From Orest.Deychak at mail.house.gov Wed Jul 2 10:01:13 2008 From: Orest.Deychak at mail.house.gov (Deychak, Orest) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 10:01:13 -0400 Subject: [Ohio UZO News] Ukraine: IHT; EDM; Day/Den' (2) Message-ID: Happy U.S. Independence Day! International Herald Tribune Russia's Putin warns Ukraine over NATO bid, threatens to terminate lucrative deals The Associated Press Saturday, June 28, 2008 MOSCOW: Russia's Prime Minister Vladimir Putin warned Ukraine over its NATO bid and threatened to terminate lucrative deals with Ukrainian arms and space facilities if the ex-Soviet neighbor joins the alliance. Ukraine has a massive arms and electronics industry inherited from the Soviet era that relies on contracts with Russia's military and space agencies. The industry remains state-owned and poorly adjusted to business-oriented relations with the West. Putin said Saturday in televised remarks that Ukraine would have to invest heavily into retrofitting its arms industry for production of weapons according to the Western alliance's standards. Moscow vehemently opposes efforts by Ukraine as well as Georgia to gain NATO membership, saying that would jeopardize Russia's security. Putin issued the warning on joining NATO after holding talks in Moscow with his Ukrainian counterpart, Yulia Tymoshenko. The two also discussed the status of Russia's Black Sea fleet currently stationed in Ukraine's Crimean port of Sevastopol ? an issue that has become a sore point in the countries' already strained relations. Tymoshenko said Ukraine would "accurately" fulfill its obligations under a lease agreement that allows the Russian navy to remain in Sevastopol through 2017 for an annual US$93 million (?60 million). The two prime ministers also appeared to have settled price disputes over natural gas supplies, as Putin said Ukraine has paid its debt for Russian gas ? a positive sign for European customers worried after a 2006 price dispute led to supply disruptions. Putin said, however, that next year Russia's state-owned gas monopoly Gazprom would more than double its gas price from US$179 (?114) to US$400 (?254) per 1,000 cubic meters, following a hike in prices for gas from Central Asian republics. Ukraine mostly buys Central Asian gas, which is delivered through Gazprom-controlled pipelines crossing Russia. Eurasia Daily Monitor July 1, 2008 OLIGARCHS WIELD POWER IN UKRAINIAN POLITICS The leading Ukrainian magazine Korrespondent (June 12) published its annual list of wealthy Ukrainians. The most surprising new information was the estimate of Donetsk oligarch Renat Akhmetov?s wealth. Akhmetov, the head of Systems Capital Management, is worth $31.1 billion, making him the wealthiest person not only in the CIS but also in Europe. This revelation comes on top of the highest real estate purchase ever recorded in Britain to Olena Franchuk, the wife of Ukrainian oligarch Viktor Pinchuk and daughter of former President Leonid Kuchma (London Evening Standard, February 26). The purchase was for 80 million pounds ($160 million). London is fast becoming a refuge not only for Russian but also Ukrainian oligarchs. Russian political exiles, such as Boris Berezovskiy, flee to London while Ukrainian exiles (Ruslan Bodelan) flee to Russia. This is testimony to the different approaches to money laundering and due diligence undertaken by the United States and the EU. In the U.S. former Prime Minister Pavlo Lazarenko was convicted and jailed in 2004 for money laundering $120 million into the United States, $40 million less than Franchuk paid for her new London home. Four years of political instability in Ukraine have not damaged the ability of Ukraine?s oligarchs to increase their capitalization during President Viktor Yushchenko?s administration. Political instability has not affected the economy, which has continued robust growth; purchasing power is high and foreign direct investment is at record levels. According to Korrespondent editor Vitaliy Sych, Akhmetov?s estimated wealth has doubled in the past year because of three factors. First, he has publicly revealed for the first time the full extent of his wealth. Akhmetov?s land in Donetsk alone is valued at $1 billion. Second, Ukrainian oligarchs with metallurgical assets experienced fast growth due to high world demand. Third, Metinvest, a key Akhmetov company, merged with the Smart Group providing it with access to iron ore. The total worth of the wealthiest 50 Ukrainians is $112.7 billion, as much as two annual Ukrainian state budgets. Ukrainian oligarchs can be found in most factions, including the Socialists, in the 2006-2007 parliament. The greatest concentration of wealth lies within the Party of Regions. This in itself is ironic, because the Party of Regions, like the Unified Russia party, has attracted a large proportion of former communist voters. Of the $112 billion total assets of Ukraine?s 50 wealthiest, $35.4 billion or a third of the total is held by members of the Party of Regions. The Party of Regions is uncomfortable about explaining why there is such a large concentration of oligarchic capital within its ranks. Akhmetov?s wealth is $1.5 billion greater than that of Russia?s wealthiest oligarch, even though Ukraine?s population is a third of Russia?s and it does not possess the strategic raw materials, such as oil, gas, diamonds and gold, which are abundant in Russia. Russia?s wealthiest 50 oligarchs only account for 35% of the country?s GDP, compared with 85% of Ukraine?s. When asked about Akhmetov?s extraordinary wealth, Party of Regions leader Viktor Yanukovych said, ?If God gave certain individuals business talents, then what is most important is that this talent goes toward the greater good of the country and the people who live there.? Yanukovych believed that, ?these people bring budgetary proceeds and promote the economic growth of the country? (Ukrayinska Pravda, June 13). Akhmetov entered parliament in 2006 in the Party of Regions. In 2005 he fled to Monaco because of fear that the Tymoshenko government would bring criminal charges against him, but he returned after these were blocked by Yushchenko. Other oligarchs either fulfilled their promises of separating business and politics by not standing for re-election to parliament (Pinchuk) or never running for parliament at all (Igor Kolomoysky). Yanukovych believes that the large number of wealthy Ukrainians in the Party of Regions is not mere coincidence. ?They entered the party out of their beliefs,? he said, a statement that is hard to accept since the party is ideologically amorphous. Immunity from prosecution, defensive protection against Tymoshenko and access to government funds are three likelier explanations for their interest in entering parliament. Akhmetov is in the Tymoshenko government?s line of fire. One major factor in the government?s cancellation of the October 2007 Vanco contract for Ukraine?s Black Sea shelf oil exploration was the presence of an Akhmetov company as one of its four partners. The government also seeks to ?re-privatize? Dniproenergo, which Akhmetov purchased at a knock down price in August 2007. (That would involve nationalizing the company back from Akhmetov and privatizing it again.) Ukraine?s oligarchs were never united as a group. Following Yushchenko?s election, they openly supported the orange camp. Pinchuk (Interpipe) and Kolomoysky (Pryvat) are Ukraine?s second and third wealthiest citizens but with far less wealth than Akhmetov, at $8.8 and $6.6 billion, respectively. Both have continued to fund political projects externally: Pinchuk in Viche and Kolomoysky in Our Ukraine. Three Pryvat oligarchs in third, fourth and sixth places control $17.7 billion. Other oligarchs also supported the orange camp. Petro Poroshenko ($1.12 billion [22nd place]) was an ally of Yushchenko from 2001 when Our Ukraine was formed, and his Channel 5 was one of only two television stations that gave coverage to the 2004 Yushchenko election campaign. Kyiv Mayor Leonid Chernovetsky ($750 million [28th place]) backed Yushchenko in 2004 and has remained an ally. The former head of the 2004 Yanukovych campaign, Serhiy Tyhipko ($1.64 billion [17th place], who, like Pinchuk, left politics after the orange revolution, has returned as head of the Tymoshenko government?s Council on Investors. Another Pinchuk prot?g?, Valeriy Khoroshkovskyi ($1.55 billion [18th place]), is head of the State Customs. Meanwhile, Industrial Union of Donbas (ISD) oligarchs Serhiy Taruta and Vitaliy Haydiuk (worth $2.37 billion each [11th and 12th]) are aligned with the Tymoshenko government. Konstantyn Zhevago ($5.2 billion [fifth]), the first and only Ukrainian businessman to float shares on the London Stock Exchange for his Ferrexpo company, is a Tymoshenko bloc parliamentary deputy. The separation of business and politics remains a long way off in Ukraine, even though it was one of the main aims of the orange revolution. --Taras Kuzio Den` (The Day) Kyiv, Ukraine William TAYLOR: "Ukraine needs a period of stability" ________________________________ Interviewed by Mykola SIRUK, The Day ________________________________ Six months from now a new president will be elected in the United States. Despite all the difficulties that emerged during George Bush's presidency, the US is still the most influential and powerful state in the world. Today many people are questioning whether US policy will change after the new president comes to the White House. Many Ukrainians are also interested in knowing whether US policy will change toward our country once there is a new head of state and whether US support for Ukraine on its way to NATO will remain unchanged. What guides Washington in its relations with Kyiv - interests or values? What should Ukraine do in order to receive an invitation to join the MAP at the NATO summit in December? These and other questions are raised in The Day 's interview with US Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to Ukraine William TAYLOR. "NO MATTER WHO WILL BE IN THE WHITE HOUSE ON JAN. 20, 2009, THIS PERSON WILL BE DEVOTED TO SUPPORTING UKRAINE" Mr. Ambassador, what changes should Ukraine expect in US foreign policy in view of the fact that a new president will be elected on Nov. 4? "This question is extremely interesting both to Americans and Ukrainians. We have two candidates that are very attractive. But they are very different in many respects: age and life experience. They also have different approaches to policy in many spheres. There are clear differences even concerning foreign policy. We can see this from their discussions about Iraq and whether one should negotiate with enemies. But to respond to your question about Ukraine, I think there will hardly be any differences here. I have several grounds for making such an assumption. The first is that support for Ukraine is not a question on which the candidates have differing positions. I have worked in US administrations headed by both Republicans and Democrats. I have supported the need to give Ukraine support before Congressional Committees that were headed by both Republicans and Democrats. And there have never been any differences either in the approach of the administration or of the Congressional Committees that were headed by either Republicans or Democrats. Generally speaking, there was no difference in the approach to the policy toward Ukraine. "And there is also agreement of both candidates with regard to the policy toward Ukraine. When John McCain and Barack Obama were getting ready for the NATO summit in Bucharest, both of them on their own initiative issued statements in support of giving the MAP to Ukraine in Bucharest. Both McCain and Obama have visited Ukraine. Therefore, I am sure that whoever will be in the White House on Jan. 20, 2009, this will be a person devoted to supporting Ukraine." ON AMERICAN INTERESTS AND VALUES What can you say about American Realism or, to be more exact, "Rethinking the National Interest?" the title of Condoleezza Rice's article in Foreign Affairs, in which she writes that US foreign policy is based on two principles: interests and values. Which of them applies to Ukraine? "Both of them. We cannot draw a dividing line here. Our interests and values coincide. We have a great interest in seeing Ukraine achieve success as a democratic country and an inseparable part of Europe. And this coincides with our values, which emphasize how much we appreciate a democratic Ukraine. It seems to me that the Ukrainian people - I want to stress the people, not just the country's leadership - are also interested in European values, European markets, and European institutions. So, for the US it is a concurrence of values and interests in having a strong democracy in Ukraine that is part of Europe." Ukraine is a young democracy, as you say, but it is hardly being strengthened by the constant flow of statements from Russian politicians, resolutions of the State Duma on Sevastopil and the Crimea, and the review of the Great Agreement between Ukraine and Russia. Will there be any change in US policy toward Russia in the next American administration? "I don't think that one can speak of any serious impact here. First and foremost, I don't think that Russian leaders support the radical statements of some Russian politicians. For example, Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has not expressed any support for Mayor Luzhkov's statements. We don't think that any responsible government in Russia would dare cast doubt on Ukraine's territorial integrity." ?PUTIN IS WRONG ABOUT THE LEVEL OF SUPPORT FOR UKRAINE?S NATO MEMBERSHIP? Are you, personally, or the US government concerned about reports in the mass media that say that ?Russia will buy Europe,? ?Russia is trying to separate the US from the EU,? as well as about the German expert?s opinion that President Dmitrii Medvedev wants to split NATO? ?Indeed, Russia?s official position is that it does not want to see Ukraine in NATO. But Russia takes an active part in NATO activities and cooperates with it. Russians benefit from this cooperation and vice versa ? NATO benefits from such cooperation with Russia. I don?t think that Russia would like to destroy these relations. Our point of view is that we believe that Ukraine should decide on its own whether it wants to be a member of NATO at some stage. This means that now the decision concerning NATO membership is fully in Ukraine?s hands, not Russia?s. However, Putin is right that in saying that democracy should be upheld. If the Ukrainian people confirm during the referendum that they want their country to be in NATO, then it is yes. NATO has also confirmed its readiness to accept Ukraine as a member. But if Ukrainians, after holding a thorough discussion of all aspects of this question and after obtaining answers to all their questions, decide that no, they don?t want to be in NATO, this will be a response. He is right in this sense: democracy is important.? But is Putin right in saying that 80 percent of Ukrainians are against NATO? According to surveys, 53 percent are against NATO membership, while over 20 percent support it and over 20 percent are unsure? ?No, he is wrong about the concrete level of support for Ukraine?s membership in NATO. In your question you say that the level of support for Ukraine?s membership is shaky. It is not important what surveys indicate yesterday, today, or tomorrow. What is important is what Ukrainians will say during the referendum or in another way, granting their leaders one kind of power or another on this question. This must happen when it should. This may be in two years or five.? ?UKRAINE HAS DONE WHAT IT HAD TO DO IN ORDER TO BE READY TO START THE MAP? Do you see any trump cards or levers that would favor a positive decision for Ukraine at the meeting of NATO foreign ministers this December? ?Yes. Most of the factors that may have an influence are in the hands of the Ukrainian government. First of all, it must be shown to NATO foreign ministers that Ukraine is treating the onset of this process with all gravity. And the heads of foreign ministries