by Mychailo Wynnyckyj Ph.D., Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, (via the Ukraine List)

I don't know if Kommersant published its Sept 14 article (reprinted in UKL 360) intentionally trying to misinform its readers, or if this was an honest mistake, but the Constitutional Court DID NOT rule yesterday on the fundamental changes to Ukraine's Constitution adopted last December by Parliament - i.e. on the package of laws which change Ukraine from a presidential-parliamentary to a parliamentary-presidential republic as the article states. The challenge to the constitutional changes adopted last December have not even been examined by the Court yet!

What in fact happened yesterday? The Court ruled (by a vote of 10-4) on the Constitutionality of Bill 3207-1, and agreed that this bill is in accordance with Ukraine's basic law.

The official text of Bill 3207-1 can be found here:
http://zakon1.rada.gov.ua/cgi-bin/laws/main.cgi

Bill 3207-1 was passed by the Rada on December 8, 2004 together with Bill 4180 during the "heady" days of the Orange Revolution. Bill 4180 dealt with changes to the Constitution which transferred executive powers from the Presidency to the Cabinet of Ministers and Parliament - i.e. with the issue of separation of powers at the central government level. Bill 3207-1 (the one which the Constitutional Court ruled on yesterday) deals with the
organization of LOCAL governments.

Some may recall that according to the deal struck in Parliament between Kuchma,  Yushchenko, et. al. in December, Ukraine's system of government was to change from its current presidential-parliamentary form to a parliamentary-presidential system on January 1 2006, or on September 1 2005 if additional amendments to the Constitution referencing local self government were passed by Parliament. Bill 3207-1 encompasses these infamous "additional amendments."

Tymoshenko's Dismissal

Ukrainska Pravda, 8 September 2005
[translated by Nykolai Bilaniuk for UKL]

Political scientists have voiced different opinions on the president's cabinet shuffle. Some maintain that Yushchenko did the right thing by dismissing Tymoshenko and Poroshenko. Others acknowledge that a cabinet change had to happen sooner or later. All the same they believe that the conflicts involving Poroshenko and Tymoshenko are not going to end. For Yushchenko the key is not to nurture an electoral rival over the next year. Tymoshenko will take the parties with her, the symbols of the Maidan.

Political scientist Andrii Yermolayev approves of Yushchenko's dismissal of Prime Minister Tymoshenko and National Security and Defense Council (RNBO) Secretary Poroshenko.

"In my time I made a suggestion about the situation Yushchenko found himself in, concerning the conflicts surrounding corporate entities close to Tymoshenko and Poroshenko. I said the only reasonable approach is their dismissal," he said in an "Ukrains'ka pravda" commentary. "I approve of this step, seeing as otherwise the crisis would only deepen," noted the political scientist.

In his view, if Yushchenko had made his move on Monday, it would still have been possible to form an electoral bloc with the Tymoshenko and Poroshenko forces, but this wasn't done. Now, believes Yermolayev, the initiative has passed into the hands of Tymoshenko's team. "The dismissal of Tymoshenko and Poroshenko looks like a move Yushchenko was forced into as a result of his inability to subdue the crisis," believes the political scientist.

Concerning what Tymoshenko will do after her dismissal, Yermolayev believes she will be occupied with "her own perspective". In his view, Yushchenko has little chance of reaching an agreement with Tymoshenko to stand together at the next elections.

Yermolayev also thinks that now Tymoshenko can set her sights on the presidential post, and will build her political team on that basis.

Petro Poroshenko, the other dismissed official, will probably be active in the parliamentary electoral process, believes Yermolayev. Poroshenko will seek a more substantive role in the NSNU (Our Ukraine) party. But Yermolayev also doesn't exclude the possibility that Poroshenko will be offered another post, but he thinks that the ex-secretary of the RNBO doesn't need one.

With respect to the appointment of Yekhanurov as acting Prime Minister, Yermolayev believes that he will be a temporary figure. Yushchenko might also suggest him for the Prime Minister's seat, but even so Yekhanurov will be a technical prime minister. In Yermolayev's opinion, Yekhanurov's candidacy can pass in parliament without problems.

"Otherwise Yushchenko can appoint a new government. It may be led by an unexpected strong figure. In this way, Yushchenko can restore the appearance of a pro-presidential alliance and create a new-look electoral bloc" predicts the political scientist.

Yermolayev declined to guess the name of such a figure noting that "it's not a simple scheme".

