migration and the use of
economic incentives, could strengthen bilateral agreements,” said Willem
van Eeeghen, the World Bank economist responsible for the report.

The report said that circular migration, or allowing migrants to spend short
periods of time abroad without seeking permanent residency, could enable
migrants to increase their income, build savings, pay lower remittance costs
and maintain links with their families.

“If these approaches work, they will yield a ‘triple win’ for migrants and
sending and receiving countries,” van Eeeghen said.          -30-
———————————————————————————————–
LINK: http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/01/17/business/remit.php
————————————————————————————————

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
    NOTE: Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
========================================================
8.  WHERE HAVE ALL OUR MIGRANTS GONE? COUNTRIES
                    IN EASTERN EUROPE WANT THEM BACK.

By Michael J. Jordan, Correspondent, The Christian Science Monitor
Boston, Massachusetts, Wednesday, January 10, 2007

VILNIUS, LITHUANIA – Much ado was made in Paris several years ago
about the symbolic “Polish plumber” who was coming to steal jobs from
les français. Now, it’s Eastern Europeans who are lamenting the loss of
not only plumbers, but all service workers.

“If you want some repairs in your apartment, you can’t find anyone,” says
Rita Stankeviciute, a sportswriter in Vilnius, Lithuania’s capital. “It’s
ridiculous. Lines in the grocery stores are longer. When I used to need a
taxi, it was always three minutes. Now it’s ‘In an hour.'”

As Western Europeans fret about a new wave of Eastern Europeans flooding
their countries – this time from Romania and Bulgaria, the EU’s newest
members – those nations have an opposite concern: how to bring those
immigrants home.

For a small country like Lithuania, with a low birthrate but high rates of
immigration, alcoholism, and suicide, the situation is particularly urgent.

The former communist nation of 4 million has seen at least 400,000 people
migrate west, whether to work construction in Dublin, pick strawberries in
southern Spain, or conduct research in Scandinavia.

“We must invite them back,” says Zilvinas Beliauskas, director of the
government- supported Returning Lithuanian Information Center. “We
should consider them an integral part of the nation.”

Agencies such as the International Organization for Migration (IOM) have
also joined the repatriation movement. IOM’s Vilnius branch recently
unveiled its Lithuanian-language “Independent Migration Information Center”
website to separate fact from fiction for both Lithuanians contemplating
migration abroad and those mulling a return home.

It’s the first such IOM site among new EU members, says Audra Sipaviciene,
who heads the Vilnius office.

“If a migrant’s been gone for five years, sometimes they’re very pessimistic
about the job situation back home, that ‘Oh, nothing’s changed,’ ” says Ms.
Sipaviciene. “But it is very different. So if there’s good information, all
in one place, perhaps they’ll return.”

Deimante Doksaite, a young Lithuanian journalist who recently cofounded
www.Lietuviams.com to keep the diaspora connected with home, had a
slightly different goal: show compassion.

“Immigration is the issue everyone here talks about,” says Ms. Doksaite. Yet
migrants “don’t get enough attention from Lithuania, so we wanted to … let
them know someone here cares. And this is the fastest, easiest, and cheapest
way to do it.”

In a region where seemingly everyone has a sibling or neighbor working in
the West, similar websites have also sprouted for Poles, Latvians, and
Russians.

Economic migration westward, both legal and illegal, has been a constant
since the Berlin Wall crumbled 17 years ago. Some politicians in the
economically ravaged East have been reluctant to stem the tide.

The billions of dollars of remittances sent home annually to the region have
been a boon, and the exodus has eased pressure to produce decent-paying
jobs quickly.

In fact, the migrants have allowed states to project, somewhat misleadingly,
the image of having effectively tackled unemployment:In July, the EU said
Estonia and Lithuania had recorded the largest drops in unemployment
among all EU members.

But it’s also become clear that just as the brain drain harms the national
interest – as highly educated young professionals flee to fulfill their
earning potential in wealthier countries – the disappearing working class is
devastating local service industries, with shortages of construction
workers, truck drivers, waitresses, and supermarket clerks.

To compensate, some employers in the region are now turning to laborers from
Ukraine, Russia, Belarus, and Moldova. In Vilnius, where there’s a fear of
re-Russification, “Lithuania for Lithuanians” sentiment runs high.

But Poland, by far the largest of the new EU members, couldn’t hold off any
longer. In August, the Polish Labor Ministry announced it would no longer
require work permits for farmworkers from the East arriving for seasonal
work.

Some say higher salaries could bring back Poles, but that would also raise
costs for employers, making them less competitive in international markets.

“It’s my dream to return to Poland, but not for 30 percent of my salary,”
says economist Jacek Cukrowski, a regional adviser for the UN Development
Program in Bratislava, Slovakia. “So many have gone west [that] to return,
they might not have to receive equal pay, but certainly more than now.”

 In Lithuania, pay is only one factor, says Vida Bagdonaviciene, deputy
director general of the state Department of Lithuanians Living Abroad.

She says that some Lithuanians may be turned off by the bureaucracy,
corruption, and crime – the latter two often sensationalized by the media,
she says. Or perhaps it’s the gloominess. She says that one contented
transplant in Dublin told her, “Irish people are always smiling and polite.”

Lithuanian officials now study the Irish experience: Long a source of
migration, Ireland gradually evolved into the economic “Emerald Tiger” and
a destination target for migrants.

Mr. Beliauskas is a member of an interagency task force that the government
created earlier this year to propose ways to recover some of the nation’s
human resources – while also tapping the experiences they’ve accrued abroad.

The group expects to convene its first meeting this month, proffering
concrete ideas: small-business loans and special classes for young
Lithuanians to reintegrate into schools – and for young adults, year-long
scholarships to study or do research work in an institute.

On www.Lietuviams.com, much of the content is geared to life in Lithuania,
such as tax policies, job prospects, and real-estate prices. “Everything
comes down to quality of life,” says Ms. Bagdonaviciene. “Migrants have
contact with their family and friends, and they’re waiting for the signal
that things have really gotten better here.”                  -30-
———————————————————————————————-
LINK: http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0110/p04s01-woeu.html
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

========================================================
9.    UK: WHY NORFOLK FARMS NEED MIGRANT WORKERS
      We have had people from Bulgaria, Belarus, the Ukraine and Romania.

By Naomi Canton, Norwich Evening News 24
Norwich, United Kingdom, Wednesday, 24 January 2007

NORWICH, UK – “I don’t think I could employ British people and remain
solvent. The business as we know it today would not carry on without
migrant workers. They are absolutely critical to our business.”

These are the words of Peter Dickie, who runs the Wood Farm in Wicklewood.
He is one of a growing number of farmers who insist there is no local demand
for jobs in Norfolk’s soft fruit and vegetable growing industry and
therefore the fresh food that ends up on our plates is being picked and
packed by migrant workers.

According to the latest figures, 6,580 migrant workers came into the county
last year, and of those 1,650 came to Norwich, many of them looking for
employment.

Add to this the 11,724 unemployed people in Norfolk and 2,925 in Norwich
and that is a lot of people in need of jobs.

However, farmers say supermarkets’ pressure to keep prices low forces them
to keep wages at minimum levels, thus preventing them from employing some
people.

Gone are the days when farms would send buses off to village market places
to pick up seasonal workers university students would pick strawberries
during their summer vacation.

Farms now rely on the Seasonal Agricultural Workers Scheme (SAWS) which
gives people from non EU countries the right to work picking fruit on farms
across the UK for six months.

More than 15,000 temporary staff arrive each year in the UK under the scheme
from countries such as those in the former Soviet Union bloc.

But in January 2008 it will only be open to people from Bulgaria and
Romania, following their introduction into the European Union, who are
otherwise not going to be allowed free movement in the labour market.

The 50 Club Horticultural Employers’ Association is launching a judicial
review of the Home Office decision because it is worried that restricting
the scheme to people from those countries will mean Norfolk farms will face
a labour shortage in the future and the best workers may not be from these
two countries.

Colin Hall, director, said: “Until now the workers have been students coming
to the UK to earn hard currency that goes far back home and they often use
to pay for their studies.

“Few of them abscond and there is a need for them because there is a lack of
British workers. Migrant workers are very hard-working and not troublesome –
they keep farms going.

“We don’t think there will be sufficient reliable and suitable labour to
satisfy our requirements in the future.

“These students are young, they are in and out, they are doing degrees so we
know they are going to go back. We have a genuine concern that absconding
will increase with just the Romanian and Bulgarian workers because they are
not just students – it’s anyone of any age.

“SAWS operators normally try to build up relationships over a few years to
make sure they are honest and reliable. They have made an assumption without
calculating the impact that there will be sufficient numbers coming from
those countries. I don’t believe it’s the answer and effectively they are
closing the SAWS scheme down.”

Richard Hirst, left, chairman of NFU Horticultural Board, whose farm is near
Great Yarmouth, agreed there was a danger that eventually there would not be
enough people to do the work.

He said: “A lot of the work can’t be done mechanically and has to be done by
hand and eye. It’s a very good way for students to sample our Western way of
life and that has now been sacrificed.”

A Home Office spokesman said: “It does not make sense to have in place
restrictions on the economic activities of people with right to free
movement and at the same time continue to admit people subject to
immigration control to do the same type of work.”

Christine Lumb, executive director of Concordia, one of the SAWS operators
across the UK which supplies farms in Norfolk, said: “Young people in the UK
generally speaking are not interested in working the land and that’s why we
have to have migrant workers.

“They will earn £5.35 a week which is not that attractive for a British
person. Many of them have come from countries which are quite poor and this
is the only opportunity they have to see a democracy. This is the only
opportunity they have to travel outside of the country and look at new
technology and to take some knowledge away with them.

“No one has thought about what the farms might want. These people from
Bulgaria or Romania might be alcoholics. They might have been in prison. It
will be a different type of worker who might take the job. They could be
less motivated.

“The industry could be in total crisis in the future because there won’t be
any harvesters.”

Are you a migrant worker willing to share your story? Call Naomi Canton on
01603 772418 or e-mail naomi.canton@archant.co.uk
                  WE WOULD CLOSE WITHOUT MIGRANTS
Andy Allen is the 10th generation of his family to run Portwood Farm in
Great Ellingham, Attleborough.

The 43-year-old said the asparagus side of his business would not survive if
it were not for migrant workers.

Mr Allen grows rape, barley, beans and sugar beet on 1,300 acres. Most of
the time he has three full-time staff, but from May to June he employs 35
seasonal workers and they all come through the SAWS scheme.

He said: “We don’t employ any local seasonal workers. It doesn’t fit in with
the term times of students and we need them to work seven days a week. We
pick and cut every day.

We have been down that line before but it just didn’t work. There are not
enough unemployed people in Norfolk. People here don’t seem to want to work
the land any more. People earn what they pick and they can earn up to £600
per week.

“I think the SAWS scheme is a great idea. It means that different cultures
can come together and learn about each other; we have had people from
Bulgaria, Belarus, the Ukraine and Romania. They live on the farm and they
love it. We can barely find them enough work. They like to work long hours
and they train really well.”

“I think we should give these people an opportunity to come here and there
should always be an allowance for people from non-EU countries, otherwise we
are going to have a shortage of labour in the future. Asparagus is dependent
on migrant workers.”
                               A RELIABLE WORKFORCE
Peter Dickie runs Wood Farm Wood Lane Wicklewood, Wymondham,
with his wife Joan.

When did you start your farm?
In 1992. Before that I had been working as a plant breeder for a subsidiary
of Shell in Italy and was made redundant.

What go you produce?
We grow strawberries, blackberries and raspberries and sell them to farmers’
markets, local wholesalers and supermarkets. I also grow wheat, barley and
oats.

Do you employ migrant workers?
From May to October I employ about 15 migrant workers through the SAWS
scheme. The rest of the year I don’t employ anyone. They are usually
university students.

Have you ever recruited locally?
Yes we have recruited from the UEA in the past but it’s better for us, with
modern regulations and so on, to have staff on site who we can train and we
know are following the rules and regulations. We often do training and
orientation and it’s difficult to do that if lots of new people are coming
in.

Students from the UEA would not necessarily guarantee they could come every
day so we have the continuity problem. Last year we started picking at 5am
so it’s difficult to get students to do that. The price of strawberries has
not gone up in eight years and we are under extreme pressure to produce them
at low production costs.

What does a migrant worker do?
It depends on the weather but often they start at 5am and carry on till
12pm. They live in caravans on the farm and cook their own food. Most of
the time they are picking strawberries and putting them into punnets. We pay
them according to how much they pick.

They all tend to be students, some come as friends, some come alone. Often
if they are studying horticulture they tend to have more of a clue as to
what is going in. There is romance and they have arguments. We have one or
two barbecues for them which we organise as a family.

I think it’s good for them to come up against other people from across the
world. It gives these guys a break. What they earn in six months is more
than double their annual salary back home.

What are the benefits of employing migrant workers?
They are prepared to do it and the amount of money they earn is more
significant for them. Many of them are coming from subsistence environments
where there is no state subsidy.

Often their families have scrimped and saved to get them to university. I
don’t think I could employ British people and remain solvent. It’s good for
UK businesses because these people will take back positive thoughts about
the UK.

What do you think about the latest rules coming into force?
What the Home Office is doing is reducing the number now at the very time
when our operation needs more labour. (http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk)
————————————————————————————————-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
10. CRIMEAN TATARS RALLY, DEMAND RETURN OF ANCESTRAL

            LAND SEIZED BY STALIN MORE THAN 60 YEARS AGO

Associated Press (AP), Kiev, Ukraine, Monday, January 22, 2007

KIEV – Thousands of Crimean Tatars rallied Monday on Ukraine’s Crimean
Peninsula to demand the return of land seized after Soviet leader Josef
Stalin forced the deportation of their ethnic group more than 60 years ago.

Lilya Muslimova, press secretary for the Tatar Mejlis, or Assembly, said
some 12,000 Tatars from across Crimea had gathered in front of the main
government building in the regional capital, Simferopol, to demand that
their land claims be honored. Regional police put the number at about 5,000.

The protesters – banging metal barrels and waving national flags – were also
demonstrating against changes to the criminal code that toughen penalties
for the illegal seizure of land, which they fear is meant to deter them from
pushing their land claims.

Some Tatars, frustrated by the government’s lack of response, have
physically taken over land on the Black Sea peninsula or attempted to block
access to the current owners.

“The land issue has been dragged out, and people have had enough,”

Muslimova said by telephone.

In 1944, Stalin accused the Crimean Tatars of collaborating with Germany’s
Nazis and ordered some 200,000 deported to Central Asia. Many have returned
since the 1991 Soviet collapse and have sought – mostly unsuccessfully – to
reclaim property, raising tension on the multi-ethnic peninsula.

Protests are common, but they rarely attract more than a few hundred people.
Fights also frequently break out between Tatars, most of whom are Muslim,
and the ethnic Russians and Ukrainians, who refuse to relinquish land they
were given after the Tatars’ deportation.                      -30-

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
11.    UKRAINIAN CABINET FORMS COMMISSION FOR RETURN
                OF PROPERTY TO RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Wed, January 24, 2007

KYIV – The Cabinet of Ministers has set up a commission for returning
property to religious organizations. Deputy Prime Minister Dmytro Tabachnyk
announced this at a press conference following the Cabinet of Ministers’
meeting on Wednesday.

In his words, the government endorsed at the meeting a resolution on the
creation of this commission. “I am confident that systematic and organized
work for returning church property to religious organizations will improve
cooperation between executive power and local government bodies in the
settlement of concrete questions,” Tabachnyk said.

In his words, particularly, the point at issue is return to religious
organizations of over 300 former spiritual and other clerical premises.

As Ukrainian News reported, in 2003 the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Kyiv
Patriarchy, the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church and the Roman Catholic
Church expressed protest against the draft law proposed by the Cabinet of
Ministers, which envisages the property right of churches to religious
installations, fearing that they may go over to the Ukrainian Orthodox
Church of Moscow Patriarchy.                           -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================

If you are receiving more than one copy of the AUR please contact us.
========================================================
12.   FOREIGN FILMS FOR CHILDREN WILL ALL BE DUBBED
                          INTO UKRAINIAN BY END OF 2007

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, January 22, 2007

KYIV – The Ministry of Culture and Tourism and film distributors have

agreed that 100% of foreign films for children will be dubbed into Ukrainian
or will have Ukrainian subtitles before the end of the year.  They signed a
memorandum to this effect on Monday.

The distributors undertake to provide citizens with open, full, authentic
and objective information about age restrictions, sale and language
requirements, and about time these films will be shown in Ukrainian cinemas.

As Ukrainian News earlier reported, the Ministry of Culture and film
distributors also agreed that 50% of foreign films will be dubbed into
Ukrainian before 2008. Deputy Prime Minister Dmytro Tabachnyk opposes

the idea of dubbing 100% of foreign films into Ukrainian.

In October 2006, the Kyiv Appeal Court cancelled the Cabinet of Ministers
resolution that requires all foreign films to be dubbed into Ukrainian.  -30-
————————————————————————————————-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
         Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
========================================================
13.   PLAITED LADY OUT ON THE OFFENSIVE

OP-ED: by Myron Wasylyk, Kyiv Post, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thu, Jan 25 2007

While in Jerusalem last week, Ukraine’s chief oppositionist Yulia
Tymoshenko called on her fellow politicians to visit Holy Land
religious sites to cleanse themselves from the dirt of Ukrainian politics.

The call was timely given her surprising political support to Prime Minister
Viktor Yanukovych’s successful efforts to overturn a presidential veto on
the law on the Cabinet of Ministers.

The new law expected to go into effect soon strips the president of key
executive authorities and vests them in the hands of the coalition
government.

Given Tymoshenko’s opposition to the political reforms that weakened the
presidency during the height of the 2004 Orange Revolution, her early
January votes in the Rada caused many to question her true political
motives.

In fact, Tymoshenko allies openly distance themselves from any rational form
of democracy and state they are interested in gaining total control of state
institutions with few checks and balances.

This runs contrary to the president’s agenda of correcting the current
political asymmetry and refining a reliable system of checks and balances
between the presidency, parliament and coalition government.

Yulia Tymoshenko’s tactical alliance with the Party of Regions will not only
bring more chaos to governing institutions in the short term, but will have
grave consequences on the strategic development of Ukrainian democracy
for years to come.

Luckily there are at least 11 procedural and other violations of the
existing Constitution within the recently passed Cabinet of Ministers law
that could be used by the courts to turn back the latest attempt to usurp
political power in Ukraine without a consultation with voters.

However, until the courts hear the case, the law will have taken effect and
will have the following repercussions and consequences.

[1] First, the law on the Cabinet of Ministers overridden by parliament
strips the president of almost all executive authorities and places them in
the hands of the prime minister. In essence, a voter’s right to directly
elect the president has been violated.

Direct elections to the presidency with one set of powers have been replaced
with a presidency of limited political powers – that which former President
Leonid Kuchma and his top aide Viktor Medvedchuk couldn’t get parliament
to pass in the fall of 2004.

Tymoshenko’s support of the Cabinet of Ministers law now fully nullifies the
guiding principles and values that formed the rationale for the hard-fought
2004 presidential election that brought about the Orange Revolution.

[2] Second, Ukraine’s existing balance of political powers between two
directly elected democratic bodies – the president and parliament – will
under the new law on the Cabinet of Ministers shift completely to the
governing coalition.

Given the existing make-up of the parliament and the finances concentrated
in the Party of Regions, de facto all political powers shift to Prime
Minister Yanukovych.

The president’s earlier right to disband parliament if a ruling coalition is
not formed, a prime minister not nominated, a budget and national government
program not passed, is vested absurdly with the parliament itself. The
result is, again, a usurpation of power without consultation with voters.

[3] Third, the draft law on the so-called “imperative mandate,” which

Tymoshenko has fought so hard for, limits direct voter representation
further by giving political parties, and not the courts, the right to remove
elected council representatives.

If not vetoed by the president, the new law will allow party leaders to
replace those local deputies who abandoned their party lists in city and
oblast councils. Most notably, this could have an impact on the make-up

of the Kyiv City Council.

In effect, those elected deputies who express independent views and do not
follow the central party line face expulsion from party ranks and removal
from public office.

While this position may gain the support of strong party discipline
advocates, the protection of individual rights as guaranteed by the
Constitution will be violated and their adjudication and fair application
would rest not with the courts but with the central political committees of
political parties – much like the system that existed during the times of
the Communist Party Politburo.

So where have the Tymoshenko Bloc’s hasty actions steered Ukraine’s
nascent democratic polity?

The Jan. 12 votes were brought about by a turn of events among the
radicalized political faction within the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc. The latter
feared their further political marginalization by a stability pact that was
to be signed by President Viktor Yushchenko, Prime Minister Yanukovych
and Speaker Oleksandr Moroz in mid-February.

The president’s attempts to usher in a political culture of party
coexistence and political compromise as a means toward reaching agreement
on refining a democratic system of political checks and balances is a direct
threat to Tymoshenko.

Given her strong showing during the 2006 parliamentary election, her
immediate political goal is to amass as much Orange electorate support as
soon as possible.

This solidifies her positions in the Orange camp and limits potential
competition from rising democratic stars such as Yuriy Lutsenko, Arseniy
Yatsenyuk, Mykola Katerynchuk, Vitaliy Klitschko, and others.

To ensure she stays relevant, Tymoshenko played tactically against
Yushchenko the tried and true populist trump cards of “the worse off the
better.” Her only hope of achieving new parliamentary elections is to
further weaken the presidency and build up an encroaching opponent in
Yanukovych.

This, she hopes, will push Yushchenko to call early elections, which if held
soon are likely to turn Ukraine from a multi-party democracy to a political
system dominated by two highly centralized political parties with populist
platforms and authoritarian tendencies: the Party of Regions and the Yulia
Tymoshenko Bloc.

This turn of events would once again bring to the fore the east-west divide
and put Ukraine on the road to a long-term internal struggle that could
further push away prospects for Western or any other form of international
integration.                                             -30-
———————————————————————————————–
NOTE: Myron Wasylyk is Senior Vice President of The PBN Company,
where he provides political consultations to businesses, governments,
NGOs and political parties.
————————————————————————————————

LINK: http://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/oped/25930/
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
14.                THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS
               Why Tymoshenko Bloc (BYuT) voted against the president

INFORM Newsletter #27, Newsletter for the international community
providing views and analysis from the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc
Kyiv, Ukraine, Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Ukrainian politics was stood on its head with the overturning, by the
Verkhovna Rada, of the presidential veto on the law of the Cabinet of
Ministers. Despite the severity of the rebuke, the president refused to
concede ground and last Thursday vetoed the law for a second time.

But this was a hollow gesture as the speaker of the parliament, Socialist
Party leader, Oleksandr Moroz, is able to sign and enact the legislation.

Viewed in its entirety, it appears that Ukraine has moved from being a
presidential to a parliamentary democracy.

So why did BYuT, which has campaigned steadfastly to revoke the
constitutional reforms, vote with the Yanukovych-government?

“Voting with Yanukovych was the lesser of two evils,” explained Hryhoriy
Nemyria, BYuT deputy leader and Mrs Tymoshenko’s top foreign affairs
adviser, “the step is clearly an interim solution which enabled us on
one-hand to end the deadlock and, on the other, to strengthen our position
as the leading democratic parliamentary opposition force.”

Clearly, there was mounting concern that the president was pushing for a new
agreement with the Anti-crisis Coalition. Two days before the vote, the
president, prime minister and speaker met to thrash out negotiations aimed
at formulating a modified National Unity Pact. “A ‘roadmap’ based on the
National Unity Pact will be the top issue at the negotiating table,” said
President Yushchenko at the time.

“Such a tactical compromise by the president would have been folly,”
remarked Mr Nemyria, “it was a solution aimed at preserving the status quo
and ignored the fact that the country is seized by a constitutional crises.
It was time for us to act.”

By voting as it did, BYuT pulled the rug from the feet of the
president and quashed any plans for a new National Unity Pact.
At the same time there was a degree of quid pro quo in that BYuT, in
exchange for its support, succeeded in getting the first reading of the law
on the Opposition passed – overcoming the first hurdle to establish a
western-style parliamentary opposition force.

Equally important was the signing of the law on the Imperative Mandate.
This entitles sanctions to be brought against regional council deputies that
refuse to follow the party line. This legislation will help eliminate
corruption in regional councils by thwarting unscrupulous politicians
wishing to follow business interests over their party’s policies.

Some, like Vasyl Lemak, Doctor of Legal Sciences, Professor of Uzhgorod
National University, believe the Imperative Mandate is not good for
Ukraine’s democratic development and ultimately “will carry it away from
democracy and European values of constitutionalism.”

Others argue that you cannot apply these mores to youthful democracies
trying to shake off the yoke of big business and oligarch influences.
Indeed, they see the tacit quid pro quo deal that shaped BYuT’s voting
behaviour as a cause for celebration – a healthy sign of a democracy at
work.

There are many from both former-Orange camps who hope that the override
will be the much needed catalyst for President Yushchenko to exercise his
power to call early elections. One political analyst said, “it is less of a
catalyst and more of a detonator for Yushchenko to act.”

BYuT has called consistently for fresh elections and for the constitutional
reforms to be revoked. “We need to end the constitutional crisis by
democratic means,” said Yulia Tymoshenko, leader of the opposition and of
her eponymous bloc. “What you have seen is an interim position in order to
secure gains for Ukraine’s long-term future.

We have always maintained that the constitutional reforms were a mistake,
that there needs to be new parliamentary elections and that there will be no
strategic deal with the Party of Regions. We will continue to push for this
but now will do so from a stronger base. This week BYuT has showed that
it’s not just beautiful but is also strong.”

In referring to the strategic significance of the January 12th vote, Tetyana
Nikolayenko, writing for  Ukrayinska Pravda, summed it up as “the most
successful for Yulia Tymoshenko since she got 22% of votes at the
parliamentary elections.”

Whilst the next reading of the law on the Opposition may be less easy going,
BYuT has nevertheless strengthened its political capital both in the
national parliament and at regional level.  Concurrently, it sent a strong
message to the president and underscored its position as the main opposition
force in the country. If the president has the gumption to act, then the
pro-western future of Ukraine may take a step closer to becoming reality.
                               LAW ON THE OPPOSITION
The Opposition Bill passed its first reading. Major rights include:

[1] The right to form an opposition shadow government that is funded by the
Verkhovna Rada. The head of the Shadow Cabinet may take part in the
session of the Cabinet of Ministers and has speaking rights.
[2] Leadership of 12 parliamentary committees.
[3] First deputy positions in parliamentary committees, except those chaired
by the opposition.
[4] Nomination of candidates for governmental agencies such as the National
Bank Council, National Television, Radio Broadcasting Council, Accounting
Chamber and the High Council of Justice.

[5] The right to make proposals concerning the draft state budget,
determination of the parliamentary agenda, reports for formation of domestic
and foreign policy, state budget and approval of the government’s action
plan.
[6] The right to receive information on state governing bodies and state
officials.
                     LAW ON THE IMPERATIVE MANDATE
Local MPs or regional deputies may be deposed by their political party for:
[1]Infringement of the Laws and Constitution of Ukraine, other legislative
acts of Ukraine, the Constitution of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea
and lawful acts of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea;
[2] Insufficient execution of their deputy responsibilities
relating to this law and other laws of Ukraine;
[3] Use of their deputy mandate to pursue personal and self-interest, and
the systematic infringement of ethics and moral norms.
—————————————————————————————————
Questions or comments? E-mail us at taras@byti.org.ua
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
15.         BAN ON POLITICAL DESERTION
                Opponents and supporters of the ‘imperative mandate bill.’
   Bondage, serfdom, totalitarianism or a restoration of justice, a step forward

ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: By Serhii Rakhmanin
Zerkalo Nedeli On The Web, Mirror-Weekly No. 2 (631)
International Social Political Weekly
Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, 20 – 26 January 2007

A week ago, the Ukrainian parliament adopted an “imperative mandate bill”.
Opponents of this legislative innovation label it as “bondage”, “serfdom”,
and “return to totalitarianism”.

Supporters praise it as “restoration of justice”, “a step forward in the
development of parliamentarianism”, “a hard but necessary disciplinary
measure”.

Under the new law, a person elected to a representative body as a member of
a political party is bound to their respective faction. Any deserter for any
other faction shall be stripped of their mandate.

These “political handcuffs” were put on MPs in December of 2004. On January
12 2007, the parliament voted for the bill that “cuffed” members of regional
and district councils.
                          FROM JULIUS CAESAR TO LENIN
The term “imperative mandate” is not quite relevant to the bill in question.
Most reference books explain it as “a form of responsibility of elected
representatives before their voters” which implies the voters’ “legal right
to recall their representatives”.

In fact, it is an instrument of the people’s influence on their servants.
The Ukrainian “imperative mandate”, instead of bridging the gap between the
choosers and the “chosen”, makes it even wider.

The question of elected representatives’ political responsibility arose long
ago. Early cases of expulsion date back to ancient times. Even Julius Caesar
resorted to this weapon. Later, medieval rulers learned and enriched the
experience of Romans and Greeks.

The term “imperative mandate” in its “classical sense” emerged in 1871 when
the French communards made members of the National Assembly hostages of the
electorate. They invented an entirely new model of government: amalgamation
of the executive, legislative, and judicial functions.

Persons elected through general suffrage received posts in courts,
administrative offices, and representative bodies. They stayed at their
posts as long as they were up to their voters’ expectations and demands. The
negligent had to step down at once.

Studying the experience of using this instrument in different countries in
different historical epochs, experts noticed some peculiarities. It worked
in the political systems that tended to concentration of power and where the
source of power was (de jure and de facto) the state, not the people.

The freedom-loving French spirit did not bear the fetters of the imperative
mandate too long and outlawed it for good. Yet, the seeds sown by the French
communards sprouted abundantly in another country of permanent revolutions –
Russia.

From 1905, when parliamentarianism emerged in the Russian Empire and until
the 1917 Bolshevik coup, members of the Duma held so-called “free mandates”,
i.e. they were not directly responsible before their voters who could not
recall them. Nicholas II granted them “complete freedom of opinion”.

The Bolsheviks went a different way: in 1918 they introduced a system of
mandatory reports of “workers’, peasants’, and soldiers’ deputies” to
voters. During the Civil War, they used it too practically: they simply
dissolved representative bodies on all levels.

According to S. Danilov, a well-known chronicler of political history,
“between 1917 and 1925 reelections occurred so often that there was simply
no time for recalling individual deputies”.

Professor M. Pobokin and other experts on this subject cite exemplary cases:
the Cheka [Russian abbreviation for “Extraordinary Commission” – the early
predecessor of the KGB – A.B.] coerced voters to recall “socially alien
deputies” from local councils.

The imperative mandate was an invariable attribute of the Soviet political
system throughout its existence. This norm was present in the first
constitution of 1918 and the last constitution of 1977. However, the
procedure of recalling a people’s representative at voters’ initiative was
practically never used.

[1] Firstly, the legislative mechanism for recalling people’s
representatives appeared in 1959.
[2] Secondly, even the leading theoreticians of Soviet law were not
unanimous in defining the imperative mandate. Thirdly, the Soviet electoral
system was purely decorative and there was no need to recall decorative
deputies.

In the late 1980s, some Soviet jurists even called the imperative mandate a
“useless instrument”. In civilized countries it is regarded as
anti-democratic, and authoritarian regimes have other means of influence on
disobedient lawmakers.

Interestingly, the recall procedure in Bolshevik Russia was invented by
Lenin. In the fall of 1917, he personally drafted a document that made the
basis of the decree of the All-Russia Central Executive Committee “On
Recalling of Elected Deputies”.

More interestingly, Lenin was the first to raise the issue of Bolsheviks’
responsibility before voters and denied their direct dependence on the
position of the party leadership.

In 1903 in Geneva he said, “There is the important question of imperative
mandates. This issue was raised long before the party congress and it was
decided to abolish imperative mandates. It was resolved that no member of
the party must consider himself bound by any obligations to the organization
that delegated him to the congress.” [here and further bold-faced by the
author – A.B.].

Thus, Lenin was against what the Ukrainian lawmakers legalized a hundred
years later (the Communist faction voted for the imperative mandate bill
almost in a body – 20 yeas and one abstained). Lenin was against blind
obedience to the party leadership.

He rejected the very form of the imperative mandate the Ukrainian lawmakers
just voted for. How does that go with the Ukrainian Communists?
                                   THEORY AND PRACTICE
Few states practice the imperative mandate. One of them is Russia. From the
next elections on, members of the State Duma as well as of regional and
local legislative assemblies will have no right to desert their factions.

Urging the lawmakers to vote for the imperative mandate bill, Duma Vice
Speaker Lyubov Sliska called the imperative mandate a “normal international
practice”.

She was wrong. According to open sources, the membership of the “imperative
mandate club” is not numerous: Russia, Cuba, China, North Korea, Vietnam,
India, the South African Republic, Nigeria, Vanuatu, and Ukraine. Judging
from this list, it is anything but a “normal international practice”.

In India, for example, an MP may be stripped of the mandate not only for
deserting his faction, but also for voting “autonomously”. In the South
African parliament, there is a symbolic term for the norm of imperative
mandate – “anti-traitorous”.

In all European countries (except Ukraine), people’s representatives hold
free mandates: they are accountable to their own conscience and the entire
nation, not just a constituency or a political party.

If some individual representatives or political parties fail to live up to
their voters’ expectations, they have no or almost no chances to be
reelected.

The imperative mandate contradicts the European legal tradition and is
generally viewed as a means of exerting pressure on people’s
representatives. It is banned by the constitutions of Belgium, Germany,
Italy, Finland, and France.

One may argue that members of those parliaments don’t sell their votes as
openly as Ukrainian lawmakers do.

That’s right, but there is an example: Poland has lived through something
like this, but after long discussions, Polish jurists decided not to limit
constitutional rights and ruled that members of the Sejm should have the
right to secede from their factions.

At the same time, the MPs ought to be aware of the likely damage to their
reputation and further career.

Even in the self-proclaimed Caucasian republic of Nagorny Karabakh the
majority voted in late 2006 for a local constitution that said in black and
white, “The people’s representative is not constrained by the imperative
mandate.” And Ukraine chooses to be more like Nigeria or Vanuatu.

Opponents of the imperative mandate admit that uncontrollable desertions
from factions upset the balance of political forces and are detrimental to
certain political parties, but they are convinced that this “serfdom” is far
more detrimental to the entire nation.

They admit that desertion is immoral, but “opportunists” would go against
the grain anyways, even though they were bound to their faction.

One may call such an approach naive, but unlike Nigeria or Vanuatu, the rest
of the civilized world has it. It is officially accepted by the Council of
Europe. Ukraine, being its member, assumed the obligation to follow the
Venetian Commission’s recommendations.

This leading European organ of constitutional law has repeatedly warned the
Ukrainian lawmakers against imposing the imperative mandate: “This norm
may . weaken the Verkhovna Rada by invalidating the free and independent
mandate of its members who will be unable to follow their convictions and
remain members of parliament.

The mandatory membership of a faction or bloc impairs the independence of a
people’s representative and may be regarded as unconstitutional, considering
that members of parliament are supposed to represent the people and not the
parties they belong to.”

The Venetian Commission has sharply criticized the Ukrainian parliament
three times, recommending it to abandon this instrument as a threat to the
voters’ and their elected representatives’ rights. The Constitutional Court
of Ukraine has ruled three times that the imperative mandate does not limit
the citizens’ rights.

Well, Ukraine may disregard European theories and practices. But then

why complain about Europe keeping its door closed to Ukraine?

To belong to Europe means not just to have luxury cars or expensive
boutiques of European brands. As long as Ukrainian politicians are ignorant
of this truth, all doors will remain closed to this country.
                                       DISTORTING MIRROR
Last week the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc (whose members had bailed out in
dozens) initiated the bill on imperative mandate for members of local councils,
urging other factions to “restore the voters’ rights”.

Their former allies from the pro-presidential Our Ukraine said nay as one.
Some of them recalled the Venetian Commission’s warnings.

The same happened in 2001 but. exactly the opposite way: the pro-Yushchenko
faction submitted a draft bill that banned MPs from deserting their
factions. Its author was Boris Bezpaliy. Now he is one of the most vehement
opponents of the imperative mandate.

But in 2001 he never mentioned the Venetian Commission and said, “Deserting
the faction of the political party that issued them the MP mandates, they
distort the actual returns of elections.

This bill is meant to protect the voters’ interests. MP mandates must remain
in the hands of the party the people voted for.” We hear the same from
Tymoshenko in 2007.

In 2001, her faction stood up against the imperative mandate. Her
representative Chernenko called it “draconic”, asking his opponents with
indignation, “Why do you include rolling stones in your election rolls?

Before you nominate your candidates, think well who you choose so you don’t
have to hold them back by force!” Almost all members of the Tymoshenko
faction voted against the bill. Nevertheless, their resistance did not
outweigh the majority’s position – the bill collected 262 votes.

The then President Leonid Kuchma supported the innovation. In his letter to
the Constitutional Court, he maintained that it would protect the voters’
rights and freedoms as an insurance of their will. The judges shared his
opinion.

The members of the Tymoshenko faction who lashed out at the imperative
mandate in 2001 are now all for it. Why? In the country of legal nihilism
where political leaders follow the principle of political expediency, it is
no sin to change a political position.

Hence a question: if a people’s representative can change his mind whenever
he likes, is it right to prohibit him to change his faction? No imperative
mandate can prohibit metamorphoses in the Weltanschauung. These
metamorphoses are the very root of all evil and it is just silly to fight it
with dubious legal acts.

The “evolution of views” is a peculiar feature of Ukrainian politicians. The
brightest example is [Parliament Speaker] Olexandr Moroz. He was the only
Socialist to vote against the imperative mandate for members of local
councils and the only representative of the pro-government coalition to call
its constitutionality in question.

He stated his “indifferent” attitude to the innovation, but then disproved
his own statement, saying, “It’s wrong to extrapolate partisan problems on
the rest of society;” “It would be hard to keep the discipline with the
imperative mandate;” “This is a case of oppression of concrete people’s
representatives;” “To a certain extent, this is coercion.”

He would have the moral right to say so if he hadn’t said the opposite just
a few months ago. In spring of 2006, Moroz (who was not Speaker yet) spoke
for the imperative mandate for members of local councils.

Meeting with representatives of European Socialist parties in Kyiv on May 3,
Moroz said that it was necessary and justified as it proceeded from the
logic of forming coalitions at the local level. When was he earnest – last
spring or this winter?
                           CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES
Moroz is right, saying that the imperative mandate bill is unconstitutional
and the President has every right to veto it. This legal act applies to
members of local councils who were elected in March 2006 and who joined
other factions before it was adopted. Thus, it is retroactive.

Article 58 of the Constitution says that a legal act may have the
retroactive force only if it mitigates a liability, and this is a case of
the opposite. Voting for the bill in defiance of this article, 362 MPs
violated the Constitution.

Members of the Tymoshenko faction approached the Constitutional Court

with a request to interpret the constitutional norms related to the imperative
mandate. The judges are going to hear the case on January 25.

Many believe that Yulia Tymoshenko made a big mistake by striking a deal
with the coalition majority on January 12, when her faction contributed 120
votes for the law on the Cabinet of Ministers in exchange for the coalition
majority’s votes for the bills on the opposition (in first reading) and on
the imperative mandate.

Tymoshenko’s supporters praise her for the deal because:
[1] she has demonstrated her ability to pursue an independent policy;
[2] she has lobbied for decisions that are of crucial importance to her;
[3] she has put local councils where her political force has the formal
majority under full control;
[4] having contributed to the limitation of Yushchenko’s presidential
powers, she has spurred him to a much coveted preterm parliamentary
election;

Tymoshenko’s opponents argue that her deal with the pro-

government coalition has done more harm than good:
[1] it has brought down the people’s trust in Tymoshenko and her political
force;
[2] it has brought coalitions of the Tymoshenko Bloc and the Our Ukraine in
some local councils to the verge of breakup;
[3] it has buried the last hopes for a preterm election (which is tantamount
to Yushchenko’s political suicide);
[4] it has conserved the regime of the Donetsk clan at least until 2011.

Time will show which side is right, but the above pros look rather
questionable while the cons are very convincing.

What has Tymoshenko gained? – The bill on the opposition in first reading?
Who says the coalition majority will vote for it in second reading? She has
the bill on the imperative mandate, but what if the President vetoes it?

Tymoshenko refers to some “verbal agreements with Yanukovych”, but the
Constitutional Court may invalidate the bill as unconstitutional. And even
if these bills take effect, the coalition may just as well revoke them – it
has more than the required 226 votes.

There is much talk about the “morality” of Tymoshenko’s move and her
“betrayal” of Yushchenko (or Yushchenko’s betrayal of Tymoshenko). Yet,
Ukraine has witnessed some grosser immorality – betrayal of ideals. The
Tymoshenko Bloc claims that the imperative mandate serves the interests of
voters and parliamentary democracy.

However, according to the bill, the fate of a “renegade” is to be decided by
the leadership of his or her party. This means that the fate of the people
elected by the whole country is at the mercy of a very narrow group. Does
that meet the interests of voters and principles of democracy?

Tatiana Melikhova, leader of the Tymoshenko faction in the Kyiv City
Council, reports happily that one deserter has already applied for
restituting his membership in the faction and that six more are ready to
follow suit. Big deal! Traitors are coming back!

So what? Who trusts those who have betrayed once? What are they worth

in terms of voters’ interests and democratic values?
Besides, who says that they will be allowed to return? The bill doesn’t. It
only provides for stripping them of their mandates.

There is another question: who will succeed the renegades stripped of their
mandates? It is no secret that Tymoshenko factions in some local councils
are short of members. Other factions have other problems: a number of their
neophyte members have stated their refusal to return to their initial
factions.

Olga Bogomolets who was elected to the Kyiv City Council as a member of

the Our Ukraine left the OU faction very soon. In an interview with the ZN she
explained, “I always held my ground. That was one of the main reasons I left
the faction that never actually needed people with strong personal
positions. I’d rather surrender my mandate than my principles.” Others may
have other reasons – ideological or mercantile.

One thing is for sure: Ukraine can hardly benefit from the imperative
mandate bill. A day will come when people’s representatives will stop
trading their votes and will feel their responsibility before voters without
any legislative constraints.

Nobody knows when it will come, but the more similar Ukraine is to

North Korea and Nigeria, the longer we will have to wait.    -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
16.    UKRAINE: 11,000 RALLY IN SUMY TO SUPPORT PEOPLE’S
      SELF-DEFENSE MOVEMENT STARTED BY YURII LUTSENKO 
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thu, January 25, 2007

KYIV – Some 10,000 of residents of the Sumy city and region have held a
demonstration on Independence Square, the central square of the region’s
capital, to support the People’s Self-Defense movement started by
ex-minister of internal affairs and president’s aide Yurii Lutsenko.

The demonstration began at 5 p.m. and ended at 6:30 p.m. Musical band

Tartak and singer Maria Burmaka opened the rally.

Demonstrators held a sign saying, ‘Lutsenko is one of the few who did not
betray the people of Ukraine’, signs with the names of their settlements,
state flags and the flags of Our Ukraine People’s Union party and Ukrainian
National Assembly.

Taras Stetskiv, one of the organizers of the movement, made a speech to the
gathering in which he highlighted the need to establish people’s control
over the authorities.

Lutsenko made a speech after Stetskiv and urged all democratic parties to
unite. The demonstrators chanted: ‘Thank you, Yura!’

The state anthem was played at the end of the rally and Lutsenko handed over
the flag of People’s Self-Defense to the people who came to the square.

As Ukrainian News earlier reported, on January 23, Lutsenko set off on a
tour around Ukraine to create steering committees for People’s Self-Defense
movement. He started his movement when Rada dismissed him from the

ministerial post on December 1.                  -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
17. UKRAINIAN OPPOSITION LEADER, YULIYA TYMOSHENKO,
                            SEEKS FRIENDSHIP WITH ISRAEL

NRG Ma’ariv website, Tel Aviv, in Hebrew 16 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service. United Kingdom, Thursday, Jan 18, 2007

Excerpt from interview with visiting Ukrainian opposition leader Yuliya
Tymoshenko by Eli Bradenstein posted on the web version of the Israeli
newspaper Ma’ariv on 16 January; subheadings are the newspaper’s own

[Bradenstein] Yuliya, it seems that the Orange Revolution has failed.
[Tymoshenko] For some reason, everyone thought that a week after the
revolution the country would prosper and all of the expectations would be
realized, but that’s impossible, because the forces that sustained the
corruption and the oligarchies in Ukraine were so strong and well
entrenched, and it was a big mistake to think that.

[Bradenstein] Is that an indication of the politicians’ weakness, including
your own?
[Tymoshenko] It became clear that the politicians were weaker than it had
seemed. All of the politicians who led the revolution were not strong enough
to fight with the citizens who went out into the squares.

Perhaps I did not do enough either, but I think that the political force I
head is continuing on that track, and is capable of learning from mistakes
and not giving in to disappointment.

[Bradenstein] With [Viktor] Yanukovych as prime minister, how is it even
possible to talk about continuing the revolution?
[Tymoshenko] For now he is only the prime minister, but I do not know of a
force in Ukraine that could prevent us from doing what needs to be done in
order to continue the revolution. It’s just a matter of time until that
happens. [Passage omitted]
            DEEP AFFECTION FOR RABIN AND GOLDA
Tymoshenko arrived for three short days, and during that time she has
already visited Yad Vashem, the Jewish Agency and Jerusalem’s Old City.

She also met with a string of politicians, such as Ministers Avigdor
Lieberman, Binyamin Ben-Eli’ezer, Shim’on Peres and Knesset Speaker Dalya
Itzik.

Today, Tymoshenko will meet with opposition leader Binyamin Netanyahu,
and at Tel Aviv University she will lecture on the democratic challenge in
the Commonwealth of Independent States [CIS] and Ukraine and on their
relations with the West.

One of the assessments for the circumstances of her visit to Israel is
Tymoshenko’s desire to bolster her standing in the West, ahead of a possible
run in the near future for Ukraine’s presidency. Apparently, she thinks that
in Israel there will be enough politicians who will act on her behalf in the
international arena.

[Bradenstein] Why did you come to Israel?
[Tymoshenko] This is my second visit to Israel. We are looking for friends
and partners here. Since Ukraine has problems of its own, such as the
struggle for its economic and political independence, I have an interest in
Israel.

I believe that Israel has also not completed this struggle. Russia, in that
sense, unites Ukraine and Israel, sine we love Russia and want it to help in
achieving this independence and employ a more honest politics vis-a-vis both
countries.

[Bradenstein] What Israeli politician do you admire?
[Tymoshenko laughs] When a politician from one country expresses

support for a politician in another, he always risks a clash of interests.

Still, I’ll go out on a limb and say that I feel deep affection for two
politicians – Yitzhaq Rabin, who aroused within me a sense of
determination – and the second is Gold Me’ir, apparently because of a
certain female solidarity and admiration for strong women, who occasionally
take the world in their hands and more than once change it. [end Tymoshenko]

As expected, Tymoshenko did not mention a single living Israeli politician,
“despite the fact that I know several of them”.

[Bradenstein] You talk about friendship with Israel, but during the second
Lebanon war Ukraine did not side with us.

[Tymoshenko] Unfortunately, sometimes the media are dependent on their
owners. Russian politicians, Russian businessmen and the Kremlin in general
influence the media in Ukraine. I would like to see the media in Ukraine be
more balanced and not support any side, but rather simply cover the events.

[Bradenstein] Over the past two years the number of anti-Semitic incidents
in Ukraine has grown greatly, and there are increasing complaints that the
Ukrainian government is not doing enough to fight the phenomenon.

[Tymoshenko] My people and your people have suffered much throughout
history and we will do everything we can to fight the negative phenomena of
anti-Semitism. [end Tymoshenko]

Regarding Ukrainian Jews living in Israel, Tymoshenko said that one of the
reasons for her coming to Israel is to learn about their situation
first-hand.

She also said that she intends to help with legislation in the Ukrainian
parliament on behalf of Ukrainian Jews (about 250,000 who immigrated to
Israel over the past 15 years – E.B.) who have left and who need help
safeguarding their rights: “I find it unfortunate that Ukraine created such
conditions that its citizens were forced to leave it.

However, I am also not ignoring the fact that Ukraine’s Jewish citizens are
going to their state, and therefore it is a very complex thing to judge
their decision to live among their people.

We need to create comfortable conditions so that they will not leave, while
on the other hand everything should be done for those who do leave so that
they will not sever their ties with Ukraine. We need to do everything we can
for them in order to solve problems such as pensions and visas.

Our politicians should be more tolerant toward those who decided to leave
for Israel, as well as toward the Jews who continue to live in Ukraine and
by so doing are endangering their lives.

[Bradenstein] Aren’t you afraid of being assassinated?
[Tymoshenko] I am afraid, but as a politician in Ukraine I will continue on
my path.

[Bradenstein] Why do you need this? It’s much calmer in business.
[Tymoshenko] Because I cannot do without it. My goal is to establish new
standards of politics in Ukraine. It doesn’t matter whether I’m in the
opposition or in power.                               -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
     You are welcome to send us names for the AUR distribution list.
========================================================
18.       TYMOSHENKO BLOC ASKS ISRAEL TO RECOGNIZE 
UKRAINIAN FAMINE OF 1932-1933 GENOCIDE OF UKRAINIANS

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tue, January 16, 2007

KYIV – The Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc parliamentary faction has asked the
parliament of Israel to recognize the Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933, known
in Ukraine as Holodomor, act of genocide against the Ukrainian people.

Ukrainian News learned this from a statement by the press service of the
Yulia Tymoshenko bloc. The press service referred to a meeting between
eponymous bloc leader Yulia Tymoshenko and Knesset [parliament] Speaker
Dalia Itzik in Israel.

Tymoshenko handed a relevant appeal of the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc to the
Knesset over to Itzik. Tymoshenko said the Knesset might pass a relevant
decision soon. “We see a good will from the Israeli politicians and this
inspires hope,” Tymoshenko said.

Itzik assured Tymoshenko in turn that Israel, as a country that has lived
through a number of tragic events in its history, understands the Ukrainian
people.

“We will attentively study all of the aspects of this page of the history
and we will take all efforts to pass the best decision for the Ukrainian
people,” Itzik said.

Tymoshenko and Itzik discussed the development of small business and the
live of pensioners, who have come to Israel from Ukraine and don’t get
pensions in Ukraine.

As Ukrainian News earlier reported, President Viktor Yuschenko said the main
event of 2006 was the recognition of Holodomor by the Verkhovna Rada as an
act of genocide against the Ukrainian people.                      -30-

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
19. POLISH MEP CALLS ON EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT TO RECOGNIZE
     UKRAINIAN FAMINE OF 1932-1933 AS OUTRAGE UPON HUMANITY

Interfax Ukraine News, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thu, January 11, 2007

KYIV – A Polish MEP has called on the European Parliament to recognize the
Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933, known in Ukraine as Holodomor, as an outrage
upon humanity.

Polish MEP Konrad Szymanski has presented a relevant draft resolution of the
European Parliament, according to the Polish Rzeczpospolita newspaper.

The draft resolution reads that the Holodomor in Ukraine was an artificial
famine aiming at the punishment of Ukrainian people for their resistance to
the collectivization.

According to the Polish newspaper, representatives of two largest factions
in the European Parliament have signed the Polish draft resolution of the
European Parliament.

To date, 26 countries have recognized the Holodomor as an outrage upon
humanity, including the United States, Canada, Australia, Georgia, Moldova,
Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia.                  -30-

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
20. UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT YUSHCHENKO CALLS RECOGNITION
      OF FAMINE OF 1932-1933 AS GENOCIDE MAIN EVENT OF 2006

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, January 1, 2007

KYIV – President Viktor Yuschenko calls the Verkhovna Rada’s recognition

of the famine of 1932-1933, also known as Holodomor in Ukraine, as act of
genocide of Ukrainian people the main event of 2006. Yuschenko made a
statement to that score in his New Year address to the nation.

“In 2006, under the will of people, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine recognized
Holodomor of 1932-1933 as act of genocide. This was the event of the
historical scale, the most important fact of the national life in 2006,” he
said.

Among achievements in 2006 Yuschenko also named the birth of 400,000

babies in Ukraine. Ukrainians stop being pococurante and the charitable
event of collection funds for the children’s “Hospital of Future” indicated
that, he said.

While referring to polls, Yuschenko said Ukrainians became more patriotic in
2006 due to the moods of young people in the eastern and southern regions of
Ukraine.

The success of the Ukrainian national football team at the World Cup in
Germany in 2006, where Ukraine was among top eight teams of the world,

was a joyful event for Ukrainians, Yuschenko said.

Yuschenko said he was proud of Ukrainian peacekeepers performing their
mission in other countries. “There is pride for Ukrainian peacekeepers, who
rescued lives of hundreds of thousands,” he said.

Yuschenko said there was a feeling of freedom, real economic growth and
growing attention to Ukraine in the world.

As Ukrainian News earlier reported, President Viktor Yuschenko has left
together with his family to the Huta village (Bohorodchany district,
Ivano-Frankivsk region) to celebrate the New Year and Christmas holidays.

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
       Please contact us if you no longer wish to receive the AUR    
========================================================
21.                        RETURN TO UKRAINE
  In an emotional trip, Sentinel columnist Greg Dawson finds the tragedy and
  miracle of years past, as well as a modern nation that opens its heart to him.

Greg Dawson, Sentinel Staff Writer, Orlando Sentinel
Orlando, Florida, Sunday, January 21, 2007

On a flawless late-summer day in eastern Ukraine that mimicked the nation’s
flag of sky blue over harvest gold, I stood at the top of a hill and stared
into the grassy ravine where Nazis dumped the corpses of my Jewish
grandparents and great-grandparents.

This is where my mother, Zhanna, was supposed to die, in this ditch, with
her sister, Frina. Miraculously, they escaped this killing field called
Drobitsky Yar, used their wits and musical talent to survive the Holocaust,
and came to America.

In September, my wife and I visited Ukraine to trace their odyssey for a
book I’m writing called “Hiding in the Spotlight.” There were surprises and
revelations — but also delights — at every turn of a two-week trip that
took us to five cities by plane, train and careening automobiles.

Our route included the capital, Kiev, a cosmopolitan city of breathtaking
topography and beauty, and my mother’s birthplace, Berdyansk, a resort town
of leafy boulevards and open-air markets in southeastern Ukraine on the
serene Sea of Azov.

Ukraine, which gained independence when the Soviet Union unraveled in 1991,
is a country of dramatic extremes. Cities such as Kiev and Kharkov pulsate
with youthful energy and optimism.

Mass transit is jammed, and construction cranes abound. But from the windows
of our night train from Poltava to Mariupol, we caught glimpses of grinding
poverty and blank-stare lethargy in rural areas, the legacy of failed Soviet
policies.

On a rollicking minibus ride from Mariupol to Berdyansk, we bisected
thousands of acres of rich, dark farmland — the land Hitler coveted — that
gave Ukraine its nickname, “the breadbasket of Europe.”

It could have been the American Midwest except for one haunting detail: no
farmhouses, another vestige of Soviet rule, when the government owned
everything and there were no private farms.

My personal discoveries began in Kharkov, 300 miles east of Kiev, close to
the Russian border, where my mother’s family moved when she was 8 years
old.

I was startled to find her childhood home still standing, along with her
school and the conservatory where she and her sister studied piano.

But the most jarring moment came on that idyllic day at Drobitsky Yar, a
place of sloping fields and ravines outside Kharkov. Starting on Dec. 26,
1941, the Nazis slaughtered more than 16,000 Jews there.

Part of the somber beauty of the Drobitsky Yar memorial is the subterranean
Room of Tragedy, where the names of 4,300 of the dead are etched on the
walls, illuminated by candlelight.

In the sepulchral half-light, I scanned the walls in faint hope of finding
the names of my mother’s parents and grandparents. And there they were —
four names in a vertical row, neat as the column in which my family was
marched to the ravine by whip-wielding guards, starting with my
great-grandfather, “Arshansky N.M.”

My eyes wandered over to the next row, and the sight of the first name
sent a sharp chill up my spine: “Arshanskaya Z.D.” My mother. Dead.

Under her name, “Arshanskaya F.D.” Her sister. Dead.

It’s impossible to describe how I felt as I stared at my mother’s epitaph
and, in a way, my own. The black Cyrillic letters were a silent rebuke to my
very presence: “You are not supposed to be here! You cannot exist!”

Then, oddly, a feeling of triumph began to wash over me. My mother had

told me the story of her survival in detail, but there was a surreal, fantastic
quality to it. Seeing her name on the wall among the dead had finally made
her life real for me.

I wanted to call her back home and say, “Mom, you did it. You beat the
bastards.” And I might have if things had not gone from the sublime to

the farcical in the turn of a head.
                                         A CLOSE CALL
My wife, Candy, had gone outside to take video of the Drobitsky Yar
memorial arch and had placed our digital camera at the base of the steps.
It seemed safe. No one else was there except a guide and a security officer.

When she stopped taping and turned around, the camera was gone. I saw two
teenage boys scampering into an apple orchard 50 yards away; one appeared to
be carrying something — perhaps our camera loaded with priceless photos of
the trip.

I did what seemed the only sensible thing for a visitor who didn’t know the
landscape or the language — I ran into the apple orchard after them, the
portly security guard chugging behind me in pursuit. When I caught up with
the boys, they were empty-handed and looked bewildered when I said,
“Camera?” and held an imaginary camera up to my face.

I figured the camera was gone. But our charming guide, a woman named Irina,
took a walk in the orchard with the boys, and 45 minutes later we had our
camera back.

By that stage of our trip, less than a week in, we were used to the antic
episodes that had started the day we landed in Kiev.

Thanks to a manic porter who took control of our bags before we knew what
was happening, we entered the country without going through customs, a
serious violation that gave us visions of Ukrainian jail cells and
confiscated possessions.

Then, we almost had to spend our first night on the street because we locked
ourselves out of our rented apartment and couldn’t figure out how to make a
local call to the landlord.

We were rescued by Natasha, hostess of a swanky club called Decadence,
where we hoped to find someone who spoke English. We were not optimistic.
This was not France or Italy — English is Greek to most Ukrainians.

Natasha spoke very little English, but she recognized the nearby apartment
building from a camera-phone picture that Candy, acting on experience, had
taken “just in case” we became lost.

To our amazement, Natasha somehow knew the identity of the young woman
whohad let us into the apartment earlier in the day — we never even got her
name — and called to tell her the stupid Americans had locked themselves
out.

Lest you get the wrong impression, I should say at this point that we loved
Ukraine. My capsule description for those who ask is that Ukraine is off the
leash — in a good way. There’s an exuberance, an unvarnished, unabashed
quality to life in vivid contrast to the regulations, inhibitions and
airbrushing of American life.

In Ukraine, “keeping it real” is not a marketing slogan; it’s the way it
is — from sporadic hot water to nonexistent traffic control. The streets
are a massive bumper-car ride, and no one wears seat belts.

On one of our thrilling, if harrowing, taxi rides, the driver found all
lanes blocked. No problem! He simply zipped onto the adjoining trolley-car
tracks.
                                        SAFETY ISSUES
You walk at your own risk in Ukraine because most sidewalks double as
streets and parking lots. On our first day we were strolling down one of
Kiev’s broad sidewalks when we jumped at the beep! of a Lada, a boxy little
Soviet-era car, coming up behind us.

There is a downside to this refreshing frontier mentality. Don’t even think
about visiting Ukraine if you are physically handicapped.

The Great Pyramids are more accessible. We were on the fifth floor of a new
hotel with no elevator and no bellhops. Don’t expect onlookers to rush up
and help hoist a leaden suitcase. In public places, Ukrainians have a
live-and-let-lift philosophy.

In private, kindness and generosity overflow. One night in Kharkov, we dined
in the home of Antonina Bogancha, whose husband’s gentile family
courageously sheltered my mother and her sister in that same home after they
escaped the death march.

Antonina served us Ukrainian delicacies such as salo — raw pork fat — and
her son-in-law, Vadim, toasted us with vodka until we could barely move.

This was repeated the next night at the apartment of Vadim, his wife,
Larissa, and their beautiful daughter, Marianna. Later we were treated to an
evening of world-class Russian ballet and given desserts to take back to our
hotel room.

Ukraine is not affluent by American standards, but there is an elegance in
everyday life that’s missing here. Even cafeterias and casual outdoor cafes
serve food on lovely dishes; we never saw paper or Styrofoam. Each tea
service seemed more exquisite than the last.

However, don’t bother looking for the no-smoking section. If you’re
wondering where tobacco companies are making up for lost profits in the
United States, come to Ukraine.

It’s also nirvana for beer companies. Drinking starts at breakfast and
doesn’t stop. One morning, the man at the next table was having the
Ukrainian breakfast of champions — black bread, eggs, ham, cheese,
cucumbers and a Heineken.
                                  BEAUTIFUL BENEFITS
Ukraine’s population, at least in the cities, seems fixated on shoes. Men
wear pointy shoes Santa’s elves would envy, and women glide over the
rutted, uneven sidewalks in stiletto heels. I wish I had a hryvnia (the
local currency) for every time Candy marveled, “You just don’t realize
how hard that is.”

There’s no obesity epidemic in Ukraine, or modesty epidemic either,
especially among young women. It’s easy to see why so many American
men go there in search of brides better-looking — a hundred times
better-looking — than themselves. The dollar stretches like Gumby in
Ukraine, so they can wine and dine with abandon.

The metro is 10 cents. Vending-machine coffee is a quarter. (Nescafe is all
the rage in Ukraine — no sign of Starbucks.) A beautiful bouquet of roses
from a street vendor was $3. Tickets to the ballet, $4. A fabulous meal for
two with exquisite service at the best hotel in Kharkov, $40.

Ukraine is a place of wild contradictions, with one foot in the past and the
rest of it rushing toward a bright future. Snapshot: A babushka — a
grandmother in a headscarf, a revered and iconic figure — burning leaves on
a city sidewalk next to an ATM and a luxury hotel.

