[Ohio UZO News] FT; IHT; EDM; RFE/RL (2)

[Deychak, Orest]

Financial Times
Rift reopens between leaders of Ukraine
By Roman Olearchyk in Kiev 
Published: September 21 2006 03:00 
The deal between Viktor Yushchenko, Ukraine's president, and Viktor
Yanukovich, his prime minister - agreed only a few weeks ago after months of
argument - has run into trouble amid fights over domestic reform policies
and the president's speedy western integration agenda.
Mr Yanukovich was due to visit Brussels today and meet European Union
officials to reassure them of Kiev's continuing commitment to closer
integration. But there are questions about what exactly the Ukrainian
premier will say following a Brussels trip he made last week to see Nato
representatives when he unexpectedly announced that Kiev was not prepared to
take the first steps towards membership of the military alliance. This is in
defiance of Mr Yushchenko's wishes.
The prime minister shrugged off a presidential public rebuke for his
actions, casting doubt on the realism of Mr Yushchenko's foreign policy
ambitions. The president's "desires, at times, exceed his capabilities", Mr
Yanukovich told the FT at a briefing earlier this week.
As well as threatening political gridlock, the resurfacing of deep political
rifts has called into question Mr Yushchenko's ability to keep Ukraine on a
path of swift western integration.
Both leaders agree on seeking improved trade relations and eventual
membership of the EU for their country of 47m. However, with the two men
vying for domestic political advantage, foreign policy has become a
battleground.
Mr Yanukovich, who campaigned ahead of last March elections for reviving
ties with Moscow, Kiev's principle energy supplier, does not support Mr
Yushchenko's plans for quick Nato membership. Most Ukrainians also oppose
Nato membership.
The prime minister's position on Nato and his government's first domestic
reform moves have triggered sharp criticism from Mr Yushchenko and Our
Ukraine, the president's political party.
Allies of both leaders said relations between the two men were also tense
because of the inability of their respective political camps to find common
ground.
Our Ukraine leaders this week accused Mr Yanukovich of breaking last month's
compromise agreement through which his candidacy for prime minister was
supported on condition that Mr Yushchenko's western integration drive be
preserved. Mr Yushchenko avoided dissolving parliament after Mr Yanukovich
signed the compromise accord.
But during a five-hour meeting last Friday, Mr Yushchenko issued what he
described as a "first political warning" to his former arch rival from the
"Orange Revolution" of 2004, criticising the government's changed stance on
Nato and its failure to push ahead with reforms, such as tax cuts.
Earlier this week Mr Yanukovich said relations with Mr Yushchenko had been
complicated by constitutional changes that shifted key presidential powers
to the parliament, which formed the country's first coalition government.
He held firm in defending his government's policies and restated his plans
to pursue pragmatic western integration policies.
Mr Yushchenko hopes to gain influence over the government by coercing Our
Ukraine to join Mr Yanukovich's coalition, which is made up of the
pro-business Regions party, Communists and Socialists. All three oppose
swift Nato integration and, to a lesser degree, liberal reforms.
International Herald Tribune
EU welcomes Ukraine's PM's pledge to seek closer ties 
The Associated Press
 <<...OLE_Obj...>> 
Published: September 21, 2006
BRUSSELS, Belgium The European Union appeared to push any misgivings about
Ukraine's new prime minister into the background Thursday and gave a warm
welcome to Viktor Yanukovych's pledge to reform the economy and fight
corruption. 
"I believe we are going to have a very good working relationship," European
Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso told Yanukovych as the Ukrainian
wrapped up his second visit to EU headquarters in eight days. 
Yanukovych has enjoyed a political rebirth this year in elections that
brought him to power less than two years after his fraud-marred attempt to
win the Ukrainian presidency in 2004 sparked the Orange Revolution protests.

