Several brave members of Ukraine's Central Electoral Commission, including its deputy head, Zhanna Usenko-Chorna have been highly critical of the manner in which last month's parliamentary elections were conducted - their comments resonate with the damning assessments produced the OSCE/ODIHR and other international observers.
The head of the CEC, Volodymyr Shapoval, has been critical of judges who had interfered in the electoral process, and has called for them to be punished.
Shapoval agreed with some of his CEC colleagues who wanted results in several constituencies to be annulled, but he, and they were outvoted.
Now Foreign Policy Advisor to the Ukrainian President, Leonid Kozhara, who has been set to visit western capitals to whitewash the election process and results, has publicly criticised these people on PoR's official website: "The CEC is not a political body and its members should stay out of politics. Any inconsiderate frivolous political statements undermine the Ukraine's image in the world, and those who resort to dirty political insinuations have to understand this."
Your blogger considers the CEC's job is to conduct free and fair elections. They have every right to make comments on whether they succeeded or not in their task, and provide details of specific failings.
p.s. Kozhara's trip has been terrible. Last Friday he was torn to pieces by a well-briefed BBC interviewer on the 'Hardtalk' programme. His arguments looked as phony as his dodgy hairpiece....He may even get promoted soon..
Monday, November 12, 2012
Friday, November 09, 2012
Opposition candidates in disputed constituencies will continue to fight despite Azarov's offer
PM Azarov, in an official statement on the government site, has just said:
"The Government is seriously concerned about the situation which arose regarding the counting of votes in the elections to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in some single member districts.
As Prime Minister of Ukraine I've repeatedly spoken out about this.
Meanwhile, succession of events encourages us to officially call upon political parties and candidates, who're caught up in conflicts of counting votes, to stop these conflicts and to start a dialogue with each other."
I watched several opposition candidates from the 13 disputed single mandate constituencies as they were interviewed on Thursday's Mykola Knyazhytsky show on TVi. What struck me was their quiet dignity, intelligence and determination.
The stories they told were all very similar. The 'protocols' resulting from parallel vote counting at the lowest level were generally satisfactory [primarily because when these votes were 'totted up' at polling stations there was little chance of knowing for sure how the vote was going overall in the constituencies.] These protocols are in the public domain.
But once the protocols together with voting slips were delivered to constituency electoral commissions and it quickly became clear from the numbers on the protocols that bad news awaited the pro-authority candidates, the 'funny business' started. This took the form of power cuts and black-outs inside the building, unnecessary 'time-outs' and delaying tactics by the counters, seizure of votes in back-rooms by unknown persons of 'sporting appearance', tampering of bags containing the votes, and so on.
Most of these opposition candidates on the tv show were academics, doctors, bosses of small to medium businesses etc. They were standing against very prominent multi-millionaire businessmen who, in many cases, employ hundreds of persons [including security staff ]in the areas where they were standing for election...
These high-power businessmen say in self-justification of their criminal behaviour: 'Look, I have grown my business here and brought hundreds of jobs...what have these opposition candidates brought, what can they do for you?' As if this gives them the right to cheat...
Encouragingly the opposition candidates who considered they were cheated, declared they will continue their fight for justice using the enormous amount of evidence they have accumulated for as long as necessary. They complained however, that the dozens of law suits already put before judges challenging results, have all been, so far, treated with contempt and ignored.
p.s Yevheniya Tymoshenko on British Channel 4 TV interview here
"The Government is seriously concerned about the situation which arose regarding the counting of votes in the elections to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in some single member districts.
As Prime Minister of Ukraine I've repeatedly spoken out about this.
Meanwhile, succession of events encourages us to officially call upon political parties and candidates, who're caught up in conflicts of counting votes, to stop these conflicts and to start a dialogue with each other."
I watched several opposition candidates from the 13 disputed single mandate constituencies as they were interviewed on Thursday's Mykola Knyazhytsky show on TVi. What struck me was their quiet dignity, intelligence and determination.
The stories they told were all very similar. The 'protocols' resulting from parallel vote counting at the lowest level were generally satisfactory [primarily because when these votes were 'totted up' at polling stations there was little chance of knowing for sure how the vote was going overall in the constituencies.] These protocols are in the public domain.
But once the protocols together with voting slips were delivered to constituency electoral commissions and it quickly became clear from the numbers on the protocols that bad news awaited the pro-authority candidates, the 'funny business' started. This took the form of power cuts and black-outs inside the building, unnecessary 'time-outs' and delaying tactics by the counters, seizure of votes in back-rooms by unknown persons of 'sporting appearance', tampering of bags containing the votes, and so on.
Most of these opposition candidates on the tv show were academics, doctors, bosses of small to medium businesses etc. They were standing against very prominent multi-millionaire businessmen who, in many cases, employ hundreds of persons [including security staff ]in the areas where they were standing for election...
These high-power businessmen say in self-justification of their criminal behaviour: 'Look, I have grown my business here and brought hundreds of jobs...what have these opposition candidates brought, what can they do for you?' As if this gives them the right to cheat...
Encouragingly the opposition candidates who considered they were cheated, declared they will continue their fight for justice using the enormous amount of evidence they have accumulated for as long as necessary. They complained however, that the dozens of law suits already put before judges challenging results, have all been, so far, treated with contempt and ignored.
p.s Yevheniya Tymoshenko on British Channel 4 TV interview here
Thursday, November 08, 2012
The opposition's dilemma
Because the Central Electoral Commission have so far not been able to complete their count in some single mandate constituencies the authorities [under the instruction of the president] have grudgingly approved legally highly dubious reruns of the elections in five of the more than one dozen most hotly disputed simple majority constituencies. These re-elections could take place, by next March at the earliest, maybe. It seems the three opposition forces that will enter parliament have, kind of, agreed to this.
In your blogger's opinion both the authorities and the opposition are not behaving entirely correctly and are 'jumping the gun'.
According to Ukrainian law, the Central Electoral Commission have until next Monday to produce final election results..The CEC have not finished their task until this deadline is reached - they should not yet be allowed to 'wash their hands' of their responsibilities. The evidence of malfeasance which they must obviously possess has to be passed to law enforcement bodies to deal with.
If the CEC's stance remains unchanged until after next Monday, the opposition should make it absolutely clear - there is solid evidence of fraud in the 13 disputed constituencies and they will not accept the swearing in of any deputies for these constituencies. The opposition should insist any possible rerun election must first be preceded by criminal proceedings against wrongdoers in these constituences whose deeds made it necessary for additional elections to be held.
Mykola Knyazhytsky in his blog describes the opposition's dilemma. It should not tamely accept the authorities' ideas of compromise - but because the legal system in the country is in the firm grip of the president, fair judgements are unlikely too.
He goes on: "For the opposition the position is very uncomfortable. Despite the high vote of confidence which the opposition parties received, they are not strong enough to resist an organised and cynical government machine. It would be better to gather strength and present a united front in the next presidential election [in 2015].
