Tag Archives: Ukraine

Ukraine confusion continues

Posted on by

Ukraine is planning on shifting its “philosophy of co-operation with the European Union”, hinting that membership is the country’s final aim following Yushchenko’s victory in the re-run presidential elections.

Could all that noise about a Yushchenko victory meaning a shift to the West actually be true after all? Well, considering the election results haven’t been confirmed yet (or even published – they will be appearing in Ukrainian papers tomorrow), it’s a bit early to say.

It may depend on who is chosen as Prime Minister: “The contest has narrowed to three main candidates: Yulia Tymoshenko, the charming but fiery former “gas princess” who helped lead the Orange Revolution protests in November and December; Petro Poroshenko, the softly-spoken “chocolate prince” whose television channel brought the protests into the homes of millions of Ukrainians; and Olexander Zinchenko, Mr Yushchenko’s campaign manager.” (In case of Financial Times Subscriptions kicking in, I’ll post the whole article in a comment – interesting stuff.)

However, the byword for freedom and truth that is Pravda today has a nice big headline: “Russian politician Grigori Yavlinsky to become Ukrainian prime minister”. Not to worry, though, if you read the article this turns out to be largely spin, based on a report in The Russian Courier yesterday: “Yavlinsky, the newspaper wrote, has good chances to take the position because he is equally alienated from all political and economic clans of Ukraine.”

In fact, despite being Russian Yavlinsky may not be too bad – he may even be an ideal choice to placate Putin. If he believes all the stuff he claims in this interview, the Russian could well work: “Freedom, human rights, and dignity. We will advocate independence of courts and legislative authorities, reduction of administrative clout with elections on all levels. We will speak against the merger of powers-that-be and businesses. It is this merger that resulted in the conflict between YUKOS and the regime. We will also advocate a political agreement but in the form of a law, not an accord. On the one hand, we will advocate an amnesty to capitals and fortunes made in the course of privatization in the 1990′s. On the other, we want transparency of funding of political parties, establishment of a transparent political process, adoption of the law on lobbying within the framework of participation of major businesses in politics.”

Either way, it seems as though Yushchenko and Putin will have a chance to chat in a week’s time, so maybe they can get all friendly again. Although after this week’s humiliating forced climb-down over pensions (which, though not significant in terms of cash for the old dears nonetheless shows Putin can be beat on home turf), Putin may not be in the mood to be friendly – he just ripped off Kazakhstan fairly effectively, pinching some prime gas fields in exchange for a bit of spare land.

So then – which way is Ukraine going to go – EU or Russia? Or will Yushchenko live up to expectations and manage to balance gracefully in between the two powers, getting the best of both worlds?

Once again, we’ll have to wait and see…

Ukraine: “the administration learned that it did not have sole influence over the last guarantor of power: the men with the guns.”

Posted on by

Fascinating blow-by-blow account in the NY Times of the role of the SBU (successor to the Soviet-era KGB) in Ukraine’s “Orange Revolution”. This is far from being my area of expertise, but it casts an interesting new light on the events of last November. Specifically it accounts for a crucial factor in any successful revolution, support (whether tacit or active) of at least an element of the military and security services.

Ukrainian crisis – the aftermath

Posted on by

Discoshaman provides a roundup of recent developments, including the news that “Yanukovych has brought a fifth complaint to the Supreme Court, hoping to overturn the elections. Even his own spokesman doesn’t sound hopeful. The Court will consider his complaint tomorrow. The Central Election Commission head has decided not to certify the results until hearing from the Court.”

Over at Yorkshire Ranter, Alex has an interesting piece dissecting some of the more stupid commentaries on the Ukrainian election crisis. Specifically, the opinions of Jonathan Steele in the Guardian. He does, it must be admitted, have a tendency to spout nonsense – the Ranter’s piece, however, is a great dismissal of Steele’s take on events, and well worth a read for anyone who has been following the Ukrainian situation.

Meanwhile, Foreign Notes has a good piece on Ukraine’s blossoming economy, although how this will be affected by the new natural gas deal with Turkmenistan (necessitated after the Turkmens cut off the vital supply to Ukraine on New Year’s Eve to force a new contract) remains to be seen.

And two of the major outside influences on the election now have to ponder what to learn from the experience, as Russia wonders what went wrong, and some in the US wonder whether America’s alliance with Russia is more important than helping democracy in former soviet states.

