Alegeri in Ukraina

Revealed: the full story of the Ukrainian election fraud
By Tom Parfitt in Kiev and Colin Freeman
(Filed: 28/11/2004)

It was 5.30pm on election day in Ukraine when the thugs in masks arrived armed with rubber truncheons. Vitaly Kizima, an election monitor at Zhovtneve in Ukraine's Sumy region, watched in horror as 30 men in tracksuits stormed into the village polling station. "They started to beat voters and election officials, trying to push through towards the ballot boxes," he told The Telegraph. "People's faces were cut from blows to the head. There was blood all over." The thugs - believed to be loyal to the pro-Russian presidential candidate Viktor Yanukovich from his stronghold, Donetsk - were repulsed only when locals pushed them back and a policeman fired warning shots.

The catalogue of abuses in the contest between Mr Yanukovich, the prime minister, and his opponent, the pro-Western Viktor Yushchenko, is growing longer by the day.

Ukraine is split, with the western, Europe-leaning regions voting overwhelmingly for Mr Yushchenko while the eastern part of the country - where many speak Russian - backing Mr Yanukovich.

Maya Syta, a journalist working at polling station 73 in a Kiev suburb, witnessed ballot papers destroyed with acid poured into a ballot box. "The officials were taking them out of the box and they couldn't understand why they were wet," she said. "Then I saw they started to blacken and disintegrate as if they were burning. Two ballots were wrapped up into a tube with a yellow liquid inside. After a few moments they were completely eaten up." In her polling station, 26 ballots were destroyed and had to be invalidated. Six other cases were recorded of ballots destroyed by acid.

The most common trick was "carousel" voting, in which busloads of Yanukovich supporters simply drove from one polling station to another casting multiple false absentee ballots.

In another brazen fraud recorded by observers from the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe, voters were given pens filled with ink that disappeared, leaving ballots unmarked and invalid.

Mr Yushchenko has refused to accept the election results, which gave him 46.61 per cent of the vote against 49.46 per cent for Mr Yanukovich. The figures are due to be reviewed tomorrow by the Supreme Court, although it cannot reverse them.

Diana Dutsyk, a member of Mr Yushchenko's campaign team, claimed that "dead souls" - late citizens' ballots used by imposters - were also used to augment his opponent's share of the vote.

And late last week Mr Yushchenko's headquarters released an audio recording in which senior members of Mr Yanukovich's campaign team were allegedly caught red-handed discussing how to fix the election result. In the telephone conversation, a member of the team can be heard saying that he ordered a local election commission to disqualify votes.

Mr Yanukovich denies rigging the vote and claims that a "small clique" of his opponents is trying to divide Ukraine. But mediators, including Javier Solana, the European Union's foreign policy chief, have hinted that a new election should be called and President George W Bush, said the world was "watching very closely" after Washington called the result into doubt.

Both candidates enjoy genuine support but election observers say that Mr Yanukovich's team used its bureaucratic muscle to rig last Sunday's election in his favour. "The openness and cynicism of the manipulation was unprecedented," said Olexander Chernenko of the Committee of Voters of Ukraine (CVU), an American-funded organisation that has monitored elections for more than a decade.

About 11,000 complaints have been lodged so far with regional courts. Mr Yanukovich has described the protest movement as an attempt at an "anti-constitutional coup"; Mr Yushchenko sees it as the "people's self-defence". But the scale of the indignant response from hundreds of thousands of protesters who swept onto the streets - and the extent of the election fraud - are a reflection of larger forces at work.

The state of almost 50 million people, crunched between East and West, was once Kievan Rus - the proto-state that gave birth to the Russian nation. Many in Moscow still think of the country as a southern province.

In recent years, a resurgent Russia under President Vladimir Putin has sought to reassert control over Kiev. Ukraine is an important pipeline route for Russian oil and gas, and a friendly regime will not impose high transit fees. The country's Black Sea port of Sevastopol is also home to Russia's southern naval fleet, offering easy access to the Mediterranean. Moscow is pushing for the creation of a "joint economic space" in Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia and Ukraine - a project that Mr Yushchenko has said would dilute the country's sovereignty.

