Published by the Ukrainian National Association Inc., a fraternal non-profit association

$1/$2 in UkraineVol. LXXIV No. 29 THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, JULY 16, 2006

by Zenon ZawadaKyiv Press Bureau

KYIV – Ukraine’s governmentplunged into crisis as pro-Russian groupsled by the Party of the Regionsannounced they had formed a parliamen-tary coalition on July 11, while their pro-Western opponents called for a dismissalof the Verkhovna Rada and new parlia-mentary elections.

The pro-Russian Anti-Crisis Coalitionwas formed just days after SocialistParty of Ukraine leader OleksanderMoroz betrayed the pro-Western Orangecoalition agreement he had signed withthe Our Ukraine and Yulia Tymoshenkoblocs.

In opening the Verkhovna Rada’s July11 session, Mr. Moroz immediatelydeclared the democratic coalition nulland void, throwing the Parliament intochaos as pro-Western politicians beganbrawling and resorting to any measuresneeded to obstruct the day’s work.

“I turn to television viewers and radiolisteners: Do you see who doesn’t wantthe Verkhovna Rada to work, bringing inmegaphones and other devices to the ses-sion hall?” Mr. Moroz asked amidst ear-piercing sirens sounded by Our Ukraineand Tymoshenko Bloc deputies.

“The issue is not resolving politicalmatters and passing the necessary laws.The issue is that certain people, at any

Rada in crisis as new pro-Russian coalition is formed

by Zenon ZawadaKyiv Press Bureau

KYIV – It had come as a shock tomost Ukrainians.

Socialist Party of Ukraine NationalDeputy Yosyp Vinskyi announced on theafternoon of July 6 that the party’s chair-man, Oleksander Moroz, had betrayedthe democratic coalition he had enteredinto with Roman Bezsmertnyi of OurUkraine and Yulia Tymoshenko of theeponymous bloc.

As part of the parliamentary coalitionagreement, the Socialists were supposedto support Our Ukraine’s nominee forchairman of the Verkhovna Rada, nomatter who it was.

“Socialist national deputies andMoroz personally created a system ofabsurd, imagined and unjustifiable argu-ments as justification for their anti-partyposition,” stated Mr. Vinskyi, who wasfirst secretary of the Socialist Party’sPolitical Council until he resigned inprotest to what he saw as Mr. Moroz’sbetrayal of the party.

“The goal of these arguments was tohide the true intention of a part of thefaction, which is trying to form a coali-tion with the Party of the Regions,” Mr.

Oleksander Moroz’s surprise

(Continued on page 11)

THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLYINSIDE:

• A fatal blow to the Orange coalition? — page 2.• A look at what is at stake in Ukraine — page 3.• Dancers galore at Yonkers and New York festivals — page 12.

Newly elected Verkhovna Rada Chair-man Oleksander Moroz.

National deputies fight in the Verkhovna Rada during the July 11 session after the newly elected Parliament chairman, Oleksander Moroz, announced the formation of the Anti-Crisis Coalition of pro-Russian political parties.

KYIV — The Press Office ofPresident Viktor Yushchenko released astatement on July 12 on the recent eventsin the Verkhovna Rada. Ivan Vasiunyk,first deputy chief of staff, told the mediathat the president wants the Parliament toresume legitimate work and added thatcontinued negotiations with parliamen-tary parties is imperative, as is the nomi-nation of a “non-controversial” primeminister.

According to the press release,President Yushchenko believes thatdeputies should observe the Constitutionof Ukraine and Ukrainian laws, setnational interests as priorities, search forcompromises, and be ready to tolerantly,publicly and unemotionally start a dia-logue in order to resolve the existingproblems.

Commenting on the recent change incoalitions, President Yushchneko said,“Unfortunately, we all see that politicianshave not learned to implement thoseagreements but make political decisionssecretly ‘under the table’.”

In response to the change in the major-ity coalition in the Verkhovna Rada,

President Yushchenko proposed the fol-lowing steps: convening theConstitutional Court as the only institu-tion that can settle legal collisions andthe nomination of a non-controversialprime minister.

“Yesterday’s events in the VerkhovnaRada show that this questionable politicalperformance in Parliament ... obviouslycontradicts the fundamentals of theEuropean parliamentary culture andUkrainian laws. It is particularly impor-tant in Ukraine, whose new Constitutionrequires exceptional understanding andknowledge of democratic mechanisms,”said Mr. Vasiunyk.

Mr. Vasiunyk added that the presidentwas “indignant that decisions inParliament were made under pressure withbribery and subornation involved, and sohe urges all the forces in Parliament todiscard such agreements and decisions, forthey devalue democracy, devalueUkrainian government and promote hugepolitical corruption in Parliament.”

“All attempts to contradict the logic ofnational reunion, including legal and

President tries to stay above the fray,wants Rada to resume legitimate work

(Continued on page 8)

Vinskyi added.Just a few hours later, the Socialists

nominated Mr. Moroz as their candidatefor the Verkhovna Rada chair, a positionhe had coveted ever since he lost it in

(Continued on page 8)

Zenon Zawada

AP/Sergiy Chuzavkov

www.ukrweekly.com

http://www.ukrweekly.com

THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, JULY 16, 20062 No. 29

NEWSBRIEFSNEWSBRIEFSby Jan Maksymiuk

RFE/RL NewslineJuly 7

The Verkhovna Rada on July 6resumed its work after 10 days of ablockade organized by lawmakers fromthe Party of the Regions. In an unexpect-ed move, the Ukrainian Parliament elect-ed Socialist Party leader OleksanderMoroz as its speaker.

Mr. Moroz was elected by lawmakersfrom the Party of Regions and theCommunist Party, while his anticipatedcoalition allies – the Yuliya TymoshenkoBloc and Our Ukraine – shunned the vote.

Does the choice of the speaker spell anend to the Orange coalition deal reached inJune, after three months of uneasy talks?

An impasse emerged in the Parliamenton June 27, when lawmakers from theParty of the Regions led by former PrimeMinister Viktor Yanukovych blocked therostrum in and entrance to the VerkhovnaRada hall, thus preventing lawmakers ofthe coalition from opening a session.

Several days earlier, on June 22, thethree allies in the 2004 Orange Revolution– the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc (129 seats),Our Ukraine (81 seats), and the SocialistParty (33 seats) – signed a coalition deal,following three months of negotiations.

Regarding the distribution of top gov-ernment posts, Ms. Tymoshenko was toassume the post of prime minister, whilePetro Poroshenko from Our Ukraine wasto become Rada chairman. The SocialistParty was entitled under the deal to thepost of first deputy prime minister.

Some of the would-be coalition part-ners were visibly unhappy about the Junedeal to recreate the Orange governmentthat collapsed in September 2005, afterthen-Prime Minister Tymoshenko accusedthen-National Security and DefenseCouncil Secretary Poroshenko of corrup-tion practices and encroaching upon herexecutive prerogatives. Ms. Tymoshenkoand Mr. Poroshenko, the fiercest enemiesin the 2005 feud, were again to assumetop government posts, and many saw inthis the seeds of a future conflict.

Socialist Party leader Moroz, whoaspired to become Rada chairman afterthe March 26 parliamentary elections, wasalso apparently unhappy with the fact thatthis post was offered to Mr. Poroshenko.

And there was the Party of the Regions,which unsuccessfully tried to strike acoalition deal with Our Ukraine in mid-June. After it became clear that the formerOrange allies might recreate their govern-ing alliance, the Party of the Regionslaunched a blockade of the Parliamenthall. The blockade was in protest againstwhat the Yanukovych-led party saw as anunlawful scheme to appoint the primeminister and parliamentary speaker in asingle, open vote, and against the coali-tion’s failure to offer the opposition suffi-cient positions on legislative committees.

But the Party of the Regions agreed tolift its parliamentary blockade on July 6,after reportedly reaching an agreement withthe Orange Revolution allies. According tothis agreement, the election of the Radachair was to be conducted in a secret ballot,and the opposition – that is, the Party of theRegions and the Communist Party – wasoffered leadership positions on 50 percentof parliamentary committees.

When everybody thought that theVerkhovna Rada would proceed withapproving Mr. Poroshenko as speaker,Mr. Moroz was suddenly proposed as a

ANALYSIS

Jan Maksymiuk is the Belarus andUkraine specialist on the staff of RFE/RLNewsline.

THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY FOUNDED 1933An English-language newspaper published by the Ukrainian National Association Inc.,

a non-profit association, at 2200 Route 10, P.O. Box 280, Parsippany, NJ 07054.Yearly subscription rate: $55; for UNA members — $45.

Periodicals postage paid at Parsippany, NJ 07054 and additional mailing offices.(ISSN — 0273-9348)

The Weekly: UNA:Tel: (973) 292-9800; Fax: (973) 644-9510 Tel: (973) 292-9800; Fax: (973) 292-0900

Postmaster, send address changes to: Editor-in-chief: Roma HadzewyczThe Ukrainian Weekly Editors: 2200 Route 10 Zenon Zawada (Kyiv)P.O. Box 280 Matthew DubasParsippany, NJ 07054

The Ukrainian Weekly Archive: www.ukrweekly.com; e-mail: staff@ukrweekly.com

The Ukrainian Weekly, July 16, 2006, No. 29, Vol. LXXIVCopyright © 2006 The Ukrainian Weekly

ADMINISTRATION OF THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY AND SVOBODA

(973) 292-9800, ext. 3041ukradmin@att.net(973) 292-9800, ext. 3040e-mail: adsukrpubl@att.net(973) 292-9800, ext. 3042e-mail: ukrsubscr@att.net

Walter Honcharyk, administrator

Maria Oscislawski, advertising manager

Mariyka Pendzola, subscriptions

candidate for this post. Mr. Poroshenkowithdrew his candidacy, calling Moroz’smove a betrayal of the coalition dealreached on June 22. Mr. Moroz wasapproved as chairman with 238 votesexclusively from his party, the Party ofthe Regions and the Communist Party.

“There is a new coalition. Let themwork, while we will be in opposition,” OurUkraine leader Roman Bezsmertnyi com-mented on what happened in theVerkhovna Rada on July 6.