Back then, many in the west viewed the Russian-supported Yanukovych with
suspicion and welcomed his ultimate defeat by his pro-Western Viktor
Yushchenko. 
Now he's back at the head of a coalition government, Yanukovych says he
wants Ukraine to be a bridge between Russia and the EU. Ukraine, he says,
seeks closer political cooperation with the EU, a free-trade zone and
eventual membership of the Union. 
While the EU views Ukraine's membership as a step too far in its eastward
expansion, it is encouraged by Yanukovych's pro-Western statements. 
Asked by a reporter to assess the potential for cooperation with Yanukovych
after their first meeting, Barroso gave an upbeat reply. 
"What matters is not if it's party A or party B, or personality A or
personality B. What is important is the commitment to our common values of
democracy, rule of law and open economies," he said. "I'm very happy that
the new government has stated the commitment of Ukraine to political and
economic reform and its attachment to European values." 
Yanukovych restated that EU membership remains a "strategic goal" for
Ukraine, but acknowledged the former-Soviet republic of 47 million faces a
"difficult road" to gain membership. Barroso said the EU would support
economic and political reforms designed to bring Ukraine closer to the EU
and improve living standards. 
He also gave the EU's backing for Ukraine's bid to join the World Trade
Organization, a step Yanukovych hopes will lead to the negotiation of a free
trade zone with the 25-nation bloc. 
The EU has no plans to offer Kiev membership and instead suggests an
agreement to cement closer economic and political ties, including free
trade. "Our objective is to bring Ukraine closer to the European Union,"
Barroso said. 
Yanukovych said Ukraine had no plans to sign up to a customs union with
Russia - a move which the EU has warned would hurt its chances of setting up
a free trade zone with the European Union. 
Although he has maintained a pro-EU line, Yanukovych upset President
Yushchenko and some ministers in his own government last week when he told
NATO that Ukraine was putting its bid to join the Western military alliance
on hold because of widespread public opposition in the country. 
Pressed about NATO membership again, Yanukovych said his position had the
support of parliament and repeated that joining the alliance would have to
be submitted to a referendum in Ukraine. 

Eurasia Daily Monitor
Wednesday, September 20

UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT, ALLIES ON THE DEFENSIVE OVER NATO POLICY

Ukrainian Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych clearly exceeded the powers of
his office, breached internal governmental procedures, and undoubtedly
usurped the presidency's constitutional authority by announcing in Brussels
that Ukraine is opting out of NATO's Membership Action Plan. Shocked,
President Viktor Yushchenko and his supporters in government and parliament
seem prepared for a political confrontation with the governing majority over
this issue, which is a fundamental one to them.

Moreover, they realize that the prime minister's seemingly unilateral move
on NATO is but one aspect of the Party of Regions' aggressive expansion of
its power and influence, rapidly exceeding the bounds of its pact concluded
in August with the pro-presidential Our Ukraine factions. That pact and its
subsequent misuse by the Party of Regions have almost turned the
pro-presidential camp into a hostage of its more powerful partner. Thus, the
president and his pro-NATO allies in government and parliament would be
acting from a position of weakness if they decide to confront the Party of
Regions and its allies on this issue.

Yushchenko, the ministers of defense and foreign affairs Anatoliy Hrytsenko
and Borys Tarasyuk, and some second-tier presidential advisers (the
first-tier positions being vacant or changing hands) are publicly
criticizing Yanukovych and his party for the move on NATO and are proposing
counter-measures. Their arguments, however, reflect the weakness of their
position in Ukraine's internal politics generally and in the governing
coalition's politics in particular. The main arguments and proposals are:

1) Ukraine should announce that Yanukovych's position on NATO is that of the
prime minister and party leader, not the position of the president or the
entire cabinet, and the relevant ministers have not been consulted. This
assertion is correct, but the decisive political fact is that Yanukovych's
position does reflect that of the main ruling party and its allies, the
majorities in government and parliament, and public opinion at large. The
Verkhovna Rada's Socialist chairman, Oleksandr Moroz, has promptly defended
Yanukovych's conduct in Brussels as reflecting a political consensus.
Moreover, the Party of Regions has become powerful enough to circumvent
other centers of authority. The prime minister did not deign to include the
pro-Western ministers of defense and foreign affairs in the delegation that
accompanied him to NATO and European Union headquarters in Brussels.
Yanukovych's chosen foreign policy adviser is Anatoliy Orel, a leading
exponent of the Russia "vector" in former president Leonid Kuchma's
administration. 

2) The National Security and Defense Council (NSDC) -- as a presidential
body, the argument goes -- should hold a special meeting and issue
directives to all relevant departments of government regarding
implementation of ongoing NATO-Ukraine reform programs. However, the NSDC's
overall performance and its actual involvement in coordinating such reforms
have declined precipitously during Viktor Yushchenko's presidency. The
decline will continue if Yushchenko carries out its intention to appoint
former prime minister Yuriy Yekhanurov to head the NSDC. After Petro
Poroshenko and Anatoliy Kinakh, Yekhanurov would be the third consecutive
NSDC chief with a business background rather than national security
credentials in 21 months since Yushchenko became president.