"Yekhanurov cannot make an independent play. If the president opts for the alternative approach, then Yekhanurov will go away without conflicts," he noted.

Political scientist Viktor Nebozhenko believes that appointing Yuri Yekhanurov as acting Prime Minister was a success for Yushchenko, so reports "Novisti Ukraina".

"The figure of Yekhanurov was a good choice, because it takes the sting out of the pain experienced by former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko. Her place is being taken by a technical prime minister so to speak, and not by person who can play some kind of political role in the short run," proposed Nebozhenko. He thinks that "Now Yushchenko needs a pure technocrat, who will occupy himself only with solving concrete problems, and not with public relations, politics, and so on."

Besides, notes Nebozhenko, "the candidacy of Yekhanurov gives the president great latitude for a painless change to any other Prime Minister."

"For the president, it is important not to cultivate a political rival in the run-up to the March elections. Yekhanurov is very appropriate for this role" believes the expert.

Speculating on the various possible candidacies for the post of RNBO Secretary, Nebozhenko answered that the RNBO is "a strange organization".

"Its political weight depends on the person that chairs it. Under Horbulin it had huge, even unlimited authority, above the Cabinet of Ministers and the Verkhovna Rada. Under other leaders its meaning was greatly diminished. Under Poroshenko the RNBO ranked equal to the Prime Minister" explained the political scientist.

"I think that after the appointment of an acting Prime Minister, the president is not going to go with an outstanding personality (in appointing a secretary for the RNBO). This will be somebody from among the generals or somebody from among Poroshenko's senior officials" said Nebozhenko.

In connection with this, the political scientist did not exclude that "at some point, in some form, we may see Poroshenko make a comeback."

Commenting on Yushchenko's expressed desire to face parliamentary elections in one coalition with whatever blocs might be formed by Tymoshenko and Poroshenko, Nebozhenko suggested that "there can't be talk of a united team".

"Both Poroshenko and Tymoshenko will continue their battles, just as they had been trading blows earlier," said Nebozhenko.

"I don't think that a coalition is possible. This was obvious from the very beginning, insofar as Tymoshenko enjoys an excellent rating," summarized the expert.

The director of the Institute for European Integration and Development, Dmytro Vydrin believes that the dismissal of the government was in accordance with the law, and that its members had ititially been chosen without regard for the one important criterion for forming a team.

"In selecting a team, what ought to happen is that one distinguishes between excellent candidates and substandard performers," the political scientist told "Interfax Ukraine".

Vydrin noted that  Yushchenko decided to dismiss everybody, but now there is an open question about the formation of the next government. "If the team will be assembled once again on the basis of personal loyalties and on the principle of political approval, this would mean that substandard people would once again be admitted. On the other hand, if the team will be built on the principles of high professionalism, and social and moral responsibility, then the jobs will go to the excellent candidates," said the political scientist.

He considers it possible that after a certain cooling-off period, Yulia Tymoshenko will once again be offered the chance to form a government under her direction but based on the new principles.

If the president decides to place at the head of the Cabinet of Ministers a subservient technical Prime MInister who will be completely given to carrying out not even his own will, but the will of his Secretariat, then the political scientist believes Ukraine can expect a series of crises right up until the parliamentary elections.

The expert believes that the crisis of governance in Ukraine will in no way be reflected in relations with Russia. "Ukraine doesn't understand what has happened at its center. Russia understands even less what has happened in Ukraine. Lately I have received phone calls from tens of politicians and journalists. Nobody understands what happened, and therefore, nobody understands how to react to the events in the country," said Vydrin.

The director of the Institute for Global Strategy, Vadim Karasov believes that through these latest dismissals, Yushchenko has demonstrated not only the qualities of a political leader, not only of the leader of a revolution, but also of a statesman.

"It was not possible to tolerate the continuation of a situation in which two parties within the government were splintering the country. They were fighting within the government for a monopoly on access to the powers that be. Parties should compete in politically, on the political stage, but not within the government," said the political scientist.

In his words, these are two supposedly aligned political forces, which embody "different grouped business interests" with different "political, economic, and ownership orientations and instincts," yet "one of them exhibited a revolutionary, Jacobin, Robespierresque line like Yulia Tymoshenko, and the other was more conservative, at some moments even oligarchical and counterrevolutionary."

Karasov thinks that now "we can place a period the end of the epoch of revolution, counterrevolution, and of radical revolutionary assaults on property, the ruling elites, and the lives of ordinary people," and from now on "begins the epoch of pragmatic evolution."