But the government has placed the opposition in a position where it will be impossible for them to acquiesce to cynical fraud in some consitituences. That is why the government must revoke their decision and recognize the unfalsified election results according to the original protocols [which are already in the public domain], or the atmosphere will gradually becomes revolutionary, despite all of the talk that Ukrainians are most unwilling to take such radical steps. If the opposition agrees to this current brazen lawlessness, it will have to take some of the responsibility for it because it will be with their tacit consent that Ukraine turns into authoritarian regime of the type seen in Belarus and Russia."
p.s. From a cynical point of view many of the so called independents who have won in the single mandate consitituencies [and also the communist deputies] would be delighted to see a finely balanced parliament. It would make their vote far more valuable in monetary terms....
The Communists did surprisingly well too and will be no pushovers....why should the 'independent' new members of parliament declare with whom they will vote if the Communists have not yet made their own position clear....PoR will have to dig deep into their depleted money bags..
p.p.s. A good explanation for the rise of 'Svoboda' here
Tuesday, November 06, 2012
Opposition leaders sell out...
There are 13 electoral constituencies were journalists and local opposition forces claim systematic cheating took place during last week's elections:- constituency numbers 11, 14, 20, 90, 94, 132, 183, 194, 197, 211, 214,216, 223. Many serious allegations and much evidence of fraud have been accumulated in these constituencies. Any perpetrators found guilty of election fraud should go to prison for many years.
Yet now Yatseniuk, Klychko and Tyhnybok have timidly agreed to a recount in just five of these - numbers 94, 132, 194, 197, 223, and forgotten entirely about the remainder.
They have sold out...they have sold out their supporters who so bravely have tried to protect their constitutional right to free and fair elections across the country.
They have crumbled so publicly that the electorate will never trust them to carry out any of their manifesto proposals again were they were ever to get into power [not much likelyhood of that now]. Even though the parties of Yatseniuk, Klychko and Tyhnybok received about 48% of votes cast, compared to Regional's 30% by the party lists, even despite this moral victory, they have crumbled, thus providing more ammunition to those who declare the so-called opposition leaders have been 'bought out' a long time ago - it certainly looks like it.
p.s. Excellent analysis on Ukraine's elections from Mykola Riabchuk here
Yet now Yatseniuk, Klychko and Tyhnybok have timidly agreed to a recount in just five of these - numbers 94, 132, 194, 197, 223, and forgotten entirely about the remainder.
They have sold out...they have sold out their supporters who so bravely have tried to protect their constitutional right to free and fair elections across the country.
They have crumbled so publicly that the electorate will never trust them to carry out any of their manifesto proposals again were they were ever to get into power [not much likelyhood of that now]. Even though the parties of Yatseniuk, Klychko and Tyhnybok received about 48% of votes cast, compared to Regional's 30% by the party lists, even despite this moral victory, they have crumbled, thus providing more ammunition to those who declare the so-called opposition leaders have been 'bought out' a long time ago - it certainly looks like it.
p.s. Excellent analysis on Ukraine's elections from Mykola Riabchuk here
Sunday, November 04, 2012
President struck dumb
The situation following last Sunday's parliamentary elections is rapidly spinning out of control. For the sake of a handful of disputed single mandate constituency seats, mainly in the Kyiv area, the ruling coalition are making a mockery of Ukrainian democracy [an oxymoron if ever there was one].
There is a strong possibility that the combined newly-elected opposition forces will rip up their mandates and not enter the V.R. causing a constitutional crisis, probably forcing a second election.
Where is the president? Your are supposed to be an authoritarian fixer, not an indecisive bozo!
Show some leadership!
Have no doubt, the gangsters are back..
'KyivPost' ran this story on Friday: 'Bloody vote count in Mykolayiv Oblast as police clash with opposition'
However, they missed much of the important background to this story...
Just over a month ago I posted a blog about how V.R. deputy Artem Pshonka, son of current Prosecutor-General Viktor Pshonka, was trying to seize the Mykolayiv-based 'Agrofirma Kornatskykh' agro-company by the dirtiest of means. 'ORD' website call Pshonka Jr. 'raider No.1 in Ukraine'. His dad Viktor is an old pal of Yanukovych from the bad old days in Donetsk...
It so happened that the owner of this agro-company, Arkady A. Kornatsky, was an election candidate in the oblast despite being forced to go abroad because of possible risk of arrest...and he won the election, beating his closest rival, Deputy Chairman of the Oblast State Administration and PoR candidate, Vitaliy Travyanko, by about 4000 votes or 39.66% of votes cast against 34.09%. These results were posted on the official Central Electoral Commission website on 29th October.
'ORD' now describes how after news of Kornyatsky's victory spread, all hell broke loose. The 15,000 hectares of land Pshonka Sr. was attempting to steal from Kornatsky could possibly slip out out of his grasp as a result.
During the evening of 30th October police stormed the premises of District Election Commission number 132 in Pervomaysk, Mykolaiv led by the Regional Governor, Mykola Kruglov. [Kruglov was PM Azarov's deputy when the latter ran the State Tax Administration]. A squad of 'Berkut' special forces, some still in civilian dress, blocked the entrance of the building, kicked out the head Constituency Electoral Commission, and unknown persons entered to feed 'fresh data' into the election commission computer. A few minutes later the Central Electoral Commission website was amended and Travyanko declared the winner. These guys did not even bother to change the figures from some stations for other candidates on the list, they added other votes to Travyanko only on the summary page so their fraud was obvious.
'ORD' reports "In Pervomaysk there is almost a civil war. "KAMAZ" trucks have blocked the centre and all entrances to the city. Twice, on the night of 1st and the 2nd November 2012 "Berkut" troops used tear gas in the premises of the district election commission. Prosecutor General Pshonka and Governor of Mykolayiv region Kruglov are brutally preventing the declaration of the owner of the Arcadia farm, Kornatsky, as winner of the elections because Pshonka wants to seize the15 000 hectares he owns for for his son."
It is clear that without personal guarantees of immunity from Prosecutor General of Ukraine, from Pshonka himself, no-one would have dared to steal the results in such an open manner or involve "Berkut" in this shocking deed.
There have been many protests, beatings, and much unrest as these crooks, having committed their fraud so crudely, are left with no option but to destroy voting slips favouring Kornatsky.
The brave deputy head of the CEC, Zhanna Usenko-Chorna, has said: "The whole country watched, international observers...electors. For many hours we witnessed that Kornatsky was victor, winning by 4299 votes. Then after a very short time, changes were introduced into the system, and by very peculiar means, data is introduced in favour of Vitaliy Travyanko, votes begin to dribble in from two candidates/donors.".
The head of the Constituency Electoral Commission may had suffered a heart attack...and the CEC are going to 'rework' the results from the Pervomaysk constituency, 'checking every comma'. [The Prosecutor-General's office will no doubt be informed of any fraud, eh?]
Scenes such as these described have been repeated elsewhere in Ukraine these last few days, though in Pervomaysk thelaw enforcement officials have been particularly brutal and most determined to crush any protests against falsification. PM Azarov claimed these elections to have been the best in the history of independent Ukraine....
p.s. more photos from Pervomaysk here
Thursday, November 01, 2012
Steamroller beginning to stutter?
Interesting discussion in tonight's 'Politklub' with Vitaliy Portnikov on the independent TVi channel.
