LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (02/18/01)

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Ukrainian language and statehood

Dear Editor:

I read with great interest Taras Kuzio's article on language poll results in Ukraine (January 28). The poll concludes that there is no organized Russophone effort in Ukraine, and that although 53 percent of Kyivites use Russian, half of these also believe "that the Ukrainian language is an attribute of Ukrainian statehood." Only 43 percent of Russophones in Kyiv agree with elevating Russian as second state language.

My perspective comes from dealing with the military, which I think is a close cross-section of the general population. From 1993 to 1997 there was an active effort to use Ukrainian in all areas of the Ukrainian military. Gen. Kostiantyn Morozov initiated these efforts. Beginning in 1997 we could see a reversal in the use of Ukrainian. At a recent medical conference the program was written in Ukrainian, the presentations were primarily in Russian. Exceptions included several researchers from Lviv and our American contingent. The use of Russian was excused as just being easier. Right! During another mission, the same general who greeted us the previous year opened the visit in Russian. Why? Well, you know, "we were trained in Russian and there is not much written in Ukrainian."

From the poll, one would think that the Russophones or the Russophiles are ambivalent about whether they use Russian or Ukrainian. Participating in eight missions, I could see the shift to Russian. These Russophiles, or even Russian chauvinists, were very concerned that Russian dominate in every sphere. One physician told us "Ukrainian is a domestic language not worthy to be used in international circles."

For Peace Shield missions in 1995 and 1996 there appeared to be little participation of Russians in the Ukrainian/American organized training events. The journalists from Russia attending the training exercises were near hysteria after learning how closely the Ukrainians and Americans have been working.

This is not to say that Ukrainian is not used at all. On the contrary, recent visits by U.S. military have indicated that Ukrainian is used and may even be on the upswing. Only time will tell.

In the final analysis, I conclude that the more Russia loses control of Ukraine the more Ukrainian is incorporated into all aspects of life. Russia also can feel Ukraine slipping away every time the U.S. military visits Ukraine and keeps reminding Ukrainians about freedom, independence and democracy.

Roman G. Golash
Palatine, Ill.

Some explanations needed from KUN

Dear Editor:

As a keen follower of Ukrainian military affairs I have written extensively on paramilitaries in Ukraine. Therefore, I was surprised to read of the arrival in the last week of paramilitaries in Kyiv claiming to be members of the "Sports-Patriotic Group Tryzub." There are three Ukrainian (in contrast to Russian or Soviet) paramilitary formations in Ukraine: Ukrainian National Self-Defense Forces (UNSO), linked to the Ukrainian National Assembly; Varta, linked to the State Independence of Ukraine (DSU) party; and the 'S.Bandera Sports-Patriotic Association Tryzub, linked to the Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists (KUN), the overt political party of OUN(B).

Both UNSO-UNA and Varta-DSU have supported the anti-Kuchma movement since the explosion of Kuchmagate in late November of last year. In contrast, KUN (together with its allies in its election bloc - Reforms and Order and Rukh-Udovenko) has adopted a low profile and has neither joined the anti-Kuchma forces or the new Pravytsia, a center-right anti-Kuchma bloc. The refusal by Rukh-Udovenko to oppose President Kuchma, even though he has been accused of being behind the alleged assassination of its former leader, Vyacheslav Chornovil, led to the resignation this week of Taras Chornovil from the Rukh faction in the Verkhovna Rada.

The paramilitary group in Kyiv claims to be Tryzub, i.e., affiliated with KUN-OUN(B) and has distributed leaflets in support of Mr. Kuchma, accusing the anti-Kuchma protesters of being linked to the "anti-state left." Their accusation that the Communists are behind the anti-Kuchma movement are unfounded; in reality, they have sat on the fence and voted against the Rada vote of no confidence in the procurator general on January 10. Oleksander Moroz, who is one of the leaders of anti-Kuchma movement, is more of a "derzhavnyk" and democrat than Mr. Kuchma, and is certainly not corrupt.

Coming from the United Kingdom, an OUN(B), but, by no means pro-Kuchma, stronghold, I am sure I am not the only one who would be very interested to hear from diaspora organizations linked to OUN(B) the answers to three important questions. Firstly, are these paramilitaries in Kyiv from their Tryzub formation? If not, have they protested through KUN at the provocation of others masquerading as members of Tryzub? Secondly, if they are members of Tryzub, why is KUN (and therefore OUN(B) in league with President Kuchma, somebody who has been accused of involvement in the murder of a journalist (Heorhii Gongadze) and Rukh leader Chornovil and under whom Russification is continuing in Ukraine and the country is being returned under Russia's sphere of influence? Finally, why are KUN and its two political allies unwilling to join the Pravytsia anti-Kuchma center-right bloc?

Dr. Taras Kuzio
Toronto

The writer is affiliated with the Center for International and Security Studies at York University.

Thanks for article about Lithuania

Dear Editor:

I am writing in response to the article titled "Ten years ago in Lithuania: shots heard around the world" by Paul Goble of RFE/RL Newsline (January 21). I would like to thank you for recognizing an important and memorable day in Lithuanian history in your Ukrainian newspaper. The article explained the significance of this day very accurately, and the article was very well written.

Karolina Lieponis
Orland Park, Ill.

The Ukrainian Weekly welcomes letters to the editor. Letters should be typed (double-spaced) and signed; they must be originals, not photocopies.

The daytime phone number and address of the letter-writer must be given for verification purposes.

| Home Page |