|
Written Testimony of Ihor Gawdiak, President,
Ukrainian American Coordinating Council (UACC),
Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on Europe,
U.S. House Of Representatives, Wash, D.C., Wed, May 12, 2004
|
Dr. Bill Gleason (L), Chair,
Advanced Ukrainian Studies Coordinator, Eurasian Studies,
Foreign Service Institute,
U.S.
Department of State,
and Ihor Gawdiak (C), president of the
Ukrainian American Coordinating Council (UACC) and moderator
of the AUC working lunch, listen to Markian Bilynsky (R), Vice
President and Director, Field Operations in Ukraine for the U.S.-
Ukraine Foundation (USUF) who is making some points after the
meeting concerning Ukraine's integration into the European Community
(Photo by Natalie Gawdiak-2004)
|
Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the committee, I am Ihor
Gawdiak,
President of the Ukrainian American Coordinating Council. The Council began
as an umbrella organization made up of numerous organizations within the
Ukrainian American community focused on cultural and social issues of
interest to the entire community. Since Ukraine's independence the Council's focus has turned primarily toward fostering democracy, the rule of law and
economic prosperity in Ukraine and facilitating closer ties between the
United States and Ukraine.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to submit this statement and
thank you sincerely for holding this hearing on the situation in Ukraine. I
will be clear; we believe the United States' national interests require
immediate focused attention to events in Ukraine and a major change in
American policy. If our policies and approach to Ukraine do not change and
those changes are not implemented now, our interests in Eastern Europe most
likely will be damaged for years to come.
It would not be alarmist to say that if Ukraine's election can be
manipulated a reconstituted "union" will not be far off with all of its
complications and challenges to peace and harmony in Europe and beyond.
Action is needed now! And there are actions that can be taken.
As this committee knows, this is a year of consequence in Ukraine. Ukraine's
presidential election campaign ends with balloting on October 31 and the
outcome could set the course for Ukraine and for U.S. interests in the
region for generations to come. At this critical stage in the election
campaign we are alarmed by our country's approach to this election. What
is our cause for alarm?
The President of Ukraine, his administration, his assorted colleagues and
the interests vested in Ukraine's current stagnant and corrupt government
apparatus, are rigging the entire election process and they are deaf to the
cautious, diplomatic eloquence of American statements of concern.
Essentially these people are immune to Foreign Service niceties.
Why are the vested interests so afraid of openness and fairness, so
antagonistic to free elections? They cringe at the reality of public
opinion. In the last parliamentary election, despite the manipulations of
official Ukraine, opposition reformers won the largest contingent in the
Ukrainian parliament. This was not expected or hoped for. The reality set
in that the citizens of Ukraine want what we Americans know all people
want - - freedom and opportunities - - opportunities the vested interests
currently in control of Ukraine are determined not to provide.
The results of the parliamentary election and the overwhelming evidence that
the most popular politician in Ukraine is the reformer Viktor Yuschenko
frighten Ukraine's entrenched powers. Now that Yuschenko is running for the
Presidency, the authorities have become paranoid and aggressive to the point
of clumsy outrages in their efforts to rig the election. But, no matter how
obvious, blatant and clumsy they are, they will succeed in denying the
people of Ukraine their honest election unless it is made crystal clear that
those in power will suffer unequivocal and adverse consequences if the
election campaign is not immediately made fair and transparent.
Fair elections are critical to Ukraine and to American interests in the
region. Fairness will only come when the United States recognizes the
nature of the people with whom it is dealing and takes aggressive action to
assert its stated policy of wanting the election to be open and free.
Ukrainian authorities will only modify their despicable behavior when they
know the United States is serious and feel the reality that their corruption
will have serious adverse consequences on their government's and their
personal interests with the West.
Mr. Chairman, we do share the Administration's view that the United States
should not have a "favorite" candidate in Ukraine's presidential election,
that our national interest is in a free, fair and transparent election.
Whoever is to be elected should be the choice for the people of Ukraine.
However, we do believe the United States must take the lead in pressing for
a fair election process through an American policy that makes this year's
crucial election the top priority in U.S.-Ukrainian relations.
Elections, as we all know, are more than just the day on which ballots are
cast. While the beginning of the presidential campaign in Ukraine has not
officially started, it has in fact already begun, and I want to underscore
the fact that the election campaign so far has been anything but free, fair
and open.