3) The presidency and relevant ministries should launch a public information
campaign about NATO and the benefits to Ukraine in implementing reform
programs with the alliance's assistance. Such an effort is indeed overdue;
but it will take time and funding, and requires more credible standard
bearers than the political forces that emerged with 10-15% ratings from the
recent elections. In any case, the information effort would almost certainly
be more effective in the eastern and southern regions if it focuses on the
Party of Regions and affiliated interests first, before reaching out more
widely to the populace of those regions.

4) Yushchenko is being asked to confront Yanukovych and, by implication, the
Party of Regions with the argument that the prime minister's move on NATO
has violated the president's constitutional authority on foreign and
national security policy making and the August 3 Declaration of National
Unity. The constitutional argument is impeccable but risks remaining
ineffective due to the political weakness of the presidential forces. Hardly
anyone in Ukraine or abroad takes the Declaration of National Unity
seriously as a binding pact or guide to policy (see EDM, August 7); merely
invoking that document amounts to an admission of lacking real leverage.

On September 15, Yushchenko summoned Yanukovych for a four-hour discussion
about the latter's actions in Brussels. Following their encounter,
Yushchenko declared that the prime minister had violated the president's
constitutional prerogatives, the Declaration of National Unity, and
Ukraine's national interests. Yushchenko gave Yanukovych a "first political
warning" and announced that he would henceforth hold weekly meetings with
Yanukovych to coordinate policies. However, the president and his allies do
not seem to hold any leverage that could counter Yanukovych's and the Party
of Regions' continuing expansion of their power and influence.

(UNIAN, Interfax-Ukraine, Channel Five TV [Kyiv], September 14-18)

--Vladimir Socor

RFE/RL Feature
September 21, 2006
Ukraine: Gongadze Case Still Unsolved, Despite Pushing
By Roman Kupchinsky 
The Gongadze murder case has been the most politicized crime in Ukraine's 15
years as an independent state. Now, six years after the disappearance of
Internet journalist Heorhiy Gongadze, the case is still not fully solved --
to the frustration of many Ukrainians.

Gongadze's murder in September 2000 led to the bloodiest street riots Kyiv
has seen since the 1917 October Revolution. Demonstrators demanding the
resignation of then President Leonid Kuchma, who was suspected of having
ordered the killing, were brutally beaten by special police detachments. 
In November 2000, covert recordings surfaced, supposedly of Kuchma's office
made by a member of his security detail, Mykola Melnychenko. The tapes
contained a voice similar to Kuchma's giving orders to the head of the
Interior Ministry, Yuriy Kravchenko, that Gongadze be "taken, beaten, and
thrown to the Chechens." 
New Impetus
Some politicians in Ukraine are now pushing for resolution of the case.
Addressing the Ukrainian Parliament on September 15, parliament speaker
Oleksander Moroz launched an angry attack against unnamed "high government
officials" for drawing out the murder investigation.
"The investigation of this case is being deliberately prolonged by members
of the government," Moroz said. "This is the result of a politically
motivated request." 
Moroz, along with others, believes that President Viktor Yushchenko has
instructed the prosecutor-general not to press charges against Kuchma for
ordering the killing of Gongadze. 
Ukrainian Prosecutor-General Oleksander Medvedko defended his office,
telling parliament that, although the voice on the recordings appears to be
Kuchma's, the fact that Melnychenko has not provided the prosecution with
the original chips on which he recorded the conversations precludes his
office from pressing charges against Kuchma. 
Mykola Protasov and Valeriy Kostenko in court in December 2005 Melnychenko
has said he is refusing to turn over the original chips because he fears
Ukrainian law-enforcement organizations might be asked to shield Kuchma from
prosecution and destroy the only credible evidence remaining of his possible
guilt. 
Another investigation, into the death of Kravchenko, was reopened in August
by the Prosecutor-General's Office. 
After the Orange coalition victory and the inauguration of Yushchenko as
president in January 2005, a campaign to clean up the country began. Two
months later, in March, Kravchenko allegedly committed suicide by shooting
himself in the head twice.
He had been asked to appear at the prosecutor's office on the day of his
death to answer questions about the Gongadze case. He left a note saying
that he was the victim of "Kuchma's intrigues."
Some, however, have speculated that Kravchenko had been murdered in order to
prevent him from naming those who gave the order to kill Gongadze. 
Rumors Of Deal
The perceived footdragging on the investigation has reinvigorated the idea
that Yushchenko made a secret deal with Kuchma in December 2004, which gave
Kuchma immunity from prosecution in return for his pledge to support a third
round of balloting during the hotly contested presidential election. 
Kuchma allegedly agreed and Yushchenko won the election. Both Kuchma and
Yushchenko deny that such an agreement exists.
Despite the sluggish investigation, the Prosecutor-General's Office has
produced some notable results. 
In August 2005, three high-ranking police officials -- Valeriy Kostenko,
Mykola Protasov, and Oleksandr Popovych -- were arrested and put on trial
for kidnapping and killing the journalist. 
The officers admitted to the charges, but insisted they did so on the direct
orders of Oleksa Pukach, an Interior Ministry general responsible for
overseeing Gongadze's surveillance in the months prior to his kidnapping. 
Pukach, however, had already fled to Israel where numerous attempts to
extradite him failed. In 2005, a team of Ukrainian security service
operatives were sent to Israel to kidnap Pukach. The attempt failed and they
returned home empty handed. Pukach remains on Ukraine's most-wanted list.

