Author: Tatoyan Vazgen

Britain knew of Equatorial Guinea coup plot in advance: report
Agence France Presse — English
November 27, 2004 Saturday 11:59 PM GMT
LONDON Nov 28 — Britain received a full outline of a plot to stage
a coup d’etat in Equatorial Guinea at least two months before it was
nipped in the bud, the Observer newspaper reported Sunday.
Citing “confidential documents,” it said Foreign Secretary Jack Straw
“was personally told of the plans at the end of January” but failed
to warn the government of the small, oil-rich west African state.
Five South Africans and six Armenians were jailed by a court in
Equatorial Guinea last Friday for plotting to overthrow President
Teodoro Obiang Nguema, the country’s iron-fisted ruler since 1979.
The complex coup bid was foiled last March when a team of mercenaries
was arrested in Zimbabwe, where a number of other participants —
including a British national, Simon Mann — have also been convicted
and sentenced.
In South Africa, Sir Mark Thatcher, son of former British prime
minister Margaret Thatcher, is awaiting trial for allegedly helping
to bankroll the plot. He was arrested in August, and denies the charge.
The Observer said Straw and his junior minister for Africa, Chris
Mullin, had been told of the coup plot on January 30.
It said two “highly detailed” reports had been sent, in December
2003 and January this year, from Johann Smith, a former commander in
the South African Defence Forces, to two senior British intelligence
officers.
The reports included dates, details of arms shipment and key players,
the newspaper said.
Copies of the reports, marked “strictly confidential,” were also
sent to “a senior colleague” of US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld,
it said.
It said the documents featured the names of many South African
mercenaries who have since been sentenced for their roles in the plot,
and that the January report stated that the coup would be attempted
“in mid-March 2004”.
The author of the January report added: “Knowing the individuals as
well as I do, this timeline is very realistic and will provide for
ample time to plan, mobilise, equip and deploy the force.”
In a statement to The Observer, the Foreign Office said: “We do not
comment on intelligence issues. But ministers and officials (in the
ministry) acted promptly on receipt of relevant information.”
Straw told parliament earlier this month that the Foreign Office had
received “confidential information” about a coup plot, but said that
they had added nothing significant to rumours circulating at the time.
The Sunday Times meanwhile reported that police in South Africa want
to question the new EU trade commissioner, Peter Mandelson, over any
knowledge he might have had about the coup plot.
It said investigators were curious about allegations by a coup
suspect that he had twice approached Mandelson — who is close to
Prime Minister Tony Blair — to know how the British government might
feel about a coup.
“They do not regard Mandelson as a suspect, but they want to know
what he knows,” a South African government source was quoted as saying.
A spokesman for Mandelson said the trade commissioner, a two-time
cabinet minister under Blair, “categorically denies” speaking to
anybody about the coup plot.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Council of Europe monitoring group visits Azeri prisons, meets rights activists
Zerkalo, Baku
20 Nov 04
Text of report by Turkan and Ceyran in Azerbaijani newspaper Zerkalo
on 20 November headlined “Ago Group arrives in Baku” and subheaded
“Having familiarized themselves with the human rights situation,
the guests were quick to visit prisons”
Several rights activists met the Ago Group of the Council of Europe CE
Committee of Ministers headed by Roland Wegener, the German permanent
representative at the CE, at ISR Plaza Hotel in Baku yesterday 19
November.
The group was made of ambassadors from Switzerland, Sweden, the
Netherlands and Turkey, as well as the secretary of the CE Committee of
Ministers, (?Mirel Pauls), a human rights activist, Rena Sadaddinova,
who also attended the meeting, has told Zerkalo.
The Ago Group visited Azerbaijan to monitor how the country was
fulfilling the commitments undertaken before the CE.
Sadaddinova said that the rights activists had provided the guests with
detailed information about the human rights situation in the country
and also on the political situation in Azerbaijan in general. They
said that Azerbaijan was not fulfilling the assumed commitments fully,
she said. For instance, the issue of political prisoners, including
the “October prisoners” – 33 people plus seven opposition leaders
charged with involvement in riots in the wake of the 15 October 2003
presidential elections – remains open.
