Ukraine PM Signals Consent For Early Polls

KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukraine's prime minister signaled Saturday he might agree to early elections after a fresh presidential order to disband parliament and call early elections for June 24 threatened to prolong the political crisis in the country.

Viktor Yanukovych with Constitutional Court in the background
Viktor Yanukovych, locked in a lengthy power struggle with the president, said: "Politicians should sit down at the negotiation table.

If a decision to hold early elections cannot be made through the courts, we could adopt it through political discussions."

President Viktor Yuschenko signed a decree Thursday, which amended the previous April 2 order setting early elections for May 27 and dissolving parliament.

The move came shortly before the Constitutional Court issues a decision on his initial decree, which is widely expected to be unfavorable.

The premier said amendments had to be made to the budget to finance elections, and the Supreme Rada's powers had to be reinstated to achieve this.

He added he hoped to meet with the president soon to relay the proposals.

The 18-judge Constitutional Court said Saturday it had not started looking into the new decree yet, and were still hearing the original decree.

"[The legislature's] request for this [new] inquiry is being studied at the moment," the court said.

The standoff, triggered by the defection of 11 pro-presidential lawmakers to the majority parliamentary coalition backing the premier in late March, has plunged the ex-Soviet nation into its worst political crisis since the 2004 "orange revolution."

Thousands of Yanukovych and Yushchenko backers have been rallying in central Kiev, bringing back memories of mass protests that swept Yushchenko to power after Yanukovych lost the presidential poll over vote rigging accusations.

Russia's Vladimir Putin and Angela Merkel, who is currently holding the EU rotating presidency, discussed the current situation in Ukraine over the telephone.

The Kremlin press service said Putin and Merkel said it is essential to resolve all matters within the bounds of law and the country's Constitution, underlining the importance of the upcoming ruling by Ukraine's Constitutional Court.

Source: RIA Novosti

Party Of Regions Member: Attempt On Tymoshenko's Life Being Plotted

KIEV, Ukraine -- Volodymyr Sivkovych, a member of the Party of Regions in Ukraine, claimed he possess information indicating that a "provocative" attempt on the life of main opposition leader Yulya Tymoshenko might be in the works.

Is an attempt on Yulya Tymoshenko's life being plotted?
"I have asked the president to instruct the Security Service to appoint security guards for opposition leaders, in particular, Yulia Tymoshenko," Sivkovych said.

"I have information that an attempt on Yulya Volodymyrivna [Tymoshenko]'s life or something of the sort could happen," Sivkovych, a deputy chairman of the parliamentary committee for legislative support of law enforcement activities, said in an interview published last week in Komsomolskaya Pravda.

"This information comes from abroad," and "it can be trusted," he said.

"This will be exactly a provocation. The suspicions will be on her political opponents. But these opponents will have nothing to do with this," he said.

The provocation that is being plotted "will benefit some foreign countries," which are not CIS members, Sivkovych said. He called on Tymoshenko "to take a closer look at her entourage."

Sivkovych also said later that he had received the information from sources in Ukraine as well.

Source: Interfax

Khrushchev And Ukraine

KIEV, Ukraine -- Nikita Khrushchev, a bulky man with a provincial face and a wart on his cheek, led Ukraine's Central Committee of the Communist Party for eight years, including the period of the Great Patriotic War.

Nikita Khrushchev
When he was a Kremlin official, his actions affected Ukraine as well. Of all the Soviet leaders, Khrushchev was the most unpredictable and impetuous "helmsman of the party."

Unlike the more reserved Stalin, he impulsively and resolutely demonstrated the country's military might, plunging the world into the Cuban missile crisis. However, Khrushchev, unlike his reclusive predecessor, traveled abroad widely and often welcomed "imperialistic" leaders to Moscow for talks.

It was Khrushchev who energetically resolved the housing problem by building primitive but much needed five-story apartment blocks, the so-called khrushchovkas.

Khrushchev rudely forced writers and artists to fit the procrustean bed of communist ideology, instructing them on how to write books and paint pictures.

It was during his rule that peasants shook off the yoke of serfdom and were given passports. Hundreds of thousands of energetic Ukrainians born in rural areas headed for cities and towns. They soon renounced their rural Ukrainian and began speaking the urban Russian language.

There were lots of mystical and strangely odd episodes in Khrushchev's career.

For example, clay pits above the district of Kurenivka in Kyiv had accumulated loess, a loamy deposit formed by wind, for years. The Kremlin was going to use this dirt to flood Baby Yar, the site where more than 100,000 Kyiv residents, mostly Jews, had been exterminated by Nazi-directed but mostly Ukrainian death squads.

The Soviet leaders hoped this would help the nation forget the Zionist idea of erecting a monument to the victims of the mass killings. In the spring of 1961, thousands of tons of that watery clay broke through a dam and flowed down, covering a nearby village, not Baby Yar. The tragedy left 1,500 people dead.

A few days after the disaster, the planet's first cosmonaut, Yuriy Gagarin, flew into the space. Khrushchev kissed this immaculately honest guy many times upon his arrival from the orbit. He must have been asking humanity to forgive his blasphemous intention to blanket Baby Yar in clay waste.

A memorial to the Baby Yar tragedy was unveiled in 1976 after Moscow had been stubbornly reluctant to honor the Jewish Holocaust for years.

It was under Khrushchev that farmers chopped down their fruit orchards to protest against fruit tree taxes. It was Khrushchev who ordered a demonstration of starving workers in the provincial town of Novocherkassk dispersed with rifles.

Khrushchev's attempts at ideological futurology resulted in a shattering fiasco. His slogans, "We will outrun America in the per capita production of milk and meat," and "This generation of the Soviet people will live under Communism," proved impractical, idealistic and unachievable.

Khrushchev was not a typical Soviet leader; he was mobile and public. Working as a regional reporter in the southeast of Ukraine, I rarely saw the Kremlin ruler but popularized his economic innovations in my articles.

Nevertheless, I had first seen Khrushchev before the war broke out.

Meeting the people in an old raincoat

It was May 1, 1941. I was 11 years old. I remember standing on a sunlit Khreshchatyk, holding a little red flag. People gathered downtown to watch the Labor Day military parade. After it, industrial workers marched in columns.

Soviet newsreels made me unusually politicized for my age. I immediately recognized Khrushchev on a government platform. He was gesticulating merrily, wearing a peaked cap, a so-called stalinka.

The demonstrators left Khreshchatyk, taking away the sounds of brass bands. Khrushchev went down from the platform immediately. He will now walk into the crowd, someone said, both with approval and blame.

When I grew up, I appreciated Khrushchev's bravery. When Lazar Kaganovich, Stalin's closest ally, was flying to Bandera's Ukraine one day, he was accompanied by a squadron of fighter planes.

When Khrushchev, a member of the Military Council of the First Ukrainian Front, visited the liberated capital of Ukraine on November 7, 1943, he rode along the ruined and smoldering Khreshchatyk in an open-topped convertible limousine.

Khrushchev's "crowd walking" on May 1 resulted in a startling discovery made by my aunt, who was hosting my mother and me that day. My aunt, whose husband was one of the big bosses in Kyiv, was standing near Khrushchev that day, and saw that he was wearing "an indecently shabby raincoat."

She even advised her husband to dress more modestly, so as to avoid contrasting with Khrushchev's shabby dress. However, he did not heed her advice. The war started a month later, and both Khrushchev and my uncle were sent to different fronts.

Stalin's personal case

In 1956, I was a member of the Soviet Union's only party. My skepticism prevented me from becoming a devout communist. I did not appreciate the bureaucratic falsity of public party meetings. A notice about a closed gathering contained at least some intrigue.

We often considered personal cases of some communists during such meetings. Usually we were discussing those who had committed adultery, or reprimanded poets for "wrong and inappropriate" poems or journalists for "distorting the Soviet reality."

At one of such meetings we were considering Joseph Stalin's case. The debate was very nervous.

Everything started in February 1956, when Khrushchev delivered his historic Secret Speech to the 20th Communist Party Congress. He read the Report on the Personality Cult and Its Consequences quickly and anxiously. Then all the secretaries of local party organizations throughout the country were made to read it to their "congregants…"

Our retired communists were unanimous: "You can criticize him [Stalin], but there should be some limit." The young demonstrated their awareness and presented sensational details. Here is one of them.

Once Khrushchev came to Stalin's office late and sat quietly at the corner of the table. Stalin looked at him gloomily and asked him rudely why he was hiding.

"Don't be afraid. I will not execute you," he promised sinisterly…

Delegates of the 20th Congress demanded Khrushchev remove this episode from his report but it still became known.

Khrushchev hated Stalin. Embarrassment reinforced his hatred: this apparently decent man had been compelled to carry out Stalin's atrocious orders. Many of Stalin's allies were also afraid and therefore hated him. But they could not dare to be morally vindictive. Khrushchev did.

In 1946, the country celebrated the 20th anniversary of Stalin's constitution. On that day, Khrushchev unveiled a monument to Lenin in Kyiv without asking Stalin's permission. Stalin, who had wanted to have his own statue erected in Kyiv for years, remembered this surprise for the rest of his life.

The Lenin monument was built opposite the Bessarabsky market, on the spot where a gallows, used to execute Ukrainian foes of the German Reich during the war, once stood. The stone Lenin still stands there today. "The nation will not be able to feed another party"

In the May of 1959, I came to Kyiv to attend a meeting of regional journalists, while Khrushchev, then the leader of the country, came to Kyiv to present the Ukrainian capital with the second Order of Lenin.

He was loyal to his habit and rode along Khreshchatyk in an open-topped limousine. However, it was a new Khrushchev: there was no peaked cap but an elegant hat, no old shabby raincoat but a fashionable jacket.

He was waving his hat to salute thousands of Kyiv residents. These people were brought to Kyiv's central street by their directors and stood in the scorching sun, waiting for their leader.

I felt as uncomfortable as those people when returning from Kyiv to propagandize Khrushchev's innovation in the provincial press. It infuriated party functionaries at all levels.

Maryinka was an administrative center of a rural district in Donbass. It had a tile plant, a furniture factory, a dairy, and a granary, and 45 collective farms in the area. A district party committee of 30 members controlled blacksmiths, carpenters, farmers, schoolteachers and polyclinic doctors.

When Khrushchev ordered the disintegration of the monolithic party structure, he must have wanted to make national and regional leaders control one another. But this innovation was a caricature in poor districts.

So there were two party committees in Maryinka. The number of party functionaries had doubled. They all worked in the same building and sat there like hens in a hencoop, and oversaw the same processes and projects.

They were so ashamed to hear laughs of wise local workers and farmers that they made up an anti-Soviet anecdote, which was not spoken openly but whispered.

A communist asks a communist, "Do you think we should have one more party in the country?" "No, the nation will not be able to feed another party…"

The substance of this joke is that the Communist Party by itself absorbed almost the entire national budget.

Crimea: A slap for arrogance

In the summer of 1972, the steppe Crimea saw the first artificial rain, sparkling and multicolored. The trimmed fields absorbed it greedily. The irrigation system was built on an artificial river. I was writing an article about the Dnipro River for a regional newspaper, sitting by that canal, which saved the Crimean peninsula.

My interlocutor was Petro Marchuk. He headed a collective farm growing tons of rice, wheat, grape, and watermelons.

Khrushchev's dream came true in Crimea: it had the sun and other climatic characteristics to grow his favorite maize.

Marchuk was among those who started building this canal from the Kakhovka reservoir on the Dnipro. The construction began in 1956, soon after Khrushchev had officially given Crimea to Ukraine. Geodesist Marchuk was in charge of a team of bulldozer drivers. He was crying when his native village with the graves of his relatives was being flooded, as well as dozens of other Ukrainian villages.

However, like the Soviet government, he understood that it was vital to give water to the arid Crimea. When he had built half of the canal, he started growing wheat. He had a degree in agriculture and generalized his irrigation experience in a Ph. D. dissertation.

Crimean residents no longer remembered and spoke the Tatar language in the 1970s. Marchuk was almost illegally collecting information about Crimea's indigenous population, deported in 1944 by Stalin to Siberia and Middle Asia.

Settlers from Russia occupied the territory. Their reaction to the Crimean climate was panicky, even though water was practically beneath their feet, Marchuk explained.

The banished Tatars had gathered morning dew in special pots. He showed me a copy of a report to the Ukrainian government compiled by a special commission in 1954: it said only three collective Crimean farms of three hundred were functioning properly.

The experienced agrarian Khrushchev must have understood that only Ukraine could save Crimea by helping it build a canal for irrigation. The 400-kilometer-long North-Crimean Canal took 20 years to build. It took so long because the country's new leader, Leonid Brezhnev, made Ukraine finance the project after Khrushchev's forced resignation in 1964.

Russians, both in Ukraine and Russia, as well as in Crimea, forgave Stalin for his atrocities, including the deportation of Tatars. But they still insist Khrushchev cannot be forgiven. They say Russia conquered Crimea with blood and iron but Ukraine received it as a gift, thanks to Khrushchev's generosity.

Khrushchev has been criticized for his unmotivated innovations and injustice, caused by disinformation and deliberate silence. The Izvestiya newspaper contributed to Khrushchev's oblivion. On October 14, 1971, this official media outlet published a short obituary "on the demise of the personal pensioner Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev."

No condolences from the Kremlin were presented to his family in that article. Why? Khrushchev must have been right to give away Crimea to Ukraine but his gesture has been seen as a slap in the face by the arrogant Russians since then.

Source: The Ukrainian Observer

NATO Tests Putin With Talks On Expansion

OSLO, Norway -- After tempestuous talks with their Russian counterpart on missile defenses, NATO foreign ministers on Friday turned to other issues that risk upsetting Moscow - Kosovo, the further expansion of the Western alliance and a drive to build closer relations with Ukraine.

Informal meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission. The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, Arseniy Yatsenyuk (L) and NATO Secretary General, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer (R).
On Thursday, the NATO allies expressed concern over Russian President Vladimir Putin's declared intention to freeze compliance with a European arms control treaty.

"That message was met by concern, grave concern, disappointment and regret," NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer told reporters after Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov confirmed Moscow's threat.

The Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty limits the number and locations of military aircraft, tanks and other non-nuclear heavy weapons around Europe. Withdrawal would allow Moscow to build up forces near its borders.

Putin's threat was just the latest indication of a growing divide between the former Cold War foes. The U.S. plan to extend an American missile shield to central Europe is just one source of annoyance.

Western criticism of Russia's rights record, and Moscow's perception that the U.S. is dominating world affairs also have strained relations.

"Our partners are behaving incorrectly, to say the least," Putin said in his state-of-the-nation address on Thursday. "In case no progress is made during negotiations, I propose to discuss the possibility to end our obligations."

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice fired back by insisting Moscow should live up to its obligations under the treaty. She called Russia's concerns "purely ludicrous" in a news conference at a meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Oslo, Norway.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov later added to the fire in a lengthy diatribe that recalled the language of the Cold War. He accused the U.S. and its NATO allies of upsetting the security balance in Europe, creating new dividing lines and treating Russia as an enemy.

"We cannot be unconcerned by the fact that NATO military infrastructure is creeping up to our borders," Lavrov said at a news conference after a NATO-Russia meeting in Oslo. "They are still looking for an enemy."

Like Putin, Lavrov spoke of suspending participation in the arms control treaty.

However, a Kremlin spokesman said later that Russia would not pull out if it could reach accommodation with the West. And Russian military experts suggested the threat was a symbolic raising of the ante in the missile shield showdown more than a sign of impeding military escalation.

Russia has no actual interest in a buildup of forces because it faces no real military threat and has no plans to launch any attack, they said.

Lavrov was not attending the final day of the NATO talks where ministers from the 26 allied nations were due to discuss plans to further expand the Western alliance next year. Friday's discussions were expected to focus on the membership bids of Croatia, Macedonia and Albania.

Moscow has opposed successive enlargements of NATO into Eastern Europe. NATO's likely expansion into the Balkans does not please Russia, but the Kremlin has been much more concerned about the prospect that its neighbors Ukraine and Georgia also may be brought into the Western alliance.

Georgia's membership bid was not on the agenda Friday, but some NATO members are pushing for the alliance to open the door to the former Soviet republic.

Ukraine's pro-Russian Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych has put the country's NATO membership on hold, but Foreign Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk will join the NATO talks to discuss closer cooperation with the alliance.

However, the talks are overshadowed by the political standoff in Ukraine between supporters of Yanukovych and pro-Western President Viktor Yushchenko.

On Kosovo, de Hoop Scheffer pressed Lavrov Thursday to support a U.N. plan that would grant independence to the Serbian province under international supervision. Lavrov gave no sign that Russia would relax its support for Serbia's opposition to the plan.

The Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty was signed in 1990 and amended in 1999 to reflect changes since the breakup of the Soviet Union, adding the requirement that Moscow withdraw troops from the former Soviet republics of Moldova and Georgia.

Russia has ratified the amended version, but the United States and other NATO members have refused to do so until Russia completely withdraws.

In his speech to parliament and government officials, Putin accused NATO members of taking advantage of the situation to build military bases near Russia's borders, and said the missile defense plans for the Czech Republic and Poland were undermining the balance of military power in Europe.

"It is high time that our partners proved their commitment to arms reductions not by words but by deeds," Putin said. "I consider it worthwhile to declare a moratorium until all NATO countries ratify (the treaty) ... and begin to strictly abide by it."

Rice repeated U.S. assertions that any defense system in Europe would be useless against Russia's enormous missile arsenal and urged Russia to accept U.S. offers to cooperate in combatting new threats, notably from Iran and North Korea. She insisted that Russia, Europe and the United States were all at risk from Iran developing long-range missiles.

She said the U.S. would continue efforts to "demystify" the plan for the Russians by pushing an offer to share data and technology with Moscow.

Source: AP

Ukraine: Reaping The Harvest Of Presidential Indecision

PRAGUE, Czech Republic -- Following the tumultuous Orange Revolution in 2004, Ukraine is facing its second serious crisis in just less than three years.

Ukraine's President Viktor Yushchenko
President Viktor Yushchenko on April 2 issued a decree dissolving the Verkhovna Rada and calling for early elections in May, but both the government and parliament refused to obey it. On April 26 Yushchenko signed another decree, rescheduling the early elections for June.

Yushchenko's new decree on early parliamentary elections effectively annuls his decree of April 2, which has been undergoing examination for its compliance with the constitution by the Constitutional Court since April 17.

It is expected that the Constitutional Court, in accordance with its rules of procedure, will soon end consideration of this decree now that it is no longer valid.

The Legal Issues

Many Ukrainian legal experts and political commentators have opined that Yushchenko's April 2 decision to disband the Verkhovna Rada was poorly justified, predicting that the Constitutional Court would invalidate it.

According to them, by issuing another decree Yushchenko obviates such an unfavorable turn of events.

Yushchenko's decision to dissolve the Verkhovna Rada should have been made in July 2006, when Our Ukraine, the Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc, and the Socialist Party buried all chances to recreate their post-Orange Revolution ruling coalition, and the Verkhovna Rada clearly overstepped the constitutional timeframe for forming a majority.

In his first decree, Yushchenko quoted Article 83 of the constitution, which stipulates that a government majority in parliament be formed by deputy factions.

Since the ruling coalition had expanded its parliamentary representation with some 40 lawmakers from other factions in March, Yushchenko argued the coalition violated the constitution, thus providing him with the right to disband the legislature in order to put the political process in the country back on a constitutional path.

However, the moot point for Yushchenko's opponents from the ruling coalition of the Party of Regions, the Socialist Party, and the Communist Party is that the reasons for early parliamentary elections are specified in Article 90 of the constitution.

This article stipulates the president may call early elections if the Verkhovna Rada fails to form a majority in accordance with Article 83 within 30 days after its first sitting; fails to approve a new cabinet within 60 days after the dismissal or resignation of the previous one; or fails to gather for a sitting within 30 days during an ongoing parliamentary session.

None of these reasons was explicitly mentioned in Yushchenko's April 2 decree.

Yushchenko's new decree refers to Point 1 of Article 90 as a reason for the dissolution of the Verkhovna Rada. It remains to be seen whether, as Yushchenko implies, the defection of more than 30 opposition deputies to the ruling coalition in March may be considered the formation of a new majority.

But at any rate, as one legal expert recently told RFE/RL's Ukrainian Service, the new decree at least provides the Constitutional Court with substance for discussion.

Apart from causing headaches for Constitutional Court judges, the current constitutional crisis poses the disturbing question of whether democracy, which was so joyfully celebrated on Independence Square in Kyiv during the 2004 Orange Revolution, has a chance to survive in Ukraine.

Despite ongoing street protests by both supporters and opponents of the dissolution of the Verkhovna Rada, the situation in Kyiv and in the provinces has so far been under the government's control.

But it is evident Ukraine is slowly edging toward political and legal chaos, which may culminate in a violent scenario if the president, the prime minister, and parliament fail to find a solution quickly.

The Seeds Of The Confrontation

Could the current confrontation between the key institutions of Ukraine's political system -- the president and the Verkhovna Rada -- have been averted?

The seeds of a potential institutional conflict in Ukraine were sown during the 2004 Orange Revolution in a hurriedly passed constitutional reform that enabled all political players at that time to find a way out of an electoral impasse and paved the way for Yushchenko's victory over Yanukovych in the third round of the presidential election.

The 2004 political-reform package included many vague formulations and loopholes that both Yushchenko and Yanukovych tried to use to their advantage.

Yanukovych eventually took the upper hand by passing in January 2007 a law on the cabinet of ministers. This law expanded the prime minister's powers at the expense of the president even more than the constitution amended in 2004, which essentially transformed Ukraine from a presidential republic into a parliamentary-presidential one.

However, this law was not enough for Yanukovych, who launched a campaign to poach lawmakers from opposition caucuses in order to build a majority of at least 300 votes that would enable him to override presidential vetoes, amend the constitution, or even abolish the presidency in Ukraine altogether.

Had it not been for Yushchenko's decree on early parliamentary polls, Yanukovych might have succeeded in this plan.

But it would be totally wrong to put the blame for the current crisis only on Yanukovych's appetite for power. Yushchenko should also take a measure of responsibility, because on many occasions he indicated he would like to abolish the 2004 political reform and regain the executive prerogatives enjoyed by his predecessor, Leonid Kuchma.

In short, both Yanukovych and Yushchenko showed disrespect for the constitution amended in 2004 and the checks and balances that were included in it to shift the country's authoritarian political system toward a more European model.

Both Yanukovych and Yushchenko have failed to pass a test of political responsibility and moderation and have showed they are true representatives of the post-Soviet mentality, for which a "strongman" is still the ideal of a political leader.

Yushchenko's decision to dissolve the Verkhovna Rada should have been made in July 2006, when Our Ukraine, the Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc, and the Socialist Party buried all chances to recreate their post-Orange Revolution ruling coalition, and the Verkhovna Rada clearly overstepped the constitutional timeframe for forming a majority.

At that time Yushchenko could have recaptured political initiative and presented himself as a decisive leader of the nation. What we see now is the direct consequence of his indecision in 2006.

Tymoshenko Behind The Scenes

The current political crisis seems to have been cunningly provoked by his fervent ally in the Orange Revolution, Yuliya Tymoshenko, who helped Yanukovych overcome Yushchenko's veto on the law on the cabinet of ministers and thus goaded Yushchenko into action against Yanukovych.

Tymoshenko, for whom there has been no government role following the March 2006 elections, is the actor who most wants early elections and a new political opening.

Sociological surveys indicate that Yanukovych's Party of Regions and Tymoshenko's eponymous bloc are poised to win a new poll and effectively inaugurate a two-party system in Ukraine.

For any other country in transition such a situation could be a blessing. For Ukraine -- with Yanukovych's electorate entrenched in the east and the south and Tymoshenko's supporters grouped in the west -- such an election outcome could turn into a nightmare.

For Yushchenko, any resolution of the current standoff does not bode well. If he fails to enforce early elections, he will suffer the humiliation of being marginalized in Ukraine's political arena.

If early elections take place and, as generally expected, the results reinforce the Party of Regions and the Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc at the expense of Yushchenko's Our Ukraine, his political stature will hardly improve.

The time when Yushchenko could impose his will on Ukraine appears to have been lost.

Source: Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

Ukraine Mourns 21st Anniversary Of Chernobyl

KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukraine mourned the victims of Chernobyl on Thursday, as President Viktor Yushchenko said much relief work remained to be done 21 years after the world's biggest nuclear accident.

People light candles placed in the form radioactive symbol in Kiev, Ukraine, Thursday, April 26, 2007. Ukraine marked the 21st anniversary of the deadly explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, the world's worst nuclear disaster. The April 26, 1986 explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant affected about 3.3 million Ukrainians, including 1.5 million children, according to Ukraine's Chernobyl Union report.
The president and his former political ally Yulia Tymoshenko laid flowers to the victims at a solemn overnight ceremony in the capital marking the anniversary of the catastrophe in this ex-Soviet state.

In the town of Slavutich, 50 kilometers (31 miles) east of the ruins of the Chernobyl nuclear power station and home to many of its former workers, thousands of mourners lit candles and laid flowers at another monument.

"We bow our heads in sorrow before all the heroic rescue workers and the victims of the nuclear disaster that struck our land on April 26, 1986," Yushchenko said in a statement.

"As head of state I insist that all state authorities focus their highest attention on the problems of developing the contaminated territory and people's social rehabilitation," he said.

The president said that compensation and social aid for victims this year would amount to nearly 4.5 billion Ukrainian hryvnias (900 million dollars, 662 million euros).

Ukraine has spent 15 billion dollars over the past 20 years in dealing with the after-effects of the disaster, and expects to spend another 170 billion dollars by 2015.

Radioactive fallout from the accident at the plant affected five million people, including 2.6 million Ukrainians.

Source: France 24

Ukraine Parliament Rejects Amended Election Date, Crisis Drags On

KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukraine's parliament on Thursday flatly rejected a compromise offered by President Viktor Yushchenko, allowing the country's constitutional crisis to drag on and sparking more street demonstrations by supporters of both sides in the capital Kiev.

Viktor Yushchenko (L) and Viktor Yanukovych (R)
The pro-Russia legislature voted 260 in favour out of 261 present to condemn as illegal an announcement by Yushchenko that new elections he had ordered for 27 May, would be rescheduled to 24 June.

Some 190 pro-Yushchenko MPs have boycotted the legislature since April 2, when according to Yushchenko he dissolved parliament.

The legislature has continued to meet and even pass legislation, in defiance of the order.

Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich, the leader of the Parliament majority, said Yushchenko's order rescheduling the elections to late June 'was extremely surprising.'

The parliament majority 'will act according to circumstances ... in accordance with the law and the constitution,' he said, according to the Interfax news agency.

Yanukovich made the comments in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, where the prime minster was on a working visit. He cut the stay short and was en route back to Ukraine early Thursday afternoon.

One of Yanukovich's key allies, parliament speaker Oleksander Moroz, likewise cut short an official visit to Lithuania, returning to Ukraine hours after Yushchenko's announcement.

Demonstrations in a central section of Kiev near the constitutional court continued, with some ten thousand protestors on hand, divided roughly half and half between the Yanukovich and Yushchenko camps.

Police presence was significant and law enforcers had erected a temporary wall between pro-Yanukovich demonstrators carrying mostly blue flags, and pro-Yushchenko demonstrators carrying predominantly orange flags.

Heavily-armed riot police were spotted in buses and in apartment courtyards some 500 metres from the demonstrators, on a side street.

Hostility between the two crowds was negligible, and individual marchers from both sides were visible wandering about the fringes of the opposing crowd without incident.

Ukraine's constitutional court on Thursday began its first full day of deliberation on the case, final arguments having been made on Wednesday.

The eighteen justices therefore had clearly not accepted an argument advanced by Yushchenko on Wednesday evening that the court case should be dismissed, as the executive order setting elections for May 27 was now null and void.

Ukraine's constitutional court has been reviewing the legality of Yushchenko's 27-May order since early last week.

Yushchenko has repeatedly claimed he dissolved parliament legally, as the pro-Russia majority was violating constitutional statute by admitting MPs elected on an opposition ticket, into the ranks of the ruling coalition.

Ukrainian political observers have predicted elections will likely take place in the latter half of the summer, or as late as October.

Source: Deutsche Presse-Agentur

European Rights Body Critical Of Ukraine's Constitution, Warns Democracy Not Safeguarded

STRASBOURG, France -- European lawmakers on Thursday criticized Ukraine for what they said was a failure to carry out substantial legal and administrative reforms since President Viktor Yushchenko's rise to power three years ago.


They also said that the country's hastily adopted new constitution does not safeguard democracy.

Parliamentarians from the Council of Europe's 46 member states said the escalating political crisis in Ukraine is a direct result of insufficient constitutional reforms introduced in 2004, which they said did not fully define the competencies of the president, government and parliament.

"The political reforms that would set the rules of the game and enable law-based institutions to ... promote political competition have not been completed to date," the council's parliamentary assembly said in a resolution, after a heated debate in which both Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych and President Viktor Yushchenko were criticized.

Parliament Speaker Oleksandr Moroz told journalists before the debate that his country would resolve the crisis "by our own means," without involvement from abroad.