Mr Yanukovich, who has a criminal record and links to shady business magnates, is backed by Mr Putin, and draws his support from Russian-dominated eastern Ukraine.

However, Western countries such as Britain and the United States support Mr Yushchenko - who promises a turn towards Europe and pursuit of Nato membership. His supporters have been wooed with millions of dollars from the United States. In turn, Mr Putin did what he could to support his preferred candidate. Immediately before the election, he made two high-profile visits to Kiev to meet Mr Yanukovich and the Ukraine's President, Leonid Kuchma. Russian advisers, including a leading Moscow spin doctor, Gleb Pavlovsky, were said to be in effect running the prime minister's campaign.

Despite talk of an East-West showdown, many Ukrainians protesting about the election result say that Mr Yanukovich's criminal background is unacceptable, not his bias towards Russia. The prime minister was twice convicted for robbery and battery in his youth and is seen as the protege of a group of business oligarchs known as "the Donetsk fellas" from the eastern region where he was once governor. "How could they dare try to impose such a bandit on us?" asked Yuri, who was ferrying protesters to Kiev's Independence Square yesterday in a car festooned with orange streamers. "We will never accept it."

http://telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh...l&sSheet=/portal/2004/11/28/ixportal.html

Traducerea in l.rusa
http://www.inopresa.ru/sundaytimes/2004/11/29/13:28:17/ukraina
 
EURASIA DAILY MONITOR
Volume 1 Issue 135 (November 29, 2004)

VIKTOR YANUKOVYCH LOSES CONTROL IN KYIV, RETREATS TO DONETSK
By Taras Kuzio

Extras:

As the political standoff continues in Ukraine, the only conclusion that can now possibly be made is that the pro-presidential camp never sought to hold free and fair elections in the first place. Both rounds one (October 31) and two (November 21) of the presidential elections were condemned by international organizations, Western governments, and Ukrainian domestic observers.

Plans for organized mass election fraud have been confirmed on tapes made by the Security Service (SBU) in Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych's campaign headquarters and subsequently leaked to challenger Viktor Yushchenko. (The Russian-language tapes can be heard at maidan.uar.net/audio and pravda.com.ua has published three excerpts.) Just as President Leonid Kuchma was implicated in Kuchmagate, now a "Yanukovychgate" is taking shape.

http://www.jamestown.org/publications_details.php?volume_id=401&&issue_id=3154
 
Surid cind aud de Cucimagate. Cind stii cine statea in spatele acestui Cucimagate si in ce tara s-a aciuat (chiar ghiciti, unde ?) unul dintre protagonistii Cucimagate-ului, maiorul Melnicenco, atunci chestia cu Ianucovicigate pute de la o posta a tertip grosolan zamislit tot acolo unde se afla azi Melnicenco.

Chiar m-am distrat.

Ceea ce merita analiza este nu aberatia din Eurasia Daily Monitor ci demisia de azi a lui Teghipco, seful bancii nationale a Ucrainei si unul dintre cei mai influenti sustinatori ai lui Ianucovici. Tipul deci isi da astazi demisia si declara ca ii intelege, ba chiar ii sustine (!) pe oamenii care stau de citeva zilele in piata centrala a Kievului cerind revizuirea rezultatelor... M-am gindit, cu mintea mea intortocheata, ca treaba poate fi o manevra din partea clanului Ianucovici. Caci daca ambele tabere accepta alegeri noi, acest Teghipco poate fi propulsat drept candidat in locul lui Ianucovici, capitalizind astfel atit voturile din est cit si o parte a celor din vest care vor cadea in capcana... N-ar fi o miscare neinteligenta, dar trebuie sa recunoastem ca e cam riscata.

Urmarim cu atentie desfasurarea evenimentelor.
 
