Travelers might soon be obliged to pay to leave Russia as officials are considering a new exit tax for international passengers.
The levy is needed to boost domestic flight demand which would be freed of the value added tax, according to the proposal submitted by the Transport Ministry.
Ticket prices for international routes might rise by up to 1,000 rubles, but experts are dubious as to whether flying within the country’s borders will become cheaper.
Zero VAT on domestic flights could leave the budget without annual 32 billion rubles, but transport officials want travelers to plug that hole.
Exit taxes for international flights have been proposed “from national airports for all commercial flights regardless of the carriers’ national identity.
The document has been submitted to the Finance Ministry, which has yet to announce its decision.
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Sunday, 15 April 2012
Permanent Seliger youth base planned for monastery grounds
Pro-Kremlin youth might soon start "camping" at Lake Seliger all year round, as the specially protected grounds of a local monastery are expected to be handed over to the Federal Youth Agency.
A letter to the governor of the Tver region, where the agency has been holding its annual summer forum since 2000, has been endorsed by Sports, Tourism and Youth Policy Minister Vitaly Mutko.
"The camp is developing, they want to tidy it up and stop living in tents,"
Hordes of young people have been descending on Lake Seliger's vicinity since 2000. And their numbers grew dramatically after gatherings of Kremlin-supporters from the Nashi and Idushchiye Vmeste movements were transformed into the All-Russian Educational Forum in 2009.
But camp-like gathering are soon to become history, as permanent facilities might be erected on an 18.76 hectare site, which was previously owned by the Nilov-Stolbensky Monastery, sources at the regional administration and the Sports Ministry told Izvestia.
Construction, which is expected to start in 2013 if not earlier, would cost just 125 million rubles. No information about the development project has been revealed so far but the funding seems to be rather modest, given that 200 million roubles have been allocated from the state budget for this year's forum.
The news about the looming construction has caused a stir in the region. "Local residents have become worried about the situation. That's why we've asked officials to give us with a clear answer about the monastery's lands," A Just Russia Duma Deputy Alexei Chepa,said. Chepa is drawing up a request to official bodies to check the legal grounds of the project.
The representatives of the monastery, however, don't seem to have a shared opinion on the matter. "We know nothing about it. Officially we haven't given the lands away," Father Pyotr, the monastery's spokesman told.
The head of the monastery, Father Arkady, told Izvestia that the territory could be passed to another owner.
"I have no concerns about it. I've always supported [the Seliger forum]. We've agreed to transfer the lands," he said.
Chepa was suspicious about the monks' position. "They are far from the political background of the story, in the first place. And secondly, it's likely that they have been pressured by the local authorities,"
A letter to the governor of the Tver region, where the agency has been holding its annual summer forum since 2000, has been endorsed by Sports, Tourism and Youth Policy Minister Vitaly Mutko.
"The camp is developing, they want to tidy it up and stop living in tents,"
Hordes of young people have been descending on Lake Seliger's vicinity since 2000. And their numbers grew dramatically after gatherings of Kremlin-supporters from the Nashi and Idushchiye Vmeste movements were transformed into the All-Russian Educational Forum in 2009.
But camp-like gathering are soon to become history, as permanent facilities might be erected on an 18.76 hectare site, which was previously owned by the Nilov-Stolbensky Monastery, sources at the regional administration and the Sports Ministry told Izvestia.
Construction, which is expected to start in 2013 if not earlier, would cost just 125 million rubles. No information about the development project has been revealed so far but the funding seems to be rather modest, given that 200 million roubles have been allocated from the state budget for this year's forum.
The news about the looming construction has caused a stir in the region. "Local residents have become worried about the situation. That's why we've asked officials to give us with a clear answer about the monastery's lands," A Just Russia Duma Deputy Alexei Chepa,said. Chepa is drawing up a request to official bodies to check the legal grounds of the project.
The representatives of the monastery, however, don't seem to have a shared opinion on the matter. "We know nothing about it. Officially we haven't given the lands away," Father Pyotr, the monastery's spokesman told.
The head of the monastery, Father Arkady, told Izvestia that the territory could be passed to another owner.
"I have no concerns about it. I've always supported [the Seliger forum]. We've agreed to transfer the lands," he said.
Chepa was suspicious about the monks' position. "They are far from the political background of the story, in the first place. And secondly, it's likely that they have been pressured by the local authorities,"
Ukraine Oligarch Pulls Development Plan After Protests
KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukraine's richest man, Rinat Akhmetov, has been forced to scrap plans to build a glitzy business centre at a historic tourist site in Kiev after a public outcry in which he was accused of "spitting on the soul" of the capital.
Protests by several hundred people brought a rare dose of bad publicity for the 45-year-old steel and coal tycoon who normally shuns the public limelight but is one of the most influential political players in the ex-Soviet republic.
Several hundred protesters, alerted by the social networking site Facebook, turned out to rally on Wednesday night against plans by the billionaire's System Capital Management (SCM) company to build a multi-storey business centre on "Andriyivsky Descent", a picturesque cobbled street and one of Ukraine's best-known tourist spots.
But the protests came too late to stop bulldozers from destroying at least one 19th century building and wrecking another built 40 years ago in mock 19th century style, cultural officials said.
Chanting "(Put) Akhmetov down a mine shaft !" and "Get Akhmetov out of town", several protesters dumped building material near SCM headquarters to signify their disgust.
"They have come here and brutally turned things into a pig-sty," said Olexander Serhiyenko, a member of a Kiev civic organization.
"They have spat on the soul of Kiev with their 'Andriyivsky Plaza'", he said.
"The ESTA company (a subsidiary of SCM), having examined the opinions of Kiev people, decided back in March to cancel the construction of the business centre," said Akhmetov in a statement issued by his press service.
"Unfortunately, after this decision, there were two bad errors. Firstly, the actions of the company were not coordinated. Secondly, they were not explained to the public," Akhmetov said.
Akhmetov, whose net worth Forbes puts at $16 billion, added:
"I promise that SCM will return the original look to the destroyed facades. We will also help the town restore Andriyivsky Descent."
Akhmetov, whose power base is in the eastern city of Donetsk, made his fortune in steel and coal in the 1990s after a turbulent period in post-Soviet history marked by gangland-style shootings and bombings.
A big soccer enthusiast, he is the owner of Shakhtar Donetsk, one of Ukraine's most successful football clubs, and also has interests in construction, banking, media and property.
According to British media, he bought a penthouse at One Hyde Park in London a year ago for a price of about $220 million.
KING-MAKER
As a financial backer of President Viktor Yanukovich's election campaign in 2009 he is seen as a 'king-maker' in politics, but he is notoriously publicity-shy and rarely meets journalists.
In his power base of Donetsk he is revered as a benefactor and his critics say the protests in Kiev have clearly shaken him.
"They called the Berkut (Ukrainian special forces) to their headquarters as soon as they heard about the protest. They were afraid of a peaceful protest. But without this protest they would have just gone ahead with their plans," said Anna Putova, an archivist at Ukraine's national archives.
"I don't believe a word of his promises. I don't believe him and I don't think anyone in Kiev believes him," she said.
Andriyivsky Descent, a half-mile winding drop down from the administrative centre of Kiev to a riverside quarter, is a top tourist spot in season, with chic restaurants, street-side arts and crafts studios and souvenir stalls.
With Ukraine co-hosting the Euro-2012 soccer championships in June, the street would normally be heaving with traders preparing for a busy season ahead.
But eve-of-Euro reconstruction work to install new drainage and upgrade the quarter's infrastructure has reduced the cobbled street to a sea of building sand, bricks, mud and heavy machinery.
Most traders are sitting things out, hoping city authorities will complete the work by the target day of May 27
Protests by several hundred people brought a rare dose of bad publicity for the 45-year-old steel and coal tycoon who normally shuns the public limelight but is one of the most influential political players in the ex-Soviet republic.
Several hundred protesters, alerted by the social networking site Facebook, turned out to rally on Wednesday night against plans by the billionaire's System Capital Management (SCM) company to build a multi-storey business centre on "Andriyivsky Descent", a picturesque cobbled street and one of Ukraine's best-known tourist spots.
But the protests came too late to stop bulldozers from destroying at least one 19th century building and wrecking another built 40 years ago in mock 19th century style, cultural officials said.
Chanting "(Put) Akhmetov down a mine shaft !" and "Get Akhmetov out of town", several protesters dumped building material near SCM headquarters to signify their disgust.
"They have come here and brutally turned things into a pig-sty," said Olexander Serhiyenko, a member of a Kiev civic organization.
"They have spat on the soul of Kiev with their 'Andriyivsky Plaza'", he said.
"The ESTA company (a subsidiary of SCM), having examined the opinions of Kiev people, decided back in March to cancel the construction of the business centre," said Akhmetov in a statement issued by his press service.
"Unfortunately, after this decision, there were two bad errors. Firstly, the actions of the company were not coordinated. Secondly, they were not explained to the public," Akhmetov said.
Akhmetov, whose net worth Forbes puts at $16 billion, added:
"I promise that SCM will return the original look to the destroyed facades. We will also help the town restore Andriyivsky Descent."
Akhmetov, whose power base is in the eastern city of Donetsk, made his fortune in steel and coal in the 1990s after a turbulent period in post-Soviet history marked by gangland-style shootings and bombings.
A big soccer enthusiast, he is the owner of Shakhtar Donetsk, one of Ukraine's most successful football clubs, and also has interests in construction, banking, media and property.
According to British media, he bought a penthouse at One Hyde Park in London a year ago for a price of about $220 million.
KING-MAKER
As a financial backer of President Viktor Yanukovich's election campaign in 2009 he is seen as a 'king-maker' in politics, but he is notoriously publicity-shy and rarely meets journalists.
In his power base of Donetsk he is revered as a benefactor and his critics say the protests in Kiev have clearly shaken him.
"They called the Berkut (Ukrainian special forces) to their headquarters as soon as they heard about the protest. They were afraid of a peaceful protest. But without this protest they would have just gone ahead with their plans," said Anna Putova, an archivist at Ukraine's national archives.
"I don't believe a word of his promises. I don't believe him and I don't think anyone in Kiev believes him," she said.
Andriyivsky Descent, a half-mile winding drop down from the administrative centre of Kiev to a riverside quarter, is a top tourist spot in season, with chic restaurants, street-side arts and crafts studios and souvenir stalls.
With Ukraine co-hosting the Euro-2012 soccer championships in June, the street would normally be heaving with traders preparing for a busy season ahead.
But eve-of-Euro reconstruction work to install new drainage and upgrade the quarter's infrastructure has reduced the cobbled street to a sea of building sand, bricks, mud and heavy machinery.
Most traders are sitting things out, hoping city authorities will complete the work by the target day of May 27
U.S. Calls On Ukraine To Release Tymoshenko Ally
KIEV, Ukraine -- The United States said on Friday the jailing by Ukraine of an ally of former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko was a miscarriage of justice and called for the release of Valery Ivashchenko on health grounds.
A Ukrainian court this week found Ivashchenko, who served as acting defence minister in opposition leader Tymoshenko's cabinet in 2009 and 2010, guilty of abusing his powers in privatising a Black Sea ship repair facility.
"With respect to the conviction of former Acting Defense Minister Ivashchenko, we are deeply disappointed in this latest example of selective justice in Ukraine and call for his release, particularly given the state of his health after 18 months in pre-trial detention," the U.S. embassy in Ukraine said in a statement.
Tymoshenko, the fiercest opponent of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich, has described her conviction for abuse of office, for which she has been sentenced to seven years in prison, as part of the government's campaign to destroy the opposition.
The United States and the European Union saw it as an example of selective justice and have urged her release.
Ivashchenko has dismissed the charges against him as politically motivated and plans to appeal.
A Ukrainian court this week found Ivashchenko, who served as acting defence minister in opposition leader Tymoshenko's cabinet in 2009 and 2010, guilty of abusing his powers in privatising a Black Sea ship repair facility.
"With respect to the conviction of former Acting Defense Minister Ivashchenko, we are deeply disappointed in this latest example of selective justice in Ukraine and call for his release, particularly given the state of his health after 18 months in pre-trial detention," the U.S. embassy in Ukraine said in a statement.
Tymoshenko, the fiercest opponent of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich, has described her conviction for abuse of office, for which she has been sentenced to seven years in prison, as part of the government's campaign to destroy the opposition.
The United States and the European Union saw it as an example of selective justice and have urged her release.
Ivashchenko has dismissed the charges against him as politically motivated and plans to appeal.
People Power In Ukraine
KIEV, Ukraine -- Even as Ukraine drifts towards ever-more authoritarian government, the people’s ability to challenge the authorities was illustrated recently by protests against the demolition of a historic squarter in Kiev.
The Ukrainian authorities continue to test the limits of patience of their own people. A first example is the destruction of ancient buildings in a historic part of Kiev, Andriyivskyy Descent, while another is the change of rules for the parliamentary elections due for October of this year.
In first case we have Andriyivskyy Descent, a short, ancient street in the centre of Kiev where tourists could buy souvenirs and paintings and feel the spirit of traditional Ukrainian culture.
It is now completely under reconstruction with several old buildings destroyed.
Apologies to the tourists Ukraine is expecting for the Euro 2012 Football cup in June: they will not see it.
In a second case, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine has forbidden simultaneous balloting of parliamentary candidates on party lists and in first-past-the-post districts.
It means that the opposition henceforth has even less chances of getting a majority in the new Parliament.