Ms. Tymoshenko did not commentdirectly on the election of Mr. Moroz,adding only that she does not understandwhat is going on.

Meanwhile, Mr. Moroz explained hiselection as Parliament chairman by hisintention to heal the west-east division inUkrainian society deepened by the 2004Orange Revolution and the 2006 parlia-mentary elections.

“We must reduce this tension, whichhas been artificially created; we must endthe split we now see in Ukraine. I’m surewe can overcome this problem. I’m evenmore sure that we can bring together thosewho see themselves as the victors andthose who see themselves as the van-quished,” Mr. Moroz said.

How Mr. Moroz is going to achieve thisgoal is not immediately clear. The YuliaTymoshenko Bloc, with its political-sup-port base in western Ukraine, has repeat-edly and firmly declared that it will notenter any governing coalition with theParty of the Regions, which is entrenchedin eastern and southern Ukraine.

Most likely, Mr. Moroz is expecting thata new “grand” coalition would include OurUkraine along with the Regions and theSocialists. Only such an alliance could givesome credibility to his claim about healingUkraine’s west-east rift.

Could Our Ukraine enter a ruling coali-tion with its fiercest political opponent, theParty of the Regions? Such an option wassuggested by Our Ukraine itself in mid-June, when the pro-presidential bloc turnedto Mr. Yanukovych’s party to discuss theformation of a new government. There isreportedly a significant group of politiciansin Our Ukraine, including acting PrimeMinister Yurii Yekhanurov, who prefer toform a government with the Regions ratherthan with the Tymoshenko Bloc.

What other options are available forUkraine?

A ruling coalition could be created bythe Party of the Regions, the SocialistParty and the Communist Party. The threeparties jointly control 240 votes in the450-seat legislature. But such a coalitionwould hardly contribute anything substan-tial to healing the Ukrainian political split.

If Ukrainian lawmakers fail to approvea new prime minister and Cabinet by July25, President Viktor Yushchenko willhave the right to disband the VerkhovnaRada and call for new elections. But lastweek, Mr. Yushchenko ruled out such apossibility. “There will be no repeat elec-tions. It is an excessively expensivepleasure for the country and an inappro-priate price [to pay] for the ambitions ofsome politicians,” he said in a radioaddress on July 1.

The Verkhovna Rada on July 7 post-poned its session until next week, appar-ently not knowing how to resolve itscoalition-building conundrum.

It seems that the Ukrainian politicalelite is now waiting for a word fromPresident Yushchenko. It was he whoreportedly advised Our Ukraine in Juneagainst forging a coalition with the Partyof the Regions. Perhaps this time, inorder to avoid repeat elections, he willurge Our Ukraine to take this step.

Former allies react to Moroz’s election

KYIV – Yulia Tymoshenko, whoseeponymous bloc was part of the Orangecoalition, responded on July 7 to theelection of Oleksander Moroz by callingon President Viktor Yushchenko to dis-band Parliament. The same day, thedeputy head of the pro-presidential OurUkraine faction, Roman Zvarych, saidthat Our Ukraine will consider leavingany democratic coalition in which theSocialists participate and instead becomean opposition party. (RFE/RL Newsline)Moroz announces new coalition

KYIV – Verkhovna Rada speakerOleksander Moroz on July 11 announcedthe creation of a new coalition, whichincludes lawmakers from the Party of theRegions, the Socialist Party and theCommunist Party, Interfax reported. Mr.Moroz also notified the Parliament of thedissolution of the Orange coalition. YuliaTymoshenko, the head of the eponymousbloc and the leader of the dissolved coali-tion, described the new coalition on July10 as “an illegal majority.” The SocialistParty, Ms. Tymoshenko argued, endorsedOrange principles and the CommunistParty pledged to fight against corruption,but both formations joined “the clan ofcriminal oligarchs.” The Parliament ses-sion descended into chaos as lawmakersscuffled before the new coalition wasannounced, and afterwards Orange par-ties’ members blocked the rostrum pre-venting further debate. Lawmakers fromPresident Viktor Yushchenko’s OurUkraine party appealed to the presidentto call new elections. Viktor Yanukovych,the leader of the Party of the Regions,said his party does not support elections,but does not fear them. (RFE/RLNewsline)Rada session erupts into chaos

KYIV – Members of the YuliaTymoshenko Bloc successfully disruptedthe July 11 session of the VerkhovnaRada, using megaphones equipped withsirens to drown out Parliament ChairmanOleksander Moroz, international newsagencies reported. Scuffles broke outwhen members of the Socialist Party

attempted to seize the megaphones, andwhen members of the Party of theRegions and the Tymoshenko Bloc jos-tled in their efforts to control the rostrum.The Tymoshenko Bloc was protesting therecent formation of the Anti-CrisisCoalition, comprising the Socialist Party,the Party of the Regions and theCommunist Party. During the session,Socialist Party Chairman Moroz official-ly announced the alliance. Two weeksearlier, the Socialist Party joined theOrange coalition with Our Ukraine andthe Tymoshenko Bloc. Mr. Moroz report-edly sent the new coalition’s nominationfor prime minister – Party of RegionsChairman Viktor Yanukovych – toPresident Viktor Yushchenko. Outside theParliament building, more than 1,000supporters of the Party of the Regionsgathered to support the new coalition andMr. Yanukovych’s candidacy for theprime ministership. They held placardssuch as: “Broad Coalition – Guarantor ofState Stability,” “Yulia, Calm Down” and“Viktors, Unite Ukraine.” (RFE/RLNewsline)Coalition’s legitimacy questioned

KYIV – President Viktor Yushchenkohas questioned the legitimacy of thecoalition created by the Party of theRegions, the Socialist Party and theCommunist Party, Interfax reported onJuly 11, quoting presidential administra-tion head Oleh Rybachuk. Mr. Rybachuksaid that the formation of the new Anti-Crisis Coalition violates the Constitutionof Ukraine and the Parliament’s regula-tions. Under the regulations, any partici-pant that wants to leave a coalition isrequired to inform his partners about themove 10 days in advance. Mr. Rybachukalso noted that the president on July 25will have the right to dissolve Parliamentif a government is not formed by thattime. (RFE/RL Newsline)Tymoshenko expects new elections

KYIV – Yulia Tymoshenko announcedon July 11 that her bloc does not intendto participate in future Parliament ses-sions and is preparing for new elections,

(Continued on page 15)

A fatal blow to the Orange coalition?

by Stephen Velychenko

Although the Party of the Regions iscommonly called an “opposition” partythis is a misnomer that carries with iterroneous implications and assumptionsthat will lead to erroneous assessmentsand judgments. The Party is rather a“restorationist” party that will destroyUkrainian democracy and threatenEuropean security if its leaders come topower again and turn Ukraine into anoth-er Belarus.

For all its faults, there is no alternativeto the Orange Coalition whose membersare trying to peacefully destroy Europe’ssecond-to-last imperial era “old regime”elite and, therefore, merit support.

Ukrainians re-emerged on Europe’spolitical map in 1991 after more than 200years of direct foreign political ruleimposed by military might. Between1709 and 1711, then between 1918 and1921, and again between 1944 and 1950Russia invaded Ukraine three times in aseries of bloody wars that tied Ukraine tothe tsarist and then Soviet empires.

Under Russian rule Ukrainians gotRussian-style serfdom, Siberian exile,governmental prohibition of publishingand teaching in the native language, ter-ror and Famine-Genocide. When in 1991Ukraine emerged as an independent statethere was no “liberation war.”Consequently the imperial or “oldregime” elites were not exiled or execut-ed.

They remained in power until 2004and since then have retained positions ofinfluence to such a degree that they cankeep their own out of jail. Their con-stituency, meanwhile, is the product ofSoviet migration policies that directedRussians into and Ukrainians out ofUkraine.

This immigration and “ethnic dilu-tion,” combined with deportations andmillions of unnatural Ukrainian deathsbetween 1917 and 1947, created largeRussian-speaking urban enclaves in thecountry’s four easternmost provinces.

In addition, educational and mediapolicies channeled upwardly mobile non-Russian rural migrants into Russian-speaking culture and allowed urbanRussians to live, work and satisfy theircultural/spiritual needs without having touse or learn Ukrainian.

Second- and third-generation urbanRussian immigrants and assimilatedmigrants spoke in Russian, lived in aRussian public-sphere and wereMoscow- oriented culturally and intellec-tually. After 1991 most of the urban pop-ulation accepted Ukrainian independ-ence, but few changed their Russian lan-guage-use or intellectual/cultural orienta-tion.

Since 1991 an increasing percentageof Russians and Russian-speakers seeUkraine as their native country. However,in 2005, whereas only 6 percent ofUkrainians still saw themselves as“Soviet citizens,” the percentage forRussians was 18 percent, and while 2percent of Ukrainians still did not regardUkraine as their native country, 9 percentof Russians in Ukraine did not.

This means that a percentage of thepopulation in Ukraine today, of whommost are Russian, supports foreign rule

over the territory in which they live –much as did once the French in Algeria,the Germans in Bohemia and Poland, thePortuguese in Angola and the English inIreland.

This anomie and nostalgia for empireof some Russian speakers would beharmless if not for Ukraine’s neo-Sovietpolitical leaders who exploit it to main-tain their bygone imperial-era power in apost-colonial state. Both would be man-ageable if leaders in Russia, the formerimperial power, were able to resignthemselves to the loss of their empire,and like the British, help the new nation-al government rather than its imperial-eracollaborators. Vladimir Putin is noCharles de Gaulle – who realized in theend that French settlers had to leaveAlgeria.

Ukraine’s neo-Soviet leaders areorganized in four major groups withvarying degrees of support covert andovert from Russia and its government –whose ambassador in Kyiv is not knownto ever have made a speech in Ukrainian.Ukraine’s Communists and the NataliaVitrenko Bloc openly advocate the abro-gation of Ukraine’s independence and itsreincorporation into a revamped imperialRussian-dominated USSR.

