HOME  DISINFORMATION  PLUNDER  PLUNDER BRAINS
Document concerning proposed land reform in Ukraine: CONCLUSION
Prytulak   InfoUkes Posting   10-Feb-1998

Go to the INTRODUCTION   This is the CONCLUSION

Date:  Tue, 10 Feb 1998 11:02:03 -0800
To: [email protected]
From:  Lubomyr Prytulak
Subject: Document concerning proposed land reform in Ukraine: CONCLUSION


At 05:25 PM 2/9/1998 -0800, I (Lubomyr Prytulak) posted to POLITICS under the Subject "Document concerning proposed land reform in Ukraine" the following:

I have received a document from Ukraine detailing proposed legislation concerning the reform of land laws in Ukraine.  The source of the document, I will for the moment withold.  The chief aim of the proposed legislation is to resolve the question of land ownership in such a way as to promote Ukrainization.

The questions which the document is likely to elicit in some minds are:
  1. In what region of Ukraine, and from what movement, does the proposed legislation originate?
  2. Would the world permit such legislation to be passed without censure?
  3. Would Western countries, particularly the U.S., continue foreign aid to Ukraine in the event such legislation was passed?
  4. Does the proposed legislation contravene international laws or international declarations of human rights?
  5. Does the proposed legislation have a parallel anywhere else in the civilized world?
  6. Is it conceivable that such legislation could be passed without Ukraine erupting into civil war?

Here is my translation from the Ukrainian of a portion of this document:

The State of Ukraine will limit land privatization to around 8% of total land, the remaining 92% will be defined as "state land."  After those lands are defined as owned by the State of Ukraine, they can be leased for long periods only to Ukrainians.  The right to a long-term lease of such land will be denied to all non-Ukrainians without a single exception.  This denial will be enforced by placing all state lands under the administration of the Ukrainian National Fund, whose statutes will forbid their long-term lease, or any other use, to non-Ukrainians.  Their lease to Ukrainians, conditional upon the prohibition of sub-lease to non-Ukrainians, will be granted for a period of 49 years with an automatic renewal for another 49-year period.  Consequently, they will be treated as property and will be bought, sold and mortgaged, provided the party to the deal is Ukrainian.  An exception would be a small number of cases of leasing state land to non-Ukrainians for grazing for periods never exceeding eleven months.  A Ukrainian lessee of state land will be allowed, often subsidized or otherwise encouraged, to develop the land and especially to build a house for himself there, but a non-Ukrainian lessee will be strictly prohibited to do so.  Leasing state land to a non-Ukrainian will be accompanied by restrictive conditions, such as the prohibition of construction or development, or of sub-leasing it to somebody else.

And now, I (Lubomyr Prytulak) go on to explain:

I must start by reaffirming one aspect of my world view, which is that Ukraine is being plundered, most importantly of its intellectual assets, and most importantly by Israel.

Israel is aided in its plundering by: (1) the poor economic performance of Ukraine; (2) the incessant inculcation of the view that Ukrainians are Nazis and anti-Semites; and (3) the holding out to some of the Ukrainian intelligentsia the hope of a better life in Israel.

The hemorrhaging of the Ukrainian intelligentsia can be stemmed ... how?  Obviously, by reversing the three conditions above; that is, by: (1) improving Ukraine's economy; (2) refuting the image of Ukrainians as Nazis and anti-Semites; and (3) demonstrating that life in Israel has its drawbacks.

What can be my role in achieving these three goals?  (1) I can't do much to improve Ukraine's economy, other than to point out that Leonid Kuchma is a gangster who has (you know what's coming) turned Ukraine into the Sicily of Europe (with apologies to Sicily for the invidious comparison).  My contribution here is a small one, and yet if every Diasporan spoke as I do, it would have a large impact.  (2) I do take steps to refute the image of Ukrainians as Nazis and anti-Semites.  (3) And the time has now come to demonstrate that life in Israel has its drawbacks.  As you can see, I am forced, in the defense of Ukraine, to take this additional measure to begin demonstrating to Ukrainians that there are certain considerations that point to the conclusion that emigrating from Ukraine to Israel will be a mixed blessing.  Israel disseminates disinformation in order to steal Ukrainian brains; it is incumbent on Ukraine to disseminate information to keep these brains from being stolen it's that simple.  If you can see where my reasoning has gone wrong, please explain this to me.

So what does this have to do with the above passage concerning land reform in Ukraine?  Precisely this that if Ukraine passed such legislation, it would be branded as a rogue state having no respect for human rights, and would be isolated by the international community.  In fact, Ukraine does not have such laws, and as far as I know does not contemplate passing such laws.  However, in reality, the State of Israel does already have exactly such laws, has had them since the inception of the state.  The laws are aimed not only at Arabs generally, and Palestinians specifically, but against all non-Jews.  The above passage, therefore, does not describe anything that exists in Ukraine or that is contemplated for Ukraine rather, it is a modification of a passage from Israel Shahak's "Open Secrets: Israeli Nuclear and Foreign Policies," Pluto Press, London and Chicago, 1997, pp. 169-170.  I introduced the passage as I did because everything is forgiven Israel and nothing is forgiven Ukraine, so to present the laws as Ukrainian was more likely to elicit a negative response to them.  And now here is the real quotation:

