[Ohio UZO News] AP; EDM; ISCIP; CSCE

[Deychak, Orest]

AP

Nov. 5, 2007
US Ambassador Urges Reform in Ukraine 

By MARIA DANILOVA Associated Press Writer 



KIEV, Ukraine - The U.S. ambassador urged Ukraine Monday to form a
government quickly and push through reforms to hasten its economic and
political integration with the West.

Addressing students at a university in Kiev, Ambassador William Taylor
called on the former Soviet republic's feuding leaders to put together a
governing coalition. He said the country should implement judicial
reforms and anti-corruption measures, and take the final steps necessary
to join the World Trade Organization.

The two pro-Western parties central in staging the 2004 peaceful Orange
Revolution that helped bring President Viktor Yushchenko to power won
enough parliament seats in elections Sept. 30 to form a Cabinet
together. They have pledged to forge a coalition once the new
legislature convenes.

While he urged economic integration with the European Union, Taylor said
the issue of NATO membership must be resolved following broad public
discussion.

"My simple view on Ukraine and NATO is that it's up to Ukrainians
decide," he said. "If you want to join, we will be very helpful, but we
are not going to push you to want to join."

Ukraine is sharply divided over NATO membership. Most Ukrainians,
particularly in the largely Russian-speaking east and south, remain
skeptical about joining former Cold War adversaries in the military
alliance.

Taylor also said it should reduce its energy dependence on Russia by
developing its own oil and gas fields and looking into alternative
energy sources such as bio, wind and nuclear.

He urged Ukraine to get rid of RosUkrEnergo, a middleman company,
through which it buys Central Asian gas from Russia, and adopt a more
direct and transparent method.

Yushchenko's Orange Revolution partner Yulia Tymoshenko, who has a good
chance of returning to the prime minister's post, has criticized the
RosUkrEnergo arrangement as corrupt, and pledged to get rid of it.

 

Eurasia Daily Monitor

November 6, 2007 

http://www.jamestown.org/edm/

PRESIDENT'S PARTY IS WEAKEST LINK IN ORANGE COALITION

Taras Kuzio

Friday, November 2, was the last day that the Our Ukraine-People's Self
Defense (NUNS) bloc could collect signatures to support a "democratic"
(orange) coalition with the Yulia Tymoshenko bloc (BYuT). BYuT deputies
have openly expressed their fear that disunity in NUNS will lead to an
unstable orange coalition and a political crisis in 2008.

By last Friday, 69 of the 72 NUNS deputies had signed. The fact that
three deputies have not signed is significant. As the orange coalition
only has a slim majority of 228 deputies (156 BYuT + 72 NUNS) in the
450-seat Rada, a parliamentary motion for Tymoshenko to become prime
minister would fail if the trio sat out.

The three absentees are National Security and Defense Council (NRBO)
secretary Ivan Pliushch and two deputies from Trans-Carpathia, the only
district NUNS won in the September 30 elections. The two-Ihor Kril and
Vasyl Petiovka-are allies of the head of the presidential secretariat,
Viktor Baloga, himself a native of Trans-Carpathia.

This situation is yet another indicator that NUNS would be an unstable
partner in either the planned orange coalition or a theoretical grand
coalition with the rival Party of Regions.

First, it shows that President Viktor Yushchenko has no control over his
deputies. They have ignored his October 30 demand that "all of those
colleagues who had not signed the declaration on a personal level
[should] do so as quickly as possible."

Second, Yushchenko is now wavering on key agreements, including Our
Ukraine's February 24 agreement to cooperate on a future coalition with
BYuT, an inter-party agreement on August 2 that ruled out either BYuT or
NUNS joining a coalition with the Party of Regions or the Communists,
and an October 15 draft coalition agreement between BYuT and NUNS that
was reinforced by an October 29 NUNS presidium meeting. Any betrayal of
these commitments and agreements risks voter wrath. The Socialists
learned that lesson this year, when voters angry over their betrayal of
the orange coalition in summer 2006 kept the party out of parliament for
the first time in its history.

Third, even though Our Ukraine was overhauled in the first quarter of
2007 with a new leader (Vyacheslav Kyrylenko), an alliance with Yuriy
Lutsenko and his eponymous group, and the removal of businessmen accused
of corruption, NUNS received the same 14% of the vote as Our Ukraine did
last year.

