I never know whether it is better to update a post already made if there is more on the subject or just to make another post on it with the additional information. I think what normally happens is that the title of the post is seen and, since that one has already been read, the reader moves on. So my tendency is to make another post.
In the last post, an anonymous commenter takes the position opposite mine in response and makes a compelling argument—the people are for it. In a democracy, what could be more compelling? Of course, that the people are for it has come from opinion polls and they can present their own problems. What would be the answer if the question asked, for example, “Would you be for lustration if there were a possibility that it would delay or make impossible government reform?” The objection to that is that it is a bit too leading. Often though the questions that get us to what the public is supposed to want are as leading in an opposite direction. But public opinion polls are accepted as a reflection of the voice of the people and in democracies, vox populi, vox deii--the voice of the people is the voice of god.
A digression. If an opinion poll is valid, it still suffers from the problem that it is a snapshot of a person’s opinion at a given point. What would it be the next day or the next hour or even minute? Wouldn’t you need to take a sampling over an extended period of time to get the real opinion? A government would be really democratic that based its policies on what the majority of the people thought. So give them a button to register that opinion and have a computer compile it from moment to moment. Wouldn’t make government workable because the people are, what even some of the founders made the case for, fickle? That is one reason why we have an arbitrary time set for elections and a time limit to them. We get the will of the people at that set time and move on. Government would not be workable otherwise. And all this talk about elections in the US is simply trying to get to what the opposition absolutely knows to be the opinion of the people based on polls. But that is not the system. Vote, figure out who won the majority of those votes and set up office for 2 years, 4 years or 6 years. Is the vote the best way to register the will of the people? Maybe not, but it is the only workable way.
I’m finished. Now back to the issue.
But possibly the even more compelling reason for lustration as it is called here is that Yuschenko himself is for it. He made it an issue during the revolution and seems to be still making it an issue. And that may be driving opinion as much as anything.
And there is a lot to the argument that those who have committed crimes against the people through abuse of their office should be brought to justice. Or those who have used their political power to get rid of certain people like Gangadze should be brought to justice. You might say that there has been a sort of dam that has kept justice pent up for not only the years of Soviet rule but for centuries before that under the Tsars. Prosecutions of those who have perpetrated these crimes would bring some sort of release—relief-- a sense that justice has finally been served. I find that to be a compelling argument too.
And who could look at the widow of Gangadze (I believe he was married, right?) or at his mother and say that the government will delay dealing with those who killed him so brutally. Delay is what they have had to this day. To them delay would mean the same it has meant under the Kuchma regime which would make the Yuschenko government to them and to those for whom this is a significant issue, no different. That is a compelling argument to me also and I don’t think I could look at them and do it.
But even with all of these arguments, I think there is a reason not do it, at least not yet. (Don G. in the comments makes the argument that this would be better dealt with later by a successor regime. That makes a lot of sense to me.) And this reason could create more good for the Ukrainians so as to be a more moral reason to wait than to act right now. The reason is that reform of the government and dealing with corruption is a way to prevent the abuses that brought about the murder of Gangadze and the flagrant abuse of power that the Ukrainians have been subject to under the Kuchma regime. If corruption can be dealt with, and I think it can be under a man like Yuschenko, that would go a long way to prevent what resulted in taking the life of Gangadze.
So why can’t Yuschenko do both? Why can’t he proceed on two fronts, prosecuting the criminals and reforming government to deal with the source of these abuses? The short answer is that he does not have absolute power. To be frank, he is only president of Kiev and the western part of the Ukraine. He has to work to consolidate his power over the eastern part. That he will most likely be able to do this right now is because of a certain acquiescence by those in the east--maybe it’s fatalism, kind of a cultural trait?—and because the opposition has gone to ground, for now.
That opposition has not gone away though. It is still there and still powerful. They have money if they don’t have political power. Yuschenko is not in control of the Parliament either and that Parliament has been controlled by the oligarchs to a great extent for years. They still wield considerable influence there even if it is a minority.
Kuchma, as one focus of lustration, may not enjoy the support of the oligarchs anymore. I don’t think he is getting any phone calls from them today, do you? Out of office and out of favor is always the rule. But what about Pinchuk? He seemed to come out more moderate in the tail end of the revolution. That made him seem to be more of a realist than some of the others. He still has considerable power and wealth. Would his realism mean that those would not be at the disposal of Kuchma if he were to be prosecuted?
And what is Kuchma’s own personal wealth? He may not have political power but if he has money, he has power. He can still buy a lot of influence in the event he were to be prosecuted.
If I didn’t have a conscience and, as a result, were capable of defending Kuchma were he to be prosecuted and I had a virtually unlimited budget to do it, I would take on the whole incoming government and focus the light on a lot of them. None of these guys, with the possible exception of Yuschenko, is squeaky clean. You cannot look closely at a lot of these people and not come away with something that doesn’t look right. No one who participated in the free-for-all that was privatization and came away with anything is pure. And they may have even acted legally but by present lights it might not look all that good.
Tymoschenko is a most appealing target of opportunity, not so much because she has done anything—that hasn’t been shown—but because there has been so much out there and so many interested in taking her down. They could be called out to do it again very easily. But she is not alone. How did Poroshenko get his wealth, for instance?
So put the attention on these people and their histories. Set up a Maidan-like website to publicize it and get the media outlets that are friendly still to publicize it. Even the ones that are not friendly will most likely not turn down advertising money. Put together a half hour or hour expose and pay the stations to run it. They might even think it’s a public service since they may be having some pangs of journalistic integrity for having come down so whole-souled for Yuschenko in the revolution. For journalists when information comes out about one side that is not good, objectivity often means finding something bad to say about the other side.
Have an issue a day press conference to keep it in the news. And if there is any hint that the press is being muzzled by the government, howl long and loud about how the Yuschenko camp talks about freedom in public but issues its own temniki or comes down on the press in its own way in private. As part of that front of the campaign—that is what it is a war campaign—take any suspicion of government restrictions on freedom of the press to the International Court of Human Rights. (Supported by evidence of course. That can always be found.) Do they have jurisdiction for such a case? I don’t know and frankly, if I were a part of this amoral world, wouldn’t care. The thing would be to take an issue to the West on the West’s own terms in their own institutions. Frankly, for me, it might be better that they refuse to take it. The argument would be that the West is hypocritical about freedom of the press and human rights. Hit them where they are most sensitive. Then have the PR firms follow up in the West consistently—meaning daily--to keep the issue in the forefront there.
I can assure you that it will be only a short time before the stories start to show up: “The promise of the Orange Revolution started to go sour today when it was revealed that the government of Victor Yuschenko has engaged in (fill in the blank.)” Or: “The Yuschenko government has come to resemble more the government of Vladimir Putin in its treatment of the press…” At that point, the honeymoon with the West will be over.
If the Yuschenko government were confronted by daily bombardments of information about the activities of some of their leading lights, what would they do? I think Yuschenko is a man of principle but he is not the only one who would have any power that could be used to deal with this sort of thing. Wouldn’t the real temptation be to try to stop this the way it has been stopped before? A very old reflex.
And it wouldn’t matter if there was any real truth to any of it in the end. That it might be true is the only thing that matters. That would keep the people on their heels about this. And the Western outlets would begin to examine this too more closely than they did. A story about a fall is much more interesting than one about any rise. The story is the thing—just ask Dan Rather.
