Ukraine: February 2008 Archives
You may remember my post in late December regarding the inclusion of Poland and many other Eastern European countries in the “Schengen” free travel zone. Several days ago, a friend sent me an article discussing troubles along the Poland-Ukraine border - a reflection that Schengen does not always represent “free travel.”
Prior to December 21, 2007, people were able to travel visa-free between Poland and Ukraine, needing only their passports. Now, they can leave their passports at home, but must possess Schengen travel visas.
In response to these Schengen restrictions, Ukrainians have staged protests at the border against what they see as the new Berlin Wall. Some even feel as though they are being treated like third-class Europeans.
Another Schengen-related problem is a wave of strikes by Polish customs agents, who deserted their posts because of increased responsibilities and low pay. They demanded monthly pay increases of 415 euros, almost double the previous average salary.
Ukraine is trying to work with Poland on a visa-free travel agreement for Ukrainians living within 50 kilometers of the border. Poland insists the arrangement should be limited to a 15-kilometer zone.
In the wake of this change, Ukrainian visa fees have risen to 35 euros. This is troublesome to Ukrainian citizens, whose average monthly salary is 226 euros. These new visa restrictions have also caused a rise in corruption, in the form of bribes for expedited documents at the Polish consulate in Lviv.
The new rules also affect the transport of goods. Approximately 80% of Ukraine’s EU exports go through Polish border posts, and truck drivers must have their visas up-to-date. This could become a larger problem when Ukraine becomes a World Trade Organization (WTO) member and their export volumes increase.
So much for “free” travel zones. It is hard to believe that Poland would void an existing agreement with Ukraine to enforce the “letter of the law” of the Schengen agreement. I’ll bet no one saw these difficulties coming when considering Schengen participation. What a mess!
Prior to December 21, 2007, people were able to travel visa-free between Poland and Ukraine, needing only their passports. Now, they can leave their passports at home, but must possess Schengen travel visas.
In response to these Schengen restrictions, Ukrainians have staged protests at the border against what they see as the new Berlin Wall. Some even feel as though they are being treated like third-class Europeans.
Another Schengen-related problem is a wave of strikes by Polish customs agents, who deserted their posts because of increased responsibilities and low pay. They demanded monthly pay increases of 415 euros, almost double the previous average salary.
Ukraine is trying to work with Poland on a visa-free travel agreement for Ukrainians living within 50 kilometers of the border. Poland insists the arrangement should be limited to a 15-kilometer zone.
In the wake of this change, Ukrainian visa fees have risen to 35 euros. This is troublesome to Ukrainian citizens, whose average monthly salary is 226 euros. These new visa restrictions have also caused a rise in corruption, in the form of bribes for expedited documents at the Polish consulate in Lviv.
The new rules also affect the transport of goods. Approximately 80% of Ukraine’s EU exports go through Polish border posts, and truck drivers must have their visas up-to-date. This could become a larger problem when Ukraine becomes a World Trade Organization (WTO) member and their export volumes increase.
So much for “free” travel zones. It is hard to believe that Poland would void an existing agreement with Ukraine to enforce the “letter of the law” of the Schengen agreement. I’ll bet no one saw these difficulties coming when considering Schengen participation. What a mess!
Images (left to right): Rinat Akhmetov, Party of Regions Logo, Viktor Yanukovych
Ukraine's Party of Regions (PoR), winner of the majority of votes in last year's Parliamentary election, may splinter into two smaller groups due to a growing internal divide. One faction, led by former Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, wants business practices to remain opaque and maintain good relations with Russia, hoping this would lead to cheaper gas prices. The other division, headed by billionaire industrialist Rinat Akhmetov, wants to see business and legal reform that would provide greater access to Western markets and capital investment.
