Another Intermission
BYuT and NUNS fight over city politics, the nation gets closer to crisis
February and part of March were the Party of Region's chance to waste everyone's time blocking parliament with their NATO Circus of Obstructionism. The end of March seems to have been burnt up looking for the next issue for politicians to focus on. Now it's April and they've finally found something to keep themselves from addressing any of the multiple looming disasters—the Kyiv Mayoral Election.
NUNS is the less popular party, but is pushing for the vastly more popular candidate in this election: Klitchko. BYuT's candidate is Turchynov, who has about 6% popularity to Klitchko's 31%. That means that if Tymoshenko wants him to win she'll have to spend massive amounts of time and political capital to do so. So far she doesn't seem to have been deterred at seeing what PoR earned for its anti-NATO efforts on a national level—a ten percent drop in popularity and repeated local election losses to Bloc Yulia Tymoshenko.
Certainly Baloha and his new gang (a breakaway from NUNS) haven't acted constructively and won't do so in the future. But NUNS bleeds votes every election because of their pettiness and unprofessionalism. It's BYuT, which is stronger and more politically savvy that will need to compromise here, because there are much bigger national problems her Cabinet needs to be addressing.
Inflation
Thank's to IIU's blogging, readers here already know that inflation is a big problem that's getting worse. Years without reform, worldwide price increases for foodstuffs, government-on-government increases in unsupported payouts to voters (the most recent being Tymoshenko's payments on Soviet accounts) have all resulted in 26% inflation this March.
As with other issues, NUNS and BYuT are working at cross-purposes. Tymoshenko's payouts went through, but the privatizations she proposed to use to generate the money to pay for them were vetoed by Yushchenko. She's tried to get rid of a longstanding land auction ban which she also thinks could improve economic growth (I do, too) and has again been vetoed by Yushchenko. I would be less apt to think Yushchenko was simply playing spoiler if I saw any indication that he has a better plan instead of his usual vague generalities.
Tymoshenko has said the government going to stop inflation in five to six months. To do this will take actual reforms, though, and that means working with NUNS. That may not be possible under any circumstances, but fighting over the Kyiv mayor is the one way to ensure defeat.
Gas Price Hikes
RosUkrEnergo is still hanging on in Ukraine-Russia gas deals despite Tymoshenko's opposition. She is claiming a victory anyway by saying that the deals will happen on Russian soil so it is technically "out of the Ukrainian market", but it looks from this angle like she's trying to save face after failing to eliminate it.
Though Russia has been able to keep its intermediary (and its active push to keep RosUkrEnergo throughout the negotiations last month confirms that it is, indeed, Russia's preferred intermediary), this won't stop Ukraine's gas prices from increasing significantly in the next few months. The ultimate driving force will be simple, rational self-interest: why sell at under $200 per m3 to Ukraine when Europe will soon be paying over $300 per m3 to Europe?
The price rise has already been foreshadowed: a month ago Russia increased the price it pays Central Asia for gas. This was not out of generosity: it was a revision to preempt hard bargaining by Central Asia, or (much worse for Russia) actual progress on alternative gas routes to Europe that don't include it (one of them is Tymoshenko's White Stream project, lauded by The Economist, which would be a great use of her considerable political skills if she weren't too busy in Kyiv). Russia's price increase is likely to be passed on to Europe in the near future, and Ukraine should not expect to be far behind.
We should not be distracted from this issue. Yes, another Russian general has threatened to attack Ukraine militarily (and with "other methods" as well), and responding in a professional manner was important. Yes, Kommersant claims Putin said Ukraine "isn't a real nation" and it will "cease to exist" if it joins NATO (a claim his government has not refuted). Ukrainian politicians should remember this when dealing with Russia (Hey, Yanukovych, you've been shouting a lot about Ukrainian national sovereignty at anti-NATO rallies—refresh my memory, when did any NATO ally threaten that as much as Putin just did?). Nevertheless, the real motive force in the gas sphere will be the $100 per m3 price differential. Either Russia will take payment in cash, or in ownership of Ukrainian energy assets, but it won't sit for long without payment.