The Russian Orthodox Church, whichclaims an estimated 50 percent ofUkraine’s Orthodox, is not only led by apatriarch in Moscow, in a foreign coun-try, who sits in the Putin government, butis dominated by its chauvinistic, anti-Semitic fringe. This Church does not rec-ognize Ukrainians as a distinct nationali-ty, it publicly supports Ukraine’sCommunists, and it fielded priests to runin elections.

In June 2003 the Russian patriarchgave the leader of Ukraine’s CommunistParty the Church’s “Order of PrinceVladimir.” No more than 8 percent ofUkraine’s voters back these oldCommunist Party leaders.

The more serious threat to Ukraine isposed by its fourth major neo-Sovietgroup – the Party of the Regions.Although 2004 and 2006 election resultssuggest approximately one-third of allvoters in 2006 supported the Party of theRegions, these returns are dubious.

First, they are a product of document-ed coercion, intimidation and covertoperations – albeit smaller in scope andscale than was the case in 2004.

Second, they are based on “machinepolitics” in Ukraine’s eastern provinceswhere, controlling the local administra-tion and manufacturing, the party canoffer people fearing poverty and insecuri-ty short-term material incentives in returnfor votes.

Third, they are based on a lingeringSoviet-style cradle-to-grave enterprise-paternalism, still stronger in eastern thanwestern Ukraine, that allows managersand owners to politically blackmail theiremployees – much as “company-town”owners did in 19th century WesternEurope and America.

How strong the party would be inUkraine’s east without the dirty tricks,machine politics and neo-feudal enter-prise-paternalist-based intimidation isdifficult to determine. But it would haveless than one-third of the seats in thecountry’s Parliament.

The party ostensibly supportsUkrainian independence inasmuch as itsleaders regard Ukraine as a territory thatthey should control as a “blackmail state”– just as they controlled it up to 2004.Yet, its anti-constitutional advocacy of

COMMENTARY: The situation in Ukraine: What is at stake?

THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, JULY 16, 2006 3No. 29

“... the whole world closely followed the events on the maidan [IndependenceSquare in Kyiv, the epicenter of the Orange Revolution].

“The United States was among the most ardent supporters of this democraticmovement toward Ukraine’s prosperity and well-being. Over the last 18-20months, relations between the U.S.A. and Ukraine have been developing muchmore dynamically and comprehensively than ever before.

“Our interest in Ukraine stems from Ukraine’s own strengths, from the real-ization of its value as a nation and of the significance of its objectives. It wouldalso be fair to say that the success of Ukrainian democracy, its secure bordersand its growing economy will set a good example, a model case for the entireregion.

“The U.S. president and secretary of state agree regarding the great impor-tance that the U.S. attaches to success stories of democratic choice made by peo-ple in different countries. It is well manifested in Ukraine, whose experience ismost valuable for Ukrainians and the international community-at-large.

“We in the United States believe that democratic governments are much moreeffective than non-democratic ones in expediting their national interests andestablishing good relations with their neighbors. ...”

– William Taylor, U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, in an interview with YuliaMostovaya of the online version of Zerkalo Nedeli, July 1-7.

Quotable notes

In response to recent political eventsin Ukraine, the board of directors of theOrange Circle, a non-partisan, not-for-profit, non-governmental organizationheadquartered in New York, on July 10approved the following statement.

1) While the Orange democratic coali-tion has disintegrated, the effects of theOrange Revolution are permanent. Thevalues of the Orange Revolution haveremade Ukraine and created the basis fora more pluralistic society with freemedia, divided power among the branch-es of government, and freed economicactivity from government intimidationand blackmail. The Orange Revolutionstands as a reminder that society will nottolerate the erosion of its hard-wonrights, and anyone who holds power willbe reticent to test the public’s capacity tomobilize in defense of its rights.

2) Contrary to views of critics, theyear and a half since the maidan has notbeen wasted. The private sector hasgrown more diverse, prosperous andinfluential; many business leaders havebecome less politically engaged; realincomes are up significantly; propertyvalues are booming; a middle class isexpanding; cultural and intellectual dis-course has blossomed; media have deep-ened their independent roots; a nation-wide democratic election based on opencontestation and a level playing field washeld; society and government are moretransparent as corrupt schemes and con-flicts of interest have been exposed.

3) There are important forces in theRegions and Socialist parties that under-stand Ukraine’s future is in Europeanintegration and in the acceptance of thesocial, market and democratic values ofthe prosperous West. However, in the cir-cumstances of a likely Regions-Communist-Socialist coalition, there willbe serious dangers that anti-democraticand anti-Western voices, as well as thosewho were involved with the criminal fal-sification of elections, will have signifi-cant influence in the new ruling team andon policy. That anti-democratic influencecan only be overcome by the consolida-tion of supporters of the OrangeRevolution’s democratic values aroundthe president of Ukraine, who retains sig-nificant powers and is responsible for thesecurity of the country and its foreignand defense policy.

4) The Orange Coalition collapsed as

a result of great personal ambitions andthe failure to compromise for the sake ofthe common good. Today, when vigi-lance on behalf of democracy is crucial,those in Ukraine who supported theOrange Revolution need to set aside per-sonal ambitions and consolidate aroundthe president as the guardian of demo-cratic values.

5) The immediate and most crucialchallenge to be faced is the struggle forUkraine’s heart and soul. To strengthenits integrity as an independent nation,Ukraine must preserve its distinct nation-al identity and the primacy of theUkrainian language and culture. Thatchallenge will be faced by the govern-ment and the president, but its outcomewill be determined by civic discourse, bymedia, and largely by ordinary Ukrainiancitizens and the private sector. Whateverthe course of events in the coming days,the friends of democratic Ukraine have ahuge obligation and opportunity now tooffer assistance and support for thosedemocratic values.

6) Today, as never before, thosearound the world who supported theOrange Revolution must join together tosupport Ukraine’s reform voices and towork with them, wherever they emerge.Today, as never before, friends of democ-racy in Ukraine must work together tostrengthen the international standing andinfluence of President Yushchenko, whois chief standard-bearer of democraticvalues, economic vitality and a Westernorientation for Ukraine.

Headquartered in New York, with rep-resentation in Kyiv, the Orange Circle isa non-partisan, not-for-profit, non-gov-ernmental organization that advocatesUkraine’s integration into global andEuropean institutions. The Orange Circlepromotes investment in Ukraine, worksto strengthen democratic values and mar-ket reform in Ukraine, and engagesUkraine’s leaders in dialogue with theircounterparts in North America andEurope.

Our mission is to champion andadvance the values that were at the coreof Ukraine’s Orange Revolution: democ-racy, honest and transparent government,and pro-market reform, and to accom-plish this through the promotion of poli-cy exchanges with Ukraine’s top govern-ment officials, business leaders and poli-

Orange Circle issues statementon recent political events in Ukraine

FOR THE RECORD

(Continued on page 20)

Stephen Velychenko is a resident fel-low at the Center for European, Russianand Eurasian Studies and research fel-low at the Chair of Ukrainian Studies,University of Toronto. This commentarywas originally published in ActionUkraine Report on July 6. (Continued on page 8)

THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, JULY 16, 20064 No. 29

by Peter T. WoloschukBOSTON – “Having a saint in the

family is a tremendous honor and aheavy responsibility,” said ChristinaDawydowycz Gamota of Lexington,Mass., as she and her cousin Dr. TatianaNikolic of Zagreb, Croatia, caught up onfamily history and news and talked abouttheir great uncle Bishop Vasyl VsevolodVelychkovsky, CSsR, of Lutsk, who diedin Winnipeg in 1973 and was beatified byPope John Paul II during his visit toUkraine in June 2001.

The two cousins had met briefly inZagreb in the early 1990s, but this wastheir first opportunity to really get toknow each other. Dr. Nikolic had come toNorth America to attend a medical con-ference in Toronto and then took theopportunity to visit family and friends inBuffalo, N.Y., Boston, New York Cityand Washington.

“Our family today, like manyUkrainian families, is scattered all overthe world,” Dr. Nikolic said, “and wehave branches in Canada, the UnitedStates, Argentina, Belgium, Croatia andUkraine. We trace our roots to three oldGalician priestly families, theDawydowyczes, the Teodorovyches andthe Velychkovskys, who have providedthe Ukrainian Catholic Church withpriests and sisters for more than 400years.”

“Priests from our family have servedall over western Ukraine, in Canada andin the United States as both eparchialclergy and in the Basilian andRedemptorist religious orders,” she con-tinued, “and the nuns in our family inboth the Basilian and Redemptoristorders have also served in westernUkraine, Yugoslavia, Belgium and theUnited States and, in many instances,were ihumenas of their monasteries. Infact, the first group of Basilian sisters tocome to the United States was led by oneof my cousins, Mother JosephataTeodorovych.”

“The family has a history of dedica-tion to the Ukrainian Catholic Churchand there was even a tradition that whenone of the priestly members of the familydied his wife would enter the convent,”Mrs. Gamota added.

Dr. Nikolic went on: “My grandmoth-er was Bishop Velychkovsky’s sister, andtheir father was a priest in Stanyslaviv.

She met my grandfather in Lviv while hewas studying architecture at the universi-ty. He was a Serb from Zagreb and con-verted to Ukrainian Catholicism in orderto marry my grandmother. After he com-pleted his studies, the two settled inZagreb. They continued to speakUkrainian among themselves, and theytaught my father and the rest of the fami-ly as well.”

“My grandparents were very pious andattended liturgy daily, and each one tooktime for meditation and said the rosaryevery morning and evening,” Dr. Nikolicsaid. “They also maintained contact withUkraine and followed the tragic fate ofthe Church and of my great uncle veryclosely. When my great uncle was inVorkuta both my grandmother and myfather petitioned the Soviet leaders andthe Supreme Soviet for his pardon andrelease, and repeatedly indicated theirdesire to have him with them in Zagreb.”

“My father is also a doctor and wasthe head of his department at theUniversity of Zagreb medical school, andhe used his position as much as possibleto work for my great uncle’s release,” Dr.Nikolic recalled.

“I was only 4 when my family gotword that Uncle Vasya had been releasedand was on his way to Zagreb. I remem-ber that my father had to go to the airportto collect our famous relative and Iremember his flowing beard and his kindvoice,” she said.

