A House Divided
The Orange Revolution is carving new fault lines between Old and New Europe that have nothing to do with war in Iraq.
By Steven Paulikas
Newsweek International
Jan. 24 issue - At one time, they had a Union of their own. When the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth met its demise in 1795, its territory included not only those two countries but the entire western half of Ukraine.
In Eastern Europe, history remains a powerful guide to its leaders?-a fact some in the West apparently do not fully appreciate. Angered at the initiative taken by Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski and his Lithuanian counterpart, Valdas Adamkus, in helping to defuse Ukraine's political crisis, European Parliament President Josep Borrell likened the pair to a "Trojan horse" for the United States. Borrell has since insisted his off-the-cuff remarks, made at a private forum in Madrid on Jan. 4, were misinterpreted. But the intended message was clear: new EU members should leave the tough foreign-policy decisions to their bigger, older brothers.
Borrell's slip of the tongue underscores how far the Union has to go toward unity. The EU's response to the crisis in Ukraine has miffed politicians from both halves of the continent. Bigwigs from Europe's traditional powerhouses are unused to taking a back seat to Europe's upstarts from the east. For their part, representatives newly arrived in Brussels from countries in Ukraine's backyard have been left to wonder why a Spaniard like Borrell is commenting on their policy toward an unstable neighbor. Poland immediately loosed an angry protest. "It's not his role to evaluate other countries?-his job is to unite, not divide," says Polish EU parliamentarian Janusz Wojciechowski. Tart as the rhetoric may be, it's but a prelude of more to come.
"Old" versus "New" Europe? If ever that divide applied, it's over Ukraine. For several years, Poland and Lithuania have sought to build on their centuries of shared history and assist their neighbor in its recovery from the communist past. "President Kwasniewski and I have consistently been the only advocates of Ukraine to the Western world," says Adamkus. When outgoing Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma made a state visit to Lithuania in 2002, Adamkus took him bowling at Vilnius's first major shopping mall.
Because of that unique degree of friendship, Adamkus says, it was natural for him to pick up the phone and call his old bowling buddy as the situation in Ukraine turned critical. "When I asked what we could do to help, Kuchma said the friends of the Ukrainian people should drop whatever they were doing and come to Kiev immediately." A frantic night of communication between the Lithuanian and Polish foreign ministries and EU foreign-policy experts ensued. The next day, Adamkus, Kwasniewski and EU external-relations chief Javier Solana were sitting at round-table discussions with Viktor Yushchenko and Viktor Yanukovich, the feuding candidates in Ukraine's presidential elections.
The EU's diplomatic intervention in Ukraine's political fate could have been cause for celebration. Not only did the talks result in a fresh round of fairer elections, but the Brussels establishment had joined with the Union's newcomers to tackle their first shared foreign-policy crisis since last May's enlargement. Instead the crisis has exposed fault lines already raw from the tumult over the war in Iraq. Borrell's "Trojan horse" crack echoed French President Jacques Chirac's suggestion two years ago that Eastern Europe had missed an opportunity to "shut up" when countries in the region supported the U.S. invasion. Viewed as hopelessly pro-American, nations like Poland and Lithuania have long been accused of obstructing attempts to construct a single foreign-relations platform for the entire EU.
Ironically, a democratic Ukraine is likely to make matters worse. Before men like Adamkus and Kwasniewski had an inside voice in the EU, Europe was able to quietly ignore Ukraine?-and the massive financial and political effort it would take to pull the country into the European fold. But now that Poland and Lithuania have helped launch the country boldly down the path of reform, Ukraine threatens to gobble up the attention of Eurocrats who would rather worry about preapproved EU issues, such as the accession of Turkey and the European Constitution.
The pro-Western forces that took power in Ukraine after the last round of elections have made EU membership a top priority. Oleh Rybachuk, Yushchenko's chief of staff, has vowed to "knock down" Europe's door until the EU lets his country in, a development that until November was unthinkable in Brussels. And Eastern Europe's representatives to the EU can be expected to press Ukraine's case vigorously, not least because they see a democratic Ukraine as key to stability throughout the region. After all, they ask, how much more European is Turkey than Ukraine, not to mention Romania or the Balkans? Poland will not only support Ukraine's drive to join the EU, but "we will fight for it," a Polish member of the European Parliament, Janusz Onyszkiewicz, told reporters in Kiev recently.
Everyone accepts that Ukraine's EU bid will take time. But Europe can expect to be pushed for more immediate concessions: support for Ukraine's membership in the WTO, the creation of a free-trade zone or even associate EU membership?-and a fast track into NATO. Even as Europe has been giving Kiev the cold shoulder, NATO has launched a bilateral cooperation program with Ukraine that many speculate could lead to full membership now that the undemocratic regime of Leonid Kuchma is gone.
All this alarms many in Old Europe, especially those for whom NATO is often a synonym for America. To politicians with a history of Ameriskepticism like Borrell, the spectacle of hyperenthusiastic NATO members Poland and Lithuania throwing themselves into the Orange Revolution smacked of Washington's meddling. Old- guard Europeans?-particularly in France, Belgium, Italy and Germany?-also worry about further alienating Russia, whose relations with the EU over the past year have turned frosty. Officially, Old Europe's leaders have welcomed the changes in Ukraine. Behind the scenes, the rhetoric has been very different. "I've never seen anything like it," says a U.S. official just back from Warsaw and Kiev. "They're really beating up on Poland," as well as other new members.
For New Europe, the experience has been unsettling. "It's difficult for Polish politicians to have to choose between loyalty to the United States and NATO and solidarity with the EU. They're only now realizing that the West doesn't always speak with one voice," says Zdzislaw Mach, director of the Center for European Studies at Jagiellonian University in Krakow. Which voice Europe will use when it finally speaks to Yushchenko is still unclear. Yet many EU countries understand only too well the struggle to emerge from a communist past. Whether old or new, it will be difficult for Europe to abandon a Ukraine so tantalizingly close to joining it on the other side of totalitarian rule. That fact alone may sooner or later force the two sides to bridge their differences.