The laws of the State of Israel pertaining to the use of land are based on the principle of discrimination against all non-Jews.  The State of Israel has turned most of the land in Israel (about 92 per cent) into "state land."  After those lands are defined as owned by the State of Israel they can be leased for long periods only to Jews.  The right to a long-term lease of such land is denied to all non-Jews without a single exception. This denial is enforced by placing all state lands under the administration by the Jewish National Fund, a branch of the World Zionist Organization, whose racist statutes forbid their long-term lease, or any other use, to non-Jews.  Their lease to Jews, conditioned upon the prohibition of sub-lease to non-Jews, is granted for the period of 49-years with an automatic renewal for another 49-year period.  Consequently, they are treated as property and are bought, sold and mortgaged, provided the party to the deal is Jewish.  The small and decreasing number of cases of leasing state land to non-Jews for grazing is never for more than eleven months.  A Jewish leasee of state land is allowed, often subsidized or otherwise encouraged, to develop the land and especially to build a house for himself there, but non-Jewish leasee is strictly prohibited to do so.  Leasing state land to a non-Jew is accompanied by restrictive conditions, such as the prohibition of construction or development, or of sub-leasing it to somebody else.

And so what conclusion?  Simply this: that Israel is a racist, apartheid state worse than was South Africa, and for this reason, and because it is surrounded by a hostile sea of some hundred million Arabs, and because it has incurred the ill-will of some 900 million Muslims, has a short life expectancy.  Israel today with respect to the Palestinians is replaying the role of the Jews who ruled Ukraine in 1648 seemingly all-powerful and immovable, seemingly destined to rule forever, and yet having overlooked the possibility of the emergence of a Bohdan Khmelnytsky.

I cannot help being reminded of my own description, recently posted to POLITICS, of the Jewish delegation before the Canadian Senate committee on the question of including a Jewish Holocaust museum within the Canadian War Museum.  What struck me was how calm, articulate, and intelligent were the members of this delegation and yet how they had come to the meeting having made a gigantic miscalculation, and then paid the price by rousing the indignation of at least one key senator, and more importantly, losing credibility with possibly all impartial observers.  The same strikes me as being the case in Israel today the people on the whole are intelligent, gifted, capable of achieving miracles, and yet all their work must come to naught because it is based on a set of massive miscalculations.

The State of Israel cannot long survive that is what must be obvious to anyone who takes the trouble to examine the facts of the matter.  A nation built on Zionist ideology is necessarily frangible, inescapably carries within itself the seeds of its own destruction.  Notice in the following quotation the key statement, "ISRAEL IS UNDERMINING ITS OWN IMPERIAL AND MILITARY POWER":

It is easy to see that by the rigorous enforcement of such laws, also against the most loyal supporters of the state, Israel is undermining its own imperial and military power.  Let me give two instances of this.  The first concerns the Druzes who serve in the Israeli Army, Police and Intelligence, often reaching high ranks in those services.  They are nevertheless legally barred from use of the state land and as non-Jews they suffer from other discriminatory laws as well.  The same can be said about other Palestinians who either serve in the above-mentioned security services or reach high ranks in various branches of civil service, for example as judges.  Israel had appointed Palestinians to be consuls and other diplomatic representatives.  It is now contemplating appointing the first Palestinian ambassador.  But a Palestinian general, ambassador or judge is still subject to the discussed discriminatory laws.  He still does not have the right to lease even a small plot of state land, whereas any released Jewish murderer has this right as matter of course.  (Israel Shahak, Open Secrets: Israeli Nuclear and Foreign Policies, Pluto Press, London and Chicago, 1997, pp. 170-171)

Does such discrimination as we have been discussing above really undermine Israeli imperial and military power?  Well, let me tell you a short anecdote.  I recollect seeing on TV many years ago an interview with a Soviet defector who had held some intermediate military rank.  Among the topics discussed was his reasons for defection.  One of these struck me, and I remember it to this day.  It was that his superior had addressed him as "ty" and not "vy."  (To any reader who doesn't speak Ukrainian, these two words are parallel to the French "tu" and "vous" the first being singular and familiar, the second being singular-polite or plural.)  To address someone with the familiar "ty" when he is expecting the polite "vy" can be like slapping him in the face.  This alone can eat at a man's heart, and can make him disloyal to a disrespectful superior, and ultimately to the state that the superior represents.  How much more does it eat at a man's heart that he cannot own land and that he does not enjoy equality before the law?


This, then, is one reason why no Ukrainian should move to Israel.  This is one reason that every Ukrainian should be reminded of daily for not moving to Israel.  This is one reason why every Ukrainian who has moved to Israel should move back.  The reason is that Israel is a racist, apartheid state that has no future.  There are other reasons, but this is one.

It is not for me to venture such unfamiliar comparisons and dire predictions on my own I don't know enough, and I am not bold enough.  I only know enough to repeat what wiser people have already said before me in this case, again, I am repeating what Israel Shahak, the Israeli Jew and Holocaust survivor, has seen and foretold.  You can find Shahak's own words in my letters to rabbi Bleich formerly of Brooklyn, but for the time being, of Kyiv particularly in the four letters below, with Shahak's comparison (which I only repeat) of contemporary Israelis to Jews in 17th century Poland to be found in Letter 5:

Bleich Letter 2
Bleich Letter 3
Bleich Letter 4
Bleich Letter 5


Lubomyr Prytulak
Ukrainian Archive:    www.ukar.org

To keep the Palestinians as poor as possible has always been an aim of Israeli policy, in my view also in order to arrest social change in their society.  With Arafat's complicity Israel can now achieve this aim without eliciting any strong protests, and without spending much of its manpower on suppressing such protests.  In other words, it can impoverish the Palestinians cheaply and effectively.    Israel Shahak, Open Secrets


HOME  DISINFORMATION  PLUNDER  PLUNDER BRAINS