Political ZOO. White Bengal Tiger as a symbol of a presidential electoral campaign in Ukraine.

“Promise me you'll never forget me, because if I thought you would, I'd never leave.” Winnie the Pooh.

I am back to blogging since yesterday, and the same day the President of Ukraine gave me a reason to start this subject - the Tiger topic in Ukrainian politics.

While giving a speech in frames of his visit to Cherkassy region, Viktor Yushchenko – as usually – strongly criticized the Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko. Moreover, he proposed to the PM to leave the Ukrainian politics. Answering a question on the not-adopted-Budget-of-Ukraine for 2010, President, in particular, said: “It is time for her to have a rest, at least for a little bit, because every month of her work brings a colossal poverty to our country. Let her roll on the floor with the tiger, so far to end her working way in Ukrainian politics”.

I would love not to comment the quotation, but to tell more about The Tiger.

On 24 August, 2009, the Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko visited the popular child festival “Black Sea Games” in Crimea. During the visit PM received an original gift – a Bengal tigress of a white color. By the way, they say, the unique White Tiger on the territory of Ukraine.

Re-presented to the Yalta zoo, the tigress named TigerYulia (‘tigrulia’ in Ukrainian transcription) was not abandoned and forgotten. The symbol of 2010 according to the Chinese calendar, the White Tiger became a very active ‘face’ of the presidential campaign of the Prime Minister.

At first, on the 1st of September 2009 a lot of Ukrainian schoolboys and schoolgirls received new school diaries and notebooks with the image of TigerYulia with the famous braid on her (tigress’) head.

Then TigerYulia appeared on the billboards of the PM before and after the New Year.

By the way, Viktor Yushchenko also used a symbol of Tiger in his political PR. At the end of 2009, the press service of the President informed that the beloved cat of the President, named Tiger, run away from the country house of Viktor Yushchenko. TV-journalists immediately offered a helping hand to the Tigerless President – almost the same day he got a new little cute kitty, which probably received a different name.

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.

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.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2010. Link to the article: FT.com / Comment / Editorial - Ukraine’s dilemma

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.

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).

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.

"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."

The rating of main presidential candidates (according to 5 polls, conducted at the beginning of October 2009)

The Endless Circle. Ukraine may have snap parliamentary poll in May 2010.

Ukraine may expect the comeback of a ghost of an early parliamentary election in 2010. This secret is widely known as after the presidential election in January-February 2010, the winner (whoever it will be) would surely want to take it all, and to form the majority in Parliament using the effect of his recent victory.

The same point of view has confirmed Volodymyr Lytvyn, Chairman of the Parliament of Ukraine and a newly registered presidential candidate. In May 2010 Ukraine will have snap parliamentary election, he told journalists today.

He emphasized that ‘under the current circumstances in Parliament, a lot of problems will appear’, that’s why the new President will surely try to nail down a success. The key position in country will be the Prime Minister’s office, Mr. Lytvyn added.

First-comers. The Central Election Commission of Ukraine received registration papers from first two presidential candidates.

On 20 of October the Central Election Commission of Ukraine started to accept registration documents from potential candidates to the presidential post. The first guy who submitted his papers to the Central Election Commission was some Oleh Riabokon, 36 y. o. lawyer. Mr. Riabokon is a co-founder of the “Master and Partners” law firm. Among other co-founders of this company was Sergiy Vlasenko (Member of Parliament, Yulia Tymoshenko block). Of course, Mr. Ryabokon has no chance to win any noticeable result during this election, except the PR for his name and his company.

The second fastest pretender for the first chair in the country is Anatoly Hrytsenko, MP from the “Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence” faction, ex-Minister of Defense, and ex-team-mate of the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko. The friendship with President finished after the dismissal of Mr. Hrytsenko from the ministerial office. Anatoly Hrytsenko also has no chance to become a next President of Ukraine, but his rating may rise up to the level of 5-6 heavyweighters, which will surely help him during the next parliamentary election (still expected next year). To whom it may be interesting, I am giving a link to the Ukrainian language website of Mr. Hrytsenko.

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.

Time management. The highweighters of Ukrainian politics have opened presidential race long time before its official start.

There is no such a thing as “a lack of time” for a person who understands, what the time-management is. That’s why I’ve decided to come back to blogging, despite of a pretty much pressed working schedule. Ukrainian politicians don’t want to waist the time left before the official start of the presidential race also (according to the 'new edition' of the Law on elections, it's 19 October 2009): streets of the cities, towns and villages of Ukraine, as well as the sides of big roads, are already stuffed with the billboards with political promises.