© 2005 Newsweek, Inc.
Prosecutor General closes criminal cases against Tymoshenko and her relatives
Jan 28, 15:10
Ukraine's Prosecutor General's Office has closed all criminal cases touching on acting Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko. Some of the cases go back eight years.
"It's enough. Let's put an end to it," said Prosecutor General Svyatoslav Piskun.
Piskun made the announcement on Jan. 28 in Kyiv.
He said that the cases were initiated in 1996, and looking into them has taken eight years. He said charges relating to Tymoshenko have been dropped in the United States.
Piskun underlined that criminal proceedings relating to Tymoshenko's relatives and closest circle had earlier been closed by the courts because of a lack of a corpus delicti.
"Having weighed the situation, we also dropped charges pertaining to Yulia Tymoshenko, because there isn't a corpus delicti in what she did," Piskun said.
Piskun said that the fact that the Rada had refused to countenance PGO appeals to arrest Tymoshenko testified that the charges were without basis.
The Prosecutor General also said no one is to blame for the long duration of the investigations, because the "process was moving along."
"A person shouldn't be terrorized for eight years. A person can't live his whole life under investigation," Piskun said, adding, "Therefore, I said enough. Let's put an end to it."
The Prosecutor General mentioned that the law is supposed to function under a presumption of innocence, and that if law enforcement organs aren't able to prove the guilt of the accused, then the case should be closed.
Piskun said the case had been closed before President Viktor Yushchenko named Tymoshenko acting prime minister. The decision, he said, had been taken in December, right after he became the Prosecutor General.
Despite the scotched cases in Ukraine and the possibility that she'll get to run the government, Tymoshenko remains in trouble in Russia. She's been mentioned in a Russian Interpol probe, in connection with charges that she allegedly bribed members of the Russian security services.
On Wednesday, Russia's Prosecutor General Vladimir Ustinov announced that charges would not be dropped against Tymoshenko, and that decisions about possibly arresting her would be made by Russian courts.
Asked whether the Tymoshenko investigations were politically motivated, Svyatoslav Piskin said: "I don't know. I didn't start them. I ended them, and thank god."
Thursday February 10
Ukraine's Yushchenko probably poisoned by government: attorney general [/size]
Ukraine's attorney general reportedly says he has gathered proof that President Viktor Yushchenko was deliberately poisoned in a plot probably involving the government.
"There is no doubt that this was a planned act, which probably involved people from the government. Not everybody has access to such substances," Svyatoslav Piskun was quoted as saying in the Thursday edition of Der Standard daily, published on its website late Wednesday.
Piskun said he was in Vienna to speak with the doctors here who treated Yushchenko after he fell ill on September 6 while campaigning in the country's bitterly contested presidential vote.
The same doctors said in December that tests had shown Yushchenko, who was left with blisters and scars on his face, had suffered dioxin poisoning and said they suspected foul play.
"Today I obtained documents here that give us the medical proof that Yuschenko was poisoned," Piskun said, adding that the medical reports were compiled by experts in Austria, Britain, Germany and the Netherlands.
Yushchenko was probably poisoned around the time he attended a dinner in early September at which the former deputy chief of the Ukrainian secret service was present, he said.
"We have always known roughly when the poison was administered. But the meeting today with Doctor Nikolai Korpan, the doctor of President Yushchenko, brought us some proof. The time probably coincides with the dinner, but we cannot say that it was exactly this day," he told the newspaper.
Asked whether he had specific poisoning suspects in mind, he said: "The circle of suspects is so big that I do not want to leave anybody out and hurt their feelings."
Ukrainian public prosecutors in October dismissed Yushchenko's health crisis as a case of food poisoning but reopened their investigation after the Austrian doctors revealed their findings, shortly before he went on to defeat Viktor Yanukovich in a rerun presidential vote late last year.
Yushchenko claimed from the start that he was the victim of poisoning by political opponents, telling reporters: "The aim was to kill me."
On page 11 [of Dutch newspaper Trouw], "Doubts about 'resolution' Gongadze murder"; Gongadze was the critical Ukrainian journalist who was found beheaded in a forest a few years ago. Tapes that turned up soon after featured then-President Kuchma ordering to have Gongadze silenced; protest demonstrations, then still unsuccessful, followed. Post-Orange revolution, the new President Yushchenko ordered the case reopened and last Tuesday the Justice department announced the arrest of two former high-ranking police officials - a colonel and a general. Gongadze's car was found yesterday. The presidential bodyguard who 'outed' the Kuchma tapes and Gongadze's widow, both now in the US, still expressed scepticism about whether those who ordered the murder would be punished too, however; the former, Melnichenko, is refusing to return to testify because he fears for his life.
AMS Newsletter
The digital newsletter of the Alfred Mozer Stichting
Extra edition: report on a unique event!
May 19th. 2005
Wave of Resistance: the birth of a new International!
On Saturday 14th. May De Balie in Amsterdam was filled with an audience of almost 300 people, to experience debates and documentaries about the rise of civic movements in Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia. An impression of this sold-out event was also shown on NOVA national Dutch television.
By: Arjen Berkvens; Director & Alma Balesic, Maartje Schrama, project assistants Alfred Mozer Stichting
Wave of resistance Quotes:
-> Girgi Kandelaki (Kmara, Georgia): as Lenin said; revolution is organisation, organisation and organisation."
-> Vasila Inojatova (Birlik, Uzbekistan) since 9/11 you can blame Muslims for everything. That is what Islam Karimov does: he misuses the war against terrorism. Freedoms? Freedoms do not exist. In Uzbekistan the authorities fill in the ballot papers."
