17.06.02. FN: Ukraine har ikke solgt radarsystemer til Irak

17.06.02. Irak åbner en ambassade i Kyiv

17.06.02. Styret forsøger at befæste magtpositioner

17.06.05. Medvedtjuks udnævnelse set med russiske øjne

18.06.02. Kutjma forbereder stort propagandafremstød

19.06.02. Kutjma holdt tale til parlamentet

19.06.02. Præsidentens tilhængere er parate

19.06.02. Den radikale opposition kritiserer Kutjma

20.06.02. Gongadze-film vist i det amerikanske Senat

20.06.02. Donetsk-klanen mod Kyiv-klanen

21.06.02. "Et samlet Ukraine" er blevet til syv fraktioner

24.06.02. Ukraine/Russia: Plan To Reconcile Versions Of History Causing Concern

In the former Soviet Union, official history books were notorious for distorting the truth. History was remolded to suit communist political masters in Moscow. Now many Ukrainians are angered by a decision between their country's education minister and his Russian counterpart to "reach consent" on a version of their mutual history for Ukrainian school textbooks.

Prague, 19 June 2002 (RFE/RL) -- The British actor Peter Ustinov once said, "The great thing about history is that it is adaptable." He made the remark humorously, but for communists, history was, indeed, adaptable, and it was necessary to routinely reshape it in an empire made up of disparate peoples who felt conquered by an alien power.

Now, many Ukrainians are concerned by an announcement made earlier this month by Ukraine's deputy prime minister and minister for humanitarian affairs, Volodymyr Semenozhenko, and his Russian counterpart, Valentina Matvienko. They want to form a Russian-Ukrainian commission to review and agree upon a version of history to be used in Ukrainian schoolbooks.

Several hundred people, including some members of the Ukrainian parliament, protested the agreement on 11 June. They say they fear that the work of any joint Russian-Ukrainian group will be a Soviet-style exercise in disinformation and that sensitive issues, such as cases where Ukrainians believe Russia carried out crimes against their country, will be skimmed over or omitted.

Sensitivity about the interpretation of history between countries is particularly acute in the case of Ukraine and Russia. The history of the medieval state of Kyivan Rus, which existed on the territory of present-day Ukraine, has been claimed at various times as the exclusive heritage of one or the other country.

Others say that Ukrainians voluntarily signed away their separate identities in the 17th century to join their Russian "brothers." The 20th century is littered with many tragic episodes that resulted in the deaths of millions of Ukrainians because of policies that Ukrainians say emanated from Moscow.

Semenozhenko said that the initiative for the history review came from Ukrainian and Russian historians, but he would not tell journalists at a press conference the identities of those historians.

A spokesman for the Ukrainian Education Ministry, Hryhoriy Naumenko, said the aim of the joint discussions was to ensure good relations between Russia and Ukraine. He did not know exactly how the joint group will proceed. "This is a matter for the academics. They will agree among themselves what sort of format their meetings will have and precisely which questions they will discuss. We have experience of similar work with a Ukrainian-Polish commission, where academics meet periodically -- say, every six months or a year -- and maintain a good dialogue. There's a very nice Ukrainian traditional saying that it's better to have a good neighbor than a bad relative. We can't choose our neighbors. They are there, and we have to establish good relations with them," Naumenko said.

He said the French and Germans had difficult historical relations but cooperated to overcome traditional hostilities. Naumenko said that since independence in 1991, Ukraine's Education Ministry has worked to replace Soviet-era history textbooks with truthful versions and that it will not be swayed from that course. "For the first time in many years, we have created a generation of school history textbooks that do not contain any distortions of the facts or omissions of facts, whether someone likes it or not," Naumenko said.

Maksym Strikha is a Ukrainian author and academic who said the idea of consulting other countries when preparing the history of one's own country is not a bad thing in itself. He also cited the example of cooperation between the French and Germans, as well as between German and Polish historians.

He said that if conducted honestly, cooperation between democratic countries and their historians can be of great benefit and had worked positively to help Ukrainians and Poles examine their often unpleasant and hostile past relations. "The most productive contacts are direct contacts among academics. The contacts between Ukrainians and Poles that are burdened with past insults and injuries and where stereotypes are deeply embedded, those contacts showed themselves extraordinarily productive and led to a significantly greater degree of understanding between Ukrainian and Polish society," Strikha said.