Doua ziare britanice afirma ca in spatele "revolutiei" de la Kiev stau Departamentul de Stat al SUA si G. Soros :

"People power? Or George power?"
http://www.newstatesman.com/site.php3?newTemplate=NSArticle_World&newDisplayURN=200411290007
Traducere in rusa pe : http://inosmi.ru/stories/01/06/22/3006/215152.html

"The revolution televised
The western media's view of Ukraine's election is hopelessly biased"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1360811,00.html

traducere in rusa pe : http://inosmi.ru/stories/01/06/22/3006/215125.html
 
Mircea, ti-am citit mesajele la aceasta tema. La prima vedere, s-ar putea zice ca vrei sa aplici dictonul "audiatur et altera pars", ca vrei sa fii obiectiv. Numai ca eu ma intreb si te intreb cum de nu te-a revoltat atitudinea Rusiei in toata povestea asta, cu cele doua vizite ale lui Putin, inaintea celor doua tururi de scrutin, cu sprijinul fatis (inclusiv logistic si - se pare - chiar financiar) pentru Ianucovici s.a.
 
Sfinx said:
La prima vedere, s-ar putea zice ca vrei sa aplici dictonul "audiatur et altera pars", ca vrei sa fii obiectiv.

Chiar obiectiv-obiectiv nimeni nu poate fi, dar e adevarat ca incerc sa tin cont si de acele pareri care sint potrivnice mainstream-ului. :wink: Un reflex de avocat poate.
 
MirK said:
Sfinx said:
La prima vedere, s-ar putea zice ca vrei sa aplici dictonul "audiatur et altera pars", ca vrei sa fii obiectiv.

Chiar obiectiv-obiectiv nimeni nu poate fi, dar e adevarat ca incerc sa tin cont si de acele pareri care sint potrivnice mainstream-ului. :wink: Un reflex de avocat poate.
Un avocat al lui Stalin si Mugabe. Cu alte cuvinte un "useful idiot".
 
Redneck esti demn de mila : o stiu eu, o stiu forumistii, o stie toata lumea. Asadar, nu inteleg de ce continui sa te bagi in seama. Ai realizat probabil ca nu catadicsesc sa-ti raspund decit cind mila mea fata de jalnica ta persoana da peste margini.
 
MirK said:
Redneck esti demn de mila : o stiu eu, o stiu forumistii, o stie toata lumea. Asadar, nu inteleg de ce continui sa te bagi in seama. Ai realizat probabil ca nu catadicsesc sa-ti raspund decit cind mila mea fata de jalnica ta persoana da peste margini.
Mircea Kaag, lasa vrajeala! Ai facut apologie genocidului stalinist din Cecenia, ai facut apologie lui Mugabe iar acum o faci pe avocatul lui Yanucovici, acest pupincurist al Moscovei.
 
MirK said:
Ceea ce merita analiza este nu aberatia din Eurasia Daily Monitor ci demisia de azi a lui Teghipco, seful bancii nationale a Ucrainei si unul dintre cei mai influenti sustinatori ai lui Ianucovici. Tipul deci isi da astazi demisia si declara ca ii intelege, ba chiar ii sustine (!) pe oamenii care stau de citeva zilele in piata centrala a Kievului cerind revizuirea rezultatelor... M-am gindit, cu mintea mea intortocheata, ca treaba poate fi o manevra din partea clanului Ianucovici. Caci daca ambele tabere accepta alegeri noi, acest Teghipco poate fi propulsat drept candidat in locul lui Ianucovici, capitalizind astfel atit voturile din est cit si o parte a celor din vest care vor cadea in capcana... N-ar fi o miscare neinteligenta, dar trebuie sa recunoastem ca e cam riscata.

Urmarim cu atentie desfasurarea evenimentelor.

Iata ca mintea mea intortocheata a vazut just. Astazi Teghipco a anuntat ca isi va prezenta candidatura la presedintie daca se organizeaza noi alegeri. Sa retinem acest nume, Teghipco.
 
