Taras Kuzio’s Blog

The biggest threat to Russian imperialism, whether tsarist or soviet, is – Ukrainian nationalism.

That’s why both the tsars and the soviets, both centered in Maskva, fought so hard to stamp out any vestige of Ukrainian feeling, language, culture, etc.

All throughout the world, in civilized countries, people stand up for their country.

When Ukrainians stand up for their country, Russians in Maskva brand that as “nationalism” and call it a crime, and even worse.

But there is a threat to Ukrainian democracy – and that is the oligarchic “political elite” in Ukraine.

It is a “political elite” which has decided that it’s better to be an oligarch in Ukraine, rather than sitting with Khodorkovsky in a Siberian jail under Putler.

But it takes more than mere self-interest like that to make a country.

And the loss of 6 million people since 1991 proves the point.

At the breakup of the sovok union in 1991, Ukraine had 52 million people.

Now it has about 46 million people, because lots of people got sick and tired of the “political elite” robbing the country blind, and robbing everyone of any opportunity.

Well, of course, except if you’re a Brazilian soccer player getting paid millions of dollars to chase a soccer ball for Akhmetov’s Miners.

If the “political elite” continue to be hogs at the government trough, Ukraine will not survive.

And the “political elite” hogs will indeed by slaughtered by Putler, whether they like it or not.

By elmer on Oct 11, 2009

The percentage of votes received by extreme right-wing parties in recent European elections were as follows: Austria 18.4%, Flemish part of Belgium 10.1%, Denmark 5.2%, France 9.8%, and Italy 5.9%. The average for the whole of Europe was about 4.3%. [Source: http://www.ccsr.ac.uk/qmss/seminars/2008-crossnat/documents/Lubbersetal.pdf ]

Oleh Tyahnybok, who some consider to be the leading extreme right-wing polician standing in the January 2010 Ukrainian presidential elections, according to recent opinion polls, will probably secure well under 2% of total votes cast. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_presidential_election,_2009#Progressive_opinion_polls_table ]

By LEvko on Oct 12, 2009

It is incorrect to equate “Ukrainian nationalism” with “extreme right-wing nationalism” as is found in other countries in Europe.

It cannot be over-emphasized that the “nationalism” which the tsars and Kremlin sovoks tried to erase, eliminate and eradicate was merely identification and affiliation with things Ukrainian – the country, language and culture of Ukraine.

The Kremlin sovoks were absolutely apoplectic about eliminating “nationalism” of any kind, anywhere – except for Russian-based nationalism.

Today, the sovok legacy still hasn’t quite gone away, so there are still people who dream of restoring the “might” and “glory” of Russia through the sovok union, or some other Russian empire, who still spit at “Ukrainian nationalism.”

That is what is at stake.

But, to repeat, because it needs to be understood – “Ukrainian nationalism” was a sovok-identified sin, meaning that Ukraine was absolutely not to be sovereign, independent and free from Moscow’s Kremlin in any way, shape or form.

That is not to be confused with “extreme right-wing parties.”

Not even with Oleh Tyahnybok, who is nowhere near an “extreme right-winger” in the European sense – if one actually listens to what he says.

The point is that the heavy ball and chain of the sovok legacy is still present in Ukraine – and it must be eliminated if Ukraine is to survive.

By elmer on Oct 12, 2009

All Nationalism is extremist. It is one thing to support and develop National identity but it is another when Nationalism is used as a political tool it says “we are right and you are wrong” It divides a nation and worst still seek to vilify those that do not share their limited values.

From my experience the most threats of violent and acts of intimidation have come from those who align themselves the Ukrainian Nationalists. Most being from the Diaspera based in then USA. Theor tools of trade are threats and acts of intimidation aimed at seeking to silence those that hold an alternative opinion to their own. They live and feed off a common sense of hatred.

It is one thing to embrace and repect history and culture it is another to souse hatred and promote acts of voilence (Physical or threatening). Hatred breads hatred. It is a short step from being a nationalist to a racist

Ukraine’s greatest asset is its diversity of culture. be it Hungarian, Hutzal, Tartar, Russian , Swedish, German or Ukrainian.