To my impression, the most active in the pre-electoral advertising are the Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko and ex-Chairman of Parliament Arseniy Yatseniuk. Their PR-ideas are rather original as well. Though, it seems to me that Mr. Yatseniuk is simply wasting money: his strangely colored boards and bizarre slogans are kind of shot in the eye for his ratings, imho.

So, Yulia Tymoshenko plays with contraposition. 'They promise, she works', 'They block, she works', 'They obstruct, she works', 'They ruin, she works', etc, her billboards are declaring. No names, but everyone understands, who is She.

The visual messages of Arseniy Yatsenyuk are supposed to use a kind of military symbolism to emphasize his willingness and ability to become a strong leader. But, frankly speaking, it doesn't look very convincing.

The President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko: “I'm ready to hold early presidential election”.

A couple of quotations from today’s press-conference of the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko:
"The ruling coalition in Parliament is de facto absent".
"The majority voting system will never be presented again in Ukraine".
"The parliamentary coalition should prove it has 226 MPs, and re-introduce a candidature of PM".
"I'm ready to hold early presidential election, if the parliament agrees to hold early parliamentary election on a base of a new electoral law, and to abolish unlimited parliamentary immunities"
"Decision of the Constitutional Court shall be the base for future actions (concerning early parliamentary election. – T.V.)"

Meanwhile, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) made public its World Economic Outlook today. The Fund revised its forecast of GDP of Ukraine to a drop of 8 percent this year, from the earlier figure of 3 percent. It also predicted the economy of Ukraine would grow 1.0 percent in 2010.
The World Bank also revised its 2009 forecast this month, and said that the Ukrainian GDP will drop to 9 percent from a previous prediction of minus 4 percent.
Ukrainian government still thinks that GDP-2009 will grow on 0.4 percent. In 2008, the economy grew 2.1 percent.

The April Fool’s Day. Ukrainian Parliament scheduled presidential election to be held three months earlier than it was expected – on 25 October 2009.

The Parliament of Ukraine has decided today to schedule the next presidential election on 25 October 2009. Just to remind, previously most of MPs and experts suggested the election of President has to be held in January 2010 – 4 years after the Inauguration day. The decision of Verkhovna Rada was a kind of an answer to the Presidential address to Parliament (yesterday).

Actually the real background of today’s vote of Ukrainian Parliament is hiding not exactly in the speech of the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko, and even not in his unexpected idea to change a Constitution by himself, or to introduce a two-chamber Parliament with a rather weak Lower House.

There is a rumor that the Presidential Secretariat has already drafted a Decree to dismiss the current Parliament and to call for a snap parliamentary election in a nearest future. To stay ahead, all the parliamentary factions united in common decision: to cut the presidential term of Mr. Yushchenko for 3 months. The second, but not less significant goal of the MPs was to secure their immunities: the Constitution says the Parliament shall not be dismissed during 6 months before presidential election.

401 of MPs voted in favor of “25 October”, 7 – the Presidential part of Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence faction (United Center party) – voted against. Vyacheslav Kyrylenko, member of OU-PSD, addressed his colleagues during the parliamentary debates: “What are we afraid of? Early parliamentary election? Dear Mr. Speaker, do you have information on the respective Decree of the President? Please, make this information public!”

What's next? Viktor Yushchenko is going to challenge the decision of Parliament in the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. “This decision is not legal, this decision does not correspond to the Constitution”, he said today. “All of them are going to lose before the October… The election will be held in due time, provided by the Constitution of Ukraine”.

The version of the Constitution of Ukraine acting in 2004 (when Mr. Yushchenko was elected) says the presidential election should be held every four years. A current edition of the Constitution provides that the President shall be in power during four years after he assumed the office.

Open Lists. Ukraine has learned how to hold free and fair elections, but it’s not enough to be called a true democracy.

In this post I would like to turn back to the question of the reform of electoral law in Ukraine. There are a lot of talks about how to change the way Ukrainians are electing the Parliament (I’ll stay away from the analysis of re-distribution of powers) or local Councils, but the very idea of reform is completely distorted. Instead of having a serious talk about the very details of a new electoral system that will fit to Ukrainian realities in a best way, most politicians are trying to switch the public attention to active, but non-effective discussions around one point – a need to move from the closed-party-lists to open-party-lists scheme, in frames of the current proportional voting system. I think it’s not enough at all.

Since the Orange revolution of 2004, all the elections in Ukraine were recognized as free and fair. But as a result of these free and fair elections, we, Ukrainians are receiving – again and again – the Parliament full of come-and-go people. The majority of Members of Parliament of Ukraine doesn’t make any serious decisions, but only thoughtlessly presses the “yes” or “no” buttons, in accordance with order of faction leaders. It has to be changed.

