Already at the end of March Russian mass-media disseminated information that an independent noncommercial organization can be engaged in the development of Siberia and the Far East. However, actually it means the creation of the state corporation which will be directly submitted to the president of Russia, and the list of investment objects will be confirmed by the government.

On a whole the specified initiative provides for the introduction of a number of positive innovations by the government. Among the main ones are the exemption from taxes on profits, on mineral extraction, granting of privileges to concrete projects within the limits of activities of the corporation, and what’s most important, inhabitants of Siberia and the Far East will be provided with privileges on accommodation and studies. In the framework of the whole project it is planned to create 5 million workplaces. By the way, among the primary steps of development of Russia, voiced by Putin during the report on work of the government in the State Duma, is the creation of 25 million qualitative workplaces in economy in the nearest years. Moreover, variants of simplification of procedures of receiving citizenship by foreigners who will settle in the specified territories are discussed.

Along with positive moments, there are negative ones as always. There exist not unreasonable fears that the creation of the state corporation on the contrary will slow down the development of the specified territories. After all, any private investor who has a desire to work there will have the state corporation with special preferences as a competitor. Hence, nobody is talking about competition here. An accurately limited system of governmental admission to participation in the development of Siberia and the Far East will operate.

Realization of the specified project is also connected with geopolitical questions. The basic problems lie in the plane of cooperation of Russia with the countries of Asian-Pacific region. Especially this has to do with China. In one of his program articles, V.Putin already urged to more actively build communication with China on the basis of cooperation of technological and industrial potentials of both countries. Meanwhile, this cooperation is demonstrated by the saturation of the Russian market with poor-quality goods and cheap work force. Nobody hurries to share technologies. Also the realization of plans of the Russian leadership is connected with the creation and effectiveness of new international associations, such as the Eurasian economic union for example. In the realization of the development of considerable territories of Siberia and the Far East Russia can face the main problem – shortage of human resources. Unfortunately, the demographic crisis in Russia only deepens this problem. The way-out can be found in the historical experience of attraction of human potential of the countries of the former Soviet Union to the development of Siberia and the Far East. However today, these countries have their own social and economic and demographic problems. Hence, China can have all the advantages.

Strategically, the decision on the development of the infrastructure of Siberia and the Far East fits into the foreign policy concept of development of Russia, voiced by V.Putin. However, in case of the creation of the state corporation, it will be necessary to prove the efficiency of realization of the project of development of the specified territories. The experience of Russian state companies is an example here. Everything can end up right after budgets disbursement. In 2011 there was already created a financial structure – the Far East Development Fund. Despite the pumping of the Fund with means, there is no project realized by it today, although the creation of many workplaces was planned. However, the advantage in favor of the state corporation is the Russian reality now. It is paradoxical, but rigid state control at the highest level gives a chance to control corrupt practices at the level of top-management and regional power. At the same time, it will increase competition between foreign service and financial companies for participation in this mega-project.

Considering the importance and scale of the new mega-project, the creation of a new structure of development of Siberia and the Far East has every chance to be realized right after V.Putin’s inauguration. Anyways, the choice of the head of this project will show seriousness of intentions concerning the development and exploration of the major resource region of Russia.

None of sociological services of Russia didn’t consider a possibility of conduction of the second round.  In Russia forecasts of sociological institutes have always been the spokesman of desires of the authorities concerning a configuration of political forces necessary for them.

A tacit consent of the authorities to the conduction of opposition rallies has brought about its positive consequences.  Although the authorities have made this process controlled, they nevertheless are losing.  The only plus is that the electorate has let off the stream.  However, under any circumstances, the legitimacy of the victory will be “under doubt”.

The victory in the first round is a reason for criticism from the western political scientists: democracy has been humiliated.

The second round: the prime minister V.Putin – the communist G.Zyuganov — a reason for criticism from Russian political scientists: this is a manipulation of the Kremlin.