“His eyes were always tearing up andI remember my grandmother telling methat Uncle Vasya had been tortured andthat he had been injected with chemicalsto weaken him and even to cause a pre-mature death. It was said in the familythat the Soviets released Uncle Vasyaafter they had destroyed his healthbecause they didn’t want a martyr ontheir hands and yet they also didn’t wanthim to live too long in the West so that hecould be a witness against them.”

“Uncle Vasya stayed with us a fewweeks,” Dr. Nikolic continued, “and thenmy father accompanied him by train toRome, where he spent time with Cardinal[Josyf] Slipyj before moving on toWinnipeg, where he was the guest of hisfellow Redemptorist, Metropolitan[Maxim] Hermaniuk. When Uncle Vasyawas beatified by the pope in Lviv my

Reunited cousins rememberBishop Vasyl Velychkovsky

by Evhenia MedvedenkoTOMASHHOROD, Ukraine – Despite

a driving rainstorm that briefly disruptedtheir festivities, the townspeople ofTomashhorod in northern Rivne Oblastcelebrated the opening of a new ambulato-ry hospital in their village made possibleby a grant from the government of Japanand the United Nations DevelopmentProgram (UNDP) – Chornobyl Recoveryand Reconstruction Project.

The ribbon-cutting ceremony tookplace on June 9 with representatives ofthe regional and village government,UNDP, local residents and internationalorganizations in attendance.

Speaking on behalf of the UNDP, Dr.Pavlo Zamostyan expressed the satisfac-tion of his colleagues in seeing this clinicopen after a great deal of hard work andfund-raising. He wished the townspeopleof Tomashhorod the very best of health:“May you and your children avoid alldiseases, and only use this clinic for pre-ventive purposes as much as possible.”

Dr. Zamostyan praised the efforts of thevillage elders and especially the vision anddetermination of Tomashhorod’s dynamicyoung mayor, Ivan Vlasyk, who helped tobring this hospital to completion.

Among the other guests taking part inthe opening ceremony were Dr. ViktorKovaliov, the assistant minister of healthfor the Rivne Oblast; Oksana Zalipska, the

director of Chornobyl recovery programsfor the Rivne Oblast AdministrationOffice of Emergency Preparedness; andAlexander Kuzma, the executive directorof the U.S.-based Children of ChornobylRelief and Development Fund (CCRDF).

Dr. Zamostyan, Ms. Zalipska and Mr.Kuzma were invited to cut the ribbon forthe new hospital.

The international guests were greetedby a large contingent of local school-children attired in Ukrainian nationalcostumes and a folk ensemble thatregaled them with traditional songs fromthe region.

The new clinic will serve the growingpopulation of the Rokytnenskyi-Tomashhorod District of northern RivneOblast that received relatively heavyamounts of radioactive fallout from theChornobyl nuclear disaster. The soil inthis region is relatively poor and marshy,leading to a heavy uptake of radioactiveparticles in the plants and dairy products.Most families also supplement their dietswith berries, mushrooms and meats fromwild animals that also concentrate highamounts of radiation. Despite manyhealth problems, the population of thisdistrict has continued to grow, with anunusually high number of families with10 or more children.

In anticipation of the 20th anniversary

Hospital opens in Tomashhorod to serve communities contaminated by Chornobyl

A woodcut of Bishop Vasyl Velychkovsky by Andrij Maday is flanked by Dr.Tatiana Nikolic (left) and Christina Dawydowycz Gamota, grandnieces of the

Ukrainian Catholic Church leader beatified by Pope John Paul II.

Alexander Kuzma of the Children of Chornobyl Relief and Development Fund,Oksana Zalipska from the Rivne Oblast Administration, and Dr. Pavlo

Zamostyan of the United Nations Development Program.

Schoolchildren from Tomashhorod and from the Rokytne District welcomeguests at the opening ceremonies for their new ambulatory hospital funded by

the government of Japan and the United Nations Development Program.

(Continued on page 14)

(Continued on page 20)

THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, JULY 16, 2006 5No. 29

MAPLEWOOD, N.J. – AndrewKeybida, a leading Ukrainian communityactivist in New Jersey and a formersupreme advisor of the UkrainianNational Association, died here on July 5.He was 89.

Mr. Keybida was a UNA advisor for16 years and secretary of UNA Branch322 for over 35 years.

He retired in 1987 as vice-presidentand co-owner of Eastern CommoditiesCo. of Manasquan, N.J.

He served for five years in the U.S.Army, retiring with the rank of captain.Mr. Keybida was in the Asiatic-Pacifictheater on Guadalcanal for two years. In2001 he was awarded the New JerseyDistinguished Service Medal.

On June 3, 1984, Pope John Paul IIbestowed the papal distinction of Knightof St. Gregory the Great on Mr. Keybidain recognition of his dedicated andunselfish service to his parish and theUkrainian community.

Mr. Keybida was the recipient of theprestigious James Gyuries HumanitarianAward given by the N.J. State CatholicWar Veterans State Department, inrecognition of his performance in the

field of human welfare for 10 years. Hereceived the coveted “For God” awardfrom the Essex County Catholic WarVeterans.

He was a trustee of St. John’sUkrainian Catholic Church for 35 years;chairman of the school, church and gym-nasium building funds; president andmember of the Holy Name Society;member of St. John’s Catholic WarVeterans; and national officer and mem-ber of the Ukrainian American VeteransPost 17.

He was a member of the MaplewoodSenior Citizens’ Housing AdvisoryCommittee; member of the MaplewoodRepublican Party and trustee of theDurand-Hadden House and GardenAssociation of Maplewood. He was amember of the South Mountain Districtboard of directors of the Boy Scouts ofAmerica and served on many other com-mittees and fund-raising efforts inMaplewood. He was the recipient of the1993 Maple Leaf Award sponsored bythe Maplewood Civic Association inrecognition of his volunteer service to thecommunity.

He was a member of the board of

directors of the Trident Federal Savingsand Loan Association; president of theNew Jersey Fraternal Congress; presidentof the Ukrainian American RepublicanCommittee of New Jersey; member ofthe Essex County Republican AdvisoryBoard; member of the 15th DistrictRepublican Committeeman inMaplewood; and served as campaignmanager of Republican candidates on thelocal, state and national levels. He wasthe Ukrainian representative for the N.J.Governor’s Ethnic Advisory Council for10 years and served as chairman of theEducation Subcommittee.

A native of Clifton, N.J. he lived inMaplewood, N.J., for 50 years.

He was the beloved husband of 63years to Evelyn (née Kalakura); father ofAndrea Severini and Dr. Robert Keybidawith his wife, Diane; and grandfather ofChristopher and Melissa Keybida, andLauren and Thomas Severini, with hiswife, Michele.

The funeral liturgy was held onMonday, July 10, at St. John’s UkrainianCatholic Church in Newark, N.J.Interment followed at Gate of HeavenCemetery in East Hanover, N.J.

OBITUARY: Andrew Keybida, 89, community leader, former UNA advisor

THE UNA: 112 YEARS OF SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY

THE UKRAINIAN NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FORUM

Do you know why we’re so happy?Do you know why we’re so happy?Our parents and grandparents invested in our future bypurchasing an endowment and life insurance policy for

each of us from the Ukrainian National Association, Inc.They purchased prepaid policies on account of the low

premium rate for our age group. If you’d like to be smilinglike us, please have your parents or grandparents call the

UNA at 1-800-253-9862. They will be happy to assist you!

In lieu of flowers, memorial donationsmay be sent to: St. John’s UkrainianCatholic Church, 719 Sanford Ave.,Newark, NJ.

Andrew Keybida

Share The Weekly with a colleague. Order a gift subscription by writing to: Subscription Department, The Ukrainian Weekly,

2200 Route 10, P.O. Box 280, Parsippany, NJ 07054. Cost: $55 (or $45 if your colleague is a UNA member).

Adoptive Parents weekend held at Soyuzivka

KERHONKSON, N.Y. – The third annual weekend for American familieswho have adopted children from Ukraine was held here at Soyuzivka on June16-17. More than 70 families participated in the weekend’s events, which aregeared toward helping the adopted children maintain contact with theirUkrainian roots and familiarizing Americans with Ukrainian culture. The firstAdoptive Families Weekend was held at the Ukrainian National Association’sestate back in 2004. The weekends are jointly organized by the Embassy ofUkraine, Ukraine’s Consulate General in New York and the Ukrainian NationalAssociation. In the photo above, children enjoy a game; below, Olya Fryzsings as she plays on the bandura, Ukraine’s national instrument.

Roma Lisovich

THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, JULY 16, 20066 No. 29

It was 45 years ago that The Weekly reported on the unveil-ing of the Taras Shevchenko monument in Winnipeg by thenPrime Minister John G. Diefenbaker. According to the article,over 50,000 people witnessed the historic event on June 10,

either in person on the grounds of the Manitoba Provincial Parliament or via the CBC TVbroadcast that brought the event into the homes of Canadians nationwide.

The monument was erected through joint efforts and with funding from the UkrainianCanadian community in conjunction with the Ukrainian Canadian Committee.

A motorcade led the procession to the famous Portage Avenue, which was decoratedwith 200 blue-and-yellow flags, and ended at the legislature grounds. On either side ofthe grounds were two monuments, on one side to Queen Victoria, empress of the BritishEmpire, and on the other, to the Ukrainian bard. Among the people who took part in theceremony were thousands of children, youths and numerous pioneers who established theUkrainian community in Canada exactly 70 years prior to that historic day.

Opening remarks were given by the Rev. Vasyl Kushnir, who spoke about the mon-ument funded by Ukrainians, about Taras Shevchenko and about the monument’s cre-ator, sculptor Andriy Darahan. Then Father Kushnir handed over a metal containerthat held the names of the contributors to be sealed in the base of the monument.

Premier Duff Roblin of Manitoba said Shevchenko’s ideals belong to all people andread a passage from “Uchytesia Braty Moyi” (Learn my brothers...). He announced thatthe following year Ukrainian was going to be an optional language in Manitoba schools.

