IMF Sponsored "Democracy" in The Ukraine
by Michel Chossudovsky
www.globalresearch.ca 28 November 2004
The URL of this article is:
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO411D.html
Opposition candidate Viktor Yushchenko is firmly backed by the
Washington Consensus. He is not only supported by the IMF and the
international financial community, he also has the endorsement of the
National Endowment for Democracy (NED). the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace and George Soros' Open Society Institute, which
played a behind the scnes role last year in helping "topple Georgia's
president Eduard Shevardnadze by putting financial muscle and
organizational metal behind his opponents." (New Statesman, 29 November
2004)
In the Ukraine, the NED funds Yushchenko's party Nasha Ukraina, it
also finances the Kiev Press Club. In turn, The Independent Republican
Institute (IRI), an affiliate of the NED, is involved in assessing the
"fairness of elections and their results". IRI has staff present in
"poll watching" in 9 oblasts (districts), and local staff in all 25
oblasts. (See also Ian Traynor 26 November 2004,
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/TRA411A.html )
The National Endowment for Democracy (and its affiliates including
IRI) although not formally part of the CIA, performs an important
intelligence function in party politics in some seventy countries. NED
was created in 1983, when the CIA was being accused of covertly bribing
politicians and setting up phony civil society front organizations.
According to Allen Weinstein, who was responsible for establishing the
NED during the Reagan Administration: "A lot of what we do today was
done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA." (Washington Post, Sept. 21,
1991).
In the former Soviet Union including the Ukraine, the NED
constitutes, so to speak, the CIA's "civilian arm". CIA-NED
interventions are characterized by a consistent pattern.
In the former Yugoslavia, the CIA channeled support to the Kosovo
Liberation Army (KLA) (since 1995), a paramilitary group involved in
terrorist attacks on the Yugoslav police and military. Meanwhile, the
NED through the "Center for International Private Enterprise" (CIPE)
was backing the DOS opposition coalition in Serbia and Montenegro. More
specifically, NED was financing the G-17, an opposition group of
economists responsible for formulating (in liaison with the IMF) the
DOS coalition's "free market" reform platform in the 2000 presidential
election, which led to the downfall of Slobodan Milosevic.
Copy and Paste? The Center for International Private Enterprise
(CIPE) has a very similar mandate in the Ukraine, where it directly
funds research on free market reforms in several key "independent think
tanks" and policy research institutes. The International Center for
Policy Studies (ICPS) supported by CIPE, has a similar structure to
that of the G-17 in Serbia and Montenegro. A group of local economists
hired by ICPS was put in charge of drafting, with the support of the
World Bank a comprehensive blueprint of post-election macro-economic
reform.
Who is Viktor Yushchenko? IMF Sponsored Candidate
In 1993, Viktor Yushchenko was appointed head of the newly-formed
National Bank of Ukraine. Hailed as a "daring reformer", he was among
the main architects of the IMF's deadly economic medicine which served
to impoverish The Ukraine and destroy its economy.
A year later, the Ukraine reached a historical agreement with the
IMF.
Mr Yushchenko played a key role in negotiating the agreement as
well as creating a new Ukrainian national currency, which resulted in a
dramatic plunge in real wages.
The 1994 IMF package was negotiated behind closed doors at the
Madrid 50 years anniversary Summit of the Bretton Woods institutions.
It required the Ukrainian authorities to abandon State controls over
the exchange rate leading to an impressive collapse of the currency.
Yushchenko as Head of the Central Bank was responsible for
deregulating the national currency under the October 1994 "shock
treatment":
* The price of bread increased overnight by 300 percent,
* electricity prices by 600 percent,
* public transportation by 900 percent.
* the standard of living tumbled
According to the Ukrainian State Statistics Committee, quoted by
the IMF, real wages in 1998 had fallen by more than 75 percent in
relation to their 1991 level. Ironically, the IMF sponsored program was
intended to alleviate inflationary pressures: it consisted in imposing
"dollarised" prices on an impoverished population with earnings below
ten dollars a month.
Combined with the abrupt hikes in fuel and energy prices, the
lifting of subsidies and the freeze on credit contributed to destroying
industry (both public and private) and undermining Ukraine's
breadbasket economy.
In November 1994, World Bank negotiators were examining the
overhaul of Ukraine's agriculture. With trade liberalization (which was
part of the proposed package), the door was open to the dumping of US
grain surpluses and "food aid" on the domestic market, contributing to
destabilizing one of the World's largest and most productive wheat
economy.
By 1998, the deregulation of the grain market resulted in a decline
in the production of grain by 45 percent in relation to its 1986-90
level. The collapse in livestock production, poultry and dairy products
was even more dramatic.( See
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2003/cr03174.pdf )
The cumulative collapse in GDP resulting from the IMF sponsored
reforms was in excess of 60 percent (from 1992 to 1995).