The meeting also addressed the issue of the ailing political prisoners,
Sardar Hamidov, Rza Quliyev, Natiq Afandiyev, Saxavat Humbatov (from
OPON special-purpose police forces ) and Rafael Ahmadov (the case
of industrialists). “Their further remaining in custody is dangerous
for their lives,” the rights activists said.
It was said at the meeting that the law on public TV is not in line
with the CE standards. The meeting also discussed the state of courts
and the next year’s election of judges. The issue of Yeni Musavat, an
opposition newspaper that has stopped its publication due to financial
problems caused by fines, was addressed at the meeting in particular.
The Ago Group visited prison N 9 during the second half of the day
and met ex-Defence Minister Rahim Qaziyev there. Saddadinova said
that the group then visited the Bayil prison to meet Yeni Musavat’s
Editor-in-Chief Rauf Arifoglu and other opposition leaders. She also
said that today’s (yesterday’s) 19 November ruling by the Appeals
Court which upheld prison sentences for the seven opposition leaders
had driven those struggling for the release of the opposition leaders
to despair. She said that the Ago Group was informed about the unfair
court ruling.
The Ago Group’s hectic day did not stop there. Members of the group
yesterday met leaders of main opposition parties, i.e. the Democratic
Party of Azerbaijan, the Azarbaycan Milli Istiqlal Party, the People’s
Front of Azerbaijan Party PFAP and others, the press service of the
PFAP has told Zerkalo.
The opposition party leaders criticized the country’s social and
political situation. Ali Karimli, leader of the PFAP, said that
Azerbaijan had been deviating from democratic principles over the
four years of its membership of the CE.
Interestingly, the guests were received by Azerbaijani President
Ilham Aliyev after the meeting with the opposition leaders, Trend
reported. The issue of Azerbaijan’s commitments to democratize the
country and ensure political pluralism and the country’s relations with
the Council of Europe in all fields were discussed at the meeting. The
meeting also touched on finding a peaceful settlement to the Nagornyy
Karabakh conflict and considering the issue by PACE’s Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe appropriate structures. Both sides
talked about efforts to develop cooperation in the future.

ARMENIANS OF UKRAINE CONDEMN ACTIONS OF ARMENIA’S PRESIDENT, WHO HAD
CONGRATULATED YANUKOVICH EARLY
YEREVAN, NOVEMBER 27. ARMINFO. The Armenians of the Ukraine condemned
the actions of the President of Armenia who had congratulated Victor
Yanukovich early, independent analytic agency Glavred informs with
reference of press service of the Central Office of Victor Yushchenko.
According to the resource, the Armenian community in the Ukraine
had expressed its surprise to President of Armenia Robert Kocharian
on the occasion of early congratulations of Victor Yanukovich with
the so-called victory in the presidential election. On behalf of
all honest Armenians of the Ukraine, the film director, one of the
founders of the Union of the Armenians of the Ukraine Roman Balayan,
signed the statement, where the Armenians expressed a surprise with the
actions of Robert Kocharian. The next step of the Ukrainian Armenians
was the appeal to the people of the Ukraine, where they apologized for
the actions of their President and declared their solidarity with the
Ukrainian who aspire to live in the county where the constitutional
rights are secured. They also wish the Ukraine prosperity, peace,
consent and consider it their second Motherland. They are sure that
President of Armenia Robert Kocharian as a representative of one
the most ancient peoples of the Earth with huge cultural heritage,
will correct his mistake, Glavred informs.

Newropeans Magazine
Nov 26 2004
Turkey: Yesterday, Today & Tomorrow?
– 2nd Part –
© Newropeans Magazine
An exhibition currently at the German Historical Museum on the Unter
den Linden in Berlin entitled Myths of the Nations has attracted
considerable attention with its displays of how people from different
nations have formed and reformed the narratives of their experiences
both of WWII and the Holocaust over the past sixty years. The purpose
of the exhibition is to impress upon the visitor that national memory
is really the past continuously re-interpreted through the present.