of the NATO member countries will judge the seriousness of Ukraine?s attitude from the approach its officials take to discussing questions. The foreign ministers of the NATO member countries will look at the way the Ukrainian government is holding discussions with the Ukrainian public, and whether any information campaign is taking place. The ministers will obviously be relying on what their ambassadors to Ukraine will say. And they will hear this during their visit here next week. The heads of the foreign ministries will definitely pay attention to whether the Ukrainian government is applying correct efforts to achieving political stability. If a serious political crisis takes place in Ukraine before this December, it will, of course, be much more difficult for the foreign ministers of the NATO member countries to make a positive decision concerning the MAP for Ukraine. All these criteria will be assessed by the ministers in the next six or seven months.? What is your assessment of the actions of the Ukrainian government and president to fulfill these criteria and the Ukraine-NATO Target Plan? ?Our view is that Ukraine has done what it should in order to be ready to launch the MAP. We are also satisfied with the fact that Ukraine?s officials ? ministers and deputy ministers ? are holding regular talks with Brussels on an appropriately high level. We are also glad that the government and the Presidential Secretariat have come to an agreement concerning the body that will deal with this dialog and information campaign. It is good that Vice-Prime Minister Hryhorii Nemyria will be engaged in unifying these efforts.? US SUPPORT SHOULD NOT BE TOO STRIDENT What can the United States do in order to help Ukraine receive a positive response in December? ?I will underline one more time that the main responsibility for achieving a positive decision in December rests with Ukrainian officials. The US will by all means support Ukraine in this. If Kyiv wants to launch this process, the United States will support this. Of course, we will have discussions with our allies in Brussels. We also have regular discussions both in Kyiv and Washington. And we will take part in the assessment process that will precede the meeting of the NATO foreign ministers. You have seen how strong US support for Ukraine has been. We are continuing in this spirit.? But some Europeans have said that this strong support was counter- productive. ?This support, of course, should not be too strident. Frankly speaking, I don?t understand why this decision has to be viewed as being so controversial. This is not a decision about NATO membership. This is almost a bureaucratic or even technical decision. This is a decision concerning the start of the process. I would agree with my European colleagues, who said that this should be a calmer and not very publicized procedure rather than a great political campaign.? How then should one interpret the article in The International Herald Tribune , whose author asserts that the US initiative to give the MAP to Georgia and Ukraine failed and that this failure is one more example of American ineffectiveness? ?The thing is that we have considered and still consider that Ukraine has done everything possible in order to launch this technical process, which is called the MAP. We were disappointed that no corresponding decision was approved in Bucharest. But we think that the statement that was approved by all the heads of the NATO member states in Bucharest, that Ukraine and Georgia will be members of the alliance, is a great step forward.? THE ROLE OF THE PARTY OF REGIONS AND COOPERATION WITH NATO Mr. Ambassador, what is your view of the role in the process of Euro-Atlantic integration of the Party of Regions, whose leaders previously supported Ukraine?s membership in NATO, perhaps in the long run, but suddenly began to oppose this and are now taking part in the creation of NATO-free zones? ?Any large political force or party, and the Party of Regions is this kind of large force, has a whole spectrum of opinions on important political questions. And any party both in the US and in Ukraine will lay stress on certain questions during election campaigns and will not emphasize them between election campaigns. There is a consensus among the main political forces that Ukraine should be part of and a member of European structures. There are different opinions about NATO in Ukraine and also within any political party concerning the way and at which pace Ukraine should be moving towards this.? You have spoken with the leaders of the Party of Regions. Did they explain their attitude to NATO? ?In the last two years I have had plenty of talks with the leaders of the Party of Regions. And they were, I would say, consistent enough in explaining their desire for closer cooperation between Ukraine and NATO. They view cooperation with this organization and its members from a practical point. They see, for example, possibilities for military-industrial cooperation between Ukraine and corresponding companies in Germany, Italy, and France. And this position has not changed; at least this is what the party?s leaders say. The party?s position may change with time. But the leaders of this political party said that European membership is the goal of Ukrainian policy.? At one time, the members of this biggest opposition party voted for the law stating that Ukraine?s end goal is NATO membership. What is your assessment of the position of this party and its leadership, which are not implementing the current law? ?If this party had a serious position on the need to change this law, they should have probably made concrete proposals. But there have been no proposals of this kind yet. Now we are returning to my remark about the importance of democracy. The people must have their representatives in parliament. And this parliament is responsible for approving these kinds of laws. The coalition agreement has a clear statement on NATO membership and the MAP.? ?ANY CHANGE OF GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE LEGAL, CONSTITUTIONAL, AND DEMOCRATIC? Mr. Ambassador, to continue the topic of democracy, in one of your speeches you said that Ukraine is a young democracy, and surprises will happen. Were you surprised by the situation that recently emerged in the Ukrainian parliament, when two MPs left the democratic coalition, which practically means its collapse? ?The fact that these two MPs left the coalition has not yet led to its collapse. We know that a coalition is created by factions. And the factions are still within the coalition. But yes, Ukraine is a young democracy with a high number of surprises. It was a surprise to me, for example, when the Verkhovna Rada was blocked by a senior partner in the coalition. And we can be forgiven our surprise because I don?t think that anything of this kind ever happened in Ukraine, and I don?t think that anything of this kind has ever happened in any other parliament.? Will you be surprised, then, if a so-called broad coalition is created in Ukraine? ?I will probably not be surprised by this because the talks about this have been taking place here ever since I arrived here as ambassador.? On what principles should a coalition be based in order to be recognized by the American government? ?The main principle must be as follows: any change of government should be legal, constitutional, and democratic. The elections that have taken place in Ukraine in the last two years were very good. So we are completely satisfied with how well the voice of the Ukrainian people was heard. And it is not our business how these parliamentarians, as the representatives of the Ukrainian people, are trying to organize themselves. We will recognize any government, if the process of its election is legitimate, constitutional, and democratic.? In your opinion, will such an approach ? the creation of a broad coalition ? solve the situation and secure stability for Ukraine? ?I think that Ukraine needs a period of stability, because there are a number of important decisions that should be approved. Serious reforms have to be implemented. These kinds of things are difficult to do in an instable political situation. But Ukrainian politicians and the Ukrainian people should decide on their own how to achieve this stability.? You recently issued a statement expressing your disappointment with the decision of the Cabinet of Ministers to break the agreement with the Vanco Energy Company of the US. Do you still consider that the Ukrainian government is acting unlawfully and inconsistently? How, then, should one view the fact that some unknown intermediary structure is involved in this agreement, considering that the US government had said that Ukraine was supposed to conclude an agreement in the gas sphere with Russia without intermediaries? ?I don?t think these are similar cases. It is interesting that you are offering the possibility to see how much they differ. In my opinion, the process initiated by the government headed by Yekhanurov, which was aimed at determining, with the help of a competing tender, who would get the contract to distribute the production, as a result of which this right was granted to Vanco, was organized in a very professional and transparent way, and met all standards. I have talked to the representatives of the companies that competed with Vanco in 2006. They had no complaints either about the process or the government. This was a transparent process that resulted in this company being selected. This is not at all the way RosUkrEnergo was at one time chosen to be the intermediary in the gas relations between Ukraine and Gazprom. In Vanco?s case, the clauses in the contract and the agreement on the distribution of production were public and transparent. As I said in the statement that you mentioned, investors are closely watching the way the government treats the fulfillment of the contracts it has concluded. Of course, there is always a possibility for both parties to the contract to make certain changes to it. If one of the parties does not want any changes, the following should be done: one party should sit at the negotiating table and start talking with the other party to the contract. And all this is possible but difficult.? So the government should come to the negotiating table, but with which company, the American one or the intermediary company, which is registered offshore? ?There is a usual and acceptable process whereby the main company grants a branch enterprise the right to fulfill the contract it has signed. And this daughter enterprise is responsible for all duties and has the resources of the main company at its disposal to fulfill them. This is quite an ordinary practice and rule of work for international oil companies. So the government should have sat down at the negotiating table with the company that signed the contract with Vanco and resolved the questions that had emerged. The government signed the contract with Vanco International and issued a license for Vanco Prykerchenska. If the problem is with the license, then the government should hold negotiations with Vanco Prykerchenska. This is the normal legal process.? ?SUCCESS IN THE FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION WILL BE EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FOR THE INVESTMENT CLIMATE? What is your general impression of the investment climate and the fight against corruption in Ukraine? How effective is the US?s anti-corruption assistance? ?I think that most Ukrainians and foreign observers will agree that Ukraine has much to do in the sphere of fighting corruption. The success in the struggle against corruption will be extremely important for the investment climate. The investors have to be absolutely confident that whenever necessary, any business dispute will be resolved in a Ukrainian court in an unbiased, fair, and transparent way. As for the 45 million dollars? worth of aid provided by the American government for the anti-corruption struggle, it is producing certain results. Of course, there will be a need for directives and governmental and presidential support once this program reaches the point of approving certain decisions. And these directives and support should come from the council headed jointly by the deputy prime minister and deputy head of the Presidential Secretariat. Other ministries are also represented in this council. We look forward to forming this council, which will issue directives and support the fight against corruption.? In view of the current investment climate, do you think that American companies will enter the Ukrainian market too late? Other countries are not waiting; they are not afraid that Ukraine does not have ideal conditions for business. ?Yes, they will be too late. But companies are the ones that make these decisions. Ukraine has a colossal investment potential both in agriculture, high technology, and oil and gas. But investors are conservative about this because the whole thing is about investing their own money. The US government would like to see American investments in Ukraine. We would like American companies to invest in Ukraine. But we don?t push companies to make decisions on investments based on anything else besides their own assessment of the risks they will have in Ukraine.? What else besides the question of fighting corruption should be done by the Ukrainian government so that companies will invest here? ?I think the most important thing that affects the investment climate is the reform of the judiciary system. Business disputes are taking place all the time. But some of the risks in Ukraine lie precisely in the judicial system. Once the reform of the judiciary system is implemented, there will be a smaller number of risks linked to the possibility of making deliberate rather than legal decisions, and this will increase Ukraine?s attractiveness to investors.? ?20, ????????, 24 ?????? 