Under these circumstances, why is it that the public image and
political reputation of the IMF's protégé and architect of these
deadily reforms, namely Mr. Yushchenko was unscathed. Why did he remain
so popular? Answer: a massive propaganda and public relations campaign
supported by the US, money from Washington, manipulation of civil
society organizations, etc.
The IMF and "Governance"
IMF conditionalities, however, not only applied to the
macroeconomic agenda, the IMF had also intervened in the arena of
domestic politics. As in Russia in 1993, the Ukrainian parliament was
seen as an obstacle to the pursuit of the "free market reforms". In
1999, under pressure from the IMF, Yushchenko was appointed Prime
Minister:
<< Yushchenko's candidacy had been proposed by 10 parliamentary
groups and factions, and Kuchma agreed with their choice...
The weightiest argument may be the International Monetary
Fund's desire to see Yushchenko as Ukraine's prime minister, because
the provision of the former Soviet republic with extended finance
facilities depends on that.
Several parliament members believe the IMF is ready to extend a
loan worth 300m dollars to Ukraine in January in case Yushchenko
becomes prime minister. >>
(ITAR-TASS news agency, Moscow, 17 Dec 1999)
Following his appointment Yushchenko implemented a major IMF
sponsored bankruptcy program directed against major industries, He also
attempted to undermine the bilateral trade in oil and natural gas
between Russia and the Ukraine on behalf of the IMF which had demanded
that this trade be conducted in US dollars rather than in terms of
commodity barter.
In 2001, Yushchenko was sacked as prime minister following a non
confidence vote in the parliament. Yushchenko was accused of having put
the interests of the IMF ahead of those of the country:
"Viktor Yushchenko has fulfilled obligations to the IMF better
and more accurately than his duties to citizens of his our country,
Olena Markosyan, a Kharkov-based analyst, has opined in Ukrainian
centrist daily Den" (BBC Monitoring, 16 Nov 2004)
"This [Yushchenko] government openly states that it executes
all IMF recommendations. Though the government declares the social
direction of its policy, actually it is carrying out an anti-social,
anti-national policy," said Communist Party leader Heorhiy Kruchkov (
quoted in Financial Times, May 17, 2001)
They have sacked "our own" Prime Minister!
The international financial community responded. IMF Managing
Director Horst Kohler was adamant. "Yushchenko has gained a lot of
credibility outside of Ukraine, and I think he also deserves support
inside of Ukraine." (quoted in the Financial Times, 27 April 2001).
The IMF Head did not mince his words:
"He added that the IMF respects Ukraine's right to choose its
leaders, but maintained that the direction of reforms must be
preserved. He questioned the wisdom of the VR spending time on
maneuvering for a vote of no-confidence in the government while reforms
need to be implemented."
The Ukraine was back on the creditors' blacklist following
Yushchenko's dismissal:
"The West, which openly put its stake on Yushchenko recently,
is not likely to sit on its hands. There is no lack of instruments to
bring pressure on Kiev. Most probably the question of resuming IMF,
World Bank and EBRD credits to Ukraine will be put on hold because they
were expressly linked with Yushchenko's stay in power.... Talks with
the Paris Club on restructuring Ukraine's $1.2 billion debt may run
into difficulty... Not surprisingly, (Ukrainian President) Leonid
Kuchma yesterday hastened to distance himself from what is happening
and spoke critically about the Rada [Parliament] decision. (Vremya
Novostei, 1 May 2001, original Russian)
Following his dismissal, Yushchenko was in Washington for talks
with senior members of the Bush administration. He was back in
Washington in early 2003 under the auspices of the International
Republican Institute. During his visit he met with Vice President Dick
Cheney and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage.
Washington was "setting the stage" for the October-November
presidential elections.
Military Realignments in support of the Free Market
While Yushchenko is considered a protégé of the international
financial institutions, his colleague, former Defense Minister Yevyen
Marchuk is a unbending supporter of US and NATO military presence in
the region.
It was largely the initiative of Yevyen Marchuk as Defense Minister
to send Ukrainian troops to Iraq, a decision which was opposed by the
majority of the Ukrainian population.
In August, Marchuk met with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld at
The Crimean seaside resort of Yalta.
On the agenda of the August talks: Ukraine's participation in the
Iraqi war theater but also the upcoming Ukrainian elections. Defense
Minister Marchuk announced following these meetings that Kiev would
continue to participate in "the coalition of the willing" and would
maintain its troops in Iraq.
Marchuk was sacked in September, barely a month before the first
round of the presidential elections.
Attempting a Coup d'Etat?
In a televised address on November 25th, Marchuk, sent a message to
the military, police and security forces to disobey the authority of
the civil authorities, namely the government of Leonid Kuchma.
