FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Ukraine’s Real Underdog

by CHAD NAGLE

Kiev, Ukraine.

With only a couple of days before Ukrainians go to the polls for the third time in two months (i.e., f.or the presidential election’s repeat second round), outside observers might be worried that the “notorious regime” in Kiev will try to “rig” the poll again on behalf of Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, declared winner from the Nov. 21 vote. The reality is that Yanukovych is the underdog, not because he lacks popular support relative to opponent Viktor Yushchenko ­ all indicators show Yanukovych’s support to be heavy in all major population centers except Kiev. Rather, it is because the administrative machinery of the state is now almost entirely in the hands of the “orange revolutionaries,” backing Yushchenko.

About two weeks ago, Nina Karpachova, human rights ombudsman in the Ukrainian parliament, submitted a complaint to Speaker Vladimir Litvin about infringements of voters’ rights in a new package of reforms to the election law. The new law restricts the right of citizens to appeal to territorial election commissions (TECs) about exclusion from electoral registers. The ability of voters to lodge appeals with TECs had been a major plus of the system in the first round, and an orderly redress of grievances was not only possible but the norm. Karpachova also complained about curtailment of home-voting rights as potentially disenfranchising the disabled and elderly, and urged Litvin to introduce appropriate amendments. The law will disproportionately affect pro-Yanukovych voters. Of the 11 million pensioners in Ukraine who have benefited under the Yanukovych government, it is estimated that up to four million may be effectively immobile. The mobile ballot box is their only hope. Suspiciously, the law is designed to lose force after the December 26 election.

Litvin ignored Karpachova’s complaints, and on the same day received the Order of the State and the title of “Hero of Ukraine,” awarded by President Kuchma, for “extraordinary personal services to Ukraine and the development of the state, reform of the Ukrainian political system, and consolidation of the ideals of civic unity and reconciliation in society.”

Just about every state institution, it seems ­ from the parliamentary leadership to the Central Election Commission (CEC) to the foreign ministry ­ has effectively lined up behind the “Orange Revolution,” making Yanukovych’s public condemnations of the “traitorous” and “double-dealing” authorities in Kiev far from mere bluster. On December 8, parliament, with pro-Yanukovych MPs abstaining, approved a new formulation for the CEC, giving pro-Yushchenko representatives an clear majority. All pro-Yanukovich nominees were rejected.

The international election-observing apparatus on December 26 will likewise be controlled by the Yushchenko-ites and active in eastern Ukraine, despite increasing evidence that Yanukovych supporters in western Ukraine are threatened and persecuted. On December 16, student unions from Britain, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Hungary and other Western countries jointly announced an “international student action” to observe the election on the 26th, using some 480 Ukrainian and 120 foreign students members of “mobile rapid-reaction groups” in southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. These areas, they said, were reportedly where “mass falsification of the vote” was carried out in favor of Yanukovych. The “Action HQ,” it was announced, would cooperate closely with the office of the National Salvation Committee of Ukraine, an overtly pro-Yushchenko group, but so would the joint mission of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (the main international election-monitoring body), the Council of Europe and the European Union. The OSCE, relying exclusively on opposition sources for information on polling day, said it would send more than 1,000 observers to the election, the OSCE’s “largest mission ever” according to the OSCE website.

It can be little wonder that the West has been so vocal in support of Yushchenko when Ukraine’s foreign minister himself has been an ally of the “Orange Revolution” leader for years. On December 18, Foreign Minister Konstantin Grishchenko publicly announced his approval of the November 23 foreign ministry statement that the entire Ukrainian diplomatic corps supported Yushchenko. The senior civil servant added that this was “in line with the requirements of patriotism and professionalism.” Transport Minister Georgi Kirpa had made his pro-Yushchenko sentiments known publicly even earlier, and the tide of rats leaving the sinking ship has only accelerated.