If this happened, Yuschenko and his government would be fighting battles that have nothing to do with the central important issue of corruption. The opposition in Parliament wouldn’t stand still. They would ask for inquiries and point fingers when they didn’t get them. They would howl that this is more of the same thing that Yuschenko pledged to do away with. They could bang away on the “this is undemocratic chord” to some pretty good effect I think in the West and here. Some will be sensitive that the revolution they gave so much for not be hijacked by those who were supposed to be its friends. They might join in in the criticism.
And the more people are exposed to this over and over, the more that they become uncertain about things. Is it true? Was (fill in the blank) really involved in these types of corrupt activities? If it is true, then he/she is no better than anyone involved with Kuchma et al. It wouldn’t necessarily cause support to change to the opposition, but it might neutralize any support of the people when that support is needed by the government.
And how would this play in the east and north of here? It would play into their very prejudices about the Yuschenko government. It would confirm them all. Would that be good? Not hardly.
And the same sort of thing could happen if any of the other oligarchs were singled out for prosecution. The Yuschenko government would spend its time putting out all the brush fires and not do what it needs to do and is absolutely crucuial to Ukrainainas that it do. And Yuschenko does not have unlimited time to do what he needs to do.
Will this happen? I don’t know. The opposition has not shown themselves to be all that clever. (Selection for leadership of the clans seems to have been on the basis of loyalty not on the basis of smarts. Maybe there was a reason for it? Promote those who are not a threat? Sounds like any other organization.) That they might do it should be enough to give the government pause for these reasons. I think the revolution could very well hang in the balance if they don't.
Saturday, February 26, 2005
Tuesday, February 22, 2005
Prosecution?
Olmelchenko, a Rada deputy, was interviewed on the radio this morning. He said that they have sent information to the prosecutor to charge Kuchma with, among other things, the murder of Gangadze. He said that if the prosecutor does not prosecute, they will dismiss him.
This may be fine if they have the evidence, may be. But it is not all that clear in my mind that the Yuschenko government gains anything by this prosecution. As a matter of fact, it might spend time and political capital that should be hoarded for bigger problems than trying to get Kuchma. It is agreed that he has done some not so good things here. But if in the end, the Yuschenko government can only look back on a prosecution of Kuchma as its number one contribution, it will have been a waste.
Corruption is the number one problem and it is not centered in Kuchma. It must be dealt with at all levels and if that means letting Kuchma go then that is a small price to pay even in the face of his crimes. I know this doesn't sit well with people and justice would not be served with this result, but there are much bigger problems than simply Kuchma (or Yanukovych or Medvedchuck, et al.) To solve these would prevent those kinds of crimes from happening, at least on the scale that they have here. And that would be a major improvement.
It is not necessarily a demonstration of the rule of law to prosecute him either. It looks like the kind of retribution that any incoming regime in a non-rule of law country would exact from the outgoing party. Happened in Indonesia and Japan and it isn't a convincing proof of functioning rule of law systems when it happens. I think it means the opposite. And thinking about it some more, I think it makes no difference if they now have the evidence. I looks like the winners removing the opposition from the scene. That is the status quo.
This may be fine if they have the evidence, may be. But it is not all that clear in my mind that the Yuschenko government gains anything by this prosecution. As a matter of fact, it might spend time and political capital that should be hoarded for bigger problems than trying to get Kuchma. It is agreed that he has done some not so good things here. But if in the end, the Yuschenko government can only look back on a prosecution of Kuchma as its number one contribution, it will have been a waste.
Corruption is the number one problem and it is not centered in Kuchma. It must be dealt with at all levels and if that means letting Kuchma go then that is a small price to pay even in the face of his crimes. I know this doesn't sit well with people and justice would not be served with this result, but there are much bigger problems than simply Kuchma (or Yanukovych or Medvedchuck, et al.) To solve these would prevent those kinds of crimes from happening, at least on the scale that they have here. And that would be a major improvement.
It is not necessarily a demonstration of the rule of law to prosecute him either. It looks like the kind of retribution that any incoming regime in a non-rule of law country would exact from the outgoing party. Happened in Indonesia and Japan and it isn't a convincing proof of functioning rule of law systems when it happens. I think it means the opposite. And thinking about it some more, I think it makes no difference if they now have the evidence. I looks like the winners removing the opposition from the scene. That is the status quo.
Thursday, February 17, 2005
A new Russian ambassador
It was reported on the radio yesterday that Chernomyrdin is being replaced by another ambassador. This might be something routine but it could mean something. Chernomyrdin was a moderate Russian voice during the revolution. Could signal some sort of change.
UPDATE: Looks like this wasn't the case after all. Thanks to the those in the comments who posted the info.
UPDATE: Looks like this wasn't the case after all. Thanks to the those in the comments who posted the info.
Monday, February 14, 2005
My absence
I have not been posting here because I have had spotty access to the Internet. That is a story all by itself. But we have also been trying to get our new place in shape enough to be able to live in this century. Its been a hard slog. And trying to keep up with work has taken up the rest of my time. But I will be posting more in the next few days as things kind of ease up a bit.
On the home front
We have been in our new home for about a week. We’re still without hot water but the heat is on and there is heat though I think they have it on low. It is still a bit cold inside.
We had an interesting experience a feew days back. We sent our oldest boy down to get the elevator for us so we could ride down in some style for once and not have to hoof it down the 234 steps to the ground floor. That gets old after awhile, so we sent the fleetest (and most in shape, I might add) down to bring us the elevator. (It was a little like being chauffer driven. That is the point this kind of life can bring you to.) When it got here we stepped on, pushed the button and saw the doors close. The elevator began to move and we were on our way down.
When we got to about the fifth floor--between the fifth and fourth floor as it turned out—the elevator jarred to a stop. When I say jarred, I mean that it was as if it had hit something and hit it hard. The force of the impact made my knees buckle. And the elevator stopped dead.
The first instant, there was a thought that the thing might just drop the rest of the way down. There is really know way to know that it wouldn’t. But that was a split second thought. We soon figured we were stopped cold.
Nothing worked, no buttons lighted up when pushed, no doors came open when we hit the button for it. Nothing worked and we didn’t move. The only thing that would work was the alarm. So we rang it and stood around trying to figure out what to do. Fortunately, the only other ting that worked was the elevator light so we weren’t left to think about it in the dark.
After a few minutes of pushing—actually leaning-- on the alarm button, there was no response. But we could hear some people on the floor above us, the fifth floor, and we called out to them to tell the guard downstairs that we were stuck in the elevator. And we waited some more.
I tried to pry open the door and got it open enough to see that we were between floors. But that is as far as it would go. Apparently, they are made so that you cannot pry them open in transit. That is a good thing-- when you are in transit. But when you are stuck between floors, it doesn’t seem like a good thing.
I even tried the panel on the elevator ceiling to see if it would open. I wouldn’t budge and I couldn’t see any screws to open it. What would we have done if it had opened? I don’t know maybe stick a head out to see what was going on. It was a little too small to get people out of very easily so that was not a real good way. And a lot of people, most especially my wife, would consider it the height of stupidity to even try that sort of thing. (I reserve comment on it.) But it wouldn’t open so we didn’t come to that question.
In the end, after about 40 minutes of waiting, we heard someone on the floor above us working on the door at that level. We heard first that door open and then we heard our door being winched open. What we saw when it was open was a pair of shoes at eye level sitting underneath a pair of pant’s legs. The owner of those shoes was the elevator repairman on the fifth floor. He told us to push a lever and open the door on the fourth floor below us. We did that and the door opened.