Yushchenko issued a controversial decree April 2 to dissolve parliament and call early elections, accusing Yanukovych of trying to usurp power. Yanukovych and his majority in parliament called it unconstitutional and appealed to the Constitutional Court to weigh in.

Both Yushchenko and Yanukovych have agreed to abide by whatever the court rules.

Yushchenko signed the dissolution decree after 11 lawmakers left pro-presidential factions to join Yanukovych's parliamentary majority, bringing him closer to the 300-seat majority necessary to override presidential vetoes.

Yushchenko called it a revision of voters' will from last year's parliamentary election, which saw Yanukovych's party come out ahead but fail to get a majority on its own.

But European lawmakers warned that Ukraine's constitution does not clearly define how and when early elections should be carried out.

"National constitutions usually contain clear provisions, a package of rules, describing how early elections can be conducted. Ukraine does not have that," Danish Liberal deputy Hanne Severinsen said.

"If there are to be early elections in Ukraine there should also be legislation to secure they are fair and free," she said.

The standoff has plunged the ex-Soviet republic into its worst political crisis since the 2004 protests that propelled Yushchenko to power and became known as the Orange Revolution.

The EU has expressed concern over the crisis and appealed to Ukrainian leaders to resolve it by legal means.

Source: Kyiv Post

Yushchenko Delays Election

KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko said on Wednesday he was delaying snap parliamentary elections for just under a month and named a new date of June 24 for the ballot.

Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko declares a change of date for Ukrainian parliamentary elections in Kiev, Ukraine, Wednesday, April 25, 2007.
"With the aim of conducting the elections in the appropriate manner and for a democratic solution to Ukraine's problems, I am signing a decree setting the early election for June 24," Yushchenko said in a late-night television address.

Yushchenko, locked in a stand-off with his opponents who hold a majority in parliament, had previously issued a decree setting snap elections for May 27.

The president said at the time he was exercising his powers to dissolve parliament and call an early vote because, he alleged, his opponents were shoring up their majority in the chamber by bribing lawmakers to defect to them.

But the initial decree met fierce resistance from the opposition camp, led by Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich.

They filed an appeal to the Constitutional Court challenging the legality of the original Yushchenko decree and government ministries controlled by Yanukovich refused to provide cash to fund the May 27 vote.

In his television address though, Yushchenko said June 24 was the final date for the election.

"I want to say very firmly that these elections will take place," he said.

Source: Reuters UK

Is Compromise Possible In Ukraine?

KIEV, Ukraine -- Radicalism is apparently giving way to compromise in the Ukrainian political crisis. President Viktor Yushchenko, aware of the impossibility of holding a snap election as early as May 27, as prescribed by his April 2 parliament dissolution decree, has signaled his readiness to suspend the decree.

The battle of the Viktors - Yanukovych (L) and Yushchenko (R) - will anyone come out a winner?
The bloc of his ally Yulia Tymoshenko, who has been the most radical supporter of dissolving parliament, is apparently ready to return to parliament to take part in passing laws needed to reach a compromise.

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) should probably be credited for prompting this new development.

Emotions were running especially high early in the crisis, when Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych’s ministers were making calls for criminal prosecution of Yushchenko, and Tymoshenko was ready for an immediate election in which only opposition parties would participate.

Early last week, more radical statements came from both sides.

Tymoshenko announced on April 16 that her bloc would not recognize a decision of the Constitutional Court if it declared Yushchenko’s decree unconstitutional.

Yanukovych, meeting PACE President Rene van der Linden in Strasbourg on April 17, said that if the Court’s decision was not in favor of Yushchenko, he could face impeachment.

As Ukraine waits for a Constitutional Court verdict, PACE, an international moral authority respected by both sides of the conflict, delivered its own, non-binding verdict on the crisis.

On April 19, the PACE passed Resolution 1549 summing up the results of its hearings on the Ukrainian crisis. The PACE was cautious enough not to take sides, but its message was clear: both parties should make an effort to respect the constitution and seek a compromise.

Resolution 1549 laid blame for the crisis both on the imperfect constitutional reform of 2004-2006 and “the personal rivalries and short-sighted fights for personal gain.”

It appealed to Yushchenko and the pro-Yanukovych parliament and Cabinet to choose one of two ways to settle the crisis: “either by calling legitimate early elections, emanating from the ruling of the Constitutional Court, or by way of a negotiated compromise.”

The PACE resolution was generally welcomed by both the Yushchenko and Yanukovych teams, although some of its provisions have been rejected.

Notably, Yushchenko and Tymoshenko did not accept the PACE recommendation to scrap the ban on parliamentary deputies swapping caucuses, as it had been a migration of deputies from the opposition factions that triggered the crisis.

Yanukovych’s team did not accept the advice that Yushchenko’s decree should be obeyed until -- and if -- the Court outlaws it.

The main message of the resolution -- the need for a compromise based on the rule of law -- was nevertheless accepted by both sides.

After a series of meetings with Yanukovych, Yushchenko told a press conference in Kyiv on April 20 that he was ready to suspend the decree on dissolving parliament “if a package of compromises” is agreed upon.

Yushchenko said that he and Yanukovych would form an expert group to improve the constitution.

In order to reach a compromise, he said, a legal mechanism should, first of all, be developed to prevent deputies from changing parliamentary factions.

Yushchenko also insists on a nationwide referendum to accept amendments to the constitution or a new version of it.

Yushchenko and Tymoshenko do not conceal that they want to use the referendum as a tool to reverse the constitutional reform, which has strengthened parliament and weakened the president, and reinstate a strong presidency in Ukraine.

Another proposal made by Yushchenko on April 20 showed that he is ready to recognize the legitimacy of the current parliament -- a body that he had been ostentatiously ignoring since ruling to disband it on April 2.

He suggested that all the factions should return to parliament, albeit temporarily, in order to pass “10-12 amendments to the laws regarding the opposition, parliamentary rules of procedure, and guarantees that the political results of elections cannot be revised” in order to prepare legal grounds for a snap election.

Although Yushchenko has been constrained to recognize parliament -- as it would be impossible to amend laws without a law-making body -- this is a step forward, as the opposition has refused to return to parliament since March.

The most radical proponents of a snap election -- the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc -- have also signaled readiness for compromise.

Addressing a rally in Kyiv on April 20, Tymoshenko admitted that an early election might be postponed.

On April 21, the deputy head of the Bloc, Oleksandr Turchynov, told Channel 5 that his team was ready to come back to parliament to work on the bills necessary for a snap election.

Meanwhile, it has become perfectly clear that no snap election will be held on May 27, as Yushchenko had planned.

The secretary of the Central Electoral Commission, Maryna Stavniychuk, announced on April 23 that the deadlines for the compilation of party lists and the formation of the local electoral commissions have been missed.

Source: Eurasia Daily Monitor

Analysts See Dismal Biofuel Future In Ukraine

KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukraine, rich in the various raw commodities needed to produce biofuel but short of cash to support its own production, is likely to remain solely a supplier of raw material to Europe, analysts and producers said.

Rapeseed field in bloom
The government last year adopted measures to boost biofuel production with the objective of reaching 623,000 tons annually by 2010 and increase the rapeseed harvest at the same time to 7.5 million tons.

It said Ukraine, which harvested 654,000 tons of rapeseed in 2006 and plans to increase output to 1.7 million in 2007, should build at least 20 plants to process the crop.

But producers say the high pace of rapeseed exports, caused by increased foreign demands, will leave future producers without sufficient raw material.

"We harvested about 650,000 tons of rapeseed in 2006 and have already exported about 480,000 so far this season," said Stepan Kapshuk from the Ukrainian vegetable oil producers' association Ukroliyaprom.

"Biodiesel production is not profitable for Ukraine at the present time. We are producing some rapeoil for exports to Europe. There is no reason to talk about biodiesel production in Ukraine without export restrictions for rapeseed."

Analysts and producers say local firms already operate dozens of small biodiesel plants but all of the produced fuel is uncertified and used strictly for their own needs.

"It looks like an amateurish industry -- the fuel is produced from its own raw materials at their own facilities and for their own needs," said Yelizaveta Malyshko from UkrAgroConsult agriculture consultancy.

The consultancy said biodiesel production in Ukraine's 40 plants could total up to 32,000 tons in the 2006/07 season. Ukraine consumes 15 million tons of diesel fuel annually.

ETHANOL

Ukrainian and foreign firms have announced several projects to build bioethanol plants, which could produce 800,000 tons of fuel per year, but analysts say a lack of demand and government support have delayed their implementation.

The government has said Ukraine will build 23 bioethanol plants by 2010 which could cost about $1.4 billion, but does not plan to invest budget funds into the projects.

Analysts have said Ukraine could produce bioethanol from grains and sugar beet, but they noted that even the current high cost of the fuel was likely to rise due to a future increase in demand for either commodity.

"The energetic value of bioethanol is 30 percent lower than the energy used to produce this biofuel. The increase in grain area to cover biothanol needs will boost energy supply to the grain planting and could boost grain prices," ProAgro consultancy said in statement.

The consultancy said Ukraine, which consumes 27 million tons of petrol and diesel per year, could compensate with bioethanol, but only for up to 5-10 percent of needs.

Analysts from the Biomassa research center said liquid biofuel could cover no more than 1 percent of total energy needs.

"There is a powerful oil lobby in Ukraine which makes it best to avoid using alternative fuels. We can see a developing conflict between Ukraine's fuel and agriculture ministries," said Serhiy Sapehin from Psikheya research company.

Ukrainian legislation, unlike most European countries, does not oblige oil refineries to use ethanol as an additive in fuel further diminishing prospects for the biofuel industry.

Source: Reuters

Russian Tycoon Wants To Move To Ukraine

LONDON, England -- Russian tycoon Boris Berezovsky, a fierce critic of President Vladimir Putin, says he wants to leave Britain for Ukraine -- a move likely to ruffle the Kremlin leader’s feathers.

Russian tycoon Boris Berezovsky
Berezovsky, one of Russia’s once-mighty and hugely wealthy "oligarchs", told Reuters on Saturday the victory of Ukraine’s new President Viktor Yushchenko, a Western-leaning liberal whose candidacy Putin publicly opposed, had made up his mind.

"Yes, I want to go and live there with my family. And since it became a democratic country, there is no reason for me not to," Berezovsky, who was granted political asylum in Britain, said in an interview in London.

He said he had liked Britain during his three-and-a-half years in the country and added that he would seek new commercial opportunities in Ukraine, which neighbours Russia, once there.

"I do not have any business in Ukraine until now. Probably I will look for business there," he said.

A powerful Kremlin insider under ex-President Boris Yeltsin in the 1990s, Berezovsky lives in exile in London and wants to stir an opposition movement against Putin -- a man Berezovsky says he helped Yeltsin to pick as his successor.

Berezovsky said he would be making a preliminary trip to Kiev within a month to assess the practicalities of moving closer to Moscow.

"Kiev is very close to Moscow and if I miss something, most of all I miss snow!"

"RUSSIA WILL TRY TO GET ME"

He was confident Ukraine’s new leaders would not extradite him to Moscow, where he is wanted for fraud and embezzlement.

"I was granted political asylum according to the Geneva Convention. Many countries, including Ukraine, signed it and I am sure they will respect it.

"For sure, Russia will try to extradite, but I have already proved in court that everything Russia is trying to do against me is political. If Yushchenko is genuinely democratic, I have no doubt Russia will fail in its attempts to get me."

Yushchenko, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, said he was unaware of Berezovsky’s aim. "One thing is sure. We will be acting in strict compliance with domestic and international laws ... in this context," he told reporters.

Yushchenko, elected in December, has pledged to work towards Ukraine’s greater integration with Western Europe while maintaining good ties with neighbouring Russia.

Putin had publicly backed his more pro-Moscow opponent in the election but later acknowledged Yushchenko’s victory.

Berezovsky sees Moscow’s campaign against him as part of Putin’s drive to subdue the "oligarchs" of the 1990s -- men who made fortunes in the privatisation of state assets after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry said on Saturday he had not contacted it yet to pursue a visa, Interfax news agency said.

Source: Tiscali News

Is the Orange Revolution Over in Kiev?

KIEV, Ukraine -- Just a few short years ago, what seemed to be a tidal wave swept across The Ukraine. Ukraine reformers and nationalists led by Yulia Tymoshenko and Victor Yushchenko overturned a fraudulent election and swept the Russian backed President Victor Yanukovich and his pro-Russian party out of an office they had tried to steal.

Orange Princess Yulia Tymoshenko
Putin had openly backed the Yanukovich pro-Russian party.

During the campaign Yushchenko was poisoned by political opponents, and his scarred face had become the rallying point of the Ukraine reformers. Yushchenko had learned free market principles from his American born wife, and learned from her the virtues of Ronald Reagan. Or at least had seemed to.

And for awhile it seemed to work. Yushchenko reached out to Russia and met with the Putin government. The new government in Kiev went to the West and told the US and most of the European Union that they wanted to mend fences with the Western World. The Ukraine Stock Exchange (PFTS) had a small but significant rise. Currently 220 companies trade on the PFTS.

However charges of corruption became the norm for the "Our Ukraine" party. Yushchenko accused Tymoshenko of using her position as Prime Minister (akin to our Vice-President's office) to write off $1.5 billion dollars of debts incurred by their family business.

And people close to Yushchenko said that the corruption in Kiev had only gotten worse under Yushchenko than in the previous government.

Now it looks like the tables may have turned. Last year, Yanukovich's Pro-Russian party took the largest number of seats in their Parliament, and relations between Tymoshenko and Yushchenko have so deteriorated that the two can barely be in the same room together.

And in a political move designed to put the pro-Russian forces on the defensive, Yushchenko called for the dissolution of their Parliament and has asked for the Austrian Chancellor to mediate the current political differences. Yanukovich has also asked for the Ukrainian Supreme Court to intervene. In the past few days, Yushchenko has threatened to level criminal charges against Yanukovich for trying to bring down the government.

It is a very sad state of affairs, and one that the US State Department must share in some of the blame. Condi Rice and the Bush administration were both so concerned about possibly offending Vladimir Putin and Russia that they seemed to overlook that the Ukraine could have become one of our more vital allies.

The European Union's Western countries look down on anyone not from "Old Europe" and has pretty much told the Ukraine that they have no chance to enter the EU, and to forget about joining NATO.

Most Americans tend to think of Ukrainians and Russians as the same people. They are very different with two unique (albeit similar) languages. The country that we now know as Russia was founded in the 800's and was called Kiev Rus by the Vikings.

After the Mongols sacked Kiev in the early part of the 1100's, Moscow grew in prominence and Kiev has been relegated to the sidelines. The two areas grew apart and adopted different languages and customs. Russia looks down on the Ukraine and thinks that it should be a part of Russia. The Ukraine sees itself as the original birth of the Russian nation and has little tolerance for the way that Russia looks down on the Ukraine.

December 2004 could have been the beginning of a new Ukraine. One that has Western ideals and concepts. A Ukraine that could be a stable trading partner with the US. A Ukraine that could be a military ally with us. Remember that the Ukraine did contribute over 1000 troops to the Coalition fighting in Iraq. 18 brave Ukrainians were either killed or wounded in the fighting.

We need to remember that not all democracies are born with the use of weapons. And that democracies and capitalism, especially those emerging from former communist countries, are extra fragile. It is the US and Europe's duty to assist the Ukraine people and save them from Russian domination. These people want to be our allies. It is time that we treat them as such.

Source: American Thinker

Ukraine Court Hears Arguments From MPs

KIEV, Ukraine -- Thousands of demonstrators surrounded Ukraine’s constitutional court yesterday as parliamentary deputies told judges why a presidential decree to dissolve parliament should be declared invalid.

An unidentified judge of Ukraine's Constitutional Court is escorted by riot police into the court's headquarters to start a hearing in downtown Kiev, on Saturday, April 21, 2007. Ukraine's Constitutional Court on Saturday continued considering the legality of President Viktor Yushchenko's decree on the early dissolution of parliament. Ukrainian Premier Viktor Yanukovych initiated talks Friday with his chief rival, President Viktor Yushchenko, to discuss the political stalemate that has plunged the government of this ex-Soviet republic into its worst crisis since the 2004 Orange Revolution.
For a fifth day running the court heard arguments on the legality of President Viktor Yushchenko’s April 2 decree to dissolve the legislature amid a feud with Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich, plunging the ex-Soviet country into a constitutional crisis.

The 17 judges of the court later adjourned until tomorrow. They still have to hear more members of parliament as well as representatives of the government and the central electoral commission.
Deputy Yaroslav Mendus told the judges that Yushchenko had exceeded his authority by claiming the constitution allowed him to dissolve parliament.

“Only the constitutional court is allowed to interpret the basic law. If the president gets involved in this, it means we have serious problems,” Mendus said.

The president has justified his move by saying that Yanukovich’s parliamentary majority had violated the constitution by luring pro-Yushchenko deputies into switching sides.

Yanukovich has opposed the dissolution and members of his majority asked the court to rule the decree illegal.

It is not clear when the court will make a decision.

On the streets outside, thousands demonstrated both for and against the dissolution amid a police presence that has grown significantly since a demonstration delayed the hearing for an hour on Wednesday.

Both sides’ supporters have held protests in the capital nearly every day since the president issued his controversial decree.

The latest round of talks between the prime minister and president on Friday failed to break the deadlock.

The stand-off is being closely watched by outside powers anxious about the political course of this country of 47mn people, located between the European Union and Nato to the west and Russia to the east.

Source: Gulf Times

When Home Is A Blighted Land: Tales From Chernobyl

CHERNOBYL, Ukraine -- Olga Rudchenko cried every night for eight years, desperate to return home. Now she is happy, living once again in her town, Chernobyl.

Chernobyl reactor No. 4
Rudchenko’s family was among 200,000 residents evacuated after an explosion ripped through the Chernobyl nuclear power station on April 26, 1986 in the world’s worst nuclear accident.

She and her husband, Andriy, defied a government ban and returned 12 years ago to live on contaminated land.

"It was a long time ago, but it is hard to forget. It was worse than a war. We were told so many lies," Rudchenko, 71, says, outside a small, shabby house in need of a coat of paint.

"They took us away in buses and said we were leaving for three days. We came back eight years later. I cried every night. I wanted to go home. Thank God, we are here in the best place on earth."

If you didn’t know Chernobyl’s history, you might understand her delight. A town of 9,000, it now boasts several offices, three shops, a bar and a Soviet-style canteen -- despite being in an exclusion zone where settlement is banned. It is surrounded by rich, green forests, teeming with wildlife.

But for millions around the world, Chernobyl symbolises disaster and devastation, myth and controversy.

On April 26, 1986, several explosions destroyed reactor No. 4 at the plant, turning it into a radioactive inferno that sent a lethal plume into the night sky.

The Soviet government acknowledged the accident two days later -- after the fallout set off radiation alarms in Sweden.

The blaze raged for 10 days. Radioactive material was deposited as far away as Japan and the United States.

"I was at work on April 26, 1986. I worked with nitrogen to cool the fourth and third reactors in a room 150 metres (490 feet) away from the fourth bloc," Mykola Bondarenko said in his office in Ukraine’s capital Kiev.

"After about an hour we heard a sound, then a wave came, like in an earthquake. That was the first explosion. The second one came several seconds later. We saw white smoke rising into the sky. But we kept on working."

"LIQUIDATORS"

Hundreds of staff toiled through the night after the blasts which struck just after one in the morning. Tens of thousands of soldiers, firefighters and engineers were dispatched and tonnes of material ferried in to build a shelter around the reactor.

Many received huge radiation doses. Some died instantly. Others suffered agonising deaths in hospitals in Kiev or Moscow.

There were no official records of the doses received by the hundreds of thousands of "liquidators" who buried contaminated machinery and cleaned up poisoned land, forests and rivers in Ukraine and neighbouring Belarus.

"Radiation was the last thing on our minds then," said Evhen Lushkevich, a senior operator at the fourth reactor.

A nuclear industry worker since 1964, Lushkevich knew a great deal about radiation. He came to work the day after the explosion and finished his shift nearly three weeks later.

"By that time the dose was sufficiently high. I was taken to a hospital in Moscow. When I got there in May, many of my colleagues were already dead."

Lushkevich was in hospital for about two months. Bondarenko had marrow surgery requiring a hospital stay of about two years.

Two decades later, and 5 1/2 years after Chernobyl’s last reactor was shut down, the area around the plant is alive with reminders of the disaster.

The 30-km (19-mile) exclusion zone is patrolled by police and Ukraine’s Emergencies Ministry. Counters show radiation in some areas far above the norm, while other villages display levels lower than in Kiev, 80 km (50 miles) to the south.

The town of Pripyat, built to house plant workers, is still deserted -- the day after the accident, 50,000 residents were evacuated in just six hours.

In empty apartments with gaping, glassless windows, clothes, shoes, dolls, books and family photos lie scattered.

Several hundred mostly elderly people have returned to their homes in Chernobyl and nearby villages despite the ban. Authorities turn a blind eye and help with food and electricity.

Dozens of curious foreigners tour the area where animals have exploited 20 years of human absence -- wild boars, wolves and deer roam the streets. Scientists want more funds to establish a nature reserve.

HUMAN COST

Debate still rages about the human cost of the accident.

This week, environmental group Greenpeace said the eventual death toll could be far higher than official estimates with up to 93,000 cancer deaths attributable to the disaster.

The World Health Organisation puts at 4,000 the number of extra deaths in the worst-hit areas of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia, with 5,000 in less affected zones.

Ukrainian doctors, who have observed patients exposed to radiation for 20 years, point to a dramatic rise in thyroid cancer among those who were children in 1986.

Thyroid cancer can be treated if detected early. Mobile laboratories conduct checks in villages near the exclusion zone, where unemployment is high and most residents worry more about making ends meet than about their health.

Doctors fear for the future.

"Though 20 years have passed, Ukraine will feel the consequences for a long time," said Hryhory Klymnyuk from the Cancer Institute at Ukraine’s Academy of Sciences.

"There are not only direct medical consequences but possible changes in genes. I think future generations will be under threat from various illnesses, including tumours."

The government and Western donors have focussed attention on securing the crumbling concrete and steel sarcophagus.

The actual process of making the plant safe will take many years. Officials have said the last fuel rods will not be taken away until 2008 and it will be between 30 and 100 years before the station is completely decommissioned.

Andrei Novikov, Chernobyl’s deputy technical director, says there has been too much haste in dealing with the spent fuel.

"When they closed Chernobyl in December 2000, I wrote in my diary: the power station has been shut down, but Chernobyl has only just started," he said.

Source: Tiscali News

Little Progress At Crisis Talks In Ukraine

KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko and his arch-rival Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych failed to overcome key obstacles at talks on Friday aimed at ending their constitutional feud.

Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko (L) and his arch-rival Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych failed to overcome key obstacles at talks on Friday aimed at ending their constitutional feud.
The president told journalists that the two had agreed on a number of issues but not the crucial one of his April 2 decision to dissolve parliament and hold early elections.

"The prime minister's side is in agreement on all questions" necessary for a compromise, "with the exception of early elections," Yushchenko said.

The president has justified his attempt to dissolve parliament by saying that Yanukovych's pro-Russian coalition violated the constitution by luring pro-Yushchenko deputies into switching sides.

The crisis is being closely watched by outside powers anxious about the political course of this country of 47 million people, located between the European Union and NATO to the west and Russia to the east.

Yanukovych has resisted Yushchenko's order to dissolve parliament and both sides' supporters have held demonstrations in the capital nearly every day this month.

Yushchenko said he remained ready to suspend his dissolution decree if the government agreed to legal changes including a ban on deputies switching sides.

Yanukovych was more upbeat on the chances of agreement, as he addressed thousands of flag-waving supporters on Kiev's central square, scene of the 2004 Orange Revolution that brought his rival to power.

"We agreed to overcome all the contradictions rapidly next week," Yanukovych said.

"The president said... he was almost ready to suspend his decree and that we would find political and judicial answers to all our disputes and sign an amicable agreement."

The pair have held several meetings since the start of the crisis, with little apparent progress.

On Tuesday the constitutional court stepped in at the prime minister's request and began examining Yushchenko's decision.

The 18 judges have yet to make a ruling, amid sometimes stormy scenes outside the court.

On the fourth day of deliberations on Friday, thousands of demonstrators thronged around the building, with rival sides separated by police and a metal fence.

Yushchenko ally Yulia Tymoshenko led a demonstration in the city center of about 15,000 pro-presidential protestors, who waved the white-and-read flags of her bloc and the orange banners of the president's party.

"Are we ready to support our president so he doesn't take a single step backward?" Tymoshenko asked the crowd, drawing a cry of: "Yes!" and the chant: "Elections! Elections!"

While both sides have held protests over the past three weeks, none have matched the size of the 2004 Orange Revolution rallies that propelled Yushchenko to power on a wave of public goodwill.

That uprising was sparked by a presidential poll judged by Western observers to have been rigged in Yanukovych's favor, a conclusion the constitutional court supported.

But since Yushchenko won a new round of elections in December 2004, his popularity has plummeted. Yanukovych made a come-back as prime minister at parliamentary polls last year.

Yushchenko has made joining the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation a priority for Ukraine while Yanukovych favours retaining strong ties with Russia.

Source: Baku Today

Police And Fences Keep Rival Protesters Apart In Ukraine

KIEV, Ukraine -- Extra police were deployed as the Ukrainian Constitutional Court resumed hearings yesterday into the standoff between the former Soviet republic’s President and Prime Minister over the dissolution of parliament and a call for early elections.

Ukrainian riot police protect the Constitutional Court headquarters in downtown Kyiv, on Thursday, while supporters of Viktor Yanukovich hold their flags and shout slogans. Thousands of both Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych and President Viktor Yushchenko blocked the entrances to Ukraine's Constitutional Court on Thursday, prompting riot police to intervene to allow judges in for the second day of hearings into the legality of a presidential decree dissolving parliament.
Thousands of supporters of President Yushchenko and the Prime Minister, Viktor Yanukovych, gathered at the court in Kiev, where police and a metal fence separated rivals to avoid a repeat of Wednesday’s chaos when judges were prevented from entering the building for an hour.

The court is to rule on the legality of Mr Yushchenko’s dissolution of parliament this month and call for new elections.

The President and Mr Yanukovych both say that they will respect the court’s decision.

Proceedings are being watched closely by outside powers, anxious about the political direction of this country of 47 million people, located between the European Union and Nato to the west and Russia to the east.

Source: Times Online

Our Ukraine And Yushchenko Revive Their Fortunes

KIEV, Ukraine -- On April 18, the opposition Yulia Tymoshenko (BYuT) and Our Ukraine blocs permanently withdrew their deputies from Ukraine’s parliament. Together, the factions account for 202 of the Rada’s 450 deputies.

Opposition leaders Yuriy Lutsenko (L), Yulia Tymoshenko (C) and Vyacheslav Kyrylenko at a press conference.
With no constitutional majority, the parliament -- which was disbanded by presidential decree on April 2 -- has no legal standing. A minimum of 300 deputies is required for parliament to constitutionally operate.

This move is the culmination of eight months of political fighting between Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych and his government and the disunited and partially discredited opposition. But now the opposition has transformed into an energized political force. Reflecting this growing confidence, President Viktor Yushchenko, Our Ukraine, and Yuriy Lutsenko’s People’s Self-Defense movement no longer oppose early elections.

Opposition unity was made possible by a shift in the balance of power within Our Ukraine and an effort to reach out to the Tymoshenko bloc. BYuT had always been in opposition to the Anti-Crisis Coalition (ACC) and had never supported a grand coalition with Yanukovych’s Party of Regions. Following the 2004 Orange Revolution, the “Liubi Druzi” (business cronies or “Dear Friends”) wing of Our Ukraine had dominated, and then-prime minister Yuriy Yekhanurov disastrously led it during the 2006 parliamentary elections.

The “Liubi Druzi” supported a grand coalition -- and opposed Yulia Tymoshenko -- while the national-democratic wing backed an Orange coalition. Both coalition variants were negotiated simultaneously from April-June 2006 but neither succeeded, and the ACC was established following the defection of the Socialist Party.

In August 2006 all parliamentary forces except BYuT signed a “Universal Agreement” that created a still-larger grand coalition, now including the Communists. Two months later Our Ukraine pulled out and declared itself in opposition to the ACC.

It took another four months before Our Ukraine signed an opposition alliance with BYuT. The alliance reflected the new dominance of Our Ukraine’s national-democratic wing.

The “Liubi Druzi” opposed the opposition alliance and, together with inducements such as government positions, prompted defections to the ACC the following month, led by Anatoliy Kinakh’s Party of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs (PPPU).

A second echelon of defectors came from “Liubi Druzi” closer to President Yushchenko’s inner circle. Petro Poroshenko was offered the position of minister of finance and was reportedly considering defecting. Poroshenko had been a founding organizer of the Party of Regions in 2000-2001 until moving to Our Ukraine in 2002.

Yushchenko had called for Our Ukraine to be “radically overhauled.” The withdrawal of Kinakh’s PPPU has been followed by the marginalization of “Liubi Druzi” such as Poroshenko, and the culling of other unpopular parties and discredited members. Two of Our Ukraine’s remaining four parties have joined the Ukrainian Rightists bloc, while another has joined People’s Self-Defense. The fourth party, the Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists, was not invited to join any bloc because its leader, former Naftohaz CEO Oleksiy Ivchenko, was discredited two years ago when it was revealed that he had purchased a $225,000 Mercedes car with Naftohaz Ukrainy state funds.