According to the current electoral law, Ukraine elects its Parliament on a base of proportional representation system with closed party lists. The system stipulates that Ukrainian citizens vote not for individuals, but for parties, which are receiving seats in Parliament proportionally to the amount of votes they had won. Every party draws up a list of its candidates for the seats in Parliament, but it must make public only the names of five first persons from the list. A couple of hundreds of other candidates may be hidden until the end of the vote – it’s a provision of the closed-party-lists type of proportional voting system.

As a result, according to the closed-party lists scheme, Ukrainians are voting not for all members of Parliament, but are only choosing between “groups of five”. Even if a party makes public the entire list, the electoral campaign has been centred on a little group of party leaders. And after the elections Ukrainian voters may realise that the party they voted for has in its list, for example, a personal massager of the party chief, or the secretary of a party sponsor. A very big problem of the current electoral system is also the fact that the Members of Parliament has almost no officially established connection with the regions of a country. People simply don’t feel they have a real representative in Parliament: there is no one to be called “my MP”.

It is naive to think that the problem will be cured, if all the party lists were open in its literal meaning – becoming public before the elections. Ukrainian parties are mostly based not on the ideology, but on their leaders who are associated with all the party. And the majority of Ukrainians will keep voting for the personalities they like, not taking care about any lists. (And even if an old woman from the village has an opportunity to read all the lists of all the parties, she will surely not be able to analyse them properly, and to estimate how much people from the list she may see in Parliament after the elections. To make the outcome of the parliamentary election more democratic, there is a need to change the voting system as a whole.

As to my point of view, the best thing for Ukraine is to come back to the majoritarian (plurality) system of vote: the person, not a party should win support of voters, and should represent Ukrainian people in Parliament. Ukraine still doesn’t have a developed party system. Imagine, only about 3% of the citizens of Ukraine are members of any party. That means that 97% of Ukrainians doesn’t feel close to any political party at all. Proportional system was established, among other issues, in order to build up the party system in Ukraine. This idea failed: new-formed Ukrainian democratic political parties in reality are something between the oligarchic lobby groups and fan clubs of charismatic leaders.

In frames of the current proportional, party-based system of vote, the easiest way for Ukraine would be to switch to one of the models of open party lists, when a voter receives a right not only to vote for a party, but also to express his or her preference for a particular candidate(s) in frames of the party list. That means that voter indicates not only a name of the party he or she favours, but also names the favourite candidates from this party, or even indicates the order of preference. Such a model is widely used in the countries of Western and Central Europe. I would propose also to move forward from a single constituency scheme Ukraine currently has. In this case the parties will have to draw up several regional lists of candidates, giving a chance for regional leaders to be elected, and also establishing a stronger link between regions and Parliament.

There are other things which I think have to be done to make the parliamentary election in Ukraine closer to the best democratic standards:
1. To adopt an Electoral Code, a single document, which would incorporate all the rules (including technical) concerning holding parliamentary, presidential and local elections.
2. To form the Registry of voters (at long last) to avoid fraud.
3. To change the provisions of electoral law, re-establishing the so-called “absence certificates” for people who are not at home at a day of election (for ex., they are in the other region of Ukraine or abroad) to have a possibility to realize their Constitutional right to vote.

What’s up, Ukraine: a headless Foreign Ministry and new talks on early presidential race.

The Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko declared she is in favour of the early presidential election in her country. “The sooner there will be presidential election in Ukraine, the better it will be politically cured”, she said in the column for French Le Monde, published today. Today Mrs. Tymoshenko is on the travel to France, where she’s meeting with French President Nicolas Sarcozy.

Yulia Tymoshenko thinks that the biggest mistake of the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko is that he used some dirty weapon against her. “I always offered him my hand. I was only person during the Orange revolution he could rely on. I had never betrayed him. The struggle will end with his political suicide”, she added. When asked what could stop her from becoming president in the near future, she said: "Nothing!"

Meanwhile, The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine was sacked yesterday. 250 Members of Parliament of Ukraine voted in favour of the dismissal of Mr. Ogryzko: the oppositional Party of Regions, the Communists, and 49 lawmakers from the parliamentary Block of Yulia Tymoshenko. As the authoritarian rule inside the Prime Minister’s faction is a well-known fact, the result of this vote means that Mrs. Tymoshenko was in favour of the dismissal. “Ohryzko did not suit me as a minister,” PM said. “He is not professional, he is a person who has been making provocations against the government.”