I wouldn’t wait for the guy to come down a floor and take us out, which is what he asked us to do. I jumped out and got my wife out as quickly as we could. Our oldest boy got out last. It is a bit unsettling to come through a door of an elevator stuck between floors knowing that the thing is capable of moving and catching you as you are getting out. It is s scene from a movie, I know, and it may be that it is not possible to happen with all the safeguards built in, but the thought is still there. That is why I insisted that we move quickly out when we started to go.
The repairman showed up on the fourth to help us out but we were out already. We of course had some pointed questions to ask him. He explained that there was a lot of dust from all the work that is going on in our building and that that dust, cement dust, had worked its way into the elevator shaft and onto the mechanisms there. That caused the elevator to stick at points and when it was sticking too much, it stopped. He didn’t tell us, but I think that what happened was that the elevator had to work against all that debris and the effort caused a breaker to pop. That turned off the elevator, meaning that the buttons wouldn’t work, and, being between floors, it caused the brakes to come on. That is the reason why it jarred to a stop. It is only a guess mind you. But absent their finding a deer dead in the elevator shaft, I think it is a good one.
The guy told us that we would be better off not riding the elevator. That is probably a good idea, but when my wife and I were out later in the evening, later than the elevator is usually on, and we came back to find someone had left the elevator on, I couldn’t resist taking it up. I told my wife that it was like getting on the horse that bucked you off. When we got to our floor, the doors opened, we kissed the ground and were home.
Later in the evening, the water went off. Cold water is one thing, but no water is quite another thing entirely.
We had an interesting experience a feew days back. We sent our oldest boy down to get the elevator for us so we could ride down in some style for once and not have to hoof it down the 234 steps to the ground floor. That gets old after awhile, so we sent the fleetest (and most in shape, I might add) down to bring us the elevator. (It was a little like being chauffer driven. That is the point this kind of life can bring you to.) When it got here we stepped on, pushed the button and saw the doors close. The elevator began to move and we were on our way down.
When we got to about the fifth floor--between the fifth and fourth floor as it turned out—the elevator jarred to a stop. When I say jarred, I mean that it was as if it had hit something and hit it hard. The force of the impact made my knees buckle. And the elevator stopped dead.
The first instant, there was a thought that the thing might just drop the rest of the way down. There is really know way to know that it wouldn’t. But that was a split second thought. We soon figured we were stopped cold.
Nothing worked, no buttons lighted up when pushed, no doors came open when we hit the button for it. Nothing worked and we didn’t move. The only thing that would work was the alarm. So we rang it and stood around trying to figure out what to do. Fortunately, the only other ting that worked was the elevator light so we weren’t left to think about it in the dark.
After a few minutes of pushing—actually leaning-- on the alarm button, there was no response. But we could hear some people on the floor above us, the fifth floor, and we called out to them to tell the guard downstairs that we were stuck in the elevator. And we waited some more.
I tried to pry open the door and got it open enough to see that we were between floors. But that is as far as it would go. Apparently, they are made so that you cannot pry them open in transit. That is a good thing-- when you are in transit. But when you are stuck between floors, it doesn’t seem like a good thing.
I even tried the panel on the elevator ceiling to see if it would open. I wouldn’t budge and I couldn’t see any screws to open it. What would we have done if it had opened? I don’t know maybe stick a head out to see what was going on. It was a little too small to get people out of very easily so that was not a real good way. And a lot of people, most especially my wife, would consider it the height of stupidity to even try that sort of thing. (I reserve comment on it.) But it wouldn’t open so we didn’t come to that question.
In the end, after about 40 minutes of waiting, we heard someone on the floor above us working on the door at that level. We heard first that door open and then we heard our door being winched open. What we saw when it was open was a pair of shoes at eye level sitting underneath a pair of pant’s legs. The owner of those shoes was the elevator repairman on the fifth floor. He told us to push a lever and open the door on the fourth floor below us. We did that and the door opened.
I wouldn’t wait for the guy to come down a floor and take us out, which is what he asked us to do. I jumped out and got my wife out as quickly as we could. Our oldest boy got out last. It is a bit unsettling to come through a door of an elevator stuck between floors knowing that the thing is capable of moving and catching you as you are getting out. It is s scene from a movie, I know, and it may be that it is not possible to happen with all the safeguards built in, but the thought is still there. That is why I insisted that we move quickly out when we started to go.
The repairman showed up on the fourth to help us out but we were out already. We of course had some pointed questions to ask him. He explained that there was a lot of dust from all the work that is going on in our building and that that dust, cement dust, had worked its way into the elevator shaft and onto the mechanisms there. That caused the elevator to stick at points and when it was sticking too much, it stopped. He didn’t tell us, but I think that what happened was that the elevator had to work against all that debris and the effort caused a breaker to pop. That turned off the elevator, meaning that the buttons wouldn’t work, and, being between floors, it caused the brakes to come on. That is the reason why it jarred to a stop. It is only a guess mind you. But absent their finding a deer dead in the elevator shaft, I think it is a good one.
The guy told us that we would be better off not riding the elevator. That is probably a good idea, but when my wife and I were out later in the evening, later than the elevator is usually on, and we came back to find someone had left the elevator on, I couldn’t resist taking it up. I told my wife that it was like getting on the horse that bucked you off. When we got to our floor, the doors opened, we kissed the ground and were home.
Later in the evening, the water went off. Cold water is one thing, but no water is quite another thing entirely.
Friday, February 04, 2005
Thanks
Thanks to those who posted a comment to my post about our move and to those who voted for this blog in the Fistful of Euros awards, all 17 of you. That is actually 17 more than I thought would ever be reading this thing. I actually started it as a place to post on Ukraine that I could steer clients and family to for some background information. I also thought I might post on some things that I teach in my critical thinking classes. To post in a more public forum needs more discipline than making a note to myself would.
But we got caught up in the revolution here and so a few more people started reading. The thing that constantly amazes me about those who do read is how sharp they are. A lot of the comments have been very good and show real intelligence.
Anyway, thank you for the comments.
But we got caught up in the revolution here and so a few more people started reading. The thing that constantly amazes me about those who do read is how sharp they are. A lot of the comments have been very good and show real intelligence.
Anyway, thank you for the comments.
Thursday, February 03, 2005
In an Internet cafe
I am sitting here in an Internet cafe a couple of blocks from our new home after we have talked the guy into letting me connect in with my own computer. It is a problem for them because of their official documents. Here, as the saying goes, if you don't have the right documents, you are less than a bug. Their official documents don't say anything about letting anybody connect in with their own computer. They do talk about people using the internet café’s computers to access the Internet, but not about people using their own computers to access the Internet. That I might pay money to have them do it is not the point. The point is that it is not in the documents so they are uncomfortable with it.
But they ended up letting me do it anyway. A lot of it was the insistence of my wife. She is persuasive.
I am here because we moved the day before yesterday to our new place. This new place is in a new building but that new building does not have any Internet connection. When we asked why not, we were told it is a matter of the documents.
We were supposed to be moved in in December. It is now the first part of February. The building is supposed to be signed off by the various agencies of the government that have a say in who knows what in order for us to get any Internet connection and other services. Someone somewhere has not signed and is probably filibustering to up his fee. This view may be colored somewhat by some heavy duty frustration. I want to blame someone for it and corruption is a god reason I could do this.