The reactions of two participants in the Ukrainian political process – civil society and the opposition – to the authorities’ actions are demonstrative.
First we have the community of Kiev’s people.
The very day when three ancient buildings at the Andriyivskyi Descent were demolished, protest groups were organised through the internet and people gathered to offices of the builders and organisers of the destruction of that historic part of Kiev.
They brought construction garbage and left it in front of the offices of the self-styled ‘modernisers of the capital’.
The reaction of the authorities was telling.
All TV channels aired speeches of officials who assured that everything would be renewed in a short time frame.
They recognised that the wrecking of historical buildings was a big mistake and said that those guilty would be punished.
The proactive actions of the public frightened the authorities and forced them to start a dialogue and seek compromise.
Or else the bricks could fly through the windows of offices of builders and state and city officials.
Kiev’s civil society has demonstrated its capacity to protect the city and its way of life.
Regarding the second case, when the authorities took away the right of the opposition to double balloting by party lists and majority districts by means of the Constitutional Court, the opposition-minded forces and their leaders became confused and didn’t know what to do.
The opposition has once again shown its own impotence.
A joint strong-willed decision on boycotting parliamentary elections by all opposition forces could become a way out of the situation.
The authorities would be compelled to make concessions in the face of the threat of delegitimisation in the eyes of society and the opposition.
But it seems that the current Ukrainian opposition establishment, unlike civil society, is unfortunately incapable of displaying maturity.
If we look at the future development of Ukraine, considering tendencies predominating now, the following picture emerges:
Viktor Yanukovych’s regime will continue the process of growing authoritarianism of power.
This will be achieved through the conclusion of non-public arrangements on cooperation with a part of the opposition parties and their leaders.
And in case someone won’t be cooperative, the state machinery of pressure in the form of law enforcement bodies, tax and control services will be applied to them.
It will deal a considerable blow to the possibilities of financing any mass oppositional or anti-government activities.
The authorities will definitively monopolise their grip on any big and medium-sized businesses in Ukraine.
There won’t be any foreign investment coming, as political risks will be too high.
At the same time there will be a large-scale backslide in the area of freedom of speech, freedom of opinion, freedom of assembly and free movement.
This will lead to intimidation of the population and strengthen the manipulation of public opinion.
The authorities will be happy to introduce rigid control over the internet.
The authorities hope that the society will degrade to poverty, social apathy and to the basic level of survival.
But without any doubt, radical anti-authority resistance will also amplify and it will be headed by the present public activists and leaders.
This image of Ukraine in the near future has high chances of becoming reality.
In two to three years Ukraine could turn into a classic sample of an authoritarian state on the model of Belarus or the Central Asian post-Soviet regimes.
But this is provided that external players, first of all, Russia and the EU, won’t influence the situation.
And this is highly improbable.
Russia already now is actively developing variants of deepening cooperation with Ukraine.
A latest example is provided by the plans of the Russian Federation to create a new advisory council which would deal with the promotion of Russian interests in the post-Soviet territories.
The European Union is also trying to “not freeze” relations with Kiev.
The only thing which can transform today’s Ukraine into a democratic country which will care about interests of its citizens, and not about officials and big business, is the Ukrainian people, and more precisely, its most active and most conscious representatives.
Those public activists who are now rescuing historical Kiev from destruction, tomorrow will go out to rescue the whole state, and not only its capital.
They won't be deceived by politicians any more, as it was the case in 2004-2005.
External players who would like Ukraine to be democratic and not authoritarian will bet on them.
As long as the majority of Ukrainians don’t realise that they have influence, changes won’t come about.
But look at what public activists did at the Andriyivskyy Descent – they proved that their anger matters.
Let’s not let our hope die! There is enough will for this
The Ukrainian authorities continue to test the limits of patience of their own people. A first example is the destruction of ancient buildings in a historic part of Kiev, Andriyivskyy Descent, while another is the change of rules for the parliamentary elections due for October of this year.
In first case we have Andriyivskyy Descent, a short, ancient street in the centre of Kiev where tourists could buy souvenirs and paintings and feel the spirit of traditional Ukrainian culture.
It is now completely under reconstruction with several old buildings destroyed.
Apologies to the tourists Ukraine is expecting for the Euro 2012 Football cup in June: they will not see it.
In a second case, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine has forbidden simultaneous balloting of parliamentary candidates on party lists and in first-past-the-post districts.
It means that the opposition henceforth has even less chances of getting a majority in the new Parliament.
The reactions of two participants in the Ukrainian political process – civil society and the opposition – to the authorities’ actions are demonstrative.
First we have the community of Kiev’s people.
The very day when three ancient buildings at the Andriyivskyi Descent were demolished, protest groups were organised through the internet and people gathered to offices of the builders and organisers of the destruction of that historic part of Kiev.
They brought construction garbage and left it in front of the offices of the self-styled ‘modernisers of the capital’.
The reaction of the authorities was telling.
All TV channels aired speeches of officials who assured that everything would be renewed in a short time frame.
They recognised that the wrecking of historical buildings was a big mistake and said that those guilty would be punished.
The proactive actions of the public frightened the authorities and forced them to start a dialogue and seek compromise.
Or else the bricks could fly through the windows of offices of builders and state and city officials.
Kiev’s civil society has demonstrated its capacity to protect the city and its way of life.
Regarding the second case, when the authorities took away the right of the opposition to double balloting by party lists and majority districts by means of the Constitutional Court, the opposition-minded forces and their leaders became confused and didn’t know what to do.
The opposition has once again shown its own impotence.
A joint strong-willed decision on boycotting parliamentary elections by all opposition forces could become a way out of the situation.
The authorities would be compelled to make concessions in the face of the threat of delegitimisation in the eyes of society and the opposition.
But it seems that the current Ukrainian opposition establishment, unlike civil society, is unfortunately incapable of displaying maturity.
If we look at the future development of Ukraine, considering tendencies predominating now, the following picture emerges:
Viktor Yanukovych’s regime will continue the process of growing authoritarianism of power.
This will be achieved through the conclusion of non-public arrangements on cooperation with a part of the opposition parties and their leaders.
And in case someone won’t be cooperative, the state machinery of pressure in the form of law enforcement bodies, tax and control services will be applied to them.
It will deal a considerable blow to the possibilities of financing any mass oppositional or anti-government activities.
The authorities will definitively monopolise their grip on any big and medium-sized businesses in Ukraine.
There won’t be any foreign investment coming, as political risks will be too high.
At the same time there will be a large-scale backslide in the area of freedom of speech, freedom of opinion, freedom of assembly and free movement.
This will lead to intimidation of the population and strengthen the manipulation of public opinion.
The authorities will be happy to introduce rigid control over the internet.
The authorities hope that the society will degrade to poverty, social apathy and to the basic level of survival.
But without any doubt, radical anti-authority resistance will also amplify and it will be headed by the present public activists and leaders.
This image of Ukraine in the near future has high chances of becoming reality.
In two to three years Ukraine could turn into a classic sample of an authoritarian state on the model of Belarus or the Central Asian post-Soviet regimes.
But this is provided that external players, first of all, Russia and the EU, won’t influence the situation.
And this is highly improbable.
Russia already now is actively developing variants of deepening cooperation with Ukraine.
A latest example is provided by the plans of the Russian Federation to create a new advisory council which would deal with the promotion of Russian interests in the post-Soviet territories.
The European Union is also trying to “not freeze” relations with Kiev.
The only thing which can transform today’s Ukraine into a democratic country which will care about interests of its citizens, and not about officials and big business, is the Ukrainian people, and more precisely, its most active and most conscious representatives.
Those public activists who are now rescuing historical Kiev from destruction, tomorrow will go out to rescue the whole state, and not only its capital.
They won't be deceived by politicians any more, as it was the case in 2004-2005.
External players who would like Ukraine to be democratic and not authoritarian will bet on them.
As long as the majority of Ukrainians don’t realise that they have influence, changes won’t come about.
But look at what public activists did at the Andriyivskyy Descent – they proved that their anger matters.
Let’s not let our hope die! There is enough will for this
Ukrainian Civil Society - Eleven Wise Men
WARSAW, Poland -- Twenty years ago, the West tried to build civil society in post-Soviet Ukraine.
Now 11 Ukrainian intellectuals have taken the matter into their own hands, through the “1st December” initiative (Pershoho Hrudnya).
Launched in December 2011, its name is a reference to Ukraine's 1991 referendum on independence.
Its members are giants, if faded ones.
One, Ivan Dzyuba, broke Soviet taboos in his essay "Internationalism or Russification?", written in the mid-1960s.
Another, the Geneva-based economist Bohdan Hawrylyshyn, was one of the few people to predict the collapse of the USSR.
A third, Cardinal Lyubomyr Huzar, is a former archbishop of the patriotic Ukrainian Catholic church (although the initiative was endorsed by three Orthodox churches).
Several members are former dissidents who served sentences in Soviet labour camps, an asset in a region where moral currency is often measured in years spent imprisoned by the Communist regime.
The initiative's first round-table event, held in Kiev last Thursday, gathered 70 members of the Ukrainian intelligentsia to discuss relations between state and society.
Their banner, "A Free Person in a Free Country", is a reaction to a society they see as basking in consumerist indifference; or, as Yevgen Sverstyuk , a philosopher, put it, “like a varenyk [dumpling] in butter”.
In pushing for a stronger, more responsible society, and one that is closer to Europe, these grandees turn to abstract themes: human dignity and responsible citizenship.
They hope to drum up interest through a series of local round-table meetings.
The initiative aims to include all Ukrainians, regardless of political affiliation.
The response has been quiet but broadly positive.
Taras Voznyak, editor of the cultural journal Ï, said, “I have understood why there are 11 of them. They are apostles”.
Ukraine's president, Viktor Yanukovich, has expressed an ambiguous interest in the initiative.
The group's members say they hope to connect with younger Ukrainians, despite their average age being well over 70.
But even their most enthusiastic backers wonder what practical steps these philosopher-kings can take to improve life in Ukraine.
Or why it has taken them 20 years to get into gear.
One answer to that may be the chillier atmosphere that has descended in Ukraine since Mr Yanukovich took power in 2010, and the eroding hopes of the generation of Orange revolutionaries that grabbed the world's attention in 2004.
Ukraine's media have begun speculating about parliamentary elections due in October.
If the message of the 1st December group begins to resonate before then, it could become a significant political player.
But some think its influence will be better expressed through a gradual renaissance of civil society, and as an influence for future generations of Ukrainians.
Food for thought, as Ukraine’s Orthodox Christians celebrate Easter this weekend.
Now 11 Ukrainian intellectuals have taken the matter into their own hands, through the “1st December” initiative (Pershoho Hrudnya).
Launched in December 2011, its name is a reference to Ukraine's 1991 referendum on independence.
Its members are giants, if faded ones.
One, Ivan Dzyuba, broke Soviet taboos in his essay "Internationalism or Russification?", written in the mid-1960s.
Another, the Geneva-based economist Bohdan Hawrylyshyn, was one of the few people to predict the collapse of the USSR.
A third, Cardinal Lyubomyr Huzar, is a former archbishop of the patriotic Ukrainian Catholic church (although the initiative was endorsed by three Orthodox churches).
Several members are former dissidents who served sentences in Soviet labour camps, an asset in a region where moral currency is often measured in years spent imprisoned by the Communist regime.
The initiative's first round-table event, held in Kiev last Thursday, gathered 70 members of the Ukrainian intelligentsia to discuss relations between state and society.
Their banner, "A Free Person in a Free Country", is a reaction to a society they see as basking in consumerist indifference; or, as Yevgen Sverstyuk , a philosopher, put it, “like a varenyk [dumpling] in butter”.
In pushing for a stronger, more responsible society, and one that is closer to Europe, these grandees turn to abstract themes: human dignity and responsible citizenship.
They hope to drum up interest through a series of local round-table meetings.
The initiative aims to include all Ukrainians, regardless of political affiliation.
The response has been quiet but broadly positive.
Taras Voznyak, editor of the cultural journal Ï, said, “I have understood why there are 11 of them. They are apostles”.
Ukraine's president, Viktor Yanukovich, has expressed an ambiguous interest in the initiative.
The group's members say they hope to connect with younger Ukrainians, despite their average age being well over 70.
But even their most enthusiastic backers wonder what practical steps these philosopher-kings can take to improve life in Ukraine.
Or why it has taken them 20 years to get into gear.
One answer to that may be the chillier atmosphere that has descended in Ukraine since Mr Yanukovich took power in 2010, and the eroding hopes of the generation of Orange revolutionaries that grabbed the world's attention in 2004.
Ukraine's media have begun speculating about parliamentary elections due in October.
If the message of the 1st December group begins to resonate before then, it could become a significant political player.
But some think its influence will be better expressed through a gradual renaissance of civil society, and as an influence for future generations of Ukrainians.
Food for thought, as Ukraine’s Orthodox Christians celebrate Easter this weekend.
Ukrainian Former Prime Minister Tymoshenko Faces Murder Accusations
KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukrainian prosecutors announced last week that former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko (2005; 2007-2010) and former Prime Minister Pavlo Lazarenko (1996-1997) were suspected of commissioning several murders in the 1990s.
This looks like a last-ditch attempt to influence public opinion – both at home, ahead of the October parliamentary election, and in the West, where opposition leader Tymoshenko is regarded as a political prisoner – that she is a monster who deserves to be in jail.