"Ukraine’s former defense minister and head of the National
Security and Defense Council has declared that he’s convinced that
opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko is entitled to be recognized as the
president of Ukraine.
Former Defense Minister Yevhen Marchuk called on President
Leonid Kuchma and Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych to exercise good
sense. Marchuk underscored that there should be no bloodshed in Ukraine.
Marchuk appealed to state security officers not to fulfill
illegal orders and to remember their official honor and dignity.
He stressed that election fraud in the Nov. 21 presidential
run-off election, which the government says was won by Prime Minister
Yanukovych, was on a mass scale. He said that there is only one way out
of the tense political stand-off that has engulfed Ukraine since
Monday: negotiations between equals.
Marchuk also appealed to Russian Ambassador to Ukraine Viktor
Chernomyrdin to pass along to Russian President Vladimir Putin only
objective information. He reminded officers of the Russian Black Sea
fleet in Sevastopol that they are on the territory of a foreign
government, and that they should remain mindful of that, calling on the
Russian Federation’s defense minister to obey the law."
(See Kiev Post, 26 Nov 2004 and Kanal 5 transcripts, BBC Monitoringm 26
Nov 2004)
This statement by Marchuk, which calls upon the Armed forces and
the Police to go against the government, essentially sets the stage for
a US-NATO sponsored Coup d'Etat.
Power Struggle: Oil and Pipeline Corridors
Behind the presidential elections, there is a power struggle
between pro-US-NATO and pro-Russian factions within the leading
political establishment and the military.
What is at stake is not only the maintenance of the IMF sponsored
macroeconomic agenda, strategic US-NATO military interests in the
region are also at stake.
The objective of the Bush Administration is to install a Ukrainian
government which is firmly aligned with Washington, with the ultimate
objective of displacing the Russian military from the Black Sea.
In this regard, The Ukraine has already signed several military
agreements with NATO and Washington under the government of Leonid
Kuchma.
The Ukraine is a member of GUUAM, a military alliance between five
former Soviet republics ( Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan and
Moldova). This military alliance was initially designed in 1997 by the
Ukrainian National Security Services (NSBU) in close liaison with
Washington. Its objective was to undermine the alliance between Russia
and Belarus, signed between Moscow and Minsk in 1996.
The Ukraine also signed agreements with Poland and the Baltic
states, pertaining to the control of transport corridors and pipeline
routes.
GUUAM lies strategically at the hub of the Caspian oil and gas
wealth, "with Moldava and the Ukraine offering [pipeline] export routes
to the West." The objective of GUUAM was to exclude Russia from the
Black Sea, protect the Anglo-American pipeline routes out of Central
Asia and the Caspian sea and essentially cut Russia off not only from
the Caspian sea oil basin but also from the Black sea.
Coinciding with the ceremony of NATO's 50th anniversary at the
outset of the war on Yugoslavia in 1999, the heads of State from all
five GUUAM countries were present including President Leonid Kuchma of
The Ukraine. They had been invited to NATO's three day celebration in
Washington to sign the GUUAM agreement under NATO and US auspices.
Georgia, Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan, immediately announced that they
would be leaving the Commonwealth of Independent States= (CIS)
Asecurity union, which defines the framework of military cooperation
between the former Soviet republics, as well their links to Moscow.
"The formation of GUUAM (under NATO's umbrella and financed by
Western military aid) was intent upon further fracturing the CIS. The
Cold War, although officially over, had not yet reached its climax: the
members of this new pro-NATO political grouping were not only
supportive of the 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia, they had also agreed to
'low level military cooperation with NATO while insisting that 'the
group is not a military alliance directed against any third party,
namely Moscow.' Dominated by Anglo-American oil interests, the
formation of GUUAM ultimately purports on excluding Russia from the oil
and gas deposits in the Caspian area as well as isolating Moscow
politically."
(Michel Chossudovsky, War and Globalization, the Truth behind September
11, Global Research, Montreal, 2002, Chapter V)
---
Text of Former Defense Minister Marchuk's speech on Kanal 5 TV.
25 November 2004
Speaking on opposition 5 Kanal, former Defence Minister Yevhen
Marchuk urged President Leonid Kuchma to admit widespread vote rigging
(Marchuk) Dear viewers of 5 Kanal, dear participants in the political
events, dear government officials, dear military.
(Passage omitted: could not speak earlier due to illness)
Police must help, not fight civilians
(Addressing servicemen) When fulfilling any orders given to you,
you must remember one thing: you are dealing with human beings,
civilians, citizens, your brothers, sisters or friends. The main thing
is: using force - to say nothing of using arms - against civilians,
against your fellow citizens is an extremely high risk.
You must remember that any political orders are usually issued
verbally, while commanders issue orders either in writing or verbally.