Fourth, prior to the elections NUNS leaders committed themselves to
unite their nine marginal parties into a single pro-presidential force.
However, this has not happened and is unlikely to occur while Yushchenko
wavers over which coalition to support.

Two of the parties in NUNS have already stated that their deputies will
not vote for legislation according to the imperative mandate, which
penalizes deputies for leaving their factions with the threat of losing
their seat. BYuT initiated that regulation in the outgoing parliament,
but the legislation was never adopted.

Baloga reminded NUNS that it had agreed to unification steps prior to
the elections and that the aim is to build a presidential party. But so
far there is no legal mechanism to merge parties; instead the members of
the eight parties would need to self-liquidate and then join Our
Ukraine.

In contrast, BYuT and the Party of Regions emerged from the 2006 and
2007 parliamentary elections as Ukraine's only real party machines. The
personal charisma of Tymoshenko in BYuT and the Soviet-style discipline
in the Party of Regions means their ranks act as a united front.

Fifth, there are five influential groups in NUNS who are openly hostile
to a coalition with the "populist" BYuT and to Tymoshenko's return as
prime minister. These include the pro-grand coalition wing of NUNS
grouped around former prime minister Yuriy Yekhanurov, Sobor party
leader Anatoliy Matvienko, and Petro Poroshenko, a businessman who
withdrew from the NUNS 2007 election list in exchange for the position
of National Bank chairman.

A second group has coalesced around NRBO secretary Pliushch. The NRBO
under Yushchenko has morphed from an institution involved in formulating
national security policy into a shadow government.

A third group is aligned around Baloga, who has been tempted by a Party
of Regions offer to back him as prime minister in a grand coalition that
would make incumbent Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych parliamentary
speaker. The Party of Regions has continued to combine inducements for
Yushchenko to switch to a grand coalition by agreeing to drop
contentious issues (i.e. referendums on NATO membership and Russian as a
second state language).

A fourth faction is grouped around presidential legal adviser Stepan
Havrysh, the coordinator of the pro-Kuchma parliamentary coalition in
parliament prior to the Orange Revolution. The return of Tymoshenko
would lead to a "deep systematic crisis," Havrysh predicted.

Finally, opposition comes from the First Lady Kataryna Yushchenko, whose
personal dislike for Tymoshenko is well known in Kyiv.

Although personal, economic, and ideological conflicts serve to dampen
these groups' support for Tymoshenko, gender cannot be ignored as an
additional factor. Antipathy toward Tymoshenko from the president and
within NUNS is also a product of unreformed gender relations inherited
from the Soviet era.

If Tymoshenko is not elected prime minister, the resulting political
turmoil would likely plunge Ukraine into crisis, as new elections could
not be held for one year. For Yushchenko it is better to have Tymoshenko
inside the government than her leading the opposition from the outside
and launching what she has termed as "Plan B" -her presidential
candidacy.

(Ukrayinska pravda, October 25-31, November 1-2, Zerkalo Tyzhnia,
October 27-November 2, razom.org.ua, November 1-2)

 

 

Subject: Behind the Breaking News: A briefing from the Institute for the
Study of Conflict, Ideology & Policy 


Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 

Behind the Breaking News 
Volume VI, Number 1, 1 November 2007
A briefing from the Institute for the Study of Conflict, Ideology and
Policy

_______________________________________________
Capital flight: Ukraine's gas price controls push US firm out
By Tammy Lynch
Senior Fellow
Institute for the Study of Conflict, Ideology and Policy
_______________________________________________

In the midst of Ukraine's ongoing political negotiations to create a new
government, a number of worrying signs for the country's potential
investors have gone almost unnoticed internationally.  During the last
two weeks, an independent US energy firm chose to leave the country,
while a military-style raid on a major oil refinery called into question
the country's ability to enforce the rule of law.

Cardinal Resources
On 30 October, Cardinal Resources plc announced plans to sell its
Ukrainian assets.  The US-owned corporation was one of the first
independent oil and gas exploration firms to invest heavily in Ukraine
10 years ago, drawing largely from US investors.  Its experience speaks
volumes about the difficulties of working in an environment that
provides no legitimate avenues for influence on government decisions and
no clear rule of law. 
 