This split has grown wider since Akhmetov has recently partnered with pro-Western President Viktor Yushchenko, temporarily putting their political differences aside in an attempt to weaken current Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko. Yushchenko and Tymoshenko have battled on numerous occasions since she became Prime Minister in December 2007. It is an odd relationship as they disagree on almost everything, but still need each other's support to be successful. For example, Yushchenko has submitted an amended Cabinet of Ministers law to Parliament which would allow the President to select the Prime Minister instead of a Parliamentary majority. Yushchenko needs the Tymoshenko Bloc's suppport to pass such constitutional reforms, while Tymoshenko needs Yushchenko's support to remain as Prime Minister and accomplish her agenda.
In the Party of Regions, Yanukovych is in charge and not happy about this Yushchenko-Akhmetov partnership. Yanukovych and his supporters are preparing to rally against Yushchenko, but Akhmetov is unlikely to join them. Akhmetov is the chief financial backer of PoR and would likely have more followers than Yanukovych if a split occurs, therefore saving Yushchenko. It is not clear how Yanukovych's faction would function without Akhmetov's financial support.
Yushchenko would love to see a split in the Party of Regions. His support has dwindled in the past several years, and he faces potential challenges from both Tymoshenko and Akhmetov in Ukraine's 2009 Presidential election. If PoR splits, Akhmetov would be less of a threat in the upcoming election, and Yanukovych would most likely not have enough support to win. That leaves Tymoshenko as Yushchenko's lone formidable opponent. Perhaps joining forces with Akhmetov and weakening Tymoshenko now will make it easier for him to get re-elected next year. There's never a dull moment in Ukrainian politics.
Russian President Vladimir Putin is 100% against Ukrainian membership in NATO. Putin is not only concerned with Ukraine's joining NATO, but the possibility of hosting NATO or U.S. military installations on Ukrainian soil. In a join press conference with Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko, Putin warned, It is horrible to say and terrifying to think that Russia could target its missile systems at Ukraine, in response to deployment of such installations on Ukrainian territory. Imagine this for a moment. This is what worries us.What does Putin have against NATO? According to an interview published in Time Magazine, Putin noted that NATO is a leftover of the Cold War past. He questions the organization's ability to fight terrorism, and feels joining such a military-political bloc would essentially restrict Russia's sovereignty.
Acknowledging that Russia has no right to interfere with Ukraine's decisions, Putin has cautioned Yushchenko's government against accepting "limitations on its sovereignty." Putin also stated, "But if Ukraine wants its sovereignty restricted, that is its own business."
Yushchenko responded the following day, citing Ukraine's Constitution, which bans the stationing of foreign military foces on Ukrainian territory, with the temporary exception of the Russian fleet stationed in Sevastopol until 2017. Further, Yushchenko indicated that Ukraine would never take any steps that would create threats to Russia.
It should surprise no one that Putin feels this way. He is extremely protective of his country, and will not allow anyone or anything to become a threat.
Results from a recent poll conducted by FOM - Ukraina (Public Opinion Foundation) indicate that overall, Ukrainian citizens are not very trusting of their government. However, over half of Ukraine's population approve of Yulia Tymoshenko's performance as Prime Minister (through February 2,2008).
The following are results from the poll:
Yulia Tymoshenko's Job Approval as Prime Minister (rounded):
Yulia Tymoshenko Job Performance as Prime Minister (rounded):
Current or Former Government Leaders Not Trusted:
The poll, consisting of 2,000 respondents, found 23% of the country trusts nobody in government, while 0.4% trusts everyone. 14.1% of respondents could not answer the question. The poll's margin of error is 2.2%.
The list does not contain many surprises, except for the number of people on the "Not Trusted" list. After everything that has happened in the country since it declared its independence in 1991, the government has a lot of work to do to regain the people's trust. If I lived in Ukraine, I would probably feel the same way, too - I would not know who in government to trust.
