LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (02/23/97)

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Kyiv's Montessori center seeks funds

Dear Editor:

In reference to the article on Montessori in Ukraine (January 26), I encourage the Ukrainian community to help support this venture. I was privileged to attend and translate the initial meeting between the late Dr. Nancy McCormick Rambusch and Boris, Vera and Tatiana, who have worked tirelessly on the Kyiv Montessori School. Dr. Rambusch had been approached to facilitate Montessori principles in other countries, but she chose Ukraine because she felt Montessori had the best possibility of success in the framework that is in place in that country.

While visiting Kyiv with Ginny Cusack, the author of the article and the director of the Princeton Center for Teacher Education, we encountered much interest in the Montessori philosophy. Despite the scarcity of printed information available to them, parents and educators are eager to facilitate the ideals of this method, which develops self-direction and concentration in children and promotes respect for the individual.

The Princeton Montessori Society has worked consistently to raise funds to train Ukrainian staff in order to establish the teacher training center that will serve all of Ukraine. To support this venture with a tax-deductible donation, or to attend the fund-raiser in Princeton on February 23, call (609) 924-4594.

Olenka Makarushka-Kolodiy
Maplewood, N.J.

U.S. government cancels aid program

Dear Editor:

My experiences with the U.S. Department of State in the past two years have been ones of frustration, agony, sadness and profound disappointment with two different situations concerning Ukraine. One is regarding Operation Support Freedom, and the other is the matter of Ukrainian citizens being denied visas to visit the United States.

In the first instance, Operation Support Freedom (OSF) was a program to aid the newly independent states (NIS) after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. OSF was a most valuable and cost-effective foreign aid program. It was a shining moment for the United States, an unprecedented opportunity to offer aid and encouragement to the people in Ukraine and other countries of the NIS.

OSF enabled my organization, along with many other small organizations, to send significant amounts of desperately needed aid to Ukraine at a minimum cost to our government and with a minimum of red tape.

In October 1996 we received a notice from the State Department that the OSF program was being transferred to USAID. I later learned the truth. In reality, the program had been canceled. The USAID program is a completely different type of program, for which most small charities will not be able to qualify. The letter from the State Department was an obfuscation of the truth. So besides the frustration of the cancellation of the program, we have had to deal with the fact that our government did not tell us the truth about it. Now I must explain to our friends in Ukraine that our government has canceled this lifeline of help and hope.

The second instance is in regard to the systematic denials to Ukrainian citizens for visas by the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv. I visited the Embassy in September and pleaded the case for three fine Ukrainians to be granted visas for a short visit to the U.S. All were denied visas more than once, with sometimes contradictory reasons given for the denials. No matter what scenario is presented, it seems the Embassy can find a reason to just say no. Appeals for help to senators, both liberal and conservative alike, have been fruitless despite their promises.

Every Ukrainian citizen who appears at the U.S. Embassy window in Kyiv is presumed to be dishonest or a "classic visa skipper." Every supporting document that is presented is dismissed as being fraudulent. It is impossible to overcome such prejudice and the pre-determined answer of "no." In spite of this, the Embassy continues to extract a $20 application fee when there is no hope for obtaining a visa. No wonder the Ukrainian people refer to the American Embassy as the "New Iron Curtain."

One of the goals of our organization is to promote ties and intercultural exchange between Americans and Ukrainians. It is difficult to try to forge bonds of friendship between the two countries when I find that the U.S. Embassy is treating Ukrainians with disrespect and discrimination.

The Ukrainian American community needs to protest these actions of the U.S. State Department. America's problems with illegal immigration should not be thrust upon honest Ukrainians who wish to come to the United States for short visits. In addition, the cancellation of the humanitarian aid program Operation Support Freedom should be protested.

Clifford Netz
Maple Grove, Minn.

The writer is president of Hand in Hand Together, a non-profit organization committed to supplying humanitarian aid to Ukraine and fostering intercultural exchanges between Ukrainians and Americans. To date, the organization, based in Maple Grove, Minn., has sent over 100 tons of humanitarian aid to Ukraine. In September 1996 Hand and Hand Together organized an optometric mission to Shchors, Ukraine, in cooperation with the Volunteer Optometric Service to Humanity. The mission conducted an eye clinic, fitting and donating eyeglasses to about 900 people with vision problems. For more information about Operation Support Freedom, contact Mark Sloman, (301) 649-7614.

Personal efforts can help Ukraine

Dear Editor:

I recently read an article about Michajlo Gawa of Toronto who donated books and other materials to a school in his native village in Ukraine. This was a very commendable personal effort and demonstrates how individuals or small groups can improve conditions in Ukraine.

For some time now I have observed officials and promoters, within and outside the Ukrainian community, announce grandiose schemes for assistance to Ukraine. Many such programs are government funded, and it seems much of the money is spent on administration, travel and red tape. While the majority of these programs are beneficial, others are of dubious value. They either never get implemented or do not materialize past the conceptual stage. Such projects give false hope to Ukrainians, and the diaspora's credibility in Ukraine is not enhanced by them.