At the moment of the unveiling, the prime minister stepped up to the monument andpulled the cord, which revealed the sculpture of the bard sitting with his hands on his lap,one of them over a book. The people in attendance stood at attention as the orchestraplayed “Zapovit” (Testament), and concluded the ceremony with “God Save the Queen.”

From there, the audience was treated to a concert at the university, followed by abanquet at the Hotel Marlborough. Prime Minister Diefenbaker said in his speech atthe banquet that there were tears in his eyes at the unveiling of the Shevchenko monu-ment. He praised the freedom-loving people of Ukraine and the Ukrainian settlers inCanada, at which time he stressed the fact that Canada presents a mosaic of culturesand that Shevchenko and his ideals should be the goal of our lives.

Source: “Canadian PM Unveils Shevchenko Monument” The Ukrainian Weekly,July 15, 1961.

July

151961

Turning the pages back...

A parliamentary crisis occurred, leading to the formation of an Anti-CrisisCoalition, which led to further crisis. That’s pretty much how it went in Kyiv,amidst betrayals, fisticuffs and filings of legal actions. The European Union saidUkraine was “in a sorry state.”

It all began when it became clear that Our Ukraine’s nominee for chairman ofthe Verkhovna Rada, Petro Poroshenko, was not accepted by the Socialists –though they had signed an agreement establishing the democratic Orange coali-tion that spelled out how it would function. That nominee, of course, was meantas a counterbalance to Yulia Tymoshenko, the presumptive nominee for primeminister, whose ascension to the post was accepted only grudgingly by PresidentViktor Yushchenko and Our Ukraine. The Poroshenko-Tymoshenko tandem hadbeen an abject failure in Mr. Yushchenko’s first Cabinet, so it was not understoodwhy it should have worked now. Or was it not supposed to work?

After the surprise election of Oleksander Moroz as Rada chairman, it wasannounced that a new parliamentary majority had been formed comprising the Partyof the Regions, the Communist Party and Mr. Moroz’s Socialist Party. Next, the newcoalition nominated Viktor Yanukovych, leader of the Regions, as prime minister.

Thus, the president now faces a parliamentary coalition that is hostile to hispolicies and may soon have an equally hostile prime minister who was his oppo-nent in the 2004 presidential election that resulted in the Orange Revolution.

In the latest developments from Ukraine, Ms. Tymoshenko appealed on July 12to the people of Ukraine to support her bloc’s struggle for democracy and itsdefense of Ukraine’s national interests. She called on Our Ukraine not to negotiatewith “the Yanukovych clan.” Tymoshenko Bloc supporters rallied to demand thatthe president disband the Rada, and Pora Party members set up a tent camp, pledg-ing to remain there until that demand is met.

Yanukovych supporters also came out onto the streets of Kyiv, demanding thattheir man become prime minister and that other parties unite behind him. Theyerected a tent city near the Rada.

Meanwhile, President Yushchenko tried to stay out of the fray, and was reducedto making pronouncements of dubious value. (The New York Times describedhim as “appearing increasingly isolated and indecisive.”) On July 12, reportedlyat the request of the president, representatives of Our Ukraine and the RegionsParty met for negotiations. On what exactly, we don’t know; that’s a secret.

On July 13 the president sent a letter to the Rada in which he wrote that “thewithdrawal of some deputies from the coalition of democratic forces, which result-ed in its disintegration, is inconsistent with the Constitution and the VerkhovnaRada’s procedural rules.” Therefore, Mr. Yushchenko added, the circumstances inwhich the new coalition was formed and its proposals are illegal. He demandedthat national deputies resume “effective work in Parliament, settle the coalitionissue legally and nominate a prime minister, but try not to make hasty decisions.”

Pardon our skepticism, but what are the chances of that happening?In the meantime, all the turmoil in Ukraine could lead the country back to

where it was in November 2004, thus leading to the biggest betrayal of all: dou-ble-crossing the millions of ordinary Ukrainians who came out to support whatthe Orange Revolution stood for.

Crisis, anti-crisis, crisis

THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLYby Judge Bohdan A. Futey

On March 22 the National Committeeto Strengthen Democracy and the Rule ofLaw in Ukraine adopted a new ConceptPaper for the judiciary in Ukraine. ThisConcept Paper was the result of the man-date given by President ViktorYushchenko in his inaugural address onJanuary 23, 2005, to establish an inde-pendent judiciary and a civil society basedon the rule of law.

Therefore, the aim is clear: to strengthenjudicial independence and the rule of lawin accordance with Ukraine’s Constitution,as well as standards approved by theEuropean community and the rest of thefree world.

In my opinion, this concept is a valianteffort to strengthen some aspects of courtproceedings and guarantee citizensaccess to the courts, but as a whole itseems to me that it fails to address theproblem of reforming the judiciary in-depth, and provides for additional waysto exercise control over the judiciary.

Furthermore, it may be in conflict withthe Constitution of Ukraine as enacted onJune 28, 1996; it violates the principal ofseparation of powers (Article 6) and therule of law commitment (Article 8). Theidea of having government inspectors forthe judiciary is not an encouraging practice(guarantee) for judicial independence.Also, it fails to address many aspects of thepresent law on the judiciary and it under-takes to provide solutions that are not verydemocratic. It barely touches on aspects ofeducation at law schools and the role oflegal/professional organizations (like theAmerican Bar Association in the U.S.).

I will not make any additional com-ments at this time, but I am willing to doso at a roundtable discussion, conferenceor other fora on this subject.

The judiciary in Ukraine, the UnitedStates and Europe should be somewhatalarmed. Judges should be participants inthe discussion of these issues as theyrelate to Ukraine’s Constitution, the Lawon the Judiciary and the Law on theStatus of Judges. Naturally, they shouldreserve their comments strictly to therelationship of the proposed concept onjudicial independence, the Constitutionof Ukraine and the rule of law.

Judicial independence does not meanthe judges do as they choose, but do as theymust in accordance with the Constitutionand laws of the country. Judicial independ-ence in the final analysis will depend large-ly on the conscience and courage of thejudges themselves. Judges will not berespected until they respect themselves.

There are two aspects in which judgesmust be independent. First, they must behonest brokers, in that they are independ-ent from and neutral among the partiesthat appear before them. Judges mustdecide matters before them impartially,on the basis of the facts and the law,without any restrictions, improper influ-ences, inducements or threats, direct orindirect, from any party or institution orfor any reason. A judge’s moral commit-ment to this form of independence elimi-nates favoritism and corruption from thenation’s judicial system. If judges fail inthis duty the public will lose confidence

in the basic equity of its society, generat-ing cynicism, anger and instability.

Second, the judiciary, and hence eachindividual judge, must act as co-equaland independent of the other branches ofgovernment. Judges are independent inthis sense if they are not beholden to anyother branch of government or politicalparty. It is vital that courts have jurisdic-tion and the power to restrain the legisla-ture or executive by declaring laws andofficial acts unconstitutional when theyabridge the rights of citizens. Further, forjudicial independence to have practicaleffect, the courts’ interpretation must beaccepted and enforced by the legislativeand executive branches of government.

As there cannot be a market economywithout private ownership of property,there cannot be a system based on the ruleof law without judicial independence.

In addition, the judiciary needs to haveits own constituency, primarily the legalprofession and strong bar associations.These will be responsible to expose uneth-ical practices of the judges and/or coer-cive tactics upon judges and to enlist thepress on their side. In the United Statesthe major defenders or critics of the judi-ciary are members of the legal professionthemselves (ABA), law school professorsand the news media.

It would be refreshing and welcomenews if professors of law schools inUkraine would start to speak out, alongwith the association of lawyers, jurists, theUkrainian Bar Association and, hopefully,the World Congress of Ukrainian Jurists.

There is no question that the judiciaryin Ukraine needs to be reformed. Keyissues and/or problems with the judiciaryare not addressed. For example, the legalcrisis with the Constitutional Court ofUkraine, which since October of last yearlacks a quorum, is not addressed at all.

What is needed is to strengthen thechecks and balances – not control over thejudiciary by the executive. Providing ade-quate salaries for judges, guarantees ofappropriate funding and assistance for thecourts, prompt publication and availabilityof judicial decisions, transparency in deci-sion-making and enforcement of judicialdecisions are ways to eliminate corruptionamong the judiciary. Nevertheless, greateraccess of citizens to judges should notmean or indicate ex parte communicationsbehind closed doors. This practice shouldbe eliminated completely.

In the United States, the FederalJudicial Conference is authorized byCongress to create and enforce rules ofprocedure and evidence, which theSupreme Court may adopt, modify orreject. The Federal Judicial Conferenceemploys various advisory committees,whose members include judges andlawyers, to propose new rules and modi-fy existing ones. Meetings of the adviso-ry committees are open to the public, andmembers of the bar may attend to givetheir suggestions. They may also mailtheir comments to the committees at anytime.

Judges and attorneys often hold con-ferences to discuss the procedural andevidentiary rules, submit comments tothe advisory committees, and publisharticles in scholarly journals criticizingthe rules and proposing changes. If therules are adopted by the Supreme Court,these rules become binding.

Also, it would be worthwhile for theNational Committee to StrengthenDemocracy and the Rule of Law toreview the recent assessment done by theABA Central and East European

Reforming the judiciary in UkraineCOMMENTARY

Bohdan A. Futey is a judge on the U.S.Court of Federal Claims in Washington,appointed by President Ronald Reagan inMay 1987. Judge Futey has been activein various rule of law and Democratiza-tion Programs in Ukraine since 1991. Heserved as an advisor to the WorkingGroup on Ukraine’s Constitution (adopt-ed on June 28, 1996). (Continued on page 14)

Dear Editor: Thank you for your in-depth reporting

on the subject of international traffickingof women and children. More specifical-ly, for the recent articles by AndrewSorokowski and Fran Ponomarenko inthe June 25, issue of The Weekly. Thisgave us, members of American forHuman Rights in Ukraine, theimpetus tojoin other NGOs and write a series of let-ters to the pertinent individuals involvedin the 2006 FIFA World Cup tournament.