But it is not necessarily corruption. It could be the other problem that occurs here too which can be s source of frustration (and a ready-made source, by the way, for corruption.) It is the bureaucracy. The bureaucracy must have its due which means it must have the paperwork together. (What bureaucracy does not thrive on paperwork?) And if the paperwork is not together, the right document, without which you are no more than a bug, will not be issued. And that bureaucracy can work at a glacial pace, grinding its way to a final decision inch by stupid inch.
But it is unsatisfying to rail at an impersonal system. I want to be able to rail at somebody, a readily identifiable somebody. And there may be some evidence as to who the culprit is from a visit my wife made to the government agency in charge. (In charge of the documents.) She had gone there to tell—correction, to ask politely; I want to tell them-- them to turn on the elevator one day. (More on this in a moment.) There was a guy down there at the agency in charge of Okaying the building, that is, signing off on the document, who told my wife that he had his own problems with that building. Now, he may in fact have some problems with the building that a conscientious public servant in any other country might have with the same building, that might prevent him, in good conscience, from signing off on it until they are corrected. But here, this kind of talk is often the opening salvo of a series of negotiations on the price of his signature.
So I am railing against him.
But we are now in and like the amount of space we have. Nice. The only problems are the lack of services that we have come to count on for living in this century. The first of these is hot water. Here they do not have a hot water heater in the various homes. They have central heating. By central is meant very central, out of the building central, in its own heating plant building central. And that building is controlled by the government. In order for us to get hot water, it has to be turned on by the government. And in order for it to be turned on by the government, they must have the proper documents. (Rail, rail.)
And we live on the 13th floor. This is not a problem because we are superstitious. This is a problem because we are not Olympic athletes. The point is that the elevator is only working from the first floor. There is a button on the 13th which, when pushed, does nothing. This has meant that we ride up with the stuff we have. But when we need to go down, we walk the 26 flights.
This may seem a small matter. Walking down with not much stuff is a lot better than walking up with a lot of stuff. And this is true. But the elevator does not work all the time from the first floor. It works only until around 4 p.m. If you get caught out after 4 p.m. you will be left having to hoof it the 26 flights back up. And in the morning, it will work sometimes from 9:30 a.m. but oftentimes not until 10:30. Why? The guy doesn’t get there to turn it on.
On the weekend, though, the schedule is different. On Saturdays, it works from the same time in the morning, a ballpark 10 a.m. But it is shut off at 1 p.m. And on Sundays, we have no elevator at all. This means that the elevator works when people are not here and doesn’t work when people are. Go figure.
So why won’t they just turn it on and leave it on? The reason is the documents. You must have the right documents for the elevator can be turned on.
They would say that the fact it is even on at all is an accommodation to the people here. And there is something to that. Of course, wanting to rail, I would say that the building owners found the right person who was able to get it turned on for those periods absent any documents—they can only go so far at their pay grade. This would mean a fee of course.
It could be worse though. We have a friend who bought a place in another area of town. My wife asked them about the elevator. Turns out they didn’t have one for 6 months after they moved in. And they live on the 19th floor—nice view by the way-- and have a baby. “But that is all behind us now.” Sounds like it was a very bad experience.
Which brings us to the Internet. We were told that we could not get any Internet connection until the proper documents were signed. That is of course the whole problem and the reason why are I am now in the Internet café. I think I might have to get cozy here. I could be making my way back to this place for some time. I hope not but I have to steel myself for the possibility.
I shouldn’t rail too much though in the end. Even with all the problems, we still like the place. But this is just another reminder that this is not the West. And maybe at the end of six months we will be able to say that it is all behind us too.
But they ended up letting me do it anyway. A lot of it was the insistence of my wife. She is persuasive.
I am here because we moved the day before yesterday to our new place. This new place is in a new building but that new building does not have any Internet connection. When we asked why not, we were told it is a matter of the documents.
We were supposed to be moved in in December. It is now the first part of February. The building is supposed to be signed off by the various agencies of the government that have a say in who knows what in order for us to get any Internet connection and other services. Someone somewhere has not signed and is probably filibustering to up his fee. This view may be colored somewhat by some heavy duty frustration. I want to blame someone for it and corruption is a god reason I could do this.
But it is not necessarily corruption. It could be the other problem that occurs here too which can be s source of frustration (and a ready-made source, by the way, for corruption.) It is the bureaucracy. The bureaucracy must have its due which means it must have the paperwork together. (What bureaucracy does not thrive on paperwork?) And if the paperwork is not together, the right document, without which you are no more than a bug, will not be issued. And that bureaucracy can work at a glacial pace, grinding its way to a final decision inch by stupid inch.
But it is unsatisfying to rail at an impersonal system. I want to be able to rail at somebody, a readily identifiable somebody. And there may be some evidence as to who the culprit is from a visit my wife made to the government agency in charge. (In charge of the documents.) She had gone there to tell—correction, to ask politely; I want to tell them-- them to turn on the elevator one day. (More on this in a moment.) There was a guy down there at the agency in charge of Okaying the building, that is, signing off on the document, who told my wife that he had his own problems with that building. Now, he may in fact have some problems with the building that a conscientious public servant in any other country might have with the same building, that might prevent him, in good conscience, from signing off on it until they are corrected. But here, this kind of talk is often the opening salvo of a series of negotiations on the price of his signature.
So I am railing against him.
But we are now in and like the amount of space we have. Nice. The only problems are the lack of services that we have come to count on for living in this century. The first of these is hot water. Here they do not have a hot water heater in the various homes. They have central heating. By central is meant very central, out of the building central, in its own heating plant building central. And that building is controlled by the government. In order for us to get hot water, it has to be turned on by the government. And in order for it to be turned on by the government, they must have the proper documents. (Rail, rail.)
And we live on the 13th floor. This is not a problem because we are superstitious. This is a problem because we are not Olympic athletes. The point is that the elevator is only working from the first floor. There is a button on the 13th which, when pushed, does nothing. This has meant that we ride up with the stuff we have. But when we need to go down, we walk the 26 flights.
This may seem a small matter. Walking down with not much stuff is a lot better than walking up with a lot of stuff. And this is true. But the elevator does not work all the time from the first floor. It works only until around 4 p.m. If you get caught out after 4 p.m. you will be left having to hoof it the 26 flights back up. And in the morning, it will work sometimes from 9:30 a.m. but oftentimes not until 10:30. Why? The guy doesn’t get there to turn it on.
On the weekend, though, the schedule is different. On Saturdays, it works from the same time in the morning, a ballpark 10 a.m. But it is shut off at 1 p.m. And on Sundays, we have no elevator at all. This means that the elevator works when people are not here and doesn’t work when people are. Go figure.
So why won’t they just turn it on and leave it on? The reason is the documents. You must have the right documents for the elevator can be turned on.
They would say that the fact it is even on at all is an accommodation to the people here. And there is something to that. Of course, wanting to rail, I would say that the building owners found the right person who was able to get it turned on for those periods absent any documents—they can only go so far at their pay grade. This would mean a fee of course.
It could be worse though. We have a friend who bought a place in another area of town. My wife asked them about the elevator. Turns out they didn’t have one for 6 months after they moved in. And they live on the 19th floor—nice view by the way-- and have a baby. “But that is all behind us now.” Sounds like it was a very bad experience.