Below is a summary of some of the comments made by journalists taking part:
On the topic of whether western observers should pull their punches in their election reports:
"We cannot expect [or demand] our decent west European friends to call black white just so Ukraine does not somehow drift eastwards...we should not expect them to compromise their principles.."
Not unexpectedly, there have been significant reports of election fraud during the counting of votes, but we should really scrutinise how seriously law enforcement agencies react and deal with these allegations...this will be the true test of fair elections..
The sentence for election fraud is 3-5 years in prison...and there is great suspicion of the bodies involved in running the election, because of bad experiences in the past...The ugly scenes and battles in several high-profile constituencies, particularly around Kyiv, over just a few seats, risks making things appear much worse that they were. It was therefore a bad mistake for the pro-ruling party candidates to so deliberately and openly attempt to cheat in these few seats. It was widely reported on the day immediately after polling day, that from what western observers saw, the results of elections would be acceptable to EU countries. This prompted a second wave of frauds, particularly in the single mandate, simple majority constituencies, where counting was being deliberately drawn out.
Some of these 'mazhorytarka' candidates are former Party of Regions' deputies who were excluded from their party lists, because they were deemed to be not important enough to figure on the higher rung positions where the likelihood of entering parliament on the party list would be higher. They were left to some degree to run and fund their own campaigns. There are some grounds to assume these guys will take their deputy responsibilities more seriously, having run their own campaigns, and they may even harbour some bitterness toward their party bosses who put them out in the cold to fight their own battles whilst favouring others having 'better connections'.
As a result, the fresh parliament will not be stable....the new boys will have their noses in the air [looking toward the 2015 presidential elections]...it will be difficult for authorities to maintain a solid majority...every law,..especially those linked to taxation and the economy and affecting the 'madzoritarshchyky;, most of whom are significant businessmen in the own right, will have to be negotiated. The 50% party list, 50% 'mazhorytarka' system that produced a 'tilted playing field' may well turn out to have weakened internal discipline inside Party of Regions.
'Svoboda' seem to be the only party not controlled by Ukraine's oligarchic political puppetmasters. They seem to be the only party ready to stand up for the common man against oligarch-controlled parties..including those of the opposition. [The stout defence of their candidates in disputed constituencies bears this out]. This may account for their success particularly in the Kyiv region where, until now, they have been nowhere.
The Communist party was the only realistic place where anti-PoR voters could go in the eastern part of the country, even though everyone was aware they could well side with PoR again. Inside their hearts, the Communists will be bitter that many of their votes were stolen by their probable allies. Their leader, Petro Symonenko may fancy one more shot at the presidency in 2015 - this will also affect his attitude to PoR inn the new parliament.
These views were not all held by the guests on Pornikov's programme, by any means, it's just I thought they seemed to be the most reasonable ones.
p.s. IMO Svoboda may have benefited from the imprisonment of Tymoshenko and Lutsenko. Voters who voted for Svoboda because they felt it was time to 'fight fire with fire', may well have voted otherwise - for Batkivshchyna - had the two opposition leaders been free. Their undoubted electioneering skills would have been most useful during the campaign, it is reasonable to assume therefore that their imprisonment did affect the result of Sunday's polls.
p.p.s. Polish periodical's estimate of how much was spent on the election campaign:
Below is a summary of some of the comments made by journalists taking part:
On the topic of whether western observers should pull their punches in their election reports:
"We cannot expect [or demand] our decent west European friends to call black white just so Ukraine does not somehow drift eastwards...we should not expect them to compromise their principles.."
Not unexpectedly, there have been significant reports of election fraud during the counting of votes, but we should really scrutinise how seriously law enforcement agencies react and deal with these allegations...this will be the true test of fair elections..
The sentence for election fraud is 3-5 years in prison...and there is great suspicion of the bodies involved in running the election, because of bad experiences in the past...The ugly scenes and battles in several high-profile constituencies, particularly around Kyiv, over just a few seats, risks making things appear much worse that they were. It was therefore a bad mistake for the pro-ruling party candidates to so deliberately and openly attempt to cheat in these few seats. It was widely reported on the day immediately after polling day, that from what western observers saw, the results of elections would be acceptable to EU countries. This prompted a second wave of frauds, particularly in the single mandate, simple majority constituencies, where counting was being deliberately drawn out.
Some of these 'mazhorytarka' candidates are former Party of Regions' deputies who were excluded from their party lists, because they were deemed to be not important enough to figure on the higher rung positions where the likelihood of entering parliament on the party list would be higher. They were left to some degree to run and fund their own campaigns. There are some grounds to assume these guys will take their deputy responsibilities more seriously, having run their own campaigns, and they may even harbour some bitterness toward their party bosses who put them out in the cold to fight their own battles whilst favouring others having 'better connections'.
As a result, the fresh parliament will not be stable....the new boys will have their noses in the air [looking toward the 2015 presidential elections]...it will be difficult for authorities to maintain a solid majority...every law,..especially those linked to taxation and the economy and affecting the 'madzoritarshchyky;, most of whom are significant businessmen in the own right, will have to be negotiated. The 50% party list, 50% 'mazhorytarka' system that produced a 'tilted playing field' may well turn out to have weakened internal discipline inside Party of Regions.
'Svoboda' seem to be the only party not controlled by Ukraine's oligarchic political puppetmasters. They seem to be the only party ready to stand up for the common man against oligarch-controlled parties..including those of the opposition. [The stout defence of their candidates in disputed constituencies bears this out]. This may account for their success particularly in the Kyiv region where, until now, they have been nowhere.
The Communist party was the only realistic place where anti-PoR voters could go in the eastern part of the country, even though everyone was aware they could well side with PoR again. Inside their hearts, the Communists will be bitter that many of their votes were stolen by their probable allies. Their leader, Petro Symonenko may fancy one more shot at the presidency in 2015 - this will also affect his attitude to PoR inn the new parliament.
These views were not all held by the guests on Pornikov's programme, by any means, it's just I thought they seemed to be the most reasonable ones.
p.s. IMO Svoboda may have benefited from the imprisonment of Tymoshenko and Lutsenko. Voters who voted for Svoboda because they felt it was time to 'fight fire with fire', may well have voted otherwise - for Batkivshchyna - had the two opposition leaders been free. Their undoubted electioneering skills would have been most useful during the campaign, it is reasonable to assume therefore that their imprisonment did affect the result of Sunday's polls.
p.p.s. Polish periodical's estimate of how much was spent on the election campaign:
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Big beasts await Yanuk in the shadows
In my Monday blog I posted a photo from Party of Regions' swanky central Kyiv hotel press centre and said the party were in a state of shock immediately after polling stations closed and exit poll results declared.
The performances of their representatives on that evening's television programmes were far from those of a party who, as most western media reported: "were closing in on victory". In fact it was never in doubt that the ruling authorities would retain control in the new parliament because of the recent amendments to voting rules. Had the voting system remained "100% by party lists", PoR's deputies would be in opposition right now.
