Ukrainian Canadian

In a few words:

Ukraine’s new president  Viktor Yanukovich soothed Moscow Friday by suggesting he would reverse key policies of his pro-Western predecessor, but won no public promise that Russia will lower Kiev’s onerous gas bills.

Yanukovych is already bending over backwards for Russia. First he removed a Holodomor memorial from the Presidential website the day of his inauguration, and now is giving in on many issues that the Orange Revolution fought for:

Gas Prices

Russian Prime Minister  Vladimir Putin forged a long-term gas deal in 2009 with Yanukovich’s election rival, former Prime Minister  Yulia Tymoshenko, removing preferential price treatment for Ukraine and bringing rates paid in line with the market.

Many analysts believe Kiev’s desperate public finances mean Yanukovich must push for change in the long-term gas deal.

…

The Kremlin Thursday said Ukraine should not seek to revise gas contracts. But Russian daily Kommersant reported on Friday that Ukraine will offer Moscow a one-third stake in the management of its gas pipelines in exchange for deep price cuts.

Ukraine’s acting prime minister and Yanukovich rival Oleksander Turchinov, said giving Moscow any control over the pipelines would be “a betrayal of national interests.”

Yanukovich has pleased Russia by making clear he opposes Ukraine joining NATO. But analysts have said Yanukovich would have to offer Moscow bigger incentives, such as a deal for the Black Sea Fleet to stay on, to win lower gas prices.

And that’s not all. Russia has a plan:

But neither Medvedev nor Putin discussed the gas pricing with Yanukovich, Russian officials said. They suggested it would be addressed once Yanukovich forms a government in Ukraine.

The Yanukovych group is acting fast to alter Ukraine’s current laws in order to build a loyal government:

Yanukovich’s Regions Party proposed a parliamentary amendment giving deputies the right to join a ruling coalition on an individual basis, rather than necessarily as part of a faction as under the current law.

Yanukovich lawmaker Vyacheslav Lukyanov said the change “creates the possibility of forming a coalition in the nearest future, possibly by the end of the week or the start of the next”.

…

The Regions Party has 30 days to form a new coalition in parliament or face the possibility of a snap parliamentary election.

Update – the law has passed:

Ukraine’s parliament approved a constitutional amendment Tuesday to allow deputies to defect from their parties and join a new coalition forming around Kremlin-friendly President Viktor Yanukovych’s party.The amendment will drastically ease Mr. Yanukovych’s ability to consolidate power, as it allows his party to lure deputies away from the camps of his rivals, including the bloc of former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko.

The current constitution only allows parliamentary factions to join a coalition, not individual deputies. The rule has helped enforce party discipline even as alliances began to shift in Mr. Yanukovych’s favor after he was elected last month.

Mr. Yanukovych’s rivals lashed out against Tuesday’s vote, with a member of former President Viktor Yushchenko’s party calling it a”constitutional coup” and vowing to challenge it in court.

A loyal government can quickly adopt many of the lingering issues that Russia is hoping to return to its favour:

Russia’s Black Sea Fleet in Ukraine’s Sevastopol

Yanukovich suggested he would let Russia’s Black Sea Fleet remain at its base in the Crimean peninsula port of Sevastopol after the current lease expires in 2017. Former President  Viktor Yushchenko had stressed he wanted Russia out by the deadline.

Heroes of Ukraine

Yanukovich also said he would scrap orders Yushchenko signed which elevated two World War II-era nationalists reviled by Russia to the status of “Heroes of Ukraine.”

Mr. Yanukovich, who must avoid alienating western Ukrainians in order to govern effectively, said Friday that a decision on the award would be made before the 65th anniversary of the Soviet victory in World War II in May.

He added that he would also evaluate an earlier award granted by Mr. Yushchenko to another Ukrainian nationalist and World War II partisan, Roman Shukhevych.

The decrees angered Ukraine’s former imperial master Russia and increased its distaste for Yushchenko, who pushed his nation toward  NATO and sought to shed Moscow’s influence.

Economic alignment

Yanukovych later met Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, who urged the visiting president to bring Ukraine into a Moscow-backed customs union comprising Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan.