The victory in the second round with a big gap – journalists will call it an administrative resource.

The victory with a small gap — the holiday of the opposition, which hasn’t been capable of generating an alternative for already 15 years.

Protest actions in Russia have revealed problem points of the Russian political system.  A new president will be compelled to restart it.  It won’t be enough only to declare the necessity of democratic changes.  V.Putin will search for ways of realization of the declared democracy.  And they have to be adequate to protest demands of Russians. And here it will be impossible to limit oneself to electronic democracy only.

The issue of legitimacy of his election will be put in question.  And first of all due to the application of the administrative resource.  The virtualized young civil society will make resistance, and its methods will acquire new forms.

Today’s formation of the civil society in Russia will lead to the appearance of new leaders of the national scale.  The history of Russia is rich with examples of unpredictable appearance of this sort of personalities.  And this will happen before the termination of a 6-year term of office of the future president.

It is possible to ascertain that V.Putin already for the second time in his life faces the task of updating the Russian authorities.  And it is the first time that he gets a possibility to remain a leader in the consciousness of Russians.  The one who created a platform for a new stage of development of Russia, instead of being only the one who happened to receive the power.  Six years of presidency is too little to change a geopolitical world map.  However, it is a lot to improve life of millions of citizens.  Apparently, he also doesn’t have to wait all the term.

At present, according to Mr. Mas, the province overpays Madrid by some 17 billion euros every year. A new fiscal pact would enable the Catalonian government to hang on to around 10 billion of this amount and use it as a cushion against the harshness of the austerity measures forced upon Madrid by international lenders.

The interview provides a glimpse into the thinking of regional political leaders like Mr. Artur Mas or his Scottish counterpart, Mr. Alex Salmond. Both Catalonia and Scotland lost their independence at about the same time, at the beginning of the 18th century. Their drive for independence is only a few decades old and is being fuelled in part by the process of EU integration. In the vision of Artur Mas, for example, if more powers are devolved towards Brussels and the regions, national governments would become obsolete. If that happens, a more independent Catalonia could become more competitive internationally, something like a «Holland of the South».

The devolution of powers to organise a region’s economic, social and cultural affairs would leave Brussels to worry about the military, securitary and foreign affairs of the entire Union. National states, however, are still jealously keeping for themselves the power to tax and to organise economic life on their territory. In practice, national politicians are also opposed to doing away with national armies, or with national security and foreign policy in favour of similar, EU-wide institutions, the latter of which have very limited prerogatives, as a consequence.

Unlike Scotland, Catalonia contributes a full one-fifth of the national GDP, being the second richest province among the 17 Spanish provinces after Madrid. The Catalonian politicians’ drive to get a better fiscal deal from Madrid could, if rebuked by the Rajoy government, rekindle desires for full independence. This is mirrored in Scotland, where the First Minister is preparing his countrymen for a referendum on independence planned to take place in 2014. National leaders in both Spain and Britain will therefore need all the political talent they can muster in order to keep their countries whole and their economies from dipping into recession. (sources: Le Monde, Financial Times, The Guardian)

The role of the newest information technologies grows rapidly in the world.  They compel the  Russian authorities to take them into consideration.  Internet democracy starts to emerge in Russia as well.  Perfectly understanding this, the prime minister of Russia mentioned the necessity of introducing legislative mechanisms for its realization.  He has suggested to legalize the consideration of public initiatives in the parliament provided that they collect 100 thousand signatures and more on the Internet.  He recognized the necessity of realization of citizens’ rights.  He has suggested that citizens express themselves on topical issues at local referenda, offer ways of their solution and control this process.

Nowadays realities in Russia demand new forms of participation of citizens and society in the life of the state.  The desire to influence the authorities and participate in the decision-making has been heard by the Russian prime minister.  Although the indicated article is only a program one now and has pre-election campaign elements in it — the recognition of necessity of Internet democracy by the authorities has become a fact.