In Ukraine the power of the president is now almost absolute. He has a firm grip on the power structures such as the police and prosecutors' office, security services, constitutional court, the judiciary, customs and border control agencies, tax administration, state bank etc. etc. Only a parliament with 2/3 opposition constitutional majority can hurt him, and this is unlikely to ever be assembled.
Despite all of the money spent by PoR on advertising and bribes, despite control of vast portion of the media which churned out heavily biassed or 'purchased' reports, despite heavy pressure on minority independent media sources, despite locking away leaders of the opposition, despite fixing the composition of local election committees, despite suspect counting in dozens of simple-majority constituencies, despite widespread 'buying' of votes, despite pressure on workers in the public sector, despite a lacklustre and fractured opposition performance, despite generously funded and promoted 'planted' and now disgraced parties like those of Nataliya Korolevska, despite late generous social spending programmes, despite the afterglow and feel-good factor following the Euro 2012 soccer competition, despite all of this, Party of Regions have barely scraped together 30% of votes cast.
What awaits in the months to come is almost certainly a worsening economic situation.
Industrial production has declined around 7% this year. Gas and utility prices will increase soon, as will the price of foodstuffs resulting from poor global harvests. Unemployment on the up...pressure from Russia..pressure from the EU...
The so-called independents entering parliament by winning electoral constituencies will have much to ponder when they take up their seats and as the next presidential elections draws closer....they will still be parliament after the next presidential elections have taken place..
Yanukovych's big hope was the creation of a constitutional majority in the new parliament under his control - this has not happened. In months to come Yanukovych will be facing a stark choice: become a Lukashenko clone, or face the electorate, and likely demise in the next presidential election... The handful of immensely powerful oligarchs in Ukraine will already be looking at the results of Sunday's voting...and weighing up their options for the future...
F.A.Z. reveals high-power EU mission will blast Ukraine
[google-translated] 'Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung' today reports :
"Selective Justice and inhuman treatment"
30.10.2012 · An EU mission to review the cases against Tymoshenko and two other opposition figures in Ukraine has come to a confidential report on a devastating assessment: The outcome of the process "could have been predicted."
After severe criticism, the Western observer missions have practiced at the presidential election in Ukraine, is now known that the mission of the European Parliament, which has examined the sentences against the opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko and some of her colleagues judgment, at a highly negative has come. The mission, led by the former Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski and former President of the European Parliament, Pat Cox, the Irishman comes in a 15-page classified report, the FAZ.NET and the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung is present, to the conclusion that the output processes "could have been predicted," opposition leaders in Ukraine.
Also get the medical treatment of the defendants, all of whom were ill during the process, possibly an "inhuman treatment" as defined by the European Convention on Human Rights the same. Urged Ms. Tymoshenko, who as a leader of the democratic "Orange Revolution" the current President Viktor Yanukovych in 2004 temporarily out of power was and then until his return twice held the office of prime minister, was in October 2011, criticized by an international focus process has been convicted of the alleged abuse of office to seven years imprisonment. - there's more at the link..
[This story was surely held back until Sunday's election was over and most results counted..LEvko]
Monday, October 29, 2012
PoR in shock....
From 'Ukrainska Pravda's continuously-updated election night special:
28.10.2012 23.45 [less than 4 hours after polling stations closed] - Mustafa Nayem [Report from PoR's glitzy press centre]
All activity in the Party of Regions' press centre has died. There is not one representative of the party in the hall. The last presentation to journalists was one and one half hours ago. No announcements or messages. Only the plasma screens showing the tele-marathon broadcasts [on various channels] are running. No sound."
Gone to massage figures in backrooms?
Friday, October 26, 2012
Will observers pull their punches to prevent Ukraine's eastward tilt?
European leaders have quite correctly declared Ukraine's further European integration to be dependent on how Sunday's parliamentary elections are conducted.
Some are worried that if observers deem Sunday's elections to be unsatisfactory, Ukraine may as a result turn eastward and enter into a customs union with three authoritarian countries - Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan.
In order to prevent this, they predict: "the official evaluation [of the elections] by EU observers, the OSCE and the Council of Europe will be very cautious."
This is bollocks. The job of official observers is to give neither cautious, nor harsh assessments, but to observe and scrutinise, report on what they see, and provide a conclusion. This is what they will hopefully do.
Western politicians should not respond to Yanukovych's playing of he Russia card: "Go easy on us, or we will turn east" - it is all bluff. Russia will not give Yanukovych anything...even for something. E.g. the Kharkiv Accords agreement has become a taboo subject during this election campaign. Ukraine gave away one of it's crown jewels - the best naval port in the Black sea, and still did not receive a fair gas price from Russia - Ukraine is still paying far more for Russian gas than other customers.
Whether or not Sunday's elections are declared satisfactory on not by independent observers will make little difference to Yanukovych's steamroller. His priority is to maximise the wealth of his family and maximise political power, by whatever means necessary, in order they remain 'on top of the muck-heap'.
Yanukovych said in Kharkiv today: "The fewer prompters [commentators] who [try to] teach us how to live in our house there are, I have in mind from the outside, the better and more comfortable we will feel in our house, in Ukraine.." Is he suffering from pluralis maiestatis?
p.s. Vice Premier of Ukraine Serhiy Tihipko thinks their could be a national referendum on Ukraine joining either the Customs Union or the European Union. We will see in the weeks to come whether the country will have any choice, or whether there is any point in such a referendum.
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Ukraine’s Troubling Trends
Hillary Clinton and Catherine Ashton's op-ed in the 'NYT' provides a link to this recent report: 'The prospects for the EU-Ukraine free trade agreement'.
The report's conclusion?
"The future of the Association Agreement of the DCFTA will strongly depend on how the parliamentary elections in Ukraine, which are scheduled for 28 October, proceed; the EU will not take any strategic decisions before then. If the Ukrainian government continues to violate democratic standards, the European Union’s consent to the implementation of the DFCTA will be very unlikely." [my italics]
...continues to violate.....
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Slipping into isolation
Kostiantyn Yeliseyev, Ukrainian ambassador to the European Union, claims Sunday's parliamentary election "will be a good election".
He urges his EU colleagues: "Sign the Association Agreement! Not because we want it, but because we deserve it [?!]. Because it is the best possible guarantee of Ukraine’s way to European standards and its future as an independent and sovereign state." It all sounds rather desperate....
Ukraine lags miles behind normal European electoral standards. The list is large: widespread overt and cynical purchasing of votes by parties and candidates; systematic pressure applied to the already diminished independent information media such as TVi; persistent bias in favour of the ruling party's candidates in the mass media, particularly on television channels almost wholly owned by pro-Party of Regions' oligarchs; frequent appalling harassment and intimidation of independent candidates, e.g. as in this case, especially in simple majority consituencies; use of dummy party candidates to gain maximum influence in local electoral commissions....the list goes on and on.
And all this is on top of a year's criticism as the result the elimination from public life by means of ludicrous show trials of the top two opposition leaders, Yulia Tymoshenko and Yuriy Lutsenko.
My view is next Sunday's elections will receive a negative assessment by foreign observers, and the likes of Yeliseyev know this already - it will not be a "good election." I wonder how much worse it would be if the systematic scrutiny by independent observers was not in place..