We wrote 86 letters protesting prosti-tution in Germany: a letter to PopeBenedict, six letters to members of theGerman government, 26 letters to allmembers of the FIFA Committee inZurich. 46 letters to members of the U.S.government and Congress, five letters tomembers of the Ukrainian governmentand 10 letters to the major sponsors.

In the letters we protested condoningprostitution and using the repressed womenand children from Eastern Europe for thepleasure and gratification of men duringthe soccer spectacle and appealed to theorganizers to mend their ways in the future.

Bozhena OlshaniwskyNewark, N.J.

The letter-writer is president ofAmericans for Human Rights in Ukraine.

THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, JULY 16, 2006 7No. 29

Dear Editor: The coup d’état was carried out with

surgical precision. When the votes werecounted, the candidate from the Party ofthe Regions, Mykola Azarov, received 0votes (even he did not vote for himself),while the candidate from the SocialistParty, Oleksander Moroz, received 100percent of the vote from the Communists,Socialists and Donbas oligarchs.

It was just enough to ensure that oli-garchs, Socialists and Communists willrule in Ukraine in the foreseeable future.President Viktor Yushchenko and hishapless Our Ukraine were left holding anempty bag.

Mr. Moroz proved to be a brilliantstrategist. Together with ViktorYanukovych he was able to accomplishin a matter of hours what Mr.Yushchenko and his entourage of “mylidruzi” (sycophants) could not accom-plish during three and a half months ofpolitical maneuvering, to say nothingabout a couple of years of his wastedpresidency.

Socialist Moroz and “capitalist”Yanukovych, with an assist fromCommunist Petro Symonenko were ableto grab the power that eluded theYushchenko crowd. That is how success-ful coups d’état are always done. In amatter of hours everything is over.

Of course, Mr. Moroz will take a hitfor his traitorous action of switchingsides in the heat of the battle. But,frankly, one cannot blame Mr. Morozthat much. It was and remains publicknowledge that the party of PresidentYushchenko had been negotiating withMr. Yanukovych’s Party of the Regionsfor months. Expecting a double-crossfrom Our Ukraine, which would havesidelined him and his party, Mr. Morozsimply pre-empted their move, placinghimself and his party at center stage.

It was a brilliant demonstration of sur-vival of the fittest. It was also a demon-stration of the Heisenberg Principle ofUncertainty (anything and everythingcan and does happen) in the practice ofUkrainian politics.

After self-inflicted disaster, PresidentYushchenko is now campaigning for abroad or “grand” coalition with the Partyof the Regions. The president does notwant to be in opposition to his own gov-ernment. That is how ridiculous it got.

But he has a problem here. He cannotdismiss the prospective government ofMr. Yanukovych, the way he dismissedthe government of Yulia Tymoshenko.Only Parliament can do so. Mr. Morozmade sure of that when the Constitutionof Ukraine was amended in 2004, duringthe days of the Orange Revolution. Andnow Mr. Moroz controls the Parliamentthat controls the composition of the nextgovernment.

In spite of the disaster that befellthem, the oligarchs of Our Ukraine canclaim at least one small consolationprize: they have prevented the much-hated and feared Ms. Tymoshenko frombecoming prime minister, which was,after all the object of three and a halfmonths of delays in forming a democrat-ic coalition, and manipulations andintrigue on their part. Ms. Tymoshenkowas getting ready to clean the stables,and that was not to be, if they could pre-vent it. It took them much underhandedmaneuvering and the writing ofgrandiose but false Orange Coalitionplatform declarations demanded by thepresident (all meaningless now), but they

A coup d’étatin Ukraine

finally did it. Ms. Tymoshenko will notbe prime minister.

In the process of neutralizing Ms.Tymoshenko, Our Ukraine has lost a lot,including direct access to the govern-ment money trough. This golden troughof other people’s money will be nowcontrolled by a competing clan of oli-garchs from the Donbas.

Of course, Our Ukraine hopes that Mr.Yanukovych will permit them at leastpartial access to the golden well of cor-ruption. Oligarchs are oligarchs, all arecharter members of the former Sovietnomenklatura, birds of a feather. Howgenerous the victorious Viktor will bewith Our Ukraine remains to be seen.After all, the Socialists and theCommunists stand ahead of them in linefor handouts. And the price of admissionto the trough has not yet been deter-mined.

In the end nothing much has reallychanged in Ukraine, in spite of thedoomsday predictions in the internation-al press.

A few years back, former President ofUkraine Leonid Kravchuk during his visitto Minneapolis told us that the bulk of600,000 or so bureaucrats(“chynovnyky”) that rule the country areformer members of the Communist Party.And that includes almost everybody inpower, from the lowest “lanonyi” (over-seer of a few hectares of agricultural land)to the president of the country and every-one in between. Patriotic and nationallyconscious leaders, on the other hand, aremostly poets and literary intellectualspoorly suited to run the affairs of state,said the former head of state (TheUkrainian Weekly, September 14, 1997).The recent history of Ukraine has provedhow right he was.

A ruling cabal of the former Communistnomenklatura, be it in the guise of oli-garchs, Socialists or Communists, issteeled to the core in the Soviet mentalityand corrupt way of doing business of gov-ernment. Messrs. Moroz and Yanukovych

Thanks for articleson trafficking issue

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

(Continued on page 14)

The Ukrainian community in theUnited States heaved a collective groanwhen Italy defeated Ukraine 3-0 in thequarterfinal match of the 2006 WorldCup on June 30 in Dortmund, Germany.Ukrainians in New York, Cleveland,Chicago and Washington who had gath-ered in Ukrainian sports clubs, localwatering holes and in private homes tocheer Team Ukraine were left disappoint-ed – although not completely. Soccer, itseems, had unified Ukrainians around theworld better than any of Ukraine’s politi-cians.

Thousands of Ukrainians from theUnited States, Canada, England,Scotland, Belgium, France and Australia,as well as from Ukraine itself, traveled toGermany for the World Cup. TarasJaworsky of Chicago, who began follow-ing Team Ukraine back in 1999 at a qual-ifying match in France, organized agroup of 45, mostly from the UnitedStates, to travel to Germany, through soc-certravel.com.

They came from Chicago, LosAngeles, Miami, Toronto, Philadelphia,Passaic, N.J., and Yonkers, N.Y.; threecame from Australia. There were familieswith young children and a father-and-sonteam. They set up camp at a hotel inBerlin, and took trains to Leipzig for theUkraine-Spain match on June 14 and toHamburg for Ukraine v. Saudi Arabia onJune 19.

It was on the midnight train fromHamburg back to Berlin that a few ofthem bumped into former UkrainianPresidents Leonid Kravchuk and LeonidKuchma. Andriy Futey of Cleveland tellsthe story: “After the Saudi game, I’mwalking through the train cars, and thereis Kravchuk, wearing shorts and aUkraine team jersey, playing cards withBohdan Mysko [an American business-man]. I’m introduced to the president,and he says to me, ‘You look like yourfather.’ A few seats down is Kuchma,also playing cards.” Andriy’s father isJudge Bohdan Futey of Washington, whohas advised Ukraine on legal and consti-tutional issues.

Andriy Futey and Taras Jaworsky alsohad a chance to chat with striker AndriyShevchenko, when they took a side tripto Potsdam to see how Team Ukrainelived. Potsdam’s central square wastransformed into a Ukrainian “selo,” orvillage, where Ukrainian food was served

and Ukrainian artists, includingEurovision winner Ruslana, performed.“We told Sheva that we supported him,”said Mr. Futey.

“It’s the first time Ukraine hasappeared at a World Cup as a free coun-try. We came to Germany to show therest of the world that there are fans fromall over the world backing Ukraine,” hesaid. Those fans included the currentpresident of Ukraine, Viktor Yushchenko,and boxing champions Vitalii andVladimir Klitschko.

Letting Team Ukraine know that it hassupporters is equally important to theUkrainian Americans who have traveledto France, Norway, Spain, England andWales for various matches. “We want tolet the players know that Ukrainiansfrom the United States, from England,from Scotland and Belgium are behindthem,” said Mr. Jaworsky.

Lida Mykytyn of New York, who trav-eled to Hamburg for the Saudi Arabiamatch and to Berlin for Ukraine v.Tunisia, said the experience was veryunifying. “Everyone would meet at theUkraine booth of Fanfest [an area set upfor fans]. Everyone is wearing blue-and-yellow, everybody is friendly. You have aconnection because they are wearing aUkraine shirt and you are wearing aUkraine shirt, and you start talking ...”

She shared her reaction to seeing alarge banner, written in English, carriedby Team Ukraine fans fromDnipropetrovsk: “One Nation. OneCountry. One Team.” “You look at thatbanner and think, ‘sport is doing this.’You’re Ukrainian and it’s something big-ger than you are,” she said.

But, lest we get lulled into a falsesense of peace, love and Ukrainiantogetherness, there were media reports offights breaking out between Ukrainiansfrom abroad and Ukrainians from theDonbas, in eastern Ukraine. Messrs.Futey and Jaworsky described an inci-dent that happened to them.

“There were groups of guys fromUkraine, between the ages of 18 and 28,who would walk away from us whenthey’d see us coming, or who would askus why we didn’t speak Russian. [Duringthe Ukraine-Spain match] when Spainhad three goals, a bunch of these guysstarting stomping on the Ukrainian flag.

Double ExposurDouble Exposureeby Khristina Lew

I’m with the team

A banner from Dnipropetrovsk reads: “One nation. One country. One team.”

(Continued on page 14)

Taras Jaworsky

THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, JULY 16, 20068 No. 29

Russian as a “second language” shows itwants to keep Ukraine within theRussian-language communicationssphere and out of the English-languagecommunications sphere.

While the Canadian and Polishambassadors can learn Ukrainian beforetheir appointments well enough to use itpublicly, some Party of the Regions lead-ers have the unmitigated gall to speak inRussian in the Ukrainian Parliament.Some, like Mykola Azarov, have not yetmanaged to learn Ukrainian after 15years of independence.

But then how many French in Algerialearned Arabic? How many English inIreland learned Gaelic? How manywhites in Africa knew Swahili or Bantu?How many Japanese learned Chinese orKorean? How many Germans in Breslaulearned Polish?