But he said there is no guarantee that Russia and Ukraine will have an equal say in how their histories are interpreted. Ukraine, he said, has been playing a weak and acquiescent role in recent relations with Russia. "If this 'agreement' is done today and by the type of people who reflect the views of those who signed the document, then there is a real risk that it will lead to a new rewriting of Ukrainian history in accordance with a well-established, totalitarian, externally imposed framework," Strikha said.

Many Russians, including otherwise liberal figures, have found it difficult to reconcile themselves to the notion of an independent Ukraine and believe it somehow chips away at Russia's historical foundations.

Strikha said that attitude is still prevalent among important Russian historians and commentators. "Unfortunately today, the official elite in Russian academic circles still thinks in imperialistic terms. For instance, I was horrified to read in 'Literaturnaya gazeta' [a respected Russian newspaper] an essay by a senior figure from the Russian Academy of Sciences who still sincerely believes that Ukrainians are part of the Great Russian tribe that was tainted by Austrian or German or Polish machinations. That's exactly the sort of thing they were writing 100 years ago. But at the same time, a younger generation of academics is coming up who are less affected by this imperialistic viewpoint, and without question we have to talk to them," Strikha said.
    Plans for a joint Russian-Ukrainian historical commission are to be discussed in the Ukrainian parliament at a future unknown date.
 

24.06.02. CIUS Open letter to Ukrainian historians on the planned 2004 "commemoration" of the 1654 Pereiaslav Council

We address ourselves to you in response to the decree of the president of Ukraine dated 13 March 2002 "On the Commemoration of the 350th Anniversary of the Pereiaslav Cossack Council of 1654." The decree's contents, as well as the membership of the organizing committee, indicate the serious nature and breadth of scope of the intended undertaking. The 2004 commemoration of the Pereiaslav Council, if actually carried out according to the plan outlined in the decree, will not, of course, equal the scale of the 300th anniversary "commemoration" in 1954, but will significantly outdo the 325th anniversary "commemoration" of 1979. The previous anniversaries were commemorated in Ukraine as a constituent of the Soviet Union; this new "commemoration" is to take place in independent Ukraine. The main feature that seems to distinguish the proposed 2004 event from those of 1954 and 1979 is the use of the more neutral term "commemoration" in the 2002 decree as opposed to the previous C! ommunist Party-prescribed term "celebration." In the main, the Soviet tradition of fawning before Moscow and the "elder brother" is being continued.

Do the authors of the decree and members of the organizing committee not understand that they are preparing to commemorate the anniversary of an event that led to the abolition of the independent Ukrainian state formed under Bohdan Khmelnytsky's leadership? The March decree calls into question not only the historical legitimacy of Ukraine's current independence, but also the official genealogy of the Ukrainian government. That government's traditions go back to Ukraine's first president, Mykhailo Hrushevsky, who regarded Pereiaslav as a mistake and declared an "end to [our] orientation on Moscow" in1918. The decree also calls into question Ukraine's official declarations in favour of European integration. When it comes to the historical calendar, the decree ignores the 750th anniversary of Prince Danylo's coronation (symbolizing Ukraine's orientation on the West) in 2003, but "commemorates" the 350th anniversary of the Pereiaslav Council, which marked the beginning of the! Russian Empire's westward expansion. Will the "commemoration" of Pereiaslav be followed by similar elaborate "commemorations" of the Ukrainian-Swedish alliance of 1656, the Hadiach Agreement of 1658, or Ivan Mazepa's break ("betrayal," in official Soviet terminology) with Moscow in 1708? The answer to this question will be given, most likely, during the presidential elections of 2004, for which the "commemoration" of Pereiaslav is undoubtedly intended to set the tone.

The organizing committee of the "commemoration" includes not only politicians and government officials, for whom elections are the alpha and omega of their existence, but also leading scholars who have done much in the past decade to demolish the Pereiaslav myth created by Russian imperial and Soviet historiography. Their careers will not begin or end with the 2004 elections, while scholarship-their "electoral district" -is no place for dramatic shifts in conclusions and orientations every few years. To a degree, we understand the motives that guide many of them. For directors of scholarly institutes, the decree is a means of obtaining funds from the state, of which there is a great dearth and which are constantly lacking for scholarly pursuits, particularly conferences, publications, and other activities for which provision is made in the presidential decree. Besides, taking money earmarked for "commemorations" makes it possible to hold genuine conferences, undermine the! "Pereiaslav myth," and underscore the true motives and significance of the Pereiaslav Council-a real turning point in Ukrainian history. These arguments, which we have had occasion to hear, were certainly valid in a state that did not belong to us. But reverting to this way of thinking in independent Ukraine is equivalent to one more attempt at outfoxing oneself.

