Lutsenko goes on trial - The Ukrainian Weekly

More documents

Recommendations

Info

6THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, MAY 29, 2011No. 22The Ukrainian WeeklyEnemies of the pressAround May 3, World Press Freedom Day, there were many stories about thestate of the press around the globe. According to Freedom House, which tracksdemocracy and freedom worldwide, press freedom has dropped to its lowest pointin over a decade and only one in six people have access to free and independentmedia. That was the bad news delivered in the report “Freedom of the Press 2011:A Global Survey of Media Independence,” which pointed to “significant declines inpress freedom” over the past year in such countries as Egypt, Hungary, Mexico,Turkey and Ukraine, where press freedom under the administration of PresidentViktor Yanukovych has suffered an alarming drop. True, Ukraine was not in the top10 worst countries in terms of free media (Belarus, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Iran,Myanmar, Cuba, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Libya and North Korea), but Ukraine’spress was rated as only partly free,” putting it in the same category as Serbia,Montenegro, Croatia, Romania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia, Kosovo andMoldova. Previously, the report said, Ukraine had consistently been among the bestperformers in the Central and Eastern European region in terms of media freedom.Likewise, Reporters Without Borders said Ukraine fell from 89th to 131st in itsranking for freedom of expression over the past year. And, in related news, theInstitute of Mass Information and Kyiv Independent Media Trade Union, in itsreport “Enemies of the Press 2010 Edition,” ranked President Yanukovych as theNo. 1 enemy of the press in Ukraine, Prime Minister Mykola Azarov as No. 2 andVolodymyr Storozhenko, head of housing services in Kyiv, as No. 3.In April, Freedom House had released a detailed report on the state of democracyand human rights in Ukraine titled “Sounding the Alarm: Protecting Democracyin Ukraine.” (That’s in addition to the “Freedom in the World” report released inJanuary in which Ukraine was downgraded to party free.) Noting that, over all,“there is no question that President Yanukovych has consolidated power at theexpense of democratic development,” Freedom House underscored that “the trendsare not favorable” as regards press freedom. Most major media outlets in Ukraine,it said, are controlled by politically connected oligarchs and “the relationshipbetween media ownership and political power is clearly more intimate than before.”Since the majority of Ukrainians get their news and information from television,“dominance of the medium by the state and government-friendly oligarchs givesviewers a distorted picture,” Freedom House explained. While there do not appear tobe explicit written instructions à la the “temnyky” of the Kuchma regime, “a cultureof self-censorship is fostered.” Furthermore, Freedom House reported that – contraryto the statements of the Yanukovych administration that there are media which representalternate views – “access is narrower than it used to be.” The report cites informationfrom various media watchdog groups that indicates there were “notablyfewer television appearances by opposition politicians in the early months of thisyear, and that serious commentary on current events is becoming increasingly rare.”In Ukraine’s regions, the status of press freedom is even worse than on thenational level, Freedom House noted. There are numerous instances of conflicts ofinterest, as political authorities control the news media; and journalists are harassed,facing physical threats and attacks. (You can read the full report at http://www.freedomhouse.org/uploads/special_report/98.pdf.)In short, the people of Ukraine suffer from a dearth of free press and reliableinformation. The most credible information may be amassed from trustworthysources online, but less than a fifth of the population – some 17 percent, accordingto the results of a 2009 survey by the International Telecommunication Union – areInternet users. That’s proof yet again that ending Western radio broadcasts toUkraine was a foolish and foolhardy decision.Ukraine needs a truly free press to ensure its democratic development. It isimperative that Ukraine’s independent news media get the support they need toserve Ukraine’s public and to propel the country’s progress.May291953Turning the pages back...Fifty-seven years ago, on May 29-31, 1953, the UkrainianNational Women’s League of America held its 10th conventionsince the organization’s founding in 1925, at theUkrainian Temple, located on Martin Street in Detroit.More than 70 delegates participated in the three-day eventover Memorial Day weekend, presided over by OlenaHordynska of Newark, N.J. Olena Dobush Lototsky of Philadelphia was re-elected aspresident of the organization, which counted