The country is filled with golden-domed cathedrals and stunning statuary
honoring war heroes, poets and, yes, Lenin. But in Kiev’s Independence
Square, where the Orange Revolution was celebrated, there is a huge stage
and video screen for rock concerts.

As we passed through one night, we were trapped among thousands of
exuberant partners singing and cheering as Epcot-quality fireworks lit up
the sky and set off car alarms. And this was on a Sunday night.
                                    NO INDIFFERENCE
No place in the world has produced more classical virtuosos than Ukraine,
but the contemporary soundtrack, heard in taxis and buses and cafes, is the
driving beat of Gypsy punk, familiar to anyone who has seen Everything Is
Illuminated, a 2005 movie about a young American who goes to Ukraine to
find the woman who saved his grandfather from the Nazis.

One of the charms of the movie is the fractured English of the Ukrainian
guide, Alex. I thought of Alex our last night in Ukraine when I was perusing
the guest information at the Boryspil Airport Hotel.

“We have provided all up to the slightest trifles, from cozy and modern
furniture up to beautiful curtains. All this is a part of an interior. Their
ensemble creates fine harmony which does not leave indifferent the client.
We hope to make your staying here pleasant and memorial.”

Our trip to Ukraine was more than memorial. From Drobitsky Yar to vodka
toasts, bumper cars, ballet and stilettos, it was, to use Alex’s pet phrase,
“most premium,” and did not leave indifferent the clients.
                              COMPLETING THE STORY
Until recently my mother’s past — half my genealogy — existed only as an
abstraction for me, a shadowy parallel universe consisting of fragments of
an untold story.

I had never seen an image of my mother as a child, or of her mother and
father, until a few years ago when a cousin in Israel — who my mother
thought was dead — sent her precious photos.

My trip was the culmination of an attempt to recover my mother’s past, and
with it my own. She prepared for me an introduction, written on a notecard
in Russian, with a photo of her family taken before the war.

Dear countrymen!
I am turning to you because my son Greg and his wife, Candy, don’t speak

and don’t know the language. It is in case they need help. He wrote a book
about Ukraine and about my family. The book is about heroism of our people.

Everyone in my family was killed in Kharkov, and it is only because of the
help of the kind population in our wonderful place that my sister and I are
alive so that the story could be told about us.

Greg and Candy already love you the way I do. Thank you all for generosity
and for colossal courage. Be happy and healthy.

Zhanna Arshanskaya Dawson, who would love to be going to see you all.

I handed out the cards everywhere, to flower vendors, hotel clerks, waiters,
cabbies, babushkas selling seeds and nuts on the street, and the words had a
magical effect. Faces that greeted me with wariness and suspicion dissolved
into nods, knowing smiles and, often, tears.

A language barrier separated us, but in the eloquent smiles and tears of my
mother’s countrymen, I read this message: “Welcome home, at last.” -30-
———————————————————————————————–
NOTE: Greg Dawson can be reached at gdawson@orlandosentinel.com.
————————————————————————————————-
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/travel/orl-gregukraine2107jan21,0,4313917.story?page=1&coll=orl-travel-headlines
———————————————————————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
22. LOOKING BACK TO GET A CLEARER PICTURE OF THE FUTURE
        The ‘living history” of their elders that is part of their Ukrainian heritage

By Kristina Gray, Ukrainian Observer magazine, Issue 227
The Willard Group, Kyiv, Ukraine, January, 2007

History is taught in many ways and I have chosen what I hope and believe
will be one of the most effective in order to help my students at Wisconsin
International University of Ukraine (WIUU) understand the history that is a
part of their heritage.

I required my sophomore students to ask their grandparents, “Where have

you been?” or put another way, “Tell me about your life?”  I reminded them,”
a shortened pencil is better than a long memory.”

My students’ essays provided many answers to these questions about their
grandparents’ past in order to comply with a Service Learning project I had
assigned them.

The interviews necessary to satisfy course requirements uncovered stories of
events that occurred during the communist period of the former Soviet Union.

My Ukrainian students became not only passionate about this subject of the
“living history” of their elders, but they proved to be very articulate in
recounting the stories.  At least ten themes emerged with quotable quotes
from fourteen of my students.

            AFTERMATH OF BOLSHEVIK REVOLUTION
Tanya Pavlova revealed her great grandmother’s story that she learned from
her grandmother: “In 1930 my grandmother’s father was dispossessed by
Bolsheviks. He was called a “kulak” because of having too big of a
household. His family lost everything, including some of their lives.

My great-grandfather was sent to prison, where he sickened and died. Part of
the family was sent to Siberia; another part to Arkhangelsk to camps for
‘Enemies of the State.’ Only because my great-grandma married a poor man
before these events was she able to escape being sent to Siberia.”
    HOLODOMOR – THE FORCED FAMINE OF 1932-1933
Dmitriy Mykhaylusenko penned what he knew about the Holodomor: “People

were treated like cattle and some of them became insane.  I heard kids ate dirt
and wheat seeds together because they thought it would grow up in their
stomachs and they wouldn’t be hungry anymore.”

Maryana Bobyliak wrote that the starvation period was a “black spot” in
Ukraine’s history, “My Grandma has her own story of how they used to eat
grass and how they had one cow that lived, not in a shed, but in their house
with all six people. That cow saved their family.”

Maryana continued, “People who worked in granaries said that grain was
purposely strewn with some kind of green powder.  People died on the roads.
They took them into a wagon like some pieces of wood and put all of them
into one grave.”
               THE GREAT PATRIOTIC WAR – RED ARMY
After the Holodomor tragedy, within ten years there was The Great Patriotic
War (better known in the West as World War II) where the storytelling
continues about the Red Army valiantly fighting the Nazis or fascists.

Katya Khandogina reflected that her great grandfather went to build barriers
against German tanks and probably an enemy projectile killed him.

“His body was never found and unfortunately the family knows nothing about
the details of his death and cannot bring flowers to his grave.”  Renata
Kozak artfully carved out these words, “The story of my grandparents out of
a million others is a small stroke on the large, bloody painting of WWII.”
                                       WWII – PARTISANS
But then there were the Partisans whose WWII activities are framed as brave
souls holed up in the forests close to Byelorussia who simultaneously fought
both the Nazis and the Red Army.

Roma Shatov noted what his grandmother told him about helping the Partisans:
“Fortunately, Ukrainian Partisans found us. They were very surprised that
two little girls were willing to help them.

After some time of discussion, the head of the Partisan detachment, Olexiy,
gave us the first task to carry the letters to the villagers. We were
running home with those letters as if it were our birthdays.

After sometime of helping our Ukrainian Partisans, we became like a small
bridge betweens the Partisans and the villagers.  This bridge gave an
opportunity to transfer priceless information.”
                      WORLD WAR II – GERMAN SOLDIERS
Also, a theme that kept surfacing in my students’ writings, besides the
German atrocities, were the kind acts of certain German soldiers toward
Ukrainians as individuals, families or whole villages.

In some cases, a German soldier warned people ahead of time that their
village would be torched. In other situations, a caring German fed a whole
family or the German invaders did not destroy a church. There are even
reports of a firing squad that did not shoot villagers already lined up for
this fate.

Tanya Pavlova told of her grandmother’s return from Donbas to be met with
German sympathy.  “In thirty-one days they managed to get to Putivl, which
was occupied by Germans. The Germans had transformed her former home,

the biggest in the village, into a hospital (by the way, it remained a hospital
until 1980).

Inhabitants recognized her and told the occupying Germans that she was the
owner of the house that they now used. To her astonishment, she was given
one room there.

My grandmother remembers how one German doctor gave her a big piece of
chocolate and showed the photo of his family, whom he missed but had to stay
here because of the war. ‘He always said that both Hitler and Stalin must be
shot’ my grandma remembers.”

However, many grandparents were forced into German labor camps and tried to
escape the Germans who needed extra human power to support their Nazi war
effort.

Ulia Sotnik’s great-grandfather had been captured by the Germans and in 1947
walked home through all of Europe to Ukraine to rejoin his wife and see his
daughter for the first time in seven years.  It took Ulia’s grandmother a
whole year to call him “Father” once they were reunited.
                                    AFTERMATH OF WWII
For Julia Levenko’s grandmother, life did not become easier after the war.
“Years 1946-1947 brought a famine due to a bad harvest.” There was barely
anything to eat. There were no potatoes and the bread was available only to
those with special cards.

The children received 300 grams of bread per day each, the father was
allotted 700 grams because he was working, and the mother got nothing
because she had no job. However, even this 1.3 kg was nothing to be greatly
appreciated since it was of very poor quality.

Jane Shcherbakova’s grandmother also keenly felt the lack of food after WWII
stating, “Everyday my mother cooked soup out of grass that is called Loboda;
usually people put it in salad.  Now whenever I see it, I want to throw up.”
                                     TEARS IN HER EYES
In the course of meeting their assigned tasks, students were met with many
tears, stories that suddenly went silent because of great emotion in the
retelling and voices that might become very strained by the emotions brought
forth by memories.

Roma Shatov noted: “I didn’t want my grandmother to cry, and I could imagine
how hard it was for her to remember the time of war.”

Maria Polishchuk’s grandmother said, “I was left without parents at the age
of 13. My parents were hiding a Jewish family in the basement of their house
and had to pay with their lives and the lives of their children.”

By chance Maria’s grandmother was absent when the German soldiers murdered
her family.  Maria ended with, “She stayed alive but till now when she tells
us about those days she can’t help herself from crying.”

Anna Myshlyakova’s grandmother told some things, “but many stories about

the terrors she had to go through she still keeps secret.”  Anna’s grandmother
had witnessed her father as well as others in the village being burned alive
as punishment for being Partisans.  Anna reflected, “I cannot blame her for
not telling anything before. No one would like to remember such things.”
                             IMPORTANCE OF EDUCATION
Julia Batarchukova also shared her thoughts about the importance of
education, based on what her grandmother told her about her great
grandfather who died heroically in the Great Patriotic War. Consequently,
her great grandmother was left without the breadwinner to feed their six
children.

This bereaved mother was caught getting extra bread from a guard and both
were sent off to Siberia where she died. “The Soviet authorities were
ruthless and sent all six children to different charity houses.

Five years later when Aleksey, the eldest brother, became eighteen years
old, he managed to travel across the country searching for his brothers and
sisters.”  Even though it was difficult, the siblings were all reunited
under the care of Aleksey, who deprived himself of an education while he
worked at a plant.

Julia continued, “My grandmother highly appreciates everything her brother
did for them, saying, ‘He gave us a chance for a better life. He forbade us
to work and insisted on our excellent studying. Aleksey was absolutely
right. We all entered the universities and all of us got a ticket to a
better life.'”
                          GRATEFUL GRANDCHILDREN
Finally, one other theme that emerged was respectful appreciation for their
elders. Sergey Petrov confessed that he and his peers take everyday
conversation for granted while elderly people often feel very isolated due
to distance, sickness that keeps them bedridden or the death of friends.

Some of the elderly do not have the pleasure of talking to anyone for days
on end. Sergey wrote, “This simple fact explained all the excitement
Evdokiya had when I came to her house and asked permission to talk to

her about her life.”

Others view their elders as important as if returning to a distant past.
Alex Evstigneyev believed that we should “value these people as an
inexhaustible resource of knowledge and life experience.”

Roma Shatov’s grandmother quoted a Ukrainian idiom of a “white bar after

a black bar,” which portrays the indomitable Ukrainian spirit of believing
that good things always happen after bad things.

CALL TO ACTION OF CURRENT UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT
The Ukrainians are waiting for the good to happen and perhaps impatiently
expecting the present form of government to mete it out.

George Onyschuk claimed: “It is offensive to me that our country cannot
ensure a proper old age to its heroes and they have to live out their days
receiving scanty pensions.”

Katya Khandogina was realistic: “I realized that the government did not
think about people who fought for our land.  The leadership of the Soviet
Union always repeated that everything is for the people but nothing was

done to improve their lives.  The deaths of thousands of people are on their
consciences.”

The question of “Where are you going?” may be asked of Ukraine after a
look at its thousand-year history.  Having just read Henryk Sienkiewicz’s
historical novel,  Quo Vadis, written in 1895, I now understand why a
Ukrainian woman recommended this book to me several years ago.

After the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution, Sienkiewicz’s book seems almost
prophetic about how Stalin’s iron rule of 30 years would try to destroy
Ukrainians.

Reading Sienkiewicz’s book makes one realize that Emperor Nero’s acts
against his own Roman citizens pale in comparison to the millions of
Ukrainians who perished under the hammer and sickle. Yet, the nationalistic
spirit of Ukrainians is unquenchable even today.

I want my students on their own initiative to continue to write with
shortened pencils about the memories of their grandparents.

Not only should the current Ukrainian government be challenged with the
question of “Where are you going?” but also the Ukrainian youth of today
should help to correct the injustices from yesteryear and be able to know
where they are going, hopefully to a better and brighter future.
  -30-
———————————————————————————————–
Kristina Gray teaches at Wisconsin International University of Ukraine in
Kyiv. All photos appearing with this story (except that of the students)
were provided by those interviewed from their own family collections.
————————————————————————————————
http://www.ukraine-observer.com/articles/227/981?PHPSESSID=f9bb90bc937ba6f69d5dfbf3b8add79d

———————————————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
   If you are receiving more than one copy of the AUR please contact us.

    Please contact us if you no longer wish to receive the AUR.    
       You are welcome to send us names for the AUR distribution list.
   If you are missing some issues of the AUR please let us know.
========================================================
         “ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR”
         A Free, Not-For-Profit, Independent, Public Service Newsletter
                With major support from The Bleyzer Foundation
 
      Articles are Distributed For Information, Research, Education
                Academic, Discussion and Personal Purposes Only
                                  Additional readers are welcome.
========================================================
               ACTION UKRAINE PROGRAM – SPONSORS
                              Action Ukraine Report (AUR)
               Holodomor Art and Graphics Collection & Exhibitions
          “Working to Secure & Enhance Ukraine’s Democratic Future”
1.  THE BLEYZER FOUNDATION, Dr. Edilberto Segura,
Chairman; Victor Gekker, Executive Director, Kyiv, Ukraine;
     The additional supporting sponsors for the Action Ukraine Program 
                          will be published again later this week.
========================================================
 TO BE ON OR OFF THE FREE AUR DISTRIBUTION LIST
If you would like to read the ACTION UKRAINE REPORT- AUR,
around four times a week, please send your name, country of residence,
and e-mail contact information to morganw@patriot.net. Information about
your occupation and your interest in Ukraine is also appreciated.
 
If you do not wish to read the ACTION UKRAINE REPORT please
contact us immediately by e-mail to morganw@patriot.net.  If you are
receiving more than one copy please let us know so this can be corrected
 
  SPAM & BULK MAIL BLOCKERS ARE A REAL PROBLEM                 

If you do not receive a copy of the AUR it is probably because of a
SPAM OR BULK MAIL BLOCKER maintained by your server or by
yourself on your computer. Spam and bulk mail blockers are set in very
arbitrary and impersonal ways and block out e-mails because of words
found in many news stories or the way the subject line is organized or
the header or who know what.
 
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, The Bleyzer Foundation

Emerging Markets Private Equity Investment Group
President (Acting) and Chairman, Executive Committee of the
Board of Directors, Ukraine-U.S. Business Council
P.O. Box 2607, Washington, D.C. 20013, Tel: 202 437 4707
mwilliams@SigmaBleyzer.com; www.SigmaBleyzer.com
========================================================
       Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely.
========================================================
return to index [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

AUR#808 Jan 27 Ukraine In WTO By July Says PM; Akhmetov & Pinchuk; Nazi-Era Car; Koloymyia Tourism, Hetman Skoropadsky

=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR           
                 An International Newsletter, The Latest, Up-To-Date
                     In-Depth Ukrainian News, Analysis and Commentary

                      Ukrainian History, Culture, Arts, Business, Religion,
         Sports, Government, and Politics, in Ukraine and Around the World       

 
      UKRAINE WILL GAIN SUCCESS ONLY AS A COUNTRY OF
   POLITICALLY AND ECONOMICALLY INDEPENDENT PEOPLE
         ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: By Mykola Tomenko (Article 16)
                        
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR – Number 807
Mr. E. Morgan Williams, Publisher and Editor, SigmaBleyzer
WASHINGTON, D.C., SATURDAY, JANUARY 27, 2007

              –——-  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 PRIME MINISTER TOUTS COUNTRY’S CREDENTIALS
                            BUT GETS LUKEWARM RESPONSE
           Latvian President Vaira Vike-Freiberga said, “The Ukrainian people
                           deserve much better than what they have.”
By Bradley S. Klapper, Associated Press Writer
AP, Davos, Switzerland, Friday January 26, 2007

2. YANUKOVYCH FORECASTS UKRAINE’S ENTERING WTO BY JULY
                       Speaks at Viktor Pinchuk’s luncheon in Davos
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 26, 2007

3.       UKRAINE FACING THREE PROBLEMS ON WAY TO WTO,

                             PM VIKTOR YANUKOVYCH SAYS
Interfax Ukraine Business Express, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 26, 2007

4UKRAINIAN PRIME MINISTER IN DAVOS PLEDGES TO ENSURE
                          STABLE TRANSIT OF HYDROCARBONS 
NTN, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1700 gmt 26 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Friday, January 26, 2007

5PRIME MINISTER SAYS UKRAINE’S PIPELINE PLAN PROMISES

                           TO DIVERSIFY EU’S OIL SUPPLY
By Marc Champion, The Wall Street Journal
New York, New York, January 26, 2007; Page A4
 
         IN ECONOMIC REFORMS AND EUROPEAN INTEGRATION
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 26, 2007
 
Interfax Ukraine News, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 26, 2007

Interfax-Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 26, 2007
9.    UKRAINE: THE OBSERVER’S “PERSONS OF THE YEAR” 2006
                            Victor Pinchuk and Rinat Akhmetov
By James Hydzik, The Ukrainian Observer magazine Issue 227
The Willard Group, Kyiv, Ukraine, January 2007

10.         UKRAINE: PINCHUKARTCENTRE IN KYIV OPENS A

                          NEW GENERATIONS.UsA EXHIBITION
PinchukArtCentre, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 19, 2007

11ROMANIA SAYS UKRAINE DISREGARDING RECOMMENDATIONS
        ON DANUBE DELTA MADE BY INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION
Rompres news agency, Bucharest, Romania, Friday, 26 Jan 07

12.     RARE NAZI-ERA RACE CAR COULD GO FOR $15 MILLION
             American collector found the parts in a scrap heap in Ukraine
Associated Press (AP), New York, New York, Friday, Jan 26 07

13.       “HOW MUCH IS ONE CUBIC METRE OF DEMOCRACY?”
    Writer derides Ukrainian authorities reaction to Turkmen opposition’s visit
ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: By Arslan Mamedow
Gundogar website, Moscow, in Russian Tuesday, 23 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Thursday, Jan 25, 2007

14. VISIT BY TURKMEN OPPOSITION LEADERS HARMED UKRAINE
                SAYS PARLIAMENT MEMBER ANATOLIY KINAKH
RIA Novosti, Moscow, Russia, Wednesday, Jan 24, 2007

 
15.        SCOTS GROWER FINDS UKRAINE SOIL PRODUCTIVE
Jim Buchan, Scotsman.com, Edinburgh, Scotland, Thu, Jan 25, 2007

16.    UKRAINE WILL GAIN SUCCESS ONLY AS A COUNTRY OF
      POLITICALLY AND ECONOMICALLY INDEPENDENT PEOPLE
ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: By Mykola Tomenko
Original article in Ukrainian translated by Anna Platonenko
Ukrayinska Pravda, Kyiv, Ukraine, Wed, January 24, 2007

17.             KYIV, UKRAINE: BUREAUCRATIC POLTERGEIST
    Three 19th century architectural monuments disappeared without a trace.
By Tetiana Kolesnychenko, The Day Weekly Digest #2
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, January 23, 2007

18UKRAINE: PUTTING KOLOMYIA ON WORLD’S TOURIST MAP
By Valerie Wright, Ukrainian Observer magazine
The Willard Group, Kyiv, Ukraine, January 2007

19HETMAN PAVLO SKOROPADSKY’S GRANDSON IN UKRAINE
        Pavlo Petrovych Skoropadsky was born in 1873 and raised in the true
           Cossack spirit, learning to respect Ukrainian culture and traditions.
Olena Kahanets, Kyiv, The Day Weekly Digest, #2
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, 23 January 2007

20.                   UNITY AS GUARANTEE OF STRENGTH
                              Towards the Day of Ukrainian Unity
January 22, 1919, an Act Of Unity was proclaimed on Kyiv’s Sophia Square
By Ihor Siundiukov, The Day Weekly Digest #2
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, January 23, 2007

 
21.                        “I COCKED MY REVOLVER………..”
  Examining the emergence of Ukrainian peasant insurgent armies movement
       Nestor Makno and Nykyfor Hryhoriev, Civil War allies and enemies
By Volodymyr HORAK, Candidate of Sciences (History)
The Day Weekly Digest #42, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tue, Dec 26, 2006
========================================================
1
UKRAINE’S PRIME MINISTER TOUTS COUNTRY’S CREDENTIALS
                           BUT GETS LUKEWARM RESPONSE
         Latvian President Vaira Vike-Freiberga said, “The Ukrainian people
                           deserve much better than what they have.”

By Bradley S. Klapper, Associated Press Writer
AP, Davos, Switzerland, Friday January 26, 2007

DAVOS, Switzerland – Ukraine’s prime minister pitched his country’s
investment credentials to the world’s rich and powerful on Friday — but
only got a lukewarm response from his audience which included the

European Union’s enlargement commissioner.

Pro-Russian Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych said the country’s strong
democracy and potential as an economic powerhouse between Western

Europe and Russia should make Ukraine a candidate for membership in
the EU.

While the presentation sought to stake Ukraine’s claim as this year’s
compelling investment story at the World Economic Forum, the unenthusiastic
assessments of the ex-Soviet country’s reform process from EU Enlargement
Commissioner Olli Rehn and Latvian President Vaira Vike-Freiberga ensured
that Ukraine failed to engineer the splash garnered in previous years by
China and India.

              WHERE IS UKRAINE HEADING? LUNCHEON
Nevertheless, the “Where is Ukraine Heading?” session held on the Forum’s
sidelines pulled in a number of major international figures including
billionaire George Soros, Brazilian novelist Paulo Coelho, Poland’s
ex-President Aleksander Kwasniewski, French Socialist Dominique Strauss-
Kahn and a number of top Russian businessmen.

“I’m not sure why some challenge the sincerity of our European aims,” said
Yanukovych, who pledged huge government investment in the country’s
state-owned highways and utilities, and new laws to simplify regulation of
business.

Yanukovych shares power in an uneasy arrangement with pro-Western President
Viktor Yushchenko. While the government has been plagued by a constant
tug-of-war partially caused by the country’s unclear constitutional division
of power, Yanukovych sought to allay fears that he was attempting to take
power away from his rival.

“I am for a reasonable system of checks and balances that makes it
impossible to usurp power,” he told a group of about 150 people at a Davos
hotel. “Neither the government nor the prime minister ever aspires to
replace the president.”

The glitzy presentation featured an independent report saying that Ukraine
would one day become an EU country, even as the 27-nation bloc earlier this
week refused to give any promise of future membership for its giant eastern
neighbor.

Rehn and Vike-Freiberga were reserved about Ukraine’s chances and urged

the prime minister to gain consensus on a clear direction for the country.
                    UKRAINIAN PEOPLE DESERVE BETTER
“Make up your mind. Make a commitment. Do it. We’re with you,”
Vike-Freiberga said. “The Ukrainian people deserve much better than what
they have.”

Rehn said Europe’s doors remain open to new members, but made clear that
membership in the EU is not defined by geography alone. On future prospects
for Ukraine, he said only “never say never.”

One enthusiastic advocate for Ukraine’s EU bid, however, was former U.S.
President Bill Clinton.

“Gaining membership in the European Union is an important and attainable
goal for the Ukrainian government, that has the potential to create a
stronger Europe,” Clinton said in a taped video address.

On Monday, the EU agreed to begin negotiations for closer across-the-board
ties with Ukraine but refused to go any further than the proposed “enhanced
relationship” — seen as a setback for Britain and Poland.

Ukraine is one of 13 members of an EU “neighborhood” program of broad
economic aid and eventual free trade that specifically excludes future
membership.

The others are Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, the
Palestinian Authority and Tunisia and — to the east — Armenia, Azerbaijan,
Georgia and Moldova.

The program offers easy access to the vast EU market of 455 million
consumers in exchange for economic and political reforms designed to keep
the EU’s fringes secure and stable. The arms-length nature of the aid
program has long irked Ukraine.                           -30-
————————————————————————————————-

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
2. YANUKOVYCH FORECASTS UKRAINE’S ENTERING WTO BY JULY
                        Speaks at Viktor Pinchuk’s luncheon in Davos

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 26, 2007

KYIV – Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych is predicting, that Ukraine will
enter the WTO by July. Yanukovych told this when speaking to ministers at a
lunch, organized by Viktor Pinchuk in frames of the World Economic Forum

in Davos.

“I hope, by the mid-year we’ll make this successful finish,” Yanukovych
said. Yanukovych underlined the government success in the negotiation
process on Ukraine’s accession to the WTO.

“It was my government that has almost completed the process of entering

the WTO in three months,” the Premier said.

As the Prime Minister’s press secretary Denys Ivanesku told to reporters, at
the Ukrainian delegation meeting with WTO director general Pascal Lami the
latter noted Ukraine tops the list 23 countries, nominated for accessing the
WTO.

Lami also stressed that the remaining problems are not big ones and they
would not delay the process of Ukraine’s entering this organization.

Yanukovych stressed the Ukraine’s unsettled questions remain those of meat
import and grain export, subventions to the agricultural-and-industrial
complex and Kyrgyz debts.

The Premier said Ukraine performed all the necessary procedures on the

meat import issue and informed the United States of that.
 STILL TRYING TO FIND OUT HOW MUCH GRAIN THERE IS
As to the grain export, the Premier told the government at its recent
session solved almost all the quota problems except those of food grain.

He added, that the question of canceling food grain quotas will be solved
after winter, when the state of winter crops will be clear and Ukraine will
know, what to expect. “We’ll turn to this question late March-early April,”
said the Prime Minister.

Concerning subventions to the agricultural-and-industrial sectors,
Yanukovych said that experts were still evaluating Ukrainian subventions

for correspondence to the WTO requirements.

The Premier assured, that in case the experts decide the subventions are in
line with the WTO requirements, the question would be settled.

As to the debts to Kyrgyzstan, the Premier said Ukraine does not recognize
them and that this question does not touch upon the WTO. He informed Lami

of this and the latter basically agreed with him but the final decision will be
made at the WTO commission conference.

First deputy head of the Presidential Secretariat, the President’s
representative in the Cabinet of Ministers, Arsenii Yatseniuk told Ukrainian
News, that the Kyrgyz side received all the bilateral documents for the
previous year.

Concerning those clauses, on which Kyrgyzstan claims improper duty

payment, Yatseniuk said zero trade showings are stated at them.
 SIGNING WTO MEMBERSHIP AGREEMENT A MILESTONE EVENT
In his turn Yanukovych invited Lami to Ukraine to sign an agreement for
Ukraine’s accession to the WTO. “I want to invite you to the milestone
event – Ukraine’s accession to the WTO, to arrive to Kyiv and sign the
agreement on the Ukrainian land,” Ivanesku cited Yanukovych as saying.

Yatseniuk also confirmed to the journalists the outlook of Ukraine’s entry
to the WTO by mid-summer. He also added, that most likely it will happen
simultaneously with Russia.

As Ukrainian News reported before, the Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych
stays with a three-day visit in Switzerland participating the World Economic
Forum. The World Economic Forum is held annually in Davos.  -30-
————————————————————————————————

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
3. UKRAINE FACING THREE PROBLEMS ON WAY TO WTO,
                           PM VIKTOR YANUKOVYCH SAYS

Interfax Ukraine Business Express, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 26, 2007

KYIV – Ukrainian Premier Viktor Yanukovych says Ukraine has yet to settle
three questions concerning its accession to the World Trade Organization,
which may be resolved in the first half of 2007.  “We see [Ukraine’s date of
accession to the WTO] in the first half of 2007,” Yanukovych told the press
in Davos, Switzerland on Friday.

Yanukovych said Kyiv had yet to settle some questions in [1] relations with
the United States, [2] the question of subsidies to the country’s
agriculture sector, and [3] the question of the so-called “Kyrgyz debt.”

As for the relations with the United States, there are two questions: [1]
imports of meat to Ukraine, and the [2] export of Ukrainian grain.

“We are resolving these two issues,” Yanukovych said, adding that Ukraine
had taken all of procedural decisions concerning the meat imports in Ukraine
and notified Washington of them.  The Cabinet of Ministers has also
increased quotas on exports of barley and corn.

Commenting on the so-called “Kyrgyz debt,” Yanukovych said Kyiv didn’t
recognize the debt to Kyrgyzstan, as well as such debts to other countries.
“Ukraine doesn’t have such debts and the issue has nothing to do with
accession to the WTO,” he said.

He said WTO President Pascual Lamy “heard this” and agreed that the issue
could be settled during a meeting of the commission of the WTO on the
accession of Ukraine to the organization.                        -30-
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

========================================================
4. UKRAINIAN PRIME MINISTER IN DAVOS PLEDGES TO ENSURE
                          STABLE TRANSIT OF HYDROCARBONS 

NTN, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1700 gmt 26 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Friday, January 26, 2007

KYIV – [Presenter] Another day of discussions on the improvement of the
world in Davos, which is the declared official objective of the World
Economic Forum. This year they are planning to improve the world by
ensuring energy security. Ukraine has made its own statements on the
subject.

[Correspondent] The World Economic Forum in Davos recovers its serious
status – no stars of show business and traditional amusements. They talk
about business only. Most frequently, they talk about energy security.

Ukraine will help to improve energy security in Europe and will strictly
fulfil all previously signed contracts, Fuel and Energy Minister Yuriy Boyko
said at the World Economic Forum.

The Ukrainian delegation in Davos is led by Prime Minister Viktor
Yanukovych. Earlier, Yanukovych said that Ukraine is ready to offer
Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Russia to form an alliance to transit oil to the
West.

According to Yanukovych, Ukraine can increase volumes of oil and gas

transit to Europe, and these supplies will be reliable.

[Yanukovych] There are many ways in which Ukraine is integrated into the
world economy. We would like Ukraine not only be on time, but sometimes
make steps in advance regarding the development of our country. There are
many ways to achieve this, in particular, in energy sphere.
                    STATE GUARANTEES FOR INVESTORS
[Correspondent] Ukraine made another remarkable statement in Davos: apart
for guarantees of the supplies of hydrocarbons, Viktor Yanukovych also
promised state guarantees to investors who will work in this field.

Yanukovych said that ministers understand the importance of being quickly
prepared to the switching to world prices for energy resources. There is a
special programme developed regarding this, he said.

Yanukovych also said that Ukraine plans to decrease its dependence on the
supplies of Russian hydrocarbons. Kiev is planning to increase the extraction
of hydrocarbons on Ukraine’s territory and on the territory of third
countries, Yanukovych said. [Passage omitted: Russia presents

Shtokmanovskoye gas field project.]                       -30-
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
    Send in names and e-mail addresses for the AUR distribution list.
========================================================
5. PRIME MINISTER SAYS UKRAINE’S PIPELINE PLAN PROMISES
                           TO DIVERSIFY EU’S OIL SUPPLY

By Marc Champion, The Wall Street Journal
New York, New York, January 26, 2007; Page A4

DAVOS, Switzerland — In a move that would help to diversify Europe’s energy
supplies, Ukraine’s prime minister said he is working to complete a pipeline
to carry Caspian-region oil directly to the European Union.

Completion of the pipeline would bring an additional 12 million metric tons
of oil a year to the EU from Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Russia, Ukrainian
Premier Viktor Yanukovych said in an interview at the World Economic Forum.

That would help to diversify supplies at a time of mounting concern over EU
dependence on Russian energy. The EU consumed 700 million tons of oil in
2005, according to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy.

EU concerns again came to the fore this month when Russia, without warning,
shut down a pipeline that crosses Belarus during a dispute over duties. The
move cut off refineries in Germany, Poland and other Central European
countries, causing fury in the EU.

The pipeline proposal would appear to be at odds with the perception of Mr.
Yanukovych as a Russian puppet. “I consider myself pro-Ukrainian,” not
pro-Russian, he said.

Currently, the pipeline from Odessa stops in western Ukraine, near the
Polish border. There it connects to the main Russian export lines from
Siberia. Since 2004, it has carried only Russian oil south to Odessa. From
there it is shipped through Turkey’s overcrowded Bosporus.

Mr. Yanukovych said Russia is on board with the plan to complete the
pipeline — which would enable oil to flow in the other direction.

“We believe Russia will decide quite soon how big their interest will be, in
terms of the amount of oil they put in the pipeline,” said Mr. Yanukovych,
adding that Russian oil could be shipped from Novorossisk on the Black

Sea and fed into the pipeline.

Two years ago, Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko came to the annual
World Economic Forum meeting in Davos as a political star.

Just weeks earlier he had beaten Mr. Yanukovych in a rerun of a presidential
poll forced by weeks of massive street protests known as the country’s
Orange Revolution. His face had been disfigured by poisoning during the
campaign.

At the time, Mr. Yanukovych appeared to be hurt badly politically, along
with Russian influence in Ukraine: Russian President Vladimir Putin had
publicly backed Mr. Yanukovych for the job.

Mr. Yanukovych allowed Russia to start sending oil south through the
pipeline to Odessa before the election, a move widely cited at the time as
evidence of his dependence on Moscow.

The pro-Western coalition that elected Mr. Yushchenko soon fell apart.
Economic growth and investment collapsed over fears the new government

might seize back thousands of companies privatized in allegedly rigged
privatizations. Last spring, Mr. Yanukovych’s Party of the Regions won
parliamentary elections. In August, he was appointed prime minister.

This time it is Mr. Yanukovych who has come to Davos. Ukraine’s economy

has bounced back: Capital investment rose 16% in the second half of last year,
compared with the same period in 2005.

According to Mr. Yanukovych, the reality of the Odessa pipeline story wasn’t
one of allegiance to Russia over the West. It was about the simple
availability of oil. He noted that the pipeline had stood empty for years,
bringing no revenue, because the links to Poland and Slovakia hadn’t been
built.

“The fact is that there wasn’t enough oil coming out of the Caspian basin to
fill the Odessa pipeline then,” he said. Next year, he added, there will for
the first time be enough surplus oil flowing out of Azerbaijan and
Kazakhstan to make completion of the pipeline commercially viable.

How long it takes to build the Western links and start pumping oil to the EU
depends on Slovakia and Poland, he said, declining to put a date on
completion.

Mr. Yanukovych said he is building a consortium with Ukraine, Azerbaijan,
Kazakhstan and Russia to operate the pipeline. Poland in the past has said
it would like to see the pipeline finished and working.

The Belarus cutoff may have helped to persuade Russia that the project is a
good idea, as it would provide them with an additional route for oil that
circumvents Belarus. “Russia has an interest in securing more ways to move
its oil in this direction too,” Mr. Yanukovych said.

The pipeline is one of few issues on which Messrs. Yushchenko and

Yanukovych agree. They are locked in a bitter power struggle that Mr.
Yanukovych is winning.

The two men are divided over whether Ukraine should join the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization, for example. One of Mr. Yanukovych’s first acts in
office was to put those efforts, which Russia strongly opposes, on hold.

The change of Ukraine’s direction under Mr. Yanukovych enabled him to
negotiate a relatively small increase in the price it pays Russia for gas
this year, keeping the price substantially lower than that charged other
former Soviet countries.

He denies allegations he traded anything for that, saying the benefit to
Russia was a stabilized relationship with a neighbor of 50 million people.

——————————————————————————————–
Write to Marc Champion at marc.champion@wsj.com
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================      
6.   PM SAYS UKRAINE INTERESTED IN FINLAND’S EXPERIENCE
        IN ECONOMIC REFORMS AND EUROPEAN INTEGRATION

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 26, 2007

KYIV – Ukraine is interested in Finland’s experience of implementing
economic reforms and integration into the European Union. The Cabinet

of Ministers’ press service reported this.

“Ukraine is interested in Finland’s experience of economic reforms and the
country’s integration into the European Union,” said the Prime Minister
Viktor Yanukovych during the meeting with the Finnish President Tarja
Halonen in Davos (Switzerland).

He also noted Ukraine paid great attention to development of trade-economic
relations with Finland, which is one of the Ukraine’s most important
partners in the North Europe.

Yanukovych also said, that recently Finnish business interests in Ukraine
had considerably grown, particularly, over 70 leading Finnish companies

were operating in the Ukrainian market presently.

The Premier also shared his confidence in a big unexhausted potential of
bilateral cooperation in the economic sphere.

Thus, Ukraine is interested in those businesses, in which Finland is an
acknowledged world leader – telecommunications, machine-building,
pulp-and-paper, chemical and construction industries, sources of renewable
energy and energy saving.

“It would be very important for us to study Finnish experience of organizing
safety of atomic energy objects and also storage and dumping of used nuclear
fuel,” underlined Yanukovych.

The Premier also added, that the inter-governmental agreement on mutual
protection of investments, which had already taken effect, was meant for
creation of corresponding conditions for activities of Finnish investors in
Ukraine.

As Ukrainian News reported, in the morning Yanukovych left for Switzerland
to take part in the annual World Economic Forum, which is taking place in
Davos. In the forum frames Yanukovych is meeting heads of a number of
countries. Yanukovych will return to Kyiv on Saturday evening, January 27.
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
7. TOP UKRAINIAN BUSINESSMAN RINAT AKHMETOV DISCUSSES
       IPO WITH LEADERSHIP OF NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE

 
Interfax Ukraine News, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 26, 2007
 
DAVOS – Ukrainian MP and businessman Rinat Akhmetov, who owns
the System Capital Management Company, has discussed with the leadership
of the New York Stock Exchange the organization of IPOs of his companies.

“My business has been assessed at $11.8 billion, I believe it is worth more,
and somebody may say it is worth less. In order to avoid guessing we should
come to the stock exchange and it will give a real market price for SCM and
other companies.

Ukraine needs it – we should organize IPOs. That is why we have met today
[with the leadership of the NYSE],” he told the press in Davos on Friday.
He described the meeting as positive.                       -30-
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
    NOTE: Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
========================================================
8.   UKRAINIAN BUSINESSMAN AND PHILANTHROPIST VIKTOR

         PINCHUK SAYS POLL SHOWS THAT 65% OF EUROPEANS
            SUPPORT UKRAINE JOINING THE EUROPEAN UNION
 

Interfax-Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 26, 2007
 
DAVIS – Ukrainian businessman and philanthropist Viktor Pinchuk said
he was satisfied with the results of a special meeting on Ukraine at the
World Economic Forum in Davos on Friday.

“The greatest sensation for all of us today was the result of the poll in
Europe that 65% of Europeans support the idea of Ukraine’s joining the
European Union,” told the press in Davos on Friday.

“These results [of a poll conducted by the TNS company under an order of
Yalta Economic Strategy organization] were a surprise for the [officials] of
the European Union too,” he said.

“It is important for the country to keep moving toward the civilized world,”
he said.                                                 -30-
———————————————————————————————–
LINK: http://www.ukraine-observer.com/articles/227/973

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
9.       THE OBSERVER’S “PERSONS OF THE YEAR” 2006
                             Victor Pinchuk and Rinat Akhmetov

By James Hydzik, The Ukrainian Observer magazine Issue 227
The Willard Group, Kyiv, Ukraine, January 2007

Ukrainians should be rightly understood as a generous lot. Walk around Kyiv,
for example, and watch the people taking care of stray animals outside their
flats, or dropping their pocket change into the cups of street singers and
the old, whose pensions sit firmly on the poverty line.

However, organized charities are often seen as foreign entities, and the
best-known do come from abroad. But that perception is changing, and
charitable foundations created by members of Ukraine’s industrial elite are
gaining the limelight.

Foundations created by Victor Pinchuk and Rinat Akhmetov have been
particularly active, and are setting the pace for what observers hope will
be even more work for the public good from Ukraine’s top businessmen.
And this pace is picking up.

The Viktor Pinchuk Foundation and the Foundation for the Development
of Ukraine, funded by Akhmetov’s SCM Corporation, are engaged in an
increasing number of projects in fields as diverse as legal aid, fighting
tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS, and post-secondary education.
                                      GIVING WISELY
Both foundations aim to do more than just throw cash at a problem. Thomas
Eymond-Laritaz, Director of the Victor Pinchuk Foundation, points out that
the organization has “to focus on what has the highest impact in order to
modernize society.”

In education, for example, “We believe that it is by focusing on university
education, and also on young leaders in their 30s and 40s (via the Aspen
Ukraine Initiative) that we can make the biggest impact.”

The Foundation for the Development of Ukraine follows a similar line of
thought. On its web site, the foundation is equally candid about being
“determined to eliminate the roots of social problems through in-depth
activities and shift from a number of separate charitable and sponsorship
activities to a comprehensive social responsibility strategy of SCM Group
and its shareholders.”

The two organizations evolved from the social involvement of their founders,
and contributions still come from outside the foundations. For instance,
Rinat Akhmetov still gives significant amounts via commercial entities such
as his football team FC Shakhtar Donetsk.

A donation of $300,000 was given to support the families of the 170 victims
of the Russian Pulkovo Airlines crash in Donetsk oblast in August 2006.

From treats for Donetsk oblast’s schoolchildren for Valentine’s Day and
Christmas to $ 500,000 in aid to the citizens of Alchevsk, the
eastern-Ukrainian city that experienced a catastrophic communal heat failure
in the dead of last winter, FC Shakhtar’s range of public involvement is
quite high.

However, the creation of the Foundation for the Development of Ukraine in
July 2005, from funding by Systems Capital Management, which is 90%
owned by Rinat Akhmetov, set a new tone for social assistance from his
holdings.

Also, while the foundation commits itself to longer-term projects, it is
more concentrated in scope, and works on public health, post-secondary
education and Ukraine’s cultural heritage.

Anatoly Zabolotny, Director of the Foundation for the Development of
Ukraine, notes that, “The reason why we have chosen to work in these three
areas lies in their close connection with the development and success of the
country. If we look at the future of the country we would like to have a
healthy and well-educated nation closely connected with its history and
culture.

We are very well aware that these three areas, both in Ukraine and in other
countries of the former Soviet Union, lack reforms and require the
implementation of better practices, and more striking examples and projects,
which might be replicated and further become everyday reality. This is the
mission and strategy of the Foundation: to create star projects.”

Likewise, the Victor Pinchuk Foundation was created in order to bring
together various projects that Interpipe Corporation and Pinchuk personally
were already involved in.

This includes work on legal clinics for Ukrainians who cannot afford their
own lawyers under the Legal Assistance Fund, which according to the
International Renaissance Foundation extends back to 2001, as well

Pinchuk’s well-known patronage of the arts.

Eymond-Laritaz said that, “the Viktor Pinchuk Foundation develops and
supports projects that contribute to the modernization of Ukraine and to the
emergence of a new generation of Ukrainian leaders. Its six fields of
activity and current projects have been carefully selected to contribute to
those goals.

These include:
   [1] Health (Neonatal Centers, fight against HIV/AIDS)
   [2] Education (Stipends Program, Kyiv School of Economics, Aspen
        Ukraine Initiative)
   [3] Culture (Contemporary Art Center, Film with Steven Spielberg,
        Chamber Orchestra)
   [4] Human Rights (Legal Clinic/Legal Aid with the Soros Foundation)
   [5] Ukraine in the World (Yalta European Strategy [YES], Amicus
        Europae Foundation, Brookings Institution [Washington, D.C.],
        Peterson Institute of International Economics [Washington, D.C.],
        International Crisis Group, Davos)
   [6] Local Communities (Dnipropetrovsk, Jewish Communities)

          LEADERSHIP, FINANCE AND PARTICIPATION
Both organizations make a point of actively participating in the fields that
they have chosen. For example, Viktor Pinchuk’s work regarding human
rights has been on-going and thorough.

The International Renaissance Foundation in Kyiv says that the creation of
the Legal Assistance Fund in 2004 was the result of a joint effort between
George Soros and Viktor Pinchuk.

The project has grown from 24 clinics in 17 oblasts in 2004 to 35 clinics in
21 oblasts currently. Future expansion should cover all of Ukraine’s oblasts
in 2007.

At the same time, the Legal Assistance Fund’s two founding organizations
have cooperated on improving the quality of their work.

Together, they have worked for the “establishment of a wide-ranging and
effective system for the provision of legal assistance that meets European
standards,” as IRF notes. “The concept of how to implement it was developed
with the Ministry of Justice, the Attorney’s Union of Ukraine and other
NGOs, and sanctioned by Presidential decree.”

The Foundation for the Development of Ukraine is embarking on a long-term
project that will raise the level of care in Ukraine, through its most
ambitious project is in health care.

FDU Director Zabolotny emphasizes that the Foundation’s fight against
drug-resistant tuberculosis is important for the Ukrainian medical
establishment.

“Although the project on drug resistant tuberculosis (DRT) is less than one
year old we have managed to discuss and approve the DRT treatment protocol
at the level of Oblast authorities and this is a breakthrough for Ukraine
because there weren’t any DRT treatment systems in Ukraine whatsoever.
Next month the training program for doctors and technical personnel will be
launched.”

The DOTS+ treatment program that will be launched is being implemented by
the World Health Organization under the aegis of the Ministry of Health of
Ukraine and with cooperation of the Ministry at the Donetsk Oblast level.

FDU is providing more than just the money to fund the project, however, in
that public awareness and media exposure is also part of the organization’s
remit.

Also, the foundation has provided the framework for the project, including
the desire to ensure a successful exit strategy.

Zabolotny remarked, “from the very beginning we have been saying that in
four years, upon the completion of the project, the authorities should be
ready to bear total responsibility for the DRT treatment system.

And this is one more strategic approach of the Foundation: we are not only
implementing the projects, we are also changing the attitude of stakeholders
to the problem when it’s necessary.”
                             CHARITY BEGINS AT HOME
While it might come as no surprise to an observer that FDU’s DOTS+ project
is being implemented in Donetsk Oblast, the inclination to work close to
home shouldn’t be denigrated.

After all, the only privately funded chamber orchestra in Eastern Europe is
in Dnipropetrovsk, and is backed by the Victor Pinchuk Foundation.

Both organizations are engaged in projects that, while centered in Kyiv, are
considered as being of national importance. FDU is a partner in the
refurbishing of the Metropolitan’s House at the Sofia Kyivska National
Reserve.

The project, located at the very heart of Ukrainian culture, is also an
example of how the foundation wants itself to be understood. FDU initiated
the creation of an Advisory Council to oversee the project and ensure its
progress.

Zabolotny sees the project as important, “not only in view of reconstruction
of the building but also because of creation of system of public
participation in life of National Reserve Sofia Kyivska, creation of
development strategy as contrasted to survival strategy.

For us it was important not only to provide support for this facility which
is considerably important from the culture’s point of view, but also to
teach the management to apply state-of-the-art approaches and management
mechanisms.”

The Victor Pinchuk Contemporary Art Center is another example of a
Kyiv-based project that aims to work for the edification of others on
several levels.

While the art center has garnered a lot of attraction for the works
displayed, its role as a benchmark for others in Eastern Europe’s industrial
elite to gauge their own patronage has been commented upon in the English
language press.

The role that politics played in the location of the center should not be
forgotten as well.  Eymond-Laritaz remarked that, “The fact that Victor
Pinchuk is no longer involved in politics helps a lot: it makes things
easier!”
                                STILL A LONG WAY TO GO
Being involved in charity projects of the magnitude that the Foundation for
the Development of Ukraine and the Victor Pinchuk Foundation are requires
contact with the government whether the principals are engaged in politics
or not.

Government ministries and state financial organs are factors in determining
not only how effective a project will be, but also in the amount of
bureaucracy attached.

While Zabolotny said that the legislation regarding charities in Ukraine is
the best in the former Soviet Union, both directors point out that there is
a long way to go for the country’s legislation to become
philanthropic-friendly.

Bureaucracy, taxation and incoherent legislation, sometimes inappropriately
derived from laws for commercial entities, are all issues.

Still, both point out that the most pressing problem isn’t a legislative
matter, but an issue of mind-set. Donor organizations exist in Ukraine, and
charitable activity is increasing, but the need for a step-change is
required.

Both organizations see that they are at the forefront of this change, and as
Eymond-Laritaz claims, “We believe that the best way to develop modern
philanthropy in Ukraine is to set an example. And this is what we are trying
to do.”                                               -30-

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
=======================================================
10.  UKRAINE: PINCHUKARTCENTRE IN KYIV OPENS A

                    NEW GENERATIONS.UsA EXHIBITION

PinchukArtCentre, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 19, 2007

KYIV – On the 19th of January 2007, at 12:00, PinchukArtCentre presented

the exhibition GENERATIONS.UsA- a new project of young Ukrainian and
American artists.

The opening ceremony started with “unwrapping of a huge gift” – an
installation, created by a noted Ukrainian artist Iliya Chichkan by the
PinchukArtCentre façade.

GENERATIONS.UsA is the first exhibition that brings together in one place
works of young artists from Ukraine (UA) and the United States of America
(USA).

Its main goal is to provide a general review of contemporary art in both
countries, while focusing on the new and most interesting phenomena.

Alexander Soloviov, one of the curators of GENERATIONS.UsA, believes

that such exhibitions “provide young authors with the opportunity to compare
themselves with others and find their own spot within the generation.

This is a quite unique situation, when such works are exhibited at the same
time at the same place! “

The countries are represented by 12 Ukrainian artists (including 2 art
duos): Stanislav Volyazlovsky, Kseniya Gnylytska and Lada Nakonechna,

Mykyta Kadan, Zhanna Kadyrova, Volodymyr Kuznetsov, Olena
Polyashchenko, Mykola Ridny, Bella Logacheva, Oleksander Semenov,
Lesya Khomenko, Masha Shubina; and 8 Americans: Dzine, Faile, Kozyndan,
Shepard Fairey, Naomi Fisher, Ryan McGinness, Ed Templeton, Swoon.

They work in different art genres: paintings, graphics, sculpture photos,
video, wall pictures and installations.

Peter Doroshenko, recently appointed as the president of PinchukArtCentre,
emphasizes that in the future, the Center’s projects will impress not only
Ukraine but the world. “In two or three years, we expect to become one of
the best European art centres.

We will exhibit the best Ukrainian artists, create the context for them,
show them abroad. These will be high rank exhibitions that would be
recognized “different”, innovative not only in Ukraine, but also in Europe
and all over the world” – Peter Doroshenko said.

The exhibition GENERATIONS.UsA is open daily (except Monday) from

19 January till 25 March 2007 at PinchukArtCentre from 12:00 to 21:00. The
entry is free.

Additional information: PinchukArtCentre is one of the biggest contemporary
art centres in the Eastern Europe. . Its main activities include running
exhibition, support for cultural projects, stipend granting to talented
artists, etc.

The first “New Space” exhibition, opened at PinchukArtCentre from

September 16th to December 16th 2006, has been attended by 35.000
persons.

PinchukArtCentre address: 2a, Basseyna Str, Bessarabska square, Kyiv
Official web page of PinchukArtCentre: www.pinchukartcentre.org
Tel.: 38 044 590 08 58; press@pinchukfund.org, tel.: 38 044 494 11 48,
fax: 38 044 494 11 49                               -30-

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
11. ROMANIA SAYS UKRAINE DISREGARDING RECOMMENDATIONS
        ON DANUBE DELTA MADE BY INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION

Rompres news agency, Bucharest, Romania, Friday, 26 Jan 07

BUCHAREST – The Romanian authorities on 23 January notified the committee

on implementing the Espoo Convention of Ukraine’s failure to observe the report
of the commission of international inquiry into the Bystroye project,
according to a press release sent to Rompres by the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs (MAE).

“In a first stage this stand was promoted within the Bureau of the Espoo
Convention over 26-27 January 2007. The MAE delegation is to present a
detailed and well-grounded analysis of the Bystroye case on 13-14 February
2007, during the 11th meeting of the committee on implementing the
convention,” reads the press release.

MAE mentioned the fact that on 10 July 2006, in Geneva, the commission of
international inquiry, which was set up at the initiative of the Romanian
side on the basis of the provisions of the 1991 Espoo Convention on
Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, officially
presented its report on the possibility of a negative transboundary impact
on the delta ecosystem, brought about by the implementation of the Ukrainian
project of building a deep shipping canal in the Danube delta on Kiliya and
Bystroye branches.

“The report of the commission of international inquiry identified several
activities, carried on as part of the project, that are likely to bring
about an important negative impact on the flora and fauna of the Danube
delta and also made several recommendations for the Ukrainian side meant to
reduce and remove the negative transboundary effects of the project,” said
MAE.

“Thus, the Kiev authorities were asked not to continue work on deepening the
canal before consulting the Romanian side with a view to finding the most
reliable solutions for this project, to organize public consultations with
the people living in the areas potentially affected by the Ukrainian project
(both in Ukraine and in Romania) and to inform Romania of the solution they
adopted for the competent authorities in Bucharest to be able to make
proposals or comments on it,” added MAE.

So far, according to the MAE release, “The Ukrainian side has not observed
any of these requests and went on approaching the Bystroye problem
unilaterally,” whereas the Romanian side went on taking bilateral steps for
the full observance in good faith of the conclusions of the commission of
international inquiry.

Moreover, the Bucharest authorities approached this problem in a
multilateral context and informed the international community, during the
regular international meetings of the international organizations in charge
of environment protection, of the stand taken by the Ukrainian side on the
resolutions of an unbiased international body.

In the letter notifying the committee on implementing the Espoo Convention,
according to the above-mentioned source, MAE pointed out the fact that the
decision-makers in Kiev went on ignoring the recommendations of the
commission of international inquiry. The aim of Ukraine for 2007 is to make
the canal navigable again.

The Romanian side also added that, in spite of the steps taken bilaterally,
the Ukrainian side did not give an essential answer to any of the questions
put forward and added that “such a behaviour might create an unwanted
precedent for the international practice in general, as well as for the
efficiency of the control mechanisms stipulated by the Espoo Convention”.

The committee on implementing the Espoo Convention is the subsidiary body
set up through the decision of the states that were part of this
international instrument (56 states and the European Community) and has the
mission to watch over the way in which the countries observe the pledges
stipulated by this international document.

The committee on implementing the Espoo Convention informs the signatory
states of the dysfunctions occurring in the way some states apply the
provisions of the convention.                                -30-

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
If you are receiving more than one copy of the AUR please contact us.
========================================================
12. RARE NAZI-ERA RACE CAR COULD GO FOR $15 MILLION
                  American collector found the parts in a scrap heap in Ukraine

Associated Press (AP), New York, New York, Friday, Jan 26 07

NEW YORK – A rare Nazi-era race car hidden in a German mine shaft during
World War II and said to be worth millions of dollars is on display in New
York City.

The sleek silver D-Type from Audi forerunner Auto Union was on display

until Friday at the car company’s fancy showroom on Park Avenue. It will be
auctioned as part of Christie’s Retromobile auto sale on February 17 in
Paris, France, and is expected to fetch between $12 million and $15 million.

While Adolf Hitler gave about 500,000 reichsmarks to Auto Union and
Mercedes-Benz to promote racing and technology, the car is not specifically
affiliated with the Third Reich, Christie’s said.

The car, one of only two in existence, is thought to be the grandfather of
modern race cars. It revolutionized racing by putting the driver in front of
the engine instead of behind it and reached speeds up to 185 mph.

“This car was really quite ahead of its time,” said Rupert Banner, head of
Christie’s International Motor Cars division. “It was revolutionary. It
changed the face of racing.”

More than 20 Auto Union series cars were built between 1933 and 1939. This
model, which has a body shaped like an airplane fuselage, was designed by
Ferdinand Porsche.

The driver sits sunken into the body of the metal, and the wheels, which
look like oversize bicycle tires, have independent suspension.

“There was a kind of memory loss after the war,” said Audi historian Thomas
Erdmann. “It took really until the early 1960s and later on to the 1980s for
car design to catch up to these cars.”

During the European motorsports heyday just before World War II, the D-Type
won the 1939 French Grand Prix. The Silver Arrow, as it was known, also was
filmed winding through country roads for use in newsreels across Europe. In
racing, German cars were always silver, British were racing green and French
were blue.

During World War II, Auto Union workers hid the cars in a mine shaft in
eastern Germany to save them from being scrapped for their metal. After the
war, the Russians discovered the cars in the mine shaft and took them to
Russia, along with dismantled Auto Union factories, to re-create
motorsports.

“They vanished, lost behind the Iron Curtain,” Erdmann said. The Russians
did not do much with racing, and the cars eventually were taken apart.

An American car collector came across car parts in a scrap heap in Ukraine
and took them back to England, where experts Crosthwaite & Gardiner

restored this car. Christie’s did not say who is selling it.

Audi owns three Auto Union race cars, and another car was owned by a
corporation, but Christie’s did not know which.

If the car displayed Thursday does fetch the estimated $15 million, it will
be a record for a car at auction. The current record is $9.8 million, for a
1931 Bugatti Type 41 Royale Sports Coupe, which sold at Christie’s in

London in 1987.                                   -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
         Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
========================================================
13. “HOW MUCH IS ONE CUBIC METRE OF DEMOCRACY?”
      Writer derides Ukrainian authorities reaction to Turkmen opposition’s visit

ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: By Arslan Mamedow
Gundogar website, Moscow, in Russian Tuesday, 23 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Thursday, Jan 25, 2007

An article posted on the Turkmen opposition website makes fun of the
Ukrainian authorities’ reaction to the invitation of two Turkmen opposition
leaders to Kiev by Ukrainian Transport and Communications Minister Mykola
Rudkovskyy.

The latter has been accused by the Ukrainian authorities of deteriorating
relations with energy-rich Turkmenistan. “Democracy today is like natural
gas, it is measured by cubic metres and has its market price. Alas, it is
cheap,” the article says.

The following is an excerpt from Arslan Mamedow’s article “How much is one
cubic metre of democracy?”, published by the gundogar.org website on 23
January; subheadings inserted editorially:

A scandal has broken out in Ukraine. The cause for this has become last
year’s [late December] visit to Ukraine by the chairman of the Republican
Party of Turkmenistan, Nurmuhammet Hanamow, and the chairman of the

Watan public and political movement, Hudayberdi Orazow.

The Ukrainian ambassador to Turkmenistan, Viktor Mayko, was the first to
ring the alarm bell. “I am convinced in one thing: this was a planned action
aimed at deteriorating bilateral relations between Ukraine and
Turkmenistan,” he said.
UKRAINIAN TRANSPORT MINISTER ACCUSED OF ABUSING POST
Shortly after that a “pointsman” was found. The Ukrainian transport and
communications minister, Mykola Rudkovskyy, who personally met

Nurmuhammet Hanamow and Hudayberdi Orazow and helped arrange their
stay in Kiev, was accused of violating professional ethics and inflicting
damage to the national security of Ukraine .

The Security Service of Ukraine and the Ukrainian foreign minister took the
role of chief accuser, who said that the transport and communications
minister had abused his post and interfered in the activities of the Foreign
Ministry, by assisting the leaders of the Turkmen opposition to obtain entry
visas.

“Rudkovskyy phoned a diplomatic and consular establishments at night and
noted the need to immediately issue visas [to Nurmuhammet Hanamow and
Hudayberdi Orazow], saying that the issue had been agreed with the
leadership of the country,” said Ukrainian Foreign Minister Borys Tarasyuk
in a live broadcast of the One Plus One TV channel.

Mykola Rudkovskyy himself does not deny that he applied to the Ukrainian
embassy in Austria with the request to speed up issuing visas for
Nurmuhammet Hanamow and Hudayberdi Orazow, but he said he put no

pressure on consular staff.

He told journalists that he indeed asked the diplomats to help the Turkmen
oppositionists visit Kiev. But he emphasized that he acted as a private
person and that he did not refer on the leadership of the country.

“I said that there are such people and asked them [the diplomats] to speed
up the issuing of visas to them. All the rest is the business of relevant
agencies,” the Ukrainian transport and communications minister said.
                          “DANGEROUS TERRORISTS”
Under “relevant agencies” Rudkovskyy means additional circumstances that
supplemented the Turkmen opposition leaders’ visit to Kiev. Official Asgabat
maintains that Nurmuhammet Hanamow and Hudayberdi Orazow are dangerous
terrorists, who are on Interpol’s wanted list.

The Turkmen side sent a note to this effect to the Ukrainian Foreign
Ministry immediately after Nurmuhammet Hanamow and Hudayberdi Orazow
appeared on a news conference in Kiev.

“During my working experience of over 30 years, I have very rarely had these
kinds of notes with such content and wording,” Ukrainian Foreign Minister
Borys Tarasyuk complained.

The Turkmen note talked about “disrespect for and hypocrisy towards
Turkmenistan and its people”, expressed a “resolute protest” and demanded
that all the guilty be brought to account and that the toughest measures be
taken.

The Turkmen Foreign Ministry’s attempts to organize an “international
search” for Nurmuhammet Hanamow and Hudayberdi Orazow started back in [the
late Turkmen president] Saparmyrat Nyyazow’s time. As proof that the leaders
of the opposition were guilty, Foreign Minister Rasit Meredow has been
disseminating a strange document for several years now.

The document, called “Extract from the sentence announced by a panel of
judges of the Supreme Court of Turkmenistan on 29 December 2002″, says that
Nurmuhammet Hanamow and Hudayberdi Orazow were found guilty of brutally

and deliberately murdering two and even more people in Asgabat on 25 November
2002.

Moreover, it alleges that the murdered people were on duty. The document
says Hanamow and Orazow “have got” 25 years in prison each under the above
grave accusation alone, not to mention terrorism, smuggling in drugs and
arms, recruiting mercenaries and so on.

