1933 Timoshenko denounces Holodomor

Winnipeg Free Press
Monday, December 25, 1933

SOVIET METHODS ARE

DENOUNCED BY

UKRAINE SPEAKER

Prof. V. P. Timoshenko Says

Peasants Endure Enslavement

Worse Than in Czarist Rule

Forced methods of collectivization of farm lands in the Ukraine by the Communist regime in Soviet Russia have reduced the peasantry to enslavement worse than they had ever endured in the past 70-years even under the czarist rule, declared Prof. Vladimir P. Timoshenko, author of several studies and now lecturer in economics and statistics at Michigan University, when addressing a Ukrainian audience In the Ukrainian Greek-Orthodox cathedral, Saturday night.

Sunday night Prof. Timoshenko was the guest of the Ukrainian Students' club "Prometheus" at a banquet in his honor at the Picardy hall, where a hearty welcome was extended to him by a number of well known Ukrainians in the city. These included Rt. Rev. S. W. Sawchuk. head of the Ukrainian Greek-Orthodox church in Canada; W. Swystun; M. Stechishin, editor of the Ukrainian Voice, and D. Maksemiuk, who spoke on behalf of the Students' club.

The Soviet government in the winter of 1929-30, eager to inaugurate the collective farm system on a large scale, and to exterminate the well-to-do peasantry as a class, had resorted to administrative coercion and pressure because this class of people was considered a menace to the Communist regime, Prof. Timoshenko told a packed meeting Saturday night.

Not only had the property of these peasants been confiscated, including buildings, machinery, equipment and livestock, the speaker went on, but the wealthier peasants were forbidden to join the collectives, and had not been accepted as simple workers on collective farms even after the wholesale confiscation of their property, he said.

Compares Economic Status

Comparing the economic status of the Ukraine during the time of the czar regime and today under the Communist rule, Prof. Timoshenko stated that the people had enjoyed greater autonomy under the absolute monarchy of the czar than they have today under the republican constitution.

Refering to the industrialization of the country under the five-year plan, Prof. Timoshenko stated that the Ukraine benefitted nothing from the industrialization as the gigantic factories were built in the areas outside of Ukraine. The reason for this was, he said, the Communist regime fears that one day the Ukraine may secede from Russia, possibly by intervention, and the industries be used against them.

Saturday afternoon Prof. Timoshenko had a brief interview with Premier John Bracken. The interview centred around his recent book on "Agricultural Russia and the Wheat Problem."

1933 Big Four Wheat Talks Fail

Winnipeg Free Press
Friday, September 29, 1933
====================

“BIG FOUR” WHEAT TALK WITH

SOVIET PROVES FRUITLESS

Russia Insists on Exporting

About Double Amount Allotted to It

(Associated Press Cable)

London, Sept. 29 — Another meeting between wheat representatives of the "big four" exporting nations and the Russian delegate, at Canada House, held Thursday in an effort to solve the problem arising from the Soviet government's demand for the right to export about double the amount allotted to it, broke up with an official statement that "no definite conclusions have been reached."
The Russian, Abraham Gourevitch, told the press that his government had not changed its position. "Why should we?" he asked.
The official statement said that "further negotiations will be carried on between the governments."
The Soviet delegate, who left the meeting before its conclusion, said that the representatives of the big powers might meet again early in November.
Under the international wheat agreement drawn up at the World Economic Conference, Russia would be permitted to export 37,000,000 bushels.
At Thursday's meeting, Russia turned down a conditional offer from Canada and the United States to increase the Soviet Union's allotment for the coming year by 22 per cent.
A reservation was made in this offer that there was to be no increase unless world demand justified extending the 560,000,000 bushels limit for world exports tentatively adopted at the recent wheat conference.
This would have meant a direct sacrifice by Canada and the United States, it was said, as the original agreement was that these two countries were to share any possible extension in the world quota.
The Russian delegate insisted that his nation must have twice the present tentative allotment of 37,000,000 bushels to satisfy her needs.
Although a brief communique at the close of the session said the "chief exporting nations" were represented, it was learned later the Argentine and Australian delegates did not attend. It was explained that this was because only Canada and the United States were concerned, as any concession would be at their expense.
The conditional increase offered to Russia was 8,000,000 bushels, which would place her practically on an equal basis with the United States, whose allotment is 47,000,000.
Thursday's action by Soviet union (sic) will probably end efforts here to bring Russia into the world wheat agreement at least until November.
The Russian delegate said when he left Thursday's meeting that he had not been in communication with Mos­cow before he conferred with the other delegates. Previously, however, it had been understood by other dele­gates the meeting had been called to hear Moscow's response to the in­crease offer.
All of the delegates have been consulting their home governments at length, it was said.