Re: Mircea kaag induce in eroare

redneck said:
MirK said:
The British Helsinki Human Rights Group (BHHRG) considera ca partizanii lui Iuscenco au comis un numar important de iregularitati in timpul alegerilor :

http://zadonbass.org/news/message.html?id=6541

Cine sunt BHHRG? Un grup obscur, care nu are nici in clin, nici in maneca cu Comitetul Helsinki pentru Drepturile Omului, si care a declarat alegerile din Belarus drept libere si corecte. Cu alte cuvinte niste idioti utili ai dictatorilor Lukashenko si Milosevici.

Acest BHHRG a susţinut că şi alegerile în Tiraspol au fost libere şi democratice ;-)
http://www.olvia.idknet.com/BRITISH.html
 
Re: Mircea kaag induce in eroare

Vasile said:
redneck said:
MirK said:
The British Helsinki Human Rights Group (BHHRG) considera ca partizanii lui Iuscenco au comis un numar important de iregularitati in timpul alegerilor :

http://zadonbass.org/news/message.html?id=6541

Cine sunt BHHRG? Un grup obscur, care nu are nici in clin, nici in maneca cu Comitetul Helsinki pentru Drepturile Omului, si care a declarat alegerile din Belarus drept libere si corecte. Cu alte cuvinte niste idioti utili ai dictatorilor Lukashenko si Milosevici.

Acest BHHRG a susţinut că şi alegerile în Tiraspol au fost libere şi democratice ;-)
http://www.olvia.idknet.com/BRITISH.html

Mie mi s-a parut suspect link-ul furnizat de Mircea Kaag : o organizatie cu sediul in fieful lui Ianucovici, Donbas, regiune rusofona ce ar putea deveni, la o adica, "Transnistria" Ucrainei.
 
Idiotii utili ai lui Yanukovych

The Washington Post

The Freedom Haters

By Anne Applebaum
Wednesday, December 1, 2004; Page A25

Just in case anyone actually thought that all of those people waving flags on the streets of Kiev represent authentic Ukrainian sentiments, the London Guardian informed its readers otherwise last week. In an article titled "US campaign behind the turmoil in Kiev," the newspaper described the events of the past 10 days as "an American creation, a sophisticated and brilliantly conceived exercise in western branding and mass marketing." In a separate article, the same paper described the whole episode as a "postmodern coup d'etat" and a "CIA-sponsored third world uprising of cold war days, adapted to post-Soviet conditions."

Neither author was a fringe journalist, and the Guardian is not a fringe newspaper. Nor have their views been ignored: In the international echo chamber that the Internet has become, these ideas have resonance. Both articles were liberally quoted, for example, in a Web log written by the editor of the Nation, who, while writing that she admired "citizens fighting corrupt regimes," just as in the United States, she also noted darkly that the wife of the Ukrainian opposition leader, a U.S. citizen of Ukrainian descent, "worked in the Reagan White House."

Versions of this argument -- that pro-democracy movements are in fact insidious neocon plots designed to spread American military influence -- have been around for some time. Sometimes they cite George Soros -- in this context, a right-wing capitalist -- as the source of the funding and "slick marketing." Sometimes they cite the evil triumvirate of the National Democratic Institute, the International Republican Institute and Freedom House, all organizations that have indeed been diligently training judges, helping election monitors and funding human rights groups around the world for decades, much of the time without getting much attention for it.

They seem a little odd in the Ukrainian context, given that President Bush has bent over backward to sound conciliatory and anything but anti-Russian (in notable contrast to his blunter but soon-to-be-retired secretary of state, Colin Powell). In fact, the United States has historically backed "stability" in Ukraine, which is another way of saying Russian influence. The current president's father once made a speech in Kiev calling on Ukraine to remain in the Soviet Union, mere weeks before the Soviet Union disintegrated. Nevertheless, these ideas have traction. Last weekend an Irish radio journalist angrily asked me why the United States is so keen to expand NATO into Ukraine: Didn't Russia have a right to be frightened? Yesterday a colleague forwarded to me an e-mail from a Dutch writer condemning the campaign that the "CIA and other U.S. secret services" have conducted across the former U.S.S.R.