The following are results from the poll:
Yulia Tymoshenko's Job Approval as Prime Minister (rounded):
- Approve - 52.7%
- Do Not Trust - 33.6%
- Unable to Answer the Question - 13.8%
Yulia Tymoshenko Job Performance as Prime Minister (rounded):
- Positive - 27.7%
- Excellent - 12.7%
- Satisfactory - 23.6%
- Bad - 16.3%
- Very Bad - 7.2%
- Unable to Answer the Question - 12.6%
Current or Former Government Leaders Not Trusted:
- Viktor Yanukovych (former Prime Minister) - 32.3%
- Oleksandr Moroz (leader - Socialist Party of Ukraine) - 23.0%
- Leonid Kuchma (former President) - 21.9%
- Viktor Yushchenko (President of Ukraine) - 21.6%
- Petro Symonenko (leader - Communist Party of Ukraine) - 19.7%
- Yulia Tymoshenko (Prime Minister) - 19.6%
- Nestor Shufrych (Parliament Member - former Minister of Emergency Measures) - 17.3%
- Yuri Lutsenko (Interior Minister) - 15.9%
- Leonid Chernovetskyi (Kyiv Mayor) - 13.5%
- Taras Chornovil (Parliament Member - Party of Regions) - 12.7%
- Anatoliy Kinakh (Parliament Member - Party of Regions; former Prime Minister) - 10.1%
- Volodymyr Lytvyn (head of Lytvyn Bloc) - 9.8%
- Raisa Bogatyreva (Secretary - National Security and Defense Council) - 9.2%
- Viktor Baloha (Leader - Secretariat of the President) - 7.7%
- Yuri Ekhanurov (Defense Minister) - 6.6%
- Vyacheslav Kyrylenko (Leader Our Ukraine People's Self Defense Bloc) - 6.4%
- Viktor Pynzenyk (Finance Minister) - 5.4%
- Arseniy Yatsenyuk (Speaker of Verkhovna Rada) - 4.9%
- Mykola Katerynchuk (Parliament Member - Our Ukraine) - 4.6%
The poll, consisting of 2,000 respondents, found 23% of the country trusts nobody in government, while 0.4% trusts everyone. 14.1% of respondents could not answer the question. The poll's margin of error is 2.2%.
The list does not contain many surprises, except for the number of people on the "Not Trusted" list. After everything that has happened in the country since it declared its independence in 1991, the government has a lot of work to do to regain the people's trust. If I lived in Ukraine, I would probably feel the same way, too - I would not know who in government to trust.
On February 6, 2008, Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and her Cabinet of Ministers issued several decrees (#201-r, 203-4, 204-r and 208-r) dismissing State Property Fund of Ukraine (SPFU) head Valentyna Semeniuk and several of her deputy chiefs. Andriy Portnov has been temporarily appointed SPFU chief, and several deputy chiefs were also appointed. These assignments are considered temporary until the Verkhovna Rada meets to consider candidacy for each post.
Tymoshenko's government is investigating SPFU to determine if the Fund violated Constitutional law, and if Semeniuk was involved in corruption. Along with Semeniuk, the decree also removed deputy chiefs Victor Petrov, Anatoliy Hrynenko and Oleksander Potymkov from office.
President Viktor Yushchenko followed the government's announcement by issuing his own decree (#106/2008) on February 7, suspending the Cabinet of Ministers decrees. Yushchenko claims that the dismissals were inappropriate and violated Constitutional law. According to the Law "On State Property Privatization" and the Temporary Provision on the SPFU, the institution is defined as a state agency, carrying out state policy in the realm of state property privitization. According to Ukraine's Constitution, the government does not have the authority to appoint and dismiss chiefs of central executive power agencies. In fact, such appointments and dismissals must be approved by Parliament. Yushchenko has told Semeniuk to remain in office and follow the existing legislation.
Tymoshenko is determined to rid the government of corruption and speed up privatization, but seems to be overzealous and willing to sidestep existing laws to get the job done. Perhaps, since the opposition Party of Regions has blockaded the Verkhovna Rada, thus preventing the body from operating, Tymoshenko was overanxious and decided not to wait until Parliament reconvenes.