According to Cardinal CEO Robert Bensh, his company's exit from the
country is necessary because government price controls and increased
fees make it impossible to earn a profit - or even to break even. The
company, he said, "can't generate any revenue because of capped prices."
(1) 
 
Bensh said the sale of the company's interests was the only viable
option available, with bankruptcy protection being the company's sole
alternative. (2)  The Kuwait Energy Corporation (KEC), which bought
Cardinal's assets for $71 million, will take over the company's share in
the operation of four gas fields and three licenses in Ukraine. 

According to those close to the operation, Cardinal had intended to
invest roughly $100 million in further exploration, in an attempt to
increase Ukraine's domestic gas production.  The country now depends on
Russia's Gazprom for 85% of its gas.  KEC likely will move forward with
these plans, after a pause to allow more favorable conditions to
develop.  Investors are waiting, said Bensh, and are hopeful for more
favorable conditions under the new government, which should be confirmed
by mid-November. Regulations have "stopped most foreign investment" in
the energy field, leaving the country "18 months behind" where it would
have been, he said. (4)
 
Decree 31
Cardinal's difficulties began in December 2006, when Ukraine's
government included a new regulation for international and domestic
businesses in its 2007 state budget.  The regulation specifies that all
companies in joint-ventures with state-owned enterprises must sell their
products to one state-designated company at a fixed price. (5)
 
In February 2007, Ukraine's government enacted the widely condemned
"Decree 31."  This measure forces energy companies like Cardinal to sell
its product to the state-owned Naftohaz Ukrainy, at a price set by
Naftohaz Ukrainy.  The price offered was approximately $1.50 mcf (1
mcf=1,000 cubic feet).  This price is almost 300 times lower than the
market price of around $4 mcf for which Cardinal sold its product in
2006, before the new regulations.  It is also below Cardinal's
production costs of $1.70 mcf. (6)
 
At the same time, the cabinet raised taxes and royalties on profits for
most companies operating in Ukraine to 30%-50% of gross profits.  It,
therefore, became impossible for Cardinal and other similar companies to
break even, let alone to make a profit.
 
In response, Cardinal repeatedly met with Ukraine's officials, including
Fuel and Energy Minister Yuriy Boiko, to urge them to rescind Decree 31
and return to market pricing.
Cardinal representatives also say they sought assistance from US
government officials, but to no avail.
 
Another oil and gas exploration firm, Europa Oil and Gas plc, went to
court following the passage of Decree 31.  The company won its case
based on Ukrainian legislation governing foreign investment that
guarantees the right to sell at market prices.  The court ruled that the
company could sell its gas at market prices, but it has been reported
that the government is simply ignoring the ruling. (7) 
 
In response, several production companies attempted to stop selling
their gas domestically, pumping it into storage instead.  Cardinal
received information, however, that its gas has been taken from storage
by Naftohaz Ukrainy.  The company has been unable to confirm this
report. (8)
 
Bensh and others interviewed for this article suggest several reasons
for the government's actions:

First, Decree 31 was passed during the pre-election season.  By capping
gas prices, Yanukovych could guarantee low domestic prices for a limited
time.  The increased taxes also could be used to help maintain budget
expenses, which ballooned prior to the election. 
 
Second, some suggest that companies like Cardinal and Europa have been
caught in a larger struggle between Ukrainian business interests for
control of both Ukrnafta, Cardinal's state-owned joint venture partner,
and the country's overall gas network. The gas network is Ukraine's most
lucrative asset, generating up to a quarter of the country's GDP.
 
Ukrnafta
In 2006, Ukrnafta produced 70% of Ukraine's total oil and gas condensate
and 16% of its natural gas output, according to a May 2007 report from
Dragon Capital.   (9)
 
Although the state owns a 50% + 1 share in Ukrnafta, it has been de
facto controlled by Pryvatbank (a subsidiary of the Pryvat Group), which
technically owns only 42%.  The CEO of Pryvatbank/Group, Ihor
Kolomoisky, controls the Ukrnafta board and most of its assets. This is
thanks to former President Leonid Kuchma, who reportedly allowed Pryvat
"free rein in directing Ukrnafta," and who allowed Kolomoisky to install
personnel loyal to him. (10)
 
Those close to the situation suggest that Yanukovych's government may
have attempted to dilute Kolomoisky's control over Ukrnafta through
various techniques, in order finally to assert the state's majority
interest.  Those techniques appear to include minimizing Ukrnafta's
profits through Decree 31.  
 