2008 Den Nebezpechna Hra Moskvy ta Uroky Istoriyi By Yuriy Shcherbak, former Ukrainian Ambassador to the United States (in Ukrainian, although should be available in English soon) http://www.day.kiev.ua/203441/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 31894 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://clevelanduzo.org/pipermail/uzonews_clevelanduzo.org/attachments/20080702/8fcb948c/attachment.bin From Orest.Deychak at mail.house.gov Tue Jul 8 10:26:08 2008 From: Orest.Deychak at mail.house.gov (Deychak, Orest) Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 10:26:08 -0400 Subject: [Ohio UZO News] Ukraine: WP (2); Ukraine Famine resolutions (2) Message-ID: The Washington Post Finding Common Ground With Russia By Henry A. Kissinger Tuesday, July 8, 2008; A15 Excerpt re: Ukraine: ...The issue of Ukraine goes to the heart of both sides' perceptions of the nature of international affairs. America sees the situation in terms of overcoming a potential military threat. For Russia, the question of relations with Ukraine is, above all, about coming to terms with a painful, historic upheaval. Genuine independence for Ukraine is essential for a peaceful international system and must be unambiguously supported by the United States. Creating close political ties between the European Union and Ukraine, including E.U. membership, is important. But the movement of the Western security system to the approaches to Moscow brings home Russia's decline in a way that is bound to generate emotions that will inhibit the solving of all other issues. With NATO accepting the principle of Ukrainian membership, there is no urgency to accelerate the implementation. ... Link to entire Kissinger commentary: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/07/AR200807 0702218.html Lengthy reference to the Ukrainian sailor Myroslav Medvid case: The Washington Post The Jesse Helms You Should Remember Marc Thiessen 7 July 2008 FINAL A13 With the passing of Sen. Jesse Helms, the media have demonstrated one final time that they never fully understood the power or impact of this great man. Consider, for example, The Post's obituary of Helms; here are some things you would not learn about his life and legacy by reading it: As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Helms led the successful effort to bring Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic into the NATO alliance. He secured passage of bipartisan legislation to protect our men and women in uniform from the International Criminal Court. He won overwhelming approval for his legislation to support the Cuban people in their struggle against a tyrant. He won majority support in the Senate for his opposition to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. He helped secure passage of the National Missile Defense Act and stopped the Clinton administration from concluding a new anti-ballistic missile agreement in its final months in office -- paving the way for today's deployment of America's first defenses against ballistic missile attack. He helped secure passage of the Iraq Liberation Act, which expressed strong bipartisan support for regime change in Baghdad. He secured broad, bipartisan support to reorganize the State Department and bring much-needed reform to the United Nations, and he became the first legislator from any nation to address the U.N. Security Council -- a speech few in that chamber will forget. Watching this record of achievement unfold, columnist William Safire wrote in 1997: "Jesse Helms, bete noire of knee-jerk liberals . . . is turning out to be the most effectively bipartisan chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee since Arthur Vandenberg. . . . Let us see if he gets the credit for statesmanship that he deserves from a striped-pants establishment." This weekend, we got our answer. What his critics could not appreciate is that, by the time he left office, Jesse Helms had become a mainstream conservative. And it was not because Helms had moved toward the mainstream -- it was because the mainstream moved toward him. When Helms arrived in Washington in 1973, conservatives were a minority not only in our nation's capital but also within the Republican Party. He often took to the floor as the lonely opposition in 99-to-1 votes. By the time he became chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee in 1995, Republicans were in the majority in the Senate and conservatives were in control of the Republican Party. And Helms was winning floor votes by wide bipartisan majorities. What made Helms stand out was his willingness to stand up for his beliefs before they were widely held -- even if it meant challenging those closest to him. In 1985, his dear friend Ronald Reagan was preparing for his first summit with Mikhail Gorbachev when a Ukrainian sailor named Miroslav Medvid twice jumped off a Soviet ship into the Mississippi River seeking political asylum. The Soviets insisted that Medvid had accidentally fallen off -- twice. The State Department did not want an international incident on the eve of the summit. But Helms believed it was wrong to send a man back behind the Iron Curtain -- no matter the cost to superpower diplomacy. He tried to block the ship's departure by requiring the sailor to appear before the Senate Agriculture Committee, which he chaired then -- and he had the subpoena delivered to the ship's unwitting captain in a carton of North Carolina cigarettes. Despite Helms's efforts, the ship was allowed to leave for the Soviet Union with the Ukrainian sailor aboard. Miroslav Medvid was not heard from again until 15 years later, when he came to Washington to visit the man who fought so hard for his freedom. I was working at the time on Helms's Foreign Relations Committee staff and witnessed this emotional meeting. Yes, Medvid told Helms, he had been trying to escape -- that was why he joined the Merchant Marine in the first place. When he was returned to the Soviet Union, he said, he was incarcerated in a mental hospital for the criminally insane. The KGB tried to drug him, but a sympathetic nurse injected the drugs into his mattress. Eventually he was released; today he is a parish priest in his native village in Ukraine. In the course of dozens of interrogations, he told Helms, "the KGB didn't fulfill its desire about what they wanted to do with me. They were afraid of something," he said, "and now I know what they were afraid of." They were afraid of Jesse Helms. President Bush had it right when he said on Friday that "from Central America to Central Europe and beyond, people remember: In the dark days when the forces of tyranny seemed on the rise, Jesse Helms took their side." This is the Jesse Helms that Miroslav Medvid remembers. Unfortunately, it was not the Jesse Helms written about this weekend. The writer, the chief White House speechwriter, was Foreign Relations Committee spokesman for Sen. Jesse Helms from 1995 to 2001. U.S. House of Representatives Ukraine Famine Resolution Introduced: HRES 1314 IH 110th CONGRESS 2d Session H. RES. 1314 Remembering the 75th anniversary of the Ukrainian Famine-Genocide of 1932-1933 and extending the deepest sympathies of the House of Representatives to the victims, survivors, and families of this tragedy, and for other purposes. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES June 26, 2008 Mr. LEVIN (for himself, Ms. KAPTUR, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland, Mr. GERLACH, Mr. BERMAN, Mr. ANDREWS, Mr. BILIRAKIS, Mr. COSTA, Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida, Mr. ENGEL, Mr. HINCHEY, Mr. LANGEVIN, Mr. MCCOTTER, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. MCNULTY, Mrs. MILLER of Michigan, Mr. ROTHMAN, Ms. SCHWARTZ, and Mr. WALZ of Minnesota) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs ________________________________ RESOLUTION Remembering the 75th anniversary of the Ukrainian Famine-Genocide of 1932-1933 and extending the deepest sympathies of the House of Representatives to the victims, survivors, and families of this tragedy, and for other purposes. Whereas in 1932 and 1933, nearly 10 million Ukrainian people perished at the will of the totalitarian Stalinist government of the former Soviet Union, which perpetrated a premeditated famine in Ukraine in an effort to break the nation's resistance to collectivization and communist occupation; Whereas the Soviet Government deliberately confiscated grain harvests and starved millions of Ukrainian men, women, and children by a policy of forced collectivization that sought to destroy the nationally conscious movement for independence; Whereas Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin ordered the borders of Ukraine sealed to prevent anyone from escaping the man-made starvation and preventing any international food aid that would provide relief to the starving; Whereas Canadian wheat expert Andrew Cairns visited Ukraine in 1932 and was told that there was no grain `because the government had collected so much grain and exported it to England and Italy,' while simultaneously denying food aid to the people of Ukraine; Whereas nearly a quarter of the rural population of Ukraine was eliminated due to forced starvation, while the entire nation suffered from the consequences of the prolonged lack of food; Whereas the Soviet Government manipulated and censored foreign journalists, including New York Times correspondent Walter Duranty, who knowingly denied not only the scope and magnitude, but also the existence, of a deadly man-made famine in his reports from Ukraine; Whereas noted correspondents of the time were castigated by the Soviet Union for their accuracy and courage in depicting and reporting the famine-genocide in Ukraine, including Gareth Jones, William Henry Chamberlin, and Malcolm Muggeridge, who wrote, `[The farmers] will tell you that many have already died of famine and that many are dying every day; that thousands have been shot by the government and hundreds of thousands exiled'; Whereas in May 1934, former Congressman Hamilton Fish introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives (House Resolution 399 of the 73d Congress) which called for the condemnation of the Soviet Government for its acts of destruction against the Ukrainian people; Whereas the United States Commission on the Ukraine Famine, formed on December 13, 1985, conducted a study with the goal of expanding the world's knowledge and understanding of the Ukrainian Famine-Genocide of 1932-1933 (Holodomor), and concluded that the victims were `starved to death in a man-made famine' and that `Joseph Stalin and those around him committed genocide against Ukrainians in 1932-1933'; Whereas on May 15, 2003, in a special session, the Ukrainian Parliament acknowledged that the Ukrainian Famine-Genocide was engineered by Joseph Stalin and the Soviet Government deliberately against the Ukrainian nation; Whereas with the dissolution of the Soviet Union, archival documents confirmed the deliberate and pre-meditated deadly nature of the famine, and the Soviet Government was exposed for its atrocities against the Ukrainian people; and Whereas on October 13, 2006, the President of the United States signed into law Public Law 109-340, authorizing the construction of a memorial in the District of Columbia to honor the victims of the Ukrainian Famine-Genocide, in recognition of the upcoming 75th anniversary of the genocide in 2008: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the House of Representatives-- (1) solemnly remembers the 75th anniversary of the Ukrainian Famine-Genocide of 1932-1933 and extends its deepest sympathies to the victims, survivors, and families of this tragedy; (2) condemns the systematic violations of human rights, including the freedom of self-determination and freedom of speech, of the Ukrainian people by the Soviet Government; (3) encourages dissemination of information regarding the Ukrainian Famine-Genocide in order to expand the world's knowledge of this man-made tragedy; and (4) supports the continuing efforts of Ukraine to work toward ensuring democratic principles, a free-market economy, and full respect for human rights, in order to enable Ukraine to achieve its potential as an important strategic partner of the United States in that region of the world. END (Note the last two sentences): Kommersant OSCE Acknowledges Ukrainian Famine The annual session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe concluded yesterday in Astana. At it, Joao Soares of Portugal was chosen new chairman, replacing Swede Goran Lennmarker, and a resolution was passed on the Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933. The resolution was passed despite objections from Russia and Kazakhstan, which insisted that the Ukrainian people were not the only ones affected by the tragedy. Speaker of the Russian Federation Council Sergey Mironov called the resolution acknowledging the famine "complete nonsense." A resolution on Georgia was also passed. The Georgian resolution was written by U.S. Congressman Alcee Hastings states that regional instability is tied to Russia's decision to strengthen official ties with the separatist regimes in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, to increase the size of its military contingent in Abkhazia and to issue Russian passports to the residents of the territories. The document, calling on Russia to refrain from ties with the breakaway states and maintain OSCE standards in conflict resolution, was passed by a majority of votes. The resolution on the Ukrainian famine (Holodomor) was authored by Ukrainian delegate Oleg Bilorus. Russian delegate Natalia Karpovich objected that "We should acknowledge that the Holodomor was not only in Ukraine, Russians, Poles, Kazakhs and other peoples suffered in the tragedy." Kasymzhomart Tokaev, speaker of the Kazakhstani senate, supported Karpovich. The resolution was passed by a majority of votes and met with indignation in Moscow. "History will avenge!" Mironov steamed. www.kommersant.com (Note: Members of the U.S. Helsinki Commission/ US Delegation to the OSCE PA cosponsored the Holodomor resolution. OD) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 18616 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://clevelanduzo.org/pipermail/uzonews_clevelanduzo.org/attachments/20080708/3c32b48e/attachment.bin From Orest.Deychak at mail.house.gov Tue Jul 15 11:47:08 2008 From: Orest.Deychak at mail.house.gov (Deychak, Orest) Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 11:47:08 -0400 Subject: [Ohio UZO News] Ukraine: WP (2); IHT; AP (2), link Message-ID: The Washington Post Letter to the Editor Misreading Russia 15 July 2008 FINAL A18 In his July 8 op-ed, "Finding Common Ground with Russia," Henry A. Kissinger made two questionable points. He asserted that the emergence of two centers of power under President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin may herald "an evolution toward a form of checks and balances." But that will depend far more on a strong civil society, with private property rights and an independent press, judiciary, legislature and nongovernmental organizations. Mr. Kissinger argued that so as not to "generate emotions" in Moscow, NATO should not "accelerate" implementation of the pledge made at its April summit to admit Ukraine. Would this not reward Russia for bad behavior toward its neighbors? Although it agreed to the eventual admission of Ukraine and Georgia, NATO declined to launch membership action plans for concrete steps. A few weeks later Moscow sent more troops into the Georgian separatist region of Abkhazia, shot down a Georgian drone flying over Abkhazia and took other steps pointing toward possible annexation. The Russian newspaper Kommersant reported that behind closed doors at the summit, Mr. Putin questioned Ukraine's right to exist as an independent state. Aborting NATO's careful procedures for admitting new states would encourage dangerous miscalculations that are out of place in modern Europe. WILLIAM COURTNEY KENNETH YALOWITZ Washington William Courtney is a former ambassador to Kazakhstan and Georgia. Kenneth Yalowitz is a former ambassador to Belarus and Georgia. The Washington Post A War The West Must Stop By Ronald D. Asmus Tuesday, July 15, 2008; A19 There is war in the air between Georgia and Russia. Such a war could destabilize a region critical for Western energy supplies and ruin relations between Russia and the West. A conflict over Georgia could become an issue in the U.S. presidential campaign. How they respond could become a test of the potential commander-in-chief qualities of Barack Obama and John McCain . The issue appears to be the future of Abkhazia, a breakaway province of Georgia and the focus of a so-called frozen conflict. The real issue, however, is Moscow's desire to subjugate Tbilisi and thwart its aspirations to go west. For several years, Russian policy toward countries on its borders has been hardening. Moscow has concluded that democratic breakthroughs in places such as Georgia and Ukraine are threats that need to be squashed. It is using the "frozen conflicts" in such places as Abkhazia and South Ossetia to reestablish a sphere of influence. With a lame-duck president in Washington and Europe heading off on vacation, Moscow may sense an opportunity to "resolve" this issue once and for all. This latest round of Russian aggression started after the West recognized Kosovo's provisional independence in February and NATO bungled the issue of offering Georgia and Ukraine a membership action plan at its Bucharest summit in April. Moscow has since launched a creeping annexation of Abkhazia, including a series of illegal moves to strengthen its military hand and to provoke Tbilisi into actions that could lead to further Russian military intervention. Many in the West are tempted to look the other way. This crisis is, after all, inconvenient. Georgian democracy is far from perfect, and Tbilisi has certainly made its own mistakes. Russia has a new president who we all hope could be more liberal and open to the West. We also need Moscow to be aligned with the West in the United Nationson issues from Iran to North Korea to Zimbabwe. This is an awkward time to take a tough stance. It would be only too easy to equivocate, blame all parties a little and call for more diplomacy. But this approach is making war in the Caucasus more likely, not less so. Its warts notwithstanding, Georgia is the region's best hope for democratic development. If the Rose Revolution fails, we will wait a generation or more for another chance for positive change. Critical principles, including sovereignty and territorial integrity, are at stake. Russia is seeking to redefine the rules of post-Cold War European security to its advantage. And as Georgia is considered America's project, U.S. prestige is on the line. The Rose Revolution was animated by American values. Tbilisi has pursued American-style economic reforms, has soldiers in Iraq and wants to join NATO. The region is waiting to see whether and when Washington will step in. If we don't try to stop Russia's overstepping, countries in the region -- from Azerbaijan to Central Asian energy producers -- will recalculate accordingly. There is one way to stop this Russian power play for Georgia: solidarity. Working with our allies in Europe, we can draw a clear line and tell Moscow that there will be real consequences in its relations with us if it does not stop its aggressive course. Georgia, too, needs to act to de-escalate the tension. Yet Tbilisi cannot resolve this crisis alone. Halting the drift toward war requires heavy lifting by the West. In the short term, we need to prevent a conflict from starting this summer. In the medium term, we need Moscow to reverse its creeping -- and illegal -- annexation of Abkhazia. In the longer term, we need to establish an authentic peace process that can resolve the conflict for good. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice is finally engaged in this issue personally. President Bush should be, too. After all, Vladimir Putin , with whom he prides himself on having a close relationship, is the mastermind of this anti-Georgia campaign. If McCain and Obama issued statements strongly supporting Georgia, Moscow would have no illusions that its actions in the months ahead would affect U.S.-Russian relations after January, no matter which of the two senators becomes president. Last weekend, I attended a conference at Lavadia Palace in Yalta. In the place where Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Winston Churchill acquiesced in February 1945 to Joseph Stalin's desire for a sphere of influence, I couldn't help thinking about the costs and consequences of accepting spheres of influence today. Many suspect that Crimea could be the next target if Moscow subjugates Georgia and then shifts its sights to Ukraine. Whatever the failings of these countries, they deserve better in the 21st century. They should be free to choose their own paths and to become normal democratic societies, including joining the European Union or NATO, if they so choose. That is why we should stand up for Georgia today. Accepting Moscow's demand for a sphere of influence was wrong in 1945. It would be wrong again today. The writer is executive director of the Brussels-based Transatlantic Center and is in charge of strategic planning at the German Marshall Fund of the United States. The views expressed here are his own. International Herald Tribune Ukrainian premier Tymoshenko survives no-confidence vote in parliament By MARIA DANILOVA Associated Press Writer 11 July 2008 KIEV, Ukraine (AP) - Ukraine's Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko on Friday survived a no-confidence vote in parliament, but her victory was likely to provide only a temporary respite in this ex-Soviet republic's political turmoil. Although Tymoshenko remains in the premiership, her alliance with President Viktor Yushchenko is threatening to collapse. The opposition Party of Regions had sought to get rid of Tymoshenko over her failure to stem inflation, which has reached 30 percent, and other economic problems. Tymoshenko claims inflation has already started to slow. She has also accused the president's office of blocking her anti-inflation measures. Tymoshenko and Yushchenko were the two main figures of the 2004 Orange Revolution protests, which forced the overturning of a fraudulent presidential election. But since then their relations have been tense. Tymoshenko briefly served as Yushchenko's premier in 2005 until the two fell out, then regained her post in December. The two leaders put together a coalition government and pledged to put their differences aside in order to fulfill their promises of prosperity and quick integration with the European Union. But the two are seen as likely opponents in the 2010 presidential race and they have sought to undermine each other and block each other's work. "It just gets them through the summer, that's all," said Geoffrey Smith, strategist at the Renaissance Capital investment bank in Kiev. "The coalition is effectively dead in any case." The 450-seat Verkhovna Rada voted 174-32 to dismiss Tymoshenko, far short of the 226 votes needed to throw her out. Analysts predict the coalition will not last beyond this fall, saying the president will either call early parliamentary elections or Yushchenko's party may join forces with the opposition. The Party of Regions is led by Viktor Yanukovych, who was credited with the most votes in the 2004 election, sparking the massive weeks-long protests. The party resists Yushchenko's and Tymoshenko's drive for integration with the West. Associated Press Ukraine to investigate whether devastating 1932-33 Soviet-era famine was genocide 10 July 2008 KIEV, Ukraine (AP) - Ukraine plans to open a formal investigation into a Soviet-era famine that killed millions of people to see if it can prove the famine was an act of genocide. The 1932-33 famine was engineered by Soviet dictator Josef Stalin to force peasants to give up their private plots of land and join collective farms. Ukraine, which has rich farmland, suffered the most of all Soviet regions and President Viktor Yushchenko has led efforts to win international recognition of the tragedy as an act of genocide against the Ukrainian nation. In 2006, the Ukrainian parliament declared the famine a genocide. Vladislav Verstyuk, deputy head of the government's Ukrainian Institute of National Remembrance, said Thursday that prosecutors and the state security service will now seek to prove that in court. Historians are divided on whether "death by hunger" -- or "Holodomor" as it is known here -- was an act of genocide. Some are convinced the famine targeted Ukrainians as an ethnic group. Others argue authorities set out to eradicate private landowners as a social class and say the Soviet Union sought to pay for its rapid industrialization with grain exports at the expense of starving millions. The probe is likely to anger neighboring Russia, which insists the famine was not genocide because Russians and other ethnic groups also suffered. Verstyuk said the investigation is not aimed at extracting compensation from Russia, the Soviet Union's legal successor. "What matters for us is to condemn Stalin's regime and those who surrounded him," Verstyuk said. Estimates of the number of people who perished differ wildly. Yushchenko estimates up to 10 million Ukrainians died, while Stanislav Kulchitsky, a Ukrainian historian, believes 3.5 million perished Associated Press Ukraine grapples with alarming rise in hate crimes as it pursues EU dreams By MARIA DANILOVA and OLGA BONDARUK Associated Press Writers 10 July 2008 KIEV, Ukraine (AP) - Nigerian medical student George Itoro Ebong was waiting for a bus in central Kiev when three young men ran up and shouted, "Go back to Africa, you're a monkey!" They smashed a bottle over his head and ran away, leaving him dripping with blood. Such hate crimes are shooting up at an alarming rate in this country that is trying to hone its reputation as a bastion of democracy in the ex-Soviet bloc as it pursues its ambition of joining the European Union and NATO. Neighboring Russia has been struggling with a much bigger problem with racist attacks, but foreigners in Ukraine have been stunned by the sudden and ferocious spike in violence here. Ebong has led a secluded life since last year's attack, feeling safe only in his dorm or in the lecture hall. Going to a movie theater is too dangerous, he said, so he fills his free time assisting the local Nigerian community and carrying out advocacy work. The 28-year-old says he can only venture out to a cafe or bar during the day and with three of four friends accompanying him. "I don't go anywhere," says Ebong, who came here in hopes of a vibrant student life in a European country. "It is safe in the university and the dormitory, but on the street it is not safe, on the metro, even on the bus it is not safe." In a report released Thursday, London-based Amnesty International warns of an "alarming rise" in racist attacks in this ex-Soviet republic of 46 million in recent years. The group says more than 60 people were targeted in racist violence last year, and six of them died. More than 30 people suffered in racist attacks since the beginning of this year, and at least four were killed. The group did not give data for earlier years, but the United Nations' International Organization for Migration said there were 12 racist attacks in 2006, three of them fatal, and only five attacks in 2005. Much of the violence has been blamed on ultrarightist groups like the Ukrainian National Labor Party, whose leader Evhen Herasymenko has called for purging the nation of "sludge." Attacking dark-skinned foreigners, Herasymenko told The Associated Press, is like "the immune system -- the reaction of a healthy body to the infection that got into it." Any non-Slavic looking person can be a target: from engineering students at elite universities, to jeans vendors at outdoor markets, to professional athletes and diplomats. A black American diplomat, not assigned to Ukraine, was attacked in Kiev in 2005 by a group of men in an apparent hate crime and suffered light injuries. The U.S State Department now warns prospective travelers to Ukraine of "increasing incidents of racially motivated violence" on its Web site. Foreign students are perhaps the most vulnerable to attacks. Despite the dangers, they keep coming to Ukraine, lured by the solid Soviet-style education and relatively cheap tuition fees. Since 2002, the number of foreign students has doubled to nearly 40,000. Most come from China, Russia, Syria, India, Iran and Malaysia, according to the Education Ministry. Rights advocates are puzzled by the rise in hate crimes but they say government inaction is partly to blame. "These things happen when governments let them happen," said Heather McGill, a researcher at Amnesty International, who co-authored the report. The report criticizes the government for failing to thoroughly investigate hate crimes and punish perpetrators. The group says Ukrainian law enforcers fail to classify such attacks as racially motivated crimes and instead often write them off as hooliganism, which is easier to prove in court and usually carries a lighter sentence. Rights groups also say the government aggravates the problem by denying that racism is growing and only acknowledging isolated incidents. Even public officials sometimes make controversial or offensive statements. This week, Interior Minister Yuriy Lutsenko stressed the importance of fighting illegal migration in the western city of Lviv, saying: "I don't want Lviv to turn into a Chinatown." "Government spokespeople have demonstrated a bewildering lack of understanding about the nature of racial discrimination and the gravity of the problem in Ukraine," the Amnesty International report said. Ethnic minorities also regularly accuse police officials of targeting them for document checks on the streets, trying to extort money from them or generally treating them disrespectfully. Ukrainian hate groups are believed to be inspired by their counterparts in Russia, where minorities are assaulted almost every day. Russian skinheads help the local groups, sharing tips and video clips on how to attack and torture their victims and how to safely leave the crime scene, rights groups say. Police say some 500 skinheads operate in Kiev alone. Another 1,000 members of hate groups are estimated to be active elsewhere in the country, according to the International Organization for Migration. Ahmet, 25, an aviation student at a top mathematics institute in Kiev who came here from Turkey, has not suffered physical attacks but is subject to daily insults on the street. "They start to spit the moment they see you," said Ahmet, who refused to give his last name or even be photographed for fear of being tracked down and attacked. Henry Asimote, 40, is still recovering from multiple knife wounds to the stomach he suffered in March when two men assaulted him on a trolley bus in Kiev. Asimote, who came here from Nigeria eight years ago, said he may be forced to quit his job selling sports clothes at an outdoor market and take his Ukrainian wife and 2-year-old daughter back to Nigeria. "We came to this country, these were good people, but it is becoming too dangerous for me and my family," he said. Amnesty International report on Ukraine: http://www.amnesty.org/en/for-media/press-releases/ukraine-racial-discri mination-rise-20080710 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 23469 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://clevelanduzo.org/pipermail/uzonews_clevelanduzo.org/attachments/20080715/dbe6a09a/attachment.bin From Orest.Deychak at mail.house.gov Thu Jul 17 16:20:08 2008 From: Orest.Deychak at mail.house.gov (Deychak, Orest) Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 16:20:08 -0400 Subject: [Ohio UZO News] Ukraine: State Dep't; AP; CT; EDM; KP; Kommersant Message-ID: U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing Sean McCormack, Spokesman Washington, DC July 16, 2008 Excerpt: ...QUESTION: Russia's foreign policy document which has been approved by President Medvedev said that Russia maintains its negative position towards NATO plan to grant Ukraine and Georgia NATO membership. What do you think? How difficult will it be after this for Georgia and the Ukraine to get membership action plans in December? MR. MCCORMACK: Well, NATO - NATO, at the summit in Bucharest that President Bush attended, made very clear its position on MAP and eventual membership for Ukraine and Georgia. I don't think they could have been clearer. It was a very strong statement. And while there is a NATO-Russia Council, and again, we as well as other members of NATO consult closely with Russia, they don't have a vote. So it will be the position of NATO members to decide when to extend MAP status, when to extend membership status to any of the states.... Chicago Tribune No extradition in poisoning; Russia won't release key figure in case, officials say 17 July 2008 Chicago Final 13 KIEV, UKRAINE Ukrainian officials say Russia has refused to extradite a key figure in the investigation into the dioxin poisoning that disfigured and nearly killed President Viktor Yushchenko. Ukraine has asked Russia to hand over Volodymyr Satsyuk, the former deputy chief of Ukraine's security service. He is also wanted for suspected abuse of office in a separate probe. A prosecutors' spokesman said Wednesday that Russia's Prosecutor General's Office has declined to hand Satsyuk over because he holds Russian as well as Ukrainian citizenship. The Russian prosecutor's office could not be reached for comment. Yushchenko, who was an opposition leader at the time, fell severely ill during the 2004 presidential election campaign after dining with Satsyuk and his boss, national security service chief Ihor Smeshko. Satsyuk has denied allegations that poisoning was administered at that dinner and has accused Yushchenko of concealing information. Associated Press Ukraine Orange Troubles; Ukraine ruling coalition heading toward collapse By MARIA DANILOVA Associated Press Writer 17 July 2008 KIEV, Ukraine (AP) - The hero and heroine of the Orange Revolution are once again on the brink of divorce. And it's ordinary