Intentionally or not, the presidential decree of 13 March 2002 politicizes historical scholarship in order to legitimize a possible change in the foreign policy of Ukraine and reorient the historical consciousness of the Ukrainian people. Your participation in these measures-commemorating an event that most historians on the organizing committee continue to regard as a decision forced upon our "great Bohdan"-will lend legitimacy to those forces in Ukraine and beyond that seek to resurrect the empire which Pereiaslav helped create. That would be a disservice to Russia and Ukraine, whose progress requires not the rebuilding of the empire but the development of democratic nation-states.

Dr. Zenon E. Kohut, Director, Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, University of Alberta

Dr. Frank Sysyn, Director, Peter Jacyk Centre for Ukrainian Historical Research, Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, University of Alberta

Dr. Serhii Plokhy, Director, Church Studies Programme, Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, University of Alberta

14 June 2002
 

24.06.02. New Publication: Ukraine's Quest for Mature Nation Statehood: A Roundtable

Abstract: This work contains the complete, edited and annotated transcript of a conference that was held in Washington DC on September 19/20, 2000 at the Library of Congress and at the Council of Foreign Relations. The conference was dedicated to intensively exploring Ukraine's quest for mature nation statehood. http://www.buybooksontheweb.com/description.asp?ISBN=0-7414-1113-x

"I was pleased to be part of an event that brought together Ukrainian and American politicians, government officials and researchers to discuss the key issues of Ukraine's present and future development. There was no doubt whatsoever that the discussion panels so thoughtfully composed on knowledgeable personalities would produce an informed opinion on Ukraine's priorities in domestic and foreign policy. The Conference met its expectations and delivered the message that Ukraine's success in building a strong democratic state with a market economy is in America's national interest." -- Borys Tarasyuk, Minister of Foreign Affairs for Ukraine, September 28, 2000.

The Conference in which Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski presented the extraordinary theme "Ukraine is Not Russia."

"For the United States, the implication's quite simple. If Ukraine is not Russia, then we shouldn't treat it like Russia. It's as simple as that. We should have a relationship with Ukraine which stands on it's own feet, including on the symbolic level. I do not think it is a good practice for the U.S. President when he visits Moscow or for the U.S. Secretary of State, when the Secretary of State visits Moscow, to tack onto the visit a few hours of a hasty visit to Ukraine, punctuated by loud slogans pronounced in Ukrainian regarding America's affection for Ukrainian independence. Such symbolism, in my view, sends the wrong message. Ukraine should be treated as a significant, regional European state with which it is in America's interest to have a good and solid relationship." -- Zbigniew Brzezinski

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contributors included: K. Hryshchenko, J. Van Oudenaren, S. Levin, W. Taylor, P. Martynenko, T. Dine, V. Pikhovshek, D. Fried, I. Ostash, O. Rybachuck, V. Chervonenko, O. Kuzhil, K. Jenkins, I. Bilas, J. Dutkewych, N. Ledsky, J. Van Rest, M. Ratushny, P. Wolfowitz, A. Aslund, D. Kaufman, A. Cohen, W. Courtney, P. Dobriansky, W. Miller, A. Lozynskyj, Z. Brzezinski, J. Tedstrom, W. Schneider, B. Tarasyuk.
 

25.06.02. Ukraine vil ind i NATOs Membership action plan

25.06.02. Pressekonference i Strasbourg med Gongadzes enke

Hanne Severinsen vil i morgen den 25. juni i Europarådets parlamentariske forsamling stille nedenstående spørgsmål til formanden for ministerkomiteen.