-> Oleh Kyriyenko (Pora! Ukraine) in reaction to the accusation that Pora! Accepted American funds: In case a child is dying and the only thing that can safe it is the kidney of a serial killer: would the mother refuse the kidney out of principle?"
-> André Gerrits (University of Amsterdam): International democracy promotion is partly altruistic and partly foreign policy self-interest. The idea is that it is advantageous to all: for a fist full of dollars democracy promotion strengthens the spread of democracy creates international stability and prosperity."
-> Mike Staresinic (Freedom House, Serbia Director): Congratulations on an outstanding forum for exploring this specific type of political change."
-> Arjen Berkvens, Maartje Schrama and Alma Balesic (AMS) Our conclusion is that money isn't everything. Without the power, bravery and sheer persistence of the people of these countries, nothing is possible. The credits for change therefore should go to the people of Serbia, Georgia and Ukraine and not to foreign powers."
Introduction
After the "electoral revolutions" in Serbia (2000), Georgia (2003) and Ukraine (2004), the civic youth movements that were in the frontline of the successful democratic revolutions received full attention. Representatives of OTPOR! (Serbia), PORA! (Ukraine), KMARA (Georgia), Yox (Azerbaijan), Zubr (Belarus), and activists from various organisations from Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Albania, Turkmenistan and the Russian Federation were therefore invited to The Netherlands to talk about their long and painful struggle, their successes and their failures. Wave of Resistance was an event where they met representatives of political parties, universities, NGO's and political foundations. In workshops, private talks and after documentaries they debated their similarities, differences, allies and enemies, past, present and future. 300 people were present to share their experience and trigger them with arguments and questions.
Where activists learn, the regimes learn too!
Their struggle is still going on, under varying circumstances; sometimes under almost absolute dictatorship, sometimes in a more hybrid society where elements of liberal democracy and presidential authoritarianism go hand in hand. The fact that these circumstances differ so much makes it hard to generalise, but still some common elements are present in all countries. It seems that an "International Movement" of civic youth organizations has been created. Kmara in Georgia learned from OTPOR! in Serbia. ZUBR activists from Belarus and KMARA and OTPOR! veterans went to Ukraine to help out PORA! to spread their philosophy of non-violent resistance. The shadow-side is also visible. Where activists learn, the regimes learn too. They know what to expect and take measures to counter newly founded civic youth movements. They also take measures to stop international interference. International democracy support is a growing "industry" and receives more and more attention. The Alfred Mozer Foundation supported PORA! with training for instance. Freedom House supported OTPOR! and others. Critical questions are raised about this involvement. Is it morally right that democracy support is in the self-interest of the main western powers: the USA and the EU? Why do we support some and hesitate to support others? Is democracy more important than stability? Should the EU and the USA interfere in countries where The Russian Federation also has an interest? Do we harm these movements by paying too much attention to the international support, while in fact it is only a small contribution that can only have an effect in fertile soil?
The documentaries
The documentaries provided an intriguing insight in the movements in Serbia (Bringing down a Dictator by Steve York), Georgia, Serbia and Ukraine (The Anatomy of a Revolution by Alex Shprintsen), Ukraine (Pora!/ It's time! By Arnold van Bruggen a.o.) and Belarus (Ne Tarmazi by Gerhard Stoel a.o.) Interesting was that the documentaries also showed the differences in approach by the filmmakers and the countries they came from. From The Anatomy of a Revolution, a sceptic Canadian Documentary criticizing the US involvement in Serbia, Georgia and Ukraine, to a fast non-critical American promotion documentary: Bringing down a dictator showing the strategy and inspiration of Otpor! presented by Martin Sheen.
The Anatomy of a Revolution (introduced by Alex Shprintsen himself) compared the strategies of the three movements. This led to a discussion about the supposed similarities between these movements and whether the revolution in Serbia was a blueprint for revolutions elsewhere in Eastern Europe. Pora!/It's Time experienced its premiere at this event. The makers of the film went to Kiev during the demonstrations at Maidan, the main square in Kiev, and filmed the demonstrators, their activities, the tent camp and how they eventually won. This short film will be used as a campaign instruction movie for BKB Campaign Company. It clearly gives you an insight in the enormous creative capabilities of the young PORA activists.
Ne Tarmazi compared the three student associations in Belarus, Zubr, The Belarus Student Association (BSA) and the Belarusian Patriotic Youth Union that is loyal to Lukashenka. This documentary was probably the most impressive. It showed under which circumstances Zubr and BSA fight against the so-called Lukashism of the regime. It gave an impression of underground actions and the difficulties of fighting for democracy under circumstances where there is almost no freedom to manoeuvre. It also raised questions about the use of Belarus national symbols (red and white flag and language) as opposed to the Soviet symbols and the use of the Russian language by the regime.
In addition, two short documentaries were presented to our audience, which were made by Otpor! and Zubr about their respective movements.
The debate
The debate started at 20.00 hours and lasted till 22.30. It included three sessions. First was titled Success Stories, activists from Otpor!, Kmara and Pora! answered questions from the chairman Arjen Berkvens (Director AMS) and the audience. The second session, Inspired Movements, was led by our guests from Zubr, Yox and Yabloko.
Although these movements had and have to operate under different circumstances, the similarities were striking. All are non-hierarchical, use humour as their main weapon, are non-violent and are not connected to any political party (except in the very specific Russian case.) Gene Sharp is their Guru, although some admitted never to have read his books The main similarity was actually on a more psychological level. All these movements had to overcome apathy and fear. Apathy because people did not belief anymore that they would be able to change the situation for the better. Changing this, recruiting volunteers and taking non-violent action to the streets was an enormous challenge. Overcoming fear was the most important thing. Being threatened by the regime meant being kicked out of university, being molested by the riot police, being arrested and accused of all kinds of offences. The reaction of the authorities therefore also shows many similarities. However, as one activist stated: "When the level of oppression grows, the level of resistance also increases." The activists in Serbia ridiculed the authorities after they were branded as foreign agents and terrorists. Displaying a 22 year old slim student OTPOR activist in the streets as a terrorist, triggered the attention of the older generation and made them realise: "if our children are accused of being terrorists, what can we expect from these leaders?"