Party of the Regions leaders, additional-ly, engage in symbolic colonial-homage-type acts that pander to imperial Russiannostalgia and compromise Ukraine’s statusas an independent country.

In November 2005 in Krasnoiarsk, forexample, Viktor Yanukovych publiclygave the speaker of the Russian Duma abulava – the symbol of Ukrainian state-hood. While the party formally supports“Euro-integration” – just like PresidentPutin supports the Euro-integration ofRussia – it has not explicitly stated that itis for European Union membership forUkraine.

Given this omission, there is everyreason to believe that if the Regionsreturn to power they will first incorpo-rate Ukraine into the Single EconomicSpace and only then, via Russia, “inte-grate into Europe” just like Belarus.

Regions Party leaders learned theirpolitics under Volodymyr Scherbytsky,ran Leonid Kuchma’s “blackmail state”and employed criminal Bolshevik-styleelectioneering practices. They publiclybelittle Ukrainian independence, are inconstant contact with Russian extremistslike Vladimir Zhirinovsky, KonstantinZatulin and Yuri Luzhkov, and they wantthe Communist Party included in coali-tion talks.

All of which shows that, for all theirchatter about laws, representation andcommittees, Ukraine’s neo-Soviet Party ofthe Regions is no mere opposition party. Itis more a restorationist party whose pur-pose is to destabilize the country.

If the Party of the Regions’ tacticssucceed, they will compromise Ukraine’spost-2004 ruling coalition; they willstrengthen those opposed to Ukraine’sentry into EU and who think that itshould remain in Russia’s sphere ofinfluence.

Foreign observers must ask themselveshow a renewed Party-of-the-Regions led,Kuchma-like “blackmail state” is sup-posed to fit into the EU? How is Russia, aresource-based autocracy, supposed to be“stable” when resource-based autocracieseverywhere else in the world are notori-ously unstable?

Ukrainians, for their part, can be surethat Party of the Regions leaders will nottrouble Bill Gates about a Ukrainian ver-sion of Windows, or Hollywood studiosabout Ukrainian dubbing and subtitles,or fashion magazine chains like Burdaabout Ukrainian translations.

(Continued from page 3)The situation...

political manipulations to appoint topparliamentary and governmental offi-cials, are doomed,” said Mr. Vasiunyk.“The president has always supported anational political dialogue, which hebelieves is the only way to overcome thecurrent stage of parliamentary uncertain-ties. At the same time, efforts to involvethe president in any confrontational sce-nario are in vain.”

Mr. Vasiunyk also said the presidentwas going to send a letter to the VerkhovnaRada to demand that parliamentarians for-get words and mere declarations and beginworking to consolidate society.

In related news, at the request ofPresident Yushchenko, the Party of theRegions and Our Ukraine spent the after-

noon on July 12 conducting negotiations,reported The Ukraine List, which is pub-lished by the Chair of Ukrainian Studiesat the University of Ottawa.

News sources said the Regions sidewas represented by Raisa Bohatyriova,Mykola Azarov, Olena Lukash, AndriiKluiev and/or Volodymyr Rybak. TheOur Ukraine delegation comprisedRoman Zvarych, Mykola Martynenko,Borys Tarasyuk and Anatolii Kinakh.

Afterwards, Mr. Yanukovych appearedoptimistic on the prospects of OurUkraine joining forces in a coalition withthe Party of the Regions. However,President Yushchenko was more pes-simistic in his remarks to journalists.

Various news sources reported that thenegotiations between the Regions and OurUkraine had taken place but noted that thetalks were being conducted in secret.

(Continued from page 1)President tries...

1998. Suddenly, it was apparent that the

Party of the Regions was willing to giveMr. Moroz what the Our Ukraine blochad refused.

President Viktor Yushchenko was themost responsible for this turn of events,which resulted in the collapse of thedemocratic Orange coalition, said Mr.Vinskyi.

At 11:14 p.m. July 6, it wasannounced in the Parliament that a defacto coalition involving the SocialistParty, the Party of the Regions and theCommunist Party of Ukraine had given238 votes to Mr. Moroz – enough toreturn him to the Verkhovna Rada chair-manship after an eight-year absence.

(Continued from page 1)Oleksander Moroz’s...

Need a back issue?If you’d like to obtain a back issue of The

Ukrainian Weekly, send $2 per copy (first-class postage included) to:

The Ukrainian WeeklyAdministration2200 Route 10, P.O. Box 280

Parsippany, NJ 07054.

To The Weekly Contributors:We greatly appreciate the materials – feature articles,

news stories, press clippings, letters to the editor, etc. – wereceive from our readers. In order to facilitate preparation ofThe Ukrainian Weekly, we ask that the guidelines listedbelow be followed.

• News stories should be sent in not later than 10 daysafter the occurrence of a given event.

• Photographs (originals only, no photocopies or comput-er printouts) submitted for publication must be accompaniedby captions. Photos will be returned only when so requestedand accompanied by a stamped, addressed envelope.

• Full names (i.e., no initials) and their correct Englishspellings must be provided.

• Persons who submit any materials must provide a day-time phone number where they may be reached if any addi-tional information is required.

Mailing address: The Ukrainian Weekly, 2200 Route 10,P.O. Box 280, Parsippany, NJ 07054.

PLEASE NOTE: Materials may be sent to The Weeklyalso via e-mail to the address staff@ukrweekly.com. Pleasedo include your mailing address and phone number so thatwe may contact you if needed to clarify any information.

Please call or send query via e-mail before electronicallysending anything other than Word documents. This appliesespecially to photos, as they must be scanned according toour specifications in order to be properly reproduced.

Any questions? Call 973-292-9800 or e-mail staff@ukr-weekly.com

yet been discovered by our contempo-raries. A lot of themes are still waiting fortheir researchers, among them the role ofViktor Medvedchuk in Stus’s life anddeath. The palimpsest character of hisimprisonment works has not been studiedyet; his imprisonment notes deliveredfrom the hermetic closed hard-regimelabor camp have not been examined. Thearchives in the Museum of theMovement of the ‘60s and other collec-tions have not been investigated.

“For our generation, who were luckyto be contemporaries of Stus, he isremarkable as a fighter for human digni-ty, a talented and conscientious man ofletters. We also remember him as a kindand impressionable man with quite mun-dane weakenesses and virtues.

“He has always been a brother, faithfulcompanion, native spirit for my family,especially for Ivan Svitlychny. My moth-er recalled ill and weak Ivan to havemystically felt Stus’s death before wewere informed about it. Vasyl dreamt inhis letter from prison, ‘I pray God that Icould meet Ivan, bow our gray heads inquiet friendly chat, hear clear Sverstiuk’svoice, and then I really can die.’

“Now Ivan and Vasyl have met togeth-er ‘outside the golden windows of starsin heavenly Kyiv, where even the eternityis a bit cramped for Stus,’ according toIryna Zhylenko.”

During the conference the first docu-mentary exhibition about Stus’s life andwork was opened and will be on displayuntil the end of August of this year. Theexhibit includes rare photos of the poetand his close circle. Many other uniquematerials are part of the exhibit, includ-ing one display that allowed visitors tohear the voice of the poet reciting hispoems.

Concluding the conference wasStanislav Chernilevsky, 2006 laureate ofthe Vasyl Stus Prize with a presentationof the film “The Black Candle.”

The next conference at the SmoloskypBuilding will be dedicated to the 30thanniversary of the formation of theUkrainian Helsinki Group in the fall ofthis year. It is expected that attendance atthis conference will equal or surpass thisrecent event dedicated to Vasyl Stus, oneof the members of the Ukrainian HelsinkiGroup, and will properly honor the trueheroes of Ukraine.

THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, JULY 16, 2006 9No. 29

by Oles ObertasKYIV – The Ukrainian Samvydav

Museum-Archives, Smoloskyp Publish-ers and Vasyl Stus Humanities Center,earier this year held a conference at theSmoloskyp Building in Kyiv on thetopic: “Vasyl Stus: Twenty Years AfterHis Death: Contemporary Reception andReinterpretation.” The event focused onthe social, political, legal, linguistic, liter-ary and other aspects of the dissidentwriter’s works from the perspective ofcurrent events in Ukraine.

Being that many aspects of VasylStus’s works are connected to the hard-ships he suffered during his life, the con-ference participants agreed that it isimpossible to interpret his literary workswithout knowledge about the author’slife.

The February 3 conference, which wasfeatured in a special issue of the journalMoloda Natsiya (The New Nation) inMarch, was a rare event, being that onlythree such conferences have been heldsince 1998. The aim of the conference,moderated by Rostyslav Semkiv, OksanaDvorko and Oles Obertas, was to begin ascholarly discussion and form a circle ofresearchers of different generationsincluding young scholars (mostly stu-dents and post-graduates), as well asrespected literary critics of Ukraine, suchas Mykhailyna Kotsiubynska, YevhenSverstiuk, Vasyl Ovsienko, Dmytro Stus,V. Morenets, R. Veretelnyk, TamaraHundorova, Vakhtanh Kipiani and E.Solovey, that would study the works ofStus.

Students and writers from all overUkraine convened at the conferenceincluding: Maryna Harbar, HryhoriiSavchuk, Olha Cheremska, Olena Kozyr,Antonina Tymchenko and Viktor Kysil ofthe Kharkiv region; Hanna Vivat andDmytro Shupta of the Odesa region; IhorIsaiev, Nataliya Kandybka and KaterynaChernykh of the Zaporizhia region;Volodymyr Kuzentsov, NataliyaPokolenko, Valerii Babenko, LesiaOlifirenko and Serhii Nesvit of theDonetsk region; Yevheniya Naychuk andIryna Nosenko of the Poltava region;Olha Dmytruk and Yulia Ostapchuk ofthe Rivne region; Roman Krylovets,post-graduate of the Ostroh Academy;Iryna Stamplevska of the Khersonregion; Uliana Mishchuk and YuriiKhorunzhy of Kyiv; Larysa Podkorytovaof Khmelnytskyi; Nataliya Purii of

Drohobych; Olha Fedorchenko, post-graduate of Kerch, Crimea; and HalynaShmilo of Lviv.