The Ukraine crisis will likely have major repercussions – it remains too early to tell what form they may take, but it seems likely that the major changes will be seen not within the country’s borders, but in the attitudes of other states with a stake in the region.

Whether these changes will be for the benefit of the inhabitants or of outside influences I have no idea, but I can’t say I’m too hopeful that the wishes of the Ukrainian people will remain on the minds of observers from further afield for too much longer… I’ll try and keep intermittently on the case, but it seems most people’s interests have shifted elsewhere – natural disasters have a tendency of drawing attention to themselves, after all.

Ukrainian deja vu

Posted on by

Hope everyone had a nice Christmas / non-denominational festive celebration thing, and congrats to those Ukrainian chappies I’ve been on and off in touch with for the apparent victory of their man. Let’s hope he can live up to the hype (assuming he ever gets sworn in)

The results, for those who have been even more out of touch than I, were:

Yuschenko 51.21%, Yanukovych 44.01%

Allegedly.

I have no idea if these results are accurate, as I have been (and, indeed, still am) stuck in the provinces for the Christmas period on a dial-up modem with bugger-all connection speed and thus utterly out of touch with the world. The Ukraine situation seems to pale somewhat in the light of the massive death toll from the Indian Ocean earthquake, but still – this blog was one of the first outside the region to pick up on what was going on, so no comment at all on the re-run election would be a tad amiss. This is the first chance I’ve had. Sorry all…

The deja vu? Well, apparently Yanukovych is contesting the results. I never thought this would end easily, and it seems this may be the case. I’ll try and have more on this shortly, but have no idea when I’m getting back to civilisation. Happy New Year just in case.

Ukraine TV debate

Posted on by

So, Yuschenko and Yanukovych are going to slug it out on TV, are they?

I’m desperately trying to work out the point, as the whole rhetoric of the last few weeks seems to be made up almost exclusively of personal attacks, threats and accusations. Are these two bitterly opposed candidates really going to debate policy issues in the midst of ongoing mass protests, while desperate efforts are still going on to ready the country for the unprecedented re-run elections on Boxing Day?

I can’t see it myself. If they stick to policy it’ll only looked forced – unless the entire debate is about foreign policy, but then each candidate risks looking like a tool of either Moscow or Washington/Brussels. I can’t see any way that Yushchenko’s poisoning or the threats of certain regions in the east to split off from the rest of the country – let alone the on-going protests and the scenes of the tent city – could not be raised in a properly free discussion, so I can’t see that it’s in either candidate’s interest to have a completely free debate. The events and accusations of the last few weeks are bound to dominate, not the things that should truly matter.

Especially at this late stage, what is the point of dialogue? The country is so polarised I really can’t see there being any swing voters left. The thing to do is simply get the elections out the way as quickly and cleanly as possible and then set about rebuilding stability, not start more slanging matches.

A good summary of recent Ukrainian developments is here.

(Note: Blogging on Europhobia may be intermittent over the next couple of weeks – as I imagine is the same with many bloggers, what with this whole Christmas business and all. We’ll try to get something up every day, but it may be tricky…)

Ukraine, NATO and the EU

Posted on by

Eurosavant reckons that Ukrainian NATO membership is simply not on the cards, while Elmar Brok, chairman of the European Parliament�s foreign policy committee, has said explicitly that “Ukraine belongs to Europe… Over the last few years we have given the impression that we would never open negotiations with Ukraine. That�s sending the wrong signals about whose zone of influence we believe the Ukraine belongs.”

So, whither Ukraine? The foreign policy of the Ukraine is characterized by ambiguity. In some ways, Ukraine�s relations with NATO are the most advanced of any of the international organisations that it co-operates with, and a year ago Ukraine was pushing for both NATO and EU membership – even while the supposedly pro-Russian Kuchma was in charge (he later dropped the bid, having got concessions from Moscow).

But many Ukrainians have less and less confidence in NATO, and many of the reforms desired by NATO have been delayed. So, could it be the case that the Ukrainian leadership, including Yuschenko, are simply planning to use NATO and the EU to give itself added leverage when dealing with its more powerful Russian neighbour?

Is the whole East-West thing little more than for show, a cunning use of realpolitik? Or is Yuschenko’s apparent desire for closer relations with Europe thanks to a genuine feeling that it must be now or never, that there is a danger that “if Ukraine relies exclusively on Russia�s support, it may well become a part of Russia�s foreign policy project”?

