foreign policy?

Funding like this is hardly the same as sponsoring assassinations, lol. This is just the current regime making tired appeals to old hardliners by playing the same anti-american card. Not much to worry about.

 

But Americans cry foul everytime any candidate received or even remotely obtained foreign support or sponse or financial aids. They claimed that their feeling were hurt, coz people from other countries bluntly interfere their matters. Remember those letters from Britains to American voters? Everybody on TV was so upset, that it seemed to me that those Britains just pushed a holly button. Then again, Americans have been influcencing election outcomes and support different groups (government or opposition) for years in other countries. It's just fine, coz it's America, and it's a democratic country. Not much to worry about.

 

Your question was 'is it democratic' (for the US to give aid). The answer is yes. Is it the same as assassinating a leader. No. I don't know what people getting mad at British letterwriters has to do with it.

 

Are you sure that's my question? The post is about that US supporting Ukraine opposition candidate. Most Americans see this fine. I am asking you whether it's fine if a foreign government supported or financially aided Kerry in last election, what would Americans think? Yes, people getting mad at British letterwriter has a lot to do with that. I would be absolutly ok if the same people get mad at American telling people from other countries who to vote and even put in money to convince them.

 

real excellent point and it again highlights the moral relativity and downright hypocrisy of many right wingers as well as the general american foreign policy.

 

Oops. That was vincecarter's question.

They didn't tell Ukrainians who to vote for. They donated money to help balance out the democratic process. And the original premise of the thread was whether or not this was a foreign policy disaster. Its not. Although it certainly highlights the catch-22 the US is in, when we're condemned for NOT supporting democracy and condemned FOR supporting democracy. Go figure.

 

How is it hypocritical or morally relativist for the US to donate money to further the democratic political process in a place that doesn't have a long or stable tradition of it? Please explain.

 

because if someone donated money to balance out the tom delay race im sure you'd object to it.

if france or OBL or canada gave tom delay opponents money and if israel gave money to bush we'd all be fairly offended.

remember when there were allegations of china helping clinton?

giving money to specific opponents display moral relativity. if its fair game on our part it should be fair game on their part.

 

Hayes,

You don't think it's meddling in another country's political process for the U.S. government to donate money to a specific candidate?

 

Come on, please tell me that you are serious about the "further the democratic political process" part. Two candidates, US gives money to one guy, coz (I guess) that guy is "pro-US", or in a politically correct term, he's "pro-Freedom" or "pro-Democracy", or all those rightous things. In other words, US picked a guy, who they thinks it's the best for Ukrainens, and financially supported the guy. You call that "furthering democratic political process". Why is it so difficult to admit that US does it for own interest? I don't have any problem with that. Please don't paint those white holly angel-like wings over plain political benefit driven moves. Coz nobody is rightous, and the guy US hand-picked could end up Saddam like. Of course, then again, even if that happens, US can take him out to "liberate people". My question is, why is it ok for US to influence other elections, but not ok for others trying the same thing on US? You cannot expect to be a player, referee, and commisioner at the same time, and still force others to believe that you are for "fair play". Power decides everything nowadays. This is the sad part but reality.

 

So Yanukovych, who's just been forced to rerun an election as the first go was widely agreed to be rampant with fraud, calls out US meddling???

Sounds more like the standard paint-the-yanks-as-the-bad-guys posturing that plays well when you're low on political capital. I'll take what he says with lots of scepticism.

 

Not sure what you mean balance out the race. Care to clarify?

You should read the article before you post. The money didn't go to specific parties.

 

We didn't do that.

"President George W. Bush's administration has spent more than US$65 million (euro49.1 million) in the past two years to aid political organizations in Ukraine. U.S. officials say the activities don't amount to interference in Ukraine's election but are part of the US$1 billion (euro756 million) the U.S. State Department spends each year trying to build democracy worldwide.

No American funds were sent directly to Ukrainian political parties, U.S. officials say."

 

Uh, yes I'm serious. Giving money to help the political process in countries that are not used to having one, like.....uh....Ukraine, is a good thing. Is it in our interest? Certainly. Its in our interest to see democracy flourish in many places.

bnb, EXACTLY.

 

The goals of US aid: (sure sounds diabolical)

1. Improve the legal and regulatory framework as it relates to the electoral process;
2. Strengthen adherence to the legal framework and international standards by the Government of Ukraine, political parties and candidates;
3. Strengthen oversight of the electoral process by civil society, including journalists and political parties; and
4. Increase participation of well-informed voters.

The Plan of Cooperation includes training of political party and candidate representatives, who will be working as members of territorial and polling station commissioners for the 2004 Ukraine presidential election; collaborative preparation and support for the publication of the CEC’s official Commentary on the Presidential Election law; election law summer schools in both 2004 and 2005 for students and recent university graduates. The schools hope to train a potential cadre of future election administrators. Other activities under the Plan include a major conference on elections in the beginning of 2005 and seminars with the CEC, members of Parliament and experts at the Verkhovna Rada.