Often called the “Taras Shevchenko ofthe 20th Century,” Stus has been studiedby various generations. The participantsof the conference were divided into threegroups including: people who had knownStus from 1960 to 1980, scholars whohad already begun to study Stus’s worksduring his lifetime, and youngresearchers who are investigating theworks of the prominent Ukrainian poetfrom fresh perspectives.

Members of the first group sharedtheir recollections of Stus at a roundtablediscussion, while the second group dis-cussed working under the Soviet regimeand its influence on their investigations.The third group collaborated on differentapproaches to Stus’s works and discussedhow this kind of teamwork can con-tribute to inter-generational dialogue.

Lively discussions among the repre-sentatives of different generationsfocused on the topic of Stus’s “mental ill-ness,” the problem of perception andinterpretation of Stus’s works by studentsand others. Mr. Kipiani, a journalist,employed the Smoloskyp archives toresearch an interesting detail of Stus’sbiography: his nomination for the NobelPrize in literature in 1985.

Mr. Kipiani covered the biographicalaspect of Stus studies with the help ofmore than 1,200 documents from theUkrainian Samvydav Museum-Archivesthat were presented electronically duringthe conference. Among these materialswere articles about Stus’s life and work,translations of his works, the texts ofRadio Liberty broadcasts, documents ofthe Ukrainian Supreme LiberationCouncil and Smoloskyp informationservices, and other important papersabout Stus’s works in different languagesfrom Ukraine and abroad.

In addition to those present at the con-ference,“virtual” participants OsypZinkevych and Nadiya Svitlychna con-tributed to the gathering. Ms. Svitlychnasent a letter of greeting to the conferees.

She wrote: “... Having learned that theVasyl Stus conference gathered so manypeople who are interested in his life,works and immortality 20 years after hismartyr death, I greet you sincerely fromAmerica, where he had sent his‘Palimpsesty.’

“These 20 years have changed us andespecially our country; a new generation,for whom Vasyl Stus is a kind of abstrac-tion separated from this generation by hisenormous talent, has grown. In spite ofconsiderable publications, Stus has not

NEWS AND VIEWS: Kyiv conference focuses on life and work of Vasyl Stus

Participants of the Kyiv conference marking the 20th anniversary of the death of Vasyl Stus.

Vasyl Stus was born on January 6,1938, in the village of Rakhnivtsi,Vinnytsia Oblast. In 1940 the familymoved to the Donbas, where Stus spenthis childhood. He studied philology atthe Donetsk Pedagogical Institute, andhis first poems were published in 1959.After graduation he worked as ateacher in the Kirovohrad Oblast,served in the army and taughtUkrainian language and literature inHorlivka, Donetsk Oblast.

In 1963 Stus began graduate studiesat the Institute of Literature in Kyiv.His poems and critical articles startedto appear in journals, and he took anactive part in the rich literary life of thetime.

In 1965 he was dismissed from theinstitute for taking part in a protestmeeting that denounced the secretarrests and closed trials of members ofthe Ukrainian intelligentsia that hadbegun that year. He was forced to workat various menial and unsatisfyingjobs, but he continued to write poetry,literary criticism and appeals protestingthe restoration of the personality cult,Russification and the denial of freedomof thought.

Mykhailyna Kotsiubynska, in herintroduction to the collected works ofVasyl Stus, writes: “There was a con-stantly present conviction that he waswasting his life. This, coupled with anearly developed consciousness of hisvocation and an objective self-evalua-tion of his potential, produced a stateof mind he later called ‘death-exis-tence’ or ‘life-death’ ... The little com-promises with life, the times one had toremain silent – all this gnawed at hissoul and pained him. It is rare to meet aperson so unamenable to compromise.”

In 1972 Stus was arrested with otherdissident writers – Ivan Svitlychny,Yevhen Sverstiuk, Ihor and IrynaKalynets – and sentenced to five yearsin a labor camp and three years’ exile.He spent his imprisonment inMordovia and exile in Kolyma. Hereturned to Kyiv in 1979 and soon

joined the Ukrainian Helsinki Group.Eight months later, he was again arrest-ed and sentenced to 15 years (10 years’imprisonment and five years’ exile).

The circumstances of his secondincarceration in the strict-regime campin the Perm Oblast were unbearable.He was allowed no visits, was continu-ally harassed by the authorities and hishealth was deteriorating – he sufferedfrom chronic stomach ulcers and heartproblems. Worst of all for him, he hadno opportunity to smuggle out a singleline of his writings. His letters wereconfiscated and everything he wrote inthe camp was taken away.

In a state of total nervous exhaustionand during a protest hunger strike, Stusdied in solitary confinement onSeptember 4, 1985. He was buried atthe camp cemetery in a grave markedonly “No. 9.”

On November 19, 1989, his remainswere interred at Baikove Cemetery inKyiv along with those of his fellowinmates Yurii Lytvyn and OleksaTykhy, who had died in 1984.

– Oksana Zakydalsky (originallypublished in The Ukrainian Weekly onSeptember 3, 1995).

Vasyl Stus, 1938-1985

Vasyl Stus

Oles Obertas is on the editorial staffof the monthly bulletin SmoloskypUkrayiny.

To subscribe: Send $55 ($45 if you are a member of the UNA) to:The Ukrainian Weekly, Subscription Department

2200 Route 10, P.O. Box 280Parsippany, NJ 07054

THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, JULY 16, 200610 No. 29

by Fran PonomarenkoSpecial to The Ukrainian Weekly

Roman Serbyn was born in 1939 in Vyktoriv, WesternUkraine. In 1948 he and his family settled in Montreal.In 1960 he obtained a B.A. in political science fromMcGill University. He went to France, where he firststudied French and then history at the Sorbonne. In1967 he obtained a licence en lettres in history from theUniversité de Montréal. In 1975 he completed his Ph.D.in history at McGill University. He began teaching atthe Université de Québec – Montréal (UQAM) in 1969;he retired from this institution in 2002. Prof. Serbyn isthe author of many scholarly publications.

I had the opportunity to speak with Prof. Serbyn onJune 2. The interview is published in two parts.

PART IIWhen did you start work on the way in which

World War II was and is being presented inUkraine? In commemorative events this war isalways called the “Great Fatherland War” inUkraine and in Russia.

I began my regular travels to Ukraine as of 1990 andin 1994 I noted in that year Ukraine was celebrating the50th anniversary of the “liberation” of Ukraine. Also the9th of May is a statutory holiday commemorating theend of the war and is always portrayed as a great victoryof the Soviet and Ukrainian people. And, of course, thewar was referred to as the “Great Patriotic War.”

I found it outrageous that Ukraine should be celebrat-ing the exchange of a Nazi tyrant (Hitler) for aCommunist tyrant (Stalin), especially as the seconddestroyed more innocent Ukrainians than the first. Ibecame interested in how the whole mythology gotstarted and what it meant for the Soviet Union and whyit was taken over by independent Ukraine.

I asked historians in Ukraine when this expression the“Great Fatherland War” first appeared. No one knew orcared. So I started doing some research. The term was,in fact, invented on the first actual day of the war, that ison June 22, 1941. The next day it appeared in Pravda inan article by Emilian Yaroslavsky titled “The GreatFatherland War of the Soviet People.” In this article youcan see the coalescing of various aspects that were usedfor propaganda purposes and for forging the myth thatthis was a “war for the fatherland.”

The three components of the myth are: a) the patriot-ism and élan of the Soviet people, b) the liberation ofUkraine, and c) of victory of the Soviet people. Myresearch and reflection on the German-Soviet war haveled me to conclude that for the vast majority ofUkrainians it had little to do with patriotism, it did notliberate Ukraine and the Soviet soldiers can hardly beconsidered as the real victors.

In Europe the commemoration of the end of thewar takes place on May 8. In Russia and Ukraine thedate is May 9. Why is there this discrepancy?

I examined this question also. On the 8th of May1945 Stalin decreed that there would be a holiday on the9th of May, and so Victory Day was celebrated in 1945,1946 and 1947. But by 1947 (on December 27 to be pre-cise) a decree was issued that the 9th of May 1948 wasgoing to be a regular workday.

At the same time in 1947 all the invalids on thestreets in the big cities started to disappear. They endedup on Valam Island, north of St. Petersburg and in otherplaces of deportation. They were removed in order notto remind the people of the war. Why? In order to startchanging the collective memory, to issue a new memory.The Revolution was the foundation myth and the waythe war was remembered would become the consolidat-ing myth.

In this regard there were two very revealing toastsproposed by Stalin at victory banquets. In the first one,at the end of May 1945, Stalin singled out the Russiannation as the guiding nation of the USSR. Nationswould now bow to the Russian nation. In the secondtoast, Stalin raised his glass to the “cogs” of the greatstate mechanism without whom the people in commandcould accomplish nothing. How true, but cogs are notliberators or victors, they are just cogs, and that’s theway Stalin liked it. After Stalin’s death the “party”replaced him as the main authority focus.

In 1965 Brezhnev brought back the May 9 holidayand monuments started going up. In Kyiv we have thedeservedly maligned metal monstrosity of a womanwarrior, spoiling the graceful silhouette of Kyiv’s rightbank. May 9 replaced Revolution Day as the SovietUnion’s main holiday. Independent Ukraine took the

holiday and the myth that went with it.The struggle for the historical memory of the

Ukrainian nation is clearly still urgent. The UPAdoes not have recognition. Divizia Halychyna is noteven on the horizon, whereas the myth of the GreatFatherland War is alive. Who is promoting this atthis moment?

The Communist Party, the Red Army Veterans, theOrthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, ethnicRussians and non-Russian Russian speakers who mayfeel threatened are continuously bolstering this. Themyth of the Great Fatherland War is preventing reconcil-iation between Ukrainians who fought in the three dif-ferent military formations (even though there weretransfers between them): the Red Army, the UkrainianInsurgent Army (UPA) and those who fought in the Axisarmies, especially the Division Halychyna.

It is a disgrace to Ukraine and especially a shame onthe Ukrainian political elite that 60 years after the warUkrainians are still divided on this issue and a shamethat must be shared by the president, the governmentand t