One cannot take this document seriously since the Turkmen side flatly
ignored two obvious facts: no-one was killed in Asgabat on 25 November 2002;
and most importantly, Hanamow and Orazow were thousands kilometres away

from Turkmenistan at that time.

[Passage omitted: the opposition leaders have been granted political asylum
in the European Union and can freely travel in Europe]
                                             NATURAL GAS
“The current situation is not to the benefit of Ukraine because Turkmenistan
remains one of its main suppliers of natural gas,” Borys Tarasyuk said. Is
Tarasyuk’s statement not interfering in the activities of another
department?

Because the minister of fuel and energy of Ukraine, Yuriy Boyko, on his
part, maintains that nothing terrible has taken place and that the visit of
the leaders of the Turkmen opposition will not spoil strategic relations
between the two countries.

“To describe the incident with the Turkmen opposition as a scandal means
exaggerating things. Several people – who have a conflict with the Turkmen
regime and, as a result, have been exiled from Turkmenistan – have arrived
in our country.

And the Turkmen side takes an understanding view of the fact that we support
them [the opposition] so that the country could develop in a stable and
democratic way and that the election was held calmly,” the Ukrainian
minister of fuel and energy said.

Socialist Mykola Rudkovskyy knows the Turkmen opposition since the time he
himself struggled against the regime of [former Ukrainian president] Leonid
Kuchma. His [Turkmen] colleagues turned to him for advice, taking into
account Rudkovskyy’s practical experience of working in the opposition in
the capacity of MP and now in the capacity of minister.

Naturally, this caused Asgabat to go into hysterics. But why has this caused
commotion in Kiev? Since when have news conferences become a threat to
national security?

All this is taking place because the saying “natural gas in exchange for
democracy” is not just a populist stock phrase of the opposition, but is the
reality which exists not only in Ukraine, but also in Russia, the USA and
the European Union, and which should be taken into account. Democracy

today is like natural gas. It is measured by cubic metres and has its market
price. Alas, it is cheap.                                -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
14. VISIT BY TURKMEN OPPOSITION LEADERS HARMED UKRAINE
               SAYS PARLIAMENT MEMBER ANATOLIY KINAKH

RIA Novosti, Moscow, Russia, Wednesday, Jan 24, 2007

KIEV – A senior Ukrainian lawmaker said Wednesday the visit to Kiev by
exiled Turkmen opposition leaders had damaged relations with the energy-rich
Central Asian state.

Turkmen authorities filed complaints with the Ukrainian government after
several exiled opposition leaders visited Kiev in late December, reportedly
at the invitation of Transport and Communications Minister Mykola
Rudkovskiy.

Highlighting a growing rift between political factions in the ex-Soviet
state, Anatoliy Kinakh, a member of the pro-presidential party Our Ukraine,
said: “The events that took place show that the lack of coordination between
branches of power and growing political tensions lead to chaotic and
uncoordinated foreign policy decisions.”

Turkmen opposition leaders, including presidential candidate Khudaiberdy
Orazov, gave a news conference in the Ukrainian capital speaking out about
the situation in the country following the death of its longtime
authoritarian leader, Saparmurat Niyazov.

President Viktor Yushchenko sacked his ambassador to Austria Tuesday for
helping the opposition leaders obtain visas, and demanded the dismissal of
Rudkovsky, a member of the Socialist Party that is part of a government
coalition led by the Western-leaning president’s opponent, Prime Minister
Viktor Yanukovych.

Rudkovsky had reportedly approached Ukrainian embassies in several countries
privately asking them to process visas for the Turkmen oppositionists, who
Turkmenistan claimed were on the international wanted list.

Yanukovych said Tuesday the government had no reasons to fire the transport
minister, but later ordered a probe into the visa scandal.

The lawmaker said irresponsible decisions could damage Ukraine’s relations
with Turkmenistan, including in the energy sector.

Turkmenistan is a core natural gas supplier for Ukraine, which has moved to
step up relations with the country since a bitter pricing row with Russia at
the start of last year.

“It is necessary to investigate [the affair] with no regard for names,
positions and political affiliations.” Kinakh said. “Those who took the
irresponsible steps, turning a blind eye to the country’s national strategic
interests, must be held accountable.”

————————————————————————————————–
LINK: http://en.rian.ru/world/20070124/59627096.html
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
15. SCOTS GROWER FINDS UKRAINE SOIL PRODUCTIVE

Jim Buchan, Scotsman.com, Edinburgh, Scotland, Thu, Jan 25, 2007

WHEN the United States was first opened up to development over 200 years
ago, the word from pioneers such as Daniel Boone was “go west, young man”.

Now the call for UK entrepreneurs is to go east and make the most of the
huge opportunities that await in the countries of the former Soviet Union.

Leading the charge is George Taylor, who with his family has made Taypack,

a business based at Inchture, near Dundee, into one of the major players in a
competitive potato business, handling over 30,000 tonnes of potatoes a year
and supplying Tesco. Taylor is now looking to new horizons.

He said: “Two decades on from starting on the Taypack route, we are now
serving a mature UK market, but we see new opportunities in spreading our
wings.

Around 53 per cent of the land in Ukraine is arable and formerly supplied 25
per cent of the Soviet farm output. That is where we intend to grow our
business.

“The rainfall near the Polish border is absolutely ideal for arable crops,
but half of it only comes in the real growing season, which is just about
ideal for any sensible farmer.”

Corruption and backhanders are a fact of life in Ukraine, but Taylor reckons
that this aspect of the economy can be handled with a modicum of good will
and an appreciation of the local population.

Taylor has set up KRMG, a consortium of Scottish farmers and agronomists.

He said: “In 2006 we started by growing 90 hectares of potatoes near the city
of Liov, which was previously peasant country.

The initial crop yielded 35 tonnes per hectare, largely as a result of the
advice from SAC, whose presence is now spreading through all of Europe.”

KRMG now has 2,500 hectares of rented land in Ukraine and that will soon
double if negotiations between Taylor and local farmers come to fruition.

Up to 500 hectares of sugar beet, a crop that went off the map in Scotland
40 years ago, are also on the schedule, but potatoes will remain at the
heart of this new enterprising Scottish venture.

Taylor said: “Land rents are £10 per hectare and labour costs £260 per
month, or 80p per hour. However, it is not all straightforward. Fertilisers
and chemicals cost the same as in the UK and it has been very difficult to
source timber for potato boxes at a reasonable price.”

“The big difference [between the UK and Ukraine] is that waste levels are
virtually zero. We are able to sell even the poorest quality potatoes, to
the local prison service for £40 per tonne.

“It’s very exciting, and we have now purchased a redundant flax mill as our
company headquarters as a base for our 15 full-time staff.”     -30-
———————————————————————————————-
This article: http://business.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=127702007

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
16.     UKRAINE WILL GAIN SUCCESS ONLY AS A COUNTRY OF
       POLITICALLY AND ECONOMICALLY INDEPENDENT PEOPL
E

ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: By Mykola Tomenko
Original article in Ukrainian translated by Anna Platonenko
Ukrayinska Pravda, Kyiv, Ukraine, Wed, January 24, 2007

On December 1, 1991 the all-Ukrainian Referendum took place: 90.32% of
Ukrainian citizens, who took part in the voting, gave their support for the
Act of Declaration of Independence of Ukraine.

15 years have passed since that day. What has changed in Ukraine?

The first thing we can confidently assert is that our country has withstood
all the tests of independence, starting with the Ukrainian Independence
Movement, The Act of Declaration of Independence of Ukraine, Referendum,
the first presidential elections, and the adoption of the Constitution.

With the adoption of the Constitution in 1996 the forming stage of the
corresponding attributes and structures of the independent Ukraine was
practically completed.

However, that time it was already clear that this independent country was in
the first place lacking in democracy, which could very well be felt during
the second presidency of Leonid Kuchma.

As a result of this, the Orange Revolution in late 2004 being a fact of
public resistance established freedom of choice, free speech, the
impossibility of stealing elections etc.

It is already apparent nowadays, that independence and democracy are of
great concern to Ukraine. At the same time, the country is still separated,
unstable and unpredictable.

That is why there is a crying need to form and implement the new political
and socio-economic development strategy of Ukraine.
A higher degree of human development in Ukraine should lay down the
foundations for this strategy.

In other words, new life quality of citizens is to be achieved along with
the introduction of social, economic and democratic European standards of
human activity, state and society.

However, the present political elite has not yet proposed any feasible
strategic plan on Ukraine’s future.

Instead, Viktor Yushchenko’s team, focusing its attention on such
problematic issues as Holodomor or the recognition of the OUN-UPA

soldiers, does not make aware that despite their profound importance
for the recovery of historical memory and reviving the feeling of national
dignity, these issues cannot be a nationwide consolidating idea for
Ukrainian citizens today.

It might as well be apparent that one cannot unite the country actively
promoting entry into NATO.

Viktor Yanukovych’s team has also failed to succeed in defining the issues
of public significance, actively supporting the big business, giving
preferences to several regions and taking a stand in favour of synchronizing
the foreign policy activity between Ukraine and Russia.

And this, in its turn, created all the conditions for triggering the
conflict of the last presidential elections: a combat between the
pro-American Yushchenko and pro-Russian Yanukovych.

These two teams in their daily routine are struggling for power rather than
for social values.

As soon as the authority of the President had been restricted, Viktor
Yushchenko’s team ‘realized’ that the working Constitution was not
efficient, despite the fact that the team members voted for the adoption of
the constitutional reform.

Yanukovych’s team, however, contrary to the conception of the working
Constitution, craves for conferring additional authority on the government.

A dramatic proof of this is the adoption of the Law on the Cabinet of
Ministers in the first reading, which was prepared by the government and
prohibits consideration of any draft law which affects the revenue and
expenditure side of the state budget without the consent of the Cabinet of
Ministers.

In essence, this implies the urge of Yanukovych’s team to build a
governmental rather than a parliamentary-presidential republic, as provided
for by the working Constitution.

Another artificial conflict was stirred up as a sequel to the confrontation
between the so-called ‘fair-dealing Orange politics’ and ‘Donetsk bandits’.

The period of time after the Orange Revolution has shown that quite an ample
quantity of Orange politics have proved to be not less disposed towards
corrupt practices than the ‘Donetsk bandits’.

That is why such nature of political discussion makes the conception of two
Ukraines still more intense and generally brings discredit upon Ukrainian
politics.

Society is looking less stained by stereotypes and contradictions in the
government in the mist of confrontation between the ruling elites.

Since the Orange Revolution society has become more conscious and
able to defend itself.

No less importance is the fact that there has also been a change in the
social structure of society, where the role of the so-called ‘middle class’,
that is to say, economically and politically independent people, acquired
more importance.

Therefore, the most important task at present is to further restructure the
Ukrainian society, emphasizing the significance of a self-contained human
in it, namely, a citizen who knows his/her rights and is ready to maintain
them, an individual interested in the realization of his/her liberties, and
a tax-payer, who not only pays taxes in due time, but is also ready and
able to check on the efficiency of their use.

It is not just wrong of political forces to act solely in the interests of
big business (and hence, of the rich) or in the interests of the poor,
socially disadvantaged citizens.

Such false steps tend to sharpen the social conflict and destabilize the
situation in the country, whereas a unifying idea should consist in the
national strategy of Ukraine becoming a nation of successful people, who
would form the basis of a stable country.

Ukrainian citizens should be provided with all the favourable conditions

for fulfilling their potential in economics, politics, culture or any other
sphere in their own country.

Ukrainian people are to change their minds and realize that they are able to
fulfill their potential without relying on the government assistance.

In this respect, the key task of the present government is to minimize the
intervention of government bureaucracy in the activity of economically
independent people, and also to necessarily implement the effective politics
as to the socially disadvantaged citizens.

In this context, it is important to launch an informational campaign, which
would popularize the fashion for successful people, enterprises and,
finally, for prosperous regions of Ukraine.

Ukraine should finally cope with its own stereotype which suggests that it
is politics that one can only be successful in: that is why this sphere has
been entered by so many businessmen, singers, sportsmen, actors, – in other
words, by those who have a too general idea about the specific character of
politics in general or about the legislative policy in particular.

I am thoroughly convinced that in the near future we will learn to recognize
success and not to envy or bother the popular and authoritative people of
Ukraine.

Ukrainians still lack faith in themselves and their own country. And there
will always be a lack of WILL without this faith – the political will of
society, the will of every citizen to exercise and maintain his/her rights.

Nevertheless, 15 years of independence prove that Ukraine is capable of
becoming a prosperous country of politically and economically independent
people.                                          -30-
————————————————————————————————-
Mykola Tomenko is the Chairman of Family, Youth, Sports and Tourism
Affairs Committee, and the Director of the Institute of Politics, Ph.D.
Candidate in History
————————————————————————————————-
LINK: http://www2.pravda.com.ua/en/news/2007/1/24/7007.htm
————————————————————————————————-

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
17.    KYIV, UKRAINE: BUREAUCRATIC POLTERGEIST
    Three 19th century architectural monuments disappeared without a trace.

By Tetiana Kolesnychenko, The Day Weekly Digest #2
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, January 23, 2007

The Day has already reported that on New Year’s Eve demolition vehicles
pulled up to the Kyiv Fortress, the world’s largest earth fortification, and
razed three mid-19th-century buildings.

Among them was a military telegraph, the only one that had preserved its
original shape. The destruction of this particular structure is what caused
the stir.
            PULLED DOWN FOR NEW HOUSING ESTATE
The architectural monuments were pulled down to make way for a new housing
estate. An ad hoc commission convened by the Kyiv City Administration
launched a probe into whether the builders’ action was lawful and published
its preliminary conclusions a few days ago.

As the bureaucrats learned, there was no telegraph to begin with. “The
structure at 24/16 Rybalska Street is not a cultural heritage monument,”
said Vitalii Zhuravsky, deputy chairman of the Kyiv City Administration,
“but it stands next to an architectural monument of national importance:
tower No. 3 of the Kyiv Fortress, located at 22 Rybalska Street.”

The commission also believes that the structures torn down by the builders
were in fact service buildings. One of them, a former barracks, once
belonged to the Ministry of Defense.

One of the reasons why the commission came to this conclusion was that the
archives do not contain any photographs of the telegraph dated later than
2004.

The bureaucrats also suggest asking Kyiv’s ex- mayor Oleksandr Omelchenko
where the building has gone because it was the former Kyiv Council that
decided to authorize the build-up of this area.

Viacheslav Kulinich, curator of the Kyiv Fortress Museum, is sure that
asking the Ministry of Defense will be useless because ministerial documents
list the architectural monuments as ordinary buildings.

“This provides a legal opportunity to demolish, build up, and sell
architectural monuments,” says Kulinich angrily. “The Ministry of Defense
had no right to sell these structures because it was only leasing them; it
didn’t own them.”

Still, the ministry’s involvement is not the main thing that surprises
Kulinich. What alarms him is the fact that, according to the commission,

the telegraph, which he saw on Dec. 28, disappeared back in 2004.

“I clearly saw this telegraph house and I can testify to this in court,” the
curator says. In reply, the members of the commission only explained that
they rely on official documents, and since there was no photographic
evidence, there was no telegraph.
TSARIST EMPIRE’S FIRST MILITARY TELEGRAPH DESTROYED
Incidentally, as soon as the Kyiv Fortress vandalism hit the headlines,
Ruslan Kukharenko, chief of the Kyiv City Administration’s Cultural Heritage
Protection Department, visited the site. “The tsarist empire’s first
military telegraph has been destroyed,” he told journalists.

Kukharenko, official, who is also a commission member, has since rescinded
his words on the grounds that when he came to the museum, the telegraph
building had already been demolished. “I could have been mistaken, of
course,” Kukharenko says. “How could I tell what kind of a building it had
been?”

“The No. 5 fortress is part of a complex of other structures, including the
telegraph house. Why are we talking about the latter?

Because when workers were building it, they laid out the construction date
in bricks,” Kulinich says, producing photographs showing that the date,
1887, may be clearly seen on the building’s facade. “And it never occurred
to me to take a picture of the telegraph.”

Where the telegraph has gone and what should be done in this situation are
questions with no easy answers. The commission has promised to make
public the final results of its inquiry in the next few days.

Yet even now it is possible to predict, on the basis of the preliminary
conclusions, what kind of results they will be. The only hope for the museum
staff is the Kyiv Prosecutor’s Office, which is already investigating the
“museum case.”

Meanwhile, the commission claims that all the construction and renovation
work near the Kyiv Fortress has been suspended. But according to Kulinich,
excavators are continuing to dig at full blast – they only stopped this
mayhem when journalists came to the scene. The Kyiv Fortress curator thinks
the builders are trying to destroy the remaining evidence.

In order to begin construction near a historic site, builders are supposed
to carry out archeological excavations in the area, which, of course, was
not done in this case. “If we let the culprits get away with this incident,
tomorrow we will be living among the buildings of a housing project,”
Kulinich says.
            PLANS TO BUILD FOUR HIGH-RISES HERE
“There are plans to build four high-rises here – one with eighteen stories
and three with twenty-five. They are more massive than the belfry of the
Kyivan Cave Monastery. And this is only the beginning of mass-scale
construction in Pechersk District.”

There are a lot of murky aspects to the Kyiv Fortress affair. Three
19th-century architectural monuments have mysteriously vanished like
needles in a haystack.

If one reflects on this state of affairs reasonably, even if it turns out
that the real telegraph was pulled down several years ago and what was
demolished recently was a disused military barracks, is it a good idea to
disfigure such a historic place as Kyiv Fortress with another skyscraper?
——————————————————————————————–
LINK: http://www.day.kiev.ua/175878/

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
     You are welcome to send us names for the AUR distribution list.
========================================================
18.   PUTTING KOLOMYIA ON THE WORLD’S TOURIST MAP

By Valerie Wright, Ukrainian Observer magazine
The Willard Group, Kyiv, Ukraine, January 2007

Kolomyia has arrived: it can be Wikied.  Like George Bush’s observation
that the war in Iraq is just a comma in history, Kolomyia’s Wiki entry is a
series of short paragraphs touching upon nineteen nation-changes in an
800-hundred-year history.

Kyiv-Rus, Halych, Poland, Moldova, Poland, Ottoman Empire, Poland,
Ottoman, Poland, Austria, Russia, Austria, West Ukraine, Romania, Poland,
USSR, Germany, USSR, Ukraine. You have to give the tenacity award to
Poland.

All this flux has created a kind of stability.  You can’t drop what your
doing every time there is a violent overthrow.  You add a few new words to
the local dialect, a few new spices to the rack, a new angle on local
architecture.

Kolomyia is the center of the Pokuttya region, meaning “in the corner”.
Just try to stay out of the way as the cannons role through.

As regimes changed, Kolomyia held tight to the thread of history.  Despite
the paprika added to borsch or the funny local dialect, itself a borsch of
Slavic, Hungarian, Romanian, German, Kolomyia remains a most Ukrainian
place.

                 KOLOMIYA MUSEUM OF PYSANKY
It is home to the Museum of Hutsul and Pokuttya Arts as well as the
Kolomiya Museum of Pysanky, wondrously intricate wax and dye painted
eggs.

Not to say that the city projects flag-waving patriotism.  Who’s in power
seems to mean less that staying close to the soul of the land, to tradition,
to work done by hand in honor of ancestors.

Kolomyia lies on a slightly elevated plain abutting the Carpathian foothills
on a line equidistance between Lviv and Chernivtsi. It is an hour’s drive
over winding but decent roads south of Ivano Frankivsk.

It has a population of around 60,000 which is comparable to Luzerne,
Switzerland or Santa Fe, New Mexico, brethren cities in  mountainous places
with rich cultural histories.  And hoards of tourists.  Well, not yet, not
quite for Kolomyia.  But there are local entrepreneurs betting that if they
build it, the tourists will come.
                                    VITALY PAVIUK
I first met Vitaly Paviuk at a small tourism development seminar at the
Kolomyia rayon library.  He called together a private-public group to
brainstorm on priorities.

The group included several area Peace Corps volunteers and, as a treat, we
Americans were invited to stay at Vitaly’s Kolomyia-based bed and breakfast
on Friday followed by a stay at his new rural cottage on Saturday.

As far as the B&B, Vitaly said we were in luck as it was vacant for the
weekend.  Hold on a minute.  This is Kolomyia, barely on a path, much less
one beaten.  Even at $16 per night per person, where was the demand to
uphold such an audacious claim?  Surely this guy was dreaming.

Vitaly looks like a grown up Alfalfa from Our Gang. His face is boyish and
doe-eyed, his dark blunt-cut hair parted in the middle. He speaks softly and
carefully, and grins almost all the time.

We arrived at On the Corner, so named because it is, to find a three-storied
pitched-roof gray cube.  Other than a small membership plaque for the
Carpathian Tourist Board, there was no sign that this is a guest house.

Inside were 350 meters, five bedrooms, two living areas, dining area,
fireplaces, three bathrooms, cable TV, internet access and some people
pretty darn proud of the place.  We met Vitaly’s mom, dad and sister, who
are the main staff for On the Corner.  Sister is just here on vacation from
her large-chain hotel management job in Turkey.

We chose our rooms, my daughter tagging the pink one with the balcony. We
crashed onto comfy couches around the fireplace, waiting for dinner.  Home
made potato varenyky with shkvarky, crispy fatback fried with onions and
garlic.

During the crazy 90s, while in high school, Vitaly’s friend called from
Germany.  It was a wonderful, civilized place and Vitaly should come.  His
parents scrapped together money to send their son to a six-month German
language course at the prestigious Goethe Institute in Gottingen.

He finished in two months and returned to find a job working with a German
company exporting forest mushrooms. After two years of “the best business
school of my life”  he had saved enough to go to Prykarpaty State University
and earn his legal degree.   Then the phone rang again.

Another friend in Austria.  Come to Austria and study.  It’s great.  So he
did, fitting right in, no homesickness at all.  He thought he would stay, be
a cosmopolitan European.

But one day he awoke and knew that he was going back to Ukraine to turn

the family house into a bed and breakfast, the kind that he had become
fascinated with in Austria.  “I wanted to do something with the same quality
as you find in the west, but with a Ukrainian face.”  His mom, who was
cleaning houses in Italy, agreed immediately.  His dad was skeptical.

His son was a lawyer and should pursue a stable and prestigious career.
Many people were discouraging.  Crazy idea.  Who would come to Kolomyia
for a holiday?  Build your silly hotel and sit and wait.  Hah!  Vitaly was
philosophical.  “I learned not to listen to that.  You just have to believe
in your ideas and keep going.”

Over four months with an investment of $10,000 in materials, family and
friends stripped the house to the bricks and put it back together again.

“We took out a 400-liter cast-iron Soviet heating system and replaced it
with a 40 liter PVC system.”  The first guest soon came through a Kolomyia
travel agent.  A businessman from Dnipropetrovsk.  He stayed for a year.

He brought his colleagues.

“At first it was really uncomfortable”, bemoans the young businessman.  “I
didn’t even buy socks for a year. We put all the money into variable costs
for food and utilities and used the rest to buy furniture.”  He began
advertising on the web including hostelworld.com which allowed online
booking.

The business took off among tourists that Vitaly calls “backpackers”,
foreign students looking for adventure and culture, include the grit, if you
will.  But visitors only stayed a couple of nights while Vitaly’s vision had
them staying longer.  Leaving their money in the community.

He checked with local travel agents. No one was thinking in terms of local
events and excursions for these long-sought tourists who were to provide
local economic salvation.  Just a lot of sitting and waiting.

           KOLOMYIA SECTOR OF TOURIST SERVICES
So, Vitaly created the Kolomyia sector of tourist services.  He enlisted
his uncle, a professor of history, geography and culture, and they went
a’huntin.  They organized local crafts people working in folk arts,
painting, ceramics, rugs, blacksmithing, to provide demonstrations and
workshops.

They plodded through verdant hills staking out nature hikes.  They organized
transportation to run people to Bukovel or Kosiv for the day.  At first, he
took no cut from service providers.

“I did it to keep guests in my hotel and to take care of the local people.”
Now he wholesales excursions to local agencies.  But that is another
business.  In addition to importing water pumps, coffee beans and
motorbikes, and that is getting ahead of our story.

Running at thirty percent annual occupancy by early 2004, he had put the nay
saying to rest.  He took a seat on the Carpathian Tourist Board and started
helping, pro bono, others in town venturing into hospitality.  “Tourists
coming to Ukraine are experienced travelers,” he notes.

“It makes it difficult because they are seasoned.  They know what they
want.” On the Corner got a small mention in a “backpacking” article in the
Guardian, then a note in the New York Times.  By the end of the year, On the
Corner was running at fifty percent annual occupancy.  Then the phone rang
again.

A Lonely Planet reporter had been by recently, secretly, after seeing the
reference in the New York Times.  She wanted to know if she could recommend
OTC for the 2005 edition.  “Our occupancy soared to 80 percent year round.
We have lots of repeat customers, mainly from Europe, lots of families.  It
is a family business and it attracts families.”

He began wholesaling most of On the Corner’s time to European tour agents.
That is when he got bored and branched off into coffee beans and water
pumps. People told him he had crazy ideas.  Who in Kolomyia would buy
imported coffee beans?  When he sold the business, he was moving a hundred
kilos a month of beans through a retail shop in sleepy little Kolomyia.

It seems that Vitaly has both the courage to reach out and grab opportunity
and the velocity to gather no moss. The phone rang again.

                                            Mr. B                       
This time it was Mr. B.  He wanted to bring to fruition his vision of a
peaceful country retreat on 200 hectares that he had recently acquired.
Would Vitaly be interested. Yak zhe!

Mr. B is a private down-to-earth kind of guy.  The proverbial grizzled
friendly bear. I asked him why, like Vitaly, he could live anywhere in the
west – his daughter lives in America –  why stay in Kolomyia?  “Now don’t

go writing something about patriotism and all that.  This is my home, this is
where I am comfortable, this is where I want to be.”  Mr. B has had his
share of traveling.

He roamed around Europe during perestroika working illegally as a
construction tradesman.  He saved some money.  When the coup took place,
it was time to come home.  He started a small factory making hand-crafted
furniture for export. That led to general contracting for fancy dachas all
around Ukraine.  Life was good.   He had time for fishing.

Mr. B is passionate about fishing.  “My favorite lake was wild, full of the
most beautiful pike.”  Through bad management, the lake died.  So he
bought it.  He worked for a year with Vitaly to clean and restock it. It was
christened Silver Lake.

It is now a lovingly managed home to fourteen kinds of fish.  Mr. B’s eyes
sparkle when he says, “Some of those fish are pretty big.  I want to try
some bow fishing.”  What?  You know, with a bow and arrow.

They built a four bedroom cabin ten meters from the shore. We drove to
Silver Lake Cottage just after it opened, on a gorgeous Fall day, color like
I had never seen in Carpatia.  The cottage was small and fanciful, like
something you would come across in a fairy tale.

Everything was made of wood and smelled of pine sap and holiday. It was
not luxurious, but peaceful, private, other worldly.

What was there to do?  Fish, of course.  Ride the all-terrain vehicle which
was modified to dampen the noise.  Walk for hours through the woods, along
the lake and river.  My daughter found a brood of four kittens which were
generously offered as free souvenirs. We made shashlyk for dinner.

“This is not about money,” says Mr. B. “Its about nature and peace and
privacy.  I have always wanted to work in hospitality, but I want guests
with whom I can socialize, who appreciate the preservation of natural
beauty.  Right now we only have guests from On the Corner.

We will see how it goes before building some more.  I want to do a sauna

and a swimming pool. I have seen a lot of hotels, and they are all more or
less the same.  I want this to be something different.”

Vitaly has been sitting at the table during this interview.  “Can I add
something?”, he asks.

“I like our city council now, I like the mayor.  They have a vision.
Kolomyia is all about community.  Money is starting to come in.  We are
working on plans for repatriation of people working abroad.

But we have to avoid mass tourism, keep the character of Kolomyia.” He tells
me about his new vision to create facilities for business conferences and
training. But really, who would come to Kolomyia for something like that?
————————————————————————————————-
Valerie Wright came to Ukraine in 1992 as part of the first group of Peace
Corps volunteers in the former Soviet Union and was drawn to stay. After
many years mainly in Kyiv, she is now building a new home in Ivano-
Frankivsk region and will contribute frequently to the Observer.   -30-
————————————————————————————————-
LINK: http://www.ukraine-observer.com/articles/227/980
————————————————————————————————-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
=========================================================
19. HETMAN PAVLO SKOROPADSKY’S GRANDSON IN UKRAINE
         Pavlo Petrovych Skoropadsky was born in 1873 and raised in the true
           Cossack spirit, learning to respect Ukrainian culture and traditions.

Olena Kahanets, Kyiv, The Day Weekly Digest, #2
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, 23 January 2007

Hetman Pavlo Skoropadsky’s grandson Borys D. Skoropadsky has returned
to Ukraine with his family to restore the historic truth about the second
Hetman State.

The Skoropadsky family history dates back more than seven centuries. This
old Cossack family is descended from Ukraine’s two oldest dynasties, and
Borys’s ancestors include Constantine IX Monomachos and Grand Duke of
Lithuania Gediminas.

Among Ukraine’s other hetmans were Pavlo Skoropadsky’s great- grandfather
Ivan Skoropadsky (1708-22), grandson of the famed Fedir Skoropadsky, who
fought in Bohdan Khmelnytsky’s army and died a hero’s death during the
Battle of Zhovti Vody.

Pavlo Petrovych Skoropadsky was born in 1873 and raised in the true
Cossack spirit, learning to respect Ukrainian culture and traditions.

He graduated from the most elite educational establishment in imperial
Russia, the St. Petersburg Page Corps. During the First World War he
commanded a regiment of the elite Life Guards, then a cavalry division, and
later an army corps, becoming Russia’s youngest general.

The life of his grandson Borys Skoropadsky took such a course that he
learned about his grandfather only in Canada, in 1999, because his mother
had concealed the truth from him.

He was born in Canada in 1956 and spent 50 years there. His father Danylo
was poisoned on Feb. 22, 1957, and died the next day in London. His son
Borys was 10 months old.

Borys Skoropadsky’s mother Oleksandra was aware of the threat to her son’s
life. Trying to protect him, she registered him under her mother’s surname,
Tuhaibei, which he kept for 44 years.

Borys was raised by his mother and his uncle, Colonel Porfyrii Sylenko, who
was like grandfather to him and served as his male role model. Sylenko had
served with Pavlo Skoropadsky and later, in London, was Danylo
Skoropadsky’s personal secretary and consultant.

As the only surviving relative of Borys’s mother, on who he had a strong
influence, Sylenko insisted on hiding Danylo Skoropadsky’s son after
settling in Toronto on a permanent basis.

Sylenko meant to tell Borys the truth after he grew up. He had no time,
however, because he died when Borys was 22, and his mother did not dare
tell him for a long time. Years passed, and she continued waiting for an
opportunate moment.

Meanwhile, Borys tried to find himself: he lived in England, California, and
Florida. He took up various projects, including starting his own business.

He was a car dealer and real estate agent, and even designed residential
construction projects. When he first visited Germany at the age of 17 years,
he realized that he was being drawn to this land by some magnetic force.

Later he discovered that his grandfather Pavlo Skoropadsky was buried there.
After flying to London when he was 22, he felt another surge of energy
pierce his body, which made his hair stand on end. His father Danylo
Skoropadsky was buried in London.

Nothing like that happened when he visited France and other countries.
Years later the same thing happened for the third time, and the impact was
considerably stronger. It happened in Ukraine.

Borys has two sons: eight-year-old Danylo (named after his grandfather whom
he resembles) and six-year-old Maksym. Both are devout hockey players.

When I asked whether he felt easier when he discovered who he was and the
family he came from, Borys replied:

“Oh yes! One hundred percent. I realized what was causing that anxiety and
my constant quest for the meaning of my life. I instantly felt a hunger for
information. I browsed the Internet and found lots of data.

Then friends started bringing me various kinds of books. I was looking for
my family and family connections, something I lacked so badly. It was as
though half of my personality were nonexistent.

People who don’t have a father or mother know perfectly well what I’m
talking about. So I started my search and eventually found some old men and
women, but many of them were in their 90s and could hardly pronounce their
name.

Sometimes I would find out about a relative that I had managed to discover
and call him only to learn that he had died the previous month. I would even
get mad at my mother for not telling me the truth sooner.”

According to Skoropadsky (and history confirms his story), in 1938 Hetman
Pavlo Skoropadsky officially made his son Danylo Skoropadsky hetmanych,
his successor, who would become hetman after his father’s death.

When this happened, however, the hetman powers went to Pavlo
Skoropadsky’s eldest sister Maria. She died three years later, in 1959,
whereupon Yelyzaveta took over.

She died in 1976, and Pavlo Skoropadsky’s youngest daughter, Olena
Ott-Skoropadsky, refused to have anything to do with the succession issue,
announcing that she wanted to stay out of politics. She was the youngest of
the family and had none of the political experience of Skoropadsky’s older
children.

We know that a hetman organization created by Pavlo Skoropadsky functioned
in the Ukrainian Diaspora, whose membership was topped only by the
Communist Party. Its strongest and most effective organizations operated in
the US, Canada, Germany, and Great Britain, where many Ukrainians live.

The US government even gave Ukrainian-American hetman- affiliated war pilots
aircraft with names like Kyiv, Odesa, and Lviv. The hetmanites had weapons,
uniforms, and training camps.

In time, however, the hetman movement began to decline, and fewer books
were published about Skoropadsky whose name began to sink into oblivion.

[The Day] You launched your quest in Canada and now you are here in
Ukraine. What is the purpose of your resettlement?

Pavlo Skoropadsky: I came to live here because I have to be here. I wanted
to live in Ukraine. My mother raised me and made sure I learned the
language, Ukrainian culture, had information about our people, and knew our
songs and dances – in a word, about all things Ukrainian.

My mother raised me as a Ukrainian patriot. After I learned the truth about
my family, I found myself burning with the desire to return to Ukraine.

Now I understand where this energy comes from, the origin of my thoughts
about coming to Ukraine and being able to change a lot of things! My blood
makes me assume a tremendous responsibility; I am even proud to shoulder it,
even though I heard older people tell me, ‘Borys, you will bear a very heavy
cross by resettling in Ukraine. You will return in a month.'”

[The Day] You have been here for more than a month and not returned. How
do you feel in Ukraine?
Pavlo Skoropadsky: I feel great. I will live in Ukraine for the sake of
Ukraine.

[The Day] Do you know much about your grandfather?
Pavlo Skoropadsky: Pavlo Skoropadsky was a career army officer in tsarist
Russia. In his childhood he studied in Greece and Italy and then traveled
far and wide. He lost his father when he was 12.

He studied a lot and worked hard to improve himself; he became the youngest
general in the tsarist army. He wanted to be in the front ranks during the
war. His men fought better because their commander was always nearby.

[The Day] Do you know what kind of character he had?
Pavlo Skoropadsky: I read a memoir. One evening his colleagues visited him
at home. The apartment had three rooms where people gathered. His wife
Oleksandra was in the kitchen, two rooms away. She stepped into the room
where he was and said, “Pavlo, not so loud.”

 When I read this, I started laughing. All my life people have told me,
“Please, Borys, not so loud.” I don’t need a microphone. I can address an
audience so my voice will be carried to the last row of seats.

My grandfather restored the hetman state 150 years after it was abolished.
He grew up in Trostianka, Poltava gubernia, where the family owned an
estate. There he saw old Cossack weapons and portraits of Ukrainian
personalities and hetmans.

[The Day] Do your sons know who you are?
Pavlo Skoropadsky: Yes, I told them as soon as I learned the truth. I
continue to study my history and that of the second Hetman State, what

my grandfather accomplished, what has been written on the subject by
Lypynsky and other wise individuals.

I am looking for the real reasons behind the quick rise and fall of the
second Hetman State. I have realized that it was a genuinely strong and
independent Ukrainian state, and that this was why my grandfather instantly
found himself confronted by so many enemies.

[The Day] Does this mean you also have enemies?
Pavlo Skoropadsky: None of them are left. There are no enemies of the
Skoropadskys or those opposing the hetman state left today. Instead, there
are people opposed to what can actually benefit Ukraine. Whatever you do,
they will always be there to oppose it.

Consider the last 100 or 200 years of Ukrainian history. Any more or less
unbiased researcher will agree that the second Hetman State was the best
period in terms of the economy, science, culture, art, and society.

[The Day] What were the main reasons for the defeat of the Hetman State?
Pavlo Skoropadsky: I have given this considerable thought and arrived at the
conclusion that the reasons have nothing to do with the economy, politics,
or inadequate diplomacy. The Hetman State fell prey to falsehood, treason,
and information warfare.

 My grandfather was an aristocrat, who had a strong sense of duty and code
of honor, so all those backstage intrigues and conspiracies were beyond him.

Lies, however, can exist for long afterwards. Years later many of my
grandfather’s opponents repented and even personally apologized to him.
Among them was Colonel Yevhen Konovalets. He visited my grandfather in
Germany and told him simply, “Lord Hetman, I betrayed you.”

Therefore, it is extremely important today to restore the historical truth
about Pavlo Skoropadsky and his state. In 1918 he succeeded in uniting
Ukraine for seven months. I believe that the truth about the second Hetman
State will help unite today’s Ukraine.

I see my own calling in learning this historical truth, the way it really
is, and conveying it to the people. This is why I came here, to stay
forever.
POSTSCRIPT FROM THE AUTHOR OF THE DAY’S HISTORY COLUMN
There is no denying the merits of Pavlo Skoropadsky in the development of
Ukrainian statehood and culture. But history is not a panegyric.

For the sake of justice and historical truth, it is worth pointing out
certain circumstances that may somewhat alter the excessively complimentary

image of the celebrated hetman.

Unfortunately, the irrefutable fact remains that Skoropadsky’s regime very
heavily leaned on the German occupation authorities’ support. It was no
accident that the state stopped existing almost as soon as the German troops
left Ukraine.

Another fact is the Federation Act proclaimed by Skoropadsky on Nov. 14,
1918, according to which the hetman undertook to unite Ukraine with a future
non-Bolshevik government of Russia. So this panegyrical tone is not very
appropriate for the discussion about Skoropadsky.            -30-
———————————————————————————————–
LINK: http://www.day.kiev.ua/175869/
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
20.              UNITY AS GUARANTEE OF STRENGTH
                              Towards the Day of Ukrainian Unity
 January 22, 1919, an Act Of Unity was proclaimed on Kyiv’s Sophia Square

By Ihor Siundiukov, The Day Weekly Digest #2
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, January 23, 2007

There are holidays and holidays. Some of the dates just honor the tradition
and ceremony, but there were and still are Ukrainian holidays that muster
the nation’s strength and show us a difficult, thorny, and exhausting, like
a climb onto a snowy peak, but the only way to the future that is worthy of
a proud nation.

One of such holidays that will always remind us of an imperative of the
national unity of all Ukrainians from Uzhhorod to Luhansk (an imperative is,
incidentally, not that which has already been achieved but that which still
requires a strenuous effort every minute!) is the Day of Ukrainian Unity
celebrated on Jan. 22.

This is not a chance date. For it was on Jan. 22, 1919, that an Act of Unity
(Sobornist, or Zluka) was proclaimed on Kyiv’s Sophia Square in the presence
of the leaders of the Ukrainian National Republic and the West Ukrainian
National Republic, i.e., the leading personalities of Halychyna and Dnipro
Ukrainians, the two branches of our nation that had been tragically
separated from each other for almost six centuries).

A decree was also issued, which said in particular, “From now on, the parts
of Ukraine that were separated from each other for centuries – the West
Ukrainian National Republic, including Halychyna, Bukovyna, Hungarian Rus,
and Dniproside Ukraine – are uniting into one independent state, the
Ukrainian National Republic.

From now on, the Ukrainian people have an opportunity, in a powerful upsurge
of their own forces, to bring together all the aspirations of their sons to
establish an undivided and independent Ukrainian state for the benefit and
happiness of the working people.”

The idea of Ukrainian unity, to which our people were committed throughout
centuries, needs as much sober courage as possible, rather than sweet
patriotic phrases which cause grave harm, perhaps even as grave as overtly
chauvinistic loutishness.

From the historical perspective, we should admit that in 1919 the Act of
Unity remained just a declaration due to a large number of factors of both
external (reluctance of the Entente countries to support, let alone
recognize, the idea of Ukrainian independence, and, naturally, the military
intervention of Moscow, the White Army, and the aforesaid Entente) and
internal nature.

Symon Petliura wrote three weeks before his death, “Given the state of
national awareness, organization and discipline of our nation in 1917-1918,
only a well-coordinated action of its two parts – Dniproside and Halychyna
Ukrainians – could have helped achieve the ideal of political independence.

There was no such coordination from the very beginning of the struggle.
Both parts were not mature enough to accept the necessity of a single ruling
will. The idea of a united Ukraine was in fact a mere phrase to be
pronounced on festive occasions.”

This thought of Petliura has quite a tangible bearing on the present-day
situation, doesn’t it? The solemn “oaths of allegiance” to the idea of a
united Ukraine, taken by statesmen who, in reality (a bitter truth!), only
think of their business interests and of which of them is really the first
in this state, are nothing but cynical incantations that cannot inspire
confidence by definition.                         -30-
———————————————————————————————
LINK: http://www.day.kiev.ua/175861/

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
       Please contact us if you no longer wish to receive the AUR    
========================================================
21.                    “I COCKED MY REVOLVER………..”
  Examining the emergence of Ukrainian peasant insurgent armies movement
       Nestor Makno and Nykyfor Hryhoriev, Civil War allies and enemies

By Volodymyr HORAK, Candidate of Sciences (History)
The Day Weekly Digest #42, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tue, Dec 26, 2006

One cannot properly understand the history of the Ukrainian National
Revolution of 1918-21 without examining such phenomena as the Ukrainian
insurgent movement.

At the time, the wide expanses of Ukrainian lands saw the emergence of
peasant insurgent armies numbering tens and even hundreds of thousands
of combatants armed with all kinds of weapons, including artillery.

The insurgents entered into alliances with other political forces
(Bolsheviks, Petliurites, and even the Whites), but as a rule such alliances
were temporary, which further attests to the political independence of these
peasant movements. At the same time, the insurgents, who had much in
common but were led by different otamans, often clashed with one another.

These hostilities claimed the life of Nykyfor Hryhoriev, one of the best
known Civil War peasant military leaders in Ukraine, who was killed by
Nestor Makhno’s fighters in late July 1919.

THE OTAMAN OF THE KHERSON AND CRIMEAN INSURGENTS
Little is known about the early life of Nykyfor Servetnyk (Hryhoriev’s real
name). He was born in the mid-1880s in the little town of Dunaivka, in
Podillia Gubernia.

Later, for reasons that are still not clear, the future otaman changed his
name to Nykyfor Hryhoriev and moved to the Kherson region. For a long time
Hryhoriev did not distinguish himself. He was employed as a petty excise
collector and later as a tsarist policeman.

It is very likely that he would have led a humdrum and obscure life had it
not been for the wars and revolutions that blew in like a storm and gave
people like Hryhoriev power over thousands of people, as well as immense
popularity.

Hryhoriev soon had an opportunity to see action: he fought in the 1904-1905
Russo-Japanese War and then in World War One. The future otaman acquitted
himself well on the battlefield, was promoted to staff-captain, and awarded
St. George’s Cross for conspicuous gallantry.

After the tsarist government fell, Hryhoriev became a supporter of the
Central Rada but later switched sides and served under General Pavlo
Skoropadsky, who promptly suppressed all kinds of “socialist experiments”
promoted by the Ukrainian socialists and Russian Bolsheviks.

The former tsarist staff-captain carved out a brilliant career for himself
in Skoropadsky’s army and soon was commissioned as a colonel of the

hetman’s armed forces.

Later, however, Hryhoriev fell under the strong influence of politicians who
were opposed to Skoropadsky, which marked a turning point in his life story.
In August 1918 Hryhoriev returned to the Kherson region to organize a
guerrilla movement against the Skoropadsky regime.

In the large village of Verbliuzhky the former officer of the hetman’s army
created an insurgent detachment of 120 people armed with pitchforks,
revolvers, and Austrian-made rifles.

The great success of his insurgents (who once seized an Austrian freight
train) made the otaman a popular figure in the Kherson region and brought
him hundreds of new peasant volunteers.

The guerrillas, whose numbers were mounting, quickly brought down
Skoropadsky’s weak and unpopular government in a large part of Kherson
Gubernia and then.

After joining Symon Petliura’s republican army in early December 1918, they
launched a campaign against the German interventionists concentrated in
Mykolaiv and White Army units stationed in Kherson.

The Kherson Division (as Hryhoriev’s detachments came to be known after they
joined the UNR army) captured these cities and proclaimed the authority of
the Directory, the new Ukrainian government.

Many facts indicate that the otaman used not only weapons to win this
victory and others. For example, the German troops in Mykolaiv received two
ultimatums from Hryhoriev.

In the first he vowed that, if they put up armed resistance, he would disarm
and drive them out of Ukraine in shame, and in the other he said that they
would be wiped out like flies “at a wave of the otaman’s hand.”

Trying to avoid these undesirable and realistic prospects, the Germans twice
surrendered Mykolaiv to Hryhoriev’s men without a fight.

The geography of Hryhoriev’s insurgent movement was gradually expanding to
embrace the Katerynoslav region. Here, the soldiers of the Kherson Division
fought against the White Army and the guerrillas of the famous batko
(“father”) Nestor Makhno, who also opposed the new Ukrainian government.

Like other officers in Petliura’s army, Hryhoriev had orders to eliminate
Makhno’s detachments as soon as possible because they posed a considerable
danger to the Directory in the south.
                           RED BRIGADE COMMANDERS
Neither Hryhoriev nor other commanders under Petliura were able to carry out
these orders because the Makhno movement was too strong and influential.

Yet the followers of Makhno and Hryhoriev were not always destined to remain
on opposite sides of the barricades. On Jan. 29, 1919, Otaman Hryhoriev,
emulating Makhno, rose up against the Directory.

There were several reasons for the Kherson Division’s actions: the Ukrainian
government had failed to proclaim Soviet power, which most of Hryhoriev’s
men wanted, and approved the Entente intervention in southern Ukraine. Now,
Hryhoriev – this time a Soviet commander, not a Petliura otaman – moved his
detachments to Kherson.

At the same time, the troops of Hryhoriev and Makhno faced a quandary. Both
otamans had to fight simultaneously against several powerful enemies: the
armies of Petliura and Denikin, Entente interventionists, and German
colonizers. The peasant commanders were not always winners in these battles.

In late January 1919 the Whites seized the village of Huliai-Pole, the hub
of the Makhno movement, and in early February the French interventionists
drove Hryhoriev’s detachments out of Mykolaiv and Kherson.

Makhno and Hryhoriev decided to join the advancing Red Army. Their intention
suited the plans of the Soviet commanders, who wanted to reinforce the Red
Army with local insurgents.

Soon the Soviet military command resolved to form the Trans-Dnipro Rifle
Division composed of three brigades. Hryhoriev and Makhno were appointed
commanding officers of the 1st Trans-Dnipro and 3rd Trans-Dnipro Brigades,
respectively.

Thus, the former enemies found themselves not only in the same army but also
in the same division. Soon, however, the Trans-Dnipro Rifle Division ceased
to exist as a single unit, which was only natural.

The paths of the Red Army officers, Hryhoriev and Makhno, were diverging
more and more: Hryhoriev’s men were advancing in a southwestern direction
towards Odesa, while Makhno’s fighters were moving southwest in the
direction of Tahanrih. But despite the different roads of the Civil War,
both Red brigade commanders were always in touch with each other.

Their headquarters exchanged battle reports, and at the end of March 1919
batko Makhno sent Hryhoriev a cavalry detachment as reinforcement. Hryhoriev
repaid Makhno with a large quantity of captured weapons.

The two Red Army commanders achieved impressive military successes during
this campaign. Hryhoriev’s brigade liberated Znamianka, Yelysavethrad,
Kherson, Mykolaiv, Odesa, and other cities from the Petliurites, White Army
troops, and Entente interventionists. Makhno’s brigade troops were no
laggers: they expelled Denikin’s units from Huliai-Pole, Berdiansk,
Volnovakha and Mariupil.

Hryhoriev and Makhno were later awarded Orders of the Red Banner “for
achievements in the revolutionary struggle,” and the Soviet press lavished a
great deal of praise on them.

But the Soviet government would hardly have bestowed these honors on them if
it had known well in advance the kind of danger the Hryhoriev and Makhno
movements wouldlater represent.
                              POLITICAL ABOUT-FACE
It should be stressed that in the Civil War years the political situation in
Ukraine often changed at a breakneck pace, and yesterday’s reliable ally
could easily turn into a sworn enemy today, or vice versa.

What united the Bolsheviks and Hryhoriev and Makhno’s men was the joint
struggle against the armies of Petliura and Denikin as well as the foreign
interventionists, but they were disunited, each possessing different visions
of how to build a new life.

As far as land management was concerned, the communists were in favor of
instituting large state-run farms (“Soviet farms”), while most peasants in
the Kherson and Katerynoslav regions preferred either an equitable
distribution of landlords’ lands or voluntary communes, rather than those
forced “from above.”

The peasants also rejected the all-out food requisition to which the
communists resorted; they wanted either normal cash-commodity relations
or a fair and equitable commodity exchange.

However, Ukraine’s Bolshevik masters did not reckon greatly, to put it
mildly, with the interests of the peasants, and thus propelled Hryhoriev,
Makhno, and their men into a hostile camp.

Otaman Hryhoriev’s troops, who were advancing on Odesa, knew only too
well from different sources what the Bolshevik authorities were doing in
their rear lines. Naturally, the news of forced “communization” and the violent
robbery of peasants of the fruits of their labors triggered their legitimate
protests.

This gradually formed a fixed idea in their ranks that communist power was
alien, not Ukrainian, that it had been brought to Ukraine by people of a
different ethnic origin, above all, the Jews.

Those who visited the otaman’s units at the time spoke of widespread
anti-Semitic sentiments among the fighters. These were the sentiments that
Hryhoriev’s men brought to their native Kherson region after capturing
Odesa.

The areas where Hryhoriev’s detachments were stationed saw mass murders of
communists and their supporters, counterintelligence officers, and members
of food-requisition squads. A major armed mutiny was brewing, which posed a
grave danger to the Bolshevik government because Hryhoriev had about 20,000
well-armed soldiers at his disposal.

Documents show that there was also a complicated political situation in the
Katerynoslav region, the sphere of Makhno’s influence, where peasants were
also protesting against the imposition of state-run farms and food
requisitioning. Makhno issued a decree banning food-requisition squads on
his territory and disbanded the secret police unit in Berdiansk.

But in contrast to areas under Hryhoriev’s control, the protest against
communist policies did not assume an anti-Semitic coloring. This detail is
very important for understanding why fatal shots were fired at otaman
Hryhoriev in the village of Sentove, near Kherson, in late July 1919.

Meanwhile, on April 27, 1919, five people assembled at a safe house in
Katerynoslav. Three of them were confidants of batko Makhno and two
were messengers from otaman Hryhoriev.

Clearly afraid of attracting attention, the secret negotiators began quietly
discussing a plan to seize Katerynoslav by Makhno and Hryhoriev’s troops.
But there was a traitor among the plotters (Makhno’s man Goriev), who
informed the Bolshevik authorities of the secret talks, and the Cheka
(Soviet secret police) arrested the conspirators.

A few days later Vladimir Antonov-Ovseenko, commander of the Soviet troops
in Ukraine, visited Huliai-Pole and bluntly asked Makhno about his secret
contacts with Hryhoriev. Makhno did not deny them, but emphasized that he
did so in order to uncover the otaman’s secret intentions rather than to
hatch an anti-Bolshevik plot together with him.

Makhno did not reveal the whole truth. Naturally, the batko had taken
advantage of the opportunity to sound out Hryhoriev and his men for their
political attitudes – not for a trivial reason but to size up the real
possibility of a future Makhno-Hryhoriev putsch against the Bolshevik
government.

Makhno’s actions were quite expected: exactly 10 days earlier, the Soviet
newspaper Kommunar had carried an article headlined “Down with Makhno’s
Rule!” After reading it, Makhno understood that the communists no longer
looked on him as a friend but as a potential enemy at the very least.

There were many hot heads among the Bolshevik functionaries of different
levels, who stubbornly insisted that the “counterrevolutionary hotbeds” in
Kherson and Katerynoslav gubernias be eliminated immediately.

This might well have happened if Soviet Ukraine had not been experiencing
simultaneous powerful blows from Petliura, the White Army, and
anti-Bolshevik peasant insurgents. Thus, a moderate compromise line with
respect to Hryhoriev and Makhno took the upper hand in the highest strata of
the Bolshevik government.

Antonov-Ovseenko was an active supporter of this line. Contrary to numerous
and extremely alarming facts, he claimed that Hryhoriev and Makhno’s troops
“are our reliable combat reserve” and will never oppose the Soviet
government.

These illusions were dispelled late in the evening of May 9, 1919, when the
Ukrainian Front commander received a telegram from Khristian Rakovsky,
chairman of the Ukrainian SSR Council of People’s Commissars. The brief
message was: “Hryhoriev has raised a revolt. Be careful!”
                          MAKHNO AGAINST HRYHORIEV
At first Hryhoriev, the former Soviet commander, who was now a rebellious
otaman, managed to achieve major military successes. Supported by the
peasantry and some Red Army units, within two weeks Hryhoriev’s rebellion
had spread to the Kherson, Katerynoslav, Poltava, and Kyiv regions.

The insurgents seized Kherson, Mykolaiv, Yelysavethrad, Katerynoslav,
Oleksandriia, Cherkasy, and other cities. However, instead of promptly
organizing a new life here “without communists and commissars,” the otaman
and his insurgents set about exterminating the defenseless Jewish populace.

A wave of bloody Jewish pogroms swept over the cities captured by the
insurgents, and thousands of Jews fell victim to Hryhoriev’s men, although
the vast majority of Jews were poor and had nothing to do with the state-run
farms, food requisitioning, the Bolshevik party, or politics in general.

This was undoubtedly the gravest political mistake of otaman Hryhoriev and
his men. The mass-scale bloody pogroms alienated many workers and peasants
who, quite naturally, did not consider the pogrom-minded Hryhoriev as a
guarantor of a future quiet and stable life.

Meanwhile, a large Bolshevik army, twice the size of Hryhoriev’s, was sent
to crush the uprising. In early June 1919 the otaman’s troops were expelled
from all the cities under their control, and their numbers fell to 3,000
because so many of them were killed, wounded, or taken prisoner.

Hryhoriev and his insurgents badly needed allies in early May and June. The
otaman was pinning special hopes – not unjustifiably – on Makhno. Hryhoriev
never forgot about the secret talks with Makhno’s men in late April 1918.

As soon as the uprising broke out, Makhno received a few telegrams from the
otaman, in one of which were these lines: ” Batko! Why are you looking at
the communists? Kill them!” At the same time, Makhno was receiving messages
from Lenin’s closest associate Lev Kamenev.

Fully aware of what catastrophic consequences the “counterrevolutionary”
alliance of Hryhoriev and Makhno’s forces could have, Kamenev categorically
insisted that Makhno decisively and irreversibly disengage himself from
Hryhoriev’s rebellion.

Circumstances thus inexorably demanded that Makhno make what we now call a
political choice. Clearly, Makhno could not resolve such an important
political problem on his own. He gathered his commanders in Mariupil on May
12, 1919, to sound out their attitude to Hryhoriev’s uprising.

The commanders were sharply divided. Most of them considered Hryhoriev a
counterrevolutionary and even claimed that the real leader of the uprising
was not the otaman but somebody from Gen. Denikin’s closest retinue.

They came to an unequivocal conclusion: they should forget their differences
with the Bolsheviks and strengthen the alliance with the Red Army aimed
against both Denikin and Hryhoriev. A dissenting note came from Yakiv
Ozerov, chief of Makhno’s staff, who called Hryhoriev’s men “our brothers”
and suggested siding with their uprising.

Makhno also addressed the meeting. In his speech, the “father” rode
roughshod over the Bolsheviks’ rural policies but also rapped Hryhoriev over
the knuckles, calling him a true henchman of Denikin.

Still, Makhno left unanswered the question concerning the attitude to the
otaman’s uprising, which is quite natural if we examine the difficult
situation in which Makhno found himself in May 1919.

On the one hand, the communists’ policy in the countryside was pushing him
towards Hryhoriev, the Green Angel, and other rural otamans whose
detachments had already been fighting the Bolsheviks.

On the other, the real danger of a White Army-led restoration of the old
regime moved him back to the alliance with the communists and the Red Army.
In addition, when that military congress was being held, Makhno had a rather
hazy view of the nature, goals, and real strength of the Hryhoriev uprising.

He asked his close comrade-in-arms Oleksandr Chubenko to clarify all these
matters, and the latter, together with some of Makhno’s men, soon crossed
the Bolshevik-Hryhoriev front line.

Makhno’s envoys failed to reach the otaman’s headquarters, but they still
managed to learn something about Hryhoriev’s rule. According to Makhno’s
staff officer, the hero of the capture of Odesa and bearer of the Order of
the Red Banner, Hryhoriev followed the way of Petliura’s otamans whose
pogroms and atrocities were well known in Ukraine.

The news of a Jewish pogrom in Piatykhatky became the decisive argument
for the batko. By an absolute majority of votes Makhno’s military council
declared war on ruHHty Hryhoriev.

Makhno’s headquarters soon released a communique with the characteristically
debunking title “Who Is Hryhoriev?” which described the otaman as an
anti-Semitic organizer of pogroms, a traitor of the revolution, and a public
enemy.

Makhno did not confine himself to a verbal condemnation of Hryhoriev’s
mutiny. Soon after, the commander of the 3rd Trans-Dnipro Brigade sent
against Hryhoriev’s army the 6th Trans-Dnipro Regiment and the Spartacus
armored train which, together with other Soviet units, routed the rebels
near Katerynoslav. Thus, Makhno again helped the Bolsheviks, who soon
repaid the batko with black ingratitude.
                              AN INSURGENT ALLIANCE
On May 25, 1919, the commanding officer of the Red Army’s 3rd Trans-Dnipro
Brigade, batko Makhno, was outlawed. Soviet troops began disarming Makhno’s
units, and on June 12 secret agents managed to capture most of Makhno’s
staff officers, who were later shot and killed.

The Cheka was also hunting for Makhno, but he managed to escape arrest.
Makhno and his fighters found themselves in a real quandary, with Denikin’s
troops pressing in front and the Red Army in the rear.

Makhno was very well aware that he clearly lacked forces to successfully
oppose both the Reds and the Whites. There is evidence that at this time
Makhno hit upon the idea of forming a mighty insurgent army based in the
Kherson region. But this area was still crawling with Hryhoriev’s guerrillas
with whom Makhno’s fighters were at war.

The new realities finally forced Makhno to revise his attitude to the
“counterrevolutionaries,” and very soon he led a large detachment to the
Kherson steppes with the intention of forming a military alliance with them
against the Bolsheviks and the White Army.

En route, Makhno’s troops attacked Yelysavethrad but were quickly repelled
by Red Army troops, who outnumbered them. But even this short period of time
was enough for Makhno to gain additional – and by no means encouraging –
information about Hryhoriev and his insurgents. He learned that Hryhoriev’s
men had recently killed 2,000 Jews there. Some of them were confirmed
anarchists.

This information stunned Makhno, forcing him to think twice about his future
alliance with the otaman. He believed that Hryhoriev’s rank-and-file
soldiers, who Makhno thought were a blind instrument in the hands of the
“adventurer,” should be incorporated into his army and reeducated, while the
anti-Semitic officers should be executed.

Having conceived this plan, which in fact amounted to a secret plot against
otaman Hryhoriev and about which the “father” did not breathe a word to
anybody, Makhno headed for the village of Verbliuzhky. Failing to find
Hryhoriev there, he went to the village of Kompaniivka, where the otaman and
his chief of staff also came a short while later.

Hryhoriev, who had suffered a number of crushing defeats at the hands of the
Reds, was not at all averse to having Makhno as a long-awaited ally rather
than an enemy. But anti-Hryhoriev sentiments were still strong among
Makhno’s leading commanders, and most of them resolutely opposed the

alliance with a “counterrevolutionary bent on pogroms.”

Some of them even suggested arresting and shooting the otaman. Makhno
had to reveal his secret plan to his close colleagues, telling them they
should take in Hryhoriev’s rank-and-file fighters and that they could shoot
Hryhoriev any time they wanted.

Soon Makhno and Hryhoriev’s detachments merged into a single guerrilla army
whose commander-in-chief, Hryhoriev, was supposed to follow all the
instructions of the army’s Revolutionary Council headed by Makhno. A joint
insurgent headquarters was set up, with Makhno’s men constituting the
majority. It was decided that the joint insurgent army would fight against
the Reds, the Whites, and the Petliurites.

Bowing to the batko’s demand, Hryhoriev also firmly promised to refrain from
carrying out Jewish pogroms.

These facts prove that the insurgent army quickly came under the control of
Makhno’s top officers. All they had to do now was “neutralize” Hryhoriev
himself.
                              SHOOTOUT IN SENTOVE
It is clear that Makhno had no real possibilities to carry out his plot
immediately against the otaman and his men. First it was necessary to
collect sufficient compromising information against Hryhoriev in order to
expose him convincingly in the eyes of the ordinary insurgents, and this
required some time. Makhno’s counterintelligence was brought into the
picture, and his agents began shadowing every step of the otaman. They
did not have to wait long for compromising evidence.

Shortly after merging with Makhno’s army, Hryhoriev’s fighters again
attacked Oleksandriia and Yelysavethrad. After capturing these cities, the
insurgents killed about 70 Jews, despite Hryhoriev’s solemn promise not to
lay a finger on the Jews.

Makhno’s counterintelligence also discovered the otaman’s suspicious
contacts with a local landlord with whom Hryhoriev had left a machine-gun
and a large quantity of clothing.

Still more alarming were the agents’ reports that Hryhoriev’s men were
contemplating the assassinations of Makhno, his brother, and the united
army’s chief of staff. Makhno could not help wondering whether his ally

was hatching a revolt in the army.