Yushchenko’s decision to dissolve parliament served as a pre-emptive strike against further defections that threatened to lead to a constitutional majority.

Yushchenko, Our Ukraine, and the People’s Self-Defense embraced BYuT’s call for early elections after Kinakh’s defections and the police raids on Lutsenko’s apartment and offices. People’s Self-Defense was established by Our Ukraine businessmen, such as Davyd Zhvannia, who had become discontented by the “Liubi Druzi.”

On March 31, the Our Ukraine congress elected Vyacheslav Kyrylenko as its head. This confirmed a national-democratic takeover, as Kyrylenko is a former member of Yuriy Kostenko’s Ukrainian People’s Party (UNP), one of three offshoots of the pre-1999 Rukh movement.

This development was matched by the change in leadership of the presidential secretariat. Viktor Baloha is the third secretariat head since Yushchenko’s election and the first with managerial skills. Baloha, like Kyrylenko, is a national democrat and closer to BYuT. The two ousted secretariat heads (Oleksandr Zinchenko, Oleh Rybachuk) and former Our Ukraine head (Yekhanurov) are aligned with the “Liubi Druzi.”

Kyrylenko has ruled out any grand coalition after the elections. “We are strong members of the united opposition and are going into elections practically as one front, and, I think, that democracy will again flourish,” he said.

Yushchenko has called for the creation of a mega center-right “pro-presidential bloc.” Baloha is seeking to unite the disparate center-right into such a bloc.

Currently the center-right is divided among Our Ukraine, the Ukrainian Rightists (Rukh, UNP, and the Republican Party ‘sobor”) and Lutsenko’s bloc (People’s Self-Defense, Christian-Democratic Union, European Platform, and Forward Ukraine!). Center-right unity would facilitate a two-pronged right-left opposition with BYuT representing the center-left wing.

The opposition more closely resembles that found in the 2002 and 2004, rather than the 2006, elections. However, in the 2002 and 2004 elections the opposition still had moderate (Our Ukraine) and radical (BYuT, SPU) wings. Now, Our Ukraine has moved from a moderate to a BYuT radical stance for the first time in its six-year history.

These developments explain both President Yushchenko’s radicalized stance and the unity of the opposition. The Party of Regions has been taken aback by this new opposition energy and unity and remains in a state of denial that Our Ukraine and Yushchenko have the same stance as BYuT. “Inside Our Ukraine and BYuT there are principled differences on tactics that its leaders are proposing,” Party of Regions faction leader Raisa Bohatiorova believes.

The ACC has sought to appease Yushchenko by dealing with many of the issues that provoked him to act and support BYuT’s call for early elections, hoping to again divide Our Ukraine and BYuT. After parliament was disbanded the ACC voted to eject deputies who had defected to it, and it has agreed to support the imperative mandate and transforming the 2006 Universal into law.

Yushchenko’s handling of the crisis, the revamped Our Ukraine, and opposition unity have ramifications for the 2009 elections, which is far enough in the future to rebuild Yushchenko’s popularity. In the last month, Yushchenko’s ratings have increased nearly two-fold from 11% to 18%.

Although Yushchenko’s ratings remain half those of Yanukovych (35%) he now has pulled even with Tymoshenko, and together the two Orange candidates have 35%. With the same ratings as Tymoshenko, Yushchenko can now argue that he should be the Orange candidate, something he could not plausibly do before the crisis.

Source: Eurasia Daily Monitor

Council Of Europe Criticizes Ukraine

PRAGUE, Czech Republic -- The Council of Europe's Parliamentary Assembly has passed a resolution criticizing Ukraine's leadership for failing to pass substantive political reforms in the years since the 2004 Orange Revolution, RFE/RL's Ukrainian Service reported.

A session of the Council of Europe's Parliamentary Assembly
The resolution says the root causes of the current conflict between President Viktor Yushchenko and Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych are "hasty and incomplete" reforms following the 2004 Orange Revolution "which failed to settle the crucial issues of separation of powers" and establish "the rules of the game."

European lawmakers urged Ukraine's leadership to resolve its political crisis in "a quick, democratic, and legitimate manner."

"We will be grateful if the necessary reforms will not only be carried out, but also implemented quickly," lawmaker Renate Wohlwend, corapporteur for Ukraine, told the assembly today.

In a heated debate before the resolution's passage, lawmakers criticized both Yushchenko and Yanukovych.

Yushchenko issued a decree on April 2 dissolving parliament and calling for new elections. Yanukovych called the move illegal and refused to obey the decision.

The issue is currently before Ukraine's Constitutional Court.

Source: Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

Reflections On NATO – Will Ukraine And Georgia Ever Join This Alliance?

KIEV, Ukraine -- The renewed political crisis in Ukraine with rival Orange and Blue demonstrations in Kyiv once again show the regional divisions in the country that deepened in the 2004 and 2006 elections.


Georgia also has its own regional divisions with two «frozen» conflicts within its borders. These, and other domestic and geopolitical factors, could derail both nations’ drives to join NATO.

U.S. Support for NATO Membership

On March 6 and 9, the US Congress ratified the NATO Freedom Consolidation Act outlining Washington’s support for NATO enlargement to the Western Balkans, Georgia and Ukraine. U.S. support is “contingent upon their continued implementation of democratic, defense, and economic reforms, and their willingness and ability to meet the responsibilities of membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and a clear expression of national intent to do so…”

Greater optimism surrounding Georgia and Ukraine’s integration into Trans-Atlantic structures arose after the Nov. 2003 and Nov. 2004 Rose and Orange revolutions. Georgia and Ukraine are placed in the same category because they both experienced democratic revolutions; Georgian and Ukrainian Presidents Mikheil Saakashvili and Viktor Yushchenko are close friends and both are members of the CIS. However, their differences increasingly outweigh their similarities.

Four Differences

Georgia and Ukraine are different in four-strategically important ways.

First, Ukraine’s Orange Revolution led to a fundamental reform of the Constitution that moved the country away from the abused super-presidentialism prevalent under former President Leonid Kuchma to a parliamentary system. Control over the government has been transferred from the executive to the winning parliamentary coalition while the president retains key areas of control, such as foreign and defense policy. Ukraine’s reformed political system has improved democratization by leading to greater checks and balances between different branches of government.

There is a clear division within the 27 post-communist states: most are super- presidential systems that dominate the largely autocratic CIS where democracy has regressed. Parliamentary systems dominate the successful democracies of Central-Eastern Europe and the Baltic states who have joined NATO and the EU.

Super-presidential systems have emasculated parliaments and led to widespread abuse of high level power and corruption by the executive. Political machinations, abuse of administrative resources, fraudulent elections and virtual parties have been the outcome. These features were all present during Kuchma’s decade-long period in power prior to Ukraine’s Orange Revolution.

The US and EU supported the Rose Revolution in Georgia believing it would lead to a democratic breakthrough after a decade of stagnation under Eduard Shevardnadze. Yet, there are troubling developments that would suggest that democratic progress is under threat in Georgia.

Take the issue of the type of political system that Georgia is developing since its revolution. Among the three states that experienced democratic revolutions, namely Serbia, Georgia and Ukraine, it has been Georgia that moved to a super-presidential system a month after Saakashvili’s election in January 2004.

These constitutional reforms in Georgia served to push Georgia away from its declared goal of Euro-Atlantic integration. As a consequence, Georgia’s political system is closer to the Eurasian CIS than to Europe.

Georgia’s democratization has been set back because of the move to a super- presidential system. Parliament is no longer as important an institution; checks and balances are no longer present; there is still extensive political interference in the judiciary and there are fears that the executive is behaving autocratically.

Second, domestically there are worrying signs that marginalization and repression of the opposition in Georgia is occurring. In Ukraine, the opposition returned to power in the March 2006 elections and the defeated presidential candidate, Viktor Yanukovych, became Prime Minister in August of that year following a round-table of parliamentary forces initiated by President Yushchenko.

In the Freedom House 2006 Nations in Transit annual study, Georgia and Ukraine are considered to be “transitional” or “hybrid” regimes. Freedom House’s 2006 Freedom in the World survey upgraded Ukraine in 2006 to “Free”, the first CIS state to attain this level. Georgia remains classified as “Partly Free”.

Democratization in Georgia and Ukraine has improved in some important areas. Nevertheless, Freedom House warned about the lack of change in Georgia’s election administration, civil society, media freedom and national governance. In Ukraine, Freedom House registered a vastly improved media environment with the ending of censorship, greater transparency in government and state activities and policies and a free electoral environment.

Georgia lacks a strong opposition and its opposition parties are marginalized. The Georgian parliament lacks a strong opposition check on the executive because of the high seven percent threshold to enter parliament. In Russia a seven percent threshold has been used to marginalize the opposition from the State Duma.

Ukraine, in contrast, has only a three percent threshold, a figure more consistent with the European average of four percent. Georgia therefore again resembles other CIS states, rather than Europe, in having increased the threshold for parties to enter parliament.

The marginalization of the opposition is also a result of the selective application of the rule of law in Georgia. The judiciary in Georgia is still being subjected to political interference.

The recently-released US State Department 2006 country report on human rights in Georgia pointed to persistent pressure on the judiciary by the “executive branch and powerful outside interests”.

“Many NGOs complained that judicial authorities continued to act as a ‘rubber stamp’ for prosecutors’ decisions and that the executive branch exerted undue influence. NGOs expressed concerns that recent judicial appointees lacked experience and training to act independently,” according to the report.

Of particular concern to the US State Department was “the high number of vacancies at the trial court level resulted in long delays in scheduling of trials, which in turn required pretrial detainees to be kept in severely overcrowded detention facilities for extended periods”. Constitutional reforms transforming Georgia into a super-presidential system, “increased the Georgian president’s authority to dismiss and appoint judges”, the report stated.

Political interference in the Georgian judiciary appeared to be behind the Sept. 2006 arrest of alleged coup plotters. Only a month before local elections, a large number of opposition members were arrested and accused of conspiring to violently overthrow the ruling regime.

Not surprisingly, the alleged plot and accompanying diplomatic row resulted in Russia severing all transport and postal links with Georgia. That led to a landslide victory for the ruling United National Movement (UNM). The alleged Russian plot proved to be highly beneficial in attracting voters to the UNM. The OSCE post-election report complained of that “the blurred distinction between the ruling authorities and the leading party reinforced the advantage of the incumbents.” The OSCE was referring to the use of machine politics (i.e. abuse of state administrative resources) by the UNM.

The alleged coup plotters belonged primarily to the Justice Party led by Igor Giorgadze who has been in exile in Russia since 1995. Maia Topuria, Giorgadze’s niece and single mother of three, together with eleven others were charged with attempts to overthrow the regime. If convicted, Topuria could face up to 25 years in prison. Topiura is being tried in a closed court where the public and media have no access.

Topiura and other alleged plotters have been held without bail for more than six months. The US State Department’s country reports and annual reports by international human rights organisations, such as Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Amnesty International, have criticised Georgia for the common practice of extended pre-trial detention. A 2007 HRW report on Georgia found that two-thirds of the prison population are pre-trial detainees who are held in overcrowded, dirty cells with poor sanitation and food.

The arrests seemed to be more a sweep against the already cowed opposition ahead of local elections, than an alleged plot. This is evidenced by the accusation linking the plotters to a 4 May meeting that many doubt ever took place. The charges claim that Topuria invited the Anti-Soros, Conservative-Monarchist and 21st Century parties to a meeting at the Justice Party headquarters to discuss a plan to be carried out in the autumn to violently overthrow the regime.

Some of the arrested alleged plotters have claimed that a meeting never took place on 4 May 2006 and others state that they have never visited the offices of the Georgian Justice Party where the meeting was allegedly held. Neighbours living in the same building accused the police of planting weapons in the basement of one of the alleged plotters, Kakhaber Kantaria. Other witnesses have produced contradictory statements.

Third, NATO has long stated with an eye to Russia that it will never give any country a veto over another’s desire to join. But a Russian veto may well exist in practice through two frozen conflicts in Abkhazia and South Ossetia that show no sign of being resolved since Georgia’s Rose Revolution. The two regions have acted as quasi-independent states since Georgia lost both wars of secession in 1992.

President Saakashvili’s early success in reinstating central control over Ajaria is unlikely to be replicated any time soon in these two frozen conflicts. For progress to take place there has to be an improvement in relations between Georgia and Russia. Recent arrests of plotters, expulsions of diplomats and the severing of transportation and communications links have only served to worsen Georgia’s relations with Russia. According to Russian analysts, President Vladimir Putin personally dislikes only two CIS leaders, Georgia;s Saakashvili and Alyaksandr Lukashenka of Belarus.

Fourth, Georgia and Ukraine have both declared their support for Euro-Atlantic integration and claim that their domestic policies are geared towards this goal. Georgia is in a more precarious position by virtue of both its geography and domestic policies since the Rose Revolution.

Georgia has little chance of ever joining the EU as the Trans-Caucasian republics lie outside the commonly understood definition of what constitutes “Europe”, a requirement for EU membership as outlined by the 1957 Rome Treaty. This makes NATO membership for Georgia even more important and not merely a stepping stone to EU membership, as was the case for Central-Eastern Europe and the Baltic states.

Ukraine’s geography makes it more likely that it might join the EU at some future date. This likelihood could be brought forward by Ukraine’s greater democratic progress than Georgia’s since revolutions occurred in both countries. But, even Ukraine may have to wait; the Enhanced Agreement under negotiation with the EU to replace the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement currently includes no provision for membership.

Georgia and Ukraine were upgraded in 2005-2006 to Intensified Dialogue on Membership within NATO. The alliance, with strong backing from the Bush administration, backs their eventual integration into NATO.

At the same time, NATO sources remain unclear as to when Membership Action Plans (MAP) could be granted to Georgia and Ukraine. Both countries will not be included in next year’s NATO enlargement summit which will be restricted to the three Western Balkan states that have long been inside the MAP process.

Uncertain NATO

NATO is uncertain whether to enlarge into the CIS by bringing Georgia and Ukraine into the MAP process, a step that would signify a future membership offer. Georgia has high domestic support for joining NATO but includes two frozen conflicts that would make NATO members weary of bringing the alliance into a territorial conflict with Russia. Democratic regression could also dissuade some NATO members from extending an invitation to Georgia.

Ukraine has low public support for membership of only 20 percent, down from a third during the 1990s. Donetsk, the home base of Prime Minister Yanukovych and the Party of Regions he leads, has only 2 percent support for NATO membership. The Yanukovych government and ruling Anti-crisis parliamentary coalition, which could remain in place until the next elections in March 2011, is opposed to joining NATO. During a Sept. 2006 visit to NATO, Prime Minister Yanukovych said it was “premature” for Ukraine to enter a MAP.

Georgia’s attempts to appease the Bush administration by offering to increasing the number of troops in Iraq to 2,000 (a mover that would give Georgia the third largest contingent) and to host a base for the new Defense Shield cannot paper over the threats to democratic reforms that exist. Post-communist states that have joined NATO and EU all have parliamentary systems, do not marginalize the opposition by unduly high thresholds or arrests and uphold the rule of law. Georgia is deficient in all three areas.

Ukraine’s Orange Revolution is often placed in the same category as the Rose Revolution. Nevertheless, Ukraine has clearly moved further ahead in democratic reforms; conflict between the legislature and executive are not a preserve of Ukraine as anybody who follows French politics will all too willingly testify. Ukraine has a parliamentary system and the opposition has returned to power.

Source: Kyiv Post

Ukraine's Opposition Calls Non-Stop Rally For Polls

KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukraine's opposition urged supporters on Wednesday to stage a non-stop rally akin to the 2004 "Orange Revolution" to press for a parliamentary election, deepening a crisis that has engulfed the country.

Riot police stand guard at the entrance to Ukraine's Constitutional Court as political opponents hold two simultaneous rallies near the building in Kiev, April 18, 2007.
Embattled pro-Western President Viktor Yushchenko, long at odds with Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich over Ukraine's future direction, has dissolved the assembly and ordered a snap election for May 27.

Yanukovich and his allies, who are closer to Moscow, reject the president's decree and have asked the Constitutional Court to rule whether Yushchenko acted lawfully.

Both leaders, rivals since the "orange" protests swept Yushchenko to power, have pledged to abide by any decision by the Court and suggest they may compromise on an election date.

But the opposition, led by fiery former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko, again accused the Court of political bias.

Tymoshenko, who lobbied hardest for a new election, called on supporters to pour into the streets on Friday and demand an election without a court ruling.

"Today we decided to ask all citizens, all patriots who believe that criminals, mafia or clans should not rule today's Ukraine... to gather by 6 p.m. (1500 GMT) on Friday and hold our maidan," Tymoshenko told a news conference. She was referring to Independence Square, focal point of the 2004 upheavals.

"It must be held until the start of legitimate, free and honest elections ... which will put an end to any notion of using cash to buy Ukrainian politics."

Tymoshenko roused crowds alongside Yushchenko in 2004 and was first prime minister for eight months before being sacked. She long pressed him for a new election, but has been more radical in rejecting a role for the Constitutional Court.

SCUFFLES OUTSIDE THE COURT

Earlier on Wednesday, riot police pushed aside protesters outside the Constitutional Court, letting judges inside to press on for a second day with an assessment of Yushchenko's decree.

The sitting got under way after about an hour's delay, with 16 of the 18 judges present.

"Today they (the court) have nothing to do with justice. They are involved in a farce called 'the seizure of power by Yanukovich's clan'," Tymoshenko said.

The president dissolved the assembly after accusing Yanukovich, named prime minister after parliamentary elections barely a year ago, of illegally enticing his supporters to join the coalition backing the government.

The president and prime minister took their arguments to Western Europe on Tuesday, Yushchenko visiting European Union's headquarters in Brussels and Yanukovich addressing the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg.

Both men vowed to solve the crisis by democratic means. European institutions say they will take no sides.

European Union heavyweight France appealed to Yushchenko and Yanukovich loyalists on Wednesday "to show restraint and let the democratic institutions do their work safely".

French foreign ministry spokesman Jean-Baptiste Mattei called for dialogue "to find a rapid solution to this crisis, in the interest of the stability and democracy in Ukraine".

Yanukovich told a government meeting he still saw a chance of a compromise solution. But he also asked the prosecutor general to look into attempts to block the Constitutional Court.

Source: Reuters

Poland And Ukraine Chosen To Host Euro 2012

CARDIFF, Wales -- Poland and Ukraine will host the European soccer championship in 2012 after UEFA awarded them the tournament ahead of Italy and another joint bid from Hungary and Croatia on Wednesday.

UEFA president Michel Platini opens the envelope to reveal Poland and the Ukraine will co-host the Euro 2012 tournament at a ceremony in Cardiff, Wales.
Despite the Italian game being blighted by match fixing and crowd violence in the last year, Italy were slight favourites to be awarded the finals for the third time in their history.

Instead, UEFA have gambled by awarding the second largest soccer tournament in the world to two countries who have never previously hosted anything of this magnitude.

Their bid appeared to have been undermined on two fronts.

FIFA had threatened to ban Poland from international competition after its government removed the country's football association from power in January following a scandal involving corrupt referees.

The unstable political climate in Ukraine, with a presidential decree having dissolved parliament and called for a new election next month, had also raised doubts.

Italian delegates at Cardiff's City Hall, where UEFA president Michel Platini announced the decision, were stunned while the Polish and Ukrainian officials leapt and hugged each other in rapturous delight.

"There are 85 million people now waiting for this big football event," Polish FA chairman Michal Listkiewicz said.

"The friendship between our nations has a very long history. This big tournament will be an important milestone in the history of our two Slavic nations."

GREATEST RESULT

Hryhory Surkis, the president of the Ukraine FA said: "This is the greatest result in the history of our football."

The 12 eligible voting UEFA executive committee members gave eight votes to Poland and Ukraine, four to Italy and none to Hungary and Croatia.

"I'm not surprised this has happened," the president of the Italian Football League, Antonio Matarrese, told Italy's La7 television station from Cardiff.

"We are coming out of one of the most terrible tragedies in the history of Italian football," he added, referring to the death of police inspector Filippo Raciti outside Catania's Massimino stadium in February.

Aljosa Asanovic, a former Croatia player and assistant to the national team coach, told Croatian news agency hina:

"It's difficult to say what caused this decision, but one should bear in mind that Hryhory Surkis is a member of the UEFA executive board. He could not vote, but probably had a considerable influence on the final decision."

While the Italians, Croats and Hungarians were licking their wounds, the Poles and Ukrainians were overjoyed.

Ukrainian government ministers broke into applause as the announcement was made during a cabinet meeting while the Warsaw stock exchange reacted by reaching a record high.

BEAUTIFUL DAY

"It's a beautiful day for Polish sport," Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski told reporters in Brussels as he met with European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso.

Sergei Bubka, the former world and Olympic pole vault champion and now president of the Ukraine Olympic Committee and an IOC member added: "This is a remarkable achievement for our country. It is an astonishing success."

Ukraine's First Deputy Prime Minister Mykola Azarov said the government would within 10 days draw up a programme to prepare for the championship.

"In terms of the economy, Ukraine will come out a winner. It will provide a serious boost for developing our infrastructure and tourism," Azarov told a briefing afterwards.

"What's important is that we will have not only Ukrainian resources working on this, but also foreign investors."

Poland's former president, Solidarity leader and Noble Peace Prize winner Lech Walesa also acclaimed the result.

"I'm extremely happy. I was personally involved in trying to help Poland and Ukraine organise the Euro tournament. I've put my authority at stake and I admit that I gave a 50-50 chance of Poland winning," said Walesa.

Leo Beenhakker, the Dutch coach of the Polish national team praised the decision saying: "Michel Platini has said it was time to change and UEFA have done that.

"I am delighted for the two countries. It would have been too easy to give it to Italy."

Poland and Ukraine have earmarked six venues for the 16-team tournament-- four of which will be used with two in reserve.

The four Polish cities are Warsaw, Gdansk, Poznan and Wroclaw, while Kiev, Donetsk, Lvov and Dnipropetrovsk will stage games in Ukraine.

UEFA sources likened the final Italian presentation to that of Paris made to the IOC in Singapore in 2006 when London were surprisingly awarded the 2012 Olympics.

"The Italian presentation was rather safe and a little unemotional while the Polish/Ukraine bid was passionate," the source said. "The fact the two presidents of the countries: Viktor Yushchenko of Ukraine and Lech Kaczynski of Poland were here in person to help the bid made a huge impression."

The 2008 European championship is being staged in Switzerland and Austria.

Source: Reuters

Ukraine Leaders Take Feud To EU

BRUSSELS, Belgium -- Ukraine’s two feuding leaders took their power struggle to the heart of the European Union on Tuesday amid signs that the country’s political crisis could drag on and hamper efforts to move closer to the bloc.

Ukraine's President Viktor Yushchenko (L) and European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso shake hands as they pose for a picture during their meeting in Brussels, April 17, 2007.
Viktor Yushchenko, the pro-western president, used a visit to Brussels to promise that the constitutional stand-off over early elections would be resolved by democratic means. He said there had not been “a single discussion” about using military force.

Viktor Yanukovich, the Moscow-leaning prime minister, used a speech in Strasbourg to promise he would respect Ukraine’s constitutional court, which on Tuesday started hearings that will lead to a legal ruling on the impasse.

Mr Yushchenko said his recent decision to dissolve parliament and call elections on May 27 was the only way to bring stability. He claimed Mr Yanukovich had used “non-constitutional mechanisms” in assembling a coalition by recruiting individual MPs instead of building it through uniting a series of factions in the parliament.

Ukraine’s worst political crisis since the Orange Revolution of 2004 has worried supporters in Brussels of the country’s democratic evolution. José Manuel Barroso, the European Commission president, said: “I believe there is a serious political crisis – let’s face the facts.” Highlighting his fears that the situation might degenerate, he pleaded with both sides to stay within the rules of democracy and law.

He warned that if the crisis continued there would inevitably be delays in talks between Brussels and Kiev over closer ties through a new co-operation agreement. “If there is political instability, of course there are delays,” he said.

Mr Barroso wants to bring Ukraine closer to the EU, but the country has never been offered the prospect of EU membership.

Meanwhile, Mr Yanukovich, on a visit to the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, said: “I and my colleagues in the ruling coalition will abide by any ruling of the constitutional court over whether to dissolve parliament. This represents a democratic and civilised way out of the impasse.”

Mr Yanukovich’s governing coalition snubbed election funding, making it unlikely a vote would be held on schedule.

Tuesday’s constitutional court hearings were overshadowed by a corruption investigation launched by Ukraine’s state security agency against Suzana Stanik, one of the 18 constitutional court judges.

Valentyn Nalyvaychenko, the agency’s acting chief, said the probe was into one of Mrs Stanik’s relatives, who last year acquired real estate and luxury cars worth some $12m (€8.8m, £5.9m).

Mrs Stanik dismissed the allegations. Mr Yanukovich accused the security agency of putting pressure on the court. The investigation could delay the court’s efforts to resolve the crisis.

Source: Financial Times

Ukraine's Constitutional Court Tries To Solve Power Battle

KIEV, Ukraine -- While Ukrainian archrival President Yushchenko and Prime Minister Yanukovych each make their case at different EU institutions, the country's constitutional court is trying to settle the country's battle of wills.

Judge Suzanna Stanyk of Ukraine's Constitutional Court begins consideration in the judicial hall on Tuesday, in Kyiv, at the start of a long-awaited hearing on the legality of the president's order to dissolve parliament and call new elections
Pro-Western President Viktor Yushchenko pledged on Tuesday to find a democratic solution to his country's political crisis and ruled out the use of force.

"We are determined to find a democratic resolution to the parliamentary crisis in Ukraine," he told reporters in Brussels, after talks with European Commission chief Jose Manuel Barroso.

"We've never been saying and never (been) crudely speaking about any option with using force to resolve the situation," Yushchenko said.

The Ukrainian president said he would respect any decision taken by his country's Constitutional Court, which on Tuesday opened a hearing into Yushchenko's standoff with Yanukovych over the president's decision to dissolve parliament and call early elections.

"A serious political crisis"

For his part, pro-Russian Yanukovych, who rejects the decree, is due Tuesday to address the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, a continent-wide rights body, in the French city of Strasbourg.

Barroso called the situation in Ukraine "a serious political crisis," but appealed to both sides to find a negotiated solution.

"We hope this political crisis is solved according to the rules of democracy," Barroso said, adding that he was "more confident" a lawful and democratic solution could be found after his talks with Yushchenko.

Yushchenko has defended his two-week-old decree, having originally dissolved Ukraine's assembly after accusing Yanukovych of trying to steal his supporters for the government's coalition.

Yanukovych and his majority in the 450-seat parliament have defied the order and appealed to the court to resolve the matter.

Legal or not?

The Constitutional Court in Kiev on Tuesday began proceedings determine whether Yushchenko's decision two weeks ago to dissolve parliament was legal; Yanukovych claims it was not.

Last week, five of the court's 18 judges complained that they had come under "gross pressure" from the prime minister's parliamentary majority and demanded protection by bodyguards. A from the court ruling could take as long as a month.

Both sides have pledged to abide by the Constitutional Court ruling, but many officials say such a decision would broaden divisions and suggest a negotiated settlement could obviate legal action.

Both the president and prime minister have called for a political deal to resolve the crisis, possibly by postponing the May 27 parliamentary election laid down in Yushchenko's decree, a move that has also been suggested by European officials, including an EU envoy in Kiev last week.

Source: Deutsche Welle

PACE Will Only Mediate In Ukraine If Requested - President

STRASBOURG, France -- The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe will not interfere in an ongoing political crisis in Ukraine without a formal request, the PACE president said Monday.

PACE President Rene van der Linden
The body, which advises the EU on human rights and political issues, decided Monday to hold an urgent debate on the standoff between factions backing the president and those supporting the prime minister which has gripped the ex-Soviet state since April 2.

Rene van der Linden said the organization was willing to mediate in the crisis between Viktor Yushchenko and his long-time rival Viktor Yanukovych if Kiev made a formal request.

The current crisis in the country triggered by the presidential order to disband parliament over the expansion of its majority coalition backing Yanukovych will be discussed in PACE Thursday.

Konstantin Kosachev, who leads the Russian delegation to PACE, said Monday the body was expected to pass a resolution and express its opinion on recent events in Ukraine, a transit nation for Russian energy supplies to Europe.

He also confirmed reports that Yanukovych would address a session in Strasbourg at noon local time Tuesday.

Van der Linden said earlier Monday he hoped a debate would help political leaders in Ukraine find a solution to the crisis simmering since August, when the former presidential hopeful returned as premier under a power-sharing deal.

He also said Foreign Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, the president's ally, had also requested the floor at the session and was free to attend.

Yushchenko will meet with the head of the European Commission, the EU's executive body, in Brussels Tuesday to brief him on the situation, chief commission spokesman Johannes Laitenberger said, adding the meeting had been requested by the Ukrainian leader.

Ukraine's parliament, which has continued work pending a Constitutional Court ruling on the presidential order, made a decision last week to ask for mediation.