I don't know when the hike will come. Gazprom may not know, and maybe not even the Russian government. But since the Russian government doesn't like NATO and doesn't think Tymoshenko is going to give it anything in exchange for the discount pricing, the hike will certainly come this year. If Russia is looking to improve its chances of getting paid, it may hike them this summer or wait until inflation is more under control, so it doesn't catch Ukraine when it is more desperate. If it wants to shake Ukraine up more it may load on the hike about the same time that inflation problems come to a head.
Not Even Together Enough To Host A Soccer Match
Inadequate preparation for Euro 2012 should be a big issue. There is $25 billion more investment that needs to be made, Ukraine's reputation is on the line—this should be a cause for major concern. But, because the government has gotten into an inflationary and budgetary mess that dwarfs even this event, all that I'll do is note that it's still a problem. I will add, though, that it particularly unhelpful to see Yushchenko blithely state that everything is going smoothly despite warnings from Ukraine's host partner Poland and the Euro 2012 committee.
Tymoshenko Should Support Klitchko
Below inflation, gas prices, Euro 2012, somewhere under corruption in public transportation, is the Kyiv mayoral election. And yet, the politicians of an entire nation are occupying themselves with this single city election.
Tymoshenko doesn't need to look very far to know what she should do in this situation: all she needs to do is remember her own decision ahead of the 2004 presidential election.
In 2004 she gave up her own candidacy in order to support Yushchenko, despite her ego and despite the animosity between them that is unlikely to have emerged fully-formed in January of 2005. The reason she did so was that she did not have a real chance at the presidency (her public popularity was in the low teens, I believe), but Yushchenko needed help to overcome his opponent Yanukovych. Divided, their two parties could have both lost a legitimate election to Yanukovych. In doing the right thing, Tymoshenko also earned enough voter support to improve her political rating far beyond anything she had had thusfar.
Tymoshenko should support Klitchko. Like Tymoshenko in 2004, Turchynov in 2008 is little more than a spoiler. This is especially true since the mayoral election, unlike the presidential, is decided without a runoff (though BYuT is trying to change this). If Turchynov and Klitchko fight one another, it is likely that both will lose to to Chornovetsky, whi is still polling above 30% popularity.
In a real, monetary way, Ukrainians cannot afford to watch BYuT and NUNS continue to squabble. If Tymoshenko makes the magnanimous step here, not only will it improve the nation's chances in the upcoming crises, but likely result in voters rewarding her as they did after 2004.
Dan McMinn
in 02) Foreign Policy - Russia, 11) Tymoshenko - Bloc Yulia Tymoshenko, 01) Economics and Finance, 07) Political History, 10) The Cabinet, 20) Privatization, 08) Oil and Gas, 13) Yushchenko - Nasha Ukrayina
|
29 Comments
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (29)
In the absence of a collective security arrangement, Chernoco will pack a punch of vermicelli to knock out both Klychko and Turchynov.
This déjà vu outcome in turn will cast a blight on Tymoshenko's presidential electability.
By Western standards, that is not a very large sum for the mayor of a large city. By Ukrainian standards, it's outrageous, especially because the mayor was giving himself bonuses on various pretexts - such as knowledge of language.
http://zik.com.ua/en/news/2008/04/21/134161
It is absolutely unbelievable and outrageous that the mayor flipped the bird to the people. In Western cities, the guy would be run out of office.
Maybe, finally, people in Ukraine are beginning to get it - that government is supposed to serve the people, and not the other way around. That government is accountable to the people. That government is supposed to respond to the people.
Maybe they are finally shaking off the sovok legacy, the inherited genetic culture of fear.
Maybe the people are finally learning to speak out and to organize, rather than leaving everything to corrupt officials and to political "experts."
