Ó ÏÎØÀͲ ÄÎ ÑÂ. Ï. ÏÀÏÈ ²ÂÀÍÀ ÏÀÂËÀ ²²

Ïðîò. Ä-ð ²ãîð Êóòàø

„Öüîãî âå÷îðà àáî ö³º¿ íî÷³ Õðèñòîñ â³äêðèâຠäâåð³ äëÿ Ïàïè”. Òàê âèñëîâèâñÿ ãåíåðàëüíèé â³êàð³é ïàïè äëÿ ì³ñòà Âàòèêàíó, íàéìåíøî¿ äåðæàâè â ñâ³ò³, Àðõèºïèñêîï Àíäæåëî Êîìàñòð³ â ñóáîòó 2-ãî êâ³òíÿ îêîëî 70,000 â³ðíèì, ÿê³ ç³áðàëèñÿ íà ìàéäàí³ Ñâ. Ïåòðà â Ðèì³, ùîá ñâî¿ìè ìîëèòâàìè ï³äòðèìàòè ñâîãî äóõîâíîãî Àðõèïàñòèðÿ â éîãî îñòàííüîìó æèòòºâîìó çìàãàííþ. Â³í ³ â³ä³éøîâ ó â³÷í³ñòü òîãî æ äíÿ î 2:37 ïî ïîë.. íàøèì ÷àñîì.

Âåëè÷ öüîãî ñëóãè Áîæîãî, Éîãî Ñâÿòîñòè ²âàíà Ïàâëà ²², Ïàïè Ðèìñüêîãî ìîæíà ï³çíàòè õî÷ áè â òèõ ñëîâàõ, ÿêèõ ïåðåäàâ ç äîïîìîãîþ ñâîãî ïðèâàòíîãî ñåêðåòàðÿ Àðõèºïèñêîïà Ñòàí³ñëàâà Äæ³â³øà ñâî¿ì ïîì³÷íèêàì ïåðåä íàéíîâ³øîþ ³ ìàáóòü îñòàííüîþ éîãî æèòòºâîþ êðèçîþ Ñâÿòèé Îòåöü: „ß ðàäèé – ³ âè òåæ ïîâèíí³ áóòè ðàäèìè. Ìîë³ìîñü ðàçîì ó ðàäîñò³”.

Ïðèãàäóºòüñÿ ³ éîãî â³äíîøåííÿ äî ÷îëîâ³êà, ùî âèñòð³ëèâ ó íüîãî 13-ãî òðàâíÿ 1981 ð. íà òîìó æ ìàéäàí³ Ñâ. Ïåòðà, Ìåãìåòà Àë³ Àäæ³. Ñêîðî ï³ñëÿ àòåíòàòó Ïàïà çàêëèêàâ â³ðíèõ ìîëèòèñÿ çà „ìîãî áðàòà (Ìåãìåòà), ÿêîìó ÿ ùèðî ïðîñòèâ”. Ïîò³ì ³ â³äâ³äàâ éîãî â òþðì³ ³ ïðîâ³â ç íèì ïðèâàòíó ðîçìîâó.

Çàðàç î÷³ ñâ³òó çâåðíåí³ íà êîí÷èíó ö³º¿ â³ðóþ÷î¿ ëþäèíè, ÿêà çìàãàºòüñÿ ç Áîæîþ ïîì³÷÷þ, çà òå ùîá ñëîâà ¿¿ âèçíàííÿ ä³éñíî ñõîäèëè÷ñÿ ç íàñòàâëåííÿì òà ä³ëàìè. Éîãî Ñâÿò³ñòü â³äõîäèòü â³ä ñâ³òó ïîâ÷àþ÷è öèì ñâîþ ïàñòâó – ³ ö³ëèé ñâ³ò – äî îñòàííüîãî ñâîãî â³ääèõó.

Íàñë³äóº öèì Ïàñòèðîíà÷àëüíèêà Ãîñïîäà ²ñóñà Õðèñòà, ßêîãî ñìåðòü íà Õðåñò³ ïðèíåñëà ñâ³òîâ³ íåâèìîâíî âåëèêå äîáðî: â³ðóþ÷³ âáà÷àþòü ó öüîìó ê³íåöü âîëîä³ííÿ ñìåðò³, áî æ Â³í «ñìåðòþ ñìåðòü ïîäîëàâ». Àëå é äëÿ íåâ³ðóþ÷èõ – äëÿ âñ³õ ëþäåé ñâ³òó, ÿêîãî á äóõîâíîãî ïåðåêîíàííÿ âîíè íå áóëè á, ²ñóñ ç Íàçàðåòó - öå ïðèêëàä Ëþäèíè, ÿêà âèÿâëÿº íàéâèùèé ñòåïåíü äîáðà, ïðîùàþ÷è é ìîëÿ÷èñü çà òèõ, ùî ¯¿ ðîáëÿòü òàêó íå÷óâàíó êðèâäó, ³ òàêèì ÷èíîì ïðîêëàäຠñòåæêó äëÿ ñïðàâæíüîãî ïðèìèðåííÿ ì³æ ëþäüìè ³ îñòàòî÷íî¿ ïåðåìîãè â ñâ³ò³ ëþáîâ³ òà äîáðà.

Âñ³ ëþäè ñâ³òó ìàëè á áóòè âäÿ÷íèìè ìóæåâ³ Áîæîìó Êàðîëþ Âîéòèë³, Éîãî Ñâÿòîñò³ ²âàíîâ³ Ïàâëîâ³ ²², çà ã³äíå íåñåííÿ ñâîãî ïîêëèêàííÿ â³ä Ãîñïîäà, ÿêèì íàïåâíî ïðèñêîðèâ ðîçïàä íåëþäÿíî¿ êîìóí³ñòè÷íî¿ ³ìïåð³¿, òà âèñîêî ï³äí³ñ ³äåàë ã³äíîñò³ ëþäèíè ³ çàêëèêàâ âñ³õ ïðèãëÿíóòèñÿ äî îñîáè Õðèñòà, ÿê êëþ÷ äî çðîçóì³ííÿ ³ ðîçâèòêó ñïðàâæíüî¿ ëþäèíè.

Ñëàâà Áîãó çà äàð ö³º¿ ëþäèíè, çà ¿¿ æèòòÿ òà çà ¿¿ ã³äíå ïðèì³ðíå â³äíîøåííÿ äî ê³íöåâîãî åòàïó çåìíîãî æèòòÿ.

³þê (02-04-05)

top

Ukraine : l’impossible choix entre l’Union européenne et l’orbite russe (CÉRIUM)

Magdalena Dembinska (Université de Montréal)

La Chronique du Centre d’études et de recherches internationales (CÉRIUM), 22 janvier 2005 Après une longue attente et l’annonce officielle des résultats suite à la reprise du deuxième tour de l’élection présidentielle du 26 décembre, Victor Iouchtchenko, le leader de la révolution orange, est assermenté dans ses fonctions de Président depuis dimanche, le 23 janvier.

Plusieurs dignitaires étaient présents dont le Secrétaire d’État américain, Colin Powell. Le Président russe Vladimir Poutine, qui a félicité le Président élu (une troisième fois en espace de trois mois) a refusé d’assister à l’événement. C’est le nouveau Président Iouchtchenko qui effectuera sa première visite diplomatique à Moscou dès ce lundi 24 janvier. Le lendemain, le Président ukrainien est attendu à Strasbourg à l’Assemblée parlementaire du Conseil d’Europe puis le 27 il présentera une communication au Parlement européen à Bruxelles.

L’Union européenne ou la Russie ?

Lors de ses visites européennes, Iouchtchenko parlera de l’avenir de l’Ukraine en Europe. Des proches du nouveau Président ont récemment déclaré que leur objectif était d’entreprendre des démarches dans le but de faire adhérer l’Ukraine à l’Union Européenne. À Moscou, Iouchtchenko devra donner satisfaction à des attentes incompatibles avec cet objectif. Le choix entre une alliance avec l’Occident et avec la Russie semble déchirant, surtout compte tenu des régions pro-russes aux aspirations autonomistes de l’est et du sud de l’Ukraine .

Dans sa lettre de félicitations qu’il a envoyée à Iouchtchenko, Poutine exprime les attentes de son gouvernement à endroit de son voisin, autrefois membre important de l’Empire soviétique. Moscou désire qu’au plan politique, l’Ukraine reconnaisse explicitement le rôle stratégique d’un partenariat avec la Russie ; qu’au plan économique, elle participe au développement d’un espace économique commun, base d’une nouvelle communauté postsoviétique dont le centre serait Moscou. Ce faisant, Poutine s’est placé en situation d’opposant aux aspirations occidentales de l’Ukraine. Une adhésion éventuelle de l’Ukraine à l’OTAN est vue comme un cauchemar à Moscou.

Iouchtchenko est donc devant un choix. Il semble impossible à l’Ukraine de jouer sur les deux tableaux, l’adoption des lois et règlements (l’acquis communautaire européen) qu’implique une adhésion à l’Union européenne étant en plusieurs points incompatibles avec une participation à la sphère économique (et politique) de la communauté postsoviétique.

Même si la majeure partie des exportations de l’Ukraine s’effectue vers l’Europe, le pays reste dépendant de l’approvisionnement russe en pétrole et en gaz. De plus, la division politique interne du pays complique les choses. Au moins, l’électorat des Républiques Baltes à la fin des années 1980 et au début des années 1990, étaient presque unanime - y compris leurs minorités russophones - sur le projet de rupture avec la Russie soviétique. En Ukraine, les régions de l’est et du sud s’opposent à l’ « européisation » et brandissent la menace d’une sécession. Notons que quelques dizaines de tentes bleues - couleur du candidat pro-russe déchu - sont déployées dans les rues de deux grandes villes à l’est et les quelques dizaines de campeurs atterrés attendaient hier le retour au bercail de leur leader défait, Ianoukovitch.