The West has woken up to the problems of Ukraine and its region, and is beginning to feel that “to make NATO effective in counter-terrorist operations… in addition to new members that will strengthen us, we have got to have new relationships with the countries to the East of NATO that are singularly important for stability and security in Europe. Russia, and the Ukraine, and the states of the Caucuses in Central Asia.”

Actions speak louder than words – and we have yet to see any real action from Ukraine, no matter who is in charge. Will this change should Yushchenko be named president? During his term as prime minister between 1999 and 2001, Yushchenko also cultivated close economic ties with Russia – would a Yuschenko presidency actually be better for Russia?

One thing does seem certain – although the orange-covered protestors may well bring in a change of leadership, a new course for Ukraine will be shaped not by Ukraine’s leaders alone but by Ukraine’s external needs.

Ukrainian politicians – even before Yushchenko’s latest resurgence – have certainly delivered on the rhetoric, but can they deliver anything of real substance to keep the EU and NATO happy? Might a Yuschenko presidency be the first step, or will the need to keep in with Russia ensure that, once again, nothing changes?

Ukraine crisis – EU implications

Posted on by

A well-considered and interesting article on the impact the Ukrainian election crisis has had on the EU:

“while the western establishment failed quickly to grasp the import of the Kiev events, the rapid engagement of Polish politicians in the unfolding Ukrainian events allowed Poland again to show that it is at the heart, not the periphery, of the enlarged European Union.

“The Ukrainian events catapulted Poland into a crucial position of cajoling, then leading, the EU�s involvement in the post�election crisis. The resistance of Polish officials and MEPs to the traditional Franco�German preference for �stability� over �chaos� was crucial in preventing Viktor Yushchenko from being sacrificed on the altar of good relations with Vladimir Putin and non�interference with Russian imperial interests. As over Iraq, Paris and Berlin have learned that they no longer monopolise or dictate the �European� position; Poland and other escapees from the Soviet empire possess historical experience that allows them both to recognise a time of historic opportunity and to find appropriate responses.”

Has this been the first taste of just how much Europe has been altered by the expansion of the Union seven months ago? So far everyone’s been concentrating on the constitution, the possibility of Turkey joining, and all that chaos over the new Commission. The new member states and their impact has been almost entirely ignored. Perhaps we should have been paying a bit more attention to these guys.

Update: Via Perfect.co.uk, more Ukraine implications – this time for trans-Atlantic relations:

“the crisis in Ukraine shows what an enormous and vital role Europe can play, and is playing, in shaping the politics and economies of nations and peoples along its ever-expanding border. This is no small matter. On the contrary, it is a task of monumental strategic importance for the United States as well as for Europeans. By accident of history and geography, the European paradise is surrounded on three sides by an unruly tangle of potentially catastrophic problems, from North Africa to Turkey and the Balkans to the increasingly contested borders of the former Soviet Union. This is an arc of crisis if ever there was one, and especially now with Putin’s play for a restoration of the old Russian empire. In confronting these dangers, Europe brings a unique kind of power, not coercive military power but the power of attraction. The European Union has become a gigantic political and economic magnet whose greatest strength is the attractive pull it exerts on its neighbors. Europe’s foreign policy today is enlargement; its most potent foreign policy tool is what the E.U.’s Robert Cooper calls ‘the lure of membership.’”

Ukraine re-vote gets go-ahead

Posted on by

Via Tulipgirl, it sounds like the right result seems to have been achieved:

The Supreme Court has ruled that:
1. The election from November 21 is invalid.
2. There will be another run-off election, between Yushchenko and Yanukovich.
3. The election will be held before the end of December.

Good. I was getting worried again.

Let’s just hope that they can ensure that no dodgy tactics come into play again. A vast fleet of international observers will be vital – preferably from impartial countries (i.e. not the US, EU or Russia). How about Japanese election-watchers? That’d do the trick.

Update: The vote will be before the 26th.

Oh, and it seems Volodymyr Campaign was first with the news.

abdymok (as it is now) has a transcript of the voting laws.

Some reactions from the Bloggosphere:

SueAndNotU: “Fuck. Ukraine elections to be held on Dec. 26. One day after Christmas. Alright, what do I do? Family, or Ukraine?”