Mr. Ogryzko, always loyal to Viktor Yushchenko, recently was in a center of scandal with Russian foreign ministry: he warned the Ambassador of Russia in Ukraine, ex-Prime Minister of Russia Viktor Chernomyrdin that he may become persona non grata in Ukraine for his critical statements. Before his dismissal, Volodmyr Ogryzko addressed Parliament on the recent ruling of the U.N. court, establishing the maritime border between Ukraine and Romania – it is considered as a big fiasco of Ukrainian diplomacy, as Ukraine in fact lost a big part of its territory inside the Soviet Union border (the UN-court decision may become a dangerous precedent for future attempts to change existing post-Soviet borders).

The press-secretary of President Iryna Vannikova said the dismissal of Ohryzko “was untimely and ungrounded.” “It makes absolutely no sense to weaken the country’s foreign policy, and to create new source of tensions in the middle of the economic crisis,” she emphasized.

Some Western media say that the dismissal of Ogryzko may shift Ukrainian foreign policy from pro-Western to pro-Russian. I would not agree with that. I’d better say that the Ministry of Foreign affairs was clearly not friendly to Russia, and also was often acting against the interests of its own country – Ukraine – moving the domestic political quarrels on the international stage. However, taking to the account the recent statements of Mrs. Tymoshenko in Le Monde, the last tendency mentioned above is not going to change.

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.

Jaap de Hoop Scheffer: "If there is a Russian-Ukrainian dispute on energy security I think NATO allies should pick that up".

Let me not to tell anything about Ukrainian politics today. Everything is going well here in Kiev, the politicians are going on with presidential campaign, claiming each other in all the possible sins. The main topics of discussion: gas contracts (Presidential secretariat has issued a new research, making the conclusion that the papers signed in Moscow are not good for Ukraine and may - and possibly should - be revised), the date of Presidential election (December 2008 or January 2009), and a couple of dismissals and appointments - current and prospective. Instead of Ukrainian domestic politics saga, I propose some NATO-reading for today: Transatlantic Leadership For A New Era: Speech by the NATO Secretary General at the Security and Defence Agenda - 26 January 2009. This speech, followed with questions and answers session, really worth to be read. I will give here the words of NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, which were concerning directly Ukraine and its geopolitical role in global processes.

"We have seen how the need for reliable energy supply is transforming from a mainly economic question into a central security issue. For many nations, being cut off from energy is a matter of national survival. The recent quarrel between Russia and Ukraine was only the latest reminder of this. This latest crisis showed how a bilateral dispute can have a powerful knock-on effect, both in terms of the heat in houses and a chill in international relations".

"Clearly, no one gets a veto over NATO enlargement. That process is central to our aim of consolidating Europe as an undivided and democratic security space and it is not negotiable. The pace and direction will be of our choosing. But the NATO-Russia relationship is too valuable to be stuck in never-changing arguments. We need a positive agenda, one that befits the importance of both Russia and NATO".

"Considering the political, security and energy issues that run through Central Asia and the Caucasus, I believe we need stepped up focus on those regions as well. I think NATO should consider its role in energy security much more seriously. There is, to my mind, clear added value for the Alliance".

"It is simply not enough to have Heads of State and Government provide NATO with a mandate in energy security, yet to have Allies hesitate to use NATO as a forum for discussion during crises".

"The Bucharest decision was rather clear, or was very clear, I should say, and as I said in my introductory remarks, we will set the pace and we will decide upon the moment. But the moment is performance-based. So I cannot give you a timeframe. It is not around the corner, I would say, as we speak, as far as, of course, Ukraine and Georgia are concerned. We are intensifying our relationship, as you know, through the NATO-Ukraine Commission, the NATO-Georgia Commission, but I do think that enlargement in this sense is not around the corner, but I can't be more specific here in that regard".

"If there is a Russian-Ukrainian dispute on energy security I think NATO allies should pick that up. Not because we have any ambition, or we pretend to play any role. Please, no! There was a Czech presidency which immediately was proactive and involved. That was the European Union involved. Other people were involved. Certainly not NATO. But that does not mean that those subjects are irrelevant for NATO, if you agree with me that NATO is a political military organization".

"I think Russia cannot afford to have a non-dialogue with NATO, and NATO cannot afford to have a non-dialogue with Russia".

"Of course I'm discussing protecting pipelines in times of crisis. I said protecting pipelines is first and foremost a national responsibility. And it should stay like that. NATO is not in the business of protecting pipelines. But when there's a crisis, or if a certain nation asks for assistance, NATO could, I think, be instrumental in protecting pipelines on land".