more than 5,000 members in 63 branchesthroughout the United States.Approximately 300 guests attended the banquet held on Saturday, May 30, withgreetings delivered by Gov. Mennen. G. Williams and Mary Beck, the first womanever elected as councilmember of the city of Detroit and an original member of theUNWLA, who spoke on behalf of Detroit Mayor Albert E. Coho.Olena Kysilevska, honorary president of the UNWLA and head of the WorldFederation of United Ukrainian Women’s Organizations, greeted the banquet guests.At 83 age, she was seen as the matriarch of Ukrainian women’s organizations.A youth forum was held during the convention on Saturday, May 30, for juniorleague members, headed by Olga Kachner of Detroit. The forum’s theme, “The Futureof the Junior League,” focused on critical self-analysis and re-organization to get moreyoung women involved.A lively discussion followed the forum and a planning commission was appointed,which formulated a two-year agenda calling for closer cooperation with the seniorleague, for membership of each branch in the American Federation of Women’s Clubsat the city and the state levels, and membership in each community’s Ukrainian organizationsas publicity directors for the affairs of the community.Source: “Ukrainian National Women’s League of America holds 10th convention,”The Ukrainian Weekly, June 6, 1953.FOR THE RECORD: FBIreport on Demjanjuk caseFollowing is an excerpt from redactedfield office report of the FBI’s ClevelandField Office, dated March 4, 1985, thatwas recently uncovered by theAssociated Press. The newly declassifiedreport questions the authenticity of theso-called Trawniki ID card purportedlyissued to John Demjanjuk.As noted in the memorandum in supportof the motion to reappoint theOffice of the Federal Public Defender toserve as co-counsel in the Demjanjukcase in the U.S., “The defense had neverseen this report before, even though ithas been in existence presumably forover a quarter century.”The memorandum, written by DennisG. Terez of the Office of the PublicDefender, argues that legal representationis necessary so that “the Office caninvestigate and review the recentlydeclassified materials, confer with Mr.Demjanjuk and pro bono counsel Mr.[Michael E.] Tigar on the results of thatinvestigation, and to take whatever proceduralsteps may be appropriate inlight of these materials to ensure theprotection of Mr. Demjanjuk’s legalrights.”As reported in The Ukrainian Weeklyon May 15, U.S. District Judge DanAaron Polster did appoint a publicdefender for Mr. Demjanjuk, indicatingthat his denaturalization might bereopened in view of the new informationthat a key piece of evidence used againsthim was judged not credible by the FBI.Investigation at Cleveland [blackedout portion] has strongly indicated thefollowing scenario, involving Soviet utilizationof the USDJ Office of SpecialInvestigation (OSI) to effect Soviet purposes.1. Through its spotter service withinthe Soviet émigré community in the“ T h e P e r s e c u t i o n o f J o h nDemjanjuk,” by Patrick J. Buchanan,http://buchanan.org/blog/, May 13:“ ‘John Demjanjuk Guilty of NaziDeath Camp Murders,’ ran the headlineon the BBC. The lede began:“ ‘A German court has found JohnDemjanjuk guilty of helping to murdermore than 28,000 Jews at a Nazi deathcamp in Poland.’“Not until paragraph 17 does one findthis jolting fact: ‘No evidence was producedthat he committed a specificcrime.’“That is correct. No evidence was produced,no witness came forward to testifyhe ever saw Demjanjuk injure anyone.And the critical evidence that putDemjanjuk at Sobibor came – from theKGB.“First was a KGB summary of analleged interview with one IgnatDanilchenko, who claimed he was aguard at Sobibor and knew Demjanjuk.Second was the Soviet-supplied ID cardfrom the Trawniki camp that trainedguards.“There are major problems with bothpieces of ‘evidence.’“First, Danilchenko has been dead fora quarter of a century, no one in the Westever interviewed him, and Moscowstonewalled defense requests for accessto the full Danilchenko file. His veryexistence raises a question.“How could a Red Army soldier whoturned collaborator and Nazi camp guardUnited States, the KGB learns of prominentémigré dissidents speaking out publiclyand/or leading émigré groups inopposition to the Soviet leadership in theUSSR.2. The KGB, in continuation of internalsecurity measures extended into theUnited States, initiates an anonymousletter to USDJ/OSI, accusing the émigrédissident of being a former war criminal,guilty of atrocities during World War II.3. USDJ/OSI initiates an investigationinto background of the accused émigré.Lacking evidence of the allegation’sveracity, USDJ/OSI, thereupon sendsresults of their investigation to KGB/Moscow, requesting review of recordsseized from Nazi Prison Camps in theaftermath of World War II for evidencewhich might substantiate the accusation.4. The KGB then produces a recordpurporting to tie