United Kingdom , our partner
For example, the report implied that if the Lausanne Treaty of 1923 –
the basis of the Turkish State and its foreign relations – had been
fully implemented after WWI, the bloodshed between Turks and Kurds
might well have been avoidable. To justify this argument, which is
volatile in Turkey however mild it might be perceived elsewhere, the
report cited article 39 of the treaty that allows Turkish nationals
to use “any language they wish in commerce, in public and private
meetings and all types of press and publication”. It added that those
articles supposedly protecting non-Muslim minorities have been read
too narrowly: as well as covering Jews, Armenians and Greeks, these
articles should have been applied, for example, to Syrian Orthodox
Christians. More controversially, still, it suggested replacing the
term “Turk” with a more inclusive word to cover all ethnicities and
faiths such as Turkiyeli [of Turkey].
This report provoked a furore within the Turkish establishment. The
Turkish authorities have gone so far as to investigate whether the
board members who drafted this report committed treason, and there is
every possibility that both authors of the report might end up being
prosecuted under article 305 of the new penal code approved in
September 2004 providing for up to ten years’ imprisonment for those
who engage in unspecified “activities” against Turkey’s “national
interest”. But what might such activities be? In a footnote, this
discriminatory law deems “anti-national” anyone who describes as
“genocide” the killing of Armenians in 1915 [during the Armenian
Genocide] or advocates a withdrawal of Turkish troops from Cyprus.
A long road of improvements lies ahead of Turkey with respect to
civil liberties and fundamental rights. If it wishes to become member
of the Club of 25, and to be seen as a democracy wherein human and
minorities’ rights are not squelched systemically, it is imperative
that Ankara proceed in its reforms and commitments to include ipso
facto the recognition of the Armenian Genocide of 1915 and the
lifting of the economic blockade against Armenia. Instead of
legislating laws in its penal code that would outlaw any mention of
the Armenian Genocide perpetrated by its predecessor Ottoman regime,
it should move forward to recognise this genocide as much as adopt
the recommendations of the panel it set up.
Despite its aspirations toward democracy and its manifestations
toward reform, Turkey still refuses to admit that internal repression
and external emancipation are contradictory dual facets of the same
coin. They create tensions and lead to conflict. Much like the poster
at the German Historical Museum in Berlin, Armenians cannot simply
expunge their collective memories and national sacrifices for the
sake of political expediency. Turkey would be wrong to insist upon EU
membership without coming clean on this chapter, much as the EU would
also be complicit in applying double-standards by obfuscating the
truth and editing history if it goes along with this strategy for the
mere sake of creating an expedient south-eastern EU-drawn insular
zone. Indeed, it is almost axiomatic that nowhere in the world can
human rights be stifled forever since history has a way of unmasking
the truth eventually. For instance, an international conference In
History and Beyond History – Armenians and Turks: a thousand years of
relations organised by The Institute for Venice & Europe of the
Giorgio Cini Foundation took place in Venice from 28-30 October 2004.
Eminent scholars from different countries focused on the placement of
the Armenian case within the frame of the genocides of the 20th
century, the sense of guilt associated with this genocide and how
best to explain this genocide to the Turkish public opinion after
years of denial and amnesia.
Some commentators have recently opined that Turkey’s adhesion to the
EU would constitute a message of hope, peace, prosperity and
democracy. I welcome hope, peace, prosperity and democracy, and I
hail those lofty ideals anywhere in our broken and polarised world.
Nor, for that matter, am I impermeable toward Turkish membership of
our European Union.
