Showing posts with label Yanukovych. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Yanukovych. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Revenge or Justice? Old criminal case re-launched against ex-PM of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko.
Today, on 12 May 2010, former Prime Minister and current active oppositionist Yulia Tymoshenko visited the Main Investigative Department of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine. She was officially informed that the criminal case No4912-93 has been re-launched against her.
It is an old, but not very clear story. There is no official information yet on the content of a case, but it is said that the case concerns suspected bribes. I may only say for sure that the criminal case No4912-93 against Mrs. Tymoshenko was opened in May 2004, while she was in a strong opposition to President Leonid Kuchma. Current President Viktor Yanukovych had been serving as a Prime Minister that time.
According to the Prosecutor General’s Office information service, the proceedings were closed in January 2005 – after the Orange Revolution and the inauguration of President Viktor Yushchenko. The planned investigative actions were not completed, PGO press service claims, and the pre-court trial has been re-launched.
Yulia Tymoshenko states that the case No4912-93 was closed in 2004 (e.g. before she came to power). At the today’s press briefing near the office of the PGO Main Investigative Department, she said that the investigation was dismissed due to the absence of crime components. ‘Prosecutor General’s Office is a repressive instrument of Yanukovych”, she argues. “A big shadow project on privatization of state monopolies has been prepared, using the technology of foundation of joint ventures with foreign country. Our political team is the only one which opposes to that”.
The same time some fresh cases have been opened against the team of Yulia Tymoshenko. The Vice Prime Minister of Ukraine Volodymyr Sivkovych has recently informed journalists that investigation of cases on stealing the budgetary funds by the Tymoshenko’s Government is planned to be finished by autumn 2010. By that time “the majority of opposition members will think on how to hide or escape”, he added. The alleged corrupt practices in a budget sphere are estimated to overcome 100 billion UAH (more than 12.5 billion USD).
Meanwhile, on 17-18 May the President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev will visit Ukraine again – to sign more documents, strengthening the ties between two countries. First of all, an agreement on the demarcation of Russia-Ukraine border is to be signed. Let’s see what Ukraine is granting to Russia in this field.
It is interesting to mention that on the day of Medvedev’s arrival to Kiev, Yulia Tymoshenko is invited to the PGO office again. Revenge or justice?
It is an old, but not very clear story. There is no official information yet on the content of a case, but it is said that the case concerns suspected bribes. I may only say for sure that the criminal case No4912-93 against Mrs. Tymoshenko was opened in May 2004, while she was in a strong opposition to President Leonid Kuchma. Current President Viktor Yanukovych had been serving as a Prime Minister that time.
According to the Prosecutor General’s Office information service, the proceedings were closed in January 2005 – after the Orange Revolution and the inauguration of President Viktor Yushchenko. The planned investigative actions were not completed, PGO press service claims, and the pre-court trial has been re-launched.
Yulia Tymoshenko states that the case No4912-93 was closed in 2004 (e.g. before she came to power). At the today’s press briefing near the office of the PGO Main Investigative Department, she said that the investigation was dismissed due to the absence of crime components. ‘Prosecutor General’s Office is a repressive instrument of Yanukovych”, she argues. “A big shadow project on privatization of state monopolies has been prepared, using the technology of foundation of joint ventures with foreign country. Our political team is the only one which opposes to that”.
The same time some fresh cases have been opened against the team of Yulia Tymoshenko. The Vice Prime Minister of Ukraine Volodymyr Sivkovych has recently informed journalists that investigation of cases on stealing the budgetary funds by the Tymoshenko’s Government is planned to be finished by autumn 2010. By that time “the majority of opposition members will think on how to hide or escape”, he added. The alleged corrupt practices in a budget sphere are estimated to overcome 100 billion UAH (more than 12.5 billion USD).
Meanwhile, on 17-18 May the President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev will visit Ukraine again – to sign more documents, strengthening the ties between two countries. First of all, an agreement on the demarcation of Russia-Ukraine border is to be signed. Let’s see what Ukraine is granting to Russia in this field.
It is interesting to mention that on the day of Medvedev’s arrival to Kiev, Yulia Tymoshenko is invited to the PGO office again. Revenge or justice?
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Two Hetmans and Defector. The coalition negotiations in the Parliament of Ukraine have reached a final stage.
There is a popular joke-proverb in Ukraine: among three Ukrainians there are two hetmans (hetman is the old Ukrainian Cossack chieftain) and one defector. The proverb reflects the main peculiarity of Ukrainian national character: it is very difficult for us to reach an agreement in political negotiations as every party has its own huge ambitions.
The ‘two hetmans – one defector’ formula is a great illustration of what’s going on inside the Parliament of Ukraine these days. After the inauguration of Viktor Yanukovych as the President of Ukraine, his faction has started negotiations to form a new coalition of majority in Parliament. The Party of Regions expected a kind of blitzkrieg. But the expectations failed. Even the dismissal of Prime Minister and a threat of snap parliamentary election have not led the MPs to consolidation.
The stumbling block of the ‘coalition saga’ hides in provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine, which have no clear regulation of the process of formation of the coalition in Parliament.
A bit of prehistory. Before 2004, Ukraine had a majority voting system, when each constituency elected its own Member of Parliament. (I still hope we will come back to this scheme one day). But in December 2004, at the peak of Orange Revolution, the Constitution of Ukraine was amended, changing the voting system from majority to proportional vote. The amendments came into force in 2006, when first ‘proportional’ parliamentary election was conducted.
The December-2004 amendments also introduced new terms ‘majority’ and ‘coalition’ in Ukrainian parliament. According to the amended Chapter 83 of Constitution, “basing on the consensus of political viewpoints the coalition of the MP’s factions shall be formed, comprising the majority of Members of Parliament of Ukraine from the constitutional membership of the Parliament of Ukraine”. If the coalition is not formed duting 30 days, the President of Ukraine has a constitutional right (not obligation) to dismiss Parliament.
The main question of today’s Ukrainian political discussions is whether the coalition of factions, which have the majority of seats in total amount of MPs, or the coalition of majority of MPs shall be formed.
If the constitutional way of formation of the coalition is a simple sum of factions, the Party of Regions can not form the coalition without the Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence faction. (Extra details on Ukrainian parliamentary arithmetic may be found in one of my previous posts)
Moreover, due to the current situation inside the OU-PS faction (which is divided to little groups of interest, and can not act as a monolith body), the formation of the coalition on the base of factions, not MPs individually, is totally impossible. Every part of the OU-PS faction tried to lobby the appointment of its candidate for the position of Prime Minister – the names of Arseniy Yatseniuk, Viktor Yushchenko, and some other variants were proposed. As a result, the Party of Regions ‘got tired’ and made a decision to propose the candidature of its member Mykola Azarov (ex-Minister of Finance and Vice-Prime Minister of Ukraine).
(Some rumors say that Azarov was planned for the PM position from the very beginning, and the negotiations on the ‘non-Party-of-Regions’ candidate were just a trick).
Nevertheless the fact is the following: tomorrow, on 11 of March 2010, the Party of Regions will form the coalition of MPs (based on its own faction, factions of the Block of Speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn, Communist Party, and some individual MPs from the OU-PS and even from the Block of ex-PM Yulia Tymoshenko plus independent MPs).
All the political forces who will be eliminated from acting power after the formation of a new coalition are claiming that such a coalition will be unconstitutional. Among them – Yulia Tymoshenko and her allies, Arseniy Yatseniuk, and even Viktor Yushchenko (who seriously hoped to become a PM by himself).
By the way, number 3 according to the results of the first round of Presidential election – 2010 Sergiy Tigipko has agreed to become a Vice-Prime Minister in a new Government (it is a result of his yesterday’s meeting with Viktor Yanukovych). Number 4, Arseniy Yatseniuk has decided to form its own opposition government. The same business is in plans of Yulia Tymoshenko who declared herself as the only leader of democratic opposition. (See the proverb about two hetmans).
The opponents of the ‘individually made’ coalition are referring to the decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine No 16-pn/2008 of 17 September 2008, which has interpreted the Constitutional provisions in favor of faction-based formation of the coalition.
Again a prehistory. The need in the interpretation of the coalition-building part of the Constitution was caused by decision of two MPs from the OU-PS and BYT factions (on 6 June 2008) to withdraw their membership in the coalition, formed by their factions. As the result, the coalition had less than 226 members (the majority of MPs).
The same time (it is what the opposition doesn’t mention it its rhetoric), in the decision No 16-pn/2008 the Constitutional Court stated that on that time the Parliament of Ukraine had no legitimate Rules of Procedure, which, according to the Constitution, shall regulate the process of formation and the termination of activities of the coalition: “The filling of such gaps (in legislation) is not the authority of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. These questions shall be regulated in the Constitution of Ukraine and/or in the Law of Ukraine on the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament of Ukraine”.
I would also quote the Constitution of Ukraine here: “The basis for the formation, organization of operation, and termination of activities of coalition of deputy factions in the Parliament of Ukraine shall be established by the Constitution of Ukraine and Rules of Procedure of the Parliament of Ukraine”.
The Rules of Procedure of the Parliament of Ukraine were adopted (at last) on 10 February 2010. On 9 March 2010 Parliament adopted amendments to the Law on the Rules of Procedure, which permits to form the coalition of majority according to the individual membership principle.
So, the Rules of Procedure and the common sense say that it is possible to form a coalition, comprising 226 and more Members of Parliament of Ukraine (i.e. the majority of MPs).
Moreover, the individual way of formation of the coalition corresponds with the international standards and the rule of law. The European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) has issued the Opinion on the amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine adopted on 8.12.2004 (adopted by the Commission at its 63rd plenary session in Venice, 10-11 June 2005).
The opinion of the Venice Commission states the following:
“It may be questioned whether such a formalised procedure for forming a parliamentary majority would contribute to enhancing political stability in Ukraine. Furthermore, it could hardly be seen as compatible with the freedom of the choice and decision guaranteed to political parties by the Constitution, in conformity with European standards in this field. Generally speaking, alliances between political parties depend on the free choice of the parties concerned, and will last as long as the governing bodies of the parties find it convenient to stick to the negotiated agreements. In addition, a coalition government may give disproportionate power to small parties and therefore be unrepresentative”.
Full version of the Venice Commission opinion may be read here.
For all intents and purposes, it is unconstitutional indeed to restrict the activities of Members of Parliament of Ukraine as representatives of citizens of Ukraine by the ‘will of the faction’. Besides, even in this convocation of Parliament only the Communist party faction consists of members of one political party. Other factions are political blocks of two and more parties’ representatives. So, it is not logical to push them into the borders of ‘united actions inside the faction’.
When I was discussing this question with my friend (ex-journalist of Yulia Tymoshenko newspaper) yesterday, she invented a very interesting idea. If the coalition is formed only by factions, there is no need in personal vote in Parliament at all, she said. Heads of parliamentary factions may single-handedly decide, which a faction’s position is, and all the decisions in Parliament shall be made by simple arithmetical calculations. Than, there is no need to keep a building of the Parliament, she added. What a great way to save money for a state budget in crisis times!
