New Parliamentary Elections to Resolve Ukraine's Political Crisis
May 8, 2007
After a month of political deadlock, Ukraine's main political leaders — Viktor Yuschenko (President) and Viktor Yanukovich (Prime Minister) — have agreed to hold early parliamentary elections sometime in the coming months. This should lead to a stabilization of the conflict that has once again revealed the imperfections of Ukraine's legislative and political system, as well as the political and cultural divide between the eastern and western halves of the country.
Background of the conflict
These two "Viktors" have been political opponents since 2004, when Yanukovich was accused of having won the presidential election through voting fraud and was forced to agree to fresh elections, which were won by Yuschenko. In the year following the Orange Revolution, the "orange" parties — then Our Ukraine, Yulia Timoshenko Bloc, and the Socialist Party — were unable to consolidate power and make good on their campaign promises. A central reason for the orange parties' problems is the struggle for influence between Viktor Yuschenko and charismatic politician Yulia Timoshenko. Naturally, the greater the problems between Yuschenko and Timoshenko, the better for Yanukovich and his Party of Regions.
When the Socialists defected from the rest of the orange parties to form a majority coalition with Party of Regions and the Communists, the balance of power shifted to Yanukovich's party, and Yanukovich became Prime Minister of Ukraine. His party's power base is in primarily Russian speaking eastern and southern Ukraine.
Ukraine's political crisis of April, 2007
On April 2, 2007, President Yuschenko issued a decree to disband the Verkhovna Rada (Parliament). His immediate motivation for doing so was the ruling Anticrisis Coalition's strategy of aggressively luring members of opposition blocs into their coalition. Whether or not individual fraction members may change affiliations after being elected is a gray area of the law, but Yuschenko was facing the possibility that the coalition might gain a two-thirds majority in Parliament, allowing them to make changes to the Constitution and override his vetoes.
In Ukraine the president has the right to dismiss Parliament under certain conditions, and the Anticrisis Coalition immediately protested his decision in the Constitutional Court, the country's highest legislative body. Two and a half years ago the Constitutional Court's decision to hold a repeat presidential election because of widespread falsifications was the turning point in the Orange Revolution.
This time, however, the Constitutional Court was not able to act independently of political leaders. Several judges appointed under Yuschenko's Our Ukraine quota made a statement complaining of intense pressure from "certain political groups," but failed to name those guilty, raising suspicions as to their sincerity. Judges from Party of Regions included some with dubious qualifications and experience. Judge Stanik, who was appointed to lead the hearings, was accused by the Security Service — headed by an appointee of Yuschenko — of having accepted large bribes in the past, though this has not yet been officially confirmed.
In late April the mild Yuschenko began to play hardball, surprising even Yanukovich. He issued a second decree repeating his dismissal of Parliament and establishing a new date for elections, since it had become clear that the previous date would not be honored by the ruling coalition or the idle Central Election Committee, four members of whom had unexpectedly fallen ill and had been in the hospital for a lengthy period of time.
Next, Yuschenko dismissed two judges for breaking their oaths. Both of these steps were of unclear legitimacy, but by this time it had become clear that the court would be unable to make an independent decision. While each side of the conflict continued their public accusations, they made steps to try to resolve the conflict through political agreements rather than rely on the discredited and mistrusted Constitutional Court.
The result of these closed talks was a decision — essentially a concession on Yanukovich's part — to agree to new parliamentary elections and establish a special committee to establish a date for the elections and outline the laws that Parliament needed to pass before then. Yuschenko, on his part, agreed to recall his decrees — though this procedure is not technically allowed by law.
Probably election results
The new election may mark the end of Socialist Aleksandr Moroz's active political career, since his defection to the Anticrisis Coalition split his party and tarnished his image. In return, he was given the post of Speaker of the Verkhovna Rada (Parliament) — a position of considerable clout.
Some parties currently in Parliament will have difficulty overcoming the current 3% barrier to enter Parliament — particularly the Communists and the Socialist Party, who have been losing their electorate. However, the 3% margin might be changed in the coming months.
General levels of support for so-called pro-West parties versus pro-Russia parties are not expected to change significantly. Political protest in Ukraine
In contrast to the Orange Revolution of late 2004, the vast majority of protesters in Kiev this time are paid demonstrators receiving from $10 to 20 USD per diem. Since 2004, "tent cities" and sit-in protesters have become a "political technology" used by political parties in Ukraine and other post-Soviet countries to create the impression of grass-roots support. In actuality, the vast majority of Ukrainians are mostly indifferent to the current political crisis.
Since the Orange Revolution, the political divide between East and West Ukraine has become wider and more distinct. For the first time political scientists and commentators have begun to seriously entertain discussions of a possible separation of the country. However, this is not in the interests of the country's wealthy elite and so should not be viewed as a threat for the time being.
VIEW ARCHIVED NEWS FROM 2007 |