A court in Kiev last October imprisoned Tymoshenko for seven years for exceeding her authority in preparing the controversial January 2009 contracts with Russia’s Gazprom, while Lazarenko, who is Tymoshenko’s former ally, is serving a prison sentence for money-laundering in the US.
First Deputy Prosecutor-General Renat Kuzmin spoke last fall about Tymoshenko’s possible involvement in the 1998 murder of Yevhen Shcherban, who was an influential people’s deputy and businessman from Donetsk.
Kuzmin admitted then that the prosecutors lacked evidence.
It has since become obvious that public opinion and Western policymakers do not trust Ukrainian prosecutors on Tymoshenko, which has been jeopardizing Ukraine’s European integration.
The EU has made it clear that the association and free trade agreement with Ukraine will not be signed if Kiev does not change its attitude to justice in general and Tymoshenko in particular.
What is more, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych himself admitted in Davos this year that Tymoshenko had been indicted under an outdated Soviet law.
The ruling team has apparently decided that it is now time for more serious charges against Tymoshenko to influence Western opinion.
Kuzmin has told FT that he had evidence that companies, which were linked to Tymoshenko and Lazarenko, transferred money to Shcherban’s killers.
Kuzmin also chided the West for defending Tymoshenko:
“What is your view in the West of political persecution? Does this mean that the leader of the opposition cannot be prosecuted even for murder?”.
Simultaneously, Shcherban’s son Ruslan Shcherban, who is a deputy of the Donetsk regional council from the ruling Party of Regions (PRU), wrote a letter to US Ambassador John Tefft saying that European and US politicians should not defend Tymoshenko who, he claimed, had commissioned his father’s killing.
Ruslan Shcherban alleged that he had heard threats from Tymoshenko and Lazarenko whose businesses, he said, competed with his father’s.
He also accused Washington of blocking Kiev’s attempts to establish the truth.
The gas trader United Energy Systems, which Tymoshenko headed in the mid-1990s, was a bitter rival of Shcherban’s businesses on the energy market when Lazarenko was prime minister.
On April 5, Prosecutor-General Viktor Pshonka announced that his team had re-launched the investigation into Shcherban’s murder, which was closed a decade ago.
Also, commenting on old embezzlement cases against Tymoshenko, Pshonka claimed that several of them were closed in January 2005 by his predecessor, Svyatoslav Piskun, because then-President Viktor Yushchenko threatened Piskun with dismissal if he did not close the cases.
In the meantime, the person who confessed to killing Shcherban a decade ago, Vadym Bolotskikh, has been reportedly transferred from a distant prison to Kiev for questioning.
Kuzmin, asked during a talk show why Ruslan Shcherban had not come up with his accusations earlier, said that he was afraid for his life.
What’s more, Kuzmin said that his team suspected Tymoshenko and Lazarenko of also commissioning the murders of another Donetsk businessman, Oleksandr Momot, in 1996, and former central bank governor Vadym Hetman in 1998.
Kuzmin also said that the prosecutors were targeting the deputy chairman of Tymoshenko’s Fatherland party, Oleksandr Turchynov, who de facto heads Fatherland while Tymoshenko is in prison.
He said Turchynov was suspected of illegally awarding an apartment to his spokesman when Turchynov headed the security service in the Yushchenko-Tymoshenko government in 2005.
Another ally of Tymoshenko, former Interior Minister Yury Lutsenko, was sentenced to four years in jail earlier this year for awarding an apartment to his former driver.
Turchynov has dismissed all the new accusations against his boss and himself as a smear campaign and suggested that the prosecutors’ goal was to shock Europe into stopping its defense of Tymoshenko.
He also alleged that those who commissioned Yevhen Shcherban’s murder must be among the PRU ranks as several influential members of the PRU had built their business empires on the ruins of Shcherban’s business.
Meanwhile, another former minister from Tymoshenko’s government has received a prison term.
On April 5, a court in Kiev sentenced former Environment Minister Georgy Filipchuk to three years in jail for exceeding his authority in preparing a ministry contract with a legal company.
Filipchuk was indicted under the same law under which Tymoshenko was indicted last October and which Yanukovych called “outdated.”
Fatherland has claimed that Filipchuk was punished for opposing the US company Vanco’s attempts to “snatch the Black Sea shelf from the state”.
Tymoshenko’s cabinet canceled Vanco’s license to develop the Prikerchenskaya oil field in the Black Sea in April 2008 claiming that it had been awarded the license illegally.
Vanco planned to develop the field in partnership with Donetsk-based tycoon Rinat Akhmetov, who is a senior member of the PRU.
This looks like a last-ditch attempt to influence public opinion – both at home, ahead of the October parliamentary election, and in the West, where opposition leader Tymoshenko is regarded as a political prisoner – that she is a monster who deserves to be in jail.
A court in Kiev last October imprisoned Tymoshenko for seven years for exceeding her authority in preparing the controversial January 2009 contracts with Russia’s Gazprom, while Lazarenko, who is Tymoshenko’s former ally, is serving a prison sentence for money-laundering in the US.
First Deputy Prosecutor-General Renat Kuzmin spoke last fall about Tymoshenko’s possible involvement in the 1998 murder of Yevhen Shcherban, who was an influential people’s deputy and businessman from Donetsk.
Kuzmin admitted then that the prosecutors lacked evidence.
It has since become obvious that public opinion and Western policymakers do not trust Ukrainian prosecutors on Tymoshenko, which has been jeopardizing Ukraine’s European integration.
The EU has made it clear that the association and free trade agreement with Ukraine will not be signed if Kiev does not change its attitude to justice in general and Tymoshenko in particular.
What is more, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych himself admitted in Davos this year that Tymoshenko had been indicted under an outdated Soviet law.
The ruling team has apparently decided that it is now time for more serious charges against Tymoshenko to influence Western opinion.
Kuzmin has told FT that he had evidence that companies, which were linked to Tymoshenko and Lazarenko, transferred money to Shcherban’s killers.
Kuzmin also chided the West for defending Tymoshenko:
“What is your view in the West of political persecution? Does this mean that the leader of the opposition cannot be prosecuted even for murder?”.
Simultaneously, Shcherban’s son Ruslan Shcherban, who is a deputy of the Donetsk regional council from the ruling Party of Regions (PRU), wrote a letter to US Ambassador John Tefft saying that European and US politicians should not defend Tymoshenko who, he claimed, had commissioned his father’s killing.
Ruslan Shcherban alleged that he had heard threats from Tymoshenko and Lazarenko whose businesses, he said, competed with his father’s.
He also accused Washington of blocking Kiev’s attempts to establish the truth.
The gas trader United Energy Systems, which Tymoshenko headed in the mid-1990s, was a bitter rival of Shcherban’s businesses on the energy market when Lazarenko was prime minister.
On April 5, Prosecutor-General Viktor Pshonka announced that his team had re-launched the investigation into Shcherban’s murder, which was closed a decade ago.
Also, commenting on old embezzlement cases against Tymoshenko, Pshonka claimed that several of them were closed in January 2005 by his predecessor, Svyatoslav Piskun, because then-President Viktor Yushchenko threatened Piskun with dismissal if he did not close the cases.
In the meantime, the person who confessed to killing Shcherban a decade ago, Vadym Bolotskikh, has been reportedly transferred from a distant prison to Kiev for questioning.
Kuzmin, asked during a talk show why Ruslan Shcherban had not come up with his accusations earlier, said that he was afraid for his life.
What’s more, Kuzmin said that his team suspected Tymoshenko and Lazarenko of also commissioning the murders of another Donetsk businessman, Oleksandr Momot, in 1996, and former central bank governor Vadym Hetman in 1998.
Kuzmin also said that the prosecutors were targeting the deputy chairman of Tymoshenko’s Fatherland party, Oleksandr Turchynov, who de facto heads Fatherland while Tymoshenko is in prison.
He said Turchynov was suspected of illegally awarding an apartment to his spokesman when Turchynov headed the security service in the Yushchenko-Tymoshenko government in 2005.
Another ally of Tymoshenko, former Interior Minister Yury Lutsenko, was sentenced to four years in jail earlier this year for awarding an apartment to his former driver.
Turchynov has dismissed all the new accusations against his boss and himself as a smear campaign and suggested that the prosecutors’ goal was to shock Europe into stopping its defense of Tymoshenko.
He also alleged that those who commissioned Yevhen Shcherban’s murder must be among the PRU ranks as several influential members of the PRU had built their business empires on the ruins of Shcherban’s business.
Meanwhile, another former minister from Tymoshenko’s government has received a prison term.
On April 5, a court in Kiev sentenced former Environment Minister Georgy Filipchuk to three years in jail for exceeding his authority in preparing a ministry contract with a legal company.
Filipchuk was indicted under the same law under which Tymoshenko was indicted last October and which Yanukovych called “outdated.”
Fatherland has claimed that Filipchuk was punished for opposing the US company Vanco’s attempts to “snatch the Black Sea shelf from the state”.
Tymoshenko’s cabinet canceled Vanco’s license to develop the Prikerchenskaya oil field in the Black Sea in April 2008 claiming that it had been awarded the license illegally.
Vanco planned to develop the field in partnership with Donetsk-based tycoon Rinat Akhmetov, who is a senior member of the PRU.
Saturday, 7 April 2012
Dialogue Of The Deaf: Ukraine And The EU Talk Past Each Other
KIEV, Ukraine -- On March 20, the Ukrainian parliament voted to accept a report by its Temporary Investigative Commission that looked into the January 2009 gas contract signed by Prime Ministers Yulia Tymoshenko and Vladimir Putin.
Parliament voted by 266 deputies to accept the report accusing Tymoshenko of “treason.”
The report claimed that Tymoshenko was blackmailed by Russia into accepting gas prices that were disadvantageous to Ukraine because United Energy Systems, which she ran in the mid-1990s, owed Russia $400 million.
Bizarrely, on the same day the Ukrainian parliament issued a lengthy resolution calling on the EU to “demonstrate political will and ensure the speedy signing of the association agreement between Ukraine and the EU”.
Earlier this month, President Viktor Yanukovych issued detailed instructions “On the working out and affirmation of plans toward the integration of Ukraine to the European Union in 2012”.
During an official meeting in Germany, the head of the Presidential Administration’s department on international relations, Andriy Honcharuk, said that European integration remains Ukraine’s main foreign policy goal.
“Our main aim in 2012 is the signing of the Association Agreement with the European Union,” he said.
This affirmed what President Yanukovych told the January Davos World Economic Forum:
“Ukraine sees its future in the European Union. 2011 was a constructive year for Ukraine’s European integration. Membership of the European Union is the basis for the democratic development of Ukraine, improvement of its economy, personal freedoms and well-being of every citizen”.
To prove their case, the Party of Regions has launched and is financing the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine (ECMU) in Brussels.
The ECMU board includes three Party of Regions deputies and three Western Europeans with links to the Socialist political group in the European Parliament.
In 2010, the Party of Regions signed a cooperation agreement with the Socialist political group and the main lobbyist was Ion Iliescu, a Romanian MEP.
Since summer 2011, cooperation has waned and the Socialist Group refused to send greetings to the Party of Regions March congress.
Today, Viktor Yanukovych’s party has no ties with European or North American political parties and the greetings to its March congress that it did receive were indicative of how bad the Party of Regions’ reputation is.
The only greetings that were sent were from the Bulgarian Socialist Party, the Communist Party of China, the Communist Party of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, the Political Council of the ruling Azeri Party “Yeni Azerbaijan,” the United Russia party, and from Gagik Tsarukyan, the oligarchic leader of the “Prosperous Armenia” party.
The greetings are a better reflection of the reality facing President Yanukovych and the Party of Regions than its statements, presidential instructions and parliamentary resolutions.
In an interview with the news outlet Den, the Czech Ambassador to Ukraine Ivan Pochukh said that: “it is necessary to tell Ukrainian citizens that the process of the completion of the Association Agreement and Free Trade Zone have been curtailed”.
This re-affirmed what has been repeatedly said – but ignored by Kiev – by EU leaders. Swedish Minister of Foreign Affairs Carl Bildt told the same Davos summit attended by Yanukovych that:
“The question stands as follows: can Ukraine return to the path of European integration, or will Ukraine be stuck on what is its de facto departure from the path of European integration?”.
On March 4, Bildt, William Hague, Karel Schwarzenberg, Radoslaw Sikorski and Guido Westerwelle, the foreign ministers of Sweden, Britain, the Czech Republic, Poland and Germany, signed a joint opinion article in The New York Times that lambasted democratic regression in Ukraine.
They said, “Today, however, we are at an impasse in the association process. While negotiations on the association agreement were successfully concluded in December 2011, the way forward – through signing and ratification of the agreement – has in effect been blocked by Ukraine’s actions”.
The five foreign ministers continued, “The reason for this is simple: Developments in Ukraine in the last two years have caused us to question Kiev’s intentions with respect to the fundamental values that underpin both the agreement and our relations in a broader sense.”
The response from Ukraine’s Minister for Foreign Affairs Kostyantyn Gryshchenko was published in The New York Times on March 20, not coincidentally the same day as parliament voted on the temporary commission report into the 2009 gas contract that denounced Tymoshenko’s “treason”.
Gryshchenko claimed that: “Ukraine is committed to European values. We are not sliding but striding toward full integration into the European Union.”
His statement blatantly contradicted European and American government opinions of Ukraine’s recent track record, as well as that of international organizations and human rights groups.
With such a dialogue of the deaf, it is highly surprising that some seasoned US and European diplomats and ex-Ambassadors to Ukraine were saying right up until summer 2011 that the Yanukovych administration was listening to Western criticism.