In Karasov's view, the appointment of Yuri Yekhanurov as acting Prime Minister demonstrates that the president "caught on to society's wish for stability, for a stabilizing, incremental, evolutionary trend in development."

Speaking of practical consequences, the political scientist said that Ukrainian politics will experience a fundamental realignment of political forces, after which two main political poles will be formed. Tymoshenko, first off the mark, will create a new opposition -  a new opposition of a new government.

The ex-Prime Minister, believes Karasov, will be supported by a part of the revolutionaries of the Maidan - these being "Pora", the PRP, political forces from the "Bat'kivshchyna" (Fatherland) group, and the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc itself. This pole could possibly include part of the Party of Regions, the united Ukrainian social-democrats and communists, for whom the important consideration will be not so much supporting the Julia Tymoshenko Bloc so much as being in opposition to Yushchenko.

The presidential pole, according to Karasov, will retain the support of those who supported him before, but now without the extremist, revolutionary, or even the conservative counterrevolutionary element. Besides that, Yushchenko will get the support of political forces who are dissatisfied with Tymoshenko and tired of the revolutionary experiments of the Cabinet of Ministers.

Karasov figures that the speaker of the Parliament, Volodymyr Lytvyn, will occupy a position closer to the president. "The problem here is not one of personal sympathies or antipathies, but rather, that the office of the speaker, as head of parliament, embodied the desire for stability. Thus, in this revolutionary and post-revolutionary situation, those political forces that valued stability were attracted to Lytvyn."

"Now, in Yekhanurov, Lytvyn is not merely gaining an ally for this evolutionary trend in Ukrainian development, but is getting a rational, pragmatic, and experienced partner in government," said the political scientist.

He called Yekhanurov an experienced, pragmatic, and serious politician who, "amazing as it may seem, managed to not get into an argument with anybody in his long political career."

The director of the Ukrainian section of the International Institute for Humanitarian-Political Research, Volodymyr Malynkovych, believes that the crisis of government and dismissal can have a positive outcome for the country, but that for Yushchenko, it's clearly a negative result.

"Yushchenko demonstrated weakness, I think, because he appeared lost, even in claiming that today's events were not a crisis in government," said the political scientist on Channel 5.

Malynkovych described the government crisis as foreseeable, insofar as the people standing on the Maidan included individuals from the old days, "fallen flyers" who had already tasted power, people with diverse ambitions. Besides that, the arrival of the new government uncovered a "war of various oligarchic groupings," noted the political scientist.

In his words, Yushchenko showed himself to be a weak politician, insofar as he allowed confrontation within his team, inflamed by oligarchic groups.

In his turn, the director of the Agency for Modelling Situations, Vitalii Balu, believes that at the moment, one of the less desirable scenarios in the possible development of the Ukrainian political situation is being played out.

He also believes that a powerful bloc will now be formed around Yulia Tymoshenko, with the "parties and symbols of Maidan," which will compete with NSNU for victory in the elections.

Ukrainska Pravda, 8 September 2005
translated by Olga Bogatyrenko for UKL

Dear journalists, friends, colleagues!

When on 23 January of this year I stood on the Maidan and made my inaugural speech, I promised that in Ukraine there will be a professional government, an honest government working day and night in the interests of the Ukrainian citizen and of the state, a government that will work as a team, that will be, let me repeat, honest, transparent and professional.

That is why I invited people who had been through dozens of demonstrations, meetings with people, who stood by me on the Maidan in Kyiv, people who had helped rid of the old corrupt regime and who had helped create a free Ukraine to join my team. These were loyal people without whom, I am sure, all our successes in the fall of last year would have been impossible.

Once again, 9 months ago I suggested to the Ukrainian Parliament Yulia Volodymirivna Tymoshenko as the Prime Minister, appointed Petro Oleksiyovysh Poroshenko as the Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council, and appointed Oleksandr Oleskiyovych Zinchenko as the State Secretary of Ukraine.

These people were in charge of my electoral campaign, some came to me in 2002, others came to me a few months before the electoral campaign was over or at some point during the campaign. I think of these people as extraordinary (neordynarni), they are my friends, and let me speak frankly, some of the things I will be talking about now are difficult to talk about.

Yet, I understand that it is high time for such a statement since it has to do not just with the relations with the government, the Security and Defense Council or the Secretary of State, it has to do with the processes that were an end in itself for the electorate.

I knew of certain disagreements among these people. I am sure that disagreemens characterize any relations, especially relations between such interesting and extraordinary people. I am sure that every great person has his problems.