The ‘two hetmans – one defector’ formula is a great illustration of what’s going on inside the Parliament of Ukraine these days. After the inauguration of Viktor Yanukovych as the President of Ukraine, his faction has started negotiations to form a new coalition of majority in Parliament. The Party of Regions expected a kind of blitzkrieg. But the expectations failed. Even the dismissal of Prime Minister and a threat of snap parliamentary election have not led the MPs to consolidation.
The stumbling block of the ‘coalition saga’ hides in provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine, which have no clear regulation of the process of formation of the coalition in Parliament.
A bit of prehistory. Before 2004, Ukraine had a majority voting system, when each constituency elected its own Member of Parliament. (I still hope we will come back to this scheme one day). But in December 2004, at the peak of Orange Revolution, the Constitution of Ukraine was amended, changing the voting system from majority to proportional vote. The amendments came into force in 2006, when first ‘proportional’ parliamentary election was conducted.
The December-2004 amendments also introduced new terms ‘majority’ and ‘coalition’ in Ukrainian parliament. According to the amended Chapter 83 of Constitution, “basing on the consensus of political viewpoints the coalition of the MP’s factions shall be formed, comprising the majority of Members of Parliament of Ukraine from the constitutional membership of the Parliament of Ukraine”. If the coalition is not formed duting 30 days, the President of Ukraine has a constitutional right (not obligation) to dismiss Parliament.
The main question of today’s Ukrainian political discussions is whether the coalition of factions, which have the majority of seats in total amount of MPs, or the coalition of majority of MPs shall be formed.
If the constitutional way of formation of the coalition is a simple sum of factions, the Party of Regions can not form the coalition without the Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence faction. (Extra details on Ukrainian parliamentary arithmetic may be found in one of my previous posts)
Moreover, due to the current situation inside the OU-PS faction (which is divided to little groups of interest, and can not act as a monolith body), the formation of the coalition on the base of factions, not MPs individually, is totally impossible. Every part of the OU-PS faction tried to lobby the appointment of its candidate for the position of Prime Minister – the names of Arseniy Yatseniuk, Viktor Yushchenko, and some other variants were proposed. As a result, the Party of Regions ‘got tired’ and made a decision to propose the candidature of its member Mykola Azarov (ex-Minister of Finance and Vice-Prime Minister of Ukraine).
(Some rumors say that Azarov was planned for the PM position from the very beginning, and the negotiations on the ‘non-Party-of-Regions’ candidate were just a trick).
Nevertheless the fact is the following: tomorrow, on 11 of March 2010, the Party of Regions will form the coalition of MPs (based on its own faction, factions of the Block of Speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn, Communist Party, and some individual MPs from the OU-PS and even from the Block of ex-PM Yulia Tymoshenko plus independent MPs).
All the political forces who will be eliminated from acting power after the formation of a new coalition are claiming that such a coalition will be unconstitutional. Among them – Yulia Tymoshenko and her allies, Arseniy Yatseniuk, and even Viktor Yushchenko (who seriously hoped to become a PM by himself).
By the way, number 3 according to the results of the first round of Presidential election – 2010 Sergiy Tigipko has agreed to become a Vice-Prime Minister in a new Government (it is a result of his yesterday’s meeting with Viktor Yanukovych). Number 4, Arseniy Yatseniuk has decided to form its own opposition government. The same business is in plans of Yulia Tymoshenko who declared herself as the only leader of democratic opposition. (See the proverb about two hetmans).
The opponents of the ‘individually made’ coalition are referring to the decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine No 16-pn/2008 of 17 September 2008, which has interpreted the Constitutional provisions in favor of faction-based formation of the coalition.
Again a prehistory. The need in the interpretation of the coalition-building part of the Constitution was caused by decision of two MPs from the OU-PS and BYT factions (on 6 June 2008) to withdraw their membership in the coalition, formed by their factions. As the result, the coalition had less than 226 members (the majority of MPs).
The same time (it is what the opposition doesn’t mention it its rhetoric), in the decision No 16-pn/2008 the Constitutional Court stated that on that time the Parliament of Ukraine had no legitimate Rules of Procedure, which, according to the Constitution, shall regulate the process of formation and the termination of activities of the coalition: “The filling of such gaps (in legislation) is not the authority of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. These questions shall be regulated in the Constitution of Ukraine and/or in the Law of Ukraine on the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament of Ukraine”.
I would also quote the Constitution of Ukraine here: “The basis for the formation, organization of operation, and termination of activities of coalition of deputy factions in the Parliament of Ukraine shall be established by the Constitution of Ukraine and Rules of Procedure of the Parliament of Ukraine”.
The Rules of Procedure of the Parliament of Ukraine were adopted (at last) on 10 February 2010. On 9 March 2010 Parliament adopted amendments to the Law on the Rules of Procedure, which permits to form the coalition of majority according to the individual membership principle.
So, the Rules of Procedure and the common sense say that it is possible to form a coalition, comprising 226 and more Members of Parliament of Ukraine (i.e. the majority of MPs).
Moreover, the individual way of formation of the coalition corresponds with the international standards and the rule of law. The European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) has issued the Opinion on the amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine adopted on 8.12.2004 (adopted by the Commission at its 63rd plenary session in Venice, 10-11 June 2005).
The opinion of the Venice Commission states the following:
“It may be questioned whether such a formalised procedure for forming a parliamentary majority would contribute to enhancing political stability in Ukraine. Furthermore, it could hardly be seen as compatible with the freedom of the choice and decision guaranteed to political parties by the Constitution, in conformity with European standards in this field. Generally speaking, alliances between political parties depend on the free choice of the parties concerned, and will last as long as the governing bodies of the parties find it convenient to stick to the negotiated agreements. In addition, a coalition government may give disproportionate power to small parties and therefore be unrepresentative”.
Full version of the Venice Commission opinion may be read here.
For all intents and purposes, it is unconstitutional indeed to restrict the activities of Members of Parliament of Ukraine as representatives of citizens of Ukraine by the ‘will of the faction’. Besides, even in this convocation of Parliament only the Communist party faction consists of members of one political party. Other factions are political blocks of two and more parties’ representatives. So, it is not logical to push them into the borders of ‘united actions inside the faction’.
When I was discussing this question with my friend (ex-journalist of Yulia Tymoshenko newspaper) yesterday, she invented a very interesting idea. If the coalition is formed only by factions, there is no need in personal vote in Parliament at all, she said. Heads of parliamentary factions may single-handedly decide, which a faction’s position is, and all the decisions in Parliament shall be made by simple arithmetical calculations. Than, there is no need to keep a building of the Parliament, she added. What a great way to save money for a state budget in crisis times!
Monday, March 1, 2010
New lords, new laws.
The chapter about Holodomor has dissapeared from the official website of President of Ukraine.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Yushchenko or Yatseniuk – who will be the next Prime Minister of Ukraine?
Viktor Yanukovych was inaugurated as the President of Ukraine today. Yulia Tymoshenko still insists that he is not her President. Prime Minister and members of her faction have even ignored the official inauguration events. Looks not very smart, imho.
But who will be the next Prime Minister? Has Yulia Tymoshenko any chance to save her chair? Here is some news on the negotiations inside Parliament:
1. The Block of Yulia Tymoshenko (BYT) has started to gather signatures of MPs to justify the current parliamentary coalition, the existence of which is rather questionable. (The Speaker of Ukrainian Parliament Volodymyr Lytvyn has demanded to prove the existence of current coalition before 2 of March, otherwise a new coalition shall be formed, or in 60 days Parliament will be dismissed according to the Constitution).
2. The BYT will definitely fail to gather 226 signatures; it is obviously seen after today’s sitting of the Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defense (OU-PS) faction. Not more than 10 MPs from the faction would support Mrs. Tymoshenko premiership.
3. To form a new coalition (in order to avoid the early election) the Party of Regions and its leader Viktor Yanukovych need support of the OU-PS faction.
4. According to the info from today’s OU-PS faction sitting, the majority of MPs may support the coalition with Yanukovych party, but only if the ‘democratic Prime Minister’ is elected (i.e. not-member of the Party of Regions).
5. The candidacy of ex-President Viktor Yushchenko has been actively lobbied, and is in general approved by the Party of Regions. But the OU-PS faction (ex-pro-Yushchenko monolith, now split to little groups of interest) has not approved the Yushchenko-PM-scheme. Yet?
6. Today OU-PS MPs had discussed the idea to nominate ‘number 4’ in the first round of Presidential election Arseniy Yatseniuk as a future PM. He made a speech, which did not inspire the majority of veteran MPs as was made in Yatseniuk’s habitual paternalistic and moralizing style.
7. On Monday, 1st of March, the OU-PS faction will have the next sitting to approve the final decision. Before that they are going to negotiate with Yanukovych, and also with Tymoshenko.
8. It sounds surreal, but I think Viktor Yushchenko has about 80% of chance to become next Prime Minister – he is the most convenient for all (as nobody wants to keep the rating of Yatseniuk).
9. Though the PM’s chair is not a convenient place to seat in these days, due to the total crisis of Ukrainian economy and state finances, when the declaration of default is a very realistic outcome.
But who will be the next Prime Minister? Has Yulia Tymoshenko any chance to save her chair? Here is some news on the negotiations inside Parliament:
1. The Block of Yulia Tymoshenko (BYT) has started to gather signatures of MPs to justify the current parliamentary coalition, the existence of which is rather questionable. (The Speaker of Ukrainian Parliament Volodymyr Lytvyn has demanded to prove the existence of current coalition before 2 of March, otherwise a new coalition shall be formed, or in 60 days Parliament will be dismissed according to the Constitution).
2. The BYT will definitely fail to gather 226 signatures; it is obviously seen after today’s sitting of the Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defense (OU-PS) faction. Not more than 10 MPs from the faction would support Mrs. Tymoshenko premiership.
3. To form a new coalition (in order to avoid the early election) the Party of Regions and its leader Viktor Yanukovych need support of the OU-PS faction.
4. According to the info from today’s OU-PS faction sitting, the majority of MPs may support the coalition with Yanukovych party, but only if the ‘democratic Prime Minister’ is elected (i.e. not-member of the Party of Regions).
5. The candidacy of ex-President Viktor Yushchenko has been actively lobbied, and is in general approved by the Party of Regions. But the OU-PS faction (ex-pro-Yushchenko monolith, now split to little groups of interest) has not approved the Yushchenko-PM-scheme. Yet?
6. Today OU-PS MPs had discussed the idea to nominate ‘number 4’ in the first round of Presidential election Arseniy Yatseniuk as a future PM. He made a speech, which did not inspire the majority of veteran MPs as was made in Yatseniuk’s habitual paternalistic and moralizing style.
7. On Monday, 1st of March, the OU-PS faction will have the next sitting to approve the final decision. Before that they are going to negotiate with Yanukovych, and also with Tymoshenko.
8. It sounds surreal, but I think Viktor Yushchenko has about 80% of chance to become next Prime Minister – he is the most convenient for all (as nobody wants to keep the rating of Yatseniuk).
9. Though the PM’s chair is not a convenient place to seat in these days, due to the total crisis of Ukrainian economy and state finances, when the declaration of default is a very realistic outcome.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
The Court-Round. Hearing of the case on election of President of Ukraine to be broadcasted live this week, and the Inauguration ceremony – next week.
