By the way, the results of the 1999 presidential election are on the Central Election Commission website here (sorry, they use frames) under Rezultaty Holosovanya half way down the links on the left. They are in Ukrainian, but include helpful bar charts so should still be understandable to non-Ukrainian speakers. For comparison, look here under Rezultati Golosuvannya-Pidtrimka Lideriv Po Rehionakh, for the comparable chart from 2004.

I like how clearly the graph illustrates that the perceived "East vs. West" divide in Ukraine is not nearly as pronounced as it was made out to be. Given the choice between the hugely pro-Russian Symonenko and the at-the-time avowedly pro-EU, pro-Nato Kuchma, many of the places so associated with Yanukovych today were ambivalent. Luhansk voted for Symonenko 54% to 41%, Donetsk 53% to 41%, Crimea 51% to 44% and the city of Sevastopol, the base of the Russian fleet (which would have to be removed if Ukraine entered NATO) voted 50% to 44% for Kuchma.

The nearly 20% spread between candidates came in that Western Ukraine was almost as starkly against the Communists as it was againt Yanukovych in this round. Ternopil and Ivano-Frankivsk oblasts, which were the most pro-Yushchenko with 96% and 95% of voters this round, were both 92% for Kuchma in 1999. When given the chance, (in 2002 as well as 2004) they voted for opposition candidates. But when there wasn't any choice, they resoundingly voted against Communism, whomever that meant they were voting for.

The 2004 election was not about a great East-West split, it was about the use of administrative resources, intimidation and disinformation against the people of Ukraine, most egregiously in the East. The lesson is that while you can't fool all of the people all of the time, if you control all the major media sources, you can scare almost all of the people all of the time. And fear is good enough in elections.