MORE EVIL DOINGS TO MAKE UKRAINE A COLONY!!! (muhaahahahaha)

Elections

USAID-funded projects and CSOs worked in cooperation with the Central Election Commission to ensure broad and effective monitoring of local by-elections. In addition to improved domestic monitoring, USAID supported Parliament in efforts to strengthen Ukraine ’s electoral legislation. In 2003 election-related amendments were introduced to the Criminal Code, which provide new instruments to deal with so-called “dirty election technologies.” USAID’s program on elections and political processes conducted five regional seminars for political party activists which contributed to more competitive and transparent parliamentary and local by-elections in certain constituency centers. As a result of USAID-sponsored training, election administration during repeat and by-elections improved in some regions.

Independent Media

A new media program was launched in the fall of 2003 with four main objectives: improvements in media legislation and adherence to the law; improved professionalism of journalists that will also contribute to the production of quality news; better access to legal aid; and access to credit and tools for greater financial viability.

To support improved access to quality information, USAID partners have designed training sessions for print and broadcast professionals in civic journalism, niche reporting, and investigative journalism. To assist outlets to become financially independent, the program offered ongoing services and consultations to 16 media outlets on a variety of topics, including buying/selling contracts for news production; the new law on advertising and its potential impact; rules of payment and taxation of charitable donations.

Rule of Law

Trainings supported by USAID were provided on the legislative process, policy analysis and comparative information gathering. Over the life of the parliamentary internship program, 547 young professionals have participated in this program. Approximately 30 percent of interns have obtained a job in the Rada.

ABA/CEELI’s advocacy program enhances access to justice by increasing the availability of quality pro bono legal services throughout Ukraine. ABA/CEELI’s advocacy network was expanded from three advocacy centers working exclusively in environmental rights in 3 major cities of Ukraine, to a network that now includes 13 advocacy centers in 11 different oblasts. The work done by this network includes 3,405 consultations, 319 administrative actions and 596 lawsuits. Interest in judicial associations, supported by ABA/CEELI, contributed to the emergence of new regional associations and, ultimately, to the creation of a National Independent Judicial Association. Surveys completed by ABA/CEELI indicate that about one in six Ukrainian judges now belongs to at least one association.

Civil Society and NGO Development

The Ukraine Citizen Action Network (UCAN) project awarded almost $1 million through a competitive process to Ukrainian NGOs in 15 oblasts, in support of advocacy and legislative reform, including a micro-granting program to newer CSOs in smaller cities.

USAID and its partners have delivered more than 30 targeted training sessions for CSOs throughout Ukraine. Ongoing round tables in the regions contributed to the first international conference on Ethics for Civil Society Organizations in Ukraine, which resulted in an aggressive new Ukrainian-led initiative for self-regulation.

USAID’s anti-corruption program centers on a regional anti-corruption NGO coalition model to protect and promote transparency and fight corruption at the local and regional levels. NGOs in several communities expressed interest in replicating this model. During the past year citizen advocacy offices have provided legal consultations to more than 7,000 people, some of them over telephone hotlines. Program lawyers helped to resolve more than 1,000 corruption cases that involved violations of citizens’ rights by corrupt officials. Other specific program achievements include: establishment of a transparent systems of municipal property management and the introduction of transparent policies in secondary school finance and personnel management.

 

the funny thing is if you've ever been OUT of the U.S and i don't mean on vocation... you will see how the U.S has intervened with foreign governments… and I mean financially or helped bring to power (forcefully)…it is not new news that the U.S has had a hand in ‘helping’ other nations with their problems…the thing is everything comes with a cost…the donation has to paid back…the U.S does not do things for nothing in return…the Gulf War’s Price tag was on Kuwait’s Oil and Saudi Arabia… the world is not as black and white as you see on the news…you have to plug in some stuff from what you hear from others in the country which had been effected…anyway point being this is nothing new...as far as democracy...you can't force it down on some country...thats not being democratic in itself no?

HayesStreet ... just wondering if you have ever lived outside the U.S?

 

I think Hayesstreet has a point that its difficult to show a direct intervention by the US to tilt the election one way. Also since the Soviet Union collapsed there have been many leaders who've whipped up fear and mistrust of the west for political gain in former Soviet republics.

OTOH though how much do we know about the groups that got the aid and how they used it?

Moveon.org is an NGO that is officially non-affiliated to any party but you'd have to be blind to consider them impartial. It seems to me likely that the US aid could've gone to the Ukrainian equivalent of Moveon.org who were supporting Yuschenko.

Its an interesting situation in Ukraine right now but one that I would be hesitant to draw any quick conclusions.

 

It has always been appalling to me that our government financially supported and continues to support "political organizations" in other countries, but we cry foul when other nations try to fund "political organizations" in this country. Anyone that thinks that the funding of "political organizations" in a particular country is solely for democracy and not for partisanship is naive. Not to mention that when we try to fund "political organizations" in our countries, we end up funding people that come back to bite us in the behind. Pahlavi in Iran, Duvalier in Haiti, Marcos in the Phillipines, Ortega in Nicaragua, and Noreiga in Panama are just a few examples.

 

Sadly the policies of the US are trashing the whole concept of democracy. Anyone else recall how after Gulf War I we started calling Kuwait as well on the road to democracy. I guess the press forgot to follow up on that one.


We have a cynically named National Endowment for Democracy trying to subvert elections in othe countries. Their involment in support of the attempted coup in Venezuela was reprehensible.

The neocons are willing to accept democracy if it results in an outcome they support. If not as we have seen admitted in Venezuela and just saw in Haiti, they are for coups.