Most people within Ukrainian communities in the West do not have access to large pools of capital, as do governments or corporations, that provide funds for large-scale assistance or investment projects. There is, however, a way by which individuals and organizations can help Ukraine, and Mr. Gawa has set the example. With such smaller scale undertakings, achievable goals of a modest nature that directly benefit the local population get accomplished. They often have a greater impact, are more efficient and cost effective and have a better chance of succeeding than many "top down" programs. Smaller projects, particularly in the social and cultural sphere, also provide the necessary interaction between donors and recipients, thereby developing positive relationships.

Some of this, of course, is already being done. However, these efforts need to be expanded much further. Therefore, individuals, organizations, professional associations, clubs and parishes in the West should adopt specific cities, towns and villages in Ukraine for the purpose of organizing and undertaking more manageable and meaningful projects that directly address local needs. Projects of this type might involve material or financial assistance for the building or renovation of a church, library or school, housing for the elderly or needy; a health clinic; a sewer or water system for a village; or sending tools, equipment or computers to schools, etc. A closer bond between communities in and outside Ukraine would be established in the process.

As we all know, the needs in Ukraine are many. What is necessary for this kind of effort to succeed is that the type and location of such projects be identified and given priority according to the urgency of need. Then the relevant organizations or individuals in the West and the needy communities in Ukraine could be matched. Only a clearinghouse operation would be required, with a computerized data base to coordinate information and track all activities, and ensure that projects are evenly spread. The rest would be up to the organizations themselves.

I hope that my letter stimulates further discussion on this topic in your paper, and encourages other individuals and groups to initiate more projects of the type developed by Mr. Gawa.

Alexander Kay
Edmonton

Land issue remains enigma in Ukraine

Dear Editor:

The recent session of Ukraine's Parliament has recessed without moving any closer to a solution for the ailing agricultural sector. The key issue remains the privatization of land as a commodity. It has stalled in Parliament and remains an enigma among politicians and activists.

The land ownership issue has also drawn acerbic comments in the diaspora, saying basically that agriculture will not emerge from its limbo until the farmers get the feeling that they own farmland. Such an appraisal is consistent with our traditional values. But it may reflect an oversimplification of available choices. The conflict is not simply between the good guys (privatizers) and the bad ones (collectivists).

The reality of the privatization record so far in Ukraine and in Russia suggests how the privatization of land, if given the green light, might evolve. As Adrian Karatnycky aptly stated two years ago in a McNeil Lehrer interview about the Russian path, "one man's privatization is another man's plunder." Similarly, William Safire recently observed that "Russia's privatizers have double-crossed reformers and delivered the national wealth to Moscow's elite."

Ukraine's government party, coming from the same school as its Russian cousins, is hardly an ideal privatizing agent for delivering land into farmers' hands. More likely, ownership would funnel into the paws of that noveau riche who have amassed billions in Swiss banks by plundering Ukraine's exports of raw metals and other industrial commodities - using the licenses and credits obtained from among friends in high places in 1992. They have real funds to buy land and anything else, while most of Ukraine's population finds itself in abject poverty. In that case, collective farms would be transformed into corporate agriculture, perhaps similar to the American landscape that has replaced the family farm in the U.S. The economy of scale would be touted as a plus. Whether this is good or bad depends on the point of view, but it hardly would make the farmers feel as if they own the land.

There are other models, of course. For instance, in Poland most of land under cultivation is owned by small farmers. The cost inefficiency is such that importing grain from the West is cheaper. German and French policies include a significant government role. In any event, there seems to be no obvious formula for charting Ukraine's next step beyond ideological advice.

Boris Danik
North Caldwell, N.J.

USCAK also helped 1996 Olympic effort

Dear Editor:

Re: The Year in Review "Summer Olympics: Ukraine Debuts" (December 29, 1996).

Congratulations for a very interesting article about Ukraine's participation in the 1996 Olympics. However, we must point out that you gravely underreported the role played by our sports federation. Please note the Ukrainian Sports Federation of the U.S.A. and Canada contribution to the Ukrainian Olympic effort:

1) Purchase of modern gymnastic equipment for the training of Ukrainian gymnasts in the amount of $40,557.

2) Funds to cover the cost of transportation, food and lodging of the athletes during pre-Olympic training, particularly for swimmers, weightlifters, freestyle wrestlers, boxers, cyclists and others. Cost: $41,248.

3) A $10,000 check was presented to the Regional Olympic Committee in New York on the occasion of Valerii Borzov's visit to the U.S.

Thus, total financial assistance provided during 1996 was $91,805.

In light of the fact that you specifically cited figures and names of two other contributors to the Olympic effort, the omission of USCAK's contribution constitutes a major omission and should be prominently acknowledged in your paper at your earliest convenience.

Myron Stebelsky
Roman Pyndus
Newark, N.J.

The writers are, respectively, president and secretary of the USCAK.

Editor's Note: The figures cited in The Weekly's year-end review were provided by the U.S. representative of the National Olympic Committee of Ukraine.

| Home Page |