However, I simply cannot accept such membership that is spun at the
expense of another people or their history. To make the point
clearer, let me refer to the Foreign Affairs Committee of the
European Parliament that examined last week a brief seven-page
provisional report (to be voted on in Brussels on 22 November 2004)
entitled Turkey’s progress toward accession. Presented by the Dutch
MEP Camiel Eurlings, the report calls upon the Governments of Turkey
and Armenia to start a process of reconciliation [] in order to
overcome the tragic experience of the past. It also requests the
Turkish government to reopen the borders with Armenia as soon as
possible. Currently under review are 483 amendments to the Eurlings
Report that were tabled by five different groups at the European
Parliament. They include demands for the explicit recognition of the
Armenian Genocide in accordance with the European Parliament
resolution of 18 June 1987 (Doc. A2-33/87) that called upon Turkey to
recognise the Armenian Genocide as a pre-condition to its European
candidacy.
In one of his first articles entitled Vous êtes formidables that
addressed French colonialism in Algeria, the philosopher and
existentialist Jean-Paul Sartre wrote in 1956 that crimes committed
in our name imply by necessity our personal responsibility since it
will have also been in our power to stop them. As far as the Armenian
Genocide of 1915 is concerned, Ottoman Turkey was capable of stopping
those massacres. It did not do so, and thereby bears responsibility
for them. I therefore hope that Turkey will no longer shirk away from
this onus when it is knocking at the EU doors and when Armenians
across the world are preparing to commemorate in 2005 the 90th
anniversary of their sorrowful tragedy.
Dr Harry Hagopian, Ecumenical, Legal & Political Consultant
Armenian Apostolic Church – London
–Boundary_(ID_iniGeTIiUk+PpIb3p01xNQ)–
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Covenant hailed as a landmark
Townsville Bulletin/Townsville Sun (Australia)
November 25, 2004 Thursday
AUSTRALIAN churches signed a covenant during the Fifth National Forum
of the National of Council of Churches in Australia (NCCA).
The forum was held in Adelaide last month.
Church leaders have hailed the covenant as one of the most
significant events in Australia’s ecumenical history.
“It’s an international benchmark,” NCCA president, Rev James Haire of
the Uniting Church said.
“No one else I believe, anywhere in the world, has been able to
produce anything quite as comprehensive as this. It is true that the
US is working towards something similar — but that doesn’t include
the Catholics.”
The invitation to the churches in Australia to engage in a process of
covenanting together at the national level has been grounded in the
conviction that ecumenical commitment is fundamental to the integrity
of the Church’s mission.
The process since 1996 has been an invitation to the churches, at the
national level, to take specific steps towards a more visible
expression of unity, to move towards a deeper experience of communion
(koinonia).
Bishop Michael Putney was present in Adelaide for the Forum of the
National Council of Churches.
Archbishop Carroll, president of the Australia Catholic Bishops
Conference, signed the covenant on behalf of the Catholic Church.
The first part of the covenanting document includes a Declaration of
Intent by the member churches.
It reaffirms their commitment to one another as partners on the
ecumenical journey and another to engage in an ongoing process of
growing together not knowing what visible form, unity, which is God’s
will and gift, may take.
The signatories to the covenant are: the Anglican Church of
Australia; Anticohian Orthodox Church; Armenian Apostolic Church;
Assyrian Church of the East; Churches of Christ in Australia;
Congregation Federation of Australia; Coptic Orthodox Church of
Australia, Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia; Lutheran Church
of Australia; Religious Society of Friends; Roman Catholic Church in
Australia, Romania Orthodox Church; the Salvation Army; Syrian
Orthodox Church and Uniting Church in Australia.
Different churches then agreed to more specific parts of the
covenant.
The Catholic Church agreed:
* To explore initiatives for sharing physical resources such as
buildings
* To explore with other Christian communities issues and strategies
for mission so that the possibility of common mission is recognised
as a priority
* To seek, to develop clear and sensitive guidelines dealing with
how Christian churches together can best meet the needs of people in
local (especially rural) situations
* To recognise the Sacrament of Baptism administered in the other
Christian churches and to promote the use to the common certificate
of baptism.