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Belarus, Ukraine, and Moldova Report Vol. 8,
No. 32, 19 September 2006

UKRAINE

WHO POISONED YUSHCHENKO? THE SEARCH CONTINUES. The case surrounding the
apparent poisoning two years ago of Viktor Yushchenko remains shrouded in
mystery -- so much so that even Yushchenko himself routinely uses cryptic
language to describe it.

Speaking to journalists in Baku on September 8, the Ukrainian president
stated the investigation into the alleged poisoning in September 2004 was
"one step away from the active phase of solving this case."

Yushchenko's statement came as Ukraine's prosecutor-general, Oleksandr
Medvedko, announced investigators had determined the time, place, and
circumstances in which the poisoning attempt took place.

All that remains, apparently, is to find the individual, or individuals,
responsible.

Austrian doctors responsible for examining Yushchenko several months after
the poison was reportedly administered said the Ukrainian politician had
ingested a concentrated dose of dioxin.

The powerful toxin caused bloating and pockmarks on Yushchenko's face,
giving his skin a greenish hue and adding a macabre note to a tumultuous
political season culminating in the mass Orange Revolution protests in
December 2004.

Prosecutor-General Medvedko, confirming earlier allegations, said tests on
the dioxins found in Yushchenko's blood showed they were highly purified and
manufactured in either Russia, the United States, or Great Britain.

He declined to divulge other details. If investigators have in fact traced
the time and place of the poisoning, it would mark a significant development
in a seemingly stagnant case.

The mystery began on September 6, 2004.

Yushchenko, the pro-Western presidential candidate facing off against the
Kremlin's preferred nominee, Viktor Yanukovych, became violently ill,
suffering severe abdominal pain and facial lesions.

When he was rushed four days later to Vienna's Rudolfinerhaus clinic, his
liver, pancreas, and intestines were swollen, and he was barely able to
walk.

Doctors were initially baffled. But Yushchenko's supporters already had a
theory: that the candidate had been poisoned during a dinner September 5
with Ihor Smeshko, the head of Ukraine's Security Service, at the summer
home of Smeshko's deputy, Volodymyr Satsyuk.

Later that month, many were surprised to read a Rudolfinerhaus press release
stating doctors did not believe Yushchenko had been poisoned.

But several days later, officials at the Vienna clinic publicly objected,
insisting the press release was a forgery -- an episode that conjured up
images of a Soviet-style disinformation campaign.

By December, doctors had confirmed that dioxin was behind Yushchenko's
ailment, and that he had received the substance from a perpetrator who
allegedly intended him harm.

Yushchenko's supporters immediately pointed to Yanukovych as the likely
suspect, and accused Moscow of providing the dioxin.

The Yanukovych camp vigorously denied the charges. Some questioned whether
there was in fact any real evidence to suggest Yushchenko had been poisoned.

At the peak of the Orange Revolution protests in December, Yushchenko
announced he would soon have proof his opponents had attempted to
assassinate him. The proof, however, never materialized.

Since then, an investigation by the Ukrainian Security Service and
Prosecutor-General's Office has been under way. But no findings have been
announced.

In the interim, many Ukrainian and Western observers have begun to express
doubt the case would ever be solved.

Some questioned why it was taking so long to discover the truth --
especially when Yushchenko himself was offering frequent assurances a
solution was around the corner. Was the investigation being blocked? Or have
investigators simply been unable to build a solid case?

A member of the investigative team told RFE/RL that in such a high-profile
matter as the Yushchenko poisoning, it is prudent to wait until the evidence
is so watertight that there is no way the case can be thrown out of court.

But many of Yushchenko's supporters believe that with Yanukovych now in the
prime minister's post it is unlikely the case will be solved soon -- if
ever. 

(Roman Kupchinsky)


	
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/uzonews_clevelanduzo.org/attachments/20060921/b562ce08/attachment.html