Foreign Notes: “I think this opinion will give the court a stature that it did not have. Good for them. I might have tried to do more but I am not in their shoes. What they did do though was very, very good for democracy, for their court and for the government in the end… I read that there are members of the Court from all over Ukraine. If true, that will make it hard to argue that this is an East/West issue.”

LoboWalk: “Yes, this is very good but there are reports that secret notes were passed to Parliament from the Court concerning the ruling… Also there are still questions as to any procedural changes that would take place in the re-vote; most notably concerning the issue of absentee balloting… Either way one can hardly blame the Ukrainian people for the celebratory mood.”

The Argus: “Uzbekistan will undergo a process resembling an election on the 26th as well. I wonder if that creates any kind of problem for OSCE monitoring. Well, we all know that BHHRG won�t be able to be in two places at once that day�”

Ukraine, Russia, Europe, The US, Oh My!: “There are… rumors that Yanukovych will withdraw. If that is the case, and if he withdraws before the 16th, Yuschenko’s opponent will be Moroz, because Moroz placed third in the first tour. However, since Moroz has firmly placed himself in Yuschenko’s camp, it would seem unlikely that he will pick up the mantle to run against Yuschenko. Unless he does so only to encourage voters to support Yuschenko in the election. If Moroz withdraws, Yuschenko’s opponent will be Petro Symonenko, the communist.”

Victor Katolyk at The Periscope: “Yanukovych can withdraw. However, if he withdraws less than 20 days before the run-off, Yushchenko will be the only candidate in the list. In this case, he will have to get more than ‘I don’t support any candidate’ votes.”

A Fistful of Euros: “outgoing President Kuchma vetoed the recently passed law invalidating �absentee ballots� for the re-run. These ballots allowed Ukrainians to vote in other than their home districts, and were, according to numerous reports by international observers, one of the main instruments of electoral fraud in the initial run-off.” (Oh, and by the way, vote for Fistful!)

Daniel Drezner: ” What’s becoming clear is that the correlation of forces within Ukraine are tilting in favor of a runoff election that would presumably lift Viktor Yushchenko to power. The emerging question is whether the correlation of forces outside Ukraine will permit this to happen. Will Putin tolerate the blow to his reputation that would come with a Yushchenko victory?”

By the looks of things it’s all still rather up in the air…

Yushchenko – anti-democratic?

Posted on by

Now don’t get me wrong here. I’m genuinely just wondering how else it is possible to interpret his announcement yesterday that re-running the elections would not be fair.

Yushchenko himself argues that the last round was rife with corruption and fraud. International observers back him up on this. Voters were intimidated and beaten, the count was flawed and – most importantly for this situation – votes went missing.

If votes went missing and those that were left were mis-counted, how can Yushchenko be so certain he was the rightful winner? He can’t possibly know – no one does. The only way he can gain any kind of democratic legitimacy is for the elections to run again – utterly fairly this time – and for him to win them fair and square.

How can running them again possibly be a problem for him? If his support is as great as he claims then surely he should storm it? Naturally it would have been better for Ukraine if they could have got a clear winner from the first lot, but it has descended into chaos and near-farce now. Time to wipe the slate clean and start again, surely – and let the best man (which I am pretty sure is Yushchenko, for the record) win.

Update: There have been a couple of very good comments made to this post. If you want a better idea of the situation, I strongly suggest you have a read.

Ukraine, Blogging and Democracy

Posted on by

Le Sabot Poste-Moderne is reporting that a compromise has been reached. There will apparently be a re-vote, and both sides have renounced violence.

Let’s hope this is not another of those false starts, of which there have been so many over the last week or so. There are still a lot of questions. Yep, much is undecided.

Nonetheless, some lessons learned from blogging the revolution:

  • It is practically impossible for anyone in the west to understand the complexities of the Ukrainian situation, and certainly not the sheer enthusiasm involved – we have never experienced anything like this
  • Many people have confused “Yushchenko for President” with “Democracy for Ukraine” – they are not necessarily interchangable
  • Wearing orange to show support for Ukrainian democracy, even if that is your only intention, actually only shows support for Yushchenko
  • Pointing out the last point often leads to irritated – and perhaps justified – rebuttals from Ukrainians who see in Yushchenko hope for the future
  • That hope can blind them to his flaws
  • Pointing out that Yushchenko has flaws is not the same as saying he is not the better candidate, but it will usually be interpreted that way
  • It is next to impossible to find any pro-Yanukovych views online, despite the fact that he gained the support of a sizable chunk of the population, even after fraudulent results are taken into account
  • The one-sided feed of information makes informed comment of the overall situation utterly impossible – like reporting a US election using only Democrat sources, or on the EU while only reading pro-European blogs and articles
  • Most importantly, after more than a week of covering and following the elections, I have yet to see a run-down of either candidate’s actual policies – and without seeing the policies, how is it possible to form a decent opinion?