Presidents Obama, Medvedev, Sarkozy, and other world leaders has already congratulated Yanukovych on winning the presidential election, but Prime Minister Tymoshenko still fights. Tomorrow (on 16 February) she is going to take the election-case to the Supreme Administrative Court. The victory was fabricated, Yulia Tymoshenko claims. The same time Viktor Yanukovych is getting ready for the inauguration: Parliament is expected to approve the date – 25 February 2010 – during its tomorrow morning sitting (16 Feb).
On Sunday, 14 February, the Central Election Commission of Ukraine officially declared Viktor Yanukovych as a winner of presidential election in Ukraine (the results adopted by the CEC are here in Ukrainian language).
One day before the CEC decision, on 13 February, Yulia Tymoshenko made an appeal to the nation, saying she would not accept the victory of Yanukovych because the result of election was fraudulent. Saturday declaration was the first public appearance of Mrs. Tymoshenko after the Election Day (except of her televised opening speech at the Cabinet sitting, when she avoided mentioning election topic at all). ‘I want to declare very clear: Yanukovych is not our President. In whatever way the situation develops, he will never be the legitimately elected President of Ukraine’, she said.
So, the ‘court-round’ of election of the President of Ukraine – 2010 is inevitable. But it is most likely that the claim of Prime Minister will not be satisfied. The difference between candidates is to big (3.48 percent) to prove the falsifications and to change the winner’s name. Though the Tymoshenko camp (at least a part of it, as some personages, including, according to rumors, the Vice Speaker of Parliament Mykola Tomenko, Vice Prime Minister Grygoriy Nemyria, and even a top-lawyer of BYT and Deputy Head of Block of Yulia Tymoshenko faction Andriy Portnov were strongly against the court appeal) expects the cancellation of the election result and declaration of a repeat, third round of election, or even the roll-back to the new first round with a new nomination of presidential candidates.
Whatever the case, the show will surely be worth watching. I used a word ‘show’ as the First Vice-Prime Minister Oleksandr Turchynov has promised today that the Supreme Administrative Court sitting will be broadcasted live on TV.
Very interesting point is the possible involvement of some OSCE observers as witnesses during the court examination. Direct speech of Yulia Tymoshenko: ‘My convincement in the idea that we have to fight is supported also by the last evidences of some OSCE observers. They expressed a wish to testify in courts on our side with video materials, with their estimations that there was a system fraud at the Ukrainian election’. Oleksandr Turchynov also has said today that they will file to the court some video materials, which prove the fraud in favor of Yanukovych.
The same time the winner’s establishment prepares to the inauguration procedure. According to the law on election of the President of Ukraine, the inauguration shall take place during 30 days from the official declaration of the winner by the CEC (in this case – by March, 14). The first question in tomorrow’s order of business of Parliament is the establishment of the inauguration date on Thurthday, 25 February. This proposal is very likely to be approved by the majority of MPs.
The Inauguration Day is closer, and the negotiations inside Parliament are more and more active. As I mentioned in my previous posts, to dismiss Prime Minister a new coalition of at least 226 MPs (leading by the 172-seats Party of Regions) should be formed. Despite of some controversial Constitutional provisions on the procedure of coalition-building (some details on the formation of current, very questionable BYT-leaded coalition may be found here) the coalition of the Party of Regions, the Block of the Speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn, part of Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence faction, and maybe the Communist Party faction is likely to be formed, and Parliament will pass a no-confidence motion against the PM Tymoshenko. It is very probable that the no-confidence-vote will appear in the parliamentary agenda even next week.
By the way, the ex-presidential Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence (OU-PS) faction is demonstrating re-load tendencies. Some members of the faction has already mentioned that there are active negotiations on the formation of a new political movement (group, party) on the base of OU-PS, with the participation of members of other parliamentary factions (BYT, Party of Regions) and out-of-parliament political forces.
Who will be elected as a new Prime Minister? It may be a PM of a current ‘opposition government’, ex-Vice Prime Minister (2002-2005 and 2006) and ex-Minister of Finance (2006), Head of Viktor Yanukovych electoral headquarters Mykola Azarov. But some people say that the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko may be appointed to this position due to some shadow pre-election agreement with Yanukovych. Let’s see. The scheme with the Prime Minister who is not a member of the Party of Regions is very convincing – in that case ‘democratic’ forces in Parliament will have a strong argument to explain to electorate their decision to join the anti-crisis coalition of Viktor Yanukovych.
In the meantime the phantom of snap parliamentary poll is still present in Parliament’s building. As it would be easy to link the early parliamentary election with the regular local elections, scheduled for this year, MPs are preparing the decision to postpone the local vote, scheduled on 30 May 2010 (the campaign shall be started on 23 February). Vice-Speaker Mykola Tomenko (BYT faction) has registered a project of law proposing to shift the local election date to 27 March 2011. MP from the OU-PS faction Oksana Bilozir proposed another (earlier) date in her law project – 26 September 2010. Parliament will discuss this question tomorrow. Show to be continued.
On Sunday, 14 February, the Central Election Commission of Ukraine officially declared Viktor Yanukovych as a winner of presidential election in Ukraine (the results adopted by the CEC are here in Ukrainian language).
One day before the CEC decision, on 13 February, Yulia Tymoshenko made an appeal to the nation, saying she would not accept the victory of Yanukovych because the result of election was fraudulent. Saturday declaration was the first public appearance of Mrs. Tymoshenko after the Election Day (except of her televised opening speech at the Cabinet sitting, when she avoided mentioning election topic at all). ‘I want to declare very clear: Yanukovych is not our President. In whatever way the situation develops, he will never be the legitimately elected President of Ukraine’, she said.
So, the ‘court-round’ of election of the President of Ukraine – 2010 is inevitable. But it is most likely that the claim of Prime Minister will not be satisfied. The difference between candidates is to big (3.48 percent) to prove the falsifications and to change the winner’s name. Though the Tymoshenko camp (at least a part of it, as some personages, including, according to rumors, the Vice Speaker of Parliament Mykola Tomenko, Vice Prime Minister Grygoriy Nemyria, and even a top-lawyer of BYT and Deputy Head of Block of Yulia Tymoshenko faction Andriy Portnov were strongly against the court appeal) expects the cancellation of the election result and declaration of a repeat, third round of election, or even the roll-back to the new first round with a new nomination of presidential candidates.
Whatever the case, the show will surely be worth watching. I used a word ‘show’ as the First Vice-Prime Minister Oleksandr Turchynov has promised today that the Supreme Administrative Court sitting will be broadcasted live on TV.
Very interesting point is the possible involvement of some OSCE observers as witnesses during the court examination. Direct speech of Yulia Tymoshenko: ‘My convincement in the idea that we have to fight is supported also by the last evidences of some OSCE observers. They expressed a wish to testify in courts on our side with video materials, with their estimations that there was a system fraud at the Ukrainian election’. Oleksandr Turchynov also has said today that they will file to the court some video materials, which prove the fraud in favor of Yanukovych.
The same time the winner’s establishment prepares to the inauguration procedure. According to the law on election of the President of Ukraine, the inauguration shall take place during 30 days from the official declaration of the winner by the CEC (in this case – by March, 14). The first question in tomorrow’s order of business of Parliament is the establishment of the inauguration date on Thurthday, 25 February. This proposal is very likely to be approved by the majority of MPs.
The Inauguration Day is closer, and the negotiations inside Parliament are more and more active. As I mentioned in my previous posts, to dismiss Prime Minister a new coalition of at least 226 MPs (leading by the 172-seats Party of Regions) should be formed. Despite of some controversial Constitutional provisions on the procedure of coalition-building (some details on the formation of current, very questionable BYT-leaded coalition may be found here) the coalition of the Party of Regions, the Block of the Speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn, part of Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence faction, and maybe the Communist Party faction is likely to be formed, and Parliament will pass a no-confidence motion against the PM Tymoshenko. It is very probable that the no-confidence-vote will appear in the parliamentary agenda even next week.
By the way, the ex-presidential Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence (OU-PS) faction is demonstrating re-load tendencies. Some members of the faction has already mentioned that there are active negotiations on the formation of a new political movement (group, party) on the base of OU-PS, with the participation of members of other parliamentary factions (BYT, Party of Regions) and out-of-parliament political forces.
Who will be elected as a new Prime Minister? It may be a PM of a current ‘opposition government’, ex-Vice Prime Minister (2002-2005 and 2006) and ex-Minister of Finance (2006), Head of Viktor Yanukovych electoral headquarters Mykola Azarov. But some people say that the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko may be appointed to this position due to some shadow pre-election agreement with Yanukovych. Let’s see. The scheme with the Prime Minister who is not a member of the Party of Regions is very convincing – in that case ‘democratic’ forces in Parliament will have a strong argument to explain to electorate their decision to join the anti-crisis coalition of Viktor Yanukovych.
In the meantime the phantom of snap parliamentary poll is still present in Parliament’s building. As it would be easy to link the early parliamentary election with the regular local elections, scheduled for this year, MPs are preparing the decision to postpone the local vote, scheduled on 30 May 2010 (the campaign shall be started on 23 February). Vice-Speaker Mykola Tomenko (BYT faction) has registered a project of law proposing to shift the local election date to 27 March 2011. MP from the OU-PS faction Oksana Bilozir proposed another (earlier) date in her law project – 26 September 2010. Parliament will discuss this question tomorrow. Show to be continued.
Monday, February 8, 2010
Breaking News. Yulia Tymoshenko decided not to recognize the victory of Viktor Yanukovych and to contest the result of election in court.
The press conference of Yulia Tymoshenko was announced and cancelled two times today. Instead of making public speeches, Prime Minister held a closed sitting of her parliamentary faction. Yulia Tymoshenko, who, according to preliminary calculations of Central Election Commission, is 3.20 percent behind Viktor Yanukovych, had to make a vital decision: what to do next?
The result of today’s evening sitting couldn’t stay hidden from journalists (that’s what democracy is, by the way!). Ms Tymoshenko declared that she will not recognize the victory of head of the Party of Regions Viktor Yanukovych, and ordered her lawyers to start legal proceedings to contest the result of the election. The main goal is to repeat voting, i.e. to have the third round of presidential election as it was in 2004.
According to the latest CEC data (99.44 percent of electronic ballot-count records counted), Viktor Yanukovych has 48.81 percent of the vote, and Yulia Tymoshenko – 45.61 percent. 4.37% of Ukrainians voted against all. 1.19% of ballots were declared invalid.
The turnout on 7 February was 69.07%.
To be continued tomorrow.
The result of today’s evening sitting couldn’t stay hidden from journalists (that’s what democracy is, by the way!). Ms Tymoshenko declared that she will not recognize the victory of head of the Party of Regions Viktor Yanukovych, and ordered her lawyers to start legal proceedings to contest the result of the election. The main goal is to repeat voting, i.e. to have the third round of presidential election as it was in 2004.