Therefore you must be very clear about formulating and understanding
orders.
Using force, in any form, is not only a great risk as I said, but
is always fraught with casualties, even when weapons are not used.
Servicemen know well that you can use force without using arms and
cause panic and casualties among protesters because of chaotic movement
of a panicking crowd of people. This is a science you've studied well.
It is worth reminding you that the law on the fundamental
principles of national security says that before deciding to use force
a government must weigh its force compared to the object it plans to
using force against. To put it simply, you cannot use force against the
peaceful population. While using other means, you must ask yourselves
whether this could lead to panic and casualties.
To special forces. I understand that today you are called upon to
perform various tasks as special units within the Ministry of Interior
and the Security Service. When I worked on the law on the Security
Services of Ukraine, I had to add one article, almost in the last
minute: officers, servicemen and officials at the Security Service of
Ukraine must not perform orders that do not correspond to the
constitution and the law. The same is stipulated in other laws that
regulate security agencies. In this connection I want to remind you
that most special units must now, first of all, stay at their home base
and, mainly, not to perform any tasks in plain clothes, especially in
protesters' midst. The only thing you can do is help protesters in
keeping order, preventing provocations and identifying provocateurs who
can cause a lot of trouble.
I also want to address special units of the Interior Ministry and
interior troops. It's hard work now. But you must remember one thing.
You are facing people who disagree with the outcome of the election.
They are defending their constitutional right to protest. It is their
constitutional right, and you must help them.
Protesters must not storm
I also want to address protesters themselves. Friends, you need to
understand that there are instances when governments can legitimately
use force: when government bodies come under attack: either the
presidential administration, the Cabinet of Ministers, the Supreme
Council, the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court.
(Passage omitted: these are guarded by police)
Therefore, there should be no storming. Any storming will
invariably cause casualties.
Russia warned
I also wish to address the leaders of the Russian Black Sea Fleet
and my colleague, Russian Defence Minister Sergey Ivanov. Please give
an order to all your units. It is desirable now, while there is a
crisis in Ukraine, that the main units of the Black Sea Fleet stay at
their home base. This would be the wisest and farsighted decision. You
have a complex status. You are based in a foreign state. Therefore, any
careless action could cause great harm to Ukrainian-Russian relations
and the fleet's continued deployment in Ukraine.
I would also like to address the Russian ambassador in Ukraine,
Viktor Chernomyrdin. (In Russian) Viktor Stepanovich, please try and
insist that your staff report unbiased information to the Russian
president about the true state of affairs in Ukraine regarding the
election. The Russian president must receive maximum objective
information about developments in Ukraine. I am sorry, I have certain
reasons to give you this advice. But we have known each other for a
long time, and I think you get my meaning.
Message to President Kuchma: vote was rigged
(In Ukrainian) I would also like to address the president of
Ukraine. Leonid Danylovych, you know very well the true state of
affairs and the true reasons for the current situation. I have told you
before, it is sad to see how you are ending your presidency. But
unfortunately this is the way it is. You are president now, and very
much depends on you. And intimidation is not the way out - for either
side. The situation has reached boiling point, a level of confrontation
with such potential that the risk is growing every day. Only talks and
nothing else can resolve this problem. You as president must seize the
initiative and understand that today you as the guardian of the
constitution and stability you bear the chief responsibility for
stability and a peaceful way to resolve this conflict situation.
Leonid Danylovych, all people know there was widespread
vote-rigging. Maybe you don't know this, but teams of Donbass people
toured the country in carousel voting by absentee ballots. And before
that there were squads going around intimidating electoral commissions
and voters. They added a huge number of people to the circle of
(opposition leader Viktor) Yushchenko's supporters and turned many
people away from you. Believe me, it is these circumstances that scared
many people, that this is possible in Ukraine, - these very
circumstances caused the greatest damage to your reputation. Maybe your
headquarters do not tell you this, but I have the moral right - and you
know why - to say this straight to your face.
(Passage omitted: more in this vein)
There is only one solution: talks. But not talks between the
victorious and the defeated, but talks between equals. And to reach the
platform of equals, you must seriously consider what happened during
the election. And the fact that there was widespread vote rigging has
been proven.
(Passage omitted: hopes there will be no bloodshed.)
The protest potential is growing fast. But the government is also
concentrating a large potential to counter it. And I know that this
potential is strong. Therefore, you must stop. Just as the arms race
which seemed insurmountable was once stopped, now we must stop the
growth of potential on both sides. The situation is extremely dangerous.
Courts will prove opposition victory
I also wish to address Viktor Yushchenko. Viktor Andriyovych, I am
firmly convinced that legal and constitutional procedures can prove
that you won.
