Taras Kuzio’s Blog

Hi, Congratulations to the site owner for this marvelous work you’ve done. It has lots of useful and interesting data.

By blitytrergy on Jun 5, 2009

Zhulyki (pl ??????) is Russian for crooks.

Like most Ukrainian politicians (incl Tymoshenko & Yanukovych), Yushchenko often lapses into surzhyk.

Keeping in mind that Yushchenko had his own shyrkoid plans, the word zhulyki describes the whole trio.

By Taras on Jun 6, 2009

But Tymoshenko and Yanukovych are the biggest crooks. Yushchenko’s “Shyrkoid” plans envisioned unifyiing Ukrainian politicos for the good of Ukraine. Tymoshenko’s “Shyrkoid” plans envision a Putinesque dictatorship, void of input from the electorate. Big difference here Taras, like comparing Oranges and Apples. Again you attempt to shift the focus away from Tymoshenko, onto Yushchenko. Tymoshenko will soon find herself at the bottom of the Ukrianian political heap, having self destructed because of her lust for power.

By Wolodymir on Jun 6, 2009

I don’t think anyone’s trying to say that an OU-POR coalition is good and a POR-BYUT one isn’t per se so to speak. The point is that Yush appeared to be trying to get POR to agree to his western agenda including NATO ie the never-actualized coalition would have pulled POR in a western direction (in his dreams as happened with Raisa B (who certainly wasn’t that to start with)) and failed partly because Tym was much more concerned with becoming PM again and was prepared to undermine the Pres in his “battle’ with Yanuk to achieve that. On the other hand the proposed BYUT-POR coalition, appears to be pulling Ukraine in the opposite direction because Tym does not have any commitment to ‘westernization’ or democracy and will concede anything on that score to POR.
As for the Grystenko and Yek – two people trading accusations I can’t tell who has the better case from the information given. I also don’t get Yek accusing Gryt of undermining the defence budget because of the cost of returning 13 officers – I know the budget’s not exactly the size of the United States but the cost of returning 13 officers?

By anon on Jun 6, 2009

There are no legal grounds for dismissing the VR, at this point, so in answer to your question, No on point 3. Yushchenko has the constitution on his side, specifically

Chapter XIII. Article 156
A draft law on introducing amendments to Chapter I — “General Principles,” Chapter III — “Elections. Referendum,” and Chapter XIII — “Introducing Amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine,” is submitted to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by the President of Ukraine, or by no less than two-thirds of the constitutional composition of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, and on the condition that it is adopted by no less than two-thirds of the constitutional composition of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, and is approved by an All-Ukrainian referendum designated by the President of Ukraine.

Article 157
The Constitution of Ukraine shall not be amended, if the amendments foresee the abolition or restriction of human and citizens’ rights and freedoms,

So, what we have is a requirement for a nation wide referendum designated by the President in order to amend the constitution and 2nd, taking away the rights of the citizen to elect its President is also a violation of Article 157.

Why are you now attempting to cloud the issue by bringing Hrytsenko into the equeation? As was referenced by Anon, Hrytsenko and Yek trading barbs, thats all it is, trading barbs, no proof, or sound evidence has been brought to bare by either one. If you don’t believe there is Oligarch monies behind Hrytsenko, you must be living in a cave.

At this point in time, the President must be backed or Ukraine is in for a long dark step backward. Tymoshenko is taking the final gamble, will she win, or will Ukraine be set back another 10 years?

By Wolodymir on Jun 6, 2009

“I disagree that its ok for Our Ukraine-Regions to have a coalition for the “good of the country” while BYuT-Regions is a “Moscow conspiracy to undermine Ukraine. This is too simplistic and again falls into the trap of “good” and “bad” guys.”

Are you really going to tell us that removing the right of the citizen to elect his President is a good thing for Ukraine? Surely you jest. Its quite clear that this “coalition” is nothing more than a power grab in order to avoid elections, which neither party is certain of winning, especially with Yatseniuk gaining momentum. So if neither one of us is certain of winning, lets take the vote away from the people and give it to the VR which we control, that way, we’re assured of a victory. Doesn’t take a PhD to figure out this one.