I present here but a few items attesting to the campaign realities in
Ukraine.
According to the Country Report on Human Rights Practices released by the
Department of State on February 25, 2004, the human rights situation in
Ukraine remains "poor." The report particularly notes "authorities
interfere with the news media by harassing and intimidating journalists,
censoring material, and pressuring them into applying
self-censorship.Arbitrary arrest and detention from what appeared to be
political motivation, were problems at times, as was lengthy pretrial
detention in very poor conditions." In light of the presidential campaign,
the government of Ukraine continues to use its administrative resources
selectively to target individuals, media outlets, labor and trade unions and
other entities associated with the opposition. It continues to abridge its
citizens' basic freedoms of speech, press, and assembly.
On March 3, 2004, Ukrainian affiliates of U.S.-funded Radio Free Europe
and Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) in Kyiv were taken off the air, arrested and
had their stations raided by the police. Fearing for his life, the former
owner of the station fled to Poland and is awaiting political asylum.
Further attempts made by the U.S. side to discuss this issue were turned
down by Ukrainian government officials. The same day that the RFE/RL
was shut down, Yuriy Chechnyk, a former director of Radio Yuta in the
city of Poltava, was killed in a highly suspicious car accident after he
announced his decision to rebroadcast RL short-wave programs on his
radio station.
Unfortunately, these are not simply isolated events. They illustrate only
one facet of an increasingly authoritarian tendency of repression against
individuals and media in Ukraine. Numerous reports indicate that Ukrainian
authorities are using their tax and other powers to harass journalists,
suppress fact-based news, and even physically eliminate their opponents.
These facts must not go unnoticed by the Members of this Committee, this
Congress or the Administration.
On April 18, 2004, we witnessed the so-called practice of "democracy in a
social-democratic way" in a town of Mukacheve in southwest Ukraine.
Overwhelming evidence has demonstrated that the local mayoral election there
was the dirtiest election campaign in the history of independent Ukraine.
Orchestrated by Ukrainian President Kuchma's Chief of Staff, Viktor
Medvedchuk, who heads the Social-Democratic Party United (SDPU), authorities
employed what appears to be unprecedented techniques of physical violence,
intimidation, harassment, manipulation and forgery. Four deputies of the
Ukrainian parliament were severely beaten by the police in attempt to obtain
the final vote recount. Several election observers were hospitalized after
being assaulted.
In addition to this, on May 5, a local court refused even to accept
documents for an appeal in the case of Viktor Baloha (the winner) vs. the
Territorial election commission. This election in Mukacheve has sparked
sharp criticism in the international community. According to Ambassador
Steven Pifer, "It is more than doubtful that the results that were announced
matched the way people voted." Moreover, I wish to suggest to the Members
of this Committee that these events are more than likely merely a rehearsal
before the upcoming presidential election. Let us be real-the U.S.
Government's hopes for "free, fair, and transparent pre-election process in
Ukraine" were ruthlessly destroyed along with the choice of Mukacheve's
voters.
Time is running out; it is late in the season but it is not too late.
So far, the Administration has expressed concerns about the election
irregularities. It reports having had tough and direct private
conversations with President Kuchma and other Ukrainian officials. The
Administration has a tag-team of officials traveling to Kyiv to raise
concerns and all of this will surely be covered in Ambassador Pifer's
testimony today.
However, Ukrainian reality is not changing. Nothing is changing for a
number of reasons. These include the Ukrainian Administration's belief that
President Kuchma's having sent 1,650 troops to Iraq allows them to continue
to carry out the outrages of blatant election manipulation and to safely
ignore any negative American reaction. For instance, many of the power
brokers in Ukraine are not particularly concerned about American or Western
reaction, their interests lie in mutually beneficial financial relationships
within the old Soviet Bloc. There are those in Ukraine who feel they can
have it both ways-good relationships with the repressive elements of the Old
Soviet bloc and with the West.
So far, the calculations of these thugs has proved to be accurate. Private
admonishments and erudite press releases mean nothing to them. So far, they
see our policy regarding the election as a joke--maybe something said to
placate the Diaspora but nothing that directly has a negative impact on
them.
The Diaspora is not satisfied so easily. All Americans, in fact, should
also realize that the United States national interests lie in having a free,
strong, independent, and democratic Ukraine, with a mutually beneficial
relationship with the U.S. Such a Ukraine could be a critical, strategic
linchpin for peace and cultural understandings in Eastern Europe.
