Germans are watching Ukraine with awe and wonder. It's not every day that a people refuses to accept "official" (albeit forged) election results and takes to the street in protest. It's not every day that an "official" election loser (Viktor Yushchenko) declares himself the winner and swears himself into office. When you add that Ukranians long lived under the hard foot of communism, where their jobs, salaries, families, even foodstuffs were determined and monitored by the state, the tale begins to sound like a true holiday season miracle. Yet, it is true. And German papers can't stop commenting.

"The presidential election that Ukraine experienced on Sunday may just have been the beginning of their journey to Europe," writes the conservative daily Die Welt. "In Europe's (geographically) second-largest land (next to Russia), the fiercest power struggle since the 1991 Ukraniain independence has broken out. It is a battle not only about people, but about principle, about the direction this nation is going and -- as Yushchenko never tires of saying -- about complying with justice and the laws." The paper praises the tenacity of the Ukranian people and begs Europe to support them. "Not only because of what they are fighting for, but also because the non-violent way this velvet revolution of Kiev is unfolding has earned the Ukrainians the unlimited support of Europe."

Similar praise comes from the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, which comments how seriously the will of the people was misread by the current administration and its "Russian advisors." They thought "the people -- as they have been accustomed to doing -- would simply accept the outcome. In this they fooled themselves." It adds, "What is happening in Kiev has to make even the most skeptical in western Europe see that this is a people -- at least a great percentage of them -- that is ready to shed its Soviet background and to fight for what it believes in."

The daily Sueddeutsche Zeitung has a slightly different take and lays much of the blame at the door of Russian President Vladamir Putin, who, it insists, could have prevented the chaos, by calling for an investigation into the charges of election fraud. Instead, he congratulated the "winner," Viktor Yanukovich, for his "convincing victory." Obviously, says the paper, Putin wants to keep Ukraine under his thumb. "Russia does not want to let the country out from under its influence and is not ready to accept the feelings of a majority of the people." Such a stance, the paper comments, does not bode well and defeats Russia's larger goals. "A liberal, open Russia could eventually cause more countries in the Eastern hemisphere to flock to it than an authoritarian Russia. In such a case, the West would have no grounds for distrust."

The business daily Handelsblatt concurs, saying Ukraine is of vital interest for Putin -- not just because it is an important corridor for transporting energy -- but also because it gives Moscow clout. "The master of the Kremlin invested himself heavily in the Ukrainian elections and will continue to do so in order to keep control over all the lands between the Donau (River) and the Don (River) firmly in the hands of Moscow. This has less to do with economics than with Putin's political goal of rebuilding a Russian empire." Without Kiev, the paper writes, "Moscow becomes a regional power."

When they take their eyes off Ukraine, editorialists have plenty of pent up venom for Iraq. They are especially peeved by the overly harmonious atmosphere surrounding a two-day conference at the Red Sea resort of Sharm el Sheikh, Egypt. The conference ended Tuesday with an eight- page communique outlining plans for Iraq and high hopes for Iraqi elections in January. Such hopes are foolish, says the Financial Times Deutschland. "You don't have to be a prophet to predict a gloomy election scenario. It will be accompanied by a level of violence that will go way beyond the current situation. But this worrying -- albeit realistic -- prediction is still no argument for postponing Iraq's first-ever democratic election. In six months, the security situation will be no better. It will be worse."

The Sueddeutsche sees the smiles and photo ops at Sharm el Sheikh as a sham. "The good news that there was unity at Sharm el Sheikh is in reality a bad sign," the paper says. "Those participating in the conference have collectively denied the reality of the war for the sake of harmony.... Which problems would elections solve? Elections don't create security, don't bring an end to terror or the presence of foreign troops and they certainly don't create a just balance between the different ethnic groups.... If all parties cling blindly to one day in January, then this is nothing but just another expression of desperation."