the accused with thecommission of Nazi atrocities, whichrecord may be falsified for the expresspurpose of discrediting the accused.5. The KGB then makes the questionedrecords “available” to USDJ foraction against the accused in immigrationcourt. A KGB officer is dispatchedfrom a Soviet embassy or consulate inthe United States, to “present” the questionedrecords in court, but not to permitits examination by document experts.6. In court, the KGB officer thereupon“shows” the documents to the judge, butdoes not permit the documents to be presentedin evidence or to be otherwisecopied; thus barring United Statesauthorities or the court from examiningthe authenticity of the records.7. The end result is that justice is illservedin the prosecution of an Americancitizen on evidence which is not onlynormally inadmissible [sic], in a court oflaw, but based on evidence and allegationsquite likely fabricated by the KGB.IN THE PRESS: Demjanjuksurvive Operation Keelhaul, which sentall Soviet POWs back to Joseph Stalin,where they were either murdered or sentto the Gulag?“As for the ID card from Trawniki,just last month there was unearthed at theNational Archives in College Park, Md.,a 1985 report from the Cleveland officeof the FBI, which, after studying the card,concluded it was ‘quite likely’ a KGBforgery. …”“In pursuit of justice; U. S. must investigaterevelations of likely forgery inDemjanjuk case,” editorial, BuffaloNews, April 17:“…the legitimacy of 30 years of proceedings[in the case of John Demjanjuk]has been cast into severe doubt based ona 1985 FBI report that has just come tolight. In it, the FBI’s Cleveland officereports the likelihood – not the possibility,but the likelihood – that the key pieceof evidence used against Demjanjuk hadbeen forged by the KGB.“The Associated Press discovered thedocument at the National Archives inCollege Park, Md. None of Demjanjuk’sdefense attorneys was aware of it and neitherwere prosecutors in Germany.“But what about in the United States?Here is what the report concluded:‘Justice is ill-served in the prosecution ofan American citizen on evidence which isnot only normally inadmissible in a court(Continued on page 22)
No. 22THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, MAY 29, 20117LETTERS TO THE EDITORWho is to blamefor ‘khamokratiya’?Dear Editor:Re: “Khamokratiya” in Ukraine: (May8), who is to blame for this state of affairs?Oksana Zabuzhko’s term “khamokratiya”is an apt word to describe the currentsituation in Ukraine. But it should beremembered how she contributed to theelection of the current president during thecrucial 2010 period.Following Viktor Yushchenko’s statementthat “there is no difference between[Viktor] Yanukovych and [Yulia]Tymoshenko,” Ms. Zabuzhko campaignedvigorously to convince the voters that thebest choice is to vote “against all.”This Tymoshenkophobia resulted inwhat we have now in Ukraine.Our patriarchate,Rome and MoscowDear Editor:Roman Tratch, Ph.D.Penfield, N.Y.In The Ukrainian Weekly issue of April10, a lead article notes that MajorArchbishop Sviatoslav did not ask PopeBenedict XVI to grant the Church partiarchalstatus. This is disappointing but notsurprising, for the proverbial elephant inthe room is the patriarch of Moscow.I continue to believe that Pope BenedictXVI has Moscow at the top of his agendafor reconciliation and visitation. MakingMajor Archbishop Sviatoslav patriarchand visiting Kyiv before Moscow wouldundermine this delicate balancing actbetween the two sees. Moscow takes precedenceover Kyiv. It’s as simple as that.But why wait for Rome to act? Let thepeople speak and bestow the title on themajor archbishop as in the old days, for“He is worthy!” “Axios!”It seems that there is only one way tokeep Moscow from meddling in the affairsof the Ukrainian Church, and that is forthe Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church andthe Ukrainian Orthodox Church to recognizeeach other in communion with bothConstantinople and Rome. This is anexciting concept not only for Ukraine butwould be precedent-setting and a modelfor ecumenism in the Christian world.This action would also free Moscow tospend more time on its own affairs.I look forward to the new and excitingpossibilities for the Ukrainian Church withthe new major archbishop in the positionof leadershipFather Michael FillPhiladelphiaLearning lessonsfrom the pastDear Editor:Who are the Ukrainians in Ukraine?Why have we failed to learn a lesson fromthe past?Day after day, we hear bad news comingfrom Ukraine, and apparently there is noend in sight; maybe the worst is still tocome. Although we, the Ukrainian diaspora,and the people in Ukraine call ourselvesUkrainians, we need to face the fact thatwe and they are totally different people.In accordance with Moscow’s wishes,we are faced with the fact that the“Malorosy,” “Sovietchyky,” native Russians,Communists and members of theParty ofRegion have the upper hand in rulingUkraine.Hence, it