OCR-ed in Kyiv, June 2008

1933: The Toronto Daily Star

The Toronto Daily Star

Monday, November 13, 1933

====================================================

Soviet grain tax blamed for hardship of peasants

Farmers facing another year of food shortage in Ukraine, critics are ousted

BY: Pierre Van Paassen

Kieff, Oct. 25. — In spite of the abundant harvest this year, the Russian people are facing another winter of great hardship. Old peasants who have survived the famine of last winter feel certain that a new ordeal "even more terrible" than last year stands before the door. Certain responsible members of the Communist party, after making sure that they were not overheard, admitted that famine conditions were certainly inevitable for the 1933-1934 season.
The reason for this strange anomaly, famine in the midst of plenty, is the manner and method in which the government collects the grain tax. By far too much is taken away to leave the rural regions of the Ukraine to subsist on. Protests avail nothing. High officials of the Communist party in the Ukraine, who have taken their courage in their hand and who have ventured to point out that the new system of grain collections ruins the farmers and drives them to starvation and destitution, are simply deprived of their posts. Zaslavsky, Karachewitsch and Rybak are names on everybody's lips in Kieff. They are three officials who, at the risk of their lives, advised Moscow of the ruinous practices of the grain collectors.
They have been removed from office for their pains on the accusation of being Trotskyist counter-revolutionaries. A host of lesser officials has followed. Tens of thousands of members have been ousted from the Communist party in the Ukraine by order of the Stalinian autocrats in Moscow during the last few weeks. The charges may be summarized in one word: criticism. Alarmed over the prospects of another winter of famine they had ventured to question the methods of grain collection.

Plan Contains Joker
As the non-conformist peasants, that are those not in collective farms, feared right along the new favorable decree on grain collection which is being enforced this year contained a joker. The joker did not become apparent until the collectors arrived on the spot. The decree provides for the collection of a fixed tax, amounting to about thirty per cent of the harvest. This would leave the peasants seventy per cent of their harvest for their own use and for seed grain, while any surplus might be disposed of by selling it in the open market. The announcement of these new conditions this spring produced a feeling of optimism, which was encouraged by the press and the Stalinian statement that the time of hardships for the peasants was over.
It is becoming apparent now that the harvest is in full swing that the decree does not leave the peasants seventy per cent, of their grain, but only twenty, fifteen, ten and even five per cent, or nothing at all, according to different districts. The collectors are not proceeding according to the volume of the harvest, but according to the plans of sowing which were drawn up long ago in the offices of the grain trust. As far less was sown in many districts than was officially planned, but the estimates of collection are nevertheless to be fulfilled, the peasants come out in a miserable manner.

Government Blamed Kulaks
The government put the blame for the discrepancy between grain estimates and actual harvest on the enemies of the regime, Kulaks and wreckers. Those people are charged with purposely sowing less than was officially anticipated. Fact of the matter is that in many regions the peasants were decimated by famine and that the survivors were too weak to put the stipulated area under crop.
Yet the grain-tax now being collected is as large as if every acre had yielded the full quota estimated by the planners. What the peasants thought to be their own, to be disposed of at will, is again taken by the collectors who carry out the decree to the letter. In view of the fact that collectors are all devoted party members and every party member sees in every peasant an avowed or secret opponent of the regime, it stands to reason that there is little gentleness in seizing the grain.

