Palij Memorial Lecture at University of Kansas focuses on Orange Revolution (07/30/06)

Palij Memorial Lecture at University of Kansas focuses on Orange Revolution

by Jennie Dienes

LAWRENCE, Kan. - The annual Maria Palij Memorial lecture was a presentation by Prof. Alexander Motyl of Rutgers University titled "Did the Orange Revolution Make a Difference?" The April 11 lecture was made possible by the donations from the Palij family and from Friends of Ukrainian Studies to the Maria Palij Memorial Fund, with sponsorship from the Center for Russian, East European and Eurasian Studies at the University of Kansas.

Dr. Motyl opened his presentation by describing a hypothetical situation where the Orange Revolution had not happened and Viktor Yanukovych won the presidential election in November 2004. He did this to help illustrate the changes that have come about and to present a possible scenario of "what if" to show what could have been.

In this scenario, Dr. Motyl presented Mr. Yanukovych as president and his close cooperation with Russia and the other countries that make up the Commonwealth of Independent States. Mr. Yanukovych would align Ukraine's stance with Russia's position against American and NATO policies in Afghanistan and Iraq. Talks would ensue regarding Russian banks acquiring Ukraine's top three banks - a move that will deepen economic integration between the two fraternal states.

Dr. Motyl said he believes that without the Orange Revolution, Ukraine would have become more oriented toward Russia and Central Asia.

Further transformations as a result of the Orange Revolution include people's perceptions and expectations. One such expectation was that, as a result of the Orange Revolution, Ukraine would immediately embark on a course of major fundamental, comprehensive, rapid transformation and reform - reform that would catapult Ukraine into the forefront of Europe and transform it into some kind of Switzerland of Eastern Europe. This expectation was unrealistic and this false hope led the people to disappointments and negative assessments of the situation with a "sense that the country has not changed any," explained Dr. Motyl.

Despite the unrealized expectations of the Orange Revolution, Dr. Motyl said he believes that a lot has changed, even though these changes may not be so easily perceived by everyone. The Ukrainian Constitution played a central role in the election contest; questions arose and everyone pointed to the Constitution. Dr. Motyl noted: "That's how it works in a democracy. That's how it worked during the Orange Revolution."

He went on saying that the political landscape has changed for the better as well, noting that during the 16 to 18 months prior to the 2006 parliamentary elections, extreme right and left parties became marginalized with the creation of a greater center. This, he said shows that Ukraine is becoming more democratic.

Dr. Motyl was not blind to the current situation in Ukraine, noting that some things have not changed for the better. The main characters in the government and ruling elite have been around for quite some time and corruption is everywhere.

One of the consequences of the Orange Revolution is that Ukraine has made its presence felt on the international arena, he continued. Today Ukraine is more than a place on the map, it is engaged in the debates about what Europe is, where Europe should or should not extend, and the future of the European Union.

In the last year and a half Ukraine's focus has shifted from the East to the West, but Dr. Motyl said he does not see Ukraine becoming anti-Russian anytime soon. He posed this question: "Is the West becoming more receptive to Ukraine's pro-Western overtures?" Dr. Motyl also said he believes that the Orange Revolution forces the West to be more receptive, even though membership in the EU may be possible only in the distant future - maybe 15, 20, 25 years away - another generation away. However, Ukraine is likely to join the WTO very soon and its status as a market economy boosts its presence in global markets.

Russia's attitude toward Ukraine has changed as a result of the Orange Revolution, Dr. Motyl pointed out, adding that Ukraine's attitude toward Russia is influenced by Russia's attitude toward Ukraine, by Ukrainian's attitudes toward themselves and who they are. President Vladimir Putin's decision to intervene in the 2004 elections and the "gas war" earlier this year revealed that Russia's attitude toward Ukraine also was transformed.

As a result, Ukraine can no longer feel that Russia is an unconditionally positive partner for Ukraine. Dr. Motyl posed the question, "Was Russia's response to Ukraine appropriate? Was Ukraine's reaction to Russia's response appropriate?" These questions led to his conclusion that something had indeed been altered in the Russian-Ukrainian relations.

