quote:

---

Ukraine has a new coalition, formed amid chaotic scenes in the parliament.

It is made up of the pro-Russian group, the Socialists and the Communists, and has nominated Viktor Yanukovych to be prime minister.

The pro-Russian politician is the arch-rival of President Viktor Yushchenko, who was leader of the 2004 Orange Revolution.

Ukraine has been without a government for more than three months because no party won a majority in the March poll.

---

quote:

---

That's a fine statement Unionist, except for the fact that Moroz (who happens to be one of a very select few of non-corrupt Ukrainian politicians) was a supporter of the Orange revolution. The pro-Russian party of Yanukovych is pretty well the same gang of thugs who ran things under Kuchma, which will mean increasing deference to Russia.
What Ukraine needs is integration into the greater European community, not more domination from the Oligarchs who have ran the show for the past 10 years.

---

Oligarchs run majority of former Soviet republics to some degree. But the West normally turns a blind eye anyways.
These Kuchma's gang of oligarchs happened to cross American neo-liberal designs in the region - an unwise move, since Georgian President Shevardnadze was ousted in a coup for the same reason.(in early 2004)
Regardless, the issue was US (and EU) interference into Ukrainian politics and their attempt (to quote unionist) to "colonize" the country. A few months back, a Canadian diplomat admitted in an interview that the West was prepared from the start for any disturbances and was ready to support Yuschenko, no matter what happens. he also admits that Western governments thought Kuchma would send in tanks to crush the protests - something that is consistent with Western stereotype of Eastern countries as "banana republics".
As was seen, the protests of disaffected Ukrainians grew, and yet the government did nothing. Intrusive EU observers demanded a 3rd round of elections(has anyone else ever done it?).

quote:

---

Originally posted by non sequitur:
That's a fine statement Unionist, except for the fact that Moroz (who happens to be one of a very select few of non-corrupt Ukrainian politicians) was a supporter of the Orange revolution.

---

I think you are confusing me with someone else. I made no statement at all. I quoted a BBC report on an apparent change of government in Ukraine that the Canadian media don't appear to be interested in (they were very very interested 1.5 years ago), and asked a question as to what this meant for the "orange revolution".

Is that why they call you "non sequitur"?

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Well spoken, Gregori. Duzhe dobre!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gregori:

i feel weired being complimented by the unionist. thanks.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:

As for what would be good for the Ukrainian people, I do believe the best judge of that would be the Ukrainian people. They appear to have spoken.

---

Apologies for the confusion Unionist, I read through the thread too quickly.

Well, seeing as how the new government is not the result of a distinct electoral result, but rather backroom dealing, I fail to see how the Ukrainian people have spoken.

quote:

---

Ukraine's political landscape shifted radically on Friday after President Viktor Yushchenko's party said it would join a coalition with its archrival, the pro-Russian Party of the Regions led by Viktor Yanukovich, who could make a comeback as prime minister.

In an extraordinary shift in fortunes for Yanukovich, who lost to Yushchenko during a presidential run-off in January 2005, any coalition would include Our Ukraine, one of two parties that spearheaded the 2004 Orange Revolution.

The Socialist party, which opposes economic reforms and Ukraine's joining NATO, will also join the coalition. But Yushchenko has insisted that the Communists, who are part of an earlier coalition agreement, must be excluded. Yanukovich has until Tuesday to decide whether he will meet Yushchenko's demands.

The participation of the Socialists in the new government could derail U.S. attempts to invite Ukraine to start negotiations for joining the alliance at the NATO meeting in Riga in November.

The "anti-crisis" coalition - the third attempt at forming a different coalition nearly four months since the parliamentary elections - was brokered after marathon talks on Thursday and Friday. The Party of the Regions had won the most seats during the March election but not enough to establish a stable government.

The latest coalition, however, will not include the other leader of the so-called Orange Revolution, Yulia Tymoshenko.

---

Party of Regions 186
Our Ukraine 81
Socialist Party of Ukraine (SPU) 33
total 300

Ukraine's post-modern coup d'état

quote:

---

In Ukraine, Yushchenko got the western nod, and floods of money poured in to groups which support him, ranging from the youth organisation, Pora, to various opposition websites. More provocatively, the US and other western embassies paid for exit polls, prompting Russia to do likewise, though apparently to a lesser extent.