By Wolodymir on Jun 6, 2009

Ah, clever little Tymo, she has already announced that Parliamentary elections would not be postponed another 2 years under the constitutional amendments.

The Party of Regions said it wants to have constitutional amendments in place before a coalition is formed (Ukrainian Journal).

Ukrainian Pravda has already reported that Tymo is buddying up to her mortal enemy, Baloha the creepy thug, because Baloha apparently “has influence” over some of the Constitutional Court judges where this travesty will have to pass muster.

The “disbanding Rada” cards have already been played.

It worked once for Yushchenko when the Party of Regions was attempting to form a veto-proof majority by buying up all of the deputies, such as Kinakh and company.

The latest games were the “fictitious” Orange majority of 226, no, wait 225, no wait, noone knows what the number is given assorted NUNS members walking out, but Lytvyn is appointed Speaker in a big hurry, so we’ll go with the original number anyway.

It (the disbanding Rada bluffs) didn’t work again, and Yushchenko/Baloha kept threatening again this year, to which the Rada responded by calling for early Presidential elections in October, 2009 (found unconstitutional by the Court) and – again – impeachment.

You know, given the absolute brutally corrupt insanity in Ukrainian politics, and how serious a threat this is to the existence of Ukraine, I would support option 3.

By elmer on Jun 6, 2009

Yanukovich has backed out of the coalition deal, says Elections are the right way to go. Tymoshenko gambled, and lost. The people will not forget.

By Wolodymir on Jun 7, 2009

Yushchenko must have been very convincing with Yanukovich in there private meeting the other day. Thank you Mr. President!!

By Wolodymir on Jun 7, 2009

Taras, I agree with those who wrote in their posts that our Ukrainian politics is highly unpredictable( or ?). And maybe I was right when in one of previous posts wrote: “let’s wait”. Just I came home after several hours (I did not finish writing this post) I’ve heard of new Yanukovich’s statement. What’s interesting – the first my thought was: “Well, now it’s the time for supporters of Yushchenko-Yanukovich’s “shirka” (contrary to the discussed one it was Yushchenko’s dream from the very beginning of his rule) to say: “Two real patriots – the “Two Victors the Greats!”- save the democracy and independence of Ukraine from dark forces of Tymoshenko!!!”
And to my great surprise I hear smth. like from Wolodymir “Thank you Mr.President!”, etc.
Well, I haven’t yet heard Tymoshenko’s comments (they are supposed to be this evening), but I think she will only confirm my opinion on her as true politician who is ready for hard compromises and at the same time pretty well knows the limits for them. So, let’s wait again.

(and below is what I started to write before)
Taras, I think (also I’m not sure in my English) – the word “defend” as to “constitutional changes” is not quite correct. There is a difference between “defence” and “support as bitter neccessity”. Early in 2005 I could not imagine later progress of events even in a bad dream. I thought: at last our people gained enough kinetic energy to escape from deep potential well where we lived before! Unfortunately I was wrong because I could not forecast such miserable behavior from a man who was raised by thousands of people on the top of the power.
We all are percieving and evaluating events, persons firstly “emotionally” and then (it seems that not all of us) are trying to interpret them, create own opinions in some logical way. Sometimes they match, sometimes not, and I think that there is no any personal tragedy because not WE but THEY took the oath for us.

Well, I will not continue – events change dramatically, but I think that one and maybe the first problem is not politicians as persons but how we understand and evaluate their intents and their decisions. Why in our country everyone knows “Politics is the art of the possible” and continues to dream of God-like “saviors” instead of comparing existing ones in real time and real world?

By Yuri_D on Jun 7, 2009

Having gambled and lost, Tyomshenko, as could have been easily predicted, is now again blaming everyone else of sabotage. She should be apologizing to the Ukrainian people for even momentarily thinking about a coalition with the criminal thug Yanukovich. She made her bed, now she’s going to have to sleep in it. Tymoshenko will be lucky to get 3% by the time this is over with. She has NO ONE to blame but herself and her lust for power.