Karabakh Telecom expelled from GSM Association – Azeri minister
Assa-Irada
25 Nov 04
Baku, 25 November: Karabakh Telecom’s appeal to be restored as a GSM
Association member has been rejected, Communications and Information
Technologies Minister Ali Abbasov told Assa-Irada today. Abbasov said
that thus, Karabakh Telecom was expelled from the association once
and for all.
Commenting on the fact that Karabakh Telecom has become the second
mobile communications operator in Armenia, Abbasov said that the
company would not be successful. Since Karabakh Telecom is no longer
a member of the GSM Association, it will not be able to cooperate
with other member companies, he said.
Passage omitted: background information

Turkish Speaker hosts Black Sea Economic Cooperation parliamentary meeting
Anatolia news agency, Ankara
23 Nov 04
Belek, 23 November: Black Sea Economic Cooperation Parliamentary
Assembly (BSECPA) 24th Term Meeting started in Belek hamlet of southern
city of Antalya southwestern Turkey on Tuesday 23 November .
Making opening remarks of the meeting, Turkish Parliament Speaker
Bulent Arinc said: “BSECPA has been maintaining its activities since
1992-1993 with its 11 members. Earlier, Serbia-Montenegro applied to
become a member of BSECPA. Their membership will be approved during
the meeting.”
“BSECPA is an international organization having a population of nearly
350 million and gross national product of 300bn US dollars. Many
international organizations have been monitoring its activities,”
he added.
Representatives of member countries to BSECPA (Albania, Azerbaijan,
Armenia, Bulgaria, Georgia, Moldova, Romania, Russia, Turkey, Ukraine
and Greece) are attending the meeting.
On Thursday, BSECPA 22nd Term President Bulent Arinc will hand over
his mission to his Ukrainian counterpart Volodimir Litvin.
Arinc is scheduled to hold bilateral meetings with Parliament Speaker
Zoran Sami of Serbia-Montenegro on Wednesday and with Parliament
Speaker Volodimir Litvin of Ukraine on Thursday.

PRESS RELEASE
November 23, 2004
American University of Armenia Corporation
300 Lakeside Drive, 4th Floor
Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone: (510) 987-9452
Fax: (510) 208-3576
Contact: Gohar Momjian
E-mail: [email protected]
AUA Extension Program Features Ombudsman Dean Gottehrer
Yerevan – Co-sponsored with Armenia’s National Assembly and the United
Nations Development Program (UNDP), AUA’s Extension Program Lecture Series
featured guest speaker, Dean Gottehrer, UNDP Consultant on Ombudsmen who
spoke on Ombudsman Institutions: History, Development, and Challenges. While
visiting Armenia at the invitation of the “Promoting Human Rights and
Facilitating Public Awareness of the Public Defender’s Office in Armenia
Project,” the primary objective of Mr. Gottehrer’s mission was to assist in
increasing awareness and understanding of the Armenian public about the role
and functions of national human rights institutions. He emphasized the
characteristics that were essential in an Ombudsman institution, the
Ombudsman institution functions and how people can voice their concerns.
During his lecture, Dean Gottehrer discussed the history of Ombudsman
institutions from the first Swedish Ombudsman to the international basis of
establishing National Human Rights Institutions. “In my ombudsman
experience, the most able ombudsmen and most open and committed government
officials can work together to solve and prevent violations of human rights
and improve the quality of public life.” He pointed out that the Ombudsman
institutions most likely to succeed are those in which the government has
made clear its commitment to listen to recommendations and follow them
through. “The success of an Ombudsman is like a excellent soup–composed of
many elements that all need to work well with each other,” stated Gottehrer.
Mr. Dean M. Gottehrer is an experienced specialist who has been consulting
on Ombudsman issues in 22 countries, including 14 post-communist countries,
working as an expert, consultant, and professional in residence on Ombudsman
and Human Rights Institutions for many US government and international
organizations. Gottehrer suggested an approach that comes closer to a
realistic standard to appraise the work of the Ombudsman. “My suggestion is
that you take a comprehensive look at the Ombudsman’s work. This is like
tasting that soup I spoke about earlier. If you focus on one or two
ingredients in the soup, you are not going to have a comprehensive appraisal
of its quality. You need to think about all of the ingredients and how well
they blend together to make a soup that tastes good and is nourishing.”
