Nick's Manifesto

Shit, I need an editor. There is a really interesting article over at the Guardian today. It tells the story of how the US and some NGO’s are ‘controlling’ democratic revolutions in a number of Post-communist countries. It’s the first real negative opinion of Ukraine’s revolution that I’ve found, and it leaves me with some conflicting feelings. First: a little bit of background. Part of the argument in Ukraine is between a Western-leaning Vladimir Yuschenko and Moscow-toadie Vladimir Yanukovitch (sorry for the editorial, can’t help it). So what if Yuschenko worked with NGO’s and the US to inspire a democratic revolution. Who the hell cares? There are MILLIONS of people in the streets. They aren’t thinking of overbearing US foreign policy – they’re thinking of their own self interest, of their country, of their desire to be a free, normal European country. And the argument isn’t just between capitalism v. socialism, or Brussels-Washington v. Moscow. It’s between people who genuinely care about the condition of their country v. self-interested gangsters. Check out this quote about Yuschenko from Scott Clark at Foreignnotes “In a speech yesterday, Yuschenko talked about 150 or so Yanukovych supporters who were standing guard near one of the government buildings in downtown Kiev on Tuesday. They were from the eastern part of the Ukraine. He said they were cold and hungry and that some of his supporters, who had taken up positions near that same building, had given them food, some warm clothes and had tried to make sure they were taken care of. He said that on Wednesday, those Yanukovych supporters were no longer there. And then he said, “I call upon the Prime Minister to send us trainloads of these people. We will feed them, take care of them and they will find out what the truth is.”” Check out this quote about Yanukovych supporters from this blog “You have to understand the situation in Ukraine. The country is run by a series of oligarchic clans that actually found their beginnings in the Soviet Union, and then grew fabulously rich during the early days of "privatization". Compare the situation to Russia, where an authoritarian Putin faced off against corrupt oligarchs. In Ukraine, authoritarianism and oligarchy are fused. Yanukovych isn't just another unscrupulous candidate, he's the main man of Akhmetov -- the duke of Donetsk and the richest man in Ukraine. The current president, Kuchma, is the head of a different clan, Dnepropetrovsk. The presidential administrator is Medvedchuk, who happens to run the Kiev-based Medvedchuk-Surkis clan. He also owns the two biggest Ukrainian TV stations, which is awfully convenient." It's gangsters v. people who actually care about their country. Even if you hate Bush you can't deny that the man deeply cares about the success of the American republic. Another argument is that they don't want American firms buying up all the assets. Yet look at what the last government did: "A good example of the clan system in action was the recent privatization of the Kryvorizhstal factory. Western firms offered 2.1 billion dollars. It was sold to the presidents son-in-law for 800 million. His son-in-law is Pinchuk, the head of the Pinchuk-Derkach clan. " - Le Sabot Post-Moderne But these countries need Americans to purchase these firms. Russian/Ukranian managers don't have experience. You don't want to re-invent the wheel - let Americans come in and create successful enterprises. Their experience will rub off- just look at any other country in the Globalized world. Would you rather have your boss be an efficient foreign firm that pays, on average, 20% more than the local wage? Or a local, but corrupt, son of a regional governor who doesn't care if he runs the firm into the ground? Okay so that's my spiel. My reaction to Ian Traynor's negativity. I believe the people in Kyiv will succeed, and I know that's a good thing.