By Wolodymir on Jun 7, 2009

Wolodymir, you’d better write such a stupidity on Tyahnybok’s blog in “Ukrainian Pravda”. It’s full of such kind deep thoughts…

By Yuri_D on Jun 7, 2009

More intelligent then the fantasies posted on this blog.

By Wolodymir on Jun 7, 2009

Your email at Kuzio Associates does not work, Dr. Kuzio.

Pit bulls, like other powerful breeds, get a bad rap because idiots abuse them. They are like any other dogs – if someone abuses them, they will act accordingly. Some time when you have a chance, catch the Dog Whisperer on National Geographic – Cesar Millan.

Re: parliamentary democracies electing presidents. I take your point about parliamentary democracies.

BUT —-

Do you know of any other true parliamentary democracy that has a “party list” system, as in Ukraine?

In Ukraine, there is a small “political elite” which treats government as business – not as government.

And the “party list” system promotes nothing but corruption.

And I could not agree with you more about the ingrained, hideous sovok mentality.

Wolodymir, to be fair, I think that both the Party of Regions AND BYuT ought to be apologizing for their shenanigans – forming a “shyrka” in order to rig democracy, prolong their power, and create a false “stability” to allow them to continue their corruption in “peace.”

This whole episode is really more like the proposed merger of 2 corporations. It had everything to do with business, and nothing to do with true, democratic government.

And, is an any corporate merger, who stays, who goes, and who comes out on top are crucial issues – to those in the 2 corporations.

Of course, when the 2 corporations are also in control of the government, then people in general are also affected.

By elmer on Jun 7, 2009

And I still think it is an insult to pit bulls to compare them to Baloha.

Snake is a more apt comparison.

Viper, cockroach, virus, dirtbag would also work well in his case.

I’d say rats, but that would be an insult to the rats.

By elmer on Jun 7, 2009

Seriously, Dr. Kuzio, I have personally run into the Michael Vick dogs – and they are just fine.

I strongly recommend the Dog Whisperer on the National Geographic Channel.

“He trains people, he rehabilitates dogs.”

It is amazing.

He has a pack of dogs, and his lead dog is Daddy – a former fighting pit bull that he now uses to rehabilitate other dogs. Daddy is quite cute, and is the nicest dog you’d ever want to meet.

If Cesar Millan can do that with pit bulls, and Rottweilers, I suggest that he should come to Ukraine and rehabilitate the “political elite.”

By elmer on Jun 7, 2009

Elmer, don’t get me wrong, I think both Yanukovich and Tymoshenko are wrong and both should apologize, However, it was in fact Tymoshenko who has stated in the past that she would never under any circumstances form a coalition with Yanukovich. Had they been motivated to form a coalition to actually attack the crisis, as you said, they would have worked on passing the required legislation begining last October. Now its all spin factor for both to save face.
Neither one of these so called politicians has what it takes to run a convenience store, let alone manage a government.

By Wolodymir on Jun 7, 2009

Where I live they also elect the President in Parliament but the whole point is he has no powers. It’s a ceremonial position like the
English Queen. This point was made over and over again in this debate in Ukraine.
Apparently Merkel also said this to Tym. Another other major flaw was extending the power of a Parliament after it was elected for a certain period. Obviously a receipe for abolishing deomcracy – what’s to stop them extending their period until they like. Another one was skipping any referendum. I don’t think the point was the problem of change in an election year.
As for Tym – the ability to rouse crowds has nothing to do with a commitment to democracy. She is much better than Yush but so was Hitler. She did it for her own reasons for her own political career.
Corruption – almost as bad as corruption are the accusations which fly around and Tym is master at this as with the defence Minister. Show me your wire on Petro please. I agree with your point that the corruption is endemic in the whole country and that all candidates are getting business funding without the usual rules in democractic countries – so I think everyone ought to stop blaming the President just because he happens to be the President. He’s not responsible as odd as that may sound. As for Firtash where exactly is the corruption? It’s just assumed and never explained. He supplies gas to other countries. She removed him not because he was corrupt but because he was a member of and presumably supported POR and that was a way to put pressure on POR and that was also the reason she cancelled the VANCO licence which also happened to be corrupt. That was the same reason for removing the mayor of Kiev – she hoped that her man would take over.
Finally if someone bothers to comment politely on your blog, it’s rather rude don’t you think to accuse them of a pathological hatred as if their arguments are completely worthless. Why should they bother to contribute just to get insulted. It doesn’t take too much imagination to realise that given your comments on Yush and and Tym that people who disagree with them think the same of you.