Vladimir Putin has become perhaps the first high-ranking Russian politician who has started to support direct democracy institutions.

Weird, but these are the realities.

What can the Ukrainian authorities offer in turn?  Are they going to hear citizens and build a feedback system?

The presence of the Ukrainian high-ranking officials in social networks is only declarative.  As a rule it looks like a “washing machine” for their reputation.  The Ukrainian authorities continue to obstinately ignore possibilities of the network in terms of self-organization of its users.  And maybe, it’s good.  The territory of information freedom extends.  The authorities are ready only to forbid their criticism in the network at the legislative level.  For example, the decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine concerning an official interpretation of confidential information confirms this.  But confidentiality covers only civil servants and members of their families.  The decision limits dissemination of information concerning their income, expenses, real estate, places and ways of leisure and residence.  Henceforth,  journalists can receive this information only at the consent of those very officials.  Nobody is talking about defending ordinary citizens.

Freedom of speech and right to public information is walked all over again.  And all this is in times of the information epoch.

Weird, but these are the realities.

Duran´s opinion prevails over Mas-Colell´s criticism regarding income tax rise

CiU vote for GOS (Government of Spain) anti-crisis measures has not been fully understood in Catalonia. Not even for a large number of CDC rank-and-file members, according to several CDC militants close to RCAT associates.

These members have started to press the party’s leaders. They don’t quite understand the yes vote, specially after voting against Mr.Mariano Rajoy´s election as President. And also after Mr. Andreu Mas-Colell, the Minister for Economy and Knowledge, categorical words opposing to those measures -that include a rise of the income tax. According to the Minister´s words, tax income rise risks to place Catalonia’s fiscal burden at a suffocation level. In critics opinion “if they didn´t want to to vote against, they could have just abstained“.

Having that in mind, it is quite obvious the motivation of former president Jordi Pujol‘s article posted in his website. Mr. Pujol would have written it to try to appease the unease of militants. In the piece, Mr. Pujol acknowledges that

“ Catalonia as a country could be driven to unviability, (…) not because of the economic consequences of independence, but the impossibility – as a result of economic discrimination –of Catalonia to respond not only to the needs of wealth creation or the support for our language and culture, but also to build a truly bona fide society for all her citizens. This, as much or more than any other argument, would be a valid reason to opt for independence. “

However, some analysts consider that the yes vote can also be read having in mind the traditional tensions between CDC and UDC. And more specifically as a Mr. Duran‘s victory not only over Mr. Mas-Colell, but over the whole Catalan Government. Mr. Duran, as CiU´s top figure in Madrid, in this sense, would be setting the political line of the Government of the Generalitat, without paying the costs that entails to head a department.

Authored: RCAT Web Team

Translation: MA

The first trend, – the Ukrainian authorities will conceal the absence of the plan for the state and society development.  Two years of work of the existing authorities convincingly prove that they have no plan for Ukraine’s development at least till 2015.  And, if in 2010 the government was hiding behind “the heavy inheritance” of the predecessors, then in 2011 the discrediting of “reforms” of the parliamentary majority of the “Party of Regions” took place in all directions.

As a result, – the Ukrainian society has already matured for mass social protests and is quickly getting mature for political ones.  And the authorities can offer their own citizens nothing but a hurried privatization of Ukraine.  Assignment of separate regions of the state to big businessmen close to the Ukrainian leadership with an unspoken permission to fully monopolize them — is a final chord of the Ukrainian politics.  This is an essential step to the federalization of Ukraine according to the Yugoslavian scenario.  It is unnecessary to say that it takes Ukraine back not even to the 20-th, but to the 19-th century.  But it is not worth hoping that the Ukrainian people will keep silent.  It is historically not characteristic of them.  The answer of citizens to the authorities will come in the form of direct democracy.