is beyond my comprehensionwhy the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation and theUkrainian American Coordinating Councilarranged a meeting on May 4 in Washingtonbetween the Ukrainian American communityand national deputies of the Party ofRegions (The Ukrainian Weekly, May 15).Did they expect truth from members ofthe Party of Regions? Haven’t we learnedthat they would send the best spin doctorsto the U.S.? Why provide a stage for theParty of Regions to use U.S. soil for liesand propaganda? Haven’t we learnedenough from the Ukrainian ambassador?Please, please, someone answer (factsonly).Jerry ZinyczVenice, Fla.Malicious attacksagainst UkrainiansDear Editor:As Ukraine approaches its 20th anniversaryof independence and freedom fromcenturies-long occupation, relentlessRussification, and terror and genocide, ithas again become a victim of maliciousattacks by the Kremlin with the support ofCommunist infiltrated elements in its owngovernment, which has openly introducedUkrainophobic policies to undermine thecountry’s independence and the democraticprocesses that have already taken root.It appears, that contrary to the hopes andaspirations of its people, Ukraine has founditself again on the verge of loosing all it hasgained – during the previous administrationsand is now in danger again of becoming avassal-state of Russia and a victim of its greatpower-imperial chauvinistic aspirations.The nationally conscious democraticopposition to the policies of the presentgovernment is openly and systematicallysuppressed and its leaders threatened withincarceration.Ukraine and its people have only onedesire: to be free and live in peace and harmonywith other nations. Regrettably, however,now, some of the “freedom-loving”Western democracies, instead of standingsolidly in support of Ukraine’s freedom anddemocratic processes, have chosen instead,for the sake of their own selfish interests, tojoin the Kremlin’s chorus and spreadunfounded and malicious falsehoods andfear. The patriotism and desire of a nationto be free of foreign occupation is equatedwith fascism and neo-Nazism.Ukraine and its people have sufferedlong enough under a foreign yoke. Theyhave no desire to dominate or enslave othernations, and they do not want to become apart of any new Russian club.Lubomyr PawlowychUnion, N.J.We welcome your opinionThe Ukrainian Weekly welcomes lettersto the editor and commentaries on a varietyof topics of concern to the UkrainianAmerican and Ukrainian Canadian communities.Opinions expressed by columnists,commentators and letter-writers aretheir own and do not necessarily reflectthe opinions of either The Weekly editorialstaff or its publisher, the UkrainianNational Association.Letters should be typed and signed (anonymousletters are not published). Letters areaccepted also via e-mail at staff@ukrweekly.com.The daytime phone number andaddress of the letter-writer must be givenfor verification purposes. Please note that adaytime phone number is essential in orderfor editors to contact letter-writers regardingclarifications or questions.Please note: THE LENGTH OF LETTERSCANNOT EXCEED 500 WORDS.Who will bury us?Will there be a priest to bury us whenwe die? For younger Ukrainian Catholics,at least, the statistics raise some doubt.The overall number of Catholic priests inthe United States has fallen from 56,540in 1963 to 40,788 in 2010. For UkrainianCatholics, the number has also declined.In 1958, there were nearly 300 UkrainianCatholic priests in the United States; for2010, the Vatican yearbook yields a figureof 215.Things are not much better in theRuthenian Greek-Catholic Church. Thenumber of Byzantine Catholic priests hasfallen from 265 in the peak year of 1965,to 223 today (Joseph Bonchonsky,ABCRC No. 196). The situation in theUkrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.is similar. According to the Association ofReligion Data Archives, the Churchreported 130 clergy in 1965; by 2006,they numbered only 114.More indicative of future trends is thenumber of seminarians. Between 1963 and2010, the number of Catholic seminariansin the United States plummeted from47,574 to 5,131. In 2010, UkrainianCatholic seminarians in the U.S. numbered33; in Canada, eleven. Between 2005 and2010, seven graduates of St. Basil’sSeminary were ordained. AmongByzantine Catholics, the Pittsburgh seminaryreached a peak of 111 seminarians in1962; by 2010, they were down to 10.Since 2003, they have averaged fewer thantwo ordinations per year. (ABCRC No.196).But absolute numbers are not thewhole story. The ratio of priests to faithfulalso matters. For U.S. Catholics overall,the availability of pastoral care has diminished:in 1963 a single Catholic priestserved, on the average, 776 faithful; in2010, he would have to suffice for 1,680.Ukrainian Catholic figures for 2010 aremuch better, yielding a ratio of about onepriest per 280 faithful in the U.S.; forCanada, one priest for about 