We - - the United States - - have too much at stake to tolerate the current
marginalized policies toward Ukraine.
As Jackson Diehl wrote in his op-ed piece, "Ukraine's Tipping Point" in The
Washington Post on March 1, 2004, "The regime is afraid of one thing: the
reaction of the West to what is happening in Ukraine. If they hear more of
it in the coming months, democracy might still be saved." That statement
was made over two months ago and the fear Diehl refers to is the fear that
the United States will be serious about pressuring the regime unilaterally
and through all of its available bilateral avenues, none of which has
happened to date. 72 days have passed. The polling day is now 172 days
away. Time is running out. I have attached a copy of Mr. Diehl's piece and
ask that it be included in the record.
But the question is, what types of things can the United States do to expose
the thieves who would steal the election, sanitize the process by shining
the klieg lights of international attention on those who are now acting with
impunity? What can be done to drive the corrupt elements back into their
shadows and allow the people of Ukraine to vote freely?
Among other things--and we emphasize that there have been a number of
very thoughtful proposals submitted to U.S.A.I.D. for funding that, if
funded, would have created a very different atmosphere in Ukraine--I outline
a few possible action items:
· The Administration--through the White House and Department of
State--and the Congress--should increase the volume of public statements
denouncing the election law and civil rights violations.
· The Administration should abandon the practice of saving its
harshest criticisms for closed door sessions. The Administration should
make its criticisms clear to the people of Ukraine. Currently, well-worded
statements have been issued but are never carried in the controlled
Ukrainian media. As far as the citizens are concerned, nothing of
consequence has ever been said and that must mean everything is OK with
the United States.
· The Administration criticisms must make it clear that the United
States wants free and fair elections, and the criticism must include the
entire campaign season and that at this point the campaign/election process
is corrupt and must be fixed immediately.
· High level and continuing delegations should be sent to Ukraine by
the Administration and Congress--and maybe others like the Association of
Former Members--to deliver clear and unequivocal messages about the election
and that the way this current election is run will determine the course of
U.S.-Ukrainian relations and relations with international organizations in
which the United States participates. These delegations should, upon their
return, publicly brief this Committee and maybe other committees so that the
American public record is clear and current about the election situation in
Ukraine.
· Oligarchs and other manipulators of the election should be
identified and be made to understand that their actions will have personal
consequences. People who see to it that candidates and political parties
are denied access to the media, for example, will be on the visa blacklist.
It is critical that these malfeasants understand the U.S. reaction will be
personal.
· Everything possible should be done to discourage prominent
Americans, certainly public officials, from accepting invitations from
Ukrainian sources prior to election day. It has been the practice of people
in power to seek legitimacy by association with prominent Americans. This
"use" of well intentioned people is, among other things, terribly
disheartening to the true Ukrainian democrats who have their message
undercut by manipulation. In this regard the Committee might offer at least
a word of caution to former President George H.W. Bush who apparently
has accepted an invitation later this month to visit Ukraine as a guest of
Viktor Pinchuk, President Kuchma's son-in-law.
We do not necessarily here question Mr. Pinchuk's motives. We do
however, believe that our President's father being hosted in Ukraine by a
prominent member of President Kuchma's family could be a symbolic disaster
and certainly undercut the democratic opposition's message to the people of
Ukraine.
· Although Ukraine is qualified for the lifting of the Jackson-Vanik
restrictions, this Committee and the Congress might indicate that such
restrictions and other standards of an improved bilateral relationship will
only be available to Ukraine if the current, on-going election campaign and
the conduct of election day are deemed to be free, open and fair.
Mr. Chairman, I conclude noting that Ukraine's future as a democratic nation
hangs in the balance. We know the choice on October 31 belongs to the
people of Ukraine, their right to vote freely after a fair campaign is the
entire issue. For their interests and for our own national interests we
must do everything we can to ensure that the people of Ukraine receive full
and fair coverage of the candidates and the national political parties, and
that they have the opportunity to cast their votes free of oppression,
intimidation and interference.
The Iron Curtain fell. It is time the people of Ukraine have a fair
opportunity to vote on the direction they want their country to take.This
will not happen if current U.S. policies and practice toward Ukraine
continue.
FOR PERSONAL AND ACADEMIC
USE ONLY |
|
back