Finally, the response of the bloggosphere has been incredible. While it took the mainstream media three days to pick up on how serious the situation was, bloggers were on it within hours. They will continue to keep on it, and I with them.

Even if we get it wrong sometimes, and even if we often fall foul of the lure of leaping to the obvious conclusions, this whole affair has convinced me of the good that us bloggers can do. With a UK General Election coming up – perhaps as soon as May – and with the ongoing preparations for Britain’s EU presidency and the vote on the European Referendum, I am going to give serious consideration as to how I can help foster debate through this blog. Maybe Blog:Vote is the way forward, maybe something else entirely.

I am entirely open to suggestions – let me know which direction you’d like this blog to go in. It will remain Eurocentric, normally with a heavier emphasis on international relations and foreign affairs than domestic British politics, but beyond that I’m entirely open to ideas.

One thing is sure – this blog will try to remain entirely unpartisan. As the Ukrainian election crisis has demonstrated, it is impossible to reach any conclusions without looking at the claims of all sides. Although I am loosely pro-European, there will be anti-EU posts on here as well, when this is merited. No one political party will be endorsed or slagged off more than any of the others… Well, except for UKIP and the BNP, obviously. But they aren’t proper political parties anyway.

Oh, one final final thing – I am fully, utterly aware of how arrogant and self-righteous this all sounds. But such is also the nature of blogging. We’re mostly a bunch of semi-anonymous, egomaniacal obsessives who think our views may actually be of merit, and who normally seem to get riled beyond belief when someone disagrees with us. But in that we’re hardly different from the mainstream press, or indeed politicians themselves – so what does it matter, eh? Humour us. Fan our egos. Fan MY ego. Go on… Please…?

Ukraine crisis continued – one week on

Posted on by

For a chronology of events and a by-the-minute look at the boom in global coverage over the last week: one, two, three , four, five, some analysis, and six – between them these provide a chronology of events and coverage from 7pm on Monday 22nd November until 11pm on Thursday 25th (London time), as well as an almost insane number of links to other blogs covering events, articles, news sources and the like.

Since then, the mainstream media seems to have picked up the job of covering events rather better, and I’ve been massively busy for the last couple of days – sorry for the lack of updates. If you want a good overview of the last couple of days’ developments, try All About Latvia, No Illusions or Le Sabot Post-Moderne. For an ever-growing compendium of Ukraine-related links, try this site, or Fistful’s rather handy Kinja digest.

If you’ve liked my coverage, please consider bunking a vote my way in The Deutche-Welle International Weblog Awards, where this blog has been nominated in the category Best Journalistic Blog (English) – it’d be much appreciated.

An article in the Kyiv Post highlights many of my own thoughts over the last couple of days:

“it remain[s] unclear whether opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko w[ill] take the presidency of Ukraine through a street-side revolution or by legal-political means � if he t[akes] it at all.”

This has to be a legally valid election, no matter who the eventual victor is (no pun intended), or a large chunk of the Ukrainian population will be left feeling cheated and disaffected. Emotions are high, there are still thousands of supporters – both blue and orange – on the streets, and there still remains the fear that violence could kick off at any time.

Without a result which none can argue with, the country will never be able to get over this, and large sections of the population will feel disenfranchised. That is, after all, why Yushchenko’s supporters have been on the streets for the last few days. Declare him the winner without democratic and legal support, and his people will simply be replaced by Yanukovych’s equally upset supporters.

Most are agreed that the second round of the presidential elections, held one week ago today, were riven with vote-rigging, intimidation, and every kind of dodgy tactic in the book – hence the Ukrainian parliament’s vote of no confidence in the Central Elections Committee. But because of this, a simple re-count will not do it – the election has to be run again. After all, what’s the point of re-counting ballots which may have been falsified, and where some voting papers may have been destroyed?