I treated these problems and disagreements as something temporary. I hoped that as soon as everybody was to take their post, there would be no time for personal intrigues, PR or anti-PR campaigns [Note from UKL : in the post-Soviet context, "PR" (piar) has the connotations of measures to discredit political opponents] among certain political centers of power within one coalition. Those were my hopes.

Moreover, I would like to say that in accordance with the Constitution of Ukraine I gave my colleagues substantial powers and rights.

I am sure that nobody before today's Security and Defense Council Secretary, or the Secretary of State, or the Prime Minister had comparable powers; starting from forming institutions, forming the apparatus, I do not remember a single person being dissatisfied after this or that institution had been formed  and after all the necessary basic documents had been signed.

Yet, every day I witnessed how these institutions engaged in confrontations and serious conflicts. Then mutual behind-the-scenes intrigues started to carry over into the arena of state politics.

I witnessed how, in fact, every day I had to interfere with and resolve conflicts that arose between the Security Council and the government, between the Secretary of State and the Security Council, between the government and the Supreme Rada, in other words, these conflicts became a part of daily governmental agenda.

I am sure that my friends who were awarded such unique popular trust and such unseen-before powers, could have used this resource for their work. I was also sure that people who occupy such high governmental positions understand the burden of responsibility and that is why I believed that they had to listen to each other and cooperate - because it was their duty.
The President cannot be their nanny and resolve their disagreements. However, let me be open, I would be willing to do it despite the fact that I understood that it was a matter of state importance. Despite the fact that I felt bad about spending time on things that were not constructive things. Yet, that's the reality.

Once again, these discords continued, wars of opinion grew more severe. These wars of opinion exacerbated by the principle of «two Ukrainians-three Hetmans ».

It started feeling like an electoral campaignŠ one wanted working in Kyiv, another wanted to work in Kyiv, yet another wanted to work in L'viv, and somebody else wanted to reshuffle political forces and invite new coalition partners. In other words I realized that every time I would hold council meetings, there would be zero trust among my partners. And that after every meeting there would be behind the scenes discussions leading to some other political principles, and then the country would end up in turmoil.

The last scandal on NFZ [the Nikopol Chemical Plant, which the Ukrainian government is trying to re-privatize -UKL]. I remember what my last Friday ended with, when I witnessed how a unique court decision that we had a very difficul ttme reachingŠ when a unique honest court decision after an hour led to, as a result of behind-the-scenes intrigue both within and outside of Ukraine, a crisis when people went outside to the main square.

And that's given the fact that we have a precedent, we have a correct decision of the court. Yet, the end of the story had to do not with how the enterprise was to be transferred from a gang to the government, but with how to transfer the enterprise from one gang to another. And that is how people got their right to protest. I am positive that the time has come when my colleagues have lost their team spirit and their faith. I am saying this with bitterness. Because these people remain my friends no matter what the circumstances. I will continue to appreciate them, yet I have to be saying this.

For 8 months, the President of Ukraine has been a peacemaker among these institutions. I almost never spoke of this in public. I believed that this was my karma, my job that I had to do. In the meantime, Ukraine was losing momentum, especially economically. I think that the members of my team were listening to the President but could not hear him.

Today, no matter how hard it is for me, I have to break this Gordian knot for the sake of Ukraine. On the Maidan, on 24 August, on Independence Day, I made a promise to my colleagues.. We witnessed how the government obtained many new faces, yet the paradox is that the face of the government itself did not change. The country is again being accused of corruption, the country is againg being accused of a lack of economic transparency, especially when it concerns privatization.

We are witnessing how the processes that could have been substantially democratized are undergoing a reversal. Look at the tax system, customs system, we are witnessing a growing populism. We witness from dawn to dusk all those sweet promises that will be increasingly difficult to fulfill over time. This year's decisions - economic, social - are the decisions that can be made only once. Next time they can't be made without significant economic changes.
Yet, we have witnessed the fact that not a single economic package has been proposed for 2006 - not in the area of social welfare, not in the area of social reform, not in the area of education or healthcare. We are going to accumulate 12 more months of stagnation in all those areas. Which is something I cannot accept, my friends.

I am sure that the reason for this has been lack of understanding about what the priority of national interests means. A lack of ability to work exclusively for the people, for the state - as the highest priority of everybody in the government. Yet, the first priority of the executive branch has become PR - either for oneself, for a political force or for a political position.