Which brings us to the Internet. We were told that we could not get any Internet connection until the proper documents were signed. That is of course the whole problem and the reason why are I am now in the Internet café. I think I might have to get cozy here. I could be making my way back to this place for some time. I hope not but I have to steel myself for the possibility.
I shouldn’t rail too much though in the end. Even with all the problems, we still like the place. But this is just another reminder that this is not the West. And maybe at the end of six months we will be able to say that it is all behind us too.
Thursday, January 27, 2005
Moving and all
We are moving right now to our apartment across the river from here. That means I will probably be non-existent here for the next few days.
There is a lot of interesting stuff going on right now both here and in Russia. Tymoshenko, the AARP age people in Russia protesting the loss of benefits, and others.
Some analysts, for example, are looking for conspiracies behind the protests in Russia right now. Shades of the Orange Revolution. I'm sure they will find them. Reminds me of this:
I saw last night upon the stair,
A little man who was not there.
He wasn't there again today,
I wish that man would go away.
But they will have to wait until we get settled into the new digs.
There is a lot of interesting stuff going on right now both here and in Russia. Tymoshenko, the AARP age people in Russia protesting the loss of benefits, and others.
Some analysts, for example, are looking for conspiracies behind the protests in Russia right now. Shades of the Orange Revolution. I'm sure they will find them. Reminds me of this:
I saw last night upon the stair,
A little man who was not there.
He wasn't there again today,
I wish that man would go away.
But they will have to wait until we get settled into the new digs.
Monday, January 24, 2005
Business fears in Russia
Here's more on the same subject, Chubais Blasts State for Climate of Fear: "Unified Energy Systems CEO. Chubais is credible on business issues though he may have been discredited in the minds of some for his economics.
Anatoly Chubais lashed out at Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov's government last
week for not addressing what he called the worst crisis of confidence for businesses 'in 15 years.'
Aggressive tax probes and a lack of predictability by officials has created 'tensions' that must be alleviated for businesses to continue to develop, Interfax quoted Chubais as saying at the Council on Competitiveness and Entrepreneurship's first meeting of the year."
This will help business?
The tax authorities are at it again in Russia. Japan Tobacco Hit With $85M Back Tax Bill
Japan Tobacco International, one of the largest foreign investors in Russia, said Friday it had been served an $85 million bill for back taxes and fines, the latest in a string of similar claims against major companies.
The authorities say it is a routine audit but for the year 2000. Will there be more
routine audits for the later 3 years?
This seems to be happening with more frequency and can't help but hurt when companies start rethinking their investments in Russia or other companies pass on it.
More on Kremlin insularity
This article, Law 122 Is Kremlin's Catch-22, says quite a bit about a Kremlin and Duma out of touch. An excerpt:
The Kremlin is trapped in a Catch-22 of its own making. This became deadly evident last week with the nationwide wave of protests against the notorious Law 122, the law that strips millions of poor Russians of the little support they previously received from the state.
Yet the trap was imminent. It has been described on thousands of pages of textbooks that outline the pitfalls of nontransparent, corporate-type regimes with corrupt and closed bureaucracies.
The law was developed and written by bureaucrats barely familiar with everyday life in the nation they believe they govern.
They live in tightly guarded compounds on Rublyovskoye Shosse and in Arkhangelskoye, paid for by the property department of the presidential administration. They dash to their offices in state-provided foreign cars and have no knowledge of Moscow's traffic jams and skyrocketing gasoline prices, let alone the price for the Metro or the bus. They receive free medical care in special well- equipped, Kremlin-run clinics, and in case they get really sick, they are taken to Germany or Switzerland, for which they don't pay out of pocket, either. On top of that, in accordance with the new law on public administration, which was passed at
exactly the same time as Law 122, they enjoy salaries at least 20 times the national average. Translated into market prices, the compensation packages of high-ranking bureaucrats come to at least $130,000 and as much as half a million dollars a year, compared to an average income of $6,000 in the nation's most well-to-do city, Moscow.
Life intrudes again but the revolution goes on
It turned out that the inauguration was scheduled for the only time this weekend that my wife and I couldn't go. So we weren't there.
There is however a good posting on it at Les Sabote.
This inauguration may seem to put an end to the revolution and the tents will come down now and people will get back to their lives again, those who haven't already. But in a number of ways, the revolution is not over yet. There will still need to be made a great effort to root out what has caused the problems all these years--corruption. And it will need the efforts of everyone because the reality is that corruption is seen as a bad thing by people only if they do not benefit from it themselves. But corruption is a problem at all levels here, not just on the level of top government officials. The point is that Ukrainians are used to getting personal attention from government officials on their problems if, that is, they can pay the price for it. It will be a sobering day when they find out that the corruption finger also points back to themselves--if they see it. I hope they do. It will make things better for everyone.
There is however a good posting on it at Les Sabote.
This inauguration may seem to put an end to the revolution and the tents will come down now and people will get back to their lives again, those who haven't already. But in a number of ways, the revolution is not over yet. There will still need to be made a great effort to root out what has caused the problems all these years--corruption. And it will need the efforts of everyone because the reality is that corruption is seen as a bad thing by people only if they do not benefit from it themselves. But corruption is a problem at all levels here, not just on the level of top government officials. The point is that Ukrainians are used to getting personal attention from government officials on their problems if, that is, they can pay the price for it. It will be a sobering day when they find out that the corruption finger also points back to themselves--if they see it. I hope they do. It will make things better for everyone.
Saturday, January 22, 2005
So it all was CIA and MI6
This is an interesting article, The man who survived Russia's poison chalice, that says the people were saved by the CIA and MI6. That is exactly what the Russians have been saying and so has Yanukovych. But it all sounds a little too convenient for me.
For one thing, the elections were important but not all that important for Washington and London to devote all that many intelligence assets here to deal with it. Were there people from the CIA here and other Western intelligence agencies? Absolutely. Were they here in force in a planned move to help the people overthrow their corrupt government? That is where it sounds too unreal for me.
No one thought this would happen, not even the most optimistic sounding of the analysts. That it did happen, that people took to the streets was a surprise to everybody who had studied the situation. To think that the CIA and MI6 would devote any significant people here other than their normal contingent is to have them devote those assets on the outside chance that something might happen that most people said wouldn't happen. The fact is that they have not had a good record predicting recently. And these guys don't have any closer inside track to the future by training or by anything else than a lot of other highly qualified people do. They are highly trained and highly competent but they are human beings after all. I think it is highly likely they were as surprised as everybody else.
When it happened, though, I have no doubt they got some satellite time and started to follow things a bit more closely than they had been. (Do you really think that satellite time was waiting for them to use if they needed it? That sort of thing is not unlimited and it is being used extensively in other areas of the world.) But I don't think they were in front of events at all. I think they were behind them like everyone else.
This one is interesting:
The last sentence makes a claim I don't believe at all. Resources are allocated based on likely outcomes not on speculative outcomes, weighing allocation against any potential benefit. The case would have to be made for those hundreds of agents to be sent to Ukraine in the face of all the effort internationally that is being put into finding and rooting out terrorists. For what benefit? Would Langley listen to an appeal even if that appeal were from a station chief, for lots of people and assets to be devoted to the Ukraine especially in the current climate? Let's face it, Ukraine is not and was not the number one item on the US's or anyone else's agenda, for that matter. It was on the list but other things were and still are more important, terrorism being the big one. (This is even important for European intelligence agencies notwithstanding what their governments might say.)