© Copyright MICHEL CHOSSUDOVSKY CRG 2004
www.globalresearch.ca
by Michel Chossudovsky
www.globalresearch.ca 28 November 2004
The URL of this article is:
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO411D.html
Opposition candidate Viktor Yushchenko is firmly backed by the
Washington Consensus. He is not only supported by the IMF and the
international financial community, he also has the endorsement of the
National Endowment for Democracy (NED). the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace and George Soros' Open Society Institute, which
played a behind the scnes role last year in helping "topple Georgia's
president Eduard Shevardnadze by putting financial muscle and
organizational metal behind his opponents." (New Statesman, 29 November
2004)
In the Ukraine, the NED funds Yushchenko's party Nasha Ukraina, it
also finances the Kiev Press Club. In turn, The Independent Republican
Institute (IRI), an affiliate of the NED, is involved in assessing the
"fairness of elections and their results". IRI has staff present in
"poll watching" in 9 oblasts (districts), and local staff in all 25
oblasts. (See also Ian Traynor 26 November 2004,
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/TRA411A.html )
The National Endowment for Democracy (and its affiliates including
IRI) although not formally part of the CIA, performs an important
intelligence function in party politics in some seventy countries. NED
was created in 1983, when the CIA was being accused of covertly bribing
politicians and setting up phony civil society front organizations.
According to Allen Weinstein, who was responsible for establishing the
NED during the Reagan Administration: "A lot of what we do today was
done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA." (Washington Post, Sept. 21,
1991).
In the former Soviet Union including the Ukraine, the NED
constitutes, so to speak, the CIA's "civilian arm". CIA-NED
interventions are characterized by a consistent pattern.
In the former Yugoslavia, the CIA channeled support to the Kosovo
Liberation Army (KLA) (since 1995), a paramilitary group involved in
terrorist attacks on the Yugoslav police and military. Meanwhile, the
NED through the "Center for International Private Enterprise" (CIPE)
was backing the DOS opposition coalition in Serbia and Montenegro. More
specifically, NED was financing the G-17, an opposition group of
economists responsible for formulating (in liaison with the IMF) the
DOS coalition's "free market" reform platform in the 2000 presidential
election, which led to the downfall of Slobodan Milosevic.
Copy and Paste? The Center for International Private Enterprise
(CIPE) has a very similar mandate in the Ukraine, where it directly
funds research on free market reforms in several key "independent think
tanks" and policy research institutes. The International Center for
Policy Studies (ICPS) supported by CIPE, has a similar structure to
that of the G-17 in Serbia and Montenegro. A group of local economists
hired by ICPS was put in charge of drafting, with the support of the
World Bank a comprehensive blueprint of post-election macro-economic
reform.
Who is Viktor Yushchenko? IMF Sponsored Candidate
In 1993, Viktor Yushchenko was appointed head of the newly-formed
National Bank of Ukraine. Hailed as a "daring reformer", he was among
the main architects of the IMF's deadly economic medicine which served
to impoverish The Ukraine and destroy its economy.
A year later, the Ukraine reached a historical agreement with the
IMF.
Mr Yushchenko played a key role in negotiating the agreement as
well as creating a new Ukrainian national currency, which resulted in a
dramatic plunge in real wages.
The 1994 IMF package was negotiated behind closed doors at the
Madrid 50 years anniversary Summit of the Bretton Woods institutions.
It required the Ukrainian authorities to abandon State controls over
the exchange rate leading to an impressive collapse of the currency.
Yushchenko as Head of the Central Bank was responsible for
deregulating the national currency under the October 1994 "shock
treatment":
* The price of bread increased overnight by 300 percent,
* electricity prices by 600 percent,
* public transportation by 900 percent.
* the standard of living tumbled
According to the Ukrainian State Statistics Committee, quoted by
the IMF, real wages in 1998 had fallen by more than 75 percent in
relation to their 1991 level. Ironically, the IMF sponsored program was
intended to alleviate inflationary pressures: it consisted in imposing
"dollarised" prices on an impoverished population with earnings below
ten dollars a month.
Combined with the abrupt hikes in fuel and energy prices, the
lifting of subsidies and the freeze on credit contributed to destroying
industry (both public and private) and undermining Ukraine's
breadbasket economy.
In November 1994, World Bank negotiators were examining the
overhaul of Ukraine's agriculture. With trade liberalization (which was
part of the proposed package), the door was open to the dumping of US
grain surpluses and "food aid" on the domestic market, contributing to
destabilizing one of the World's largest and most productive wheat
economy.
By 1998, the deregulation of the grain market resulted in a decline
in the production of grain by 45 percent in relation to its 1986-90
level. The collapse in livestock production, poultry and dairy products
was even more dramatic.( See
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2003/cr03174.pdf )
The cumulative collapse in GDP resulting from the IMF sponsored
reforms was in excess of 60 percent (from 1992 to 1995).