According to the latest CEC data (99.44 percent of electronic ballot-count records counted), Viktor Yanukovych has 48.81 percent of the vote, and Yulia Tymoshenko – 45.61 percent. 4.37% of Ukrainians voted against all. 1.19% of ballots were declared invalid.
The turnout on 7 February was 69.07%.
To be continued tomorrow.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
The Guesstimation. Who (and when) will be the next President of Ukraine? And what comes next?
It is my first post here after the first round of presidential election in Ukraine. Obviously, the result was predictable. But nevertheless every Ukrainian needed time to think over in order to understand, what happened. After January, 19, at least one simple thing is clear: there will be no miracle for Ukraine. And no hope for a big change. We’ve got a choice without choice – between two well-known faces.
The results of the first round of Presidential vote in Ukraine demonstrated a confident priority of leader of the opposition Party of Regions, anti-hero of times of the 2004 Orange revolution Viktor Yanukovych, who received a support of 35,32 percent of voters.
The Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko has got only 25,05 percent (a gap between two leaders is 10,27 %, which is a big challenge for the PM).
The 7th of February will be a day of a totally hopeless choice for Ukraine. President Viktor Yushchenko had mentioned recently that both candidates are almost equal. Yes, I must confess that there is not much difference between Tymoshenko and Yanukovych. First of all, they’ve got very similar programmes, mostly based on social promises and well-written slogans (it reflects a wider problem of absence of big ideological parties in Ukraine – all the main political forces differ by names of their leaders and oligarchic sponsors). Secondly, they have almost the same origin – East of Ukraine. It is very popular these days to say that Viktor Yanukovych represents Eastern and ‘pro-Russian’ (I don’t agree with that formulation) Donetsk region, and that he has a lot of difficulties with communication in Ukrainian language (though he’s not a good speaker at all). But lot of experts prefer to forget that only a decade ago Yulia Tymoshenko had a nickname “ a gas princess from Dnipropetsovsk”, and that she learned Ukrainian only at the beginnign of 2000th.
The choice between Viktor Yushchenko (who did represent Ukrainian mentality and traditions) and Viktor Yanukovych in 2004 was really a choice between values – Western and Eastern. But the current choice is totally different. It may be said that it is a choice between importers and exporters (as there are more representatives of the biggest export-oriented enterprises are accumulated around Viktor Yanukovych, and Yulia Tymoshenko’s biggest supporters are making their profits on import operations). but it’s not a clear statement at all. I would say, it is just a fight for power between two politicians and their establishments – it is naïve to expect the revolutionary breakthrough from any of them.
Who will win?
Most probably, Yanukovych.
Is it for better, of for worse? I don’t know what to say. No comments for this moment.
Let’s count. (It will be just a ‘guesstimation’ as the percentage strongly depends on the voters’ turnout. Besides, the less turnout we will have in the second round, the better it will be for Mr. Yanukovych, as he proved to have a very stable electorate).
Starting position:
YANUKOVYCH – 35,32 %
TYMOSHENKO – 25,05 %
Both the pretenders are fighting now for votes of supporters of other political heavyweighters.
First of all, it is Sergiy Tigipko who (with a help of a French political technologist Jacques Segela) showed the third result – 13,05 percent. Here I would like to mention that I don’t agree with experts who call Mr. Tigipko a kingmaker. Yes, he may become very and very influential, but only after the parliamentary election. As for now, Mr. Tigipko may hardly influence his electorate to vote for this or that candidate – it’s a specifity of Ukrainian voter, and especially of a well-educated urban voter, than he makes his own decisions, some times unpredictable.
Most of Ukrainians who voted in favor of Tigipko didn’t actually support him as a politician, but were hoping for change and the renovation of Ukrainian politics. On 7th of February a big part of them will stay at home, some will vote against all, and others will divide between Yanukovych and Tymoshenko. I would suppose that at least half of supporters of Tigipko will vote for Yanukovych as they represent Eastern, Central and Southern part of Ukraine.
So, we are adding 6,5% to Yanukovych – subtotal result 41,82 percent. Let’s also give around 4% to Tymoshenko – subtototally 29,05 percent.
Arseniy Yatseniuk with a very unsuccessful advertising campaign, mostly created by Russian team of PR-professionals, has gained only 6,95 percent. Some of his voters will also demonstrate the absenteeism, but the active part will surely vote for Yulia Tymoshenko. Let’s say it will be 5%. (YANUKOVYCH – 41,82 %, TYMOSHENKO – 34,05 %.)
The voters of the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko (5,45 %) are also rather unpredictable. Taking to the account the rough fight between PM and President during last months, we may predict that part of them will not show up at the polling places. But I hope Yulia Tymoshenko may count on additional 4,5 percent. (YANUKOVYCH – 41,82 %, TYMOSHENKO – 38,55 %.)
It is for sure that the electorate of a Communist party leader Petro Symonenko (3,54%) will vote for Yanukovych. At least, 3 percent. (Subtotal result: YANUKOVYCH – 44,82 %, TYMOSHENKO – 38,55 %.)
In favor of Prime Minister may be also around 4 percent of voters, who supported other candidates – like Speaker of the Parliament of Ukraine Volodymyr Lytvyn (total 2,35%), radical right politician Oleh Tyahnybok (1,43%), and ex-Minister of Defense Anatoliy Hrytsenko (1,2%).
So, the forecasting figures look like YANUKOVYCH – 44,82 %, TYMOSHENKO – 42,55 %. (The gap is 2,27 percent).
But taking to the account the probable growth of the level of absenteeism, my own style of the vote-count, very favorable to the Prime Minister, and also the fact that Ms. Tymoshenko represents the acting power, I would predict that in reality the gap may be not 2, but 3-4 percent or even more.
Anyway, both candidates are preparing to challenge the result of election in courts. And here comes the next important question:
Is there any chance to have an inauguration in March?
According to the Law on Election of the President of Ukraine, the official results of second round should be declared not later than 17 February. But the court proceedings (which will be long and difficult in case of 1-2-3-percent gap between candidates, or in case of a high level of ‘against all’ votes) may postpone this date even for a month.
The inauguration shall be held in frames of 30 days after the declaration of official results, and some influential off-going forces may try to postpone this date. The elected President shall take the oath during the special parliamentary sitting, which may also be wrecked.
So, there is a chance that the inauguration of nobody-knows-who will be held in March 2010, but as I am informed the headquarters of both candidates has received the instructions to be ready to work till the summer. Maybe, to prepare for the early parliamentary elections, who knows.
Early parliamentary election: to be or not to be?
Analyzing the current alignment of political forces in Ukraine, I am 99 percent sure there will be no early parliamentary election on 30 of May 2010, despite of all the ‘promises’ of the top-politicians.
(The day of 30 of May is widely discussed as a possible date for early parliamentary vote as is an officially established day for the local elections).
The argumentation is simple: there is no parliamentary party in Ukraine, which would be really very interested in early election in 2010. Though, it is very possible that the early parliamentary poll will take place in 2011, even in January 2011, – about one year before the scheduled time.
Why the current composition of Parliament seems to be very livable? First of all, because two biggest factions wouldn’t run the risk of losing the precious parliamentary seats.
The party of Regions is again in the most confident position. In comparison to the results of last parliamentary election of September 2007, Viktor Yanukovych slightly strengthened the ranks of his supporters – on 1 percent (from 34,37%). But it is not clear, how Ukraine will vote for the ‘Regions’ in half of the year, especially if Yanukovych win the presidential position (Ukrainians are predisposed to give less support to the ruling authorities).
Yulia Tymoshenko, to the contrary, has lost more than 5 percent – in 2007 she had 30,71% of votes. And 5 percent is about 20-27 seats in Parliament (it depends on the quantity of parties, which will overcome a 3% threshold).
All the other political parties, presented in Parliament now, including the members of so-called ruling coalition, have very illusive chances to enter the Parliament after the early vote. The block of Viktor Yushchenko Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defense has already been falling into pieces, and ex-and-current-pro-presidential MPs are seriously thinking about their political future and risk not to become MPs again in case of the early election. Communist Party understands that it will never win 27 seats in Parliament which they have now. The block of Volodymyr Lytvyn (currently having 20 seats) seems as totally not able to pass the 3% threshold, so, the Speaker would surely form a coalition with a winner of Presidential fight, whoever it will be.
Does a new coalition already exist?
The vote in favor of dismissal of the Interior Minister of Ukraine Yuriy Lutsenko on Thursday, 28 January, has showed that a new coalition (pro-Yanukovych one) already exists in Ukrainian Parliament.
Who voted in favor? Here is the list, ahich may be considered as a draft of a 'new coalition':
The Party of Regions faction – 171 vote (out of 172 members of the faction)
The Block of Yulia Tymoshenko faction – 1 vote (out of 153 members of the faction)
Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defense faction – 11 votes (out of 71).
I have to add that part of these MPs represent ex-Head of Presidential Secretariat Viktor Baloha. A brother of Viktor Yushchenko Petro and a godmother of President’s child Oksana Bilozir also voted in favor of Minister’s dismissal.
The Communist Party of Ukraine – 27 (out of 27).
The Block of Lytvyn – 19 (out of 20 – as the Speaker decided not to vote).
Independent MPs – 2 (out of 6).
As the proverb says, we shall see how the cat jumps.
The results of the first round of Presidential vote in Ukraine demonstrated a confident priority of leader of the opposition Party of Regions, anti-hero of times of the 2004 Orange revolution Viktor Yanukovych, who received a support of 35,32 percent of voters.
The Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko has got only 25,05 percent (a gap between two leaders is 10,27 %, which is a big challenge for the PM).
The 7th of February will be a day of a totally hopeless choice for Ukraine. President Viktor Yushchenko had mentioned recently that both candidates are almost equal. Yes, I must confess that there is not much difference between Tymoshenko and Yanukovych. First of all, they’ve got very similar programmes, mostly based on social promises and well-written slogans (it reflects a wider problem of absence of big ideological parties in Ukraine – all the main political forces differ by names of their leaders and oligarchic sponsors). Secondly, they have almost the same origin – East of Ukraine. It is very popular these days to say that Viktor Yanukovych represents Eastern and ‘pro-Russian’ (I don’t agree with that formulation) Donetsk region, and that he has a lot of difficulties with communication in Ukrainian language (though he’s not a good speaker at all). But lot of experts prefer to forget that only a decade ago Yulia Tymoshenko had a nickname “ a gas princess from Dnipropetsovsk”, and that she learned Ukrainian only at the beginnign of 2000th.
The choice between Viktor Yushchenko (who did represent Ukrainian mentality and traditions) and Viktor Yanukovych in 2004 was really a choice between values – Western and Eastern. But the current choice is totally different. It may be said that it is a choice between importers and exporters (as there are more representatives of the biggest export-oriented enterprises are accumulated around Viktor Yanukovych, and Yulia Tymoshenko’s biggest supporters are making their profits on import operations). but it’s not a clear statement at all. I would say, it is just a fight for power between two politicians and their establishments – it is naïve to expect the revolutionary breakthrough from any of them.
Who will win?
Most probably, Yanukovych.
Is it for better, of for worse? I don’t know what to say. No comments for this moment.