Peasants Desert Farms
It should be added that the collective farms make no exception. The toll there is also taken on the planned crop and not on the amount of wheat actually harvested. A member of the party, a reliable old revolutionary from Moscow, who was in prison for twenty years under the czar and who visited every part of the Ukraine as an official inspector of farms told me that as a result of the ruthless grain collections many collective farms were already deserted, the workers leaving in disgust "There are villages where not a human being remains," he said. "All the houses are empty." This statement was confirmed by several others, whose word I have no reason to doubt.
On the other hand the authorities when questioned affirm that everything is proceeding, smoothly and quite according to schedule. To come with objections, baaed on personal observations on definite statements by men who ought to know and on all sorts of sinister rumors arouses suspicion. "Our enemies are active in poisoning public opinion," it is said.
Whatever view is taken by the government officials, however, the fact remains that the peasants feel certain that the stocks left them after paying their taxes and back-dues for loans in the past, will be wholly inadequate in the coming winter. And that they do not say this for fun is evidenced by the fact that a new exodus of tens of thousands from the farms to the cities is already on the move. Unless the government checks this outpour, the rural regions will be depopulated next winter and spring and the sowing campaigns will again fall short of the plan.

OCR-ed in Kyiv, 2008.

Cosmic elections or astronomical farce?

Courtesy of M. F.

Voter turn out was unexpectedly low in Sunday’s local government election: initial reports quoted 48%, but the Kyiv Territorial Electoral Commission was saying more than 53% by March 28. The TEC has 5 days after E-Day to establish official results (presumably by Friday). This posting is based on preliminary returns from 964 of 1,026 polling stations.

Blocs/parties in Kyiv Rada	May '08 Seats*	March '06 Seats	Difference
Leonid Chernovetsky Bloc	43	21	22
Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc	32	41	-9
Vitaly Klitschko / Pora PRP	15	14	1
Volodymyr Lytvyn Bloc	11	6	5
HAK Hrom. Aktyv	8	7	1
Party of Regions	6	9	-3
Mykola Katerynchuk Bloc / Nasha Ukrayina	5	15	-10
* Source: Ukrayinska Pravda.com.ua , 964 of 1026 poll stations reporting

An alarming majority of apathetic, inebriated or otherwise incapacitated voters opted out of the electoral process. As a result, 1% in the final election tally equaled 10,000 votes, according to Ukrayinska Pravda. With that math, a party/bloc needed to “organize” only 30,000 ballots to secure a spot in the city council sun. The fact that more than 30 parties and electoral blocs split 15% of the popular vote also made life easier for the 7 political forces that qualified for rada with at least 3%.

4 more years of “Cosmos”?
Kyiv mayor L. Chernovetsky appears to have come away the big winner from Sunday’s snap election in Ukraine’s capital city: he bested his March 2006 mayoral results by more than five to 37 percent in May 2008.
The anti-Chernovetsky vote was efficiently split, most notably by Yu. Tymoshenko Bloc mayoral candidate O. Turchynov (19%) and V. Klitschko (18%). (One for the “told you so” files). Klitschko’s support fell from 24% fourteen months ago, but the former heavyweight boxing champ will still have a 15-member caucus in the Kyiv rada. His bloc has vowed to prove electoral law violations and challenge the results in the courts.

Kyiv Rada math
Chernovetsky’s eponymous bloc gained 17% and 22 seats in the Kyiv Rada and will now have 43. His will be the largest caucus and best suited to court coalition allies in the 120-seat chamber.
Reports suggest that L. Chernovetsky bloc will likely find common ground quickest with the V. Lytvyn Bloc and the Hromadsky Aktyv Kyeva, because they are political projects financed by business partners V. Khmelnytsky and A. Ivanov, with whom the mayor has done business. Together, these 3 caucuses have enough for 62 seats.