The insinuation in that quote is that it was Western intelligence agents that sent the truck of vodka. But this is looking at it from where we are now not from where things stood at that time. The argument is that Yanukovych's miners would make their way down to the square and start the fighting but that the vodka stopped them. Is it all that clear that vodka would stop such a thing? Might it not actually make things worse, raising the risk that there would be confrontation? It only looks like a stroke of genius perpetrated by some very clever operatives because nothing happened. There were no provocations.
I tell you my problem with the whole "the-CIA-did-it" belief and it has colored my point of view here. It is that it makes what are otherwise, fairly normal human beings into super clever, all-knowing creatures who go around from one success to another, always in the shadows, never detectable. That is not any kind of people I know.
It is a lot like the newspaper that my uncle used to read from a fairly right wing organization. One cover story when I was younger was on the assassination of J. Edgar Hoover. The whole gist of the article was that those clever Commies got J. Edgar with an undetectable poison. (See if you can spot the obvious problem.) But that group was always on the case of big communist conspiracies that were among us sapping our will or killing our people and being so clever about it to never be caught.
Human beings make mistakes and they are not all-knowing. And in government and even with the highly trained and competent people in these agencies, decisions are made and resources allocated on the basis of their best information. And that information can be and, more often than we like to think, is wrong. That means a lot of scrambling to catch up and a lot of doing things and making decisions on the fly.
We'll see how this all comes out later as the stories begin to come out more and more but, until we do, I would take this article with one very large grain of salt.
For one thing, the elections were important but not all that important for Washington and London to devote all that many intelligence assets here to deal with it. Were there people from the CIA here and other Western intelligence agencies? Absolutely. Were they here in force in a planned move to help the people overthrow their corrupt government? That is where it sounds too unreal for me.
No one thought this would happen, not even the most optimistic sounding of the analysts. That it did happen, that people took to the streets was a surprise to everybody who had studied the situation. To think that the CIA and MI6 would devote any significant people here other than their normal contingent is to have them devote those assets on the outside chance that something might happen that most people said wouldn't happen. The fact is that they have not had a good record predicting recently. And these guys don't have any closer inside track to the future by training or by anything else than a lot of other highly qualified people do. They are highly trained and highly competent but they are human beings after all. I think it is highly likely they were as surprised as everybody else.
When it happened, though, I have no doubt they got some satellite time and started to follow things a bit more closely than they had been. (Do you really think that satellite time was waiting for them to use if they needed it? That sort of thing is not unlimited and it is being used extensively in other areas of the world.) But I don't think they were in front of events at all. I think they were behind them like everyone else.
This one is interesting:
As support for Mr Yushchenko grew daily, the Yanukovich-Kuchma faction became more desperate. They decided to transport miners from Donetsk on the Russian border and diehard Yanukovich supporters to Kiev to counter-demonstrate the students. The intention was clear - they would spark a conflict and violence and crack down on the peaceful Orange Revolutionaries. The fighting would not just
crack skulls, it would lead to a suspension of Parliament, of the elections, a one-year state of emergency and the continued rule of President Kuchma.
Then a curious thing happened. As the miners gathered in Donetsk, free vodka was handed out. They got vodka on their coaches and trains, and they were met in Kiev by trucks loaded with crates of vodka. By the time they had been in Kiev for an hour or so, most were paralytically drunk.
"No, the vodka was not a coincidence," said Alex Kiselev, a close adviser to Yushchenko rival Yanukovich, glumly. "We realised what was going on too late. It wasn't illegal but it was damned clever. It was a trick and we were dumb enough to fall for it, we shot ourselves in the foot with that one. It was all very scripted. There
were hundreds of Western agents in Ukraine."
The last sentence makes a claim I don't believe at all. Resources are allocated based on likely outcomes not on speculative outcomes, weighing allocation against any potential benefit. The case would have to be made for those hundreds of agents to be sent to Ukraine in the face of all the effort internationally that is being put into finding and rooting out terrorists. For what benefit? Would Langley listen to an appeal even if that appeal were from a station chief, for lots of people and assets to be devoted to the Ukraine especially in the current climate? Let's face it, Ukraine is not and was not the number one item on the US's or anyone else's agenda, for that matter. It was on the list but other things were and still are more important, terrorism being the big one. (This is even important for European intelligence agencies notwithstanding what their governments might say.)
The insinuation in that quote is that it was Western intelligence agents that sent the truck of vodka. But this is looking at it from where we are now not from where things stood at that time. The argument is that Yanukovych's miners would make their way down to the square and start the fighting but that the vodka stopped them. Is it all that clear that vodka would stop such a thing? Might it not actually make things worse, raising the risk that there would be confrontation? It only looks like a stroke of genius perpetrated by some very clever operatives because nothing happened. There were no provocations.
I tell you my problem with the whole "the-CIA-did-it" belief and it has colored my point of view here. It is that it makes what are otherwise, fairly normal human beings into super clever, all-knowing creatures who go around from one success to another, always in the shadows, never detectable. That is not any kind of people I know.
It is a lot like the newspaper that my uncle used to read from a fairly right wing organization. One cover story when I was younger was on the assassination of J. Edgar Hoover. The whole gist of the article was that those clever Commies got J. Edgar with an undetectable poison. (See if you can spot the obvious problem.) But that group was always on the case of big communist conspiracies that were among us sapping our will or killing our people and being so clever about it to never be caught.
Human beings make mistakes and they are not all-knowing. And in government and even with the highly trained and competent people in these agencies, decisions are made and resources allocated on the basis of their best information. And that information can be and, more often than we like to think, is wrong. That means a lot of scrambling to catch up and a lot of doing things and making decisions on the fly.
We'll see how this all comes out later as the stories begin to come out more and more but, until we do, I would take this article with one very large grain of salt.
Friday, January 21, 2005
West or north?
There have been some reports that Yuschenko will make his first visit to Brussels to address the EU. This is reported as an intentional snub of Putin for his involvement with Yanukovych in the first elections.
And it has also been reported that Yuschenko will make his first visit to Moscow and then will fly from there to Brussels. This move would not be interpreted as a snub of Putin for his interference.
So which one will it be? West or north? (Moscow is north of here.)
I think it will be north. Yuschenko said it earlier and I think he meant it then and still means it. He has had a clear sense of what is at stake with relations between Russia and Ukraine throughout the elections; he is a realist in that. So I think he will go north first. There are very few reasons of any value to Ukraine not to.
And it has also been reported that Yuschenko will make his first visit to Moscow and then will fly from there to Brussels. This move would not be interpreted as a snub of Putin for his interference.
So which one will it be? West or north? (Moscow is north of here.)
I think it will be north. Yuschenko said it earlier and I think he meant it then and still means it. He has had a clear sense of what is at stake with relations between Russia and Ukraine throughout the elections; he is a realist in that. So I think he will go north first. There are very few reasons of any value to Ukraine not to.
Divided Europe
Here's an interesting article, MSNBC - A House Divided on a split between the new members of the EU, Poland and Lithuania being the most prominent.
I posted on this earlier, but some in the EU have told these two to stop shilling for the US in Ukraine. The article ends:
The CIA thinks that the EU won't be around in the next few years. If they are right on this, and they haven't been right on a number of important things recently, this might be one reason, the split between Old Europe and New Europe. And interestingly enough, that split is really over America-- and it might affect Ukraine.
