LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (08/27/06)

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Kuchma No. 3 rises in Ukraine

Dear Editor:

Less than two years ago, during the presidential debates, Viktor Yushchenko called his opponent "Kuchma No. 3," meaning that Viktor Yanukovych's presidency would be nothing but a continuation of the old Kuchma regime that lasted for two consecutive presidential terms. Well, Kuchma No. 3 is back, and the person responsible for it is Mr. Yushchenko himself.

The day of August 3 should be remembered as one of the darkest dates in Ukrainian history and should be equated with the dates May 31, 1223, when in a bloody clash at the Kalka River Kyivan Rus' forces lost their first battle to the advancing Mongol hordes; or perhaps June 28, 1709, when the Swedish-Ukrainian alliance lost the battle of Poltava to Peter I of Russia, with Ukraine falling into the abyss of Russian dominance afterwards; or even February 3, 1919, when the Bolshevik Red Army occupied Kyiv, thus effectively destroying a brief period of independence of the Central Rada in 1917-1919.

The so called "universal" that President Yushchenko signed with the former "jail bird" Mr. Yanukovych is nothing but a piece of paper that provides an excuse for wider use of the Russian language and retreats from a firm stand on joining NATO, and guarantees that absolutely nothing in all those nicely printed materials will ever be fulfilled by any of the parties. Furthermore, joining a coalition not only with the Party of the Regions, but also with the Communist Party, is already a complete betrayal of many millions of Ukrainians who perished during the artificially created Famine-Genocide orchestrated by Stalin and the Communist Party in the 1930s.

The union of Mr. Yushchenko's party with those who believe in the ideals of Lenin, Stalin and Brezhnev ought to be repulsive even to a half-wit, not to mention how horrific it must be for any civilized human being.

One can only hope that the American and the Canadian Ukrainian diasporas will have enough decency and common sense to no longer shower this "Ukrainian Judas" with flowers and dinners as we did in April 2005. My only other personal hope is that the next president of Ukraine will be a petite woman of strikingly good looks and a wrap-over trademark Ukrainian braid, with a strong, decisive character and enough political will to rid our motherland of criminal unions of Communists and Kuchma No. 3.

Alex Kozhushchenko
Wilmington, Del.

Of deadlocks and illusions

Dear Editor:

A note about Alexander Motyl's "Commentary: Is Ukraine in Crisis?" (August 6). With stoic nonchalance and a definition of the word "crisis," he averred that there was no crisis, only a deadlock.

Dr. Motyl's comparison of the "deadlock" in Ukraine with New York's traffic jams shows an inclination towards "reductio ad absurdum," in the same vein as his earlier sound-bite, the "Orangization of Yanukovych." His argument goes: "Traffic jams are a learning experience. They always come to an end ... Ukraine's politicians are actually learning democracy."

Ukraine's status and existence as an independent state hangs in the balance, basically because that existence is deemed unacceptable in Moscow, and the Kremlin is using an army of proxies in Ukraine to undermine its footing, Dr. Motyl has difficulty understanding that what he calls "a deadlock" is a permanent condition reflecting an irreconcilable split between two mindsets: the pro-Ukrainian and the pro-Russian.

Presently the strongest force, the Party of the Regions, a home-grown Trojan horse with an increasingly aggressive Russian Azarov/neo-Tabachnyk, content has entered into a power-sharing agreement with President Viktor Yushchenko and the remnants of his Our Ukraine party. Ihor Lysyj (letter to the editor, June 18) correctly predicted this coalition as "Oligarchs United".

The road to this development was paved by Ukraine's president from the day he took office in 2005 by his performance as a misogynous political simpleton, the epitome and personification of Ukraine's "bad luck." He has the distinction of having blown the best opportunity that Ukraine had in 800 years to get on its feet as an independent nation.

Although the oligarchs have huge leverage, their politics have nothing in common with the national interest. At the end of the day, political expediency determines their direction. They want to be on the winning side. The momentum points toward Russia, as Ukraine's vital link with the West has been undercut by Mr. Yushchenko's follies. A letter in the Financial Times (August 12) called the new amalgamation "A Coalition of National Betrayal." Another factor working to Russia's advantage - enough to make a difference because of the importance of the swing vote in an almost evenly divided electorate - is the distrust in Ukraine of the role of NATO, which is seen by most as America's tool in the post-Soviet aftermath for advancing its ambitions. A stark example is a growing role of NATO in Afghanistan, from which the story of a similar, Soviet occupation left long memories in Ukraine and elsewhere.

Adding to the skepticism is an awareness of President Vladimir Putin's popularity in semi-autocratic Russia, in contrast to the dismal ratings of Prime Minister Tony Blair and President George W. Bush in their quasi-democratic countries, where foreign policy is made at the very top by an invisible cabal and war is waged in total disregard of the people's sentiment.

Even more devastating to America's image is the worldwide condemnation of U.S. violations of the Geneva Conventions belatedly taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled against the Bush administration - after waiting three years for a politically propitious moment. There is much more on this score - all of it well-known in Ukraine.

In the "big picture" (Dr. Motyl's favorite buzz-word), the traffic jam allegory is devoid of any historical perspective or an inkling that Ukraine's weakness is due to the debilitating deficit of nationally conscious "Ukrainian people," who are needed as a meaningful majority that could push aside the "deadlock" by asserting their own identity.

It would not be surprising if some in the diaspora are taken in by the fog of the present coalition's banal pronouncements. In New Jersey there is already a minor groundswell for "the pragmatic trait of Viktor Yanukovych and his government, ... a chance to unite the country." Such praise, to be sure, comes from continuing illusions about Mr. Yushchenko. Mr. Yanukovych benefits by extension only.

Nevertheless, there will be craving for photo-ops in New York with the prime minister, and maybe a banquet. But don't mention that yet.

Boris Danik
North Caldwell, N.J.

| Home Page |