Yushchenko at his first news conference in two weeks Thursday said he did not rule out international assistance either.

The European Union mediated in Yushchenko's standoff with Yanukovych in 2004, when he defeated the Moscow-backed rival in a rerun of the allegedly rigged presidential poll.

Yanukovych backers with white and blue banners and Yushchenko's supporters clad in the pro-presidential parties' orange colors have been facing off in the capital, Kiev, the situation bringing back memories of the 2004 "orange revolution" mass protests.

Source: RIA Novosti

Poland, Ukraine Want Euro 2012 As Sign Of Eastern Integration

KIEV, Ukraine -- Poland and Ukraine aim to jointly host the 2012 European football championships not for national pride alone, but to establish integration of eastern Europe's football.


"UEFA has said explicitly that it wants to develop football in the east (of Europe), so our joint bid with Poland is the best choice in this sense," said one football official in Kiev.

The championships have never been staged in the East of the continent, the closest being the 1976 edition in then Yugoslavia.

Football has a proud tradition in both countries. Poland came third at the World Cup in 1974 and 1978 while Andrei Shevchenko's Ukraine is now the top team in the region.

However, there are problems on and off the pitch.

Hooliganism overshadows the game in Poland. A corruption scandal in the game and government interference in the national federation has also not gone down well with international football officials.

In Ukraine, the political power struggle between the nation's president Viktor Yushchenko and prime minister Viktor Yanukovich is overshadowing the bid.

"The political situation in Ukraine is definitely not a plus for our joint bid," said Polish football legend Zbigniew Boniek.

But there are other areas which could be far more important for the UEFA executive board in its decision-making process - most notably infrastructure.

UEFA inspectors have reportedly complained about road conditions, but Polish sports minister Tomasz Lipiec said last Thursday that the tournament offers a chance to improve this situation.

"This is a chance for development of airports, roads, hotels and stadiums in Poland," he said.

The Polish and Ukrainian ministries of transport and regional development also plan an expansion of the highway linking Ukraine and Poland with western Europe at a cost of 1.3 billion euros (1.76 billion dollars).

Both countries have a massive popular support to get the event with matches to be played in the Polish cities of Warsaw, Chorzow, Gdansk, Krakow, Poznan and Wroclaw and the Ukraine cities of Kiev, Dnepropetrovsk, Donetsk and Lviv.

"We are creating a huge marketing value with a population of more than 80 million," Polish bid committee general director Michal Nykowski said.

Source: Earth Times

Kasparov, Anti-Kremlin Activists Detained In Moscow

MOSCOW, Russia -- Former world chess champion Gary Kasparov and at least 170 other anti-Kremlin activists were detained Saturday when hundreds of riot police sealed off a central Moscow square and clubbed some protesters to prevent a banned opposition rally and march.

Garry Kasparov, a former world chess champion, seen at a news conference in Moscow, Thursday, April 12, 2007. Kasparov who became a fierce critic of President Vladimir Putin's government, and members of the group called Other Russia, held a march to downtown Moscow on Saturday, despite city authorities refusal to allow it.
"They are seizing people everywhere so that any group of people that look even the least bit suspicious is immediately arrested, not just blocked, but arrested, harshly," said Kasparov in a cell phone interview with the radio station Echo Moskvy after his arrest. He waved to supporters from a police van before he was driven off.

Police later broke up a demonstration outside the police station where he was being held. Protesters shouting "freedom for political prisoners" were kicked and clubbed by police.

Earlier, lines of police, including undercover officers pointing out vocal demonstrators, quickly moved in on anyone who began to chant slogans or who tried to galvanize people milling around the police cordon.

Some elderly women, carrying flowers and copies of the Russian constitution, were knocked down or hauled away. A number of journalists were also arrested, but officials said they were quickly released.

Kasparov is one of the leaders of the Other Russia, an opposition coalition that called on its supporters to assemble in Pushkin Square despite a decision by the city authorities to ban any gathering by the group there.

"The authorities are afraid of us, they are nervous," said former prime minister Mikhail Kasyanov, who broke with President Vladimir Putin and is now a leader of the Other Russia and a potential presidential candidate. "Why can free people not walk? Why are they beaten?"

The coalition has held a series of marches in Russian cities in recent weeks, all of which have been suppressed, sometimes violently, by riot police. Another is planned for St. Petersburg Sunday.

Kasparov and his supporters say they plan to continue to step up their protests in advance of parliamentary and presidential elections in the next 12 months. They charge that Putin has constrained Russian democracy and is managing the election process to prevent a free choice.

Local authorities stressed that they did provide a permit for a demonstration at another location where Kasyanov later spoke to several hundred people.

Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov said the Other Russia -- by seeking to stage a march where it was not permitted -- was looking for a confrontation with the police.

"We have sanctioned a large number of events, both pro-government and pro-presidential and also anti-government ones," Luzhkov told journalists on Saturday. "We live in a free and democratic country and allow the expression of both agreement and disagreement with the government.

Processions are a problem to us. We have not allowed pro-presidential organizations to hold them as well and suggested that they find a large place for a rally. We act similarly with anti-government organizations who want to express their protest to the authorities."

Officials said 9,000 police and Interior Ministry troops were deployed at different locations across the city.

The authorities appear unwilling to allow opposition gatherings except at locations where the crowds can be easily contained by large numbers of police.

A pro-government youth group was allowed to rally Saturday on Pushkin square where about 150 people gathered inside the police cordon.

The Kremlin, in particular, appears to be haunted by the memory of street demonstrations in neighboring Georgia and Ukraine where the crowds grew exponentially and eventually toppled governments after fraudulent elections.

"The authorities want to scare the opposition," said Alexei Makarkin, an analyst at the Center for Political Technologies in Moscow. "There are always radical activists who will go out on the street but this show of force was psychological pressure designed for those who want to go out but are unsure and want to be safe."

Kasparov's Other Russia, despite the attention it receives from the authorities, remains a very marginal group in this country, where the overwhelming majority of the population either supports Putin or is indifferent to politics.

And the opposition itself is divided. Some opposition figures, including the leaders of Yabloko and the Union of Right Forces, have distanced themselves for the Other Russia because of the presence of radicals such as the National Bolsheviks.

At the sanctioned rally Saturday afternoon, the political satirist Viktor Shenderovich chided some of the young radicals in the crowd telling them to ease up on the talk of revolution. The authorities, he said, have "an inferiority complex."

"Our job is to develop that complex," he said.

Source: Washington Post

Political Crisis Threatens Fragile Democracy In Ukraine

KIEV, Ukraine -- Amid a sea of orange flags and banners crammed into a small downtown roundabout, Vyacheslav Kireichuk angrily jabs his finger toward Independence Square about 200 yards away.

Protestors sit at their camps during a rally to support Ukraine's Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich in central Kiev April 13, 2007. The background is awash with red Communist flags.
There, thousands of opponents of President Viktor Yushchenko have seized what Kireichuk regards as sacred ground - the place where the Ukrainian democracy movement known as the Orange Revolution all began.

They have hunkered down in canvas tents in and around the square, just as Kireichuk and thousands of other Orange revolutionaries did in the frigid winter of 2004. And they have been dancing in the plaza day after day, just as Kireichuk's compatriots did.

The Maidan, as Ukrainians call Independence Square, "is where I stood for so many days in the snow for the sake of the revolution," Kireichuk says, spying legions of countrymen draped in the opposition's color, sky blue. "Looking over to the Maidan today, I feel as if this place has been corrupted."

In the topsy-turvy world of Ukrainian politics, about the only thing anyone agrees on these days is that their country is in the throes of another political crisis - the latest in a series of crises that have dogged Yushchenko's presidency ever since the Orange Revolution launched him into power.

The latest imbroglio, however, is by far the country's worst since the revolution, pitting Yushchenko on one side against Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych and parliament on the other, with the country's constitution hanging in the balance.

And for every Orange devotee like Kireichuk, you'll find a sky blue-clad loyalist of Yanukovych who says it's Yushchenko, the Orange movement's leader, who has made a mess of Ukraine's politics and economy.

After seeing his presidential powers steadily eroded by Ukraine's Yanukovych-led legislature, Yushchenko on April 2 decided to fight back by ordering the dissolution of parliament. He said new parliamentary elections would be held May 27, just 14 months after Ukrainians elected the current parliament.

Yushchenko and Yanukovych had been at loggerheads since Yanukovych's Party of Regions won the largest share of votes in the March 2006 parliament election. For Yushchenko, however, the last straw came with the defection of 11 lawmakers from Yushchenko's Our Ukraine party and Orange ally Yulia Tymoshenko's bloc over to Yanukovych's ruling coalition.

The defections gave Yanukovych 260 lawmakers in the 450-seat parliament, drawing him closer to the 300-vote supermajority he would need to override any Yushchenko veto.

Yanukovych and his allies have refused to abide by Yushchenko's decree and have continued to work in parliament. They also have bused thousands of Ukrainians from Yanukovych's support base in the east and south to Kiev's Independence Square to demonstrate daily against Yushchenko's decision.

The impasse has been put in the hands of Ukraine's Constitutional Court, which is expected to begin discussing the legality of Yushchenko's decree April 17. They were scheduled to begin their work this week, but hearings were postponed after five of the court's judges complained they were being pressured by Yanukovych's allies.

For many Ukrainians, the latest political row has left them deeply disillusioned about the value of the Orange Revolution, a milestone that was supposed to mark an end to years of post-Soviet corruption and political chicanery.

Instead, Ukrainians have anxiously watched as Yushchenko's presidency has reeled from one crisis to the next. Yushchenko's partnership with Yulia Tymoshenko's bloc broke down long ago. Corruption allegations have brought down other key members of Yushchenko's circle. In the March 26, 2006, parliament election that resurrected Yanukovych's place in Ukrainian politics, Yushchenko's party finished a distant third.

"Right now, the overriding sentiment in Ukraine is one of lost opportunity," says Volodymyr Polokhalo, a Kiev-based political analyst. "After the revolution, Yushchenko had a chance to make so many changes and reforms to improve politics, the economy, the judicial system. But he didn't do it."

So far, Yushchenko has refused to back down, though on Thursday he said he would be willing to postpone the holding of early parliament elections to ease the crisis. "This is a political crisis, and politicians must use their best skills to make sure that this conflict is resolved by political means," Yushchenko said at a news conference in Kiev. "This is the best way."

Yanukovych says he won't agree to early parliament elections unless they are accompanied by an early presidential election, a contest Yanukovych's allies believe their leader is in an ideal position to win.

The standoff is being eyed closely by the West, which regards Yushchenko as a pivotal ally wedged between the European Union's easternmost border and Russia. Yushchenko has been actively pursuing Ukraine's possible membership in NATO, despite strong opposition from Yanukovych and much of Ukraine's population.

Further weakening of Yushchenko's authority in Ukraine jeopardizes the country's pro-West agenda, says Vadim Karasyov, an analyst with the Kiev-based Institute for Global Strategies.

"This crisis is demonstrating to the West just how unstable Ukraine is right now," Karasyov says. "It suggests we haven't reached a certain level of development. No matter who comes out the winner, I'm afraid this instability will go on for many years."

Such dire forecasts may have more to do with Ukraine's history than with its current cast of political players. Ukraine's pro-Yushchenko western and central regions are oriented culturally and economically toward Europe, while the eastern and southern sections of the country are staunchly pro-Russian. Ukrainian is spoken in the country's western half, Russian in the east.

Many in Ukraine believed that the momentum the Orange Revolution supplied Yushchenko would give him the clout he needed to erase Ukraine's east-west divide. By rallying thousands of orange-clad Ukrainians to Independence Square every day for several weeks in 2004, Orange movement leaders mustered enough support to overturn rigged election results that would have given the presidency to Yanukovych instead of Yushchenko. A rerun election was held, which Yushchenko won with 51.9 percent of the vote.

However, even members of Yushchenko's Our Ukraine party acknowledge that Yushchenko didn't do enough to unify the country after the election rerun.

"Yes, we can blame him because right after he was elected, he didn't act decisively," says Yuri Artemenko, an Our Ukraine lawmaker. "This division between east and west just festers and worsens. And I'm afraid new elections won't help. The only hope is to negotiate."

Yushchenko and Yanukovych have been meeting regularly, but neither side has shown signs of backing down. Appearing onstage before thousands of his supporters at Independence Square on Wednesday, Yanukovych made it clear he was digging in his heels.

"Two and half years ago, there were people here under a different flag-an orange flag-and they promised a happy life," Yanukovych said. "Did we get that happy life? I don't think there is anyone in Ukraine who is happy with their life. . . . Today we have crisis, and it has a visible negative impact on every person and every family."

Yanukovych asserts that the president's order to dissolve parliament was illegal and tantamount to a coup. He has ordered his government to not pay for the holding of new parliament elections. Yushchenko's decree, Yanukovych told parliament April 3, "aims at power usurpation."

Constitutionally, Yushchenko has the power to dissolve the legislature and order new elections under certain circumstances. In this case, he said Yanukovych and his allies violated the constitution by recruiting opposition lawmakers over to Yanukovych's side. According to Ukraine's constitution, parliament is elected on the basis of political party factions, not individuals. Switching parties, therefore, is unconstitutional in Yushchenko's view.

Both sides have agreed to abide by whatever decision the constitutional court makes, but that ruling could take weeks. On Independence Square, Yanukovych's supporters insist they're willing to wait, in part because they are in no big hurry to relinquish the Maidan.

"Being here on the Maidan, it means we're the winners now," said Alexander Elytch, 26, of Zhitomyr in central Ukraine. "The Orange camp, they had their chance and lost it. They promised so much, and never kept their promises."

Source: Chicago Tribune

Smear Tactics Used In Ukraine Constitution Row, Says Court Justice

KIEV, Ukraine -- Susana Stanik, a justice in Ukraine's top court, claimed on Friday political groups had targeted her with a smear campaign in a bid to influence her vote in an upcoming hearing on the country's ongoing constitutional crisis.

Justice Susana Stanik
"I am doing everything possible, so that this case is heard," she told reporters in Kiev. "There has been a dirty campaign to pressure me and my family members so that I do not prepare for the case properly. "

Stanik is one of 18 constitutional court justices scheduled on Wednesday to review the legality of President Viktor Yushchenko's controversial order last week declaring parliament dissolved.

Viktor Yanukovich, the parliament majority leader, has called the order illegal, and the legislature has continued to meet.

Stanik was responding to allegations made on Ukrainian internet websites accusing her of having received a new Kiev apartment from the government, in exchange for her support to Yushchenko in in the hearing.

Rocketing real estate prices in central Kiev rival Tokyo and London. A state-allocated apartment in the best regions of the city would be worth millions of dollars.

Yushchenko supports market reform and closer relations with Europe while Yanukovich supports closer relations with Russia, and government assistance to industrial tycoons.

Stanik said she intended to review the case impartially, but warned she and members of her family "could become targets of physical violence. "

Yushchenko on Wednesday assigned bodyguards from the country's elite national spy agency, the SBU, to any court justice in need of protection.

The promise of bodyguards came last week, after five justices threatened to walk off the case because of efforts by the country's political camps to influence their vote.

They did not make public the nature of the pressure tactics or name the side using them.

Most political observers believe the court is split almost evenly between Yushchenko and Yanukovich appointees, as parliament and the president appoint six justices each according to statute.

Stanik is considered an exception by most political analysts and a as a potential swing vote, as she was not appointed by polticians, but rather a supposedly apolitical judicial council.

The upcoming court decision is likely to set constitutional precedent, and determine whether the president or the prime minister runs the executive branch of government.

Both Yushchenko and Yanukovich have said they will abide by the high court ruling.

The Ukrainian capital Kiev has seen street demonstrations, and vicious polemics across the media for nearly two weeks, as both sides have jockeyed for public support in the run-up to the court hearing.

Source: Jurnalo

Ukraine Premier Signals Readiness For Early Polls

KIEV, Ukraine -- Signs of compromise appeared yesterday in Ukraine’s power struggle as Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich signalled readiness to participate in early elections as demanded by his political rival President Viktor Yushchenko.

Protesters gather at their camps before a rally to support Ukraine’s Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich, at Independence Square in Kiev. Yanukovich is refusing to implement a decree by President Viktor Yushchenko to dissolve parliament and to hold a new election.
In an apparent major concession, Yanukovich said that he could take part in an election even if the constitutional court, which is due to start hearings next week, rules that Yushchenko’s demand is illegitimate.

“If the court rules the decree was unconstitutional, elections are possible if all the participants in the political process agree,” he told journalists.

The crisis, now in its second week, began when pro-Western Yushchenko decreed the dissolution of parliament and new elections.

Yanukovich’s Russian-backed allies have until now refused to comply, resulting in constitutional paralysis.

According to Yushchenko’s decree new parliamentary elections must take place May 27, although a senior aide to the president said on Wednesday that the decree might be suspended in order to put off the election until a later date.

Yushchenko underlined his determination yesterday, telling journalists that he ruled out rescinding his decree.

As the two sides haggled, their supporters continued to take to the streets.
Several thousand supporters of Yanukovich gathered on the capital’s main square waving the blue flags of his Regions Party, which leads the anti-Yushchenko coalition dominating parliament.

A few hundred Yushchenko supporters, waving the orange flags of his Our Ukraine party, also gathered nearby.

Pressure has been growing on the constitutional court, which is due to rule on whether Yushchenko’s original April 2 decree dissolving parliament and calling new polls was legal.

Tension increased this week when the court at the last minute announced that initial hearings would be put back until next week.

Several judges, including three Yushchenko appointees, complained of coming under political pressure and requested bodyguards.

While Yanukovich suggested that he could support elections even if the court declares the decree illegal marked a sharp turn-around, he did not lay out how likely it was that all other forces in Ukraine’s complex political landscape would also agree in such circumstances.

Yanukovich’s signal of flexibility followed the apparent olive branch held out on Wednesday by Vitaliy Gaiduk, a top security adviser to Yushchenko, who said the May 27 election date – just six weeks away – was not set in stone.

During a suspension of the decree, a date for early elections would be negotiated with parliament, ensuring that all parties, including those currently opposed to Yushchenko, had time to campaign.

Yushchenko and Yanukovich have feuded since 2004, when the “Orange Revolution” protests brought Yushchenko to power after a presidential election win initially handed to Yanukovich was declared fraudulent.

Source: AFP

Ukraine: Did West Pull Up Stakes Too Soon?

PRAGUE, Czech Republic -- Two years ago, Viktor Yushchenko was hailed as a conquering hero in many Western capitals.

President George W. Bush and Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko meet in the Oval Office prior to participating in a joint press availability at the White House April 4, 2005.
The United States Congress, hosting the newly annointed Ukrainian president in April 2005, welcomed his arrival with boisterous enthusiasm, chanting his name and cheering as he thanked "the entire American nation" for its support.

That speech, and one in Germany's Bundestag a month earlier, were part of a post-revolutionary victory lap after the massive public protests of the Orange Revolution propelled Yushchenko into the Ukrainian presidency -- and reduced his Moscow-backed rival, Viktor Yanukovych, to political ignominy.

Now Yushchenko and Yanukovych are once again locking horns.

This time, however, Yanukovych is prime minister and head of the lynchpin party in parliament's ruling coalition. And the cheers of Western support for Yushchenko? Nowhere to be heard.

"Any political questions in Ukraine need to be resolved by the Ukraine government," said State Department spokesman Sean McCormack, responding to Yushchenko's dissolution of the Verkhovna Rada following the defection of opposition lawmakers to the coalition.

And in Brussels, Adrian Severin, a member of the EU-Ukraine Parliamentary Cooperation Committee, said this time around, Europe was putting its support behind "values," rather than "people."

Yushchenko himself appears to acknowledge he cannot turn to the West for support on this battle. In an interview with RFE/RL on April 11, the president said Ukrainians must solve the current crisis "by themselves."

Orange Letdown

Some observers say many in the West have been disappointed by the inability of the Orange Revolution leaders to capitalize on their powerful public mandate and effectively lead the country down a new progressive path.

"The lethargy that you see, the hesitancy, or even the frustration on the part of Brussels and Washington has to do with the degree to which the Orange Revolution itself collapsed or disintegrated or eroded," says Robert Legvold, a professor at New York's Columbia University who specializes in post-Soviet politics.

Just months after the Orange Revolution, Yushchenko and his charismatic political ally, Yuliya Tymoshenko, had been reduced to constant bickering. By September 2005, Yushchenko removed Tymoshenko from her prime ministerial post.

That move split the pro-Western Orange forces and opened the door for Yanukovych's political comeback and the victory of his Party of Regions in March 2006 parliamentary elections.

After months of haggling, Yushchenko, Tymoshenko, and Socialist Party leader Oleksandr Moroz appeared to revive the Orange forces and form a ruling coalition that would have returned Tymoshenko to the prime ministerial post.

But in the end, Moroz defected and instead formed a coalition with Party of Regions and the Communists. By August 2006, it was Yanukovych, and not Tymoshenko, who was confirmed as prime minister.

"The Orange Revolution alliance quarreled so much, it didn't have the sort of inner dynamism to create a government of its own," said Eugeniusz Smolar of the Warsaw-based Center for International Relations, who said he watched the months of haggling with a mixture of "sympathy and horror."

The fighting, he said, "destroyed, on the one hand, the cohesion -- and, on the other hand, some of the support -- of the population toward the government."

Divided Loyalty

Some analysts and politicians suggest the West could have done more to support pro-European forces in Ukraine by expediting the country's bid to join Western institutions like the World Trade Organization, the European Union, and NATO.

Brussels, which acknowledges expansion fatigue, has been firm in its refusal to bolster Ukraine's hopes of membership.

But U.S. President Bush on April 10 signed legislation backing NATO membership for five countries, including Ukraine.

The fact remains, however, that Ukraine's eastern regions remain largely loyal to Russia, which adamantly opposes NATO expansion.

As a result, Ukraine itself is deeply divided over whether it wants to join the EU or NATO.

Some polls have indicated that most Ukrainians would reject membership in either if the issue was put to a referendum.

"There is a quite a large group of public opinion in Ukraine that is not terribly interested in joining the European Union, understanding that it has an important economic, social, and cultural interest in staying close to Russia," says Smolar.

So did the West fail, or Ukraine? "It's a complex situation," Smolar says. "I believe that the Ukrainian public and the Ukrainian elite didn't do enough. Whether the West could do more... I believe it could do more, but I am not sure it could do much more."

Wider Implications

Ukraine's inconstancy regarding the West may prove an inconvenience elsewhere in the former Soviet Union -- particularly in Georgia, whose NATO bid also got U.S. President Bush's blessing this week.

Georgia kicked off the wave of colored revolutions with its 2003 Rose Revolution, and President Mikheil Saakashvili has traditionally kept close ties with Yushchenko.

But Legvold at Columbia University says Georgia's own Western ambitions may be hampered by the ongoing Ukrainian stalemate.

"I don't see any prospect that Georgia can be considered for NATO membership -- even if it seems in some fashion more qualified -- until the Ukrainian issue is settled," he says. "You can't jump over Ukraine and address the Georgian question separately."

Ultimately, U.S. and EU support for Yushchenko and Ukraine's pro-Western forces may also be muted because the current composition of the Ukrainian government is the product of elections that were universally judged to be among the fairest and cleanest in post-Soviet Ukraine.

The Orange Revolution had a clear villain in Yanukovych, whose backers blatantly falsified election results.

This time around, he is the legitimate head of government and leads the most popular party in the country.

Marek Siwiec, deputy chairman of the European Parliament, said on April 11 that Yushchenko can no longer expect the unequivocal Western support he enjoyed in 2004.

"All parties have a legal democratic mandate now," Siwiec said. And that makes a "huge difference."

Source: Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

Russia: Ukraine Crisis Looms Large

MOSCOW, Russia -- The recent spat in Ukraine between the president, Viktor Yushchenko, and his rival, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, has been followed closely in Russia.

Supporters of Ukraine's President Viktor Yushchenko attend a rally in central Kiev. Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich says he will not take part in a new election ordered by Ukraine's president pending a court ruling, but five judges investigating the matter say they cannot examine the issue as they are being subjected to pressure.
Russian politicians have been eager to speak out about the mounting crisis, with the Duma issuing a statement on April 6 supporting the Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada and denouncing Yushchenko's decision to dissolve parliament.

But a member of a Russian State Duma delegation visiting Ukraine, Duma Deputy Aleksandr Krutov, denied today that Russia was interfering in Ukrainian politics.

The Duma's statement "is not interference in [Ukraine's] internal affairs. It is an assessment of the Ukrainian president's decree," Krutov said. "Anybody, any organization, any country may give their assessment to any legal act in any country. The State Duma has given its own assessment and it is fully entitled to do so."

Old Ties

Events in Ukraine have provoked strong feelings among many Russians.

Russian television news programs have devoted hours of airtime to the current crisis in Ukraine. The escalating row has dominated the news and the front pages of most of the newspapers in Russia for several days

Yevgeny Volk, the director of the Moscow branch of the Washington-based Heritage Foundation, says Russia and Ukraine are bound together.

"The idea of Ukraine becoming a completely independent state is very hard for Russians to understand," Volk says.

"It always used to be that when something happened in Ukraine, we regarded it as something that was happening to us. We'd watch it with a great deal of attention. And of course the question of Ukraine joining the West, becoming a member of NATO or the European Union -- this is the worst imaginable nightmare for Russian public opinion."

Winter Of Orange

Three winters ago, when demonstrators wearing orange jackets took to the streets in Kyiv to contest fraudulent elections, they had the strong support of Washington and the European Union. The results of the election were overturned and the Western-leaning Yushchenko came to power in what became known as the Orange Revolution.

But three years later, there are signs that the West's support for Ukraine has waned.

Sam Greene, a political researcher at the Carnegie Moscow Center, says things look different now.

"Unfortunately, attention spans, particularly in Washington -- but I think not only in Washington -- I think are sometimes shorter than we would like them to be, and I think that interest has moved on. I think we saw similar dynamics probably in Georgia and probably in Kyrgyzstan," Greene says.

But has the void left by the Western governments that supported the Orange Revolution in Ukraine, the Rose Revolution in Georgia, and the Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan left an opportunity for Russia to regain influence in these former Soviet republics?

Greene says the issue is a little bit more complicated.

"The attention deficit from Washington's side may provide some opportunities to Moscow. They're more aware of an opportunity when it comes up and they might be able to take better advantage of it," Greene says.

"But in the long run, the real meat and bones of the relationship is something that is played out and fought over on a daily basis, not just in these moments of crisis and specific opportunity, but something that is part of trade negotiations and diplomacy and investment."

Saving Face

In recent years, Russia has taken steps to exert political influence in the region. At the beginning of 2006, an energy row between Moscow and Kyiv took on broader implications when Russia said it would no longer supply gas to Ukraine at reduced rates. Eventually, Ukraine was forced to accept the new terms. A few months later, Georgia agreed to pay market rates for Russian gas, too.

Greene says part of Russia's show of force is about saving face.

"The other thing they're sensitive to is image and prestige, partly for domestic reasons, partly for maintaining this international rhetoric that obviously makes them feel very good on some level," Greene says.

"They certainly would not want to see Ukraine join NATO or Georgia join NATO. They certainly would not want to see American antimissile systems and radar bases directly on the other side of the Russian border."

At the same time, he says, Moscow is coming to realize that the influence it used to wield over countries like Ukraine and Georgia is on the wane.

The decision makers in the Kremlin are under no illusion they can bring these countries into line -- now, he says, their primary concern is to do business with them.

Source: Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

Byut Leader Could Come Out On Top

KIEV, Ukraine -- With Ukraine’s ongoing political crisis looking increasingly likely to end in some kind of compromise between pro-Western President Viktor Yushchenko and his Eastern-leaning arch-rival Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, the faction of fiery opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko may once again find itself on the sidelines in parliament, albeit with growing popular support among the nation’s voters.

Yulia Tymoshenko meeting with former Polish President Aleksandr Kwasnewski
As the Post went to press on April 11, tens of thousands of demonstrators supporting Yanukovych’s pro-Russian majority coalition, and crowds backing the president, continued to converge on the center of the nation’s capital.

The day before, Yushchenko and Yanukovych, who had fought for the presidency in front of international television audiences during the country’s much-touted Orange Revolution of 2004, met once again to try to find a way out of their deadlock.

Following Yushchenko’s April 2 decision to disband parliament, the country’s media, courts and offices of executive power have served as chaotic political battlegrounds, while major foreign powers watch with interest.

Yushchenko accused Yanukovych, whom the president himself nominated for office following last year’s parliamentary elections, of trying to monopolize executive power through unconstitutional Cabinet decisions and the luring of opposition lawmakers into the coalition.

Tymoshenko, whose political ambitions have been derailed by Yushchenko despite that fact that she vehemently supported him during his rise to the presidency, is once again rallying Ukrainians to back him in his latest battle for power.

Unlike in the past, the president is standing strong against Yanukovych, vowing to stick to his decision to disband parliament and hold early elections, which are currently scheduled for May 27.

Nevertheless, during a meeting with foreign media on April 10, the president hinted that he may be willing to give in a little by postponing the snap elections to a later date.

“Dates are one of those issues that can be decided during negotiations,” he said.

“The most important thing is that we find a constitutional formula in the issue of the dates so that they can’t be subject to revision.”