The claim will be made that the final result generally reflects the wishes of the electorate - but how can anyone be sure about this in the light of the 'epidemic of pro-government PR, 'bought' television news reports, and the 'arm-twisting' of vulnerable voters.
Yanukovych has taken so much flak from western capitals I believe he does not care about this any more.
But Yanukovych's body language and stuttering delivery in this brief video clip during Monday's meeting with president Putin seems to indicate Ukraine will not be receiving any favours, especially on the gas front, from its northern neighbour either. The humiliation continues...
Thursday, October 18, 2012
The oligarchic democracy. The influence of business groups on Ukrainian politics
I can thoroughly recommend a superb, recently published piece of work entitled: "The oligarchic democracy. The influence of business groups on Ukrainian politics", from the excellent Polish 'Centre for Eastern Studies' [OSW]
"A definite majority of papers concerning contemporary Ukrainian politics as a rule disregard or deal with this subject very superficially, while it is impossible to understand modern Ukraine without understanding a number of dependencies existing between the political and business elites there.."
Below is a summary:
• The Ukrainian oligarchic system developed into its ultimate shape during Leonid Kuchma’s presidency (1994–2004). Although this system has undergone some form of evolution, it appears to be very durable. Oligarchic clans emerged in the mid 1990s and would gain a dominant influence on the country’s political life over the course of a few years. The Orange Revolution triggered a reshuffle among the oligarchs, but the system itself has remained unaltered. Representatives of big business still have a decisive impact on the politics and economy of Ukraine.
• Big business not only controls entire sectors of the Ukrainian economy and the electronic mass media—it also has a vast influence within political parties. It is often the case that the overriding goal of a given grouping’s existence is to represent the oligarchs who sponsor it. A network of mutual connections exists between politicians and oligarchs. In some cases these connections are so durable that it is fair to say that oligarchic groups have been formed (consisting of businessmen, politicians and state officials who support each other). Representatives of big business are often much more important players on the Ukrainian political scene than the politicians themselves. One may risk stating that it is the interplay of the interests of the oligarchs that is the real mechanism which shapes Ukrainian politics. When giving their support for a given political grouping, representatives of big business are guided by nothing more than their own interests, and they do not identify themselves with the views of the political parties and politicians they are offering financial support to. If the political configuration changes, the oligarchs usually have no problems finding common ground with the new government.
• Although the oligarchic system does have some positive elements (for example, it contributes to pluralism in political life and the media), it needs to be stated that the overall influence of Ukrainian big business is harmful and hinders the country’s development in both political and economic terms. The monopolisation of the key economic sectors has constrained competition and is one of the causes of the unfavourable investment climate in Ukraine. The dependence of most political forces on big business means that the government in many cases is guided by the interests of the oligarchs who are sponsoring it instead of the interests of their country; this often leads to multi-billion dollar losses in the Ukrainian state budget.
• The influence of the oligarchs on Ukraine’s foreign policy is limited when compared to economic or internal policy. They do not seem to have a coherent strategy in external relations, but their actions resulting from their individual interests often have a significant impact on Ukraine’s behaviour on the international arena. Sometimes their influence serves the Ukrainian national interest. However, where the interests of big business come into conflict with the interests of the state, oligarchs lobby (often successfully) for their own benefit.
• In some sectors (primarily metallurgy), representatives of big business are the main barrier to Russian capital expansion in Ukraine. Russian business is their key competitor on foreign markets. However, oligarchs are sometimes forced by the circumstances to sell their businesses, and Russian investors are often the only prospective buyers in such cases. Given the high degree of ownership concentration in the hands of relatively few oligarchs, it is very likely that Russia would take control of a number of Ukraine’s strategic companies should an emergency situation arise (for example, the second wave of the economic crisis).
• When Viktor Yanukovych won the presidential election in 2010, representatives of one political grouping, the Party of Regions, gained strength to an extent unseen so far in Ukraine’s history, and completely monopolised political power in the country. The coalition partners of the Party of Regions and opposition groupings have been marginalised to a large extent. The network of the groups of influence which emerged after the Party of Regions took power has remained essentially unchanged over the past two years. The government and the presidential administration have been divided between the RUE Group and the ‘Donetsk clan’, currently the two strongest groups.
• The emerging business of ‘the family’ – this term is used to refer to the people who are directly linked to President Viktor Yanukovych and his sons – is a new phenomenon. The political and economic expansion of ‘the family’ began shortly after Yanukovych took office as president of Ukraine, and gained momentum in 2011 and in early 2012. Although Yanukovych’s political power is stronger than that of any other president in Ukraine’s history, the financial strength of ‘the family’ is still limited.
• A further strengthening of‘the family’s’ position in business atthe expense of other oligarchic groups is very likely to bring about a conflict between Yanukovych and most representatives of big business. The consequences of this are difficult to predict. The concentration of huge political power in the hands of Yanukovych has already given rise to concern among oligarchs, including those who have so far formed his political base.
• It seems quite unlikely that a system resembling the Russian model, where big business is subordinate to the government, will be created. Yanukovych’s main weaknesses are the limited number of people who he can see as unconditionally loyal to him and the strength of the other oligarchic groups. It seems that the most likely scenario for the development of the situation in the next few years (at least until the presidential election in 2015) will be the development of a compromise between the oligarchs and President Yanukovych. If this is the case, ‘the family’ would gain an important but not dominant position in the model of power and business in Ukraine.
• The political influence of those oligarchic groups which are not linked to the governing Party of Regions has lessened significantly since 2010. However, this has not led to any major ownership changes so far. Other groups have managed to keep their assets, although the government has taken some action aimed against their representatives. However, financial support from big business for opposition political parties has either ceased or been significantly reduced.
Proof of the influence of 'the family' was provided at the Donbas Imternational Investment Summit which was addressed by Yanukovych Sr. today. His eldest son was constantly in the company of Ukraine's top bananas - photos here
Sunday, October 14, 2012
'Forbes' accuse Fuel and Energy minister Boyko of serial theft
Yuriy Boyko has been Minister of Energy and the Coal Industry of Ukraine for exactly 30 months.
In a recent article, 'Forbes.ua' allege that during this time, Boyko and companies linked to him, have won contracts from his ministry totalling more than $5.5 billion.
When the state gas company 'Naftohaz Ukrainy' requested tenders for two deep sea drilling platforms their final cost turned out to be $1.4Bn, even though shady 'middlemen' allegedly linked to Boyko paid the rigs' builders only $400m for each one. Much has been written about these 'vyshky Boyka' and the massive 'rake-offs', including by your humble blogger.
But apart from this scandal, Boyko is accused of involvement in four further resonant cases.
The first concerns the 'Yevrotrubplast' trading company. Regional gas companies have allegedly overpaid this company millions of Hryvnya for large diameter pipes. The managing director of the trading company is an old pal of Boyko's. Total loss to the 'oblgas' companies is estimated at 850 million Hryven.
The second concerns the 'Ukrenergomotazh' company which constructs electricity supply networks connecting nuclear and other power stations, and consumers. One of the company's directors runs a fuel trading company - with Boyko's wife. 'Forbes' estimates 'Ukrenergomontazh' have received 3.7 Bn. Hryven 'over the odds' in state contracts.