“Join the customs union,” Putin told Yanukovych, who chuckled and said nothing in response.

he prospect of Ukraine joining the Moscow-backed customs union has raised concern in the European Union and would likely damage or derail Ukraine’s chances of EU integration. [ AFP]

Russian language in Ukraine

“The Ukrainian language will remain the only state language in the country,” said President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych in the city of Kanev by the grave of Taras Shevchenko, where the celebrations in honor of the poet’s birth anniversary are being held.

Meanwhile, during the election campaign, Yanukovych claimed he would seek to make Russian a state language if he were elected a president.Though later, speaking to voters, he said that this would change the constitution, and the Party of Regions did not have enough votes in parliament.

Therefore, Mr.Yanukovich offered to make Russian an official language of communication in those regions of the country where the most people would vote for this. [ InfoCentre]

Update: Groups are already starting to gather en masse to protest Russian as a second state language:

Ukraine’s nationalist forces have threatened to hold mass protests if President Victor Yanukovych annuls the decree awarding the Hero of Ukraine, the country’s highest honor, to Stepan Bandera and Roman Shukhevych.

“The Ukrainian president made pledges to Russia concerning the language, church, Shukhevych and Sevastopol. This is something he will run against before he learns to run the state in the interests of the state itself. What are we going to do? Definitely, we will stage serious protests,” Ihor Mazur, leader of the Kyiv branch of the UNA-UNSO nationalist organization, said at a news conference in Kyiv on Tuesday.

The former President Viktor Yushchenko released a statement noting his displeasure in the selling out of Ukraine’s national interests:

The first official visit by Viktor Yanukovych to Moscow didn’t address any key problems in the relations between Ukraine and Russia, Yushchenko notes.
“The Russians didn’t send any signals with regard to revising the crippling terms of the gas-supply contract or delimitating the common border without which a visa-free travel agreement with the EU is impossible. Moscow continues to play hardball with Ukraine in order to make Ukraine change its foreign policy course and subjugate Ukrainian interests to those of Moscow,” Yushchenko says.
“The Kremlin resorts to economic (dragging Ukraine into the Customs Union) and military levers (insistence on the continued stationing of its Black Sea fleet in Crimea),”

Will relations between Russia and Ukraine improve under this new regime? Seeing the attitude of Putin so far, it doesn’t look so good:

Speaking before reporters as he met Putin, Ukraine’s new President Viktor Yanukovych complained about the political chaos in his country in recent years and told the Russian leader: “I don’t wish it upon you.”
Not missing a beat, the Russian president-turned-prime minister smiled and said: “Send us your ’salo’ instead”.

Salo for those who don’t know is a cured slab of back fat pork (unrendered bacon) but is also a derogatory symbol of Ukrainians:

In Eastern-European  humour, salo is a stereotypical attribute of  Ukrainian culture, analogous to vodka and bears with  balalaikas for Russian; beer and  wurst for German;  oatmeal for English; Coca-cola and cheeseburgers for the US culture.

It really is the candy man situation all over again:

On the day of Yanukovych’s Presidential inauguration, the European Parliament had already suspiciously prepared and presented a resolution on the situation in Ukraine. Some of them were nominal decrees to establish Ukraine as a neighbour (ie. not European or within the EU) and validating the recent questionable elections, but clause #20 took aim at former President Yushchenko’s last acts to establish Stephen Bandera as a Hero of Ukraine:

20.  Deeply deplores the decision by the outgoing President of Ukraine, Viktor Yushchenko, posthumously to award Stepan Bandera, a leader of the Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) which collaborated with Nazi Germany, the title of ‘National Hero of Ukraine’; hopes, in this regard, that the new Ukrainian leadership will reconsider such decisions and will maintain its commitment to European values;

An op-ed in a most recent Kyiv Post article tried to make sense of it all:

(T)he deputies of the European Parliament – having no great knowledge of Ukrainian history – want to forbid us from having our own vision of our national past. The Russians are developing their own vision by creating a special federal committee. But at the same time, Ukrainians aren’t granted the right to have our own point of view. And if we do have it, it’s called fascism or Nazi collaboration.

After the European Parliament’s resolution, the revision of this award is inevitable – and not at the orders of Moscow, but following a recommendation from Europe.

There is no academic or social discussion about the ambiguity of certain historic figures. But there should be one.