Unlike during the Orange Revolution of 2004, Yushchenko has less supporters on the streets and, more importantly, no decision in his favor from the country’s high courts.

The Constitutional Court has been asked by Yanukovych’s team to decide whether the dismissal of the parliament was legal, but justices have so far avoided a ruling. What’s more, they appear to be using every excuse from ill health to accusations of political pressure.

Tymoshenko, who rallied public support in 2004 and popular votes during the 2006 parliamentary elections, has been consistently defiant of backroom deals, demanding that new elections be held immediately.

Garnering far more votes than Yushchenko’s Our Ukraine faction during the last parliamentary election and continuing to rise in public opinion polls, Tymoshenko has every reason to support new parliamentary polls in preparation for a presidential bid in 2009.

Yushchenko, on the other hand, is finding it increasingly difficult to stare down Yanukovych, the strongman from Donetsk. Yanukovych’s Regions party and their leftist allies in the Rada have refused to fund the snap elections and threatened the president with impeachment.

Short of using the security services to arrest the coalition lawmakers and their supporters in the government, Yushchenko is virtually powerless to enforce his will.

Ukrainian political analyst Oles Dony said the president and the premier are nearing a compromise that could entail moving the election back a few months. According to Dony, Regions wants elections at the end of the year, to give it more time for campaigning, while the president is offering early June.

Dony said a likely compromise would be early fall, thereby allowing both sides to save face and wage campaigns. The public images of the president, the premier, the parliament and especially the courts have suffered greatly as a result of the standoff, Dony added.

“It doesn’t matter who wins, as long as the situation continues where lawmakers are allowed to sell their votes to the faction willing to pay the most.”

Vadym Karasyov of Kyiv’s Institute of Global Strategies also thinks a compromise between Yanukovych and Yushchenko is likely. Such a move could sideline Yulia Tymoshenko’s Byut again, but she could also remain in a strong win-win-win situation, rising in the polls further ahead of 2009 presidential elections as the only alternative to the longstanding infighting between the two male leaders.

“The current situation is least harmful for Byut,” he said, referring to the continuing standoff between the president and the premier.

“Neither of them (Yushchenko or Yanukovych) has a decisive advantage to get a compromise on their terms.”

Karasyov said Byut could even come out much better in one of three non-compromise scenarios: if Yushchenko pushes forward with snap parliamentary elections, if the coalition impeaches Yushchenko and a presidential poll is held, or if no elections are held at all.

Following Yushchenko’s sacking of Tymoshenko as premier in September 2005, the fiery femme fatale came back to get 22 percent of votes in the March 2006 parliamentary elections, surprising both Yanukovych and Yushchenko, whose blocs did worse than expected.

Tymoshenko, who hails from eastern Ukraine but espouses a policy popular in the west, picked up votes during last year’s election in the Yanukovych-dominated east and south.

While Yanukovych and Yushchenko were arguing at home over issues of power that climaxed with Yushchenko’s recent dismissal of the parliament, Tymoshenko was warmly greeted in Washington DC as the next possible leader of Ukraine’s democratic movement.

More recently, Tymoshenko has been supporting the president – at a safe distance – in his battle against Yanukovych.

Tymoshenko announced solidarity with Yushchenko’s Our Ukraine party in its campaign to reclaim the parliament but dismissed speculation of forming a single electoral bloc. Going it alone preserves a strong launching pad for Tymoshenko into the 2009 presidential elections.

“We are going to the elections as two [separate] powerful streams,” she said during an April 10 press briefing, rejecting the suggestion that fresh elections could be delayed. “Putting off the elections is practically impossible, as Article 77 of the Constitution envisages that early elections must be held within 60 days, and the law on elections envisages that the elections must be held on the last Sunday of that 60-day period.”

While Yanukovych and Yushchenko continually drag each other into the mud at home and abroad, Tymoshenko’s rating has steadily grown.

A recent poll shows Tymoshenko’s bloc would get 25 percent of the popular vote in a snap election, just two percentage points behind Yanukovych’s Regions Party.

Late last year, as Yushchenko continued to have his authority wrestled away from him by Yanukovych, his Our Ukraine bloc appeared to be on the verge of a split, making it likely that part of the pro-presidential party would join Tymoshenko.

Indeed, fired as premier in 2005 and then passed over for the position a year later – in favor of Yanukovych – Tymoshenko owes the president nothing.

Dmytro Vydryn, a lawmaker in the Tymoshenko faction, said that any attempt to reach a compromise between Yushchenko and Yanukovych would make the president look worse.

“It will cause a shift in popularity favoring [Tymoshenko’s] Byut or other democratic parties,” he added.

Source: Kyiv Post

Ukraine Demos Target High Court, Russian MPs Arrive

KIEV, Ukraine -- Demonstrators and political pressure groups on both sides of Ukraine's ongoing constitutional crisis focused on the country's highest court on Wednesday, as a delegation of Russian legislators arrived in the former Soviet republic.

Communist supporters of Ukrainian Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych attend a rally on Independence Square in Kiev, Ukraine, Wednesday, April 11, 2007. Ukraine's Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych urged President Viktor Yushchenko on Wednesday to halt his order to dissolve parliament and call early elections, warning of unspecified 'consequences' if he refused.
More than 1,000 activists supporting parliament's side of the conflict gathered outside the supreme constitutional court, waving banners and chanting slogans accusing President Viktor Yushchenko of illegally dissolving parliament.

Yushchenko, a proponent of market economics and closer Ukrainian relations with Europe, last week ordered the legislature closed and called for new elections, citing alleged constitutional violations by the parliamentary majority in forming a ruling coalition.

The Ukrainian capital Kiev has seen marches and protests - all peaceful so far - almost every day since Yushchenko's order.

The morning demonstration outside the constitutional court was likewise low-key, with non-violent demonstrators shouting primarily for the benefit of television cameras. Some 50 police were observing the gathering.

A column of 2,000 pro-Yushchenko demonstrators marched by the court house later in the morning. The sides traded insults but there was no violence.

More than 25,000 parliament supporters gathered in Kiev's central Maidan square in late afternoon.

Some 2,000 Yushchenko supports held a rally a few hundred metres away, in the nearby Europe Square. The two crowds avoided each other.

Constitutional court hearings on the dissolution order are set to begin on April 17, and according to Yushchenko new elections will take place on May 27.

Many political observers in the country doubt the chances of the poll deadline being met, given the amount of constitutional wrangling needed for it to proceed.

The high court already has missed one deadline to start considering the case, on Tuesday.

Ukraine's cabinet of ministers, which is hostile to Yushchenko and loyal to Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich, on Wednesday afternoon made government funding for the election illegal.

A possible compromise between Yushchenko and Yanukovich setting the elections on October 27 was under secret discussion between the two camps, the Ukrainska Pravda web magazine reported.

A delegation of 20 Russian MPs arrived in the Ukrainian capital on Wednesday afternoon.

The Moscow legislators were expected to meet Yanukovich, the pro-Russia leader of the parliament majority, as well as other senior parliament officials.

The Russian MPs had no plans to discuss the dispute with Yushchenko, but intended to visit a memorial to Ukrainians killed during famines in the 1930s, senior Yanukovich spokesman Serhy Kivalov said on Channel Five television.

Sergei Markov, a Russian political scientist participating in the trip, criticized the Yushchenko administration's alleged violation of Ukrainian law, saying "protection of human rights is not just an internal Ukrainian matter."

The Russian visit and Markov's widely-reported remarks were little less than a calculated insult by the Kremlin towards Yushchenko, whose supporters generally consider Russia an enemy to Ukrainian independence, and the Soviet government responsible for millions of Ukrainian deaths during the 1930s famines.

Russia MP Aleksander Lebedyev, head of the Russian delegation, told the Inter television station the goal of the Russian visit was only fact-finding and "we have no intention of interfering in Ukrainian internal affairs . we are not taking sides. "

Former Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski met with Yanukovich and Yushchenko in afternoon talks, without any publicly-announced result.

Petro Symonenko, head of Ukraine's Communist party and among the most outspoken of Yushchenko's opponents, accused the President of "wanting to force Ukrainians to live not by the constitution . but according to foreign orders. "

During his term as Polish president Kwasniewski was a key mediator between Yushchenko and Yanukovich in Ukraine's 2004 Orange Revolution, which eventually propelled Yushchenko into the presidential office and Yanukovich into the opposition.

Yanukovich's faction gained a parliament majority in 2006 elections, with Symonenko's Communists a junior partner in the coalition.

Source: Jurnalo

Judges Deciding Ukraine Crisis Are Given Protection

KIEV, Ukraine -- While protestors continue to gather on the streets, behind closed doors the focus of Ukraine's political crisis is now turning to the country's Constitutional Court.

Yushchenko is sticking to his "guns" as the political crisis continues
A crucial hearing was postponed until next Tuesday, over claims of intimidation.

Five of the 18 judges have now been given bodyguards.

The first sign of a compromise came yesterday, however, when President Viktor Yuschenko said he was flexible over dates for the snap elections - but nothing more. Yuschenko has issued a decree dissolving parliament, which the Russian-backed majority of Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich has dismissed as unconstitutional.

Opposition leader Yulia Timoshenko called for the poll to take place as soon as possible: "It is impossible to postpone the polls - the constitution says early elections must take place within 60 days of Parliament being dissolved - and that date is May the 27th."

Yuschenko said he had put forward a 15-point plan to resolve the crisis during talks with Yanukovych yesterday.

Yanukovich's supporters in turn said they will only support early parliamentary polls if a presidential vote is held as well.

However they do not have enough of a majority to bring this about.

Source: EuroNews

Bush Signs Law On Ukrainian, Georgian Accession To NATO

WASHINGTON, DC -- US President George Bush has signed into law a document supporting the bid of Ukraine and Georgia, among others, to join NATO, the White House press service said Tuesday.

US President George Bush
'The President signed into law the NATO Freedom Consolidation Act of 2007, which reaffirms support for continued enlargement of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), designates Albania, Croatia, Georgia, Macedonia, and Ukraine as eligible to receive assistance under the NATO Participation Act of 1994, and authorizes fiscal year 2008 appropriations for certain military assistance for these countries,' the press service said in a statement on its Web site.

The NATO Freedom Consolidation Act of 2007, already approved by the Senate March 15 and the House of Representatives March 26, envisions $12 million in aid to Albania, Croatia, Macedonia, Georgia and Ukraine in 2008, which 'have clearly stated their desire to join NATO and are working hard to meet the specified requirements for membership.'

A total of $30 million will be allocated from the US budget to the countries between 2008 and 2012 under the same program.

In mid-March, despite bitter differences on domestic issues, Georgia's parliament voted unanimously to carry on with the NATO bid.

'NATO is a priority for all Georgian people,' Nino Burdzhanadze, the speaker, said. 'Hope of restoring territorial integrity and protecting the country's sovereignty are pinned on this organization.

The organization is the only guarantor of stability and peace in the region.'

The idea is unpopular with the largely Russian-speaking population in the east of the country.

Mass anti-NATO protests rocked Ukraine's Crimean Autonomy in late May-early June 2006.

As well as being uneasy about the opening of NATO bases on the territory of Russia's former Soviet allies in the Baltic region and Central Asia, Moscow strongly opposes efforts by Georgia and Ukraine to join the alliance, saying the prospect threatens its security and will unleash a new arms race.

Source: India eNews

Ukraine's President Meets Premier, Insists On Early Parliamentary Elections

KIEV, Ukraine -- President Viktor Yushchenko told Ukraine's premier on Tuesday that the only way out of the political crisis gripping this ex-Soviet republic was to hold early parliament elections, the president's office said.

Constitutional Court of Ukraine. Five of the 18 judges said Tuesday they would refuse to participate in the hearings, citing pressure on them from the Yanukovych camp.
Yushchenko's latest round of talks with Premier Viktor Yanukovych ended with the president again refusing to back down from his order to dissolve parliament and call new elections.

As they met, some 20,000 of Yanukovych's supporters — waving party flags and holding portraits of the premier — protested in Kiev's Independence Square against the presidential order.

Yanukovych and his parliamentary majority have called the order unconstitutional and refused to obey it. They have appealed to Ukraine's Constitutional Court, which is set to begin hearings Wednesday.

Five of the 18 judges said Tuesday they would refuse to participate in the hearings, citing pressure on them from the Yanukovych camp. The hearings can still go ahead, however, because the court only needs a 12-member quorum.

"The president's decree to dissolve the Ukrainian parliament falls within his constitutional powers," the judges said in a statement. "Unfortunately, some famous officials and politicians publicly say it is unconstitutional, even though under the Constitution, it is only the Constitutional Court that has the right to check its constitutionality."

The standoff has plunged this nation of 47 million into its worst political crisis since the 2004 Orange Revolution. Russia, Ukraine's historic partner, and the West, with whom Ukraine was trying to build closer relations, have both appealed for calm.

Yushchenko told Yanukovych at their meeting Tuesday that a compromise was possible "only under the condition of early parliamentary elections," the presidential office said.

Yushchenko has defended his order to call early elections, saying it was necessary to prevent his Orange Revolution rival from trying to usurp power.

During the bitter 2004 presidential race, Ukraine's Central Election Commission declared Yanukovych the winner. But Yushchenko claimed the election had been stolen and called hundreds of thousands of his supporters to the street.

The mass protests, known as the Orange Revolution, ended after Ukraine's Supreme Court declared the vote riddled with fraud and ordered another poll, which Yushchenko won.

This time, it is Yanukovych who has brought his supporters to the streets. They have set up a tent camp in a central Kiev park, and pledged to increase their numbers to up to 60,000 on Tuesday.

"Yushchenko won't compromise," Transport Minister Mykola Rudkovsky told Yanukovych's supporters, many of whom came to Kiev from Yanukovych's support base in eastern and southern Ukraine. "We must show the president that it is impermissible to ignore half of the country."

Halyna Ozhetrushko, of the eastern city of Dnipropetrovsk, said she was at the rally to make Yushchenko understand that "new elections are a waste of money."

Meanwhile, more than 100 supporters of Yushchenko's Our Ukraine party gathered in nearby European Square to guard a stage that has been erected for their rally in support of the president's dissolution order.

That rally is slated to begin Wednesday.

Source: International Herald Tribune

Is Cheney Trying To Break Up Ukraine?

ARLINGTON, VA -- Evidence is mounting that Vice President Dick Cheney may be personally handling a "Ukraine portfolio," involving the destabilization of Prime Minister Victor Yanukovych's government, or even splitting the country in two, at the same time that Cheney is running "special forces" operations inside Iran, against the Iranian government.

U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney
A March 28 Interfax-Ukraine wire noted that Cheney had just met in Washington with Ukrainian Central Election Commission Chairman Yaroslav Davydovych, to discuss "development of democracy in Ukraine."

This followed Cheney's late-February consultations with visiting ex-Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, a celebrity of the U.S. Project Democracy-backed Orange Revolution of 2004.

Speaking at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, as EIR Online reported March 6, Tymoshenko cast herself as the person to relaunch the Orange movement.

She met with Cheney and with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Back in Kiev, Tymoshenko crowed that "Cheney and Rice" support new elections.

Cheney-friend Tymoshenko's push for new elections escalated April 2, when her on-again/off-again ally President Victor Yushchenko announced dissolution of the Supreme Rada (parliament) and called new elections for May 27.

The legalistic pretext was the defection of 11 members of his own and Tymoshenko's parties to the parliamentary majority (Yanukovych's Party of the Regions, the Socialist Party, and the Communist Party), becoming members of the Yanukovych cabinet.

Yushchenko said this was unconstitutional because those individuals would be leaving the blocs, under whose banners they were elected. The Supreme Rada majority rejected Yushchenko's decree, sending the matter to the Constitutional Court.

In the meantime, Yanukovych supporters poured into central Kiev, and a new round of heated politicking began.

Defense Minister Anatoli Hrytsenko, a Yushchenko ally, reflected the high level of tension on April 3, when he stated that the Armed Forces were at their permanent stations, with no advance of troops or tank units.

There has been virtually a dual-power situation in Ukraine for months. After the Orange coalition of Yushchenko and Tymoshenko disintegrated in 2005, Yanukovych's Party of the Regions was the top vote-getter in 2006 elections.

A months-long political crisis ended with the return of Yanukovych—who had suffered defeat in the Orange coup—as Prime Minister in August 2006.

His government and the Supreme Rada majority oppose Yushchenko's commitment to join NATO, among other things.

By late autumn, they were at loggerheads, with the Supreme Rada refusing to ratify appointments made by Yushchenko, and Yanukovych recruiting cabinet members from Yushchenko's own party, and others, whom Yushchenko will not accept.

Tymoshenko has been working to drive these conflicts to a new, full-scale power crisis. When Yushchenko finally acquiesced to formation of a government under Yanukovych, the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc went into what she called "hard opposition."

Later, however, Tymoshenko rekindled her alliance with Yushchenko's Our Ukraine, and the two parties signed an alliance in February of this year.

She then rushed off to the U.S.A. for the consultations with Cheney. Moscow Kommersant wrote on March 5 that their agenda had to have included three points, related to recent energy agreements between Kiev and Moscow: "The possible loss of Ukraine's economic sovereignty as a result of the pro-Russian orientation of ... Yanukovych; plans for diversifying Europe's energy supplies; and the consequences that Yanukovych's moves may have for the development of democracy in the countries of the former Soviet Union."

Tymoshenko told Cheney, Kommersant claimed, that Yanukovych might hand over control of much of Ukraine's energy sector to RosUkrEnergo, the intermediary firm involved in settling Ukraine's conflict with Russian Gazprom over prices in 2006.

Western media are once again playing up the scenario of a "pro-West" vs. "pro-Russia" split of Ukraine.

The new outbreak of a Ukrainian political crisis was top news in Russia, whose Foreign Ministry issued a statement that, "Russia is watching the development of the situation in Ukraine closely and with concern.

We assume it will not go out of the bounds of the 'legal field'—the country's current laws." Yushchenko cancelled a planned visit to Moscow.

On April 5, Yanukovych spoke against calls from within the parliamentary majority to impeach Yushchenko, saying he did not want to "deepen the crisis."

Rumors swept the Supreme Rada, as well as Ukrainian and Russian media, that Yushchenko would declare a state of emergency and attempt to impose direct Presidential rule right after Easter.

U.S. connections to the destabilization were the subject of sensational claims, such as the assertion by Socialist Party Rada member Vasili Volga, that Tymoshenko had received $1 billion from the Shell Oil Company during her U.S. trip, "to organize a coup in Ukraine."

On the Russian web site KM.ru, analyst Alexei Pushkov claimed that Tymoshenko was interrogated by American investigators about her connections with ex-PM Pavel Lazarenko, jailed in California on a large-scale embezzlement conviction (the public record shows only that Tymoshenko was asked about this during her appearance at the CSIS), and that therefore she is vulnerable to blackmail by U.S. authorities.

As of April 6, Yanukovych and Yushchenko were meeting to discuss a possible compromise.

Source: Executive Intelligence Review

Ukraine's Defiant Parliament Calls For Early Presidential Elections

KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukraine's defiant parliament on Monday said it would only support early parliamentary elections a presidential vote is held at the same time, raising the stakes in the country's ongoing political confrontation.

Demonstrators hold Communist flags before a rally to support Ukraine's Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich at Independence Square in Kiev, April 9, 2007
The parliamentary majority has no power to force an early presidential ballot, but its threat showed how deep the standoff between President Viktor Yushchenko and his rival, Premier Viktor Yanukovych, has become.

Yushchenko last week ordered parliament dissolved and called snap elections for May 27, accusing Yanukovych and his parliamentary majority of trying to usurp power in the ex-Soviet republic.

Yanukovych and his supporters have called the order unconstitutional and refused to honor it. They have appealed to Ukraine's Constitutional Court, which is expected to begin hearings on the issue this week.

The standoff has provoked the biggest political crisis in this ex-Soviet republic since the 2004 Orange Revolution mass protests against Yanukovych's fraud-marred presidential victory.

Yushchenko brought hundreds of thousands of supporters to the street, and later won a court-ordered revote.

This time, it is Yanukovych who has brought his supporters to the streets. They have set up a tent camp in a central Kiev park, and pledged to increase their numbers to up to 50,000 on Tuesday.

"We are not against early elections, we are against calling elections illegally," parliament said in a statement to the public approved by 258 lawmakers — all Yanukovych supporters — in the 450-seat legislature.

The statement said that if early parliamentary elections were held, this ex-Soviet republic must also hold early presidential elections and put to a referendum the question of whether Ukraine should seek membership in NATO.

The pro-Western Yushchenko has pushed for Ukraine to join NATO, but the Russian-leaning Yanukovych put Ukraine's bid on hold.

Yushchenko could find himself in a very fragile position if the 18-judge Constitutional Court rules that his dissolution order was unconstitutional and cancels the early elections.

Yanukovych's parliamentary allies, the Communists, have said they would immediately launch impeachment proceedings against the president.

However, Yanukovych currently only has the support of about 260 lawmakers in the 450-seat house — less than the 300 needed to impeach Yushchenko.

Source: International Herald Tribune

Opposition MPs In Ukraine Accuse Yushchenko Of Pressurising Constitutional Court

KIEV, Ukraine -- Rebel parliamentarians in Ukraine have broken into their Easter holidays to accuse President Viktor Yushchenko of pressurising judges to rubber stamp his dissolution of parliament.

Ukrainian Parliament
'We see the president's pressure on the constitutional court as one of the means of legitimatising the anti-government coup being carried out by reactionary forces,' deputies from the pro-Russian parliamentary majority said in a resolution, Interfax reported.

The resolution was endorsed by 256 deputies, meeting in an unscheduled session a week after what they have described as an illegal presidential decree to dissolve the legislature.

The constitutional court is this week due to consider the president's decree, which would require early elections for the 450-strong parliament in which pro-Russian forces headed by Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych have a majority.

In a combative Easter speech televised late Saturday, Yushchenko accused his opponents of trying to impose 'tyranny' and 'managed democracy' in Ukraine.

'My decision is legitimate and constitutional and there will be no going back,' Yushchenko said in his speech, delivered from outside the Saint Sophia church in central Kiev.

His rival Yanukovych also issued an Easter message posted on the government website Sunday in which he expressed confidence that the crisis 'will be successfully resolved through democracy and supremacy of the law.'

The crisis began April 2 when the president ordered the dissolution of parliament and elections on May 27.

This triggered a defiant response from the pro-Russian prime minister.

Tens of thousands of Yanukovych supporters have protested in the capital of the former Soviet republic over the past week and hundreds have kept up a round-the-clock vigil in a tent camp outside the parliament.

The European Union, Russia and the United States have all voiced concern, without explicitly taking sides.

The crisis comes after months of mounting tensions between Yanukovych, who favours strong ties with Russia, and Yushchenko, who came to power in 2005 promising closer relations with the West.

Source: Forbes

Yushchenko’s Gamble

KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko’s recent decision to dissolve the Verkhovna Rada, the Ukrainian Parliament, is so risky a step that it may threaten the integrity of his political legacy.

Petro Poroshenko, responsible for some of Yushchenko's major blunders, and one of the most disliked public figures of Ukraine
Contrary to the tenor of current heated discussions about the legal quality of Yushchenko’s decree, the main question about his decision is not a juridicial, but a political one: Yushchenko can, arguably, not win the fight into which, oddly, he got himself.

Not only might the Constitutional Court strike down his decree as unconstitutional which would leave his reputation fundamentally tainted. Yushchenko has created a political condition in which provides his political opponents with an opportunity to choose from a variety of possible counter-strategies.

Moreover, he has plunged the country into a process the results of which are impossible to predict, and might get out of control. In a hubris similar to Yeltsin’s in 1993, Yushchenko and his entourage seem to think that they have, finally, put themselves into the saddle when, in fact, they have created a fragile situation which may well turn against them.

This move is merely another addition to a series of awkward performances by Yushchenko’s team since the Orange Revolution: the break-up of the first Orange Coalition of 2005, the embarrassing results of the “Nasha Ukraina” (Our Ukraine) bloc in the 2006 parliamentary elections, and the failure to form a functional second Orange Coalition in their aftermath.

Oddly, a major protagonist, in all three of these major bungles, was Petro Poroshenko, a prominent “oligarch,” godfather of Yushchenko’s children, and one of the most disliked public figures of Ukraine.

In 2005, Poroshenko drove Timoshenko out of the government with his attempts to transfer governmental prerogatives to the Security Council which Poroshenko was then briefly heading.

During the electoral campaign of early 2006, Poroshenko was a major public face of “Nasha Ukraina” making, among others, regular (and often bizarre) appearances on ICTV’s popular political talk show “Svoboda slova” (Free Speech).

After the poor showing of “Nasha Ukraine” in the March elections, it was “Nasha Ukraina’s” insistence that not the well-respected Socialist Party leader Oleksandr Moroz, but the widely abhorred Poroshenko should become Head of the Presidium of the Verkhovna Rada.

With reference to the infeasibility of a second cohabitation of Timoshenko as Prime Minister with Poroshenko as Rada Speaker, the disillusioned Moroz switched sides, and the second Orange Coalition fell apart before even having formed a government.

What Yushchenko and Co. are unable to accept is that, after these and a number of other lapses, it is, in some ways, natural that they have recently been loosing power to their political opponents.

Like the market punishes companies when their strategies do not fit current economic conditions, politics is a game where, often, not the “bad guys” but the weaker organizers and less effective campaigners loose.

By now wanting to cut out their previous blunders with one great strike – new elections – Yushchenko’s team is making the Ukrainian state a hostage of its own incapacity and is risking the break-up of the country.

It seems less important how the Constitutional Court will assess Yushchenko’s decree, and more relevant how the people will react to his proposal to have new elections. What happens, one asks oneself, if the elections will – in Yushchenko’s best-case scenario – really happen? Ukraine’s exceptionally low 3%-barrier makes many combinations possible that are difficult to foresee.

The elections may create an even less advantageous situation for the Orange factions in the Rada than the current correlation of forces.

One is reminded of Russia’s December 1993 State Duma elections after Yeltsin had dissolved the Supreme Soviet three months before. It was Zhirinovskii’s triumph in these elections that created the political atmosphere within which Moscow decided one year later to intervene in Chechnya.

In turn, the Kremlin’s Chechnya adventure in combination with the new 1993 constitution have been the two factors that helped most to undermine post-Soviet Russia’s nascent democracy, and prepared the ground for Putin’s recent perversion of Russia’s public sphere.

While the current Ukrainian situation is very different from Russia’s in 1993, the recent course of events in Russia illustrates what an eventually miscalculated act the democratic camp’s 1993 gamble, in particular, was, and what unexpected results radical political steps in transition societies may, in general, have.

In Ukraine, the socio-cultural context for Yushchenko’s move is, one might argue, even more complicated than in Russia: What happens if large numbers of voters in Eastern and Southern Ukraine – whether encouraged by Yanukovich and Simonenko, or not – fail to show up at the parliamentary elections on May 27, 2007?

The Western oblasts will, to be sure, take part in large numbers in such elections. Perhaps, as a result of such an imbalance, Timoshenko’s bloc could receive an absolute majority in the elections.

But what would a parliament where the russophone regions bordering with Russia are heavily underrepresented mean for the future of the Ukrainian state? Crimean politicians have voiced some of the most aggressive critiques of Yushchenko’s move during the last days.

What happens if the Crimean parliament decides to leave Ukraine and declares itself a part of Russia, as a result of Yushchenko’s unpopular move?

In view of these scenarios, Yushchenko and his team are, one suspects, merely bluffing, and not seriously expecting that the elections will actually take place. Whether that is the case or not: They are playing with fire.

The results of their previous operations make one wonder how well they will play this game. It is not even clear whether they comprehend how high the stakes are.

Source: History News Network

New Rallies Planned In Ukraine, Deadlock Continues

KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukraine's rival political factions on Sunday geared up for big street rallies this week as the former Soviet state remained mired in political deadlock over the president's dissolution of parliament.

Several hundreds Easter cakes lay on a stage erected by supporters of Ukraine's defiant premier on Independence Square in Kiev, Ukraine, Sunday, April 8, 2007, waiting to be blessed by Orthodox Christian priests.
Pro-Western President Viktor Yushchenko, at odds for months with parliament and his prime minister, last week issued a decree dissolving the legislature and calling a May election.

Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich, defeated and humiliated by the president after "Orange Revolution" mass protests in 2004, has challenged the decree in the Constitutional Court and refuses to take part in the new poll.

A top member of Yanukovich's Regions Party predicted tens of thousands would gather for a rally on Monday, a public holiday.

"Orange" supporters of the president's decree, led by fiery ex-prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko, are to gather on Tuesday.

Yushchenko used Easter celebrations, a major event in mainly Orthodox Ukraine, to stress he would uphold order.

"My decision is both constitutional and legitimate. There will be no turning back," Yushchenko said just before midnight outside the 11th century St Sofia Cathedral, an Orthodox shrine.

"Nor will there be confrontation or insecurity in our country. I guarantee that. The security forces are carrying out the president's orders. The new election will be free and fair."

Yanukovich, friendlier towards Moscow, attended services in Donetsk, his stronghold in Russian-speaking eastern Ukraine. His Easter message assured Ukrainians that "our country's political crisis will be resolved through democracy and the rule of law."