By anon on Jun 8, 2009

Where was the corruption with Firtash?

You have GOT to be joking to ask that question.

The fact that there was a middleman, Firtash and Firsun, in the gas deals between Ukraine’s Naftohaz and Gazprom is, in and of itself, suspicious.

But the fact that Firtash and Firsun and RosUkrEnergo performed no tasks, yet skimmed off billions of dollars for themselves out of these deals, is corruption.

Tymo’s motives may have been self-serving – to remove Firtash and RUE as a source of funding to the Party of Regions and to Yushchenko and his secretariat (which apparently received bonuses from Firtash) – but that does not eliminate the fact that the whole RUE middleman scheme was corrupt.

That’s not an assumption – it’s fact.

And you, anon, are clearly taking a page out of the sovok playbook of “denial” and “there are no facts” – when they’re staring you right in the face.

Plus, tell us where you live, anon, so we can evaluate whether it’s really worth the expense and trouble of having a “queen president.”

I would still like someone to point out a “party list” system of voting in places which have true democracies.

The “party list” system of voting is antithetical to true democracy.

Wolodymir – ah, but if you saw Tymo’s TV statement, she has an excuse for becoming a political bedfellow with Yanuk – “the crisis changed everything.”

You are absolutely right, and it’s especially evident in the TV statement to which Dr. Kuzio linked – they are both out there trying to save face now, because they got caught.

By elmer on Jun 8, 2009

Anon:

I won’t reply on RUE as the previous blogger replied. On RUE please download the free Global Witness Report at:
http://www.globalwitness.org/media_library_detail.php/479/en/its_a_gas._funny_business_in_the_turkmen_ukraine_g

Another source of information on energy corruption and RUE are Roman Kupchinsky’s articles in EDM:
http://www.jamestown.org/articles-by-author/?no_cache=1&tx_cablanttnewsstaffrelation_pi1author=485

Of course its ridiculous to demand (as did Yan) that a ceremonial president elected in parliament should have the same (or some reports stated) greater powers than Yushchenko has under the 2006 constitution. These greater powers invested in a ceremonial president were to be over two “guaranteed” terms as a “transition” to a proper ceremonial president. Yanukovych demand of a “guarantee” of two terms with these “transitional” extensive powers was unacceptable. As was, any notion of extending parliament by two or three years.

As to party lists – I am sure there are arguments back and forth. I see only one way out and that is to return to the mixed proportional-majoritarian first past the post) system used in the 1998 and 2002 elections. In local elections there should be a return to a full majoritarian system (because political parties at the local level are a fiction and local people need to know who are their local representatives). When the proportional system was voted through in 2004 there were two strong arguments made: a) proportionalism would encourage the development of parliamenary parties (this has not happened – Ukrainian parties remain non-ideological and popular due to the charisma of leaders) b) majoritarianism encourages oligarchs and state officials to stand as “independents”. That was why pro-Kuchma parties voted against the change of the election law in 2004 to a fully proportional system and the left and right voted in favour. Ironically, the Party of Regions (which in 2004 did not support the move to proportionalism) has won the 2006 and 2007 elections using the proportional election law.

As to my comment on pathological hatred of Tymoshenko – I rest my case when bloggers compare her to Nazism. I am probably Yushchenko’s biggest Western critic in print and I have never used such out of place language when writing about his faults.

Finally, if you do not accept as a historical fact that Tymoshenko was the key mobiliser of the crowds in the orange revolution then a) you were not there and b) you do not understand the dynamics behind the orange revolution c) you have never heard Yushchenko’s droll speech giving style.