The third concerns the Cyprus-registered 'Benzol' company which supplies explosives to Ukraine's mines. Once Boyko became minister this company have won the lion's share of all contracts to supply either state coal mines or companies linked to Boyko. Overpayments are estimated at 200m. Hryven.
The fourth concerns payments to 'Truskavetskurort' health recuperation complex which is part-owned by an associate of Boyko's. Ukraine's national insurance agencies, whose management has ties to Boyko, have overpaid 'Truskavetskurort' over 100m Hryven for their services, claim 'Forbes'.
If the president's son can do it, why can't ministers? Yanuk jr. has been registering companies in Switzerland and Holland to minimize payment of taxes when his outfits [for which, according to his dad, he works so hard] export coal abroad.
Tuesday, October 09, 2012
A bit of history..and Lazarenko - his rise and fall...
Interesting interview with Aleksandra Kuzhel in 'Ostro' recently.
Originally from Konstyantynivka in Donbass, she's been at the heart of Ukrainian politics for many years. She's worked for Kuchma, and Yanukovych in PoR, as well as for the murdered Yevhen Shcherban.
Aleksandra Kuzhel was until recently a close confidente of Serhiy Tihipko in his now-defunct 'Strong Ukraine' project, but is now a defender of Tymoshenko.
Tihipko is currently deputy PM, and deputy PoR chairman..
Kuzhel complains bitterly about the two years that 'Strong Ukraine's' leader in Donetsk, Vladislav Dreger, has now spend in jail with no prospect of trial. She claims Dreger probably 'crossed' Yanukovych's son, Aleksander, in a business deal and is now paying the price...
When asked whether Kuchma ordered the murder of Yevhen Shcherban, she replies:
- "Hardly. Kuchma is not capable of such a thing. When Gongadze was murdered, I was the first to confidently declare it was not Kuchma... Kuchma can yell at you and blow you out, but he is a man of the sixties. He could not even send anyone to prison. He did not imprison anyone all the time he was president. Gongadze's murder was blatant provocation. In the Scherban case, I'm sure it was not Kuchma. And it was not Yulia. Look where all his property ended up, and draw your own conclusions."
Kuzhel was asked: "You worked with Kuchma for quite a while you know this man well. Tell me why did he began to push Yanukovych [to head the cabinet, and to run in the 2004 presidential elections]?
Why did Kuchma go with the "Donetskiites?"
- "Kuchma never liked Yanukovych. Never trusted him. On this issue the decision was made more by his team - Litvin, and Liovochkin. They lobbied for Yanukovych. I myself asked Kuchma the question - why such a choice, why not Tihipko, who's from Dnepropetrovsk? Kuchma told me - your Tihipko has been frightened off... a comfortable place as the head of the National Bank suits him. Nobody at the time was ready to fund the authorities' election campaign, except Donetsk. At the same time, everyone knew that there would be a very serious fight put up by the "Oranges", and they needed something to oppose this. They understood the consequences of Yushchenko coming to power. Today Yushchenko says that he did not succeed, and puts all of the blame on Tymoshenko. You know, these are the complaints of an impotent man who blames a woman for his problems. He could never have been an effective president because he was never an effective prime minister."
- "Did you think that Yanukovych would be better?"
- "Do you know the difference between the campaign then and the campaign of 2010? They were built under different presidential powers. Yanukovych has usurped the powers Putin now has, but then Kuchma had it carefully all planned out. They were going to do what Putin and Medvedev did - place Yanukovych into the president's office, with Kuchma appointed as his powerful prime minister. In fact, it would have been a third term for Kuchma."
- "So why did a weak Yushchenko win, and Kuchma and Yanukovych lose?"
- "They lost not to Yushchenko. They lost to the people of Ukraine. He did not have the resources to disperse the huge number of people [who staged the orange revolution] to suppress such a protest. Kuchma would never do that....But Yushchenko was pushed all of his life by other people such as Tymoshenko. Poroshenko, Zinchenko. Without them, he would be a complete zero."
------------------------------------------------------------------
In a few weeks time, after serving a long prison sentence, former PM Pavlo Lazarenko will be released from jail in the USA.
'Forbes.ua' run an article about Lazarenko's business empire, the people who assisted in its construction, and what remains of it.
The article contains a small graphic with the following titles: In 1995-1997 Tymoshenko was president of UESU - "Lazarenko's milch-cow". Serhiy Tihipko ensured good cooperation between his PrivatBank, and Lazarenko and his structures.
Tihipko briefly served in Lazarenko's cabinet and also in Yushchenko's cabinet.
All these people became exceeding rich..some are now 'under the wagon, others are still riding on it..'
Anyhow, here's a brief resume of the 'Forbes' item:
When U.S. authorities froze the accounts of the former prime minister and his structures they were officially valued around $ 280 million. Right now this would place Lazarenko in 29th place in the list of richest Ukrainians. Some however, estimate Lazarenko's weath as exceeding $2bn. 'Forbes' say, "Judging from what we know today, it is no exaggeration."
Before the collapse of the Soviet Union, Lazarenko was chairman of a collective farm, in charge of the Department of Agriculture and Food Industry of the Dnepropetrovsk regional committee of the Communist Party.
At that time the heavily industrialised Dnepropetrovsk region was full of armament factories and steel plants; it was the preserve of "red directors" who were all-powerful. However, Ukraine's first president, Leonid Kravchuk got on badly with this Dnipropetrovsk clan, and in their turn the bosses of the defence, chemical and metallurgical enterprises of region hated Kravchuk, who they considered to be a traitor to the Soviet Union and a nationalist.
In March 1992, under strong pressure from the "red directors", Kravchuk agreed to appoint Valery Pustovoitenko, the Dnipropetrovsk City Council Chairman, as his governor in the region. But when the president issued his decree he dumped Pustovoitenko and surprisingly named the 'agrarian' Lazarenko as governor.
Lazarenko improved the local economy but also immediately intensively started 'growing' his own business empire which included, agrobusinesses, petrochemicals, retail outlets, gas stations, restaurants, pharaceuticals, etc. His companies were frequently engaged in barter chains between energy companies, farmers and exporters. He was active in accumulation of property assets via various privatisation schemes.
In September 1995, with the country facing serious economic problems, Kuchma transferred the energetic governor of Dnipropetrovsk to Kyiv, making him first deputy prime minister, in charge of fuel and energy.
As a member of the cabinet, he immediately undertook the redistribution of the most profitable branch of the Ukrainian economy - the domestic gas trade, which was in chaos. The Russian "Gazprom" were receiving little, if no payment for gas, and were demanding order be restored At the end of 1995, all the regions had been divided between the three Ukrainian mediators who would supply gas to industrial consumers. Two of the most wealthy areas - Dnepropetrovsk and Donetsk - were assigned to "United Energy Systems of Ukraine" (UESU), run at that time by Yulia Tymoshenko. She had worked under Lazarenko previously in the petroleum market in Dnipropetrovsk.