While I am happy to see Tymoshenko's government off to an promising start, I cannot condone these dismissals. It may be necessary to temporarily remove these officials from office during the investigation, however there is a right way and a wrong way to handle the situation..Unfortunately, it seems that Tymoshenko chose the incorrect approach. She needs to slow down a little bit and ensure that her government is operating in accordance with existing laws, otherwise they are no better than their corrupt predecessors.
Valentyna Semeniuk
Tymoshenko's government is investigating SPFU to determine if the Fund violated Constitutional law, and if Semeniuk was involved in corruption. Along with Semeniuk, the decree also removed deputy chiefs Victor Petrov, Anatoliy Hrynenko and Oleksander Potymkov from office.
President Viktor Yushchenko followed the government's announcement by issuing his own decree (#106/2008) on February 7, suspending the Cabinet of Ministers decrees. Yushchenko claims that the dismissals were inappropriate and violated Constitutional law. According to the Law "On State Property Privatization" and the Temporary Provision on the SPFU, the institution is defined as a state agency, carrying out state policy in the realm of state property privitization. According to Ukraine's Constitution, the government does not have the authority to appoint and dismiss chiefs of central executive power agencies. In fact, such appointments and dismissals must be approved by Parliament. Yushchenko has told Semeniuk to remain in office and follow the existing legislation.
Tymoshenko is determined to rid the government of corruption and speed up privatization, but seems to be overzealous and willing to sidestep existing laws to get the job done. Perhaps, since the opposition Party of Regions has blockaded the Verkhovna Rada, thus preventing the body from operating, Tymoshenko was overanxious and decided not to wait until Parliament reconvenes.
While I am happy to see Tymoshenko's government off to an promising start, I cannot condone these dismissals. It may be necessary to temporarily remove these officials from office during the investigation, however there is a right way and a wrong way to handle the situation..Unfortunately, it seems that Tymoshenko chose the incorrect approach. She needs to slow down a little bit and ensure that her government is operating in accordance with existing laws, otherwise they are no better than their corrupt predecessors.
Ukraine's President Viktor Yushchenko and Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko both advocate for closer ties with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) - seemingly one of the few things they agree upon. Though the Ukrainian government has already begun talks with NATO, this will not be an easy process. The ultimate decision to join NATO requires a referendum, and according to a recent poll by the Democratic Initiatives Foundation, 52.8% of Ukrainian citizens oppose the idea, while only 31.8% favor the action.
The hesitancy of Ukrainians may be partially due to NATO being originally formed in 1949 to help prevent a possible attack by the Soviet Union on North America or Western Europe. The Soviet Union may have disintegrated over 16 years ago, but many people in Ukraine maintain their loyalty to Russia, if not even old Soviet ideals. There is also a question of what exactly is NATO today, and how would Ukraine fit in to the organization?
Today, Ukrainians seem to be much more interested in joining the European Union (EU) than NATO. Either way, European integration seems inevitable, but joining the EU may cause less damage to Russian relations than joining NATO. Yushchenko and Tymoshenko face a rough road at home if they really want NATO membership for their country.
The hesitancy of Ukrainians may be partially due to NATO being originally formed in 1949 to help prevent a possible attack by the Soviet Union on North America or Western Europe. The Soviet Union may have disintegrated over 16 years ago, but many people in Ukraine maintain their loyalty to Russia, if not even old Soviet ideals. There is also a question of what exactly is NATO today, and how would Ukraine fit in to the organization?
Today, Ukrainians seem to be much more interested in joining the European Union (EU) than NATO. Either way, European integration seems inevitable, but joining the EU may cause less damage to Russian relations than joining NATO. Yushchenko and Tymoshenko face a rough road at home if they really want NATO membership for their country.