The second trend, – growth of development of direct democracy in Ukraine.  Thanks to the technical development which is demonstrated in the sphere of information dissemination through the Internet and social networks, a dialogue between authorities and people in the world becomes much more intense.  If authorities don’t wish to notice this, then a civil protest, similar to the Tunisian or Egyptian variants, takes place.  If the dialogue occurs – then the country gets an additional chance to develop, as the USA.

In 2012 manifestations of direct democracy will considerably grow in Ukraine.  A new quality of development of the civil society will occur with a more perfect level of self-organization and more specific demands concerning the protection of rights of citizens to the authorities.  The Ukrainian people will directly ask the authorities why the life of ordinary people in the country gets worse, and that of officials and politicians gets better.  And if the people vote for other politicians at the parliamentary elections this coming autumn, and the authorities falsify elections, then they have high chances to see mass manifestations of direct democracy similar to the Orange Revolution of 2004 or December events in Russia in 2011.  Admission of failure of their own policy will be seen in the readiness of the authorities to call preschedule parliamentary elections.

Hence, if the authorities don’t offer the Ukrainian people a new form of a democratic dialogue this year – they will promptly accelerate their own end.  A “cooling” in relations with the West after the introduction of parliamentary feudalism and a prompt growth of corruption and irresponsibility of the judicial system is the first signal of such scenario.   

The third trend, – the Ukrainian authorities will get more and more self-isolated from the world.  After the failed Ukraine – EU summit at the end of December, 2011, a way of development according to the model of full-fledged integration with the European Union and transition to its system of democratic values has been closed for Ukraine.  Presidential and state image of Ukraine has been irrecoverably harmed.  The West, in particular the EU, has lost trust in promises of the Ukrainian authorities and their capability to come to an agreement.  The existing Ukrainian power is already without hesitation perceived exclusively as an authoritative regime and preparations of sanctions for its isolation from the world have already been started.  Ukraine has come close to the brink of foreign policy isolation and Tymoshenko’s case is not a sole reason for this.

It’s highly probable that this year Europeans will head for isolation.  The Euro-2012 in June-July of this year won’t improve the situation, but, on the contrary, will uncover the essence of present Ukrainian problems.  This will delegitimize the present authoritative regime even more both inside, and outside of Ukraine.  The situation with the observance of democracy norms will get worse.  Parliamentary elections in autumn of 2012, in case they take place, will probably become a “Pyrrhic victory” of the authorities, as they can no more get a real one because of a full loss of trust of the population.  This is confirmed by all sociological polls. 

The course for self-isolation will leave a narrow space for foreign policy maneuvering.  Russia will act as a basic “ally”, China and other partners in Asia, Latin America and Africa will be situational allies.  This will considerably  raise risks for the Ukrainian economy which is mostly supported by the raw materials export. Hence, due to political reasons the existing authorities will blow up their own economic stability, which will become apparent by mass social protests already this autumn and will reach the apogee after elections.

At the same time, Ukraine hasn’t yet completely come into a stalemate so far.  Not all bridges are burned for the president and his team.  But a definitive loss of an initiative by the Ukrainian authorities in the course of communication with their own people and the world will lead to the realization of the worst scenarios for Ukraine in 2012.

Integrity of Ukraine will become a target for governmental intrigues and new unexpectedness for EU bureaucrats.

We, Ukrainians, have been familiar with democracy for a long time. In 1710 the Ukrainian Cossacks created a Constitution of Pylyp Orlyk – the first democratic constitution on the European continent.

Ukrainian people treat EU values as a guide to reforms of economy and the modernization of a political system. In case the EU refuses to sign an Association Agreement, he who will suffer won’t be a corrupt bureaucracy which already a long time ago opened accounts in the European banks. A specific citizen who is actually a carrier of these European values will suffer then. We know that every nation deserves the power it has. However, we don’t have a Ukrainian power, it is a Soviet times heritage.