His supporters in Kiev handed out "paskha" Easter cakes in Independence Square, focal point of the 2004 upheavals. There were few takers as most Ukrainians spent the holiday at home.

RESOLVE

Yanukovich's backers have sought to recreate the atmosphere of the 2004 protests which engulfed Ukraine, vowing to remain in scruffy tent camps until the president rescinds his decision.

But the numbers have so far been small and demonstrators' resolve less than apparent. Tymoshenko, sacked by the president in 2005 after eight months in office, has drawn the largest crowd -- tens of thousands late last month to urge Yushchenko to order a new election.

A backer of European Union and NATO membership, Yushchenko's powers have been cut by constitutional change and his popularity has sunk as supporters accused him of vacillation.

Yanukovich staged a remarkable comeback in Ukraine's last parliamentary election -- barely a year ago -- when his party took first place.

He was appointed prime minister after "orange" parties failed to put together a government and initially agreed to uphold the president's pro-Western policies. But he has since continuously chipped away at Yushchenko's authority.

Some Ukrainian commentators suggest time is needed before politicians can be persuaded to compromise.

"The fierce battle for power is made worse by a post-Soviet 'winner take all' syndrome which not a single leader involved has chosen to shed," wrote the weekly Zerkalo Nedeli.

Source: Washington Post

Ukraine President Fights Off Political Rebellion

KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko vowed on Saturday to press ahead with plans for early elections in a combative speech aimed against his rebellious Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych.

Viktor Yushchenko at Easter services
"My decision is legitimate and constitutional and there will be no going back," Yushchenko said in the televised speech from the Saint Sophia church in the Ukrainian capital Kiev to mark the Easter holiday.

Yushchenko accused his opponents of seeking to impose "tyranny" and "managed democracy" on Ukraine. He also said that he would guarantee security in the current political stand-off.

The crisis, which comes after months of tensions between the two men, was triggered on Monday when Yushchenko ordered the dissolution of parliament and early elections -- a ruling that Yanukovych has refused to obey.

Thousands of Yanukovych supporters have protested in the streets of Kiev over the past five days and hundreds have kept up a round-the-clock vigil in a tent camp set up outside the parliament building.

The crisis pits Yanukovych, who favours strong bonds with Russia, and Yushchenko, who came to power in 2005 promising to build closer ties with the West and seek membership in the European Union and NATO.

The president has said he was forced to issue his order because pro-Russian forces in parliament led by Yanukovych's Regions party were violating the constitution and trying to lure pro-Western deputies over to their camp.

The constitutional court is to meet next week to examine the legality of Yushchenko's decision to dissolve parliament but a final ruling could take up to a month, observers said.

Two rounds of crisis talks between Yushchenko and Yanukovych this week have failed to yield a compromise and the two political leaders appear to be firmly entrenched in their positions.

Yanukovych on Thursday called for international mediation in the stand-off but Yushchenko brushed off the suggestion in his speech on Saturday, saying: "We will find a solution to our problems ourselves."

A rally earlier in the day drew several thousand people protesting against the president's leadership but also appealing for stability at Easter in a country that has been rocked by constant political disputes in recent years.

"I've had enough of living in an unstable country," said Nadezhda Bychenko, a 48-year-old mother of three, who arrived from the city of Kirovograd in southeast Ukraine with around 150 other Yanukovych supporters.

"I'm here for justice and so that there's no war," said Tetyana Ovcherenko, who came on the train from the Kiev region, as her four-year-old granddaughter played in the park outside parliament.

Organisers said that 15,000 people attended the rally on Independence Square, site of the Orange Revolution mass protests that brought Yushchenko to power in 2004. A police official put their number at 7,000.

Korrespondent, a weekly news magazine, said on Saturday that the crisis "could end with a civil confrontation or a return to authoritarianism. The third way is elections."

Another news weekly, Dzerkalo Tyzhnia, warned that a constitutional court ruling on whether elections that Yushchenko has decreed for May 27 can go ahead may have little binding power.

"Political forces have invested in people -- judges, lawyers, journalists, political and social experts -- just like in property," the article said.

"The result of this is that there is no referee in the country whose ruling will be recognised by both the opposing parties."

Source: AFP

Ukrainian Yanukovych And Akhmetov On The War Path

KIEV, Ukraine -- When midnight between April 2 and April 3 came, members of Ukrainian parliament voted to disobey the decision of their President. One person was absent from the hall during the voting and this person is Rinat Akhmetov.

Ukrainian billionaire Rinat Akhmetov
Mr. Akhmetov controls half of the parliamentary fraction which refused to obey the presidential decision. However, the time will pass and Mr. Akhmetov may become the key advocate of the early elections if the confrontation continues.

It may look absurd, but Rinat Akhmetov is the key guarantor of peace and stability in the country. In several years he aims to own a $20 billion dollar business empire. And the first single drop of blood, split in the confrontation over the dissolution of the Verkhovna Rada, will decrease the price of his holdings dramatically.

Authors of the radical comments in the lobby of the Verkhovna Rada were people who have nothing to lose except their parliamentary badge. The bigger is the scale of business which the MP owns, the milder were his speeches that night.

Some regionalists openly told journalists that they are ready for the early election. Party of Regions made itself vulnerable when dozens of entrepreneurs were admitted to the election list a year ago.

The outcomes of the recent events in the Parliament are unpredictable. The recall of the Central Elections Committee is opening of the Pandora’s Box. As the political reform of 2004 was voted together with the new composition of the CEC, the recall of the structural element in that large package gives interested parties arguments to doubt changes to the Constitution made in 2004.

What is now happening in the Parliament is an attempt of coalition to get as many sandbags as possible before the air balloon leaves. When the negotiations with Mr. Yushchenko will start, these sandbags will be thrown away pretending that they are outcome of the coalition’s desire to cooperate with the President.

Mr. Yushchenko in his turn tries to grant support from the older generation of Donetskies. Yukhym Zvyahilsky and Volodymyr Rybak were seen among the recent visitors of the Presidential Secretariat.

Several weeks ago Victor Yushchenko reanimated Ofitsiynyi Visnyk Prezydenta, an official bulletin of the Ukrainian presidents which Mr. Yushchenko closed two years ago. He can now publish presidential decrees without having to wait for Holos Ukrayiny parliamentary newspaper or Uriadovyi Kurier governmental bulletin.

Last week President fired the chairman of Pechersky District Court. This court is the most likely place for the majority to dispute his decree. President dared to dissolve the Parliament only after he managed to take over the control in Our Ukraine political bloc.

Olexander Moroz understands the risks. That is why he might simply flannel or take hostages to ask Yushchenko for a ransom. Otherwise Mr. Moroz is provoking Yushchenko for the further radicalization of the conflict.

MPs name the submission to the Constitutional Court as the main remedy against Yushchenko’s decree. However, it is evident that the President went through a long path to his decision and it would be naïve to think that he did not take the factor of the Constitutional Court into account.

There are no guarantees that the Constitutional Court would open the proceedings initiated by the MPs. To have the proceedings open, Verkhovna Rada shall be backed by 10 justices out of 18 while the recent composition of the Constitutional Court makes it virtually impossible to gather such support.

The only real thing MPs can do now is giving their comments. They are criticizing or supporting President Yushchenko without giving the analysis of the situation. The nearest week will be a vapor relief.

Only after the anger is relieved, leaders of the coalition will be ready to take the new reality as it is. The Constitutional Court they are relying on cannot terminate the decree on the early election; it can only issue a decision and the proceedings the decision is result of can take a lot of time.

After President Yushchenko made his statement on the early election, the surprise of the coalition became evident. The faces of the MPs sent a clear message — they are not ready to fight for power in case the confrontation with the President starts. And when the Parliament adopted hasty decisions that night there were no applause in the hall.

In case Mr. Yanukovich selects the tactics of confrontation, there will be too many factors that will work against him. The national TV channels are pro-Yushchenko oriented while Ukrainian revolutions happen in the capital where the PM recently did not make a breakthrough in the popular support.

That is why all street actions which the coalition and opposition would organize will not become Second Maidan. They will more likely be a mobilizing factor before the early elections. Mr. Yanukovich will also have to face unexpected opponents in his fight for the power, such as Mrs. Vitrenko, Mr. Medvedchuk and Mr. Lytvyn who were outsiders of the 2006 parliamentary election.

These dinosaurs will not allow the PM to deprive them of the last chance to return into the big politics.

For the first time in months President had taken the initiative and gained position of a person, who can state his conditions. President Yushchenko had done the thing which President Kuchma already desired for 10 years.

However, the dissolution of the parliament is only a tool and not a purpose for Mr. Yushchenko. And he might agree to cancel his decree after MPs return his presidential powers.

While opposing the decision of the president the coalition had not taken into account that the word of the president counts for more in the eyes of the world comparing with the parliament or the government.

President is the head of the state. And he has legitimacy in the eyes of the nation because nation voted for him. Mr. Yanukovich does not see to have both, the international reputation and the legitimacy.

The quiet local official will sooner or later have to make a choice of whom to obey: the President, the PM or the Parliament. And he remembers that Parliament is an abstract structure consisting of 450 MPs and that the PM may lose his position at any moment. Contrary to this, the President has a fixed term of his authority and the impeachment attempt, if any, will fail without doubts.

One of the key arguments against the early election is grave budget expenses. The price of the question amounts to several hundred billion hryvnas. These are the money Ukrainian budget had lost last week when the State Property Fund sold out Luhanskteplovoz on a fake tender.

Moreover, the monetary question looks irrelevant as during the recent months Vice-premier Azarov never stops telling that the Ukrainian economy is on a rise and the budget is bursting with the surplus money.

Ukrainian communists will not be an obstacle to the early election because they have improved the rating during the recent months. Nobody has a doubt that the Party of regions will show the same result as in 2006.

Socialists are the only party for which the early election equals to a political death. They will not get into the Parliament alone. They have a chance to form a block with Mr. Yanukovich, but there is no guarantee that the sponsors of the party will approve inclusion of socialists into the party list. It is also possible that PRU will offer Mr. Moroz to dissolve his party as Yevhen Kushnaryov once did.

However, any outcome will deprive Mr. Moroz of his speakership. A possible outcome of the early election might be a broad coalition between PRU and Our Ukraine and the premiership of Yanukovich will be exchanged for speakership of some Yushchenko’s ally. Mr. Moroz is undoubtedly out of scope if the coalition between BYuT and Our Ukraine is created.

Rinat Akhmetov is having hard times selecting the proper line of conduct in the new situation. The only person for whom the things are even worse is Nestor Shufrych. This guy is split between the joy of the victory gained by his beloved woman and the sorrow of the defeat endured by his boss.

Source: BosNewsLife

Democracy Means Headaches For Ukraine

KIEV, Ukraine -- Since the tumultuous Orange Revolution of 2004 opened the door to democracy in Ukraine, this ex-Soviet republic has lurched from one political showdown into another. This time, however, the stakes are higher.


The latest crisis blew up a week ago when President Viktor Yushchenko ordered Parliament dissolved and called early elections. His longtime foe, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, defied the order, and the parliament, in which he holds a majority, has vowed to continue working.

Now, as it faces another season of harsh words and street demonstrations, this nation of 47 million is facing political paralysis and an array of worst-case scenarios of dueling parliaments, lawmakers behind bars or Yushchenko being unable to hold an election because Yanukovych won't approve the funding.

It all adds up to a prospect that alarms both the West and Russia, and both have appealed for calm.

Unlike neighboring Belarus and Russia, Ukraine has a vibrant democracy and strong opposition forces. What it lacks are clear rules for resolving disputes.

The constitution was hastily rewritten during the 2004 mass protests that swept Yushchenko to power, and is unclear, even contradictory, about where power lies. The court system that could decide these questions is ineffectual and vulnerable to political influence.

The political divide goes deep. Ukraine historically has been tied to Russia, but Yushchenko has sought to steer it toward the European Union, encouraged by the EU's newest members — former communist countries eager for Ukraine to be a friendly buffer between them and a resurgent Russia.

Moscow, meanwhile, is determined to keep its influence. The Russian Black Sea Fleet is based in Ukrainian waters, and Ukrainian pipelines feed Russian oil and gas into Western Europe.

The Kremlin had already suffered embarrassment in 2004 when its favorite, Yanukovych, lost to Yushchenko in a rerun of the presidential election ordered by the Supreme Court after the mass protests of the Orange Revolution.

Yanukovych says he disagrees with the court's decision, but has accepted it, and that Yushchenko should now accept his right to fight the parliamentary dissolution order in another forum — the Constitutional Court.

However, that court has failed to issue any decision in the eight months since its full complement of justices was named, and many consider it susceptible to political pressures. As those pressures built last week, its chief justice tried to resign, but his colleagues stopped him.

The standoff over Parliament began after 11 lawmakers from pro-Yushchenko factions defected to Yanukovych's majority coalition last month. More defections were rumored to be on the way, raising the possibility that Yanukovych would soon have the backing of 300 deputies — enough to override presidential vetoes.

Yushchenko, already unpopular after failing to deliver on promises of reform, seemed in danger of being sidelined altogether. His authority had already been severely damaged when Yanukovych's coalition forced the ouster of Ukraine's pro-Western foreign minister, Borys Tarasyuk — one of two Cabinet ministers the president had the right to appoint under the constitution.

During the Orange Revolution, Yushchenko and Yanukovych were polar opposites. Yushchenko looked West, Yanukovych looked to Russia. As prime minister, Yanukovych has sounded more pro-European, advocating EU membership. But unlike Yushchenko, he is wary of NATO membership, and has expressed some interest in joining a Moscow-dominated economic union.

Both men are also backed by competing alliances of business tycoons which have always played a big role in Ukrainian politics.

Adding to the sense of political disorder is a very Western reform: When Yushchenko came to power, he lifted government controls over the media. Now the political scandals and intrigues play out live on television.

"It looks like one political crisis after another," said analyst Sehriy Taran, "but what we are seeing is really just evidence of a very inexperienced democracy."

Source: Houston Chronicle

Ukraine Protesters Call For Yushchenko To Quit As Crisis Deepens

KIEV, Ukraine -- Supporters of Ukraine's prime minister called Friday on President Viktor Yushchenko to resign, as legislators in neighbouring Russia condemned his order to dissolve parliament.

The battle between the two Viktors, Yushchenko (L) and Yanukovych (R), intensifies.
As the power struggle between the two Ukrainian leaders intensified, about 3,000 anti-Yushchenko protesters demonstrated in Kiev's Independence Square, scene of the Orange Revolution protests in 2004 that helped bring the president to power.

Others camped outside parliament, parading with flags and banners that read "Early elections aren't needed."

Yushchenko showed no signs of backing down from the order he issued on Monday to dissolve parliament and hold snap legislative polls.

His move has been opposed by Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, bringing their long-standing rivalry to a head.

Protester Yegor Kovalev, arriving from the Black Sea coastal town of Kherson to join the tent camp outside parliament, said it was time for Yushchenko to go.

"The presidential order showed that the president isn't competent. He is politically bankrupt and should resign. Yanukovych should be our president," said Kovalev, 38.

"Ukraine should integrate with Russia, which is a strong country," he said.

Yanukovych has favoured strong bonds with Russia, while Yushchenko came to power promising to build closer ties with the West and seek membership of the NATO military alliance.

The president accuses pro-Russian forces in parliament of violating the constitution and trying to lure pro-Western deputies over to their camp.

The constitutional court will meet next week to examine the legality of Yushchenko's decision to dissolve parliament.

In Russia, the lower house of parliament overwhelmingly adopted a declaration that labelled Yushchenko's dissolution order unconstitutional and warned that it sent "the most dangerous signal" to political forces in Ukraine.

The declaration also called on Western countries and institutions that had positively evaluated last year's elections, which swept Yanukovych to power, to support the current parliament.

Western bodies "should take a really principled position and firmly voice solidarity with the Ukrainian lawmakers in the face of what is a challenge to the idea of parliamentarianism itself," it read.

Another protester in Kiev, 57-year-old pensioner Alla Strokulenko, said: "We want the law to be obeyed here like it is in Europe, not the way our president does things."

"I'm absolutely sure we'll win. The constitutional court will decide, based on the constitution," she said.

Meanwhile, the president's Orange Revolution ally Yulia Tymoshenko, who heads a pro-Western coalition in parliament, went on the offensive, accusing the Yanukovych camp of using bribes and threats to get legislators over to their side.

"They put pressure on the businesses of deputies and their families... Or they bought them by promising jobs in government," Tymoshenko told British daily The Times.

"People were also literally paid. Deputies from our faction... told us that they were offered five million dollars (3.7 million euros) to cross the floor," Tymoshenko said.

On Thursday, Yanukovych spoke by telephone with EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana and said he was also seeking help from European mediators including Austrian Chancellor Alfred Gusenbauer to resolve the crisis.

There was no immediate response from Gusenbauer's office.

The prime minister's appeal was partly aimed at dispelling the idea that he remains Moscow's man in Ukraine, said analyst Volodymyr Fesenko, of the Penta research centre.

"He cannot appeal to Russia because Yushchenko will not listen to Moscow," said Fesenko.

"Since his nomination... Yanukovych has tried to please Europe. He has been to Brussels more often than to Moscow and has even tried to rival Yushchenko on the European integration issue," said Fesenko.

Source: AFP

Tymoshenko Unfazed As Ukraine Fissures Deepen

KIEV, Ukraine -- Her country is once more deep in political crisis, but Yulia Tymoshenko seems completely, uncharacteristically, calm. It's almost as if, for the first time in nearly two years, things are going according to plan.

Yulia Tymoshenko
Ukraine's president and prime minister are openly at odds, each accusing the other of breaking the law. Parliament has been officially dismissed but is ignoring an order to hold new elections. There are thousands of protesters in the streets, some sleeping in tents and blocking parts of the center of Kiev.

But the veteran revolutionary says she's unworried about Ukraine's future. Between occasional giggles, the 46-year-old Tymoshenko, who is again leader of the opposition, acknowledged that she prefers the unpredictable to the stable.

In fact, many see Tymoshenko as the only sure winner from the current political chaos in the country. Fresh elections are likely to either put her back in the prime minister's chair, from which she was ousted after a falling out with the president, or at least in position to choose who gets the post.

"She now has role No. 1 and (President Victor Yushchenko) is No. 2," said Mikhail Pogrebinsky, a political analyst linked to Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich. "She wins from destabilizing the country. She needs this war."

Amid allegations of widespread corruption and bribery, Ukraine's pro-Western President Yushchenko took the drastic step this week of dissolving the country's parliament and calling for fresh elections.

Parliament, dominated by pro-Russian groups, has ignored the order, and Yushchenko's long-time rival, Yanukovich, has called his supporters into the streets for the past three days to protest against the move.

The impasse deepened Thursday as Yushchenko warned that Yanukovich and his allies could face prosecution if they continue to refuse his order to hold early parliamentary elections.

The split is considered so dangerous that some analysts worry that Ukraine itself could fracture in two. Some have compared it to the constitutional standoff that struck neighboring Russia in 1993, which ended only when Boris Yeltsin ordered tanks to fire on the seat of Russia's government, the White House.

While such alarmist talk is rampant on the streets of Kiev these days, Tymoshenko says the country is enduring only another of its periodic bumpy patches on the road from Soviet communism to true Western-style democracy.

"I strongly believe that every step we are taking, however difficult, is a step toward real democracy in Ukraine," she said in an interview at the newly built headquarters of her parliamentary faction. "I'm proud of the president because he didn't close his eyes to the violations of the constitution, he didn't allow a U-turn to the Soviet past."

Since the fall of 2004, when Tymoshenko became a global celebrity as the comely face of Ukraine's pro-Western Orange Revolution, she has seen higher peaks and more valleys than many politicians do in their entire careers.

She was made prime minister in the euphoric weeks that followed the uprising on the streets of Kiev, and shortly afterward was named the third most-powerful woman of the world by Forbes magazine, trailing only U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Chinese Vice-Premier Wu Yi.

But just eight months into the job, she was fired after a stunning falling out with her co-revolutionary, Yushchenko. Even more startling, Yanukovich, the man implicated in the electoral fraud that motivated the Orange Revolution, was chosen by Yushchenko to replace her.

But while she's currently exiled to the opposition benches, she's once more very much at the center of things. She and Yushchenko have patched up their differences and are planning to work together to defeat Yanukovich in the May 27 vote. It's a campaign that could very well end up with. Tymoshenko back in the prime minister's chair.

Source: Knoxville News Sentinel

Yushchenko Slammed By Russian Parliament

MOSCOW, Russia -- Russia’s lower house of parliament on Friday slammed Ukraine’s pro-western president, Viktor Yushchenko, taking sides in a constitutional clash over early elections with Kiev’s Moscow-friendly prime minister, Viktor Yanukovich.

Russian State Duma
The sharp criticism raised concern in Kiev that Moscow could once again interfere in domestic Ukrainian politics as it did during the tense days of the Orange Revolution that brought Mr Yushchenko to power in December 2004.

The Russian Duma overwhelmingly backed a resolution that called Mr Yushchenko’s April 2 decree disbanding the Ukrainian parliament “unconstitutional”.

The Duma expressed serious concerns over attempts to resolve a political crisis by “dissolving a legally elected parliament”.

Kiev’s pro-western president has repeatedly defended his decision as necessary to thwart unconstitutional attempts by Mr Yanukovich’s governing coalition to monopolise power.

But the defiant premier has refused to recognise the decree.

The dispute between the two men has plunged Ukraine into its worst political crisis since the Orange Revolution.

The Duma’s harsh words are expected to further polarize Ukraine’s political leaders and voters, who already deeply divided by the crisis.

Repeat elections threaten to oust the governing coalition of Mr Yanukovich, backed by a majority of legislators in parliament.

Elections are scheduled for May 27, but an appeal to Ukraine’s constitutional court by allies of Mr Yanukovich threatens to call them off.

The daring move to disband parliament is destabilizing Ukraine “with each day,” the Duma resolution said.

Gennadiy Udovenko, a Yushchenko ally and former foreign minister, struck back accusing Russian legislators of “interfering in domestic affairs.”

But Oleg Morozov, the Russian Duma’s first deputy speaker, said the Duma was not planning to send any kind of official delegation to Kiev.

Following his embarrassing intervention in the 2004 presidential elections, when President Vladimir Putin twice congratulated Mr Yanukovich on his supposed victory in the disputed poll, the Kremlin has so far refrained from comment.

But relations between the two countries have been strained since the Orange Revolution propelled Mr Yushchenko to power over Mr Yanukovich, the Moscow-backed candidate.

Mr Yushchenko’s rise to power was a setback for Moscow, which has aimed to keep a strong grip over business and energy assets in Ukraine, a key transit route for Russian natural gas and oil to Europe.

Ukraine’s two leaders have been locked in a wrestling-match for authority ever since Mr Yanukovich returned as prime minister last summer after the inconclusive results of parliamentary elections held in March 2006.

Mr Yanukovich has systematically muscled authority away from the Ukrainian president, leaving him largely marginalised.

Source: The Financial Times

Moscow No Match For Kiev

MOSCOW, Russia -- For Russians the current political imbroglio in Kiev was similar to struggle for power that took place in Moscow in September and October 1993.

Siege of Moscow White House on October 4, 1993
On the outside, the two episodes look almost identical. In both cases, the heads of state lost patience with endless opposition from the parliament and opted to call for new elections.

Parliament refused to recognize the decision, the public was at odds with the political elite over its interpretation of the Constitution, and the specter of two separate governments trying to rule simultaneously hung over the country with all the usual negative consequences.

The similarity between the two events is even more striking in that both arose a little more than two years after a revolutionary restructuring of national authority -- in August 1991 in Russia and in December 2004 in Ukraine.

But a focus on these impressive similarities is misleading. The current situation in Kiev differs fundamentally from the earlier events in Moscow.

The first difference is that Russia had just experienced a critical socio-economic crisis, so the struggle for power in Moscow played out amid a mix of potentially explosive political forces. Despite numerous problems, today's Ukraine is a developing state.

The second is that there were almost no systemic avenues in place in the Russian system in 1993 by which different political groupings could pursue their interests. Fragments of the Soviet system were thrown together with elements of the new ideology, and out of this jumble emerged the aspirations of new social strata.

The question of parceling out state property had yet to be decided, and it was impossible for any stable coalition of political interests to form. And no mechanisms to govern interaction between them -- whether in the form of public political parties, private back-room dealings or lobbying -- existed yet anyway.

Today's Ukraine has powerful and well-developed business groupings that exert influence through publicly supported political parties. The interaction between these groups provides the foundation for the entire political system.

The third major difference is that the fundamental questions of national authority and the future organization of the country were decided on the streets of Moscow in 1993. Each of the opposition groups expected to come out victorious, but it was the president's party that ultimately prevailed.

The diverse structure of Ukrainian society and elites makes it highly unlikely that any one group can even hope for an outright victory over the others. The cultural, historical and economic differences between the regions and different social groups are not going to vanish under any circumstances, and this is a reality with which any responsible Ukrainian politician must come to terms.

Events of recent years demonstrate a clear pattern: As soon as any political group -- and the economic and other interests behind it -- tries to pull too much of the political blanket to its side of the bed, the remainder of the system immediately reacts to restore the original balance.

Just as in physics, every action in Ukrainian politics generates an equal and opposite reaction. The radical swing of the pendulum during the Orange Revolution upset the balance, but the pendulum quickly swung in the other direction, with the results of elections for the Verkhovna Rada, Ukraine's parliament, counterbalancing the earlier presidential election results.

A compromise between the squabbling factions last summer established a new balance, but this has eroded over the last several months. When the parliamentary coalition decided to reconfigure itself to increase its influence, its opponents lined up against it.

The Ukrainian political map is like a microcosm of the very multipolar world that Moscow would like to see on a global scale. Systems of this type are unstable by nature, subject as they are to the ebb and flow of alliances and coalitions that try to battle the natural pull back toward equilibrium.

It is impossible for one group to dominate such a system completely, just as it is impossible for one group of nations to dominate the larger international community fully.

A two-party system in Ukraine is theoretically possible, but it would not be able to accommodate the country's great cultural and political diversity. The only option left, therefore, is the current system of never-ending maneuvering by various political forces as slow forward progress continues.

This does not mean that there won't be occasional dramatic reversals, but these will inevitably be followed by corrections to the general course.

Ukrainian society also differs from Russia's in its greater ability to maintain a semblance of order. Despite the fact that almost all governmental bodies were paralyzed from March to June last year -- the Verkhovna Rada could not convene, there was no confirmed government or Constitutional Court, and the country seemed to be on the verge of chaos -- Ukrainians serenely labored on and the economy actually grew more than it had when Yulia Tymoshenko was prime minister.

The current collision of political forces in Kiev is but the latest in a series of showdowns to determine the direction the country will take. In the winter of 2004 and 2005 the political elite had the presence of mind to avoid taking drastic steps, opting instead for civilized competition between rival factions -- however ludicrous or unattractive the process might sometimes have appeared.

If common sense and the spirit of compromise prevail in this situation as well, it will demonstrate that Ukraine's expressed wish to be considered a European nation is well founded.

The country is going through a difficult maturing process toward becoming a properly functioning democracy. It is very important that actors to the west and east try not to interfere in the process. The West's "democratizers" and Russia's "great power" proponents have already played out their own campaigns in Ukraine and no longer have any rightful claim to be representing the interests of the Ukrainian people.

The country has demonstrated its ability to find the most pragmatic solution to its problems intuitively, or at least to minimize the damage resulting from the actions of domestic and foreign politicians.

Source: The Moscow Times

Ukraine's Yushchenko: Officials Refusing To Hold Early Elections Will Face Criminal Charges

KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukraine's President Viktor Yushchenko Thursday raised the stakes in the stand-off with the country's defiant premier, warning that officials who failed to carry out his order to hold early parliamentary elections would face criminal charges.

Ukraine's Parliament Speaker Alexander Moroz (L) speaks with Defense Minister Anatoliy Hrytsenko (R) while General Prosecutor Olexander Medvedko(C) sits before an extraordinary meeting of Ukraine's Security and Defense Council in Kiev April 5, 2007. Ukraine's President Yushchenko on Thursday threatened to prosecute his prime minister if he refused to take part in a new election, escalating a standoff paralysing the ex-Soviet state.
"I stress again that this order is binding," Yushchenko said as he opened a session of the presidential Security and Defense Council. "Failing to fulfill it will result in criminal charges."

In a deepening political crisis, Premier Viktor Yanukovych and his ruling coalition in parliament have refused to accept the order, saying they would wait until the Constitutional Court rules on its legality and have taken their supporters into the streets of the capital.

The dispute between the pro-Western Yushchenko and the Russian-leaning Yanukovych echoed their struggle in a bitter presidential race and the subsequent Orange Revolution protests in 2004, when Yushchenko's supporters erected a tent city in the square and remained there for weeks in freezing temperatures to protest Yanukovych's fraud-tainted victory.

Yanukovych returned as premier last August after his party won most votes in parliamentary elections.

Yushchenko's order on Monday dissolving the parliament and calling new elections on May 27 has created the most serious political crisis since the Orange Revolution.

Parliament's majority coalition and the government, led by Yanukovych, have called Yushchenko's decision illegal and appealed to the 18-judge Constitutional Court.