Nationalism is and can be a very dangerous and blunt weapon.

The Ukrainian Nationalist movement (like all Nationalist movements) spouses the words of European Democratic ideals but their actions are far from democratic.

The so called Nationalists represent a minority of 5% of the Ukrainian Population.

Democracy is about giving every one equal opportunity and equal rights. It is not about imposing one set of value over the other. If you have no policies or constructive ideas you fall back on the notion of Nationalism. Us versus them.

By UkrToday Uk on Oct 15, 2009

“Nationalism” as used by the kremlinoids/sovoks, to this very day, means any attempt to impose kremlinoid/rashan domination.

“Nationalism” as used in Ukraine means sovereignty, freedom, independence from kremlinoid dominance and imperalism. And it definitely does not mean dictatorship or authoritarianism.

The attempt to transform that into some sort of extremism is FALSE and incorrect.

By elmer on Oct 15, 2009

Has UkrToday Uk any understanding of what I originally wrote when he wrote this unintelligent comment:

From my experience the most threats of violent and acts of intimidation have come from those who align themselves the Ukrainian Nationalists. Most being from the Diaspera based in then USA. Theor tools of trade are threats and acts of intimidation aimed at seeking to silence those that hold an alternative opinion to their own. They live and feed off a common sense of hatred.

In my original comment I wrote that in Ukraine’s two decade history the score of nationalist murders is:
2 Russian versus 0 Ukrainian

Russian nationalism has shown itself to be aggressive and violent. Ukrainian nationalism (apart from a fringe represented by Tyahnybok types) is defensive, like Welsh, Irish, Catalan, etc.

By Taras on Oct 15, 2009

Anthony Van Der Craats, AKA UkrToday

From the Sydney Morning Herald

Battle for lord mayor gets nasty

Security guards will supervise the election for Melbourne\\\’s lord mayor after staffers for leading candidate Peter McMullin allegedly threatened a returning officer.

Victorian Electoral Commissioner Steve Tully has sent a letter to all candidates warning he will not tolerate bullying of election scrutineers on Saturday.

The commission alleges McMullin campaign staffers and Labor Party members Ray Collins and Anthony van der Craats intimidated and threatened Melbourne returning officer Bill Lang.

Where does this goof get off complaining about intimidation?

By Wolodymir on Oct 15, 2009

Taras

When I was in Lviv one day I also witnessed numerous heated arguments that resulted in “Supporters of the Nationalist movement” verbally and physically attacking people who spoke out against perceived interests of the national movement.

Yes I did read your comments and am fully aware of the various acts of violence that have occurred in the part. (I am sure the number of greater then 2) I have also visits the various memorials and the grave site in Lviv.
You should be aware that you yourself have been the target of various hate mail, insults and threats published by supporters of Ukraine’s President Viktor Yushchenko ultra-nationalist movement.

These threats have come in various forms included veiled death threats, publication of personal information, lies and other such acts.

Recently Jacob Smith, USA, came under an aggressive personal attack that included the publication of his wife’s name personal address. His crime was to challenge and question various issues.

Personal who have been identified committing such offences include Thomas Martinez, USA, Nestor, Jeff Mowatt and others. Many who use to frequent For-ua.com and now publish under the name of Ukraine-English-News.com.

As much as you may wish to deny the threats and acts of violence and intimidation coming from the Ultra-Nationalists they do exist.

By Ukraine Today on Oct 18, 2009

Allegations of threats and intimidation is an abuse of authority.

There was no act of bulling or harassment as claimed by Steve Tully, Chief Electoral Commissioner.

Mr Steve Tully’s accusations are false and not supported by the facts.

Mr Tully was not even present at the briefing in question.

Having spoken to a number of people present at the meeting all stated that Mr Tully’s statement is a gross over-reaction to criticism at the way in which the VEC elections are to be counted.

There was no grounds or justification to Mr Tully’s statement or his accusations.

The reason behind Mr Tully’s emotive outburst is simple, Steve Tully had come under serious criticism in relation to his conduct of the 2006 State election along with concern that he may have deliberately mislead the parliament in his evidence given to the State Parliamentary committee on electoral matters.

