Talk:Politics of Ukraine

What about all these place names with apostrophes in them? Surely, the English word for Kiev is Kiev, not Kyyiv?

• I believe that the various apostrophes and so forth are intended as guides to either the Cyrillic spelling or the actual pronunciation of the city names. -- April

• April is right, apostrophes mean different (soft) pronounciation and/or spelling of the letters preceding them. I'm not sure whether it's correct to write so in English but I do (aiming to show the actual pronounciaton). For general differences between Slavic and English phonetics, see respective articles (can`t explain since I'm no linguist). --AlexPU 18:22, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The apostrophe is a common way to transliterate the Soft sign (indicating palatalization, or 'softening', of the preceding consonant) from Ukrainian, Russian, and other Slavic languages. See romanization of Ukrainian and transliteration of Russian into English for details.

"Kiev" is transliterated from the Russian spelling Киев, "Kyiv" or "Kyyiv" from the Ukrainian Київ (using two different transliteration systems). Since Ukraine has become independent from the USSR and adopted Ukrainian as its official language, there has been debate about how to spell the name in English. —Michael Z. 20:10, 2004 Nov 23 (UTC)

ATTENTION PEOPLE!

As a Ukrainian journalist and one of Yushchenko's supporters, I insistently ask all of you TO AVOID P.O.V. PUSHING, UNBALANCED WRITING AND OVERINFORMING, not only on his page, but also everywhere regarding Ukraine. He is not a Saviour, and Ukraine is not an ideal nation as some of you are likely trying to show. This is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. If we don't keep ourselves in neutrality limits, less informed readers may consider us the propagandists of a loosing side. And please, be more professional in updating serious non-event articles like Politics of Ukraine. Best wishes, AlexPU

(Article in NY Times)

On November 28, 2004 over 10,000 IM (Internal Ministry) troops mobilized to put down the protests in Independence Square in Kiev according to their commander Lt. Gen. Sergei Popkov. The SBU (Ukrainian Security Service, successor to KGB) warned opposition leaders of the crackdown. Oleksandev Galaka, head of GRU (military intelligence) made calls to "prevent bloodshed". Col. gen. Ihor P. Smesko (SBU chief) and Maj. Gen. Vitaly Romanchenko (military counter-intelligence chief) both warned Popkov to pull back his troops, which he did. Senior officers known as the siloviki were successful in preventing election fraud, bloodshed and possibly averted civil war.

The NY Times article: How Top Spies in Ukraine Changed the Nation's Path (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/17/international/europe/17ukraine.html?8bl).

Here's a more concise edit. Still needs work. Did I get the right head with the right agency? Who are siloviki (sylovyky?)?

On November 28, 2004 over 10,000 of the Internal Ministry's militia mobilized to put down the protests in Independence Square in Kiev, according to their commander Lt. Gen. Sergei Popkov. Senior officers of Ukraine's security and intelligence agencies (called sylovyky) informed opposition leaders of the impending crackdown, and warned off Popkov, who held back the militia. By their actions, Ihor Smeshko of the SBU, Oleksander Galaka of the HUR, and Maj. Gen. Vitaly Romanchenko of the SZR prevented election fraud, bloodshed, and possibly averted civil war.

—Michael Z. 01:00, 2005 Jan 18 (UTC)

I'll fix it, Michael. No you didn't get the right bureaucrats - all listed are SBists. Sylovyky is a political jargonism meaning the leadership of law enforcement, prosecutor office and Armed Forces - as a kind of distinctive collective political force. It is also (and mainly) used in Russia. Pryvit, AlexPU

On November 28, 2004 over 10,000 of the Internal Ministry's troops mobilized to put down the protests in Independence Square in Kiev, according to their commander Lt. Gen. Serhiy Popkov. Senior officers of Ukraine's security and intelligence agencies informed opposition leaders of the impending crackdown, and warned off Popkov, who held back his forces. By their actions, the leaders of SBU and HUR helped to prevent election fraud, bloodshed, and possibly averted civil war.

Michael, here is my edition to your text. My suggestion is to accept this as a preliminary version since the story is complicated and unverified. The NYT article looks like a cheap scoop and/or SBU promotion ad for me. Facts listed need to be proved first. What I can tell right now, is:

• They possibly meant "Internal Troops" (внутрішні війська), not police. To understand the difference, see my recent contribution to militsiya and also elder passage at Military of Ukraine. BTW, if you will have more questions after reading militsiya, please list them on the talk - I need such reaction to improve the logic of the content for non-CIS readers. Your copyedits would also be great.
• I think the incident described has a little to do with the prevention of electoral fraud itself. It would be blasphemous to praise the sylovyky for it - they first made the fraud possible by ignoring its preparation, then withdrew reacting on the revolution. That's why I suppose the article was a promo action for Smeshko.
• My mistake - Halaka indeed is a HUR Chief and a close ally to Smeshko. Hence, this doesn't mean that the whole military leadership has been cooperative with opposition. But, Генерал-майор Виталій Романченко is a head of SBU's "управління військової контррозвідки" - directorate/department of military counterintelligence (while SZR is going to be an independent foreign intelligence agency).
• The original article tends to state that SBists kind of frightened Popkov. This is likely to be a bullshit. Unlike Soviet times, MVS now is a domestic competitor for SBU, not a subordinate. Legally, in case if a state of emergency put in force, Popkov would be in charge with thousands of heavily armed men, not Smeshko. That's why I suppose some passages of Chivers are a crap. They are more likely to have convinced him with the help of the President.

What I suggest is to place a generalized and NPOVed passage, study the case and wait for the critical reaction on the NYT article (it's already happening on Ukrainian media). If the facts listed prove - we need to reflect them more widely - not only here, but also on MVS and Orange Revolution pages.

BTW, Michael, this is just another cause to start a kind of Wikiproject regarding Ukrainian military/law enforcement (actually started by our edits to SBU, Mel'nychenko etc.) And the detailization of MVS Internal Troops could be the first practical objective. And your interest to Morozov tanks would also be useful. BTW, this summer we are going to have a big military Ukrainian occasion - the troops withdrawal from Iraq with the natural summing up of their mission. So, are you in? AlexPU

Absolutely, Alex. I'll just try to keep up.

You noticed the Morozov article! I'm afraid it's largely culled from propaganda on their own web site; I don't think it differentiates Morozov and Malyshev well enough, and probably leaves out a lot of relevant information about the other factories. I have to start going through my Zaloga books to straighten it out a bit.

I'm also hoping to do some reading and fill out the articles on UNR, Symon Petliura, etc. I'll ask you to have a look when I get started.

Cheers, Michael Z.

Stub Message Removal

I'm removing the stub notices from this article. While I understand that the page is by no means an exhaustive work, it has sufficient length and information that it's really too good to be considered a stub. I think the page is well on its way and doesn't need the extra notice for people to work on it. I just thought I'd share my reasoning in case anyone disagreed. I don't think the stub notices are necessary any longer. --BDD 02:28, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)