No historic figure has only one side. They were only human and they had to act in complicated circumstances. Heroes of one nation are always criminals for another, and vice versa. But this does not mean that every nation does not have the right to create its own pantheon of national heroes.

Perhaps the Ukrainians should start by revising the roles of some Russian and Polish heroes? Many Ukrainians suffered from the Polish Armia Krajowa [the underground movement in Poland during World War II], just like many Poles suffered from the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, known as UPA. Do the Ukrainian victims deserve mention and memory? We could initiate a resolution to revise those Polish state awards received by the veterans of Armia Krajowa.

But should we? Or should we just respect the historical memory of peoples of other nations?

Very good questions indeed. Why hasn’t the European Parliament commissioned a study into these issues, and why have EU politicians jumped on the bandwagon to denounce Ukraine?

Nobody can persuade me now that European leaders did not want Yanukovych as president. They must have wanted him to make sure that nothing stands on the way of their licking Russia’s natural gas pipes. When I say “nothing,” I mean Ukraine here.

Does the EU Parliament only want unfettered access to Russia’s energy supplies? How many clauses in their resolution ask for Ukraine’s cooperation in getting Russia’s gas without interruption?

–   having regard to Ukraine’s accession to the Energy Community Treaty, approved by the ECT Ministerial Council held in Zagreb in December 2009,

–   having regard to the Memorandum of Understanding on cooperation in the field of energy between the European Union and Ukraine, signed on 1 December 2005,

–   having regard to the Joint Declaration adopted by the Joint EU-Ukraine International Investment Conference on the Modernisation of the Gas Transit System, which took place on 23 March 2009,

–   having regard to the agreement between Naftogaz and Gazprom on transit fees on oil supplies for 2010, agreed in December 2009,

8.  Stresses the importance of reinforcing cooperation between Ukraine and the EU in the field of energy and calls for further agreements between the EU and Ukraine aimed at securing energy supplies for both sides, including a reliable transit system for oil and gas;

9.  Calls on Ukraine to fully implement and ratify its accession to the Energy Community Treaty and swiftly to adopt a new gas law which complies with EU Directive 2003/55/EC;

That’s a lot of requests. What’s the carrot dangling for Ukraine to fulfill the EU’s gas dreams? An insincere shot at some sort of EU partnership:

The very same resolution confirms Ukraine’s right to apply for membership in the European Union and asks the Council of Europe to create a roadmap for a visa-free regime with Ukraine.

This is a pretty safe strategy for Europe. It came about long after the 2004 Orange Revolution, when its implementation was more likely, but on the day of Yanukovych’s inauguration, whose presidency makes extremely doubtful the possibility of required changes. As far as visas are concerned, Brussels with one hand writes joyful decrees on simplification of the visa regime, while with the other one actively strengthens the mighty Berlin Wall on its eastern borders.

This all looks too much like amputating someone’s legs and suggesting that they start running because it’s good for one’s health.

One has to wonder if the European Parliament will take it’s wagging finger to the rest of it’s Eastern bloc neighbours:

I am wondering if the European Parliament will rush to approve similar resolutions about the hanging of public portraits of Josef Stalin and campaigns to promote him in Moscow. Or are European values not getting violated in this case?

Your country or your gas. It seems the EU will not allow Ukraine to have both.

[ Kyiv Post via Ukemonde]

Update: Regional councils in Ternopil, Lviv and Ivano-Frankisk have addressed the European Parliament to review its resolution. The session decided to send this address and a biographical note about Bandera to the European Parliament, Ukraine’s president, the Verkhovna Rada, the Cabinet of Ministers and regional councils.

From the Associated Press:

The Ukrainian parliament ousted the government of Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko in a no-confidence vote on Wednesday, dealing a final blow to the leadership of the pro-Western Orange Revolution and leaving her to lead the opposition in parliament.

The vote followed weeks of shifting alliances in the parliament after the pro-Western Tymoshenko lost her bid for the presidency to Kremlin-friendly Viktor Yanukovych.

…

The parliament now has 30 days to form a new governing coalition. It is expected to coalesce around Yanukovych’s Party of Regions, and would then be able to put forward a new prime minister.

If no new coalition is formed, Yanukovych will be able to disband parliament and call early elections.