634.These positive ratios, however, resultfrom a shrinking number of faithful. In1916, there were some 500,000 UkrainianGreek-Catholics in the U.S. By 1965,with post-war immigration as a counterweightto assimilation, this number hadrisen to 593,000. But by 2010 it had fallenby over 90 percent, to 53,000 (RomaHayda, “Choho My Navchylysia VidChotyriokh Khvyl Emihratsiyi do SShA?”Patriiarkhat, No. 6 [November-December2010], pp. 19, 21). The 20 years from1990 to 2010 alone show a decline of over50 percent; in Canada, similarly, thedecline for the same period is nearly half(Annuario Pontificio 2010). ByzantineCatholics have experienced a comparabletrend: from 316,947 faithful in 1965, to280,064 in 1986, to 87,436 in 2010(ABCRC No. 196).The Ukrainian Orthodox Church of theU.S.A. had 87,250 faithful in 1965; by2006, this had fallen to 50,000.In terms of supply and demand, then,the problem is solving itself: fewer faithfulneed fewer clergy. But the disappearanceof our organized religious life shouldconcern us. We are not only losing aprime element of our Ukrainian identity;we are dying a collective spiritual death.Currently, many Ukrainian Catholicparishes in the United States are served bypriests from Ukraine, Argentina, Brazil orelsewhere. But these countries need clergyfor their own faithful. And even thebest foreign pastor may not always understandthe needs of parishioners in an alienculture. A healthy, sustainable Churchdoes not depend on imported clergy.Can we, then, revive priestly vocations?Only if we revive the Church itself:that is, the entire body of the faithful. Ifpriesthood is not esteemed and encouragedon the levels of family, parish andcommunity, individuals with a calling arelikely to ignore it.But vocations are usually discerned inone’s college years. Conversely, those arethe years when many lose their faith. Forthis reason, we need an Eastern Catholicinstitution of higher education that willnurture vocations – both priestly andmonastic. And since our decline encompassesthe laity as well as the clergy, thisinstitution must also educate active, committedlaymen and women. It should notcreate a clerical ghetto, but offer the samebasic program for all. And like theUkrainian Catholic University in Lviv, itshould welcome Orthodox as well asCatholics.To be financially viable, as well asintellectually comprehensive, this EasternCatholic college would not be limited to aUkrainian identity. It would teach all themajor Christian traditions: Byzantine,Antiochene, Chaldean, Armenian andAlexandrian as well as Latin. Courseswould be offered in the Greek, ChurchSlavonic, Arabic and Latin liturgical languages.This would create a broad demographicbase, while creating a fascinatingcultural meeting-place for students andfaculty alike.What kind of students would such aninstitution attract? Not the conformists ofyesteryear. They would question the selectivemorality and the nihilism of contemporarysociety, realizing that one cannotdivorce personal from social ethics. Theywould understand that self-discipline, notself-indulgence, brings genuine freedom.These students would have the intelligenceto see through the trite and mendaciousvalues of mass culture.They would resist the twin temptationsto make an idol of tradition, or a fetish ofmodernity, but would seek the best ofboth, always with an eye to truth. Andthey would understand that they need notaccept the definition of modernity propagatedby the contemporary West. Enrichedby the several Eastern Christian traditions,they would have the imagination to constructan alternative vision of modernity,and the commitment to live it out.Finally, as future clergy and laity livingin a post-modern age that is afraid toapproach the big questions, they wouldhave the courage to ask those questionsand find the answers.Such a college could be founded on thebasis of one or more existing institutions.The project would require three elements:a major source of funding; committededucators; and a community of parentsand students ready to participate in a daringenterprise. But first of all, it wouldrequire bold, imaginative and far-sightedchurchmen and women. Are they up to thechallenge?If not, we may end up burying ourselves.Andrew Sorokowski can be reached atsamboritanus@hotmail.com.
Page 2: 2THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, MAY 2
Page 5: No. 22THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY,
Page 12: 12THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, MAY
Page 17 and 18: No. 22THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY,
Page 19: No. 22Groundbreaking conference...(
Page 22 and 23: 22THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, MAY
Page 24 and 25: 24THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, MAY
Page 27: No. 22THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY,

Lutsenko goes on trial - The Ukrainian Weekly

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?