Ce dernier a annoncé son intention de passer dans le camp de l’opposition « dure » et il est probable qu’il s’alliera au parti de la Nouvelle Démocratie formé samedi dernier par Kouchnariov, l’ancien gouverneur de Charkov, une région de l’est du pays. Le parti vise la restructuration du pays en un État fédéral. Il devrait entrer au Parlement lors des prochaines élections en 2006. Une contre-révolution bleue est peu probable vu le manque d’envergure du mouvement. Néanmoins, ces aspirations locales peuvent être alimentées par Moscou, à l’image des tensions en Moldavie dans la région de la Transdniestrie pro-russe. C’est une carte entre les mains de Poutine lors des négociations.

Le contexte géopolitique de l’Ukraine ne lui permettra pas de faire un choix tranché. Garder l’unité du pays tout en se réformant de fond en comble nécessite une stabilité qui ne peut être atteinte que grâce à une politique équilibrée entre Bruxelles et Moscou. La tournée diplomatique de la semaine prochaine du nouveau Président semble indiquer une stratégie allant dans ce sens : un rapprochement avec l’Europe sans trop irriter la Russie.

L’auteure est candidate au doctorat au département de science politique de l’Université de Montréal.

le Cérium publie des chroniques, liées à l’actualité étrangère, de professeurs, chercheurs et étudiants de troisième cycle de l’Université de Montréal qui travaillent sur des sujets internationaux. Les propositions sont bienvenues, à cerium@umontreal.ca

top

Presentation to Finance Minister Goodale re the cutbacks to Ukrainian language broadcasting by Radio Canada International at The Round Table chaired by Borys Wrzesnewskyj

by Myroslava Oleksiuk

Feb. 25, 2005

Transcription of presentation as per video

Myroslava Oleksiuk:
I would like to address the third paragraph in your budget speech, which was the very welcome recollection of the Ukrainian Orange Revolution and, which I am sure, was uplifting not only for Ukrainians, but for world humanity. The issue that I want to connect it to is the cutback in the department of the Ukrainian language at RCI [Radio Canada International]. Two and half years ago the programming was an hour every day into Ukraine via short wave. Today it is Saturday and Sunday for half an hour, no longer on short wave, which means only two provinces have access to that. Now, this is not strictly a Ukrainian issue because, as you yourself have acknowledged and others, of course have - you have pointed out that what happens in Ukraine from this point on is very much something that the other countries of the former Soviet Union are looking toward. If Ukraine succeeds, and it still is a precarious situation, then we have leaped so far ahead in world peace and democracy. So our attempt to communicate further our ideals of Canadian democracy to the population, particularly in view of the fact that 40% did not vote for the ‘democracy candidate’, it would seem to me that it would be premature at this point to let that cutback take place.

Now, I know that that cutback was planned to take place prior to the Orange Revolution and as things evolved Minister Pettigrew stepped in and prolonged the funding to enable that cutback not to proceed. But now, indeed at the end of January I believe that has been a fact. I would like to impose upon you to look into this matter and I would be happy to remind you or your assistant of this issue. [Showing an envelope with documentation in it.]

Perhaps a judgment could be made that if a country, for example, 30% of the people are using internet, then that’s the time to cut back and let them go loose.

But in this instance it’s not. And in view of the central significance of democracy and the fact that Russia is still predominantly not democratic and such a huge influence in the eastern part of Ukraine, I would ask you to address this issue.

Minister Ralph Goodale:
Well I don’t know the specifics, but I am certainly happy to look into it. There was a meeting a month or so ago of Ukrainian leaders in Winnipeg, where I think the same point was made. At this delicate point, and you are quire right, December 26th is a great day, but it’s not over yet.

Canada, no doubt, in its collection of international activities, I think would want to find the ways to encourage the democratic tradition to really take hold and to succeed for the long-term. This may be one of the ways in which we can help – I’m not sure of the details, but I certainly would be glad to receive your representation and see if there is a way we can help.

Myroslava Oleksiuk:
It would be such a minimal amount.

Minister Ralph Goodale:
Do you know what it is?

Myroslava Oleksiuk:
The cutback? I think it is $250,000 a year.

Minister Ralph Goodale:
$250,000 a year.

Myroslava Oleksiuk:
$250,000 to half a million. I’ve been given the figure of $250,000.

Minister Ralph Goodale (enthusiastically):
All right. Let me see the envelope.

[The room bursts out in laughter and the Minister jokes to the effect that if that is all that he has to spend, then there is money still left over for lunch.]

top

PUTIN FEARS THE ORANGE REVOLUTION

Kremlin creates youth movement
New organization reminds some of pre-war Germany's Hitler Youth

JULIUS STRAUSS

London Daily Telegraph
Tuesday, March 1, 2005

With President Putin's popularity in sharp decline, the Kremlin has set up a Russian youth movement to control the streets in the event of mass anti-government protests.

Hundreds of youths, many belonging to the president's cultural society, "Walking Together," held a meeting in a house owned by the Kremlin Property Department to launch the group this weekend. The organization was christened "Nashi" (Ours), a word that, in Russian, has chilling nationalist overtones. When two outsiders sneaked into its founding conference, they were humiliated and one was beaten.

This Kremlin move comes after claims it has been using infiltrators to cause trouble at anti-government rallies, giving the police an excuse to disperse them.

In the eyes of many, the tactics are more reminiscent of the Hitler Youth of pre-war Germany than of the supposed democracy in Russia, whose health Putin defended when he met U.S. President George W. Bush last week.

"Scared by the Orange Revolution in Ukraine, the Kremlin is trying to form a Putin Jugend to suppress future opposition," said Andrei Pointkowsky, director of the Centre for Strategic Studies. "People are finally beginning to realize that the emperor has no clothes."

Ilya Yashin, youth leader of the opposition party Yabloko and one of the two liberals who gate-crashed the conference, said, "Our apprehensions about the Kremlin's intentions to form assault units to fight the opposition have been confirmed. Under the Nashi slogan, the Kremlin is forming brigades of storm-troopers so that they can use force against the opposition."

top

LEBANESE INSPIRED BY THE ORANGE REVOLUTION

Lebanon shakes off the excitement prepares for political moves ahead

By SAM F. GHATTAS

March 1, 2005

BEIRUT, Lebanon (AP) - Lebanon's president was taking on the task of forming a new government Tuesday, while opposition leaders shook off the jubilation of using people power to force out a pro-Syrian Cabinet and sought to ensure the next one is less beholden to Damascus.

A few diehard activists remained in tents overnight and about 400 protesters joined them midmorning, but Lebanese soldiers had been withdrawn from the area where the day before 25,000 flag-waving demonstrators demanded - and got - Prime Minister Omar Karami's resignation.

"We will be here every day until the last Syrian soldier withdraws from our land," one activist said through a loudspeaker. The crowd, blowing whistles, chanted back: "Freedom, Sovereignty, Independence."

They sang in rhyming Arabic: "We are all, Muslims and Christians, against the Syrians."

Elsewhere in the country, shops, businesses and banks reopened after a one-day strike Monday to protest the Feb. 14 assassination of former prime minister and billionaire businessman Rafik Hariri, whose killing was the catalyst for the massive, peaceful protests demanding Syria release its military and political hold.

Syria keeps about 15,000 troops in Lebanon and all key political decisions get a stamp of approval from Damascus, but pressure from Lebanese as well as from an international community led by the United States has led to talk of a troop withdrawal.

Syria's government has remained silent about the rapidly changing atmosphere in Beirut, the protests or the resignation. Syria's state-controlled state media reported the resignation but did not mention the protests against the pro-Syrian government or show pictures on TV or in newspapers of the massive protests.

"Lahoud accepted the resignation of the Karami government," said the headline in the Syrian ruling party's Baath newspaper.

In Beirut, demonstrators vowed to carry on, demanding the resignation of pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud and the withdrawal of Syrian soldiers. Hariri's parliamentary bloc issued a statement late Monday demanding the departure of Lebanese security and intelligence chiefs.

Opposition leaders - a diverse group of Muslim, Druse and Christians - were expected to meet later Tuesday to chart their course. It wasn't clear if they would seek to keep up the street pressure or - as some have urged - step back to work through the political process to ensure a new government less tied to Damascus.

They have demanded a neutral government to organize parliamentary elections this spring and to investigate Hariri's murder, which they blame on the pro-Syrian government and Syria. Both governments have denied involvement.

The dramatic developments - reminiscent of Ukraine's peaceful "Orange Revolution" and broadcast live across the Arab world, including Syria where some people have access to satellite TV - could provoke a strong response from Syria. There are fears it also could plunge this nation of 3.5 million back into a period of uncertainty, political vacuum or worse.

The White House welcomed Karami's resignation, saying it opens the door for new elections "free of all foreign interference" from Syria, but called again on Damascus to pull out its soldiers.

"Syrian military forces and intelligence personnel need to leave the country," said White House spokesman Scott McClellan said. "That will help ensure that elections are free and fair."

The State Department dubbed the events in Lebanon a "Cedar Revolution" - a moniker that bringing the country in line with Czechoslovakia's Velvet Revolution, Georgia's Rose Revolution, and Ukraine's Orange Revolution.

Lebanese carrying it out, however, call it their peaceful "independence uprising." They wave Lebanon's red-white flag with the Cedar tree in the middle and wear red and white scarves.

top

Ukrainians Push Stalin Wine Off Canadian Shelves (Reuters)

Thursday, February 10, 2005

WINNIPEG, Manitoba (Reuters) - Wine labeled with a photo of brutal Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin was pulled from shelves in the Canadian province of Manitoba this week after complaints from the local Ukrainian community, a spokeswoman for government-owned liquor stores said. The sherry and port from the Massandra winery in Ukraine featured a photo on the bottles' labels of Stalin seated with former U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill.

The wine commemorated the Yalta Conference, held at a castle near the winery 60 years ago this week, where the leaders decided on the shape of Eastern Europe after World War Two.

"I don't want Stalin to be forgotten. I want him to be remembered for exactly what he was: a genocidal mass murderer," said Lubomyr Luciuk of the Ukrainian Canadian Civil Liberties Association.

The Yalta agreement forced hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans living in Western Europe to return to countries controlled by the former Soviet Union, where many were killed, Luciuk said.

"I don't think anyone in Canada would welcome a Hitler Riesling or a Stalin sherry or a Pol Pot port or a Mao Tse-tung merlot," Luciuk said.

About 3 percent of Canadians, or more than 1 million people, identify themselves as ethnic Ukrainians in census surveys. About 40,000 Ukrainian political refugees moved to Canada after World War Two, Luciuk said.

The Manitoba Liquor Control Commission had ordered 14 cases of the wines, priced at C$38 ($30.60) a bottle, but only six bottles had been sold before the wines were pulled, said Diana Soroka, a spokeswoman.

top

Sgro took a last kick at the can
Law would punish Canadians who were teens when they were forced to join Nazi groups during World War II (Toronto Sun)

By Peter Worthington -- For the Toronto Sun (Sun, February 13, 2005)

One of Judy Sgro's last acts before resigning as immigration minister last month was to recommend to cabinet that a bunch of aging Ukrainian-Canadians be stripped of their citizenship and deported. In doing so she apparently ignored the federal Court of Appeal's unanimous decision that revocation of the citizenship of Kitchener's Helmut Oberlander, without appeal or legal representation, violated the Constitution and potentially made every naturalized Canadian second-class.

The Sgro recommendation applied to Oberlander and Toronto's Wasyl Odynsky, and a couple of other aging Ukrainian-Canadians who have Alzheimer's. All were teenagers in World War II who were forced to join Nazi auxiliaries.

None participated in war crimes or committed crimes against humanity (as determined by a government-appointed judge). But because they "probably" withheld details of their record when they entered Canada after the war the government has ruled they can be stripped of citizenship and deported.

Why the Liberal government is so intent on punishing these people, who have impeccable records as citizens, is puzzling.

Last month, representatives of some 25 ethnic organizations held an informal meeting in Toronto to discuss what to do about the feds' proposed new Citizenship Act, which will allow the minister the power to order such revocations and deportations without the right of an explanation or appeal.

One fighting it is Andrew Telegdi, Liberal MP for Kitchener-Waterloo, who is the elected chairman of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration that is to tour Canada for opinions on the proposed law. Telegdi and others (including me) think some basic principles should apply to citizenship:

All Canadians, be they citizens by birth or choice, should have the same rights and obligations.

Citizenship should not be revoked by politicians -- only by the courts.

Citizenship should be revocable only after guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt" has been established.

All rights of appeal that are available under the Canadian legal system must also be available in cases involving revocation.

Legal representation should be available to every accused.

None of the above seems very radical. In essence, it's what the three justices of the Court of Appeal said when they ruled the government did not follow its own guidelines of fairness -- that if "evidence of individual criminality ... cannot be proven, no proceeding will be considered."

A previous court ruled that "no punishment should be inflicted upon a suspected war criminal unless his or her guilt is fairly established by Canadian standards of justice."

Those slated for revocation and deportation were just men, trapped by war as teenagers, who sought to survive and protect their relatives by submitting to the enemy.

As it stands now, the proposed new act is supported by Justice Minister Irwin Cotler, a former Nazi hunter, and Deputy PM Anne McLellan. But with their government holding only a minority in Parliament, there's a chance Telegdi's committee can make the case for this draconian legislation to be scrapped.

After all, before he died, famous Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal publicly announced that all major Nazi war criminals had been convicted or had died, and any who were still alive would have been too young at the time to have had much power.

If it's good enough for Wiesenthal, it should be good enough for Canada.

top

LETTER RE CANADIAN CITIZENSHIP COALITION

Dear Members of the Canadian Citizenship Coalition,

First of all, I would like to congratulate the excellent preparation and presenation by members of this committee who appeared before the Standing Committee on Citizenship in Ottawa last Tuesday February 10th. This was televised and shown on CPAC this past Saturday afternoon.

Members of the group were: Dr. Ulrich Frisse, Paul Grod, Ameena Sultan, Khurum Awan and Bill Pidruchney of Edmonton.

I would like to remind you to find individuals from each of your respective communities or organizations to make representations to the Cross Country Hearings which are coming up. The deadline to apply is FEB. 22. 2005.

Contact Mr. William Farrell - 613- 995-8525 or Denyse 613-947-6846 or at cimm@parl.gc.ca The best thing to do is send and email stating that you would like to appear before the Committee. Provide your complete name and contact information; the organization or community group that you represent and state why you would like to appear. ( one or two lines will do).

Please copy me on your emails olyaod@sympatico.ca, so that I can make sure everyone is included. REMEMBER FEB. 22 is the DEADLINE.

Mon. April 4 - Winnipeg
Tues. April 5 - Regina
Wed. April 6 - Calgary
Thurs.April 7 - Edmonton
Fri. April 8 - Victoria
Mon. April 11 - Vancouver
Tues. April 12 - Vancouver
Wed. April 13 - Toronto
Thurs.April 14 - Toronto
Fri. April 15 - Kitchener- Waterloo
Mon. April 18 - St.John's
Tues. April 19 - Halifax
Wed. April 20 - Charlottetown
Thurs. April 21 - Fredericton
Fri. April 22 - Montreal


Please see:
Sgro took a last kick at the can
Law would punish Canadians who were teens when they were forced to join Nazi groups during World War II

top

KITKA COMES A-CAROLING

Eight-member a cappella group brings Wintersongs lineup here Saturday, putting a new twist on eastern-European Christmas folksongs

BERNARD PERUSSE (Montreal Gazette), Wednesday, February 02, 2005

Christmas might be a memory, leaving only a pile of bills in its wake, but that doesn't mean we have to say goodbye to seasonal songs just yet. Kitka, an eight-woman vocal ensemble based in Oakland, Calif., plans to sing us through the cold darkness that still lies ahead.

Their a cappella voices will join together Saturday night to present their Wintersongs repertoire, made up largely of songs from last year's disc of the same title, as well as selections from their three other albums. The show is part of the group's first visit to Canada.

But those who can't stomach another note of Christmas music need not worry: the material in Kitka's set lists is mostly eastern European in origin, and audiences will be offered folktales from such places as Romania, Bulgaria, Ukraine and Belarus - in their original languages - instead of Silver Bells or White Christmas. Medieval Sephardic songs, Slavic folk carols and Eastern Orthodox sacred choral works are among Kitka's specialties.

Shira Cion, one of the group's vocalists and its executive director, said the richness of the region's music drew the many women who have passed through the group's revolving-door lineup over the years. Kitka - the name means "bouquet" in Bulgarian and Macedonian - was formed in 1979 as an offshoot of a Bavarian dance project put together by the Westwind International Folk Ensemble in the San Francisco Bay area. "The group kept gathering informally for many years in peoples' living rooms and, over time, it evolved and eventually turned into a professional touring ensemble," Cion said - one that now performs to standing-room-only audiences in its home base.

Five women took part in the Westwind project, but none of the original singers are still in Kitka. Cion, who joined in 1988, is one of the longest-standing members, and some have joined as recently as last year. All have been attracted by the haunting music that has become, for them, a lifelong love affair.

An open-voice technique, which parts ways with Western operatic and pop singing by losing much of the vibrato, is crucial to the group's sound, Cion said. Strong harmonies and unusual rhythms are also a trademark. "(Unexpected time signatures) produce a mesmerizing, hypnotic groove in slower tempos. In faster tempos, it becomes a very driving, almost maniacal kind of rhythmic pattern - and we love that," Cion said.

For source material, some of it pre-Christian, the group sometimes goes into the field. A trip to Bulgaria and Macedonia in 2002 was their most recent excursion and a mission to Ukraine and Belarus is planned for this summer. "In general, people in eastern Europe sing more as a part of everyday life. Standard inhibitions about performance or singing in tune don't apply. And one thing that's so challenging about collecting these tunes is that, often, they're not sung the same way twice by our source people over there," Cion said.

The trips also present economic challenges - not only to raise funds, but to adapt to a different standard of living. "Often, I feel expeditions combine camping and roughing it with lessons in how privileged and spoiled we are in our North American lifestyles," Cion said.

Although the members of Kitka speak a variety of languages, that doesn't always help decipher regional speech patterns. "Many of the folk songs we collect are actually not in standard, academic contemporary languages or dialects," Cion said. "There's always the challenge of reconciling the Bulgarian you studied in a course or in a book with the way people actually speak and sing over there." Ethic communities in North America also help the group uncover material.

Once some previously unheard music is in the bag, the members decide on their approach to singing it. That could mean sticking to the tune as they heard it or coming up with their own arrangement. "We really enjoy picking a folk melody - and we'll often hear more layers or harmonies or interesting ways of setting it that spring more from our imaginations than from the traditional performance style," Cion said.

As for the final sound, Kitka works with each member's strengths and assets as a vocalist, Cion said. "We work tirelessly to achieve an ensemble blend that incorporates all of the voices and all the different colours," she said.

Kitka performs at Maison de la Culture Ahuntsic-Cartierville, 10,300 Lajeunesse St., Saturday, February 5, 2005 at 8:00 p.m. Admission is free, but call to confirm there is still space available. Call (514) 872-8749.

www.kitka.org

top

HE BELIEVES GIVERS RECEIVE

Mitch Joel of Twist Image doesn't spend a lot of time in the office, giving about one-third of his workday to the community

STEPHANIE WHITTAKER, Freelance (Montreal Gazette), Monday, January 31, 2005

Mitch Joel has a philosophy that has guided how he runs his life and his business. "There are people who can give and those who must receive," he says. "I'm damn grateful that I'm one of the people who can give."

Joel, a partner in Twist Image, a Montreal marketing and communications firm, spends about one-third of his workday giving his time and efforts to the community.

"I work for about 10 or 12 volunteer organizations and spend a lot of my day doing that," Joel said.

He's discovered the karma of business. "Givers gain," he said.

His approach has been a two-way street. While Joel, 33, is out of his office doing community work, the goodwill it generates attracts business to his company.

Joel discovered the joys of community volunteerism about 10 years ago.

A university dropout, he's had a varied career that includes publishing a rock magazine and freelancing for alternative weekly newspapers. He also spent two years editing In Montreal magazine, a publication that focused on young Jewish Montrealers, which led him to a gig with search engine Mama.com.

"I met someone who was in business development at Mama.com. I helped build the company and was there through several buyings and sellings of it."

What followed was a series of positions, first as director of marketing and communications at Airborne Entertainment, the co-founding of a music label and a gig with a public-relations firm before he met Aubrey Rosenhek and Mickael Kanfi, the founders of Twist Image, 21/2 years ago.

"I thought of working as a consultant for Twist Image, but within two weeks, the partners and I realized we had the same vision and goals and we decided to work together," he said.

Housed in a hip open-office space in the Plateau, the company has attracted such clients as Bombardier, Insight, McGill University, iPerceptions, Mount Sinai Hospital, SNG Chartered Accountants and K-Way, which Twist is rebranding.

"We do everything from branding and advertising to marketing, communications and Web," Joel said. The company now employs about 10.

Joel doesn't spend a lot of time in the office, though.

Back when he was working for In Montreal magazine, he discovered he wanted to dedicate time to his community.

"When I left that job, I knew that I would continue to do volunteer work for Federation Combined Jewish Appeal," he said. "I had never done any volunteer work at all, but I started getting involved in events and various other nonprofit groups.

"I would meet people and it felt very liberating. Once you start doing that, it's like a tectonic shift. You almost want to quit your day job."

His community involvements, which have won him a raft of awards, are many and include working for Youth Employment Services, Federation CJA and the Multiple Sclerosis Society.

How does business gain from giving time to community causes?

"The community benefits," Joel said. "If I ask someone to speak at the Youth Employment Services entrepreneurship conference, I'm getting that person involved in community. They get to network and we grow our connection."

"I call this kind of work being socially responsible," said Stephen Goldberg of Optimus Performance, a West Island firm that does training and development and coaching in the corporate milieu.

"When we work with business leaders, we encourage them to adopt social responsibility. How much importance they place on it depends on the health of their businesses. When a company is in survival mode, it can't always focus on the community."

But healthy companies that can afford the time and resources to shore up their communities do benefit, Goldberg said.

"Your ability to generate business depends on the health of your locality," he said. "We have to look at creating healthy environments to nourish businesses."

He said healthy communities produce productive workforces.

"But even if business owners understand that concept, how much they'll devote to improving the community depends on their values," Goldberg said.

There is, however, a big payoff for businesspeople when they network through community work, he said.

"Anytime you're out with people, you're exposing yourself and your business," he said.

"All things being equal, people will do business with people they know and trust and, all things being unequal, people will do business with those they know and trust."

Working for one's community also demonstrates to potential business contacts "that you're genuine," said Goldberg, who also gives his time to various kinds of volunteer work.

"And the rule of abundance is that whatever you give, will come back to you."

What's more, volunteering can forge deeper connections with others than those gained from simply attending networking events and handing out business cards, he said.

Like Joel, Goldberg believes that helping the community is its own reward.

"The idea is we can create a better world by starting as individuals," he said.

Ann Coombs of Vancouver-based Coombs Consulting Ltd. and the author of The Living Workplace (Soul, Spirit and Success in the 21st Century), applauds people like Joel who devote their time to community pursuits.

"Social responsibility hit the corporate world about 15 years ago and everyone got on the bandwagon, giving employees time off to do volunteer work.

"Now, this encompasses other things, such as employee-wellness and environmental issues.

"I think the essence of creating living workplaces is that you can't ask people to leave their life purpose and values behind when they arrive at work. Organizations have to become sensitive to what people feel rather than just what they think.

"After doing volunteer work, people bring a renewed perspective on compassion, listening, dialogue and empathy to work."

When the example starts at the top, it percolates down.

"Shortly after the tsunami in southeast Asia, one of our employees suggested instead of going out for lunch, we should brown bag it and donate what we would have spent on lunch to the tsunami victims," Joel said. "The employees collected $250 and the partners doubled it to $500."

Joel's other key philosophy is that "we have a short time on this Earth. That's why I do what I do. I want to make sure that when I draw my last breath, I'll have made a difference.

"My business life and my personal life are intertwined. I can't pull the wires apart and say that one part is separate from the other."

top

Sokyrka named Saskatchewan Centennial 2005 Youth Ambassador

January 1, 2005

Theresa Sokyrka was born in Moose Jaw and now lives in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. Her interest in music started at an early age being born into a musical family. Sokyrka was very active in her Ukrainian culture, attending the province's only Ukrainian bilingual program at St. Goretti School. Sokyrka also studied dance, violin and voice.

A graduate of Saskatoon's Holy Cross High School, Sokyrka added oboe and bassoon to her list of talents. In her senior year, she was the lead in "My Fair Lady." Sokyrka enrolled in the music program at Red Deer College where she took special interest in jazz vocals, taught herself to play the guitar and began to write and perform her music arrangements.

In April 2004, Sokyrka was one of 9,000 people to audition for Canadian Idol. After 21 weeks of competition, Sokyrka emerged as the runner up in the talent competition. During those weeks, Sokyrka captivated the hearts of millions of Canadians with her vocal artistry, unending diversity, natural elegance and genuine personal modesty. With her cheerful and friendly personality and her genuinely wholesome demeanor, she attracted legions of fans and has become a refreshing positive role model for young Canadians and a deserving recipient of the title Saskatchewan Centennial 2005 Youth Ambassador.

Throughout 2005, Sokyrka will have the chance to share her talent and her Saskatchewan spirit with the province and nation. In her role as youth ambassador, Sokyrka will promote the province and share her unique perspective and experiences with Saskatchewan youth.

Theresa Sokyrka's
Official Fan Club Site!

top

Moderate Christians benefit from Ukraine's determined fight for democracy

by Michael Bourdeaux (Keston Institute)

IN EARLY November last year the staff of Viktor Yushchenko, soon to be installed as Ukraine's new President, found a stock of some 10,000 unsigned leaflets in an Orthodox church calling him "a partisan of the schismatics and an enemy of Orthodoxy" and his American-born wife, Kateryna Chumachenko, a "CIA agent".

These were on the premises of the Holy Assumption Church in Bilhorod-Dnistrovsky, an undeveloped rural region in southwestern Ukraine, adjacent to the independent state of Moldova. Further copies were distributed in the more populous regions around Odessa.

This was the worst, but by no means the only, instance of a church-based scurrilous campaign against the eventual winner of the recent elections. In Kyiv itself on November 11, Orthodox priests led a procession of some 2,000 people between Ukraine's two most ancient Christian sites, the Monastery of the Caves and St Sofia's Cathedral, carrying not only icons, but also political banners proclaiming anti-Nato and anti-American slogans. This was a strong visual component in the anti-Yushchenko campaign on television before the falsified election in which his rival, Viktor Yanukovych, would prematurely claim victory.

So did the Orthodox Church take a united stand against the man who has now been elected and who is reportedly a member of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (as is his wife)? The answer is no.

There is schism among Ukrainian Orthodox, with three separate jurisdictions within the same territory. Before independence in 1991, the Moscow Patriarchate stood alone in Ukraine, dominating church life there as surely as the Kremlin and communism ruled the political sphere. Just before this, Moscow had suffered a devastating blow: the relegalisation, during Mikhail Gorbachev's last days, of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church in the West, that part of Ukraine which had not been under Soviet control until the westward march of the Soviet Army in the Second World War. In 1946 Stalin's henchmen liquidated the Church of the people there, once designated as "Uniate" -- a Church which celebrated the liturgy according to the Orthodox model, had a married priesthood (though celibate bishops), but was also fiercely loyal to the Vatican. Moreover, it contained a nucleus of Ukrainian nationalism. Stalin believed that by forcing the Greek Catholics to become Orthodox and imprisoning all the bishops, he could force people to transfer their loyalty to Moscow. Although some of the clergy, fearing for the lives of their families, yielded, Stalin had buried a time bomb, which ticked away for 40 years until Gorbachev's policies opened the way for the old wrongs to be righted.

The Moscow patriarchate, in retreat, nevertheless continued to dominate the majority of the churches in the Russian-speaking areas of central (around Kyiv) and eastern Ukraine. However, a strong minority established a schismatic jurisdiction, the Kyiv Patriarchate, which supported Ukrainian independence.

Yet a third jurisdiction came into being, the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church, which traced its origins back to the brief years after 1917 when Ukraine was an independent state and before it was liquidated after the imposition of Soviet control. These churches offered mostly tacit support for Yushchenko.

However, on November 20, the day before the rigged election, the head of the Moscow jurisdiction, Metropolitan Volodymyr, perhaps recoiling from President Putin's blatant interference in the process, seemed to feel a chill wind. He called on both candidates to "stand together against those who want to sow discord" and quoted the words of the great poet Taras Shevchenko: "Love your Ukraine and pray for it." Opposition voices within the Moscow jurisdiction then became stronger. Early last month, three priests and a group of laymen circulated an open letter calling on President Kuchma and Yanukovych to resign.

After the falsified election, events in church circles were now moving as fast as in the political sphere. Amid the turmoil, Cardinal Lubomyr Husar, head of the Greek Catholic Church, pointed out on December 5 that "the root of the crisis remains an immoral regime which has deprived the Ukrainian people of their legitimate rights and dignity", but ten days later his synod of bishops issued a statesman-like call to their clergy "not to take part in election campaigning and not to limit the rights of the faithful".

There was one remarkable ecumenical Christian intervention from outside. Anticipating, as it were, the visit of President Saakashvili of Georgia to congratulate Yushchenko on December 31, a group of three clergymen from Tbilisi occupied the rostrum on Independence Square earlier in the month and addressed a rally. By now Ukrainian TV was carrying the full story of the demonstrations, so the sight of these three -- two Georgian Orthodox clerics, Fathers Basil Kobakhidze and Zaza Tevzadze, unofficially led by the head of the Georgian Baptist Church, Bishop Malkhaz Songulashvili -- carried a strong message. These men had been prominent in the movement for democracy in Georgia a year earlier and Bishop Malkhaz had several times suffered physical assault from fanatical elements in the Orthodox Church.

Absent from the reports about activities on Independence Square is any account of the significant relief work and nurture of demonstrators which the various Protestant churches (strong in Ukraine) carried out in two tents. They called on demonstrators not to fuel their protests with vodka. This had an effect on some of the Yanukovych supporters brought from Donetsk for whom strong drink was on tap. Apparently, some listened to the message, even its Christian content.

The three most senior Protestant leaders (of different churches) co-signed a statement on December 2 condemning the falsification of the recent election results. They were joined by Cardinal Husar and Patriarch Filaret, head of the Kyiv patriarchate, in an unprecedented ecumenical gesture. Protestant leaders also offered prayers from the platform on December 5.

The Moscow patriarchate, like Putin himself, has lost an immense amount of face. Patriarch Aleksei II in Moscow issued a defensive statement last week in which he said: "I expect the new President of Ukraine will have enough wisdom to go the way of unity and not confrontation" -- which is being interpreted in Kyiv as both directive and patronising. Authoritarianism has taken a sharp blow, while independent Christian voices have shown themselves both moderate and effective, raising their stock in Ukrainian society.

Canon Michael Bourdeaux is the founder and president of Keston Institute, Oxford, which monitors religious freedom in the communist and former communist countries (www.keston.org)

top

BACK CHANNELS: A CRACKDOWN AVERTED

How Top Spies in Ukraine Changed the Nation's Path

By C. J. CHIVERS

January 17, 2005 New York Tims

KYIV, Ukraine, Jan. 16 - As protests here against a rigged presidential election overwhelmed the capital last fall, an alarm sounded at Interior Ministry bases outside the city. It was just after 10 p.m. on Nov. 28.

More than 10,000 troops scrambled toward trucks. Most had helmets, shields and clubs. Three thousand carried guns. Many wore black masks. Within 45 minutes, according to their commander, Lt. Gen. Sergei Popkov, they had distributed ammunition and tear gas and were rushing out the gates.

Kyiv was tilting toward a terrible clash, a Soviet-style crackdown that could have brought civil war. And then, inside Ukraine's clandestine security apparatus, strange events began to unfold.

While wet snow fell on the rally in Independence Square, an undercover colonel from the Security Service of Ukraine, or S.B.U., moved among the protesters' tents. He represented the successor agency to the K.G.B., but his mission, he said, was not against the protesters. It was to thwart the mobilizing troops. He warned opposition leaders that a crackdown was afoot.

Simultaneously, senior intelligence officials were madly working their secure telephones, in one instance cooperating with an army general to persuade the Interior Ministry to turn back.

The officials issued warnings, saying that using force against peaceful rallies was illegal and could lead to prosecution and that if ministry troops came to Kyiv, the army and security services would defend civilians, said an opposition leader who witnessed some of the exchanges and Oleksander Galaka, head of the military's intelligence service, the G.U.R., who made some of the calls.

Far behind the scenes, Col. Gen. Ihor P. Smeshko, the S.B.U. chief, was coordinating several of the contacts, according to Maj. Gen. Vitaly Romanchenko, leader of the military counterintelligence department, who said that on the spy chief's orders he warned General Popkov to stop. The Interior Ministry called off its alarm.

Details of these exchanges, never before reported, provide insight into a hidden factor in the so-called Orange Revolution, the peaceful protests that overturned an election and changed the political course of a post-Soviet state.

Throughout the crisis an inside battle was waged by a clique of Ukraine's top intelligence officers, who chose not to follow the plan by President Leonid D. Kuchma's administration to pass power to Prime Minister Viktor F. Yanukovich, the president's chosen successor. Instead, these senior officers, known as the siloviki, worked against it.

Such a position is a rare occurrence in former Soviet states, where the security agencies have often been the most conservative and ruthless instruments of state power.

Interviews with people involved in these events - opposition leaders, chairmen of three intelligence agencies and several of their senior officers, Mr. Kuchma, a senior Western diplomat, members of Parliament, the interior minister and commander of the ministry's troops - offer a view of the siloviki's work.

The officers funneled information to Mr. Kuchma's rivals, provided security to opposition figures and demonstrations, sent choreographed public signals about their unwillingness to follow the administration's path and engaged in a psychological tug-of-war with state officials to soften responses against the protests.

Ultimately, the intelligence agencies worked - usually in secret, sometimes in public, at times illegally - to block the fraudulent ascension of Mr. Yanukovich, whom several of the generals loathe. Directly and indirectly, their work supported Viktor A. Yushchenko, the Western-oriented candidate who is now the president-elect.

Many factors that sustained the revolution that formed around Mr. Yushchenko are well known. They include Western support, the protesters' resolve, cash from wealthy Ukrainians, coaching by foreign activists who had helped topple presidents in Georgia and Serbia, the unexpected independence of the Supreme Court and cheerleading by a television station, Channel 5, which Mr. Kuchma never shut down.

Each influenced the outcome to various degrees. None by itself seems decisive. The full extent of the siloviki's role is unknown, although Oleg Ribachuk, Mr. Yushchenko's chief of staff, called it "a very important element" that aided the opposition "professionally and systemically." "They were doing this like a preventive operation," he said.

Opposition Inside the S.B.U.

The support did not start with the protests. Long before the election, the siloviki and the opposition opened quiet lines of communication, including General Smeshko's assignment last summer of an S.B.U. general as secret liaison to Mr. Ribachuk.

The 38,000-member S.B.U. is Ukraine's descendant of the Soviet K.G.B., and has been sullied by its reputation for blackmail, arms trading and links with Russian security services and organized crime. It remains highly factionalized, with cliques loyal to different political camps, and with remnant ties to its old masters in Moscow.

Its previous chairman, Leonid Derkach, was fired under international pressure after being accused of organizing the sale of radar systems to embargoed Iraq. Mr. Kuchma appointed General Smeshko, a generally Western-oriented official and a career military intelligence officer as S.B.U. chairman in 2003. The general had previously been posted to embassies in Washington and Zurich; the move was regarded as an effort to smooth relations with the West.

Some of the siloviki who worked against the fraudulent election and resisted the crackdown are part of General Smeshko's military intelligence circle and had spent parts of their careers working in Western countries or as liaisons to Western governments.

Mr. Ribachuk said that he ultimately had several S.B.U. contacts, and they met regularly, sometimes nightly. The officers leaked him documents and information from Mr. Kuchma and Mr. Yanukovich's offices, he said, and were sources for much of the material used in the opposition's media campaign.

Whether the collaboration was a convergence of political aims, or a pragmatic understanding by the siloviki that Mr. Yushchenko's prospects were rising, is subject to dispute. Yulia Tymoshenko, another of Mr. Yushchenko's closest allies, said many S.B.U. officials, including General Smeshko, merely hedged their bets. "This was a very complicated game," she said.

Mr. Ribachuk saw it differently. "They are clearly our supporters," he said. "They risked their lives and careers."

The officers themselves express several motivations.

One, said Lt. Gen. Igor Drizhchany, who runs the S.B.U.'s legal department, was simple. "At all times we talked of our desire to prevent the shedding of blood," he said.

But there are also signs that among some officers a desire to block Mr. Yanukovich was authentic. Having been prime minister for two years, Mr. Yanukovich was well known. Several S.B.U. officers said the premier, who was once convicted of robbery and assault and has close links to the corrupt eastern businessmen who have acquired much of Ukraine's material wealth, was a man they preferred not to serve, especially if he were to take office by fraud.

S.B.U. officials and Mr. Ribachuk also said that roughly a week before the Nov. 21 election, General Smeshko was disgusted enough after a personal meeting with Mr. Yanukovich that he sought to resign, and vowed never to work for the premier.

Mr. Kuchma did not accept the resignation, telling the spy chief that if he left, then a general loyal to Mr. Yanukovich would assume the post, and the nation would risk bloodshed, General Smeshko and Mr. Kuchma said.

It is not clear whether the president was certain of this, or simply outmaneuvered General Smeshko to avoid pre-election turmoil. But the spy chief stayed on.

Sending Signals

The siloviki's unease with Mr. Yanukovich's candidacy deepened on Nov. 21 when early results indicated the premier was winning the election, but through widespread fraud.

The S.B.U.'s leadership met in General Smeshko office. Among those present were General Romanchenko, General Drizhchany, Maj. Gen. Oleksander Sarnatskyi, the chief of S.B.U.'s cabinet, and Col. Valery Kondratyuk, chief of liaison to foreign intelligence services.

The group contemplated a public resignation, but decided to try steering the gathering forces from a clash, and to fight from within. "Today we can save our faces or our epaulettes, or we can try to save our country," General Romanchenko and General. Sarnatskyi said they remembered the spy chief saying.

Whether the full extent of the position and activities of the S.B.U. leadership was understood at this point by Mr. Kuchma is unclear; S.B.U. officers said that given the competing factions in their service, and its infiltration by Russian agents, elements of its work were certainly known.

Kyiv was tense. As protests began on Nov. 21, the opposition had the money and organization for long-term civil disobedience. General Popkov, the interior commander, said he knew this, and had scheduled an exercise that massed 15,000 troops in the capital and nearby. He sent several thousand to barricades and posts at government buildings, and kept more than 10,000 in reserve.

The government swiftly tried drawing the intelligence chiefs into an image of state solidarity. On Nov. 22, the prosecutor general's office released a statement scolding the opposition for organizing the rally. It said the authorities and the S.B.U. were prepared "to firmly put an end to any lawlessness."

General Smeshko said he was furious and called the prosecutor to tell him not to speak for the S.B.U. "It was a falsification," he said. The S.B.U. countered with a statement saying that it disagreed with the prosecutor, that citizens had the right to exercise political freedoms and that political problems could be solved only by a peaceful path.

It was a public crack in Ukraine's law enforcement bodies, and an omen.

On Nov. 24, when the election commission met to certify Mr. Yanukovich's nominal win, Kyiv was so fully blockaded that Mr. Kuchma was unable to work in his office.

He called for a meeting outside the city, where his government celebrated its win and several politicians declared that if crowds continued to block the government, troops should disperse them, three people in the meeting said.

As General Smeshko sat quietly, his spy agency was delivering a shadow blow.

Even as the election commission deliberated over Mr. Yanukovich's victory, Ukrayinska Pravda, a news Web site, posted transcripts of conversations from among members of the Yanukovich campaign.

The officials were discussing plans to rig the election, including padding the vote. One conversation, recorded on election night, was between Yuri Levenets, a campaign manager, and a man identified as Valery.

Valery: "We have negative results."

Mr. Levenets: "What do you mean?"

Valery: "48.37 for opposition, 47.64 for us."

Valery later added: "We have agreed to a 3 to 3.5 percent difference in our favor. We are preparing a table. You will have it by fax."

Mr. Yanukovich won by 2.9 percent. In an interview, Mr. Ribachuk said he gave the transcripts to Pravda after receiving them from the S.B.U., which had bugged the Yanukovich campaign.

General Smeshko refused to discuss the tapes in detail. "Officially, the S.B.U. had nothing to do with the surveillance of Yanukovich campaign officials," he said. "Such taping would be illegal in this country without permission from the court. I will say nothing more."

But a member of the siloviki, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the taping was illegal, acknowledged the surveillance but said it was too delicate for General Smeshko to confirm. "Those who did this, they did not intend to become heroes," the officer said. "They wanted only to prevent a falsified election."

Not long after Pravda posted the transcript, General Smeshko left the meeting with Mr. Kuchma and headed to a S.B.U. safe house in Kyiv for a secret liaison with Mr. Yushchenko, the opposition leader.

The meeting had self-evident ironies. Mr. Yushchenko, nearly incapacitated after being poisoned by dioxin in the summer, a crime that remains unsolved, had publicly linked the poisoning to a meeting with General Smeshko and another S.B.U. general.

Now he wanted another talk. The group met in a tiny room, behind a drawn yellow curtain, and ate fruit. Present were General Sarnatskyi, General Smeshko and General Romanchenko, as well as Mr. Yushchenko, Mr. Ribachuk and another Yushchenko ally.

Two agreements were struck, both sides say.

Mr. Yushchenko requested more security for his campaign. General Smeshko agreed to provide him eight specialists from the elite Alpha counterterrorism unit - a highly unusual step - and to arrange former S.B.U. members to guard the campaign.

Then the group also agreed that the S.B.U. must publicly show that it was on the side of the law, not a candidate - an implicit message the agency was unwilling to abuse power for the premier.

As the meeting ended, Mr. Yushchenko, who is an amateur artist, gave General Smeshko one of his landscape paintings. The spy chief and the opposition leader embraced.

Back at the S.B.U. headquarters, General Smeshko and the siloviki decided that to send a signal to the public they would send officers to read a statement to the protesters. Mr. Yushchenko appeared the next night, Nov. 25, with five members of S.B.U.

Their statement was indirectly but clearly pro-opposition. It said concerns about the election were valid, and addressed the Supreme Court, which had just announced that it would review complaints of electoral fraud. The officers urged the judges to work objectively.

Then they addressed police officers and soldiers. "Do not forget that you are called to serve the people," their statement said. "The S.B.U. considers its main assignment is to protect the people, no matter the source of the threat. Be with us!"

It was a rare moment for officers used to anonymity and reflected how deeply opposition sentiments had reached into Ukrainian society. In interviews, two officers from the stage, Lt. Gen. Oleksander Skibinetsky, a reservist, and Lt. Gen. Oleksander Skipalsky, who is retired, were asked if their families influenced their decisions.

"Both of our wives were in the square," General Skibinetsky said.

General Skipalsky said: "My wife. And my daughter, too."

The signal seemed to have had its desired effect. The next morning, cadets from the Interior Ministry's academy joined the opposition, marching to the barricades to try to persuade the officers on duty to join them. A few carried flowers.

The Battle for Kuchma

The state was leaking power. The next day, Nov. 27, Mr. Kuchma summoned General Smeshko to a meeting at Koncha Zaspa, a government sanitarium outside Kyiv.

In a conference room were Mr. Yanukovich and politicians from eastern regions supporting him, with the leader of the Interior Ministry, or M.V.D., Mykola Bilokon, one of Mr. Kuchma's loyalists, who made no secret of his support for the premier.

Mr. Yanukovich confronted Mr. Kuchma, asking if he was betraying them, four people in the meeting said. Then came demands: schedule an inauguration, declare a state of emergency, unblock government buildings.

Mr. Kuchma icily addressed his former protégé. "You have become very brave, Viktor Feyodovich, to speak to me in this manner," he said, according to Mr. Bilokon and General Smeshko. "It would be best for you to show this bravery on Independence Square."

General Smeshko intervened to offer the S.B.U.'s assessment of the situation, warning the premier that few of Ukraine's troops, if ordered, would fight the people. He also said that even if soldiers followed an order, a crackdown would not succeed because demonstrators would resist. Then he challenged Mr. Yanukovich.

"Viktor Feyodovich, if you are ready for a state of emergency, you can give this order," he said. "Here is Bilokon," he continued. "The head of the M.V.D. You will be giving him, as chairman of the government, a written order to unblock the buildings? You will do this?"

Mr. Yanukovich was silent. General Smeshko waited. "You have answered," he continued, according to people in the meeting. "You will not do it. Let us not speak nonsense. There is no sense in using force."

Mr. Kuchma left the room to take a phone call, then returned with a state television crew. Mr. Yanukovich slammed down his pen and left.

The government's position was set: there would be no martial law. It was formalized the next day, on Nov. 28, when the National Security and Defense Council voted to solve the crisis through peaceful means.

"This was the key decision," Mr. Kuchma later said. "I realized what it meant to de-block government building by force in these conditions. It could not be done without bloodshed."

Fighting a Crackdown

Although there seemed to be a consensus at the council, a crackdown remained possible, either as a response to opposition provocation, or by secret, unexpressed agenda.

Emotions had been rising and falling in Kyiv, and within hours of the council meeting, they surged again when Ms. Tymoshenko, a Yushchenko ally, warned demonstrators that there would be an effort to unblock the government buildings. She urged more people to defend them.

General Popkov, the commander of interior troops, said he was notified of Ms. Tymoshenko's words and the crowd's restlessness, and ordered the alarm. The mobilization began.

Precisely what followed, and why, remains unclear, as does who gave the order, and by what means. General Popkov insists that he alone was engaged in a calculated bluff, and thus made certain his signal would be instantly seen.

Holding up his mobile phone, he said, "I deliberately gave the order on this phone, which is bugged."

Whether General Popkov's phone was bugged is not publicly known. But General Romanchenko said his agents in the interior units watched the preparations; simultaneously, S.B.U officers said, their agents in the Interior Ministry's communications center heard radio traffic about preparations to march. Bedlam, and battles of nerves, ensued.

Reports of the alarm were relayed to the S.B.U. command, which notified the opposition, its officers on Independence Square, and then the American Embassy.

The opposition called the American ambassador John E. Herbst, who called Viktor Pinchuk, Mr. Kuchma's son-in-law, to find out what was happening, Mr. Pinchuk said.

Mr. Pinchuk said he called Viktor Medvedchuk, chief of Mr. Kuchma's administration, who called the interior minister at home. Mr. Bilokon said he did not know what was happening. "I was really worried," Mr. Bilokon said, in an interview. "How, without my knowledge, was this order given?"