So - in 4 years, what have we seen? Is it true that the Orange Revolution had only a limited purpose, as stated in this movie revie-
http://blog.kievukraine.info/2008/04/harvard-law-movie-review-orange.html
Is it true that the only 4 legacies of the Orange Revolution are creation of a free press, election reforms which have provided three fair elections, enactment of constitutional reforms which created a healthier balance between the executive and legislative branches, and the awakening of a national political identity?
In Kyiv - is any one of the mayoral candidates running on a platform of anti-corruption, given all of the corruption of the Chernovetsky regime?
We gotta make people see that it doesn't have to be black and white for them to be able to take part in being responsible citizens or supporting intermediaries to help in this regard.
dlw
****
Did Putin in fact say that?
The above quoted overlooks the fact that most Ukrainians OPPOSE NATO membership. FYI, Ukraine's borders expanded when it had an affiliation with Russia.
Do u hv any proof that he in fact did not??? because there are links to Putin's speech.
=============
In terms of listening and 'obeying' it's citizenry --- most Ukrainians want better health care, an end to corruption and clean honest government, as well as Ukrainian the only state language ---- interesting how these views seem not to matter. I guess that just as some lives are worth more than others, some opinions are worth more than others.
As for corruption not being black and white, I think Ken Lay, Paul Wolfowitz, Eliot Spitzer et al would be glad to hear that. Too bad they have such harsh laws in the States.
****
Kindly provide them.
-----------------------------------------------
"For more than three centuries, the Russian empire expanded in no small part due to human and natural resources from Ukraine, not to mention the founding of Moscow by a Kyiv Prince. Without this costly contribution, the Russian empire as we know it wouldn't have existed."
*****
Yes, Kievan Rus is called such and not Kievan Pol or Kievan Uke.
There's no legitimate denying where Russia is historically descended from. This in part explains the positions of many like Gogol and the Skoropadsky family.
The Riurik dynastic line which governed Russia had the Tryzub (Trident) as its coat of arms. The Romans were the de facto successors of that family.
On April 7, "Kommersant" reported that Putin had questioned Ukraine's right to exist during a closed-door Russia-NATO Council meeting in Bucharest. Citing an unidentified NATO source, the daily said Putin told his counterparts that in order to prevent Ukraine from joining the alliance, Russia was prepared to claim the eastern and southern parts of the country. "Ukraine will cease its existence as a state," Putin purportedly said.
As Hello said:
"most Ukrainians want better health care, an end to corruption and clean honest government, as well as Ukrainian the only state language"
I believe that these opinions are indeed beginning to matter more and more.
That's just one link. There are many others.
Also:
Kyivan Rus is NOT Russia, as many sly Kremlin propagandists would like people to believe.
Also, Ukraine is NOT Russia.
Россия (Rossiya), the Greek name for Русь (Rus), was adopted by the Grand Duchy of Moscow (Москва) in a self-promotion bid.
That glory-seeking branding trick does not entitle Rossiya to a “big brother” claim on Kyivan Rus’ heritage, much less to a controlling stake in it.
Without Moscow, there would have been no Rossiya. Therefore, Rossiya should cut the “umbilical cord” right there, and trace its statehood from Moscow, not from Kyiv. (Leaving Ukraine alone would be great, too.)
After all, if Kyivan Rus, along with the introduction of Christianity, had rebranded to New Byzantium, that wouldn’t have made New Byzantium a cultural successor to Constantinople and Istanbul.
To be exact.
Contrary to anti-Rusisan propagandists, many Ukrainian citizens (ethnic Russians, Ukrainians and mixed alike) don't share their historically misguided conceptions.
The latter mentioned favor close, friendly ties without historical distortions.
As previously noted:
There's no legitimate denying where Russia is historically descended from. This in part explains the positions of many like Gogol and the Skoropadsky family.
The Riurik dynastic line which governed Russia had the Tryzub (Trident) as its coat of arms. The Romanavs were the de facto successors of that family.
Another source: http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article.php?article_id=2372968
I have modified the reference to reflect that. However, the reporting is from Kommersant, not exactly a bastion of anti-Kremlin rhetoric. Would you consider it an undependable source?