One thing’s for sure, the sense of collective, national identity and pride is booming. Reports of little acts of human kindness are flooding in from all over. There are thousands – perhaps millions, of Ukrainians feeling just like TulipGirl’s friend Lena. There are thousands of people, like Foreign Notes’ Scott Clarke’s mother-in-law helping the protestors with food and warm clothes, and even the protestors helping out others. Meanwhile, supporters of Yushchenko continue to mobilise, and plan ways to spread the word. There are reports of protestors from each side showing restraint and respect, and doing their utmost to avoid violence.

As has been pointed out on Ostracised from �sterreich, there are two kinds of non-Ukrainian supporters for the Ukrainian protestors: those who identify ideologically with Yushchenko and want to see him win, and those who want to see democracy win. The Russian Dilletante sums it up nicely.

Please remember, if you’re planning on wearing orange tomorrow to support democracy in Ukraine, that Orange is the colour of just one party. Spare a thought for those who genuinely voted for Yanukovych as well. It is vital that those who are pro-Yuschenko don’t forget that him gaining the presidency through a popular revolt is just as bad for Ukrainian democracy as Yanukovych gaining the presidency through rigging the election.

As it stands at the moment, there is still no clear solution beyond holding the elections again to ensure that whoever wins has a clear democratic mandate. And that could still take some time…

Europhobia’s Ukraine coverage continues here.

Ukraine crisis continued – room for hope

Posted on by

For a chronology of events and a by-the-minute look at the boom in global coverage over the last week: one, two, three , four, five, and some analysis – between them these provide a chronology of events and coverage from 7pm on Monday 22nd November until 5:30pm on Thursday 25th (London time), as well as an almost insane number of links to other blogs covering events, articles, news sources and the like.

If you’ve liked my coverage, please consider bunking a vote my way in The Deutche-Welle International Weblog Awards, where this blog has been nominated in the category Best Journalistic Blog (English) – it’d be much appreciated.

Blogger’s been acting up again, but little has changed that hasn’t already been covered by the mainstream western media – better late than never for them to get on the case, eh? Here’s a quick round-up:

Although there was no agreement between Russia and the EU reached today (and although it looks unlikely that Putin will back down, especially now the bastion of democracy that is China has weighed in to say the elections were fair), there is much room for hope, even if this may prove to be just the first of an on-going series of confrontations between the EU and Russia.

The Ukrainian Supreme Court has announced that it feels the election to be dodgy, and has prevented any inauguration from taking place until the results have been investigated. Considering the number of defections from the government side already – including sections of the military and police – they haven’t got reliable enough support to risk going against the Supreme Court, and certainly can’t if they want to maintain their claims of a lawful win.

Also, the press has become much more free. Information is flowing within Ukraine in a way that has been impossible during the last few days, letting the people gain a far better idea of what is going on – even though no one yet truly knows. With knowledge of what has been going on in the government’s name, perhaps yet more will join the Orange Revolution. Neeka provides a Ukrainian perspective.

Tonight, the actions of the Supreme Court and the growing refusal of the Ukrainian press to simply act as a government mouthpiece means that good old Victor Katolyk, who has done an amazing job covering the events over at The Periscope, has clocked off early. His final post?

“Everything seems to be great.”

Time will tell. They aren’t out of the woods yet, and with the wild card that is Putin on the scene, anything could still happen. But the world has woken up to the Orange Revolution, and international support is growing by the minute, and you can add yours here.

However, British Prime Minister Tony Blair today said in an interview broadcast on the BBC’s “Newsnight” that he would refrain from making a definitive statement of support for either candidate until the situation is clearer.

He makes a very good point – with all the corruption it is important to remember that NEITHER candidate yet has a democratic mandate. Yushchenko may be the more appealing, and he may well have been denied many votes thanks to governmental corruption, but his claims to have won are based on no hard evidence. The only real solution is for the elections to be run again – this time with much, much closer independent scrutiny. This could still take a while…

Quick update: TulipGirl has one of those posts that just makes you feel all warm inside, from her friend Lena:

“Quite recently I didn’t believe that my people able to resist to violence and humiliation. 2 month ago I guessed that I live in the worst country in the world. I was oppressed when I could not see a dignity in my fellow citizens, that I could not see the willingness to freedom and happiness in them…

“November, 22 I started to be really proud of my co-citizens. Now I can see that them are not passive mammals who want just to dig comfortable burrow, to generate they own posterity and to finish life in poverty, pretending that there is no another way. Since November, 22 there was not a crowd on the main square of my country. It is the PEOPLE. It is the NATION. Love, faith and hope filled up a whole space of capitol of my country and warm these people who spend the nights on the frost snowing street…

“We are the people in the most exalted and humane sense of this word. And not only number turns us to be the force, but exactly these LOVE, FAITH and HOPE which live in everybody now.