This will also become a signal for other “Eastern Partnership” states. They will cease to perceive the EU as a reliable guideline for their civilizational, political and security development. As a result the EU will lose some of its authority at its Eastern frontiers. This will also deepen an internal crisis of the European Union.

People in Ukraine can get tired of waiting for reciprocity of the EU officials in the process of the European integration.

In Ukraine there is a whole lot of problems which should be noticed when realizing practical steps on the way to the European integration. Tymoshenko’s case shouldn’t be the only demand of the EU leaders to the Ukraine’s authorities – so that it doesn’t become a hypocrisy.

El mensaje de Barroso no dejaba lugar a dudas: en tiempos de austeridad y con administraciones públicas endeudadas les ha recordado que si las Comunidades Autónomas no contribuyen a hacer los deberes, “la situación para España va a ser francamente difícil”, según el relatado que hizo a los medios Yolanda Barcina. Un recordatorio innecesario, pues, todos ellos conocen la propuesta presentada por el Ejecutivo comunitario de cara al período2014-2020, por el que Bruselas congelará los fondos para proyectos regionales a los Estados miembros que no cumplan con los objetivos de déficit, es decir, donde éste supere el 3% del PIB. Una medida tan injusta como discriminatoria, pues, mide por el mismo rasero a aquellas Comunidades que cumplan sus objetivos presupuestarios equilibrados, como a los que los incumplan, además de hacer culpables a las regiones de los errores que pudieran cometer los gobiernos centrales. Un desatino absoluto que convierte a regiones, länder o comunidades en meros instrumentos administrativos sin capacidad política. La peor de las versiones centralistas de la visión de Europa. Esto ante unos mandatarios que acaban de ponerse a la tremenda tarea de presidentes “manostijeras” aplicando recortes a diestro y siniestro en los servicios del Estado del bienestar que disfrutaban sus ciudadanos. Educación, Sanidad, Dependencia, asistencia a mayores… todo sucumbe a la imparable marea de la reducción del déficit. Y ellos cómplices primeros de la circunstancia tienen que escuchar lecciones del presidente de la Comisión, el político europeo más alejado de la calle, menos cercano a los problemas reales de la gente.

Una situación tan esperpéntica que contradice los principios fundacionales de la Unión Europea. Entre las misiones que la propia UE se adscribe para el siglo XXI, suscrito por sus mandatarios estatales, subraya la de hacer frente a los retos de la globalización y preservar la diversidad de los pueblos de Europa. Y añade: “El antiguo adagio “la unión hace la fuerza” conserva hoy en día toda su pertinencia para los europeos, si bien el proceso de la integración europea no ha acabado con las diferencias en cuanto a formas de vida, tradiciones y culturas de los pueblos que componen la Unión Europea. De hecho, uno de sus valores fundamentales es la diversidad”. Pues bien, la crisis ha hecho olvidar a los todopoderosos presidentes de los Estados europeos sus buenas intenciones de respeto a la riquísima pluralidad nacional que compone el mosaico continental. La simplificación se impone, solo cabe lo grande, aunque en la esencia de los males causantes de la situación que padecemos esté esa manía de homogeneizarnos a todos, sin poner en valor la fuerza de la identidad y las capacidades culturales de cada pueblo por pequeño que sea. Traicionados los principios y borrada la memoria histórica, ¿qué motivos tenemos para confiar en una Unión que dilapida las aportaciones de pueblos milenarios, con civilizaciones que han aportado los capítulos más brillantes de la historia de la Humanidad?