Let’s count. (It will be just a ‘guesstimation’ as the percentage strongly depends on the voters’ turnout. Besides, the less turnout we will have in the second round, the better it will be for Mr. Yanukovych, as he proved to have a very stable electorate).
Starting position:
YANUKOVYCH – 35,32 %
TYMOSHENKO – 25,05 %
Both the pretenders are fighting now for votes of supporters of other political heavyweighters.
First of all, it is Sergiy Tigipko who (with a help of a French political technologist Jacques Segela) showed the third result – 13,05 percent. Here I would like to mention that I don’t agree with experts who call Mr. Tigipko a kingmaker. Yes, he may become very and very influential, but only after the parliamentary election. As for now, Mr. Tigipko may hardly influence his electorate to vote for this or that candidate – it’s a specifity of Ukrainian voter, and especially of a well-educated urban voter, than he makes his own decisions, some times unpredictable.
Most of Ukrainians who voted in favor of Tigipko didn’t actually support him as a politician, but were hoping for change and the renovation of Ukrainian politics. On 7th of February a big part of them will stay at home, some will vote against all, and others will divide between Yanukovych and Tymoshenko. I would suppose that at least half of supporters of Tigipko will vote for Yanukovych as they represent Eastern, Central and Southern part of Ukraine.
So, we are adding 6,5% to Yanukovych – subtotal result 41,82 percent. Let’s also give around 4% to Tymoshenko – subtototally 29,05 percent.
Arseniy Yatseniuk with a very unsuccessful advertising campaign, mostly created by Russian team of PR-professionals, has gained only 6,95 percent. Some of his voters will also demonstrate the absenteeism, but the active part will surely vote for Yulia Tymoshenko. Let’s say it will be 5%. (YANUKOVYCH – 41,82 %, TYMOSHENKO – 34,05 %.)
The voters of the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko (5,45 %) are also rather unpredictable. Taking to the account the rough fight between PM and President during last months, we may predict that part of them will not show up at the polling places. But I hope Yulia Tymoshenko may count on additional 4,5 percent. (YANUKOVYCH – 41,82 %, TYMOSHENKO – 38,55 %.)
It is for sure that the electorate of a Communist party leader Petro Symonenko (3,54%) will vote for Yanukovych. At least, 3 percent. (Subtotal result: YANUKOVYCH – 44,82 %, TYMOSHENKO – 38,55 %.)
In favor of Prime Minister may be also around 4 percent of voters, who supported other candidates – like Speaker of the Parliament of Ukraine Volodymyr Lytvyn (total 2,35%), radical right politician Oleh Tyahnybok (1,43%), and ex-Minister of Defense Anatoliy Hrytsenko (1,2%).
So, the forecasting figures look like YANUKOVYCH – 44,82 %, TYMOSHENKO – 42,55 %. (The gap is 2,27 percent).
But taking to the account the probable growth of the level of absenteeism, my own style of the vote-count, very favorable to the Prime Minister, and also the fact that Ms. Tymoshenko represents the acting power, I would predict that in reality the gap may be not 2, but 3-4 percent or even more.
Anyway, both candidates are preparing to challenge the result of election in courts. And here comes the next important question:
Is there any chance to have an inauguration in March?
According to the Law on Election of the President of Ukraine, the official results of second round should be declared not later than 17 February. But the court proceedings (which will be long and difficult in case of 1-2-3-percent gap between candidates, or in case of a high level of ‘against all’ votes) may postpone this date even for a month.
The inauguration shall be held in frames of 30 days after the declaration of official results, and some influential off-going forces may try to postpone this date. The elected President shall take the oath during the special parliamentary sitting, which may also be wrecked.
So, there is a chance that the inauguration of nobody-knows-who will be held in March 2010, but as I am informed the headquarters of both candidates has received the instructions to be ready to work till the summer. Maybe, to prepare for the early parliamentary elections, who knows.
Early parliamentary election: to be or not to be?
Analyzing the current alignment of political forces in Ukraine, I am 99 percent sure there will be no early parliamentary election on 30 of May 2010, despite of all the ‘promises’ of the top-politicians.
(The day of 30 of May is widely discussed as a possible date for early parliamentary vote as is an officially established day for the local elections).
The argumentation is simple: there is no parliamentary party in Ukraine, which would be really very interested in early election in 2010. Though, it is very possible that the early parliamentary poll will take place in 2011, even in January 2011, – about one year before the scheduled time.
Why the current composition of Parliament seems to be very livable? First of all, because two biggest factions wouldn’t run the risk of losing the precious parliamentary seats.
The party of Regions is again in the most confident position. In comparison to the results of last parliamentary election of September 2007, Viktor Yanukovych slightly strengthened the ranks of his supporters – on 1 percent (from 34,37%). But it is not clear, how Ukraine will vote for the ‘Regions’ in half of the year, especially if Yanukovych win the presidential position (Ukrainians are predisposed to give less support to the ruling authorities).
Yulia Tymoshenko, to the contrary, has lost more than 5 percent – in 2007 she had 30,71% of votes. And 5 percent is about 20-27 seats in Parliament (it depends on the quantity of parties, which will overcome a 3% threshold).
All the other political parties, presented in Parliament now, including the members of so-called ruling coalition, have very illusive chances to enter the Parliament after the early vote. The block of Viktor Yushchenko Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defense has already been falling into pieces, and ex-and-current-pro-presidential MPs are seriously thinking about their political future and risk not to become MPs again in case of the early election. Communist Party understands that it will never win 27 seats in Parliament which they have now. The block of Volodymyr Lytvyn (currently having 20 seats) seems as totally not able to pass the 3% threshold, so, the Speaker would surely form a coalition with a winner of Presidential fight, whoever it will be.
Does a new coalition already exist?
The vote in favor of dismissal of the Interior Minister of Ukraine Yuriy Lutsenko on Thursday, 28 January, has showed that a new coalition (pro-Yanukovych one) already exists in Ukrainian Parliament.
Who voted in favor? Here is the list, ahich may be considered as a draft of a 'new coalition':
The Party of Regions faction – 171 vote (out of 172 members of the faction)
The Block of Yulia Tymoshenko faction – 1 vote (out of 153 members of the faction)
Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defense faction – 11 votes (out of 71).
I have to add that part of these MPs represent ex-Head of Presidential Secretariat Viktor Baloha. A brother of Viktor Yushchenko Petro and a godmother of President’s child Oksana Bilozir also voted in favor of Minister’s dismissal.
The Communist Party of Ukraine – 27 (out of 27).
The Block of Lytvyn – 19 (out of 20 – as the Speaker decided not to vote).
Independent MPs – 2 (out of 6).
As the proverb says, we shall see how the cat jumps.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Expected Fraud. Is Yulia Tymoshenko preparing a ground to declare the results of presidential election as a fake?
The BYT (Block of Yulia Tymoshenko) parliamentary faction has accused the Central Election Commission in taking the decision, which will lead to the mass falsifications during the election of the President of Ukraine.
‘Controlled by the party of Regions majority at the Central Election Commission made a decision of 4 January this year on the procedure of vote at home, and inclusion of voters into the voter registers on election day, which contravenes the democratic standards for holding elections’, is said in today’s official statement of the BYT faction. ‘In such a way members of CEC, who are close to the Party of Regions, had de facto opened the unlimited opportunities for use of the mass fraud during the election of the President of Ukraine’.
“There is no doubt: the establishment of Viktor Yanukovych doesn’t believe in victory of its candidate in free and transparent election”, members of the Block of Yulia Tymoshenko declared.
By the way, all Ukrainian polls stated that the rating of Mr. Yanukovych is bigger than Ms. Tymoshenko’s one on 7-15%.
The BYT faction has proposed to hold an extraordinary sitting of the Parliament of Ukraine on 13 January – to change some procedures of vote, approved by the CEC, ‘to prevent fraud’. One shouldn’t be an expert to predict that the Parliament will fail to adopt any changes. But the fact of putting the question of electoral procedures on vote will surely give to one of the presidential candidates an extra-right to declare the result of vote on 19 January, and especially on 7 February (2 round), as a fraudulent.
Viktor Yanukovych has already commented the BYT initiative, saying that ‘we will fight, and we will not permit to make a decision on the result of election in courts’. But it seems to me that there may be a third round of election of the President of Ukraine – in the Arbitration Courts.
‘Controlled by the party of Regions majority at the Central Election Commission made a decision of 4 January this year on the procedure of vote at home, and inclusion of voters into the voter registers on election day, which contravenes the democratic standards for holding elections’, is said in today’s official statement of the BYT faction. ‘In such a way members of CEC, who are close to the Party of Regions, had de facto opened the unlimited opportunities for use of the mass fraud during the election of the President of Ukraine’.
“There is no doubt: the establishment of Viktor Yanukovych doesn’t believe in victory of its candidate in free and transparent election”, members of the Block of Yulia Tymoshenko declared.
By the way, all Ukrainian polls stated that the rating of Mr. Yanukovych is bigger than Ms. Tymoshenko’s one on 7-15%.
The BYT faction has proposed to hold an extraordinary sitting of the Parliament of Ukraine on 13 January – to change some procedures of vote, approved by the CEC, ‘to prevent fraud’. One shouldn’t be an expert to predict that the Parliament will fail to adopt any changes. But the fact of putting the question of electoral procedures on vote will surely give to one of the presidential candidates an extra-right to declare the result of vote on 19 January, and especially on 7 February (2 round), as a fraudulent.
Viktor Yanukovych has already commented the BYT initiative, saying that ‘we will fight, and we will not permit to make a decision on the result of election in courts’. But it seems to me that there may be a third round of election of the President of Ukraine – in the Arbitration Courts.
Sunday, January 10, 2010
FT.com / Comment / Editorial - Ukraine’s dilemma
And here is the FT-editorial view on the situation in Ukraine, in rather interesting tone:
Five years ago, Ukraine’s presidential elections captured the imagination as Viktor Yushchenko emerged triumphant.Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2010. Link to the article: FT.com / Comment / Editorial - Ukraine’s dilemma
On Sunday, Ukrainians vote in the first presidential election since 2004 and in very different circumstances from the Orange Revolution. Mr Yushchenko’s failure to create stability, fight corruption or protect citizens against a rapacious bureaucracy has created widespread disillusion.
The gloom is compounded by the economic crisis, which has forced Kiev into an International Monetary Fund rescue programme.
Despite the political chaos, the Orange Revolution’s legacy has survived in a free media, openness to the outside world, and multi-party competition. Despite constant Russian interference, Ukraine’s sense of identity as an independent state has grown. And, despite the economic crisis, Ukraine is a richer place than five years ago, with a better stock of housing, cars and consumer goods.
But Mr Yushchenko’s political failures have left voters with a lamentable electoral choice. He stands no chance of retaining office. The top contenders are Viktor Yanukovich, the opposition leader, and Yulia Tymoshenko, the prime minister, Mr Yushchenko’s 2004 ally but now his bitter rival.
It is humiliating for Ukraine that Mr Yanukovich, whose 2004 presidential campaign was widely seen as fraudulent, has not been hounded out of politics. He has survived thanks to a cynical political culture and the backing of big business. Even Mr Yushchenko has done deals with him.