Coalition Combos for 120-seat Kyiv Rada*
Chernovetsky + Lytvyn + HAK	62
Chernovetsky + Lytvyn + HAK + Regions	68
Tymoshenko + Klitschko + Katerynchuk	52
* Source: Ukrayinska Pravda.com.ua , 964 of 1026 poll stations reporting)

The Party of the Regions’ 6 seats could further solidify the majority. One analyst suggested that the Mykola Katerynchuk Bloc could join to form a “grand coalition” in the council. That would leave the Y. Tymoshenko and V. Klitschko blocs with less than 50 seats; M. Katerynchuk’s 5 seats are not enough to form anything resembling an orange/democratic coalition.

Full party lists:
http://kiev.pravda.com.ua/publications/4839d358c201e/

“Leonid Chernovestky vyhrav match na svoyemu poli,” Ukrayinska Pravda.com.ua, 26.05.08:
http://www.pravda.com.ua/news/2008/5/26/76527.htm

2: Exit Poll on May 25

This reporter is hightailing out of the crazy capital city for all the chaos of the Kyiv city council and mayoral elections this Sunday.

Not to worry – all the ground work on Election Day will be completed by Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KMIS) who is fielding 200 interviewers to poll 10,000 voters as they leave 100 of Kyiv’s 1,000+ polling stations. KIIS says the coverage should result in an error rate in the 3% range.

The interviews will be conducted between 8 AM and 10 PM Kyiv time (EST+7), and the results will be announced on ICTV’s Fakty news program shortly after 10 PM: http://www.ictv.ua

On the web, the exit poll results will be made available by Democratic Initiatives Foundation at the site: http://www.exitpoll.org.ua

KMIS/KIIS website: www.kiis.com.ua

BBC's "Greatest" goes sour in Ukraine

cover of Segodnya issue with Tabachnyk interview

The scandal surrounding the Ukrainian version of BBC’s popular 2002 “Greatest Britons” popular history TV project is being portrayed by Ukrainian media as a battle between supporters of 10th century Kyivan-Rus ruler Yaroslav Mudry and 20th century Ukrainian nationalist leader Stepan Bandera, who finished first and third by the time more than two million votes were counted on May 16.

However the supporters who should be most upset are those of football legend Valery Lobanovsky and of 18th century wandering philosopher Hryhori Skovoroda.
An investigation into the daily vote totals from the project’s last week shows that over 5,500 (5, 577) votes of support for the two “greats” vanished from the final total.

Meanwhile, a half million votes of support for Yaroslav Mudry were generated in the project’s final days causing media watchdogs to cry foul over the use of technology to dump votes in favor of one candidate over another for political purposes.



Stuffing Great Ukrainians

Final ranking	Top Ten "Great Ukrainians"	Interim Results 13.05	Final Results 16.05	Difference
2	Mykola Amosov	124,938	322,321	197,383
3	Stepan Bandera	208,926	261,247	52,321
6	Valery Lobanovsky	54,181	51,564	–2617
8	Hryhory Skovoroda	31,050	28,090	–2960
9	Lesia Ukrayinka	23,295	26,590	3,295
10	Ivan Franko	22,205	24,247	2,042
5	Bohdan Khmelnytsky	52,127	64,931	12,804
7	Vyacheslav Chornovil	36,661	42,743	6,082
4	Taras Shevchenko	93,354	150,873	57,519
1	Yaroslav Mudry	63,442	648,443	585,021

Source: Vakhtang Kipiani, “Yak vkraly “Velykoho Ukrayinstya’” (How the “Great Ukrainian” was stolen), Ukrayinska Pravda website (Ukrainian lang.), May 20, 2008 Link to original: http://www.pravda.com.ua/news/2008/5/20/76074.htm

SMS vote stuffing
Both Mudry and Bandera supporters organized multiple voting by fan clubs, as did the Communists (for Lenin as a “Great Ukrainian) and student clubs.