"NATO is not in the energy business. So if in a situation like we had over the past weeks NATO allies are totally deprived of gas you will not see a NATO Secretary General stepping forward, raise his finger and tell the Europeans or the Russians or the Ukrainians for that matter, listen, guys, you have to stop this. We have other international organizations, other people to do this, and certainly not a NATO Secretary General, the European pres... the European Union presidency, rather, or others.
So we are not in the energy business, but of course when a nation is for a long time deprived of all gas, or all energy, in the North Atlantic Council, and quite rightly so, when a nation raises its finger and says, Secretary General, we would like to discuss the energy situation, should NATO then say no, that's none of our business? I don't think so. Although you'll not see us in the forefront in the energy business because we are not in the energy business. We're in the security business.
And I say again, we usually use the word energy security. And that's our business".

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 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%.

The Time Bomb. According to the new Russian gas price formula, with the recovery of a world economy, the economy of Ukraine will feel worse.

In the comment to my last post, Leopolis mentioned (very reasonably) that the reliance on a cheap gas has harmed Ukraine’s energy security. It harmed Ukrainian economy as well. Yes, that’s true that Ukraine lost a lot of time, not taking any significant measure to ensure the development of energy saving programmes. As a result, Ukrainian industry is extremely energy consuming, and Ukrainian economy is one of the most energy intensive on the continent. But it is not a fault of Viktor Yushchenko as a President (though he could do something in this field instead of just talking). The problem is that Ukrainian and foreign (mostly Russian) oligarchs who privatised big powerful plants and factories – at a very low price actually – didn’t care at all about any energy saving during all the 17 years of independence of Ukraine. These people, together with Ukrainian politicians, just used low gas prices to earn millions, or even billions of dollars. Business climate is so co-dependent with political situation in Ukraine that it’s really more reasonable for businessmen to have a fast profit today than to invest in an uncertain future.

Anyway, to switch to the market gas prices at the peak of the world economy crisis is also an evil for the country. Ukrainian industry simply doesn’t have time and financial strength for quick modernization and re-equipment. As a result, thousands of workers will lose jobs, provoking the social crisis. It opens a room for some radical or extremist ideas to override the common sense, which is really dangerous.

But the main problem with Russia-Ukraine gas agreement is that it contains a delayed-action bomb – according to the gas price formula, with the recovery of a world economy, Ukrainian economy will feel worse. Everyone noticed that the base gas price for that formula (which nobody have seen) is $450 per tcm. So, de facto Ukraine agreed for the raise of the price of Russian gas almost in three times – in December 2008 Kiev still paid $179.5 per tcm of gas from Russian pipeline.

$450 is really a very high level, taking to the account the geographical closeness of Ukraine to Russia. For example, in the first quarter-2009 Germany will pay $470/tcm, but the cost of transit of gas from Russia-Ukraine border to Germany costs not less than $50/tcm (only Ukrainian transit fee is around $20/tcm). One more example: according to the information of the Secretariat of the President of Ukraine, Hungary will pay for Russian gas only $400/tcm in the first quarter-2009. Romania pays $470, but buys only around 4 bcm of gas every year.

So, if we take these “European averages” together, we will have a base price for Ukraine around $400-420, but not $450.

Ukraine will not suffer a lot from the new gas price in 2009, as it will be presented with 20% discount. Meanwhile, it is still not clear, how much will Kiev pay in average during the year. Gazprom officials made public only the price for the first quarter 2009 – $360/tcm, and mentioned that the average price “may be less than $250”. The Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko said that the average figure is $228.8. It’s still $50 more than a price-2008, but Ukraine will definitely survive.

Well, Ukrainian industry will survive in 2009, but not develop. European industry instead will have a unique opportunity to use low gas prices for future growth of its potential. Ukrainian plants and factories will definitely lose their market competitiveness. I have to mention here that – according to the Moscow agreements – the GazpromSbytUkraine Company will control up to 25% of the domestic industry gas market of Ukraine, so, Russians will have a possibility to support loyal and “punish” competitive Ukrainian enterprises.

But the most important changes are expected not in short-term, but in mid-term prospects. What will happen, when the world economy will start recovering from the current crisis? Oil price will grow. As oil price will grow, gas for Ukraine will be more and more expensive. I would like to inform that the gas price of $450 corresponds not with a peak oil price of 2008 - $140/barrel – but with the price of Brent at the level of $111,4, according to the Naftogaz source. So, in 1,5-2 years time Ukraine will unfortunately face its own big economy crisis. …But it’s not an important question for Ukrainian politicians: all the worst is going to happen AFTER the presidential election.