Our Ukraine convention adjourned for three weeks
Our Ukraine’s convention on Saturday can claim a place in the Guinness World Records as the shortest large political gathering. People expected to hear some concrete things, like replacements in the leadership (three days before the convention Our Ukraine’s ranks were reinforced by two new members, Viktor Bondar and Arsenii Yatseniuk). There were plenty of points on the agenda, including changes to the party statute. The convention also planned to issue a number of resolutions, including Ukraine’s integration into the EU and membership in the WTO.
As it turned out, the whole affair lasted 45 minutes. At 11 a.m. on the dot Viktor Yushchenko made his appearance in the audience. The president was amazingly punctual. His attire was also meaningful: a blue shirt with a yellow bandana. He started by assuring the party members that he “was, is, and will be with this party,” thus refuting rumors about his withdrawal from Our Ukraine. Then he launched into some harsh criticism. President Yushchenko stressed that he does not want Our Ukraine to turn into a closed corporation with “chief shareholders deciding what the country needs or protecting its interests.” According to the president, Our Ukraine’s loss of ratings is the result of a policy blindfolded by opportunism and ambition.
Yushchenko does not like the bloc’s opposition either, because you have to join forces even with the Party of Regions if this serves the good of Ukraine. Interestingly, every delegate received a copy of the book The Donetsk Mafia, probably to make it easier to identify consolidation partners).
After that Yushchenko demonstrated his talent for surprises by proposing to hold the convention in two stages. “An audience is not always an optimum scenario for drafting working documents,” he said. Roman Bezsmertny stepped up to the podium and obediently declared, “The president has set forth key ideas for us, and we will need time to work them out. In view of this I declare this convention adjourned for three weeks.”
The delegates probably could not believe their ears, and the hall fell silent for a second. Then there were angry voices, and delegates from several western regions started chanting “Shame!” and “Katerynchuk!” From the podium MP Viktor Korol called for an emergency party council meeting and continuing the convention. Mykola Katerynchuk tried to explain that the adjournment was the president’s will and asked the heads of regional organizations to get together and delegate two representatives each to form working groups.
Katerynchuk could have easily taken over the party leadership if he had wanted, thus carrying out a coup. Instead, he barely managed to calm down his supporters. In fact, Katerynchuk’s popularity among rank-and-file members was a surprise for many prominent members of Our Ukraine, and an unpleasant one at that. Now they will have to reckon with this phenomenon. Whether this popularity will help Katerynchuk head the party remains a big question. This politician has one big flaw — his friendly relations with Yulia Tymoshenko. Besides, the president also made it perfectly clear that Our Ukraine must continue talks with the Party of Regions.
Arsen Yatseniuk is also considered a possible candidate to lead Our Ukraine. His chances are the greatest, as he is the president’s favorite. All signs seem to point to Bankova St., where the name of the party leader will be determined. The only problem is that rank-and-file party members do not see Yatseniuk as the new leader, and Our Ukraine practices very democratic procedures. A candidate “parachuted” in without a party seniority record may not pass muster. According to conversations in the lobby of the convention hall, the president imposed a three- week recess precisely because of Yatseniuk: the newcomer apparently needs time to visit the regions and communicate with people.
Viacheslav Kyrylenko is known as a compromise figure. He has worked in the government, people like him, but he does not have much influence in the party. Nevertheless, a lot of things can happen during the three-week break. For example, Yushchenko and Yanukovych may return to the coalition talks. Incidentally, on Oct. 23 Roman Zvarych said that Our Ukraine could resume talks with the anticrisis coalition that week, in which case the legendary party will not be revived but replaced by an altogether different project.
COMMENTARY
Vadym KARASIOV, Director, Institute of Global Strategies:
I would like to begin with the foundations of Our Ukraine’s latter- day history. In the last while the Bezsmertny-Poroshenko group has occupied a leading position in OU and begun making independent decisions, without coordinating them with the president. For example, the group decided to join the opposition without asking the president’s opinion, thus leaving him vulnerable to a degree. They seem to have struck the president from future electoral schedules. This group has sought advantageous positions between the current government and the opposition, and has already given thought to 2011 and the next or later parliamentary elections.
In the last while the president has started losing control over Our Ukraine, and he could find himself without a party resource. Embarking on a new project is unrealistic for the president; it would be too expensive and there are no guarantees of success, because during the 2004-2006 elections the party system in Ukraine consolidated and acquired more or less concrete contours. Of course, it is possible to launch a new project, but it will be a minority project of three percent, which could grab a few votes and be underfoot, but not be able to change the course of the game.
Therefore, the president must have arrived at a conclusion that can be formulated by paraphrasing Stalin’s well-known statement: “I have no other writers for you and no another party.” So he had to either disown Our Ukraine’s heritage or take full control of the party. We know that a group of young appointees with a liberal and respectable image was channeled to the party. A new party generation is taking shape, consisting of Yatseniuk, Bondar, Kniazevych, and Kyrylenko, which may form Our Ukraine’s leadership nucleus.
Meanwhile, the president lacks resources and time to effect such a total replacement of players. Hence the three-week recess, during which a new balance of forces must be established in the party.
Who will head the party? Of the three candidates (Yatseniuk, Kyrylenko, and Katerynchuk) Kyrylenko may emerge as a compromise figure that will satisfy all groups of influence and the president’s demand to control and influence the party in order to save it. This party needs to be rescued. At least this is what the situation looks like to the president.
This option may also be acceptable to Yatseniuk, who seems to be taken aback by this unexpected turn in his career. I think he is wondering whether he should shoulder the heavy burden of Our Ukraine. Kyrylenko is thus a possibility, but not Katerynchuk because Our Ukraine would then gravitate toward the radical opposition, even in the direction of the BYuT. Today the president needs Our Ukraine as a resource in the big game with the anticrisis coalition, the prime minister, speaker, and so on. He needs a more flexible Our Ukraine in this sophisticated and rather confusing game — if only to gain time.