Although this generally might be true, the situation changes radically when the authorities choose to use brutal violence and repression. What if the police, secret service and the military remain loyal to the oppressive regime and do not hesitate to use every means possible? The case of Uzbekistan shows that Karimov did not hesitate to shoot hundreds of protesters and to label them as Islamic terrorists.
We have clearly seen that the regimes have also learned from the revolutions in Serbia, Georgia and Ukraine. They know the concept, they know what to expect and react accordingly. Positively, perhaps, in the case of Moldova, negatively for certain in the case of Belarus. The complications even deepen when we take into account the role of the United States of America and The Russian Federation in countries like Uzbekistan where they have a common interest in keeping the countries stable and in their sphere of influence. Then suddenly freedom and democracy became of lesser importance than the global fight against terrorism. The representative of YOX stated the same about Azerbaijan. Although the Aliyev regime is repressive and clearly undemocratic, the main powers in the world seem to be driven by the goal of keeping the oil flowing and the country stable. Here, democracy is much less on the march, and although the murder of the journalist Elmar Huseinov shocked the international community, it did not have serious consequences for the regime. The YOX movement is now starting its activities for a democratic Azerbaijan; using leaflets and graffiti as its weapons.
In the debate with the audience a number of important additions were made. Someone noted that these movements are not the only ones fighting for democracy and that they are only a link in a chain of human rights groups, women groups, political parties, independent media etc. This statement was followed by the analysis that the main question is what will happen after the revolution. How sustainable are the changes? The case of Serbia shows that progress is very slow and sometimes in the pace of two steps forward, one-step back. What will happen with the new leaders of Ukraine and Georgia; will they repeat the faults of the past or will they be faithful to the cause of establishing true pluralist democracies in non-corrupt societies where the rule of law prevails, NGO's and independent media thrives and administrations are transparent?
Questions were raised about the obvious support from especially the United States (private and governmental funds) to the civic youth movements. One person in the audience stated that taking money from the same country that invaded Iraq and is responsible for death squads, Guantanamo bay and sending possible Al-Qaida terrorists to be tortured in other "friendly though undemocratic" countries, cannot be reconciled. PORA activists Oleh replied as follows: " In case a child is dying and the only thing that can safe it is the kidney of a serial killer: would the mother refuse the kidney out of principle?" This statement opened the eyes of some in the audience and raised the eyebrows of others, shouting in protest: "how can you compare the US with a serial killer "
The importance of international support and the doubts that come with it were discussed during the whole day. Mr. Jonathan Steele of The Guardian en Mr. André Gerrits of the University of Amsterdam led the last discussion, which was titled the Revolution in Perspective. This part of the debate focused especially on international involvement in democracy promotion. André Gerrits posed four question regarding this phenomenon: - what is at stake when we speak about international democracy support?; - Do we have the right to interfere?; - Does it work? And what do we gain from it? According to Gerrits the popular revolts in Georgia and Ukraine have also shown a potential problem related to democracy promotion: it creates new troubles between Russia and the West. There is no doubt that for a series of specific reasons, we will face increasing tension between Russia and ?'Europe' over the so-called Near Abroad. They have conflicting interests here. Gerrits stated however that increasing tensions could never be reason not to give support to democratic forces in the region. Not to support these forces because it might annoy the Kremlin is politically and morally repugnant. It reduces these republics to hostages of Russia. Europe should intensify the contacts with the former Soviet Republic. Europe should employ all the means available to assist these countries in their political and economic reforms. All means, according to Gerrits, with the exception of one: EU membership. International democracy promotion is partly altruistic and partly foreign policy self-interest. The idea is that it is advantageous to all: for a fist full of dollars democracy promotion strengthens the spread of democracy creates international stability and prosperity. Gerrits concluded: "I wouldn't be too optimistic: democratization creates as much initial chaos and disorder as it may ultimately establish stability and peace."
Jonathan Steele of the Guardian is well known for his critical stance on the different revolutions, especially the Orange revolution in Ukraine. He warned that the situation was and is not black and white. That we should be critical about the events and take into account that Ukrainians in the third round still voted for Yanukovich massively (over 40%.) This does indeed give him a strong democratic legitimacy. Steele also warned us that besides the probable altruistic motives the United States might have, we should not forget that their motives are also driven by self-interest, geo-political strategies and gaining power and influence. He reminded the audience of the recent example of Guatemala, where the democratically elected president Chavez was nearly toppled by a coup, according to Steele, staged by the US. He stated that the European Union should play a more active role.
Concluding remarks
Although everybody agrees that substantial support is given (estimates are that almost 2 billion euros is spend on all sorts of democracy support annually), the effects of it are strongly debated. Some like to play it down, some like to exaggerate the importance. Others stress the fact that money isn't everything. Transfer of knowledge, training and facilitating the dissemination of information all play a major role. Besides that the human capital is crucial. Later that evening the Dutch news programme NOVA showed an item on the Wave of resistance with interviews and impressions. Their main argument was that these revolutions are instigated by the USA and strongly backed by US money. This is certainly a too simplistic way of looking at the events and does not take into account the influence the European Union and The Russian federation also have in the countries discussed. The Russians spend more than one billion dollar to back Yanukovich in Ukraine, outspending the USA and the EU by far. Still Yushchenko and his coalition won. We have to avoid simplistic schemes and overcome our ideological biases.
Our conclusion is that money isn't everything. Without the power, bravery and sheer persistence of the people of these countries, nothing is possible. The credits for change therefore should go to the people of Serbia, Georgia and Ukraine and not to foreign powers.