Former US Ambassadors to Ukraine Steven Pifer and William Taylor were willing to believe that: “If President Yanukovych is committed to European integration and EU membership, his administration’s domestic actions make achieving that goal much tougher.
Yanukovych declares, like former President Leonid Kuchma, that he seeks EU membership.
But this declaration means little if the political culture underpinning his administration seeks a monopoly of power at home and builds an authoritarian system.
Until the summer of 2011, Western policymakers mistakenly took at face value Yanukovych’s and Gryshchenko’s pro-European rhetoric, similar to that quoted above, when they should have been highly skeptical.
The reality facing Ukraine is three-fold:
Firstly, the EU will initial the Association Agreement on March 30, a technical step that signals the end of negotiations and which should have taken place at the December 2011 EU-Ukraine summit in Kiev.
The EU has stated, as quoted above, that the next two steps will not take place until Kiev no longer undertakes a selective use of justice against the political opposition.
These next two steps are the signing of the Association Agreement by the European Council (EC) and the EC’s recommendation for ratification to the European parliament and EU member state national parliaments.
Secondly, the EU has stated it will not recognize Ukraine’s October parliamentary elections as having been undertaken in accordance with democratic standards if opposition leaders are in jail and not permitted to participate in them.
In such a situation, visa black lists and sanctions could follow in 2013 – the same year Ukraine is set to hold the rotating chairmanship of the OSCE.
Thirdly, Ukraine’s relations are frozen with the IMF at a time when Ukraine’s financial situation is deteriorating as seen on March 15 when the S&P downgraded Ukraine’s credit outlook to “negative.”
This year Ukraine has to cover or rollover $6 billion in external and $3 billion in domestic debt obligations.
Yanukovych cannot fulfill the EU’s demand and release Tymoshenko as he then would likely be criminally charged and the Party of Regions would lose this year’s elections.
Although Ukraine loses out from its frozen integration into the EU this is of less strategic importance to the Yanukovych administration than its maintaining a monopoly of power coupled with its ability to continue travelling, working and playing in the EU.
Ukraine’s elites have long been integrated into Europe and do not care if they deny this possibility to their Ukrainian citizens.
Parliament voted by 266 deputies to accept the report accusing Tymoshenko of “treason.”
The report claimed that Tymoshenko was blackmailed by Russia into accepting gas prices that were disadvantageous to Ukraine because United Energy Systems, which she ran in the mid-1990s, owed Russia $400 million.
Bizarrely, on the same day the Ukrainian parliament issued a lengthy resolution calling on the EU to “demonstrate political will and ensure the speedy signing of the association agreement between Ukraine and the EU”.
Earlier this month, President Viktor Yanukovych issued detailed instructions “On the working out and affirmation of plans toward the integration of Ukraine to the European Union in 2012”.
During an official meeting in Germany, the head of the Presidential Administration’s department on international relations, Andriy Honcharuk, said that European integration remains Ukraine’s main foreign policy goal.
“Our main aim in 2012 is the signing of the Association Agreement with the European Union,” he said.
This affirmed what President Yanukovych told the January Davos World Economic Forum:
“Ukraine sees its future in the European Union. 2011 was a constructive year for Ukraine’s European integration. Membership of the European Union is the basis for the democratic development of Ukraine, improvement of its economy, personal freedoms and well-being of every citizen”.
To prove their case, the Party of Regions has launched and is financing the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine (ECMU) in Brussels.
The ECMU board includes three Party of Regions deputies and three Western Europeans with links to the Socialist political group in the European Parliament.
In 2010, the Party of Regions signed a cooperation agreement with the Socialist political group and the main lobbyist was Ion Iliescu, a Romanian MEP.
Since summer 2011, cooperation has waned and the Socialist Group refused to send greetings to the Party of Regions March congress.
Today, Viktor Yanukovych’s party has no ties with European or North American political parties and the greetings to its March congress that it did receive were indicative of how bad the Party of Regions’ reputation is.
The only greetings that were sent were from the Bulgarian Socialist Party, the Communist Party of China, the Communist Party of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, the Political Council of the ruling Azeri Party “Yeni Azerbaijan,” the United Russia party, and from Gagik Tsarukyan, the oligarchic leader of the “Prosperous Armenia” party.
The greetings are a better reflection of the reality facing President Yanukovych and the Party of Regions than its statements, presidential instructions and parliamentary resolutions.
In an interview with the news outlet Den, the Czech Ambassador to Ukraine Ivan Pochukh said that: “it is necessary to tell Ukrainian citizens that the process of the completion of the Association Agreement and Free Trade Zone have been curtailed”.
This re-affirmed what has been repeatedly said – but ignored by Kiev – by EU leaders. Swedish Minister of Foreign Affairs Carl Bildt told the same Davos summit attended by Yanukovych that:
“The question stands as follows: can Ukraine return to the path of European integration, or will Ukraine be stuck on what is its de facto departure from the path of European integration?”.
On March 4, Bildt, William Hague, Karel Schwarzenberg, Radoslaw Sikorski and Guido Westerwelle, the foreign ministers of Sweden, Britain, the Czech Republic, Poland and Germany, signed a joint opinion article in The New York Times that lambasted democratic regression in Ukraine.
They said, “Today, however, we are at an impasse in the association process. While negotiations on the association agreement were successfully concluded in December 2011, the way forward – through signing and ratification of the agreement – has in effect been blocked by Ukraine’s actions”.
The five foreign ministers continued, “The reason for this is simple: Developments in Ukraine in the last two years have caused us to question Kiev’s intentions with respect to the fundamental values that underpin both the agreement and our relations in a broader sense.”
The response from Ukraine’s Minister for Foreign Affairs Kostyantyn Gryshchenko was published in The New York Times on March 20, not coincidentally the same day as parliament voted on the temporary commission report into the 2009 gas contract that denounced Tymoshenko’s “treason”.
Gryshchenko claimed that: “Ukraine is committed to European values. We are not sliding but striding toward full integration into the European Union.”
His statement blatantly contradicted European and American government opinions of Ukraine’s recent track record, as well as that of international organizations and human rights groups.
With such a dialogue of the deaf, it is highly surprising that some seasoned US and European diplomats and ex-Ambassadors to Ukraine were saying right up until summer 2011 that the Yanukovych administration was listening to Western criticism.
Former US Ambassadors to Ukraine Steven Pifer and William Taylor were willing to believe that: “If President Yanukovych is committed to European integration and EU membership, his administration’s domestic actions make achieving that goal much tougher.
Yanukovych declares, like former President Leonid Kuchma, that he seeks EU membership.
But this declaration means little if the political culture underpinning his administration seeks a monopoly of power at home and builds an authoritarian system.
Until the summer of 2011, Western policymakers mistakenly took at face value Yanukovych’s and Gryshchenko’s pro-European rhetoric, similar to that quoted above, when they should have been highly skeptical.
The reality facing Ukraine is three-fold:
Firstly, the EU will initial the Association Agreement on March 30, a technical step that signals the end of negotiations and which should have taken place at the December 2011 EU-Ukraine summit in Kiev.
The EU has stated, as quoted above, that the next two steps will not take place until Kiev no longer undertakes a selective use of justice against the political opposition.
These next two steps are the signing of the Association Agreement by the European Council (EC) and the EC’s recommendation for ratification to the European parliament and EU member state national parliaments.
Secondly, the EU has stated it will not recognize Ukraine’s October parliamentary elections as having been undertaken in accordance with democratic standards if opposition leaders are in jail and not permitted to participate in them.
In such a situation, visa black lists and sanctions could follow in 2013 – the same year Ukraine is set to hold the rotating chairmanship of the OSCE.
Thirdly, Ukraine’s relations are frozen with the IMF at a time when Ukraine’s financial situation is deteriorating as seen on March 15 when the S&P downgraded Ukraine’s credit outlook to “negative.”
This year Ukraine has to cover or rollover $6 billion in external and $3 billion in domestic debt obligations.
Yanukovych cannot fulfill the EU’s demand and release Tymoshenko as he then would likely be criminally charged and the Party of Regions would lose this year’s elections.
Although Ukraine loses out from its frozen integration into the EU this is of less strategic importance to the Yanukovych administration than its maintaining a monopoly of power coupled with its ability to continue travelling, working and playing in the EU.
Ukraine’s elites have long been integrated into Europe and do not care if they deny this possibility to their Ukrainian citizens.
Freedom House: Ukraine President Yanukovych Eliminates Opposition
KIEV, Ukraine -- The international human rights organization Freedom House says Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych of systematically eliminating any opposition before parliamentary elections scheduled for October 2012.
In 2011, Yanukovych launched a systematic campaign to eliminate any viable opposition to the ruling Party of the Regions ahead of parliamentary elections set for 2012."
"Most importantly, prosecutors brought a series of charges against Tymoshenko, Yanukovych's strongest opponent, in a bid to secure a criminal conviction," stated a Freedom House report, cited by RIA Novosti.
The document reminds readers that in October 2011 Tymoshenko was sentenced to seven years in prison for abuse of authority for signing gas contracts with Russia, a decission the opposition says was politically motivated, although the Ukrainian authorities deny this.
Currently Tymoshenko is serving the sentence in a women's prison of Kharkov.
President of the European People's Party (EPP) Wilfried Martens said on Friday that the EPP demands the immediate implementation of a European Court of Human Rights decision, which called for Yulia Tymoshenko's release.
The report also reads that other political prisoners were placed or remained behind bars in 2011, including nine leaders of protests against the administration's tax policies and 14 or more nationalists involved in the beheading of a Stalin monument.
Freedom House also noted that the attempts to mount street protests against the persecution of Tymoshenko and other former government officials, including former Interior Minister Yuriy Lutsenko, were met with a heavy police crackdown.
Lutsenko, an ally of jailed opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko, was arrested in December 2010.
In late February he was sentenced to four years in prison for illegally employing and giving an apartment and pension to his former driver, as well as of overspending government funds during Police Day celebrations in 2008 and 2009, when he was in office.
In addition international human rights organization Freedom House noted that working conditions for media in Ukraine got worse.
"The constitution guarantees freedoms of speech and expression, and libel is not a criminal offense. Business magnates with varying political interests own and influence many outlets, while local governments often control the local media. Conditions for the media have worsened since Yanukovych's election."
Some 69% of Ukrainians get their news from television and the medium now features fewer alternative points of view, open discussions, and expert opinions, says the report of Freedom House.
In 2011, Yanukovych launched a systematic campaign to eliminate any viable opposition to the ruling Party of the Regions ahead of parliamentary elections set for 2012."
"Most importantly, prosecutors brought a series of charges against Tymoshenko, Yanukovych's strongest opponent, in a bid to secure a criminal conviction," stated a Freedom House report, cited by RIA Novosti.
The document reminds readers that in October 2011 Tymoshenko was sentenced to seven years in prison for abuse of authority for signing gas contracts with Russia, a decission the opposition says was politically motivated, although the Ukrainian authorities deny this.
Currently Tymoshenko is serving the sentence in a women's prison of Kharkov.
President of the European People's Party (EPP) Wilfried Martens said on Friday that the EPP demands the immediate implementation of a European Court of Human Rights decision, which called for Yulia Tymoshenko's release.
The report also reads that other political prisoners were placed or remained behind bars in 2011, including nine leaders of protests against the administration's tax policies and 14 or more nationalists involved in the beheading of a Stalin monument.
Freedom House also noted that the attempts to mount street protests against the persecution of Tymoshenko and other former government officials, including former Interior Minister Yuriy Lutsenko, were met with a heavy police crackdown.
Lutsenko, an ally of jailed opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko, was arrested in December 2010.
In late February he was sentenced to four years in prison for illegally employing and giving an apartment and pension to his former driver, as well as of overspending government funds during Police Day celebrations in 2008 and 2009, when he was in office.
In addition international human rights organization Freedom House noted that working conditions for media in Ukraine got worse.
"The constitution guarantees freedoms of speech and expression, and libel is not a criminal offense. Business magnates with varying political interests own and influence many outlets, while local governments often control the local media. Conditions for the media have worsened since Yanukovych's election."
Some 69% of Ukrainians get their news from television and the medium now features fewer alternative points of view, open discussions, and expert opinions, says the report of Freedom House.
Tight Security Keeps DSK Speech Civil In Ukraine
KIEV, Ukraine -- Dominique Strauss-Kahn has not had very good luck giving speeches in Europe since his return from New York, but he's finally mastered the security protocols necessary to get through one in Ukraine.
The audience he addressed in Kiev on Wednesday did not protest or hit him with awkward questions, as other European crowds did last month, primarily because the security at his address was strict and the crowd carefully managed.
As Reuters' Olzhas Auyezov reports:
His lecture in Ukraine, organized by local billionaire businessman Viktor Pinchuk's charitable foundation, was carefully arranged in order to avoid embarrassment.
Security was tight to filter out uninvited guests and journalists were not allowed to ask questions, a privilege reserved for local businessmen and politicians as well as students, many of whom were on Pinchuk's fellowships.
That must have been something of a relief to him after last month's address at the Cambridge Union Society, where protests greeted him out front, and a student inside asked him to "explain" the bruises reported by his New York accuser, Nafissatou Diallo.
Strauss-Kahn canceled a second planned speech at the European Parliament later in the month after protests broke out there, too.
A Beijing address Strauss-Kahn gave in December went smoothly enough, but he's had bad luck in Europe until now.