Es evidente que el modelo fracasado es el de los Estados-nación anciano ya en el escenario europeo y que tantas muertes en guerras de décadas nos ha deparado. Las realidades glocales son muchos más ricas hoy en un mundo globalizado con economías en movilidad, con capitales que se mueven velocidades hasta ahora impensables. De ahí que sea necesario no sólo el respeto de lo diverso, sino que se deba primar y se deban utilizar como base fundamental del desarrollo económico, social y cultural. La visión geopolítica europea del siglo XXI no puede basarse en la perspectiva del siglo pasado y menos aún con mapas heredados del XIX. Conceptos antiguos como el manido hinterland que basa todo crecimiento en la creación de áreas o zonas de influencia siguen estando presentes en muchas de las decisiones de los presidentes de las potencias europeas. Y la verdad es que lo único que tienen de novedoso es que les anteponemos la etiqueta de lo neo para seguir calificando procesos imperialistas y ultraliberales. El diseño que de la UE ha pretendido hacer Alemania con la incorporación de los neo-Estados de la Europa central, del Este, Bálticos o de los Balcanes, recuerda a los procesos emprendidos por la Francia imperial o la Rusia zarista en otras épocas. Viejas recetas que siempre han fracasado para tratar de solventar nuevos problemas, que no son sino nuevas realidades que no queremos reconocer. Realidades donde lo pequeño cobra un inmenso valor frente a la incapacidad pesada de lo grande.

Se debería imponer por sentido común en Europa un modelo basado en la cooperación regional, en la creación y fomento de los clusters territoriales donde las alianzas y los trabajos en red generan innovación como elemento motivador de la actividad. Se trata de convencer y no de vencer, se trata de negociar y no de imponer. Una suerte de colaboración de intereses desde el más absoluto respecto a la identidad de cada cual, precisamente porque cuando uno tiene raíces y arraigo, sabe de dónde viene y le resulta más fácil saber a dónde quiere ir. Existen más coherencia en los pueblos con orgullo identitario integrador, por supuesto no excluyente, que en la amalgama que pretenden ser las uniones basadas en la uniformidad y los conceptos consumistas ramplones, como los que actualmente imperan en la Comisión en Bruselas. No podemos permitirnos el lujo de que nuestra UE fracase porque sería lo mismo que reconocer que los europeos somos incapaces de caminar juntos en paz y progreso. Pero de la mismas forma no podemos admitir la imposición de un modelo facilón que aniquile lo mejor de nuestras historias particulares y la riqueza de la diversidad que atesoran nuestros pueblos. Por eso el espectáculo dado por el presidente de la Comisión Europea ante unos sumisos presidentes de Comunidades Autónomas resulta totalmente reprobable.

Más allá de categorías administrativas – Länder, Región, Comunidad Autónoma, Cantón… – en muchos casos subyace la voluntad de pueblos con historia, lengua propia y, sobre todo, capacidad de inventar su futuro, el de sus gentes. Por mucho que políticos y burócratas se empeñen, las realidades locales perduran y siguen representando el sustrato base de las relaciones humanas. Querer obviar a los pueblos de Europa no es más que volver a caer en errores ancestrales que se repiten en nuestro continente como en el día de la marmota. El mapa europeo es cambiante y debe evolucionar a la velocidad que lo está haciendo el mundo. En un concepto de unidad que ha borrado fronteras administrativas, cobra todo el sentido el reconocimiento de las capacidades de los pueblos que más allá de sus límites representan una realidad pujante. No se trata de defender derechos históricos basados en privilegios decadentes, sino de adaptarse a las nuevas necesidades de una economía mundial globalizada. Sirva un ejemplo fácil de comprender: en la reunión con Barroso estaban presentes dos presidentes – López y Barcina – de territorios con sus propias Haciendas forales - Araba, Gipuzkoa, Bizkaia y Navarra – que lo son desde hace más de cinco siglos. Lo relevante no es su longevidad, sino su capacidad a fecha de hoy para servir de modelo de responsabilidad fiscal de territorios correctamente gestionados, donde se gasta e invierte según la capacidad de ingresos. Esas instituciones que siempre han funcionado bien se exponen hoy a pagar como justos por pecadores de otras latitudes. Caprichos e improvisaciones de gobernantes mediocres asustados por la crisis.