But all this paled before what happened one July day in 1919. On that day
Makhno’s soldiers brought Makhno two intelligent-looking men, who insisted
on seeing otaman Hryhoriev.

Aware that the strangers did not know what the otaman looked like, Makhno
said he was Hryhoriev and soon learned that the men were White Army
officers, who had come as messengers to his ally.

They had a letter to the otaman from General Romanovsky, which clearly
indicated that Hryhoriev had long been on the payroll of Denikin’s
headquarters.

Makhno flew into a terrible rage and personally shot the White officers. He
and his commanders were no less eager to shoot Hryhoriev. However, being
experienced in all kinds of situations, Makhno considered that the men who
said they were Denikin’s officers may have been Cheka operatives, who had a
mission to provoke a Makhno-Hryhoriev armed conflict, much to the
Bolsheviks’ pleasure. It was decided to shadow Hryhoriev’s every step.

On a July day in 1919 Hryhoriev and part of his army were marching to the
Pleteny Tashlyk railway station with the intention of stopping the White
Army’s advance units.

However, the behavior of the usually dauntless otaman was very strange and
suspicious. Instead of resisting Denikin’s units, Hryhoriev surrendered the
station without engaging in combat.

Later, when Hryhoriev was recounting this episode to Makhno, he put
everything down to the Whites’ essential advantage in personnel and
equipment. It is quite possible that at any other time Makhno would have
believed the otaman, but the story of the people pretending to be Denikin’s
officers compelled Makhno to look at this situation from an absolutely
different angle.

Makhno no longer doubted that Hryhoriev had sided with the Whites. Shortly
afterwards (in late July 1919) Makhno’s top officers proclaimed a death
sentence on the otaman.

Were Makhno and his commanders correct in considering Hryhoriev a
secret ally of Denikin? In my view, this important issue requires additional
research. But considerable direct and indirect evidence allows one to
presume that he was. I will add that, in principle, there was nothing
unnatural in this.

Disgruntled with the Bolshevik government, Hryhoriev could very well have
sided with Denikin, who would restore freedom of trade, so dear to the
peasants, and would not impose state-run farms.

On July 27, 1919, the united forces of Hryhoriev and Makhno entered the
village of Sentove near Kherson and soon assembled a large village meeting
(according to other sources, this was a congress of insurgents).

Hryhoriev was the first to speak. In his speech the otaman stressed that the
chief goal of the Ukrainian insurgent movement was a relentless struggle
against the “communist oppressors” and that, by fighting them, the
insurgents could conclude any kind of alliance, even with Denikin.

In saying this, the otaman had clearly set himself up, to use a modern
phrase. In reply, Makhno’s comrades-in-arms Chubenko and Shpota branded
Hryhoriev a pogrom-monger and counterrevolutionary in whose eye “one can
see, like before, the glitter of tsarist epaulets.” Naturally, Hryhoriev
immediately demanded that the batko and his speakers explain themselves.

The otaman heard them out in the premises of the local village council,
where he went accompanied by Makhno and some of his top commanders.

Cocking his revolver and concealing it behind his back, Chubenko reminded
Hryhoriev of the bloody Jewish pogroms, his friendship with landlords, and
contacts with the White Army.

The otaman went for his pistol, but Chubenko stepped forward and shot
Hryhoriev in the head. A few seconds later the “defendant” was hit by
Makhno’s bullets and those fired by his well-known commander Semen

Karetnykov.

Hryhoriev, seriously wounded, mustered enough strength to run into the
courtyard, but his assassins ran after him and shot him to death.

Soon, on Makhno’s orders, the otaman’s staff officers were also liquidated.
As for Hryhoriev’s rank-and-file men, they were surrounded in good time by
the batko ‘s soldiers, not daring to offer armed resistance to their allies,
although they loved their otaman. Most of them soon recognized the authority
of Nestor Makhno, their new military commander.            -30-
————————————————————————————————–
LINK: http://www.day.kiev.ua/174859/
————————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================

   If you are receiving more than one copy of the AUR please contact us.

    Please contact us if you no longer wish to receive the AUR.    
       You are welcome to send us names for the AUR distribution list.
   If you are missing some issues of the AUR please let us know.
========================================================
         “ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR”
         A Free, Not-For-Profit, Independent, Public Service Newsletter
                With major support from The Bleyzer Foundation
 
      Articles are Distributed For Information, Research, Education
                Academic, Discussion and Personal Purposes Only
                                  Additional readers are welcome.
========================================================
             ACTION UKRAINE PROGRAM – SPONSORS

                               Action Ukraine Report (AUR)
                Holodomor Art and Graphics Collection & Exhibitions
          “Working to Secure & Enhance Ukraine’s Democratic Future”
1.  THE BLEYZER FOUNDATION, Dr. Edilberto Segura,
Chairman; Victor Gekker, Executive Director, Kyiv, Ukraine;
        Additional supporting sponsors for the Action Ukraine Program 
                                 will be listed again next week.
=======================================================
 TO BE ON OR OFF THE FREE AUR DISTRIBUTION LIST
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 morganw@patriot.net. Information about
your occupation and your interest in Ukraine is also appreciated.
 
If you do not wish to read the ACTION UKRAINE REPORT please
contact us immediately by e-mail to morganw@patriot.net.  If you are
receiving more than one copy please let us know so this can be corrected
 
  SPAM & BULK MAIL BLOCKERS ARE A REAL PROBLEM                 

If you do not receive a copy of the AUR it is probably because of a
SPAM OR BULK MAIL BLOCKER maintained by your server or by
yourself on your computer. Spam and bulk mail blockers are set in very
arbitrary and impersonal ways and block out e-mails because of words
found in many news stories or the way the subject line is organized or
the header or who know what.
 
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, The Bleyzer Foundation

Emerging Markets Private Equity Investment Group
President (Acting) and Chairman, Executive Committee of the
Board of Directors, Ukraine-U.S. Business Council
P.O. Box 2607, Washington, D.C. 20013, Tel: 202 437 4707
mwilliams@SigmaBleyzer.com; www.SigmaBleyzer.com
========================================================
       Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely.
========================================================
return to index [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

AUR#807 Jan 22 GDP To Grow 4.5% In 2007 Says World Bank; Grain Of Truth; Mostly Unfree

=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR           
                 An International Newsletter, The Latest, Up-To-Date
                     In-Depth Ukrainian News, Analysis and Commentary

                      Ukrainian History, Culture, Arts, Business, Religion,
         Sports, Government, and Politics, in Ukraine and Around the World       

 
                                     FOREIGN POLICY
“IT DOES NOT SERVE UKRAINE’S INTERESTS WHEN POLITICAL 
     INFIGHTING CARRIES OVER INTO THE FOREIGN POLICY
                 ARENA” AMB. STEVEN PIFER (Article Nineteen)
                        
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR – Number 807
Mr. E. Morgan Williams, Publisher and Editor, SigmaBleyzer
WASHINGTON, D.C., MONDAY, JANUARY 22, 2007
 
                NATIONAL UNITY DAY – JANUARY 22, 1919
         The Union of the Ukrainian National Republic (UNR) and the
    Western Ukrainian National Republic (ZUNR) was declared in Kyiv.

               –——-  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. WORLD BANK EXPECTS UKRAINE’S GDP TO GROW 4.5% IN 2007
Interfax Ukraine Business Express, Kyiv, Ukraine, Wed, January 17, 2007

2.         GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO INCREASE PRICES FOR GAS

        PRODUCED IN UKRAINE SAYS WORLD BANK ECONOMIST
Interfax Ukraine News, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thu, January 18, 2007

3.               UKRAINE EYES ENERGY PROJECTS IN TURKEY
By Andrea R. Mihailescu, UPI Energy Correspondent
UPI, Washington, D.C., Friday, January 19, 2007

4 POLAND’S KETY ALUMINUM GOODS PRODUCER TO INVEST
        ALMOST $10M IN ITS UKRAINIAN DAUGHTER COMPANY
Interfax Ukraine Economic, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 19, 2007

5.         POLISH CAR MANUFACTURER FSO CONSIDERS SUING
DECISION OF EUROPEAN COMMISSION ON LIMITING PRODUCTION
                    FSO is owned by Ukrainian company AwtoZAZ
Polish News Bulletin, Warsaw, Poland, Thu, Jan 18, 2007

6.              POLAND BROADCASTS “TRUTH” TO BELARUS
      Radio Racja is helping wage an information war against a dictatorship
By Chris Johnson, Reuters, Bialystok, Poland, Sun Jan 14, 2007

7UKRAINE’S TWO LARGEST CARMAKERS TO DOUBLE INVESTMENT
       Ukraine automotive companies Bogdan & ZAZ plan production in Russia
EIU IndustryWire – News Analysis, The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited
New York, New York, Wednesday, January 10, 2007

8.     EBRD CONSIDERS LOAN TO BRITISH CADOGAN PETROLEUM
                  FOR MINING UKRAINIAN GAS AND OIL DEPOSITS

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, January 19, 2007

9.   UKRAINIAN GRAIN ASSOCIATION EXPECTS RESUMPTION OF
            GRAIN EXPORTS FROM UKRAINE IN LATE JANUARY
       Losses from grain export restrictions are already around $100 million
Interfax Ukraine Business Express, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tue, January 16, 2007

10.                     UKRAINE ECONOMY: GRAIN OF TRUTH
Government actions jeopardises Ukraine’s WTO entry & investment prospects.
Country Briefing: EIU Economy – News Analysis
The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited
New York, New York, Thursday, November 16, 2006

11.      CHRONICLE OF RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN UKRAINIAN
                       LEGISLATION, NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2006
Dr. Irina Paliashvili, Russian-Ukrainian Legal Group, P.A.

Action Ukraine Report (AUR) #807, Article 11
Washington, D.C., Monday, January 22, 2007

12UKRAINE 125TH IN HERITAGE FOUNDATION FREE ECONOMY LIST
                        Placed in the “mostly unfree” category of countries.
Interfax Ukraine Focus, Kyiv, Ukraine, January 16, 2007

13.                              WANTED: POLITICAL WILL
            Study points out Ukraine still lags far behind on the economic front.
EDITORIAL: Kyiv Post, Kyiv, Ukraine, Wed, Jan 17 2007

14UKRAINE: POLITICAL PARTY TRAINING FOR ECONOMIC REFORM
Ukrainian Center for Independent Political Research (UCIPR)
Kyiv, Ukraine, Thursday, January 4, 2007

15. BROAD STREET CAPITAL GROUP NAMED EXCLUSIVE FINANCIAL
        ADVISOR OF $120 MILLION UKRAINE POWER PLANT PROJECT
       Receives $696,000 U.S. Government Trade & Development Agency Grant
Business Wire, New York, NY, Thursday, January 18, 2007

16U.S. GRANTS USD 0.55 MILLION FOR FEASIBILITY STUDIES FOR
 MODERIZATION OF UKRAINE’S PIVDENMASH HEAT & POWER PLANT
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thursday, January 18, 2007

17UKRAINE GOVN’T INTENDS TO OFFER VANCO INTERNATIONAL
      40% OF THE PRODUCTS MINED IN BLACK SEA’S TRANS-KERCH

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 19, 2007

18. “EVER SINCE WE GOT MARRIED WE HAVE BEEN DECORATING
                             CHRISTMAS TREES TOGETHER”
                  Interview with U.S. Ambassador & Mrs. William Taylor
INTERVIEW: With U.S. Ambassador & Mrs. William Taylor
By Klara Gudzyk, The Day Weekly Digest #1
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, January 16, 2007

19“IT DOES NOT SERVE UKRAINE’S INTERESTS WHEN POLITICAL
           INFIGHTING CARRIES OVER INTO THE FOREIGN POLICY
                                   ARENA” AMB. STEVEN PIFER.
INTERVIEW: With Former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Steven Pifer
By Mykola SIRUK, The Day Weekly Digest #1
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, January 16, 2007

20.          UKRAINE: THE BEST AND THE WORST LIST FOR 2006
ANALYSIS: By Oksana Bashuk Hepburn, Canada
Action Ukraine Report (AUR) #807, Article 20
Washington, D.C., Monday, January 22, 2007

 
21.                         THE PAST IS UNPREDICTABLE,
                   CONFLICTING VIEWS OF SOVIET HISTORY
     A subtler clash of cultures is echoing through Kyiv’s St Cyril’s Church
Economist.com, London, UK, Thursday, Jan 18th 2007
 
22.    UKRAINE MP MEMBER KUSHNARIOV BURIED IN KHARKIV
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, January 20, 2007
 
23.          THE WESTERN UKRAINIAN NATIONAL REPUBLIC
                          AND THE WAR IN GALICIA, 1918-19
         On 22 January 1919 the union of ZUNR and UNR declared in Kyiv
FEATURE: Internet Encyclopedia of Ukraine (IEU)
Dr. Marko R. Stech, Managing Director, CIUS Press
Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, University of Toronto
Toronto, Ontario, Canada, January 2007
========================================================
1
. WORLD BANK EXPECTS UKRAINE’S GDP TO GROW 4.5% IN 2007
  
Interfax Ukraine Business Express, Kyiv, Ukraine, Wed, January 17, 2007

KYIV – The World Bank has confirmed its forecast for Ukraine’s GDP in 2007
to reach 4.5% and inflation of 10.7%, World Bank lead economist for Ukraine
Martin Raiser said at a press conference on Wednesday.

Ukraine should expect continued growth in foreign investment in 2007,
although the possibility of a fall in metal prices on the international
market and consumer demand will also remain in place, he said.

The World Bank could revise its forecast for the Ukrainian economy based on
results of the first quarter of 2007, Raiser said.

Commenting on the 2006 results, Raiser said GDP growth is expected to reach
7%, which would be a surprise to World Bank experts and is much higher than
previous forecasts.

This GDP growth was primarily influenced by a surge in metal prices on the
foreign market, high domestic consumer demand, and the significant potential
of the Ukrainian industry, which has managed to adapt to new energy prices,
he said.

Speaking about the price of natural gas for Ukrainian consumers, Raiser said
its increase has been positive, as it has prompted businesses to modernize
their production facilities and reduce energy consumption.

It was reported earlier that real GDP in Ukraine could grow higher than 7%
in 2006 against the background of a dramatic increase in productivity and
intensified production.

The government expected GDP to grow by 5.8%-6% in 2006. The State

Statistics Committee revised GDP growth forecast up to 5.4% from 5%
based on the results of the first half of 2006.

Ukraine’s GDP grew by 6.7% in January-November 2006. In 2005, Ukraine’s

GDP dropped to 2.6% from 12.1% in 2004.                  -30-
————————————————————————————————-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
2.   GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO INCREASE PRICES FOR GAS
   PRODUCED IN UKRAINE SAYS WORLD BANK ECONOMIST

Interfax Ukraine News, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thu, January 18, 2007

KYIV – The Ukrainian government should continue introducing market
mechanisms for setting energy prices, including for natural gas, World Bank
lead economist for Ukraine Martin Raiser said at a press conference on
Wednesday.

A further hike on prices for gas produced in Ukraine will help reduce the
country’s energy dependence, he said. The World Bank thinks it is necessary
to increase the price of the gas that Ukraine produces to the level of
imported gas prices.

This would increase gas production, thus Ukraine would not be as dependent
on imported gas from other countries, Raiser said. An increase in domestic

energy prices would also increase transparency in the energy sector, he said.

Relatively low prices for imported and Ukrainian gas benefit shadow
operations on the market and the re-export of gas to Europe where prices are
much higher, Raiser said. This possibility exists amid non-market prices.
There is transparency when there are market prices, Raiser said.  -30-
————————————————————————————————

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
3.       UKRAINE EYES ENERGY PROJECTS IN TURKEY

By Andrea R. Mihailescu, UPI Energy Correspondent
UPI, Washington, D.C., Friday, January 19, 2007

WASHINGTON – Ukraine said it is ready to participate in Turkey’s energy
projects, including the multilateral Nabucco gas pipeline project, Viktor
Yanukovych, prime minister of Ukraine, said after holding talks with Recep
Tayyip Erodgan, prime minister of Turkey, in Ankara Wednesday.

Nabucco involves five countries and Turkey “cannot hold a negative stance,
if any neighbor wishes to join the project,” Erdogan said. “The main thing
is that Nabucco becomes powerful and improves the distribution of
resources.”

Kiev, which says it has considerable potential for making gas-compressing
equipment, wants to be an active participant in oil and gas pipeline
projects wherever it successfully wins tenders.

“Therefore we will be using every possibility to take part in projects such
as Nabucco,” Yanukovych said.

The two sides are considering enhancing cooperation in throughout the energy
sector not only oil and gas, including with plans to build power plants in
Turkey. Ukraine has offered its assistance to build nuclear power plants in
Turkey, Yanukovych said.

Yanukovych said his country is interested in expanding Turkish transport
networks, primarily gas and pipelines. “The Turkish policy in fuel
transportation to Europe deserves attention and here we are partners, not
competitors,” he said.

Other possible projects include development of offshore fields in the Black
Sea.                                              -30-
———————————————————————————————
http://www.upi.com/Energy/view.php?StoryID=20070119-021851-3228r
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

========================================================
4.  POLAND’S KETY ALUMINUM GOODS PRODUCER TO INVEST
       ALMOST $10M IN ITS UKRAINIAN DAUGHTER COMPANY

Interfax Ukraine Economic, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 19, 2007

KYIV – Grupa Kety S.A., Poland’s largest aluminum goods producer, in 2007
plans to invest 29 million zloty (around $9.6 million) in its Ukrainian
daughter company Aliupol Ltd. in Borodianka in Kyiv region, which produce
aluminum profiles, according to the group’s financial forecast for 2007.

The total volume of capital investment of the group in 2007 is planned to be
163.6 million zloty, reads the report.

Earlier, Grupa Kety said that it planned to invest 30 million zloty in
Aliupol Ltd. in 2006 to launch output of aluminum products for the Ukrainian
and Russian construction markets.

The new facilities are to be launched in the fourth quarter 2006, although
the launch was set back to the second quarter 2007, Aliupol told
Interfax-Ukraine. A new press machine at the plant will have a capacity of
8,000 tonnes of products per year.

According to the group’s report, a 9% increase in aluminum products output
is expected in 2007, mainly through the launch of the Ukrainian facilities.

Grupa Kety Head Dariusz Manko in early January 2007 said in an interview
with the Bloomberg Agency that Grupa Kety could additionally invest 30
million zloty in Aliupol if the company attracts new Ukrainian clients.

Grupa Kety S.A. is the largest aluminum construction product producer in
Poland. In 2006, the group forecasted a 46.2% rise in sales, to 544 million
zloty.

In 2007, the group plans to increase aluminum product sales to 592 million
zloty, and total sales to 1.214 billion zloty. Grupa Kety actively exports its

products to Ukraine.                              -30-
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
    Send in names and e-mail addresses for the AUR distribution list.
========================================================
5.        POLISH CAR MANUFACTURER FSO CONSIDERS SUING
DECISION OF EUROPEAN COMMISSION ON LIMITING PRODUCTION
                      FSO is owned by Ukrainian company AwtoZAZ

Polish News Bulletin, Warsaw, Poland, Thu, Jan 18, 2007

WARSAW – FSO, a major Polish car manufacturer, is considering placing a

suit against the decision of European Commission, which allows a company to
receive state aid from the State in return for limiting production to
150,000 cars yearly.

The limit is unfavourable for GM, as it plans to produce the Chevrolet Aveo
into the Warsaw based factory. The decision on using or refusing the state
aid will be made by the owner of FSO, Ukrainian AwtoZAZ.

The company, which is a part of UkrAwto concern, has been granted

ZL400m of guarantees for an investment loan.

FSO has the right to appeal to the European Court of Justice, however the
proceedings may last for up to two years and within that time, the
production limit ordered by the EC would have to be obeyed, if the company
decides to use the state aid.

Following the decision, GM has already started to look for new options, as
it plans to get a solid share in the European market. One option is
acquiring former Daewoo factories in Romania.             -30-
————————————————————————————————

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================      
6.       POLAND BROADCASTS “TRUTH” TO BELARUS
       Radio Racja is helping wage an information war against a dictatorship

By Chris Johnson, Reuters, Bialystok, Poland, Sun Jan 14, 2007

BIALYSTOK, Poland – From simple back offices in a provincial Polish
town, a radio station is broadcasting around the clock to Belarus, giving
the ex-Soviet republic one of its few sources of independent news.

Run by opponents of Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko, Radio Racja
(Truth) is helping wage an information war against a regime branded by U.S.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as “Europe’s last dictatorship”.

Supported by the Polish Foreign Ministry and Budapest-based Open Society
Institute founded by U.S. billionaire investor George Soros, Radio Racja is
one of only two independent stations broadcasting freely into Belarus.
Reuters Pictures

The station uses Web technology to mix popular music and social commentary
with uncensored news in both Belarussian and Russian, aiming to provide a
platform for both opposition parties and Belarussian bands, some of which
are banned at home.

“I dream of a free and independent Belarus,” says editor-in- chief Wiktor
Stachwiuk, a 58-year-old exile. “I want to give Belarussians a taste of a
free society. Official media do not let them hear what is really going on.”

Lukashenko, in power since 1994, keeps a tight rein on the eastern European
country and its 10 million inhabitants, sandwiched between Poland and
Russia.

He rejects all criticism of his rule and has called for vigilance to keep
Belarus safe from Western “lies and violence”. Opposition politicians and
journalists have disappeared and all media outlets face serious
restrictions.   .

Western countries accuse Lukashenko of systematic crackdowns on the
opposition and dismiss all Belarus elections over the last decade as unfair.
They say the president blatantly rigged elections last year to engineer a
landslide win for himself.

“I could not simply stand by and watch what was happening in my country
without doing anything,” Stachwiuk said. He first set up Radio Racja in
1999 and it broadcast from the Polish capital of Warsaw until 2002.
                                       INTIMIDATION
His Warsaw station eventually ran into financial problems and it took
Stachwiuk and his associates three more years to raise enough money to
launch the station in Bialystok, closer to Belarus and able to broadcast
deeper into the country.

It now has a budget of $1 million a year, half of which is spent on
transmitters: two in Poland and two in Lithuania.

Almost a year after its relaunch, Stachwiuk estimates Radio Racja, with a
staff of just 32, has an audience of up to 400,000 mostly in western
Belarus, plus tens of thousands of exiles, and says it is building up
rapidly on short and medium wave and on a newly launched FM band:
“The station can be heard well on medium wave all the way to (Belarus
capital) Minsk and can even be picked up in Finland.”

The station has a small network of reporters, mostly working under
pseudonyms, across Belarus who record programs using MP3 technology
and send them via the Internet to Bialystok or to one of two covert editing
stations in Belarus.

Radio Racja editors say their correspondents face daily harassment from
the  Belarus authorities — mostly just petty intimidation but occasionally
arrest and jail.

“Several of our people have been put in prison for a few days, one for 10
days, but nothing more serious so far,” said Michal Andrysiuk, 47, head of
FM broadcasting.

“One of our correspondents broadcast live from a police car after being
arrested on a charge of cursing in the street. Hooliganism is the most
frequent official excuse to arrest people who are obviously known to the
police,” he said.
                            “NO TRUTH IN THE NEWS”
Belarus opposition politicians and journalists welcome Radio Racja’s efforts
to break the state media monopoly but say its impact so far has been
limited, partly because most Belarussians rely on television for news.

Zhanna Litvina, head of the Belarussian Association of Journalists, said by
telephone it was a “comforting thought that such radio stations exist and
that Belarussians are working for them”.

“Unfortunately, you cannot say that such projects are very effective in
current Belarussian conditions. To make them effective you would need
transmitters in Belarus and under current conditions that is impossible.”

But the radio station’s backers in Poland are convinced that there is an
audience and that it is growing: “I was in Belarus some time ago and met
people listening to the radio and glad of it,” said Michal Dworczyk, a key
advisor on eastern European issues to Polish Prime Minister Jaroslaw
Kaczynski. “The media role in the fight for democracy is indisputable.
For Belarus and its people, it is essential.”

And Radio Racja’s staff say they are not discouraged and will keep
broadcasting, even if the audience is tiny.

“We really want to show what is going on. We try to be objective, asking
for comment from the government, but they won’t talk to us,” said
program director Jana Kamienskaja, 37.

“‘There is no news in the truth, and there is no truth in the news’ —
unfortunately this old Soviet proverb is still valid in Belarus.” Belarus
officials declined to comment on Radio Racja.            -30-
———————————————————————————————–
Additional reporting by Andrei Makhovsky in Minsk and Gabriela
Baczynska in Warsaw. Link: http://today.reuters.com/news/home.aspx.
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
7. UKRAINE’S TWO LARGEST CARMAKERS TO DOUBLE INVESTMENT
       Ukraine automotive companies Bogdan & ZAZ plan production in Russia

EIU IndustryWire-News Analysis, The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited
New York, New York, Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Ukraine’s two largest carmakers, Bogdan and ZAZ, have announced plans to
more than double their earlier level of investment to establish a joint
venture for the production of cars, buses and trucks in Russia, with plans
to invest US$700m to set up the venture, which would make it the largest
foreign investment to date by Ukrainian companies. The project would also be
the first investment from a former Soviet country in Russia’s automotive
sector.

In October last year the two companies unveiled plans to invest US$300m to
set up a production base in the Nizhny Novgorod region in Russia (BEE Oct
20th 2006).

According to initial plans, the new plant will have annual production
capacity of 25,000 trucks, 6,000 Bogdan-Isuzu buses, and 25,000 Chevrolet
Lanos sub-compact models.

Bogdan already holds licences for the production of buses produced by Isuzu
(Japan) and for the Lanos model produced by Chevrolet, a unit of car giant
General Motors (GM; US). Ouput is expected to be sold primarily in Russia as
well as other CIS countries.

The two companies did not explain the reason for the increase in the
investment volume to set up the joint venture, and according to reports the
annual production capacity remains unchanged from the information released
in October. According to the initial information, the new plant should reach
output capacity in 2009.

ZAZ, Ukraine’s largest carmaker, currently assembles several car and truck
models under licensing agreements, including Opel, Chevrolet and Daewoo
models owned by GM.

Bogdan, Ukraine’s number-two carmaker, operates the Lutsk automobile plant
(LuAZ) and bus production facilities in Cherkassy, 200 km south-east of the
capital, Kiev. The company produces other carmaker’s models under licensing
agreements, including Lada models produced by leading Russian carmaker
AvtoVAZ.

Since 2003 ZAZ and Bogdan have operated joint-venture products in Ukraine
for the production of Lada models.                      -30-

————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
    NOTE: Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
========================================================
8.  EBRD CONSIDERS LOAN TO BRITISH CADOGAN PETROLEUM
               FOR MINING UKRAINIAN GAS AND OIL DEPOSITS
 
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, January 19, 2007

KYIV – The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development [EBRD]

may loan EUR 18.3 million to British Cadogan Petroleum for mining
Ukrainian gas and oil deposits. The bank disclosed this in a statement.

The funds are given for two years to perform works and exploit the developed
territories. Total cost of the project reaches USD 700 million. EBRD board
of directors will consider question of allotting funds by February 20.

Cadogan Petroleum was established in 2005 and specializes in developing and
exploiting gas and oil deposits.

As Ukrainian News reported, in Ukraine Cadogan Petroleum operates
preparation and exploration of condensed gas deposits on the area of 121
square kilometer at the Dnipro-Donetskyi basin.

It owns Cadogan Ukraine (former Rentoul), which in its turn purchased two
Ukrainian companies – Astro-Invest and Hazodobuvannia.

The first one owns 70% in the agreement of joint development of Pirkivske
deposit (the rest 30% belong to Nadra Ukrainy), the second one – 100% in the
Pokrovske deposit (Poltava region).

According to the bank’s data, as of January 1, 2007 EBRD undertook financing
of EUR 2.86 billion for 133 projects. In 2006 amount of investments in
Ukraine totaled EUR 797 million.                       -30-

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
9.  UKRAINIAN GRAIN ASSOCIATION EXPECTS RESUMPTION OF
            GRAIN EXPORTS FROM UKRAINE IN LATE JANUARY
           Losses from export restrictions are already around $100 million

Interfax Ukraine Business Express, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tue, January 16, 2007

KYIV – The Ukrainian Grain Association, uniting grain-trading companies in
Ukraine, expects that the export of grain from Ukraine will be resumed in
late January. Grain exports have been suspended since the start of the year,
as export licenses were not issued to companies.

“We expect that first licenses for the export of grain will be issued on
January 20 or January 21,” Ukrainian Grain Association President Volodymyr
Klymenko has told Interfax-Ukraine.

He said that licenses for the export of grain within the quotas set for the
current marketing year (MY, July 2006-June 2007) have not yet been issued
due to the checks of the authenticity of documents submitted for receiving
the licenses.

Klymenko said that at present, the Agriculture Ministry is completing these
checks, and a concrete decision will soon be made.

He said that according to the assessments of the ten top exporters, the
losses from the restrictions in the export of grain are already around $100
million, and another $650 million could be lost if the export of grain is
not resumed.                                      -30-

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
10.               UKRAINE ECONOMY: GRAIN OF TRUTH
Government actions jeopardises Ukraine’s WTO entry & investment prospects.

Country Briefing: EIU Economy – News Analysis
The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited
New York, New York, Thursday, November 16, 2006

Ukraine, the world’s sixth-largest grain exporter, has halted all exports in
order to keep down bread prices, following forecasts for a reduced harvest
this year.

The government’s actions in the grain market since mid-year underline
several problems: [1] a lack of strategic planning; [2] administrative
opacity; and a [3] tendency to overreaction.

Yet the most serious problem is the government’s instinctive tendency to
intervene in the economy, rather than allow markets to work. This
jeopardises Ukraine’s WTO entry and investment prospects.

Ukrainian grain exports in the first half of November have been a fraction
of their usual level, owing to administrative obstacles in the wake of a
government-introduced export quota.

Speaking on November 17th, President Viktor Yushchenko said that vessels
with 200,000 tonnes of grain were stuck in ports, with a further 1.4m tonnes
waiting to be loaded.

He called on the government to take action to resume the grain trade, noting
that the current situation threatened to deprive Ukraine of its traditional
markets and to create tension with trading partners. Underlying his comments
is a fear that the government’s interventionism could impeded accession to
the WTO.
                                BREAD IN EVERY MOUTH
The government of Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych-the oligarchic rival of
Mr Yushchenko-has intervened in the grain market following forecasts of a
weaker harvest this year.

In 2004 Ukraine’s grain harvest was 41.8m tonnes; in 2005 it was 38m tonnes
and is forecast to be 35.1m tonnes this year. Wheat production is forecast
to fall to 14.4m tonnes, from 18.7m tonnes in 2005, according to the
agriculture ministry.

Data from the state statistics committee show that grain stocks as of
October 1st were down 23% year on year.

In response, prices have risen to HRN534/tonne in the first nine months of
this year, compared with HRN474/t in the corresponding period of 2005;

wheat prices have risen to HRN551/t from HRN485/t over the same period.

Indeed, global prices have risen in response to poor harvests in many
countries in the last two years.

Consequently, Ukrainian grain producers have increased exports: according

to data from the agriculture ministry, grain exports in the first four months
of the marketing year (which began in July) amounted to 5.7m tonnes, which
is up 30% year on year.

The rise in prices frustrated the government’s belated efforts to build a
strategic grain reserve, comprising 400,000 tonnes of bread-quality wheat.
The responsible state agency was unable to make the purchases at the target
price.

According to a Financial Times report, state officials then sought to force
grain traders to sell their stocks at a US$20/tonne discount, but were
rebuffed.

Instead of agreeing to pay more, the government on September 28th introduced
without warning a new licensing regime for exports; its complexity and the
lack of preparation time sharply curbed grain exports.

Following industry protests, this was replaced on October 11th by export
quotas to the end of the year. The overall grain export quota was set at
1.6m tonnes, comprising: 600,000 tonnes of maize; 600,000 tonnes of barley;
400,000 tonnes of wheat; and 3,000 tonnes of rye.

The quotas have been successfully challenged in court but remain in place.

Indeed, confusion over the legality of shipments under the new arrangements,
and the required licensing, have all but halted grain purchases for export.

Seaport grain shipments during November 1st-15th fell by 79% to 77,600
tonnes, from 373,850 tonnes during October 1st-19th. There is also
considerable confusion over the method by which quotas are to be allocated.

                 PM YANUKOVYCH IS UNAPOLOGETIC
Mr Yanukovych is unapologetic for the losses inflicted on Ukrainian and
foreign investors in the agricultural sector-which are likely to be around
several hundred million dollars.

He insists that the government had to act, in order to prevent bread prices
from doubling. Nor is the end necessarily in sight: Deputy Agriculture
Minister Petro Verbytskiy said on November 15th that the government might
impose an export quota of 1.8m tonnes for the first half of 2008.
                                   CLUMSY AND OPAQUE
Several aspects of the grain-quota affair are noteworthy.

[1] First, the government has acted in an opaque manner. The licensing
requirements were introduced without warning, let alone any consultation,
leading to huge confusion.

Business plans have been wrecked by the cabinet’s decisions, and the
paralysis of exports since the start of November is squarely a consequence
of confusion within the state customs service over how the new export

regime is to work in practice.

Perhaps most importantly, there is little or no clarity over how mechanism
for distributing quotas. Nor is it certain that the cabinet is moving
determinedly to resolve this problem-the longer it goes on, the lower
domestic grain prices will go.

On November 15th the authorities formally authorised the customs service to
resume exports, but simultaneously it suspended licenses that cover
approximately half the wheat and barley quotas.

[2] Second, it can be argued that the government has engaged in overkill. In
a joint public statement, the US, Dutch and German ambassadors to Ukraine
described the intervention as unnecessary because there are credible
estimates that the 2006/07 harvest will be in line with historical averages.
They added that there was insufficient clarity over the level of reserves
held by the government.

Even if action on wheat was necessary, to keep bread prices down, the
restrictions on barley and other grains are questionable. Volodymyr
Klimenko, the president of the Ukrainian Grain Association (UGA), has said
that his organisation is prepared to accept a 1.3m tonne quota for wheat
exports to mid-2007, but argues that barley and maize production this year
is sufficient to satisfy both domestic and foreign demand.

The UGA estimates that Ukraine can export 5m tonnes of barley and 1.5m
tonnes of maize in the 2006/07 marketing year without risking shortages on
the domestic market.
                                 SAME OLD MEDDLERS
Most significantly, the affair reveals the economic philosophy of Ukraine’s
current government-which is little different to that of most previous
Ukrainian governments. Nearly every Ukrainian administration has struggled
to establish and run the strategic grain reserve in an efficient manner.

Equally, they have failed to develop strategies and institutions to bring
stability to the grain market; instead, when faced with a crisis, they have
intervened directly. This mode of operating is not limited to Mr Yanukovych’s
government, nor to the agricultural sector.

In 2005 the “Orange” government led by Yulia Tymoshenko responded to

rising oil prices in the country by blocking fuel exports and forcing the
country’s oil companies to accept price caps.

If there was a hope that Mr Yanukovych’s administration-with much more
experience of running the country-would be better at managing such crises,
it has been disappointed. The Ukrainian state’s instinct to interfere, and
its inability to plan strategically or build effective institutions, remains
the same.

The implications of this are manifold, but two stand out: the highly
negative signal sent to [1] domestic and foreign business, and to [2] the
countries whose support Ukraine needs to join the WTO.

For businesses, the fact that a Ukrainian government has once again
intervened directly in the market, at the first sign of political trouble,
highlights the risks of investing the country.

No investor, foreign or Ukrainian, is likely to be reassured by the content
and tone of Finance Minister Mykola Azarov’s justification for government
action.

Having claimed that traders wanted to buy grain “for nothing”, he continued:
“The price that was set now is a normal market price, which covers all of
the expenses of the producers and creates a certain profitability. The state
cannot allow itself to buy grain at unrestricted prices.”

Nor has the grain market intervention done Ukraine any favours in its WTO
bid. As the three Western ambassadors noted, foreigners have invested nearly
US$1bn in the Ukrainian agricultural sector but will probably lose several
hundred million dollars as a result of export restrictions.

Mr Yanukovych has expressed a hope that Ukraine’s trade partners be
understanding and says that “in the future we will build normal relations.”

However, Ukraine’s governments have such an established track record of
interventionism, that it is not clear why anyone should give the current
prime minister the benefit of the doubt.

If Mr Yanukovych is forced to choose between keeping bread prices low and
bringing Ukraine into the WTO, it seems he will opt for the former without
hesitation.                                        -30-
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================

11. CHRONICLE OF RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN UKRAINIAN
                 LEGISLATION, NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2006

Dr. Irina Paliashvili, Russian-Ukrainian Legal Group, P.A.

Action Ukraine Report (AUR) #807, Article 11
Washington, D.C., Monday, January 22, 2007

The “Chronicle of Recent Developments in Ukrainian Legislation” is a
monthly summary of the most important legislative developments in Ukraine
in the area of business and corporate law, and is prepared, published and
distributed by the Russian-Ukrainian Legal Group as a free service.

The Chronicle is prepared in an effort to capture news of greatest interest
to the widest cross-section of our firm’s clientele, without restating all
legislation published and drowning our readers in too much information.

Due to the winnowing process necessary when preparing the Chronicle,
we cannot and do not guarantee that it contains a comprehensive list of
all Ukrainian legislation relevant to your business.

The Chronicle is distributed only via e-mail attachment, in English and
Russian, by the middle of each month, and summarizes the legislative
developments of the previous month. In order to begin receiving the
Chronicle direct to your e-mail box, please fill out the subscription form
found at http://www.rulg.com/subscription_form.asp. The Chronicle will
only be distributed to subscribers who fill out this form. The “unsubscribe”
option is available at any time.

Finally, please bear in mind that this summary does not constitute legal
advice; it is an informational service only.  Should you wish to receive
further information or actual legal advice, please do not hesitate email us
at chronicle@rulg.com
                                                INDEX
       Accession to the World Trade Organization; Consumer Protection;
         Corporate Registration; Customs; Intellectual Property; Permits

                             System; Use of Subsoil, Oil and Gas

  ACCESSION TO THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION
1) List of bills intended to harmonize national Ukrainian legislation with
standards and principles of the World Trade Organization (“WTO”). All laws
required for Ukraine to accede to the WTO have been adopted. As a reminder,
some of these laws were adopted as early as mid-2005 (see the August 2005
edition of this Chronicle). In November 2006, the following laws were
adopted by Ukraine’s Parliament and signed by the President:

Law of Ukraine No. 317-V “On Amending Article 25 of the Law of Ukraine ‘On
the Publishing Industry'” dated 2 November 2006. The Law deletes from the
Law on the Publishing Industry the ban on setting-up and operating in
Ukraine a “printed output distribution organization” in which foreign
investments constitute more than 30% of the charter capital. The Law will
take effect five years after Ukraine accedes to the WTO;

Law of Ukraine No. 316-V “On Amending Article 8 of the Law of Ukraine ‘On
Protecting Rights to Indicate the Origin of Goods'” dated 2 November 2006.
Please see item 7 of this Chronicle. The Law took effect on 24 November
2006;

Law of Ukraine No. 374-V “On Amending Certain Laws of Ukraine Concerning
Fees for Licenses and Excise Duties on the Production of Alcohol, Alcoholic
Beverages and Tobacco Products” dated 17 November 2006. Effective 2007,
the fees for said licenses have been decreased and the rates of the excise
duties have been increased. The Law took effect on 1 January 2007;

Law of Ukraine No. 357-V “On Amending the Law of Ukraine ‘On Insurance'”
dated 16 November 2006. The Law regulates specific aspects of non-resident
insurers’ activity in Ukraine.

In particular, it stipulates that non-resident insurers are allowed to
insure large risks (sea and air carriage, space rocket launches, etc.) in
the territory of Ukraine in cases stipulated by law, after Ukraine accedes
to the WTO. The Law will take effect after Ukraine accedes to the WTO;

Law of Ukraine No. 356-V “On Amending the Law of Ukraine ‘On the Export
Duties on Live Cattle and Rawhide'” dated 16 November 2006. The revised
Law establishes the rates of the export duties on live cattle and rawhide.
Effective 1 January of the year following Ukraine’s accession to the WTO,
such rates will decrease annually until they reach a certain amount. The Law
will take effect after Ukraine accedes to the WTO;

Law of Ukraine No. 362-V “On Amending Article 9 of the Law of Ukraine ‘On
Pharmaceuticals'” dated 16 November 2006. The Law stipulates that for five
years after registration of a pharmaceutical in Ukraine, the registration
data used in filing the application for State registration cannot be used to
file an application for another pharmaceutical, except for in cases when the
right to refer to or use such data is obtained in the procedure prescribed
by law.

It is stipulated that state registration of pharmaceuticals may be rejected
if, as a result of such registration, the effective proprietary rights to
intellectual property protected by the patent are violated, including in the
process of production, use, and sale of pharmaceuticals. The Law took effect
on 12 December 2006;

Law of Ukraine No. 360-V “On Amending the Law of Ukraine ‘On Foreign
Economic Activity'” dated 16 November 2006. The Law defines the legal
regimes for goods imported from WTO member states (national treatment and
most favored nation status) and specifies the procedures for automatic and
non-automatic licensing of foreign economic operations.

The list of grounds for introducing the licensing regime includes measures
to protect domestic manufacturers in the event of acute fluctuations of the
volumes of export-import operations, as well as the liability of subjects of
foreign economic activity for violating the licensing regime.

Additionally, the Law prohibits the export from Ukraine (import into
Ukraine) of exhaustible natural resources and the export of goods in the
context of executing the UN Security Council’s resolutions. The Law alters
the functions of agencies responsible for state control over foreign
economic activity. The Law took effect on 9 December 2006;

Law of Ukraine No. 358-V “On Amending the Law of Ukraine ‘On Banks and
Banking'” dated 16 November 2006. The Law grants foreign banks the right to
open branches in the territory of Ukraine. It contains an exhaustive list of
the conditions under which a foreign bank shall be entitled to open its
branch in Ukraine, and describes the procedure for accrediting foreign
banks’ branches and representative offices in the territory of Ukraine and
the rules for such branches performing banking activity.

Certain provisions of this Law took effect on 8 December 2006; the remainder
will take effect after Ukraine accedes to the WTO;

Law of Ukraine No. 401-V “On Amending the Law of Ukraine ‘On State Support
of the Agricultural Sector of Ukraine'” dated 30 November 2006. The Law
repeals provisions of the effective Law “On State Support of the
Agricultural Sector of Ukraine” concerning the setting of minimum / maximum
import prices and the establishing of non-tariff restrictions (quotas) with
regard to importing or exporting agricultural goods included on the list of
goods subject to state price control.

Moreover, the Law cancels the rules for performing export-import operations
through the regulatory mechanism for defining the customs value of goods
subject to their established maximum or minimum purchase prices. The Law
took effect on 16 December 2006;

Law of Ukraine No. 402-V “On Amending the Law of Ukraine ‘On Milk and Dairy
Products'” dated 30 November 2006. The Law cancels export subsidies granted
to producers of dairy products, the quota on output and sale of milk to
processing enterprises, the requirements for supplying dairy products to the
national material reserve, the minimum purchase prices of milk and dairy raw
materials and the limits on retail mark-ups for dairy products.

Additionally, the Law specifies the mechanisms for extending state support
to the producers of milk and dairy raw materials. The Law will take effect
after Ukraine accedes to the WTO;

Law of Ukraine No. 335-V “On Amending Article 7 of the Law of Ukraine ‘On
Pesticides and Agrochemicals” dated 14 November 2006. The Law states that,
for the first 10 years after a company registers a pesticide or agrochemical
in Ukraine, no one is permitted to use the information contained in the
documents, that describe the rules for safe application of said substances,
absent the permission of the company that registered said substances. The
Law took effect on 14 December 2006;

Law of Ukraine No. 403-V “On Amending the Law of Ukraine ‘On Controlling the
Production and Sale of Sugar by the State'” dated 30 November 2006. The Law
simplifies the control mechanism in the sphere of production and sale of
sugar. The “B” quota (on delivering sugar under international agreements)
and “C” quota (on owners selling sugar exclusively abroad) are cancelled.

The Law also repeals the requirement for the mandatory export of sugar
produced from imported raw materials. The Law will take effect after Ukraine
accedes to the WTO;

Law of Ukraine No. 404-V “On Establishing a Tariff Quota on Importing Raw
Cane Sugar into Ukraine” dated 30 November 2006. Effective 1 January of the
year following the year Ukraine accedes to the WTO, regulations will go into
effect establishing an annual tariff quota on raw cane sugar imported into
Ukraine.

Specifically, the first 260,000 tons imported will enjoy an import duty of
2% of their customs value. The Law will take effect on 1 January of the year
following the year Ukraine accedes to the WTO;

Law of Ukraine No. 441-V  “On Establishing Export Duty Rates for Ferrous
Scrap, Non-Ferrous Scrap and Semi-Finished Products Produced Using Same”
dated 13 December 2006.

The Law states the export duty rates for alloyed ferrous scrap, non-ferrous
scrap and semi-finished products using same and stipulates that after
Ukraine accedes to the WTO such rates will decrease every year until they
reach a certain amount. The Law will take effect on 1 January of the year
following the year Ukraine accedes to the WTO;

Law of Ukraine No. 400-V “On Amending the Law of Ukraine ‘On the Export Duty
on Iron-and-Steel Waste and Scrap’ dated 30 November 2006. The Law restates
Law of Ukraine “On the Export Duty on Iron-and-Steel Waste and Scrap” and
will take effect after Ukraine accedes to the WTO.

The Law stipulates that the export duty rates on iron-and-steel waste and
scrap will decrease every year following Ukraine’s accession to the WTO.

After the seventh year following Ukraine’s accession to the WTO, the export
duty rates will hold steady at the same rates reached in the seventh year.
The Law will take effect after Ukraine accedes to the WTO.
                                  CONSUMER PROTECTION
2) State Committee of Ukraine for Technical Control and Consumer
Policy Order No. 331 “On Approving the Procedure for Conducing Inspections
of Subjects of Economic Activity in the Sphere of Trade and Services,
Including the Restaurant Business, the Quality of Goods, Compliance with the
Mandatory Requirements for Safety of Goods and Observance of the Rules of
Trade and Services Rendering” dated 25 October 2006.

The Procedure defines the mechanism for maintaining state control in the
sphere of consumer protection. Control will be effected by means of
performing inspections according to a special working plan prepared by the
agencies responsible for consumer protection.

Unscheduled inspections will be conducted by officials exclusively on the
basis of consumers’ applications (complaints) concerning enterprises’
violations of the law. The Order took effect on 2 December 2006.
                              CORPORATE REGISTRATION
3) Law of Ukraine No. 489-V “On the State Budget of Ukraine for 2007” dated
19 December 2006 (“Law on the 2007 State Budget”). Effective 1 January 2007,
Ukraine’s minimum salary has been set at 400 UAH. Therefore, the legislated
minimum amount of charter capital for limited liability companies (no less
than 100 minimum salaries) amounts to 40,000 UAH. Moreover, effective 1 July
2007, the minimum salary will increase to 420 UAH, and effective 1 December
2007, to 450 UAH. The Law took effect on 1 January 2007.
                                               CUSTOMS
4) Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine Resolution No. 1654 “On Approving the
Procedure for Issuing A.T.A. Books (Carnets)” dated 29 November 2006. The
Procedure has been approved in connection with Ukraine’s accession in April
2004 to the Convention on Temporary Admission adopted on 26 June 1990 in
Istanbul (“Convention”).

As we previously informed in the April 2004 edition of this Chronicle, an
A.T.A. book (carnet) is a document used for the temporary importation of
goods, except for transport vehicles. The use of the book facilitates the
procedure of temporary importation.

The Chamber of Commerce and Industry will issue these books in the territory
of Ukraine on the basis of applications from Ukrainian-resident individuals
and legal entities.

Together with the application, it is also necessary to file certain
documents, the list and requirements for the execution of which will be
defined by the Chamber of Commerce and Industry. The term of a book’s
validity cannot exceed one year. The Resolution took effect on 22 December
2006.

5) Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine Resolution No. 1766 “On Approving the
Procedure for Declaring the Customs Value of Goods Moved through the

Customs Territory of Ukraine and Submission of Data to Prove this Value”
dated 20 December 2006.

A new Procedure defining the conditions of and mechanism for declaring the
customs value of goods moved through the customs territory of Ukraine and
submission of a declarant’s data proving this value has been approved.

The 2003 Procedure, about which we informed in the August 2003 edition of
the Chronicle, will terminate after the new Procedure takes effect. The
Resolution has not yet been published, but will take effect 30 days after
its official publication.
                               INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
6) Law of Ukraine No. 311-V “On Amending the Law of Ukraine ‘On Protecting
Rights to Plant Varieties'” dated 2 November 2006. The concepts expressed in
the Law “On Protecting Rights to Plant Varieties” has been amended. In
particular, such concepts as “patent” and “variety’s author” have been
reinterpreted; the concept of an “owner of proprietary intellectual
property’s right to spread a variety” is defined, etc.

The Law specifies the sphere of its application and defines holders of
intellectual property rights to a plant variety. It also introduces
essential amendments to the procedure for acquiring, terminating and
invalidating intellectual property rights to a plant variety. The Law took
effect on 29 November 2006.

7) Law of Ukraine No. 316-V “On Amending Article 8 of the Law of Ukraine
‘On Protecting Rights to Indicate the Origin of Goods'” dated 2 November
2006.

According to the amendments, legal protection will not be granted for a
qualified indication of goods’ origin related to a geographical place in a
foreign state, if such right is not protected in this state. The Law took
effect on 24 November 2006.

8) Law of Ukraine No. 359-V “On Amending the Customs Code of Ukraine
(Concerning Assistance in Protection of Intellectual Property Rights During
Goods’ Movement through the Customs Territory of Ukraine)” dated 16
November 2006.

The Law grants customs bodies the right to suspend the customs clearance of
goods on their own initiative in the event of discovering the movement
through the Ukrainian customs territory of goods, for which an application
for protecting intellectual property rights has not been presented, if there
are reasonable grounds to suspect the violation of intellectual property
rights.

Herewith the Law introduces an innovation: a person holding a proprietary
right to an object of intellectual property rights, in compliance with
Ukrainian legislation, shall reimburse the customs bodies or owners of
temporary storage warehouses for the costs connected with storage of goods,
with respect to which a decision to suspend the customs clearance was
adopted, and for any damage caused by such suspension.

The Law also describes the sanctions that may be imposed on citizens who
move goods through the customs territory of Ukraine in violation of
intellectual property rights.

Finally, the Law describes how assistance may be rendered in protecting the
rights of persons holding proprietary rights to an object of intellectual
property in compliance with Ukrainian law. The Law will take effect on 10
February 2007.
                                         PERMITS SYSTEM
9) State Committee of Ukraine for Regulatory Policy and Entrepreneurship
Order No. 101 “On Approving the Form and Technical Description of a
Reference from the Register of Permit Documents” dated 9 November 2006.
References from the register of permit documents will be issued in
accordance with the form approved by the Order on the basis of any
individual’s or legal entity’s request. The Order took effect on 1 January
2007.
                            USE OF SUBSOIL, OIL AND GAS
10) Law on the 2007 State Budget. In addition to the information provided in
item 3, above, the Law suspends for 2007 a number of regulations contained
in normative documents (60 regulations in all), among which several relate
to the use of subsoil.

For instance, as has happened in previous years, the Subsoil Code of
Ukraine’s regulations concerning deduction of funds for exploration
performed at the expense of the state budget for the development of mineral
resources base has been suspended.

The regulation stipulating that the amount of the duty for the issuance of
special permits to use certain subsoil plots shall be defined by the Cabinet
of Ministers of Ukraine on the basis of costs entailed by the examination of
applications, materials and grounds to use subsoil, organizational and other
expenses related to the issuance of special permits has been suspended once
again.

The Law also suspends the regulations contained in the Law of Ukraine “On
the State Geological Service of Ukraine”, in particular with respect to the
conditions for granting special permits to use subsoil. The issuance of
estimated tax bills for gaseous hydrocarbons to be imported into Ukraine has
also been suspended. The Law took effect on 1 January 2007.

11) Law of Ukraine No. 398-V “On Amending Certain Legal Acts of Ukraine
Concerning Taxes” dated 30 November 2006. The Law defines the basic norms
of payment for using subsoil to extract minerals. Previously, such norms had
been defined in laws on the State Budget. Except for certain provisions, the
Law took effect on 1 January 2007.
                                                 TAXES
12) Law on the 2007 State Budget. In addition to the information provided in
items 3 and 10 above, the Law states that in the event of a taxpayer’s
change of legal address, after the taxpayer’s re-registration, all taxes and
duties shall continue to be paid at the place of previous registration until
the expiration of the then-current budget period.

The Law also increases the amount of duty for mandatory state pension
insurance from 31.8% up to 33.2%, which duty employers must pay directly
to the budget. The Law took effect on 1 January 2007.

13) Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine Ordinance No. 565-r “On Measures Aimed
at Reducing the Tax Debt” dated 15 November 2006. The Cabinet of Ministers
obliged state enterprises to reduce their overdue debt to the State budget.

The measures aimed at reducing the tax debt stipulate, in particular,
developing a bill on canceling the moratorium on the compulsory sale of
property of state enterprises and economic societies when the State’s share
in their charter capital constitutes at least 25%. The Ordinance took effect
on 15 November 2006.                       -30-
—————————————————————————————————–
We welcome any comments or suggestions you might have.  All messages
should be sent via e-mail to chronicle@rulg.com.  Website: www.rulg.com
Chronicle: http://www.rulg.com/chronicle.asp
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================

If you are receiving more than one copy of the AUR please contact us.
========================================================
12. UKRAINE 125TH IN HERITAGE FOUNDATION FREE ECONOMY LIST
                        Placed in the “mostly unfree” category of countries.

Interfax Ukraine Focus, Kyiv, Ukraine, January 16, 2007

KYIV – Ukraine ranks 125th out of 161 countries in the rating of economic
freedom published annually by the Wall Street Journal and the Heritage
Foundation [Washington, D.C.], the Heritage Foundation’s official Web site
has reported.

The level of economic freedoms in Ukraine was rated at 60.9% of the possible
100%. It belongs to the “mostly unfree” category of countries.

Top in the world rating was Hong Kong with 89.3%. In second place was
Singapore (85.7%) and 3rd was Australia (82.7%). The United States ranked
fourth with 82%, whereas New Zealand and Britain shared the fifth and sixth
places with 81.6%.

Ireland was seventh with 81.3%, Luxembourg occupied the eighth place
(79.3%), and Switzerland placed ninth (79.1%). Canada was tenth with 78.7%.
The first seven countries belong to “economically free” category of
countries.

Eight former Soviet countries were above Ukraine in the rating. Estonia was
in 12th place, Lithuania ranked 22nd, Armenia was 32nd, Georgia 35th, Latvia
41st, Kazakhstan 75th, Kyrgyzstan 79th, Moldova 81st, Tajikistan 98th, and
Azerbaijan 107th. Russia was 120th in the rankings.

Three post-Soviet countries were below Ukraine in the rating – Uzbekistan
(132nd), Belarus (145th), and Turkmenistan (152nd).

Cuba and North Korea were bottom of the rating. Heritage Foundation analysts
could not assess Sudan, Serbia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Iraq
for various reasons.

The index assesses 161 countries on 50 independent parameters, broken into
ten categories of economic freedom, including banking, the influx of capital
and foreign investment, monetary policy, state and fiscal burdens, revenue
and prices, the country’s intervention in economic policy, property rights,
legal regulations and the existence of a black market.

The countries in the rating are divided into five categories: “free,”
“mostly free,” “moderately free,” “mostly unfree,” and “repressed.” -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
         Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
========================================================
13.                            WANTED: POLITICAL WILL
         Study points out Ukraine still lags far behind on the economic front.

EDITORIAL: Kyiv Post, Kyiv, Ukraine, Wed, Jan 17 2007

Ukraine has, without a doubt, made great strides toward advancing democracy
since the Orange Revolution of 2004. But a study published this month points
out that the country still lags far behind on the economic front.

The study, an index featured in this week’s issue of the Post, indicates
that Ukraine appears not to have made major progress of late in establishing
a business-friendly environment.

Conducted by the United States-based think tank Heritage Foundation, in
cooperation with The Wall Street Journal, the study ranks countries
according to an index measuring ‘economic freedom,’ a mark designed to
reflect how many barriers businesses face.

The index rates countries’ levels of business, monetary, financial,
investment, trade, labor and fiscal freedom. Freedom from government and
corruption, as well as the strength of property rights, are also measured.

A score between 50 and 59 percent means that a country’s economy is
“mostly unfree.” Higher scores label a country as “free,” while lower
indexes indicate that a country’s economy is not “free,” and thus significant
barriers face businesses and entrepreneurs.

According to the Foundation’s 2007 Index of Economic Freedom, which was
released on Jan. 16, Ukraine scored 53.3 on a 100-point scale, ranking 125th
out of the 157 countries rated.

In this year’s 13th annual Index of Economic Freedom, Ukraine scored 2.2
percentage points lower than last year, the Heritage Foundation reported. In
the 2006 Index of Economic Freedom, Ukraine was ranked 99th of 161 rated
countries.

The big picture is that Ukraine has not really made progress relative to
other countries, continuing to rank amongst the “mostly unfree” batch, along
with, surprisingly, neighboring Poland and the usual suspects, such as
Cameroon, Ethiopia, Haiti, Moldova, Nepal, Nigeria, Russia and Uzbekistan.

Higher up in the ranking with so-called “moderately free” scores are other
former Eastern Bloc countries, such as Armenia, the Czech Republic,

Georgia, Hungary and Kazakhstan.

Nevertheless, the so-called “mostly free” countries include former Soviet
republics like Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. And higher up are the
economically “free” countries, such as powerhouses Hong Kong and the
United States.

Without a doubt, it will take more than a decade and tremendous efforts
before Ukraine has a chance of joining the “free” echelon, but climbing up
the ranks toward Hungary and the Baltic states is not mission impossible.

It would just require a show of strong political will and the execution of
much talked about reforms, many of which have been on the backburner for
a decade.

Where to start?

The study rated Ukraine’s fiscal freedom as high, with a relatively low
personal income tax of 15 percent, top corporate income not exceeding 25
percent, and overall revenue from taxes not compromising a high percentage
of the nation’s gross domestic product.

However, Ukraine is weak in many other key areas.

The government continues to interfere in markets. Take for example the
government’s decision this year to slap restrictions on grain exports and
its inability in more than a decade to push through a clear tax system. VAT
is still not refunded in full and on time to exporters.

Insiders say only the privileged few who have connections to top government
officials get timely refunds. Corruption remains rampant, property rights
insecure, and regulations put unnecessary burdens on a burgeoning business
community, which is ever more eager to pay its full share of taxes.

Business has pleaded for fair rules, openly expressing its desire to come
out of the shadows, but top politicians continue to stick to the old ways of
doing business, where influence clears a path through the bureaucratic
minefields.

Ukraine can make a major leap, rising up in the rankings in next year’s
Index of Economic Freedom. Everyone knows what needs to be done. It is
only a question of whether the politicians in charge set these reforms, or
their own ambitions, as the priority. Where there’s a will, there’s a way.

We urge Ukraine’s divided leadership to put politics aside and unite around
the goal of pushing forward with these key reforms.

After all, it will benefit them by garnering more public support from
potential voters, as opposed to demoralizing the electorate ever more
toward radical politicians with empty promises.            -30-
———————————————————————————————
LINK: http://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/editorial/25874

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
14. UKRAINE: POLITICAL PARTY TRAINING FOR ECONOMIC REFORM

Ukrainian Center for Independent Political Research (UCIPR)
Kyiv, Ukraine, Thursday, January 4, 2007

KYIV – The Project “Political Party Training for Economic Reform” is
implemented by the Ukrainian Center for Independent Political Research
(UCIPR) in assistance with the Center for International Private Enterprises
(CIPE/USA) [Washington, D.C.].

PROJECT OBJECTIVES:
[1] To raise level of understanding among representatives of major political
parties in the target regions of economic policy issues, [2] To increase the
capacity of major political parties in the target regions to embrace
economic reform within their platforms and to partner with the private
sector to achieve mutual goals

PROJECT ACTIVITIES:
Under the project, the UCIPR will work with major political parties in 4
target regions to assist them in develop effective economic platforms that
would address business community priorities and will serve as regional
economic development priorities for the next years until the next elections.

At the o­nset of the project, the UCIPR will carry out an interview with
political parties representatives in four target regions to determine their
understanding of market economic concepts and policy-making tools,
understanding of Ukrainian business community priorities, and level of
public-private dialogue in the regions, and also focus groups studies with
leaders of business-associations.

In May-June 2007 UCIPR will carry out a 3-days international seminar for
leaders of political parties and business-associations in four target
regions.

The UCIPR experts will work closely with the Task Force Groups providing
guidance and making recommendations at every stage of the process.

The UCIPR will also facilitate public discussions of the draft Regional
Economic Platforms and will assist Task Force Groups with finalizing the
economic platforms, incorporating recommendations made at the public
discussions.
PLATFORMS FOR ACTION BROCHURE TO BE PUBLISHED
Based o­n the materials of the training seminars and its work with the
regional administrations and political parties in the target regions, the
UCIPR, in cooperation with CIPE, will publish a brochure “Political Parties
and Economic Reform: Platforms for Action.”

The brochure will provide recommendations o­n policy-making tools for
political parties and examples of the best economic programs or program
elements in the target regions.

The UCIPR will publish 1,500 copies of the brochure (in Ukrainian) and will
present it at the final conference of the project. CIPE will also distribute
the brochure among its network in Eurasia region.
                NATIONAL CONFERENCE TO BE HELD
At the end of the project, the UCIPR will hold a national conference
“Political Parties and Economic Reform: Building Platforms for Action” for
about 100 participants including leaders of major political parties and
blocs, leaders of business associations, representatives of Ukrainian think
tanks, and the media.