Mr Tully had cut corners and in the process he made a number of serious mistakes during the conduct of the 2006 State election.

Under the terms of the Local Government Act and regulations the Returning Officer is required to preliminary sort ballot papers into primary votes which in turn is used to reconcile the number of votes pertaining to the election as part of the process of scrutiny of the ballot.

Mr Tully has opted to once again cut corners and ignore requests that the count be open and transparent and that the ballot papers be subject to a preliminary distribution as required under the Act for a manual count.

There is no justification for a computerised counting of the Lord Mayors ballot. A majority of candidates had supported calls for the ballot to be counted manually so that it could be subject to proper scrutiny.

The Victorian Parliament in reviewing the mistakes made during the 2006 State election recommended that the VEC preliminary presort ballot papers into primary votes as is the case with Federal elections. Mr Tully chose to ignore the parliament’s recommendation and the request made by candidates and others. Mr Tully directed Mr Bill Lang, City of Melbourne’s Returning Officer, to reject the request for the preliminary sorting of ballot papers undermining the independence of the appointed Returning Officer.

The Chief Commissioner misused and abused his position of authority.

At no time had staff been subjected to any threats and any act that warrants or requires police presence. Steve Tully’s statement calling for police protection is a further act of intimidation and harassment against his critics and an abuse of authority.

Mr Tully made similar false threats of intimidation in the leaduop to and following the 2006 State election in which votes went missing during the count and the data recorded seriously flawed. Mr Tully was unable and unwilling to provide access to crucial data related to the 2006 count.

In giving evidence to the parliamentary Electoral Matters Committee, Mr Tully stated that the data records of the 2006 Western Metropolitan Province count had been destroyed and were no longer available. An extraordinary claim given that it costs millions of dollars to count the ballot and it turns out that backup copies of the data were not recorded.

The complaints and submission lodged in relation to the proposed City of Melbourne count were seeking to prevent a repeat of the mistakes made by the Chief Commissioner in 2006. Mistakes that were made as result of a lack of due diligence and denial of access to crucial data by the Chief Commissioner. Mistakes that should be avoided and not repeated with the Melbourne City Council elections.

It is fundamental to our democracy that elections are open and transparent in order that public confidence in the electoral process is maintained, This issue does not just effect the City of Melbourne but the entire State.

The actions of Mr Tully are a form of retribution and intimidation of critics to his administration. This is not the first time Mr Tully has acted in such a manner.

Members of Parliament are very much aware of Mr Tully’s acts of intimidation and abuse of process against those who gave evidence to the parliamentary inquiry.

Mr Tully in making false accusations of this nature has raised doubts and questions as to his suitability to hold the office of Chief Commissioner.

By In reply on Oct 18, 2009

I am in Ukraine most of October. Yatseniuk is losing popularity fast and the gap between him and Tymoshenko is growing in her favour. What is surprising is that he failed to capitalise on Tymoshenko’s “vse propalo” after the collapse of coalition negotiations in early June (when he was only 2-3% behind her).
There are only two explanations:
1. arrogance stemming from his becoming wealthy so young. This is a major drawback he has as it leads to an unwillingness to listen to anybody because he thinks he knows the best course of action.
2. in June he switched Ukrainian for Russian odious and not good Russian consultants. They have russified his campaign and damaged it. His foreign policy stance is a clear reflection of that – he now stands for an East European union of Ukraine, Russia, Moldova, Belarus and Kazakhstan and is both anti-Brussels and anti-Moscow. This chumatsky shliakh was first raised by UNA-UNSO leader Dmytro Korchynsky in 1995 and Pavlo Lazarenko’s Hromada in 1998. Great company he keeps: http://arseniy.org/view_post.php?id=486
He is now a critic of liberal ideology:
http://frontzmin.org/view_post.php?id=691
The editor of Glavred magazine (who will vote for him) believes his ideology is “Ukrainian imperialism” building an east European union based on Kyiv). The publisher of Glavred and Izvestia-Ukraine – Oleksandr Tretiakov – is a financier of Oleh Tyahnybok.
Yatseniuk will no longer receive the 3rd position. My prediction is that the 3-5th positions will be received by Yushchenko, Lytvyn (winning Socialist votes) and Symonenko. Grytsenko, Yatseniuk and Tyhipko will be in the third echelon after them.