This phenomenon is interesting on a number of accounts. The first is that it rather dramatically overrates the influence that American money, or American "democracy-promoters," can have in a place such as Ukraine. After all, about the same, relatively small amount of U.S. money has been spent on promoting democracy in Belarus, to no great effect. More to the point, rather larger amounts of money were spent in Ukraine by Russia, whose president visited the country twice to campaign for "his" candidate. If the ideas that Americans and Europeans promoted had greater traction in Ukraine than those of President Putin, that says more about Ukraine than about the United States. To believe otherwise is, if you think about it, deeply offensive to Ukrainians.

The larger point, though, is that the "it's-all-an-American-plot" arguments circulating in cyberspace again demonstrate something that the writer Christopher Hitchens, himself a former Trotskyite, has been talking about for a long time: At least a part of the Western left -- or rather the Western far left -- is now so anti-American, or so anti-Bush, that it actually prefers authoritarian or totalitarian leaders to any government that would be friendly to the United States. Many of the same people who found it hard to say anything bad about Saddam Hussein find it equally difficult to say anything nice about pro-democracy demonstrators in Ukraine. Many of the same people who would refuse to condemn a dictator who is anti-American cannot bring themselves to admire democrats who admire, or at least don't hate, the United States. I certainly don't believe, as President Bush sometimes simplistically says, that everyone who disagrees with American policies in Iraq or elsewhere "hates freedom." That's why it's so shocking to discover that some of them do.

Traducerea in l.rusa
http://www.inopresa.ru/wp/2004/12/01/14:01:11/ukraina
 
Ukraine's parliament has voted to fire the government of Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, who was recently declared the country's new president by the electoral commission.

CNN.com
 
Foarte interesant : azi Cucima s-a pronuntat in favoarea repetarii alegerilor insa fara cei doi candidati, adica fara Iuscenco si Ianucovici. Pesemne ca "planul Teghipco" a gasit priza si in anturajul lui Cucima. Miscarea e buna, cum am zis, dar riscata. In cazul in care solutia lui Cucima este acceptata de ambele tabere, este probabil ca prezenta la vot in regiunile estice ale Ucrainei, care l-au sustinut pe Ianucovici, va bate toate recordurile. Si tinind cont de faptul ca estul Ucrainei este mai dens populat decit vestul tarii, ne putem astepta la victoria pro-rusilor, de data asta insa fara acuze de falsificarea voturilor. In afar de asta, daca Teghipco ia locul lui Ianucovici o parte din voturile vestice risca sa se duca pentru candidatura primului.

Problema e insa ca ieri opozitia a anuntat ca intrerupe negocierile cu echipa lui Ianucovici si puterea, cerind recunoasterea victoriei lui Iuscenco, desi Ianucovici a declarat ieri ca e gata pentru repetarea alegerilor. Este asadar clar ca opozitia nu este gata pentru un alt tur de scrutin, dindu-si probabil seama ca-l va pierde. Unica solutie pentru opozitie este acum sa radicalizeze protestele, or nu este sigur ca populatia va merge in acest sens.

Urmarim atent evenimentele.
 
Chestionarul e cam stupid. Cum poti propune printre optiuni de raspuns : Kremlinul si Cucima ? Cum poate Cucima cistiga alegerile ? Cucima a fost candidat in cadrul acestor alegeri ?

Apoi, daca toata te minca intr-un loc sa implici Kremlinul, de ce n-ai bagat si Washingtonul ?
 
Te credeam mai inteligent. Alegerile pot fi castigate si indirect.

Am bagat Kremlinul si n-am bagat Washingtonul pentru ca primul sustine deschis si chiar impune un candidat pe cand participarea Washingtonului ramane de demonstrat.


P.S. Ai prima avertizare pentru "te mananca intr-un loc".
 
Back
Top