Addressing the chamber ahead of the vote, Tymoshenko said she would embrace her new role as an opposition leader, and her speech showed a level of fervor that was absent during the tumultuous weeks following her election defeat.

She said her new goal will be to hold Yanukovych and his team to account for every decision they make.

“We will protect Ukraine from this new calamity that has befallen her,” she said.

Tymoshenko’s governing “Orange” coalition dissolved Tuesday after it was unable to prove the minimum 226-seat majority in parliament. The coalition, formed in December 2008, was loosely centered on the political ideals of the Orange Revolution, a series of massive street protests in 2004 led by former President Viktor Yushchenko and Tymoshenko.

Read the rest of the article

From the Associated Press:

Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko’s pro-Western Orange coalition dissolved Tuesday as her former allies turned against her, setting her up to be ousted in a no-confidence vote.

The development spells the final repudiation of the Orange Revolution Tymoshenko helped lead in 2004, and paves the way for Ukraine’s new Kremlin-friendly president to consolidate his power.

…

In a sign that she will be removed, speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn told parliament Tuesday the Orange coalition had been unable to prove it still had majority support in the 450-seat chamber.

“This coalition did not come up with enough votes … I therefore announce the termination of this coalition’s activity,” Lytvyn said.

Russia’s new ambassador arrived in Kiev to congratulate Yanukovych on now appears to be total victory.

Ukraine’s political parties must now form a new majority coalition, and are most likely to group around Yanukovych’s Party of Regions. Yanukovych says that if no majority can be reached he will disband parliament and call elections.

Tymoshenko lashed out at Lytvyn, who is also a leader of the Orange forces in parliament, for “illegally ruining the democratic coalition” and paving the way for Yanukovych’s “anti-Ukrainian dictatorship.”

“This was the last barricade worth defending if we wanted to protect our independence, sovereignty, strength and the European development of our country,” Tymoshenko said in a televised speech.

“History will hold him responsible,” she said.

Tymoshenko laid out no plan of action. She said only that she would seek to unite Ukraine’s “truly democratic and patriotic forces.”

Parliament is set to hold a confidence vote Wednesday on Tymoshenko’s government.

Read the rest of the article

From the National Catholic Register:

LVIV, Ukraine — Just 20 years ago, in Moscow, some 200 Ukrainian Catholics initiated a hunger strike to dramatize their demand that the Soviet government legalize the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, the largest Eastern-rite Catholic Church, which had been banned and persecuted by the Communists for 45 years.

The bravery of these faithful — and the Vatican’s swift engagement — led to Soviet recognition of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church in December 1989, announced during President Mikhail Gorbachev’s historic visit with Pope John Paul II at the Vatican.

The Ukrainian Greek Catholic community, geographically centered in western Ukraine around the city of Lviv, began rebuilding with gusto.

The obstacles were immense: The Soviet regime had confiscated all Church property, and the Church had few clergy, since most had been imprisoned, murdered or forced into exile. The number of believers had dwindled, since they had been punished or intimidated into worshipping elsewhere.

But the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, operating underground, also had remarkable resources, including a dedicated diaspora that had protected the faith abroad and strong support from Rome.

And from the start, the Ukrainian Church had a vision of the centrality of education to its revival.

It’s that vision that has brought about the Ukrainian Catholic University in Lviv, the only Catholic university in the former Soviet Union and the first university founded by an Eastern-rite Church in full communion with the Holy See.

Founded eight years ago and built on a cornerstone blessed by Pope John Paul II when he visited in 2001, the Ukrainian Catholic University has been cited by many Roman Catholic leaders, including Pope Benedict XVI, as a portentous sign of a Catholic renaissance in the former Soviet republics, where political progress is fitful — and religious tolerance still not perfectly assured.

The roots of the university date to an 18th-century seminary, closed by the Soviets in 1944. The seminary reopened just outside Lviv, in the middle of a forest, in 1992, one year after Ukraine regained its independence.

“To replace the Lviv seminary confiscated by the Soviets, the Ukrainian government offered the Church an abandoned summer camp, without even heating for winter,” said Matthew Matuszak, 44, an American who taught English and Latin at the school in the 1990s. In exchange, the Church had to give up claims for the seminary’s original buildings.

Read the rest of the article