Ukraine prosecutor alleges interference by U.S. ambassador

Ukraine
prosecutor alleges interference by U.S. ambassador

Prosecutor General of Ukraine Yuriy Lutsenko ignited
a diplomatic scandal on March 20 when he told thehill.com news site that U.S.
Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch gave him a list of Ukrainian
officials not to prosecute during their first meeting in 2016. “My response
to that is it is unacceptable,” he said. “Nobody in this country, neither our
president, nor our parliament, nor our ambassador, will stop me from
prosecuting whether there is a crime.” As evidence of his claim, Lutsenko
provided thehill.com reporter John Solomon with a copy of a letter sent by a
U.S. diplomat in April 2016 in which he asks the deputy prosecutor general to
stop investigating the activities of David Sakvarelidze, also a deputy
prosecutor at the time.

In response to the claim, a U.S. State Department
spokesperson said it was “an outright fabrication,” thehill.com reported in
its March 20 article. This morning, the U.S. Embassy to Ukraine also denied
the claims when asked for its response by the TSN television news staff. “The
statement of the prosecutor general of Ukraine has no basis in reality and
has as its goal to weaken the reputation of ambassador Yovanovitch,” the
statement said, as reported by the Interfax-Ukraine news agency.

In thehill.com interview, Lutsenko also said the
prosecutor general’s office will investigate whether Ukrainian law
enforcement officials intentionally leaked financial records during the 2016
U.S. president campaign about then-Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort in
order to to sway the election in favor of Hillary Clinton. The probe was prompted
by an anonymous Ukrainian MP’s release of a recording in which a top official
admits his agency leaked the records to help Clinton’s campaign, Lutsenko
said, as reported by Solomon. The same MP secured a court ruling that the
leak amounted to “an illegal intrusion into the American election campaign,”
Lutsenko said.

Zenon Zawada:
Lutsenko’s revelations are an orchestrated attempt by the Poroshenko
administration to discredit Yovanovitch, who recently criticized the
Ukrainian leadership for a series of questionable actions that undermine
anti-corruption efforts. Lutsenko delivered his accusations just 11 days
ahead of the presidential elections, which are certain to be mired by vote
fraud accusations and protests (regardless if they’re justified).

By igniting this scandal with Yovanovitch, the
Poroshenko administration to some extent undermines her objectivity should
she make a statement questioning the legitimacy of the vote. This could also
be interpreted as the Poroshenko administration setting the necessary
preconditions to engage in vote manipulations, as has already been alleged by Internal Affairs Minister Avakov.

However, any U.S. ambassador coordinates their key
statements with the State Department leadership (whose credibility won’t be
affected by this scandal), and these elections won’t be any different.
Neither do we believe Yovanovitch’s credibility will be much affected as the
Poroshenko administration has far more skeletons in its own closet to be
accusing others of unethical or hostile activity. It’s hard to imagine any
experienced U.S. ambassador – such as Yovanovitch – producing such a list and
violating diplomatic protocol.

The fact that Lutsenko coupled his accusation with
the announcement of the “Manafort leaks” investigation is a signal to the
White House that the Poroshenko administration still wants to cooperate with
the U.S., but without Yovanovitch’s involvement. But this is a moot point
since Yovanovitch’s tenure as U.S. ambassador to Ukraine concludes in May. So
the Poroshenko administration saw little to lose in this attack, giving her a
proverbial slap in the face before her departure. Naturally, Yovanovitch and
her colleagues won’t be giving Poroshenko the benefit of the doubt if vote
manipulation evidence reaches a critical mass.