********************
The American University of Armenia is registered as a non-profit educational
organization in both Armenia and the United States and is affiliated with
the Regents of the University of California. Receiving major support from
the AGBU, AUA offers instruction leading to the Masters Degree in eight
graduate programs. For more information about AUA, visit
Photo: Dean Guttehrer, UNDP Consultant on Ombudsmen, speaks at AUA
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Azeris protest against Armenian MPs’ visit to attend NATO seminar
ANS TV, Baku
23 Nov 04
Numerous protest actions were held this week against an expected
visit of Armenian MPs to Baku to attend the 58th Rose-Roth seminar of
the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. A group of the Karabakh Liberation
Organization [KLO] members have handed out special leaflets in streets.
Activists of the Liberal Democratic Party are now trying to picket
the Milli Maclis [parliament] in protest against the visit of Armenian
MPs to Baku.
[Video showed the people distributing leaflets outside a metro station]

A highly dubious result
The Economist
Nov 22 2004
>>From The Economist Global Agenda
A huge protest has gathered in Ukraine’s capital amid signs that the
expected winner of its presidential election, Viktor Yushchenko, was
robbed of victory by ballot fraud. Will the authorities crush the
protest or is a revolution—of the “velvet” or the blood-soaked
variety—in prospect?
ACCORDING to the exit polls, Ukraine’s pro-western opposition leader,
Viktor Yushchenko, was heading for clear victory in the final round
of the country’s presidential election, held on Sunday November 21st.
They showed Mr Yushchenko on 54%, compared with 43% for Viktor
Yanukovich, currently Ukraine’s prime minister, whose bid for the
presidency is backed by the outgoing president, Leonid Kuchma, and
Russia’s leader, Vladimir Putin. Yet as voting continued overnight,
the opposition leader’s apparent walkover somehow turned into a
narrow win for the official candidate. On Monday, the Ukrainian
electoral commission said that, with over 99% of votes counted, Mr
Yanukovich had an unassailable lead of almost three points.
Ukraine’s election
Nov 19th 2004
Ukraine’s presidential election
Nov 4th 2004
Ukraine, Belarus and Russia
Oct 28th 2004
Ukraine’s presidential election
Oct 28th 2004
Ukraine’s presidential vote
Aug 12th 2004
Russia, Ukraine
The Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe reports from
its independent electoral observation mission in Ukraine. The EU
issues statements on the elections and gives information on foreign
relations. See also the US State Department. “Governments on the WWW”
provides a comprehensive resource on the government and politics of
Ukraine, including the previous election results.
Elections and debt relief for Iraq Nov 22nd 2004
The falling dollar Nov 22nd 2004
Yukos under siege Nov 19th 2004
Bush’s cabinet reshuffle Nov 18th 2004
The Buttonwood column Nov 16th 2004
About Global Agenda
Fearing a repeat of the widespread irregularities seen in the first
round of voting last month, thousands of Mr Yushchenko’s supporters,
dressed in orange, his campaign colour, gathered in sub-zero
temperatures in the main square of the capital, Kiev, on Sunday
night. They called on the government to recognise his victory, and by
Monday morning, as the country’s electoral commission began issuing
tallies showing Mr Yanukovich in the lead, their numbers had swollen
to perhaps 50,000. “Remain where you are,” the opposition leader told
his followers, promising that tens of thousands more protesters were
on their way, “on carts, cars, planes and trains”, to demonstrate
against the alleged defrauding of the election. Many protesters began
to pitch tents along Kiev’s main avenue. “Our action is only
beginning,” said Mr Yushchenko. By the evening, their numbers were
said to have risen above 100,000.