According to Ukrainian investment firm Concorde Capital, Ukrnafta has
suffered significantly from the price caps imposed by Decree 31 and by
an increase in their tax and royalty payments to 50%.  Like Cardinal,
Europa and others, Ukrnafta has been unable to profit from sales of its
product. The company reported a 48% year on year drop in 9M EBITDA
(Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization).  (11)
 
Kolomoisky vs. Firtash
This drop in revenue has allowed fellow oligarch Dmitro Firtash to gain
a foothold in Kolomoisky's interests. Firtash controls the gas
distribution company Ukrgazenergo-a subsidiary of gas intermediary
RosUkrEnergo-and Ukrnafta's direct competitor. His interests are
primarily co-owned with Russia's Gazprom.

Firtash has pushed in the last year to dominate Ukraine's entire gas
system, from extraction to production to distribution.  The government's
new regulations have (possibly unintentionally) assisted him, as his
international gas sales have cushioned his companies from the cap on
domestic prices. (12)
 
All of this reportedly has forced Kolomoisky into a deal.  Firtash now
is said to have taken over the controlling share of Ukrnafta.   This
information could not be confirmed.  If it is true, one company, backed
by Russia, may now control Ukraine's entire gas system, with only the
pipelines remaining clearly under state control.  The most important
effect of Decree 31 may be a lessening of the already limited
competition that existed in the gas sector.
 
The political response
This is an issue that likely will be one of the first on the agenda of
the new Ukrainian government of Yulia Tymoshenko.  At an investor event
in September, Tymoshenko suggested that the state must create more
effective competition in the energy field.  She also stated that she
would initiate a complete overhaul of business regulations, with many
simply being removed.  In particular, when asked about "Decree 31," she
said, "Without question, that has to go.  It can't remain.  It's not a
complicated issue."  Further, "We need market mechanisms." (13)
 
Tymoshenko and her allies also have expressed concern at the increasing
number of "corporate raids" on large companies, and the effect of these
raids on the energy market.  The raids have affected at least two of the
country's oil refineries, as businesses fight for control of production
capacity.  
 
The raid on Kremenchug
Just two weeks ago, a group of "private security guards in camouflage
uniforms" arrived at the Kremenchug Oil Refinery, located in Ukraine's
Poltava Oblast, and physically took control of the plant.  The CEO who
has run the plant since 2004 was removed, while the former CEO (from
2004) was reinstated. The Ukrtatnafta corporation, which is largely
owned by Russia's Republic of Tatarstan and which controls the plant,
immediately stopped supplying the refinery with oil. (14)
 
Since the refinery provides up to 50% of all domestic oil products, the
price for petrol and other oil products in Ukraine has begun to
increase.
 
Pavlo Ovcharenko, the CEO reinstalled by armed guards, claims he was
reinstated to the position thanks to a court order.  That court-located
in another oblast-reportedly ruled that 18% of the shares in
Ukrtatnafta, which are controlled by companies friendly to Tatarstan's
interests, should be transferred to the state, giving it control.
 
Corporate raiding and corruption
In its report "Corruption, Democracy and Investment in Ukraine," The
Atlantic Council of the United States identified "raiding" as one of the
key areas of corruption in the country. (15) Various sources suggest
that, in the last two years, from 2,000-3,000 raids have occurred
against major corporate entities. In essence, the money (or to be blunt,
bribes) reportedly paid for court decisions and for the passivity of law
enforcement officials, which facilitates the raids, undermines the
country's entire system of rule of law. 
 
During a telephone conference call on 28 October, former (and likely
future) Finance Minister Viktor Pynzenyk (BYUT) identified both
arbitrary regulations and corporate raiding as the largest detriments to
foreign investment in Ukraine.  "The goal [of the new government] is to
give all investors access, and we would also like to introduce
legislation to prevent further spreading of raiders' attacks, against
which ordinary investors are defenseless." (16)
 
Despite all of these concerns, foreign investors continue to express
interest in Ukraine, and the economy continues to perform well, given
the pressures on it, growing at least 6% per year.  The number of small
and medium businesses in the country is steadily increasing, as they
generally are untouched by the battles raging over Ukraine's largest
assets, while market mechanisms show signs of taking root in many
sectors. 
 
