LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (11/05/06)

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Kuzio responds to Karatnycky

Dear Editor:

Adrian Karatnycky's letter (October 15) raised important points that could have been made without the implied threats and personal attacks. My record is absolutely impeccable regarding the use of sources and people entrusting me with information "off the record" or on the record. The conversation in the Baraban bar was in the presence of Roman Olearchyk, the Ukrainian American Financial Times correspondent in Kyiv, which surely makes him a "Western" journalist.

I have just returned from a three-week visit to Ukraine for the U.S. government during which I met many senior Ukrainian and U.S. officials. I will fully respect their privacy as always. The single case that Mr. Karatnycky is referring to is rather different and I, therefore, made a conscious decision to bring to the public domain ties between him and oligarch Rynat Akhmetov, president of Systems Capital Management and a leading financier of the Party of the Regions.

Mr. Karatnycky has never hidden his ties to Mr. Akhmetov. Only two days after President Viktor Yushchenko was elected Mr. Karatnycky traveled to Donetsk to interview Mr. Akhmetov. The interview led to a flattering article about Mr. Akhmetov in the Wall Street Journal on January 14, 2005, titled "A Ukrainian Magnate Tries to Mend Fences." This relationship has continued as Mr. Karatnycky admitted in his letter when referring to the energy conference in Houston. Donbass Fuel-Energy Co., the major energy company within Mr. Akhmetov's System Capital Management, is listed as a "supporter" of the Orange Circle (http://www.orangecircle.org/donors.html).

Let's put the decision to do this interview and write the op-ed into context. At the same time when Ukrainians in Ukraine and in the Ukrainian diaspora believed in the Orange Revolution slogan of "bandits to prison," Mr. Karatnycky was seeking to ingratiate himself with Ukraine's wealthiest oligarch. During Mr. Karatnycky's talks in the U.S. and Canada in 2005-2006 he has claimed that there was "no proof" for accusations made against Mr. Akhmetov for his murderous rise to power to become head of the Donetsk clan. During an April 10 panel on the March elections held in Washington and organized by The Washington Group, Mr. Karatnycky dismissed the lack of criminal investigations against "bandits" by stating that there had also been no charges made against those who had committed Soviet crimes. During Our Ukraine's October 21 congress in Kyiv, delegates were given copies of a recently published book titled "Donetskaya Mafiya." Mr. Akhmetov is a prominent character in the book.

During my visit to Ukraine I asked many senior politicians, lawyers and policy-makers whether they believed the Party of the Regions, which is partly financed by Mr. Akhmetov, could evolve into a post-oligarch and post-Kuchma party. I did not receive a single positive answer.

Why would the Orange Circle, through its president, choose to have any association with an oligarch group headed by Mr. Akhmetov which has one of the worst reputations in Ukraine? But, perhaps more importantly, why has the Orange Circle received financial support from Akhmetov - but not from any Our Ukraine businesses?

There would seem to be a conflict of interest between the Orange Circle and Mr. Akhmetov's Systems Capital Management that should be subjected to greater transparency. I would welcome a public debate with Mr. Karatnycky on these issues.

Taras Kuzio, Ph.D.
Washington

9/11 and beyond: a look at U.S. policy

Dear Editor:

Your editorial about 9/11 was somewhat similar to the ritualistic official line toed by mainstream media. However, there is substance in the comment about President George W. Bush's political detour in his 9/11 speech, where he tried "to make the case" for his miscalculated neo-colonial war in Iraq.

A tragedy is a tragedy; in a hostile give-and-take it usually strikes the innocent. It did so recently in Lebanon, Afghanistan and Iraq, as it did throughout history. 9/11 was no exception. It "changed the world" only because this time the U.S. was on the receiving end.

The 9/11 outrage evoked sympathy and condolences throughout the world. Tactfully, no one rubbed it in that Americans got a taste of what the U.S. has been dishing out to some Third World countries during the last 50 years in terms of both the destruction of infrastructure and human "collateral" casualties.

Media commentaries on 9/11 are mostly cliches, dwelling on drama and avoiding any reference to the failures of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East that had plenty to do with 9/11. (American military bases would not be located near the Persian Gulf in the last several decades if the main export from that region were cabbage and tomatoes instead of oil.)

Commenting on the media presentation of terrorism as the central issue in 9/11, Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security adviser to former President Jimmy Carter, wrote in The New York Times on September 1: "It is as if terrorism is suspended in the outer space as an abstract phenomenon, unrelated to any specific motivation. Missing is the discussion of the simple fact that lurking behind every terrorist act is a specific political antecedent."

With its attention focused on "the war on terror," the country was waving flags while President Bush exploited the occasion to promote the partisan far-right Republican political agenda. Given a blank check by the rubber-stamp Congress, he cut taxes for billionaires and launched two wars financed by credit card.

Fear-mongering became the centerpiece of the 2004 Republican re-election strategy - and still is for the coming Congressional election. "Terrorism is a horse which we can ride through the election," lectured Karl Rove, the president's chief strategist, at the Republican National Committee meeting in Texas during the summer of 2002.

This time the horse may be freaked out by the hefty price of gas and heating oil, which doubled and tripled since Mr. Bush took office. The miscalculation of the White House and the neocons is illustrated by a misfired prediction from Rupert Murdoch, Fox channel tycoon, in February 2003: "The greatest thing to come out of invading Iraq will be $20 a barrel for oil."

Rattled by bad news from the Middle East and the sinking poll numbers at home, the president is now compelled to escalate the rhetoric. In tune with Connecticut's Sen. Joe Lieberman and some out-to-lunch talk-show hosts, he is now battling not only the terrorists but also "the Islamic fascists."

Boris Danik
North Caldwell, N.J.

Thanks for covering Famine-Genocide

Dear Editor:

Congratulations on The Ukrainian Weekly's 73rd anniversary. I am deeply touched by the fact that your first 1933 issue was "born of the need of the times," during which the Famine was raging in Ukraine.

At that time, four of my brothers and sisters were dying of starvation in the village of Kilochky, near Poltava, while my mother was serving a five-year term for "stealing" four ears of corn. Although I am a child of my parents' second, post-Famine family, the mere mention of Famine or the year 1933 deepens the open wound in my soul.

I am eternally grateful to your publication for alerting the world to the Soviet Genocide of the Ukrainian nation.

Halyna
Hrushetska Westchester, Ill.

We welcome your opinion

The Ukrainian Weekly welcomes letters to the editor and commentaries on a variety of topics of concern to the Ukrainian American and Ukrainian Canadian communities. Opinions expressed by columnists, commentators and letter-writers are their own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of either The Weekly editorial staff or its publisher, the Ukrainian National Association.

Letters should be typed and signed (anonymous letters are not published). Letters are accepted also via e-mail at staff@ukrweekly.com. The daytime phone number and address of the letter-writer must be given for verification purposes. Please note that a daytime phone number is essential in order for editors to contact letter-writers regarding clarifications or questions.

Please note: THE LENGTH OF LETTERS CANNOT EXCEED 500 WORDS.

| Home Page |