One problem for Ukraine is that part of the population has been looking for identity. Dr. Motyl said it hasn't been certain whether it belongs in the East or the West and was searching how to define itself - what it means to be Ukrainian, what it means to be Russian or not to be Russian. It is for that segment of the population that Russia's behavior led to a certain reshaping of thinking and an acceleration of the crystallization of Ukrainian identity. What this identity will be is uncertain - whether bilingual or monolingual for example - but there will be greater identification in the region and with the state, Dr. Motyl said.

Dr. Motyl also recalled the sense of empowerment felt by the population after the Orange Revolution, with the media becoming freer and the creation of a civil society. People's attitudes towards their future, with regard to what they may or may not be able to accomplish, have been changed as well.

A reported 5 million to 6 million people took part in various aspects of the Orange Revolution. Out of these millions, a significant number of young people, possibly 2 million to 4 million, took part in in this transformation that has unified a generation of political activists, Dr. Motyl observed. These changes will begin to affect the political, cultural and social struggles that the young people will face, and they will determine Ukraine's future in positions of authority, education, business and other areas.

Dr. Motyl's comments and assessments of post-Orange Revolution Ukraine were followed up with a question-and-answer period. When asked by Prof. Paul D'Anieri about the threat of corruption in Ukraine, Dr. Motyl equated the current situation to that of Italy in the 1950s and '60s. Dr. Motyl added that corrupt countries can still be economically and democratically developed, citing the example of countries in East Central Europe, where there is a substantial amount of corruption, but not as deep or broad as in Ukraine.

On the topic of President Yushchenko's declining popularity, Dr. Motyl commented that there are many contributing factors, some of which were already discussed. Pointing to the "cult of personality" issue, Dr. Motyl said that there remains a residual Stalinism in Ukraine. Another contributing factor was Ukraine's relationship with the U.S., and especially with George W. Bush and his administration. Furthermore, with the war in Iraq and recent U.S. assistance in the Crimea, the Bush administration's actions have been portrayed as imperialist by Russophile media outlets.

However, this view will be negated after 2008 when Mr. Bush will no longer be president. U.S. foreign policy position may not change in that time, but the absence of President Bush will transform those arguments or make them substantially less valid, according to Dr. Motyl.

In comparing the new bourgeoisie in Ukraine to the robber barons of early 20th century America, Dr. Motyl noted that it was necessary for Ukraine not to send them all to jail, but to use these nouveau riche to build up business in Ukraine. Many of these oligarchs are western-educated - some with MBAs, who know foreign languages and assets in Europe. The thieves of the past are being held to new standards and they transform their behaviors to legitimize their business dealings, he explained.

Dr. Motyl pointed to Yulia Tymoshenko as an example. She made her money and transformed into that of a defender of honesty, torchbearer of the Orange Revolution and the crusader against corruption. Criminal responsibility and immunity for politicians are two problems Ukraine will have to confront. Ukraine, like Russia, will have to examine its past sooner or later, and people's backgrounds will come out, he added. Taking criminal action against them for particular crimes would be an appropriate response of the judicial system.

Regarding the inevitability of institutionalization and the potential for its reversal, Dr. Motyl said he sees a Ukraine that in 15-20 years could be like today's Poland. However, Russia will still be a problem for Ukraine, specifically Russia's stability and its new elections in 2008. Russia has been transformed into an authoritarian state with a lot of free money generated by oil and gas, which is not good for Russia or Ukraine, Dr. Motyl noted. With this in mind, the speaker said he sees Russia moving in the direction of Iran under the shah. Nonetheless, Ukraine will need good relations with Russia and vice versa, as it would be unnerving with an unstable superpower next door, he added.

Another issue that concerned Dr. Motyl was the secessionist movement in eastern Ukraine and that region's appparent desire to join Russia. He pointed out that life is better in Ukraine for a political criminal than in Russia and it doesn't make sense for these oligarchs to want to join Russia, where they would be treated like a small fish in a big pond. The threat of secession is real, but Dr. Motyl suggested that at some future time the regional divide may somehow be resolved.

| Home Page |