At its peak, UESU was served by 2,000 companies which formed long, interconnected barter chains. "Gazprom" was also paid by barter schemes. In 1996 UESU was turning over around about $10Bn.
Subjugation of the Donetsk region was much more difficult for Lazarenko. It was the only region where UESU had to work through a local broker - Industrial Union of Donbas [ISD]. The local elite rebuffed Lazarenko's appointee, Sergei Polyakov, and in August 1996, the Donetskiites insisted their nominee, Viktor Yanukovych, be appointed Polyakov's deputy.
The fall of Lazarenko was as rapid as his ascent. He had made enemies not only in Donetsk. Kuchma's inner circle, including secretary of the National Security and Defense Council Volodymyr Horbulin and head of the president's office Dmytro Tabachnyk [who is in PM Azarov' current cabinet], where whispering in in ear that Lazarenko was plotting to replace him.
Kuchma was annoyed by the-then Prime Minister's ambitious aims The president sacked the State Property Fund Secretary, Yuriy Yekhanurov, because he had begun to carry out Lazarenko's orders. [No doubt for a piece of the action. Yekhanurov claims that at the time he did not know about Lararenko's corrupt schemes...ho,ho,ho...Yekhanurov, of course, replaced PM Tymoshenko when she was sacked by Yushchenko and, as acting PM, arranged shady gas deals himself during the 2005-06 gas war...LEvko]
In the summer of 1997 Lazarenko was sacked, and in September 1998 prosecutors opened a criminal case against him. In December, the former prime minister was arrested in Switzerland. Released from prison on bail after a short stay in the country, he fled to America, where he remains to this day, serving 'time'.
Lazarenko's business empire began to fall apart soon after his departure. Kuchma immediately kicked UESU out of the gas business. Lazarenko later accused Kuchma's son-in-law Viktor Pinchuk of misappropriated nearly everything that owned, including the Nikopol Ferroalloy Plant.
Property, hotels and factories in Dnepropetrovsk, passed under the control of former colleagues and allies, especially those in the "Privat" group.
The new owner of one of the hotels, Hennadiy Axelrod was killed in the city several months ago, an event I wrote about in previous blog.
Originally from Konstyantynivka in Donbass, she's been at the heart of Ukrainian politics for many years. She's worked for Kuchma, and Yanukovych in PoR, as well as for the murdered Yevhen Shcherban.
Aleksandra Kuzhel was until recently a close confidente of Serhiy Tihipko in his now-defunct 'Strong Ukraine' project, but is now a defender of Tymoshenko.
Tihipko is currently deputy PM, and deputy PoR chairman..
Kuzhel complains bitterly about the two years that 'Strong Ukraine's' leader in Donetsk, Vladislav Dreger, has now spend in jail with no prospect of trial. She claims Dreger probably 'crossed' Yanukovych's son, Aleksander, in a business deal and is now paying the price...
When asked whether Kuchma ordered the murder of Yevhen Shcherban, she replies:
- "Hardly. Kuchma is not capable of such a thing. When Gongadze was murdered, I was the first to confidently declare it was not Kuchma... Kuchma can yell at you and blow you out, but he is a man of the sixties. He could not even send anyone to prison. He did not imprison anyone all the time he was president. Gongadze's murder was blatant provocation. In the Scherban case, I'm sure it was not Kuchma. And it was not Yulia. Look where all his property ended up, and draw your own conclusions."
Kuzhel was asked: "You worked with Kuchma for quite a while you know this man well. Tell me why did he began to push Yanukovych [to head the cabinet, and to run in the 2004 presidential elections]?
Why did Kuchma go with the "Donetskiites?"
- "Kuchma never liked Yanukovych. Never trusted him. On this issue the decision was made more by his team - Litvin, and Liovochkin. They lobbied for Yanukovych. I myself asked Kuchma the question - why such a choice, why not Tihipko, who's from Dnepropetrovsk? Kuchma told me - your Tihipko has been frightened off... a comfortable place as the head of the National Bank suits him. Nobody at the time was ready to fund the authorities' election campaign, except Donetsk. At the same time, everyone knew that there would be a very serious fight put up by the "Oranges", and they needed something to oppose this. They understood the consequences of Yushchenko coming to power. Today Yushchenko says that he did not succeed, and puts all of the blame on Tymoshenko. You know, these are the complaints of an impotent man who blames a woman for his problems. He could never have been an effective president because he was never an effective prime minister."
- "Did you think that Yanukovych would be better?"
- "Do you know the difference between the campaign then and the campaign of 2010? They were built under different presidential powers. Yanukovych has usurped the powers Putin now has, but then Kuchma had it carefully all planned out. They were going to do what Putin and Medvedev did - place Yanukovych into the president's office, with Kuchma appointed as his powerful prime minister. In fact, it would have been a third term for Kuchma."
- "So why did a weak Yushchenko win, and Kuchma and Yanukovych lose?"
- "They lost not to Yushchenko. They lost to the people of Ukraine. He did not have the resources to disperse the huge number of people [who staged the orange revolution] to suppress such a protest. Kuchma would never do that....But Yushchenko was pushed all of his life by other people such as Tymoshenko. Poroshenko, Zinchenko. Without them, he would be a complete zero."
------------------------------------------------------------------
In a few weeks time, after serving a long prison sentence, former PM Pavlo Lazarenko will be released from jail in the USA.
'Forbes.ua' run an article about Lazarenko's business empire, the people who assisted in its construction, and what remains of it.
The article contains a small graphic with the following titles: In 1995-1997 Tymoshenko was president of UESU - "Lazarenko's milch-cow". Serhiy Tihipko ensured good cooperation between his PrivatBank, and Lazarenko and his structures.
Tihipko briefly served in Lazarenko's cabinet and also in Yushchenko's cabinet.
All these people became exceeding rich..some are now 'under the wagon, others are still riding on it..'
Anyhow, here's a brief resume of the 'Forbes' item:
When U.S. authorities froze the accounts of the former prime minister and his structures they were officially valued around $ 280 million. Right now this would place Lazarenko in 29th place in the list of richest Ukrainians. Some however, estimate Lazarenko's weath as exceeding $2bn. 'Forbes' say, "Judging from what we know today, it is no exaggeration."
Before the collapse of the Soviet Union, Lazarenko was chairman of a collective farm, in charge of the Department of Agriculture and Food Industry of the Dnepropetrovsk regional committee of the Communist Party.
At that time the heavily industrialised Dnepropetrovsk region was full of armament factories and steel plants; it was the preserve of "red directors" who were all-powerful. However, Ukraine's first president, Leonid Kravchuk got on badly with this Dnipropetrovsk clan, and in their turn the bosses of the defence, chemical and metallurgical enterprises of region hated Kravchuk, who they considered to be a traitor to the Soviet Union and a nationalist.
In March 1992, under strong pressure from the "red directors", Kravchuk agreed to appoint Valery Pustovoitenko, the Dnipropetrovsk City Council Chairman, as his governor in the region. But when the president issued his decree he dumped Pustovoitenko and surprisingly named the 'agrarian' Lazarenko as governor.