As Yanukovych has witnessed one after another of the members of Ukraine’s political elite turn against him, he has redoubled his efforts. “I will never let you down,” he yelled to a crowd in Donetsk on December 8. “I would rather die than let them break me. You must know that!” Western media and governments have badly distorted the picture of the Ukrainian election from the beginning, painting Yushchenko as the disadvantaged candidate who must sweep to power on a popular wave of “freedom” if Ukraine is to have a happy Hollywood ending. The reality is the opposite, and in the American tradition I tend to instinctively sympathize with the underdog. That underdog is Viktor Yanukovych.

CHAD NAGLE is an American lawyer, accredited as an international observer of the Ukrainian election. He writes from Kiev.

 

More articles by:
Weekend Edition
May 27, 2016
Friday - Sunday
John Pilger
Silencing America as It Prepares for War
Rob Urie
By the Numbers: Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are Fringe Candidates
Andrew Levine
Hillary’s Gun Gambit
Paul Street
Feel the Hate
Daniel Raventós - Julie Wark
Basic Income Gathers Steam Across Europe
Gunnar Westberg
Close Calls: We Were Much Closer to Nuclear Annihilation Than We Ever Knew
Jeffrey St. Clair
Hand Jobs: Heidegger, Hitler and Trump
S. Brian Willson
Remembering All the Deaths From All of Our Wars
Dave Lindorff
With Clinton’s Nixonian Email Scandal Deepening, Sanders Must Demand Answers
Pete Dolack
Millions for the Boss, Cuts for You!
Peter Lee
To Hell and Back: Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Karl Grossman
Long Island as a Nuclear Park
Binoy Kampmark
Sweden’s Assange Problem: The District Court Ruling
Robert Fisk
Why the US Dropped Its Demand That Assad Must Go
Martha Rosenberg – Ronnie Cummins
Bayer and Monsanto: a Marriage Made in Hell
Brian Cloughley
Pivoting to War
Stavros Mavroudeas
Blatant Hypocrisy: the Latest Late-Night Bailout of Greece
Arun Gupta
A War of All Against All
Dan Kovalik
NPR, Yemen & the Downplaying of U.S. War Crimes
Murray Dobbin
Are We Witnessing the Beginning of the End of Globalization?
Daniel Falcone
Urban Injustice: How Ghettos Happen, an Interview with David Hilfiker
Gloria Jimenez
In Honduras, USAID Was in Bed with Berta Cáceres’ Accused Killers
Kent Paterson
The Old Braceros Fight On
Randy Blazak
Thugs, Bullies, and Donald J. Trump: The Perils of Wounded Masculinity
Lawrence Reichard
The Seemingly Endless Indignities of Air Travel: Report from the Losing Side of Class Warfare
Peter Berllios
Bernie and Utopia
Stan Cox – Paul Cox
Indonesia’s Unnatural Mud Disaster Turns Ten
Linda Pentz Gunter
Obama in Hiroshima: Time to Say “Sorry” and “Ban the Bomb”
George Souvlis
How the West Came to Rule: an Interview with Alexander Anievas
Julian Vigo
The Government and Your i-Phone: the Latest Threat to Privacy
Stratos Ramoglou
Why the Greek Economic Crisis Won’t be Ending Anytime Soon
David Price
The 2016 Tour of California: Notes on a Big Pharma Bike Race
Dmitry Mickiewicz
Barbarous Deforestation in Western Ukraine
Gilbert Mercier
Donald Trump: Caligula of the Lowest Common Denominator Empire?
Patrick Bond
Imperialism’s Junior Partners
Mark Hand
The Trouble with Fracking Fiction
Priti Gulati Cox
Broken Green: Two Years of Modi
Marc Levy
Sitrep: Hometown Unwelcomes Vietnam Vets
Andrew Moss
Bridge to Wellbeing?
Ed Kemmick
New Book Full of Amazing Montana Women
Michael Dickinson
Bye Bye Legal High in Backwards Britain
Missy Comley Beattie
Wanted: Daddy or Mommy in Chief
Ed Meek
The Republic of Fear
Charles R. Larson
Russian Women, Then and Now
David Yearsley
Elgar’s Hegemony: the Pomp of Empire
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail