Way to Russia Community and Forum

If you have a question or want to help someone, please, go to
Way to Russia Forum on our Facebook page.
 
We also invite you to join our Facebook community, where you can meet other travelers and read interesting news on topics ranging from visa regulations to culture and music.
 

 

We are currently moving the old forum to Facebook, so what you see below functions as an archive.

If you have a question, please, post it on
Way to Russia Facebook Discussions Page

FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Chat   Log in

Ukraine vs Russia Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next

Way to Russia Talk Lounge Forum Index -> Russian People

Do you trust Putin? Yes, definately  24%  [ 9 ] Somewhat  21%  [ 8 ] So, so  10%  [ 4 ] Somewhat not  16%  [ 6 ] No, definately not  18%  [ 7 ] Don't know  8%  [ 3 ] Total Votes : 37
Author	Message
markhagelin Talk Show Host Joined: 31 Oct 2004 Posts: 208 Location: Maine, USA	Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2004 5:48 am    Post subject: Ukraine vs Russia I don't normally get involved with the politics of another nation. I live here in the USA and sometimes that is bad enough. The Crisis in the Ukraine, of which I have posted a number of Moscow News and Reuters articles may be just "the tip of the iceberg". Those who value their freedom in Russia need to question Putin's motives and what he is doing before it is too late. It appears he may be partially the problem in the Ukraine by trying to put his "puppet" to become the leader of the Ukraine. The EU and the United States have both questioned the validity of the election results. Out of all the FSU, the Ukraine, despite it's corruption has made the biggest strides towards democracy and perhaps the demonstrations in the streets have shown that. Anywhere between 100,000-200,000 out of a population of 48 million. As I understand it, this si the first time the Ukraine has had mass demonstrations. Trying to indirectly control the Ukraine may be Putin's attempt to put a "buffer zone" between the EU and Russia. A map of Europe and Russia can confirm this fact. It appears even within the FSU, the desire for self-autonomy and to remain their own nation and free is strong enough motivation for some of the Ukranianians. The Ukraine appears to be divided or dividing, the Russian-speaking industrial east of the former Soviet state and the nationalist Ukrainian-speaking west. The west of Ukraine, or alternatively the east and the south, could declare a form of autonomy or even break away. Mark
Back to top
Dr-Fauste Site Admin Joined: 23 Nov 2004 Posts: 654	Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2004 5:53 am    Post subject: Mark, You are an American and you love politics. Most Russians I know hate talking about Politics.So if you happen to notice, Russians are not reponding to any comments about politics, it is just North Americans.
Back to top
markhagelin Talk Show Host Joined: 31 Oct 2004 Posts: 208 Location: Maine, USA	Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2004 6:57 am    Post subject: Dr Fauste wrote: Mark, You are an American and you love politics. Most Russians I know hate talking about Politics.So if you happen to notice, Russians are not reponding to any comments about politics, it is just North Americans. That is a stereotype, the average American doesn't love politics. In fact he/she also avoids it. That's probably why we have our problems. Too many are apathetic. They don't care. This election was unique in voter turnout. But look at the typical voter turnout, very low. Could not talking about politics be why no real change occurs? People avoid talking about it and they also avoid with coming up with solutions. I could understand if people in the FSU are afraid since the history of the USSR meant one could be arrested, etc. There is a saying Quote: "Tyranny reigns when good people do nothing" When 1 man or group of men can control an army or blow up the world with nuclear weapons, isn't that a sufficient reason to talk about and be involved with politics? If a person has children and wants those children to have a better world, whose responsibility is it to create that world? Are the children to die because the parents chose not to discuss politics? Even if we don't agree, we can agree to disagree. It appears enough Ukranians care 100,000-200,000. Why are Russians so different than Ukranians? I have seen statements made by some Russian people who are politically involved. Another quote by an American named Thomas Paine Quote: "Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it." I suppose a return to having gulags et al or having a new Tsar is preferable to talking about or being involved with politics in the FSU? Mark
Back to top
markhagelin Talk Show Host Joined: 31 Oct 2004 Posts: 208 Location: Maine, USA	Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2004 7:41 am    Post subject: Dr Fauste wrote: Mark, You are an American and you love politics. Most Russians I know hate talking about Politics.So if you happen to notice, Russians are not reponding to any comments about politics, it is just North Americans. Does that make the Ukranians better than the Russians because 100,000-200,000 of them will protest a corrupt election? I don't think the Ukrainians want a union with Russia like Belarus. They care about their freedom. Why aren't the Russians motivated to do anything? Living is more than just breathing, it is taking chances or risks without being careless when doing so. Keeping one's freedom is worth fighting for. Watch what Putin is doing. Mark Quote: Moscow Times October 4, 2004 Editorial The Case Against a Lapdog Judiciary President Vladimir Putin's proposals to take full control over the appointment of regional leaders and to eliminate independent voices from the State Duma have yet to receive final approval. But the Kremlin has already made its move against the third, ostensibly separate branch of government, the judiciary. Last week the Federation Council -- obviously on orders from the Kremlin -- put forward legislation that would remove the last vestige of independence from the Supreme Qualification Collegium, which appoints judges to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Arbitration Court. It also has sole authority to fire judges. At present, 18 of the collegium's 29 members are judges elected by secret ballot by an association of judges. The panel also contains 10 public representatives appointed by the Federation Council and a single member appointed by the president. Under the new plan, total membership would be cut to 21, 10 of them judges nominated by the president and confirmed by the Federation Council. The upper house would continue to appoint 10 public representatives to the collegium, giving Speaker Sergei Mironov, a die-hard Putin man, near-total control of the appointment process. The president would also retain the right to appoint a representative to the collegium, ensuring him the swing vote if it were ever needed. Mironov, a co-author of the bill, said the change in the judicial system was needed to fight terrorism and corruption. The fight against terrorism has provided a ready justification, in Russia as in the United States, for pushing through constitutionally questionable measures that increase the power of the central government. It is unclear how weakening the authority of regional leaders will better equip them to fight terrorism, or how putting the courts even deeper in the Kremlin's pocket will prevent terrorists from escaping justice. The fight against corruption would also seem to demand a different battle plan. An independent judiciary is essential to uprooting corruption because it guarantees that those who break the law will be brought to justice and offers recourse and protection to those whose civil or property rights are violated. This is what Russia needs. Not courts that all too often do the bidding of prosecutors and the security services. Not courts that sell verdicts to the highest bidder. Making the country's judges directly beholden to the Kremlin will only streamline an already bad system. If the Kremlin were serious about fighting corruption, it would help Russia's judges to become more independent, first by paying them properly to reduce the incentive to accept bribes and then by punishing those who do. Quote: Moscow Times October 6, 2004 Judges Who Lost Their Jobs Speak Out By Francesca Mereu Staff Writer A Federation Council bill to give the Kremlin the right to hire and fire judges would become the last nail in the coffin of Russia's already weak judiciary system, said two former senior judges who say they lost their posts after refusing to obey informal orders from the executive branch of government. The bill, which was overwhelmingly approved by Federation Council senators last week, is likely to prompt a number of judges to quit, former Moscow City Court judges Sergei Pashin and Olga Kudeshkina said. They said that even now there is little place for honest judges in courtrooms -- judges face pressure from their superiors, who are appointed by presidential decree, and are more concerned about keeping their jobs than defending justice. If the bill is approved, the judiciary system will be fully under the Kremlin's control, and the Kremlin will be able to get unconstitutional bills passed into law, Pashin said. "The judiciary system is already under the Kremlin's influence," Kudeshkina said. "But if this terrible bill is approved, it means that we will lose any hope of seeing an independent judiciary system in Russia, since it will be completely in the hands of the Kremlin." The bill would allow the Kremlin to appoint half of the members of the Supreme Qualification Collegium and the Federation Council to pick the rest. The collegium is the only authority in the country that can fire judges, and it also appoints judges to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Arbitration Court. The Supreme Qualification Collegium now consists of 29 members, 18 of whom are judges elected by secret ballot every four years by the All-Russia Congress of Judges, an association of judges. Ten members are public representatives appointed by the Federation Council, while the remaining one is appointed by the president as his representative. The Federation Council's bill proposes cutting the members of the collegium to 21 people. The judges on the collegium would be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Federation Council, while public representatives would be nominated by the speaker of the Federation Council and approved by the chamber. The president would keep the right to pick his representative. The bill allows the president to fire the judges on the collegium with the collegium's consent and the Federation Council to fire the public representatives. "This initiative will weaken the foundation of judicial authority and erase the notion of separation of powers," Pashin said. He and Kudeshkina spoke to a reporter after a round table on the judicial reform on Monday. "There are real paths for moving further with reform of the judicial branch, but not by placing it under the authority of the executive branch," Sergei Vitsin, a professor and member of a presidential council on judicial reform, told the round table. Many judges are now leaving their posts for better jobs, Pashin said, and "if the bill is approved, there will be more of them leaving the courts." Kudeshkina said judges are under constant pressure from their superiors. "This is not encouraging people to stay," she said. Kudeshkina said she was disqualified from serving as a judge last year after she refused to rule in favor of prosecutors in the case of Pavel Zaitsev, the Interior Ministry investigator who headed a controversial fraud probe connected to the Tri Kita furniture store. "The chief judge of the Moscow court put a lot of pressure on me to rule the way she wanted. Even in Soviet times pressure like that did not exist," Kudeshkina said. She said that in the course of hearing the case, Olga Yegorova, the chief judge of the Moscow City Court, summoned her to her office and made it clear what ruling was expected. Chief judges in Russian courts are appointed by presidential decree after being selected by members of the presidential administration. As such, the judges feel an obligation to do the bidding of those who supported their appointments, Kudeshkina said. What's more, Pashin said, chief judges are appointed for six years and their reappointment depends on the presidential administration. Chief judges have a central role in the courts' work, as they decide which judge will hear which case. "A chief judge usually gives cases that are important to the powers-that-be to a pliable judge who will rule in the expected way, since he is the one who gets the call from the presidential administration," Kudeshkina said. When Kudeshkina refused to rule in favor of prosecutors in the Tri Kita case, Yegorova took the case away from her -- in violation of the law -- and gave it to another judge, Kudeshkina said. Calls to Yegorova's office at the Moscow City Court went unanswered late Tuesday. In the latest chapter of the three-year case, the Moscow City Court in November handed Zaitsev a two-year suspended sentence after convicting him of abuse of office. Kudeshkina was accused of violating rules of courtroom conduct and disqualified from acting as a judge. She said prosecutors in the Tri Kita case had addressed her rudely and she had replied likewise. The controversial investigation into whether Tri Kita owners had evaded millions of dollars in customs fees reached the highest echelons of the government. Under intense media pressure, President Vladimir Putin entered the fray in December 2001, appointing a prosecutor from St. Petersburg to head the investigation. When that investigation dragged on, the State Duma tried to spur it along in March 2002 by urging Prosecutor General Vladimir Ustinov to head up the probe personally. Also that year, Federal Security Service head Nikolai Patrushev wrote a letter to then-Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov bluntly calling Tri Kita a criminal organization. Kudeshkina, who first complained about being pressured in December 2003, is appealing her disqualification. "This is what happens when chairmen are under the Kremlin's control. But the situation will be even worse if the Kremlin picks the members of the qualification collegium," she said. Pashin said he was dismissed by the Moscow qualification collegium for refusing to rule against a conscript who asked for his constitutional right to do alternative service instead of joining the military. "I was dismissed just because I ruled against the decisions of the powers that be, but I appealed the decision and won," Pashin said. "But Moscow City Court officials made the situation so unbearable for me that I had to resign," he said. Under judicial rules, judges are dismissed by the local qualification collegia on the recommendation of court chairmen. The Federation Council bill, Pashin said, is the continuation of Putin-backed judicial reforms that started in 2001 and created the system the country has today. The reform established jury trials throughout the country and transferred the right to issue arrest and search warrants from the prosecutors to the courts. In theory, the reform should have raised the professionalism of the judges by putting them under more outside scrutiny. But the stricter administrative control over the judges has ended up making them more dependent on the government instead of more responsible toward the public. The new bill, Pashin warned, would give the Kremlin unlimited power. "Now we still have the right to appeal rulings that go against the Constitution in court. But can you imagine what might happen if the courts are completely under the Kremlin's control?" he said. "They would always rule in favor of the Kremlin, even when the Constitution is broken."
Back to top
Jutrzenkapolska VIP Joined: 16 Sep 2004 Posts: 534	Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2004 8:11 am    Post subject: Footnote Little correction: Like alot of Revolutionary War propagandists, the great Thomas Paine was English, not American.He didn't even come to America until he was 37.
Back to top
markhagelin Talk Show Host Joined: 31 Oct 2004 Posts: 208 Location: Maine, USA	Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2004 10:38 am    Post subject: Re: Footnote Jutrzenkapolska wrote: Little correction: Like alot of Revolutionary War propagandists, the great Thomas Paine was English, not American.He didn't even come to America until he was 37. Paine wrote "Common Sense" around 1774, many of his ideas were used in the Declaration of Independence. Paine was an anti-monarchist who was no longer welcomed in England and was forced to leave France. So while he was born an Englishman, he died an American in New York City in 1809. His statement Quote: Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it. is just as applicable now as it was then. People cannot be lazy and expect that freedom will come to them, or that it can remain by their in-action. Putin will take away the Russian's freedom without firing one bullet. The Georgians praise the Ukrainians. It is almost a year to the day of the Rose Revolution and Georgia is doing well. I predict the Ukraine wil go the route of Georgia. Ukrainian national identity will win. Quote: The fourth—and perhaps most important—ingredient that went into the Rose Revolution was Georgian national identity and unity. Despite years of poverty and demoralization, the leaders of the Rose Revolution were successful in appealing to positive feelings of national unity when it came time to mobilize the nation Mark http://gwbweb.wustl.edu/IDCS/roserevolution.htm Quote: Making Sense of Georgia’s “Rose Revolution” Zurab Karumidze Co-editor, Caucasus Context US-Caucasus Institute Tbilisi, GEORGIA James V. Wertsch Co-editor, Caucasus Context Washington University Saint Louis, MO, USA After publishing two prototype issues of a magazine called CaucasUS Context, we will be coming out in the spring of 2004 with a new version of Caucasus Context published by Nova Publishers. What follows are some excerpts from the editors’ introduction to this first issue. The first Nova issue of Caucasus Context focuses on the “Rose Revolution” that took place in Georgia in November 2003. This extraordinary event put Georgia back on the radar screen of the global community. It is the most interesting and important experiment in democracy in the region—and perhaps the world—today. And the interest in this experiment extends far beyond think tanks and universities. Leaders and citizens in places like Azerbaijan, Armenia, Russia, and Ukraine have been watching the Rose Revolution with genuine excitement—and in some cases, trepidation. A few basic themes run throughout the accounts of the Rose Revolution we provide in this issue of Caucasus Context. Again, these are themes that are not just of academic interest when looking at Georgia. They raise crucial questions—practical as well as theoretical—for anyone concerned with moving a country along the path toward democracy. The first such theme is the important role played by civil society in the events of November. Numerous NGOs have been active in Georgia for years, and they clearly had an impact on government and society by the time of the parliamentary elections of November 2, 2003. Some of these NGOs have actively defended the rights of religious and ethnic groups and in the process helped create a public sphere of discourse in the country. The interviews reflect different, sometimes conflicting views of just how important NGOs were in the revolution, but they generally agree that they at least played a major role in laying the groundwork for the event. A free press was the second factor in the Rose Revolution that comes through in the interviews. The Georgian public was often inspired by the images and stories provided by the press, especially the television station Rustavi-2. A free press (along with the assistance provided by NGOs) had become so powerful by 2003 that attempts by government authorities in the previous few years to muzzle it were met by massive public resistance. Some of our interviewees viewed the oppositional media's coverage as occasionally bordering on being irresponsible, but all agree that it played a pivotal role in initiating and maintaining public support for the Rose Revolution. In contrast to these first two ingredients in the Rose Revolution, each of which has to do with the presence of something, the third involves something that was wanting, namely state authority. Eduard Shevardnadze’s technology of power (especially during the last 3-4 years) was marked by a sort of “liberal detachment” from the corrupt processes in his government that led many to view Georgia as a weak state. This view was supported by the fact that the leaders of the Rose Revolution, along with the NGOs and media, encountered relatively little resistance from law-enforcement agencies. The fourth—and perhaps most important—ingredient that went into the Rose Revolution was Georgian national identity and unity. Despite years of poverty and demoralization, the leaders of the Rose Revolution were successful in appealing to positive feelings of national unity when it came time to mobilize the nation. This is particularly noteworthy in a country where it is often said that whenever two Georgians get together, you can be sure of having at least three political parties. Some of the most powerful and poignant statements in the interviews that follow have to do with themes of Georgian national unity and identity. Whereas there were differences of opinion as to how important the NGOs were or how responsible the media were, there is agreement that the people were the main actors and heroes of the Rose Revolution. They were motivated by deep frustration with the corrupt government of the past few years, but this frustration did not simply express itself in an outburst of negative, destructive action. Instead, the Georgian people came together in a way that was moving and often surprising to the leaders—and even to themselves. Nino Burjanadze summarized what she saw in November by noting that Georgians “can tolerate a lot of things, poverty and so forth, but when it comes to our dignity, we cannot tolerate it . . . [T]his nation still has kept some inner force that can be used to recover its future.” And in his reflections, Zurab Zhvania remarks that the Rose Revolution “was the first time since regaining independence that Georgians feel like winners. They have this sense that they won . . . People are still in poverty and have the same economic problems and so on, but they now feel much, much stronger than before. It was like regaining dignity. We are a nation. We are a nation, and we are proud that we are Georgians again.” Of course national unity and identity can lead in dangerous directions, and they have done this in the past in Georgia. In the Rose Revolution, however, they seem to have served a productive purpose. Comments such as Burjanadze’s and Zhvania’s in the following interviews suggest that the November revolution was a victory of, and for the Georgian people. In a sense, it was a victory over themselves. They went into the streets to say “Enough!” to being part of a corrupt, shadow economy, to double standards, to social apathy and powerlessness. Now it’s up to the new leadership of the country to transform this collective pathos of the revolution into a decent everyday labor. http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/articles/eav112204a.shtml Quote: EURASIA INSIGHT GEORGIA’S ROSE REVOLUTION: MOMENTUM AND CONSOLIDATION Eric A. Miller 11/22/04 Print this article Email this article Georgia’s Rose Revolution has succeeded in making positive changes in the country’s economic and political direction, said panelists at a recent roundtable, convened to evaluate developments in Tbilisi over the past year. But, the panelists indicated, consolidating the gains already made will provide fresh challenges. President Mikheil Saakashvili’s administration must concentrate on strengthening institutions, rather that relying on the force of individual will, some suggested. The Rose Revolution – a popular protest over a rigged parliamentary election that cascaded into a political uprising -- forced former Georgian president Eduard Shevardnadze to resign on November 23, 2003. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. A November 18 roundtable – titled Georgia’s Rose Revolution: One Year and Beyond, and co-sponsored by the Washington, DC-based Georgia Forum and the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute at Johns Hopkins University – evaluated the successes and shortcomings of Saakashvili’s effort to transform the country from a failed state into a Western-style market democracy. Panelists generally agreed that Saakashvili’s aggressive campaign against high-level governmental corruption, waged since January, stands out among the year’s many accomplishments. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. "Rampant corruption under Shevardnadze was crippling for Georgian development," noted one of the panelists, Lincoln Mitchell, the former Director of the National Democratic Institute’s Tbilisi office. "But Saakashvili’s actions have increased public confidence and hope in the government." Georgian citizens have seen immediate improvements in their day-to-day lives, panelists suggested, citing a significant decrease in police corruption. "Nearly 13,000 police officers, those commonly found on the streets of Tbilisi ready to shake down Georgian motorists, have been fired," said Ambassador David Smith, a US member of the International Security Advisory Board for Georgia. "Their replacements are well-trained, salaries have been increased, and extortion and bribery has dipped significantly." The successful and relatively peaceful reintegration of the renegade region of Ajaria marked another shining moment for Saakashvili’s administration. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. The benefits of forcing former regional strongman Aslan Abashidze from power were multifaceted. The reestablishment of Tbilisi’s authority in Batumi marked an encouraging first-step in efforts to promote Georgia’s territorial reintegration. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. On an economic level, Abashidze’s departure closed a major conduit for smuggling that had hampered development efforts. But perhaps the most important issue, according to Revaz Adamia, Georgia’s ambassador to the United Nations, was the psychological impact of Ajaria: "It showed that major problems could be solved. It gave hope to the Georgian people," Adamia said. Panelists cited the reorganization of Georgia’s defense establishment – something overshadowed by other developments -- as another important Rose Revolution success story. Under Saakashvili’s watch, the US-sponsored Georgia Train and Equip Program (GTEP) ended successfully and now, in addition to US trainers, Georgians are training other Georgians. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive]. The Ministry of Defense also was placed under civilian control, and the defense budget was nearly doubled to 119 million lari (roughly 45 million US dollars). At the same time, the National Security Council cut over half of its personnel, and authority over the Interior Ministry’s military roughly 8,000-strong force was transferred to the Defense Ministry. The civil-society implications of the termination of the Interior Ministry’s influence over the country’s armed forces are profound, Smith indicated. "Democracies do not have internal armies." A year ago, the military totaled roughly 22,000 troops. Today, the number is about 15,000. The incorporation of the Interior Ministry troops into the regular army will slow the streamlining process, but Defense Ministry officials say they are committed to reducing the overall force to 14,600. "They will do this by absorbing some into the new force, retraining others, and where appropriate dismissing others," Smith said. Officials in Saakashvili’s administration express hope that in making the Defense Ministry more efficient, the government can boost the military’s effectiveness in promoting national security goals. While initial developments are encouraging, the Rose Revolution’s ability to meet its goals are far from assured, the panelists said, adding that Saakashvili’s administration faces some difficult decisions in the coming months and years. Given Georgia’s lack of well-developed institutions, the choices made by Saakashvili stand to have an especially powerful influence over the country’s near-term development. Perhaps the thorniest issue that Saakashvili will wrestle with for the foreseeable future concerns Georgia’s territorial integrity. Saakashvili appears determined to restore Tbilisi’s control over its two separatist-minded regions – Abkhazia and South Ossetia. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Panelists agreed that Abkhazia and South Ossetia will remain crucial in years to come. Georgian government attempts over the summer to replicate the Ajaria experience in South Ossetia failed, putting the two sides on the brink of a full-blown armed confrontation. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. The Tbilisi-Tskhinvali tension has, in turn, stoked confrontation between Georgia and Russia. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive]. "It is clear that Georgia needs Western help to solve these frozen conflicts, and they also deserve our help," said Cory Welt, a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Through Georgia’s participation in international peacekeeping initiatives in Afghanistan, Kosovo and Iraq, Saakashvili has sought to encourage Western support for Tbilisi’s territorial reintegration agenda. In addition, Georgia has moderated its reintegration concept by placing greater emphasis on minority rights. In Welt’s words, Tbilisi now seeks to forge a "civic identity and not an ethnic one" for the country. Whether such moves will succeed in securing strong Western backing remains an open question. Panelists noted that the Bush administration appears reluctant to confront Russia openly at this time because, as Smith put it, Washington’s "national security plate is pretty full." However, he pointed out that several times in the past year, the [Bush] administration "has sent strong signals to Moscow" on Georgia’s behalf. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Ultimately, as Welt said, unless the United States gets more involved, the South Ossetia and Abkhazia conflicts are unlikely to be resolved. "It is simply too difficult for Georgia to negotiate directly with Russia, especially with their ongoing support to Abkhazia and South Ossetia," Welt said. In the purely domestic realm, there are aspects of the anti-corruption campaign that are cause for concern. Panelists acknowledged that while the government’s actions have enhanced the public perception of the government, the moves to punish corrupt officials have at times skirted the rule of law. In Tbilisi, non-governmental activists have complained that some anti-corruption prosecutions have been politically motivated, designed to cripple and intimidate Saakashvili’s political enemies. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive]. In addition, some panelists pointed out that curbing the corrupt practices of middle- and lower-level bureaucrats will be a painstaking process, possibly testing the public’s patience. As for the country’s broader economic performance, it is too early to judge the Saakashvili administration’s performance, the panelists indicated. "The real economic question for Georgia is how it manages the assets and the liabilities inherited from the previous regime," said Ross Harrison, Executive Vice President of Tapco International and Treasurer of the America-Georgia Business Council. "The results over the past year are unclear," Harrison stated. A vibrant business community is blossoming and foreign direct investment is growing, but Harrison noted that the Georgian government has yet to set forth a clear economic strategy that leverages Georgian assets, like its strategic position in the East-West energy corridor and its once attractive tourism industry. Saakashvili has yet to develop a medium-to-long-term economic plan that could help guide his administration in confronting the challenges ahead. "The government has focused on its short-term populist appeal and not on developing a long-term strategic outlook," Harrison said. In the future the pace of Georgia’s economic development will be determined by the "balance between popular expectations and a more comprehensive economic strategy." In examining the country’s near-term political prospects, panelists emphasized a need for the Saakashvili administration to develop institutions. At present, the lack of a developed system of checks and balances, along with a shortage of qualified personnel to staff the three branches of government, leave Georgia in a precarious position. One individual, the president, wields an inordinate amount of influence – something that can compound the consequences of policy mistakes. Some panelists suggested that any attempt to further concentrate power in the hands of the president would be counter-productive in meeting the Rose Revolution’s aims. "Democracies represent more than just their elections, but also a sense of ownership, of political accountability, of a legal and legitimate process," Mitchell said. "Democracies are about institutions and not individuals." Saakashvili will have to sacrifice individual authority in order to allow Georgian democracy to flourish, Smith suggested. "Greater parliamentary oversight of the executive branch will be crucial to cement Georgia’s democratic transition." Editor’s Note: Eric A. Miller, Ph.D., is an Analyst at the National Institute for Public Policy in Fairfax, Virginia, and Research Associate at the Institute for European, Russian and Eurasian Studies at George Washington University, Washington, DC. Posted November 22, 2004 © Eurasianet http://www.eurasianet.org http://www.kyivpost.com/top/21846/ Quote: Memory of Georgia’s 'Rose Revolution' haunts Kyiv Nov 23, 12:24 (AP) - No one passing the thousands of protesters crowding Kyiv's main street asks why Georgian flags are waving in Ukraine - the parallels with Georgia's "Rose Revolution" are strong, even eerie. The demonstrations come exactly a year after protesters in Georgia forced their president out of office. The trigger in both cases: allegations of election fraud, confirmed by Western observers, that brought long-simmering resentments to a boil. Even the main players are variations on the same themes. In Ukraine, as in Georgia, the challenger is a reformer and former government member accused by foes of being an American cat's-paw, with a Western wife. The target, in Kyiv as in Tbilisi: a Soviet-schooled apparatchik. Both times, the protesters' core included people who have received guidance from activists who drove out Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic. But the analogies, however compelling, are not equivalencies, and the techniques that worked in Yugoslavia and Georgia are not ensured of success in Ukraine. In this kind of revolution, size historically does seem to matter, but conversely: it generally works better in smaller places. Georgia's total population of 5 million is smaller than that of the greater Kyiv area; Yugoslavia, at the time Milosevic fell, had 8 million people - a sixth of Ukraine's population. If Ukraine's protesters are banking that sheer numbers will prevail - that they'll compile a critical mass that will convince the authorities change is unavoidable - they'll likely need far more than have gathered so far. Nor have the Ukrainians seen much of their own blood spilled, even though the country's security forces aren't opposed to swinging their truncheons. Georgians were hardened by more than a decade of separatist mayhem and protests that erupted in gunfire; Yugoslavia was shattered by all-out wars. A violent offensive by police against Ukraine's protesters could shock them into retreat. Police response was a key to the success of the Rose Revolution - they dressed in ominous-looking riot gear, but stayed at the fringe of the crowds, giving the protesters to believe the security forces were secretly on their side. Although shots were fired, at the crucial moment during Serbia's October 2000 unrest, police openly supported protesters and joined the opposition. Whether Ukraine's security forces were willing to take tough measures against the demonstrators supporting opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko was open to question. A statement issued Nov. 21 in the name of the SBU security service, the Prosecutor General's Office, and the Interior Ministry said "we are ready to put an end to any lawlessness quickly and firmly," but the SBU later denied it was party to the statement. Although busloads of police and other forces were moving into Kyiv in recent days, there was essentially no visible police presence at the protest. As thousands of demonstrators milled before dawn, making barricades of iron benches and setting up tents, the only visible police were a pair of morose-looking traffic cops watching from the confines of their cramped Lada patrol car. In Georgia, the protesters saw little open opposition among civilians - opponents bused in from Adzharia did little other than stand around looking surly. In Ukraine, the base of support for Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, whom the protesters say won the election through fraud, is in the hard-bitten coal-mining Donetsk region - and rumors swirl of convoys of Donetsk toughs heading for the capital. Russia's role also could be critical. Although the Kremlin detested Georgian protest leader Mikhail Saakashvili, it also had locked horns repeatedly with then-President Eduard Shevardnadze and a visit from Russian envoy Igor Ivanov appeared to be key in bringing about Shevardnadze's resignation; Ivanov also showed up in Belgrade hours before Milosevic finally conceded defeat. But Russia strongly favored Yanukovych and its interest in Ukraine is stronger than in either Georgia or Yugoslavia: it's an important trade partner, a buffer between Russia and NATO countries and an important transit route for Russian oil and gas exports. In a possibly telling note, Ukraine's outgoing President Leonid Kuchma said little publicly amid the spiraling crisis Monday - but did announce he plans to meet soon with Russian President Vladimir Putin. http://www.kyivpost.com/bn/21876/ Quote: Putin increasingly walks alone Nov 24, 22:35 THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) - Increasingly, Russian President Vladimir Putin walks alone. He has alarmed the West with authoritarian policies at home. He announced last week that Russia was developing new nuclear missiles. And now he has embraced the official outcome of a Ukrainian election that Western observers say was rigged. When he succeeded Boris Yeltsin nearly five years ago, the longtime KGB officer was an enigma whose past raised eyebrows and concerns about his intentions. But as the months passed he seemed to throw his lot in with the West, stepping up ties with the European Union and NATO and pledging to develop a clean, transparent economy. He became fast friends with European leaders, picnicking in a hunting cabin outside Moscow with Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi and chatting in German with Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder. Early on, he forged close ties with U.S. President George W. Bush - a strategic bond that remains strong today. When he arrives in The Hague for a summit with the European Union on Nov. 25, Putin is bound to be in for a chillier reception. The meeting, postponed earlier this month, comes days after he set the stage for sharp confrontation with the West by congratulating Viktor Yanukovych as the winner of Ukraine's bitterly disputed presidential vote. Ukraine election officials on Nov. 24 insisted that the result would stand, drawing prompt criticism from U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell who said, "We cannot accept this result as legitimate." Putin's gesture, which capped an unabashed campaign of support for his favored candidate in a country at the crossroads of Russian and Western interests, was the latest in a long line of statements, actions and policies that have dismayed and alienated Europe and the United States. His move to legitimize an election result widely viewed abroad as fraudulent will add to their already persistent growing concerns about where he is leading his own country. When many in the West look at Russia, they see a bleak political landscape painted in Putin's bold brushstrokes: A parliament seemingly manipulated at will by the Kremlim; regional governors no longer elected but appointed directly by Putin; a media that hews closely to the government line; a prominent business leader who challenged Putin thrown into prison. EU concerns about a drift toward authoritarianism have hampered efforts to forge a new "strategic partnership" agreement with Russia. Europe is demanding that Russia pledge adherence to what it says must be the "common values" of Europe. Putin said Nov. 24 that it was important "to avoid creating new dividing lines between us and Europe," but there is increasing concern in the EU that by strengthening control over Russia at the expense of democracy and supporting heavy-handed leaders in former Soviet republics, the Russian leader is throwing up new divisions - or even rebuilding a Cold War curtain. Some of Putin's recent statements give off the chilling air of that era. Last week he boasted that Russia is developing new nuclear missiles he stressed no other nation would have for years. After the Beslan hostage-taking tragedy he darkly suggested that terrorists plotting to tear Russia apart had Western sympathy or support. But while such statements are meant at least partly for hawks at home, Putin's involvement in the Ukraine election is likely to be the most serious test yet of his ties with the West. By supporting the establishment candidate in Ukraine - where the United States and Europe are actively promoting a seminal shift to a more open, democratic society, in part as a buffer to his newly assertive Russia - Putin is taking his challenge of the West to a new level.
Back to top
36_CKOTUHOK Frequent Guest Joined: 13 Jun 2004 Posts: 29	Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2004 5:50 pm    Post subject: Read this http://kniga.temnik.com.ua/ - true story about Yshenko past. People in Ukraine choose not between Yanukovich or Yshenko, but for Yshenko and against Yshenko. Visit polit.sru section on site udaff.com - 3rd article from beginning is that you should read to understand thy people hate Yshenko. His crimes are proven, but noody can arrest him. He has too much power to be judjed.
Back to top
markhagelin Talk Show Host Joined: 31 Oct 2004 Posts: 208 Location: Maine, USA	Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2004 6:20 pm    Post subject: Thanks for the link, but I can't read Russian and have no way to translate it. Can you either translate it, or give me a general overview? There are unsubstantiated rumors that attempts were made to poison Yushchenko, his words on the subject: Quote: "Look at my face, listen to my [poor] articulation. These are just small indications of the problem I had. What happened to me is not a problem of food or my eating habits. It is a problem of the political regime in this country," Yushchenko said. At least some of the people in the Ukraine are not lazy and will not only talk politics, but will do something about it. The protestors are a good sign. The change of the broadcasting policies of the television are a good sign, the protests are making it onto tv. The police stand with the protestors is also a good sign. The same can be said for the Georgians. They too, not only talked politics, but did something about it And now corruption is down in Georgia. It is not perfect, but people are working to make it better. It looks like the Rose Revolution all over again. I think the Ukrainians want a better life and to join the EU. What will Moscow do now? Kyev is leaning to the West. Will Russian tanks be used? Or will the Russian commandos which are already said to be in Kyev be sent in? Mark
Back to top
Dr-Fauste Site Admin Joined: 23 Nov 2004 Posts: 654	Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2004 6:42 pm    Post subject: It is not a Rose Revolution again. The Georgian President had the backing almost all the Georgian people which is not the case here. There is major divide amoung the people. By the speech, both men want the power for themselves, not Ukraine. Both seems willing to spill other blood for their ambition. MacBeth is still alive and welll in the world. Fools, Ukraine will never fully west or Russian, so Ukraine's answer is between these MacBeth's ideaology.
Back to top
markhagelin Talk Show Host Joined: 31 Oct 2004 Posts: 208 Location: Maine, USA	Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2004 7:12 pm    Post subject: There will either be: 1) New elections again 2) A civil war 3) A split of the Ukraine into 2. The nationalists in the Ukraine will not let a puppet president supported by Moscow to rule the Ukraine. They will not allow a union with Russia similar to the one with Belarus. That is, at least my take, on the situation. Why else does Russia have commandos in Kyev except to take over the Ukraine by force? The protests are peaceful. The police support the protestors. The corruptness of the elections has been challenged. I feel the Ukrainians are more pro-West than Pro-Moscow. Kuchma is pro-Moscow, yet it seems little has been done to end the corruption. Georgia has had some success. The Ukraine has probably got a greater incentive to being autonomous, being able to join the EU and to get Western capital influx. They can see the partial success in Georgia. Mark Quote: After the Rose Revolution: Building Georgia’s Future CSIS Statesmen’s Forum with Zurab Zhvania Prime Minister of Georgia April 26, 2004 CSIS hosted the Prime Minister of Georgia, Zurab Zhvania, on April 26 for a CSIS Statesmen's Forum, “After the Rose Revolution: Building Georgia's Future.” Prime Minister Zhvania spoke about recent political and economic reform in Georgia, challenges for the future, and prospects for deepening the Georgian-U.S. partnership. Accompanying Zhvania to the United States were Georgia's Minister of Finance Zurab Noghaideli and Minister of Defense Gela Bezhuashvili. Georgia’s Ambassador to the United Nations Revaz Adamia and Ambassador to the United States Levan Mikeladze also attended the meeting, chaired by Dr. John Hamre, President and CEO of CSIS. Prime Minister Zhvania’s remarks are summarized below. After the “Revolution of Roses” Prime Minister Zhvania last spoke at CSIS in 2002. At that time, he was a member of the political opposition. He sought to persuade the audience that Georgian civil society had the potential to pull off a peaceful transition and to bring a new generation of leaders to power. Now, in 2004, he represents this new generation of leaders that, in the Prime Minister’s words, has emerged out of one of the most peaceful revolutions in world history. Since the election of President Mikheil Saakashvili in January 2004, questions have been raised regarding the ability of Georgia’s new government to make good on its promises to improve political and economic life in Georgia. Zhvania sought to dispel these doubts. The Georgian government recognizes that it has a window of opportunity to implement necessary reforms, and that it will not enjoy the confidence and support of the population indefinitely. To date, reforms have touched upon every sphere of government in Georgia. Prime Minister Zhvania recognized the new defense minister, Gela Bezhuashvili, and his efforts to transform the Ministry of Defense. He has retired the vast majority of serving generals and reduced the number of standing military forces. Because of Bezhuashvili’s military reforms, Georgia is becoming a more able recipient of military assistance and looks forward to an enhanced dialogue with NATO. Zhvania also recognized the finance minister, Zurab Noghaideli, and his work to put an end to complete chaos in Georgia’s financial and budgetary spheres. The government has begun to pay pensions, wages, and refugee allowances without delay and has also begun to pay arrears. Such steps, however modest, give people confidence that they have a government that is not only good at making speeches but also at delivering on its promises. Prime Minister Zhvania noted that a number of dramatic reforms remain ahead. Interior Minister Giorgi Baramidze has declared a very ambitious agenda to put an end to Georgia’s traditional Soviet-style police force. By the end of the year, the government plans to complete a pilot project in Tbilisi for retraining the city’s police force. The police force will also be reduced by ten thousand. This is a difficult and complicated step but one necessary to eradicate the corruption that has flourished in Georgia’s law enforcement agencies. For 2004, ene rgy reform remains Georgia’s number one priority. The new Energy Minister is, at 29 years old, the most competent Georgia has ever had. He has increased the financial transparency of the energy sector and has established a sixteen-month plan to overhaul the sector. Revenue collection has increased dramatically in the last three months—by nearly sixty percent. The main fiscal task is to increase the share of Georgia’s formal economy from fifty to eighty percent by the end of June. The government also plans to implement a dramatic reform of the tax code. Zhvania declared that the first part of Georgia’s war on corruption has been won. Many of the most corrupt individuals have been arrested, as have the “gangsters” who were controlling various parts of the country. Georgia is becoming a country with far more order, peace, and hope. The Challenges Ahead Zhvania was careful to note that all this is just the beginning. Georgia is now entering a more complicated phase of reforms that must make irreversible the progress that has been initiated. Georgia needs to rebuild its economy to provide opportunities to its citizens and to make Georgia a more attractive place for foreign investment. It needs to not only celebrate the successful roundup of criminals but also establish a rule-of- law based state. Viable institutions need to be established that will guarantee Georgia will not revert to past practices and will never again be considered one of the most corrupt countries in the world. Zhvania addressed the government’s relationship with the leader of the autonomous region of Ajara, Aslan Abashidze. He noted that at issue is not a personal confrontation between President Saakashvili and Abashidze. Rather, the problem is one of protecting human rights, eliminating smuggling and trafficking, and restoring a normal democratic order to Georgia. Abashidze poses a problem not only to Georgia and its government, but to the population of Ajara itself. The government must defend the rights and freedoms of its citizens in Ajara. The government has offered Abashidze guarantees that he will be permitted to stay in office through the end of his term, if he disarms his supporters, respects human rights, stops terrorizing his political opponents and attacking journalists, and allows normal elections. He has also been offered the opportunity to retain personal security forces. Abashidze has refused to negotiate on disarmament, however. Zhvania does not see Abashidze fitting in with the new Georgia. The main domestic challenge for Georgia remains the restoration of the country’s territorial integrity. The government is optimistic that, as the Georgian state grows stronger, Abkhazians and South Ossetians will come to believe that they too can enjoy living in a viable Georgian democracy. Zhvania indicated his hope that after a new Abkhazian leader is elected in the fall, the government will be more successful at negotiating a status for Abkhazia within Georgia that will provide Abkhazia with the broadest possible extent of self-government. Progress in Abkhazia will also depend on the development of successful relations with Russia. Georgia is not asking Russia to solve the problem of Abkhazia itself. It is looking for Russia to stop providing the Abkhazian separatists with any sort of military or economic support and to move forward with sincere policies for solving the longstanding conflict. Relations with Neighbors and the West Turning to international affairs, Prime Minister Zhvania noted that while Armenia and Azerbaijan were at first cautious about the rise of the new government, the leaders of both countries have expressed a willingness to seek new ways to increase regional cooperation. None of the three states wish for the South Caucasus to remain a field of constant confrontation. Georgia has an exceptional relationship with Ukraine, a country that is important for building a system of regional security in the Black Sea area. Turkey, which represents Georgia’s border with NATO, is also a major partner for Georgia and the entire region. Georgia has established new relations with Russia. Problems still exist, but there is now much more cooperation and far less confrontation. In past years, Russian media constantly vilified Georgia. Russia also had some concerns about their security that were not addressed properly by the Georgian leadership. Now, Georgia is ready to cooperate with Russia in order to make the South Caucasus a more secure place and to ensure that Russia’s security interests are not threatened. At the same time, the Georgian government hopes Moscow understands that the continued presence of Russian military bases in Georgia has not and will not contribute to improving bilateral relations. The Georgian government hopes that the rapprochement between Georgia and Russia will result in a resolution to the issue of the Russian military bases, as well as to the conflicts in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The European Union has responded positively to the latest changes in Georgia, inviting it to join the Wider Europe and New Neighborhood initiatives. For Georgians, to be European does not mean being members of a political club. Georgians believe that Georgia is a part of Europe and that they share common values with Europe. Georgia wants to contribute, together with its neighbors, to the security architecture of Europe and can contribute positively to overall European security. Zhvania reaffirmed that the most stable, final arrangement for the security of Georgia lies within the Euro-Atlantic alliance. Finally, Zhvania discussed Georgia’s relations with the United States. The United States has invested greatly in helping make Georgia a successful democracy. For years, many were frustrated that U.S. assistance was wasted, that Georgians were waiting passively for the U.S. to solve its problems, and that Georgia was at risk of turning into a failed state. Now the situation is changing. Georgia’s strong civil society, which really made the peaceful revolution happen, includes many individuals who were educated in the United States and who have been inspired by Georgia’s relations with the United States. Georgia considers the United States to be a strategic partner. It understands that what it must do as a partner of the United States is to become stronger and develop into a more stable and successful democracy. Georgia participates in the war on terror in Iraq not just because it wants to please the United States, but because Georgians believe it is also their war against terror. Summarized by Cory Welt
Back to top
36_CKOTUHOK Frequent Guest Joined: 13 Jun 2004 Posts: 29	Posted: Sat Nov 27, 2004 12:41 pm    Post subject: Translated by promt, and patched by mine due to promt bugs. Chapter 1: the appearance of the HERO In July, 1985 in capital of the Soviet Ukraine, the city-hero Kiev has arrived Victor Andreevich Jushchenko. Here it was waited with a post of the deputy chief of management of crediting of collective farms, agroindustrial associations and the intercollective-farm enterprises of the Ukrainian republican office of the State Bank of the USSR. In April, 1986 the post of the future main banker began to refer to so: the deputy chief of management of crediting of an agriculture of agriculture. Still, has made qualitative career jump, has received a post in the largest bank and habitation in Kiev, in Troeshchina. His purpose was - career, and characteristic features - resignation and sense of duty before the heads, insistence - to subordinates. As the ordinary communist it regularly visited Communist Party meetings, voting as it is necessary; soon it became the happy owner of the automobile ("zhiguli" brown color), and then and the trailer to it that easier was from village fresh products to carry; in an exchange in village were sent put to it on a rank of "soldering" in conditions then " break in deficiency ". In December 1989 it appoint the vice-president - the chief of scheduled-expert management of Ukrainian republican office Agroprombank of the USSR. Soon, having taken advantage of confusion reigned in the collapsing Soviet Union, the bank heads literally gift has received the Ukrainian republican office of the State Bank of the USSR in the order and has formed Joint-stock commercial Agroprombank "Ukraine", with multi-billion funds, with the ramified network of branches in all areas, with the uncomplaining and "checked up" collective-farm clientele. One action bank "Ukraine" in 1990 cost 100 000 Soviet roubles (approximately - 17 000 US dollars). Shareholders of bank of 5160 legal persons, - agroindustrial associations, establishments, collective farms, the intercollective-farm enterprises, etc. The agriculture even in the collapsing USSR received mullions-strong grants, so money a wide stream flown in bank " Ukraine " and through him. Well and Victor Andreevich Jushchenko since November, 1990 held a post of the vice-president of board of this bank. The USSR collapsed, the system went to pieces, and bank activity had no legislative regulation, why brought fabulous incomes. Having taken advantage of this circumstance, "adherents" from top bank "Ukraine" have managed for short time to construct for themselves "nezalezhnyj" capitalism in separately taken republican bank office. In the classical economic theory there is such concept - the capital. It is set of means which can be used by manufacture of material benefits. Except for the capital, for manufacture work and the ground are necessary still. The financial capital was in their hands, collective farms should provide the ground and cheap work, political covering was provided with the People's Deputies. Thus, people from "top" APB "Ukraine" one of the first have turned to the Ukrainian oligarches. They owned the capital, maintained work, the ground, influenced authority, providing acceptance (nonacceptance) of the necessary laws (unnecessary) them, they already then bore plans to grasp all authority entirely. With an easy hand of the lured journalists, bank " Ukraine " it is considered to be smithy of the advanced banking staff (compete to this "smithy" the Central Committee of the Lenin communistic union of youth of Ukraine, merged significant means of Komsomol (and not only) in the commercial banks organized quickly) can only. First of all usually name V.Getmana, V.Jushchenko, I.Mitjukova, V.Kravets, O.Veselovskogo's names. But, alas, others are not present, and those far. V.Getman is killed, O.Veselovsky was lost in strange accident under rather mysterious circumstances, I.Mitjukov, after long service on high posts in NBU, Ministry and the Ministry of Finance, is removed in the honourable reference as the ambassador in the Great Britain, and V.Kravets has managed to get in prison on charge in abusings in bank " Ukraine ". But the destiny of the banker in Ukraine is unpredictable, - while the chapter of Natsbank of V.Jushchenko receives laurels of the winner, goes on increase and celebrates full triumph, his assistants, adherents V.Bondar and V.Kravets get for a lattice. However, to communicate to the inspector it was necessary also to V.Jushchenko, but - about all under the order. In 1991 Declarations on sovereignties were accepted, on majdane Independence starved students, Stepan Hmary's business obeyed, has arisen and has failed GKCHP which have followed Belovezhskaja a dense forest and, at last, - full independence of Ukraine. And at the end of a year, on what it is necessary to pay attention especially, the rouble has catastrophically fallen in price. Than Victor Jushchenko in 1991 when held a post of the vice-president of board APB " Ukraine " was engaged? In the winter of 1991 V.Jushchenko has gone to a luxurious boarding house for elite "Aju-Dag", located in one of zhivopisnejshih ugolkov southern coast of Crimea, at the head of the well-known Bear-mountain. JUshchenko held there any important seminar. Already then the association " Impeks 55 Crimea " rented in this boarding house 5 number-lux on 16 places (for which it has been in total paid by 1 million 824 thousand roubles) and settled there people necessary to it. Victor Jushchenko, certainly, was for "Impeksa" very necessary person. Is remarkable also that up to him and after in those "numbers" have visited such known in Crimea (and not only) people as, for example, the chief of the Crimean GAI E.Zhagornikov (with members of household), most important "Afghan" of Crimea, chairman of executive committee of Russian Movement of Crimea (RDK) V.Klychnikov and even the future president of the future Crimean Autonomy, for that moment - " idle time nardep " Crimea Jury Meshkov. That Jury Meshkov who for short time becomes the President of Crimea, and, as a matter of fact, his dictator, that of Bags which at support of bands will try to provoke a confrontation, hardly was will not tear off in 1993 Crimea from Ukraine, it is serious possorivUkrainu with Russia, and in general will do a lot of different has put. The association " Impeks 55 Crimea " and people, its created was uneasy. The main characters of association were a certain V.V.Averkin, the general director of production association "PASS" and cooperative society " the Bureau 55 ", and N.G.Protasov, chief OPERO (an operational department) Crimean republican management AK APB " Ukraine ". To association adjoined more than thirty every possible firms and firmochek, a nucleus of structure made " Impeks 55 Crimea ", "PASS" (she "Promin") and " the Bureau 55 ". The specified grouping in "granaries" AK APB "Ukraine" "was fed". So, from the end 1989 till February, 1992 from this bank to structures of association " Impeks 55 Crimea " it has been given 804 million roubles. Including - a case outstanding - 510 million - the interest-free loan - industrial association " IANN ", the rest to other structures of all under 1-8 % annual. Almost anything from the sums given on credit back in bank has not returned, and could not return, as intended absolutely on other purposes. Money were converted in hard currency and left in pockets of participants of a grouping, and also were spent for rather doubtful political ends. The matter is that the association " Impeks 55 Crimea " was one of organizers of the powerful antiUkrainian company which hardly has not ended with full split for inhabitants of Ukraine. So, it agrees " to the Report on target use of an entrance fee ", the association " Impeks 55 Crimea " has transferred in " the Russian scientific fund " tens millions roubles of " political consultation ", " methodical assistance " and " the organizations of contacts to the Supreme Soviet and the government of Russia ". Money were actually used by Russian Movement of Crimea under which wing J.Meshkov has come to power. Quite good application have found to the money "patriots" from AK APB "Ukraine". Thus as it was found out, bank " Ukraine " on behalf of the OPERO the Crimean republican management from the very beginning was one of founders of association " Impeks 55 Crimea ". The chief of an auditing department of National bank of Ukraine N.Alekhin has paid attention to tricks "Impeksa", but soon after that has been dismissed. It and it is no wonder, taking into account V.Jushchenko's reaction to transactions with credits. Here his official opinion as one of bosses AK APB "Ukraine": " the Credits given by Protasovoj N.G. over restrictions of the limiting sizes and without corresponding sanctions of higher structures, - are given with infringement of internal departmental rules, but do not contradict the working bank legislation ". So, credits " are given with infringement ", but " do not contradict the working bank legislation ". Consequence which was carried out by special investigatory group of the State Office of Public Prosecutor of Ukraine, it has been established, that, according to Charter AK APB "Ukraine", in local branch of bank it is possible to receive the credit in the size only up to 5 million roubles and under 25-30 % annual. The association " Impeks 55 Crimea " and its structures received the sums much more, on favourable terms, which could not be coordinated differently, as at a level of the main Kiev office. JUshchenko has not told lies, asserting, that credits were given out " without corresponding sanctions of higher structures ". But this coordination was provided, most likely, with it. Individually. And the partner on business and rest in Crimea, the colleague - Igor Mitjukov assisted it, probably. How it has taken place - little bit further for now it is necessary to return to nomenclature rest house "Aju-Dag". The "Conditions" created in a boarding house for carrying out of the mentioned above seminar, V.Jushchenko have very much liked. So have liked, that in the summer, before holiday, Victor Andreevich has called Budilovichu (to director of Crimean republican management AK APB " Ukraine ") with the request "to organize" in the liked boarding house rest to it and still to " one comrade " (to the head of department of international payments AK APB "Ukraine" to Igor Mitjukovu). Clear business when the chief asks to organize to it rest, it is necessary to ask a question: and who will pay for this "organization"? But Victor Andreevich as the true market expert has specified association " Eiiaen " which is ready to incur all accompanying charges. Then, on interrogations in the State Office of Public Prosecutor, Victor Jushchenko tried "to bring down" all on the head of the Crimean branch of bank " Ukraine " Budilovicha: "... At meeting Budilovich has declared, that one number is completely redeemed, joint venture of bank [association " Eiiaen ", - avt.] and about payment cannot be and speeches... " In a word, the banker has been perfectly informed on N.Protasovoj and V.Averkina's joint activity. But be at bank even hundred joint ventures, and you even would be included into number of their employees, unless it is an occasion to not pay for the personal rest? However, the occasion at Victor Andreevicha, appears, was, and not small. Holiday has ended, and on October, 9, 1991 the association " Impeks 55 Crimea " has received credit AK APB "Ukraine" for converting in a foreign currency on purchase of the agricultural equipment (the theme of an agriculture at this time stands out on a life of our hero, later with short time she will be replaced with a theme of ecology, and then a theme sir - ukrainstva). According to working in AK APB "Ukraine" to the order, about an opportunity of delivery of the credit the Credit committee of bank created for these purposes should give the conclusion. And - at special session, after consideration of all documents proving expediency of delivery of the credit. V.Averkina's letter from October, 10, 1991 with the request to give out the credit, on the circumstances obscure till now, passing Credit committee, has fallen directly into hands to V.Jushchenko, having had time to visit before in I.Mitjukova's hands. And the credit has been given, in spite of that the significant part of documents from association " Impeks 55 Crimea " was simply counterfeit, and the part of necessary contracts has not been given at all. Besides, in credit business of bank " Ukraine " there was even a report of session of the Credit committee, dated all same on October, 10, 1991 (amazing efficiency!) . In it it is in black and white spoken about the lead session and about the positive decision concerning delivery 100 million roubles of the credit of association " Impeks 55 Crimea ", below, as it is necessary, signatures of all members of credit committee cost. At carrying out of interrogations inspectors of the State Office of Public Prosecutor of Ukraine have found out, that the presence at the specified session and the signature in the report was confirmed only with two persons, namely - lodgers "Impeks" in boarding house "Aju-Dag" - Victor Jushchenko and Igor Mitjukov. to be continued
Back to top
ow28 Frequent Guest Joined: 09 Sep 2004 Posts: 36	Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 10:31 am    Post subject: Re: Ukraine vs Russia markhagelin wrote: I don't normally get involved with the politics of another nation. I live here in the USA and sometimes that is bad enough. Those who value their freedom in Russia need to question Putin's motives and what he is doing before it is too late. Mark Those who value "freedom" in Russia voted for different Nemcov, Kovalev, Yavlinsky and the rest western sponsored politics. And they got less then 5%. Freedom for what? Freedom like in destoyed and humiliated Serbia? I remember the "freedom" of 90s. As for me, I remember the help of W. Europe and US in humiliating, ruining and robing my country. And I voted for Putin because I new he was a KGB man. It was our last hope. Why do not you care the US is poking its nose in the Ukrainian business? Please, finish your process of presenting democracy to Iraq at first. And thank you for liberated Serbs in Kosovo. They cannot thank you personaly because mostly they are killed by Albanians.