Cardinal Resources' Robert Bensh said he is "encouraged" by the
country's prospects.  Most who have suffered losses because of arbitrary
decisions or unworkable fees also seem to believe that these issues can
be addressed, even though valuable time and momentum already has been
lost.   Large investors say they are waiting, but not turning away.  It
will be up to Ukraine's next government to ensure that this optimism is
not misplaced. 
 
Source Notes:
(1) Bensh telephone interview with author, 26 Oct 07.
(2) Ibid.
(3) Ibid.
(4) Ibid.
(5) Taras Kuzio, "Yanukovych and gas price capping," Kyiv Post, 15 Aug
07.
(6) Interview with Robert Bensh by Morgan Williams, US-Ukraine Business
Council, in the Action Ukraine Report, 12 Aug 07.
(7) Bensh, ibid and Kuzio, ibid.
(8) Bensh, ibid.
(9) Dragon Capital, Ukrnafta: Ukraine Equity Guide, May 07. 
(10) Zeyno Baran, "Energy Reform in Ukraine: Issues and
Recommendations," The Nixon Center, Mar 05.
(11) Concorde Capital, Ukrnafta: Under Review Alert, 29 Oct 07.
(12) Bensh, ibid.
(13) "Contract with Investors," Yulia Tymoshenko, Investor/Press Event,
Kyiv, 10 Sep 07.
(14) Bloomberg, 1153 EDT, 19 Oct 07 via www.bloomberg.com
<http://www.bloomberg.com/> .
(15) "Corruption, Democracy and Investment in Ukraine," Policy Paper,
The Atlantic Council of the United States, Oct 07.
(16) Conference Call with Viktor Pynzenyk, hosted by Concorde Capital,
28 Oct 07.

 

 

November 2, 2007

 

SUPPORT H. RES. 713

 

Congratulating the people of Ukraine for holding free, fair, and
transparent parliamentary elections on September 30, 2007

 

Cosponsors:  Steny H. Hoyer, Christopher H. Smith, Louise McIntosh
Slaughter, Joseph R. Pitts, Robert B. Aderholt, G.K Butterfield, Hilda
L. Solis, Marcy Kaptur, Donald M. Payne, Carolyn C. Kilpatrick, Doris O.
Matsui, Gwen Moore, Sander M. Levin, Corinne Brown, Allyson Y. Schwartz,
Robert Wexler, Lincoln Diaz-Balart, Gregory W. Meeks, Jim Gerlach, Diane
Watson, Eliot L. Engel, Gary L. Ackerman, Joe Sestak; Gus M. Bilirakis,
Roy Blunt

 

Dear Colleague:

 

Please join me in supporting democratic processes and the rule of law in
Ukraine by cosponsoring H. Res. 713, congratulating the Ukrainian people
for holding free, fair and transparent elections on September 30. This
resolution is a demonstration of Congress' interest, concern, and
support for Ukraine as that strategically important country perseveres
towards full democracy and the rule of law. 

 

Ukraine has made important progress since the 2004 Orange Revolution,
but its democratic institutions and the rule of law are still emerging
and lack in their ability to safeguard democratic gains.  Thus, it is
very significant that the September 30 elections were conducted in a
peaceful, orderly manner and in an open and competitive environment
consistent with Ukraine's commitments as a participating State of the
OSCE. While democratic elections will not, in and of themselves, resolve
all of the challenges facing Ukraine in strengthening the rule of law
and delineating power among branches of government, they are a critical
stepping-stone in Ukraine's democratic development.  

 

Democratic consolidation and the rule of law will enhance Ukraine's
aspirations for full integration with the West and, importantly, serve
as a positive model for other former Soviet countries, many of whom are
in the grip of authoritarianism.    

 

Please have your staff contact Orest Deychakiwsky at the Helsinki
Commission at 5-1901 or e-mail orest.deychak at mail.house.gov regarding
co-sponsorship.