"The only way out is to wait for the Constitutional Court's ruling," Yanukovych said during Thursday's meeting chaired by Yushchenko.

Yanukovych's supporters expanded a tent camp outside the parliament building and set tents up on Independence Square, the main Orange Revolution venue.

Yushchenko's supporters had initially planned to hold a separate rally on Independence Square, but later said they called it off to avoid raising any tension.

Yushchenko on Thursday urged all political forces not to bring people into the streets to avoid fanning tensions.

But just after this call, about 5,000 supporters of Yanukovych marched to the Central Election Commision's headquarters to protest preparations for the vote.

"I came to Kyiv to support Yanukovych. We do not want to go through new elections and suffer from it," said protester Vadym Glushchenko

The United States and Russia have appealed for calm in this nation of 47 million that finds itself caught between its historic ties to Russia and its aspirations to move closer to Europe.

Although Yushchenko and Yanukovych differ over whether Ukraine should join NATO or more closely tie its fate to Russia, much of the wrangling has been widely viewed as efforts by their financial backers and behind-the-scene power-brokers seeking to protect business interests.

The current crisis emerged last month when 11 lawmakers joined Yanukovych's ruling coalition, moving it closer to a 300-seat, super majority in the Verkhovna Rada that would be veto-proof and could allow Yanukovych's allies to change the constitution.

Yushchenko called the defections illegal, saying the law permits only blocs, not individual lawmakers, to switch sides.

Source: Kyiv Post

Yushchenko: Ukraine On Brink Of Armed Violence

KIEV, Ukraine -- President Viktor Yushchenko on Wednesday accused his opponents of "political corruption" and of bringing Ukraine to the brink of violent confrontation after they refused to fulfil his order to dissolve Parliament.

Ukraine President Yushchenko is trying to avoid violence
Speaking to the Guardian at his offices in Kiev, Yushchenko said the behaviour of his arch-rival, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich, threatened to cause a repeat of the armed stand-off between executive and legislature in Russia in 1993.

"The process which the pro-government coalition has formulated in recent months is equally dangerous to democratic values," the president said, referring to the events in Moscow which led to the then Russian president, Boris Yeltsin, ordering tanks to fire on barricaded MPs.

He vowed to prevent violence, saying he had instructed the army and security forces to prevent "a single armed person from getting on to the streets of Kiev".

Yushchenko issued a decree late on Monday dissolving Parliament and calling early elections for May 27, but Yanukovich and his coalition, which controls the assembly, have refused to stop work, and surrounded the building with demonstrators.

Thousands more of Yanukovich's flag-waving supporters poured into the capital, Kiev, from the provinces on Wednesday in protest at the decree, which the prime minister has called "a fatal error".

They set up tents near the Verkhovna Rada (Parliament) building and in Independence Square, the scene of the 2004 Orange Revolution protests, where a stage was also erected.

Refusal

As thousands of protesters clamoured outside the gilded meeting hall where the president gave his interview, Yushchenko said he would not rescind his decree to dissolve Parliament, despite the refusal of MPs to submit.

Wearing thick make-up to hide the scarring on his face caused by a poisoning attempt, the president stressed that the recent desertion of MPs from his party to join Yanukovich's ruling coalition was unlawful and a valid reason to dissolve Parliament.

"This is a gross violation," he said, speaking in his first interview since the crisis broke. "According to the Ukrainian Constitution a majority coalition can only be formed on the basis of factions ... rather than individual MPs."

By enticing more opposing MPs to join them, Yanukovich's supporters had hoped to boost their 260 deputies to 300, allowing them to paralyse presidential initiatives. But Yushchenko said the desertions from one party to another represented a "partial cancellation of the political results of elections".

Brandishing a copy of the Ukrainian Constitution marked with pink highlighter, he added: "This is a revision of the people's choice, the people's vote."

Asked to comment on claims that 11 MPs who crossed to Yanukovich's coalition were paid large sums, he replied: "There is a process of political corruption."

Yanukovich's bloc has asked the constitutional court to strike out Yushchenko's decree. It is expected to report back within a month. The president said he would abide by its decision. He expected to be proved right, he said.

Ukraine has been in a state of near constant crisis since the Orange Revolution in 2004 when Yushchenko became president following weeks of street protests at an election rigged in favour of Yanukovich.

The president at that time had a powerful ally in the firebrand populist Yulia Timoshenko, but the two fell out and Yanukovich's Party of the Regions made a strong comeback in polls last year.

Yushchenko's popularity has faded fast and critics accuse him of being a lame duck president who is indecisive and incapable of rallying the orange vote.

In August he was forced to accept Parliament's nomination of Yanukovich to a strengthened premiership, leaving the country with an explosive cohabitation between two fundamentally opposing leaders. Each of the two men controls different key ministries and government institutions.

Ukraine's population remains deeply divided between the Russian-speaking east which supports Yanukovich's pro-Moscow stance, and the Ukrainian-speaking west which largely comes out for Yushchenko or Timoshenko, who favour European integration.

Yanukovich said on Wednesday: "Until the constitutional court examines this issue we will engage in no preparations for any elections."

In Independence Square several thousand of the prime minister's supporters gathered to listen to rousing speeches and blaring live music.

Alexander Bondarchuk, a former MP waving the hammer and sickle flag of the Communist party -- part of the ruling coalition -- said he had come to protest against the president's "illegal decree".

"It's clear to me that Yushchenko is just a marionette in the hands of the Americans," he said.

"They want to create instability here and push us towards Nato."

He added: "If there are new elections then half of the population will not participate and that can only lead to a total split in the country or a bloody conflict."

Supporters of Yushchenko were few and far between. However, it was clear that not all Yanukovich's protesters had willingly travelled to Kiev.

"I only came here because I work at a metallurgical plant which belongs to an oligarch who supports Yanukovich," said Lyosha (27) from Krivoy Rog in the south-east. "They sent 40 of us here in a bus and they're giving us 100 hryvnia (about $20) per day. But I don't support him. I just didn't want to lose my job. I'm for Timoshenko."

Backstory

In 2004 supporters of opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko came out in Kiev against presidential elections rigged in favour of his opponent, then prime minister Viktor Yanukovich.

The Orange Revolution forced a re-run, which Yushchenko won with his Our Ukraine party. But his partnership with the charismatic populist Yulia Timoshenko soon crumbled, allowing Yanukovich's Party of the Regions to make a dramatic comeback in parliamentary elections early last year.

In August Yushchenko was obliged to accept Yanukovich, in favour of close ties with Russia, to a beefed-up premiership. Since then the two have been locked in battle.

Source: Guardian Unlimited

Ukraine’s Crisis Set To Drag On

KIEV, Ukraine -- The political crisis in Ukraine on Wednesday looked set to drag on for weeks, as the constitutional court was pulled into a fight over the legality of early elections.

President Viktor Yushchenko
Viktor Yushchenko, president, insists parliamentary elections will go ahead on May 27, with or without the court’s backing. But his attempt to end political deadlock could lack legitimacy in the eyes of the world if he fails to win the court’s backing for his decree.

Although the president has the power to call elections, the Supreme Court played a crucial role in the 2004 Orange Revolution, when it overturned Viktor Yanukovich’s victory within a week of fraudulent polls.

This time round the pro-western Mr Yushchenko appears to have the loyalty of the military and secret service, but he is increasingly unpopular among voters, many of whom had hoped the former Soviet state could join the European Union and improve its meagre standard of living after the Orange Revolution.

Mr Yanukovich, who enjoys better ties with Moscow, on Wednesday vowed to boycott the the election campaign as rival demonstrators took to the streets of Kiev. However, street protests have been on a fraction of the scale of those in 2004.

Meanwhile the constitutional court floundered as Ivan Dombrovsky, the presiding judge, submitted his resignation.

Mr Yanukovich and allies of the president accused each other of attempting to exert political pressure on him. The court’s remaining 17 judges rejected his resignation but the development fuelled rising doubts over whether a lawful settlement was possible before the election.

A presidential official said that hearings had not yet started and “could take two months”.

Sergiy Vlasenko, a lawyer who represented Mr Yushchenko in the 2004 court battle, said the constitutional judges were “locked up in an impasse along party lines”. It is not likely that they will agree on a clear-cut interpretation of vague constitutional laws, he said.

Ukrainian politics was paralysed for months last year after an inconclusive election failed to give any of the leading parties a mandate.

According to opinion polls Mr Yanukovich’s Regions party and the opposition party of Yulia Tymoshenko were expected to garner the highest support in early elections.

As in last year’s election, Mr Yushchenko’s Our Ukraine party trails in third place.

Source: The Financial Times Limited

Gung-Ho Yushchenko

KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko, notorious for being hesitant and several steps behind his opponents, surprised us all this week in what was arguably the most difficult and risky move of his history-making political career.

Attribution: Rainer Hachfeld, Neues Deutschland, Germany
On April 2, he ousted the parliament backed by the hostile governing coalition of Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych.

For the first time in many months, Ukraine’s embattled president has made the right decision.

Faced with the very realistic prospect that his pro-democracy and Western integration agenda would not be preserved, betrayed by lawmakers defecting from his Our Ukraine faction and restrained by confusing amendments to the country’s Constitution that kicked in after he took office, Yushchenko had little choice but to “stretch” his constitutional authority in the faces of his power-hungry political opponents.

True, the situation in Ukraine’s fast-moving and smokescreen-filled political arena remains volatile. The presidential decree dismissing lawmakers could be reversed by a Constitutional Court ruling, but we doubt it, and hope the long-besieged president stays tough and on course.

Recent events at the court only show the wisdom of Yushchenko’s decision.

Designed by the authors of Ukraine’s Constitution to play referee between rivaling branches of government, the Constitutional Court has failed to rule on anything in eight months.

Had it ruled on the string of appeals by Yushchenko and Yanukovych to clarify their authorities, the long-running battle between the two men might have abated.

But the court is itself paralyzed, divided along the lines of the parties that nominated its justices.

Yushchenko was right in declaring a constitutional breakdown in the country.

Moreover, despite its lack of resolve, the presidency has arguably been the only branch of government functioning in the interests of the nation.

When all goes bad, and those at the top can’t make peace, let the people decide.

It was troubling to watch Yushchenko not act for eight months as Yanukovych’s coalition in parliament violated constitutional norms, squeezing deputies out of the opposition to increase its grip on power.

Disbanding parliament earlier on, when grounds were clearer, might have been better for the president.

Looking back, however, the dissolution of parliament has set an important precedent for this young democracy.

Yushchenko repeatedly called for a fair compromise, insisting that he had to give Yanukovych’s team a chance to change.

If all goes well, and Ukraine holds early elections, the president’s position will be viewed as a milestone in democracy, and possibly a lesson to power-hungry politicians indifferent to national interests.

The first politicians who should be doing some thinking now are the wealthy and influential ones who choose friendly relations with Moscow to secure lower natural gas prices for their factories in the near-term.

It’s a dangerous trade-off, which we believe has fueled corruption at the top.

Looking ahead, there are two important issues. The main risk for Ukraine now - with or without elections – comes from its mangled Constitution.

Ukraine’s Constitution has been dysfunctional ever since Yushchenko agreed to the political compromise that ended the country’s Orange Revolution.

That deal, of course, shifted presidential power to the parliament.

It also left the country with a gaping hole in its main charter for rule of law, and a serious lack of clarity regarding which office is responsible for what.

It’s the lack of clear rules that has brought on the current constitutional crisis.

The void created by the ill-written constitutional amendments has left ample room for Yanukovych to snatch up presidential powers with impunity.

He got away with it for eight months. But luckily, the president has said enough.

The current predicament is largely Yushchenko’s doing - he caved in to pressure back during the Orange Revolution, despite the backing of millions on the street.

We hope this time that the president can muster the courage to correct this error, using the bully pulpit, presidential authority or slick, maneuvering.

The Constitution needs to be fixed or another crisis will erupt.

Hopefully repeat elections will bring in more truly concerned legislators. At any rate, it’s up to Ukrainians to decide!

If they choose well, Yushchenko, the champion of compromise, will garner enough support to patch up Ukraine’s troubled Constitution.

If not, the country is destined to drift down a rocky road.

Source: Kyiv Post

Ukraine Rivals Remain In Standoff

KIEV, Ukraine -- President Viktor Yushchenko stood by his order dissolving Ukraine's parliament and calling for early elections and appealed for support from foreign ambassadors, law enforcement officials and governors, as his standoff with the prime minister escalated.

Communist supporters of the pro-Russian government coalition protest at independence square in Kiev. Political turmoil raged on in Ukraine Wednesday, after President Viktor Yushchenko pressed ahead with plans to dissolve parliament and hold early elections while his opponents vowed to take to the streets in protest
The president's refusal to back down Tuesday raised the stakes for Premier Viktor Yanukovych, who has said he would not accept the dissolution order.

Yanukovych's backers marshaled thousands of supporters in the capital, Kiev, waving blue-and-white flags and the red flags of his Communist coalition partners, and setting up a tent camp near the parliament building. On Independence Square hundreds of orange flag-waving Yushchenko's supporters rallied.

The two political leaders, whose rivalry dates to the 2004 Orange Revolution, met in Yushchenko's office for talks that stretched over four hours. At their start, Yushchenko told Yanukovych that "according to the constitution, a presidential order must be fulfilled." Yanukovych sat opposite the president at a small oval table, looking glum.

The meeting ended after four hours without a statement to the media.

The crisis, which has been building for months, is the most serious since the Orange Revolution and followed the breakdown Monday of an awkward power-sharing agreement between the pro-Western president and the prime minister, supported by Russia.

Under that pact, reached in August, Yushchenko accepted Yanukovych's return as prime minister in exchange for guarantees he would support the president's domestic and foreign policies. Yushchenko has since accused Yanukovych of violating that agreement.

The United States and Russia appealed for calm in this nation of 47 million that finds itself caught between its historic ties to Russia and its aspirations to move closer to Europe.

Although Yushchenko and Yanukovych differ over whether Ukraine should join NATO or more closely tie its fate to Russia, much of the wrangling has been widely viewed as efforts by their financial backers and behind-the-scene power-brokers to protect business interests.

Several business clans are known to be vying for influence over lucrative enterprises -- for example, ventures connected to the country's natural gas transport system.

There was little tension in the capital and no noticeable increase in the number of police. The president's supporters -- who held a big demonstration over the weekend to demand the dissolution of parliament -- said late Tuesday they had no plans to organize new rallies.

By evening, several hundred Yushchenko supporters had moved onto Independence Square to erect about 30 tents and listen to bands, evoking memories of the 2004 protests, when thousands of Yushchenko's supporters created a tent city that stretched from the square down the city's main boulevard.

In those protests, demonstrators camped for weeks until the Supreme Court ruled that Yanukovych's election victory was fraudulent and nullified the vote. Yushchenko, who was disfigured by dioxin poisoning during the campaign, won a repeat vote. The mystery of how he was poisoned has never been solved.

Power struggle

Yanukovych refused to fade into political obscurity, staging a remarkable comeback last year, when his party won the largest share in parliamentary voting. In August, he put together a coalition that forced the president to name him prime minister, and he has expanded his coalition by persuading lawmakers from pro-presidential factions to defect.

Last month 11 lawmakers joined the ruling coalition, moving it closer to a 300-seat, super majority in the Verkhovna Rada that would be veto-proof and could allow Yanukovych's allies to change the constitution.

Yushchenko called the defections "a revision of the voter's will," and illegal, saying the law permits only blocs, not individual lawmakers, to switch sides.

In the almost eight months the president and prime minister have shared power, their rivalry has remained sharp-edged. They've surrounded themselves with aides and allies who despise their counterparts in the rival camp.

Yushchenko called for elections to be held May 27. But speaking before parliament, which has refused to disperse, Yanukovych urged the president to return to negotiations. Yanukovych's party also vowed to ask the Constitutional Court to rule on the legality of the dissolution order.

Also Tuesday, Yushchenko met with police officials and military leaders, warning them that their "key mission is to stay out of politics." He also won the support of all of the country's 24 governors.

Russia has offered to help mediate, but both Yushchenko and Yanukovych seemed more interested in help from Europe. Yushchenko met with the ambassadors of the Group of Eight industrial nations, and Yanukovych's party appealed to the Council of Europe.

Russia was widely criticized for its strong support of Yanukovych in the 2004 elections, and Yanukovych has tried hard to dispel suspicions that he serves as the Kremlin's surrogate.

Polls suggest that if parliamentary elections were held today, the leading parties would be Yanukovych's party and the bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko, who was dismissed as Yushchenko's first prime minister in 2005 after a disagreement.

Yushchenko's party would finish a distant third, polls suggest.

Source: CNN

Geopolitical Diary: The Grab For Ukraine

KIEV, Ukraine -- The last time Ukraine was in play was in 2004, when there was an electoral fight between would-be presidents Viktor Yanukovich and Viktor Yushchenko that featured Russian President Vladimir Putin campaigning directly for the former, with the entire West backing the latter.

Putin considers Russia to be Ukraine's big brother
By the time the dust settled, Yushchenko had grabbed the presidency, while subsequent elections landed Yanukovich in the prime minister's chair.

Yanukovich has managed to use his more powerful position as head of government to steadily whittle down Yushchenko's institutional power and popularity.

Unwilling to be sidelined, Yushchenko on Monday invoked his most powerful constitutional ability, dissolving the Yanukovich-dominated parliament and ordering fresh elections.

But unlike in 2004, when Yushchenko could count on the West to provide him with financial and technical assistance, this time he might be on his own.

For Moscow, Ukraine is the single most valuable territory in the former Soviet empire. It is more than the homeland of the Russian ethnicity or the home of more than 10 million ethnic compatriots; it acted one of Soviet Russia's few warmwater ports, the location of its bulk of infrastructure links to the West, a breadbasket integrated into the Russian heartland and 1,000 miles of buffer.

With Ukraine in Russia's sphere of influence, a Russian resurgence is possible. Without Ukraine, the idea of Russia as a global power is ridiculous, and its role as even a regional power is no longer guaranteed. Hence, now that Kiev's perennial political instability has provided an opening, the Russians undoubtedly will make what they can of it.

And they will probably get exactly what they want. The Russians have a lot of power in Ukraine -- whether due to plants in the Ukrainian government, infrastructure links or cultural ties -- but it really all comes down to one fact: The United States does not want a fight with the Russians right now.

It is not simply that the Americans are bogged down in Iraq and lack the bandwidth or appetite for a fight.

It is that the Russians wield considerable influence in the Middle East -- specifically in Iran and Syria -- and have demonstrated time and again that unless the United States is in tip-top shape, Moscow retains the ability to sabotage most U.S. efforts in the region.

The one thing the United States certainly does not need right now is a Russian monkey wrench in its negotiations with Iran over the future of Iraq.

Other sponsors of Ukraine's Orange Revolution are similarly occupied. For example, the United Kingdom and France are both up to their necks in domestic transfers of power and lack the time to attempt to influence Kiev.

That really only leaves two powers with the motive and opportunity to make a meaningful difference: Poland and Germany. For both, prying Ukraine out of the Russian sphere of influence is an unabashed goal that would turn Russia's buffer into their buffer.

And, now more than ever, both would love to act. Under the Russophobic Kaczynski twins, Poland is likely to fall over itself in its enthusiasm to deal Russia a defeat, while Germany -- under Chancellor Angela Merkel -- is determined to rediscover its voice on the international stage after 60 years of absence.

But neither will do so, and the reason again goes back to Washington.

The United States is ultimately Poland's only noteworthy security guarantor, so no matter how desperately Warsaw wants to act, it cannot do so in the face of a red light from Washington.

And that is exactly the order the Bush administration will give, since it knows that if the Russians perceived Polish interference in Ukraine, Russia would hold the United States responsible.

Germany under Merkel has steadily been pushing the envelope of German actions that will be tolerated -- expected, even -- in Europe, and Berlin cares little about what ultimately happens in Iran and Iraq.

But Germany too will stay its hand, simply because no matter how far Berlin has come in the past few months and years, it is not yet prepared to stand up to both Russian and American pressure.

In essence, the Russians have delivered a message to Washington: Control your people, and we will control ours -- and the Ukrainians are our people.

Yushchenko and his camp are on their own. This means their thin reed of hope lies in making Ukraine's institutions -- the constitutional court and civilian control of the security and intelligence services -- work as they are supposed to -- not the way they traditionally do in a former Soviet republic.

Source: Stratfor

EU Calls For Calm In Ukraine

BERLIN, Germany -- As tensions mount between the pro-West President and the Prime Minister, the German EU presidency hopes the bloc's relations with Ukraine will not be harmed.

EU Council President Angela Merkel
The German EU presidency has called for "moderation" and "responsibility" in Ukraine, as the latest political crisis in Kiev threatens to destabilise one of the EU's largest neighbours in the east.

"The presidency...calls on those with political responsibility in Ukraine to settle their current differences on domestic policy in a manner which complies with the constitution and democratic rules," Berlin's Tuesday (3 April) statement said.

"The presidency...hopes...that relations between the European Union and Ukraine will not be adversely affected," it adds, after Brussels and Kiev last month launched talks on a new "enhanced agreement" on trade.

The remarks come as thousands of supporters of political rivals president Viktor Yushchenko and prime minister Viktor Yanukovych continue to mass outside the Ukrainian parliament - the Verkhovna Rada - in Kiev.

The protests come after pro-EU and pro-NATO president Yushchenko on Monday signed a decree to disband parliament and call new parliamentary elections in May, after accusing Mr Yanukovych of bribing MPs to defect to his camp.

Mr Yushchenko's push has been backed by popular former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko.

But parliament has refused to disband for now, as the country awaits a verdict from its constitutional court to say if the presidential decree is valid or not.

The verdict could come "in one hour or five days" a Ukrainian diplomat said.

Meanwhile, tension is mounting, with police special forces in bullet-proof vests deployed around the city centre and with defence minister Anatoly Grytsenko publicly saying the army will remain loyal to the president.

"Deliberate efforts are being made in parliament to worsen the political crisis, posing a threat to our country and people," Mr Yushchenko said on Tuesday, the BBC reports.

"There is still a chance to avoid the worst," the more Russia-friendly Mr Yanukovych said, warning that he will call snap presidential elections if the parliamentary election plan goes ahead.

The prime minister's political allies described the presidential decree as "a step towards a coup d'etat."

'Looks like Moscow in 1993'

"The situation, with parliamentarians sitting in parliament and saying they are not disbanded is analogous to the situation in Moscow in 1993, which ended in the shelling of the Russian White House," EU think-tank CEPS analyst, Michael Emerson said.

"Nobody knows what will happen. But my guess is it won't be violent, so the Russian analogy is interesting but is not a model. My guess is there will be early elections," he explained, adding that it is "common knowledge" in Kiev that Mr Yanukovych's side has bribed pro-Yushchenko MPs.

The crisis is the latest in a long line following the November 2004 Orange Revolution that has in the past two years seen whole governments sacked, foreign ministers shut out of cabinet meetings and Mr Yushchenko's own family caught up in a corruption scandal.

But it is bigger in scale, with the element of massed crowds and tent camps in city squares reminiscent of the 2004 upheaval, when 250,000 people protested peacefully against the rigging of presidential election results.

Ukrainians fed up

Most ordinary Ukrainians are fed up with the scandals, corruption and harsh living conditions in the country. But no matter how the present turmoil ends, it is likely to delay Ukraine's pro-EU market economy reforms and the signing of the new EU-Ukraine "enhanced agreement."

"The EU has some tools to influence the situation, making the internal development easier," a Ukrainian diplomat said, putting some responsibility for the crisis on Brussels' shoulders for not giving post-revolutionary Kiev the clear-cut EU membership perspective that Mr Yushchenko craves.

"We don't see any signals on this from the EU side and it is a problem," he added.

Source: Business Week

Standoff In Ukraine As Prime Minister Defies President's Order

MOSCOW, Russia -- A day after President Viktor Yushchenko ordered Parliament to disband, his rival, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich, continued to defy the order on Tuesday, as Ukraine lumbered toward another political crisis.

Pro-Russian Ukrainian Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych addresses supporters surrounding the parliament building in Kiev. Ukraine's pro-Western president Viktor Yushchenko held crisis talks Tuesday with his prime minister, as a deepening power struggle between the two rivals brought thousands onto the streets in protest.
Barely two years after the street protests known as the Orange Revolution resolved a standoff over a rigged election, the president and Parliament each claimed authority Tuesday to manage elections and control government.

The divisions between the two men, one a pro-Western reformer, the other favoring closer ties with Russia, reflect a wider schism in Ukrainian society, a nation of 47 million people geopolitically balanced between Russia and the West.

Also at play are natural gas and oil export routes important for European energy security. Ukraine's currency was stable Tuesday but investors sold off government bonds, a sign that they think the crisis is deepening.

Yanukovich said he would try to convince Yushchenko to rescind the order disbanding Parliament.

"We shall do everything to convince the president of Ukraine to recall his decree," Yanukovich told a crowd outside Parliament in remarks carried on Russian state television. "If he does not do it, I think in this case not only parliamentary but also presidential elections will be inevitable."

As the political dispute unfolded, Defense Minister Anatoly Hrytsenko, a pro-Western leader who has embraced close Ukrainian military cooperation with NATO under the Partnership for Peace program, said the army would obey only the president.

"The armed forces of Ukraine, which are subordinate to the commander in chief, will carry out only his orders," a Defense Ministry spokesman, Anatoly Sadilov, said by telephone.

An unwieldy power-sharing deal between Yushchenko and Yanukovich collapsed Monday when Yushchenko accused his rival of usurping power in Parliament by recruiting members from opposition parties. He called new elections for May 27, less than two months from now.

Parliament responded by passing a resolution forming a separate Central Election Committee, and the cabinet, which is appointed by Yanukovich's majority coalition, ordered government agencies to disregard the presidential decree.

In Parliament, members voted against allocating money for the new elections and forwarded a plea to the Constitutional Court to rule on Yushchenko's order.

Later Tuesday, however, Yushchenko issued his own decree, which he said overrode the cabinet's resolution, making it murky who was in charge of the day-to-day operation of government in Ukraine, one of the largest countries in Europe.

Yushchenko and Yanukovich met Tuesday afternoon in what Yushchenko's news service characterized as an effort to convince the prime minister that the president's decree was binding.

Taras Kuzio, a visiting professor of political science at George Washington University and a specialist on Ukraine, said Yushchenko remained in control in spite of the dueling decrees handed down Tuesday.

Yushchenko, he said, has a firm grip on the army and the security service, a successor agency to the KGB, and has greater popular support in Kiev, the capital. These, he said, are the variables that matter in Ukraine's young political system.

"I don't think there is stomach for a fight with the president," Kuzio said by telephone from Kiev.

He said Yanukovich and his supporters would probably continue negotiations. "The president holds more cards," Kuzio said.

Yushchenko's news service said Tuesday that the disbanding of Parliament was justified under Ukrainian law because Yanukovich had recruited individual members of Parliament to join his coalition, in violation of the Constitution, which says a parliamentary coalition may be formed only among parties.

Yanukovich's supporters, meanwhile, argued that the Constitution specifies only three circumstances when a president can dissolve Parliament, all involving a failure of parties to form a coalition.

A spokesman for the Constitutional Court said the court had received a plea to review Yushchenko's decree disbanding Parliament but could not say when a ruling would come.

Germany, which holds the rotating presidency of the European Union, issued a statement Tuesday calling on Ukrainian politicians to resolve their dispute in compliance with "the Constitution and democratic rules."

"This requires moderation and willingness to reach political compromise from all those involved," it said.

In Washington, Sean McCormack, the State Department spokesman, said Ukrainian leaders should "take full responsibility for their supporters' actions" in any street protests.

The turnout on the capital's squares and parks on a balmy spring day, however, was modest. Several thousand supporters of Yanukovich rallied at three sites in the city and erected roughly 100 tents on Independence Square, the focus of the Orange Revolution in 2004.

Source: International Herald Tribune

Ukraine’s Political Crisis Deepens

KIEV, Ukraine -- The ruling coalition of Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych has submitted a query to Ukraine’s Constitutional Court, questioning the validity of President Viktor Yushchenko’s decision late Monday to dissolve parliament and call new elections.

Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich greets supporters during a rally outside parliament in Kiev April 3, 2007. Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko's decree to dissolve parliament came into force on Tuesday as about 2000 of his opponents protested the dissolution in the capital.
The president says he took the action to save Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, after months of political deadlock.

In an extraordinary session of parliament, overnight Tuesday morning, lawmakers voted in favor of calling on the court to rule on the legitimacy of President Yushchenko’s decree, dissolving parliament and setting early elections for May 27.

The pro-government deputies also voted to block funding for new elections, in a show of defiance, just hours after President Yushchenko addressed the nation to explain his decision.

President Yushchenko and Prime Minister Yanukovych have been locked in a bitter power struggle for months. The situation worsened in late March, after 11 pro-Yuschenko lawmakers defected to Yanukovych’s coalition.

The defections meant Yanukovych was nearing a majority in parliament that might soon be able to overturn presidential vetoes and make changes to Ukraine’s constitution.

President Yushchenko has accused Yanukovych of trying to stage a coup d’etat. Yanukovych responded by accusing the president of violating the constitution and vowing to continue with parliament’s work.