Eurasian Daily Monitor, 16 October
Yatseniuk’s Presidential Election Campaign Stagnates
On October 1 the central election commission laid out the timetable for Ukraine’s January 17, 2010 presidential elections. However, the candidate who began his campaign first –Arseniy Yatseniuk– might already be in trouble before the registration of candidates begins on October 20. A poll published by Ukrayinska Pravda (October showed Yatseniuk’s popularity declining by a third to 8 percent since July, while the gap between Yulia Tymoshenko and himself has grown as her popularity has increased, currently standing at 19 percent.
Yatseniuk began his election campaign first and with a promising launch. After being ousted as parliamentary speaker on November 12, 2008 with the support of President Viktor Yushchenko and his chief of staff, Viktor Baloga, Yatseniuk’s ratings dramatically increased to 10-12 percent, a few percentage points below Tymoshenko. He gained popularity from the widespread public disillusionment with quarrelling politicians and the onset of the global financial crisis.
In spring his popularity stopped growing, and he failed to capitalize on the collapse of the Party of Regions-Tymoshenko bloc (BYuT) coalition negotiations on June 7. Moreover, his campaign replaced Ukrainian political consultants (whose leaders were from the presidential secretariat), with odious Russian political technologists who had worked for Viktor Yanukovych’s 2004 election campaign where they were involved in propaganda directed at Yushchenko.
Yatseniuk is the only leading candidate who is using Russian political technologists and, as Aylona Getmanchuk, the editor of the weekly magazine Glavred has observed, only Yatseniuk seems to believe they are good for his campaign. Getmanchuk quoted a participant in the Yalta European Strategy (YES) summit on September 26-27 as saying: “It is time to pass on to Yatseniuk that he should throw those Russians out” (www.glavred.info, September 28). YES was established as a pro-European lobby NGO by oligarch Viktor Pinchuk (www.yes-ukraine.org). European Council on Foreign Relations Senior Fellow Andrew Wilson noted that the YES annual summit is the closest event Ukraine has to Russia’s Valdai to promote its image (Kyiv Post, October 1).
Over the last four months Yatseniuk’s election campaign has slowly unraveled and seems to be in a process of stagnation. On September 7 Glavred was one of the first to notice this in an article entitled: “The star that is falling.” Yatseniuk’s support is “soft” based on disillusionment against other politicians, rather than on any clear backing for him. Yatseniuk’s support is regionally based in Western Ukraine and popular among voters with higher education. Many of these are former Yushchenko voters who also dislike Tymoshenko. By contrast, the two leading candidates, Tymoshenko and Yanukovych, have strong support bases for their campaigns.
On the issue of future NATO membership, Yatseniuk has reversed his stance. In the January 2008 letter to NATO seeking a Membership Action Plan co-signed by Yushchenko and Tymoshenko, only Yatseniuk has since removed his name. Tymoshenko has agreed to Our Ukraine’s demands for their support of her candidacy that includes backing NATO membership (www.dt.ua., September 19).
At the YES summit Yatseniuk confused European politicians about his views on European integration, and adopted the Leonid Kuchma and Viktor Yanukovych position that integration into the E.U. is in the hands of Brussels (not Kyiv). Yatseniuk disillusioned Ukrainian voters (who watched the candidates live on ICTV) and European politicians by the shallowness of his “pro-European” views.
Two journalists concluded after Yatseniuk’s presentation that he has changed compared to the 2008 YES summit and that the “new” Yatseniuk had given the greatest “contradictory impressions” to those present. “This was not the politician who only a year ago could speak about the arrival of a new generation of politicians,” Yatseniuk no longer spoke in a natural manner but as an “actor” speaking the “language of his billboards” (www.pravda.com.ua, September 28).
Yatseniuk proved unable to delineate his “ideology” and seemed to constantly shift his position. Indeed, his current position does not agree with the platform of Our Ukraine within which he was elected to parliament in September 2007 among its top five candidates. At the YES summit it remained unclear if he supported Ukraine’s membership in the E.U. (www.pravda.com.ua, September 28).
Yatseniuk is proving to be neither different nor a change from establishment politicians, and is not proposing anything new to Ukrainian voters (Glavred, September 7). The youngest candidate is proving unable to establish a dialogue with voters because he is widely perceived as arrogant and elitist. This is a common problem for those individuals in Ukraine, and other post-Soviet states who made a lot of money quickly while they were young (Yatseniuk turned 35 in May, the legal minimum age to be a candidate). Yatseniuk has sought to overcome his distance from voters by traveling economy class to watch Shakhtiar Donetsk play soccer in Turkey, eating at fast food outlets that serve Ukrainian food and switching his expensive watch for a cheaper brand. These steps are scrutinized and ridiculed by the Ukrainian media as they do not fit the image of a person who drives a Bentley.
Yatseniuk’s third place position in the polls is being strongly challenged by two other candidates –Anatoliy Grytsenko and Serhiy Tyhipko– whose popularity are growing. Grytsenko is a former defense minister and head of parliament’s committee on national security and defense who headed the analytical-research department of Yushchenko’s 2004 campaign. Tyhipko is from the Dnipropetrovsk clan and a former head of the National Bank who headed Yanukovych’s 2004 election campaign.
Among the presidential candidates, Yatseniuk launched his campaign first and possibly prematurely. His position as the candidate of the “new, rising, younger generation” has failed to take root among Ukrainian voters and commentators, Europeans and Americans and his chances of entering the second round on February 7 look increasingly slim.