“Ukrainians, I am happy that I was so wrong about you before!

“–Lena, November 25, 2004″

Europhobia’s Ukraine coverage continues here.

Ukraine crisis continued – detente?

Posted on by

For a chronology of events and a by-the-minute look at the boom in global coverage over the last week: one, two, three , four, five – between them these provide a chronology of events and coverage from 7pm on Monday 22nd November until 11pm on Wednesday 24th (London time), as well as an almost insane number of links to other blogs covering events, articles, news sources and the like.

If you’ve liked my coverage, please consider bunking a vote my way in The Deutche-Welle International Weblog Awards, where this blog has been nominated in the category Best Journalistic Blog (English) – it’d be much appreciated.

Now that the situation seems to have reached an impasse, both sides are preparing for talks to try to end the crisis, and the international press and diplomatic community have woken up to the risk of civil war, such intensive blog coverage may not be necessary, although I’ll continue to provide updates as they occur.

It may now be useful to get some background on Ukrainian internal politics, to understand just how different this situation is from the rather simplistic Yushchenko = good, pro-Western, Yanukovych = bad, pro-Russian take which it is so easy to fall in to.

TulipGirl’s transcript of an article by Ukranian novelist Oksana Zabuzhko’s article “Ukraine’s Solidarity” is a very good starting point:

“A widespread cliche used by many Western journalists to describe the major collision of our dramatic elections is that the establishment candidate, Viktor Yanukovych, is “pro-Russian,” and that opposition candidate, Viktor Yushchenko, is “pro-Western.” This version has as little to do with the feelings of an average Ukrainian voter as with those of the belligerents of the Trojan war. Mr. Yanukovych is perceived not so much as being “pro-Russian,” but as, first and foremost, being “pro-criminal” — a Ukrainian Al Capone, who has under his belt two prison sentences for robbery and assault, and publicly uses criminal argot compared to which even the boorish tongue of retiring President Leonid Kuchma sounds as innocuous as a school textbook.”

There’s more from Zabuzhko here:

“With no change of the political elite, with just the very small beginnings of civil society, with no real revolution, Ukraine has started sliding back into the dark shadow of Sovietization. In the current election campaign, the whole strategy of the presidential “candidate of power,” Viktor Yanukovich, is the brainchild of Moscow professionals and spin doctors. And Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has in such short order turned his own country into a place browbeaten by the fear of terrorism, has turned up in Kiev to offer support for the Ukrainian thugs active in this election. Small wonder: Criminals and KGB officers have worked together since the good old days of the Gulag.

“We know how eagerly the Western press buys the made-in-Russia political analysis of the current Ukrainian situation – the version that says Ukraine is “split” into East and West, “pro-Russian” and “pro-Western” factions. As George Orwell knew, the old totalitarian dragon feeds on artificially constructed illusions. So I just want to let you know how things look and feel from here. And to say that this is not a farewell letter. It is a letter of hope.”

Le Sabot Post-Moderne – a Ukranian blog in English – is beginning an overview of Ukranian politics, which looks promising:

“The country is run by a series of oligarchic clans that actually found their beginnings in the Soviet Union, and then grew fabulously rich during the early days of ‘privatization’…

“Yanukovych isn’t just another unscrupulous candidate, he’s the main man of Akhmetov — the duke of Donetsk and the richest man in Ukraine. The current president, Kuchma, is the head of a different clan, Dnepropetrovsk. The presidential administrator is Medvedchuk, who happens to run the Kiev-based Medvedchuk-Surkis clan. He also owns the two biggest Ukrainian TV stations, which is awfully convenient.

“While there is jockeying for control among these clans, the overall effect is for them to sustain one another in power. They all depend on the same system for survival, and actively collaborate to keep it in place.”