But Party of Regions’ ideologue Dmytro Tabachnyk managed to organize 585,021 votes of support for Yaroslav Mudry in the last three days of the “Great Ukrainians” project.

Mudry won with 648,443 votes. The shows presenters claimed that “Great Ukrainians” broke world records for participation with 1.6 million unique voters, who sent, phoned and texted over 2 million votes for their historical heroes.

At the after show party Tabachnyk reportedly boasted that he wanted to “screw Bandera” and told the Segodnya newspaper: “all the nationalists needed for victory was six hundred generous banderites” implying that at Hr 1 per vote, Bandera was Hr 600,000 or $120,000 short of victory. (Photo of newspaper cover above).

According to the show's chief editor Vakhtang Kipiani, 348,017 votes were cast for Mudry between May 15 and 16 and 64% of votes for the Rus rulers came in the last three days of the project (see table).

Investigation
Veteran journalist Kipiani exposed the fraud. In addition to being the chief editor of the “Great Ukrainians” project he also took part as Bandera’s celebrity endorsement and author of the 10-minute movie about the man killed by Moscow by 1959.

According to telephone company records Kipiani obtained, 15,454 SMS were sent from a single phone number “in packets” over the course of 18 hours the night before the final program aired.

“After the scandalous final I obtained a certain portion of insider information and can confirm: the announced results, allegedly based on 1,621,049 viewer votes, are a mass-scale manipulation of public opinion,” Kipiani wrote.

Tabachnyk’s past screwings

Tabachnyk has been involved in vote falsification in the past, most notably in the publication of falsified electoral results of the second round of the 2004 presidential elections (also electronically-manipulated by “transit servers”) in the parliamentary Holos Ukrayiny newspaper.

On a personal note: In this reporter’s opinion the top three should have been Taras, Ivan and Lesia. It was honor enough to see Bandera make the top ten: a Kyiv International Institute of Sociology poll from December 2007 showed Bandera ranking 14 of the top 20, among 60% of respondents who said they could “name a great Ukrainian.” In that poll, Taras Shevchenko was the hands-down country-wide winner from Lviv to Luhansk.

4: Vote-buying bonanza!

Make money with your vote, but make it count using your mobile phone camera and cellophane

Vote-buying for the imminent Kyiv mayoral and city council elections is “massive,” according to the Committee of Voters of Ukraine, a veteran elections watchdog NGO.

“We are receiving many reports of vote-buying in Kyiv. And it is occurring on a massive scale, with tens of thousands of votes already being bought,” said Ihor Popov, CVU head at a May 20 press conference at the UNIAN news agency.

Popov said the vote buying bonanza will last right up to the elections. The CVU report “urges law-enforcement authorities to detect every such a case.”

But the NGO also offered some very practical advice “if a voter wants to make money by providing mobile phone-photograph evidence of their ballot. The CVU suggests placing transparent cellophane on top of the ballot and marking the names of candidate and political forces names that are parties to the ‘purchase’ agreement … on the actual ballot place the mark in the row that corresponds to the voter’s real choice.”

The CVU said that several political forces are active on the retail electoral market and that the practice of signing “social agreements” with voters who provide passport data for material remuneration has been employed for at least five years in Ukraine.

The practice “has proven successful in the past: according to the organizers of these crimes, around half of the people who received funds voted for their political force,” Popov said. But it will not be as effective in Kyiv this time around.

“Our data shows that students living in student housing have sold their votes three-four times and are waiting for the next client. I think that they will destroy this practice, as control is impossible,” Popov said.

The CVU expects a voter turn-out between 55-60% this Sunday. In the Sept. 2007 snap Rada elections, voter turn-out was over 63%: of 2.2 million eligible voters, 1.4 million ballots were cast at 1,028 stations.

Seventy candidates and more than 35 political parties and blocs are in the running for the post of capital city mayor and 120 seats in the Kyiv Rada.

UNIAN report: http://www.unian.net/news/print.php?id=252034
Committee of Voters of Ukraine: http://www.cvu.org.ua/