At the conference, the UCIPR will present its experience in working with the
regional administrations and political parties and will introduce its
brochure and the results of two surveys in the target regions.
Representatives from the four target regions – both from political parties
and business community – will also share their experience.

The UCIPR anticipates that if successful, such an innovative approach to
developing economic platforms by political parties can be replicated in
other regions of Ukraine in the future.

During the course of the project, the UCIPR will compile, publish, and
disseminate six issues of the “Priorities” journal in Ukrainian.  The
journal, which UCIPR launched at the outset of the CIPE-sponsored National
Business Agenda program (2002), will contain information about project.

The “Priorities” journal will help the UCIPR draw media and public attention
to the economic platforms of major political parties and their
implementation.                                  -30-

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
15. BROAD STREET CAPITAL GROUP NAMES EXCLUSIVE FINANCIAL
        ADVISOR OF $120 MILLION UKRAINE POWER PLANT PROJECT
       Receives $696,000 U.S. Government Trade & Development Agency Grant

Business Wire, New York, NY, Thursday, January 18, 2007

NEW YORK – Broad Street Capital Group announced today its appointment

as the exclusive financial advisor to State Enterprise Production Association
Southern Machine-Building Plant named after A.M. Makarov (PA Yuzhmash)
in the reconstruction of a combined heating and power plant (CHP) in the
Ukraine.

The estimated $120 million project will be developed in Dnipropetrovsk and
will be financed through a combination of senior debt from commercial banks
and international financial institutions, export trade finance, carbon
credits and government funding.

“We are delighted to have been selected as the financiers for this
extraordinary project,” stated Alexander M. Gordin, Managing Director of
Broad Street Capital Group.

“Not only is this project a fine example of energy efficiency and industrial
modernization taking place in Ukraine, but it is also a tremendous
illustration of US-Ukrainian commercial cooperation,” continued Mr. Gordin.

“We are confident that our international merchant banking expertise coupled
with our extensive experience in financing complex state-owned industrial
projects will be pivotal to the success of this exciting venture.”

At an invitation-only ceremony this afternoon at the Premier Palace Hotel in
Kiev, the Management of PA Yuzhmash revealed that once completed, the

CHP will have a power generation capacity of 122MW.

This significantly increased output will allow for the servicing of the
electrical needs of the approximate 200,000 residents of Dnipropetrovsk as
well as generate substantial electrical energy capacity to sell into the
electrical grid and will create a self-sufficient plant providing all of
CHPs energy needs.

Featuring state-of-the-art gas turbines from one of the world’s leading
manufacturers, the power plant will be gas fired, and will also provide for
the use of alternative fuels such as coal or biomass.
             U.S. TRADE & DEVELOPMENT AGENCY GRANT
In addition to its role as the exclusive financial advisor to the management
of Yuzhmash CHP project, Broad Street Capital Group has been awarded a
$696,000 contract supported by a United States Trade and Development Agency
grant of $556,929 [U.S. Government] to perform the technical, economic and
financial feasibility study to be used by the project sponsors to determine
the best allocation of resources and provide detailed project information to
potential lenders, equity investors and government officials.

Bridgestone Associates Limited, an energy service firm based in Chadds Ford,
Pennsylvania, has been selected as the engineering consultant on the
feasibility study project.
                ABOUT BROAD STREET CAPITAL GROUP
Based in the heart of the financial district of New York City, Broad Street
Capital Group is an international private merchant bank with offices and
affiliates in Kiev, Moscow, and Toronto.

Founded in 1996, the firm carries on centuries of honored merchant banking
traditions, providing a comprehensive array of services to international
private and state owned companies, including merchant banking, trade and
project financing, strategic business development and professional business
services. (www.broadstreetcap.com)                   -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
16. U.S. GRANTS USD 0.55 MILLION FOR FEASIBILITY STUDIES FOR
MODERNIZATION OF UKRAINE’S PIVDENMASH HEAT & POWER PLANT


Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Thursday, January 18, 2007

KYIV – The United States Trade and Development Agency has decided

provide a grant of USD 0.55 million for financing feasibility studies for
modernization of the heat-and-power generating plant of the state-owned
Pivdennyi machine-building plant named after Makarov or Pivdenmash
(Dnipropetrovsk).  The press service of the United States embassy in
Ukraine announced this.

According to the announcement, United States Ambassador to Ukraine William
Taylor will sign on January 18 an agreement under which the United States
Trade and Development Agency will grant USD 0.55 million to Ukraine for
financing feasibility studies for modernization of the heat-and-power
generating plant of the state-owned Pivdennyi machine-building plant.

Moreover, Broad Street Capital (United States), which will conduct the
feasibility studies, will provide an additional USD 0.140 million, bringing
the total amount of money for the feasibility studies to USD 0.700 million.

According to the press service, the feasibility studies is the first stage
of preparation for the USD-120-million modernization project, which will
improve energy efficiency, reduce the release of harmful substances, and
increase the capacity of the heat-and-power generating plant, which supplies
heat and electricity to 200,000 residents of Dnipropetrovsk.

As Ukrainian News earlier reported, the Pivdennyi machine-building plant
applied to the National Electricity Regulation Commission (NERC) in July
2006 for a license to perform business operation involving production of
heat energy.

According to the Top 100 rating of Ukrainian companies published by the
InvestGazeta newspaper states that Pivdenmash ended the year 2005 with a
loss of UAH 61.5 million and that its net revenues increased by UAH 46.44
million or 9.43% to UAH 538.74 million in 2005, compared with 2004.

Pivdenmash produces the Zenit and Tsyklon rocket launchers, the Okean-O

and Sych-1M spacecraft, wind-energy equipment, city buses, and agricultural
transport machines.                                       -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
17. UKRAINE GOVN’T INTENDS TO OFFER VANCO INTERNATIONAL
      40% OF THE PRODUCTS MINED IN BLACK SEA’S TRANS-KERCH
 
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 19, 2007

KYIV – Ukraine intends to offer Vanco International Ltd. (Switzerland)
[United States] to share products, that will be mined at the Black Sea shelf’s
Trans-Kerch segment after the deposit launch, with the state’s 60% and
the investor’s 40%.

A well-informed source told this to Ukrainian News, referring to the draft
agreement that is now being worked out by the Interagency Commission for
Signing and Implementation of Product-Sharing Agreements.

In his words, the new project foresees sharing products with the ratio of
the state’s 30% and the investor’s 70% at the first stage, until start of
mining (till offset of investment costs) and with the state’s 60% and the
investor’s 40% – after start of mining at the deposit.

“These conditions suit us, almost all the problems with the project
preparation have been settled, only a couple of nuances are left,” he said.
He could not tell if Vanco International has the draft agreement.

At the same time, as the manager for project development, Uliana Bets, from
the Radnyk PR agency, servicing Vanco International, told to Ukrainian News,
as of January 18, the company did not receive the draft agreement.

She told Vanco International needs time to translate the agreement on
receiving it and for the company’s lawyers to analyze it through. Only after
that the company will continue negotiations with the Cabinet of Ministers.

As Ukrainian News earlier reported, the Cabinet intends to extend the period
during which the Interagency Commission is to draft an agreement with Vanco
International on sharing products mined in the trans-Kerch segment of the
Black Sea shelf. Previously the Cabinet instructed the Commission to draft

the agreement by January 18.

John Imle, the Ukrainian president of Vanco International, said in November
2006 that the company could accept an agreement that provided for sharing
products from the trans-Kerch segment of the Black Sea shelf at the ratio of
45:55 (45% to the investor and 55% to the state) after the start of
development and 60:40 during the stage before recoupment.

The Cabinet declared Vanco International as the winner of a competition for
the right to develop the Trans-Kerch segment in April 2006, after which the
company announced that it was ready to invest USD 2 billion in its
development.                                -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
     You are welcome to send us names for the AUR distribution list.
========================================================
18. “EVER SINCE WE GOT MARRIED WE HAVE BEEN DECORATING
                             CHRISTMAS TREES TOGETHER”
                  Interview with U.S. Ambassador & Mrs. William Taylor

INTERVIEW: With U.S. Ambassador & Mrs. William Taylor
By Klara Gudzyk, The Day Weekly Digest #1
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Shortly before New Year’s Day and Eastern-rite Christmas Day, United States
Ambassador to Ukraine William B. Taylor, Jr., granted an interview to The
Day and wished our readers happy holidays

Ambassador Taylor’s wife Deborah, who is a religion scholar, also took part
in the interview. The talk was not about strategic, political, or
international matters linked to Ukraine (these are not very festive topics):
it pivoted on such a pressing issue as the celebration of New Year’s Day and
major Christian feasts. Nevertheless, there was no avoiding politics.

The Day presented the Taylor couple with the books that our newspaper has
published in the past few years. They were most interested in the book Day
and Eternity of James Mace about the American national who did so much for
Ukraine.

William Taylor noted that the US Embassy has requested the government of
Ukraine to rename a Kyiv street in honor of James Mace.

[The Day] “Mr. Ambassador, how would you assess Ukraine’s prospects for
2007? Do you think 2006 showed a total defeat of the Orange forces and that
we failed to take advantage of the ‘green light’ that the West gave us? Many
realists in Ukraine think that there was simply nobody to go through the
door that was opened for us.”

[Amb Taylor] “In my opinion, Ukraine has all sorts of possibilities and
considerable potential to develop in 2007 the achievements of the past two
years.

“Proof of this is, first of all, two very important events, i.e., the last
Ukrainian elections (the runoff presidential election in 2004 and the
parliamentary election last March) which were free and fair, and
internationally approved and acclaimed. It was on the basis of those
elections that the West gave a ‘green light’ to Ukraine.

“Challenges certainly remain; political challenges for Ukraine. The
president and the prime minister need to find a way to work together for
the good of Ukraine.

“I believe that the international community – and definitely the Americans –
we believe that Ukraine will be stronger if the president and the prime
minister find a way to work together. We hope that 2007 can be a good year,
we hope it will.”

[The Day] “According to the distinguished Western philosopher Bertrand
Russell, the ancient Greeks, who were very gifted people famous for their
art and philosophy, were incapable of political consolidation and thus failed to
form a single mighty state, something like ancient imperial Rome, although
they were skilful warriors and strategists. Do you think that Ukrainians
also have a similar historical draw back ?”

[Amb Taylor] “I think Kyiv is as beautiful as many Greek cities. And I think
the Ukrainian people are every bit as able to consolidate democracy as any
country in ancient or current history.

“Democracy in ancient Greece was messy, and democracy in Ukraine is messy;
democracy in the United States has been messy, even in recent years. So,
again, I have confidence in the Ukrainian people as I do in the Americans.”

[The Day] “Mrs. Taylor is a religion scholar by profession and occupation.
Are you interested in the history of Ukrainian Orthodoxy? Would you please
tell our readers about the institutions that research and monitor religion
in the US and about social problems that crop up in your country on
religious grounds? Can there be any comparison with the religious situation
in Ukraine? Or perhaps the point is just in the historical traditions of
Byzantine churches?

Another question: it is common knowledge that the US Senate supports
Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I. Should he promote recognition of
the independent Ukrainian Orthodox Church more actively?”

Mrs. Taylor: “I think this is definitely a separate topic. I only arrived in
Ukraine in September, and I have to confess that at this point I still don’t
know much about Orthodoxy except that there are different groups. So far,
I’ve been spending my time settling in the house and settling in the
American community.”

[The Day] “Maybe later?”

Mrs. T.: “Absolutely later. And my own work actually focuses on very early
Christianity. Once you get to the 2nd or 3rd century…I don’t know much
more than any other educated person. I am primarily interested in the Jewish
nature of early Christianity.”

[The Day] “May I ask you the following in this connection? Church historians
are well aware of the impact of the Judaic Old Testament (especially the
Torah and the prophets) on Christianity. But has there been at least some
modest impact of Christianity on Judaism?”

Mrs. T.: “I think that there are Christians who may think differently, but I
think that with the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. the Jewish people
had massive problems continuing their own community and Christianity did

not have a major impact.

“I am therefore trying to get a clearer view of the divisions within the
Orthodox Church and the division between Orthodoxy and the Greek Catholics.

“My own experience as a Christian in the United States and my scholarly work
on the early church don’t incline me to believe that there has ever been a
case that Christianity has been a happy and undivided family.

“So I would be surprised if the problems that Orthodoxy has were much worse
than the ones we have had throughout history in trying to understand the
common way for our faiths.

“In fact, my image of the church is sort of captured by the Church of the
Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem. A year ago we were in Jerusalem, and I was very
anxious to go to this church. I’d heard from many Americans that it was so
different from what they were used to that they felt unsettled.

“It has to be remembered that many churches in the United States in many
ways do not look very different from this room. They don’t have statues,
they don’t have pictures, they are white, and they look like a place where
you have just come to have a meeting. This applies to Protestant churches
and, much less, to Catholic ones.

“But the Church of the Holy Sepulcher is almost the exact opposite in its
variety, its lack of clean organization. I thought I had visited a community
of saints because here were people from everywhere who dressed differently,
who worshipped in different ways, and this has to be what heaven would be
like.

“After we all leave here, we will have to reconcile our different visions,
but I liked the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. It seems emblematic to me
because it captivates you like no other church can, it shows the variety of
Christianity, and it captures the problems of Christianity in the six
different groups that have official hold of the church and do not get along
very well because of many disputes.”

[The Day] “Are you going to hear old Ukrainian Christmas and Epiphany carols
in Ukrainian churches or on the streets? Some people say they are one of the
most remarkable Ukrainian contributions to world culture. One more question:
did you visit Kyiv’s theaters or the Philharmonic during the Christmas
vacations?”

Mrs. T.: “I will gladly mention the Christmas carols because my Ukrainian
teacher gave me a book with the music and a CD. So I am really looking
forward to learning some of these Christmas carols. I don’t know what I am
going to do for Christmas.

“My husband’s going to be in the United States for a while, but he’ll be
back by Christmas Day. But I am hoping that this next year I will have an
opportunity to visit many different churches, to worship in many different
churches.

“We plan to go to many cultural performances here. In fact, we are going to
one tonight. There’s a Strauss concert at the Opera House. Last week we saw
the opera Taras Bulba and about three weeks ago we saw Natalka-Poltavka. I
did like it, I like the folk music. You have a genius for creating a simple
song that everybody can sing. That is just incredible.

“And we have also heard what we think was the first performance of the
Italian opera Barber of Seville in Ukrainian. It was wonderful. I must say I
tend to be nervous when operas get translated, particularly from a beautiful
language like Italian.

“Certainly, when one is translated into English, it’s a step down in its
beauty. In general, an opera in English works quite well, but an Italian
opera in English is not superb. Ukrainian itself is such a musical language
that everything worked so well.

“We are just learning Ukrainian, and people often ask what Ukrainian is like
and what its relationship is to Russian. I always say that it is the Italian
of the Slavic languages!”

[The Day] “How did you celebrate Christmas in Kyiv, far away from your
homeland?”

Mrs. T.: “This year we tried to celebrate Christmas here the way we
celebrate it at home, which means decorating our house and inviting our
friends and their families.

“And the trimmings of this tree: when I was still in elementary school, my
mother, who doesn’t do anything halfway, bought me a new Christmas tree
and some other things.

And every year we were buying a few more things, and by the time we were
married we had a very nice tree, and we have enjoyed decorating it every
year, we enjoy people’s reactions to it, and we continue to look for things,
especially things that remind us of people and places where we’ve been. So
this tree has many memories for us.”

[The Day] “How is life in this Podil villa, in the shade of Saint Andrew the
Apostle’s Hill? Do you have a chance to get to know Podil and its historic
places?”

Mrs. T.: “For me it is a great honor to be here. You just mentioned St.
Andrew’s Church. One of the most wonderful things for me is that on the

very top floor of this building there is a room that I’ve taken over as my
office, and it has a skylight that looks out directly onto the church, and I
spend quite a lot of time there. I think I will manage to get a lot of work
done, looking at a church like this.”

(At my request, the Taylors kindly agreed to show us this top floor with a
skylight that looks out on Rastrelli’s church and which, for some reason,
conjures up a vision of Paris.)

[The Day] “I am sure that if you make more skylights on the top floor of
your Kyiv house toward the other cardinal points, you will be able to see
fine urban landscapes, for example, the Church of the Holy Virgin’s
Intercession designed by the architect Hryhorovych-Barsky or the Dnipro
River with Trukhaniv Island almost beneath the windows.”

Mrs. T.: “We know the church of the Holy Virgin’s Intercession very well:
we listen to its choir practice on Saturdays. It is a superb choir indeed.”

[The Day] “I am certain that The Day’s readers will be glad to become more
closely acquainted with the US ambassador to Ukraine and his wife. Thank
you very much.”                                   -30-
————————————————————————————————
                                            DOSSIER
William B. TAYLOR, Jr., graduated from the US Military Academy at West
Point and saw service in Vietnam and other hot spots. In 1997 he graduated
from Harvard University with an M.A. in public politics.

He worked at the US Department of Energy, served in Brussels as deputy
defense advisor at the US Mission to NATO, was the coordinator of USG
assistance to the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, and has visited
Ukraine numerous times.

The ambassador has an excellent familiarity with Ukraine’s political
establishment. Many Ukrainian and American experts agree that in all his
activities William Taylor will adhere to the principle that he formulated in
2002: “Ukraine is important to the region. It’s important to the world that
this country be stable and independent. We want to support its
independence and sovereignty.”
———————————————————————————————-
LINK: http://www.day.kiev.ua/175424/
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
19. “IT DOES NOT SERVE UKRAINE’S INTERESTS WHEN POLITICAL
          INFIGHTING CARRIES OVER INTO THE FOREIGN POLICY
                                      ARENA” STEVEN PIFER.

INTERVIEW: With Former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Steven Pifer
By Mykola SIRUK, The Day Weekly Digest #1
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Steven Pifer has held various diplomatic posts, including the office of US
Ambassador to Ukraine. He left the diplomatic service in 2004 and is now
Senior Advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

In the US State Department Pifer was responsible for US policy in the
European region, particularly Ukraine. He continues to deal with these
questions and obviously can speak more openly about this sphere than
currently serving diplomats can allow themselves to say.

How does the US view relations between Washington and Ukraine and
prospects for their development? How does it assess the current conflict
between the president and the prime minister of Ukraine? Will the anticrisis
coalition last long? Does Ukraine have a prospect of joining the NATO
membership action plan?

The answers to these questions are contained in the American analyst’s
interview in The Day .

[The Day] Because of the recent elections in the US, the problems that your
country has in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Iran’s nuclear agenda, there is a
feeling in Ukraine that Washington is forgetting about it and even ready to
give Kyiv away to Russia in exchange for Russian support in the fight
against terrorism and help in preventing Iran from becoming fully nuclear.

Now the election is over and Democrats prevail in both Houses. What place
does Ukraine now have on the US foreign policy agenda or will have in the
near future? How can Ukraine influence this agenda?

[Amb. Pifer] The White House today is preoccupied with Iraq. After Iraq,
other priority issues are Afghanistan, the overall war on terror, the
Arab-Israeli peace process, and how to deal with the nuclear weapons
ambitions of Iran and North Korea. Unfortunately, this foreign policy

agenda leaves little time for Ukraine.

It would be a mistake, however, to think that Washington will sacrifice
Ukraine’s interests in return for securing Russian support on other
questions – there is no evidence to support that.

Both Democrats and Republicans in Congress are positively inclined toward
Ukraine; to the extent that Ukraine pursues coherent policies aimed at
becoming a modern European state, it can command greater attention on
Washington’s foreign policy agenda, as was the case in early 2005.

[The Day] Usually, experts see Ukrainian-American relations as a Moscow-
Kyiv-Washington triangle. Now that Yanukovych is in power, does this
triangle have even sides? What should be done to achieve balanced relations
between these three countries?

[Amb. Pifer] I do not believe that a Moscow-Kyiv-Washington prism is the
best way to view Ukrainian-American relations. That usually implies that
Ukraine can be an object of US-Russian maneuvering.

Since the early 1990s, US policy has sought to develop strong bilateral
relations with Kyiv, regardless of the state of US-Russian relations.

For its part, Ukraine should aim to have good relations with the United
States and to integrate more closely into Euro-Atlantic institutions, while
at the same time maintaining good relations with Russia. These objectives
are not, and should not be seen to be, mutually exclusive.

[The Day] Is there any possibility to institutionalize a strategic dialogue
between the US and Ukraine by creating a commission as an analogue to the
Yushchenko-Putin Commission or restoring a kind of Gore- Kuchma
Commission?

[Amb. Pifer] When it came into office in 2001, the Bush Administration chose
to end the high-level commissions that Vice-President Gore had co-chaired in
the 1990s (these included the Gore-Kuchma and Gore-Chernomyrdin
Commissions).

However, the bilateral working committees established under the Gore-Kuchma
Commission on foreign policy, defense, and economic issues continued to
meet.

By most accounts, Vice-President Cheney is interested in Ukraine, but I
doubt that a formal high-level commission will be established; it is not the
practice of this Administration.

[The Day] What are the chances that the new bill on energy diplomacy and
security will be enacted during the first 100 days after the first session
of Congress? Will this bill give any firm guarantees for Ukraine’s integrity
and sovereignty?

[Amb. Pifer] The Energy Diplomacy and Security Act was first introduced

by Senator Richard Lugar in March 2006. The first few months of the new
Congress will focus on domestic issues and, on the foreign policy side,
Iraq. So it is unlikely that this bill will be acted on soon.

The Act is primarily a policy statement aimed at getting the State
Department and the US government to devote more attention to energy

security issues in general. It does not call for specific actions regarding
Ukraine.

[The Day] Publications in the Ukrainian mass media indicate that you
preferred the creation in Ukraine of a broad coalition of White- Blue and
Orange. This has not happened. Do you think the current anticrisis coalition
will be vital, stable, and lasting?

[Amb. Pifer] My preference does not count. Ukrainians made their views

clear in a free and fair election last March, and the subsequent coalition
formation process produced the current majority coalition. The process took
longer than people would have liked and was perhaps a bit messy, but it was
not undemocratic.

As for the longevity of the coalition, that will depend on the legislation
it passes. If the legislation is good and advances Ukraine’s national
interests and prosperity, that should increase the durability of the
coalition.

[The Day] How do you and official Washington assess the cooperation
between President Yushchenko and Prime Minister Yanukovych and
especially the latter’s desire to get rid of Minister of Foreign Affairs
Tarasiuk?

How does all this and the president and prime minister’s differences
concerning certain foreign policy matters influence relations between the US
and Ukraine? Do you see Ukraine as a predictable country?

[Amb. Pifer] Some maneuvering between President Yushchenko and Prime
Minister Yanukovych was expected; that is the nature of politics. But it
does not serve Ukraine’s interests when political infighting carries over
into the foreign policy arena.

There is confusion, for example, in NATO capitals over how far and how
fast Ukraine wishes to go in its relationship with the alliance. It appears
that the president has one policy, while the prime minister has another.

As for Mr. Tarasiuk, what signal does it send other capitals when the
president says he is the foreign minister, and the Cabinet says he is not?

These kinds of confusion make it harder for the United States and other
countries to deal with Ukraine, and Ukraine risks not being taken seriously
by its international partners.

The president and the prime minister need to find a way to work together, in
a spirit of compromise and cooperation, so that Kyiv has a single, coherent
foreign policy.

[The Day] Many experts say that last year Ukraine lost the chance to get the
MAP. How has this [Yanukovych’s statement in Brussels on Sept. 14 to slow
down integration into NATO] affected Ukraine’s security and image? In your
opinion, when will Ukraine get another chance?

[Amb. Pifer] In early 2006, the expectation in Washington was that a
membership action plan for Ukraine was possible at the November NATO
summit in Riga.

It became clear in September, however, that there was no unified view
between the president and the prime minister regarding a membership action
plan. The alliance does not press countries toward membership faster than
they are prepared to go, so the Riga opportunity was lost.

At the same time, NATO has made clear that the door remains open and that it
is interested in close cooperation with Ukraine. If the Ukrainian government
wants to revive the prospect of a membership action plan, it needs to make
clear that that is the policy of the prime minister as well as the
president.

[The Day] Did you and other American officials get any assurances from
Yanukovych [in Washington] that Ukraine will definitely join NATO? Did

you see that he has a clear-cut strategy of integration into NATO?

[Amb. Pifer] The prime minister has stated several times that he supports
deepening cooperation between Ukraine and NATO, but there is some
ambiguity regarding his position on NATO membership.

When he visited Washington in early December and spoke at the Center for
Strategic and International Studies, Mr. Yanukovych indicated that he has no
strategic differences with President Yushchenko on foreign policy issues,
just differences regarding tactics.

One could interpret this to mean that the prime minister agrees that Ukraine
ultimately should be in NATO, though he does not regard now as the time to
move in that direction. But Mr. Yanukovych has not said that explicitly.

[The Day] Some Ukrainian experts and officials say that Ukraine’s accession
to NATO depends on a consensus between the political elites, which together
may lead Ukraine to membership in this alliance.

Do you believe that Yanukovych can or will convince the eastern part of the
country that Ukraine should become a member of NATO?

[Amb. Pifer] The first thing that has to happen is for there to be consensus
within Ukraine’s executive branch, that is, between the prime minister and
the president.

Then there needs to be broader support in the Rada and among the

Ukrainian public. Most opinion polls show that a majority of Ukrainians
oppose membership in NATO.

My sense is that much of that opposition is due to a lack of understanding
about what NATO is today and the advantages of NATO membership.

The prime minister has indicated that he would support a public information
campaign on NATO. I hope there is a serious effort to explain NATO, as
befits such a serious question.

I believe NATO membership is in Ukraine’s interest and that, with a better
understanding of the alliance, support for membership will grow. But this is
a decision for Ukrainians to make.

Whether the Ukrainian people decide that NATO membership is in their
interest or not, that decision should be based on a good understanding of
NATO, not on outdated Cold War stereotypes about the alliance.

[The Day] One Russian expert, Dmitrii Trenin, has said that Ukrainian
accession to NATO would be different from Poland’s. It would not be

based on fear towards Russia.

Do you believe that Ukraine can convince Russia not to be afraid of
Ukraine’s membership in NATO and accept this fact? How this can be

done?

[Amb. Pifer] Russia today appears ambivalent about NATO. Moscow

seems to understand that NATO is not a military danger, and the Russians
cooperate with the alliance on some issues, but at other times they suggest
hat any enlargement poses a threat to Russian security interests.

Seeking NATO membership is not and does not have to be an anti-Russian
move. Countries can have good relations with and even join NATO while at
the same time having stable, positive relations with Russia, and Kyiv should
be making this point to Moscow.

It will take some work, as many in Moscow continue to view Ukraine and
NATO in zero-sum terms, that is, if Ukraine moves closer to Europe, this
somehow is a loss for Russia. That kind of thinking is outdated, but we
have to understand that it is still there.

Perhaps you heard the statement by Russia’s foreign minister that NATO’s
expansion to the east would be a mistake and that there is no need for

NATO because new challenges may be met by other organizations.

[The Day] Recently I read an article by a Slovakian parliamentarian, who
proposes to dissolve NATO and instead create a new security organization
that would include Russia.

What do you think about such statements and this article? Can such a thing
as the dissolution of NATO happen; and if so, under what conditions?

[Amb. Pifer] I do not expect NATO to be dissolved any time soon. NATO
has developed considerable experience over the past 50 years.

It still plays a valuable role in strengthening Euro-Atlantic security, for
example, through Operation Active Endeavor, which works to limit the
proliferation of materials related to weapons of mass destruction.

NATO has particular expertise in assembling and commanding multilateral
military activities, including peacekeeping and stabilization operations in
Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan.

Finally, there are the habits of political and security cooperation, which
develop naturally within an organization in which consensus is the rule.

No other international organization has the alliance’s capabilities and
characteristics. Rather than dissolving NATO, it would be better to draw
Russia closer and deepen existing cooperative links between the alliance
and Russia.                                         -30-
———————————————————————————————
LINK: http://www.day.kiev.ua/175425/
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
20. UKRAINE: THE BEST AND THE WORST LIST FOR 2006

COMMENTARY: By Oksana Bashuk Hepburn, Canada

Action Ukraine Report (AUR) #807, Article 20
Washington, D.C., Monday, January 22, 2007

Almost everyone has a favorite list or two this time of year: best movies,
best books, person of the year.  For the forth year I am putting forward my
BEST and WORST list, BaWL, dealing with things of particular interest to

the global Ukrainian community.

This years’ list is particularly critical of Ukraine’s and other governments
but it includes exceptional  individuals, publications, organizations,
awards, that contributed to or undermined Ukrainian issues in 2006.
                                          BEST
1. Yulia Tymoshenko, leader of the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc, for obtaining

the highest number of votes in the March 2006 elections to Ukraine’s Rada,
parliament among the Orange forces.  And, for persistent attempts to honour
the will of the people of Ukraine by cobbling an Orange power coalition for
dominance in Ukraine’s parliament and attempting to form and lead a
government.

2. The people of Ukraine for expressing their disapproval of President
Yushchenko’s months of indecisiveness after the March parliamentary
elections which led to the creation of an anti-West government by Prime
Minister Victor Yanukovych .

3. Canadian of Ukrainian decent, Ed Stelmach, winner of Alberta’s provincial
Progressive Conservative party leadership race.  He is now the Premier of
Alberta.

4. Ukraine’s media for being well on its way to meeting a global standard
for independent reporting and critical analyses.

5. The Taras Shevchenko Foundation in Winnipeg, Canada for establishing

the Kobzar Award to honour literary works on Ukrainian themes published in
Canada.

6. Alexis Kochan, the magical Canadian singer of Ukrainian decent for her
latest CD Fragmenti.  Original, lyrical and beautiful.

7. Ukraine’s football team for its super performance at the World Cup in
Germany this summer.

8. Heidimarie Stefanyshyn Piper, the American astronaut of Ukrainian and
German decent, who flew a space mission last summer.  She is the second
female astronaut of Ukrainian descent in space.  The first was Canada’s
Roberta Bondar.

9. Jack Palance for providing prominence to his Ukrainian heritage on and
off screen.  Vichnaja pamjat’.

10. Canada’s Yaroslav Kokodyniak for ten years of invaluable internet
services www.infoukes.com to the global Ukrainian community.
                             WORST
1. President Victor Yuschenko for failing to carry out the will of the
people who gave the Orange forces a slight majority in the March Rada,
parliament, elections by failing to call them to power for months until it
was too late.

2. Victor Yanukovych , then leader of the Party of Regions, for blocking
entrance to Ukraine’s Rada and denying the Orange government coalition from
taking its rightful place as the nation’s government.  And again, for
recently blocking access to parliament to Foreign Minister Borys Tarasiuk.

3. Ukrainian diaspora organizations in the free world, including the World
Congress of Ukrainians (Askold Lozsynskyj, President, wrote a personal
denunciation of the events), Ukrainian Canadian Congress, for failing to
condemn the undemocratic events in Ukraine-items 1 and 2 above– thus

giving tacit consent to the anti-Ukrainian, anti-West, anti-democratic and
pro-Russian developments which are contrary to the wishes and spirit of
the Orange revolution which had swept the country the previous year and
contrary to the mandates of such diaspora organizations.

4. Western governments who failed to use suasion to convince President
Victor Yushchenko to honour the results of the March elections and offer

the Prime Ministerial job to the Orange forces winner, Yulia Tymoshenko.

5. Minister of Energy Yurij Boyko for selling out Ukraine’s energy sector in
favour of Russia, RosUkrEnergo, et al.

6. The author, signatories and all the eminent witnesses to President
Yushchenko’s Universal of national unity, a worthless initiative as it has
no consequence for non compliance.

7. Jerusalem Post for its anti-Ukrainian article written in conjunction with
the grand opening in Ukraine of Stephen Spielberg’s film “Spell Your Name.”

8. Dmytro Tabachnyk,  Deputy Prime Minister of Ukraine, for his public
statements undermining the Ukrainian language in Ukraine.

9. The virtual lack of protest form Ukraine’s President, Prime Minister,
government  the people of Ukraine or the Ukrainian diaspora calling for
resignation, retraction, apology for abuses sited in # 7 and #8.

10. The self mutilation and suicide of Nasha Ukrajina, Our Ukraine, party
and its inability to recoup losses by joining forces with Yulia Tymoshenko
who continues to hold strong popular support with Ukraine’s people. -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
       Please contact us if you no longer wish to receive the AUR    

========================================================
21.                       THE PAST IS UNPREDICTABLE,
                 CONFLICTING VIEWS OF SOVIET HISTORY
        A subtler clash of cultures is echoing through Kyiv’s St Cyril’s Church

Economist.com, London, UK, Thursday, Jan 18th 2007

DEPENDING on your sympathies, your education and your historical
experience, a giant bronze Soviet-era soldier in Tallinn, Estonia, may
celebrate the liberation of the Estonian capital from fascism; or it
may depict the “unknown rapist” in Soviet uniform whose arrival
marked the end of one occupation and the start of another.

In Kiev, the capital of Ukraine (or Kyiv–even spelling can be
controversial), the church of St Cyril is to some a precious symbol of
Kievan Rus’; the fabled medieval principality from which both
Ukraine and Russia claim descent; to others an obscure museum that
badly needs a new coat of paint and proper management.

These are not academic arguments among historians. The Estonian
parliament has infuriated Russia with a new law on war graves allowing
the bronze soldier to be shifted to the suburbs.

Such a move would be “akin to the [Spanish] inquisition’s destruction
of the texts and monuments of classical antiquity”, said Vyacheslav
Nikonov, a Kremlin fixer and a grandson of Stalin’s foreign minister,
Vyacheslav Molotov, who negotiated with the Nazis to divide Europe in
1939. From the upper house of the Russian parliament, Mikhail Margelov,
another foreign-policy heavyweight, has called for a suspension of
diplomatic relations.

A subtler clash of cultures is echoing through St Cyril’s, where the
Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, tied
ecclesiastically to Russia, has influence. Moves may be afoot to
redecorate the interior, which contains unique frescoes showing the
life of St Cyril.

That thought has provoked anguish among Ukrainians who fear that
their country’s religious and cultural heritage is being bought, taken or
spoiled by their neighbours to the north. They suspect Russian
religious conservatives of wanting to do down Ukraine as a rival
claimant to the spiritual and historical legacy of Kievan Rus’.

Even so, there ought at least to be common ground that the best thing
to do with anything rare and fragile is to study it first. It is
unbelievable if, as one scholar insists, the interior of St Cyril’s has
not been exhaustively photographed and catalogued, the more so in a
country with few surviving medieval monuments and with hardly any
with iconographic evidence from the Byzantine period.

The argument over Estonia’s bronze soldier is both more banal and more
visceral. It has been got up partly by the Reform Party, a member of
the ruling coalition, which wants to burnish its patriotic credentials
before parliamentary elections in March.

In a narrow sense it has succeeded. It has turned Estonians who reject
everything about the Soviet era against Estonians with a lingering
respect for the Red Army’s bravery.

But it is hard to argue that Estonia needs this argument right now, and
even harder to argue that Estonia should be expending shamefully scarce
diplomatic capital defending its behaviour abroad. Most Western
countries reckon that war graves should be depoliticised where
possible–though, even here, the facts are in dispute. Estonia says
there are no Soviet war dead beneath the bronze soldier. Russia says
there are.

For good measure the Estonian parliament may designate September 22nd,
when Soviet forces captured Tallinn, a “resistance memorial day”; and
penalise public display of both Nazi and Soviet symbols.

Fair enough, you might say. But there are so many other things which
should have a prior claim on politicians’ attention. Look at the
suspicious renationalisation of Estonia’s railways, the rampant
corruption in parts of government, xenophobic migration laws, and
foolish short-termism in party politics. Patriotism may not always be,
as Dr Johnson once claimed, the last refuge of a scoundrel. But it does
afford a convenient camouflage.                      -30-
——————————————————————————————

LINK: http://www.economist.com
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
22.   UKRAINE MP YEVHEN KUSHNARIOV BURIED IN KHARKIV

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, January 20, 2007

KYIV – Verkhovna Rada Deputy Yevhen Kushnariov was buried in Kharkiv on
January 19. The ceremony of parting with Kushnariov and the remembering
service were being held at the Blahovischenskyi cathedral from 8:00 pm on
January 18 to 7:00 am on January 19.

The civil service followed at Kharkiv’s Lysenko Academic Theater of Opera
and Ballet, where the body of Kushnariov was reposing in state from 9:00 am
to 12:30 pm on January 19. The service of the dead was broadcast live by
local television channels Simon, OTB, and the Seventh Channel.

Taking part in the funeral ceremony were: Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych,
Minister for Emergency Situations and Protection of Population from
Chornobyl Accident Consequences Nestor Shufrych, Justice Minister Oleksandr
Lavrynovych, Transport and Communications Minister Mykola Rudkovskyi,

Fuel and Energy Minister Yurii Boiko, First Deputy Prime Minister, Finance
Minister Mykola Azarov, Health Minister Yurii Poliachenko, ex-President of
Ukraine Leonid Kuchma, Verkhovna Rada Chairman Oleksandr Moroz, Kyiv
Mayor Leonid Chernovetskyi, Prime Minister’s adviser Volodymyr
Semynozhenko.

Members of Parliament Oleksandr Feldman and Andrii Shevchenko (Yulia
Tymoshenko Bloc faction), Viacheslav Chornovil, Hanna Herman, Volodymyr
Sivkovych, Rinat Akhmetov, Serhii Kivalov (Party of Regions faction), Petro
Poroshenko (Our Ukraine bloc faction) also took part.

The funeral ceremony also included Deputy Prime Minister Dmytro Tabachnyk,
Donetsk Governor Volodymyr Lohvynenko, People’s Party leader Volodymyr
Lytvyn, as well as the heads of the city of Kharkiv and Kharkiv region,
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Russia to Ukraine Viktor
Chernomyrdin, Russian Duma MP Konstantin Zatulin, delegations from almost
all regions of Ukraine, leaders of a number of regions of Russia.

Many of residents of Kharkiv who were willing to pay their last tribute to
Kushnariov failed to do so, as, according to police, a mere of 5,000 people
passed the coffin of Kushnariov over three hours of the civil service, while
about 30,000 were in the square near the theatre and in the Peremohy park
outside the theatre.

The people willing to pay their last tributes to Kushnariov queued in a line
of up to a kilometer along the alleys of the Shevchenko Garden and Sumska
Street, reaching Svobody Square.

Those who managed to approach the theater by the end of the ceremony gave
over their flowers to the police officers cordoning off the building, asking
that the flowers be taken to the hall. About 2,500 policemen were guarding
the public order during the civil service and the burial ceremony.

Later the ceremony participants went to the second city cemetery where
Kushnariov would be buried. The mourning meeting was held there.

Premier Viktor Yanukovych addressed the meeting. “His [Kushnariov’s] policy
was understood by the whole Ukrainian people. He was respected not only by
his comrades in the party, but also by opponents,” Yanukovych said at the
meeting.

Also addressing the meeting were Kharkiv regional governor Vasyl Salyhin,
Kharkiv Mayor Mykhailo Dobkin, and Kharkiv First Deputy Mayor Oleksandr
Kryvtsov.

After the end of the meeting and a short service the coffin with the body of
Kushanriov was buried under the sounds of salvo from carbines.

As Ukrainian News reported, Kushnariov died at the Izium city hospital
(Kharkiv region), where he had two surgeries after a firearm injury received
at hunting.                                                  -30-
————————————————————————————————

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
23.   THE WESTERN UKRAINIAN NATIONAL REPUBLIC
                          AND THE WAR IN GALICIA, 1918-19
        On 22 January 1919 the union of ZUNR and UNR declared in Kyiv

FEATURE: Internet Encyclopedia of Ukraine (IEU)

Dr. Marko R. Stech, Managing Director, CIUS Press
Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, University of Toronto
Toronto, Ontario, Canada, January 2007

After the independent Ukrainian National Republic (UNR) was established in
January 1918 on the central Ukrainian territories, in the western Ukrainian
lands that formed part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Ukrainian
National Rada was formed in Lviv in October 1918 and proclaimed a Ukrainian
state on the territory of Galicia, northern Bukovyna, and Transcarpathia.

It assumed power in Galicia on 1 November 1918 and in the Ukrainian part of
Bukovyna on 6 November. On 9 November the UNRada announced the
establishment of the Western Ukrainian National Republic (ZUNR) and formed
a government. The Polish rejection of Ukrainian efforts to take control of
eastern Galicia lead to an armed conflict between the Ukrainian Galician
Army and the Polish troops.

On 22 January 1919 the union of the ZUNR with the UNR was solemnly
proclaimed in Kyiv; following this event, the ZUNR officially became the
Western Province of the Ukrainian National Republic.

Learn more about the history of ZUNR and the Ukrainian-Polish War in
Galicia, 1918-19, by visiting:
http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/featuredentry.asp or by visiting:
http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com and searching for such entries as:

WESTERN UKRAINIAN NATIONAL REPUBLIC (ZUNR). A nation-state
established on the Ukrainian ethnic territory of former Austria-Hungary on
19 October 1918 by the Ukrainian National Rada in Lviv. The Constitution of 13
November 1918 determined its name and defined the territory of the ZUNR as
that which encompassed the Ukrainian regions of the Austrian crown lands of
Galicia and Bukovyna and the Transcarpathian Szepes komitat, Sros komitat,
Zemplen komitat, Ung komitat, Bereg komitat, Ugocsa komitat, and Maramaros
komitat.

A Ukrainian government took power on 1 November 1918 in Galicia,
on 6 November in Bukovyna, and on 19 November in Transcarpathia. The
governments in the last two territories were short-lived. In spite of the
Ukrainian-Polish War in Galicia, the government of the ZUNR held out
longest in eastern Galicia…

UKRAINIAN-POLISH WAR IN GALICIA, 1918-19. The Ukrainian-Polish
War broke out in late 1918 as a result of the Polish rejection of Ukrainian
efforts to establish an independent state-the Western Ukrainian National
Republic-in the wake of the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

The major issue of dispute in the conflict was control over eastern Galicia,
a predominantly Ukrainian ethnic territory regarded by the Poles as an
integral part of the historical Polish realm. As the boundaries of the new
Polish state had not yet been established, and the ZUNR had not been
granted international diplomatic recognition, the matter was ultimately
reduced to a question of control by military force. The outbreak of
hostilities can be dated to 1 November, when Poles in Lviv organized
resistance to Ukrainian efforts to take control of the city…

NOVEMBER UPRISING IN LVIV, 1918. The first stage of armed conflict

in the Ukrainian-Polish War in Galicia, 1918-19. The proclamation of the
Ukrainian National Rada on 18 October 1918 concerning the founding of an
independent Ukrainian state initiated preparations on the part of Ukrainians
for taking power in eastern Galicia. The Rada originally hoped to establish a
Ukrainian administration with the support of the Austrian authorities, but
when those hopes were only partially fulfilled, it decided to act
unilaterally.

The seizure of Lviv was planned originally for 3 November 1918. It was to
be carried out by the Ukrainian soldiers who constituted the majority of the
Austrian troops garrisoned in the city as well as by a brigade of the
Ukrainian Sich Riflemen garrisoned in Bukovyna. The creation in Cracow of

the Polish Liquidation Commission compelled the Ukrainian politicians to
move up the date of the operation.

UKRAINIAN GALICIAN ARMY (UHA). The regular army of the Western
Ukrainian National Republic. It was formed around a nucleus consisting of
the Legion of Ukrainian Sich Riflemen and other Ukrainian detachments of the
Austro-Hungarian army, which recognized the authority of the Ukrainian
National Rada and took part in the November Uprising in Lviv, 1918. The UHA
was a well-organized and disciplined force. It was established as a regular
army of the ZUNR by the law of 13 November 1918 on compulsory military
service, which empowered the State Secretariat for Military Affairs to
divide the country into military districts, to define an organizational
structure for the army, and to call up Ukrainian males between the ages of
18 and 35 for military duty…

PETRUSHEVYCH, YEVHEN, b 3 June 1863 in Buzke, Galicia, d 29 August
1940 in Berlin. Lawyer, political leader, and president of the Western
Ukrainian National Republic. An executive member of the National Democratic

party, he was elected to the Austrian parliament and to the Galician Diet and
served as vice-chairman of the Ukrainian Parliamentary Representation in
Vienna (1910-16) and the Ukrainian caucus in the Diet (1910-14).

At the end of 1916 he was elected chairman of the Ukrainian Parliamentary
Representation in the Austrian parliament and was recognized as the leading
Ukrainian politician of his day. With a number of other Slavic leaders he
proposed to transform Austria-Hungary into a federation of national states,
including a Ukrainian one composed of eastern Galicia, northern Bukovyna,
and Transcarpathia.                              -30-
———————————————————————————————
The preparation, editing, and display of the IEU entries associated with
the history of the Western Ukrainian National Republic and the
Ukrainian-Polish War of 1918-19 was made possible by the financial support
of the MICHAEL KOWALSKY AND DARIA MUCAK-KOWALSKY
ENDOWMENT FUND at the Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies
(Edmonton, AB, Canada).

ABOUT IEU: Once completed, the Internet Encyclopedia of Ukraine will be
the most comprehensive source of information in English on Ukraine, its
history, people, geography, society, economy, and cultural heritage. With
over 20,000 detailed encyclopedic entries supplemented with thousands of
maps, photographs, illustrations, tables, and other graphic and/or audio
materials, this immense repository of knowledge is designed to present
Ukraine and Ukrainians to the world.

At present, only 10% of the entire planned IEU database is available on the
IEU site. New entries are being edited, updated, and added daily. However,
the successful completion of this ambitious and costly project will be
possible only with the financial aid of the IEU supporters. Become the IEU
supporter and help the CIUS in creating the world’s most authoritative
electronic information resource about Ukraine and Ukrainians!
———————————————————————————————–
Dr. Marko R. Stech, Managing Director, CIUS Press
Project Manager, Internet Encyclopedia of Ukraine
Project Manager, Hrushevsky Translation Project
Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, University of Toronto
20 Orde Street, Rm. 124, Toronto, Ontario M5T 1N7
tel: (416) 946-7326; fax: (416) 978-2672, m.stech@utoronto.ca
www.utoronto.ca/cius, www.encyclopediaofukraine.com
————————————————————————————————

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
   If you are receiving more than one copy of the AUR please contact us.

    Please contact us if you no longer wish to receive the AUR.    
       You are welcome to send us names for the AUR distribution list.
   If you are missing some issues of the AUR please let us know.
========================================================
         “ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR”
         A Free, Not-For-Profit, Independent, Public Service Newsletter
                With major support from The Bleyzer Foundation
 
      Articles are Distributed For Information, Research, Education
                Academic, Discussion and Personal Purposes Only
                                  Additional readers are welcome.
========================================================
   ACTION UKRAINE PROGRAM – SPONSORS

                              Action Ukraine Report (AUR)
               Holodomor Art and Graphics Collection & Exhibitions
          “Working to Secure & Enhance Ukraine’s Democratic Future”
1.  THE BLEYZER FOUNDATION, Dr. Edilberto Segura,
Chairman; Victor Gekker, Executive Director, Kyiv, Ukraine;
      Additional supporting sponsors for the Action Ukraine Program 
                         will be published again later this week.
=======================================================
 TO BE ON OR OFF THE FREE AUR DISTRIBUTION LIST
If you would like to read the ACTION UKRAINE REPORT- AUR,
around four times a week, please send your name, country of residence,
and e-mail contact information to morganw@patriot.net. Information about
your occupation and your interest in Ukraine is also appreciated.
 
If you do not wish to read the ACTION UKRAINE REPORT please
contact us immediately by e-mail to morganw@patriot.net.  If you are
receiving more than one copy please let us know so this can be corrected
 
  SPAM & BULK MAIL BLOCKERS ARE A REAL PROBLEM                 

If you do not receive a copy of the AUR it is probably because of a
SPAM OR BULK MAIL BLOCKER maintained by your server or by
yourself on your computer. Spam and bulk mail blockers are set in very
arbitrary and impersonal ways and block out e-mails because of words
found in many news stories or the way the subject line is organized or
the header or who know what.
 
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, The Bleyzer Foundation

Emerging Markets Private Equity Investment Group
President (Acting) and Chairman, Executive Committee of the
Board of Directors, Ukraine-U.S. Business Council
P.O. Box 2607, Washington, D.C. 20013, Tel: 202 437 4707
mwilliams@SigmaBleyzer.com; www.SigmaBleyzer.com
========================================================
       Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely.
========================================================
return to index [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

AUR#806 Jan 21 Legal Chaos In Wake Of Reform; Imperative Madate Not Democratic; Pres Vetos Cabinet Law Again

=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR           
                 An International Newsletter, The Latest, Up-To-Date
                     In-Depth Ukrainian News, Analysis and Commentary

                      Ukrainian History, Culture, Arts, Business, Religion,
         Sports, Government, and Politics, in Ukraine and Around the World       

                        
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR – Number 806
Mr. E. Morgan Williams, Publisher and Editor, SigmaBleyzer
WASHINGTON, D.C., SUNDAY, JANUARY 21, 2007

               –——-  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.                     LEGAL CHAOS IN THE WAKE OF REFORM
ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: Judge Bohdan A. Futey
Kyiv Post, Kyiv, Ukraine, Wednesday, Jan 17 2007

2. IMPERATIVE MANDATE ESTRANGES UKRAINE FROM DEMOCRACY
       Although the legislation of all EU member countries, without any exception,
           directly prohibit an imperative mandate, initiators of such a reform in
                                 Ukraine paid no attention to this fact.
ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: by Vasyl Lemak, Doctor of Legal
Sciences, Professor of Uzhgorod National University, for UP
Original article in Ukrainian translated by Eugene Ivantsov
Ukrayinska Pravda (UP), Kyiv, Ukraine, Tue, January 16, 2007

3ON THE “IMPERATIVE MANDATE” FOR LOCAL COUNCIL DEPUTIES
               Law significantly increases influence of party leadership upon
                               tens of thousands of local deputies.
STATEMENT: Committee of Voters of Ukraine (CVU)
Milena Zherdiy, International Secretary CVU
Kyiv, Ukraine, Wednesday, January 17, 2007

4.        UKRAINE: PRESIDENT YUSHCHENKO VETOES LAW ON

                      CABINET OF MINISTERS A SECOND TIME
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 19, 2007

5.      UKRAINIAN SPEAKER SAYS NO FURTHER SUPPORT FOR
                                 OPPOSITION LAW PROMISED 
TV 5 Kanal, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1300 gmt 18 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Thu, Jan 18, 2007

6.                                       RASCAL METHOD
    Parliament easily overrides presidential veto on Cabinet of Ministers law
ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: Serhii Rakhmanin
Zerkalo Nedeli On The Web, Mirror-Weekly, No. 1 (630)
International Social Political Weekly
Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, 13-19 January 2007

7.   “HOW TYMOSHENKO TURNED YUSHCHENKO INTO NOBODY,
                               OR TILL DEATH US DO PART
       Voting deal between Ukraine coalition, opposition could damage both
ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY: By Tetyana Nikolayenko
Ukrayinska Pravda website, Kiev, in Ukrainian 12 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Thu, Jan 18, 2007

8DAY OF TRIUMPH — OR BEGINNING OF NEW ELECTION SAGA
By Vitalii Kniazhansky, The Day Weekly Digest
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, January 16, 2007

9“VOLODYMYR HORBULIN: TYMOSHENKO AND OUR UKRAINE
                  ARE FINISHED WITH EACH OTHER FOR EVER”          

INTERVIEW: With Volodymyr Horbulin, Advisor to Pres Yushchenko
BY: Olena Yakhno, Den, Kiev, Ukraine, in Ukrainian Wed, 17 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Friday, Jan 19, 2007

10.                  DOUBLE VETO BLOW FOR YUSHCHENKO
Inform Newsletter #26, Newsletter for the international community
providing views and analysis from the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc
Kyiv, Ukraine,  Monday, January 15, 2007

11.     UKRAINIAN OPPOSITION LEADER YULIYA TYMOSHENKO
                 WANTS PRESIDENT TO DISSOLVE PARLIAMENT 
TV 5 Kanal, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1300 gmt 16 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Jan 16, 2007

12.            THERE AIN’T NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH

      Oleksandr Moroz scored many political points. He has got the chance to

make his dream come true – to turn Ukraine into a Soviet Parliamentary Republic.
ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: by Taras Pastushenko
Original article in Ukrainian translated by Eugene Ivantsov
Ukrayinska Pravda (UP), Kyiv, Ukraine, January 18, 2007

13.   UKRAINE’S RULING PARTY LIKELY TO KEEP YUSHCHENKO 
ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: By Viktor Rozumakhin, Journalist
Glavred, Kiev, Ukraine, in Russian 0937 gmt 18 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Jan 18, 2007

14.                      A FRAGILE HOPE FOR COMPROMISE
           Rivalry between Ukraine’s president, premier to continue in 2007
ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: By Olesya Yakhno
Den, Kiev, in Ukrainian 11 Jan 07; p 1
BBC Monitoring Service – United Kingdom, Jan 12, 2007

15.          KYIV FORTRESS DEMOLISHED: HISTORIC SITES IN
                  UKRAINE’S CAPITAL CONTINUE TO DISAPPEAR
               Kyiv is being robbed of its historic face. Builders can build
 anywhere, everything depends on the size of the kickbacks to the bureaucrats.
By Tetiana Kolesnychenko, The Day Weekly Digest #1
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, 16 January 2007

16.   HISTORIC LANDMARK CHURCH IN UKRAINE ENDANGERED
     Scholar fears preservation of Church of St. Cyril in Kyiv is compromised.
UPDATE: By Olenka Z. Pevny, PhD., Assistant Professor of Art and
Art History the University of Richmond, VA, specializing in
Late Antique, Byzantine and Medieval art history.
BRAMA.COM, New York, Saturday, Jan 20, 2007

17UKRAINIAN MUSEUM-ARCHIVES OF CLEVELAND CONCERNED
         ABOUT PRESERVATION OF CHURCH OF ST. CYRIL IN KYIV
Ukrainian Museum-Archives, Cleveland, Ohio, Saturday, January 20, 2007

18RESTORATION OF ST. CYRIL’S CHURCH NEARING COMPLETION
                        Total restoration of frescos starting in year 2006
By Viktoria Herasymchuk, The Day Weekly Digest #41
Kyiv, Ukraine, December 20, 2005

19.       TOP UKRAINIAN OFFICIAL TO LAY WREATH AT TARAS
         SHEVCHENKO MONUMENT IN WASHINGTON, JANUARY 22
                          In commemoration of Ukraine’s Unity Day
Action Ukraine Report (AUR), Washington, D.C., Sun, Jan 21, 2007

20.    UKRAINE: PRES YUSHCHENKO LEAVES FOR SWITZERLAND

              TO UNDERGO SCHEDULED MEDICAL EXAMINATION
Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 19, 2007
========================================================
1
             LEGAL CHAOS IN THE WAKE OF REFORM

ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: Judge Bohdan A. Futey
Kyiv Post, Kyiv, Ukraine, Wednesday, Jan 17 2007

Ukraine’s Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych recently visited the United
States in order to strengthen ties between the two countries.  The success
of his visit is still not known, but, nevertheless, the prime minister faced
a political crisis and legal chaos upon his return home.

Considering the United States’ concern with building strong democracies,
more attention should be paid to countries like Ukraine that have free
elections but are struggling with the fundamentals of democracy.

Despite Ukraine’s steady progress towards democracy since it declared
independence from the Soviet Union, the leadership recently took a
significant step backwards, specifically in the legal area.

Following the fraudulent presidential run-off election in 2004, which
sparked the Orange Revolution, the Verkhovna Rada (parliament) passed
several amendments to the Constitution on Dec. 8, 2004.

These amendments were known as the political reform and became effective
Jan. 1, 2006.  Although the political reform resolved the 2004 presidential
election crisis, it was hastily adopted and not thoroughly thought out.

In addition, because the reform was passed as a package, the Rada deputies
were either unable or unwilling to examine the effect individual provisions
would have on the operation of the government.

This was all evidenced by the considerable confusion surrounding the
formation of the majority coalition and new government following the March
2006 parliamentary election.

The status of the political reform still remains in question. In a decision
handed down by the Constitutional Court on Oct. 5, 2005, just prior to the
expiration of the nine-year term for most of the judges, the majority of the
court stated that any change in the political system of Ukraine should be
submitted to and approved by a national referendum.

For nearly 10 months after this decision, however, there was no quorum in
the Constitutional Court because parliament refused to swear in the
president’s and the Council of Judge’s Constitutional Court appointees and
avoided electing its share of justices.

Therefore, the court was unable to consider the constitutionality of the
rest of the political reform before Jan. 1, 2006, the reform’s effective
date.

Many critics of the reform, including myself, agree with the Constitutional
Court’s decision because it converts Ukraine from a presidential system to a
parliamentary system and is, therefore, unconstitutional unless submitted to
a national referendum, regardless of any other irregularities.

The reform gave the majority faction in the Verkhovna Rada the power to
select a candidate for prime minister for nomination by the president as
well as most other ministers, and also empowered the Rada with the right to
terminate ministers.

The president may still nominate certain ministers, but, recently, the Rada
dismissed the minister of foreign affairs chosen by the President even
though it is unclear whether the president or the Rada has the power to
remove this person from office.

On Aug. 4, 2006, parliament passed a bill prohibiting the Constitutional
Court from reviewing the amendments to the Constitution passed as part
of the political reform. To many people’s surprise, President Viktor
Yushchenko, for one reason or another, signed the bill into law the same
day.

This is clearly an attempt to prohibit the Constitutional Court from
considering the constitutionality of the political reform now that a quorum
exists.

It is inconceivable that reforms of such magnitude would be “immune” from
constitutional scrutiny.  This was a step backwards from implementing a rule
of law system and the only way to overturn the law is for at least 45
deputies to submit a challenge to the Constitutional Court.

The political reform and its aftermath have created legal chaos and forced a
political confrontation. In addition, the Council of Europe criticized the
reform and considers it void ab initio and the Venice Commission called the
reform a step backwards for Ukraine.

Most recently, on Dec. 8, 2006, at an international forum “Law and Democracy
For Ukraine” a leading group of Ukrainian lawyers and legal scholars adopted
resolutions condemning the political reform and questioning its legality.

Simply implementing the political reform has been a source of great
confusion and strife in the Ukrainian government.

There was a great deal of disagreement following the March 2006 elections
regarding the effect of the reform, particularly as to what the president’s
powers were in nominating the prime minister. Additional problems have
come up since the coalition government was formed.

As mentioned above, the Rada fired the minister of foreign affairs, even
though many legal scholars declared it did not have that power.

The president has the power to nominate the minister of foreign affairs and
the minister of defense in line with his responsibilities for foreign policy
and national defense as the commander-in-chief.

Therefore, according to Ivan Tymchenko, the former Chief Justice of the
Constitutional Court, it seems apparent that the Rada may only request that
the president dismiss these ministers, but that the decision is ultimately
up to the president.

The Rada chose to ignore the president’s foreign policy powers and, instead,
dismissed the minister of foreign affairs.

Currently, the friction within the executive branch between the president
and ihis secretariat on one hand and the prime minister and the Cabinet of
Ministers on the other hand is extremely high because there are disputes
over who holds authority within the executive branch.

A political solution would be for all the parties to reach an agreement on
the ultimate intention of the political reform and determine its proper
meaning, which could then be voted on by the Rada in accordance with the
Constitution and submitted to a national referendum.

The legal resolution to the confusion created by the political reform is in
the hands of the Constitutional Court.

[1] First, the court would have to consider the constitutionality of the law
preventing the reform from being reviewed by the Constitutional Court, as
adopted by the Rada on Aug. 4, 2006.  Once this has been decided, the
court will have to [2] review the political reform and render a decision.

Regardless of which method is used, political or legal, there must be a
resolution to this political crisis because, unless it is solved the legal
chaos will continue.

It is in the interest of the president, the prime minister, the Rada
Speaker, and, most of all, the Ukrainian people that the situation be
settled before Ukraine stumbles any further back.          -30-
——————————————————————————————-
Bohdan A. Futey is a Judge on the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in
Washington, DC, appointed by President Ronald Reagan in May 1987.
Judge Futey has been active in various Rule of Law and Democratization
Programs in Ukraine since 1991. He served as an advisor to the Working
Group on Ukraine’s Constitution, adopted June 28, 1996.
——————————————————————————————–
LINK: http://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/oped/25873/
——————————————————————————————–

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
2. IMPERATIVE MANDATE ESTRANGES UKRAINE FROM DEMOCRACY
     Although the legislation of all EU member countries, without any exception,
          directly prohibit an imperative mandate, initiators of such a reform in
                               Ukraine paid no attention to this fact.

ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: by Vasyl Lemak, Doctor of Legal
Sciences, Professor of Uzhgorod National University, for UP
Original article in Ukrainian translated by Eugene Ivantsov
Ukrayinska Pravada (UP), Kyiv, Ukraine, Tue, January 16, 2007

Establishment of democracy in Ukraine is not only an incomplete but
sometimes an inconsistent process. It became clear on January 12, 2007

when the Verkhovna Rada adopted amendments to a number of Laws on
the Status of local MPs. It was the completion of conferring local MPs
imperative mandates.

Only MPs of village councils appeared to be beyond the imperative mandate.

An imperative mandate has gradually won its positions, beginning from the
Orange Revolution, though strange as it may seem.

[1] THE FIRST STEP. The Political Reform produced by an authoritative
regime was the first step in this direction. Amendments to the Constitution
of Ukraine introduced an institution of an imperative-type mandate for MPs,
which was new to the country.

Although the legislation of all EU member countries, without any exception,
directly prohibit an imperative mandate, initiators of such a reform in
Ukraine paid no attention to this fact.

So, the state has granted political parties an unprecedented right of
depriving a lawmaker of the deputy’s mandate if he/she has lost ties with
the party faction.

Dynamics of changing factions in the Verkhovna Rada of the last convocation
was really intense which became one of the main problems of its political
structuring.

However, to resolve the problem of changing faction the political parties
have been granted the right to deprive an MP of his mandate on the great
variety of grounds.

Even without any reasons it would be possible to exclude the lawmaker from
the faction. It is doubtful if this specific approach will resolve existing
problems or cause even more new ones.