The success of the event must be due to its heavy security and not Ukraine's general acceptance of Strauss-Kahn's persona.
The topless protesters who demonstrated outside his house in October came from a Ukrainian feminist organization called Femen.
The audience he addressed in Kiev on Wednesday did not protest or hit him with awkward questions, as other European crowds did last month, primarily because the security at his address was strict and the crowd carefully managed.
As Reuters' Olzhas Auyezov reports:
His lecture in Ukraine, organized by local billionaire businessman Viktor Pinchuk's charitable foundation, was carefully arranged in order to avoid embarrassment.
Security was tight to filter out uninvited guests and journalists were not allowed to ask questions, a privilege reserved for local businessmen and politicians as well as students, many of whom were on Pinchuk's fellowships.
That must have been something of a relief to him after last month's address at the Cambridge Union Society, where protests greeted him out front, and a student inside asked him to "explain" the bruises reported by his New York accuser, Nafissatou Diallo.
Strauss-Kahn canceled a second planned speech at the European Parliament later in the month after protests broke out there, too.
A Beijing address Strauss-Kahn gave in December went smoothly enough, but he's had bad luck in Europe until now.
The success of the event must be due to its heavy security and not Ukraine's general acceptance of Strauss-Kahn's persona.
The topless protesters who demonstrated outside his house in October came from a Ukrainian feminist organization called Femen.
Ukraine Wants To Close Yushchenko Poisoning Case
KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukrainian prosecutors have substantial grounds to close a criminal case on the alleged poisoning of former president Viktor Yushchenko due to lack of evidence, Prosecutor General Viktor Pshonka said on Thursday.
“This case has all the circumstances giving us legal reasons to close the investigation,” Pshonka told a news conference in Kiev.
He said the case had not been terminated yet only because Yushchenko had continually refused to give blood tests and offered little cooperation in the official investigation.
“For the sake of history, so that the closing verdict is unbiased, it is desirable that Yushchenko give his blood sample,” Pshonka said.
The suspected dioxin poisoning in September 2004 during the presidential election campaign in Ukraine made Yushchenko seriously ill, and left his face badly disfigured.
The original medical reports by toxicologists from Switzerland, which claimed dioxin levels in Yushchenko’s body 50,000 times above normal, were sharply criticized for lack of supporting, peer-reviewed research.
The blood tests by Ukrainian doctors in November 2005 were mysteriously destroyed.
Yushchenko poisoning theory was officially supported by Ukrainian authorities during his presidency from January 2005 until February 2010.
However, a new team of investigators assigned to the case after Yushchenko lost power to his long-term rival Viktor Yanukovych, alleged that the Yushchenko dioxin poisoning could have been falsified to strengthen his positions during 2004 presidential elections.
Investigators demanded that the ex-president give new blood tests, as traces of dioxin remain in blood forever.
Yushchenko, whose health has improved significantly since 2004, has refused to cooperate and said last year he wanted to "close that chapter" in his life.
“This case has all the circumstances giving us legal reasons to close the investigation,” Pshonka told a news conference in Kiev.
He said the case had not been terminated yet only because Yushchenko had continually refused to give blood tests and offered little cooperation in the official investigation.
“For the sake of history, so that the closing verdict is unbiased, it is desirable that Yushchenko give his blood sample,” Pshonka said.
The suspected dioxin poisoning in September 2004 during the presidential election campaign in Ukraine made Yushchenko seriously ill, and left his face badly disfigured.
The original medical reports by toxicologists from Switzerland, which claimed dioxin levels in Yushchenko’s body 50,000 times above normal, were sharply criticized for lack of supporting, peer-reviewed research.
The blood tests by Ukrainian doctors in November 2005 were mysteriously destroyed.
Yushchenko poisoning theory was officially supported by Ukrainian authorities during his presidency from January 2005 until February 2010.
However, a new team of investigators assigned to the case after Yushchenko lost power to his long-term rival Viktor Yanukovych, alleged that the Yushchenko dioxin poisoning could have been falsified to strengthen his positions during 2004 presidential elections.
Investigators demanded that the ex-president give new blood tests, as traces of dioxin remain in blood forever.
Yushchenko, whose health has improved significantly since 2004, has refused to cooperate and said last year he wanted to "close that chapter" in his life.
Ukraine Jails Ex-Minister And Tymoshenko Ally Filipchuk
KIEV, Ukraine -- A court in Ukraine has jailed former Environment Minister Heorhiy Filipchuk for abuse of office - an ally of ex-PM Yulia Tymoshenko, who is also in jail.
Filipchuk was jailed in Kiev for three years over a contract with a law firm, Astapov Lawyers, concerning a Black Sea shelf exploration deal.
His lawyer called the ruling "absurd" and said he would appeal against it.
Tymoshenko, in prison near Kharkiv, complains of acute back pain.
A Polish Euro MP visited her on Thursday.
The meeting at Kachanivska penal colony, in eastern Ukraine, lasted an hour, conservative MEP Pawel Kowal said.
"She told me about problems with her spine that require treatment," he said.
"She told me that she must lie down practically all the time and can only sustain a sitting position for a few minutes," he added.
The European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group says it is the first time that an MEP has visited the imprisoned Ukrainian opposition leader, who was a key figure in the pro-Western 2004 Orange Revolution.
On Friday Mr Kowal visited the imprisoned former Interior Minister Yuri Lutsenko, another ally of Tymoshenko, Interfax-Ukraine news agency reports.
He was jailed in February for four years, for abuse of office and embezzlement.
On 17 April the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg will hear a complaint from Lutsenko, in which he alleges the Ukrainian authorities violated his rights.
The Filipchuk case dates back to December 2010.
He had been under house arrest for a year before being jailed on Thursday.
Tymoshenko, 50, is a fierce critic of President Viktor Yanukovych.
She was sentenced to seven years in jail last October for abuse of power.
The case has strained relations between Ukraine and the EU.
Her conviction relates to a 10-year gas deal with Russia she signed in 2009, when she was still prime minister.
Prosecutors said Tymoshenko did not have cabinet approval to sign, and the deal was ruinous for the Ukrainian economy.
She denies wrongdoing but lost an appeal against the verdict in December.
She calls it political revenge by President Yanukovych.
Filipchuk was jailed in Kiev for three years over a contract with a law firm, Astapov Lawyers, concerning a Black Sea shelf exploration deal.
His lawyer called the ruling "absurd" and said he would appeal against it.
Tymoshenko, in prison near Kharkiv, complains of acute back pain.
A Polish Euro MP visited her on Thursday.
The meeting at Kachanivska penal colony, in eastern Ukraine, lasted an hour, conservative MEP Pawel Kowal said.
"She told me about problems with her spine that require treatment," he said.
"She told me that she must lie down practically all the time and can only sustain a sitting position for a few minutes," he added.
The European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group says it is the first time that an MEP has visited the imprisoned Ukrainian opposition leader, who was a key figure in the pro-Western 2004 Orange Revolution.
On Friday Mr Kowal visited the imprisoned former Interior Minister Yuri Lutsenko, another ally of Tymoshenko, Interfax-Ukraine news agency reports.
He was jailed in February for four years, for abuse of office and embezzlement.
On 17 April the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg will hear a complaint from Lutsenko, in which he alleges the Ukrainian authorities violated his rights.
The Filipchuk case dates back to December 2010.
He had been under house arrest for a year before being jailed on Thursday.
Tymoshenko, 50, is a fierce critic of President Viktor Yanukovych.
She was sentenced to seven years in jail last October for abuse of power.
The case has strained relations between Ukraine and the EU.
Her conviction relates to a 10-year gas deal with Russia she signed in 2009, when she was still prime minister.
Prosecutors said Tymoshenko did not have cabinet approval to sign, and the deal was ruinous for the Ukrainian economy.
She denies wrongdoing but lost an appeal against the verdict in December.
She calls it political revenge by President Yanukovych.
Court Reduces Voting Districts For Kiev
KIEV, Ukraine -- A Constitution Court ruling announced on Thursday may reduce the number of election districts in the city of Kiev, de-facto benefiting the ruling Regions Party ahead of the October parliamentary elections.
The Court deemed unconstitutional a part of the election law that allows Ukrainian voters temporarily living overseas to cast their ballots for candidates in Kiev districts.
The Court acted on a petition from 59 Regions Party lawmakers.
The ruling suggests that about 400,000 Ukrainians living overseas that traditionally vote for pro-Western candidates will only be able to vote for parties, but not for individual lawmakers in majority districts.
This may effectively reduce to 13 from 16 the number of lawmakers to be elected from Kiev, and may relocate the three seats to eastern regions where the Regions Party dominates the vote.
Half of the 450-seat Parliament will be elected on a party-list vote and another half will be elected in individual constituencies.
Arseniy Yatseniuk, the leader of the opposition Front of Changes party who is likely to lead Ukraine’s united opposition for the election, accused President Viktor Yanukovych and his Regions Party of breaking a pact on fair elections with opposition.
“The government understands that the Kievites will not support them that’s why they try to get more mandates in regions where it can falsify the elections,” Yatseniuk said.
“The election process has begun and the swindlers from the Regions Party have again decided to change the rules of the game for their benefit.”
“The pact on fair elections is broken by President Yanukovych,” Yatseniuk said.
“Pandora’s Box was opened in Parliament concerning the change of the election law.”
The law, approved in November 2011 by 366 lawmakers, including by 98 opposition deputies, was praised as a compromise between the ruling Regions Party and the opposition groups.
The law eased fears of possible boycott of the election by the opposition groups, a move that would most likely make the elections not legitimate.
Although losing on some issues, the opposition groups managed to push through amendments that make it more difficult for pro-government parties to dominate election commissions that will eventually count ballots.
This is supposed to reduce possible election fraud.
The law also increased the threshold that is required for entering Parliament on party lists to 5% from 3% currently, potentially hurting small parties.
Zhanna Usenko-Chorna, a deputy head of the Central Election Commission who is thought to be loyal to opposition groups, said the latest court ruling violates the constitution by denying the right of the Ukrainian living overseas the right to vote for candidates in individual constituencies.
“The article No. 22 of the constitution guarantees the right for the people to have equal election rights,” Usenko-Chorna told Ukrainian News agency.
“The situation shaped towards restricting this right.”
But Yatseniuk said that the opposition groups will win the elections, and said the judges of the Constitutional Court will be responsible for their latest ruling.
“The united opposition will win the elections anyway, despite all machinations by the Constitutional Court, whose judges will bear responsibility for today’s ruling,” Yatseniuk said.
The Court deemed unconstitutional a part of the election law that allows Ukrainian voters temporarily living overseas to cast their ballots for candidates in Kiev districts.
The Court acted on a petition from 59 Regions Party lawmakers.
The ruling suggests that about 400,000 Ukrainians living overseas that traditionally vote for pro-Western candidates will only be able to vote for parties, but not for individual lawmakers in majority districts.
This may effectively reduce to 13 from 16 the number of lawmakers to be elected from Kiev, and may relocate the three seats to eastern regions where the Regions Party dominates the vote.
Half of the 450-seat Parliament will be elected on a party-list vote and another half will be elected in individual constituencies.
Arseniy Yatseniuk, the leader of the opposition Front of Changes party who is likely to lead Ukraine’s united opposition for the election, accused President Viktor Yanukovych and his Regions Party of breaking a pact on fair elections with opposition.
“The government understands that the Kievites will not support them that’s why they try to get more mandates in regions where it can falsify the elections,” Yatseniuk said.
“The election process has begun and the swindlers from the Regions Party have again decided to change the rules of the game for their benefit.”
“The pact on fair elections is broken by President Yanukovych,” Yatseniuk said.
“Pandora’s Box was opened in Parliament concerning the change of the election law.”
The law, approved in November 2011 by 366 lawmakers, including by 98 opposition deputies, was praised as a compromise between the ruling Regions Party and the opposition groups.
The law eased fears of possible boycott of the election by the opposition groups, a move that would most likely make the elections not legitimate.
Although losing on some issues, the opposition groups managed to push through amendments that make it more difficult for pro-government parties to dominate election commissions that will eventually count ballots.
This is supposed to reduce possible election fraud.
The law also increased the threshold that is required for entering Parliament on party lists to 5% from 3% currently, potentially hurting small parties.
Zhanna Usenko-Chorna, a deputy head of the Central Election Commission who is thought to be loyal to opposition groups, said the latest court ruling violates the constitution by denying the right of the Ukrainian living overseas the right to vote for candidates in individual constituencies.
“The article No. 22 of the constitution guarantees the right for the people to have equal election rights,” Usenko-Chorna told Ukrainian News agency.
“The situation shaped towards restricting this right.”
But Yatseniuk said that the opposition groups will win the elections, and said the judges of the Constitutional Court will be responsible for their latest ruling.
“The united opposition will win the elections anyway, despite all machinations by the Constitutional Court, whose judges will bear responsibility for today’s ruling,” Yatseniuk said.
Saturday, 24 March 2012
Ukraine’s Party of Regions Uses Populist Promises, Acquires New Allies To Win Election
KIEV, Ukraine -- Opinion polls show that although the ruling Party of Regions (PRU) remains the most popular party, it may lose the parliamentary election scheduled for October 28 to the combined forces of the opposition.
Economic growth has slowed considerably of late so the ruling party cannot boast of a strong economy ahead of the election.
Neither has the government managed to improve relations with Russia and the European Union, as PRU leader Viktor Yanukovych promised when he was elected president two years ago.