THE TIMES
July 01, 2005
Suspicion shifts from Russia over poison used on leader
BY GILES WHITTELL
The investigation continues but Viktor Yuschenko's would-be killer found his dioxin in Ukraine
SIX months after the Orange Revolution that made him a national hero and a symbol of personal courage, Ukraine's first freely elected President says that his security forces have found the laboratory that made the poison used in an attempt on his life last year ?- and it is in Ukraine, not Russia.
The disclosure by Viktor Yushchenko will ease Ukraine's troubled relations with the Kremlin even as the country's love affair with Europe begins to sour after the implosion of the EU constitution.
Mr Yushchenko was badly disfigured by a near-lethal dose of dioxin, thought to have been served to him in September at a secret dinner with the man who was head of Ukraine's secret police.
Senior members of his Government still refuse to rule out the possibility of Russian involvement and the President gave a warning that an investigation would bring those responsible to justice. "I'm sure that even though some people are running from the investigation, we will get them," he said. "I am not afraid of anything or anybody."
Holding court in the palatial former Communist Party headquarters from which he is said to be anxious to move, Mr Yushchenko said: "The chemical lab has been uncovered."
Asked if it was in Ukraine, he nodded, declining to be more specific but adding that there were the "remains of poison in that lab that could have been used in violation of national and international laws".
Earlier he had made light of his appearance. "I am sure that sitting before you is a strong and beautiful man," he sighed, in his only attempt at humour.
He is certainly strong, but his face remains shockingly scarred. His ears are calloused and swollen and his cheeks, greyish under heavy make-up, look disembodied next to his healthy hand when he raises it for emphasis.
"I'm proud that I was able to come through this ordeal and I know that 99 per cent of people would not have come through it. Nobody has survived such a poisoning in Ukraine," he said.
The investigation so far bears this out. Mr Yushchenko said that the bodies of an unconfirmed number of victims of the same highly concentrated dioxin, an industrial defoliant, are being studied to establish exactly how it attacks human tissue.
He said that there were only two other known survivors of exposure to the poison in Europe. One is thought to be an Austrian textiles researcher.
The President's exclusion of Russia as a possible source of the poison will be seen as conciliatory towards President Putin, who lobbied vigorously for Mr Yushchenko's rival in the elections that triggered the January revolution. Since then relations between the countries have been tense, but the crisis that many forecast has not materialised.
Russia's share of Ukrainian exports has risen sharply and Mr Yushchenko has surprised some of his European admirers by signing up to new free trade initiatives with Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus, the ossified dictatorship on his northern border.
He has also held three high-profile summits with Mr Putin, with two more planned for the next two months, and progress is expected on fronts that remained deadlocked under his predecessor. Among them are Russia's stranglehold on gas and oil supplies to Ukraine and the disputed status of Russia's Black Sea fleet at Sebastopol. The contrast with "old" Europe's indifference towards Ukraine since May could hardly be starker.
With EU enlargement firmly on hold and Ukraine behind Turkey and much of the Balkans in the queue to begin accession talks, the goal of full membership promised to Kiev's crowds last winter now looks remote.
Asked if there was a risk that a yearning for Europe would turn to a sense of betrayal, Mr Yushchenko talked pointedly about Europe's people rather than its leaders. "The citizens of no European country object to Ukraine joining the EU," he insisted, citing polls showing 65 per cent support for the idea among Germans and an only slightly lower number in France. "We consider that Ukraine is an inseparable part of Europe," he said.
Meanwhile, Ukraine has agreed to a three-year "action plan" with the EU, but Western diplomats are making no promises and counselling patience.
Many Ukrainians feel that they have been patient long enough. "The window of opportunity is closing!" the front page of a leading national daily declared recently.
There is no question that Mr Yushchenko wants to keep that window open. His challenge is to enact the reforms required to start accession talks fast enough to satisfy his core supporters without alienating Russia or the oligarchs on whom much of Ukraine's economy still depends.
TOXIC WASTE
399BC Socrates was forced to drink a vial of hemlock when condemned for corrupting the youth of Athens with his teachings
AD54 The Roman Emperor Claudius was murdered by his wife Agrippina, who fed him a dish of mushrooms laced with poison. Her son, Nero, succeeded him
1815 Napoleon Bonaparte died in exile on St Helens. A study found abnormal traces of arsenic in his hair, suggesting that he had been given non-lethal doses to hasten his death
Simferopol Stories: Bent cops and language wars in a divided town
By Mary Dejevsky
Published: 17 July 2005
If charm and elegance define your idea of a desirable city, Simferopol will not meet your requirements. It is almost as though this scruffily rambling conurbation has been called upon to balance the delights of the increasingly chic resorts just an hour's drive over mountains to the south. In so many ways, the capital of the Crimea has caught the short straw.
It has the airport, railway station and road junction through which most holiday-makers must pass to reach the sea; at any one time a large number of those thronging its streets are just passing through. It was only lightly touched by Ukraine's Orange revolution. Lenin still lords it over the square in front of the government buildings. And, although capitalism has made its mark, with casinos, money-changing booths and cafes every few yards, the city is undisguisedly poor. Jewellery shops tempt customers inside with offers to exchange old baubles for new and a store has cornered the market in "second-hand European clothes".
Its mixed identity falls short of feeling cosmopolitan. While the rest of Ukraine is divided relatively neatly, with Russian-speakers predominating in the east and Ukrainian-speakers in the West, in the Crimea there is a three-way split: Russians, Ukrainians and the Tatar population compete for public money, space and political power. After the Orange revolution, the Russians, at almost 60 per cent, feel displaced. The Ukrainians feel at once vindicated and apprehensive, while the Tatars, who started returning in the 1980s from the Central Asian exile into which they had been brutally forced by Stalin, are trying to reclaim their old land, or any land at all. All these tensions converge in Simferopol.