P.S. If you want the Petro Yushchenko document (RUE wire to his Dubai account)send me an email. I will not put it on this web site.

By Taras on Jun 8, 2009

Roman Kupchinsky is one of the most knowledgeable scholars, not only as to the gas and oil industry in Ukraine, but also in Europe. He is an excellent reference, no doubt about it.

And, yes, Tymo’s speeches were far more inspirational than Yushchenko’s.

By elmer on Jun 8, 2009

“if you do not accept as a historical fact that Tymoshenko was the key mobiliser of the crowds in the orange revolution…” In fact, very true, but I believe Tymoshenko was motiviated by her own ambitions rather than those of the people, which has become quite evident with this weeks events.

By Wolodymir on Jun 8, 2009

Strange logic. All politicians have ambition and most are to varying degrees arrogant and self important.
If Tymoshenko was motivated by her own ambitions in 2004 (as seen through the prism of 2009) what then of Yushchenko? What was he motivated by in 2004 as seen through the prism of his first term in office from 2005-2009?
What one persons logic and motivation is today does not explain what it was 4, 6, 10, 15 or 20 years ago. People can change. And, in Ukraine’s post-Soviet culture, people can be corrupted after coming to power. That is the problem faced by all those “whose hands did not steal” who now claim the mantle of “change” as “Ukraine’s Obama (Yatseniuk).
And, what of First American Lady Yushchenko? Read the article by Zenon Zawada on the child clinic that she raised funds for but has never been built in the 31 May Ukrainian Weekly (http://www.ukrweekly.com/) and the shananigans of former American ProFFessor Roman Zvarych.

By Taras on Jun 8, 2009

Yep, 3 years in the making “for the children,” and – no results.

Plus, several million was cut out of the 2009 governmental budget for this clinic – and rightly so.

Ukraine has a budget deficit. This was a personal project of Ms. Yushchenko. The IMF correctly required Ukraine to cut its deficit.

It’s ironic – every time I open the Kiev Ukraine News Blog, I have set it to open to the page with an article about how Ukraine’s tycoon’s have become “more charitable.”

http://blog.kievukraine.info/2007/03/ukraines-tycoons-becoming-more.html

Except that according to the Zawada article, the “tycoons” cut their support, and one of them decided to re-direct his pledge to a “charity” headed by Yushchenko’s daughter, Vitalina or Vitaminy or whatever her name is.

See how that works, boys and girls?

By elmer on Jun 9, 2009

How about the Millions Tymoshenko stole from the Ukrainian people when she was “Gas Queen”?

By Wolodymir on Jun 9, 2009

I never compered Tymoshenko with a Nazi. And you’re right I never heard either of them but from what I’ve heard about them I agreed that Tym was a great speaker and Yush is awful. My point was that this talent has nothing to do with being a good democractic which was what was being discussed(like Woldymyr said she had plenty of personal reasons, like a written note from Yush promising to make her PM for excersing her talent on the square and I’m sure she enmjoyed doing it as well)and furthermore this is a talent one might be wary of in politicians and I gave the most extreme case as an example to make both points very obvious.
Yush’s motivations I agree are just as complex and mixed as everyone’s else’s – who knows perhaps something to do with having been sacked as PM. And his wife’s hospital business I’m not sure it was corruption but the need to be on a grand TV fund raising show (Of course I’m only guessing)and she got into something that in Ukraine got too complicated to finish espeically after people became a lot less “co-operative” as her husband’s popularity nodived. The point remains that the speculations motivations it became apparent afterwards that he was serious about democracy and she wasn’t.
As for my e-mail I give whenever I post.

By anon on Jun 10, 2009

Dear Dr. Kuzio, I am particularly interested in your comment above saying “But, I know for a fact who is funding Grytsenko and it is not oligarchs.” Would you be able to elaborate? Who non-oligarchs? Because I am kind of puzzled about this question and would be delighted to get a clue.

Thanks!

By Burachek on Jun 11, 2009

Thanks a lot! I was not aware of that.

By Burachek on Jun 11, 2009