Consequently, there is not much left Yanukovych can do to improve the party’s standing in the seven months remaining before the election.
The PRU has made it clear that it will bet on populism and the elimination of rivals through enrolling them in the PRU.
Yanukovych has already promised handouts to the poorest strata so his economic team is racking its brains to find the $2 billion needed for higher pensions, low mortgage rates and compensations to the depositors of the defunct Soviet state savings bank.
Yanukovych’s economy adviser, Iryna Akimova, conceded recently that his social initiatives might cost even more than that while, for the moment, no more than $1.4 billion can be guaranteed.
She suggested more could be raised from selling mineral extraction licenses and increasing personal income tax rate for the rich to 20 percent from the current 17 percent.
Like in all of its previous election campaigns, the PRU will play the Russian language card.
Speaking in an interview ahead of his visit to Moscow, excerpts from which were published by the Russian news agency ITAR-TASS on March 18, Yanukovych said Ukraine’s bilingual population was in favor of giving an official status to Russian.
Several media outlets interpreted that as Yanukovych’s intention to give Russian the status of an official language on par with Ukrainian.
However, he meant giving Russian the status of a regional language for areas where more than 10 percent of the population regards Russian as their mother tongue.
In order to pass a law on this, Yanukovych will need only a simple majority of votes in the 450-seat unicameral legislature, which is dominated by the PRU.
A state language status for Russian would require two-thirds of the votes in order to change the constitution.
Considerably more than half of Ukrainians speak Russian fluently, around one third prefer Russian in everyday communication, and most newspapers come out in Russian.
Yet, Russian has no official status in Ukraine.
A recent opinion poll by the Kiev International Institute of Sociology has shown that 47 percent of Ukrainians are in favor of giving some status to Russian.
The PRU’s traditional strongholds in eastern and southern Ukraine are Russophone, so the PRU naturally plays the language card in all elections.
However, the PRU hardly does anything to raise the status of Russian once each election campaign is over, as Yanukovych’s bitter rival, Yulia Tymoshenko, sarcastically remarked on her website.
Most recently, the PRU has gotten rid of a potentially strong rival party.
Deputy Prime Minister Serhy Tyhypko disbanded his liberal party Strong Ukraine (SU), called on its members to join the PRU and did so himself at the PRU congress on March 17.
Tyhypko was elected deputy to the party’s chairman, Mykola Azarov, who is also the prime minister.
It has been rumored that Tyhypko, who came in third after Yanukovych and Tymoshenko in the 2010 presidential election with 13 percent of the vote, may eventually replace Azarov in both positions.
Tyhypko himself told journalists at the congress that he would not mind becoming the PRU leader.
Thanks to taking over SU, the PRU may gain additional percentage points in the October parliamentary election.
The popular approval rating of SU, which targeted the nascent middle class, has been hovering around 3-4 percent during the past several months, compared to the PRU’s 14-18 percent.
The PRU will not stop at enrolling Tyhypko and his people.
Two more small parties are expected to merge with the PRU soon said deputy ideology chief, Volodymyr Demydko, on the sidelines of the PRU congress.
He added that the PRU’s strategy was to attract bright personalities who could be small party leaders while not necessarily taking over whole parties.
Emergencies Minister Viktor Baloha, who chairs United Center, a small party that used to be in the camp of former President Viktor Yushchenko, has not ruled out that his party could one day merge with the PRU.
Oleksandr Sin, the mayor of the large industrial town of Zaporizhya, which is one of the PRU’s strongholds, announced most recently that he would join the PRU.
Sin was elected mayor in 2010 as a candidate from Tymoshenko’s Fatherland party.
He left Fatherland only a month after that.
Economic growth has slowed considerably of late so the ruling party cannot boast of a strong economy ahead of the election.
Neither has the government managed to improve relations with Russia and the European Union, as PRU leader Viktor Yanukovych promised when he was elected president two years ago.
Consequently, there is not much left Yanukovych can do to improve the party’s standing in the seven months remaining before the election.
The PRU has made it clear that it will bet on populism and the elimination of rivals through enrolling them in the PRU.
Yanukovych has already promised handouts to the poorest strata so his economic team is racking its brains to find the $2 billion needed for higher pensions, low mortgage rates and compensations to the depositors of the defunct Soviet state savings bank.
Yanukovych’s economy adviser, Iryna Akimova, conceded recently that his social initiatives might cost even more than that while, for the moment, no more than $1.4 billion can be guaranteed.
She suggested more could be raised from selling mineral extraction licenses and increasing personal income tax rate for the rich to 20 percent from the current 17 percent.
Like in all of its previous election campaigns, the PRU will play the Russian language card.
Speaking in an interview ahead of his visit to Moscow, excerpts from which were published by the Russian news agency ITAR-TASS on March 18, Yanukovych said Ukraine’s bilingual population was in favor of giving an official status to Russian.
Several media outlets interpreted that as Yanukovych’s intention to give Russian the status of an official language on par with Ukrainian.
However, he meant giving Russian the status of a regional language for areas where more than 10 percent of the population regards Russian as their mother tongue.
In order to pass a law on this, Yanukovych will need only a simple majority of votes in the 450-seat unicameral legislature, which is dominated by the PRU.
A state language status for Russian would require two-thirds of the votes in order to change the constitution.
Considerably more than half of Ukrainians speak Russian fluently, around one third prefer Russian in everyday communication, and most newspapers come out in Russian.
Yet, Russian has no official status in Ukraine.
A recent opinion poll by the Kiev International Institute of Sociology has shown that 47 percent of Ukrainians are in favor of giving some status to Russian.
The PRU’s traditional strongholds in eastern and southern Ukraine are Russophone, so the PRU naturally plays the language card in all elections.
However, the PRU hardly does anything to raise the status of Russian once each election campaign is over, as Yanukovych’s bitter rival, Yulia Tymoshenko, sarcastically remarked on her website.
Most recently, the PRU has gotten rid of a potentially strong rival party.
Deputy Prime Minister Serhy Tyhypko disbanded his liberal party Strong Ukraine (SU), called on its members to join the PRU and did so himself at the PRU congress on March 17.
Tyhypko was elected deputy to the party’s chairman, Mykola Azarov, who is also the prime minister.
It has been rumored that Tyhypko, who came in third after Yanukovych and Tymoshenko in the 2010 presidential election with 13 percent of the vote, may eventually replace Azarov in both positions.
Tyhypko himself told journalists at the congress that he would not mind becoming the PRU leader.
Thanks to taking over SU, the PRU may gain additional percentage points in the October parliamentary election.
The popular approval rating of SU, which targeted the nascent middle class, has been hovering around 3-4 percent during the past several months, compared to the PRU’s 14-18 percent.
The PRU will not stop at enrolling Tyhypko and his people.
Two more small parties are expected to merge with the PRU soon said deputy ideology chief, Volodymyr Demydko, on the sidelines of the PRU congress.
He added that the PRU’s strategy was to attract bright personalities who could be small party leaders while not necessarily taking over whole parties.
Emergencies Minister Viktor Baloha, who chairs United Center, a small party that used to be in the camp of former President Viktor Yushchenko, has not ruled out that his party could one day merge with the PRU.
Oleksandr Sin, the mayor of the large industrial town of Zaporizhya, which is one of the PRU’s strongholds, announced most recently that he would join the PRU.
Sin was elected mayor in 2010 as a candidate from Tymoshenko’s Fatherland party.
He left Fatherland only a month after that.
Ukraine, Russia Leaders To Talk Gas In May
KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukraine hopes to work out a new deal on the supplies of Russian gas by late May, after Russian president elect Vladimir Putin assumes power, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich said on Thursday.
Yanukovich's government has sought for more than a year to negotiate a lower price on Russian gas but talks have produced no results so far.
Kiev, which is paying $416 per thousand cubic metres, sees a fairer price at $250.
"Expert groups are working right now, and we hope by the end of May, by the last decade of May, an acceptable solution will be found that we will discuss with... Putin," UNIAN news agency quoted Yanukovich as saying on a trip to the south-eastern city of Zaporizhya.
Yanukovich, who met Putin in Moscow this week said he also planned to meet the Russian prime minister in mid-April, before his May 7 inauguration as president.
Ukraine's government says the high price of imported gas is a drag on the country's economy and state budget.
Ukraine heavily subsidises gas supplies to households and heating companies.
Rating agency Standard and Poor's downgraded its outlook on Ukraine's credit ratings to negative citing, among other factors, the "lack of clarity over the ultimate direction of government policy" with regards to gas talks with Russia.
Russia has long insisted it would review the price only if its giant gas company Gazprom was allowed to take over Ukrainian gas transit pipelines or if Ukraine joined a Russia-led Customs Union.
Kiev has so far dismissed both options.
However, Yanukovich is now under political pressure to deliver a solution to the gas issue as his Party of the Regions has been slipping in opinion polls ahead of the October parliament elections.
Previous price disputes between the two nations have led to disruptions of Gazprom's supplies to Europe through Ukraine's territory, prompting Russia to create alternative export routes that bypass Ukraine.
Yanukovich's government has sought for more than a year to negotiate a lower price on Russian gas but talks have produced no results so far.
Kiev, which is paying $416 per thousand cubic metres, sees a fairer price at $250.
"Expert groups are working right now, and we hope by the end of May, by the last decade of May, an acceptable solution will be found that we will discuss with... Putin," UNIAN news agency quoted Yanukovich as saying on a trip to the south-eastern city of Zaporizhya.
Yanukovich, who met Putin in Moscow this week said he also planned to meet the Russian prime minister in mid-April, before his May 7 inauguration as president.
Ukraine's government says the high price of imported gas is a drag on the country's economy and state budget.
Ukraine heavily subsidises gas supplies to households and heating companies.
Rating agency Standard and Poor's downgraded its outlook on Ukraine's credit ratings to negative citing, among other factors, the "lack of clarity over the ultimate direction of government policy" with regards to gas talks with Russia.
Russia has long insisted it would review the price only if its giant gas company Gazprom was allowed to take over Ukrainian gas transit pipelines or if Ukraine joined a Russia-led Customs Union.
Kiev has so far dismissed both options.
However, Yanukovich is now under political pressure to deliver a solution to the gas issue as his Party of the Regions has been slipping in opinion polls ahead of the October parliament elections.
Previous price disputes between the two nations have led to disruptions of Gazprom's supplies to Europe through Ukraine's territory, prompting Russia to create alternative export routes that bypass Ukraine.
NBU Cuts Discount Rate By 25 Basis Points
KIEV, Ukraine -- The National Bank of Ukraine on Thursday cut its key interest rate, responding to slowing consumer inflation and seeking to boost economic expansion as the country faces financial challenges.
The NBU cut the discount rate, the rate at which it lends money to commercial banks, by 25 basis points to 7.5%, in its first action on the rate since August 2010.
The regulator also lowered reserve requirements for commercial banks, making more credit resources available for lending to the real economy.
“Favorable price dynamics create opportunity for taking additional stimulus measures, in particular using interest rate levers, for boosting credit to the real economy,” the NBU said in a statement posted on its Website.
Ukraine’s consumer inflation slowed to an annualized 3% in February from 3.7% in January, and down from 9% in the mid 2011 and 26% in 2008, according to the central bank.
Ukraine’s economic growth is forecast to slow to 3.9% in 2012 from about 5% in 2011, as Ukraine is hit by weakening global demand for steel, its main export.
The rate cut comes after a 18-month period of no action as the NBU has been watching economic developments.
The NBU cut its discount rate three times between June and August 2010, also citing lower inflation and greater influx of hard currency into the country.
The NBU started its rate-cutting cycle on June 8, 2010, lowering the rate to 9.5% from 10.25%, and then cutting the rate again on July 8, 2010 to 8.5% from 9.5%.
The NBU said it managed to fend off pressure on the hryvnia, the local currency, by encouraging people to save money in hryvnias rather than in hard currency.
Hryvnia-denominated deposits rose by 3% in February, compared with 1.5% increase for deposits denominated in hard currencies, such as the U.S. dollar and the euro.
People bought $373 million worth of hard currency in February, down from $556 million in January and $740 million in December 2010, after the central bank had introduced administrative restrictions on hard currency purchases.
The restrictions include a requirement for an individual to produce an ID at a commercial bank or an exchange kiosk to report name and address while buying hard currency.
Meanwhile, the government is facing some serious challenges later this year following the suspension of a $15.5 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund, and difficulties in securing economic aid from Russia on acceptable political terms.
The NBU cut the discount rate, the rate at which it lends money to commercial banks, by 25 basis points to 7.5%, in its first action on the rate since August 2010.
The regulator also lowered reserve requirements for commercial banks, making more credit resources available for lending to the real economy.
“Favorable price dynamics create opportunity for taking additional stimulus measures, in particular using interest rate levers, for boosting credit to the real economy,” the NBU said in a statement posted on its Website.
Ukraine’s consumer inflation slowed to an annualized 3% in February from 3.7% in January, and down from 9% in the mid 2011 and 26% in 2008, according to the central bank.
Ukraine’s economic growth is forecast to slow to 3.9% in 2012 from about 5% in 2011, as Ukraine is hit by weakening global demand for steel, its main export.
The rate cut comes after a 18-month period of no action as the NBU has been watching economic developments.
The NBU cut its discount rate three times between June and August 2010, also citing lower inflation and greater influx of hard currency into the country.
The NBU started its rate-cutting cycle on June 8, 2010, lowering the rate to 9.5% from 10.25%, and then cutting the rate again on July 8, 2010 to 8.5% from 9.5%.