Attention now moves to the streets, for signs of possible protests by pro-government and opposition supporters - and to the Constitutional Court, which has not immediately said whether it will take up the issue.

Independent, Kiev-based political analyst Ivan Lozowy says the pro-government move to take the battle to court is a risky one, already tried by President Yushchenko.

“The difficulty of the Constitutional Court is that Ukrainian judges have never been accustomed to ruling purely on the law. Because (the question) is so political — the dissolution of parliament — the Constitutional Court has put off not only this question, but a large number of other issues, such as laws adopted which President Yushchenko has claimed are unconstitutional,” Lozowy said. “Currently, the Constitutional Court’s approach is a wait and see attitude.”

Despite the continued uncertainty, analyst Lozowy says the political struggle may prove positive for Ukraine, in the long run.

“This kind of thing is good for Ukraine, I think,” he said. “It sets the precedent governments do change. The opposition was in power. Now its out again and may be back in power. I think that is what democracy is all about. It needs time before things settle down and things are worked out.”

Monday’s crisis talks, which dragged on for hours, forced the cancellation of President Yushchenko’s planned visit to neighboring Russia. He was to meet with President Putin for discussions on the so-called Russian-Ukrainian Action Plan, which aims to resolve long-standing bilateral problems. No new date for the talks has been set.

Russia Tuesday voiced concern over events in Ukraine and called for a political compromise.

The American government is also closely monitoring Ukraine’s political situation and is urging a peaceful, non-violent resolution, amid calls for protests, tent camps, and political street rallies by both opposition and pro-government supporters in Ukraine.

Source: Voice of America

Ukraine Crisis Grows With Election Decree

KIEV, Ukraine -- The decree of the Ukrainian President, Viktor Yushchenko, to dissolve parliament came into force yesterday after it was published in the official gazette.

Ukraine's President Viktor Yushchenko (3rd L) meets representatives of defence and security agencies in Kiev April 3, 2007. Yushchenko's decree to dissolve parliament came into force on Tuesday, putting him in direct confrontation with his prime minister and rival Viktor Yanukovich.
Mr Yushchenko's rival in a long-running power struggle, the Prime Minister, Viktor Yanukovich, had urged the President to pull back from a crisis by not publishing the decree, after which it automatically comes into force.

Parliament - which is loyal to Mr Yanukovich, who is closer to Russia - said the decree was akin to the start of a coup, and barred the Government from financing the May 27 poll.

The tough stances adopted by both sides on Monday raised tensions in the former Soviet republic 2½ years after the so-called Orange Revolution's peaceful mass protests changed the country's political landscape.

The opposition leader, Yulia Tymoshenko, speaking at a late-night televised rally in the central square of the capital, Kiev, praised the President's decision. "A parliament which has become steeped in corruption and started to … behave in an anti-Ukrainian manner has no right to a political life," she said, calling on Mr Yanukovich's supporters "not to destabilise the situation".

The current crisis was triggered when Mr Yanukovich began enticing individual opposition MPs to join the ruling coalition, a move Mr Yushchenko said was unconstitutional.

Mr Yushchenko, who asked the Russian President, Vladimir Putin, to put off talks due to be held yesterday in Moscow, said on television that it was his duty to dissolve parliament as it had violated the constitution.

"I have signed a decree today to disband parliament. I have taken this decision in line with the constitution," Mr Yushchenko told Ukraine's 47 million people. "My actions were prompted by a crucial need to preserve the the state, its sovereignty and territorial integrity."

The President, who advocates future European Union and NATO membership, had seen his popularity sink since the heady days of the Orange Revolution.

His rival, Mr Yanukovich, was all but written off when he was defeated in a rerun of the rigged 2004 election that triggered the Orange Revolution. But he staged an improbable comeback in parliamentary elections in March 2006, and formed enough of a coalition to become prime minister in August, leading to the power-sharing deal that ended on Monday. The May 27 poll would be barely a year after the last vote.

Parliament said the decree "bears all the signs of a step towards a coup d'etat" and made clear the chamber would defy it.

Mr Yanukovich said the President could suspend the decree or simply not publish it to allow "the country to carry on and develop in calm, civilised fashion".

Without elaborating, he told a televised post-midnight cabinet meeting: "I will not speak aloud of a third option. That would boost tension greatly … The President would be fully responsible for the heavy burden."

Agreement by all sides to take part in an election could produce a stalemate little different from the outcome of last year's poll after which a coalition of orange groups collapsed and Mr Yanukovich took over as prime minister.

Source: Sydney Morning Herald

Yushchenko Reaches The End Of The Line

KIEV, Ukraine -- Yesterday evening Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko announced the dissolution of the Ukrainian Upper Rada and scheduled early elections for May 27.

Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko after initiating the process of dissolving the Ukrainian parliament on April 2, 2007
The ruling coalition led by Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych declared the president's move illegitimate and threatened the head of the government with impeachment.

The state of affairs in Ukraine yesterday was strongly reminiscent of Russia in October 1993, when legislators barricaded themselves in the Russian White House to protest President Boris Yeltsin's dissolution of the Russian legislature and refused to budge until the army sent in tanks to shell the parliament building and force the deputies to surrender.

The question now is whether the warring factions will resort to force: the prime minister controls the police, while the president claims the support of the army.

To Dissolve or Not to Dissolve

Yesterday evening a strange broadcast flickered across the monitors in the presidential administration building in Kiev. A folder of papers and a pen appeared on the screen, alongside the motionless form of Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko. On Saturday Yulia Tymoshenko had cried to the crowds in Kiev's central square that "a decree dissolving the Rada and a pen are sufficient" to break up parliament.

As the president toyed with the pen before the assembled journalists, an emergency night-time session of the Upper Rada was already underway. Earlier that evening, the president had wrapped up a consultation with the leaders of the parliamentary factions, a constitutionally-mandated preliminary step before dissolving the Rada.

"The president does not want to listen! Even to the coalition!" exclaimed Communist leader Pyotr Simonenko, who was the first to leave the consultation with Mr. Yushchenko. "The president did not listen to our warnings that he is being pushed towards wrong actions and a violation of the constitution!"

The discussion between the president and the parliamentary leadership was fairly perfunctory. Speaker of the Parliament Alexander Moroz informed the president that there are no constitutional grounds for dissolving the Rada, to which Viktor Yushchenko repeated the same argument made during Saturday's street protests by Yulia Tymoshenko and Yury Lutsenko: Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych's "coalition of national unity" is illegitimate because it includes individual deputies, instead of being composed entirely of factions, as mandated by the constitution.

The members of the ruling coalition spent all day preparing their defense in the event that, as was expected, the president signed a decree dissolving the parliament.

Party of the Regions deputy head Vasily Kiselev said that, if the president dissolves the parliament, the coalition will make certain that the early parliamentary elections will be accompanied by simultaneous presidential elections and a referendum on Ukraine joining NATO. Early presidential elections will be possible in only one case: if the ruling coalition manages to impeach President Yushchenko.

Towards evening, as Viktor Yushchenko was being presented with the fatal pen and folder, the members of the coalition hastily gathered in the parliament building to make their latest threatening announcement. "We will not disperse, and that is final. There are already several thousand people surrounding the building, who are ready to defend the parliament to the last," said Leonid Grach, one of the leaders of the Communist Party. "Otherwise the territorial integrity of Ukraine will come into question, and Yushchenko will end up with two Ukraines," he said. He also expressed certainty that the Ministry of Internal Affairs, which is headed by the socialist Vasily Tsushko, will not side with the president and will at the very least maintain neutrality in the conflict.

The socialists are taking an increasingly radical role in the standoff. Because their chances of surviving early elections with their seats in the Rada intact are minimal, they are clearly ready to oppose the president to the bitter end.

Alexander Moroz, the speaker of the Rada and the leader of the Socialist Party, has repeatedly said that there are no grounds for the dissolution of the Rada and that he will seek to have the president's decree annulled by the constitutional court and the mandate of the current parliament restored.

Others among Prime Minister Yanukovych's "Regionalists" have been delivering even more weighty pronouncements. "If there are elections, we will win them, and then we'll have the opposition's guts for garters.

We'll kick them out of the government," Anna German, an advisor to the prime minister, promised a Kommersant correspondent yesterday. "We will choose a parliament, and then we will choose a president. Yushchenko is playing right into our hands, not into the hands of his supporters, who haven't got a chance of getting into parliament."

At the moment, however, the Party of Regions deputies also have no intention of backing down from the fight over whether there will actually be early elections. Having learned that Viktor Yushchenko had picked up the pen, Viktor Yanukovych headed immediately for the parliament building, where the deputies quickly decided to pass a resolution declaring the decree dissolving parliament to be illegitimate.

As the president pondered with the pen in his hand, the streets outside the building filled up with deputies from the Rada, and news agencies began to report that buses packed with heavily armed special police units from the Donetsk region of eastern Ukraine were heading for Kiev.

At nine o'clock in the evening, Viktor Yushchenko mustered his strength and appeared live on national television to accuse the coalition of not heeding his demands and usurping power. In dissolving the Rada, he called on hotheads who intend to interfere in the holding of new elections to cool down. President Yushchenko scheduled the new elections for May 27 and called on citizens "not to yield to provocations."

By that time, the Rada had already drafted the text of the resolution. In the vote that followed, all of the 255 deputies present at the session voted not to submit to the president's authority.

The prime minister's cabinet was charged with continuing to carry out its assigned duties and to ensure that the work of the parliament carried on as normal. The prosecutor general was requested to immediately look into violations of the law committed by the president in signing the decree.

In addition, the resolution states that any official who recognizes the validity of Viktor Yushchenko's "criminal" decree should bear legal responsibility. The Ministry of Information was assigned to relay reports about the situation in Ukraine to foreign governments.

To Go or Not to Go

Viktor Yushchenko had at least two important matters to contend with yesterday: he had to decide whether to dissolve the Rada, and he also had to decide whether or not he should go to Moscow for an official visit that was scheduled to begin today.

Two weeks ago, his March 21 visit was delayed at the request of the Kremlin after the Russian authorities decided that visiting Moscow and talking with leading Russian politicians would only serve as an ace up Viktor Yushchenko's sleeve in his domestic battles and declined to play along.

Yesterday morning President Yushchenko's press secretary Irina Vannikova confidently told Kommersant that this time the visit will go forward as planned. At the time, Kommersant sources in the Kremlin concurred. "At the moment we have no information suggesting that the Ukrainian president will not come," said a highly-placed Kremlin source, adding that "Ukraine needs the plan of action that may be signed.

President Yushchenko himself requested this meeting, but we understand that his position is difficult, and thus we would not take offense even if he did not come."

The trip to Russia was extremely important for Viktor Yushchenko. First of all, together with Vladimir Putin he was supposed to sign a long-standing plan of action laying out crucial bilateral arrangements dealing with fundamental problems in Russian-Ukrainian relations. Moreover, during the visit President Yushchenko had hoped to receive some political support from Moscow.

As the news from president's consultations with the leading parliamentary factions became increasingly gloomy throughout the day yesterday, officials in the Ukrainian president's administration began to express doubts that he would leave Kiev.

A Kommersant source in the Ukrainian delegation responsible for making arrangements for the president's arrival in Moscow said that the agenda has been rolled up and that the visit will presumably be put off until May.

Then a meeting of the commission responsible for planning the visit was cancelled, and later in the evening Viktor Yushchenko called Vladimir Putin. After a long conversation, the two presidents agreed that the visit will take place later.

In an unusual move yesterday, American Ambassador to Ukraine William Taylor made a fairly sharp public comment on the events in Kiev: "We insist that the conflict be resolved within the framework of the constitution.

The constitution lays out all paths for resolving the situation. It is necessary to learn to be responsible for one's own actions. Democracy is difficult. We want to expand the process of negotiations," he said.

In essence, Viktor Yushchenko will get no support in the current crisis either from Russia or from his traditional partners in the West. The US and Europe are not overjoyed about the government of Viktor Yanukovych, but it is clear that dissolving the Upper Rada could lead to Ukraine itself dissolving into chaos.

Source: Russia's Kommersant

Ukraine's Crisis of Democracy

KIEV, Ukraine -- Victor Yushchenko may have overcome Russian political interference and dioxin poisoning to win the 2004 Orange Revolution in dramatic fashion but he may now be losing the political war of attrition to hold on to power in Ukraine.

Viktor Yushchenko (L) and Viktor Yanukovych (R) shown yesterday after dissolution of Ukraine's single-chamber parliament
On Monday night, Yushchenko, as President of Ukraine, ordered the dissolution of his country's single-chamber parliament, the Rada, to make way for elections in late May.

However, the Rada, dominated by his opponents, refused to follow the order and the controversy is now headed for the country's Constitutional Court.

In almost theatrical fashion, the man standing to benefit from it all is Yushchenko's nemesis, Victor Yanukovych, the man defeated in what the West hailed as a great victory for democracy.

Ironically, Yanukovych has used all the instruments of Ukrainian politics and democracy to undo Yushchenko's authority. Kiev has been teeming with mass rallies and counter-rallies for the last three days.

In the mirror image of the Fall of 2004, the pro-Yanukovych tent city is rapidly being deployed around the Rada and Cabinet buildings.

But instead of orange, the dominant colors are the blue and white of Yanukovych's Party of the Regions. Defenders of the Orange Revolution are being mustered up as well but under a divided leadership.

Russian TV stations are sinisterly prophesying "the coming massive bloodshed in Ukraine."

Kremlin leaders have no love for Yushchenko and his erstwhile ally Yuliya Tymoshenko; and it believes bloody clashes in Kiev would only serve to undermine further Yushchenko's hold on power.

Since their great victory, the liberal, democratic and pro-Western Orange politicians have squandered their enormous political and ethical capital by squabbling for influence and positions amid mutual charges of corruption.

Tymoshenko, the Orange revolution's driving force, became Prime Minister, but her own Presidential ambitions intimidated Yushchenko. The allies had a falling out when Yushchenko fired her from the job.

In the meantime, Yanukovych re-forged himself via his huge business interests and with the help of American political spinmeisters who played up the shortcomings of the Orange Revolution.

In the March 2006 parliamentary elections, Yanukovych made a spectacular comeback, his party carrying 32% of the vote.

The predominantly Russian-speaking Ukrainian East, alarmed by Yushchenko's pro-Western politices and the Russian threat of steep fuel price hikes, threw its support his way.

The 2006 election coincided with political reform, which transferred considerable powers from the office of the President to the Rada and the Rada-nominated Primer-Minister.

After controversial parliamentary maneuvers and alliance building, Yanukovych became Prime Minister and immediately set out to encroach on the President's diminishing powers. Yanukovych has purged Yushchenko's nominees from his own cabinet.

The Rada and the Cabinet now oppose the President's policies, aimed at joining the European Union and NATO, playing on fears of joining the western alliance fanned by Russian propaganda.

The ever looser Orange alliance of Tymoshenko and Yushchenko was being abandoned by parliamentarians, who were defecting to Yanukovych's better funded and organized Party of the Regions and its coalition partners.

That coalition now has 258 votes against the Orange alliance's 202. If it musters 300 deputies in the Rada, it will have enough to rewrite the constitution and abolish the Presidency.

The prospect of that led to Yushchenko's decision to dissolve the Rada.

Tymoshenko offered to patch up relations in the face of a common and rising enemy. But it may be too late.

Even a Constitutional Court ruling may not be enough to heal the rift between two democratically elected but violently opposed branches of Ukraine's government.

Source: Time

Ukraine Lawmakers Reject Dissolution, Crisis Intensifies

KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukraine's political crisis has intensified following President Viktor Yushchenko's order to dissolve parliament and hold new elections.

Ukraine's Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich (R) chairs a Cabinet session in Kiev April 2, 2007.
The parliament, dominated by lawmakers loyal to Yushchenko's rival, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, has moved to defy the dissolution decree by passing a measure that blocks the government from funding the early parliamentary polls set for May 27.

Lawmakers opposed to Yushchenko say the president has no legal basis to dissolve the parliament, and they have vowed to continue meeting in defiance of the president.

The parliament has also called on Ukraine's Constitutional Court to rule on the legitimacy of the decree.

At a late-night cabinet meeting that was shown on national television, Yanukovych urged the president to withdraw his order or risk increased tensions and an uncertain future for the country.

At the meeting, Defense Minister Anatoliy Hrytsenko, an ally of Yushchenko, said the armed forces would obey orders only from the president.

"In accordance with existing legislation, the army will only carry out orders from the commander in chief [Yushchenko]," Hrytsenko said.

Earlier, Yushchenko said it was it his duty to dissolve the parliament because lawmakers had violated the constitution.

Yushchenko accuses Yanukovych's pro-Russian coalition of trying to usurp power by illegally luring pro-Western lawmakers over to his side to increase the coalition's parliamentary majority.

Meanwhile in Washington, U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said in a statement the United States calls on all Ukrainian political leaders to take full responsibility for their supporters' actions.

The statement said the United States is closely watching the situation and urges that disputes be resolved nonviolently and in a manner consistent with Ukraine's democratic values and national interests.

Source: Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

President Yushchenko Dissolves Ukraine Parliament

KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko ordered parliament dissolved on Monday, triggering a constitutional crisis.

Ukraine's President Viktor Yushchenko speaks after talks in Kiev April 2, 2007. Yushchenko, long at odds with parliament and his prime minister, said on Monday he had signed a decree dissolving the chamber and ordering a new election.
The pro-Europe politician cited as grounds for the order a need to preserve the country's government, and alleged constitutional violations by parliament's ruling coalition.

Yushchenko's political nemesis, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich, controls a reliable majority in the Ukrainian legislature opposed to Yushchenko's market reform policies.

Kiev had been rife with rumours of the impending dissolution order since morning. A worker inside Ukraine's Socialist Party told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa Yushchenko signed the order dissolving parliament at approximately 7 pm (1600 GMT), some two hours before the decision was made public.

Ukraine's parliament met in emergency session as Yushchenko was giving his television speech but - perhaps critically for later constitutional wrangling - failed to denounce Yushchenko's order dissolving parliament before its technical time of effect.

Yushchenko's supporters are almost certain to argue in the oncoming constitutional crisis that any votes taken by parliament after Yushchenko ordered the legislature dissolved have no legal grounds.

As described by Yushchenko, the dissolution order mandates early elections.

Parliament nonetheless within minutes of the Presidential speech passed a raft of motions and laws denouncing the Yushchenko move.

Oleksander Moroz, parliament speaker, made clear the parliament majority was unwilling to go along with the presidential instruction, saying during live television coverage of the parliament session "we will not be dictated to. "

The legislature voted 255 to nil in support of a motion to continue work, despite the Yushchenko dissolution order. Almost 200 members of parliament, most supporters of Yushchenko, were boycotting the session.

The stand-off is almost certain to land in Ukraine's constitutional court, a body supporting Yushchenko during the country's 2004 Orange Revolution, but since then taking a legalistic and generally literal position on constitutional interpretation.

The first demonstrators of the conflict already were in tents in Kiev's central Maidan square, a few hundred supporting Yanukovich.

Source: Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa

Ukraine's Revered Caves Monastery Deteriorating Amid Money Shortage

KIEV, Ukraine -- The workers standing on ladders at one of the churches at the Monastery of the Caves weren't touching it up for visitors to Ukraine's top tourist draw — they were trying to keep bricks from crashing down on their heads.

Pechersk Lavra (L) and the Caves (R)
The monastery, a sprawling complex of richly decorated churches and candlelit caves containing monks' tombs dating from the 11th Century, is sliding into serious disrepair.

Its golden-domed belltower, the tallest point on the Kiev skyline, has been closed to visitors for years because of insufficient funds for restoration. Part of the cave network collapsed in 2005.

Monastery managers and the monks who live in it have launched an appeal for help. But the prospect of getting more money from the cash-starved government appears dim, leaving anxieties high over the future of one of the most revered places for the world's Orthodox Christians.

"It is so difficult to name any historical monument that does not have problems now. It is almost impossible," said Sergiy Krolevets, general director of the Monastery of the Caves complex.

The monastery, called Pechersk Lavra in Ukrainian, attracts 2 to 3 million visitors each year. Founded in 1051 when monks settled into caves on a hillside above the Dnipro River, the complex is listed as a UNESCO world heritage site.

Of the 120 structures at the monastery that are considered of historical significance, some 10 percent are in urgent need of repair.

Krolevets said that US$25 million is needed for the monastery complex, but last year Ukraine's government was able to squeeze out only about 34 million hryvna (US$6.7 million, €5.3 million) for renovation of historical structures throughout the entire country.

Monastery treasurer Archimandrite Varsonofity said the Ukrainian Orthodox Church spends 10-15 million hryvna (US$2-3 million) a year to support the monastery "but it's not enough, we still count on money from the state."

Officials say the monastery's problems are due to more than just its age, lack of money and its precarious position on the side of an eroding cliff. They also complain that the city government has allowed developers to build too close, causing foundation damage to the monastery's ancient buildings.

Tetyana Kulik, the site's main architect, said a planned hotel complex near the monastery's Church of the Savior threatens the whitewashed brick church and its 11th century frescos.

"We are so concerned," she said. "It could destroy the cathedral."

The asphalt on a lookout platform that offers breathtaking views of the Dnipro is riven with deep cracks, and one section is entirely off-limits marked "Danger Zone." The platform is part of the cracked and aging reinforcements that hold up the old wall that encircles the entire upper part of the monastery.

The Great Lavra Bell Tower, which stands 96.5 meters (316 feet) high and is considered so essential to the Kiev skyline that no new building is permitted to be taller, is closed for visitors and it is unclear when it will reopen. The walls of the tower are covered in graffiti.

In 2005, an underground water leak demolished part of the monastery's caves, breaking away 10 cubic meters (353 cubic feet) of land.

"To avoid such catastrophes, the Lavra needs a geological study but that could cost about 1 million hryvna (US$198,000, €156,000)," said Archimandrite Varsonofiy.

Ukraine's Culture Ministry, charged with protecting the country's historical sites, declined to comment on the monastery's troubles.

"If something happened to (the monastery), it would be a huge loss not only for Ukraine but for the whole world," said visitor Svetlana Lotosh.

Concern is high for some other major historical sites in Ukraine, including the UNESCO-listed St. Sophia Cathedral complex in downtown Kiev. The cathedral faces danger to its foundation from drilling at nearby construction projects and from the overloading of the local sewerage system.

The director of the complex, Nelya Kukovalska, said she has appealed without success to Kiev authorities and prosecutors to stop construction projects nearby. "It's a time bomb," she said.

The sanctuary requested 41 million hryvna (US$8.1 million, €6.4 million) for restoration work this year but the government approved only half of that.

Other sites — from the historic island home of Ukrainian Cossacks in southeastern Ukraine to a 5th century Greek fortress on the Black Sea — are fighting developers and struggling to find cash to jump-start restoration work.

Source: International Herald Tribune

Opposition Rally Precursor Of New Revolution: Ukraine's Ex-Interior Minister

KIEV, Ukraine -- Leader of the People's Self Defense movement Yuriy Lutsenko has said that the rally staged by the united opposition is the precursor of a new revolution in Ukraine.

Opposition leaders Yulia Tymoshenko (L) and Yuri Lutsenko (R) talk after meeting President Viktor Yushchenko in Kiev March 30, 2007.
"I see Ukraine's readiness to fight for parliament. Today's rally will become the pivotal point in a new revolution to which we have a constitutional right," Lutsenko told a united opposition rally in Independence Square on Saturday.

Lutsenko also said that he could see Ukraine's preparedness to fight against the authorities.

"Like millions of our compatriots I think that we must be offered a better life right away, tomorrow, on Sunday - or we'll find another government which will defend our well being," he said.

"The current regime is the most inefficient regime Ukraine has ever had," Lutsenko said.

Lutsenko urged the president to fulfill his duty and disband the parliament.

"The moment of truth has come for President Viktor Yushchenko. I am saying on behalf of all of you: We have hired you, Viktor Andreyevych [Yushchenko,] as the head of state to defend our rights and our country. Do your duty! Down with the parliament!" Lutsenko said.

Source: Interfax

Ukrainian President Says Ready To Dissolve Parliament

KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukraine's president said Saturday he will hold consultations with the leadership of the country's parliament and parliamentary factions Monday to discuss possible parliament dissolution.

Yushchenko at Our Ukraine's Congress
"I want to say frankly that I am ready to sign a decree to dissolve parliament," Viktor Yushchenko told journalists amid mass rallies in Kiev to support and protest against parliament dissolution.

Speaking at Saturday's congress of pro-presidential party Our Ukraine, Yushchenko said that if the parliamentary coalition fails to act on a constitutional basis he will dissolve the Supreme Rada.

The Ukrainian leader proposed Friday legal liability for members of parliament who quit their factions, saying the parliamentary majority must be based exclusively on election results.

Yushchenko's initiative came amid a power struggle between the "orange" opposition and the ruling coalition in parliament, which escalated further after 11 opposition members joined the ruling coalition led by Yushchenko's arch rival, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, March 23.

"The head of state wants the prime minister and the government coalition to ensure the inviolability of constitutional provisions in forming the parliamentary coalition," Yushchenko's press service said Friday.

The president, who came to power on the back of the "orange revolution" in 2004, demanded Friday that he and the prime minister draft a joint address to the Constitutional Court to hold lawmakers responsible for defections.

Yushchenko said that at the beginning of the Supreme Rada's work, the parliamentary majority numbered 239 votes, but grew to 260 in eight months.

The president has not ruled out the possibility of early elections, and his secretariat has already prepared a draft decree that tentatively schedules polls for May 27.

But the Supreme Rada will first have to obtain permission from the Constitutional Court to dissolve parliament.

The first deputy speaker of the Supreme Rada said Saturday that the coalition could impose a moratorium on deputies joining the parliamentary majority until the Constitutional Court makes a ruling on the issue.

"We are ready to return to the coalition containing 238 deputies and temporarily impose a moratorium on those who would like to join the coalition," Adam Martynyuk told journalists.

Parliamentary elections in Ukraine in March 2006 saw the Party of Regions come first, followed by the Tymoshenko Bloc and Our Ukraine.

The Party of Regions, the Socialists and the Communists formed a majority coalition after five months of political wrangling, and elected Yanukovych prime minister in August.

The power struggle between the prime minister and the president broke out after the country was transformed from a presidential into a parliamentary republic by constitutional amendments following the "orange revolution."

Source: RIA Novosti

Ukraine Leader Suggests New Poll

KIEV, Ukraine -- Tens of thousands of Ukrainians backing the country's opposition thronged Kiev's main square on Saturday to urge President Viktor Yushchenko to call a new parliamentary election to end protracted political deadlock.

Former Prime Minister and opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko speaks to supporters during a rally in Kiev March 31, 2007.
Before the mass rally, the largest since "Orange Revolution" protests engulfed Ukraine in 2004, Yushchenko issued a new threat to dissolve parliament and call just such an election.

His arch rival, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich, back in power after being humiliated in that upheaval, told a rally of his own supporters he would ignore the president's "ultimatums".

Yushchenko, his powers cut by constitutional change, has sniped for months with his rival. Former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko has led an opposition drive for a new election to bolster the president's policy of moving closer to the West.

"It is not just the president's right to dissolve parliament," Tymoshenko told a cheering crowd in Independence Square, where she rallied supporters in the 2004 protests.

"It is his duty to dismiss this corrupt, treacherous assembly and go ahead with an open, honest early election in which there can be no doubt democratic forces will win."

Sporting her trademark peasant braid, she told supporters the liberal leaders of the 2004 revolution had been naive to believe they would achieve their aims painlessly.

"Above all else, we need an early election to show our people again that we are capable," she told the crowd.

Tymoshenko was the president's first prime minister after he swept to victory in the re-run of a rigged election. But she was fired within eight months after her government split into two camps, each accusing the other of corruption.

Yushchenko reluctantly appointed Yanukovich prime minister last year after his own allies scored badly in a parliamentary election and failed to form a government.

PRESIDENT ACCUSES PRIME MINISTER

The president accused the prime minister this week of illegally trying to expand the parliamentary coalition supporting him. He told supporters he could dissolve the chamber and hold a new poll.

"If the actions of the majority in parliament do not return to a constitutional basis, I will sign a decree dissolving parliament," he told a congress of his Our Ukraine party.

He issued a series of demands to parliament, including a call to approve a law barring deputies from switching parties.

Yanukovich, friendlier to Moscow, says the president has no grounds to dissolve parliament. He told supporters massed scant metres from the opposition he would tolerate no such demands.

"We will never accept ultimatums that are outside the realm of law and the constitution," he told a 10,000-strong crowd.

Yanukovich agreed last year to leave intact the president's policies of seeking European Union and NATO membership. But his government has since chipped away at Yushchenko's authority.

Yanukovich can count on about 250 votes in the 450-seat assembly and has vowed to expand his coalition to 300, a figure that could allow him to engineer further constitutional change.

The president has summoned party leaders for talks on Monday as required by the ex-Soviet state's constitution for any decision to dissolve parliament and proceed with an election.

A poll published this week put Yanukovich's Regions Party in the lead with 18 percent support. Tymoshenko's bloc was second with 15 percent and Our Ukraine lay third with 7 percent.

Source: Scotsman News