I posted on this earlier, but some in the EU have told these two to stop shilling for the US in Ukraine. The article ends:
For New Europe, the experience has been unsettling. "It's difficult for Polish politicians to have to choose between loyalty to the United States and NATO and solidarity with the EU. They're only now realizing that the West doesn't always speak with one voice," says Zdzislaw Mach, director of the Center for European Studies at Jagiellonian University in Krakow. Which voice Europe will use when it finally speaks to Yushchenko is still unclear. Yet many EU countries understand only too well the struggle to emerge from a communist past. Whether old or new, it will be difficult for Europe to abandon a Ukraine so tantalizingly close to joining it on the other side of totalitarian rule. That fact alone may sooner or later force the two sides to bridge their differences.
The CIA thinks that the EU won't be around in the next few years. If they are right on this, and they haven't been right on a number of important things recently, this might be one reason, the split between Old Europe and New Europe. And interestingly enough, that split is really over America-- and it might affect Ukraine.
Thursday, January 20, 2005
The ruling
The Supreme Court today rejected Yanukovych's final appeal after listening to arguments until 3 a.m. this morning. This was expected because of the Court's order to publish the results of the election a couple of days ago.
Members of the Supreme are purported to have been infuriated at the arguments made by Yanukovych's attorneys. Apparently, the arguments were more heat and heated than logical or legal. And it couldn't have helped that they brought in some Swiss attorneys to make a part of their case either. Because of the fact that they didn't speak Russian or Ukrainian, any argument from them couldn't have come over any better than a lecture.
At one point, one of Yanukovychs' lawyers called a court ruling stupid or something along those lines. When the Chief Justice told him he could not say that, the lawyer said that the court didn't understand him and that he didn't mean anything by it.
In court of course, it is not what you meant that is the issue, but what the judges understand. I can't beleive it to be helpful to your clients case to have a judge beleive that you called a ruling of his stupid or idiotic or something like that. They might have gotten away with that sort of thing when rulings could be bought or judges could be intimidated. But things have changed, at least for this court and for a lot of other things. The lawyers for Yanukovych haven't realized it yet or at least the extent of it. I guess having been able to exercise all that power for so long has made the world look different for them. But their little world has changed whether they see it or not.
Members of the Supreme are purported to have been infuriated at the arguments made by Yanukovych's attorneys. Apparently, the arguments were more heat and heated than logical or legal. And it couldn't have helped that they brought in some Swiss attorneys to make a part of their case either. Because of the fact that they didn't speak Russian or Ukrainian, any argument from them couldn't have come over any better than a lecture.
At one point, one of Yanukovychs' lawyers called a court ruling stupid or something along those lines. When the Chief Justice told him he could not say that, the lawyer said that the court didn't understand him and that he didn't mean anything by it.
In court of course, it is not what you meant that is the issue, but what the judges understand. I can't beleive it to be helpful to your clients case to have a judge beleive that you called a ruling of his stupid or idiotic or something like that. They might have gotten away with that sort of thing when rulings could be bought or judges could be intimidated. But things have changed, at least for this court and for a lot of other things. The lawyers for Yanukovych haven't realized it yet or at least the extent of it. I guess having been able to exercise all that power for so long has made the world look different for them. But their little world has changed whether they see it or not.
Wednesday, January 19, 2005
The Crimean Tatars
Here's an interstice article about some of the problems the Tatars face in the Crimea--RFE/RL: Three challenges for the Crimean Tatars.
I don't know much about them other than that they are descendents of the Golden Horde, the Mongols who ruled in that region for a period of time.
The Crimean peninsula has a certain amount of autonomy from Kiev. It was granted as a sort of compromise when Ukraine declared independence from Moscow. That was done to allay some of the ethnic problems that would have erupted had they not granted that autonomy.
Here's an excerpt:
The Russian base is in Sevastopol in the southeastern end of the peninsula. (Near the site of the famous charge of the Light Brigade, Balaclava.) It is the only warm water military port Russia has so it is a significant strategic asset. There is some talk about relocating it to Russian territory in the Azov Sea but they would have to build a base and harbor from scratch in that area. That is something that makes it unlikely.
Most of the Tatars were shipped off to Tajikistan by the Soviets. There is a movement afoot to come back. My wife and I visited the area and we met a man on a train who was from Tajikistan and a Tatar relocated to the Crimea. He was in charge of an office that worked with Tatars coming back to the Crimea.
It was interesting to talk to him. He was a Tatar and loyal to his group, but he still had a certain amount of loyalty to the Soviet Union. This was odd to me because of the forced move of the Tatars by the Soviet Union out of the Crimea. He was one that had come back from Tajikistan to his homeland in the Crimea. When we spoke to him, he kept making the point that all were equal in the Soviet system. That is one you hear from a lot of older people who lived during the Soviet period. All were equal no matter the nationality in the Soviet Union.
When I suggest to them that most of the party positions were held by ethnic Russians, they see the point but continue to make the same claim nonetheless. (And pointing to Stalin, a Georgian, and Kruschev, a Ukrainian, always serves to make teh counter case.) But my point is still true.
In any event, this article describes what might turn out to be a problem for Ukraine and Yuschenko.
I don't know much about them other than that they are descendents of the Golden Horde, the Mongols who ruled in that region for a period of time.
The Crimean peninsula has a certain amount of autonomy from Kiev. It was granted as a sort of compromise when Ukraine declared independence from Moscow. That was done to allay some of the ethnic problems that would have erupted had they not granted that autonomy.
Here's an excerpt:
The Crimean Tatars overwhelmingly backed the "Orange Revolution" in Ukraine, but in the wake of that victory, they face three challenges to their national aspirations: first, the probability of increased Russian meddling on the peninsula, second, the likelihood of growing Islamic fundamentalism there, and third, the possibility of declining support by Western governments that now have a government in Kyiv they like.
The Crimean Tatars face increased Russian meddling in Crimea, some of it by the local Russian community but much of it clearly orchestrated by Moscow. Ethnic Russians -- who constitute the majority of the peninsula's population -- voted overwhelmingly against Viktor Yushchenko.
Some of the more extreme ethnic Russian opponents of the Orange Revolution there organized themselves as Cossack detachments to defend against what they said were Crimean Tatar threats, according to religare.ru, and others urged a vote to put Crimea under Russian control, mignews.com reported.
Even though the Ukrainian presidential election is now over and tempers may have cooled somewhat, Moscow's interests in maintaining its naval base there and in continuing to use Crimea as a counterweight to Kyiv make it likely that Russia will attempt to exacerbate problems there, a development that is likely to hurt rather than help the Crimean Tatars.
The Russian base is in Sevastopol in the southeastern end of the peninsula. (Near the site of the famous charge of the Light Brigade, Balaclava.) It is the only warm water military port Russia has so it is a significant strategic asset. There is some talk about relocating it to Russian territory in the Azov Sea but they would have to build a base and harbor from scratch in that area. That is something that makes it unlikely.
Most of the Tatars were shipped off to Tajikistan by the Soviets. There is a movement afoot to come back. My wife and I visited the area and we met a man on a train who was from Tajikistan and a Tatar relocated to the Crimea. He was in charge of an office that worked with Tatars coming back to the Crimea.
It was interesting to talk to him. He was a Tatar and loyal to his group, but he still had a certain amount of loyalty to the Soviet Union. This was odd to me because of the forced move of the Tatars by the Soviet Union out of the Crimea. He was one that had come back from Tajikistan to his homeland in the Crimea. When we spoke to him, he kept making the point that all were equal in the Soviet system. That is one you hear from a lot of older people who lived during the Soviet period. All were equal no matter the nationality in the Soviet Union.
