NEWS AND VIEWS

Old surprises, new realities in the politics of Ukraine

by Oksana Bashuk Hepburn

The announcement by President Viktor Yushchenko's Our Ukraine (OU) party to go into opposition to the government does not surprise. The greater surprise happened a few weeks ago when the president called on Viktor Yanukovych to form a coalition government comprising the Party of the Regions of Ukraine (PRU), the Socialists (SPU), the Communists (CPU) and OU. Now OU is leaving.

In reality, the coalition is untenable. It has no ideological base, no common policies and no cohesion. Yesterday's enemies artificially forced a relationship designed to achieve immediate political imperatives. The OU wanted to regain some power and get appointed to head ministries after forfeiting a viable Orange forces coalition; the PRU was anxious to neutralize opposition.

To cover up major political fault lines, the parties signed the Universal of National Unity. To her credit, Yulia Tymoshenko refused to join the coalition and formed an opposition to the government. Nor did she sign the document.

Now, it appears, the "poyedynok z diyavolom" - the alliance with the devil - as the Ukrainians call unsavory unions, is in jeopardy. Last week Roman Bezsmertnyi, the party leader, announced that OU is joining the opposition and pulling ministers from the government. The immediate kicker was the prime minister's negative stand on NATO in Brussels; however, OU accuses him of wider disregard for the universal.

No surprise here. Once the universal had served its purpose and once he was firmly in power, Mr. Yanukovych was less bound to its principles like European integration, quick move toward the World Trade Organization, promotion of national Ukrainian symbols, freedom of the press, and, of course, NATO membership. Such principles never comprised his party's political ideology to begin with. Moreover, it appears, the universal is not enforceable by law; it's not worth the paper it's written on. In reality, the prime minister can sign it, then disregard it as much as he likes without political consequence. His position is secure as long as he controls the majority in the Verkhovna Rada, Ukraine's Parliament, or until the people have had enough of these shenanigans and demand a new election.

It looks like OU has been outmaneuvered. No surprise here. It has a history of political ineptness. Consider the following. Its forerunner, and still an influential component, Rukh championed the independence movement in 1991. Over 90 percent of the population supported them. Since then, its force has disintegrated into several parties, including OU. The result? Failure to capture political control of Ukraine. Reunited in the 2004 presidential election, what is now called the Orange forces again rallied tremendous popular support. They surprised and earned respect from most of Ukraine, and the world, with this success. Not two years later, with the Orange Revolution's political capital squandered by its leaders, parliamentary power had been handed over to Russia's preferred man, Mr. Yanukovych.

The reinvention of OU as the opposition may be its political salvation. It has lost much support among the people and will no doubt lose more if it continues to associate with the PRU which its electoral base does not. Ideologically, OU is a much better fit with the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc (YTB) than with the PRU. It might distinguish itself once again by joining forces with her to raise Ukraine to a new level of democratic evolution: a two-party system; one in power and one in opposition.

Democracy, as defined by ancient Greece, is a society in which citizens take turns in being rulers and the ruled. Rulers are those who win control of Parliament in a fair election; the opposition is those who lose but want to win and rule next. There were times in history when criticism of the government - the main role of the opposition - was considered treason, punishable by prison or worse. This was the reality in the USSR, a one-party dictatorship with no opposition. And death for some 30 million who dared!

Such pathological paranoia may explain the loathing and scorn that many politicians who come from the Communist formation heap on opposition to their "correct" way. Such people are clearly identifiable. They hurl invectives at those not inclined to support them, be it coalitions or other political views. The appalling animal name-calling hurled by Mr. Yanukovych at the Orange forces protesting the falsified presidential elections come to mind. These are yesterday's people who do not understand the indispensable value of an opposition and the need for Ukraine to go forward in its political evolution.

What does the opposition do? It debates and criticizes; asks embarrassing questions and makes statements to the press about the government's questionable dealings. When the public good is at stake, it has the right and duty to oppose the government's policies and actions. By doing so, it is convincing the electorate to give it power to govern in the next election because it, the opposition, can and will do a better job.

In democracies, the evolution from multi-party to two- or three-party systems clarifies the role of the opposition. The opposition arises from a party whose elected members do not support the government and who offer themselves to the voters - not just as individual candidates, but as an organized and alternative government. This is exactly what Ms. Tymoshenko did when she declared that YTB would not join the PRU but sit in Parliament as the opposition. If Ukraine is to continue its transformation into a modern state it is imperative that it move in this direction. The OU's decision to join the opposition is a good step forward.

What might be some others? What is in Ukraine's best interest?

Ukraine needs what every democracy needs - a strong, forceful opposition, ideologically united to fight policy battles on important issues with the government on behalf of the citizens, and in so doing get itself ready for the next election. And victory.

To win the next election, Ukraine's opposition, like those throughout the world, needs a winning strategy. To begin, here are six key steps the opposition should take:

• Decide that it is an "Orange opposition," understanding that the greater the integration and movement toward a single party, the greater its chances of galvanizing the electorate's support.
  
  
• Distance itself from losers, former political lights that have disgraced themselves. The people do not forget.
  
  
• Seek models of how other oppositions do it - the Poles, the Brits, the Americans. Use what fits. Learn quickly, elections are but a few years away.
  
  
• Establish a shadow Cabinet using the best people for the job-sharing positions among the various factions to strengthen cohesion. Reallocate portfolios periodically to broaden experience, reward talent and deal with inadequate performance. Develop winners.
  
  
• Provide solid debate on issues facing Ukraine - energy and the Russia factor; foreign affairs; despicable social inadequacies. The budget is an excellent time to query spending and financial accounting. Use the media as much as possible.
  
  
• Be fearless in criticizing the government in Parliament, the media, in meetings with the electorate, but be fair. Remember, their turn to criticize will come when they are in the opposition.

Finally, the opposition needs to surprise Ukraine again by leading it to a new political reality.

Oksana Bashuk Hepburn, president of the consulting firm, U*CAN is writing a book about her experiences in Ukraine.

Copyright © The Ukrainian Weekly, October 29, 2006, No. 44, Vol. LXXIV

| Home Page |