Under these circumstances, why is it that the public image and
political reputation of the IMF's protégé and architect of these
deadily reforms, namely Mr. Yushchenko was unscathed. Why did he remain
so popular? Answer: a massive propaganda and public relations campaign
supported by the US, money from Washington, manipulation of civil
society organizations, etc.
The IMF and "Governance"
IMF conditionalities, however, not only applied to the
macroeconomic agenda, the IMF had also intervened in the arena of
domestic politics. As in Russia in 1993, the Ukrainian parliament was
seen as an obstacle to the pursuit of the "free market reforms". In
1999, under pressure from the IMF, Yushchenko was appointed Prime
Minister:
<< Yushchenko's candidacy had been proposed by 10 parliamentary
groups and factions, and Kuchma agreed with their choice...
The weightiest argument may be the International Monetary
Fund's desire to see Yushchenko as Ukraine's prime minister, because
the provision of the former Soviet republic with extended finance
facilities depends on that.
Several parliament members believe the IMF is ready to extend a
loan worth 300m dollars to Ukraine in January in case Yushchenko
becomes prime minister. >>
(ITAR-TASS news agency, Moscow, 17 Dec 1999)
Following his appointment Yushchenko implemented a major IMF
sponsored bankruptcy program directed against major industries, He also
attempted to undermine the bilateral trade in oil and natural gas
between Russia and the Ukraine on behalf of the IMF which had demanded
that this trade be conducted in US dollars rather than in terms of
commodity barter.
In 2001, Yushchenko was sacked as prime minister following a non
confidence vote in the parliament. Yushchenko was accused of having put
the interests of the IMF ahead of those of the country:
"Viktor Yushchenko has fulfilled obligations to the IMF better
and more accurately than his duties to citizens of his our country,
Olena Markosyan, a Kharkov-based analyst, has opined in Ukrainian
centrist daily Den" (BBC Monitoring, 16 Nov 2004)
"This [Yushchenko] government openly states that it executes
all IMF recommendations. Though the government declares the social
direction of its policy, actually it is carrying out an anti-social,
anti-national policy," said Communist Party leader Heorhiy Kruchkov (
quoted in Financial Times, May 17, 2001)
They have sacked "our own" Prime Minister!
The international financial community responded. IMF Managing
Director Horst Kohler was adamant. "Yushchenko has gained a lot of
credibility outside of Ukraine, and I think he also deserves support
inside of Ukraine." (quoted in the Financial Times, 27 April 2001).
The IMF Head did not mince his words:
"He added that the IMF respects Ukraine's right to choose its
leaders, but maintained that the direction of reforms must be
preserved. He questioned the wisdom of the VR spending time on
maneuvering for a vote of no-confidence in the government while reforms
need to be implemented."
The Ukraine was back on the creditors' blacklist following
Yushchenko's dismissal:
"The West, which openly put its stake on Yushchenko recently,
is not likely to sit on its hands. There is no lack of instruments to
bring pressure on Kiev. Most probably the question of resuming IMF,
World Bank and EBRD credits to Ukraine will be put on hold because they
were expressly linked with Yushchenko's stay in power.... Talks with
the Paris Club on restructuring Ukraine's $1.2 billion debt may run
into difficulty... Not surprisingly, (Ukrainian President) Leonid
Kuchma yesterday hastened to distance himself from what is happening
and spoke critically about the Rada [Parliament] decision. (Vremya
Novostei, 1 May 2001, original Russian)
Following his dismissal, Yushchenko was in Washington for talks
with senior members of the Bush administration. He was back in
Washington in early 2003 under the auspices of the International
Republican Institute. During his visit he met with Vice President Dick
Cheney and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage.
Washington was "setting the stage" for the October-November
presidential elections.
Military Realignments in support of the Free Market
While Yushchenko is considered a protégé of the international
financial institutions, his colleague, former Defense Minister Yevyen
Marchuk is a unbending supporter of US and NATO military presence in
the region.
It was largely the initiative of Yevyen Marchuk as Defense Minister
to send Ukrainian troops to Iraq, a decision which was opposed by the
majority of the Ukrainian population.
In August, Marchuk met with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld at
The Crimean seaside resort of Yalta.
On the agenda of the August talks: Ukraine's participation in the
Iraqi war theater but also the upcoming Ukrainian elections. Defense
Minister Marchuk announced following these meetings that Kiev would
continue to participate in "the coalition of the willing" and would
maintain its troops in Iraq.
Marchuk was sacked in September, barely a month before the first
round of the presidential elections.
Attempting a Coup d'Etat?
In a televised address on November 25th, Marchuk, sent a message to
the military, police and security forces to disobey the authority of
the civil authorities, namely the government of Leonid Kuchma.