Regionen, die beim Erreichen dieser Ziele am besten abschneiden, können künftig mit einer Belohnung rechnen. Wenn EU-Mittel andererseits wegen mangelnder Verwaltungskapazitäten oder durch unsolides Wirtschaften nicht wirkungsvoll verwendet werden, soll die Kommission zukünftig die Finanzierung aussetzen können. Zudem schlägt die Kommission ein einziges, vereinfachtes Regelwerk für fünf europäische Fonds vor.

Bei der Regionalförderung sehen die Vorschläge der Kommission eine neue Förderkategorie vor, sogenannte “Übergangsregionen” mit einem Pro-Kopf-Bruttoinlandsprodukt zwischen 75 und 90 Prozent des EU-weiten Durchschnitts. Europaweit wären dies 51 Regionen, von denen 20 nach den geltenden Regeln ab 2014 keine Regionalförderung mehr erhalten würden, jetzt aber weiterhin mit Unterstützung rechnen könnten.

Im Paket enthalten sind auch Vorschläge für den Europäischen Fonds für die Anpassung an die Globalisierung und für ein neues Programm für sozialen Wandel und soziale Innovation, um den Europäischen Sozialfonds zu ergänzen und untermauern.

Johannes Hahn, EU-Kommissar für Regionalpolitik, erklärte: “Angesichts der Wirtschaftskrise muss die Kohäsionspolitik zu einem Motor für Wachstum und Wettbewerbsfähigkeit werden. Deshalb stellen unsere Vorschläge darauf ab, dass die EU-Fonds noch besser funktionieren. Indem Investitionen gezielt in Schlüsselbereichen für das Wachstum getätigt werden – kleine und mittlere Unternehmen (KMU), Innovation, Energieeffizienz – wird eine größere Wirkung erreicht.”

László Andor, EU-Kommissar für Beschäftigung, Soziales und Integration, ergänzte: “Bei unseren Bemühungen zur Überwindung der Krise ist es entscheidend, dass der Mensch im Vordergrund steht. Die Fonds sind das finanziellen Medium, mit dem unsere politischen Konzepte für Millionen von Menschen tatsächlich greifbar werden, weil sie ihnen dabei helfen, Arbeit zu finden, und zu einer wirtschaftliche Erholung beitragen, bei der viele Arbeitsplätze geschaffen werden.”

Die Vorschläge der Kommission werden nunmehr von den EU-Mitgliedstaaten und vom Europäischen Parlament erörtert. Ziel ist eine Annahme vor Ende 2012, damit die neuen kohäsionspolitischen Programme im Jahr 2014 anlaufen können. Parallel dazu gehen die Verhandlungen über den mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen für den gesamten EU-Haushalt weiter. Die Kommission hat bereits vorgeschlagen, für den Zeitraum 2014 – 2020 den kohäsionspolitischen Instrumenten 336 Mrd. EUR zuzuweisen.

The first-ever modern computer was created in Ukraine. The most reliable space rocket in the world is manufactured in Ukraine. 23% of world resources of black soil are located in Ukraine.

It is easy for me to enumerate lots of people connected with Ukraine who amazed the world by their inventions in engineering and art, military victories, political thought, humanism and charity. Ukraine and its citizens made significant contributions to the formation of a modern western civilization, equally with other nations.

I will write about this in my blog.

Now let me touch other things.

Sometimes it seems to me that today Ukraine exists as a country not because we, Ukrainians, love it, but because Europe and Russia haven’t yet decided how to redivide it publicly.

Modern Ukraine as a state is a total victory of political corruption over human dignity and rights of citizens. It is a sample of modern dictatorship and totalitarianism. This model is very simple, therefore it is very effective. There is no reason to build concentration camps – they are old-fashioned and not effective. Much more profitable is to make all the people of the country work for the state budget and pay incredible taxes, at the same time privately owning that budget.