By Taras on Oct 19, 2009

Taras

I agree with your assessment in relation to Yatseniuk. I do not think he is going anywhere fast. Three months out from the election he has not instilled confidence or demonstrated any ability to lead Ukraine.

There are two main candidates only in the circus parade. Yulia Tymoshenko and Viktor Yanukovych. In the end Ukraine will have to choose between Yulia or Yanukovych.

The dirty tricks campaigns are about to begin in order to try and take votes away from candidates. This sadly is a major trend in political campaigning pioneered and proven successful by the US republican parties.

Yatseniuk’s nominatation is supported only on the basis that it will prevent Yushchenko from progressing to a second round vote.

By Peter on Oct 19, 2009

It’s still way to early to predict what will happen, sure at this juncture, Tymoshenko and Yanukovich are the front runners, there are 3 months until the election, and as we all know, politics in Ukraine can change faster than the weather.

By Wolodymir on Oct 19, 2009

Hi there,
I have already seen it somethere…
[url=http://iphone-ipod.110mb.com/]Eremeeff[/url]

By Eremeeff on Oct 22, 2009

Kudos to Elmer for articulating, in this thread and in so penetrating a way, the distinction between Ukrainian nationalism on the one hand and, on the other hand, the nationalism manifest in other European countries. It is Drano for the mind.

It cannot be over-emphasized that these two different concepts of nationalism have little in common and cannot be spoken of in the same breath as if they were equivalent, for they are not. Most particularly, the following point that he stresses is of the highest importance and is the key to understanding Ukrainian nationalism: ” ‘Ukrainian nationalism’ was a sovok-identified sin, meaning that Ukraine was absolutely not to be sovereign, independent and free from Moscow’s Kremlin in any way, shape or form.”

Hear, hear, and thank you for this clear thinking, Elmer.

By Roman on Oct 26, 2009

Roman, thanks.

As you rightly point out, the sovoks did indeed invent a sin – Ukrainian identity, Ukrainian nationalism.

Many in Ukraine even today are trying to use this sovok brainwashing for their political advantage (eg, Party of Regions).

By elmer on Nov 7, 2009

I cannot wait to read simple things more of this excellent topic. So much than it Ive never even acknowledged. You sure did put the latest twist on something that Ive heard a great deal about. I dont believe Ive actually read most things does this subject nearly as good justice as you really did.

By Dallas personal injury attorney on Jan 12, 2011