When I suggest to them that most of the party positions were held by ethnic Russians, they see the point but continue to make the same claim nonetheless. (And pointing to Stalin, a Georgian, and Kruschev, a Ukrainian, always serves to make teh counter case.) But my point is still true.
In any event, this article describes what might turn out to be a problem for Ukraine and Yuschenko.
Tuesday, January 18, 2005
Life and work go on
These days have been very busy for me trying to catch up with work and all. And life keeps going on regardless.
I have just been too busy to post anything for the past couple of days. It does look like the inauguration will take place this weekend. I will be going to it with my wife. We'll report on it when we get back.
I have just been too busy to post anything for the past couple of days. It does look like the inauguration will take place this weekend. I will be going to it with my wife. We'll report on it when we get back.
More of the picture falls into place
This is an article, A Crackdown Averted: How Top Spies in Ukraine Changed the Nation's Path, about the security services role in the Orange Revolution. An excerpt:
Some of the help we were aware of. The SBU had recorded the conversations of Yanukovych's lieutenants about fixing the elections and made those public. But the rest of this was not known.
This might go a long way to answering why the troops stood down when everyone knew that a strike was afoot. We all waited for it but it never happened.
UPDATE: I would never have thought I could say this about a successor agency to the KGB, but after reading this article more closely, I think it is clear that there were members of the SBU that were heroes and patriots. That would be heroes with a capital "h." They saved lives and probably the revolution.
This, I think confirms what I have been arguing all along, that the revolution depended on people to stand up in the right places when it counted. The very fortunate thing is that they did.
As protests here against a rigged presidential election overwhelmed the capital
last fall, an alarm sounded at Interior Ministry bases outside the city. It was just after 10 p.m. on Nov. 28.
More than 10,000 troops scrambled toward trucks. Most had helmets, shields and clubs. Three thousand carried guns. Many wore black masks. Within 45 minutes, according to their commander, Lt. Gen. Sergei Popkov, they had distributed ammunition and tear gas and were rushing out the gates.
Kiev was tilting toward a terrible clash, a Soviet-style crackdown that could have brought civil war. And then, inside Ukraine's clandestine security apparatus, strange events began to unfold.
While wet snow fell on the rally in Independence Square, an undercover colonel from the Security Service of Ukraine, or S.B.U., moved among the protesters' tents. He represented the successor agency to the K.G.B., but his mission, he said, was not against the protesters. It was to thwart the mobilizing troops. He warned opposition leaders that a crackdown was afoot.
Simultaneously, senior intelligence officials were madly working their secure telephones, in one instance cooperating with an army general to persuade the Interior Ministry to turn back.
The officials issued warnings, saying that using force against peaceful rallies was illegal and could lead to prosecution and that if ministry troops came to Kiev, the army and security services would defend civilians, said an opposition leader who witnessed some of the exchanges and Oleksander Galaka, head of the military's intelligence service, the G.U.R., who made some of the calls.
Far behind the scenes, Col. Gen. Ihor P. Smeshko, the S.B.U. chief, was coordinating several of the contacts, according to Maj. Gen. Vitaly Romanchenko, leader of the military counterintelligence department, who said that on the spy chief's orders he warned General Popkov to stop. The Interior Ministry called off its alarm.
Some of the help we were aware of. The SBU had recorded the conversations of Yanukovych's lieutenants about fixing the elections and made those public. But the rest of this was not known.
This might go a long way to answering why the troops stood down when everyone knew that a strike was afoot. We all waited for it but it never happened.
UPDATE: I would never have thought I could say this about a successor agency to the KGB, but after reading this article more closely, I think it is clear that there were members of the SBU that were heroes and patriots. That would be heroes with a capital "h." They saved lives and probably the revolution.
This, I think confirms what I have been arguing all along, that the revolution depended on people to stand up in the right places when it counted. The very fortunate thing is that they did.
Saturday, January 15, 2005
An interesting analysis
In this article--Between Regimes: The Relationship Between Internal & External Factors. James SHERR. Zerkalo Nedeli On The WEB--the author discusses some of the problems that Yuschenko confronts.
There are some problems with it:
--He says Yuschenko may take office but that doesn't mean he has power. I think the revolution showed he has power. Maybe he means power over government but I think that is exaggerated. The scrambling going on by those who have been in power to position themselves better for a Yuschenko regime suggests differently. Even the oligarchs in the east are making positive statements which are not nothing.
If he means not in complete control of the government that is probably true. But I think that can be remedied fairly quickly with a series of appointments and Yuschenko's requirements that his potential appointees be disinterested is a good start.
I think he has power and that is being seen now and will be made plain very quickly.
--He makes the argument that corruption is mostly an economic problem. It isn't. It is a cultural problem. That makes it more of a difficulty than if it were purely economic. But even if it were economic it is hard for me to see that even paying a living wage would stop it. If a person is used to having a dacha out in the country or a Mercedes in his garage as a result of payola, why wouldn't his eyes get bigger if he had both a better wage and the possibility of more money through bribes? A bigger dacha and winter trips to Grenoble.
It is better to decrease the number of opportunities for bribes. Then work on a better ethic.
--The east/west problem. I think he overstates the problems there are between the east and the west. The east doesn't like Yuschenko it is true. But they have not shown themselves to dislike him so much as to make their way on their own to Kiev to shut down the government. If they have a job and the economy is fine, they will settle in like the rest of Ukraine. But that is the real problem for Yuschenko, making sure that they do have a job and that the economy doesn't turn sour. If there is major economic dislocation, that could spell trouble. And what was done in the Orange Revolution can be repeated, this time with out of work miners.
The rest of this is pretty good and it raises issues that will need to be addressed by Yuschenko, sooner rather than later.
There are some problems with it:
--He says Yuschenko may take office but that doesn't mean he has power. I think the revolution showed he has power. Maybe he means power over government but I think that is exaggerated. The scrambling going on by those who have been in power to position themselves better for a Yuschenko regime suggests differently. Even the oligarchs in the east are making positive statements which are not nothing.
If he means not in complete control of the government that is probably true. But I think that can be remedied fairly quickly with a series of appointments and Yuschenko's requirements that his potential appointees be disinterested is a good start.
I think he has power and that is being seen now and will be made plain very quickly.
--He makes the argument that corruption is mostly an economic problem. It isn't. It is a cultural problem. That makes it more of a difficulty than if it were purely economic. But even if it were economic it is hard for me to see that even paying a living wage would stop it. If a person is used to having a dacha out in the country or a Mercedes in his garage as a result of payola, why wouldn't his eyes get bigger if he had both a better wage and the possibility of more money through bribes? A bigger dacha and winter trips to Grenoble.
It is better to decrease the number of opportunities for bribes. Then work on a better ethic.
--The east/west problem. I think he overstates the problems there are between the east and the west. The east doesn't like Yuschenko it is true. But they have not shown themselves to dislike him so much as to make their way on their own to Kiev to shut down the government. If they have a job and the economy is fine, they will settle in like the rest of Ukraine. But that is the real problem for Yuschenko, making sure that they do have a job and that the economy doesn't turn sour. If there is major economic dislocation, that could spell trouble. And what was done in the Orange Revolution can be repeated, this time with out of work miners.
The rest of this is pretty good and it raises issues that will need to be addressed by Yuschenko, sooner rather than later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)