However, the author states: none of the countries has such a norm in their
legislative system.

The European constitutional practice has rejected the procedure of recalling
an MP by the voters, it goes without saying about political parties.

It seems not enough for Ukrainian supporters of an imperative mandate, so
they decided to apply it to the lawmakers of city councils.

Ukrainian lawmakers paid no attention to the fact that even the Russian
Federation gave up such an idea in 2005 when Vladimir Putin refused to
introduce an imperative mandate, fearing of a negative response of the
international public that would discredit his country.

[2] THE SECOND STEP. If the parliament made the first step because

it had to adopt amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine in a packet with
the Law on the Presidential elections which provided a legal basis for the
third stage of presidential election 2004, now the situation has drastically
changed.

If in December 2004 part of the parliament consented to such amendments

for the sake of overcoming the ongoing political crisis, now a
parliamentary-governmental coalition alongside with part of the opposition
has purposely and defiantly introduced an imperative mandate for local MPs,
being aware the civilized world does not accept it.

Those who think the political parties have got a leverage effect on
undisciplined MP are mistaken.

If you read the amended Article 5 of the law it becomes clear that the
highest ruling body of the party (bloc) is granted the right to recall a
local MP (except for deputies of village councils) on a fairly vague basis.

To be precise, the powers of a local MP may be terminated is case he:

     1) failed to submit an application of admission to the deputy faction
     of the relevant local political organization (bloc) under the list of
     which he was elected a deputy of the local council;
     2) left a deputy faction (resigned at his own will or joined another
     deputy faction);
     3) is recalled on other grounds set by the highest governing body
     of a political party (bloc)

Thus, the Law sets two grounds to terminate powers of a local MP.

Besides, it grants a political party the right to set any other reasons for
that at its own discretion.

Reviving a Soviet tradition, the grounds for termination powers of the
Crimean deputies are even more obscure.

These are not only ‘violation of the Constitution of Ukraine and other
legislative acts’, ‘unsatisfactory duty performance’, ‘jobbery’ and even
‘systematic violation of moral and ethical norms’ (item 2 of the law).

Obviously, a Ukrainian lawmaker does not clearly know that ‘violation of
Ukrainian legislation’ may be both speeding and crossing the street on a red
light, it goes without saying about ‘violation of ethical norms’.

With all due respect to moral nobody knows the nature of these norms.
For instance, a part of the society seriously believes it is amoral for the
local lawmakers to take part in the decision making concerning allocation

of land plots for individuals without auctions.

However, MPs and political forces that support them do not think so.
Inaccurate wording of the law causes free interpretations and random
application of its norms.

However, final provisions of this law unveil real intention of Ukrainian
lawmakers.

“This law comes into force from the date of its publication and applies to
local MPs (except for lawmakers of village councils) elected on March 26,
2006, as provided by the Law on Election of People’s Deputies of the
Autonomous Republic of Crimea, city councils and head of village councils.”

The political parties are eager to exclude those lawmakers who left the
party factions just after March 26. Of course they will not take into
account inconsistent political basis and political course of the party
itself.

Shuffle of the deputy staff and actual altering of the local election
outcomes will become another political phenomenon in Ukraine that will
carry it away from democracy and European values of constitutionalism.

This law will enable 4-5 leaders of political parties (blocs) to control
deputy staff of local city councils after elections.

It has nothing to do with a modern European democracy. The problem is

that the parliament is more likely to override a possible presidential veto on
this law.

Local MPs may hope for the provision of the Constitution of Ukraine that
stipulates: “Laws and other legislative acts cannot be retrospective unless
they extenuate or relieve a person of responsibility.” (Article 58)

However, it will happen only in case the Constitution of Ukraine and
mechanisms of its protection become stimulating factors for the aggressive
political forces, most of which are non-democratic organizations with a
shady financing and structure.                           -30-
———————————————————————————————–
LINK: http://www.pravda.com.ua/en/news/2007/1/18/6983.htm
————————————————————————————————

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
3. ON “IMPERATIVE MANDATE” FOR LOCAL COUNCIL DEPUTIES
            Law significantly increases influence of party leadership upon
                              tens of thousands of local deputies.

STATEMENT: Committee of Voters of Ukraine (CVU)
Milena Zherdiy, International Secretary
Kyiv, Ukraine, Wednesday, January 17, 2007

KYIV – On January 12, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine passed the Law of
Ukraine On Making Amendments to Some Laws of Ukraine On Status of
Deputies of the Verkhovna Rada of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea
and Local Council Deputies.

The Law establishes reasons for re-calling local council deputies, or the
so-called “imperative mandate”.

On several occasions, the CVU pointed out that local council deputies
breached election programs of political parties on which lists they had been
elected.

Also, many deputies have quitted their factions taking favorable opportunity
of the “political market”. Mainly, it was provoked by “an anything goes”
approach to formation of election list by political parties.

The situation was aggravated because previously legislation offered no means
for withdrawal of deputies.

At the same time, the CVU believes that the Law adopted by the Verkhovna
Rada of Ukraine significantly increases influence of party leadership upon
tens of thousands of local deputies.

Actually, they become dependent on will of a few persons. As the Law fails
to give exhaustive list of reasons for termination of office, supreme party
bodies may deprive a deputy of the mandate for any reason whatsoever.

The CVU’s opinion is that the Law does not solve the issue of party
discipline and accountability of local party deputies in full scope, as the
problem remains topical. Instead, the act introduces new undemocratic
practices and may restrict rights of local council deputies.

The CVU calls national deputies of Ukraine to improve the legislation on
status of local council deputies and approve an exhaustive list of reasons
for termination of office of local council deputies.     -30-
———————————————————————————————
The previous CVU Statement On organization of re-election of Kirovograd
city mayor is available on the site:
http://www.cvu.org.ua/files/doc1168606237zayava_cg.doc

You can find other news from CVU on the site www.cvu.org.ua, and also
on Domestic Observers Groups’ site www.electiondog.net, together with
news from other NGOs of CEE and FSU countries.
———————————————————————————————–
Committee of Voters of Ukraine, 21 L.Ukrainky Ave., apt. 19, Kyiv 01133
tel./fax: (044) 492-27-67, E-mail: cvu@cvu.kiev.ua, www.cvu.org.ua
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

========================================================
4.  UKRAINE: PRESIDENT YUSHCHENKO VETOES LAW ON

                   CABINET OF MINISTERS A SECOND TIME

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 19, 2007

KYIV – President Viktor Yuschenko has again vetoed the Law on the Cabinet

of  Ministers. Presidential press service disclosed this to Ukrainian News.
Yuschenko returned the draft law to the Verkhovna Rada for re-consideration,
together with his proposed amendments.

‘The bill returned to the parliament has to again pass all voting procedures
foreseen by the legislation. Only after that it has to be signed by
Verkhovna Rada chairman and sent to the president,’ the report reads.

Yuschenko proposals will be presented by Arsenii Yatseniuk, the first deputy
head of the Presidential Secretariat and the presidential representative in
the Cabinet of Ministers. Yuschenko sent eight proposed amendments to this
law to the parliament.

In particular, Yuschenko opposes the law’s provision that authorizes the
parliamentary coalition to submit candidates for the post of premier and the
posts of defense minister and foreign affairs minister if the president of
Ukraine fails to submit candidates for these posts within the established
period.

Yuschenko also sent proposals regarding the procedures for terminating the
mandates of members of the Cabinet of Ministers in cases of their dismissal
by the Prime Minister or President.

Yuschenko is also proposing that the law should stipulate that the Cabinet
of Ministers can transfer some of its powers temporarily or indefinitely to
other organs of the executive branch of government in cases stipulated by
the law.

Moreover, Yuschenko proposes amending the procedures for agreeing

candidates for posts of head of local administrations and holding them
responsible when necessary.

Yuschenko also proposes canceling the law’s provision that grants the
government the absolute power to refuse to sign presidential acts.

Yuschenko believes that the bill on the Cabinet of Ministers that the
parliament adopted on January 12 violates the Constitution.

At the same time, Yuschenko stresses that the version of the Law on the
Cabinet of Ministers that was sent to him for signing, differs from the
previous version and that it contains changes that differ from the one that
he proposed on January 11.

Presidential press service explained that part 7, article 21 of the first
version of the bill endorsed on December 21 had provision on order of
appointment of first deputy and deputy heads of central executive agencies.
That is proved by comparison table to the bill.

The bill was signed and sent to the president, who vetoed it and returned to
the Verkhovna Rada with his proposals. However, the bill was vetoed for the
second time to overcome the presidential veto (the bill did not contain the
abovementioned provision).

After the voting, the amended bill was signed by the speaker and sent to the
president again.

At the same time, difference between the first and the second variants of
the bill was confirmed by parliamentary administration head, who estimated
that as technical mistake.

The Presidential Secretariat does not agree with the estimation and insists
that the second variant is new wording of the bill. In this, the Verkhovna

Rada endorsed new bill overcoming the veto, which allows the president
to put veto again.

‘Per se, the president received new wording of the bill. In this, on January
18, the president returned the document for repeat consideration of the
parliament,’ the report reads.

The Presidential Secretariat considers the action is eligible for the
Constitution and Constitutional Court decisions on order of voting and
repeat consideration of bills at the Verkhovna Rada.

As Ukrainian News earlier reported, Yuschenko said on January 18 that he
intended to veto the law. Yuschenko believes that the text of the law that
was adopted at the second attempt differs from the text of the one he
vetoed.

The parliament overrode Yuschenko’s veto on the Law on the Cabinet of
Ministers by 367 votes on January 12. A few days earlier, Yuschenko,
Parliament Speaker Oleksandr Moroz, and Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych
agreed to jointly draft a new, coordinated Law on the Cabinet of Ministers.
————————————————————————————————

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
    Send in names and e-mail addresses for the AUR distribution list.
========================================================
5. UKRAINIAN SPEAKER SAYS NO FURTHER SUPPORT FOR
                               OPPOSITION LAW PROMISED 

TV 5 Kanal, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1300 gmt 18 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Thu, Jan 18, 2007

KIEV – [Presenter] The parliamentary coalition has no commitments towards
Yuliya Tymoshenko [opposition bloc leader] regarding the final approval of
the law on opposition, parliament speaker Oleksandr Moroz has said.

According to him, they agreed on supporting the law on imperative mandate
[banning MPs from swapping factions] and the law on the opposition in the
first reading, which the coalition actually did.

There were no other commitments, particularly on overriding the president’s
possible veto.

Oleksandr Moroz described the law on imperative mandate as the application
of force to deputies, the law on the opposition as an encroachment on
governing functions.

On the last parliamentary session day [12 January], the Yuliya Tymoshenko
Bloc’s faction voted for the law on the Cabinet of Ministers in exchange for
having the two mentioned laws approved.

[Moroz] I believe it has a lot of provisions that overstep the boundaries of
the constitution and common sense. We provided the response that
representatives of the Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc insisted on.

However, there were no commitments made regarding the final approval

of this law or overriding the veto on it.

One of our experts, a lawyer, joked once with Yuliya Tymoshenko by

saying – Yuliya Volodymyrivna, you offer such a law as if you are never
going to come to power.                                               -30-
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================      
6.                                  RASCAL METHOD
    Parliament easily overrides presidential veto on Cabinet of Ministers law

ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: Serhii Rakhmanin
Zerkalo Nedeli On The Web, Mirror-Weekly, No. 1 (630)
International Social Political Weekly
Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, 13-19 January 2007

Contrary to skeptical predictions, the Ukrainian parliament has easily
overridden the presidential veto of the law on the Cabinet of Ministers,
which was adopted on December 21, 2006 and rejected by President
Yushchenko  on January 11, 2007. At least 300 votes are required to
override the presidential veto.

This time, 366 people’s deputies cast their votes in support of the law.

The secret of success is simple: the Yulia Tymoshenko bloc supported an
anti-crisis coalition. The reason for that is obvious: quid pro quo.

[1] First, thanks to the efforts of the anti-crisis coalition the law on the
opposition, submitted personally by Yulia Tymoshenko, passed its first
reading in parliament.

[2] Second, the majority signed the law on imperative mandate for the
regional council deputies, which is equally important for Tymoshenko. From
now on, Tymoshenko needn’t worry about the outflow of deputies from her
faction into local governmental bodies.

As for prime minister Yanukovych and the pro-governmental majority, they
have finally attained legalization of the new rules of conduct with the
President – the law On the Cabinet of Ministers that has been repeatedly
challenged by the president and his team.

The lawyers of Yanukovych (who is the formal author of the law) have made
maximum use of the novelties of the political reforms and omissions of the
amended Constitution.

At the same time, certain provisions of the law are not quite flawless and
could possibly require interpretations of the Constitutional Court, which
has been silent for six months.

[1] First, Yanukovych and company tired to secure themselves against the
incidents similar to the “Tarasyuk case”. Henceforth, a minister is
officially considered to be a political figure and the laws on civil service
and labor do not apply to him. This means that ministers will not be able to
dispute their dismissal in district courts.

Moreover, the authors of the law put a final full stop (or rather they
believe that they have put a full stop) to the question of who has the right
to dismiss Foreign and Defense Ministers.

Article 19 of the law lays down a single procedure for all Cabinet Members –
they are dismissed by the Verkhovna Rada at the motion of the Prime
Minister. Any president’s motion is out of the question.

[2] Second, the president no longer has the opportunity to create artificial
conditions for an early dissolving of the Verkhovna Rada. Thus, the
Constitution provides that parliament can be dismissed if it fails to form a
new Cabinet within two months after the previous Cabinet’s dismissal. The
coalition submits the proposal of the prime minister’s candidacy to the
President, who must review it within 15 days.

Here, several questions remained unanswered.
[a] Can the president ignore the coalition’s proposals and what is to be
done if he chooses to do so?
[b] Can the parliament be dissolved if the president fails to submit the
proposed candidacy of the premier to parliament within 15 days, with the
result that this parliament fails to meet its 60-day deadline?
[c] Who can be considered a member of the Cabinet?
[d] Can we consider parliament to be formed if the President intentionally
delays the submission of the candidates for the posts of Foreign and
Defense Ministers and they are not appointed within one month since the
disbandment of the previous parliament?
[e] If not, does the president have the right to announce early elections in
this case?

The new law provides rather peculiar answers to these questions. According
to it, if the president fails to submit a candidacy of prime minister within
15 days, the coalition will make it instead of him. The idea is clear, yet
it does not agree with Ukrainian Constitution, which grants this right
exclusively to the president.

Similar method is used in cases with the appointment of the heads of the
Defense and Foreign Policy Ministries: if the president neglects his
constitutional duties and refuses to submit the candidacies of the two
ministers, the parliamentary majority does it. This innovation also
contradicts the Basic Law and most likely will be reviewed by the
Constitutional court.

The Cabinet members will assume office only after they take an oath, and the
government will become authorized only after at least 2/3 of its members
have been sworn in. This provision contains some ambiguities as well, yet
not so serious.

Can an understaffed Cabinet be fully formed and (consequently) authorized?
Only the Constitutional Court is able to prove the complete answer to this
question, and it will have much work to do in the near future.

[3] Third, Yanukovych and his lawyers decided to put an end to the arguments
over the legal meaning of the notion “countersign”. Everyone remembers
heated discussions about whether it is the right or duty of the Prime
Minister and the minister concerned to sign certain the presidential
decrees.

The new law enables the Cabinet members not to sign presidential decrees (if
ministers disagree with them) and to return them to the president’s office.
The law gives a rather detailed although somewhat one-sided description of
the countersign procedure.

The Our Ukraine strongly disagrees with such a statement, calling this law
an attempt to usurp power and stating its intention to appeal to the
Constitutional Court.

In addition, the Our Ukraine members question the right of the Cabinet of
ministers to appoint (and dismiss) first deputies, deputies of the
ministers, heads of central bodies of executive government, and to rescind
the decision of local state organizations.

It is hard how these innovations legally qualify. The impudent revision of
article 116 of the Constitutions by the authors of the law is much more
obvious. According to the Constitution, the Cabinet of Ministers “provides
for the implementation of the internal and external policy of the state”.

The new law, however, determines that the task of the Cabinet is “to
implement the internal and external policy of the sate.” “To provide for
implementation” and “to implement” are two different legal categories. The
Cabinet assumed the right to implement policy, thus encroaching upon the
constitutional power of the president and parliament.

The rights of the president were cut short in one more case. The law
provides that the government’s program of actions (whose adoption renders
the Cabinet untouchable for the entire year) is adopted by a resolution but
not by a law. This was probably done to deprive the president of the
possibility to veto it.

Adoption of the law on the Cabinet of Ministers, proposed by Yanukovych,
makes the president’s poor political arsenal even poorer and his position
more disadvantageous.

Formerly, the conflicting sides (the President and the Cabinet) were trying
to interpret the Constitution each in their own way. Now the Cabinet has law
on its side and the President must keep it.

We can assume that upon the adoption of this law the president will feel a
strong urge to dissolve this parliament. We can assume that Yulia Tymoshenko
secretly hopes for that. By venturing to form a union with the anti-crisis
coalition, she might be playing a more complicated game than it may seem.

It is obvious how much she wants to become the Prime Minister of SUCH a
government. Yet her dreams are unlikely to come true.

Yushchenko most likely will not dare for an early campaign at least because
she has nobody to run with for election. While having received SUCH power,
the Donetsk clan is unlikely to yield it to anyone.            -30-
————————————————————————————————
LINK: http://www.mirror-weekly.com/ie/show/630/55588/
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
7.  “HOW TYMOSHENKO TURNED YUSHCHENKO INTO NOBODY,
                                OR TILL DEATH US DO PART
       Voting deal between Ukraine coalition, opposition could damage both

ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY: By Tetyana Nikolayenko
Ukrayinska Pravda website, Kiev, in Ukrainian 12 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Thu, Jan 18, 2007

Both the ruling Party of Regions and opposition Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc
could lose out after they struck a deal to defeat the presidential veto on
the law on the Cabinet of Ministers last week, a website has said.

Analysing the provisions of the law itself, it said that the law passes more
powers from the president to the cabinet; at the same time, Tymoshenko
secured more authority for herself as the leader of the biggest opposition
party.

However, though the two political forces may have short-term political
gains, in the long run they may lose in terms of voter support. Tymoshenko,
a long-time ally of President Yushchenko till recently, has helped to take
away the few powers that Yushchenko has, it concluded.

The following is the text of the article by Tetyana Nikolayenko entitled
“How Tymoshenko turned Yushchenko into nobody, or till death us do
part” posted on the Ukrainian website Ukrayinska Pravda on 12 January;
subheadings are as published:

[Epigraph] “It is better that Ukrainians do not know how Ukrainian sausage
and Ukrainian politics are made” – Volodymyr Lytvyn [former parliamentary
speaker]

12 January 2007 will go down in the history of Ukrainian parliamentarianism
as the day when backroom deals came out from behind the scenes and from
under the carpet.

On this day Ukrainians learnt how politics works in Ukraine and the
principle on which laws are adopted.

On that Friday the Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc [YTB] and the [ruling] anti-crisis
coalition [of the Party of Regions, Communist and Socialist parties] agreed
to a mutually-acceptable barter deal – the president’s veto of the law on
the Cabinet of Ministers and to changes to the law on banks and banking
activity in exchange for voting in favour of the law on the binding mandate
for deputies of local councils and the first reading of the law on the
opposition.

MPs of the coalition and the YTB, first of all quietly, and then they
bragged out loud about the fact that they had conspired, and
[propresidential] Our Ukraine left the session hall once the agreement had
become reality.

After the vote parliamentary speaker Oleksandr Moroz said that this is “an
undisguised political agreement”. In his words, such an agreement was
absolutely acceptable and permissible, the more so as the entire procedure
was observed.

Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych described the voting on the law on the
Cabinet of Ministers as “a healthy reaction” by parliament to the situation
in the country, while Tymoshenko believes that she saved the country from a
permanent crisis and arguments between the president and the cabinet.

In reality, on 12 January Yanukovych grabbed a substantial portion of power,
Tymoshenko tarred her reputation while Viktor Yushchenko was left with
little. With the new law on the Cabinet of Ministers, Ukraine was turned
into a parliamentary republic where the president has the rights of someone
organizing a wedding.
                      WHAT DID YANUKOVYCH GET?
As a result of the voting on Friday the prime minister got the law on the
Cabinet of Ministers. And even if Yushchenko refuses to sign it [in Donetsk
on 17 January he said he would not due to ethical reasons], Moroz can sign
it.

This law opens up that broad array of powers for the coalition, which is not
even provided for by the amended constitution.

FIRST. >From now on the appointment of the prime minister does not depend
on the president. Thus, in accordance with Paragraph 1 of Article 8, the
prime minister is appointed to the post by the Supreme Council of Ukraine
[parliament] at the submission of the candidate by the president.

But Paragraph 3 of this article states that in the event of the president
not submitting the candidacy of the prime minister of Ukraine within the
period stipulated by the constitution, the request on appointment to the
said post is submitted to parliament by the [majority] coalition of
parliamentary factions.

So, Yushchenko or any other president can oppose a prime minister with a
criminal past as much as he likes but he will only be able to impede his
coming to power if he has his own coalition.

SECOND. The president loses control over the defence and foreign

ministers.

The president’s right, as guaranteed by the constitution, is levelled by the
law, in which it is stated that in the event of the president not submitting
his candidates for the posts of defence and foreign ministers within 15
days, the request on appointments to these posts are submitted to parliament
by the coalition.

Goodbye Tarasyuk and Hrytsenko [current foreign and defence ministers,
respectively]! Soon you will be replaced by personnel to Mr Yanukovych’s
liking.

THIRD. The Cabinet of Ministers shall, not later than 13 days after it
receives its powers, submit the cabinet action plan to parliament for
consideration by it.

Paragraph 5 of Article 11 states that the decision on adopting the cabinet’s
action plan is adopted in the form of a parliamentary resolution.

This means that the president will not be able in any way to influence the
cabinet’s “road map”, which will take the country wherever it wants to.

No wonder that Yushchenko tried to the last to ensure that the action plan
is approved by a law, as the president would still be able to veto this law.

FOURTH. The president no longer has any levers over the dismissal of the
cabinet. Although he could initiate it in parliament, early termination of
the cabinet’s powers is possible only in the event of:

     1) the resignation of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine in connection
         with the adoption of a resolution of no-confidence by parliament;
     2) the resignation of the prime minister on the basis of him submitting
         his resignation;
     3) termination of the powers of the prime minister in connection with
         his being unable to carry out his duties due to ill health;
     4) the prime minister’s death.

FIFTH. With this law Yanukovych has clearly distanced himself from any
attempts by the president to interfere in personnel appointments at a level
lower than ministerial.

There is Paragraph 7 of Article 23 for this.

The Cabinet of Ministers appoints and dismisses persons from posts:

     1) at the submission of the prime minister – heads of central bodies of
         executive power, as well as members of collegial central bodies of
         executive power which are not part of the government;
     2) at the submission of the prime minister in accordance with proposals
         made by ministers – first deputy and deputy ministers;
     3) at the submission of the prime minister in accordance with proposals
         made by members of the Cabinet of Ministers, to the sphere of
         direction and coordination of which belong central bodies of
         executive power – first deputy and deputy heads of these bodies;
     4) at the submission of members of the Cabinet of Ministers, to the
         sphere of direction and coordination of which belong central bodies
         of executive power – first deputy and deputy heads of these bodies.

So “so long Yura [presumably former Interior Minister Yuriy Lutsenko],
forgive me Vitya [presumably Yushchenko]”, long live Plekhanov, Popkov
[two recent controversial appointments to the Interior Ministry] and others
with them.

SIXTH. During the period of fulfilment of their powers, the heads of local
state administrations are accountable to the Cabinet of Ministers. Local
state administrations and their heads are accountable and subject to the
control of the Cabinet of Ministers within the auspices of their powers.

In the event of inappropriate fulfilment of powers by the head of a local
state administration, the government has the right to bring him to
disciplinary accountability or to appeal to the president with a request to
dismiss him from his post.

The Cabinet of Ministers is also hooking local administrations on financial
bait – it ratifies the typical procedure of local state administrations, the
recommended list of directorates, departments and other units of local state
administrations and typical regulations about them, sets the maximum levels
of staff and pay for the employees of local state administrations, including
their apparatus and spending on their upkeep.

SEVENTH, but not last of all. The law states that presidential acts are
countersigned by the prime minister and the minister responsible for their
fulfilment and can be returned to the president with an indication of the
reasons for their not having been signed.

In effect, experts are saying that after the signing of this law the
president is losing his influence over the mechanism of executive power.

In addition, in accordance with the constitution, he has like before the
right to suspend the action of government acts in unison with them being
sent to the Constitutional Court [for consideration] at the same time.

EIGHTH. Almost the last one. From now on the prime minister must write
only the most important facts of his or her personal biography. This is
probably a present for Yanukovych. He definitely does not regard his
two convictions as important facts about his life … [ellipsis as
published]

NINTH. And something else. The cabinet equated its influence over bank
councils with the influence of the president when parliament defeated the
presidential veto on changes to the law “On banking and banking activity”
[also on 12 January].

                                 WHAT DID YTB GET? 
On 12 January Tymoshenko got her biggest bonus since parliamentary
election day [in March 2006] when she won 22 per cent of the vote.

FIRST. She managed to get the binding mandate to be applied to deputies

of local councils. Thus, the leader of YTB will be able to keep in her hands a
majority in local councils by throwing traitors out of her ranks.

SECOND. Tymoshenko confirmed her rights as the opposition in the first
reading [of the law on the opposition]. It is a different matter as to the
form of these rights and how many of them make it into the second reading,
and that is without mentioning that this second reading could be dragged
out.
TYMOSHENKO’S SPECIAL SHARE LOOKS LIKE THIS NOW
Nevertheless, Tymoshenko’s special share looks like this at the moment.

[1] The opposition receives leadership of 12 parliamentary committees:
freedom of speech, legislative guaranteeing of law-enforcement work; human
rights; budget; parliamentary proceedings; functioning of the court system;
control over the protection of the rights of industrialists, entrepreneurs
and investors; control over observance of social standards and ensuring the
appropriate living standards of citizens; control over the operation of
state monopolies; energy security; agricultural policy; health, education
and science.

It is worth noting that as of today half of the committees listed do not
actually exist. In addition, the opposition receives the posts of the first
deputy heads of all parliamentary committees apart from those which it
heads.

[2] The parliamentary opposition takes part in forming the personnel
composition of the Accounting Chamber, the Council of the National Bank
of Ukraine, the National TV and Radio Broadcasting Council of Ukraine,
the Supreme Council of Justice of Ukraine by submitting its candidates for
posts in these bodies, the appointment of which is carried out by
parliament.

[3] The number of candidates put forward by the parliamentary opposition
during the formation of the personnel composition of state bodies is
determined taking into account the principle of proportional representation
of deputies factions [in parliament].

[4] The opposition has the right to create an opposition government and
other auxiliary bodies of its own. The head of the opposition government is
permitted to take part in sittings of the Cabinet of Ministers.

[5] In the event of participation by the head of the opposition government
at a meeting of the Cabinet of Ministers, he (she?) has the right to make an
address which is not less than 15 minutes long.

[6] The opposition has the right to submit proposals to the draft budget and
the writing of parliament’s daily agenda, to make an address during
consideration of the principles of domestic and foreign policy, the state
budget and ratification of the cabinet’s action plan and its report.

[7] It is proposed that the opposition control the work of the coalition
through representation in committees and the creation of temporary
investigation committees, submission of proposals for consideration by
parliament of the issue of the government’s accountability, appeals to
the Constitutional Court.

[8] In order to carry out control of parliament the parliamentary opposition
has the right to receive information on the work of bodies of state
authority and their senior officials.

[9] In the event of violation of legislation by senior officials of bodies
of state authority or the committing of corrupt actions, on submission of a
request for dismissal by the parliamentary opposition officials are
dismissed on the basis of a court ruling.
YULIYA WILL HAVE TO PAY FOR THESE ACHIEVEMENTS
Yuliya Tymoshenko will have to pay for all these achievements – and not
by voting for new laws put forward by Yanukovych but by losing a part
of the love for her held by the people.

This is partly evidenced by the wave of hatred of Tymoshenko expressed by
voters on Ukrayinska Pravda’s forum! She is hardly likely to like that which
people are saying about her right now… [ellipsis as published]

On Friday Tymoshenko set foot on that slippery path on which
[propresidential bloc] Our Ukraine has already smashed its head.

Now, Yushchenko’s supporters have received the opportunity to talk about
how Tymoshenko agreed to an alliance with Yanukovych, and not vice versa.

And any comments of justification by Yuliya Tymoshenko like “we resolved
the crisis in the country, while Our Ukraine is fighting for power”, will
not work.

This is because by defeating the presidential veto on the law on the
cabinet, the YTB gave Yanukovych the right to write whatever action plan he
wants and to cut pensions and raise tariffs how he wishes, against which he
fought so hard.

Moreover [former Interior Minister] Yuriy Lutsenko has already made use
of today’s barter deal by Tymoshenko and already begun to earn points
with the electorate with this.

And lastly. In the event that, let’s say, one spring the situation in
Ukraine changes radically in terms of electoral likes and dislikes, then
those political forces which carried out a legal barter deal on Friday are
hardly likely to like the documents which they ratified.

 Then they will find themselves in a mousetrap, which they built with their
own hands – the cabinet with its unlimited power and the opposition with its
showy, theatrical rights.                                 -30-
————————————————————————————————

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
    NOTE: Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
========================================================
8. DAY OF TRIUMPH – OR BEGINNING OF NEW ELECTION SAGA

COMMENTARY: By Vitalii Kniazhansky, The Day Weekly Digest
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, January 16, 2007

The shocking news last Friday was another presidential veto and parliament’s
repeated success in overriding it. The main consideration here is not even
the possibility that the law on the Cabinet of Ministers, which largely
finalizes the distribution of executive power, will be enacted.

Far more important are the signs of a new political situation in which the
ruling coalition may have secured systematic rather than situational support
from the second-largest faction in parliament – the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc.

Under this distribution of power, if the coalition makes the necessary
concessions to the chief opposition force, it will acquire almost full
control.

The second shocking news for the country is the shattering of hopes for
cooperation between the coalition, the government, and the president.

The microscopic warming of relations after the famous recent meeting at the
highest level could have been discussed at length, but it turned out to be a
flash in the pan and has led to further escalation of tensions with
consequences that are difficult to foresee right now.

From today’s standpoint, even this warming can be viewed as having been
prompted by the panic that seized the Presidential Secretariat after
parliament overrode the presidential veto on the moratorium on the sale of
agricultural land.

In cases like this, people in all headquarters are saying, “Something has to
be done.” So the parties sat down at the negotiation table as though pushing
the hawks in their own camps into the background.

Friday’s events showed that they have left the trenches and are intending to
react to their opponent’s every move. It was probably the president who
first broke the truce with his veto on the law on the Cabinet of Ministers
and others passed by parliament.

Until the last moment he obviously had not anticipated that Tymoshenko and
her faction would dare give the coalition systematic rather than just
one-time support.

Now the president’s team is up the creek and can only pin its hopes on the
Constitutional Court (which is still idle and may be demoralized by
publicized (dis)information about million- hryvnia bribes) and also on the
power structures. But the coalition is pressing on very forcefully or, as
the opposition chooses to put it, impudently.

On Friday parliament appointed a new deputy speaker, Volodymyr Radchenko,
who will deal with the power agencies. He declared his intention to put an
end to the “chaotic tasking” of these agencies and said the Armed Forces of
Ukraine need to be reformed.

Among the top-priority tasks he mentioned is coordinating the work with all
the power agencies in order to ensure that laws are obeyed in Ukraine.

The Presidential Secretariat already had a counterpart office. It was
occupied by Arsenii Yatseniuk, who was assisted by former Security Service
head Ihor Drizhchany.

But the people in these counterpart offices must belong to different classes
of political weight, and their influence on the power structures is
unsurpassed.

In short, the coalition is confidently winning points in the struggle for
control over them. But now the ball is in the president’s court, and he is
also capable of powerful moves.

If only he and, more importantly, some of his aides do not lose their nerve.
Otherwise the situation may become extremely critical.

Under these conditions, as past articles in The Day have stated, the
decisive vote belongs to the BYuT and its leader, Tymoshenko. What is
guiding her today?

In the beginning, the most plausible theory was that she had agreed to vote
for the law on the Cabinet of Ministers in exchange for the coalition’s
votes in support of the law on the opposition. Friday’s voting for this law
in the first reading provides strong supportive evidence.

There is another theory. It is a known fact that Tymoshenko, who has now
unbraided her hair (which many interpret as a sort of female signal
indicating a change in the party line) and dismissed the people’s parliament
on Independence Square, appears to be the most innocent politician at the
moment, especially as seen against the backdrop of people’s dissatisfaction
with the recent utility rate hike.

She is the only one who can be interested in new parliamentary elections.
Once appointed, she will undoubtedly be able to prove to her electorate the
strategic wisdom of all her moves.

On Friday Tymoshenko said that her bloc voted that way in order to
“establish order” and “not to disgrace the country before the whole world
with our domestic political scandals.”

She added, “We believe that the people who essentially ruined the first
Orange team, ruined everything they possibly could, and personally
nominated Yanukovych for prime minister cannot reproach us for anything.”

Is it possible that behind these words an experienced politician like
Tymoshenko is concealing a desire to urge the president, who is virtually
powerless and seems to be cornered, to disband parliament and call new
elections?                                          -30-
————————————————————————————————-
LINK: http://www.day.kiev.ua/175429/
————————————————————————————————-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]

========================================================
9. “VOLODYMYR HORBULIN: TYMOSHENKO AND OUR UKRAINE
                ARE FINISHED WITH EACH OTHER FOR EVER”
           Aide to Ukrainian president says tough negotiations lie ahead

INTERVIEW: With Volodymyr Horbulin, Advisor to Pres Yushchenko
BY: Olena Yakhno, Den, Kiev, Ukraine, in Ukrainian Wed, 17 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Friday, Jan 19, 2007

Volodymyr Horbulin, an adviser to Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko,
has said that the country is far from being a parliamentary republic,
despite the recently passed law on the Cabinet of Ministers.

However, speaking in an interview, Horbulin said that the law violates
segments of the constitution. Horbulin also said he does not believe the
National Security and Defence Council should be demoted in status, as
progovernment deputies are inclined to think.

The following is the text of the interview with Horbulin by Olena Yakhno,
entitled “Volodymyr Horbulin: Tymoshenko and Our Ukraine are finished
with each other forever”, published in the Ukrainian newspaper Den on 17
January; subheadings have been inserted editorially:

Volodymyr Horbulin is an experienced political fighter, one who has
practically never disappeared from the Olympus of domestic power. Various
presidents, prime ministers and speakers have listened (or not listened) to
his advice.

Horbulin was one of the most influential figures of the early [Leonid]
Kuchma presidency (and of course, that comes with its own accountability).
He was also of help after the Orange Revolution. And that is not surprising:
he is too experienced to not be able to demonstrate his exceptional use to
anyone in power.

In the heat of the Orange events, Horbulin did not visit the Maydan
[Independence Square in Kiev, the focal point of popular protests in late
2004] and he did not swear an oath of loyalty to democratic values to the
people.

He brought attention to himself in another way, by publishing a devastating
reply to Russian political pundit Gleb Pavlovskiy after the latter allowed
himself impolite jabs at the new, Orange, authorities.

In this way, Horbulin showed his loyalty to Viktor Yushchenko. The president
took note and, as it turned out, he did not forget.

In March 2005, Horbulin became an aide to Yushchenko, and at the end of
November 2005, the president appointed him leader of the main defence policy
service in the presidential secretariat.

Today, Volodymyr Horbulin is celebrating his birthday. He is 68. Den
congratulates Volodymyr Pavlovych [Horbulin] and wishes him to remain a
full-fledged player in Ukrainian politics.
                      NOT A PARLIAMENTARY REPUBLIC
[Yakhno] Mr Horbulin, everyone is caught up in the latest events which
transpired in parliament. After the veto on the law on the Cabinet of
Ministers was overcome, can one say Viktor Yushchenko really has become
“an English queen”, and Ukraine has become a parliamentary republic?

[Horbulin] Unfortunately, for some reason we are only capable of extremes
and see the situation exclusively in two colours: black and white.

In fact, there are a myriad of shades which allow one to look at everything
going on in a much deeper and more interesting way.

I do not see what happened on Friday [12 January] as the president getting
the status of an “English queen”. Moreover, I categorically disagree with
this.

As far as a parliamentary republic is concerned, we are far off from that. I
think we are in for a process of difficult moments of negotiation which will
determine the final status of our country (I do not mean roundtables).

[1] Because adopting a law in which norms of the constitution are violated
does not allow one to ink a full stop. Or an exclamation mark, as many are
now doing. It doesn’t seem to me that this process is complete. It will
develop on its own and I do not think it will be easy. That is first.

[2] Second is a no-less-serious moment. What happened on Friday practically
allowed us to get three documents which are needed to one degree or another
for a clear system of division between the branches of power to function in
the country.

It is another matter that it was done with certain excess. It is clear under
the current constitution that no-one besides the president has the right to
introduce the prime minister’s candidacy.

That is undoubtedly a violation of the constitution, as is the introduction
of the candidacies of defence minister and foreign minister. But I think
this is temporary.
                    COMPLICATED PROCESSES AHEAD
In my opinion, we are in for a long, complicated process in the
Constitutional Court, in which the winner will be the one who finds the
necessary arguments. I would rather not comment on everything in brief.
To agree or disagree.

I am against simplified systems. And there cannot be any such systems here.
I also do not think that the joyful cries of members of the Party of
Regions, made when the veto was overridden, were a funeral march for the
president. That is a premature verdict. I think it will be refuted in
reality.

[Yakhno] How would you comment on the vote by the [opposition] Yuliya
Tymoshenko Bloc [which backed the law] ?

[Horbulin] Tymoshenko did what she wanted to do. For her, this was a
boundary which she crossed. Now she and [propresidential, opposition

party] Our Ukraine are finished forever.

I think [her] relationship with the president is over as well. If there was
some chance to renew dialogue before, then I think that today there are no
more chances.

[Yakhno] The Party of Regions is now voicing statements about the
possibility of liquidating the National Security and Defence Council [NSDC].
As a former secretary of this institution, can you predict the likelihood of
such a scenario coming to pass?
                             DEFENCE COUNCIL IS VITAL
[Horbulin] That is yet another stupidity which is brought on by the
emotional lift which has captured the Party of Regions. An NSDC is a body
which exists in practically all civilized states.

I once laid the foundations of this body. Its unique status and composition
provides for working out a consensus among the political elite on issues of
vital importance to the country’s development. The council’s activity is
foremost directed not at the interests of any specific political forces, but
at realizing general, national tasks.

The NSDC is the highest body in the state providing definitions for the
strategic priorities of state policy in the sphere of national security and
defence. The council and its apparatus resolve unique tasks which lie

beyond the remit of the rest of the state’s bodies.

We are talking foremost about inter-institutional coordination as well as
informational-analytical activity in the sphere of providing national
security and defence in issues of extreme importance which are at the same
time ticklish, issues like intelligence and counter-intelligence, internal
politics, the military, foreign policy, economic security and so on.

I can say that in 1996, the post of secretary was not included in the
constitution only because I had extremely difficult relations with most of
the MPs in parliament. They also once introduced suggestions directed at
stopping the work of the NSDC.

I don’t know if they were formulated as laws, as MPs [Yuriy] Miroshnychenko
and [Vladyslav] Zabarskyy are trying to do now. But in light of the growing
rivalry between the NSDC apparatus and part of the parliamentary body, such
suggestions have been voiced more than once in the session hall.

Those changes did not pass then, and I do not  think they will pass now. The
building of serious state institutions cannot hung exclusively on the will
of one political force.

[Yakhno] How would you comment on Volodymyr Radchenko’s appointment
as deputy prime minister of security?

[Horbulin] I am positive about this appointment. Because he is a wise man
who has graduated through all the faculties of government building in the
sphere of security. And his presence in any post associated with designing
our uniformed agencies will be positive.

[Yakhno] But experts are saying Radchenko we be a counterweight to current
NSDC Secretary Vitaliy Hayduk. Do you agree with that?

[Horbulin] In order for the deputy prime minister to be a counterweight to
Hayduk, they need to find someone else, not Volodymyr Radchenko. I have

a very high opinion of his personal and professional qualities.

[Yakhno] You are an aide to the president. Does Mr Yushchenko often

approach you for advice? Can we say Volodymyr Horbulin is influencing
the situation in the country today?

[Horbulin] No, the only pulpit I have is the meeting of the NSDC. There I
voice all my suggestions, which I think are constructive.

[Yakhno] But still, what advice would you give the president right now?

[Horbulin] I would give this advice to all: you need to work more and talk
less, independently of a given post. And I think the tugging back and forth
on the rope of power, which has artificially been created between the
presidential secretariat and the cabinet, does nothing to make either the
government or the secretariat look good.

You don’t need to tug on the rope, but you need to look for ways to solve
the multitude of problems which Ukraine is facing today.      -30-
———————————————————————————————-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
10.              DOUBLE VETO BLOW FOR YUSHCHENKO

INFORM Newsletter #26, Newsletter for the international community
providing views and analysis from the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc (BYuT)
Kyiv, Ukraine,  Monday, January 15, 2007

Last week the Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko (BYuT) took the unusual step of
voting twice with their parliamentary opposites – the governing Anti-crisis
Coalition – to overturn presidential vetoes.  The first of two overrides was
on January 9, when over 100 BYuT deputies voted with the government to
overturn the president’s veto on the law extending the moratorium on the
purchase and sale of agricultural land until 1 January, 2008.

Last December, the Ukrainian parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, voted to
prolong the moratorium on farmland sales (Party of the Regions 180 votes,
BYuT 109, Socialist Party 30, and even the pro-presidential Our Ukraine bloc
8).  However,President Yushchenko exercised his prerogative to veto the
draft law, claiming that it would only serve to boost the illegal land
market.

The majority in parliament, including deputies from BYuT, argued that the
legislation to underpin the free land market needs further improvement.
Leader of the opposition and of her eponymous bloc, Yulia Tymoshenko said
that she wholeheartedly supported private land sales but wanted the rights
of landowners to be protected.  Of particular concern is the need to prevent
the many small farm owners from falling victim to unscrupulous corporate
investors.

“Shady speculation is keeping the peasants from receiving a fair price for
their plots,” said Mrs Tymoshenko following the vote, “there is urgent need
for rural reform and for legislation to be passed that will ensure that
farmland sales are both fair and transparent.”

Long known as “the bread basket of Europe,” Ukraine has 33 million hectares
of farmland which experts have valued at more than 60 billion dollars. Some
sources claim Ukraine possesses nearly one-third of the world’s richest
soils. In the Soviet-era this fertile land generated more than a quarter of
the total agricultural output of the Soviet Union. Ukraine’s primary crops
are wheat, corn, and sugar beets, and the country is the sixth largest grain
exporter in the world.

Despite there being many privately owned small plots, there is still no
central land register or cadastre and what meagre regulation exists is in
urgent need of reform.  “To-date the government has failed to put in place
the checks and balances needed to protect small holders and provide
legitimacy for purchasers. We don’t want to repeat the free-for-all that
blighted industry in the 90s.  The government has an obligation to get it
right,” said Mrs Tymoshenko.

There have been calls for the moratorium to continue past 2008 unless laws
on the national cadastre and land market are enacted.

Ivan Tomich, president of the Association of Farmers and Private Landowners
of Ukraine, is concerned that some 70% of land containing the famed
chornozem black soils have been earmarked by potential buyers. He
believes that a significant part of such farmland could be acquired for
prices considerably lower than market rates and that cancelling the
moratorium would result in many  rural citizens losing their land.

BYuT member Mykhaylo Hladiy, who supported overturning the presidential
veto, said, “We seek simply to have the necessary legislative base in place
to administer land sales properly, and that commonsense prevails so that we
avoid chaos.”

On Friday, President Yushchenko suffered another set- back when his veto on
the law on the Cabinet of Ministers was voted down.  It was overcome by 366
votes (Party of Regions 185, BYuT 121, Socialist Party 31, Communist Party
21 and no-faction deputies 8).  BYuT stated that the measure was adopted for
the good of the State and to end the political deadlock.  The move is set to
remove the power of the president to reject parliament’s choice of prime
minister, select foreign and defence ministers and curb his power of decree.

Our Ukraine accused BYuT of hypocrisy by siding with the Party of Regions.
Mrs Tymoshenko dismissed the allegation, “We stand hard on our position
because it was the right thing to do.It was a vote on the issues,
synchronous perhaps but not a joint strategic one. There can be no
fundamental system of cooperation with the Party of Regions.

“It’s a case of the pan calling the kettle black, for we never signed
memorandums or a pact with Yanukovych. Nor did we create a common
government with him or place our ministers in his cabinet, we have been
consistent in our approach all along.”

The president vowed to challenge this latest overriding of his veto in the
Constitutional Court, claiming that it will enable Mr Yanukovych’s ministers
to usurp his power.                                       -30-
———————————————————————————————
NOTE:  Send questions or comments to the BYuT Inform Newsletter
at taras@byti.org.ua.
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================

11.  UKRAINIAN OPPOSITION LEADER YULIYA TYMOSHENKO
              WANTS PRESIDENT TO DISSOLVE PARLIAMENT 

TV 5 Kanal, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1300 gmt 16 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Jan 16, 2007

KIEV – [Presenter] Yuliya Tymoshenko has pledged to do everything in her
power to make President [Viktor Yushchenko] dissolve parliament.

Tymoshenko was speaking to journalists after a meeting with her Israeli
counterpart Binyamin Netanyahu, who is the leader of the Israeli opposition
party Likud.

Our correspondent Olha Koshelenko has more details. [Correspondent, by
phone] Yuliya Tymoshenko believes that the powers that be do not want to the
bill on opposition passed. Nevertheless, she promised to make this happen,
without specifying how though.

Asked whether her faction voted to overcome the president’s veto on the
cabinet bill [on 12 January] to push the president towards the idea of an
early election, Tymoshenko confirmed this and said that she will do
everything in her power to make the president pluck up the courage to
dissolve parliament.                                 -30-

———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
If you are receiving more than one copy of the AUR please contact us.
========================================================
12.    THERE AIN’T NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH
      Oleksandr Moroz scored many political points. He has got the chance to

make his dream come true – to turn Ukraine into a Soviet Parliamentary Republic.

ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: by Taras Pastushenko
Original article in Ukrainian translated by Eugene Ivantsov
Ukrayinska Pravda (UP), Kyiv, Ukraine, January 18, 2007

In the evening on January 12 the entire Kyiv political beau-monde was going
nuts. All prestigious ‘spots’ were filled with jubilant masses and their
entourage, mostly of a regional origin.

The winners compared January 12 with May 9. The enemy is defeated. It is
time to celebrate.

However, through a severe hangover, the victors will suddenly realize:
“We’re screwed, folks!”

It is difficult to say if it was someone from the ‘Orange’ who opened the
eyes of the ‘regionals’ or maybe it was their own expert.

However, on January 12 Yanukovych got into such a mess which is only
compared with an unforgettable November 2004. The party will be over
and the understanding of what has happened is sure to follow.

What actually happened? The Anticrisis Coalition with the help of Yulia

Tymoshenko Bloc has actually suspended President Yushchenko from
power.

Does Yanukovych and Co. feel better now? I doubt that!

Already in November Yushchenko was unable to take part in the
decision-making. He was just getting in the way, being no obstacle for
adoption of certain decrees and resolutions.

At the same time he was a kind of a political deo spray for the Donetsk
clan, making western leaders accept Yanukovych as the PM. Reluctantly,
the political world elite did that.
                           What is the situation like now?
The US Administration is unlikely to give a positive assessment of such
actions of the Ukrainian government which has put down their protégé. They
face future presidential election and still have enough problems in Iraq.

Official Moscow has even never considered Yushchenko a possible partner
in a political dialogue.

Having taken away absolutely all authority of the executive power, the
Anticrisis Coalition failed to notice it did assume the entire
responsibility for the country, economical performance and social welfare of
its citizens.

This social welfare is not particularly good now. It is going to worsen in
the near future.

Now the shock from the new communal tariffs is somewhat virtual. However,
in a couple of weeks the tariffs will become a reality. There are problems
with gas because of crisis in Turkmenistan. The shadow of default has

loomed on the horizon.

The thing is that they cannot tell enthusiastic people now that it is
Yushchenko who is getting in the way of progress and the ‘Orange’ who
prevent Yanukovych from building a happy life and ‘improving of living
standards right away’.

Now blue-and-white chiefs are directly responsible for the country, having
no chances to shift the blame onto somebody else. Well, maybe by force of
habit they will blame Yulia Tymoshenko.

The winners have not realized yet that this victory will not profit them.
They did a hell of a job, though. The Anticrisis Coalition has overcome all
legal obstacles that might appear on their way to power.

Overriding of presidential veto upon the Law on the Cabinet of Ministers is
not the present for PM Yanukovych but for the future PM which will turn into
Kanzler by that time.

Having assumed a full responsibility for the coming social-economic crisis,
having run out the political resource in a dragged-out war with Yushchenko,
having killed the only possibility of legitimation in a civilized world,
they just cleared the road for successors.

That is not the whole story. Having voted for an imperative mandate,
‘donetskies’ secured stability of regional branches of BYuT and SPU.

They rescued the abovementioned parties from their own pressure. Thus,
Southern and Eastern branches of these parties are sure to live up to the
next elections.

We should keep in mind it happened in the right time. Regional branches of
BYuT and SPU became totally uncontrolled and unstructured. MPs started
deserting the parties, unable to stand the temptation of the gravy or
fearing for their own lives and the lives of their families.
                                        Quo prodest?
According to external features, a mittelspiel of a complex game has begun.
The authors of the games managed to stay backstage.

To find them we must answer one simple question: Quo prodest? Who
benefited from such an amazing gambit?

‘Donetskies’? All their achievements are rather virtual. Well, unless they
seriously take Yanukovych’s promises that he has come to power for 10
years. Well, really.

Someone might think that Yushchenko is the winner who got the chance to do
nothing, and assuming no responsibility whatsoever, tell the people how he
would change the situation if he had the authority.

But the thing is that Yushchenko’s voodoo has no effect at all now.

He will never get back people’s faith and trust. That will never happen. The
only thing he had is people’s respect and fear for his title – the President
of Ukraine. He has lost even this respect.

 

                    SOVIET PARLIAMENTARY REPUBLIC
Oleksandr Moroz scored many political points. He has got the chance to
make his dream come true – to turn Ukraine into a Soviet Parliamentary
Republic.

According to the Verkhovna Rada speaker, the republic is to be run by
Politbureau of parliamentary factions, represented by their ‘stock-holders’
and chaired by the speaker himself.

It is not clear if the main stock-holders consent to such table of ranks and
for how long will they let him be on the top?

Maybe it is Tymoshenko who benefited from the situation? It is quite
predictable that the entire president’s entourage headed by a clean-fingered
Yuriy Lutsenko will start babbling about treachery of Maidan values again.

Their hysteria leaves the public cool. Petro Poroshenko’s ballads do not
sound persuasive as well.

Tymoshenko’s real achievement is a new mechanism of a system structuring
of her own political project.

At the second point, she cleared the road for herself to fight for power in
the country in the legal field and on the personnel level.

At the third point, she remains the only promising politician in Ukraine.
                                         A SET PIECE
For the past to years Ukrainian politicians seemed to have no intellect.
They substituted it with two effectual principles: “Money makes the world
go round” and “birds of a feather flock together”.

But it turned out they were intellectuals. If graduates of village schools are

gambling with smart people the results may be fairly amazing, in case they
play some serious games.                         -30-
———————————————————————————————-
LINK: http://www.pravda.com.ua/en/news/2007/1/18/6986.htm
———————————————————————————————-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
         Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
========================================================
13. UKRAINE’S RULING PARTY LIKELY TO KEEP YUSHCHENKO 

ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: By Viktor Rozumakhin, Journalist
Glavred, Kiev, Ukraine, in Russian 0937 gmt 18 Jan 07
BBC Monitoring Service, United Kingdom, Jan 18, 2007

The ruling Party of Regions may want to keep Viktor Yushchenko as president
until the next presidential election, journalist Viktor Rozumakhin suggests.

He writes that Yushchenko could help Prime Minister and Party of Regions
leader Viktor Yanukovych win the 2010 election by taking votes from
opposition leader Yuliya Tymoshenko in western and central regions of the
country.

In the meantime, the pro-presidential Our Ukraine People’s Union party is
likely to reach a non-public agreement to coordinate actions with the Party
of Regions.

The following is the text of a report by the Ukrainian Glavred website on
18 January:

Despite a burst of activity from the anti-crisis coalition, paradoxically as
it may seem, Ukraine is gradually entering the stage of mutual-understanding
between the branches of power.

On closer inspection, the Party of Regions turns out to have an interest in
preserving Viktor Yushchenko as president. Regions may very well preserve
him to 2010, when the party’s own representative will have built up enough
strength.

Having increased the powers of the government and counting on Viktor
Yanukovych’s continuing career as prime minister, the coalition is unlikely
to finish Yushchenko off.

This is absolutely not out of respect for the dramatic circumstances of
Viktor Andriyovych [Yushchenko]’s election or for the manifestation of the
people’s will.

And not even the lessons drawn from the experience of [former president]
Leonid Kuchma and [Kuchma’s chief-of-staff] Viktor Medvedchuk, who
turned a once quiet and pliable financier [Yushchenko] into a politician.

Simply there are a number of circumstances that turn the Party of Regions
into an occasional and even consistent ally of the president.

[1] First, it has become clear that the king is naked – the presidential
team has failed to show anything like the declared efficacy, and the
propresidential party is so demoralized that it could not resist the
high-handed assault on the president’s position.

[2] Second, even after the strengthening of the government’s position, the
president retains sufficient powers that he has for some reason not learnt
how to use.

[3] Third, the presidency is the highest post in the land, and Regions
representatives readily repeat the thesis that the Ukrainian head of state
has the greatest powers in Eastern Europe.

So, for the time being, the Party of Regions has grounds to take care of
and coddle its former opponent, guard him against sharp movements,
and not use him as a punch-ball for boxing practice.
 YUSHCHENKO TO TAKE VOTES FROM TYMOSHENKO
It is worth remembering the specific features of the presidential race – it
will be fought by politicians who have experienced the love of the
electorate and negative human emotions.

Viktor Yanukovych, who has been through the full course for a Ukrainian
politician in 2004-2006 and has managed to return to power, remains the
Party of Regions sole presidential candidate.

It is hardly likely that a more popular politician will emerge in the
southern and eastern regions, and even a fall in his popularity would not
mean his voters going for Tymoshenko or Yushchenko, but more likely the
emergence of marginal figures of a pro-Russian and separatist bent.

The prime minister is objectively growing and has built up a team that is
commensurate in its intellectual potential with the president’s, and is able
from time to time to implement multistage operations.

Despite the existing friction within the party, it is objectively beneficial
for the Regions to promote their leader, clearing the prime ministerial post

for young and ambitious party members.

It is clear that Yushchenko’s current rating leaves few illusions as to a
favourable outcome for the current head of state in the presidential
election, whenever it is held. An early parliamentary election could also
spark an out-of-turn presidential campaign.

This has long been understood on Bankova [street in Kiev, address of
presidential secretariat], and Yushchenko even tried to launch a second
round of the “universalization” of the political elite [reference to the
declaration (“universal”) of national unity signed by political leaders on 3
August 2006], but he was too weak to overturn the results of the agreement
between the anticrisis coalition and the Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc.

The presidential team will now have to take the role of “firemen” ironing
out the contradictions. They do have something to offer the Regions. If
Viktor Andriyovych’s ambitions are properly fired up, he could well become a
strong rival for Yuliya Tymoshenko in the central and eastern regions. The
background to this conflict is simple.

Yushchenko is hardly likely to forgive Tymoshenko her energetic
participation in the attempt to inflate the government’s powers at the
expense of the president’s.

The struggle for votes between the former leaders of Maydan [Orange
Revolution venue in Kiev] will be very good for Viktor Yanukovych. It is
important for him not to allow competitors on his own territory and secure
even minimal support in the west and centre.
  COOPERATION BETWEEN OUR UKRAINE, REGIONS

The Party of Regions has the opportunity to make several beneficial steps.
It should not be forgotten that the ideological differences between Party of
Regions and [pro-presidential party] Our Ukraine People’s Union are not so
great – really just over the language issue and some aspects of foreign
policy.

The unification of two virtually non-ideological party projects would be
utopian, but non-public coordination of actions would be quite possible. Not
so much is needed for that – to depict for the current Our Ukraine
membership its prospects after 2010 and the likely defeat of Yushchenko.

In other words, a “goodfella’s word of honour” guaranteeing that there will
be no “black carveup” in business.

For obvious reasons, Yuliya Volodymyrivna is in no position to hand out
anything like guarantees to “the dear friends” [the business representatives
in Our Ukraine who were formerly close to Yushchenko] – the voices of the
“businesses” that have not gained access to financial flows at the national
level are sounding increasingly loudly in her “heart” [presumably a
reference to the Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc’s heart-shaped logo].

True, it cannot be said that the Regions will be so kind as to provide the
president with comfortable working conditions during the second half of his
term.

It is likely that their respect for him will not go further than observing
procedural formalities. While in summer 2006, the Party of Regions was ready
to make concessions, now its leaders see that there is nobody left to make
concessions to.

So the anticrisis coalition will in exchange adopt draft law 3207-1 [on
amendments to the constitution to improve the system of local
self-government] in the first reading, to please speaker Oleksandr Moroz
and ensure that political reforms are irreversible.

After that it will be possible to launch the trading for the points of the
law on the president of Ukraine that will not only allow Viktor Yushchenko
to work out with honour the remainder of his term, but also preserve the
attractiveness of the post for the next president.                -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
14.              A FRAGILE HOPE FOR COMPROMISE
         Rivalry between Ukraine’s president, premier to continue in 2007

ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: By Olesya Yakhno
Den, Kiev, in Ukrainian 11 Jan 07; p 1
BBC Monitoring Service – United Kingdom, Jan 12, 2007

The cold war for power between Ukraine’s president and prime minister will
continue in 2007, a newspaper has reported. Two political commentators said
in an interview that both president Viktor Yushchenko and Prime Minister
Viktor Yanukovych had practical reasons to continue their opposition,
including the need to keep voter sympathy.

However, they said this stand-off would likely give way to compromises on
such important issues as the law on the Cabinet of Ministers and
constitution reform.

The following is the text of the article by Olesya Yakhno, entitled “A
fragile hope for compromise”, published in the Ukrainian newspaper Den
on 11 January:

The Christmas holidays performed their deed after all: both the prime
minister and the president appear to be in a good mood. After a long
holiday, no-one wants to renew the stand-off.

“We have to leave that negativity which there was in cooperation with the
presidential secretariat and the president personally in last year”, Viktor
Yanukovych said yesterday [10 January], in opening the first meeting of the
cabinet.

Moreover, the prime minister noted it was necessary to analyse “all the
vetoes signed in 2006″ and in case of a mistake on the part of the
government “they need to be fixed in good time”. In short, Mr Yanukovych
extended his hand to Mr Yushchenko. And it appeared that hand was not left
hanging in the air.

At the end of the cabinet meeting, [presidential adviser] Arseniy Yatsenyuk
said there would be a meeting of the president and the prime minister and
speaker at the end of this week. However, Viktor Yushchenko decided not to
wait until the end of the week. At 1500 [1300 GMT] Viktor Yanukovych
together with [Speaker] Oleksandr Moroz arrived at the presidential
secretariat.

The discussion was long. Well, enough topics had piled up to be discussed.
As the lay-out on this issue was under way, the president, prime minister
and speaker were still negotiating at Bankova Street [where the secretariat
is located].

We asked Den’s experts: is peace between the president and the prime
minister possible?

[1] Volodymyr Fesenko, head of the Penta centre of applied

political studies:
The opposition will continue. It is most likely that relations between the
presidential and government structures in 2007 will develop along the lines
of something between a cold war and an exercise in political tension. The
logic of a cold war is based on two reasons.

First, the fight for control over structures of power. The second reason, a
ratings rivalry, a competition for voter sympathy. And this is why the cold
war will continue, it has objective reasons behind it. But on the other
hand, both the prime minister’s team and the president’s team will need to
periodically make agreements and find compromises.

That is, this tendency towards peace will arise periodically. It is another
matter that this will more likely be local compromises and intermittent
peace. Put more simply, this is the schematic: first they will butt heads,
shoot out information sparks and then they will understand that they have to
find an agreement anyway, to find a compromise. That happened with the
budget.

I think something similar will happen with the law On the Cabinet of
Ministers and on many other normative acts. But one must not forget that we
will have a very conflict-ridden topic before us in February – reviewing the
issue of constitution reform. And again that will lead us to increased
tension between the presidential and government structures.

[2] Oleksandr Derhachev, political commentator:
First, one must look at what happened a few months ago, in the autumn and
beginning of winter. What happened was the anti-crisis coalition filling in
the legal “gaps”.

Via personnel and organizational decisions they extended their practical
influence. That is, in places where the law is not written, they set up the
domination of this branch of power.

And I think this process has not run itself out and without any doubt this
offensive will continue. And calls to live as friends show that no-one needs
destabilization, that the conflict should be regulated and, as far as
possible, not witnessed by the public at large.

Besides this, it is very important for each of the opposing sides that it
not be considered the instigator of conflicts. This is where there is logic
in Yanukovych’s statements. You may recall the famous postulate: “The
aggressor always loves peace”.

When he has already captured the prize, he is for peace and stabilization.
At the same time, one can welcome this process of adjusting to new
circumstances.

The government has been forced to adjust, since it is in the sights of both
the opposition and public opinion (after all, criticism is even coming from
within their electorate). And so one can say that there are reasons and
stimuli for improving and evolving. But I do not think that any peace will
take place. It will simply be a controlled process. Where there is the
possibility, positions will be taken.