Ukrainians who are paying the price. In the seven months since President Viktor Yushchenko and Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko reunited in a coalition government with vows to carry out crucial reforms, they have spent more time sniping at each other than governing. Experts say the question isn't if, but rather when the coalition will collapse. Meanwhile, Ukrainians are having to tighten their belts to cope with 30 percent inflation -- the highest in Europe. Economic progress has been hampered by rampant corruption and the lack of judicial, land and other reforms. "It's hard to imagine how could it be worse. They simply haven't done anything. It's been a political crisis," said political analyst Ivan Lozowy. The country's top two officials were allies when they led the 2004 pro-democracy protests that shook this former Soviet republic loose from the grip of Russian influence and launched often chaotic democracy for its 46 million people. While they share a common vision of a more Western-leaning Ukraine, the bookish, careful Yushchenko and the glamorous, impetuous Tymoshenko are seen as likely opponents in the 2010 presidential election and they have sought to undermine each other at every turn. The sense of disappointment over broken promises of prosperity and quick European Union integration has devastated Yushchenko's popularity -- his support ratings in polls have sunk below 10 percent. Tymoshenko has dropped from 30 percent to 20 percent. Their rivalry has severely strained the governing coalition. Last month, two lawmakers quit the alliance, threatening its ability to hold on to the narrowest-possible majority in parliament. Most experts believe Yushchenko and Tymoshenko will replace the defectors and restore the minimum of 226 lawmakers needed to keep the coalition in power. But the experts still don't expect the government to last beyond the fall. Analysts predict Yushchenko may call yet another early parliamentary election -- the third in less than three years -- or someone will form a new coalition, this time involving the opposition. Tymoshenko, 47, has seen nearly every initiative of her government either challenged or blocked by the president's office. Most notably, her attempts to privatize key enterprises and raise money for the budget have been stalled by presidential decrees. Her program to compensate millions of Ukrainians for savings lost amid the Soviet collapse also has been put on hold. The rivalry reached its peak in May when Tymoshenko's faction in parliament blocked the rostrum and prevented Yushchenko, 54, from delivering his state-of-the-nation speech. An embarrassed president was forced to post his speech online. "Both sides have used the budget dispute as a tactic in their longer-term fight for political supremacy," said Geoffrey Smith, strategist at the Renaissance Capital investment bank in Kiev. There have been some achievements. Experts praise Tymoshenko for cleaning up the shady natural gas trade with Russia and removing intermediaries that were widely seen as mechanisms to siphon large sums money into private pockets. Yushchenko, meanwhile, is noted for his push to get NATO membership for Ukraine and bring it closer to the European community. Despite his failings, many credit him for his role in bringing freedom of speech, holding free elections and allowing civil society to gain strength. Eurasia Daily Monitor July 16, 2008 TYMOSHENKO CABINET SURVIVES NO-CONFIDENCE VOTE The opposition in Ukraine's parliament has failed to oust the government of Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko. Only 174 deputies in the 450-seat chamber voted in favor of a no-confidence motion against her on July 11, far short of the 226 needed. Summer vacation started for parliament on the same day. This means that Tymoshenko stays until at least September, when parliament will reconvene. This was a victory against the odds for Tymoshenko. She no longer has the support of a majority in parliament after two deputies left the coalition of the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc (BYT) and President Viktor Yushchenko's Our Ukraine-People's Self-Defense bloc (NUNS) (see EDM, June 25). Nor does she enjoy the backing of Yushchenko or those ministers who represent NUNS in her government. Yushchenko is unhappy with her economic policy, and he apparently views her as a probable rival in a presidential election campaign that should start in 2009. Nevertheless, the opposition turned out to be even weaker than the Tymoshenko government. The Party of Regions (PRU), which is headed by erstwhile presidential contender and former Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, has been insisting on a no-confidence vote ever since the pro-government majority in parliament ceased to exist last month. Speaker Arseny Yatsenyuk, who belongs to NUNS, initially refused to proceed with the motion, but he backed down when the PRU threatened him with dismissal. On July 8 the BYT started to block the parliamentary rostrum physically in order to prevent the vote, holding a vigil in the session hall (Channel 5, July 8-10). Yanukovych predicted that a no-confidence motion would be backed by more than 226 votes. He expected that the two smallest caucuses in parliament, the Communist Party and the Lytvyn Bloc (BL), and dissenters from NUNS would contribute to the PRU's initiative to oust Tymoshenko (UNIAN, July 10). Something went wrong for the PRU on July 10, however, when the BL suggested postponing the no-confidence vote until September or October. The Communists started to hesitate, and the BYT unexpectedly stopped its blockade of the rostrum (Segodnya, July 11). PRU senior member Mykola Azarov, a former finance minister, explaining the reasons for the motion in a speech to parliament on July 11, criticized the Tymoshenko government mainly for record-high inflation. He said that Ukrainians had to pay 50% more for eggs and 80% more for vegetable oil in May 2008 than a year before (Ukrainska Pravda, July 12). Those figures left the majority of parliament unimpressed. The no-confidence motion was backed only by 172 deputies from PRU plus two dissenters from NUNS. Leonid Hrach, one of the Communist leaders, said that his party refused to support the PRU because the PRU did not support the anti-NATO protests that the Communists launched several weeks ago in southern Ukraine, where the Sea Breeze international military exercise was under way (Segodnya, July 11). Several informed commentators, however, alleged that Tymoshenko had reached some kind of agreement with the Ukrainian-Russian businessman Konstantin Grigorishin, who is believed to be among the main sponsors of the Communists (Segodnya, July 11; Ukrainska Pravda, July 12). Segodnya, a newspaper linked to Rinat Akhmetov, the richest man in the PRU, accused Yanukovych of undermining the effort to ouster Tymoshenko. According to Segodnya, Yanukovych torpedoed talks with the Communists when he learned that Yushchenko's team, which he viewed as a potential ally, would not back him for prime minister once Tymoshenko was out. Segodnya suggested that the PRU should stop "exchanging the principles that it declares for secret agreements with the Orange," apparently meaning Yushchenko (Segodnya, July 13). Tymoshenko feels more than confident now, and she apparently holds Yushchenko at least partially responsible for the attempt to oust her. Commenting on the abortive no-confidence motion, she said that her opponents wanted to get rid of her government in order to set up a new ruling coalition on the basis of the PRU and NUNS. She suggested that neither the Communists nor the BL were interested in a new coalition "of the president and Yanukovych" (ICTV, July 13). She also blamed Yushchenko for parliament's failure to amend the state budget on July 11 (Channel 5, July 12). Raisa Bohatyryova, the Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council, predicted a new attempt to dismiss Tymoshenko in the fall. She said that the no-confidence vote had not been thoroughly prepared by Tymoshenko's opponents, but she forecast that "in September there will be a trend toward finding some compromise among the parties that are not in the majority and organizing a vote of no-confidence again" (Interfax-Ukraine, July 11). Bohatyryova's prediction can be interpreted as a threat. She acts as a bridge between Yushchenko and the PRU, simultaneously being a member of Yushchenko's team and remaining one of the leaders of the PRU. --Pavel Korduban Kyiv Post Ukraine takes steps to curb trafficking by Alexandra Stadnyk, Kyiv Post Editor Jul 16 2008 http://www.kyivpost.com/nation/29255/print/ And for a laugh (sardonic, perhaps), read: Kommersant [Russia], July 16 U.S. Is the Cause of Russia's, Ukrainian Clashes - The problems in relations of Russia and Ukraine are triggered by interference of the third party, the United States, said State Duma member Sergei Markov. Markov is also the director of Political Research Institute. "The key problem of Russia's-Ukrainian relations is that they don't exist. There are the relations of Russia, Ukraine and America," Markov announced at the news conference in Moscow. Therefore, Ukraine couldn't be viewed a sovereign state, the official went on, pointing out that Ukrainian government is losing control over its structures there. "We should help the Ukrainian nation restore sovereignty," Markov declared. According to Markov, Ukrainian authorities don't comply with a number of clauses of Russia's-Ukrainian Treaty on Partnership and Cooperation, including in respect of the right for the Russian language. That treaty was inked in Kiev May 31, 1997 and took effect April 1, 1999. The relations of Kiev and Moscow have clouded recently and the RF Black Sea Fleet is one of the stumbling blocks. Under the bilateral treaty, the Black Sea Fleet may station in Ukraine till 2017 and the document provides for the optional prolongation. Regardless, Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko has committed the bureaucrats to elaborate documents for terminating the treaty on expiration -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 17170 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://clevelanduzo.org/pipermail/uzonews_clevelanduzo.org/attachments/20080717/79faef27/attachment.bin From ajfutey at ameritech.net Wed Jul 23 16:33:28 2008 From: ajfutey at ameritech.net (Andrew J. Futey) Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 16:33:28 -0400 Subject: [Ohio UZO News] Jim Trakas for Congress Message-ID: <000601c8ed03$5f046ef0$6c01a8c0@AJF600laptop> Hosts Pete Alex, Andrew J. Futey & Taras G. Szmagala Along with co-hosts Dean Alex ? Michael Alex Steven Alex ? Vasyl Liscynesky ? Borys Pakush Jeff Pfaff ? Taras Szmagala, Jr. Invite you to a reception in honor of JIM TRAKAS Candidate for Ohio's 10th Congressional District Wednesday, August 13, 2008 5:30 - 7:30 p.m. Corleone's 5669 Broadview Road ? Parma $500 ? Platinum Partner $250 ? Gold Partner $100 ? Silver Partner $50 ? Bronze Partner To RSVP, please contact Brittany Williams at 216-502-0040 or brittany at paroskagroup.com. Please make checks payable to "Trakas for Congress" and mail to: Trakas for Congress, 1500 W. 3rd Street, Suite 120, Cleveland, OH 44113 www.jimtrakas.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://clevelanduzo.org/pipermail/uzonews_clevelanduzo.org/attachments/20080723/0a603747/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 1333 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://clevelanduzo.org/pipermail/uzonews_clevelanduzo.org/attachments/20080723/0a603747/attachment.gif From ajfutey at ameritech.net Wed Jul 23 22:27:51 2008 From: ajfutey at ameritech.net (Andrew J. Futey) Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 22:27:51 -0400 Subject: [Ohio UZO News] UKRAINE BLAMES SOVIET LEADERS FOR HOLODOMOR Message-ID: <005701c8ed35$565aa5d0$6c01a8c0@AJF600laptop> ???????? ??????? ????????? UKRAINIAN WORLD CONGRESS ??????????? ??????? ?????????? 75-?? ??????? ??????????? ???????????? ???????? 1932-1933 International Holodomor Committee(IHC) 75th Commemoration of the Ukrainian Genocide 1932-1933. ??????? ???????? ???? ?????? Ukraine Remembers ? The World Acknowledges http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5j3K-S2zfxwNuIaeQq6_XMMq1krVQ 23 July 2008 KYIV, Ukraine ? Ukraine on Wednesday blamed Soviet leaders for a famine that killed millions of people in 1932-33 and published documents it said "unequivocally" proved its case, part of its campaign to get the tragedy recognized as genocide. The national security service published archive documents it said proved that Soviet leader Josef Stalin and his subordinates were responsible for the famine. The scale of the death toll is contested. Some historians believe 3.5 million perished in what is known in Ukraine as "Holodomor," or "death by hunger", while the country's leaders say up to 10 million died. The issue has become a sore point in Ukraine's uneasy relations with Russia. Russia made no official comment Wednesday. In April, the lower house of parliament passed a resolution saying the famine should not be considered genocide. The documents included orders to punish those resisting collectivization and withholding agricultural products as well as details on campaigns to root out Ukrainian nationalist organizations. The famine was masterminded by Soviet authorities to force peasants across the Soviet Union to give up their private plots and join collective farms. The measure was particularly calamitous in Ukraine, the breadbasket of the Soviet state. Moscow says it was not an act of genocide because other ethnic groups, such as Russians and Kazakhs, also suffered. As the Soviet Union's legal successor, Russia is also concerned about the possibility of legal action or having to pay reparations. Historians in Ukraine and the West are divided on whether the famine was an act of genocide. Some are convinced the famine targeted Ukrainians as an ethnic group. Others argue Soviet authorities set out to eradicate private landowners as a social class. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://clevelanduzo.org/pipermail/uzonews_clevelanduzo.org/attachments/20080723/6c73f204/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 2317 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://clevelanduzo.org/pipermail/uzonews_clevelanduzo.org/attachments/20080723/6c73f204/attachment.gif From Orest.Deychak at mail.house.gov Thu Jul 24 09:41:29 2008 From: Orest.Deychak at mail.house.gov (Deychak, Orest) Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 09:41:29 -0400 Subject: [Ohio UZO News] Ukraine: CT; LAT; AP (2); VOA; KP; EDM; RFE/RL; OSCE Message-ID: Chicago Tribune Agency bolsters case for Stalin genocide; Kiev declares archive proves Soviet leaders set off 1932-33 famine, killing millions 24 July 2008 Chicago Final 14 KIEV, UKRAINE Ukraine on Wednesday blamed Soviet leaders for a famine that killed millions of people in 1932-33 and published documents it said "unequivocally" proved its case -- part of its campaign to get the tragedy recognized as genocide. The national security service published archive documents it said prove that Soviet leader Josef Stalin and his subordinates were responsible for the famine. The scale of the death toll is contested; some historians believe 3.5 million perished in what is known in Ukraine as "Holodomor," or "death by hunger." Ukraine's leaders say up to 10 million died. The issue has become a sore point in Ukraine's uneasy relations with Russia. The documents included orders to punish those resisting collectivization and withholding agricultural products as well as details on campaigns to root out Ukrainian nationalist organizations. Los Angeles Times World Briefing / UKRAINE; Bid to halt work at mass grave site 24 July 2008 A-7 A Jewish group asked the Ukrainian government to stop construction on the site of a grave containing the remains of an estimated 26,000 victims of the Holocaust. The Jewish community in Odessa says a developer has begun building what it believes will be a shopping mall on the site. When construction workers began digging, they found bones, skulls and children's toys, said Avrohom Wolf, chief rabbi for Odessa and southern Ukraine. He said the builder had removed all the remains it dug out and said he had no clue where to search for them. Wolf would not name the company, saying he hoped to find a solution to the controversy. The victims were executed in the fall of 1941, shortly after German troops invaded the Soviet Union, according to Wolf. The plot of barren land not far from the city center was marked by several Jewish monuments but not officially labeled a cemetery. AP Ukrainian prosecutors: no suspects in 4-year probe into president's dioxin poisoning By MARIA DANILOVA Associated Press Writer 23 July 2008 KIEV, Ukraine (AP) - After investigating for nearly four years, Ukrainian prosecutors acknowledged Wednesday they don't have a single suspect in President Viktor Yushchenko's dioxin poisoning. The announcement comes a day after Yushchenko was questioned by prosecutors a second time and hinted the investigation would produce "very unpleasant" surprises. Yuriy Boichenko, spokesman for the Prosecutor General's Office, told The Associated Press that investigators have so far failed to identify any suspects -- comments that raise questions about the effectiveness of the probe. Yushchenko, then an opposition presidential candidate, fell gravely ill during the 2004 election campaign and was later diagnosed with massive dioxin poisoning, which left his face disfigured. The president claims he knows who masterminded the crime but refuses to name names. He accuses Russia of refusing to extradite key figures in the case or provide Russian-made dioxin samples for tests. Many here point the finger at Russia, because Yushchenko was running against a Kremlin-backed candidate and because Russia is one of the few countries that produces the dioxin of the formula found in Yushchenko's body. AP Political, religious battles loom between Ukraine, Russia over Orthodox baptism celebration By MARIA DANILOVA Associated Press Writer 24 July 2008 KIEV, Ukraine (AP) - Solemn hymns and prayers will resonate in golden-domed Orthodox cathedrals across Ukraine on Friday to mark the 1020th anniversary of this region's conversion to Christianity. But the sonorous sounds may be drowned out by the din of a fierce political battle. Ukrainian officials are determined to use the events to lobby for autonomy for the local church from Russia, while the dominant Moscow Patriarchate will fight to retain influence over this mostly Orthodox country of 46 million. For Ukrainian leaders, recognition of the Ukrainian Orthodox church as Moscow's equal would mark a significant step in their drive to assert independence and shed centuries-long Russian influence. That effort gained strength after the 2004 Orange Revolution, which moved Ukraine away from Moscow and closer to the West. "Ukraine is an independent state like Bulgaria or Georgia, and it is normal for it to have its own church," said Anatoliy Kolodny, head of the religion studies department at the National Academy of Sciences. "There is nothing strange in that." Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople, the world's top Orthodox spiritual leader based in Istanbul, Turkey, will attend the ceremonies and could support the autonomy of the Ukrainian church, despite Russian Orthodox Patriarch Alexy II's efforts to thwart the move. But any sudden decision by Bartholomew could create a major split among the world's 250 million Orthodox believers and set off fierce battles over parishes and valuable church property inside Ukraine, with some priests siding with Moscow and others with Kiev. "Were this decision to be made today, it would lead to another schism in the church," said Andrei Zolotov, chief editor of the Russia Profile magazine and an expert on Orthodox church affairs. Recognition of the independence of the Ukrainian church could also sever one of the oldest links between the two neighboring countries, which both draw their identity from the 988 A.D. Christianization of Kievan Rus, a medieval state that was a forerunner of modern-day Ukraine, Russia and Belarus. The Slavic world's conversion to Christianity began when prince Volodymyr marched his servants into Kiev's Dnieper River to be baptized 1,020 years ago. Efforts to win autonomy have already split the Ukrainian church. Two breakaway churches have set themselves up since the 1991 Soviet collapse -- the Ukrainian Orthodox Church Kiev Patriarchate, whose self-declared Patriarch Philaret has been excommunicated by Alexy as a renegade, and its splinter, the Ukrainian Autocephalous Church, also unrecognized. Both churches are smaller than the Russian-affiliated church, which claims up to 28 million believers here. The two breakaway churches have attempted to unite in hope of winning recognition from Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople. But so far these efforts have failed. President Viktor Yushchenko, a devout Orthodox believer, has supported Philaret of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church Kiev Patriarchate, visiting his church on religious holidays with family and allies. Experts say Yushchenko, who has hung portraits of himself with Bartholomew all over the Ukrainian capital, has been lobbying the patriarch to recognize a united breakaway church as a lawful autonomous church. Another scenario Ukrainian leaders could be aiming for is to have Bartholomew recognize the Ukrainian church which now answers to Moscow as independent. Under this plan, the church would later absorb the two rebel churches. That could be tempting for Bartholomew, who is eager to boost his global clout and is jostling for influence with the powerful Moscow Patriarchate, the biggest Orthodox church in the world claiming some 95 million believers, Zolotov said. As the religious celebrations approached this week, tensions grew. Both sides blamed each other for trying to sabotage the events, scheduled for Friday through Sunday. Alexy of the Moscow church was accused of asking other Orthodox leaders not to attend the celebrations in Kiev, while his subordinates in Kiev complained that they were being ignored and the holiday spoiled by politics. Both sides can be blamed for mixing religion with politics. At political rallies priests from both churches often bless activists and voice support for candidates. The Moscow Patriarchate recently held a ceremonial procession in Kiev, praying that Ukraine will not be accepted into NATO. Most experts believe that the Ukrainian Orthodox Church will eventually gain the same independence as Orthodox churches have in other predominantly Orthodox countries. The only unknown, they say, is how abrupt the split will be. "In the historical perspective, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church must gain autocephaly -- a full canonical independence -- the question is only when and how it will happen," Zolotov said. VOA Ukrainian television Interview with Rep. Christopher H. Smith, former Chairman and current ranking member, U.S. Helsinki Commission http://www.voanews.com/ukrainian/2008-07-23-voa3.cfm Helsinki Commission website: www.csce.gov For Ukraine page or any OSCE country of interest, click on the map. Kyiv Post Op-ED Leaders lack will to root out corruption Jul 23 2008 Widespread corruption still hobbles Ukraine. Beyond rhetoric, little is being done to reduce it. Widespread corruption still hobbles Ukraine. Beyond rhetoric, little is being done to reduce it. As Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko notes, corruption has enveloped the entire higher structures of the Ukrainian state. The Orange Revolution, like other democratic revolutions in Serbia and Georgia, were largely propelled by popular anger at high-level corruption and the accumulation of disproportionate wealth by a small group of oligarchs. Little has been done to combat this phenomenon. Business has increased its influence over politics. Ukraine's Orange elites remain divided. President Victor Yushchenko continues to act in the manner of his predecessor, Leonid Kuchma, in undertaking a mainly cosmetic campaign against corruption. The president established a working group. But it means little, as Kuchma had many similar gestures and committees. What is fundamental to combat corruption is political will and European Union external support, neither of which Ukraine possesses. The president's blocking of the government's anti-corruption policies brings forth a sense of deja vu? vu. It has the hallmarks of Kuchma's blocking of then-Deputy Prime Minister Tymoshenko's anti-corruption campaign in the energy sector during the 2000-2001 Yushchenko government. Recent examples show the president's hindrance of the nascent, but real, elements of the government's campaign against corruption. Earlier this summer, the president sided with the Party of Regions-dominated Crimean parliament against Interior Minister Yuriy Lutsenko's campaign against organized crime on the peninsula. Many of the corrupt officials and organized crime groups use the Party of Regions as their krysha, or roof. The president also blocked the appointment of the acting head of the Anti-Monopoly Committee after it began to investigate the monopolist position of a chicken producer, Nasha Riaba, reportedly owned by Ihor Tarasyuk. Tarasyuk is a close ally of Yushchenko and heads the Presidential Department of Affairs. Then there are the clashes over the corrupt energy intermediary RosUkrEnergo. Recently, leaders of Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Moldova (GUAM), gathered for a regional summit in Kyiv, signed documents on an Azeri-Georgian-Ukrainian energy corridor that promised "transparency." How is the West to take this promise seriously when the president does not support transparency in the Ukrainian-Russian energy relationship? The example of post-communist countries in Central and Eastern Europe, such as Romania and Bulgaria, tells us that reducing corruption requires two factors: domestic political will and external support. Both of these factors came together after 1999 in Romania and Bulgaria. Both countries underwent, like Ukraine, corrupt transitions in the 1990s, hijacked by former communist elites, whether post-communist socialist parties in Romania and Bulgaria or centrist parties in Ukraine. In 1996 and 1997, respectively, the Romanian and Bulgarian socialists received a major shock when they lost elections to reformist forces. Although fractured and inept, these reformist forces forced the socialists to transform into more authentic social democratic parties by battling corruption and supporting Euro-Atlantic integration. When they returned to power in 2000-2001, the transformed Romanian and Bulgarian socialists were given the external assistance of the European Union that offered them conditional membership in 2007. Such a shock happened to Ukraine's centrists in 2004 when Victor Yanukovych lost the election. Yanukovych went for a long sauna to Moscow and rich Rinat Akhmetov went on a long holiday to Monaco. But the Yushchenko administration never used his massive revolutionary popularity and, instead, actually intervened in the defense of Yanukovych and Akhmetov. The president kept the circus clown, Svyatoslav Piskun, as prosecutor longer than he did Tymoshenko as prime minister. Romania and Bulgaria's 63rd position in 1999 in Transparency International's corruption index has gradually improved. Ukraine's position was similar to Romania and Bulgaria in 1999, at 75th place, but dived to 122nd in Kuchma's last year in office in 2004. Ukraine's 118th place in 2007 reflects the fact that little progress has been achieved in the struggle against corruption since Yushchenko came to power three and half years ago. Ukraine lacks important factors that existed in Romania and Bulgaria. The Ukrainian elite aren't interested combating corruption among its ranks. Only three elites have been imprisoned and all of these were abroad, one still in California and two who have since been released from Germany. Tymoshenko remains one of a handful of Ukraine's elites to be imprisoned inside Ukraine, albeit for only one month. External EU support for future membership is linked to, among other policies, a thorough overhaul of the judicial system. This membership inducement has been crucial in creating the political will in Romania and Bulgaria to combat corruption. Unfortunately, the EU has not changed its unwelcoming stance towards Ukrainian membership since the Orange Revolution. The free trade agreements under negotiation do not include a membership offer. The four years since the Orange Revolution have shown that the emergence of political will and the inducement of EU membership are needed for genuine success to be achieved against corruption. Romania and Bulgaria showed how well these two elements can work. Additionally, until suspect members of Ukraine's elite face criminal charges - rather than invitations to join philanthropic charities - the nation will remain a highly corrupt place, with little improvement in democratization and rule of law. Taras Kuzio is a research associate at the Institute for European, Russian and Eurasian Studies at George Washington University in Washington, D.C. He can be reached at tkuzio at rogers.com. Eurasia Daily Monitor July 23, 2008 YUSHCHENKO, TYMOSHENKO LOCK HORNS OVER OIL PIPELINE Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko has refused to approve using the Odesaa-Brody pipeline for pumping Caspian oil to the Pryvat Group's refineries. The pipeline, Odessa-Brody, is currently used by Russian oil companies in the reverse direction, Brody-Odessa. President Viktor Yushchenko's team is accusing Tymoshenko of disregarding national interests and even treason. Tymoshenko accuses her opponents of corruption. The pipeline Odessa-Brody was completed in 2001 to pump Caspian oil to Ukrainian and Polish refineries. It was part of plans devised under then- President Leonid Kuchma to diminish Ukraine's dependence on Russian energy resources. Ukraine, however, could not obtain oil for it from Azerbaijan or Kazakhstan as it had hoped, although the European Union and the United States supported the project politically. Lacking Caspian oil, the Odessa-Brody pipeline since 2004 has been serving TNK-BP, LUKoil, and other Russian companies, pumping their oil in the reverse direction, to Odessa, where it is loaded onto tankers for export. Kyiv never abandoned the original plan for Odessa-Brody. At the end of June, Yushchenko and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliev agreed that a certain amount of oil would be transported to Odessa and pumped through the pipeline for testing (Interfax-Ukraine, June 30). Tymoshenko forbade government officials to attend a meeting at the presidential secretariat on July 16, at which it was planned to agree on conditions for Caspian oil transportation via Odessa-Brody in the original north-western direction. UkrTransNafta - the state-controlled operator of Ukraine's trunk pipelines - was supposed to sign at this meeting a contract with Milbert Ventures, which is registered in the British Virgin Islands and is linked to the Dnipropetrovsk-based Pryvat group (Kommersant Ukraine, July 18). Yushchenko's envoy for international energy projects, Bohdan Sokolovsky, announced on July 17 that agreements had been ready for signing at the preceding day's meeting. Specifically, 5 million tons of Caspian oil were to be supplied to the Halychyna and Naftokhymyk Prykarpattya refineries in western Ukraine, and another 3 million tons to Central European countries, over the next two years. Pryvat controls those two Ukrainian refineries, which have been short of crude for processing during the past year or so. Sokolovsky accused Tymoshenko of disrupting the agreements reached with suppliers in Azerbaijan and potential consumers in Central Europe. "This is shocking," said Sokolovsky. "Those actions [by Tymoshenko] can be qualified as treason. I am sure that sooner rather than later, even if we have to gather at the National