Tunnel vision?

Diane

Ukrainian officials dismiss Western Y2K concerns

SERGEI SHARGORODSKY, Associated Press Writer
Friday, October 1, 1999

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/1999/10/01/international1936EDT0754.DTL

[Fair Use: For Educational/Research Purposes Only]

(10-01) 16:36 PDT KIEV, Ukraine (AP) -- Ukrainian officials on Friday dismissed concerns about possible Y2K problems, saying they aren't as dependent as many Western countries on computers.

``Computers have not infiltrated our lives that deeply, and it would be slightly easier for us than for the heavily computerized nations,'' said Ukraine's national security chief, Volodymyr Horbulin. ``We are not afraid of the catastrophic consequences that people are forecasting us so persistently.''

However, the British and U.S. governments have recently issued warnings about possible effects of computer glitches in the former Soviet republic -- including on nuclear power plants.

The warnings ring ominously in Ukraine, which was the site of the world's worst nuclear accident -- the1986 explosion at the Chernobyl atomic power plant. The country runs a total of 14 working reactors at five nuclear power plants.

Computers at Chernobyl had been reprogrammed and successfully tested by international nuclear experts, Ukrainian officials say.

The British Foreign Office recently advised against nonessential travel to Ukraine around New Year's, saying the glitch could affect the finance, banking, transport and power sectors. The U.S. State Department said last month that Ukraine ``appears to be unprepared'' to confront the Y2K bug.''

Ukrainian officials have promised to allow American government experts to examine all vital energy facilities -- including nuclear power plants.

Nuclear officials, however, long have been saying that the plants will not suffer any malfunctions or shutdowns on Jan. 1, 2000, adding that their computer systems were nearly fully immunized against the millennium bug.

``The Y2K problem does not exist for us,'' Vissarion Kim, the executive director of the state nuclear energy company Energoatom, said recently.

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), October 03, 1999

Answers

"If you need confirmation the y2k problem does not exist for anyone, ask my brothers Hoff Kim and Flint Kim," said Vissarion.

-- Bill (y2khippo@yahoo.com), October 03, 1999.

Actually, there is a valid point -- if you really don't depend that much on computer technology, then you won't be affected that much by it when it craps out. I doubt if the average Ukrainian is going to get too bent out of shape if the banking system collapses, or even if the electricity goes out. Lots of these remote places have always had to take a "roll with the punches" outlook on this, and can cope with such interruptions far better and longer, it would seem to me.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), October 03, 1999.

My friend's wife lives in the Ukraine--yes, now. Things are not pretty there. I'm urging her to try to get here before the end of the year and just stay--although the State Department's rules are that she has to wait another year (She was here on a special study program and had to sign something that she wouldn't move here for two years...). They have nothing there--oh yes, she has a computer and is on email, so I don't know how noncomputer dependent they are. She has been an administrator at a university and works for a U.S. based charitable organization...

-- Mara Wayne (MaraWayne@aol.com), October 03, 1999.

So why would the Ukraine... home of Chernobyl... be Y2K "different" than Russia?

Beats me.

Diane

Washington File
( USIA now merged into State Dept)

01 October 1999

Text: Lugar Says Y2K May Disrupt Russian Strategic Systems

(Recommends concerted effort to eliminate threats) (2660)

The Y2K computer problem may disrupt many Russian strategic systems, said Sen. Richard Lugar before the Senate Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem Sept. 28.

The chance of an accidental missile launch is nearly non-existent, Lugar said, but there are many other concerns to be addressed. Utilities, transportation, telecommunications and medical services might operate at less than half their capacity.

In his testimony before the committee, Lugar said "cooperation over the transition period needs to center on three specific areas: early warning systems, nuclear weapon security, and nuclear power plants."

Lugar recommended a concerted effort to eliminate Y2K generated threats now rather than deal with the potential cost and accidents that could arise later. Carefully executed programs to reduce Y2K threats are in the national security interests of both the United States and Russia.

Following is the text of Lugar's testimony:

(begin text)

http://www.usia.gov/cgi-bin/washfile/display.pl?p=/products/washfile/ latest&f=99100102.glt&t=/products/washfile/newsitem.shtml

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), October 03, 1999.

Washington File

01 October 1999

Text: Beyrle on Potential Y2K Problems in Russia

(Disruptions likely in telecommunications infrastructure) (3000)

John Beyrle, deputy to the special advisor to the Secretary of State for the Newly Independent States, addressed the potential problems Y2K will have on the Russian federation in his testimony before a Senate Special Committee on September 28.

According to Beyrle, Russia is likely to experience disruptions in its electrical grid and telecommunications infrastructure, with subsequent effects on its financial, industrial and government sectors.

Beyrle also expressed concern for the Russian telecommunications sector because a great deal of its equipment contains embedded microprocessors that might not be compliant. However, Beyrle does not expect severe, long term consequences.

Following is the text of Beyrle's testimony:

http://www.usia.gov/cgi-bin/washfile/display.pl?p=/products/washfile/ latest&f=99100101.glt&t=/products/washfile/newsitem.shtml

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), October 03, 1999.

As I understand it, there are two key Y2K issues regarding Ukraine, Russia etc. The first is of course the status of the nuclear sector. From what I've been able to glean (albeit very meagre), the key systems have been fixed or would not pose a threat to the running, safety and security of these plants. It's my understanding that the International Atomic Energy Agency has been very active in checking that these countries do not pose a safety risk to themselves and others around them. The second issue is whether the oil and natural gas pipelines that pass through these countries to Western Europe, particularly Germany, could be affected by failures in computer systems. Once again, the information is a bit meagre (as it is in Europe as a whole) about the risks and what has been done to fix them. As I understand it, many of the organisations that run these pipelines are either partly or fully (or operationally controlled) owned by Western multinational companies.

There's another question that comes up time and again, which to my mind has never satisfactorily been answered (I think it was Drew Parkhill that first raised it). That is, if the embedded systems problem is not the bogeyman it was feared a year ago in Western countries, then why should the less developed countries be more at risk from embedded systems? Are their embedded systems different? There's something missing in this picture. I'm not a technical, so perhaps Cherri or FactFinder, or someone who has researched this problem in greater depth can throw some light on what all this 'look out for the other guy, especially Ivan' is all about.

-- Chris Byrne (cbyrne98@hotmail.com), October 03, 1999.