HOME  DISINFORMATION  PLUNDER 
Prytulak   InfoUkes Posting   03-Oct-1997   The 17 surgeons (an even more radical conclusion)
Date:  Fri, 03 Oct 1997 10:20:47 -0700
To:  [email protected]
From:  Lubomyr Prytulak
Subject:  The 17 surgeons (an even more radical conclusion)
In my posting to POLITICS "Re: Friends of Ukraine (The 17 surgeons)" of Oct 2/97, I took the perhaps radical and provocative position that the U.S. aid project in question was a public relations gesture and that with the same effort, the U.S. could have provided Ukraine with substantial aid � figuratively, the U.S. could have given Ukraine a blood transfusion instead of merely throwing it a bandaid.  In the one project in question, the U.S. did improve the lives of 37 Ukrainians, but with the same effort it could have improved the lives of thousands of Ukrainians � there are some 15,000 Ukrainians employed in making exportable coats, and if exports doubled, that might provide work for another 15,000 Ukrainians, and the increased wealth of Ukraine would make possible more than a puny 37 operations.

Reflecting on what I said, I think now that it was not radical enough.

I arrive at my more extreme position by considering a second example. Ukraine presently sells tanks to Pakistan.  For this reason, I consider Ukraine's tank industry as a success, and being a success, any improvement in that industry would make it even more of a success, such that more tanks could be sold on international markets.  Now is it not plainly the case that the U.S. could have sent not 17 surgeons to Ukraine for two weeks but 17 of its top tank-design engineers?  And if these top engineers were permitted to share technology with Ukraine the way the surgeons were, would this not have enormously helped Ukraine and increased the probability of more tank sales?  And if teams of engineers repeatedly visited Ukraine over several years � the way teams of surgeons are doing � then the effect would be even greater.

More importantly, the Ukrainian tanks are probably weakest with respect to advanced computer-guided systems that are installed in American tanks, so that if the U.S. shared this technology with Ukraine, and in fact helped Ukraine set up the capacity to manufacture these electronic components on Ukrainian territory, then it is possible that Ukrainian tanks would become a world-class best buy.  A Ukrainian tank was reputed to be the best tank in WW II:

One surprise Hitler's army encountered was the T-34 tank which was designed and built in Ukraine in the Kharkiv Tractor Factory.  The German general von Rundstedt called the T-34 the "best tank in the world" and von Kleist said it was the "finest in the world."  The first Ukrainian T-34 tank, no. 1, was tested by successfully driving it 1,000 miles from Kharkiv, Ukraine, to Moscow, Russia and back.  The T-34 medium tank was superior to the German Panzer tanks because it had a more powerful cannon, a higher top speed (32 MPH to 25 for the Panzers), the armour was so superior that German shells bounced off it, superior welded construction invented by Academician Paton, and it had a wider track so it did not get bogged down in the mud like the German Panzer.  The Germans decided that the Ukrainian T-34 tank was so superior to the Panzer that they would have copied it but "Unfortunately for Germany this was not possible.  German engineering technology was not up to it, many of the special alloys used in its construction were not available," states Andrew Kershaw in Weapons & War Machines (New Yor 1976) p. 192.  (Andrew Gregorovich, Forum, Spring 1995, p.25).

And a Ukrainian tank could be the world's best tank today � Ukraine does still have (if they haven't all been stolen) the scientists and engineers and the skilled labor and the dedication to make this possible � with a little help from the West.  The gain to Ukraine would be in the order of hundreds of millions of dollars per year, and the number of knee and hip replacements that this added income would buy Ukrainians is greater than 37.

When the U.S. is genuinely interested in helping, it does share technology, and it does participate in joint development projects � as it does with Israel.  When it does not share technology and does not participate in joint projects, then it is not genuinely interested in helping.

And now here come the radical conclusions:

(1) There is absolutely no mystery as to how to help Ukraine.  The West is able, simply by signing pieces of paper, to immediately increase Ukrainian exports by hundreds of millions of dollars annually � that is, by simply removing tariff restrictions and quotas and boycotts.  And it is able, furthermore, to offer advice and guidance and technology sharing to those key Ukrainian industries that are already competitive in that they already enjoy international markets � I am thinking here of textiles, sugar, tanks, nuclear technology � so that Ukrainian exports in these areas immediately doubled or tripled or quadrupled.  Thus, there is no mystery as to how to put Ukraine on its feet immediately � but the West doesn't do it.  The West wrings its hands concerning the mystery of Ukraine's pitiful economic performance.  What to do with such a basket case?  I know! � Let's send them 37 knee and joint operations!  In fact, however, even while asking why Ukraine appears so pale, the West has its hands wrapped tightly around Ukraine's throat.

(2) With respect to tanks (as the archetypical example), the U.S. does not want the Ukrainian tank industry to succeed, because every Ukrainian tank sold is one less U.S. tank sold, and because the U.S. would then lose some control over who those tanks are sold to.  The U.S. does want Ukraine on its welfare rolls because a welfare recipient is docile, predictable, uncompetitive.

(3) More generally, the West does not want Ukraine to succeed in any department because Ukraine's success is necessarily someone else's loss. It actually wants Ukraine to sell fewer coats, fewer tanks, less sugar, less nuclear technology.  It says it wants Ukraine to succeed, but whenever Ukraine begins to, the West's blood pressure rises and the grip of its fingers around Ukraine's throat tightens.  How to help Ukraine � give it massive loans while strangling its ability to repay those loans � once mired in debt, it will give the West no further trouble.

Lubomyr Prytulak

HOME  DISINFORMATION  PLUNDER