aaus-list @ ukrainianstudies.org -- [aaus-list] my response to GS

[Natalia Pylypiuk <natalia.pylypiuk@ualberta.ca>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Natalia Pylypiuk <natalia.pylypiuk@ualberta.ca>
> Date: December 23, 2004 9:39:48 AM MST
> To: Vika Larchenko <larchenko@univer.kharkov.ua>
> Cc: gs_discussions@kcgs.org.ua
> Subject: [GS_DISC:] information blockade preceding elections in Ukraine and subsequent massive fraud
>
>
> On Dec 23, 2004, at 4:52 AM, Vika Larchenko wrote:
>
> > Если сравнивать американские и украинские президентские выборы, то, как в
> > первом, так и во втором случаях разница голосов между двумя кандидатами была
> > небольшой. Однако, если Кэрри, после объявления результатов выборов заявил о
> > намерении пересчета голосов, а на следующее утро признал свое поражение
> > после провозглашения президентом США Буша, то лидер оппозиционной партии
> > <Наша Украина> не смог смириться с итогами голосования, провозгласив себя
> > президентом Украины, держа руку на Библии.  Интересно, что многие американцы
> > хвалили украинцев за непокорность существующей власти и сожалели, что
> > подобное не произошло в США. В этом отношении прав В. Янукович, который
> > 21.12. заявил, что в Украине необходимо ввести закон, в соответствии с
> > которым кандидат, набравший меньшее количество голосов, официально объявляет
> > о своем поражении, что автоматически исключает подобные демонстрации в
> > поддержку избираемого кандидата.
>
> Dear Ms Larchenko and Colleagues,
>
> The American practice of having the loser of an election concede to the winner are built on the premises
> of a fair election process, namely that (1) both candidates have equal access to the media and to voters
> throughout all states, and (2) that there are no fraudulent processes before the election and during the vote
> count.
>
> Unfortunately, this was not the case in Ukraine, where government officials and oligarchs severely
> restricted Mr. Yushchenko's access to the media and to the citizens of the east and south. Moreover
> fraud and falsification were rampant.  Mr. Yanukovych, the PM, acknowledged as much during the debate
> with the opposition's candidate, Mr. Yushchenko, when he gave a half-hearted apology
> for the transgressions that had transpired during the second round. For a transcript of the debates,
> please visit
> http://www2.pravda.com.ua/archive/2004/december/20/debaty.shtml
>
> On the control of information and the falsifications, please read the following letter by John Radzillowski, which
> is part of an exchange with Rachel Ehrelenfeld.  The complete exchange appears at:
> http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=16387
>
> I assume that colleagues in GS have already listened to the tapes revealing the fraudulent behavior of the
> Central'na Vyborcha Komisija (the CEC). As Mr. Yushchenko stated in his opening remarks at the debate,
> Mr. Yanukovych and the powers that be stole three million votes.  For this reason, I respectfully submit that
> even if there were a law in place requiring the loser to concede, it would not apply in the recent Ukrainian case.
> The candidates and the voters deserve to know who is the real winner before any concessions are made.
>
> The hundreds of thousands of people demonstrating at the various maidans of Ukraine--including Kharkiv where
> approximately 50,000 came out to protest--were exercising their inalienable right to assemble peacefully and to
> have their voices heard.  They were not a mob, they were disciplined citizens. The court's decision demonstrated
> the independence of the judiciary.  These are truly epochal events in the history of democracy's progress.
>
> Sincerely,
> Natalia Pylypiuk
> University of Alberta
>
>
> Potemkin's Electoral Observers
>
> By John Radzilowski
>
> Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld's observation that the Ukrainian opposition movement may have engaged in fraud in last month's election may well prove to be correct. However, to equate the massive theft of the election by the government with some relatively petty acts by Yushchenko supporters is highly misleading.
>  
> Of all independent observers of the Ukrainian elections, hers was apparently the only one to discover no fraud committed by the government. Instead it apparently found all the fraud committed by the opposition. This is quite literally unbelievable. The Ukrainian Supreme Court -- hardly a tool of the opposition -- documented case after case of fraud committed by the government. Though all such charges and the evidence behind them deserve to be fairly investigated, the overwhelming preponderance of evidence brought forward so far points in one direction.
>  
> Dr. Ehrenfeld presents a type of conspiracy theory in which some powerful but unnamed forces perpetrated this fraud against the weak and helpless Ukrainian government. Moreover, the OSCE, a bi-partisan group of U.S. Senators, and other international observers were all in on the plot. This simply flies in the face of reality and is a great example of western naivete when it comes to the deceptions that are possible in an authoritarian state with years of single party rule, censorship, and police control.
>  
> The government party controlled the security forces, nearly all the press and TV, and most of the major electoral bodies. There was massive intervention in the election from the Russian authorities. The opposition candidate was mysteriously poisoned. And yet, Dr. Ehrenfeld finds nothing amiss here. If we look at the track record of the current Ukrainian government, its regular abuses of power, and examine reports by groups such as Transparency International, it is clear that the recent election falls into a well-worn pattern. Are we now to believe that for the first time in its existence the Kuchma regime not only played the game honestly but was itself a victim of a clever fraud?
>  
> The appearance of a spontaneous and well-organized demonstration in Kyiv after the election may be a mystery to some, but the real story of the Ukrainian election was that Ukrainian society had far greater civic resources and solidarity than most people realized (including many Ukrainians). The demonstrations in Kyiv are not being sustained by some well-funded effort. The demonstrators are being fed, clothed, and supported by the people of Kyiv, not some secret organization.
>
> To be sure, Ukraine has a long way to go and the opposition movement and its leaders are flawed humans who have their own demons with which to wrestle. The track record of former Soviet republics and ex-Soviet bloc countries shows that there are many possible detours and pitfalls on the way to democracy and freedom. Nor should we confuse democratic mechanisms with freedom. The former are a means to the latter and not a substitute for freedom as the cases of Russia and Venezuela demonstrate.
>  
> Sometimes things really are what they seem and conspiracy theories that purport to explain it all in a neat package may tell us more about those who promote them than about the facts on the ground. The Kuchma regime's brutality and corruption are matched only by its incompetence. These traits have now been revealed to the world and we look the other way at our own peril. Why otherwise intelligent and thoughtful people would support such a regime is a mystery, but as many American and West European intellectuals and "experts" demonstrated during the Cold War, there is ample seating in Minister Potemkin's carriage.
>  
> John Radzilowski, Ph.D., is senior fellow at Piast Institute (www.piastinstitute.org) and author or co-author of eleven books. He lives in Minneapolis and can be contacted at jradzilow@aol.com.
> *
>
> |||||||||||||||||
>
> Dr. Natalia Pylypiuk, Associate Professor
> Modern Languages and Cultural Studies  http://www.mlcs.ca
> 200 Arts, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada T6G 2E6
> voice mail: (780) 492-3498
>
> Canadian Association of Slavists
> http://www.ualberta.ca/~csp/cas