Back to top
ow28 Frequent Guest Joined: 09 Sep 2004 Posts: 36	Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 10:39 am    Post subject: markhagelin wrote: There will either be: 1) New elections again 2) A civil war 3) A split of the Ukraine into 2. The nationalists in the Ukraine will not let a puppet president supported by Moscow to rule the Ukraine. They will not allow a union with Russia similar to the one with Belarus. You are as smart as Mr. Lenin. Even more. Why? He saw the future of Russia living in Russia. You can see it livin' in other part of world, not even speaking Russian. And your discovery that Czar is derivate from Khazar was really impressive. One free advice for you if you visit Russia. If you see 2 Russina/Ukrainian/Belorussian guys fighting somewhere do not try to stop the fighting. You can be beaten by both of them and after that they will resume their chore. It's a part of slavic psychology.
Back to top
markhagelin Talk Show Host Joined: 31 Oct 2004 Posts: 208 Location: Maine, USA	Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 1:22 pm    Post subject: It is not the US or EU which has the protestors in the streets. It is the Ukrainian people protesting. They want a better life. You can support the old system all you want. It won't work. The input/output matrix for a planned economy is too big for a country the size of Russia or the former USSR. If and when the corruption goes by paying civil servants a high enough pay, having independent judges, etc the economies will no longer stagnate. I studied enough of Marxian economics and the economics of planned economies to realise the major flaws in the system. Communism can work, but not on a large scale. The communes of the 1960's in America showed it can work, but it didn't last. Lasiness, agression, etc. undermined it. Every society must have a social safety net. As can be seen in America with its limited socialism/welfare, people lose the incentive to take care of themselves if they feel they government will do it for them. Sometimes the freedom to make bad choices in one's life is better than not being able to chose. Benjamin Franklin once wrote Quote: Those who would give up liberty for security deserve neither Prospertiy under the Khazars and then the Rus indicate it is possible to have prosperity in the FSU. The biggest problem with America is that business no longer feels it has any moral obligation to the communities which they serve. Case in point, Christmas time is a time when charities within the United States collect alot of money to help the needy, the Salvation Army for one, does a very good job collecting money. Kmart, Walmart, and most of the big retailers either donate money or allow money to be collected from shoppers on their premises. Target does not. They are coming across as the Scrooge of the 21st centruy. They want onsumers money but don't give back to the community. While the American governmnet is limited in what it will do to help others, the American people are not. If the American economy is working sufficiently well or there is a perception that it will, Americans will donate their money to charities. Especially at Christmas time. Target has no idea what they are doing and who may be hurt. They want to siphon off the money from the community and not give back to it. Busieness without compassion is not buisness but a leech. Capitlalism only works with moral principles guiding it. It fails when greed is the sole motivator. America has become decadent because of greed and selfishness. Corruption within governement and business in America has become a problem just like in Georgia, the Ukraine and Russia. It's perhaps not as blatant. I like to compare the US with the Roman empire. If the US doesn't get its morality back, then there ill be a major problem. Morality is not something which can be legislated. It must be taught and practiced. A balance betweem government and the church needs to be maintained. A weak church and there is govenmental corruption. A church which is too strong and individual liberties are lost. I saw a Meet the Press tv episode recently with conservative and liberal clergy. The conservative clergy scared me because they want to force their "agenda" onto the people by passing laws to regulate moral behavior, They missed the point that the liberals made that God gave man free will and it was not their place to take it away. Individual morality is important for any country to thrive. For the Ukraine or any country to survive it must find its own balance between church and state. Both are necessary for growth. Mark
Back to top
cyndy22 Lounge Wizard Joined: 15 Oct 2004 Posts: 1076 Location: massachusetts	Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 3:36 pm    Post subject: I am pasting an email I just received from my friend Yuriy who lives in Donetsk which is eastern Ukraine. His email clearly tells just how stressful this situation is and its affects on the Ukraine people. Dear Cyndy, All last week I with a pressure watched a political situation in our country. As you, probably, know, after the second round of presidential elections at us political crisis has burst. The part of people of Ukraine, supporting on elections of the candidate from opposition has shown a civic courage, openly having acted against the declared results of elections. (By the way, I at these elections supported just the candidate from opposition – V.Yushchenko). An infringement of selective process was much. Especially in the east of Ukraine. If you know, I just live in the east of Ukraine where positions of other candidate – V.Yanukovicha were very strong. He, being at the moment of pre-election process by the working prime minister, actively used an administrative resource in pre-election campaign. Propaganda in Ukraine, it is especial in east, central and its southern part, it has been directed, basically, in support of the candidate from authority. Also frank falsifications have been admitted at the moment of voting and calculation of voices. All this has led to, that the society has actually broken up. You, probably, could observe from releases of news all over the world, that occurs and occured in Kiev and other cities of Ukraine. Frankly speaking, me one time was terrible. Ukraine stood on a threshold of civil war. All these days, after work, I practically did not depart from the screen of the TV, and also from a computer with the Internet, trying to receive the information from different, independent sources. And, only today there were events which give hope for the reasonable decision of crisis. The Supreme Court of Ukraine has considered the complaint of representatives of candidate V.Yushchenko and has made a decision – to cancel results of the second round of elections and to lead revoting the second round. Revoting can take place up to the end of this year. Events of political character already start to affect economy, anyway, at a household level. The prices for products grow, the exchange rate of cash US dollar grows. But, basically, I think, these processes have agiotage character and are not connected to the real negative phenomena in economics. But, I think, if political problems in Ukraine will be resolved, also problems in economics are stabilized. I personally would like to think more of coming nearer New Year and pleasures, with it connected. However, for the present on soul it is not quiet. Cyndy, I am very grateful to you that you worry of the situation in Ukraine. To me your support is pleasant and valuable. My best wishes to Fred and to Alex, and also hello to all of you from Natasha and Nastya. Sincerely, Yuriy.
Back to top
Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First

	Way to Russia Talk Lounge Forum Index -> Russian People	All times are GMT + 3 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3