Besides, it is very reliable when all law-enforcement structures protect such a “state” and such a “state” budget. And it is very convenient, when those who declare themselves to be the opposition, aspire not to changes in the state policy, but to backstage arrangements regarding non-aggression or personal revenge to those who are in power today.

I will write about this in my blog too.

It is most difficult to write about Europeans.  They don’t want to trust in the axiom which is, either Europe exports democracy to Ukraine, or Ukraine exports corruption to Europe. Why will it be so? Firstly,  because it is an axiom. Secondly, because Europeans are full (well-fed), therefore they will defend themselves more slowly, than they will be attacked. And thirdly, because Europe has no unitary strategy of relations with Ukraine, and each European country has got confused in tactics of its interests.

I will also write about the USA and Russia, and about democracy which they have, we have and Europe has, as well.

The goal of the informational presence of the “People First” Foundation on the “EurActiv” web-portal is delivering information about Ukraine, its internal and external problems, its risks and resources for their overcoming to Europeans.

Ukrainian Foundation for Democracy “People First” creates and develops projects supporting democracy.  We are ready to mutually build democracy in the name of a safe Europe and a renewed Russia.

Changes in Ukraine will directly or indirectly influence the EU, as well.  In case of growth of poverty, aggravation of criminality, drug trafficking, people trafficking, illegal arms trade, HIV, tuberculosis and other grave illnesses expansion, Ukraine can become a serious center of production of risks for Europe.  These risks have no borders.

I can be sure that the answer to the question “Does the European Union need a second Kosovo or Belarus in Ukraine” is obvious.

History proves that the most efficient means for preventing chaos and mess is democracy. Ukrainian democracy traditionally was characteristic of being weak and longing to anarchy  – self-identification on the local levels. In Ukraine, a discussion about mental and cultural distinctions of the country between its Western and Eastern parts is topical, as is true about many EU states. However, even weak Ukrainian democracy is the most reliable protective barrier for the European Union to those threats which Ukrainian authoritarianism can produce.

For Ukraine to worthily join the unitary European family of nations and cultures, the “People First” Foundation has launched an innovative project supporting Ukrainian democracy through the creation of the “People’s Charter” as a social treaty.

I hope that thanks to mutual efforts we will not only open up Ukraine for you again in the informational context, but also will be able to exchange thoughts and ideas regarding the further effective development of European and Ukrainian democracy in the name of the mutual future.

June 29, 2011

Author: Web Team RCat |

Source: Barometer of Political Opinion (2nd wave 2011) – CEO

Translation: GTIR

The awesome demonstration in July 10th, 2010, with 1,5 milion people marching, or the successive Plebiscites for Independence, held between 2009 and 2011, with 900.000 participants, both showed the freedom willingness of the Catalan people.

This will is now corroborated by data from the barometer just published by Centre d’Estudis de l’Opinió (a catalan government body in charge of polls and surveys). A large majority of the citizens of Catalonia, when asked, favoured Independence, and 42,9% of them would vote Yes in a referendum scenario. Only 28.2% would vote NO; 23,3% would not vote or abstain, and, finally 5.2% do not know or no answer.

Taking into account the turnout, this implies that the YES to Independence would collect at least 55.8% of votes, against 36.7% for the NO side, and 7.5% among blank and void votes.

It is worth to remember that what counts both in a Referendum and in an electoral contest is those who vote (as happened with the 2006 Statute ratification referendum).

Additionally, Barometer data also shows citizens dissatisfaction with how democracy works, and a 66.3% of them show little or not satisfaction at all.

As for citizens trust in Catalan politicians, data shows an average of  4.58 out of 10.

Also, unemployment and job insecurity (51,7%), economy functioning (17.3%) and dissatisfaction with politics (8.6%) are seen by respondents as the most important issues.

Even though Reagrupament didn’t achieve enough support at polls in last November election to gain parliamentary representation, he certainly hit the diagnosis about what our people badly need and ask for: Independence, Democracy and Work