Endvidere holder Hanne Severinsen i morgen den 25. juni kl. 16.00 en pressekonference med Mrs. MYROSLAVA GONGADZE, enken efter Mr. GEORGIY GONGADZE

Question from Mrs. Hanne Severinsen, Denmark

Noting the failure of the Committee of Ministers to comply with the recommendation of the Parliamentary Assembly regarding Ukraine;
To ask the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers,
Why the Committee of Ministers has not succeeded as regards the aims of the request in Recommendation 1538, Article 3, namely to initiate a new investigation into the disappearance and death of Mr.Gongadze and to set up an independent commission of inquiry, including international investigators for this purpose.

At the first part session in January 2002 the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers stated that the Committee “continues to follow closely the investigation into the disappearance and death of Mr. Georgiy Gongadze. Further progress in this investigation is essential. The Committee of Ministers reiterates to Ukrainian authorities the importance of conducting a full and transparent investigation of the case and reminds member states’ governments of their call for international assistance in this regard.”

What has happened since this statement? What has been done by the Ukrainian government and has any member state offered technical assistance in order to set up an international investigation?
 

25.06.02. Ukraine vil genforhandle flådeaftale med Rusland

26.06.02. 6. EU-Ukraine topmøde den 4-5. juli i København

26.06.02. Poland studies request to seek extradition of alleged death-camp guard from U.S.

WARSAW (Poland), June 18 - Poland is reviewing a request from the Simon Wiesenthal Center to seek the extradition of John Demjanjuk, an alleged guard at Nazi death camps, from the United States to face war crimes charges, an official said Monday.

Leon Kieres, head of Poland's National Remembrance Institute, said his office is investigating whether it could "put forward charges against Demjanjuk" as a basis for seeking extradition. Kieres, whose institute is empowered to investigate Nazi-and communist-era crimes, said the review could take several months. He said he was acting in part on a request from Efraim Zuroff, director and chief Nazi hunter of the Israel office of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, an international Jewish human rights organization based in Los Angeles.

Ed Nishnic, Demjanjuk's son-in-law and family spokesman, on Monday criticized Zuroff's intentions. "Apparently, Mr. Zuroff and his organization have little or no faith in the Supreme Court of the State of Israel," Nishnic said, referring to the judicial body that removed Demjanjuk's death sentence. An order again revoking Demjanjuk's citizenship is under appeal, Nishnic said. He alleged that Zuroff has a "preoccupation in destroying Mr. Demjanjuk's already shattered life."

Demjanjuk, 82, a Ukrainian refugee, lost his U.S. citizenship in 1981 and was extradited to Israel in 1986, accused of being the infamous guard known as "Ivan the Terrible" at the Treblinka death camp in Nazi-occupied Poland. He was convicted and sentenced to death in 1988.

The Israeli Supreme Court ruled in 1993, however, that Demjanjuk was not "Ivan the Terrible." He returned to the U.S. state of Ohio, and in 1998 his citizenship was reinstated. He was stripped of his citizenship again in February after the Justice Department renewed the case, arguing that he had been a guard at other death camps. He eventually could be deported. Demjanjuk, a retired auto worker, has maintained he was a prisoner of war.

In a statement released over the weekend by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, Zuroff argued that there was a strong case for Poland to try Demjanjuk on war crimes charges. "We therefore are urging the Polish authorities to initiate an investigation of this case as quickly as possible with a view toward Demjanjuk's extradition," the statement said.
 

26.06.02. Kutjma anses for at være en "bad guy"

27.06.02. PACE vil have international Gongadze-kommission

Europarådet har ikke taget nedsættelsen af en international kommission til efterforskning af Georgij Gongadzes død af dagsordenen. Det oplyste repræsentant for Europarådet Hanne Severinsen på et møde i Europarådets parlamentariske kommission vedrørende oprettelsen af international kommission til efterforskning af mordet på Georgij Gongadze.
    Men desværre, påpegede hun, har Ukraines parlamentariske kommission indstillet arbejdet i forbindelse med parlamentsvalget i Ukraine.
    En anden grund til, at det ikke er lykkedes Europarådet og andre internationale organisationer at få sat fart på efterforskningen, er den ukrainske lovgivning, som ikke giver mulighed for, at fremmede kommissioner arbejder på Ukraines territorium.
    Men repræsentanterne for det nye parlament, tilføjede referenten, håber på, at de nødvendige ændringer vil blive indført i Ukraines forfatning. UP + Radio Liberty.
 

27.06.02. Ukraine skal selv kæmpe for EU og NATO-medlemsskab

28.06.02. Ukraine gør klar til topmødet i København