* * *
Two blonde girls in their late teens sit at a card table on Rosa Luxembourg street, chatting and preening in the sunshine. The placard behind them explains that they are collecting signatures for a petition; 220,000 already collected in two weeks. Its purpose is to press for an amendment to the Ukrainian constitution that would enshrine Russian as joint official language with Ukrainian. To pass, an amendment needs the support of three-quarters of Ukraine's 400 MPs.
The petition is designed to put pressure on local MPs. "If they don't support it, we'll campaign to throw them out," says one girl. With parliamentary elections in March, and Ukraine still a simmering political cauldron, this is no idle threat. An elderly woman stops to sign. She complains that all prescription labels are now in Ukrainian and she cannot understand them.
* * *
Russians have treated the Crimean resorts as their summer playground since the 19th century, and still do, even though they now have to cross a border, change their roubles into hryvny and pay Ukraine's higher prices. With car ownership now common, thousands of Russians make the long trek south at this time of year. Reading between the lines of the local newspaper, it seems that their passage through Simferopol and its environs has become a nice little earner for the local traffic police.
After complaints from Russian drivers that they were being importuned by bent Ukrainian cops - accusations hotly denied by local police chiefs - encounters between police and drivers were secretly recorded.
The result? More than 500 "breaches of discipline" registered across 365 encounters. The police authority is now appealing to holidaymakers not to "tempt" the cops or to break the law by "offering a bribe".
If things don't improve, Ukraine's Interior Minister, Yuri Lutsenko, has threatened to drive around in a Russian-registered car to test the southern charm of his officers for himself. He says that if he comes across any rude or corrupt behaviour, he will withdraw all the traffic cops from Crimea for the summer.
"Whoopee," says a local reporter, "then we really will have a ball."
If charm and elegance define your idea of a desirable city, Simferopol will not meet your requirements. It is almost as though this scruffily rambling conurbation has been called upon to balance the delights of the increasingly chic resorts just an hour's drive over mountains to the south. In so many ways, the capital of the Crimea has caught the short straw.
It has the airport, railway station and road junction through which most holiday-makers must pass to reach the sea; at any one time a large number of those thronging its streets are just passing through. It was only lightly touched by Ukraine's Orange revolution. Lenin still lords it over the square in front of the government buildings. And, although capitalism has made its mark, with casinos, money-changing booths and cafes every few yards, the city is undisguisedly poor. Jewellery shops tempt customers inside with offers to exchange old baubles for new and a store has cornered the market in "second-hand European clothes".
Its mixed identity falls short of feeling cosmopolitan. While the rest of Ukraine is divided relatively neatly, with Russian-speakers predominating in the east and Ukrainian-speakers in the West, in the Crimea there is a three-way split: Russians, Ukrainians and the Tatar population compete for public money, space and political power. After the Orange revolution, the Russians, at almost 60 per cent, feel displaced. The Ukrainians feel at once vindicated and apprehensive, while the Tatars, who started returning in the 1980s from the Central Asian exile into which they had been brutally forced by Stalin, are trying to reclaim their old land, or any land at all. All these tensions converge in Simferopol.
* * *
Two blonde girls in their late teens sit at a card table on Rosa Luxembourg street, chatting and preening in the sunshine. The placard behind them explains that they are collecting signatures for a petition; 220,000 already collected in two weeks. Its purpose is to press for an amendment to the Ukrainian constitution that would enshrine Russian as joint official language with Ukrainian. To pass, an amendment needs the support of three-quarters of Ukraine's 400 MPs.
The petition is designed to put pressure on local MPs. "If they don't support it, we'll campaign to throw them out," says one girl. With parliamentary elections in March, and Ukraine still a simmering political cauldron, this is no idle threat. An elderly woman stops to sign. She complains that all prescription labels are now in Ukrainian and she cannot understand them.
* * *
Russians have treated the Crimean resorts as their summer playground since the 19th century, and still do, even though they now have to cross a border, change their roubles into hryvny and pay Ukraine's higher prices. With car ownership now common, thousands of Russians make the long trek south at this time of year. Reading between the lines of the local newspaper, it seems that their passage through Simferopol and its environs has become a nice little earner for the local traffic police.
After complaints from Russian drivers that they were being importuned by bent Ukrainian cops - accusations hotly denied by local police chiefs - encounters between police and drivers were secretly recorded.
The result? More than 500 "breaches of discipline" registered across 365 encounters. The police authority is now appealing to holidaymakers not to "tempt" the cops or to break the law by "offering a bribe".
If things don't improve, Ukraine's Interior Minister, Yuri Lutsenko, has threatened to drive around in a Russian-registered car to test the southern charm of his officers for himself. He says that if he comes across any rude or corrupt behaviour, he will withdraw all the traffic cops from Crimea for the summer.
"Whoopee," says a local reporter, "then we really will have a ball."
Revolutions are dangerous things, even when they are peaceful and bathed in an orange glow. Six months after Viktor Yushchenko's inauguration as democratically elected president of Ukraine, his government seems to have lost much of its early sense of purpose.
On the surface, the capital, Kiev is still high on the euphoria of "people power". Independence Square is a dawn to dusk festival starring hundreds of Ukrainians from all over the world feeling good about being Ukrainian.
You want a book by or about Yushchenko? No problem. A bust, a portrait? Pick the size, and take one of the Prime Minister, Julia Tymoshenko, while you are at it. The religious pictures and small, reproduction icons are laid out adjacent to the portraits of the revolutionary duo: the icons of yesterday and today, side by side.
But the chat behind the stalls is no longer uncritical. "Were you there?" One excited visitor asked a rough-hewn seller of folk music CDs. "Yes," he replied slowly, "and the crowds were unbelievable: they covered the square and went way down the Khreshchatik" (Kiev's renowned main thoroughfare). He went on: "And you know what: they set up stalls selling beer every few yards and there weren't any loos, and you can just imagine what it was like."