Western observers immediately denounced the election. Senator Richard
Lugar, a Republican sent by President George Bush to monitor voting,
accused the Ukrainian government of supporting a “concerted and
forceful programme of election-day fraud and abuse”. The European
Union said all 25 member countries would be summoning their Ukrainian
ambassadors to register a formal protest. But Mr Yanukovich’s
campaign manager, Serhiy Tyhypko, insisted that his man had won,
arguing that the exit polls were not reliable. Mr Putin congratulated
Mr Yanukovich on his victory.
All through the campaign, Ukraine’s news media have been highly
skewed towards Mr Yanukovich, barely giving the opposition leader a
mention. Ahead of the first round of voting, the official candidate’s
supporters were accused of intimidating electoral officials to try to
swing the vote his way. Mr Yushchenko even accused them of being
behind an attempt to poison him, which has left his face bloated and
scarred. In Sunday’s run-off, suspicions centred on possible
fraudulent multiple voting in the Russian-speaking east of the
country, where support for Mr Yanukovich is strongest. According to
the official electoral figures, turnouts there were implausibly high,
at up to 96%.
Mr Yanukovich had some strong cards to play in the election campaign:
he recently awarded big increases in pensions and public-sector pay;
and the Ukrainian economy is booming, helped by a bumper grain
harvest and rising exports of steel and chemicals. Nevertheless, even
some in Mr Yanukovich’s eastern power base have grown sick of his
regime and the oligarchic business clans that prop it up.
Foreign observers have been taking a close interest in Ukraine’s
election, not just because it is one of eastern Europe’s largest
countries, with 49m people, but because the outcome could have
important consequences for the whole region. Mr Yushchenko presented
himself as a pro-western, free-market reformer who will seek
membership of the EU and the American-led NATO defence alliance,
while cleaning up corruption and enforcing the rule of law. Mr
Yanukovich, in contrast, stood for deepening Ukraine’s close links
with Russia. If Mr Yushchenko had gained the presidency and led
Ukraine towards becoming a westernised democracy with European-style
prosperity, voters in Russia and elsewhere in eastern Europe might
have begun to demand the same.
A win by Mr Yushchenko would have been a huge blow to Mr Putin, who
twice visited Ukraine during the election campaign to back Mr
Yanukovich (while denying this was the purpose of his trips). The
Russian president’s attempts to exert control over former Soviet
states would be greatly diminished if the second-largest of them were
to escape from his grip and join the West.
So what now? Much depends on the determination of Mr Yushchenko’s
supporters. Already, there is talk of a general strike. The city
councils of Kiev and another big city, Lviv, have refused to
recognise the official result of the election. Will there now be a
crescendo of protests and civil disobedience until they reach a point
where Mr Yanukovich has no option but to step aside? After all,
something rather similar happened last year in another former Soviet
state, Georgia, where people power forced its then president, Edward
Shevardnadze, to resign following dodgy parliamentary elections.
Mr Shevardnadze was forced to quit after it became doubtful if
Georgia’s armed forces would obey any order to crush the protesters.
The question is whether Ukraine’s security forces would react in the
same way: on Monday night, they issued a statement promising that any
lawlessness would be put down “quickly and firmly”.
Though Mr Yushchenko is now hoping for a Georgian-style bloodless
revolution, there are also some less promising precedents among the
former Soviet states: only two months ago, Belarus’s president,
Alexander Lukashenka, “won” a rigged referendum to allow him to run
for re-election. The EU is said to be planning to tighten its
sanctions against his government but so far there is no sign that he
will be dislodged from power. Azerbaijan and Armenia both held flawed
elections last year: in Azerbaijan, there were riots after the son of
the incumbent president won amid widespread intimidation and bribery,
but these were violently put down; and in Armenia, voters reacted
with quiet despair at the re-election of their president amid reports
of ballot-stuffing. If Ukraine follows these precedents, hopes for
change there will be dashed.
–Boundary_(ID_F/8Wh8ME2zAhqGCbBEQDVg)–