LoboWalk also has some good insights, and has taken me to task for providing too simplistic an analysis:

“[Yanukovych's] intended use is to be nothing more than a hand-puppet for Putin and Kuchma. The only reason Yanukovych is even in this situation is because Kuchma was unable to carry his thug-mafioso government practices far enough to finagle yet another term of his own…

“to most Ukrainians this is not only a matter of national pride but it’s about freedom as well. They recognize their own identity and it’s not with Russia, Belarus, or any other country. Ukraine already suffered under Russia; think of the 7 million who starved to death under a Stalin imposed famine. Ukraine has always been used, exploited and raped by Russia. Ukriane’s culture doesn’t originate from Russia, all Slavic cultures, in many ways, owe their origination to Ukraine. Ukraine was an identity long before Russia existed.”

12:45pm update: All About Latvia has found an alternate take on Yushchenko, which just goes to show how complex the situation is. Whether these allegations are true or not, I have no idea:

“Why everyone here is so delighted about Yushchenko? The Ukrainians remember his abysmal term as a prime-minister and all those corruption scandals he was involved in. I work at the huge enterprise belonging to the son-in-law of President Kuchma which was obtained by underhand means. It’s remarkable that Kuchma’s son-in-law is the main sponsor of Yushchenko’s presidential campaign. I’m afraid that if Yushchenko wins, the corruption will only grow…

“The crisis demonstrates that there is no such country as Ukraine. There is one country of which Kiev and Lviv are the main centres, where they speak one language and look primarily to the West. And there is completely different country of which the main centres are Kharkiv and Odessa where they speak another language and look to Moscow for support. The latter country is larger in population and more industrially advanced. So the pro-Western candidate has no chance of winning the Ukrainian elections abiding by law. The Western powers would help him to get power by enciting civil unrest, that’s the only way.”

There’s not going to be an easy solution to this.

1:20pm: Victor keeps up his coverage at The Periscope – lots of conflicting reports, and rumours of scuffles, but no serious incidents as of yet. The Ukrainian media seems to be either not operating or in support of Yushchenko, so a balanced view of the situation is practically impossible.

Nonetheless, there are some signs of hope (albeit with a worrying postscript):

“Crowds of Yanukovich supporters peacefully mix with Yushchenko supporters. They still wear white and blue, but this doesn’t bar them from finding common language with the ‘orange’ protesters. However, there are also ‘blue’ crowds of aggressive youngsters that don’t look willing to mix with the others.”

Show your support: sign the letter of freedom and solidarity”

LoboWalk has more updates including ways for Americans to lobby Washington to support Ukraine.

Italian coverage of the crisis.

Swedish coverage.

Yet more background information and a new discussion forum.

5:30pm: Fistful has a good round-up of today’s developments. It’s all still very confused, but the threat of violence seems to have died down – for now.

Europhobia’s Ukraine coverage continues here.

Ukraine crisis continued – any solution?

Posted on by

This follows on from this, this, this and this, which between them provide a chronology of events and coverage from 7pm on Monday 22nd November until 11pm on Wednesday 24th (London time). I’ll continue to keep a close eye on the situation, but for tonight, it seems calm. For now.

Nick at Fistful has a final update, and a few thoughts which pretty much tally with mine:

“there were points this afternoon where I thought we could be just a short while away from a dramatic descent into violence on the streets of Kiev and elsewhere. As rumours flew around Kiev and echoed onto the internet (and as I mentioned in an email earlier tonight, we probably heard only 10% of the stories that were chinese whispered around the streets) it seemed as though the CEC meeting and declaration was going to be a flashpoint after which it would all go up. It would have been easy for Yanukovich to take power and move against the opposition then – as the reports suggested he would – and it�s to his credit that he has opened up a bit of space for air with his comments that no political position is worth anyone�s life.”

Lets hope the calm and rationality of these two deeply opposed sides can prevail, and that no matter how the presidency is settled, bloodshed can be avoided.

Victor sums up the mood in Kiev: “There are a lot of rumours, people are uninformed. But overall people are happy… Sorry if I am confusing you with contraversial information, but at least you can get the atmosphere…”

Oh yes: If you’ve liked my coverage, please consider bunking a vote my way in The Deutche-Welle International Weblog Awards, where this blog has been nominated in the category Best Journalistic Blog (English) – it’d be much appreciated.

Europhobia’s Ukraine coverage continues here.