Both the constitutional parliamentary majority and the government have
significant advantages and they will use them. And in everything else they
are ready to cooperate, since without the president there is a lot they
cannot accomplish on their own.                           -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
15.  KYIV FORTRESS DEMOLISHED: HISTORIC SITES IN
          UKRAINE’S CAPITAL CONTINUE TO DISAPPEAR
               Kyiv is being robbed of its historic face. Builders can build
 anywhere, everything depends on the size of the kickbacks to the bureaucrats

By Tetiana Kolesnychenko, The Day Weekly Digest #1
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, 16 January 2007

he Day has often written about the so-called “Kyiv phenomenon,” the term
used to describe construction in the city’s historic quarter.

Whereas in the past investors could only get their paws on children’s
playgrounds and pleasure gardens, now they are targeting nature preserves,
parks, and even museums.

Paradoxically, even the most mindless and absurd eyesores in the capital of
Ukraine have received the go-ahead from bureaucrats and experts, and no one
can change the existing situation, even the president, let alone Mayor
Leonid Chernovetsky.

Banning the build-up of the city’s historic quarter was high on the list of
the mayor’s pre-election slogans. But promises have remained just that.

Nobody even blinked when on the evening of Dec. 30 special vehicles pulled
up to the Kyiv Fortress, the world’s largest earth fortification, and razed
three mid-19th-century structures to the ground.

These architectural monuments, which were torn down on New Year’s Eve, are
making way for a multistoried residential complex that builders, investors,
and municipal bureaucrats think is more important for the city.

Meanwhile, for the last several years the administration of the Kyiv
Fortress has been trying to bring all its museum buildings together into a
single complex.

Instructions to this effect came from President Viktor Yushchenko, Prime
Minister Viktor Yanukovych, and Verkhovna Rada Speaker Oleksandr Moroz.

Yet, by all accounts, the signatures of Ukraine’s three bosses failed to
scare the builders. Initially, the Kyiv City Council gave permission for the
construction of a residential complex and demolition of a few dilapidated
museum structures that were used as sheds.

But the builders also thought it necessary to tear down three monuments of
national importance, including the former Kyiv telegraph, the only structure
that had retained its original shape.

Kyiv Fortress director Viacheslav Kulinich says that the builders have found
a formal excuse: they allege that the three structures did not have a
protection number and did not display any information plaques.

“This is nonsense. Maybe they have no protection number, but even if the
builders could prove this in court, construction on the territory of the
preserve is banned,” says Kulinich.

The administration still does not know what to do in this situation, but its
members intend to take up the cudgels against the brazen builders.

Kulinich says an unidentified person has already threatened him with
dismissal. It should be noted that the museum management also shares the
blame for the destruction of the three historical monuments: although the
territory of the preserve measures ten square kilometers, the management is
directly responsible for keeping all the structures safe.

How could it happen that three “unnecessary” buildings were torn down, even
though it was New Year’s Eve? Incidentally, the vehicles arrived on Dec. 30.

The Day asked some experts to comment on the situation. They all agree that
Kyiv has already been robbed of its historical face.

[1] Mykola PARKHOMENKO, first deputy, All-Ukrainian Civic Organization

for the Protection of Architectural Monuments:
“In general, construction on the preserve’s territory without permission
from the Cabinet of Ministers is banned. The monument should be struck
off the register, which only the Cabinet can do.

But as a rule, builders do everything on their own, leaving us to hold the
bag. I must also say that I cannot remember a single instance when the
culprits were prosecuted. Such matters are usually settled out of court,
much to the satisfaction of both bureaucrats and investors.

The whole problem is that all the laws, not only the one on construction,

do not work in Ukraine. You can break the law and get off scot-free.

There is no balanced policy. What could really change the situation is a
reform at all levels. We must make an all-out effort to raise the juridical
culture of people.

Even if we begin pursuing the builders, there will be no result unless
people choose to obey the law. Every year Ukraine loses about 500
archeological finds due to unsanctioned excavations. And who is to be
brought to justice? I don’t know! The city’s historic center no longer
exists.

You can see the latest glaring example at 2a Zhytomyrska Street, where the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs is building a hotel-and-office center. Please
tell me where they took the funds from if no budgetary expenditures have
been envisioned for major construction in many years?”

[2] Larysa SKORYK, architect and Corresponding Member of the

Academy of Architecture and Arts:
“Kyiv bureaucrats have struck a gold mine. You can make any kind of deal:
everything depends on the size of the kickback. Kyiv is not losing its
historic face, it has already lost it. Above all, this situation is bad for
the city’s economy, especially the tourist sector.

In all countries tourism is a good way to fill the state coffers. In
Ukraine, this sector is still underdeveloped. But do you really think that
tourists will be coming from all over the world just to see eyesores?

Kyiv has always been famous for its unique combination of landscape and
architecture. And now the once omnipresent green oases are vanishing

one by one.

Right now the banks of the Dnipro are practically intact, but given the
current pace of construction, this will not last for very long. As for
corruption control, I think we must begin with the officials who issue
licenses. They do as they please. Such people should be prosecuted.”

[3] Zhanna KOVBA, Associate Professor, Ph.D. (History):
“Along with the fortresses Kyiv has lost hope for the existence of the Law
on the Protection of Architectural Monuments. A historical monument was
destroyed in broad daylight, during a holiday, right before everyone’s eyes!
And nobody is held responsible.

The Museum of Kyiv has been closed for almost three years, which means
that there is no center to monitor the condition of monuments and shape
public opinion. Historical Kyiv is being lost before our very eyes.”  -30-
———————————————————————————————–
LINK: http://www.day.kiev.ua/175442/
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
16.   HISTORIC LANDMARK CHURCH IN UKRAINE ENDANGERED
   Scholar fears preservation of Church of St. Cyril in Kyiv is compromised.

UPDATE: By Olenka Z. Pevny, PhD., Assistant Professor of Art

and Art History the University of Richmond, VA, specializing in
Late Antique, Byzantine and Medieval art history.
BRAMA.COM, New York, Saturday, Jan 20, 2007

On January 11, 2007 Brama.com published a report by Dr. Olenka Z. Pevny
regarding the threat to the preservation Ukraine’s most important 12th
century monument – the Church of St. Cyril of Alexandria in Kyiv.

 
Below is an update on the situation from Dr. Pevny, who continues to
receive information regarding developments in Ukraine.

The Church of St. Cyril (the Kyrylivs’ka tserkva) is a monumental princely
foundation of the Kyivan Rus’ period. It is part of the National Preserve of
the St. Sofia Cathedral that falls under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of
Building and Housing and Communal Services of Ukraine.

It is the only 12th century monument in all of Ukraine to preserve medieval
frescoes and it is one of two monuments in all East Slavic lands that has
preserved significant sections of medieval painting (the other monument
being the Church of the Savior in the Mirozh Monastery in Pskov, Russia).

After the Cathedral of St. Sofiia, the Church of St. Cyril of Alexandria and
its frescoes is the second most important medieval monument in Ukraine. It
is also the only Byzantine Orthodox monument to preserve a depiction of the
life cycle of St. Cyril of Alexandria.

In recognition of its uniqueness and cultural importance the Church of St.
Cyril was designated a cultural/historic landmark belonging to all the
people of Ukraine. Its care has for many years fallen to the directorship of
the National Preserve of St. Sofia.

Its museum status has allowed all visitors regardless of nationality and
religious confession to appreciate the medieval murals, the most important
of which are located in the areas of the sanctuary apses.

The recognition of the Church of St. Cyril as a cultural monument also
assured the proper monitoring of the humidity and temperature in the
structure and the ongoing preservation of the wall paintings.

In 2004 the status of the Church of St. Cyril changed significantly. The
monument was designated to service a parish of the Ukrainian Orthodox
Church of the Moscow Patriarchate.

Under an agreement signed on November 12, 2004 by the acting director of
the National Preserve of the St. Sofiia Cathedral, V.V. Kyrylenko, and the
ecclesiastic Fedir Sheremeta, the unique historical monument was given over
for permanent use with no financial obligations to the Ukrainian Orthodox
Church of the Moscow Patriarchate.

This agreement limited museum access to the Church of St. Cyril to four
hours a day, from noon to four, five days a week. Soon thereafter the Church
was closed for restoration work and in October 2006 the National Research
Restoration Centre of Ukraine issued a report on the fragility of the
frescoes and painting and the need to maintain a proper microclimate in the
building and restrict access.

The report also mentions the damage caused by the burning of candles and
oil lamps. Despite these concerns, at the petitioning of the parish priest
Fedir Sheremetev, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych recently issued an

ordinance confirming the conditions of the 2004 agreement.

In the last few days His Holiness the Metropolitan Volodymyr of Kyiv
(Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate) has issued verbal
assurances that at the present time the walls will not be repainted, but
that new icons will be displayed in the church for veneration.

The issues touched upon by desired preservation of the Church of St. Cyril
of Alexandria are complicated indeed. In many cases the preservation of
religious monuments requires the negotiation of an understanding between
cultural preservationists and ecclesiastics.

The case of the Church of St. Cyril, and a select number of other monuments
in Ukraine, should form an exception to this rule. There is but one well
preserved 11th century monument in Ukraine with fresco imagery – the
Cathedral of St. Sofiia.

There also is only one relatively well-preserved 12th century monument in
Ukraine with fresco imagery – the Church of St. Cyril of Alexandria. These
monuments first and foremost belong to the Ukrainian people.

They are also part of the cultural heritage of the entire world. Access to
these structures should be restricted only on the basis of the requirements
posed by their preservation.

The scheduling of several church services daily in a 12th century structure,
the accommodation of large crowds of faithful rubbing and leaning against
the frescoes walls, the opening of door and the burning of candles, lamps,
and incense is bound to damage the existing painting.

The installation of other icons in the church, their removal and
reinstallation, will also cause harm to the underlying images and prevent
their viewing for museum visitors.

The preservation of the Orthodox heritage of Ukraine should be secured for
future generations. There are other structures that can accommodate the need
of faithful besides the handful of the most important medieval structures to
survive in the country.

Ukrainian colleagues interested in the preservation of the Church of St.
Cyril have indicated that letters sent to Ukrainian government officials may
help assure the preservation of this unique monument.          -30-
———————————————————————————————–
                                      SAMPLE LETTER
I am (We are) writing to express concern regarding the preservation of
Ukraine’s most important 12th century monument – the Church of St. Cyril
of  Alexandria (Kyrylivs’ka tserkva).

News is reaching us that the Church of St. Cyril, which is part of the
Cultural Preserve of the Cathedral of St. Sofiia is in danger of being
deprived of its protective status as museum.

Indications are that such a move may precipitate the endangerment of the
murals by such prominent nineteenth-century artists as M. Vrubel and M.
Murashko, and compromise the preservation of unique 12th century frescoes.

The Church of St. Cyril is the most important 12th century monument in
Ukraine. Its medieval frescoes are unparalleled not only in terms of Kyivan
Rus’ visual culture, but also in the context of Middle Byzantine art.

They are the only specimens of monumental 12th century Orthodox
iconography to survive in the former Rus’ and present Ukrainian capital
city, Kyiv.

Among the truly irreplaceable compositions in the church is the life cycle
of the 5th century Patriarch of Alexandria, St. Cyril. Images from the life
of this saint constitute the only representation of the life of this church
father in the world.

Together with the Church of the Savior in the Mirozh Monastery in Pskov,
Russia, the frescoes in the Church of St. Cyril comprise the most important
examples of medieval monumental painting executed in the Byzantine tradition
to survive in East Slavic territories.

There are so few actual medieval monuments remaining in Ukraine and even
fewer with iconographic evidence from the Kyivan Rus’ period that preserving
the Kyrylivs’ka tserkva must be a cultural priority.

According to colleagues in Kyiv the current crisis unfolded in the following
manner. Since 1994, the Church of St. Cyril has been officially recognized
as a dual-use building, that is, designated both as a historical site to be
used by the public as a museum and as a church to be used for worship.

The Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate was allowed to hold
services in the church. Since 2004 measures have been taken to allow for
the ultimate transfer of the Church of St. Cyril to the Church.

In a recent church newsletter the parish priest complained about the Vrubel
oil paintings not being ‘iconic’ enough, and expressed displeasure with
caricature-like style of the frescoes prompting fears that the interior of
the monument may be altered should it fall under the jurisdiction of the
Church.

I (We) urge you to intervene in this matter and help protect this unique
historical and cultural monument. The preservation of this monument should
be a national and international priority. Its appreciation should be insured
for all Ukrainians and visitors interested in learning about Ukraine’s
medieval past.

This can only be achieved by maintaining the monuments museum status
and ensuring government protection and oversight. Please help preserve
the Church of St. Cyril for future generations and assure assess to this
monument and its paintings for all visitors while giving priority to its
preservation.

Sincerely, (signature)
——————————————————————————————-
Listed below are the addresses and e-mail addresses of individuals to
contact regarding this matter. Everyone interested in the preservation of
Ukraine’s cultural heritage is encouraged to mail letters of concern.

Yushchenko, Viktor Andriiovych
President of Ukraine
252220 Kyiv, Ukraine
vul. Bankova 11 

 
Yushchenko, Kateryna
Head, Supervisory Board
International Charitable Fund “Ukraine 3000”
22A Borychiv Tik St.
Kyiv 04070 Ukraine
Yanukovych, Viktor Fedorovych
Prime Minister
Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine
01008 Kyiv, Ukraine
vul. Hryshevs’koho 12/2
pr@kmu.gov.ua

Oleksandr Oleksandrovych Moroz
Head of Verkhovna Rada (Supreme Council)
252019 Kyiv, Ukraine
vul. Hrushevs’koho 5
Moroz.Oleksandr@rada.gov.ua
postmaster@rada.kiev.ua

Volodymyr Vasyl’ovych Rybak, Minister
Ministry of Building and Housing and Communal Services of Ukraine
01025 Kyiv, Ukraine
vul. Velyka Zhytomyrs’ka 9
komitet@build.gov.ua

Yurii Petrovych Bohyts’kyi
Minister, Ministry of Culture and Tourism of Ukraine
01601 Kyiv, Ukraine
vul. Ivana Franka 19
miniater@mincult.gov.ua
monument@mincult.gov.ua
control@mincult.gov.ua
chantal@mincult.gov.ua

Volodymyr Ogruzko
Director, National Commission of Ukraine for UNESCO
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
01018 Kyiv, Ukraine
Mykhailivs’ka ploshcha 1
ukgs@mfa.gov.us / unesco@mfa.gov.ua

His Holiness Volodymyr,
Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Ukraine
01015 Kyiv, Ukraine
vul. Sichnevoho povstannia, 25, korp. 49
mitropolia@svitonline.com

Oleh Shamshur
Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Ambassador of Ukraine to the US
Embassy of Ukraine in U.S.
3350 M St., NW
Washington D.C. 20007

Mme. Françoise Rivière
Assistant-Director-General for Culture of UNESCO
2 United Nations Plaza, Rm. 900
New York, NY 10017
f.riviere@unesco.org
———————————————————————————————–
http://www.brama.com/news/press/2007/01/070120pevny_stcyril.html
———————————————————————————————–

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
17. UKRAINIAN MUSEUM-ARCHIVES OF CLEVELAND CONCERNED
       ABOUT PRESERVATION OF CHURCH OF ST. CYRIL IN KYIV

Ukrainian Museum-Archives, Cleveland, Ohio, Saturday, January 20, 2007

CLEVELAND – The Ukrainian Museum-Archives of Cleveland is extremely
concerned regarding issues that have come to light regarding the
preservation of the Church of St. Cyril of Alexandria in Kyiv, Ukraine.

This church has been deprived of its UNESCO World Heritage preservation
status and is being allowed to fall into the hands of the Orthodox Church of
the Moscow Patriarchate, which wants to remodel the interior and paint over
the 12th century murals and frescoes.

Please, please follow the link provided below to read more about this
situation and take the time to write letters of concern and protest to the
persons indicated.
http://www.brama.com/news/press/2007/01/070120pevny_stcyril.html

Perhaps we, together with the rest of our Ukrainian Diaspora, can help
prevent the destruction of the 12th century church of St. Cyril in Kyiv.
Thank you!                                         -30-
—————————————————————————————–
The Ukrainian Museum-Archives, 1202 Kenilworth Ave, Cleveland,
OH 44113, http://www.umacleveland.org
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
     You are welcome to send us names for the AUR distribution list.
========================================================
18. RESTORATION OF ST. CYRIL’S CHURCH NEARING COMPLETION
                           Total restoration of frescos starting in 2006

By Viktoria Herasymchuk, The Day Weekly Digest #41
Kyiv, Ukraine, December 20, 2005

The restoration of a unique 12th-century monument, St. Cyril’s Church in
Kyiv, is nearing completion. The church is still closed to visitors, as the
surrounding premises are still being landscaped, but the church is ready. In
the past several years the church’s main attraction – original 12th-century
frescoes – was at risk.

As a result of errors committed during a Soviet-era restoration effort,
humidity inside the church reached levels four or five times higher than the
norm. This could have led to the plaster peeling off together with the
artwork. Fungus posed no less a threat to both the frescos and murals by
Vrubel.

“However, this is not just about the frescoes,” says Nelia Kukovalska,
general manager of the St. Sophia Kyiv National Architectural Preserve,
which includes St. Cyril’s Church.

“The ancient monument itself was suffering. Groundwater had reached the
foundations, creating new cracks and causing old cracks to spread. No water
drainage system was installed, resulting in soil subsidence, which was
slowly destroying the church.

Now, after carrying out a series of preventive measures, we have made it
impossible for the aggressive, external environment to damage the monument.
         CARRY OUT RESTORATION OF FRESCOS IN 2006
Thanks to moisture proofing of the groundwork and church walls, the

humidity level will be stable. This will allow us to carry out a total restoration
of all the frescos starting next year.”
                  ARCHEOLOGICAL DISCOVERY MADE
An archeological discovery was made during the restoration: workers
unearthed the foundations of the original structural additions to St. Cyril’s
Church, dating to the 12th and 17th centuries. Although experts were aware
that these foundations existed, they did not know their actual
configuration.

Now they have a new field for research. The room whose foundations were
unearthed by builders under archeological supervision was used for divine
services and as a funeral chamber. Many graves were discovered as well.

After being carefully examined, the foundations were buried. “Ideally, of
course, we would like to place the foundations under transparent glass with
lighting, so that people can walk on top of it.

Today, however, we do not have the technical and financial means to do
 this,” says Kukovalska. The discovery was buried beneath a layer of fresh
sand, and a memorial plaque will be mounted on the site.

The design and construction company Osnova Solsif executed the entire
project to refurbish St. Cyril’s Church at its own cost (close to UAH
1,200,000). The plight of Ukraine’s cultural heritage is common knowledge.

Culture and Tourism Minister Ihor Likhovy presented the following statistics
during his recent address to parliament on Government Day: in various
Ukrainian regions between 50 and 70 percent of cultural and architectural
monuments are in unsatisfactory condition, and one in ten monuments is in
critical condition. The cost of emergency controls, repairs, and restoration
at all these sites is estimated at UAH 600 million.

Naturally, curators of museums and historical and cultural preserves know
better than to expect such funds from the state budget. They are pinning
their hopes on philanthropists, even though charity is not very widespread
in Ukraine, and donations are not large enough.

Still, Kukovalska believes that the ice has been broken between the business
and cultural communities. So far another five contracts have been signed
with companies that want to support the St. Sofia Kyiv National
Architectural Preserve.                                     -30-

———————————————————————————————–
LINK: http://www.day.kiev.ua/154819/
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
19.     TOP UKRAINIAN OFFICIAL TO LAY WREATH AT TARAS
      SHEVCHENKO MONUMENT IN WASHINGTON, JANUARY 22
                        In commemoration of Ukraine’s Unity Day

Action Ukraine Report (AUR), Washington, D.C., Sun, Jan 21, 2007

WASHINGTON: Vitaliy Haiduk, Secretary of Ukraine’s National Security
and Defense Council, will lay a wreath at the Taras Shevchenko Monument
in Washington on Monday, January 22 at 9:20 am to commemorate Ukraine’s
Unity Day. 

The public is cordially invited to attend the ceremony, which will last
approximately 15-20 minutes. 

The Taras Shevchenko Monument is located between 22nd and 23rd
Streets and P Street, NW.  The closest metro stop is DuPont Circle.

Haiduk was appointed by President Viktor Yuschenko to head the
National Security and Defense Council on October 10, 2006.  Haiduk
has held several previous government appointments including deputy
prime minister, deputy energy minister and minister of fuel and energy.

Vitalii Haiduk is president of the Industrial Group consortium, which

co-owns and manages assets of the Donbas Industrial Union corporation
(Donetsk) and is reported to be one of Ukraine’s wealthiest men. 

Haiduk will spend several days in Washington visiting with various
U.S. government officials, Ukrainian organizations, and other groups.

Further questions may be addressed to Mr. Oleksandr Mykhalchuk,
Counselor at the Embassy of Ukraine, at olex@ukremb.com
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
20. UKRAINE: PRES YUSHCHENKO LEAVES FOR SWITZERLAND

           TO UNDERGO SCHEDULED MEDICAL EXAMINATION

Ukrainian News Agency, Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, January 19, 2007

KYIV – President Viktor Yuschenko has left for Switzerland to undergo
scheduled medical examination. Presidential press service has disclosed this
in a statement.

‘President Viktor Yuschenko has left for Switzerland to undergo scheduled
medical examination and program on excretion of dioxin form organism,’ the
report reads.

As Ukrainian News earlier reported, in September, investigators of Yuschenko
poisoning ordered an expert examination to determine the country that
produced the dioxin.

The second expertise conducted by a commission comprising Ukrainian
specialists, experts from the United States, Germany, and Japan confirmed
the previous findings by laboratories of the Netherlands, Germany, Great
Britain and Belgium that Yuschenko’s body contains dioxin, poisonous
substance. The PGO established that Yuschenko was deliberately poisoned

in September 2004 with the aim of murdering him.            -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
   If you are receiving more than one copy of the AUR please contact us.
    Please contact us if you no longer wish to receive the AUR.    
       You are welcome to send us names for the AUR distribution list.
   If you are missing some issues of the AUR please let us know.
========================================================
         “ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR”
         A Free, Not-For-Profit, Independent, Public Service Newsletter
                With major support from The Bleyzer Foundation
 
      Articles are Distributed For Information, Research, Education
                Academic, Discussion and Personal Purposes Only
                                  Additional readers are welcome.
========================================================
      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 mwilliams@SigmaBleyzer.com.
               “UKRAINE – A COUNTRY OF NEW OPPORTUNITIES”
========================================================
               ACTION UKRAINE PROGRAM – SPONSORS
                              Action Ukraine Report (AUR)
               Holodomor Art and Graphics Collection & Exhibitions
          “Working to Secure & Enhance Ukraine’s Democratic Future”

1.  THE BLEYZER FOUNDATION, Dr. Edilberto Segura,
Chairman; Victor Gekker, Executive Director, Kyiv, Ukraine;
    Additional supporting sponsors for the Action Ukraine Program are:
2. UKRAINIAN FEDERATION OF AMERICA (UFA), Zenia Chernyk,
Chair, Health Initiative; Vera M. Andryczyk, President; Huntingdon
Valley, Pennsylvania
3. KIEV-ATLANTIC GROUP, David and Tamara Sweere, Daniel
Sweere, Kyiv and Myronivka, Ukraine, 380 44 298 7275 in Kyiv,
kau@ukrnet.net
4.  ESTRON CORPORATION, Grain Export Terminal Facility &
Oilseed Crushing Plant, Ilvichevsk, Ukraine
5. Law firm UKRAINIAN LEGAL GROUP, Irina Paliashvili, President;
Kiev and Washington, general@rulg.com, www.rulg.com.
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, yuriy.sivitsky@softline.kiev.ua; Volia Software website:
http://www.volia-software.com/ or Bill Hunter, CEO Volia Software,
Houston, TX  77024; bill.hunter@volia-software.com.
8. ODUM– Association of American Youth of Ukrainian Descent,
Minnesota Chapter, Natalia Yarr, Chairperson
9. UKRAINE-U.S. BUSINESS COUNCIL, Washington, D.C.,
Morgan Williams, SigmaBleyzer, Acting-President & Chairman,
Executive Committee, Board of Directors; John Stephens, Cape
Point Capital, Secretary/Treasurer; Shannan Herzfeld, ADM, Chair,
Agribusiness Working Group; Irina Paliashvili, Ukrainian Legal
Group, Chair, Legal Affairs Working Group.
10. UKRAINIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH OF THE USA, Archbishop
Antony, South Bound Brook, New Jersey, http://www.uocofusa.org
11. UKRAINIAN AMERICAN COORDINATING COUNCIL (UACC),
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: http://www.USUkraine.org
13. WJ GROUP of Ag Companies, Kyiv, Ukraine, David Holpert, Chief
Financial Officer, Chicago, IL; http://www.wjgrain.com/en/links/index.html
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, www.eugeniadallas.com.
15. ALEX AND HELEN WOSKOB, College Station, Pennsylvania
16. SWIFT FOUNDATION, San Luis Obispo, California
17. TRAVEL TO UKRAINE website, http://www.TravelToUkraine.org,
A program of the U.S-Ukraine Foundation, Washington, D.C.
18. BUYUKRAINE.ORG website, http://www.BuyUkraine.org.
A program of the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation, Washington, D.C.
========================================================
 TO BE ON OR OFF THE FREE AUR DISTRIBUTION LIST
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 morganw@patriot.net. Information about
your occupation and your interest in Ukraine is also appreciated.
 
If you do not wish to read the ACTION UKRAINE REPORT please
contact us immediately by e-mail to morganw@patriot.net.  If you are
receiving more than one copy please let us know so this can be corrected
 
  SPAM & BULK MAIL BLOCKERS ARE A REAL PROBLEM                 

If you do not receive a copy of the AUR it is probably because of a
SPAM OR BULK MAIL BLOCKER maintained by your server or by
yourself on your computer. Spam and bulk mail blockers are set in very
arbitrary and impersonal ways and block out e-mails because of words
found in many news stories or the way the subject line is organized or
the header or who know what.
 
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, The Bleyzer Foundation

Emerging Markets Private Equity Investment Group
President (Acting) and Chairman, Executive Committee of the
Board of Directors, Ukraine-U.S. Business Council
P.O. Box 2607, Washington, D.C. 20013, Tel: 202 437 4707
mwilliams@SigmaBleyzer.com; www.SigmaBleyzer.com
========================================================
       Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely.
========================================================
return to index [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

AUR#805 Jan 15 Ukraine’s Power Battle Continues; 12th Century Relic Threatened; Ukraine’s Space Pioneer Korolyov; Armenia; Potemkin’s Villages


=========================================================
ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR
An International Newsletter, The Latest, Up-To-Date
In-Depth Ukrainian News, Analysis and Commentary

Ukrainian History, Culture, Arts, Business, Religion,
Sports, Government, and Politics, in Ukraine and Around the World


UKRAINE HAD A DREAM
Is It Still Alive and Well? Is It Being Crushed?

ACTION UKRAINE REPORT – AUR – Number 805
Mr. E. Morgan Williams, Publisher and Editor, SigmaBleyzer
WASHINGTON, D.C., MONDAY, JANUARY 15, 2007

——- 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. PARLIAMENT OVERRIDES PRESIDENTIAL VETO OF LAW
TO STRENGTHEN PRIME MINISTER’S POWERS
Associated Press, Moscow, Russia, Friday, Jan 12 2007

2. UKRAINE CLOSER TO CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS
Journal Staff Report, Kyiv, Ukraine, Sunday, January 14, 2007

3. IS A WAY OUT OF A POLITICAL LABYRINTH NEAR?
By Yulia Kyseliova, UCIPR analyst, Research Update, Vol. 13, No 1/473
Ukrainian Center for Independent Political Research (UCIPR)
Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, January 13, 2007

4. UKRAINE PARLIAMENT CLIPS YUSHCHENKO’S WINGS
By Roman Olearchyk in Kiev, Financial Times
London, United Kingdom, Saturday, January 13, 2007

5. 12TH CENTURY RELIC IN UKRAINE THREATENED
Scholar fears Church of St. Cyril in Kyiv is the latest victim of political intrigue.
By Olenka Z. Pevny, PhD., Faculty member, Univ of Richmond, VA
Department of Art & Art History, specializing in Late Antique,
Byzantine and Medieval art history.
BRAMA.COM, New York, New York, Thursday, January 11, 2007

6. RUSSIA & UKRAINE MARK CENTENARY OF SERGEY KOROLYOV
Itar-Tass, Moscow/Kiev, Friday, January 12, 2007

7. UKRAINIAN SPACE HERO SERGEI KOROLYOV HONORED ON

By Vladimir Isachenkov, Associated Press
Moscow, Russia, Friday, January 12, 2007

8. A TRIBUTE TO SERGEY KOROLYOV: SOVIET SPACE PIONEER
By William Atkins, ITWire, Australia, Monday, 15 January 2007

9. THE MAN WHO MINED THE STARS
Man who designed the world’s first satellite, Sputnik and put first man in
space. He was sent as Convict N1442 to the gold mines of one of the most
feared parts of the Gulag labour camps the Kolyma region of eastern Siberia.
By Patrick Jackson, BBC News, United Kingdom, Friday, January 12 2007

10. SERGEI KOROLEV: FOUNDER OF SOVIET SPACE PROGRAM
Born in Ukraine in 1906, educated in Odessa, Kiev, and Moscow
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/korolev.html

11. IN THE SHADOW OF THE GULAG
A story of two brothers caught in Stalin’s hellish penal system.
BOOK REVIEW, FICTION: By Thomas Mallon
Book World, The Washington Post,
Washington, D.C., Sunday, January 14, 2007; Page BW03

12. CALIFORNIA GENOCIDE VICTIMS’ MEMORIAL FOR ALL PEOPLE
WHO FACED GENOCIDE AND ETHNIC CLEANSING
Ambitious project stirs emotions among widely varied communities.
By Peter Hecht – Bee Capitol Bureau
Sacramento, California, Tuesday, December 26, 2006

13. UNWITTING PARTY TO GENOCIDE
The International Criminal Court Is Complicating Efforts to Save Darfur
OP-ED:
By Stephen Rademaker, The Washington Post
Washington, D.C.Thursday, January 11, 2007; Page A25

14. CAMPAIGN TO END THE CYCLE OF GENOCIDE
Exposing the denial of all genocide
Capitol Hill Screening of ‘SCREAMERS’ at Jan. 17th, 2007

15. PRO-ARMENIAN U.S. LAWMAKER SAYS HE WILL INTRODUCE
GENOCIDE RESOLUTION SOON
Turkish Daily News, Ankara, Turkey, Tuesday, January 9, 2007

16. THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE ISSUE: WHO PUBLICIZES THE
GENOCIDE MORE? ARMENIANS OR TURKS?
NY Times refers to Armenian genocide as historical fact
By Harut Sassounian, Publisher, The California Courier
AZG Armenian Daily, Thursday, January 11, 2007

17. LVIV: THE PRESENT AND THE PAST SHOULD GO HAND IN HAND
INTERVIEW: With Oleksandr Shyshka About History of Lviv
By Iryna Yehorova, The Day Weekly Digest #41
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, December 19, 2006

18. DOBRYNIA – PRINCE VOLODYMYR’S CO-RULER
What do we know about this Kyivan Rus’ hero of legends and history?
By Volodymyr Hrypas, The Day Weekly Digest #41
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, December 19, 2006

19. AN 1787 PLEASANT JOURNEY WITH A MORAL
How Russian Empress Catherine II observed “Potemkin’s villages” in Ukraine
By Ihor Siundiukov, The Day Weekly Digest #41
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, December 19, 2006
========================================================
1
. PARLIAMENT OVERRIDES PRESIDENTIAL VETO OF LAW
TO STRENGTHEN PRIME MINISTER’S POWERS

Associated Press, Moscow, Russia, Friday, Jan 12 2007

MOSCOW – Ukraine’s parliament on Friday overrode a presidential veto of
legislation that strengthens the powers of the premier, a move the
president’s supporters warned would destabilize the balance of power in this
ex-Soviet republic.

Lawmakers summoned 366 votes to override President Viktor Yushchenko’s
veto of a bill outlining the powers of the Cabinet of Ministers – well above
the 300 needed. At the same time, parliament rejected all 42 of Yushchenko’s
proposals to change the bill.

The bill was supposed to help clarify the division of power between the
president’s office and the premier’s Cabinet, but Yushchenko complained that
instead it just strengthened Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, Yushchenko’s
rival from the 2004 Orange Revolution protests.

“This law voids the principle of ‘restraint and counterbalance,”‘ Yushchenko’s
party said in a statement, calling the vote “an anti-constitutional upheaval.”

Yushchenko and Yanukovych share power in an awkward arrangement that
initially was billed as an effort to unite Ukraine, but instead has turned
into a tug-of-war for control. The constitutional changes that created the
power-sharing arrangement are sprinkled with contradictions and ambiguities,
making it unclear who should hold the upper hand in many decisions.

Yanukovych’s governing coalition holds a majority in parliament, but it has
less than the minimum 300 needed for an override. For the second time in a
week, however, former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko’s bloc joined the
coalition, giving it the necessary votes.

In return, the coalition agreed to tentatively support a separate bill that
guarantees the rights of the political opposition.

Tymoshenko, who has vowed to bring down Yanukovych’s government,
defended her party’s decision to vote for the measure, saying it was needed
to help end the conflict brewing between the president’s office and the
Cabinet.

“We are strictly holding to our positions, but to continue this conflict,
this chaos and disorder … a line must be drawn under this,” she said in
remarks posted on her Web site.

A Yushchenko adviser said the president would refuse to sign the Cabinet
bill into law, and would instead appeal to the Constitutional Court,
Ukrainska Pravda website reported. -30-
————————————————————————————————-

[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
2. UKRAINE CLOSER TO CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS

Journal Staff Report, Kyiv, Ukraine, Sunday, January 14, 2007

KIEV – Ukraine moved a step closer to the constitutional crisis on Friday
when Parliament had overwhelmingly voted to approve a law that dramatically
reduces powers of the president.

The law, pushed for by Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, was also backed by
opposition lawmakers loyal to former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko,
allowing Parliament to overcome a veto from President Viktor Yushchenko.

The law, approved by 366 lawmakers in the 450-seat legislature, is part of a
deal between Yanukovych and Tymoshenko that is apparently aimed at
marginalizing the president and his party.

“This alliance has clearly an anti-presidential nature,” Volodymyr Fesenko,
the head of the Penta political consultancy, said.

Yanukovych and Yushchenko had been battling for control over the country’s
foreign policy since early August when Yanukovych was approved as the prime
minister.

But Tymoshenko’s joining forces with Yanukovych is a major setback for
Yushchenko that may completely re-shape the country’s political landscape
and even change the foreign policy course.

“What happened is a complete usurpation of power, complete elimination of
powers of the president,” Yuriy Lutsenko, Yushchenko’s advisor and a former
internal affairs minister, said. “Now we’re back to 1999 when Ukraine has
lived under one center approving all decisions.”

The law allows the pro-government coalition to appoint ministers of foreign
affairs and defense if the president fails to nominate them within 15 days.
It also allows the coalition to nominate the prime minister if the president
fails to do so within 15 days after the coalition has been formed.

Yushchenko criticized the law, which he said brings in “a disbalance to the
Ukrainian system of power.” He suggested that he will probably send an
appeal to the Constitutional Court asking to cancel some of the law’s
controversial clauses.

“Most likely and most effective [solution] would be to review by the
Constitutional Court those clauses of the law that come in conflict with the
constitution,” Yushchenko said on Sunday. “A wider response would be the
area of amending the constitution.”

The approval of the law came two days after Yanukovych and Yushchenko had
apparently agreed to work together to prevent the looming crisis by jointly
amending the constitution. But Yanukovych has apparently changed his mind
after Tymoshenko had indicated her lawmakers would help the pro-government
coalition to overcome the veto.

“All political agreements have been failed,” Arseniy Yatseniuk, a deputy
chief of staff at the Yushchenko office, said on Friday.

As part of the deal with Tymoshenko, lawmakers loyal to Yanukovych voted to
approve a bill that may officially declare Tymoshenko the leader of the
opposition in Ukraine.

Tymoshenko has been competing with Our Ukraine, Yushchenko’s party, for
the role of the leading opposition force after Our Ukraine officials had quit
the Yanukovych government several months ago.

The approved bill would marginalize Our Ukraine by effectively promoting a
two-party political system in Ukraine that may be dominated by Yanukovych’s
Regions Party and Tymoshenko’s group.

Another bill approved by the Yanukovych-Tymoshenko alliance on Friday may
help Tymoshenko regain control over the Kiev city council. The bill allows a
party to expel lawmakers from local councils if they vote against the party
line. (tl/ez) -30-
————————————————————————————————-
LINK: http://www.ukrainianjournal.com/index.php?w=article&id=3819
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
3. IS A WAY OUT OF A POLITICAL LABYRINTH NEAR?

By Yulia Kyseliova, UCIPR analyst, Research Update, Vol. 13, No 1/473
Ukrainian Center for Independent Political Research (UCIPR)
Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, January 13, 2007

It seems that Ukrainian politicians are still walking through a labyrinth of
relations and contradictions attempting to overcome the presidential veto
on the law “On the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine”.

This is evidenced by cautious statements by the First Deputy Head of the
Presidential Secretariat Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who disregarding a six-month
silence of the Constitutional Court commented on the document as saying,
“Because of the unconstitutional nature of the law on the Cabinet the
President of Ukraine is obliged to apply to the Constitutional Court for
recognizing the whole number of its provisions unconstitutional.”

According to Mr. Yatsenyuk, this will probably happen on Monday, January
15, as none of the 42 presidential amendments have been approved.

Meanwhile, it is more than traditional for Ukrainian politics, especially
after five-hour talks between the Prime Minister, the Speaker and the
President of Ukraine and a joint press conference on consolidation of
efforts and attainment of understanding.

There are no illusions about joint roundtables and public debates to be
heard by political forces building their thoroughgoing policy without taking
its consequences into account.
THE HRYSHEVSKY-BANKOVA RELATIONSHIP
Presently, V. Yanukovych got the thread of Ariadne that would help
governmental agencies out of the labyrinth of crises. The law on the Cabinet
actually abolishes the political role of the Ukrainian President and
minimizes his influence on the process of policy-making and implementation.

Only two Articles of the law regulate the President-Cabinet relationship.
According to these Articles, the Cabinet of Ministers shall be responsible
to the President pursuant to the Constitution of Ukraine and shall base its
actions on presidential decrees issued on the basis of the Constitution.

Acts of the President of Ukraine issued within the limits of powers
indicated in Article 106, Paragraphs 5, 18, 21 and 23 of the Constitution
shall be signed by the Prime Minister and a minister responsible for
implementation of a respective act.

So, this is what is called countersigning. Though, its procedure is not set
at all. Theoretically, nothing changed as to designation of the Prime
Minister.

Article 8 indicates that the Head of the government shall be designated by
the Verkhovna Rada upon a relevant proposal of the President of Ukraine. The
President shall put forward the proposal to the coalition of factions in the
Verkhovna Rada not later than 15 days after he received a proposal for
designation.

Should the Verkhovna Rada reject a candidature for the Prime Minister’s
office, the President of Ukraine shall, not later than 15 days following the
proposal, present a new candidature to the Verkhovna Rada for consideration
In other words, the President is deprived of the right to influence the
parliament in this aspect.

Also, he has no influence on personnel principles as to his quota in the
government because offices of members of the Cabinet are political ones, to
which the law on the public service is not applied. Hence, from now on,
court judgments on illegitimacy of a decision to resign any minister shall
be just a waste of time.

From now on, the Cabinet, on its own initiative or following presidential
decrees, shall have the permission to make proposals and develop drafts of
respective laws and acts of the President.

In other words, the Cabinet shall work for the President and the Council of
National Security and Defense of Ukraine (CNSD) because officials of the
CNSD, the Presidential Secretariat, advisory and other agencies and services
set up by the President have no right to give orders to the Cabinet of
Ministers, its members and interfere with their activity.

From now on, any inquiry for information about compliance or non-compliance
with any presidential decree may be regarded as interference. Also, members
of the Cabinet of Ministers and chairmen of other executive authorities may
not belong to and other agencies and services set up by the President.

This also theoretically limits opportunities of the Ukrainian President to
hold even trivial consultations, say, on the level of presidential
commissions.

The Cabinet Action Program shall be approved not by a law but by a
resolution of the Verkhovna Rada. Hence, all the President can do is just to
read this document, if interested.

Meanwhile, there are provisions that vest the Cabinet with wide powers, for
instance, in shaping foreign political strategies.

In the area of foreign policy, the Cabinet of Ministers shall ensure, within
its powers,
[1] foreign policy of Ukraine;
[2] develop and approve programs in this field;
[3] coordinate programs for the stay of official foreign delegations
composed of members of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine and other
relevant documents; and ensure, pursuant to the law on international
agreements,
[4] solution of issues concerning signing and implementation of Ukraine’s
international agreements and treaties.

According to Article 45 of the law on the Cabinet, the Prime Minister shall
head activity of the Cabinet of Ministers, ensure implementation of Ukraine’s
domestic and foreign policy, the Cabinet Action Programs approved by the
Verkhovna Rada and execution of other powers of the Cabinet.

Any reference to constitutional rights and duties of the President of
Ukraine in this field is absent in the document.
THE GOVERNMENT AND THE CIVIL SOCIETY
Provisions of Article 43 on relationship of the Cabinet of Ministers and
public associations are especially interesting in the context of cooperation
of power with the third sector and civil society development.

Under the law, the Cabinet directly or through executive authorities shall
ensure the execution of legitimate rights of public associations and
consider their proposals within its competence.

However, there are some interesting nuances. Article 3, Paragraph 2 reads,
“Interference of any agencies, officials, enterprises, organizations and
public associations with decisions on issues within the competence of the
Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine shall be prohibited.”

In this respect, issues relating to activity of public councils founded by
the Yanukovych’s government under Kuchma are especially technological as
any criticism or elements of public control may be interpreted as
“interference”.
MONEY TRIVIA…..
Politics means not only powers and PR but also the opportunity to manage the
national budget. Article 30, Paragraph 2 governs that presentation of the
Verkhovna Rada with drafts on changes to the law “On the National Budget of
Ukraine” falls under the sole discretion of the Cabinet of Ministers.

So, it is not the President’s concern as well but doesn’t it run counter to
the legislative initiative of Ukrainian MPs? In the budget context, issues
regulating relations with local self-government bodies are also rather
significant.

For instance, under Article 42, the Cabinet of Ministers shall have the
permission to present the Verkhovna Rada with draft laws on granting some
executive powers to local self-government bodies and simultaneously submit
proposals to fund the execution of such powers completely from the national
budget or by transfer of some national taxes to local budgets and transfer
of state-owned units to the communal ownership or the use of local
self-government bodies.

It is interesting whether respective rules of the law will be applied to all
the regions of Ukraine and transfer of what executive powers to local
self-government bodies is meant.

Could it potentially increase tension between executive leadership from the
opposition and public councils? Could it create more opportunities for
corruption and local confrontations?
THE PREMIER AND HIS 13 POWERS
It has to be mentioned that according to its general philosophy, the law
transforms Ukraine not into a parliamentary but into a kind of a “Premier’s
republic”. From now on, the Prime Minister of Ukraine actually has absolute
power concerning both strategy and implementation of a manpower policy. This
encompasses 13 powers.

We shall wait and see whether the number 13 will be lucky for our Premier.
For example, the Prime Minister shall submit candidacies for designation to
and dismissal from the office of chairmen of local state administrations to
the Cabinet.

What if these candidatures do not coincide with those nominated by the
President? He also controls proposals of ministers to designate or dismiss
their first deputies and deputies.

The Premier has other powers provided for by the Constitution of Ukraine,
this and other laws. See the full text of the law on the Cabinet of
Ministers of Ukraine on the site of the Verkhovna Rada at
(http://gska2.rada.gov.ua/pls/zweb_n/webproc4_2?id=&pf3516=2325&skl=6).
THE BONUS
Nevertheless, notwithstanding provisions of the above law, a major bonus of
the Yanukovych’s team includes not only the number and quality of new powers
of the Prime Minister but also the constitutional majority in the parliament
received due to support of the first violin of the opposition Yulia
Tymoshenko.

Cooperation has begun this year, when the Verkhovna Rada overcame the
presidential veto on the law “On Introduction of Changes to the Land Code of
Ukraine Concerning a Moratorium on Prohibition of the Sale of Agricultural
Land before Adoption of Respective Legislative Acts”.

367 out of 438 MPs voted for the veto, including 185 MPs from the Party of
the Regions, 20 – the Communist Party, 31 – the Socialist Party, 120 – Yulia
Tymoshenko’s bloc and 5 – Our Ukraine.

The next step was overcoming the presidential veto on the law on
introduction of changes to the law of Ukraine on banks and banking with the
assistance of MPs from Yulia Tymoshenko’s bloc, whose votes contributed to
positive solution of the situation.

A vote of January 12, 2007, when the Verkhovna Rada overcame the
presidential veto on the law “On the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine” became
a real culmination compared only to events surrounding formation of the
anti-crisis coalition.

366 out of 370 MPs gave their votes for such a decision, inclusive of 186
MPs from the Party of the Regions, 121 – Yulia Tymoshenko’s bloc,31 – the
Socialist Party and 21 – the Communist Party.

Our Ukraine has left the session as a protest against the overridden
presidential veto on the law “On the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine” and
later on made a statement about betrayal of the Tymoshenko’s bloc.

An agreement on joint actions in respective direction between the Tymoshenko’s
bloc and the coalition was emphasized. Yulia Tymoshenko received the first
reading of the law on the opposition and an imperative mandate for deputies
of local councils.

Later on, she pointed out no possibility of fundamental cooperation between
its bloc and the Party of the Regions.

She underlined that her bloc was ready to vote for legislative acts
necessary to settle certain issues, e.g. the laws on the opposition,
imperative mandate and social regulations, together with the Party of the
Regions interpreting such cooperation “not as a joint strategic but as a
concurrent vote”.

At the same time, such joint voting might represent variations on the topic
of changes in the Constitution and language policy.

Given the situation, the Yanukovych’s team has trump cards in this boring
game, especially after joining of the Tymoshenko’s bloc. Though, will its
leader win because life doesn’t stand still and that a way out of the
labyrinth has been found. It seems that we are in for many other battles
with local Minotaurs. -30-
———————————————————————————————-
For more details about the Research Update, please contact the UCIPR
e-mail: ucipr@ucipr.kiev.ua. Contact persons – Yulia Tyshchenko and
Kostyantyn Mykhailychenko.
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
4. UKRAINE PARLIAMENT CLIPS YUSHCHENKO’S WINGS

By Roman Olearchyk in Kiev, Financial Times
London, United Kingdom, Saturday, January 13, 2007

In a major blow to Ukraine’s pro-western president, Viktor
Yushchenko, the country’s parliament on Friday boosted the authority
of the government headed by his arch-rival, Viktor Yanukovich, prime
minister.

Legislators overcame a presidential veto to pass legislation that
increases the authority of Mr Yanukovich’s government, marginalising
the presidency. The law is a turning point in a power struggle
between the pair.

The two leaders have been locked in a political tussle since the
Orange Revolution of 2004, clashing over top government posts as well
as foreign and domestic policy since Mr Yanukovich assumed the
premiership last year.

Mr Yushchenko’s allies described the law as an attempt to “usurp”
power in the country.

Backed by a majority of legislators and enjoying the support of Yulia
Tymoshenko’s opposition bloc, Mr Yanukovich’s governing coalition
mustered more than the two-thirds support required to override the
veto.

In return, Ms Tymoshenko garnered support for a law granting the
opposition oversight over the government and another bill permitting
parties to eject members from parliament and regional legislative
bodies as punishment for voting against the party line.

The latter is expected to help Ms Tymoshenko’s camp halt the exodus
of legislators from its faction and to form a majority in the city
council in Kiev, Ukraine’s capital.

Ms Tymoshenko, a firebrand politician, played a major role in
mustering support for Mr Yushchenko during the 2004 presidential
elections, but their relations soured after was sacked as prime
minister in 2005.

The votes came as a surprise. Days earlier Mr Yushchenko and Mr
Yanukovich appeared to have mapped out plans for a compromise on
cabinet appointments.

The new law undermines presidential authority in several key areas.
It authorises the government to rebut decisions by regional officials
appointed by the president. It also limits Mr Yushchenko’s authority
over the foreign, interior and defence ministries.

An aide to Mr Yushchenko said the law violates twelve constitutional
norms and promised to challenge it through a constitutional court.

Oles Dony, a political analyst in Kiev, said: “This situation is
proof of the continuation of dangerous tendencies in Ukraine’s
political arena, namely the lack of transparency, the inability to
stick with political agreements reached, repeated backroom dealings
and violations in voting procedures.”

Mr Yanukovich, who suffered a humiliating defeat in the 2004
presidential elections despite Russian backing, staged a remarkable
comeback last August after Mr Yushchenko nominated him as prime
minister in an attempt to end four months of political paralysis.

Mr Yushchenko secured safeguards for his pro-western agenda, namely
swift integration with the European Union, Nato and the World Trade
Organization. His allies have since accused Mr Yanukovich of stalling
reforms and blocking Ukraine’s integration with the west.
———————————————————————————————
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/1da82e38-a268-11db-a187-0000779e2340.html
———————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
Send in names and e-mail addresses for the AUR distribution list.
========================================================
5. 12TH CENTURY RELIC IN UKRAINE THREATENED
Scholar fears Church of St. Cyril in Kyiv is the
latest victim of political intrigue.

By Olenka Z. Pevny, PhD., Faculty member, Univ of Richmond, VA
Department of Art & Art History, specializing in Late Antique,
Byzantine and Medieval art history.
BRAMA.COM, New York, New York, Thursday, January 11, 2007

Alarming news has come from colleagues in Kyiv regarding the preservation
of Ukraine’s most important twelfth-century monument – the Church of St.
Cyril of Alexandria (Kyrylivs’ka tserkva).

Through a series of what appear to be deliberately devious actions it
appears that the Church of St. Cyril, which was part of the Cultural
Preserve of the Cathedral of St. Sofiia – a UNESCO site, has been deprived
of its protective status and a free hand is being given to the Ukrainian
Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (UOCMP) to remodel the
interior of the monument.

This includes the overpainting of murals by such prominent
nineteenth-century artists as M. Vrubel and M. Murashko, and, even more
significantly, the desecration of unique 12th century frescoes.

Among the truly irreplaceable compositions in the church is the life cycle
of the 5th century Patriarch of Alexandria, St. Cyril. Images from the life
of this saint occupy the entire east apse of the Kyivan church and
constitute the only representation of the life of this church father in the
world.

Without exaggeration, the Church of St. Cyril is the most important 12th
century monument in Ukraine. Its medieval frescoes are unparalleled not only
in terms of Kyivan Rus’ visual culture, but also in the context of Middle
Byzantine art.

The Church of St. Cyril of Alexandrian is a monumental princely foundation
built by either the Princess Maria Mstyslavivna or her husband Prince
Vsevolod Ol’hovych (r. 1139-1147). It served as the burial chapel of Maria
and her offsprings.

The medieval frescoes of the Church of St. Cyril are the only specimens of
monumental 12th century Orthodox iconography to survive in the former Rus’
(see Kievan Rus’ – History of Ukraine) and present Ukrainian capital city,
Kyiv.

Together with the Church of the Savior in the Mirozh Monastery in Pskov,
Russia, they comprise the most important examples of medieval monumental
painting executed in the Byzantine tradition to survive in East Slavic
territories.

Notwithstanding several recent publications about the Kyrylivs’ka tserkva,
the monument remains gravely understudied.

It has never been thoroughly or professionally photographed, the
inscriptions have not been analyzed by paleographers, and the dedication
and medieval images have never been considered in the context of broader
Byzantine or local Rus’ developments.

There are so few actual medieval monuments remaining in Ukraine and even
fewer with iconographic evidence from the Kyivan Rus’ period that preserving
the Kyrylivs’ka tserkva is a cultural priority.

According to colleagues in Kyiv the current crisis unfolded in the following
manner. A few years ago (2004?) the Church of St. Cyril was quietly removed
from the highly protected list of the Cathedral of St. Sofiia Cultural
Preserve, clearing the way for its ultimate transfer to the Ukrainian
Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate.

In a recent church newsletter an official of the UOCMP complained about the
Vrubel oil paintings not being ‘iconic’ enough, and that museum restrictions
prevent the burning of candles required for proper Orthodox services.

The UOCMP hierarchy also expressed displeasure with the frescoes claming
that they are not inspiring enough and are not reflective of the UOCMP
dogma. Voicing such complaints, the ecclesiastics declared their desire to
repaint the interior.

It appears that Ukrainian laws governing historical sites can be manipulated
so as to allow the church building to be removed from the list of historical
sites following an official assessment and inventory of its worth.

This apparently already has taken place as a sum of 998 hryvnias is being
cited as the amount the UOCMP would need to pay the Ukrainian government
for the building. Once this sum is paid the UOCMP would have the authority
to remodel the interior of the monument.

Expressions of concern from abroad and from ecclesiastical, cultural,
academic and scholarly communities may be of some help to those in

Ukraine who are attempting to preserve this monument. -30-
————————————————————————————————-
Dr. Olenka Pevny is a faculty member at the University of Richmond,
Department of Art & Art History, specializing in Late Antique, Byzantine
and Medieval art history.
————————————————————————————————-
http://www.brama.com/news/press/2007/01/070111pevny_stcyril.html
Article shows several photographs.
————————————————————————————————-
NOTE: The article has now been translated into Ukrainian and published
by Majdan: http://maidan.org.ua/static/mai/1168622508.html
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
6. RUSSIA & UKRAINE MARK CENTENARY OF SERGEY KOROLYOV

Itar-Tass, Moscow/Kiev, Friday, January 12, 2007

MOSCOW/KIEV – Russia and Ukraine are marking on Friday the birth
centenary of legendary Soviet spacecraft designer Sergey Korolyov, who
won the space race with the United States in the 50s and 60s by launching
the first Sputnik and the first man to space.

Russia issued a commemorative medal and will launch a cargo Progress
spacecraft on January 18 named after Korolyov.

Unlike his US counterpart Wernher von Braun, Korolyov was a top-secret
personality until his unexpected death on January 14, 1966 because of an
allegedly botched surgical procedure and was known only as the “Chief
Designer”.

An underserved victim of Joseph Stalin’s repressions, Korolyov spent six
years in gulag. He was arrested in 1938 during Stalin’s Great Purge and
accused of subversion, apparently due to his desire to work on liquid-rocket
powered aircraft rather than solid rockets. Supposedly he had spent too much
money on a project that was not considered a top priority.

After release in 1944 Korolyov contributed greatly to the development of
ballistic missile technology, but was preoccupied with space travel plans.
In 1953 he proposed to launch a satellite into orbit and four years later
implemented the idea.

Korolyov’s planning for the manned mission began in 1958 and Yuri Gagarin
became the first man in space on April 12, 1961. Korolyov was twice awarded
the Hero of Socialist Labor Order and thrice the Order of Lenin.

He was also the winner of the Lenin Prize. In 1958 he was elected to the
Soviet Academy of Sciences. A street in Moscow was named after Korolyov
in 1966.

The town of Kalingrad near Moscow, which hosts the mission space center and
is home to the Energia space corporation, was renamed to Korolyov in 1996.
The Energia, which Korolyov headed for 20 years, was also renamed after the
Chief Designer. -30-
—————————————————————————————————–
http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=11149683&PageNum=0
—————————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
7. UKRAINIAN SPACE HERO SERGEI KOROLYOV HONORED ON
100TH ANNIVERSARY OF BIRTH

By Vladimir Isachenkov, Associated Press
Moscow, Russia, Friday, January 12, 2007

MOSCOW – His work and even his name were once top Soviet secrets. It
wasn’t until after his death that Sergei Korolyov became known to the world
as the man who led the team that put the world’s first satellite into orbit
and sent the first human into space.

Russia marks the 100th anniversary Friday of the birth of Korolyov, who
suffered years of torture, starvation and hard labour in Josef Stalin’s
gulag before becoming chief of the Soviet rocket program.

His daughter, Natalia, recalled how her father, who was forced to mine for
gold in a labour camp amid freezing cold and hunger, loathed the precious
metal for the rest of his days. “He kept repeating: I hate gold,” she said
in an interview published in the daily Rossiiyskaya Gazeta.

Korolyov, an aeronautical engineer, was arrested in 1938 during Stalin’s
Great Terror and sentenced to hard labour for anti-Soviet activities.
Stalin’s henchmen broke his jaw during interrogations, he lost all his
teeth, and after two years in the camp was on the verge of death with heart
and other ailments.

He survived, thanks to aircraft designer Andrei Tupolev, who asked
authorities to transfer Korolyov in 1940 from the labour camp to join a
design team working on new combat planes. The team worked behind bars,
like many other Soviet design bureaus, and it was only in 1944 that Korolyov
was freed.

When he saw his family for the first time, he talked for hours about his
life in prison and then asked them to never question him about it again. “I
want to forget that nightmare,” he said, according to his daughter.

She said his ordeal made him immune to fear of authorities. “Father simply
wasn’t afraid of anything after that. He could boldly tell leaders that he
categorically disagreed with something.”

After the Nazi defeat, Korolyov led a team of engineers who flew to Germany
to gather information on V-2 rockets designed by Wernher von Braun,
Korolyov’s future rival in the U.S.-Soviet space race. Korolyov’s team
started by copying the German rocket but quickly developed its own designs.

After the first Soviet intercontinental ballistic missile designed by
Korolyov was put in service in 1956, he offered to use one to launch a
satellite into orbit. Korolyov’s deputy Boris Chertok recalled the top brass
opposed the idea as a distraction from the military program, but Soviet
leader Nikita Khrushchev backed it.

“Korolyov was primarily a designer gifted with a rare insight, but he also
was an excellent organizer,” Chertok told a news conference Thursday. “He
realized that any big project requires a huge amount of organizational
work.”

When Korolyov became aware of U.S. plans to launch the first American
satellite in 1958, he shelved a complex Soviet project in favour of building
a simple version quickly. On Oct. 4, 1957, Sputnik opened the Space Age.

Korolyov’s name was only known to Soviet leaders and a narrow circle of
space workers, anonymity that sometimes made him sad. “We are like miners –
we work underground. No one sees or hears us,” his daughter recalled.

Rossiiyskaya Gazeta said Khrushchev twice rejected an offer from the Nobel
Prize Committee to nominate the man who designed Sputnik and the spacecraft
that carried the world’s first human, Yuri Gagarin, into space on April 12,
1961. “We can’t name one single person. It’s the entire people building the
new technology,” Khrushchev was quoted as saying.

Korolyov’s daughter said her father dreamed about flying to space himself.
After Gagarin’s flight, Korolyov told the family he wanted to be in his
place: “I should have done it, but age is a problem and they wouldn’t let me
do it anyway.”

She said Korolyov was superstitious – opposing launches on Mondays and
barring women from the launchpad. He carried two coins in his pocket and was
distressed he couldn’t find them on the day he was hospitalized in January
1966. He died of a heart attack during surgery just after turning 59.

It was the official obituary that first told the Soviet people – and the
rest of the world – who Korolyov was. Korolyov’s death dealt a crushing
blow to the Soviet moon program, which collapsed in a series of booster
explosions while the United States sent Neil Armstrong on his moon walk in
1969.

“Our successes would have been much greater if Korolyov lived longer,”
Chertok said. -30-
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
NOTE: Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
========================================================
8. TRIBUTE TO SERGEY KOROLYOV: SOVIET SPACE PIONEER

By William Atkins, ITWire, Australia, Monday, 15 January 2007

January 12 and 14, 2007 passed without much fanfare for the one-hundredth
and forty-first anniversaries of the birth and death (respectively) of an
important man to the development of robotic and human space exploration:
Sergey Korolyov (sometimes spelled Sergei Korolev).

Chief Soviet rocket engineer and spacecraft designer and scientist Sergey
Pavlovich Korolyov (January 12, 1907-January 14, 1966) was the architectural
counterpart to German-American engineer Wernher von Braun (1912-1977) in the
United States during most of the 1957-1975 space and arms race between the
United States and the Soviet Union.

His role in the Soviet space program with respect to rocket technology and
spacecraft design was critical to the Soviet contribution to space travel
and exploration for four decades-between the 1930s and the 1960s-and has
continued to influence the Russian space program. The Soyuz spacecraft,
which was designed by Korolyov in the early 1960s, is still in operation in
2007.

His life, contributions, and accomplishments were kept a secret until after
his death. He was only known to the public as the Chief Designer.

However, at the one-hundredth birthday celebration for Korolyov, President
Vladimir Putin called him a “true pioneer and the author of the first,
bright space exploits.”

Korolyov’s contributions to space exploration were almost never realized
when he was arrested in 1938 during the dictatorial rule of Soviet leader
Josef Stalin, forced to work at hard labor for several years, and almost
died from the freezing cold, hunger, and strenuous work of the gulags
(prison labor camps). Fortunately, Korolyov survived the brutal conditions
forced upon him.

In the 1930s, Korolyov provided critical knowledge for the Soviet Union to
launch its first liquid fuel rockets. In the 1940s, he improved on the
design of the German V-2 rocket technology. In the 1950s and 1960s, he was
largely responsible for the Soviet Union’s ability to launch its first
intercontinental ballistic missiles and spacecraft.

For instance, Korolyov was critical for the successful launching of Sputnik
1 on October 4, 1957-what was the first artificial satellite to orbit the
Earth, and generally considered the beginning of the U.S./Soviet space race
and the start of space exploration.

He was also instrumental in such Soviet projects as the first probe (Luna 2)
to reach the Moon (September 14, 1959), and the Vostok series of spacecraft
(1960-1963), which placed the first human (cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin) in space
on April 12, 1961.

In addition, Korolyov engineered the success of the Voskhod program
(1964-1966), which included the first space walk by cosmonaut Aleksei Leonov
on March 18, 1965.