Furthermore, the closest thing to a refutation of this from anyone near the Russian government is one minister saying he "didn't hear anything" personally. One would think that considering the threat to Ukraine's territorial integrity the statement would represent, someone from Putin's government would have actually refuted it, instead of just "not heard" it.
As for the "Kyiv Rus Moved to Russia" argument. If I'm understanding you correctly, and you've repeated yourself twice, so I think I am, you're saying that the heart of the Kyiv government picked up and moved to Russia at some point in time because they put a trident on their flag and based on the opinion of an 1800s short story writer and satiricist.
How is that a more plausible historical analysis than that Ukraine's power waxed in Kyiv Rus times, but it was later diminished in power and ultimately occupied since it's territorial integrity was challenged by Poland, Russia, and the Golden Horde simultaneously? Many empires have waxed and waned in power. The mere fact that symbols of older regimes that have waned in powr crop up again in other regimes is a poor argument that the original regime is still intact but in a different location.
The language of Latin was adopted by all of the countries of Western Europe, and many of the symbols of the Roman Empire persisted long after its fall. Does that mean that strong European Nations of the 1800s like France could claim to be more direct descendants of the Roman Empire than contemporaneous Italy? And does Italy, in turn, have more of a claim to direct descendence from Ancient Greece than modern Greece because Ancient Rome conquered ancient Greece and adopted much of its philosophy, many of its gods, architectural styles, symbols and more?
Kommersant has had its share of commentary that ranges from being critical of the Kremlin to mildly second guessing it.
There's no on the record admission of this alleged comment. People are known to speak more loosely in off the record scenarios.
As an anti-Brzezinski thinking Ukrainian observed online: when affiliated with Russia, Ukraine saw its largest land expansion.
As for the rise of Muscovy, it's not unheard of for nation states (modern versions of it or otherwise) to become more developed in areas that it expanded to.
Russia and much of Ukraine have much more in common with each other than the examples you give. Ukrainian identity has differing perceptions.
My references to Gogol and the Skoropadsky family relate to many other Ukrainians.
The idea that "Russia" somehow "expanded" Ukraine is absolutely false.
Under tsarist Russia, Ukrainian rights were taken away, in particular by the Prussian princess Catherine. Leading to Ukrainian Cossacks, among others, opposing the tsarist regimes.
In sovok times, the argument goes, "Russia" - meaning the center and director of the sovok empire - "gave" Ukraine certain lands.
Those were Ukrainian lands to begin with.
At any rate, as I have said before elsewhere, Russia can't have them back.
This is the 21st century.
And Dan is absolutely correct about the difference between "not hearing" something which other clearly heard and reported on, and refuting it.
To claim otherwise is absurd.
Catherine the Great converted to the ROC.
If I'm not mistaken, the UOC (Moscow Patriarchate) remains the largest in Ukraine.
Ukrainian citiznes have differing views on historical figures like Bandera, Petlura, Mazepa, Pushkin, Catherine, Suvorov and the Skoropadksys.
This is the 21st century. Concerning Ukraine, it's foolish to either go against the majority of its population or a good portion of them (NATO expansion and trying to foster Russia unfriendly views).
I'm 100% correct in what I stated about Putin's mentioned comment.
I'm wondering what that has to do with the price of tea in China.
The UOC (Moscow Patriarch) is used as a political tool. Noone goes to church except to get married, maybe, and on Easter, maybe.
Noone here is trying to foster "Russia unfriendly" views.
Rather, Russia is unfriendly - towards Ukraine and everyone else. Witness Putin's statement that Ukraine is not a state, and his statement, and that of other Russian officials, that Russia will have to point missiles at Ukraine, and worse.
Russia is conducting trade wars with everyone, including Ukraine and Georgia.
And continues to make extreme comments about NATO.
What is absurd is the continued Russian propaganda about how Ukraine can't exist without Russia, and how Ukraine saw its greatest land expansion due to Russia.
Misha, I wish you would stop, because you have no basis for your statements.