Secretary of State Colin L. Powell soon telephoned Mr. Kuchma, who did not take the call.

Outside, the S.B.U. was mobilizing. Several hundred intelligence officers were already among the protesters, S.B.U officials say. Some were pretending to be demonstrators themselves. Concealed surveillance teams were videotaping the crowd. Snipers peered down from roofs. Counterterrorism teams huddled in nearby apartments and unmarked trucks. Groups in vehicles roamed the roads to Kyiv, trying to determine the direction of the troops' advance.

Among the protesters' tents, an S.B.U. colonel who had spent the week as a liaison to the demonstration organizers alerted the organizers that troops were on their way.

His next mission was to meet the troops as they drew near, he said, to warn their officers that a crackdown without written orders was illegal. He said he also planned to warn them that the S.B.U. had surveillance units watching Kyiv, and all actions would be videotaped for use as evidence later.

The fear, he said, was intense. Some intelligence officers thought of China's crushing of the pro-democracy protesters in 1989 in Beijing. Others thought of the Romanian revolution in 1989, when, after troops fired on demonstrators, the people fought back, eventually capturing and killing President Nicolae Ceausescu and his wife.

"We could not believe it could occur to somebody to draw the first drop of blood, which would have been the detonator of a big explosion," said the colonel, a deputy chief of Ukraine's counterterrorism forces, who by Ukrainian law is forbidden to have his name published. "It could unleash a civil war in our country. Absolutely, sincerely, we were prepared to do everything in our power to stop it."

While all sides pressed for information and advantage, a group of the siloviki and Ms. Tymoshenko met at the headquarters of the military intelligence service, the G.U.R.

Among them were Mr. Galaka, the G.U.R. chief, General Drizhchany, Colonel Kondratyuk and General Romanchenko, who said he called the S.B.U. headquarters for instructions. "Chairman Smeshko told me to call General Popkov, and find out why the alert had been called," he said.

An extraordinary exchange followed. The counterintelligence chief called the troop commander, whom he had known for years, and asked what were the grounds for the alert. "He said it was his decision," General Romanchenko said. "I said to General Popkov that he had to have a written order to raise troops on full alert, and since he did not have this order he would have to call back the troops."

Simultaneously, from his office at S.B.U. headquarters, General Smeshko called Mr. Bilokon, who sought assurances the opposition would not seize buildings, both men said. General Smeshko called him back and gave that assurance, shifting responsibility to himself if buildings were overrun.

Other officers said that after about an hour, Col. Gen. Oleksander Petruk, the army chief of staff, arrived at the military intelligence service's office. The intelligence officer pressed him for help. He said the army would not deploy inside Ukraine. "He said it would not be done," Colonel Kondratyuk said. General Petruk's staff did not return phone messages seeking an interview.

Ms. Tymoshenko said she watched with amazement as the siloviki and then General Petruk made calls and warned the Interior Ministry "that they are on the side of the people, and will defend the people, and that the M.V.D. will have to deal not only with unarmed people and youth if it comes to Kyiv, but with the army" and the special forces inside the intelligence agencies.

Eventually, General Popkov folded. "He said he was carrying out orders and he was not a key figure," Ms. Tymoshenko said. First the trucks stopped on the shoulder of the road. Then the alarm was called off.

General Drizhchany, and others, said that because so many calls were made that night by and to so many people, it was impossible to tell which calls were decisive. More likely, he said, was that the calls had a cumulative effect.

While different accounts of the mobilization agree on many points, they clash on critical questions. Who ordered the alarm? Who called the troops back?

General Popkov said both decisions were solely his. This is the official version, which the siloviki, the opposition and the Western diplomat dismiss as absurd. "What he did was not a drill," said Mr. Galaka.

Only three people, they say, had authority to give such an order: Mr. Kuchma, Mr. Yanukovich and Mr. Medvedchuk. Mr. Kuchma denies a role. Mr. Yanukovich and Mr. Medvedchuk did not reply to requests for interviews.

Ms. Tymoshenko said she witnessed a turning point. Once the siloviki thwarted the alarm, the administration learned that it did not have sole influence over the last guarantor of power: the men with the guns.

After a peaceful uprising in Georgia in 2003 deposed President Eduard Shevardnadze, in part with help from the authorities, she said she was envious of a country with officers willing to resist corrupt power.

"I had always thought that all of our generals were very loyal to Kuchma and were pragmatic," she said. "All of a sudden I made this discovery. We had generals on the side of the people."

top

Montrealer takes know-how to Kyiv

PEGGY CURRAN, The Gazette

January 13, 2005

Chris Mota knows her way around a crisis. A public relations officer at Concordia University, she has spent too much of the last three years at the bull's-eye of the country's most stormy campus politics.

Efficient and unflappable, she earns her keep unruffling feathers, unravelling logisitical knots and trying to polish the school's bruised image.

No surprise, then, that as the fall term ended, she jumped at a chance for a busman's holiday tackling a very different struggle - using her Ukrainian background, local contacts and language skills to act as an unofficial liasion for North American reporters dispatched to cover Viktor Yushchenko's "Chestnut Revolution" in Kyiv.

In mid-November, as Yushchenko's battle for control of the Ukrainian parliament caught the imagination of Western media outlets, Mota began getting calls from Canadian journalists eager to pick her brain before heading overseas. Quick to recognize a goodwill opportunity, Mota's boss told her to hop on a plane for Kyiv, where hundreds of thousands of Yushchenko supporters had set up tents demanding their candidate be granted the reins of power.

"I covered the fall of the Berlin Wall for the CBC, and I know how important a big event like that can be in developing expertise and getting perspective," said Evelyne Abitbol, director of public affairs and government relations at Concordia.

Mota had been to Ukraine only once before - a sentimental journey with her parents last spring, only months before her mother's death. Yet the Greenfield Park native felt right at home immediately. "I could live there in a heartbeat," she said.

Understanding the political landscape is ingrained in her family tree. Mota's uncle, Mykola Plawiuk, was a key organizer of the World Congress of Free Ukrainians and leader of the Ukrainian Nationalist Movement. He held the title, largely symbolic, as president of the Ukrainian national government-in-exile when the country broke from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in August 1991.

For 10 days in December, Mota, a former radio reporter, camped in her uncle's apartment and offered journalists help in finding their way around. She also took to the streets to scout out her own stories for Ukrainian Time, a Montreal-based radio Webcast, appeared as a commentator on Canadian news broadcasts and soaked up atmosphere.

"In Independence Square one night, I realized I was standing in the middle of history," Mota said.

"When Yushchenko spoke, there wasn't a sound. Yet the minute he stopped, the chanting started - more than half a million people in a rousing chorus of the national anthem."

© The Gazette (Montreal) 2005

top

The Cossack's Last Laugh

By Jacek Rostowski
(January 6, 2005, The Wall Street Journal Europe, A8)

The massive demonstrations on the streets of Kyiv, which forced President Leonid Kuchma to concede free and fair elections in Ukraine, and which have now been crowned by Viktor Yushchenko's victory, were only the latest act in a 500-year old conflict between constitutional government and autocracy in the lands stretching from the Vistula river to the Ural mountains. It is usually forgotten in the West that Eastern Europe long had its own, homegrown constitutional forms of government. From the 13th century the city of Novgorod was a wealthy trading republic that came to rule a quarter of Russia. The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was an elective monarchy with a powerful parliament and autonomous provincial diets, and Transylvania elected its Prince and had self-governing cities within its borders. Even the Duchy of Prussia had a functioning Diet (local parliament) in the 16th and 17th centuries.

Of course, in these constitutional regimes voting rights were limited to the nobility or rich merchants, but that was also largely the case at the time in Britain and Holland. For three centuries, the voting (noble) population of Poland-Lithuania exceeded that of Britain several times over. The onslaught against constitutionalism in the region was launched by Ivan III (the Great), the Grand Duke of Muscovy, who conquered Novgorod in 1477. Over the next 300 years Muscovite Russia, later joined by the autocracies of Austria and Prussia, destroyed one East European constitutional regime after another, until the last of them disappeared with the third partition of Poland in 1795. There is little doubt that the triumph of imperial autocracy in the 18th and 19th centuries helped pave the way for communist totalitarianism in the 20th century.

A key turning point in these developments was the Cossack uprising in Ukraine in 1648. The Sich Cossacks, a self-governing community of escaped serfs turned warriors, wanted voting rights and autonomy within the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Blind class hatred prevented the Polish nobility from accepting these demands for equality, and in 1654 by the Treaty of Pereiaslav, just over 350 years ago, the Cossacks placed themselves under the protection of the Russian czar. Not surprisingly, with time they were deprived of the freedom they had sought. This background makes what has happened in Kyiv all the more fitting. Many of the lands in Eastern Europe that experienced constitutional government in the past have now recovered it. With the triumph of freedom in Ukraine, despite the best efforts of an increasingly autocratic Russia, constitutionalism has recovered most of the losses it suffered over the past 350 years. There is now reason to hope that the Ukrainian example will spread to Russia itself, bringing democracy back to Moscow, the historical heart of autocracy in Eastern Europe.

- Mr. Rostowski is professor of economics at the Central European University, Budapest and a trustee of the CASE Foundation, Warsaw.

(Copyright (c) 2005, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

top

UKRAINE THE LATEST TO TEST AN OLD ADAGE

The Montreal Gazette (Editorial)

Thursday, December 23, 2004

In November, as the street drama in Kyiv neared a climax, Viktor Yushchenko said a strange thing. At the height of the contest of wills over the disputed election, Yushchenko was rejoicing in a court ruling that helped his case. "This is only the beginning," he told thousands of cheering supporters in Independence Square. "It is proof that society always wins."

"Society always wins." A Ukrainian needs a highly developed sense of philosophical detachment to make a statement like that. In the last 100 years or so, an ocean of blood has been spilled in the Ukraine, by Hitler, by Stalin and by their governing henchmen, foreign and domestic.

Government and society: They aren't opposing forces, exactly, but they're certainly not the same thing, either. The African proverb "it takes a village to raise a child" acknowledges that society - the association of individuals, in all the boundless complexity of that phrase - has always been central to human experience.

But the Hillary Clintons of this world use that old saying rather differently: To them it is a justification for centralizing the work of society in the hands of government. It's all well-intentioned, no doubt, if a little self-serving. But if the century just ended taught us anything, in the Ukraine and elsewhere, it taught us that too much centralized authority leads straight to oppression and from there, often, to disaster.

In Yushchencko's sweeping claim we hear the secular echo of Pope John Paul II's magnificent exhortation to his fellow Poles when they languished under the yoke of Communism: "Do not be afraid," the Pope said. This fall, it was the turn of Yushchenko to urge his followers to conquer their fear. They did so, and society rose up and rejected an unjust, unloved and undemocratic regime.

That regime, it must be acknowledged, chose not to order the guns. This was mere prudence for a regime unable to trust its soldiers to shoot their brothers and sisters. Still, the ancien regime could have tried some head-breaking, and did not.

That pattern became familiar a decade and more ago as successive Soviet-bloc states withered and fell. When the time is right for society to assert itself, against a government revealed as rotten, then society mobilizes itself, and mere armoured regiments cannot defeat it.

"Society always wins." It's a lovely thought, but it's true only in the long term, if then. Potent forces are always ready to subjugate society, as we have been seeing in the Ukraine's big neighbour, Russia, where the forms of democracy, set up in Boris Yeltsin's heady time have been steadily eroded by the KGB man Vladimir Putin.

Society is going to have to win all over again in Russia, and many other places around this weary globe. Still, the events in the Ukraine this fall - culminating in new elections this Sunday - offer tantalizing promise that Victor Yushchenko had a point: Society exists, independent of government, and in the long run society is the master, not the servant, of government.

For all those countries where the opposite is still true, the Ukraine has this year become a beacon of hope.

© The Gazette (Montreal) 2004

top

UKRAINE: REAL VICTORY STILL TO COME

The Gazette Editorial

Tuesday, December 28, 2004

With one in every eight Canadians able to trace part of his or her ancestry to Ukraine, few countries watched the unfolding of the dramatic election rerun there on Sunday as closely as our own. Canada had 1,500 people on the ground as election observers, including former prime minister John Turner. His endorsement of the credibility of the voting process was featured prominently in international news reports yesterday, and should be seen as a barometer of the continuing international regard for Canada's good name.

Even Canadians who don't have a branch of the family tree extending back into Ukraine would have identified with the election for reasons having to do with what could be called bigbrotheritis. Where Canada lives in the global shadow of the United States, the proverbial mouse next door to the elephant, so Ukrainian history has been defined by the fact it has been joined by geography to the hip of old Russia/cum Soviet Union/cum new Russia of Vladimir Putin.

On those thankfully few occasions when Canada gets hurt because of the United States, it is invariably the result of American self-absorption wrapped up in some kind of political clothing, such as trade protectionism. The elephant sneezes; the mouse rolls. The relationship between Ukraine and Russia has been exceedingly more grim, as history has shown very vividly. One can only hope the Orange Revolution that led to opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko's election victory Sunday will provoke a new era of genuine co-operation between Ukraine and Russia.

Sadly, that is not likely to happen.Winning the election was the easy part for Yushchenko. He can and should expect Putin to do everything possible, on a clandestine level, to undermine the orange julep of political hope overflowing in Ukraine. For the better things go in Ukraine, the more likely it will be the appetite for genuine democratic reform will spill over into other former Soviet republics such as Kazakhstan and Moldova and, ultimately, Russia itself. Putin has no interest in seeing that happen.

One is tempted to say dark forces might try anything short of poisoning Yushchenko to undermine democracy in Ukraine, but, well, we all know about that.Once there was independent confirmation that Yushchenko's pocked face was the product of dioxin poisoning, it was all over for incumbent president Viktor Yanukovych.

Yushchenko looks to be smart enough to know he'll have to take things very slowly, and not get the corrupt Ukrainian oligarchy and bureaucracy too nervous too quickly. He'll also need to reassure Ukraine's important Russian-speaking minority of its future in a truly free Ukraine. Most of all, he'll need some good luck. And if he can find a place that gives lessons in wrestling Russian bears, as opposed to American elephants, he should sign up. As John Turner would put it, Yushchenko is in for the fight of his life.

© The Gazette (Montreal) 2004

top

ORANGE REVOLUTION CAN'T HAPPEN HERE

Tuesday, December 28, 2004. Page 8

By Boris Kagarlitsky for The Moscow Times

The Orange Revolution in Ukraine has inspired hope in the hearts of the liberal opposition in Russia and struck fear in the heart of the Kremlin. The last few weeks saw countless seminars, round tables and discussions dedicated to a single topic: Could it happen here? Liberal publicists are naturally insisting Russians learn from their Slavic brothers . State ideologues are terrifying the public and each other with the revolutionary phantoms conjured by gangs of young people in the pay of the Soros Foundation.

A real panic seems to have hit the government. Kremlin experts immediately attempted to figure out who the Russian version of Viktor Yushchenko might be. Former Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov almost fit the bill: Like Yushchenko, he was also fired from his post and was none too pleased about it. Though Kasyanov never announced any political ambitions publicly, authorities weren't about to take chances. Temuraz Karchava, the president of the Natsional VIP Club and Kasyanov's personal financial manager, wound up behind bars. This may have been a subtle little hint from the administration.

The fear of exported revolution was not the only reason for panic, however. The Kremlin politicos who blew it in Kyiv managed to rack up a huge amount of expenses. Now they have to answer for more than their diplomatic failures. There could be unpleasant questions as to where all the money went. The easiest excuse is to refer to some almighty power behind the Orange Revolution. The absolute evil embodied by the Americans can come into any country, plop down big bucks and organize a revolution in five minutes. Russian politicos can then say that in the fight against absolute evil, even the huge amount of money dedicated to the Ukrainian elections proved too little: We're talking about absolute evil here! We need more money!

At the same time, a simple comparison of the situation in Ukraine and Russia reveals that there is no reason to expect a repeat of the Orange Revolution. First of all, in Ukraine and in Georgia, neo-liberal reforms were implemented more gradually and less completely than in Russia. Ukrainian society has remained extremely Soviet. Ukraine is less capitalist, resembling Russia in the mid-1990s. This defined the nature of the mass mobilizations on both sides. Viktor Yanukovych's supporters in the east were still able to use Soviet methods. The directors of various enterprises could control their employees and get them to demonstrations in the finest Soviet style. The crowds in Kyiv, on the other hand, resembled Moscow's passionate mass demonstrations of the early 1990s.

On both sides, economic status had little effect on individuals' political decisions. In Kyiv, wealthy playboys and impoverished pensioners praised democracy side by side, while in the east, miners risking their lives for pitiful pay and the directors embezzling their wages protested in chorus. A similar situation is difficult to imagine in Russia, which has already gone through capitalism's school of hard knocks.

On the other hand, Russia's political system is much stricter than Ukraine's. There would be no shocked protest of rigged elections, as no serious opposition candidates are allowed to participate in elections in the first place. The Russian Yushchenko would not even be allowed to raise his head on the political scene.

Does this mean that the panic ruling the Kremlin is completely groundless? Not at all. To understand it, however, we need to turn away from political science and do some Freudian psychoanalysis. The crisis in Ukraine allowed the Russian political elite to express its subconscious fears. The elite has been divided, and the united bloc that brought President Vladimir Putin to power has fallen apart. Rival political factions are raring up to battle each other, and they will not be using democratic or "orange" methods. Cruel and shadowy people will fight this fight, and it will be far more frightening than any Orange Revolution.

Boris Kagarlitsky is director of the Institute for Globalization Studies and a columnist for The Moscow Times.

top

VESHNYAKOV: NO RUSSIAN REVOLUTION

The Moscow Times

Tuesday, December 28, 2004. Page 1.

By Nabi Abdullaev, Staff Writer

As politicians cheered or jeered the apparent victory of Ukrainian presidential candidate Viktor Yushchenko on Monday, Central Elections Commission chief Alexander Veshnyakov vowed that an Orange Revolution would never happen in Russia and President Vladimir Putin, who had once strongly supported Yushchenko's opponent, remained conspicuously silent.

Moscow lobbied hard for Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych ahead of the first election in October and the Nov. 21 runoff vote, and his evident defeat in Sunday's repeat runoff threatens to deliver a stunning blow to its policy efforts in other former Soviet republics.

Veshnyakov told reporters that the mass protests that swept Ukraine in recent weeks would never happen in Russia and that the Russian voting system is too sophisticated to be rigged.

"There are no opportunities or political prerequisites for [protests] here. Moreover, our legal and technical conditions for elections are much better," Veshnyakov said.

He said Russia's computerized voting system, for example, was able to count all the ballots in March's presidential election in just 6 1/2 hours, while it took Ukraine 10 days to count its ballots in the runoff. "And we can show the results from every polling station, which disarms our opponents and does not give anyone a chance to rock the situation as it has been in Ukraine," he said.

Opposition parties complained of vote-rigging in last year's State Duma elections, but their