The disappointment is echoed in the columns of newspapers that had once been lavish in their support for the orange batallions. The revolution belonged in part to them, because it was they who insisted the elections conform to the law and then ensured that they did.
But it also belonged to Ukraine's young urban population, who saw in Mr Yushchenko and Ms Tymoshenko not only a different future for themselves and their country but a future in which they and Ukraine would be part of Europe. Of course, it was always going to be hard for the orange revolution to live up to the expectations invested in it. And, like the somewhat hazy and idealised vision of Europe, those expectations were often ill-defined. So far as the intelligentsia was concerned, they hoped above all for an end to the pervasive corruption. Many journalists hoped for the freedom to report as they wished, and without any financial constraints.
Such aspirations were utopian. But many Ukrainians - not only those who had flocked in person to Independence Square - had convinced themselves they had accomplished a revolution and thought that after December everything would be possible.
For those now swelling the ranks of doubters, all that the new government has produced to reward their heroic efforts in the snow are price rises, leadership squabbles and a series of excited and ill thought-out policy moves based on a free-market ideology very few Ukrainians fully understand.
Top of the list of misfired government initiatives is the review of earlier company privatisations, which were widely seen as corrupt. To the population at large, it seemed so simple: just confiscate the ill-gotten gains from the millionaire oligarchs and spread the largesse around. For an elected government, operating - or trying to operate - in an international context, however, it is not so easy. How can privatisations be reversed without destabilising Ukraine's fragile market and discouraging wary foreign investors? The prime example is the country's largest steel mill, Kryvorizhstal, sold last year for what was regarded as an unfairly low price to a consortium that included the then president's son-in-law and, in effect, renationalised last month. A new auction has been promised but the timing and mechanics seem to change by week, if not by the day, and lawsuits are already looming. Responsibility for reviewing privatisations rests with the prime minister, Julia Tymoshenko, herself a first-wave "oligarch" who has sworn henceforward to work by the book.
The President and Prime Minister had intended that 14 economic bills would be passed into law before the summer recess. They were crucial to fulfilling the conditions for membership of the World Trade Organisation and an integral part, too, of the "action plan" drafted by the European Union as a preliminary to agreeing a start date for talks on EU accession.
In the last week before the recess, however, the Rada descended into shouting and brawling between pro-Yushchenko reformers and their opponents.
Worse, all the antagonism produced only eight new laws. The one regarded as most crucial for WTO membership, on copyright, was passed but the rest have been held over until the autumn.
If, as some expect, the March elections reflect disillusionment with Mr Yushchenko and do not produce a more reformist parliament, then any chance of legislating for serious restructuring of the economy, let alone of early EU accession, could be lost for several years.
Among Mr Yushchenko's many foreign patrons, there is deep concern that progress is not nearly so fast as had been hoped. One visiting US dignitary with an interest in the success of the "revolution" said: "These people just don't know how to do politics. They are not schooled in the techniques and the necessary give and take".
He was not alone in his frustration. There is a growing consensus in Ukraine that Mr Yushchenko and Ms Tymoshenko have frittered away much of their political capital. If they cannot regain momentum in the autumn, there is a real risk Ukraine will sink back into inertia.
After a series of political and diplomatic gaffes last December, President Putin has left Ukraine to its own devices. Suggestions that Russia was involved in the murder of Ukraine's most celebrated investigative journalist, Georgy Gongadze, or in the dioxin poisoning of Mr Yushchenko before the election have been rebutted. Probably it was always unreasonable to expect tangible results from the Orange revolution so soon. But Mr Yushchenko's options for rallying his disappointed cohorts are decreasing. His call earlier this week for a comprehensive reorganisation of law enforcement, to include the disbanding of the notoriously corrupt traffic police, looked more like a crowd-pleaser than a serious blueprint for change.
Challenged to say what the government had achieved, the head of the Crimean administration, Ivan Matvienko, snapped at a local reporter: "You don't plant a potato one day, then dig it up the next because you are feeling peckish."
Do you know why there is no contest "10 richest kids in Ukraine"? ?'Cause there is no competition whatsoever. There is just one champion. And his name is Andriy Victorovych Yushchenko, Ukrainian president's eldest son.
While people were speculating over Tymoshenko's future son-in-law, the president's successor was undeservedly forgotten.
People living in Luteranska Street, situated near Bankova, are telling stories about president's son and his indecent behavior. For instance, he speeds up to 62,14 mph, shifts to the wrong lane, blocking other vehicles. But what's really interesting is the cars in president's son disposal.
Some time ago Andriy Yushchenko drove Mercedes jeep. But then he gave preference to Mercedes CLS 500. The car is not a cheap one - over $90 000. But it's extremely nice and pleases eye
But it turned out the car belonged to Andriy Yushchenko's girlfriend Ann Pavlovych who lives in Luteranska Street, 24. But he can drive this vehicle only with Ann sitting beside since he doesn't have the permission to do that alone. Just one person is allowed to drive this car (except Ann) whose name and surname begins with "M". For ethical reasons we won't give the full name.
Sure it was kind of a challenge for president's son who drove a far more banal car. The feeling of male supremacy and higher social status made 19 year old president's son renew his autopark. So Andriy Yushchenko drives BMW M6 now.
One should admit he has a good taste. This car might make car enthusiasts go nut and its price drives tax officer mad. We called official BMW dealer in Ukraine AVT Bavaria.
- Morning. Do you have BMW M6?
- Should order it. The waiting term is about three months.
- How much is it?
- Standard model costs 133 000 euro.
- Are there many such cars in Kyiv?
- Just one.
- Was it purchased in you salon?
- No. Is it that important?
The end of conversation.