"Ukraine’s former defense minister and head of the National
Security and Defense Council has declared that he’s convinced that
opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko is entitled to be recognized as the
president of Ukraine.
Former Defense Minister Yevhen Marchuk called on President
Leonid Kuchma and Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych to exercise good
sense. Marchuk underscored that there should be no bloodshed in Ukraine.
Marchuk appealed to state security officers not to fulfill
illegal orders and to remember their official honor and dignity.
He stressed that election fraud in the Nov. 21 presidential
run-off election, which the government says was won by Prime Minister
Yanukovych, was on a mass scale. He said that there is only one way out
of the tense political stand-off that has engulfed Ukraine since
Monday: negotiations between equals.
Marchuk also appealed to Russian Ambassador to Ukraine Viktor
Chernomyrdin to pass along to Russian President Vladimir Putin only
objective information. He reminded officers of the Russian Black Sea
fleet in Sevastopol that they are on the territory of a foreign
government, and that they should remain mindful of that, calling on the
Russian Federation’s defense minister to obey the law."
(See Kiev Post, 26 Nov 2004 and Kanal 5 transcripts, BBC Monitoringm 26
Nov 2004)
This statement by Marchuk, which calls upon the Armed forces and
the Police to go against the government, essentially sets the stage for
a US-NATO sponsored Coup d'Etat.
Power Struggle: Oil and Pipeline Corridors
Behind the presidential elections, there is a power struggle
between pro-US-NATO and pro-Russian factions within the leading
political establishment and the military.
What is at stake is not only the maintenance of the IMF sponsored
macroeconomic agenda, strategic US-NATO military interests in the
region are also at stake.
The objective of the Bush Administration is to install a Ukrainian
government which is firmly aligned with Washington, with the ultimate
objective of displacing the Russian military from the Black Sea.
In this regard, The Ukraine has already signed several military
agreements with NATO and Washington under the government of Leonid
Kuchma.
The Ukraine is a member of GUUAM, a military alliance between five
former Soviet republics ( Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan and
Moldova). This military alliance was initially designed in 1997 by the
Ukrainian National Security Services (NSBU) in close liaison with
Washington. Its objective was to undermine the alliance between Russia
and Belarus, signed between Moscow and Minsk in 1996.
The Ukraine also signed agreements with Poland and the Baltic
states, pertaining to the control of transport corridors and pipeline
routes.
GUUAM lies strategically at the hub of the Caspian oil and gas
wealth, "with Moldava and the Ukraine offering [pipeline] export routes
to the West." The objective of GUUAM was to exclude Russia from the
Black Sea, protect the Anglo-American pipeline routes out of Central
Asia and the Caspian sea and essentially cut Russia off not only from
the Caspian sea oil basin but also from the Black sea.
Coinciding with the ceremony of NATO's 50th anniversary at the
outset of the war on Yugoslavia in 1999, the heads of State from all
five GUUAM countries were present including President Leonid Kuchma of
The Ukraine. They had been invited to NATO's three day celebration in
Washington to sign the GUUAM agreement under NATO and US auspices.
Georgia, Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan, immediately announced that they
would be leaving the Commonwealth of Independent States= (CIS)
Asecurity union, which defines the framework of military cooperation
between the former Soviet republics, as well their links to Moscow.
"The formation of GUUAM (under NATO's umbrella and financed by
Western military aid) was intent upon further fracturing the CIS. The
Cold War, although officially over, had not yet reached its climax: the
members of this new pro-NATO political grouping were not only
supportive of the 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia, they had also agreed to
'low level military cooperation with NATO while insisting that 'the
group is not a military alliance directed against any third party,
namely Moscow.' Dominated by Anglo-American oil interests, the
formation of GUUAM ultimately purports on excluding Russia from the oil
and gas deposits in the Caspian area as well as isolating Moscow
politically."
(Michel Chossudovsky, War and Globalization, the Truth behind September
11, Global Research, Montreal, 2002, Chapter V)
---
Text of Former Defense Minister Marchuk's speech on Kanal 5 TV.
25 November 2004
Speaking on opposition 5 Kanal, former Defence Minister Yevhen
Marchuk urged President Leonid Kuchma to admit widespread vote rigging
(Marchuk) Dear viewers of 5 Kanal, dear participants in the political
events, dear government officials, dear military.
(Passage omitted: could not speak earlier due to illness)
Police must help, not fight civilians
(Addressing servicemen) When fulfilling any orders given to you,
you must remember one thing: you are dealing with human beings,
civilians, citizens, your brothers, sisters or friends. The main thing
is: using force - to say nothing of using arms - against civilians,
against your fellow citizens is an extremely high risk.
You must remember that any political orders are usually issued
verbally, while commanders issue orders either in writing or verbally.