Lazarenko improved the local economy but also immediately intensively started 'growing' his own business empire which included, agrobusinesses, petrochemicals, retail outlets, gas stations, restaurants, pharaceuticals, etc. His companies were frequently engaged in barter chains between energy companies, farmers and exporters. He was active in accumulation of property assets via various privatisation schemes.
In September 1995, with the country facing serious economic problems, Kuchma transferred the energetic governor of Dnipropetrovsk to Kyiv, making him first deputy prime minister, in charge of fuel and energy.
As a member of the cabinet, he immediately undertook the redistribution of the most profitable branch of the Ukrainian economy - the domestic gas trade, which was in chaos. The Russian "Gazprom" were receiving little, if no payment for gas, and were demanding order be restored At the end of 1995, all the regions had been divided between the three Ukrainian mediators who would supply gas to industrial consumers. Two of the most wealthy areas - Dnepropetrovsk and Donetsk - were assigned to "United Energy Systems of Ukraine" (UESU), run at that time by Yulia Tymoshenko. She had worked under Lazarenko previously in the petroleum market in Dnipropetrovsk.
At its peak, UESU was served by 2,000 companies which formed long, interconnected barter chains. "Gazprom" was also paid by barter schemes. In 1996 UESU was turning over around about $10Bn.
Subjugation of the Donetsk region was much more difficult for Lazarenko. It was the only region where UESU had to work through a local broker - Industrial Union of Donbas [ISD]. The local elite rebuffed Lazarenko's appointee, Sergei Polyakov, and in August 1996, the Donetskiites insisted their nominee, Viktor Yanukovych, be appointed Polyakov's deputy.
The fall of Lazarenko was as rapid as his ascent. He had made enemies not only in Donetsk. Kuchma's inner circle, including secretary of the National Security and Defense Council Volodymyr Horbulin and head of the president's office Dmytro Tabachnyk [who is in PM Azarov' current cabinet], where whispering in in ear that Lazarenko was plotting to replace him.
Kuchma was annoyed by the-then Prime Minister's ambitious aims The president sacked the State Property Fund Secretary, Yuriy Yekhanurov, because he had begun to carry out Lazarenko's orders. [No doubt for a piece of the action. Yekhanurov claims that at the time he did not know about Lararenko's corrupt schemes...ho,ho,ho...Yekhanurov, of course, replaced PM Tymoshenko when she was sacked by Yushchenko and, as acting PM, arranged shady gas deals himself during the 2005-06 gas war...LEvko]
In the summer of 1997 Lazarenko was sacked, and in September 1998 prosecutors opened a criminal case against him. In December, the former prime minister was arrested in Switzerland. Released from prison on bail after a short stay in the country, he fled to America, where he remains to this day, serving 'time'.
Lazarenko's business empire began to fall apart soon after his departure. Kuchma immediately kicked UESU out of the gas business. Lazarenko later accused Kuchma's son-in-law Viktor Pinchuk of misappropriated nearly everything that owned, including the Nikopol Ferroalloy Plant.
Property, hotels and factories in Dnepropetrovsk, passed under the control of former colleagues and allies, especially those in the "Privat" group.
The new owner of one of the hotels, Hennadiy Axelrod was killed in the city several months ago, an event I wrote about in previous blog.
Friday, October 05, 2012
Kuzmin exposes himself as laughing stock [updated]
Ukrainian deputy prosecutor Renat Kuzmin's scandalous letter to Senators? Congressmen? [who cares?] is a joke.
It is so poorly argumented, so poorly translated, it makes "doctor of law, professor, National Academy of Public Prosecutor of Ukraine, deputy prosecutor general of Ukraine", Kuzmin a laughing stock.
Kuzmin's blind arrogance and incompetence is totally exposed. His unprofessionalism, and that of the Ukrainian authorities, is truly frightening.
Party of Regions and Ukrainian authorities pay U.S. lobbyists and PR advisers hundreds of thousands of dollars which they gladly take..Could not any of them spend a few minutes proof-reading this crap?
Many serious commentators say Kuzmin is blacklisted already in the USA. This letter further reduces any likelihood of him receiving a visa.
But it wasn't written for US politicians really; the true target was anti-western PoR regions voters...
p.s. One commentator described Kuzmin at the recent YES conference, thus: "He looked like a bandit, behaved like a bandit and spoke like a bandit." We now know he also writes like a bandit...
Update: 'Kyiv Post' have now reposted a upgraded, totally official version of the the letter mentioned above. It is still an embarrassing joke...they have nothing to apologise for...
Thursday, October 04, 2012
Yanukovych Jr's. incredible rise
My previous blog reveals that president Yanukovych's older son, Alexandr, is now the most successful businessman in Ukraine when it comes to winning state tenders.
'Forbes.ua 'recently ran a story explaining how his business operates.
Here is a summary:
In the past year Yanukovych Jr.'s wealth almost doubled. In April this year he entered the list of Ukraine's top 100 wealthiest businessmen.
His Ukrainian Development Bank is one of the three most dynamic banks in the country [It's CEO, Valentyna Arbuzova, just happens to be the mum of the chairman of the National Bank of Ukraine].
Companies set up by Yanukovych Jr.'s top managers, or registered at the address where his companies are located, this year won more than 5 billion hryvnias worth of public tenders for the supply of mining equipment and coal.
A significant portion of the companies controlled by Yanukovych, Jr have no website so it was difficult for 'Forbes' to find out the names of the 'brilliant' managers who he claims have made his companies so successful, but 'Forbes's journalists knocked together the graphic above. When it comes to answering questions about the the president's son's businesses, Donetsk businessmen become paranoid. Most refuses even informal communication.
'Forbes.ua 'recently ran a story explaining how his business operates.
Here is a summary:
In the past year Yanukovych Jr.'s wealth almost doubled. In April this year he entered the list of Ukraine's top 100 wealthiest businessmen.
His Ukrainian Development Bank is one of the three most dynamic banks in the country [It's CEO, Valentyna Arbuzova, just happens to be the mum of the chairman of the National Bank of Ukraine].
Companies set up by Yanukovych Jr.'s top managers, or registered at the address where his companies are located, this year won more than 5 billion hryvnias worth of public tenders for the supply of mining equipment and coal.
Alexandr Yanuk business empire is run from the top six floors of this Donetsk business centre. [Photos and graphics from 'Forbes']
Monday, October 01, 2012
PoR completely dominate state tendering competitions
'Forbes.ua' are systematically gathering information on the persons whose companies have been winning state tender competitions, in terms of value, since the beginning of 2012. Graphs and lots of other information here
Leading the pack is Yanukovych's son Oleksandr; second is Rinat Akhmetov.
Oleksandr Tislenko, Chairman of 'Altkom', linked to lots of Euro2012 machinations, is in third position.
Firtash is in fourth position, then Yefremov, Yanukovych's fixer Ivanyushchenko....and so on.
[More on the shady Altkom outfit, and other names on this list, from the 'Independent' here .]
How can such a bunch of people yield power to political opponents in elections?
Mezhyhirya video
The website of 'Segodnya' newspaper, owned by Rinat Akhmetov, has posted an article and video trailer about president Yanukovych's infamous kitch 'Mezhyhirya' residence...interesting..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)