Ms Tymoshenko should, in principle, be a more attractive choice, given her Orange credentials. But she has proved herself shamelessly opportunistic and shares the blame with Mr Yushchenko for the failures of the Orange camp. Her economic policies show a unnerving penchant for populist intervention, eg with arbitrary price caps.
In international affairs, both would balance ties with Russia with a slow push for European Union integration. Not much to choose between Ms T and Mr Y on this score.
So, whom to back in Sunday’s first round and next month’s run-off? Given the candidates’ shortcomings, voters must focus on what is important. The key now is political stability. Only a stable Ukraine can achieve economic reform and recovery. Ms Tymoshenko is the polar opposite of a stabilising force. Mr Yanukovich, for all his manifest faults, may prove the lesser evil. Pity Ukraine that it has come to this.
Orange sunset as Ukraine poll heralds turn to Russia | World news | The Observer
The Observer: "Orange sunset as Ukraine poll heralds turn to Russia. Five years after Ukraine's Orange Revolution, its next presidential election is between two pro-Moscow candidates"
Both of the front-running candidates in the poll have indicated that firmer ties with Russia, whether for pragmatic or ideological reasons, will be a priority. The poll will thus ring the death knell for a pro-western revolution that degenerated into a morass of political infighting, compounded by economic crisis.
Leading the polls is Viktor Yanukovych, a former prime minister whose initial victory as the Russia-backed candidate in 2004 sparked allegations of a rigged vote. His only serious rival is Yulia Tymoshenko, the prime minister and Moscow's new favoured candidate. President Viktor Yushchenko, hero of the Orange Revolution, now has an approval rating below 3%. Last week he accused Yanukovych and Tymoshenko of comprising a "single Kremlin coalition", such was their joint desire for warmer relations with Moscow.
Whether Yanukovych or Tymoshenko wins, the goal of Nato membership, still aspired to by Yushchenko, is almost certain to be abandoned.
Yanukovych last week repeated his long-held stance that he would take Ukraine off the path to Nato membership. "Ukraine was and will be a non-aligned nation, as it is now," he told.
A Zero-Wind Chill. Only 7 days left before the presidential election in Ukraine.
Celebration of the New Year and the Orthodox Christmas has lowered the speed of the electoral campaign in Ukraine. All the major candidates were actively present at Ukrainian media-space with colorful video greetings, and on thousands of billboards near the main roads all over the country, but there was no sign of a real fight. One week before election, and a total calmness of a political sea.
The zero-wind air conditions may be caused by the predictability of the result of the first round of the election (17 January 2010). It is obvious that two winners who will meet in the second tour on 7 February 2010 are Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and the leader of the biggest opposition Party of Regions Viktor Yanukovych. The distance between them is predicted to be around 10-12 percent, not in favor of the lady.
It seems that nothing may change the current correlation of political forces during the next week (though, it would be interesting to follow the last speeches of all the main pretenders to the presidential power, and I will do my best to share my impressions here, taking a week-off in the office). The most interesting developments are expected to happen within a time-frame between the first and second rounds, and also after the 7th of February – on the streets and in courts.
The zero-wind air conditions may be caused by the predictability of the result of the first round of the election (17 January 2010). It is obvious that two winners who will meet in the second tour on 7 February 2010 are Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and the leader of the biggest opposition Party of Regions Viktor Yanukovych. The distance between them is predicted to be around 10-12 percent, not in favor of the lady.
It seems that nothing may change the current correlation of political forces during the next week (though, it would be interesting to follow the last speeches of all the main pretenders to the presidential power, and I will do my best to share my impressions here, taking a week-off in the office). The most interesting developments are expected to happen within a time-frame between the first and second rounds, and also after the 7th of February – on the streets and in courts.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Political Flu. President of Ukraine may extend his time in office, imposing the state of emergency in Ukraine due to A/H1N1 epidemy.
January, 17, 2010 may turn out to be just a common Sunday, nothing more. It seems possible that the day of election of the President of Ukraine will be one or even two or more months later. This situation will come true, if the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko imposes the state of emergency in Ukraine to fight swine flu more effectively.
Viktor Yushchenko made a televised appeal to Ukrainian people today. In his short speech he criticized strongly the Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko, Speaker of Ukrainian Parliament Volodymyr Lytvyn and the opposition leader Viktor Yanukovych (all of them are his rivals at the presidential poll 2010) in ignoration of the information on the epidemic situation in Ukraine in October 2009.
One of the risk factors of A/H1N1 in Ukraine is epidemic, fast-moving character of spread of the infection on the West of a country, President said. ‘Government, the management of the Parliament and opposition knew that as early as at the beginning of October 2009’, Viktor Yushchenko claimed. ‘First and the most effective preventive measure is a prevention of crowds. Ignoring this principle, hundreds of thousands of people were taken to Kyiv from different regions’.
President meant the big public gatherings during the presidential nomination of his main opponents. Especially crowded was the Maydan-based nomination show of Prime Minister.
All the measures taken by Government to fight swine-flu epidemy Mr. Yushchenko qualified as ‘collapse’. ‘The main center of the decision-making shall be the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine’, he declared. ‘Non-obedience to its decisions will be followed by the immediate reaction of the law-enforcement bodies’. It looks like a first step to the transfer of all the controls to the National Security and Defense Council, experts say.
Let me remind that the President chairs the Security&Defence Council.
Among politicians accused in ignorant attitude to the killing virus the fastest appeared to be Volodymyr Lytvyn, the Chairman of Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. About two hours ago he gave a following comment during a television show: ‘…all are guilty except him… President and Prime Minister were informed on the flu epidemy a couple of weeks before. Why Parliament didn’t know about that?... Because our security agencies are privatized’.
Meanwhile, we’ve got the first A/H1N1 death in the capital of Ukraine Kyiv. Kyiv City Mayor Leonid Chernovetsky has appealed to Yulia Tymoshenko today with the request to announce quarantine in Kyiv. According to the Kyiv City Administration, more than 26 thousand of Kyivites are sick with acute respiratory viral infections as of 4th November 2009. Epidemic threshold is overpassed on 14%.
86 people are killed by the flu epidemy in Ukraine (Health Ministry of Ukraine, 4/11/2009).
Viktor Yushchenko made a televised appeal to Ukrainian people today. In his short speech he criticized strongly the Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko, Speaker of Ukrainian Parliament Volodymyr Lytvyn and the opposition leader Viktor Yanukovych (all of them are his rivals at the presidential poll 2010) in ignoration of the information on the epidemic situation in Ukraine in October 2009.
One of the risk factors of A/H1N1 in Ukraine is epidemic, fast-moving character of spread of the infection on the West of a country, President said. ‘Government, the management of the Parliament and opposition knew that as early as at the beginning of October 2009’, Viktor Yushchenko claimed. ‘First and the most effective preventive measure is a prevention of crowds. Ignoring this principle, hundreds of thousands of people were taken to Kyiv from different regions’.
President meant the big public gatherings during the presidential nomination of his main opponents. Especially crowded was the Maydan-based nomination show of Prime Minister.
All the measures taken by Government to fight swine-flu epidemy Mr. Yushchenko qualified as ‘collapse’. ‘The main center of the decision-making shall be the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine’, he declared. ‘Non-obedience to its decisions will be followed by the immediate reaction of the law-enforcement bodies’. It looks like a first step to the transfer of all the controls to the National Security and Defense Council, experts say.
Let me remind that the President chairs the Security&Defence Council.
Among politicians accused in ignorant attitude to the killing virus the fastest appeared to be Volodymyr Lytvyn, the Chairman of Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. About two hours ago he gave a following comment during a television show: ‘…all are guilty except him… President and Prime Minister were informed on the flu epidemy a couple of weeks before. Why Parliament didn’t know about that?... Because our security agencies are privatized’.
Meanwhile, we’ve got the first A/H1N1 death in the capital of Ukraine Kyiv. Kyiv City Mayor Leonid Chernovetsky has appealed to Yulia Tymoshenko today with the request to announce quarantine in Kyiv. According to the Kyiv City Administration, more than 26 thousand of Kyivites are sick with acute respiratory viral infections as of 4th November 2009. Epidemic threshold is overpassed on 14%.
86 people are killed by the flu epidemy in Ukraine (Health Ministry of Ukraine, 4/11/2009).
Saturday, October 31, 2009
J.P.Morgan: Tymoshenko victory in elections to lead to greater stability in 2010.
One of the news agencies of Ukraine UNIAN has distributed a link to the J.P. Morgan website https://mm.jpmorgan.com/stp/t/c.do?i=95863-48B&u=a_p*d_338911.pdf*h_7ostu6ta where the "economic research" about the consequences of Ukrainian presidential election 2010 is published.
The name of the research - Tymoshenko victory in elections to lead to greater stability in 2010 - tells for itself about the level of the impartiality of the J.P. Morgan experts. I quote here just a couple of statements of the report, rather peremptory, I may say.
The name of the research - Tymoshenko victory in elections to lead to greater stability in 2010 - tells for itself about the level of the impartiality of the J.P. Morgan experts. I quote here just a couple of statements of the report, rather peremptory, I may say.
"A Tymoshenko victory should bring fiscal consolidation in 2010 and an earlier return to growth."
"Although there are now few differences in policy programs between the main presidential candidates, we believe that a Tymoshenko victory will be the most positive outcome given the current make up of the Rada and Tymoshenko’s plans to strengthen the presidential post."
"We expect a Tymoshenko presidency to lead to fiscal consolidation, improved lending and capital inflows from 2Q 2010 culminating in brighter growth prospects in 2H2010 and 2011. A Yanukovych victory, meanwhile, may lead to early parliamentary elections and possibly a breakdown of the IMF agreement before stabilizing in 4Q2010."
"As for the pending IMF tranche, we expect the Fund to delay disbursement until December 2009 and reduce the scheduled disbursement of US$3.9bn to increase bargaining power next year."
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Get ready, get set, go! Ukraine officially launched a presidential election campaign on Monday. Today the nomination of the candidates starts.
Last time Ukraine elected president in 2004, when, after the Orange revolution, Viktor Yushchenko came to power, accusing his main rival Viktor Yanukovych in the falsification of the results of the previous tour of election. Now the situation has changed dramatically: according to polls, Mr. Yanukovych is a leading contender. Viktor Yushchenko – on contrary – may try to use his presidential administrative resource during his campaign, experts say.
The second rating has another hero of Orange revolution – the Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko. Third – ex-Head of Parliament, and ex-Minister for Foreign Affairs Arseniy Yatseniuk.
Other pretenders are former Head of the National Bank of Ukraine Sergiy Tigipko, current Speaker of the Parliament Volodymyr Lytvyn, Communist party leader Petro Symonenko, and radically right politician Oleh Tyagnybok.
The nomination of the candidates starts today, on 20 October 2009, and will last until 6 November. The last day for the documents’ submission to the Central Electoral Commission is the 9 of November. The CEC has to register all the candidates until 13 November 2009.
The second rating has another hero of Orange revolution – the Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko. Third – ex-Head of Parliament, and ex-Minister for Foreign Affairs Arseniy Yatseniuk.