As for leader of nations born in other lands - again, what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?
PS By constitution, with the exception noted below, US presidents are required to be born in the US. Thus, the first president of the US, George Washington, was born in England. But he did not view himself as a king or a tsar, and he set a great example.
No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.
The Uniates and Filaret have their own "political" agendas. The ongoing popularity of the UOC Moscow Patriarchate goes against your perception of it.
The fact of the matter is that Ukraine saw its greatest land expansion when it was affiliated with Russia. It's doubtful that Ukraine could've achieved such without that affiliation.
For good reason, many in Ukraine favor close ties with Russia. This inlcudes the Ukrainian mechanic up the block from me. He's affiliated the UOC Kyiv Patriarchate. He told me how many Ukrainas faulted Yushchenko for the energy cutoff as they froze that winter. I've heard and read likewise from other Ukrainians.
Russia's relations with Georgia and Ukraine aren't in the one sided manner you suggest.
Not every country has the same laws on who heads their state. Keep in mind prior periods in history when such laws weren't evident or as common.
the russo-sovok tendency to keep repeating things,the same things, over and over and over and over and over, ad nauseam, even when they're false, and even when russo-sovoks have nothing to say, just in order satisfy a pathological need to have the last false word, and in order to try and bully people into submission, and in order to talk about irrelevant things
second, the devastating effect of sovok brainwashing on people in Ukraine, who can't think straight.
Blaming Yushchenko for Russia cutting off the gas supply to Ukraine and Western Europe is like blaming the rape victim, or blaming the murder victim, and not the perpetrator of the crime
Even today, the Kremlin engages in distortion, sovok-type propaganda, etc. The Kremlin today is not burdened with facts or logic.
Fortunately for Ukraine, the man down the block who "told you" something, if he really does exist, is fading out
By the way, it was Yushchenko who stated that Ukraine wants Russia to be a good neighbor.
Meaning, of course, that the days of "master-slave" relationship, are gone.
The Russian-Kremlin code word for "master-slave" relationship with respect to any country, be it Ukraine, Georgia, etc. is "close ties" with Russia.
Those days are gone.
And Russia ought to try to truly be a good neighbor, instead of a pest seeking to make slaves out of everyone else.
The "slave" mentality are those who subscribe to the thoughts you express.
Yushchenko says different things at different as has Tymoshenko. Upon becoming PM during her first term, Tymoshenko said that Ukraine should join NATO when Russia does. She has since changed that tune. Shortly after becoming President, Yushchenko said the Russian language should be respected. He's not supporting a two lasnguage policy that at last notice is still the more popular route in Ukraine.
Russia wants Ukraine as a good neoghbor as do many Ukrainians.
See, Misha, I haven't heard ANY Ukrainian official talk about pointing weapons at Russia, or even wanting to point missiles at Russia. Assorted Russian officials from Putin to Zvirinovsky (spelling intentional) have specifically talked about pointing missiles at Ukraine.
Nor have I heard ANY Ukrainian official claim that Russia is not a state. Putin has claimed that Ukraine is not a state, and Russian bloggers keep claiming the same thing.
Nor have I heard ANY Ukrainian official talk about how Russia has "betrayed" Ukraine. Assorted Russian officials have talked about how Ukraine has somehow "betrayed" Russia.
I haven't heard ANY Ukrainian officials declare a trade war on Russia. Russia has declared trade wars on Ukraine, Georgia, and virtually every other country.
I haven't heard ANY Russian official support the Ukrainian language in Russia. In fact, we have seen the destruction of Ukrainian museums/libraries in Russia. In the meantime, the status of the Russian language, and other languages, is safe and protected in Ukraine.
Russia wants Ukraine as a good neighbor? The actions of its officials, and the words of its officials DO NOT BEAR THAT OUT.
Please, Misha, do not insult our intelligence here.
The days of Russian superiority are over, Misha. It's the 21st century, and democracy rules in Ukraine.
It's still developing, but it's democracy.