The US's own election this month showed how wrong exit polls can be. But they provide a powerful mobilising effect, making it easier to persuade people to mount civil disobedience or seize public buildings on the grounds the election must have been stolen if the official results diverge.

Intervening in foreign elections, under the guise of an impartial interest in helping civil society, has become the run-up to the postmodern coup d'etat, the CIA-sponsored third world uprising of cold war days adapted to post-Soviet conditions. Instruments of democracy are used selectively to topple unpopular dictators, once a successor candidate or regime has been groomed.

---

The so-called orange parties (Our Ukraine, Bloc Tyomshenko, and the Socialist Party) can't form a coalition due to personality clashes between Yushchenko and Tyomshenko.

So they try a coalition of pro-West Eurosocialists, "ex"-Stalinists, and pro-Russia oligarchs (all three have traditionally been bitter enemies in post-Soviet Eastern Europe...Stalinists nowadays tend to enjoy working with the fascist right and religious extremists to suppress the rights of gays and other minorities...Oh wait. Stalinists have always done that...Remember Mao and Ceaucescu -- among the world's most puritanical leaders -- becoming American lapdogs for a while?)...And that fails.

So now we see an attempted coalition by pro-Russia oligarchs, pro-West oligarchs, and pro-West Eurosocialists even though the former two blocs are lead by two men who ran against each other in an extremely bitter 2004 election that included mass fraud and intervention by just about every fucking superpower in the world.

What's next? Will I make up tomorrow and read about Lopez Obrador and Felipe Calderon passing around a doob and singing Kumbaya? Will the North Korea send troops to Iraq on Washington's behalf? Will Winston Churchill rise up for the grave and apologise to Iran for that little coup against Mohammed Mossadegh?

This is out of whack, and makes me wonder if the economic, political, and religious superpowers of this world are starting to play their fucking shellgames again. Oh..And will my heavy use of caffeine continue driving me mad?

[ 15 July 2006: Message edited by: Heavy Sharper ]

I gotta hit those history texts again...

[ETA: I was gonna ask what you're smoking, but I guess that's a dumb question.]

[ 15 July 2006: Message edited by: unionist ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Heavy Sharper:
Mao spent years on the American side of the Cold War due to the Sino-Soviet split.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Heavy Sharper:
Mao spent years on the American side of the Cold War due to the Sino-Soviet split.

---

I'm just really struggling with this statement. Help me out here, someone. Were we living on different planets during the Cold War? Was there some secret alliance between the U.S. and China that we all missed? Wasn't Kissinger's secret visit in 1971 -- 5 years before Mao died?

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:

I'm just really struggling with this statement. Help me out here, someone. Were we living on different planets during the Cold War? Was there some secret alliance between the U.S. and China that we all missed? Wasn't Kissinger's secret visit in 1971 -- 5 years before Mao died?

Don't feel obliged to answer these questions. I really did start this thread to see what people thought about where the Ukraine was headed. Perhaps the Great Ukrainian Colourful Revolution?

---

Argh, as Swirrlygrrl has pointed out on numerous occasions, it's "Ukraine", not "the" Ukraine. People don't talk about the Uganda or the Canada. A million plus Ukrainian-Canadians are very defensive about this...

On a serious note, I think people on this thread are making two very critical errors. First, they are focusing solely on the role the US had in the Orange revolution, whilst neglecting the mass appeal that the movement had, in particular amongst young people.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
I think that some people fully believed Ukraine was going to make a full split from Russia, join the west and start worshiping invisible hands. That's not going to happen soon. Ukraine still receives natural gas from Russia at market prices that are still better than what American companies give Canadians for our own gas. Russia and Ukraine, Slavic cousins, have more in common than they would with the far west. Do svidanya, Viktor.

---

Some would argue that Ukraine receives natural gas from Russia at market prices when it carries out pro-Russian policies and favours Russian oligarchs in business deals. The recent threats by Gazprom to jack up prices are indicative of this pattern.