At the time of his death in 1966, Korolyov was working on the spacecraft
Soyuz, the lunar landing vehicle Luna, and unmanned missions to the planets
of Venus and Mars. The Soviets may have lost the space race to the United
States upon Korolyov’s death.

Three-and-one-half years later, the U.S. Apollo 11 mission landed astronauts
Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin on the Moon-the first humans to step on the
lunar surface.

Korolyov has been awarded the Lenin Prize, the Order of Lenin, and the Hero
of Socialist Labor. He was elected to the Russian Academy of Sciences. The
Korolyov crater on the Moon was named in honor of him, as well as asteroid
1855 Korolyov. Many other honors have been bestowed on Sergey Pavlovich
Korolyov, the architect of the early Soviet space program.

A biography of Korolyov (“Sergey P. Korolev. The Great Engineer and
Scientist”) is found at: http://www.korolev.ru/english/e_biografia.html.

The article “Korolev, Mastermind of the Soviet Space Program” by James
Harford appears at:
http://www.cosmos-club.org/web/journals/1998/harford.html.
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
9. THE MAN WHO MINED THE STARS
Man who designed the world’s first satellite, Sputnik and put first man in
space. He was sent as Convict N1442 to the gold mines of one of the most
feared parts of the Gulag labour camps the Kolyma region of eastern Siberia.

By Patrick Jackson, BBC News, United Kingdom, Friday, January 12 2007

As a century falls since the birth of the late Soviet space pioneer, Sergei
Korolyov, BBC News looks at the stark contrast between a life spent in the
mines of the Gulag or in secrecy, and his posthumous fame.

Sergei Korolyov’s anniversary is being celebrated in Russia and his native
Ukraine with ceremonies, commemorative medals and coins, while a Progress
spacecraft being sent to the International Space Station next week will be
specially decorated in his honour.

On Moscow’s Red Square, wreaths are being laid at his grave in the Kremlin
wall, the last resting-place of the USSR’s officially recognised heroes.

Inside the Kremlin itself, a function will be devoted to the memory of the
man who designed the world’s first satellite, Sputnik, and put the first
man, Yuri Gagarin, in space.
‘NOT FOR YOU, COMRADE’
Back in April 1961, Gagarin himself was feted on the same square after his
return from making history but Korolyov was unable to join him there.

The space programme leader’s car had been positioned among the last in the
triumphal procession into Moscow and he and his wife were unable to wade
through the crowd, Korolyov’s daughter Natalya Korolyova told Russian
newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta in an interview.

On another occasion devoted to Soviet space exploration, he tried to take a
seat at the front of the hall and was turned away by stewards with the
words: “These seats are only for those with a direct connection to this
event, Comrade.”

The fact is that Sergei Korolyov spent his whole career unknown to most
of his fellow countrymen and unknown to the outside world.

“He was always described simply as the Chief Designer of Carrier Rockets
and Spacecraft,” says space historian Peter Bond.

Korolyov’s name was only revealed by the Soviet state on the day of his
death at the age of 59 in 1966.

But just a few decades earlier, he had faced the prospect of disappearing
into complete oblivion as a victim of Stalin’s repressions.
CONVICT N1442
Arrested in 1938 during a purge of the scientific research institute where
he worked, the brilliant young scientist was sentenced to 10 years’ prison
on a trumped-up charge of planning anti-Soviet sabotage.

His jaw broken by his interrogators, he was sent as Convict N1442 to the
gold mines of one of the most feared parts of the Gulag labour camps, the
Kolyma region of eastern Siberia.

An ordeal of 12-hour days of back-breaking work, poor diet, the cold and
abuse at the hands of guards and the genuine criminals among the convicts
wore him down.

By the time, a couple of years later, he was transferred to work in a
special prisoners’ design bureau in Kazan – the move which marked the
rebirth of his career – he had lost all his teeth to scurvy and was
suffering from other ailments.

Set free in 1946, he spent his first night at home telling the adult members
of the family about his ordeal, Natalya Korolyova said.

He finished with the words “Never ask me about it again – I want to forget
it all like a horrible dream.”

His daughter adds that her father had developed a loathing for gold and
would frequently say he hated it.

Another time, he apparently told a colleague, referring to the secrecy in
which he had to work: “We are miners, we are underground – nobody
sees or hears us.”

The success of Sputnik in 1957 sent shock waves though the USSR.
“The Soviet government was stunned by the global media coverage and
demanded ever more spectacular flights from Korolyov’s team,” Peter
Bond told the BBC News website.

“This led to the first animal in orbit, the first human, the first woman,
the first three-person mission and the first spacewalk.”

Korolyov, he added, was only part of a large space industry which included
several influential rivals and there were also many failures under his
leadership, which were hidden from the public at the time.

His Soyuz spacecraft, for example, which first flew a few months after his
death, killed its cosmonaut.

“Yet he was undoubtedly the inspiration behind the glory years of the Soviet
space programme,” according to Mr Bond, who has a book on planetary
exploration, Distant Worlds, published next month.

Korolyov may have a town named after him in Russia, and craters on the
Moon and Mars which bear his name, but his memory appears able to
create unease at the Kremlin even now.

His time in the Gulag is the focus of Korolyov, a Russian film made to
coincide with the 100th anniversary by director Yury Kara.

It was meant to be shown at the Kremlin function, Kara told Izvestiya
newspaper, but it appears that it was finally dropped from the programme
and replaced with a concert. -30-
———————————————————————————————-
LINK: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6255475.stm
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
10. SERGEI KOROLEV: FOUNDER OF SOVIET SPACE PROGRAM
Born in Ukraine in 1906, educated in Odessa, Kiev, and Moscow

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/korolev.html

Sergei Pavlovich Korolev (1907-1966) is widely regarded as the founder of
the Soviet space program. Involved in pre-World War II studies of rocketry
in the USSR, Korolev, like many of his colleagues, went through Stalin’s
prisons and later participated in the search for rocket technology in
occupied Germany.

His incredible energy, intelligence, belief in the prospects of rocket
technology, managerial abilities and almost mythical skills in
decision-making made him the head of the first Soviet rocket development
center, known today as RKK Energia.

He deserves the most credits for turning rocket weapons into an instrument
of space exploration and making the Soviet Union the world’s first
space-faring nation.
BORN IN ZHITOMIR IN PRESENT DAY UKRAINE
Sergei Korolev was born on December 30, 1906 (January 12, 1907, in the
Gregorian calendar, currently in use in Russia) in the city of Zhitomir in
present day Ukraine, in the family of a Russian language teacher. A year
later, family moved to Kiev, Ukraine.

In 1910, Sergei’s parents separated and he moved with his mother to her
parents home in the town of Nezhin. Korolev’s parents officially divorced in
October 1916 and soon Sergei’s mother remarried. In 1917, the year of the
Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, the family moved to Odessa, a major port
city in Ukraine. (84)

In 1922, as the city was still recovering from the civil war, Sergei Korolev
passed qualifying exams for a senior year at the Odessa professional
construction school, an equivalent of a community college in the West. Here
he met his future wife, Kseniya Vincentini.

In addition to a top-notch staff, the Odessa construction school gave its
graduates a privilege of entering colleges without entrance exams.

At the time, Sergei was already interested in aviation, likely ignited by
his step-father, a well-educated engineer, with booming dual career in the
railroad industry and technical education. In June 1923, Korolev joined
newly created Friends of Air Fleet Society. (241)
KIEV POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE
In 1924, Korolev transfered to the Kiev Polytechnic Institute, where he
joined a group of glider enthusiasts. Two years later Korolev transferred to
Moscow’s Bauman High Technical School, MVTU, the best engineering

college in Russia, often compared these days to MIT in the United States.

Korolev graduated from MVTU in 1929 and in 1931 he joined the Central Aero
and Hydrodynamics Institute, TsAGI. (2) In July 1932, Korolev was appointed
chief of Jet Propulsion Research Group, GIRD, one of the earliest
state-sponsored centers for rocket development in the USSR.

In 1933, the group was reorganized into the Jet Propulsion Research
Institute, RNII, where Korolev worked as Deputy Chief of the institute. At
RNII, Korolev led the development of cruise missiles and of a manned
rocket-powered glider.
ARRESTED AND SENT TO CONCENTRATION CAMPS
On June 27, 1938, at the height of Stalin’s purges, Korolev was arrested and
sent to concentration camps in Siberia, in the region of the Kolyma River.
Korolev fateful roller coaster continued in March 1940, when he was suddenly
returned to Moscow and imprisoned in the infamous Butyrskaya prison.

On July 10 of the same year, a special commission chaired by Lavrenti Beria,
chief of Stalin’s secret police, sentenced Korolev to eight years in labor
camps on phony allegations of sabotage. “Fortunately” for Korolev, in
September 1940, he was transferred to “sharashka” — one of numerous design
bureaus in prison.

The sharashka network was organized in 1939, to exploit huge population of
the Soviet GULAG. Officially called TsKB-29, Korolev’s sharashka was led by
Andrei Tupolev, also a GULAG prisoner and located in the city of Omsk.

There, Korolev participated in the development of the Tu-2 bomber, a major
aircraft of the Soviet Air Force during World War II.

Korolev was then transferred to another sharashka in the city of Kazan,
where he became a deputy to Valentin Glushko, his former colleague from
NII-3 and future partner and competitor at the dawn of space age.

On July 27, 1944, the authorities “paroled” Korolev and on Sept. 8, 1945,
Korolev traveled to Germany for evaluation and restoration of A-4 ballistic
missiles.

In August 1946, while still in Germany, Korolev was appointed chief of a
department in the newly created NII-88 in Podlipki, northeast of Moscow.
This organization was made responsible for the development and industrial
production of missile technology based on German hardware.

At the peak of his career, Korolev led the development of the world’s first
ballistic missile, known today as R-7, which became a base for a
long-lasting family of space boosters, carrying Russian cosmonauts into
orbit for decades to come.

In the following years, Korolev led the development of several generations
of ballistic missiles, launch vehicles, science, military and communications
satellites, interplanetary probes and manned spacecraft. In 2006, the Soyuz
spacecraft, which he conceived at the dawn of the space era, turned forty
years in operation.

Korolev died at the height of his career as a result of a botched surgical
operation on January 14, 1966. Even before his death, Korolev’s largest
undertaking, the development of the giant N1 Moon rocket, faced mounting
technical challenges, unrealistic schedule and political pressure to beat
Americans to the Moon.

Due to secret nature of the Soviet space industry, Korolev’s contribution to
the space program was only recognized by the Soviet authorities after his
death. For several more decades, Korolev’s personality remained a subject of
distortions by the official Soviet press.

Only in 1994, Yaroslav Golovanov, a Russian journalist and historian,
published the first uncensored biography of Sergei Korolev.

(18) In 2002, Korolev’s daughter Natalya completed her own monumental
biography of her legendary father, in which she closely retraced Korolev’s
incredible life journey and made public large volume of rare imagery from
the family archive. (241) -30-
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
11. IN THE SHADOW OF THE GULAG
A story of two brothers caught in Stalin’s hellish penal system.

BOOK REVIEW, FICTION: By Thomas Mallon
Book World, The Washington Post,
Washington, D.C., Sunday, January 14, 2007; Page BW03

New Book: HOUSE OF MEETINGS
A Novel: By Martin Amis, Knopf. 242 pp. $23

Over the past decade, the English novelist Martin Amis has been increasingly
haunted by a colossal historical atrocity that doesn’t really belong to
him — at least not in the usual way such catastrophes are assigned as moral
burdens to posterity.

In Koba the Dread (2002), his slim and forthright nonfiction volume about
Soviet communism’s 20 million victims, Amis admitted to having felt a
certain youthful queasiness over the way demonstrations against the Soviet
Union’s 1968 invasion of Czechoslovakia tended to be “sorrowful, decent”
and quite small affairs, whereas America’s involvement in Vietnam gave rise
to teeming protests marked by “unfakable emotings and self-lacerations.”

If the 1973 publication of Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago failed to make
more than a dent in Western political ignorance, Amis did recognize a
certain progress in the historical debate: “The argument, now, is about
whether Bolshevik Russia was ‘better’ than Nazi Germany. In the days when
the New Left dawned, the argument was about whether Bolshevik Russia was
better than America.”

Amis’s own imagining of Soviet crime shows no sign of resting. House of
Meetings, his new novel about life during and after the gulag, is a slender
book, on the same scale as the nonfictional Koba, and quite imperfect as a
novel.

But it is vivid and even scarifying, more than some mere noble
acknowledgment of mass suffering, a suffering that Western intellectuals so
often excused.

House of Meetings is told by an unnamed narrator born in 1919 and now in
his 80s. A veteran of World War II, he admits: “In the first three months of
1945, I raped my way across what would soon be East Germany.” It was not,
however, for any such actual crimes that he soon joined millions of new
prisoners in the Soviet camps; it was for committing an imagined offense
from the ever-lengthening and always more inane list of political
transgressions.

The narrator’s half-brother, Lev, a physically slight, intellectual
pacifist, joins him in one of the Arctic prisons in 1948. Lev’s crime
(sentence: 25 years) is to have been overheard “praising America.”

What he’d actually been praising was “The Americas,” the brothers’ nickname
for Zoya, a gorgeous girl they both love, whose voluptuous upper and lower
halves are separated by a waist “as thin as Panama.”

The narrator’s emotions for Zoya may have struck him “like an honor,” but
it’s the unprepossessing Lev with whom Zoya falls in love. The experience
renders him “almost paranoiac with happiness. It was like religion combined
with reason.”

She even makes his stutter vanish. (Zoya’s first name may be Amis’s tribute
to Zoya Vlasova, an actual victim of Stalinism — less than 10 years old —
unforgettably footnoted by Solzhenitsyn and quoted in Koba.)

Having lost out to Lev, the narrator must console himself with a bitterly
grandiose explanation for Zoya’s failure to have enjoyed his own kiss:
“The taste she didn’t like was the ferrous hormone of war. . . . I could
attribute my failure to historical forces, along with everything else.
History did it.”

House of Meetings remains less a story of romantic rivalry than of fraternal
love. As the much tougher customer and the first to arrive in the camp, the
narrator must teach his brother how to “find some murder in his heart” if
Lev is to survive the logic and methods of the system, whose twin pillars
are boredom and terror.

Amis makes fine use of the gruesome history he’s read and heard, letting
readers hear “the sound of three hundred men eating in their sleep” as well
as the crunches and cracks of the beatings, one of which leaves Lev with
“two worms of bloody phlegm coiling out of his head.”

In the years after Stalin’s death, the gulag system falls from rebellion
within and liberalization without, a process that turns the Soviet Union, by
the late 1950s, into a society of ex-prisoners and ex-jailers.

In those days, when one queued for fruit or some other scarce commodity,
the narrator explains, “If the line was fifty Russians long, there would be
seven or eight who had been away. There would be another seven or eight
who had helped put them there.”

The novel guides us in a glinting, almost furtive way through the brothers’
later lives, revealing Lev’s eventual abandonment by Zoya as well as the
narrator’s material success, first as a television repairman and then an
expert on “rotary launchers for nuclear weapons.” All of this occurs prior
to his own reckoning with Zoya and then emigration to America in the early
1980s.

The book opens two decades after that. He has returned, quite rich, to
Vladimir Putin’s post-Soviet Russia, which he recognizes as never having
undergone the atonement that Germany at least attempted to practice for its
own mass murders.

Hearing news, in 2004, of the Chechen rebels’ siege of Beslan’s School No.
1, he feels himself “re-Russifying,” once more picking up the “national
traits: the freedom from all responsibility and scruple, the energetic
championship of views and beliefs that are not only irreconcilable but also
mutually exclusive, the weakness for a humor of squalor and cynicism, the
tendency to speak most passionately when being most insincere, and the
thirst for abstract argument.”

The “Russian cross” is not an emblem of revitalized Christianity but a point
of actuarial calamity: the graphic intersection of the declining birth rate
and the rising death rate, which occurred in 1992. “Russia is dying,” says
our narrator, in farewell. “And I’m glad.”

His voice throughout is ugly and seductive, full of Amis’s typically
wonderful phrasing and metaphor: An apartment building full of the retired
political elite in the 1980s contains “many a venerable and contented
mass-murderer — taciturn amnesiacs on state pensions”; shaking hands with
a politically reliable Soviet novelist, the narrator feels “the vile bivalve
of his clasp.”

The difficulty with such bravura moments is that readers will too often feel
themselves hearing not the gulag survivor but the accomplished English
novelist.

A line such as this one — “Great beauties, they don’t have to do the work
that we have to do, the work of vox populi and ‘Mass Observation’ ” —
belongs more to Oxford than to Omsk; it is the price Amis occasionally can’t
help paying for his own extreme gifts.

The book’s title refers to a camp building in which Lev is permitted a
conjugal visit with Zoya in 1956. What actually happens inside the House of
Meetings, and its shattering effect upon the narrator’s half-brother, become
the chief psychological mystery and source of suspense in the novel, but the
revelatory payoff may strike readers as somewhat vague and anticlimactic,
dampened as it is by some of the same abstraction that the narrator finds so
telltale in the national character.

Still, the book gnaws at one’s memory. Amis tries to imagine history with
the intimacy and specificity that the greatest historical novelists,
including Tolstoy, have always presumed to seek for it.

History is the element that Soviet citizens were encouraged to see
themselves living in and moving through, always forward; it is the element
from which Americans tend to see themselves, even now, as being exempt.
For Amis’s narrator, it is the swirl in which we swim and sink, a poison
that lays waste to millions of lives and sullies even a kiss. -30-
——————————————————————————————-
Thomas Mallon’s novels include “Henry and Clara,” “Bandbox” and the
forthcoming “Fellow Travelers.”
———————————————————————————————
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/12/AR2007011200060.html
——————————————————————————————————————-
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
If you are receiving more than one copy of the AUR please contact us.
========================================================
12. CALIFORNIA GENOCIDE VICTIMS’ MEMORIAL FOR ALL PEOPLE
WHO FACED GENOCIDE AND ETHNIC CLEANSING
Ambitious project stirs emotions among widely varied communities.

By Peter Hecht – Bee Capitol Bureau
Sacramento, California, Tuesday, December 26, 2006

Assemblyman Lloyd Levine says he came to understand his Jewish cultural
roots and comprehend a horrific epoch in history on a trip to Israel in
2004.

He was at the Yad Vashem Holocaust museum in Jerusalem, transfixed by
cubes stacked like children’s play blocks. Each depicted children who died
of Nazi genocide. A somber voice intoned their names as 1.6 million beams
of light reflected the toll of young lives taken.

“For the next several hours, I had the abiding urge to throw up,” Levine,
D-Van Nuys, said. “It makes you sick knowing what happened.”

Levine returned to California determined to make his own contribution to the
victims by seeking a “dignified and quiet” memorial outside the Capitol to
honor those who “perished and suffered” in the Holocaust.

But as the bill he sponsored was debated and amended in the Legislature and
then signed into law by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Sept. 30, Levine’s
original vision grew markedly.

Under Assembly Bill 1210, which goes into effect Monday, California will
begin a quest to construct a memorial at Capitol Park not only for victims
and survivors of the Holocaust, but for all people who faced genocide and
ethnic cleansing across the world and many generations.

On its face, the effort raises a poignant challenge by seeking to bring
together diverse peoples and histories to acknowledge acts of inhumanity
from the Holocaust of Nazi Germany to the killing fields of Cambodia to the
ongoing ethnic slaughter in Darfur.

Though still an ill-defined concept, the idea of such a memorial is stirring
emotional discussions among vast, varied communities affected by genocide.

In Glendale, Haig Hovespian hopes the memorial will acknowledge the mass
murder of hundreds of thousands of Armenians in Turkey in 1915.

“A vast majority of Armenians who came to California were either survivors
or descendants of the victims of Armenian genocide,” said Hovespian,
community relations director for Armenian National Committee of America.
“If you want to boil it down, it is the reason that they are Californians
today.”

In Sacramento, Zang Fang, 36, believes such a monument should acknowledge
Hmong refugees who fled wanton killings in Laos during 30 years of
retaliations for the Hmong’s support of the United States’ secret war
against communist Pathet Lao in the 1970s.

As a toddler, Fang lost his father, Joua Lue Fang, who fought alongside U.S.
forces and was killed in an explosives accident. As an 8-year-old, he saw an
uncle, Zong Chue Fang, executed and lost a cousin, Xialee Fang, who was
gunned down while collecting wild roots as Pathet Lao forces sacked Hmong
villages.

Thousands were ultimately killed or imprisoned, and 200,000 people were
forced into exile. Fang’s family attempted a perilous trek on a mountain
trail lined with bodies of Hmong victims. They eventually made it to
Thailand in a boat crossing the Mekong River, as 16 people drowned when a
second boat capsized.

“What the Hmong did to help the Americans needs to be acknowledged,” Fang
said of the Capitol memorial. “And the price they paid to help the Americans
needs to be acknowledged.”

Under AB 1210, a nine-member International Genocide Commission, including
at least six survivors or descendants of genocide, will be appointed to
select a design and initiate private fundraising to build the memorial.

“The construction of this memorial will help all Californians remember the
unimaginable suffering genocide survivors endured,” Schwarzenegger said in
signing the legislation.

The bill declares that “California recognizes the atrocities of all ethnic
cleansing campaigns,” including “the Holocaust, Kosovo, Armenian genocide,
Rwanda, African American slaves, Native Americans and the plight of the
Hmong in Southeast Asia.”

If built, the memorial would be the 16th major monument at Capitol Park,
joining the Civil War Veterans Grove, the Father Junipero Serra statue, and
veterans, Vietnam War and firefighters memorials.

The planned genocide memorial’s attempt to meld such horrific events from
far corners of world history may prove particularly sensitive.

Andrew McPherson, director of design at Nacht & Lewis Architects in
Sacramento, which designed a veterans memorial plaza at Mather Field, said
the genocide commission should cast a wide net in seeking input.

“To have somebody go off into a vacuum and design a memorial is really,
really risky,” he said. “You’re going to have people coming out of the
woodwork that have different ideas. And you’re going to have people who
may be offended, saying, ‘Why wasn’t I asked?’ “

Holocaust survivor and author David Faber, 80, of San Diego wonders how
other acts of genocide can be incorporated into the same reflective space as
a Holocaust memorial.

“It’s nice if they do that,” Faber said. “It can work, providing that it is
put into sections: the Holocaust here, Rwanda here, Kosovo here.”

His hesitation over a combined memorial may be because his own sense of
persecution is literally burned into his flesh. Faber’s left forearm bears
number 161051 from the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp in Germany,
one of numerous death camps he was shuttled to as a boy.

He witnessed Nazi soldiers executing his mother and five sisters at his home
in Poland. He also lost his brother, father and more than 90 extended family
members to the Holocaust.

“We’re talking 6 million people (who perished),” Faber said. “How many
would be here now if they hadn’t been murdered? It would be over 50
million. A generation was wiped out.”

Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los
Angeles, said a universal-themed Capitol memorial would be an appropriate
“statement of empathy and solidarity with all victims of genocide.”

“It is a shocking and depressing statement that, here in the 21st century,
you have to stand up again and again and say this type of behavior cannot be
sanctioned,” he said.

That’s why San Francisco lawyer Martina Knee, a daughter of Holocaust
survivors and a member of the Bay Area Darfur Coalition, wants the memorial
to acknowledge still unfolding mass killings of hundreds of thousands of
villagers in western Sudan.

And Igor Cimpo, 30, of Sacramento wants the memorial to honor the 12,000
people who died in the former Yugoslavia in Sarajevo and the 8,000 — Muslim
men and boys — massacred in Srebrenica.

The Bosnian refugee dodged Serbian sniper fire during the 1992-1996 siege of
Sarajevo, “running to get water, to get food, always wondering if you were
going to make it home.”

“There was genocide in the middle of Europe. It happened again, so long
after the Holocaust,” Cimpo said. “I fear these events happen and people
forget overnight. I’m afraid they’re forgetting now.” -30-
————————————————————————————————
The Bee’s Peter Hecht can be reached phecht@sacbee.com.
LINK: http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/98282.html

————————————————————————————————
FOOTNOTE: There is no mention of the Ukrainian Genocide of 1932-1933
(the Holodomor – induced starvation, death for millions, genocide) in the
article above. We would like to know if any Ukrainian-Americans in
California are working to make sure the Ukrainian genocide is included in
the memorial that will be built. AUR EDITOR
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
Send in a letter-to-the-editor today. Let us hear from you.
========================================================
13. UNWITTING PARTY TO GENOCIDE
The International Criminal Court Is Complicating Efforts to Save Darfur

OP-ED: By Stephen Rademaker, The Washington Post
Washington, D.C.Thursday, January 11, 2007; Page A25

Over the past three years, more than 400,000 people have perished in the
Darfur genocide. Fighting has intensified in recent months as diplomatic
efforts to end the conflict have faltered.

The government in Khartoum bears principal responsibility for the continued
killing, but recently an unexpected obstacle to ending the bloodshed has
emerged: the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Critics of the ICC predicted early on that it would be more a hindrance than
a help to ending most conflicts. The threat of prosecution would rarely
motivate both parties to stop fighting, they argued, but in many cases it
would be powerful enough to convince at least one side that it was better
off continuing to fight. Yet even the ICC’s critics have been surprised by
the degree to which this is being borne out in Darfur.

Much of the world agrees that to end the genocide a highly capable U.N.
peacekeeping force must immediately be deployed to Darfur.

The only footnote to this consensus is China, which, eager for access to
Sudan’s oil and armed with a veto at the U.N.

Security Council, forced the United Nations to accept a precondition to
action in August: that the government in Khartoum must consent to the
deployment of any U.N. force.

The Sudanese government has no history of objecting to U.N. peacekeeping
forces on its territory. It agreed as recently as January 2005 to the
deployment of a 10,000-member U.N. peacekeeping force in southern Sudan
to monitor implementation of a peace agreement with rebels there, and that
force remains in Sudan.

So what has led Khartoum to reject today what it was willing to accept just
two years ago? According to Sudanese government spokesmen, it’s the
involvement of the ICC.

Sudan is not a party to the treaty establishing the ICC, so the only way the
court could obtain jurisdiction over crimes in Darfur was to be granted such
jurisdiction by the Security Council. The council took that step in March
2005.

The Bush administration supported bringing in the ICC, not least because the
perpetrators of the Darfur genocide are so richly deserving of prosecution.
More fundamentally, the administration went along because this was the
strongest action that other members of the Security Council were prepared to
take at the time.

The political situation mirrored that surrounding the Security Council’s
decision to create a war crimes tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in 1993.

In both cases, the United States was pressing for resolute steps to end
genocide, but other countries, particularly in Europe, were unwilling to
agree to steps that might entail significant military, economic or political
costs. The idea of deploying eager prosecutors rather than effective
peacekeepers emerged as a low-risk compromise.

But war crimes prosecutors didn’t stop genocide in Yugoslavia, and they
haven’t stopped it in Darfur either. To the contrary, the example of the
Balkans, where U.N. peacekeepers in Bosnia and Kosovo have tracked down
and arrested war crimes indictees, appears to have hardened the opposition
of Sudanese officials to a U.N. force.

Quite predictably, those officials are saying they’re not interested in a
U.N. peacekeeping force in Darfur if, as in the Balkans, it would offer them
a one-way trip in handcuffs to The Hague.

Those seeking to end the genocide have naturally been seeking new ways to
pressure Khartoum. Realistic options for tightening economic sanctions are
few. So, having failed to recognize that it was a mistake to call in the
ICC, many critics of the regime have compounded the error by trying to
ratchet up the threat of ICC prosecution.

This, of course, reinforces the regime’s impulse to say no. Indeed, it would
be hard to devise a policy better calculated to perpetuate Sudan’s refusal
to accept a U.N. peacekeeping force in Darfur.

If the Sudanese government ever begins to seriously consider agreeing to a
U.N. force in Darfur, the first thing it is likely to seek is guarantees
against the arrest and prosecution of Sudanese officials by the ICC. But it
is not clear that the Security Council would be able to grant the government
those guarantees should the international community be prepared to consider
such a bargain.

In an effort to insulate the ICC from political pressure, the treaty
establishing the court seeks to make it impossible for the Security Council
to permanently end ICC proceedings once they have commenced.

Should efforts to deploy a U.N. force fail and the genocide continue,
options for ending the bloodshed may narrow to some sort of coalition
military action.

Given China’s opposition, such action almost certainly would have to be
carried out without Security Council authorization and would be vastly
inferior to the deployment of an effective U.N. peacekeeping force.

In the analogous cases of Bosnia and Kosovo, coalition military action was
in large measure U.S. military action, and the same would be true in Darfur.

No matter how noble our objectives, U.S. military action without U.N.
authorization against another Arab government would prove deeply unpopular
in many parts of the world, and America would pay a steep political price.

If this is where we end up in Darfur — or if the genocide continues
unabated because peacekeepers cannot be deployed — there will be three
culprits to blame: the bloodthirsty regime in Khartoum, the oil-thirsty
government in Beijing and the U.N. Security Council’s shortsighted decision
to bring in the ICC. -30-
———————————————————————————————–
The writer, vice president of a Washington-based government affairs and
consulting firm, was an assistant secretary of state from 2002 to 2006, with
responsibility for arms control, nonproliferation and international
security.
———————————————————————————————-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/10/AR2007011002022.html
——————————————————————————————————————-
FOOTNOTE: The Ukrainian government continues to totally ignor the
ongoing genocide today in Darfur in spite of their many speeches about the
Ukrainian genocide of 1932-1933 (the Holodomor – induced starvation,
death for millions, genocide) and strongtly stating that genocide must not
be allowed to happen again. AUR EDITOR
———————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
14. CAMPAIGN TO END THE CYCLE OF GENOCIDE
Exposing the denial of all genocide
Capitol Hill Screening of ‘SCREAMERS’ at Jan. 17th, 2007

Posted by barbarnabe, Soadfans News, Sunday, January 14, 2007

WASHINGTON, DC – SCREAMERS, the gripping documentary about the
multi-platinum, Grammy-award winning band “System Of A Down’s” campaign
to end the cycle of genocide, will be screened before a Congressional
audience on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, January 17th, reported the Armenian
National Committee of America (ANCA).

The evening’s program – which is being hosted by Congressmen Adam Schiff
(D-CA) and Frank Pallone (D-NJ), Save Darfur, the ANCA Endowment, and the
Raffy Manoukian Charity – will start with a 6:30 pm reception, continue with
a 7:30 pm screening, and conclude with a discussion with the film’s director
Carla Garapedian and special guests.

It will take place in the Mumford Room on the sixth floor of the James
Madison Building of the Library of Congress. (Independence Ave SE, between
1st and 2nd Streets)

“SCREAMERS is about exposing the denial of all genocide, Armenia, the
Holocaust, Cambodia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Rwanda, the Iraqi Kurds and the
current horror in Darfur,” said Garapedian.

“It is about making sure the same critical message George Clooney and Don
Cheadle are ‘screaming’ about is heard, that these atrocities ‘never happen
again.’

And I believe, it is this generation, the ‘screamers’, who will make sure
all genocide is recognized and ends, because ‘screamers’ will no longer
tolerate or accept previous generations of politicians and humanitarians who
have so miserably failed them.”

“Adolph Hitler used the Armenian Genocide as a blueprint for the Holocaust,
silencing the potential reservations of his generals by asking the chilling
question: ‘Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the
Armenians,'” said ANCA Executive Director Aram Hamparian.

“These hateful words, inscribed on the walls of the U.S. Holocaust Museum
and Memorial, remind us all of the compelling moral cause of our time – the
message delivered so clearly and powerfully by SCREAMERS – that we must
end forever the cycle of genocide.”

SCREAMERS debuted at the American Film Institute Film Festival on November
2nd and won the coveted AFI Audience Award. On hand for the opening were
Garapedian, “System Of A Down” band members Serj Tankian, John Dolmayan
and Shavo Odadjian, producers Pete McAlevey and Tim Swain, sponsor Raffy
Manoukian of the Raffy Manoukian Charity and a host of genocide recognition
and prevention activists from the ANCA, Save Darfur, and other groups.
[check photos of this event here]

SCREAMERS is a production of MG2 productions in association with BBC
Television and The Raffi Manoukian Charity.

Garapedian, a veteran reporter who has made a career of covering the most
difficult stories, from Chechenya to repression in Afghanistan, follows the
European tour of “System Of A Down” and their ongoing efforts, through music
and activism, to raise awareness about denial of all genocide, tracing the
band members’ own personal journey of their grandparents surviving the
Armenian Genocide and its legacy of a century of atrocities.

The film, distributed by Maya Entertainment, is currently playing in the Los
Angeles area and will open on January 26th in New York City, Washington, DC,
Boston, Chicago and Detroit.

On December 22nd, during an ANCA-Western Region press conference outside
of the opening of the film in Encino, California, Congressman Brad Sherman
(D-CA) and Garapedian spoke to the media about ending the cycle of genocide,
from the Armenian Genocide of 1915 to the Genocide going on in Darfur today.

SCREAMERS will debut in Washington, DC; New York; Boston and
Chicago on January 26th.

Fresno Screening Set for January 19th. For additional cities and dates
check back SOADFans news and Screamersmovie.com. -30-
———————————————————————————————-
LINK: http://soadfans.com/Article473.htm
—————————————————————————=—————–
FOOTNOTE: There is no mention of the Ukrainian genocide of
1932-1933 (the Holodomor – induced starvation, death for millions,
genocide) in the article above. AUR EDITOR
———————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
15. PRO-ARMENIAN U.S. LAWMAKER SAYS HE WILL INTRODUCE
GENOCIDE RESOLUTION SOON

Turkish Daily News, Ankara, Turkey, Tuesday, January 9, 2007

WASHINGTON – A leading pro-Armenian member of the U.S. House of
Representatives has said he will soon introduce a resolution for recognition
of the World War I-era killings of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire as
genocide.

“We as a nation must … acknowledge the Armenian genocide, and I will soon
introduce a resolution in the House that will honor the victims and put
Congress on the record,” Adam Schiff, a California Democrat, said in a
Friday statement. “I am hopeful that with new leadership in Congress we can
finally get it passed.”

The new U.S. Congress formed in nationwide elections in November opened
on Thursday. U.S. Armenian groups have already said they will seek
congressional passage of at least one genocide resolution before April 24,
designated by U.S. presidents as day of remembrance for the Armenian
killings.

Earlier Armenian efforts for genocide recognition failed during the first
six years of President George W. Bush’s administration as then Republican
House leadership prevented a full floor vote for the measures.

But Armenians’ Democratic allies won a landslide victory in the Nov. 7
elections, winning the control of both the House of Representatives and the
Senate.

And the new Democratic congressional leadership favors the Armenian
position. New House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, another California Democrat,
announced before the elections that she would back recognition of the
Armenian genocide in the new Congress.

On the Senate side, Democratic majority leader Harry Reid and Joe Biden,
who is due to become chairman of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, are both sympathetic to the Armenian cause. “I think we have the
best chance probably in a decade to get an Armenian genocide resolution
passed,” Schiff said earlier.

The Bush government, like earlier administrations, has declined to qualify
the Armenian killings as genocide and urged Congress to refrain from passing
a genocide resolution, saying such a move would damage ties with Turkey, a
key strategic ally.

Turkey’s public is extremely sensitive on Armenian claims, and successive
Ankara governments have warned Washington that any congressional recognition
of genocide allegations would lead to a review of the entire U.S.-Turkish
relationship.

In a related development, a group of up to 20 Armenians held a five-day fast
in front of the Turkish consulate in Los Angeles last week to protest
against “Turkey’s continued denial of the Armenian genocide,” the Armenian
news agency Asbarez reported. A large Armenian community lives near the Los
Angeles area in California. -30-
———————————————————————————————–
LINK: http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=63453
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
16. THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE ISSUE: WHO PUBLICIZES THE
GENOCIDE MORE? ARMENIANS OR TURKS?
NY Times refers to Armenian genocide as historical fact

By Harut Sassounian, Publisher, The California Courier
AZG Armenian Daily, Thursday, January 11, 2007

The Foreign Minister of Turkey, Abdullah Gul, announced this week that
the Turkish government is planning to launch in 2007 a new comprehensive
propaganda campaign to deny the Armenian Genocide.

All previous Turkish government attempts to bury the facts of the Armenian
Genocide have ended in failure, after wasting millions of dollars on
lobbying firms and books by phony “scholars.”

Ironically, the more the Turks try to deny the crime committed by Ottoman
Turkey in 1915, the greater the number of countries, international
organizations and individuals that recognize it.

In recent weeks, after the Argentinean Parliament recognized the Armenian
Genocide, Ankara warned that country’s Senate not to follow suit. Despite
the Turkish warning, and maybe because of it, the Argentinean Senate adopted
the Armenian Genocide resolution unanimously!

A couple of months ago, when the French Parliament adopted a bill that would
make it a crime to deny the Armenian Genocide, the Turkish government gave a
similar warning to the French Senate.

If the Turks continue to irritate the French by their threats and obnoxious
insults, I have no doubt that the Senate would reciprocate by adopting this
new law by an overwhelming majority!

Here are a few other items of interest to our readers:

[1] Several Turkish newspapers reported last week that the Armenian American
lobby scored a major victory when Pres. Bush could not get the Senate to
confirm Richard Hoagland, the Ambassador-designate for Armenia.

The Turkish press quoted an analyst as saying that the blocking of
Hoagland’s nomination was a major success for Armenians: “The Armenian
lobby has never been this strong.”

[2] The Canadian Jewish News reported on December 14 that Israel has
developed “a rich friendship” with Shiite Muslim Azerbaijan. “The
relationship was born in 1992 when Israel supported Azerbaijan against
Armenia in the Karabagh War,” the Jewish publication stated.

Since then, Israel has continued “to provide intelligence, security and
military training to Azerbaijan.. Israel’s Backcell is the second-largest
cell phone operator” in Azerbaijan and is “one of many Israeli businesses
doing brisk trade” in Baku.

[3] The Turkish Culture Minister announced last week that the official
opening ceremonies for the renovated Aghtamar Armenian Church would
take place on April 24.

The Patriarch of Constantinople, Archbishop Mesrob Moutafian, issued an
uncharacteristically bold statement, saying that holding the ceremony on
that date would be exploiting Armenian people’s suffering for political
gain.

He said that neither he nor any other Armenian would participate in such a
ceremony on April 24. It has been obvious to me from the very beginning that
Turkish officials were planning to exploit the renovation of Aghtamar for
political purposes, independently of the date of the ceremony.

Maybe the Patriarch, instead of objecting, should have accepted that date
and turned the ceremony planned for April 24 into a commemoration of the
Armenian Genocide — which would have been a first in Turkey since 1915.

[4] Sylvester Stallone announced last week that he is interested in making
Franz Werfel’s famous novel, “The Forty Days of Musa Dagh,” into a
blockbuster movie. Turks went into total panic and organized a worldwide
e-mail campaign urging Stallone not to be “an instrument of Armenian
lobbies.”

Armenians on the other hand were so excited that they started celebrating as
if the movie was already made. Surprisingly, neither Turks nor Armenians
seem to remember that Stallone has made this same announcement several
times in the past with nothing to show for.

However, should Stallone end up making this movie someday, he can count on
the Turks to provide a lot of free publicity, ensuring its success!
N.Y. TIMES REFERS TO ARMENIAN GENOCIDE AS HISTORICAL FACT
[5] Turkey’s Prime Minister, Recep Erdogan, told the editors of the New York
Times last week that they had become “a tool in the hands of the Armenians.”

He was unhappy that the N.Y. Times had decided that the newspaper would
refer to the Armenian Genocide as a historical fact.

This is the second time that the Turkish Prime Minister has personally
complained to the N.Y. Times on this issue in the past couple of years.

Maybe it’s about time that Erdogan realized that the N.Y. Times, true to its
noble calling, is a tool for the truth and not a tool for Turkish denialism.

[6] Father Serop Azarian, the Pastor of the St. Gregory Armenian Apostolic
Church in Granite City/St. Louis, sent me an e-mail describing his encounter
with Turkish novelist and Nobel Laureate Orhan Pamuk, at a lecture sponsored
by the Washington University in St. Louis on Nov. 27.

Fr. Azarian said in his e-mail: “Although in his speech Pamuk came close to
mentioning the Armenians, denounced the criminal regime of the Young Turks
and the delusional Turkish leaders of today, and spoke about the need for
Turkey to be more open and responsible, he did not say one word about
Armenians or the Genocide. He was cautious and, I think, rather cowardly in
not telling the truth.

While signing his books, I approached him and asked him if he would write a
novel about prominent Armenian Genocide victims, such as novelist and
Parliament member Krikor Zohrab. Initially, he warmly said (in a very low
voice): ‘I live there [Turkey]. I cannot do it.’ Then in a louder and more
blunt tone he said: ‘As a novelist, I choose what I write.’ “

Later on, in December, while in Sweden to receive the Nobel Prize for
Literature, when asked about the Armenian Genocide, Pamuk replied: “No
comment!” It appears that Turkish denialists have succeeded in scaring this
great writer into silence with their threats.

Let’s see what 2007 has in store for the Armenian Cause. One thing is
certain: Armenians can count on Turkish denialists to continue publicizing
the Armenian Genocide by their extremist actions. -30-
————————————————————————————————
http://www.azg.am/?lang=EN&num=2007011102
————————————————————————————————
[return to index] [Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
17. LVIV: THE PRESENT AND THE PAST SHOULD GO HAND IN HAND

INTERVIEW: With Oleksandr Shyshka About History of Lviv
By Iryna Yehorova, The Day Weekly Digest
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, December 19, 2006

[THE DAY] “Mr. Shyshka, you live right in downtown Lviv and your windows
face the Arsenal.”

[OLEKSANDR SHYSHKA] “The fact that I had to pass Marketplace Square
every day also had an impact on me. Can you imagine: on your right is High
Castle and on the left is Freedom Avenue and to reach it you walk down
ancient narrow streets, striding through history.”

“Oscar Wilde once said ‘The one duty we owe to history is to rewrite it.’
Today many historians say that Lviv is more than 750 years old.”

“We are really celebrating the so-called 750th anniversary of Lviv, although
it would be more correct to say the ‘750th anniversary of the first recorded
mention of Lviv.’

“The Galician-Volhynian Chronicle says that Kholm (now a city in Poland) was
burning and you could see this fire as far away as near Belzky Fields (now
the Lviv neighborhood Znesinnia). Since the blaze could be seen from Lviv,
this means the city already existed as a town. Unfortunately, there is no
other concrete evidence.

“At the time, Prince Danylo of Halych or, as some say, King Danylo, was
building a number of fortified towns in the Galician-Volhynian Principality,
which was the western frontier of Kyivan Rus’. Incidentally, he built Kholm
and other towns, so historians believe that he also turned Lviv into a town.

“Still, there is ample evidence that people were living here long before
that. In the 1990s, when the Golden Lion Hotel was being built, a
5th-century settlement was uncovered. If the results of those excavations
are anything to go by, we could celebrate the 1,500th anniversary of Lviv.

“The Galician-Volhynian Chronicle does not mention any date. The year 1256
was suggested by way of comparison, i.e., taking into account events that
are precisely dated in other chronicles. It was the well-known Ukrainian
historian Professor Krypiakevych and his follower Biletsky who came to this
conclusion in 1956.

“But other historians claim otherwise. For example, Leonid Makhnovets
recently published a new translation of the Galician-Volhynian Chronicle, in
which he gives the year 1257. The Poles say it is 1259, and researchers of
ancient chronicles even say 1270. Let me explain about the year 1270.

“In the vicinity of the present-day Old Market Square, all the way to the
Pidzamche railway station, was the city of Danylo, which had the largest
number of Orthodox churches; they exist to this day.

“To tell the truth, a dozen of them were destroyed – some from old age and
others as a result of the policy of the Austrian government, which was
carrying out a church reform and trying to Germanize Lviv as much as
possible.

“The second town, according to historians and excavations, was populated in
1270 – this time it was the city of Prince Lev (Lion).

“He moved the boundary further south and founded what we call the medieval
part of Lviv, around Market Square. And, since it was the city center in the
16th-17th centuries, it was commonly believed (especially by Polish
chronicle researchers) that Prince Lev laid the city’s foundations in 1270.

“Polish researchers later claimed that the new territory was laid by Casimir
(Kazimierz) the Great in 1340, although it had already existed for about 70
years.

“The Poles came here because the last Galician prince, Yurii-Boleslaw II,
was poisoned by boyars and the state was left without a ruler. Casimir took
advantage of this and made a foray into Lviv in 1340. Despite this, the
so-called Boyar Republic headed by Dmytro Diadko existed for another nine
years.

“Then there were all kinds of peripeteia, and in 1386 Queen Jadwiga of
Poland finally made Lviv part of the Polish Kingdom as the city of the
so-called Lviv Land, i.e., the metropolitan city of this region.”

[THE DAY] “Tourism is now giving an impetus to Lviv’s development. What
was it in the Middle Ages – trade?”

[OLEKSANDR SHYSHKA] “There were several periods of untrammeled
growth. The first one began in 1386 and ended when the Turks seized
Constantinople. At that time Lviv was very affluent because it was located
at the intersection of trade routes and maintained close commercial ties with
the Middle East. Then these lucrative ties were cut and Lviv went into decline.

“To crown it all, in 1527 a raging fire gutted almost everything except for
a few buildings and fortifications. Lviv’s second burgeoning began later, in
the 17th century. Many foreigners, particularly Italians, arrived. (The
original Lviv was Germanized.) Their advent helped revitalize trade with
Western Europe and reestablish links with the Orient.

“Bohdan Khmelnytsky’s wars undermined Lviv’s progress, although he failed
to capture the city. After all, he never set himself this goal, but the area
was destroyed.

“After the partition of Poland, the Germanization of Lviv began again. In
fact, the new revival was launched when the Austrian government passed a law
on the so- called Dual Empire, i.e., the unification of Austria and Hungary.

“Galicia was granted certain privileges, for example, a Sejm, and Lviv
became a full-fledged city authorized to pass its own local government
resolutions. Actually, the year 1860 saw a new revival of the city, which
coincided with the Industrial Revolution. The Lviv-based trade and
industrial fair was known throughout Europe.”

[THE DAY] “People of various nationalities made a contribution to the city’s
crown of glory. Whom would you name?”

[OLEKSANDR SHYSHKA] “The first people were, naturally, Danylo of
Halych and his son Lev as founders of the city. If one speaks of the Polish
kings in later times, it was Jan III Sobieski who did his utmost for Lviv.

“Among the interesting personalities of Polish culture was Burgomaster
Kampian, who personally funded the construction of the City Hall tower. He
made a sizable contribution, although he also spent municipal funds.

“I must mention the Lviv chancellor, subsequently burgomaster, Bartolomeusz
Zimorowicz, who left us a well-documented chronicle of Lviv.

“Among Ukrainians, we have the brothers Rohatynets, who founded the
Stauropegion Brotherhood. One of the brotherhood’s members, Kostiantyn
Korniakt, also built a tower at his own expense, which became part of the
Assumption Church ensemble.

“The Austrian period also boasts some personalities that are interesting
from the intellectual angle, for instance, the scholar and Basilian monk
Kompanewicz, who excelled in historical studies. In 1844 the historian Denys
Zubrytsky published an unsurpassed work on the history of Lviv, which
comprises chronicles and carefully documented materials.

“He recorded various facts that he found in the books of the municipal
courts and magistracy. As a result, we have a detailed description of every
year in the period from 1340 to 1772.

“There were many political personalities in the second half of the 19th
century. I must name some writers, such as the members of the Ruska
Triitsia, the Ruthenian Triad, who in fact introduced the standard Ukrainian
language in Galicia, as well as Ivan Franko and a pleiad of other political
and public figures, who were then working in Lviv.

“Some time later, a group of Ukrainian politicians headed by Kost Levytsky
and Yevhen Petrushevych came to the fore.

“One should also note the military men, who laid the foundations of the
Ukrainian Sich Riflemen (Sichovi Striltsi) and Kyrylo Tryliovsky, who
organized a network of Sich physical-education associations that later made
it possible to form the first legion of the Sichovi Striltsi. This was in
fact the embryo of the first Ukrainian regular military unit.”

[THE DAY] “We do not know much about the technological discoveries made
by Lviv residents.”

[OLEKSANDR SHYSHKA] “Among the discoveries of worldwide importance
one must recall the famous oil lamp invented by Ivan Zeh and Ihnatii Lukashevych
at Mykolasz’s pharmacy. Intensive research in microbiology was conducted at
Professor Weigl’s institute, where an anti-typhus serum was developed.

“Under the German occupation, the institute continued to function and a
number of world-famous scientists, such as Stefan Banach, who were left
without means of subsistence, were in dire straits. The serum was made out
of the blood that the lice sucked. Whenever Banach would come to the
institute, he was given some lice in a little box, and they sucked his
blood.

“Thus, the universally acclaimed mathematician, author of the theory of
normed linear spaces (Banach spaces), was able to get ration tickets. This
even helped some researchers evade deportation to Germany.

“Among the scholars of Polish background living in Lviv was Eugeniusz Romer,
who founded a cartographic institute and helped establish the Atlas book
publishing company.”

“Lviv lived through a lot of tragedies. One of them – by far the biggest
according to some – was the shooting of Lviv intellectuals by the Nazis.”

“It is difficult to say that this was the tragedy of an entire city: it was
the tragedy of individual families, an intellectual loss. About 40 people
were shot, among them doctors and liberal arts scholars – undoubtedly,
well-known people who were able to rally young people to their side.

“I think the Holocaust is Lviv’s greatest tragedy, because a third of Lviv’s
prewar population was wiped out in a two-year period. The Jews were driven
into the Lviv ghetto; they were exterminated there as well as in other
camps. Then the ghetto was burned down.

“With a few exceptions, about 100,000 Jews who were living in Lviv were
killed. Incidentally, Poles accounted for about 60 percent of the city’s
prewar population, Jews about 30 percent, and Ukrainians, not more than 15
percent. These figures varied in different years.”

[THE DAY] “Ukrainians say there is a special Galician mentality. What does
this mean?”

[OLEKSANDR SHYSHKA] “It can be explained by a number of phenomena.
For example, boisterous merrymaking and extravaganzas were banned in Lviv
in the early 17th century. In fact there was a decree on modesty.

“The different social strata were supposed to live in harmony. Otherwise,
one could drink away an entire estate. So there were certain restrictions.

“But, seriously, there really is a Lviv phenomenon. Its roots are quite
tangled. Lviv was under foreign influence from 1340 onward. Poland, Austria,
and other governments imposed their policies, but the Ukrainian element
remained intact.

“In other words, while assimilation, if only in the field of language, took
place comparatively easily in eastern Ukraine, it failed, for some unknown
reasons, to get off the ground here.

“The Polish royal government was not exactly enthusiastic about Ukraine,
there was not much democracy here, the Ukrainians and Jews were in fact
driven into a small ghetto.

“Look at former Jewish Street, now named after Ivan Fedorov, and Old Jewish
Street. Ukrainians lived in between the Marketplace and the Wallachian
Church, on Ruthenian Street.

“In other words, these two nations were in the same situation in terms of
area and number of houses. All the rest belonged to others: Poles, Germans,
Italians, Scots, etc. It was an international community of sorts. Yet
Ukrainians managed to preserve their traditions and religion.

“Even when they had to accept a church union with Rome under the relentless
economic pressure of the Polish government, they still closely guarded their
calendar, rites, and the language of the liturgy, thus fully disengaging
themselves from the Roman Catholics. This resoluteness of spirit allowed a
small but Ukrainian Lviv to exist.

“In the revolutionary period, eastern Ukraine was rife with socialist
elements, while there was very little socialism here. The Communist Party of
Galicia, later of Western Ukraine, was not very strong and did not have
widespread support.

“Conversely, the national liberation movement, the Western Ukrainian
National Republic (ZUNR), and the Ukrainian Galician Army (UHA) were the
local people’s own flesh and blood.

“Later, in the interwar period, after the Western Ukrainian National
Republic had been suppressed, the surviving Ukrainian Sich Riflemen formed
the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists.

“Naturally, the Poles persecuted them, there were trials, and almost all the
leaders were behind bars, but there was no terrible extermination like in
the east.

“In spite of the repressive regime that was imposed by panska Polska (noble
Poland), to quote a Soviet cliche, the atmosphere was not so stifling. This
helped preserve the national cadres that later participated in the new
struggle as part of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), etc.

“In the Soviet era there were also persecutions, but there was no terrible
mass-scale departure of the people from their traditions. Everyone
celebrated Christmas and Easter. There was ample room for dissidence here.

“Ukrainian was always the language of instruction at Ivan Franko University.
The Ukrainian spirit was always alive and well, enabling many people to
breathe as easily as they could.”

[THE DAY] “Does your heart bleed when you hear it said today that Lviv is a
provincial city?”

[OLEKSANDR SHYSHKA] “Where there is a capital, there must be provinces.
My heart really bleeds when I see a terribly neglected Lviv. I am pained by
Lviv’s cobblestone roads, which are being ruined because nobody is repairing
them, not because they’ve received a new covering.

Something is rusting away, something has gone off, and then garbage
collectors come and take all of it away. I cannot say that a lot of the city
was renovated on the eve of the city’s jubilee, except perhaps Market
Square. But even here things are not so simple.

Some people cry, ‘They have cemented our historic past!’ Excuse me, but is
Market Square really our historical past? It was just a place for trading.

Yes, they have dug up some old cobblestone. So what? You can’t banish an
old town from contemporary life and turn it into a museum. This isn’t done
anywhere.

The present and the past must go hand in hand. There is more politicking
than common sense here. As for the way money is being made, paid, and
distributed in this case, the re-constructors are not the one who should be
blamed. The problem is the wrong mechanisms that the government should
eradicate.” -30-
———————————————————————————————–
LINK: http://www.day.kiev.ua/174447/
———————————————————————————————–
[return to index] Action Ukraine Report (AUR) Monitoring Service]
========================================================
You are welcome to send us names for the AUR distribution list.
========================================================
18. DOBRYNIA – PRINCE VOLODYMYR’S CO-RULER
What do we know about this Kyivan Rus’ hero of legends and history?

By Volodymyr HRYPAS, The Day Weekly Digest #41
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, December 19, 2006

“Near the glorious city of Kyiv
There was a picket of mighty warriors.
Ilia Muromets was their leader,
Dobrynia Nikitich the younger – his deputy,
There was also Alesha the parson’s son.”

These and other lines of the heroic epic were created chiefly in the 10th –
11th centuries in the southern lands of Kyivan Rus’. The text was
transmitted orally from person to person over a period of nearly a thousand
years and has reached us by unknown routes.

Despite the semi-fairytale plots, the depicted events are unquestionably
based on real facts, and the main legendary characters portray historic
personalities of different periods of the Kyivan Rus’ era brought together
by folk imagination. Some of them, like Illia Muromets, the most beloved
hero of the legends, left their traces in people’s memory only.

Information about other figures may be traced also through written sources.
From them we learn that among the Rus’ strong men killed in the Battle of
the Kalka River in 1223 was Alesha Popovych.

It is not difficult to recognize Prince Vseslav Polotsky in the legendary
character of Volkhv (the Magus) Vseslavievych, and the Polovtsian Khan
Tugorkan – in Zmii (Serpent) Tugarin.

The magnificent banquets of Prince Volodymyr the Beautiful Sun are mentioned
in the chronicles, and Dobrynia Nikitych turned out to be the uncle of
Prince Volodymyr Sviatoslavych.

Volodymyr’s origins on his mother’s side were cloaked in mystery – if not
for his contemporaries then for succeeding generations. He was not only from
the house of Riuryk but also the son of a bondswoman, a “robychych,” as the
proud Rohnida claimed.

According to the Hypatian copy of the chronicle The Tale of Bygone Years,
when Sviatoslav was leaving on a military expedition in 970, after Olha’s
death, “he placed Yaropolk in Kyiv and Oleh – in Derevy.

At this time the people of Novgorod came to plead for a prince: “If you
don’t come to us, we will find a prince elsewhere.” And Sviatoslav said: “Whom
do you want to come to you?” Both Yaropolk and Oleh refused.

And Dobrynia said: “Ask Volodymyr.” For Volodymyr was [born] of Malusha,
Olha’s alms-maid, Dobrynia’s sister, and their father was Malko Liubchanyn,
and Dobrynia was Volodymyr’s uncle. And the people of Novgorod said to
Sviatoslav: “Give us Volodymyr.” And the people of Novgorod took Volodymyr.
And Volodymyr went with Dobrynia, his uncle, to Novgorod, and Sviatoslav
went to Pereiaslavets.”

The information mentioned in this chronicle entry is unique, as none of the
other historical sources mention Volodymyr’s mother or her relatives. But
this entry gives rise to more questions than answers. Many scholars have
tried to read something new in the hidden and unspoken message of those
laconic lines.

One of the problematic words in this chapter is “alms- maid.” It is
translated in different ways: sometimes as “the one who enjoys favor,”
sometimes as “the servant who gives alms.” In the Laurentian copy of the
chronicle Malusha is mentioned as Olha’s “kliuchnytsia” (bondswoman). It may
be concluded that Dobrynia’s status was the same, and Volodymyr was a
concubine’s son.

According to the chronicle, at the beginning of his rule Volodymyr had
hundreds of concubines. But after the prince’s death only the legitimate
sons of his wives competed for the Kyivan throne (the names of the
contenders are listed in the chronicle). None of them was a concubine’s son,
as he could not claim the title.

Proof of this is Yaroslav Osmomysl’s ill-fated attempt to make Oleh, his
lover’s son, the heir to his throne of Halych. Beyond all doubt, Sviatoslav
had numerous concubines.

But the chronicle limits the number of Sviatoslav’s sons (and Olha’s
grandsons) to three persons only: Yaropolk, Oleh, and Volodymyr. This
fact suggests that Malusha was another of Sviatoslav’s wives.

In this case, what was her possible background? We may assume that
Sviatoslav married a bondmaid to whom he had taken a liking. But one fact
contradicts this assumption: Dobrynia came to Novgorod with the young
Volodymyr as the regent, the ruler of this second most important of the Rus’
lands.

It seems most unlikely that the noble boyars of Novgorod would tolerate
being subordinated to a kinless parvenu who had reached the top simply
because of his sister, no matter who she was – a prince’s wife or a
concubine. To have a position like that Dobrynia had to be at least a
boyar’s son.

It is also unlikely that Malko Liubchanyn could have been deemed worthy of
mention by the chronicler if he were a serf. For this he would have had to
be a well known figure, which explains why the chronicler did not bother to
give any details about Liubchanyn. The names of lesser known people were
usually followed by some personal details: a warlord, somebody’s uncle, a
teenager, or a serf.

Studying these questions, Prozorovsky, a 19th-century Russian historian,
came to the conclusion that Dobrynia and Malusha were both Prince Mal
Drevliansky’s children. Their father had led an uprising of the
Derevlianians against Ihor in 945. Malko Liubchanyn was the new name of
the former Derevlianian prince whom Olha was supporting in Liubech.

Relying on information from the chronicles and later studies on this
question, one can give a broader and more likely interpretation of the
chronicle entry for the year 970. While Olha was alive, Sviatoslav had no
reasons to distribute the Rus’ land among his young sons. Leaving on
numerous military expeditions, he was certain that the government was in
his mother’s reliable and devoted hands.

There were now two groups of mutual adversaries left in Kyiv – the
Varangians (Scandinavians) headed by Sveneld, and the Slavs led by Dobrynia.
Sveneld, who was the most influential warlord in Ihor’s time, could – during
the prince’s long absence – try to seize power in Kyiv and thus in all of
Rus’.

Dobrynia also sought revenge against the Varangians, because it was Sveneld
who had crushed the Derevlianians’ uprising in 945. Therefore, Mal’s son had
every reason to consider Sveneld his personal enemy, and he linked all his
hopes with Volodymyr.

The victory of either of the sides jeopardized Sviatoslav’s status. In this
complicated situation the prince of Kyiv made a decision worthy not only of
a military leader but of a mature and experienced statesman. To neutralize
both adversaries he opted for some decentralization in his absence.

It’s worth mentioning that in 970 Sviatoslav was no older than 30, so there
was no question of his sons’ independent reign. Real power was in the hands
of the regents. Taking into consideration the mighty potential of the
Varangian party, Sviatoslav appointed their representative as a regent for
his elder son Yaropolk in Kyiv (later Sveneld took the regency).

To avoid a military confrontation between Sveneld and Dobrynia and to
prevent the latter from separatist plotting against Kyiv, the prince did not
send Mal’s legitimate heir (Volodymyr or Dobrynia) to the Derevlianians, but
appointed his second son Oleh to rule there.

But the regency for Oleh was given not to the Varangians but to the
Derevlianian boyars. Consequently, Oleh (Volha Sviatoslavych of the legends)
became an active leader of Derevlianian interests. Sviatoslav’s attention to
the land of the Derevlianians attests to their leading role in the Slavonic
party.

According to the chronicle, Sviatoslav did not intend to let Novgorod, the
second most important and distant of the Rus’ lands, out of direct
subordination to Kyiv. Only the Novgorod representatives’ threat to find
another prince (not from the house of Riuryk) to rule made Sviatoslav
change his mind.

Granting Riuryk’s own ancestral lands to Dobrynia and Volodymyr was a
demonstration of Sviatoslav’s great trust in Mal’s son and a great honor.
But Sviatoslav’s main achievement was limiting the Varangians’ influence in
the northern part of Rus’.

We can only assume what was going on in Novgorod at that time because the
chronicler described only events in Rus’ (which meant only the Kyiv lands).
Behind the brief lines of the chronicle we can see Sveneld’s efforts to
exacerbate relations with the Derevlianians. He sought a pretext to defy
Sviatoslav’s will and grounds for seizing the Derevlianians’ land; he
organized provocations.

Finally, the Derevlianians’s patience wore thin. In 975 Oleh killed
Sveneld’s son Lot, who was hunting in his gaming lands. In the war that
followed in 977 the Derevlianians were defeated, Oleh was killed, and
Yaropolk “inherited his land.”

Dobrynia and Volodymyr did not ass