Having analyzed this information and the fact that Andriy Yushchenko drove such car we identified the car owner. UP correspondent tired to learn more about president's son gentility. It was quite an interesting story that almost ended in scuffle. So, Andriy Yushchenko drove up to his girlfriend's house around 23:00. He parked the car teasing DAI (traffic service) liquidated by his father. The car was just at the central reservation.
While Andriy was sitting in the car, his bodyguards took their stands. They observed traffic rules and parked their BMW at the curb.
In some minutes another car went by Yushchenko's BMW. It was the son of deputy Interior Minister, fired because of corruption accusations. The kids chatted for a while.
In ten minutes DAI car (license number 2022) came up to Andriy's automobile wonder. But having communicated with Yushchenko's bodyguards they disappeared. BMW M6 was still blocking the way making other cars press to the pavement.
Later on we found these traffic police officers and asked why they hadn't fined the driver. They explained: "What can we do? Yushchenko liquidated us today! Besides, we know who was in the car. That's either Yushchenko's bodyguard or his driver".
One evening in Yushchenko Junior's life
In a few minutes Yushchenko Junior's motorcade hit the road. But the author of this article went on his quest, i.e. he kept on looking for what he needed. As it was difficult to believe Andriy Yushchenko drove a UAH 810 000 car I had to document it. It was dark in Luteranska Street and pictures turned out really poor.
I didn't give myself up to despair and went to VIP parking spots near Passage. I came up to Fellini restaurant, beloved by Andriy Yushchenko.
And a miracle! The only BMW M6 in Kyiv was parked in the right place, not in the middle of the road. There was nobody in the car. Yevhen Lauer, editor-in-chief of the web-site Tribune was driving along the street and started taking pictures. So there were two of us who photographed Yushchenko's car.
In a minute Yushchenko's bodyguard came out.
- Hey dudes! Who are you?
- We're just taking pictures of a nice car. How much does it cost?
- 50 grands.
Apparently president's son doesn't tell the truth about his car even to his bodyguards. So we told him the real price. Then the bodyguard inquired whose order we executed.
Suddenly president's son came out of the restaurant. That was what we were waiting for and we took Andriy's pictures on the background of his car. Logically he should have waited in the restaurant not to compromise his father.
Without saying a word Yushchenko got into car and parked it on the other side. That was absolutely stupid move as the car didn't disturb anybody. On the other side a UAH 800 000 car still stroke imagination.
Andriy Yushchenko had several ways to handle the problem with press. He could have come up and fib some "fairy tale story" to feed the journalists. But instead of president's son came his bodyguard and demanded to show our IDs. For some reason he asked only Yevhen Lauer to do that. Since the bodyguard refused to show his ID it became clear that it wasn't representative of the State Security Service that is responsible for highest officials' safety.
After futile conversation the guy went to the restaurant. But he came back in a minute and did nothing original: a couple of abuses and the demand to show IDs. When we were about to leave he tried to get into Lauer's car. Lauer put the car into gear and the bodyguard was left tete-a-tete with his questions.
Sure, that was interference into Yushchenko Junior's private life. We just thought that people should know what car a third year student of Institute of Foreign Andriy Victorovych Yushchenko Affairs had. Let's remind he is just 19 years old.
We are also interested in what allows him to drive BMW M6, his father should work 25 years for (as known the president had UAH 2 600 per month till June).
Besides we are eager to know why Yushchenko Junior drives a car with Czech license plates. We failed to get to know when the car entered Ukraine, if it would be registered here and what customs duties should be paid off. So, if any people's deputies want to carry out interpellation, here is the cars license number: cz 3U1 0401.
And the last thing: his passion for luxurious things strikes. It's known that, for instance, the president's son has a very specific cell phone. It's not trivial Nokia or Motorola but a Vertu mobile phone. If somebody is ignorant we might consult you that these phones cost like a baby car.
Vertu cell phones are on sale in Kyiv in "Crystal" store on Volodymyrska Street. You may learn there that a model for men costs from 4 850 to 30 000 euro. At the same time internet shop www.ibasta.com.ua offers Vertu phones for $43 500. The high price is for platinum frame. They say, Andriy Yushchenko has the platinum one. Although, he might possess a phone made of "white gold".
Some people claim they saw president's son in club "Ibiza" in Odessa. He paid with seven C-notes. Yushchenko also prefers club "Decadence" in Kyiv. He drinks there "Crystal" champagne. The price is quite decent - over UAH 6 000.
Generally speaking, there are legends about president's son, despite his dislike for publicity. We managed to learn where he found his "delicate" bodyguards. It turns out that Andriy Victorovych is guarded by former bouncers from Kyiv club "Chaikovsky".
That's an interesting story as well. How can you trust president's son to the people who are not allowed to carry weapon. Or they have it, thus violating law?
P.S. UP addressed Andriy Yushchenko to comment on these events, with president's press-secretary as a mediator. She handed over Andriy Yushchenko's statement:
"That evening I was going to the movies (two movies were on that evening: "Fantastic four" and comedy "If your mother-in-law is a monster", UP comment).
The car I drove is not mine, it belongs to my friend. For ethical reasons I won't tell his name.
As to the bodyguard, my relatives decided to hire private guars for me during election campaign.
The guy became my friend, and a big helping hand. To tell you the truth he often helps me in the situation, like that one near Fellini restaurant when he demanded respect for my private life.
My family pays for the guard. (I also contribute my share). I must confess that being a politician's son is an enormous responsibility. Especially when you're the president's son. I respect mass media and understand their rapt attention to politicians' kids.
On the other hand I'd like journalists understand and respect my right for private life. I'm not a politician and I'm not ready to show my private life.
I understand that my surname is a big responsibility in itself. At the same time I'm a grown-up, independent person; I don't want to be just the "president's son".
I study and work at the same time for some years already for a commercial firm. I try to be financially independent. I don't have autoparks, but I earn my living myself. Concerning cars, usually I use my mother's car".