Other pretenders are former Head of the National Bank of Ukraine Sergiy Tigipko, current Speaker of the Parliament Volodymyr Lytvyn, Communist party leader Petro Symonenko, and radically right politician Oleh Tyagnybok.
The nomination of the candidates starts today, on 20 October 2009, and will last until 6 November. The last day for the documents’ submission to the Central Electoral Commission is the 9 of November. The CEC has to register all the candidates until 13 November 2009.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
The Lit-Crit. Reflections while reading the FT article ‘Yushchenko hits at Moscow ahead of poll’.
The Financial Times has published an article called ‘Yushchenko hits at Moscow ahead of poll’ on Monday, 14 of September. I’ve read this story only today, and couldn’t stand but to share my strong disagreement with some points, so categorically stated by the author. So, let me give some comments to this article.
‘Yushchenko hits at Moscow ahead of poll’
By Roman Olearchyk in Kiev
Published: September 14 2009 14:16 Last updated: September 14 2009 14:16
Viktor Yushchenko, the embattled Ukrainian president, complained of Russian meddling in Kiev’s domestic affairs ahead of a high-stakes presidential election, which the pro-western leader is expected to lose to a more Kremlin-friendly candidate.
---To be pro-Western doesn’t mean to be totally anti-Russian. I don’t think that the spoiled relationship with the official Moscow may be called as the advantage of the presidency of Mt. Yushchenko.
In a Financial Times interview, Mr Yushchenko said Moscow had waged a smear campaign against Kiev and could try to manipulate Ukraine’s electorate – claims that were also made in 2004 when Mr Yushchenko was propelled to power against a Kremlin-backed candidate. Voters remain split in an east-west axis between Russian and Ukrainian speakers.
--- It is wrong to state that the Ukrainian electorate is divided to Russian speakers and Ukrainian speakers. The author either have never visited East of Ukraine (but I hardly think so), or just wanted to make a witty statement to attract more attention of foreign readers. I would say that there are a lot of Ukrainian speakers in Eastern Ukraine, especially in a countryside: even my own relatives who are living near Donetsk are using Ukrainian as a language of family communication. Yes, there are lot of Russian speakers in the Eastern and Central part of Ukraine – mostly due to the labor migration from other regions of Soviet Union caused by the industrialization growth. But let me assure the respected author of the article that most of the Russian speaking people are feeling themselves as citizens of Ukraine, not servants of Russia as some people want to demonstrate.
The problem of the split of electoral preferences in Ukraine is not the question of language, but sort of a regional solidarity. People from Eastern Ukraine support Viktor Yanukovych and the Party of Regions, first of all, because they think he is going to support their interests, and to make their own regions more prosperous. Such an antagonism to other opponents of Mr. Yanukovych is a simple reaction to their rhetoric, which often sounds unfriendly to the Eastern regions of Ukraine – people from there had been called as thieves, extremists, betrayers, Russian henchmen and so on. The same situation we may see in Western Ukraine, when some politicians are trying to win extra-support, setting Ukrainians against each other.
The issue of Russian interference in Ukraine’s election emerged last month when Dmitry Medvedev, Russia’s president, accused Mr Yushchenko of waging “anti-Russian” policies by seeking membership in the Nato military alliance, and urged the country’s future president to be more friendly.
--- What is a problem with being friendly to your neighbors?
Mr Yushchenko said he expects Russia to stir up separatist sentiment on Ukraine’s Russian-leaning Crimean peninsula. But he ruled out escalation into a military conflict of the kind seen last summer in Georgia, another pro-western ally on post-Soviet turf. Moscow continues to firmly back the independence aspirations of two Georgian breakaway enclaves, one of which, South Ossetia, was at the centre of the war.
Many in Kiev fear a similar scenario in Crimea.“They will try to exploit the ‘Crimean Card’. But, I don’t see a risk that the situation in Georgia would repeat,” said Mr Yushchenko when asked if separatism or military clashes could erupt. “Ukraine is not Georgia,” he said, referring to the country’s larger population, military and geopolitical significance.“Strength today is not in a military position. Employing it would be complete stupidity,” he added.
--- I agree with the statement about the ‘Crimean Card”. Nevertheless, the military scenario in the Crimea is unfortunately possible, but rather in a form of a provoked inside disorder.
Referring to last January’s natural gas stand-off between Kiev and Moscow, which disrupted European supplies, and relentless Russian warnings that recession-battered Ukraine was unable to pay its gas bill, Mr Yushchenko said: “There are a lot of hidden and cynical schemes being played through information airwaves, aimed at discrediting Ukraine” in the eyes of Europe and the world.
Mr Yushchenko said: “We are witnesses of how the politics of totalitarianism is reaching its apogee against the principles of democracy, sovereignty and territorial integrity. Georgia is a sign of how, unfortunately, the Pan-European community did not stand up to defend these fundamental principles. It was a setback,” he said.
--- Nothing to say. Was the EU supposed to dig up the hatchet against Russia?
The Ukrainian president said he hoped soon to meet US President Barack Obama to discuss these and other issues and expressed solidarity with a plea to Western leaders made last week by members of Ukraine’s intelligentsia. In an open letter, politicians, artists and experts had called for western leaders to provide Ukraine with stronger security guarantees against an increasing threat from Russia.
--- ‘to discuss these and other issues’ – it’s rather strange interpretation of the interview with the President of a country.
Mr Yushchenko trails three frontrunners in the election who are actively seeking to harmonise relations with Russia. They include Yulia Tymoshenko, prime minister and erstwhile Orange Revolution partner, and ex-prime minister Viktor Yanukovich, the Moscow-backed candidate in 2004. Mr Yushchenko accused them of pandering to Moscow, selling out Ukrainian interests as “trading cards” to get Russia’s support for their candidacies.
--- Is it bad to seek to harmonize relations with a neighboring super-power? I think that the most preferable way for Ukraine to build its foreign policy and strategy of its implementation is making friends, not enemies. Russia will never disappear from Ukrainian border, and the smartest way is to try to build a system of checks and balances based on the multi-vector policy.
‘Yushchenko hits at Moscow ahead of poll’
By Roman Olearchyk in Kiev
Published: September 14 2009 14:16 Last updated: September 14 2009 14:16
Viktor Yushchenko, the embattled Ukrainian president, complained of Russian meddling in Kiev’s domestic affairs ahead of a high-stakes presidential election, which the pro-western leader is expected to lose to a more Kremlin-friendly candidate.
---To be pro-Western doesn’t mean to be totally anti-Russian. I don’t think that the spoiled relationship with the official Moscow may be called as the advantage of the presidency of Mt. Yushchenko.
In a Financial Times interview, Mr Yushchenko said Moscow had waged a smear campaign against Kiev and could try to manipulate Ukraine’s electorate – claims that were also made in 2004 when Mr Yushchenko was propelled to power against a Kremlin-backed candidate. Voters remain split in an east-west axis between Russian and Ukrainian speakers.
--- It is wrong to state that the Ukrainian electorate is divided to Russian speakers and Ukrainian speakers. The author either have never visited East of Ukraine (but I hardly think so), or just wanted to make a witty statement to attract more attention of foreign readers. I would say that there are a lot of Ukrainian speakers in Eastern Ukraine, especially in a countryside: even my own relatives who are living near Donetsk are using Ukrainian as a language of family communication. Yes, there are lot of Russian speakers in the Eastern and Central part of Ukraine – mostly due to the labor migration from other regions of Soviet Union caused by the industrialization growth. But let me assure the respected author of the article that most of the Russian speaking people are feeling themselves as citizens of Ukraine, not servants of Russia as some people want to demonstrate.
The problem of the split of electoral preferences in Ukraine is not the question of language, but sort of a regional solidarity. People from Eastern Ukraine support Viktor Yanukovych and the Party of Regions, first of all, because they think he is going to support their interests, and to make their own regions more prosperous. Such an antagonism to other opponents of Mr. Yanukovych is a simple reaction to their rhetoric, which often sounds unfriendly to the Eastern regions of Ukraine – people from there had been called as thieves, extremists, betrayers, Russian henchmen and so on. The same situation we may see in Western Ukraine, when some politicians are trying to win extra-support, setting Ukrainians against each other.
The issue of Russian interference in Ukraine’s election emerged last month when Dmitry Medvedev, Russia’s president, accused Mr Yushchenko of waging “anti-Russian” policies by seeking membership in the Nato military alliance, and urged the country’s future president to be more friendly.
--- What is a problem with being friendly to your neighbors?
Mr Yushchenko said he expects Russia to stir up separatist sentiment on Ukraine’s Russian-leaning Crimean peninsula. But he ruled out escalation into a military conflict of the kind seen last summer in Georgia, another pro-western ally on post-Soviet turf. Moscow continues to firmly back the independence aspirations of two Georgian breakaway enclaves, one of which, South Ossetia, was at the centre of the war.
Many in Kiev fear a similar scenario in Crimea.“They will try to exploit the ‘Crimean Card’. But, I don’t see a risk that the situation in Georgia would repeat,” said Mr Yushchenko when asked if separatism or military clashes could erupt. “Ukraine is not Georgia,” he said, referring to the country’s larger population, military and geopolitical significance.“Strength today is not in a military position. Employing it would be complete stupidity,” he added.
--- I agree with the statement about the ‘Crimean Card”. Nevertheless, the military scenario in the Crimea is unfortunately possible, but rather in a form of a provoked inside disorder.
Referring to last January’s natural gas stand-off between Kiev and Moscow, which disrupted European supplies, and relentless Russian warnings that recession-battered Ukraine was unable to pay its gas bill, Mr Yushchenko said: “There are a lot of hidden and cynical schemes being played through information airwaves, aimed at discrediting Ukraine” in the eyes of Europe and the world.
Mr Yushchenko said: “We are witnesses of how the politics of totalitarianism is reaching its apogee against the principles of democracy, sovereignty and territorial integrity. Georgia is a sign of how, unfortunately, the Pan-European community did not stand up to defend these fundamental principles. It was a setback,” he said.
--- Nothing to say. Was the EU supposed to dig up the hatchet against Russia?
The Ukrainian president said he hoped soon to meet US President Barack Obama to discuss these and other issues and expressed solidarity with a plea to Western leaders made last week by members of Ukraine’s intelligentsia. In an open letter, politicians, artists and experts had called for western leaders to provide Ukraine with stronger security guarantees against an increasing threat from Russia.
--- ‘to discuss these and other issues’ – it’s rather strange interpretation of the interview with the President of a country.
Mr Yushchenko trails three frontrunners in the election who are actively seeking to harmonise relations with Russia. They include Yulia Tymoshenko, prime minister and erstwhile Orange Revolution partner, and ex-prime minister Viktor Yanukovich, the Moscow-backed candidate in 2004. Mr Yushchenko accused them of pandering to Moscow, selling out Ukrainian interests as “trading cards” to get Russia’s support for their candidacies.
--- Is it bad to seek to harmonize relations with a neighboring super-power? I think that the most preferable way for Ukraine to build its foreign policy and strategy of its implementation is making friends, not enemies. Russia will never disappear from Ukrainian border, and the smartest way is to try to build a system of checks and balances based on the multi-vector policy.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
An old ghost is back. Ukrainian politicians re-started to talk about the early parliamentary election in April or May 2009.
The Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko has reported to the Parliament of Ukraine on the state of Ukrainian economy today. Now she’s answering the questions of the MPs. After that the project of law named “On the responsibility of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine” may be put to vote. The author of the document, the leader of the opposition Party of Regions (PR) Viktor Yanukovych proposes to dismiss Prime Minister.
The idea of the Yulia Tymoshenko’s dismissal is most likely going to fail. The next vote of non-confidence, according to the Ukrainian law, may be performed only in six month – in September 2009. But at time of the presidential campaign the dismissal of Mrs. Tymoshenko will play in favour of her ambitions. That’s why more and more Ukrainian politicians have started to talk again about the forthcoming dismissal (or self-dismissal) of the Parliament.
The Block of Yulia Tymoshenko was insisting on reporting in Parliament as soon as possible – for the Party of Regions of Viktor Yanukovych not to have time to find (buy) enough votes to dismiss Prime Minister. But the Regions didn’t permit Mrs. Tymoshenko to give a speech in Verkhovna Rada on Tuesday, 3 February: after the “short meeting” of Viktor Yanukovych with the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko, MPs from the Party of Regions blocked the tribune of the Parliament.
It was almost impossible for the Party of Regions to find enough votes against Prime Minister during Tuesday and Wednesday. The Block of Lytvyn will surely not support them: the Speaker of Parliament, member of the coalition with the Block of Yulia Tymoshenko, doesn’t want to lose his post. Regions may convince the faction of Communist party, but they will not have enough of votes anyway. Yulia Tymoshenko may be dismissed only if the members of pro-president part of the Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence block vote against her. It would mean that the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko decided to play together with the Party of Regions openly, working not for his rating before the presidential election, but against the rating of Mrs. Tymoshenko.
Meanwhile, the Deputy Head of the Party of Regions’ parliamentary faction Oleksandr Efremov told to journalists that it is possible that the MPs from his party may give up their credentials, and this action, according to law, will lead to the self-dismissal of the Parliament and early election. The leader of the non-parliamentary Socialist party, ex-Speaker Oleksandr Moroz also said that the President would probably call for early parliamentary election in April or May 2009 to dismiss the Government of Yulia Tymoshenko.
The idea of the Yulia Tymoshenko’s dismissal is most likely going to fail. The next vote of non-confidence, according to the Ukrainian law, may be performed only in six month – in September 2009. But at time of the presidential campaign the dismissal of Mrs. Tymoshenko will play in favour of her ambitions. That’s why more and more Ukrainian politicians have started to talk again about the forthcoming dismissal (or self-dismissal) of the Parliament.
The Block of Yulia Tymoshenko was insisting on reporting in Parliament as soon as possible – for the Party of Regions of Viktor Yanukovych not to have time to find (buy) enough votes to dismiss Prime Minister. But the Regions didn’t permit Mrs. Tymoshenko to give a speech in Verkhovna Rada on Tuesday, 3 February: after the “short meeting” of Viktor Yanukovych with the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko, MPs from the Party of Regions blocked the tribune of the Parliament.
It was almost impossible for the Party of Regions to find enough votes against Prime Minister during Tuesday and Wednesday. The Block of Lytvyn will surely not support them: the Speaker of Parliament, member of the coalition with the Block of Yulia Tymoshenko, doesn’t want to lose his post. Regions may convince the faction of Communist party, but they will not have enough of votes anyway. Yulia Tymoshenko may be dismissed only if the members of pro-president part of the Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence block vote against her. It would mean that the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko decided to play together with the Party of Regions openly, working not for his rating before the presidential election, but against the rating of Mrs. Tymoshenko.
Meanwhile, the Deputy Head of the Party of Regions’ parliamentary faction Oleksandr Efremov told to journalists that it is possible that the MPs from his party may give up their credentials, and this action, according to law, will lead to the self-dismissal of the Parliament and early election. The leader of the non-parliamentary Socialist party, ex-Speaker Oleksandr Moroz also said that the President would probably call for early parliamentary election in April or May 2009 to dismiss the Government of Yulia Tymoshenko.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Next regular election of the President of Ukraine will be held in October 2009. Or in January 2010. Or in December 2010.
The Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko made a very interesting statement yesterday. She said, “it left 9 month until the election of President” in Ukraine. It was not a kind of “slip of the tongue”: Mrs. Tymoshenko repeated the phrase about the nine months a couple of times. So, she will try to schedule the regular Presidential election for late October 2009.
The Head of the Committee on Judicial Policy of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine Sergiy Mishchenko said on Friday, 23 January that he has the information from the insiders in Presidential Secretariat that they are trying to agree with the Central Election Commission to hold the presidential vote in December 2010. Besides, Mr. Mishchenko himself is sure that the Presidential election should be held on 17 January 2010, counting this date from the Inauguration day of 23 January 2005.
According to Ukrainian law, the date of the regular election of President has to be scheduled by the resolution of Parliament.
A bit of history:
The Head of the Committee on Judicial Policy of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine Sergiy Mishchenko said on Friday, 23 January that he has the information from the insiders in Presidential Secretariat that they are trying to agree with the Central Election Commission to hold the presidential vote in December 2010. Besides, Mr. Mishchenko himself is sure that the Presidential election should be held on 17 January 2010, counting this date from the Inauguration day of 23 January 2005.
According to Ukrainian law, the date of the regular election of President has to be scheduled by the resolution of Parliament.
A bit of history:
The first President of Ukraine – Leonid Kravchuk – was elected in one tour on 1 December 2001.
In 1994 the early presidential election was held together with early parliamentary election: first tour took place on 26 June 1994, and the second tour – on 10 July 1994. Leonid Kuchma was a winner of presidential race, Leonid Kravchuk lost.The third presidential election in Ukraine was held in 1999: first tour was on 31 October 1999 and second tour – on 14 November 1999. The leader of the Communist party Petro Symonenko couldn’t beat President Kuchma, and he saved his post with more than 56% of voters’ support.
The first tour of presidential election 2004 was held on 31 October. Current President Viktor Yushchenko and current opposition leader Viktor Yanukovych met in a second tour on 21 November. The Central Election Commission declared the winner was Viktor Yanukovych. After the mass actions of protest, later called the Orange revolution, the Supreme Court of Ukraine cancelled the results of the 2nd tour on 3 December. The new second tour was held on 26 December. Viktor Yushchenko won with the result of 51.99%.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Parliamentary Control. Starting from today, a special Investigation Commission of MPs will follow the gas negotiations between Ukraine and Russia.
Today the Parliament of Ukraine has founded a Temporary Investigation Parliamentary Commission to follow all the developments of current gas crisis. The Committee is going to examine the actions of Ukrainian officials in the sphere of gas supply and gas transit in 2008, and also will follow the negotiations with Russian Gazprom in 2009. The questions of signing the new gas supply and transit contracts – including financial issues, like gas price – will be under everyday control of the Commission.
222 MPs voted in favour of the Commission’s founding: 174 members of the Party of Regions (total size of faction – 175 MPs), 27 members of Communist party (total size – 27), and 19 members of the Block of the Speaker Lytvyn (total size – 19). The Block of Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko (BYT) and all the faction Our Ukraine – People Self-Defence (OU-PSD) didn’t support the idea of establishing the parliamentary control of gas problematic.
The new-elected Head of the Temporary Investigation Commission Inna Bogoslovska (member of the Party of Regions) promised to give the information on its findings to press every three days. “Our task is to speed up the signing of two contracts”, Inna Bogoslovska explained. On 6 February the preliminary report of the Commission will be presented in Parliament. The Commission (according to the size of every faction, it comprises 4 MPs from the Party of Regions, 3 MPs from the BYT, 2 MPs from the OU-PSD, 1 MP from BL and one Communist) is going to work during two months.
“It may well happen that, according to the results of this Commission’s activities, the question on the impeachment of President and the resignation of Government will be raised”, Inna Bogoslovska said. The leader of the Party of Regions Viktor Yanukovych went further today, calling for the immediate Government resignation. The Communist party on its turn proposed to start the impeachment procedure as soon as possible.
P.S. I’m not going to comment a lot the today’s “blockade” of Russian gas transit to Europe as I still think that this “problem” is staged by some forces from Russia AND Ukraine. I would only add one point concerning the gas interests of Russia. It is important to pay attention to one interesting figure the Prime Minister of Russia Vladimir Putin mentioned during his meeting with foreign journalists last week. He told that Russia might pay for the Middle Asian gas “on average $375 per tcm” in 2009. As the European gas prices (in most of the EU countries) are linked to the oil prices, and the oil prices are still falling despite of all the Russian efforts and the statements of the OPEC countries, it is reasonable for Moscow just to win time for extra negotiations, in particular, with the successor of Turkmenbashi. But I have to say that Russia will have to re-start gas export to Europe in a very short time – there are simply not enough of gas storage facilities on the Russian territory. In a while Moscow will face only two choices: to transit the gas to Europe or to burn it (or to close some gas wells), losing money Gazprom needs too much today.
222 MPs voted in favour of the Commission’s founding: 174 members of the Party of Regions (total size of faction – 175 MPs), 27 members of Communist party (total size – 27), and 19 members of the Block of the Speaker Lytvyn (total size – 19). The Block of Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko (BYT) and all the faction Our Ukraine – People Self-Defence (OU-PSD) didn’t support the idea of establishing the parliamentary control of gas problematic.
The new-elected Head of the Temporary Investigation Commission Inna Bogoslovska (member of the Party of Regions) promised to give the information on its findings to press every three days. “Our task is to speed up the signing of two contracts”, Inna Bogoslovska explained. On 6 February the preliminary report of the Commission will be presented in Parliament. The Commission (according to the size of every faction, it comprises 4 MPs from the Party of Regions, 3 MPs from the BYT, 2 MPs from the OU-PSD, 1 MP from BL and one Communist) is going to work during two months.
“It may well happen that, according to the results of this Commission’s activities, the question on the impeachment of President and the resignation of Government will be raised”, Inna Bogoslovska said. The leader of the Party of Regions Viktor Yanukovych went further today, calling for the immediate Government resignation. The Communist party on its turn proposed to start the impeachment procedure as soon as possible.
P.S. I’m not going to comment a lot the today’s “blockade” of Russian gas transit to Europe as I still think that this “problem” is staged by some forces from Russia AND Ukraine. I would only add one point concerning the gas interests of Russia. It is important to pay attention to one interesting figure the Prime Minister of Russia Vladimir Putin mentioned during his meeting with foreign journalists last week. He told that Russia might pay for the Middle Asian gas “on average $375 per tcm” in 2009. As the European gas prices (in most of the EU countries) are linked to the oil prices, and the oil prices are still falling despite of all the Russian efforts and the statements of the OPEC countries, it is reasonable for Moscow just to win time for extra negotiations, in particular, with the successor of Turkmenbashi. But I have to say that Russia will have to re-start gas export to Europe in a very short time – there are simply not enough of gas storage facilities on the Russian territory. In a while Moscow will face only two choices: to transit the gas to Europe or to burn it (or to close some gas wells), losing money Gazprom needs too much today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