Therefore you must be very clear about formulating and understanding
orders.
Using force, in any form, is not only a great risk as I said, but
is always fraught with casualties, even when weapons are not used.
Servicemen know well that you can use force without using arms and
cause panic and casualties among protesters because of chaotic movement
of a panicking crowd of people. This is a science you've studied well.
It is worth reminding you that the law on the fundamental
principles of national security says that before deciding to use force
a government must weigh its force compared to the object it plans to
using force against. To put it simply, you cannot use force against the
peaceful population. While using other means, you must ask yourselves
whether this could lead to panic and casualties.
To special forces. I understand that today you are called upon to
perform various tasks as special units within the Ministry of Interior
and the Security Service. When I worked on the law on the Security
Services of Ukraine, I had to add one article, almost in the last
minute: officers, servicemen and officials at the Security Service of
Ukraine must not perform orders that do not correspond to the
constitution and the law. The same is stipulated in other laws that
regulate security agencies. In this connection I want to remind you
that most special units must now, first of all, stay at their home base
and, mainly, not to perform any tasks in plain clothes, especially in
protesters' midst. The only thing you can do is help protesters in
keeping order, preventing provocations and identifying provocateurs who
can cause a lot of trouble.
I also want to address special units of the Interior Ministry and
interior troops. It's hard work now. But you must remember one thing.
You are facing people who disagree with the outcome of the election.
They are defending their constitutional right to protest. It is their
constitutional right, and you must help them.
Protesters must not storm
I also want to address protesters themselves. Friends, you need to
understand that there are instances when governments can legitimately
use force: when government bodies come under attack: either the
presidential administration, the Cabinet of Ministers, the Supreme
Council, the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court.
(Passage omitted: these are guarded by police)
Therefore, there should be no storming. Any storming will
invariably cause casualties.
Russia warned
I also wish to address the leaders of the Russian Black Sea Fleet
and my colleague, Russian Defence Minister Sergey Ivanov. Please give
an order to all your units. It is desirable now, while there is a
crisis in Ukraine, that the main units of the Black Sea Fleet stay at
their home base. This would be the wisest and farsighted decision. You
have a complex status. You are based in a foreign state. Therefore, any
careless action could cause great harm to Ukrainian-Russian relations
and the fleet's continued deployment in Ukraine.
I would also like to address the Russian ambassador in Ukraine,
Viktor Chernomyrdin. (In Russian) Viktor Stepanovich, please try and
insist that your staff report unbiased information to the Russian
president about the true state of affairs in Ukraine regarding the
election. The Russian president must receive maximum objective
information about developments in Ukraine. I am sorry, I have certain
reasons to give you this advice. But we have known each other for a
long time, and I think you get my meaning.
Message to President Kuchma: vote was rigged
(In Ukrainian) I would also like to address the president of
Ukraine. Leonid Danylovych, you know very well the true state of
affairs and the true reasons for the current situation. I have told you
before, it is sad to see how you are ending your presidency. But
unfortunately this is the way it is. You are president now, and very
much depends on you. And intimidation is not the way out - for either
side. The situation has reached boiling point, a level of confrontation
with such potential that the risk is growing every day. Only talks and
nothing else can resolve this problem. You as president must seize the
initiative and understand that today you as the guardian of the
constitution and stability you bear the chief responsibility for
stability and a peaceful way to resolve this conflict situation.
Leonid Danylovych, all people know there was widespread
vote-rigging. Maybe you don't know this, but teams of Donbass people
toured the country in carousel voting by absentee ballots. And before
that there were squads going around intimidating electoral commissions
and voters. They added a huge number of people to the circle of
(opposition leader Viktor) Yushchenko's supporters and turned many
people away from you. Believe me, it is these circumstances that scared
many people, that this is possible in Ukraine, - these very
circumstances caused the greatest damage to your reputation. Maybe your
headquarters do not tell you this, but I have the moral right - and you
know why - to say this straight to your face.
(Passage omitted: more in this vein)
There is only one solution: talks. But not talks between the
victorious and the defeated, but talks between equals. And to reach the
platform of equals, you must seriously consider what happened during
the election. And the fact that there was widespread vote rigging has
been proven.
(Passage omitted: hopes there will be no bloodshed.)
The protest potential is growing fast. But the government is also
concentrating a large potential to counter it. And I know that this
potential is strong. Therefore, you must stop. Just as the arms race
which seemed insurmountable was once stopped, now we must stop the
growth of potential on both sides. The situation is extremely dangerous.
Courts will prove opposition victory
I also wish to address Viktor Yushchenko. Viktor Andriyovych, I am
firmly convinced that legal and constitutional procedures can prove
that you won.
© Copyright MICHEL CHOSSUDOVSKY CRG 2004
www.globalresearch.ca