The NBU said it managed to fend off pressure on the hryvnia, the local currency, by encouraging people to save money in hryvnias rather than in hard currency.
Hryvnia-denominated deposits rose by 3% in February, compared with 1.5% increase for deposits denominated in hard currencies, such as the U.S. dollar and the euro.
People bought $373 million worth of hard currency in February, down from $556 million in January and $740 million in December 2010, after the central bank had introduced administrative restrictions on hard currency purchases.
The restrictions include a requirement for an individual to produce an ID at a commercial bank or an exchange kiosk to report name and address while buying hard currency.
Meanwhile, the government is facing some serious challenges later this year following the suspension of a $15.5 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund, and difficulties in securing economic aid from Russia on acceptable political terms.
Ukrainian Doctors Admit Tymoshenko Needs Hospital Care
KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukrainian doctors have admitted that jailed former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko is in need of hospital care as her health deteriorates.
Tymoshenko is serving a seven year sentence for abuse of office in a penal colony in Kharkiv, some 500 kilometers from Kiev.
Tymoshenko has accused local doctors of denying her proper treatment and demanded foreign doctors treat her.
Up till now, Ukrainian officials have denied Tymoshenko was ill or being mistreated.
Now, doctors appointed by the government say Tymoshenko needs urgent medical care.
"Now we can talk about the pain syndrome becoming chronic," said Yuri Kotlyarevsky, head neurosurgeon of Kharkiv State Healthcare Department.
"We do not reject this and are ready to carry [out treatment] in a hospital, in a specialised hospital outside the jail, using spiral computer tomography [a type of CT scan]."
Doctors also admitted that the delays in getting Tymoshenko hospital care meant that treatment would be different now.
"They [German doctors] said that yes, maybe in the beginning, in the beginning of the process it would make sense to talk about a surgical intervention."
"Now the situation is different, and they themselves offered this course of therapy which we are talking about today, but it excludes the surgical intervention, and we agreed," explained Mykola Korzh, director of the Ukrainian Institute of Spinal Pathology.
Tymoshenko's relatives and supporters, as well as the European Court of Human Rights, have urged Ukraine's authorities to attend to Tymoshenko's health needs.
Supporters and much of the international community suspect the case against Tymoshenko is politically motivated with the aim of silencing a leading figure of Ukraine's opposition.
However, a majority in Ukraine's parliament voted on March 20 to back a motion accusing Tymoshenko of "high treason" for her role in negotiating a gas contract with Russia in 2009, the grounds for her jailing.
In December, the EU delayed the signing of a major trade agreement with Ukraine due to concerns over the jailing of Tymoshenko.
President Viktor Yanukovych has ignored calls to release Tymoshenko, who is now facing fresh charges dating back to the 1990s when the so-called "gas princess" ran a private natural-gas trading company, United Energy Systems of Ukraine.
Tymoshenko lost to Yanukovych in a tight presidential race in 2010.
Tymoshenko is serving a seven year sentence for abuse of office in a penal colony in Kharkiv, some 500 kilometers from Kiev.
Tymoshenko has accused local doctors of denying her proper treatment and demanded foreign doctors treat her.
Up till now, Ukrainian officials have denied Tymoshenko was ill or being mistreated.
Now, doctors appointed by the government say Tymoshenko needs urgent medical care.
"Now we can talk about the pain syndrome becoming chronic," said Yuri Kotlyarevsky, head neurosurgeon of Kharkiv State Healthcare Department.
"We do not reject this and are ready to carry [out treatment] in a hospital, in a specialised hospital outside the jail, using spiral computer tomography [a type of CT scan]."
Doctors also admitted that the delays in getting Tymoshenko hospital care meant that treatment would be different now.
"They [German doctors] said that yes, maybe in the beginning, in the beginning of the process it would make sense to talk about a surgical intervention."
"Now the situation is different, and they themselves offered this course of therapy which we are talking about today, but it excludes the surgical intervention, and we agreed," explained Mykola Korzh, director of the Ukrainian Institute of Spinal Pathology.
Tymoshenko's relatives and supporters, as well as the European Court of Human Rights, have urged Ukraine's authorities to attend to Tymoshenko's health needs.
Supporters and much of the international community suspect the case against Tymoshenko is politically motivated with the aim of silencing a leading figure of Ukraine's opposition.
However, a majority in Ukraine's parliament voted on March 20 to back a motion accusing Tymoshenko of "high treason" for her role in negotiating a gas contract with Russia in 2009, the grounds for her jailing.
In December, the EU delayed the signing of a major trade agreement with Ukraine due to concerns over the jailing of Tymoshenko.
President Viktor Yanukovych has ignored calls to release Tymoshenko, who is now facing fresh charges dating back to the 1990s when the so-called "gas princess" ran a private natural-gas trading company, United Energy Systems of Ukraine.
Tymoshenko lost to Yanukovych in a tight presidential race in 2010.
Sunday, 18 March 2012
European Parliament demands perfect democracy from Russia
The European Parliament adopted an ambiguous resolution on the presidential elections in Russia. The resolution serves two masters, as they say. On the one hand, the European Parliament described the electoral process in Russia as "not free and unfair." On the other hand, the parliament is optimistic about the future and the further dialogue with Russia.
However, Russia could expect nothing else from Strasburg, which has been trying to put pressure on Moscow over its stance on Syria. Practically all world leaders - from Merkel and Cameron to Obama - congratulated Vladimir Putin on his victory.
The European officials particularly believe that the Russian voters had been given a "limited choice," because the Central Electoral Commission refused to register the candidate of Yabloko party, Grigory Yavlinsky. The Commission denied registration to Yavlinsky after it had rejected, about 25% of signature sheets in his support (that were actually photocopies).
European MPs called on the Russian authorities to "thoroughly and openly" investigate the violations, which observers, including OSCE/ODIHR representatives, pointed out. However, the MPs called upon themselves to look into the future, rather than the past. The European deputies also stated that the European Union was determined to continue the development of the strategic partnership with Russia.
The European resolution pleased the co-chairman of People's Freedom Party (known for the Russian initials as PARNAS), Mikhail Kasyanov. Upon his return from Strasbourg, the politician told Interfax that he was "satisfied with the fact that European politicians open their eyes wider to the deteriorating situation with human rights and political freedoms in Russia. This political assessment coincides with both my position and that of PARNAS," the opposition politician stated. It appears that Mr. Kasyanov has decided to ignore the other side of the story.
The Executive Director of the Russian Foundation for Free Elections, Igor Bogdanov, expressed his opinion about the European resolution in an interview with Pravda.Ru. According to him, "the Russians elected their new president in a unique, well-organized and well-conducted election." "It was unique because so many web-cameras have never been used at poll stations anywhere in the world before," he added.
According to the expert, the presidential election campaign had certain violations and drawbacks. "But it's a natural process that accompanies any election campaign," said Bogdanov. "Assessing any campaign in Europe or in the U.S., one can find even a larger number of drawbacks," he said. "And it is not objective to question the election, which took place in our country, especially if it is being done by the people, who have never been here, but who instead listen those who scream and shout about mass violations," says Bogdanov.
A recent poll conducted by the All-Russian Public Opinion Center showed that only a third of respondents admitted "minor fraud" which did not eventually affect the outcome of the vote (34%). Those who do not believe in the announced victory of Vladimir Putin are in the minority (14%). Moreover, according to sociologists, only 2 percent of respondents said that they had noticed violations with their own eyes. On the whole, 78 percent of voters do not doubt the legitimacy of the elected president.
The head of the Russian Public Institute of the Electoral Law, Igor Borisov, said that the European Parliament resolution "had nothing to do with reality." "Official representatives of the European Parliament (it goes about the delegation), were not observing the elections in Russia. They make their statements from the words of Russian politicians - the losers, who reside in Europe and who constantly tell some sort of horrible things about the Russian elections," Borisov told Pravda.Ru.
"We had five European MPs working at the independent group of international observers. They were present here and could personally observe all of the voting and counting procedures," Igor Borisov added. "All of them highly estimated the voting process and the counting of votes. Moreover, they recommended to use some elements of the electoral system for the elections to the European Parliament. I would like to see the transparency of the procedures, through which the European Parliament is formed," concluded the expert.
Indeed, one may assume that the elections in the EU or in the United States are perfect in contrast to the "dirty Russia." In France, for example, the candidate of the National Front far-right party, Marine Le Pen, did not have the right to participate in the presidential campaign just before March 15. And all of her appeals to the Constitutional Court were wasted. In Estonia and Latvia, the so-called non-citizens have no voting rights at all.
Do we need to say anything about the manipulations with voting lists or about the use of administrative resources in the United States? Democrats still accuse Florida governor Jeb Bush of giving decisive help to his brother during the presidential campaign in 2000.
There are no perfect democracy role models. However, the European Parliament does not want to understand that.
However, Russia could expect nothing else from Strasburg, which has been trying to put pressure on Moscow over its stance on Syria. Practically all world leaders - from Merkel and Cameron to Obama - congratulated Vladimir Putin on his victory.
The European officials particularly believe that the Russian voters had been given a "limited choice," because the Central Electoral Commission refused to register the candidate of Yabloko party, Grigory Yavlinsky. The Commission denied registration to Yavlinsky after it had rejected, about 25% of signature sheets in his support (that were actually photocopies).
European MPs called on the Russian authorities to "thoroughly and openly" investigate the violations, which observers, including OSCE/ODIHR representatives, pointed out. However, the MPs called upon themselves to look into the future, rather than the past. The European deputies also stated that the European Union was determined to continue the development of the strategic partnership with Russia.
The European resolution pleased the co-chairman of People's Freedom Party (known for the Russian initials as PARNAS), Mikhail Kasyanov. Upon his return from Strasbourg, the politician told Interfax that he was "satisfied with the fact that European politicians open their eyes wider to the deteriorating situation with human rights and political freedoms in Russia. This political assessment coincides with both my position and that of PARNAS," the opposition politician stated. It appears that Mr. Kasyanov has decided to ignore the other side of the story.
The Executive Director of the Russian Foundation for Free Elections, Igor Bogdanov, expressed his opinion about the European resolution in an interview with Pravda.Ru. According to him, "the Russians elected their new president in a unique, well-organized and well-conducted election." "It was unique because so many web-cameras have never been used at poll stations anywhere in the world before," he added.
According to the expert, the presidential election campaign had certain violations and drawbacks. "But it's a natural process that accompanies any election campaign," said Bogdanov. "Assessing any campaign in Europe or in the U.S., one can find even a larger number of drawbacks," he said. "And it is not objective to question the election, which took place in our country, especially if it is being done by the people, who have never been here, but who instead listen those who scream and shout about mass violations," says Bogdanov.
A recent poll conducted by the All-Russian Public Opinion Center showed that only a third of respondents admitted "minor fraud" which did not eventually affect the outcome of the vote (34%). Those who do not believe in the announced victory of Vladimir Putin are in the minority (14%). Moreover, according to sociologists, only 2 percent of respondents said that they had noticed violations with their own eyes. On the whole, 78 percent of voters do not doubt the legitimacy of the elected president.
The head of the Russian Public Institute of the Electoral Law, Igor Borisov, said that the European Parliament resolution "had nothing to do with reality." "Official representatives of the European Parliament (it goes about the delegation), were not observing the elections in Russia. They make their statements from the words of Russian politicians - the losers, who reside in Europe and who constantly tell some sort of horrible things about the Russian elections," Borisov told Pravda.Ru.
"We had five European MPs working at the independent group of international observers. They were present here and could personally observe all of the voting and counting procedures," Igor Borisov added. "All of them highly estimated the voting process and the counting of votes. Moreover, they recommended to use some elements of the electoral system for the elections to the European Parliament. I would like to see the transparency of the procedures, through which the European Parliament is formed," concluded the expert.
Indeed, one may assume that the elections in the EU or in the United States are perfect in contrast to the "dirty Russia." In France, for example, the candidate of the National Front far-right party, Marine Le Pen, did not have the right to participate in the presidential campaign just before March 15. And all of her appeals to the Constitutional Court were wasted. In Estonia and Latvia, the so-called non-citizens have no voting rights at all.
Do we need to say anything about the manipulations with voting lists or about the use of administrative resources in the United States? Democrats still accuse Florida governor Jeb Bush of giving decisive help to his brother during the presidential campaign in 2000.
There are no perfect democracy role models. However, the European Parliament does not want to understand that.
Ukraine: Running Short Of Funds
KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovich is off to Moscow next week in his latest effort to secure economic support from his powerful neighbour, with a discount gas supply deal near the top of his list.
It’s a regular trip.
But Kiev’s financial needs are pressing: S&P on Thursday downgraded the credit outlook on Ukraine to “negative” while ministers talked of rescheduling $3bn in debts owed to the International Monetary Fund under a 2008 programme, even as Ukraine’s current programme has been suspended.
No wonder Yanukovich needs Russia.
With Ukraine heading for a balance of payments crunch, S&P’s downgrade came as little surprise.
Ukraine is this year scrambling to cover or rollover nearly $6bn in external and about $3bn in domestic debt obligations.
S&P revised its outlook on long-term foreign currency government bond rating to negative from stable, confirming the rating at B+.
The credit agency said:
"We are revising the outlook on our long-term sovereign ratings on Ukraine to negative, reflecting our opinion that ongoing uncertainty about the Ukraine government’s negotiations with the IMF and Gazprom is increasing refinancing risks."