Security and Defense Council for that, we shall secure implementation of this project, which is in the national interest of Ukraine" (Liga.net, July 17). The head of Yushchenko's secretariat, Viktor Baloha, warned Tymoshenko against interfering in energy security matters. "European energy policy and Ukraine's role in it is at stake," Baloha warned (Ukrainska Pravda, July 17) Tymoshenko, however, dismissed the contracts proposed by Yushchenko's secretariat to pump Caspian oil via Odessa-Brody as "another illegal scheme masterminded by the presidential secretariat". She said that the contracts were to be signed with "off-shore companies" that had "nothing to do with international projects." She also drew parallels between this project and the controversial deals of the presidential team with the RosUkrEnergo and Vanco companies (Interfax-Ukraine, July 17). Earlier this year, Tymoshenko had unsuccessfully tried to banish RosUkrEnergo - the monopoly supplier of Gazprom's gas to Ukraine since 2006 - from the Ukrainian market. Her government also withdrew from the contract to develop oil and gas resources in the Black Sea with a subsidiary of the US company Vanco. Tymoshenko insisted that the corrupt interests of previous Ukrainian governments were behind the two projects (see EDM, June 4, July 2). Tymoshenko apparently believes that the contracts with Pryvat were intended to give that company full control over the Odessa-Brody pipeline for many years to come. According to parliamentary deputy Serhy Pashynsky from the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc, who sits on the parliament's energy committee, Pryvat would have taken Odessa-Brody under its control for a 14-year term, had the contracts with Milbert Ventures been signed. The Russians are also unhappy. Sources at LUKoil and TNK said that they had not been notified of Kyiv's immediate intention to start pumping Caspian oil through the Odessa-Brody pipeline (Kommersant Ukraine, July 18). Russian Deputy Prime Minister Igor Sechin expressed concern over the plans, saying that the affected Russian companies would have to seek other routes for delivering their oil to EU countries (Interfax-Ukraine, July 21). Pryvat was among Tymoshenko's allies in 2005-2006, when rival Ukrainian tycoons such as Viktor Pinchuk and Konstantin Grygorishyn voiced suspicions that Tymoshenko was backing Privat in property disputes with them. Ihor Kolomoysky, the informal leader of Privat, admitted that his and Tymoshenko's interests "coincided" at that time. Later on, however, Pryvat fell out with Tymoshenko, and she accused Pryvat of foul play on the energy market (Channel 5 TV, March 28). In one of his most recent interviews, Kolomoysky said that he would back Yushchenko's re-election bid against Tymoshenko's possible candidacy, and that he would consider leaving Ukraine if she became president (Ukrainska Pravda, March 28, April 2) -- Pavel Korduban AP Ukraine Germany; Oil matters loom over Merkel's Ukraine visit By MARIA DANILOVA Associated Press Writer 21 July 2008 KIEV, Ukraine (AP) - German Chancellor Angela Merkel pledged Monday to help Ukraine implement reforms to bring the former Soviet republic into NATO, a prospect strongly opposed by Russia. As Merkel met with Ukrainian leaders on a one-day visit, Russia criticized Ukraine's energy policy in what appeared to be a reminder of the country's -- and Europe's -- dependency on Russian oil and gas. "We are proceeding from the fact that one day Ukraine will become a member of NATO," Merkel told reporters after meeting with President Viktor Yushchenko. Merkel said Germany and other NATO countries will work with Ukraine on a "navigation plan" to guide Ukraine toward membership in the Western alliance. In order to join, Ukraine will have to upgrade its Soviet-style army in line with Western military standards, fight corruption and promote civil society. Earlier this year, a NATO summit denied Ukraine a Membership Action Plan, seen as a roadmap toward joining. But the summit promised Ukraine eventual membership. That decision was seen as Russia's success in lobbying Western European countries, mainly Germany and France, who cited hostility toward the alliance among many Ukrainians and the country's main opposition parties as well as the need for further reform. The two countries were seen as reluctant to anger Russia, which supplies Europe with some 40 percent of the European Union's natural gas imports and which has fiercely protested Ukraine's efforts to join NATO. Merkel, however, stressed that the issue of Ukraine's membership does not concern anyone else. "It cannot be that other countries that don't belong to the alliance are discussing this issue," Merkel said. "It is a question for Ukraine and NATO." Merkel also said that Ukraine has made strong progress toward further integration with the European Union. The same day Merkel was in Kiev, officials in Moscow discussed oil and gas relations with Ukraine, which is heavily dependent on Russia for energy. Russian Deputy Prime Minister Igor Sechin criticized Ukraine's plans to reverse the direction of the Odessa-Brody oil pipeline this year, citing concerns over stability of Russian crude supplies to Europe. The pipeline runs in the reverse of its intended direction, shipping Russian crude to the Black Sea port of Odessa and on to overseas markets. But Ukraine wants to start shipping oil in the opposite direction to Brody, near the Polish border, which would later connect with an extension to Poland. "This is a concern for Russian companies supplying crude to Central Europe. These companies will have to look for other delivery routes," Sechin said during a meeting with Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, Interfax news agency reported. Exporters are considering sending shipments via the Black Sea port of Novorossiysk and the Baltic port of Primorsk, said Sechin, who also chairs the board of state oil company Rosneft. Ukraine plans to feed the pipeline at Odessa with Caspian crude, but there are concerns over whether there would be enough oil to fill the pipeline. Meanwhile, President Dmitry Medvedev and Gazprom CEO Alexei Miller discussed the terms of supplying natural gas to Ukraine for 2009, Interfax reported. No details were given. Miller had said earlier that the price for Ukraine could more than double, prompting concerns that such a hike could cripple the Ukrainian economy. Ukrainian leaders have asked for a phased increase. Ukraine's natural gas dealings with Russia are being watched carefully in Europe, since up to 80 percent of Russian gas reached European consumers through pipelines that cross Ukraine. Yushchenko reiterated his country's reliability as a transporter of natural gas. "We will carefully fulfill all our obligations," Yushchenko told reporters. RFE/RL July 22, 2008 EU Debates Ukraine's Credentials by Ahto Lobjakas BRUSSELS -- When is a door no longer closed, and yet not open? That might be the riddle baffling officials in Kyiv as they ponder the European Union's latest failure to determine whether or not Ukraine is "European." The seemingly straightforward question is significant, since only "European states" are eligible for EU membership according to the bloc's founding treaty. The trouble the EU is having in making up its mind was amply evident in the summary of a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels on July 22. "We have [today] spoken of the European character -- although some contest it -- [the] European character [of Ukraine], without prejudging the future of Ukraine with regard to the European Union," said French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, whose country currently holds the EU's rotating presidency. The majority of those attending the meeting responded in the affirmative. As Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt put it, Ukraine is clearly not an Asian or African country and, as such, deserves acknowledgment that it will one day be eligible for EU membership. At the other end of the spectrum are the Benelux countries and, on and off, Germany. This camp argues that the European Union is not ready to tackle what it calls the "political" issue of an increasingly impatient Ukraine's status. The EU foreign ministers' failure to agree on Ukraine's status as a "European" country -- a precondition for consideration for EU membership -- places time at a premium, with Ukraine expecting an answer by this fall. Geographically speaking, the issue is uncontroversial -- no one maintains that Ukraine is situated anywhere else than Europe. But politically, the definition would open the door for Ukraine to apply for EU membership, which critics say would be a step too far. This argument is also made by the European Commission, the EU's executive arm. Diplomats in Brussels say the commission's line throughout sometimes heated meetings this month has been to warn that Ukraine could open a Pandora's box of further EU enlargement. The European public, the argument goes, is not ready for this, nor is Ukraine itself with its feuding leaders and deeply split public opinion when it comes to relations with the West. After the July 22 foreign ministers' meeting, EU External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner said Ukraine's internal stability remains one of the EU's leading concerns. "We feel Ukraine has to do a lot in order to stabilize [its] interior politics," Ferroro-Waldner said. "That there are great frictions between the president and the prime minister -- these things, we would like to see them in a different way and I think this is also something that we will certainly discuss at the EU-Ukraine summit." As a result of the July 22 meeting, it appears Ukraine will get its wish and conclude a Stabilization and Association Agreement (SAA) with the EU sometime in 2009. However, the evocative title of the new cooperation accord is unlikely to be the symbolic breakthrough Kyiv is hoping for. The EU will try to nip in the bud any suggestions that, by getting an SAA, Ukraine would be following in the footsteps of the bloc's newest postcommunist members, all of which signed such an agreement before joining. While the preambles of those states' SAAs all mentioned the EU's intention of helping them meet their objectives of gaining membership, Ukraine's agreement is unlikely to say anything of the kind. Instead, what the EU is seeking is a formulation that, in the words of diplomats in Brussels, "would not close the door." The European Neighborhood Policy, with its studiedly noncommittal stance on the membership question, will in future still define the major parameters of Ukraine's relationship with the EU. The closest the European Union will come to acknowledging Ukraine's ambitions will be in a joint declaration at the EU-Ukraine summit on September 9. The wording of the declaration is still open. Officials in Brussels say a Ukrainian delegation walked out of a meeting in Brussels earlier this month when it became clear their country was going to be denied an explicit membership prospect. But Brussels appears confident that it can secure Kyiv's acquiescence, however grudging, in return for an offer of talks on visa-free travel -- to be formally made at the upcoming summit at the French resort of Evian. OSCE Project Coordinator's Office Kyiv, Ukraine http://www.osce.org/ukraine/ Press Releases: OSCE Project Co-ordinator trains Ukrainian regional authorities to address trafficking in human beings LUHANSK, Ukraine, 22 July 2008 - The OSCE Project Co-ordinator launched today a series of ten regional training sessions, to take place across Ukraine, on how to address the problem of trafficking in human beings... OSCE Project Co-ordinator helps discharged Ukrainian military pilots and staff find new opportunities NIZHYN, Ukraine, 22 July 2008 - A joint project by the OSCE Project Co-ordinator and the Ukrainian Defence Ministry for former military pilots and technical staff has helped the latest participants, who graduated today, to get jobs... -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 36245 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://clevelanduzo.org/pipermail/uzonews_clevelanduzo.org/attachments/20080724/8af56042/attachment.bin From Orest.Deychak at mail.house.gov Fri Jul 25 12:59:56 2008 From: Orest.Deychak at mail.house.gov (Deychak, Orest) Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 12:59:56 -0400 Subject: [Ohio UZO News] Ukraine: FT; LAT; IHT; AP; EDM Message-ID: Financial Times www.ft.com Yushchenko implicates former friend in dioxin poison plot By Roman Olearchyk in Kiev Published: July 25 2008 03:00 Viktor Yushchenko yesterday threw the four-year investigation into his near-fatal dioxin poisoning into turmoil when he implicated a former close friend and Orange Revolution ally. Asked during a televised press conference if he suspected David Zhvania, godfather to one of his children, the Ukraine president said: "I think, yes. And that is putting it softly." The question was prompted by persistent rumours of Mr Zhvania's involvement in the September 2004 poisoning that -disfigured Mr Yushchenko's face. Mr Zhvania, a Georgian native and current Ukrainian parliamentarian for a pro-Yushchenko party, held a senior position in the president's hard-fought 2004 election campaign. Mr Zhvania has denied any involvement in the case and has cast doubt on whether Mr Yushchenko was poisoned at all, suggesting the illness might have been caused by pancreatitis, herpes and facial nerve inflammation. He has also accused the president's office of spearheading a legal campaign to strip him of his Ukrainian citizenship. Mr Yushchenko declined to discuss the issue in detail so as not to interfere in an investigation. Prosecutors say there are no formal suspects. The case has gripped Ukraine ever since the pro-democracy Orange Revolution of 2004 propelled Mr Yushchenko to power over the Kremlin-backed candidate Victor Yanukovich. In the past, Mr Yushchenko has suggested that the main suspects over his poisoning, a few -individuals, had fled to -Russia. The case has affected relations with Russia, as many Ukrainians suspect possible involvement by Moscow. Oleksiy Donskiy, a prosecutor investigating the case, has not named Mr Zhvania as a suspect. Los Angeles Times The World; Ukraine leader blames friend in attack >From the Associated Press 25 July 2008 A-9 KIEV, UKRAINE President Viktor Yushchenko on Thursday accused the godfather of one of his children of involvement in his near-fatal dioxin poisoning in 2004. Yushchenko did not provide evidence for his claim that David Zhvania participated in giving him a massive dose of dioxin that sickened him and left his face badly scarred. Zhvania is a legislator with the Our Ukraine-Self Defense bloc, which supports the president. In September 2004, while campaigning for the presidency, Yushchenko fell gravely ill after attending a dinner with Zhvania that was hosted by two top security officials. This summer, Zhvania angered Yushchenko by alleging that he had suffered only from food poisoning, not dioxin, and accusing his staff of inventing a politically motivated attack to boost his popularity in the close presidential race. Asked Thursday at a news conference whether he thought Zhvania took part in the poisoning, Yushchenko answered, "I think yes, to put it mildly." Zhvania countered that Yushchenko's poisoning had yet to be proved. He said Yushchenko's statement was "absolutely ill-considered and irresponsible" and showed his disregard for the rule of law. The president has accused Russia of stalling the investigation by refusing to extradite key figures, including an official who was a host of the dinner International Herald Tribune AP Orthodox leader calls for unity among Ukraine's churches, hints at independence from Moscow By MARIA DANILOVA Associated Press Writer 25 July 2008 KIEV, Ukraine (AP) - The spiritual leader of the Eastern Orthodox faith called Friday for religious unity within Ukraine and carefully hinted at possible independence for the local church, which is trying to move away from the powerful Russian patriarch. Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople is visiting Ukraine for three-day celebrations marking the 1,020th anniversary of this region's conversion to Christianity. However, the event risks turning into a fierce political battle between Kiev, which is eager to win independence from Moscow for the local church, and the powerful Russian Orthodox Church fighting to maintain influence over this nation of 46 million. "We came to here to pray together with you for the unification of all Orthodox Christians in Ukraine into a single church, a church of your people, a church of your country," Bartholomew said at a festive welcoming ceremony at the airport. "We came as angels of peace, those who strive for unity, freedom and peace." In a bow to Moscow, Bartholomew also thanked Russian Patriarch Alexy II for the opportunity "to mark this wonderful occasion together." Bartholomew's visit is an important victory for Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko, who is trying to establish an independent Orthodox church in his country. It is the first time the spiritual leader of the world's Orthodox believers has visited Ukraine in 350 years. Bartholomew's references to "a church of your country" and "freedom" were interpreted by many Ukrainians as support for their own church. Representatives of the Russian Orthodox church complained they were shut out of the preparations. Alexy II is expected to arrive at the festivities Saturday. Experts say that the Ukrainian church is bound to attain independence in the long run. However, an abrupt decision could lead to a deep split between Constantinople and the Russian Orthodox Church, which claims 95 million out of the world's 250 million Orthodox believers and is the biggest in the world. Efforts to win autonomy have split the Ukrainian church, with two breakaway churches setting themselves up since the 1991 Soviet collapse. Both churches are smaller than Ukraine's Russian-affiliated church, which claims up to 28 million believers here. Later in the day, Bartholomew and Yushchenko laid flowers at the monument of prince Volodymyr, who 1,020 years ago initiated the Slavic world's conversion to Christianity by marching his servants into Kiev's Dnieper River to be baptized. AP Ukraine bars entry to Russian nationalist lawmaker amid Black Sea Fleet dispute 25 July 2008 KIEV, Ukraine (AP) - Ukraine has barred a Russian nationalist lawmaker from entering the country for a year amid growing tension between Kiev and Moscow over military and religious issues, border officials said Friday. Konstantin Zatulin was denied entry Thursday upon arrival at the airport in Simferopol and informed he was barred. State Border Service spokesman Serhiy Astakhov said the ban was ordered by law-enforcement officials, but he did not have further details. Officials of the national security service could not be reached for comment. Simferopol is near Sevastopol, the Ukrainian port that is home of the Russian Black Sea Fleet. Ukrainian officials have indicated they do not want to renew the Russian fleet's lease when it expires in 2017. The issue is likely to be in focus when the Russian fleet celebrates Navy Day on Sunday. Russian nationalists regard the Crimean peninsula, where Sevastopol is located, as rightfully part of Russia. Moscow also is angry about Ukraine's push to join NATO, and recent NATO-Ukraine naval exercises prompted protests. Zatulin had been declared persona non grata in Ukraine in the past over his participation in anti-NATO protests in the Crimea. The Russian Foreign Ministry summoned Ukrainian Ambassador Konstantin Grishchenko and told him the ban on Zatulin was "scandalous," a ministry statement said. The statement also said the ambassador heard Russia's complaints that celebrations of the 1,020th anniversary of Ukraine's and Russia's conversion to Christianity are being held "with disrespect to the leadership of the Russian Orthodox Church and the feelings of millions of Orthodox believers." Earlier this year Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov was also barred from Ukraine for suggesting that Sevastopol belongs to Russia. The Crimean peninsula was for centuries part of the Russian empire and then of Soviet Russia. In 1954, Nikita Khrushchev awarded it to Soviet Ukraine, where he lived and ruled for many years. After the 1991 Soviet collapse, the Crimea became part of independent Ukraine. Eurasia Daily Monitor July 25, 2008 SUB-ROSA WARFARE IN THE CRIMEA On the evening of July 24, 2008, Russian State Duma member Konstantin Zatulin was banned from entering Ukraine for one year when he arrived in Simferopol airport in the Crimea with a group of Russian parliamentarians to take part in the commemoration of the 1,020th anniversary of the conversion to Christianity of Kievan-Rus. The Ukrainian Security Service, the SBU, announced that it initiated a criminal case against him for "attempting to destabilize public order" (Ukrayinska Pravda, July 25). Zatulin, the head of the Duma's commission on CIS affairs, has been in the forefront of demanding that Crimea be returned to Russia. The Zatulin affair occurred the same day that Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko once again brought up the need to immediately begin talks between Russia and Ukraine on the removal of the Russian Black Sea fleet from Sevastopol in 2017. "The start of negotiations on the removal of Russia's Black Sea fleet from Ukrainian territory should be included in the agenda of our relations," he said in a press conference. Russia should consider the 20-year lease allowing its fleet to be based in the port of Sevastopol "a unique gesture of goodwill by the Ukrainian nation," Yushchenko said according to ITAR-TASS on July 24. "I am convinced we must do everything possible beforehand. And beforehand is not to say prematurely." Yushchenko's timing could be seen as a warning to Moscow that talks should not be influenced by public pressure from such proponents of breaking Crimea away from Ukraine as Zatulin and Moscow mayor Yuriy Luzhkov, and that their agitation will not be tolerated. Earlier, on July 2, 2008, Moscow's politically well connected mayor, Yuriy Luzhkov, announced that the municipality would send $34 million from its own budget to the Crimea in order to "promote the teaching of the Russian language" and to support the "Diaspora abroad" in 2009-2011, Kommersant online reported. Earlier, Luzhkov urged the Russian State Duma not to prolong the Russian-Ukrainian treaty of peace and cooperation which is due to expire at the end of 2008. Speaking at a press conference in Moscow, the flamboyant mayor, whose wife, Yelena Baturina, is widely regarded as one of the wealthiest women in Russia and is reputed to be a major real estate investor in the Crimea, announced his latest crusade-to save ethnic Russian Ukrainian citizens in Crimea from the terrible fate of learning the language of the country they live in. Luzhkov, who is currently banned from entering Ukraine as a result of his unceasing efforts to reclaim the peninsula for Russia from Ukraine, offered a breakdown of how this money would be spent. The mayor's office told Kommersant that 180 million rubles ($7.65 million) will go toward "direct support for the united Russian Diaspora abroad," 65.2 million rubles ($2.76 million) will be allocated for "information cooperation" with this Diaspora and 335.5 million rubles ( $14.2 million) is slated to support the Russian language, culture and education. Where the other $11 million will go was not revealed. Luzhkov's statement was supported by Sergey Tsekov, the head of the "Russian Community of the Crimea," who told the media that "Russophobia...is the essence of Ukrainian policy." The vague descriptions of how this money would be spent lends itself to various interpretations; direct support for Russians abroad could well mean financing various separatist groups who could arguably engage in terrorist acts against Ukrainian authorities in the Crimea. Luzhkov's "cultural" money could also well be a means of channeling funds for Russian covert intelligence operations in the region. When the Ukrainian Security Service, the SBU, announced in June that Luzhkov would be denied entrance to Ukraine, the announcement underscored that the mayor of Moscow was suspected of money laundering via the Crimea. No proof of this has yet been offered and Luzhkov has not made any denials. The possibility that such money could be used to fund a sub-rosa operation is not as remote as it might seem. On July 1, 2008 the website of the SBU (www.sbu.gov.ua/sbu/control) reported that it had arrested two individuals in the Crimea, members of the unregistered "National Front - Sevastopol-Crimea-Russia" group, and charged them with agitation for dismembering the "territorial integrity of Ukraine." The "National Front" was created in August 2005 and includes 12 pro-Russian public associations in the Crimea. Last year its activists declared the beginning of a campaign "Ukraine without the Crimea." They stated that the objective of the campaign was to maintain the term "Crimean autonomy" in the wording of the Ukrainian constitution, Ekho Moskvy radio reported on July 1, 2008. But their actions are alleged to be far more radical and the source of their funding remains a mystery. Did it initially come from earlier grants provided by the Moscow city budget or were other, less visible, donors involved? The SBU press release noted that recently (the dates were not specified) five spies working under diplomatic cover were declared persona non grata and asked to leave Ukraine. The SBU refused to name which countries the spies were from. More ominously, the SBU stated that 38 Ukrainian citizens were warned that they were targets of recruitment by foreign intelligence services-by which countries services the SBU did not specify. The Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, the SVR, the CIA and the Turkish national intelligence service, the MIT, all come to mind, however the SVR appears to be the most likely culprit. Moreover, the Crimean branch of the Communist Party of Ukraine (CPU) appears to be extremely well funded. The CPU has been in the forefront of organizing anti-NATO demonstrations in the Crimea Where is the money coming from to fund the anti-Ukrainian campaign in the Crimea? Luzhkov's charitable donations are not a recent development. In 2006-2008 Moscow donated 432 million rubles ($18.3 million) toward similar projects in the Crimea, Kommersant wrote on July 1, quoting a spokesman for Luzhkov. Earlier, in the 1990s, the pro-Russian movement in the Crimea was headed by the so-called Republican Movement of the Crimea, which was regarded by the SBU at the time as nothing more than a front for organized crime on the peninsula. The Republican Movement eventually disappeared and was replaced by more legitimate groups, but their legitimacy-and their funding-is now under suspicion and Yuriy Luzhkov, or his wife, might one day be asked to account for this. Are these charitable donations being run by Luzhkov alone? Is the mayor of Moscow a rogue elephant, privatizing Russian foreign policy? Is the new Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, aware of his activities and does he condone them as part of his announced intention to see that the rule of law is supreme in Russia? -- Roman Kupchinsky -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 19955 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://clevelanduzo.org/pipermail/uzonews_clevelanduzo.org/attachments/20080725/bc8f0f28/attachment.bin From Orest.Deychak at mail.house.gov Mon Jul 28 10:05:15 2008 From: Orest.Deychak at mail.house.gov (Deychak, Orest) Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 10:05:15 -0400 Subject: [Ohio UZO News] Ukraine: NYT; CT; AP; ISCIP Analyst Message-ID: New York Times Storms Kill 18 in Southeast Europe By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS 28 July 2008 Late Edition - Final KIEV, Ukraine -- Severe storms and floods in the Carpathian Mountains killed 13 people in Ukraine and five people in neighboring Romania, officials said Sunday. Two other people were missing in Ukraine. Five days of heavy rain near the Prut and Dniestr Rivers caused floods that damaged more than 21,000 houses, Ukraine's Emergency Ministry said in a statement. Ukrainian officials evacuated more than 8,000 people and reported that more than 300 towns and villages were left without electricity. The government said damage was estimated at more than $300 million. ''Ukraine has not seen anything like this in 100 years,'' Aleksandra Turchinov, first deputy prime minister, said in televised remarks. President Viktor A. Yushchenko of Ukraine declared the region a national disaster area. He left a celebration of the 1,020th anniversary of the country's adoption of Christianity in Kiev, the capital, to fly to the Ivano-Frankivsk region in southwestern Ukraine, which experienced severe storms and flooding. The meteorological service predicted the storms would continue at least into Monday and water levels would continue to rise. Prime Minister Yulia V. Tymoshenko called for a session of Parliament to allocate disaster relief funds. In Romania, five people died in flooding and heavy rain in areas bordering Ukraine, and power failures affected about 20,000 people, officials said. Chicago Tribune Ukraine seeks its own church By Maria Danilova, Associated Press 27 July 2008 Chicagoland Final 20 Photo (color): Ukrainian Orthodox Church members hold portraits of Russian Orthodox Patriarch Alexy II on Saturday in Kiev. AP photo by Sergei Chuzavkov KIEV, Ukraine The Ukrainian president on Saturday asked the world's Orthodox spiritual leader to bless the creation of a Ukrainian church that would be independent of the powerful Moscow Patriarchate. The request to Bartholomew I of Constantinople is part of Viktor Yushchenko's drive to assert Ukraine's independence and shake off centuries of Russian influence. It is certain to anger the Russian Orthodox church, which is trying to maintain its influence over this Orthodox country of 46 million. "I believe that, as if by the gift of God, as a historical truth and justice, a national self-governing church will be established in Ukraine," Yushchenko said at the start of a prayer service marking the 1,020th anniversary of Ukraine's and Russia's conversion to Christianity. "I ask your all-holiness for your blessing for our dreams, for truth, for our hope, for our country, for Ukraine," the president said to Bartholomew. The patriarch gave a vague response. "The mother church has not only the right, but also the obligation to support ... any constructive and promising proposal that would as soon as possible liquidate the dangerous split in the church," Bartholomew said. Many observers believe the Ukrainian church, which now answers to the Moscow Patriarchate, is bound to attain independence eventually. However, an abrupt decision could lead to a deep split between Constantinople and the Russian Orthodox Church. Although all Orthodox churches recognize Bartholomew as their spiritual leader, Constantinople and Moscow have been jostling for influence. AP Moscow, Kiev both claim victory in Ukraine church dispute By MARIA DANILOVA Associated Press Writer 28 July 2008 08:44 KIEV, Ukraine (AP) - Moscow and Kiev both are claiming victory in a dispute creating an independent Ukrainian Orthodox church -- which Russia fiercely opposes -- after a weekend visit by the spiritual leader of the world's Orthodox Christians. Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko is hoping to win recognition of the local church's independence from Moscow as part of his drive to shed centuries-long Russian influence. The Russian Orthodox Church resists losing control over this predominantly Orthodox country of 46 million. Yushchenko said on his Web site that the spiritual leader of the world's Orthodox believers has voiced support for the creation of a local church, independent of the powerful Russian Orthodox Church. "I am glad that the Patriarch is backing the aspiration of the