I am sure that this will be done away with. I see that some people have grown so engaged with this PR that they have no time left for constructive dialogue. They cannot imagine life without cameras. Even though I have always been for and will be for public work of the government, of the Security Council, the Cabinet, this, my friends, does not come prior to actually doing work. We should not drag the country into more unfulfilled promises, into dangerous populism.

Dear friends, I am confident that this year I became the President not to have key governmental institutions fail to reach an understanding and fail to cooperate with mutual respect. It's not why I have almost a year had such a face. I am sure that this is not what millions of people on the Maidan stood out there for. That is why I cannot pretend as if nothing is happening.

Today I have to tell my compatriots that I have to make drastic steps involving changing the leadership of the government, the Security Council and the President's Secretariat. I repeat, from now on I only want to see highest governmental institutions working as a single team, working for the people, working to create full employment, higher salaries, better schools, better healthcare, so that people felt that the government is working harmoniously and without internal discords, and that order and stability are maintained in the state.

That is why I am signing a degree to dissolve the government, to fire the Secretary of the Security and Defense Council, and, based on a resignation letter submitted by Zinchenko a few days ago, to appoint Oleg Borysovych Rybachuk Ukraine's Secretary of State.

The Associated Press, Kyiv, Ukraine, Fri, June 3, 2005
via AUR

KIEV -- Ukraine's parliament on Friday called on President Viktor Yushchenko to sack his Russian adviser, Boris Nemtsov, after Nemtsov harshly criticized Ukrainian Cabinet decisions.

Calling Nemtsov "a disciple of the Russian liberal empire's anti-Ukrainian ideas," the resolution proposed by ultranationalist party legislator Oleh Tyahnybok accused him of "unprecedented interference in Ukraine's internal affairs."

It was endorsed by 250 lawmakers -- far more than the 150 needed. The request, however, was nonbinding and likely to be ignored.

Yushchenko, who had Nemtsov's strong support during last year's Orange Revolution protests, named him to the unpaid advisory position in February, one month after taking office. He has repeatedly defended his decision.

Nemtsov was charged with helping to boost business ties between Ukraine and its main trading partner, Russia.

Nemtsov has criticized the Ukrainian leadership in recent weeks, saying that recent economic decisions made by Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko were hurting Ukraine's chances of attracting foreign investment. Nemtsov defended his criticism last week, saying, "I am not Yulia Tymoshenko's defense lawyer; I am an ally of Viktor Yushchenko."

But in a sign that Yushchenko was not entirely pleased, Yushchenko's spokeswoman reminded journalists that Nemtsov's job was not a staff position. "In any case, a person who is an adviser of the president of Ukraine should be more correct in his statements," she said.

Russian advisor says Prime Ministers policies will sooner or later end with a large-scale economic crisis in Ukraine for which millions of Ukrainians will suffer

NTV Mir, Moscow, Russia, in Russian 0900 gmt 3 Jun 05
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, Fri, Jun 03, 2005
via AUR

MOSCOW - [Presenter] A scandal in Kiev: The Supreme Council [parliament] today demanded from the head of state that he dismiss Russian politician Boris Nemtsov from the post of adviser to the president of Ukraine. The request to [Viktor] Yushchenko was submitted by 250 deputies. They believe that with his statements Nemtsov compromises the Ukrainian authorities and interferes in the affairs of a sovereign state.

Earlier Nemtsov quite harshly spoke out against the policy carried out by Prime Minister [Yuliya] Tymoshenko. He said that her command methods in the economy sharply reduced the number of potential investors. Nemtsov admitted that he had advised Yushchenko to dismiss Tymoshenko from the post of prime minister. These statements by Nemtsov today caused the anger of Ukrainian deputies.

Boris Nemtsov told NTV in a telephone interview that he would not back down on his words and is prepared to accept any decision by President Yushchenko.

[Nemtsov] I have respect for the deputies of the Supreme Council. The only problem is that a decision about my appointment and my dismissal can be taken by President Yushchenko and it is up to him to decide. I do, indeed, criticize the government of Yuliya Tymoshenko for the policy it is carrying out - and they want to dismiss me for this.

I am convinced that this policy will sooner or later end with a large-scale economic crisis in Ukraine, from which millions of Ukrainians will suffer. And I cannot lie or be hypocritical in this situation.

When prices are being regulated and a petrol crisis is being provoked, when there is constant talk about redistribution of property, when the investment climate is worsening and when economic growth is slowing down, an adviser to the president of Ukraine has to adopt a position of principle, which is what I do.