"In our view, increased risk aversion toward Ukraine’s funding needs has been fuelled by the lack of clarity over the ultimate direction of government policy in relation to ongoing negotiations with the IMF and Russian gas company, OAO Gazprom."
A responsible administration would be working for a resumption of the current $15.5bn IMF programme that was frozen last year due to lack of fiscal reforms.
But instead, Yanukovich has recently announced $3bn in populist pension increases and other social handouts.
It’s an obvious bid to win back voter support before the October parliamentary election.
Alexander Valchyshen, head of research at Kiev-based investment bank ICU, said: “Surely this is pure populism and quite a sizable addition on the expenditures side.”
The added spending could increase the total national budget deficit (including the deficit of state gas company Naftogaz) from 5.2 per cent of GDP in 2011 to 8.5 per cent this year.
That’s a big shift in the wrong direction at a time when other European countries are trying to trim deficits expanding in responding to the 2008 crisis.
But boosting public borrowing doesn’t appear to be troubling Yanukovich, when the number he’s watching closely is his approval rating which has plunged towards single digit percentage levels since he narrowly beat Yulia Tymoshenko in a 2010 presidential contest.
Despite the recent jailing of Tymoshenko on charges widely deemed to be politically-motivated, Yanukovich’s grip on voter support may be weak.
Tymoshenko’s Fatherland party is out-polling his Party of Regions.
But it remains unclear how Yanukovich will fund these social expenditure increases given that he has increasingly alienated the IMF, the European Union ( a potential source of financial aid as well as a trade partner), and Russia.
None of the options are good.
Yanukovich could squeeze more taxes and fines out of businesses, something done in the past.
But this would also hurt him in the polls.
He could borrow on international markets, but it would be expensive.
During his first two years in power, Yanukovich has failed to broker a deal with Russia’s Gazprom that would bring lower gas prices.
Sensing Kiev’s weakness, Gazprom has, in return for cutting prices, demanded control over Ukraine’s strategic gas transit pipeline.
But handing it over could be political suicide.
The IMF wants Ukraine to increase gas prices on households to compensate for the higher prices and bring more transparency to the nation’s murky gas sector.
But such an increase would hurt voter support, and Yanukovich has recently declared prices won’t be raised.
“An increasingly desperate government is looking for other short-term fixes,” London-based Capital Economics wrote in a March 15 note.
Ukrainian officials this week admitted that talks on unfreezing additional IMF billion-dollar loans are at an “impasse.”
But, in a sign of desperation, they said the country would ask the Fund to restructure, or refinance more than $3bn in IMF loan payments that have to be covered this year on previous borrowings.
The IMF and market isn’t likely to agree.
“The IMF is highly unlikely to approve Ukraine’s [recent] request to restructure $3bn of loan repayments due this year, but the fact that the government is even considering such a move demonstrates the extent to which it is running out of options,” said Capital Economics.
With about $30bn in central bank reserves, the immediate risk of default is low.
The public debt-to-GDP is ratio is not high – 38.9 per cent at end-2011.
But populist policies means it is rising rapidly, with 43.5 per cent prospect by the year-end, according to JP Morgan.
External debt redemptions will increase in 2013 and stay high over the follwoing two years.
This is not a sustainable course.
It’s a regular trip.
But Kiev’s financial needs are pressing: S&P on Thursday downgraded the credit outlook on Ukraine to “negative” while ministers talked of rescheduling $3bn in debts owed to the International Monetary Fund under a 2008 programme, even as Ukraine’s current programme has been suspended.
No wonder Yanukovich needs Russia.
With Ukraine heading for a balance of payments crunch, S&P’s downgrade came as little surprise.
Ukraine is this year scrambling to cover or rollover nearly $6bn in external and about $3bn in domestic debt obligations.
S&P revised its outlook on long-term foreign currency government bond rating to negative from stable, confirming the rating at B+.
The credit agency said:
"We are revising the outlook on our long-term sovereign ratings on Ukraine to negative, reflecting our opinion that ongoing uncertainty about the Ukraine government’s negotiations with the IMF and Gazprom is increasing refinancing risks."
"In our view, increased risk aversion toward Ukraine’s funding needs has been fuelled by the lack of clarity over the ultimate direction of government policy in relation to ongoing negotiations with the IMF and Russian gas company, OAO Gazprom."
A responsible administration would be working for a resumption of the current $15.5bn IMF programme that was frozen last year due to lack of fiscal reforms.
But instead, Yanukovich has recently announced $3bn in populist pension increases and other social handouts.
It’s an obvious bid to win back voter support before the October parliamentary election.
Alexander Valchyshen, head of research at Kiev-based investment bank ICU, said: “Surely this is pure populism and quite a sizable addition on the expenditures side.”
The added spending could increase the total national budget deficit (including the deficit of state gas company Naftogaz) from 5.2 per cent of GDP in 2011 to 8.5 per cent this year.
That’s a big shift in the wrong direction at a time when other European countries are trying to trim deficits expanding in responding to the 2008 crisis.
But boosting public borrowing doesn’t appear to be troubling Yanukovich, when the number he’s watching closely is his approval rating which has plunged towards single digit percentage levels since he narrowly beat Yulia Tymoshenko in a 2010 presidential contest.
Despite the recent jailing of Tymoshenko on charges widely deemed to be politically-motivated, Yanukovich’s grip on voter support may be weak.
Tymoshenko’s Fatherland party is out-polling his Party of Regions.
But it remains unclear how Yanukovich will fund these social expenditure increases given that he has increasingly alienated the IMF, the European Union ( a potential source of financial aid as well as a trade partner), and Russia.
None of the options are good.
Yanukovich could squeeze more taxes and fines out of businesses, something done in the past.
But this would also hurt him in the polls.
He could borrow on international markets, but it would be expensive.
During his first two years in power, Yanukovich has failed to broker a deal with Russia’s Gazprom that would bring lower gas prices.
Sensing Kiev’s weakness, Gazprom has, in return for cutting prices, demanded control over Ukraine’s strategic gas transit pipeline.
But handing it over could be political suicide.
The IMF wants Ukraine to increase gas prices on households to compensate for the higher prices and bring more transparency to the nation’s murky gas sector.
But such an increase would hurt voter support, and Yanukovich has recently declared prices won’t be raised.
“An increasingly desperate government is looking for other short-term fixes,” London-based Capital Economics wrote in a March 15 note.
Ukrainian officials this week admitted that talks on unfreezing additional IMF billion-dollar loans are at an “impasse.”
But, in a sign of desperation, they said the country would ask the Fund to restructure, or refinance more than $3bn in IMF loan payments that have to be covered this year on previous borrowings.
The IMF and market isn’t likely to agree.
“The IMF is highly unlikely to approve Ukraine’s [recent] request to restructure $3bn of loan repayments due this year, but the fact that the government is even considering such a move demonstrates the extent to which it is running out of options,” said Capital Economics.
With about $30bn in central bank reserves, the immediate risk of default is low.
The public debt-to-GDP is ratio is not high – 38.9 per cent at end-2011.
But populist policies means it is rising rapidly, with 43.5 per cent prospect by the year-end, according to JP Morgan.
External debt redemptions will increase in 2013 and stay high over the follwoing two years.
This is not a sustainable course.
Ukraine Hires Lobbyist To Influence IMF
KIEV, Ukraine -- The Ukrainian government, facing a deadlock with the International Monetary Fund over resumption of its $15.5 billion loan program, has hired a U.S. lobbyist firm to try to get the money, a newspaper reported Wednesday.
The Washington-based firm, APCO Worldwide, on March 2 circulated a letter among its senior advisors around the globe, including former diplomats and elected officials, seeking assistance in dealing with the IMF.
The letter, apparently sent by Brent Crane, Program Manager at APCO Worldwide, was aimed at helping Ukraine to get around the key IMF demand of hiking natural gas prices for households, something the government has been refusing to do.
“We are looking for persons with strong ties to relevant IMF personnel who could be in the position of querying those personnel about whether there are opportunities for creativity here to avoid the gas price hikes, which still could achieve IMF objectives,” said the letter, which was obtained and published by Ukrayinska Pravda online newspaper.
“We would take that information and discuss it with the government of Ukraine, and try to build bridges between the IMF and Ukraine with the goal of moving beyond what is now a year-long impasse,” the letter said.
The government has earlier hired U.S. law firms to check whether the previous government, led by then Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, misspent any state money.
But the hiring of APCO comes after many government officials, including Prime Minister Mykola Azarov, have repeatedly said that Ukraine would be able to handle its foreign debts payments even without the IMF money.
The letter, called the ‘Urgent Request,’ mentions that “Finance Minister Valeriy Khoroshkovskiy has been seeking to find ‘compromise’ with the IMF,” but those talks failed.
Khoroshkovskiy was appointed the finance minister on January 18, but was on February 22 dismissed as the finance minister and moved to the position of the first deputy prime minister by President Viktor Yanukovych.
Yuriy Kolobov, who replaced Khoroshkovskiy as the finance minister, is supposed to visit Washington later this month for talks with the IMF, Azarov reported Tuesday.
Kolobov, who is believed to be a close ally of Oleksandr Yanukovych, the son of the president, is expected to meet Chris Jarvis, the recently appointed IMF’s new mission chief for Ukraine.
The $15.5 billion loan was frozen in early 2011 after the government had failed to increase by 50% natural gas prices for households and utility tariffs to balance the budget.
Ukraine may ask the IMF to resume the lending that would automatically go towards repaying its debts to the Washington-based lender, Azarov has suggested earlier this week.
Ukraine needs to repay about $3.2 billion to the IMF by the end of the year, and has been struggling with raising enough funds from capital markets.
The government paid $575 million to the IMF in February.
Serhiy Tyhypko, deputy prime minister in charge of social issues and one of the key negotiators with the IMF, on Wednesday admitted the talks were at impasse.
“I don’t know about the American lobbyists, but it is the fact that we have reached an impasse,” Tyhypko said at a press conference.
He said the only reason for suspended lending is the government’s refusal to hike gas prices for households, but said the government will not resort to hiking the prices this year.
“We are not going to do this,” he said.
In the letter, requesting assistance, APCO said the government believes raising the gas prices now would be “politically suicidal” for the governing Regions Party ahead of October 2012 elections.
APCO Worldwide was founded in 1984 and is an independently owned global communication consultancy with offices in major cities throughout the Americas, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia.
Its clients include corporations and governments; industry associations and nonprofit organizations; and seven of the top 10 companies on Fortune’s Global 500.
The Washington-based firm, APCO Worldwide, on March 2 circulated a letter among its senior advisors around the globe, including former diplomats and elected officials, seeking assistance in dealing with the IMF.
The letter, apparently sent by Brent Crane, Program Manager at APCO Worldwide, was aimed at helping Ukraine to get around the key IMF demand of hiking natural gas prices for households, something the government has been refusing to do.
“We are looking for persons with strong ties to relevant IMF personnel who could be in the position of querying those personnel about whether there are opportunities for creativity here to avoid the gas price hikes, which still could achieve IMF objectives,” said the letter, which was obtained and published by Ukrayinska Pravda online newspaper.
“We would take that information and discuss it with the government of Ukraine, and try to build bridges between the IMF and Ukraine with the goal of moving beyond what is now a year-long impasse,” the letter said.
The government has earlier hired U.S. law firms to check whether the previous government, led by then Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, misspent any state money.
But the hiring of APCO comes after many government officials, including Prime Minister Mykola Azarov, have repeatedly said that Ukraine would be able to handle its foreign debts payments even without the IMF money.
The letter, called the ‘Urgent Request,’ mentions that “Finance Minister Valeriy Khoroshkovskiy has been seeking to find ‘compromise’ with the IMF,” but those talks failed.
Khoroshkovskiy was appointed the finance minister on January 18, but was on February 22 dismissed as the finance minister and moved to the position of the first deputy prime minister by President Viktor Yanukovych.
Yuriy Kolobov, who replaced Khoroshkovskiy as the finance minister, is supposed to visit Washington later this month for talks with the IMF, Azarov reported Tuesday.
Kolobov, who is believed to be a close ally of Oleksandr Yanukovych, the son of the president, is expected to meet Chris Jarvis, the recently appointed IMF’s new mission chief for Ukraine.
The $15.5 billion loan was frozen in early 2011 after the government had failed to increase by 50% natural gas prices for households and utility tariffs to balance the budget.
Ukraine may ask the IMF to resume the lending that would automatically go towards repaying its debts to the Washington-based lender, Azarov has suggested earlier this week.
Ukraine needs to repay about $3.2 billion to the IMF by the end of the year, and has been struggling with raising enough funds from capital markets.
The government paid $575 million to the IMF in February.
Serhiy Tyhypko, deputy prime minister in charge of social issues and one of the key negotiators with the IMF, on Wednesday admitted the talks were at impasse.
“I don’t know about the American lobbyists, but it is the fact that we have reached an impasse,” Tyhypko said at a press conference.
He said the only reason for suspended lending is the government’s refusal to hike gas prices for households, but said the government will not resort to hiking the prices this year.
“We are not going to do this,” he said.
In the letter, requesting assistance, APCO said the government believes raising the gas prices now would be “politically suicidal” for the governing Regions Party ahead of October 2012 elections.
APCO Worldwide was founded in 1984 and is an independently owned global communication consultancy with offices in major cities throughout the Americas, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia.
Its clients include corporations and governments; industry associations and nonprofit organizations; and seven of the top 10 companies on Fortune’s Global 500.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)