 

Below please find the text of the resolution.  

 

Sincerely,

 /s/

Alcee L. Hastings, M.C.

Chairman

Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe

 


H.RES.713


Whereas the International Election Observation Mission led by the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (`OSCE'), led by
parliamentarians of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly,... (Introduced in
House)

HRES 713 IH 

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. RES. 713

Congratulating the Ukrainian people for the holding of free, fair, open
and transparent parliamentary elections on September 30, 2007, in a
peaceful manner consistent with Ukraine's democratic values and national
interest, in keeping with its commitments as a participating State of
the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES


October 4, 2007


Mr. HASTINGS of Florida (for himself, Mr. HOYER, Ms. SLAUGHTER, Mr.
SMITH of New Jersey, Ms. SOLIS, Mr. BUTTERFIELD, Mr. ADERHOLT, Ms.
KAPTUR, Ms. MATSUI, Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin, Ms. KILPATRICK, Mr. PAYNE,
and Mr. PITTS) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to
the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

________________________________

RESOLUTION

Congratulating the Ukrainian people for the holding of free, fair, open
and transparent parliamentary elections on September 30, 2007, in a
peaceful manner consistent with Ukraine's democratic values and national
interest, in keeping with its commitments as a participating State of
the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. 

Whereas the International Election Observation Mission led by the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (`OSCE'), led by
parliamentarians of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, declared the
September 30 2007 pre-term parliamentary elections in Ukraine were
conducted mostly in line with OSCE commitments and other international
standards for democratic elections and in an open and competitive
environment; 

Whereas voting was conducted in an orderly and transparent manner and
International Election Observation Mission observers assessed the voting
process as good or very good in 98 percent of the nearly 3,000 polling
stations visited, notwithstanding some shortcomings, notably with
respect to the quality of voter lists; 

Whereas the vote count was assessed as good or very good in 94 percent
of the International Election Observation Mission reports; 

Whereas the Ukrainian people, most spectacularly during the Orange
Revolution of 2004, demonstrated their ability to resolve political
differences through nonviolent protest and in a manner consistent with
democratic principles; 

Whereas, despite the real democratic gains made by the Ukrainian people
since the Orange Revolution, serious political disputes between
President Victor Yushchenko and Prime Minister Victor Yanukovich, rooted
in weak constitutional delineations of their powers, resulted in a
political crisis earlier this year; 

Whereas after weeks of tense standoff, agreement was reached on May 27,
2007 among the President, Prime Minister and parliamentary chairman
stipulating new parliamentary elections for September 30; 

Whereas the United States Congressional delegation to the 16th annual
session of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly in Kyiv received assurances
from President Yushchenko and other prominent Ukrainian officials that
Ukraine would not backtrack on the path to political reform and good
governance; and 

Whereas the United States Congress has consistently demonstrated strong
bipartisan support for an independent, democratic Ukraine: Now,
therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives--

(1) congratulates the people of Ukraine for holding free, fair, open and
transparent parliamentary elections on September 30, 2007, in a peaceful
manner consistent with Ukraine's democratic values and national
interest, in keeping OSCE standards on democratic elections;

(2) welcomes the strong relationship formed between the United States
and Ukraine since the restoration of Ukraine's independence in 1991 and
especially following the 2004 Orange Revolution;

(3) expresses strong and continuing support for the efforts of the
Ukrainian people to build upon the democratic gains of the Orange
Revolution by strengthening respect for human rights and the rule of
law, including an independent judiciary;

(4) recognizes that the consolidation of democracy and the rule of law,
and combating corruption, in Ukraine will further strengthen its
independence and sovereignty, enhancing Ukraine's aspirations for full
integration with the West and serving as a positive role model for other
post-Soviet countries;

(5) calls for the timely formation of a government that reflects the
will of Ukrainian voters and advances political stability and democratic
development, with a special focus on the constitutional framework, in
order to address the important issues facing Ukraine; and

(6) pledges its continued assistance to the further development of a
free and transparent democratic system in Ukraine based on the rule of
law, a free market economy and consolidation of Ukraine's security and
sovereignty.


 

 

 

 




 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://clevelanduzo.org/pipermail/uzonews_clevelanduzo.org/attachments/20071106/1cefc229/attachment.html