This chance must not be missed

There were a record number of observers at the parliamentary elections in Ukraine this year. Among them was perhaps a not so numerous but influential official delegation of the European Parliament which comprised 16 MEPs who represented all the factions of the EU’s highest legislative body. This mission was led by Pawel Kowal, Chairman of the EU-Ukraine Parliamentary Cooperation Committee in the European Parliament. The Day asked the MEP to comment on these elections and say whether they were free and fair and in what way they will affect the relations between Brussels and Kyiv.

“You should never say that elections may be black or white. I think we must say honestly what stages they consist of and assess all the elements one by one. Only then can we try to make an integrated and fair evaluation of the elections. Firstly, the election law proved to be weak and became a source of nothing but problems. In my opinion, a half of the problems with these elections were caused by the election law. Then let us take the election campaign. I would assess it as very bad. There were serious problems with access to the media and the ability of the opposition to present its program. We mean the administrative factor. This created concrete problems. For instance, the authorities used their resources in first-past-the-post constituencies to campaign against the opposition. And, finally, the election day. It can be generally assessed as good. But then goes the vote count stage. And this raises some problems or, at least, some doubts. This is followed by what is known as transfer of power, which cannot be effected due to the Constitutional provisions. And we cannot speak about this now. The question is in what way parliament should be formed. Will the winning party make an interesting offer to the opposition? How will the parliamentary podium look like? Only after this we will be able to analyze all the stages and make an appraisal. We are waiting now for the final report of the Office for Democratic Initiatives and Human Rights on the count of votes (ODIHR). But what we can say now should sound critical. We must assess the elections in this way if we take into account that Ukrainian politicians wish Ukraine to move towards the European Union.”

You will also perhaps draw up a report to the European Parliament. What are you going to state: the elections were fair and free or not?

“To accept or not to accept the election results is up to the topmost political leadership, which clearly oversteps our mandate. I think these things can only be discussed after absolutely everything has been said about the elections. I will be looking forward to the ODIHR report.”

But Foreign Minister Kostiantyn Hryshchenko says that “the overwhelming majority of international observers have positively rated the voting and the counting of votes and the international community thus admits that the next composition of the Verkhovna Rada reflects the Ukrainian people’s choice, while Ukraine is strengthening the traditions of competitive democracy and parliamentarianism.” What will you say to this?

“I agree with the minister that a high level of parliamentarianism is one of the conditions for Ukraine to normally function in Europe. But Ukraine is an OSCE member, and we know only too well that ODIHR principles are a key to appraising the elections. It would be wrong to compare the impressions of some concrete observers, who only saw some concrete events at some concrete polling stations, with the report of a serious organization which applies serious methods and which Ukraine is a member of. Moreover, Ukraine will be soon voting in this organization. I think all we should do after the report has been made public is to take a human approach to it and say in what way we will respond to it. It is an internal debate at the club of which Ukraine is a member. And we must not display any paternalism in this case because Ukraine is a gull-fledged member of this club. This report must be taken into account for this very reason.”

But there has already been a response from European Parliament President Martin Schulz who said that the EU “must continue its critical interaction with that country and help it carry out the necessary reforms.” He also expressed a hope that Ukraine would take the steps that will allow it and the European Union to break the deadlock in bilateral relations. What is your vision of breaking the deadlock?

“In my opinion, it is an appropriate remark that hit the bull’s eye in terms of what is now going on in the EU. Both the EU and Ukraine are in a difficult situation, as far as their relations are concerned. And now, just after the elections, it is time for serious political proposals. We will be watching the government’s approach to this and to the opposition. What will the government propose as far as relations with the EU are concerned? What reaction will it show to the observation mission’s report? I think it is through this prism that relations with Ukraine will be assessed. But, naturally, we will be watching the opposition, too. The opposition can also be expansive. The opposition may offer proposals that will help level the problems that arose during the elections. We are open, and we are staring over with a clean slate. It is now a field of opportunities for all.”

Incidentally, Minister Hryshchenko said that all criticisms would be thoroughly analyzed and taken into account to further improve the election law.

“It is not only the question of changing the law. It is also the problems that always come up during elections in Ukraine, such as, for example, election merry-go-rounds. They are becoming a typical Ukrainian feature. Also important is the question of election campaign funding. What is more, neither the government nor the opposition is speaking much about this. It is extremely dangerous for Ukraine’s entire domestic system. There is such a key word as transparency. I think this problem must be solved one way or another. There are also things that must be settled through court right now. If we see instances of an election pandemic, if we see rigging, the court should see to it that people and the international community know about these things. If there are instances of buying votes, which we know is legally punishable in Ukraine, then it is not the question of changing the law – it is a question of reacting to this right now, at this moment. I do not see this in Ukraine. When we discussed problems in the judicial system, I came to the conclusion that this is not only the Tymoshenko and Lutsenko cases but is a general question. Courts did not react in these elections. More often than not, some infractions were dealt with by electoral commissions, whereas it is the preserve of courts.”

Incidentally, when I was in the US, I saw a local television report that some Congressional candidates were buying votes for vodka. And I read today that Obama’s followers in Illinois forged the documents that would allow them to vote instead of the people who were certain not to vote. So the question is perhaps not only in the judicial branch of power, but also in the conscientiousness of individual voters…

“Yes, it is the question of the law and political culture. Of course, all these things have already occurred somewhere in the world. We are now talking about a scale [of misdeeds] that can affect the election results. And we must take an extremely serious attitude to this – especially taking into account that the Ukrainian law provides for rather a strict punishment for certain crimes, including vote-buying. And the Ukrainians know what this is.”

What impact can these elections have on further cooperation between Kyiv and Brussels?

“It is impossible to say today what impact this will have. I think this can be done two weeks later. What is crucial now is the government’s reaction. In my view, many Western representatives will be waiting now for report of the ODIHR and four observation missions. So it does not matter what some missions saw. What really matters is what this official report will say. And all those involved in these problems know that this is a key issue. And there are so many serious violations there that one cannot comment on this as follows: well, they are just quarreling, it is just politics.”

A top Ukrainian official, who often visits Brussels, has said in a private chat that the EU always offers us the stick, not the carrot. How are the relations between Ukraine and the EU going to develop further on?

“In my view, the only thing that must not depend on electoral and political matters is liberalization of the EU-Ukraine visa regime. It is about the relationship of individuals and, hence, questions of a political nature should not affect this. As for the approach to the Association Agreement, some believe that readiness to sign it a shot in the arm for Yanukovych and his team, but others are of a different opinion because this agreement may take Ukraine to the field of standards which will force this country to change in order to meet them. It is difficult to say which of the approaches will prevail.”

And which of these approaches do you support?

“In my view, one must seize the opportunity history is offering and try to draw Ukraine into the EU by all means. Many Ukrainians vote for the parties that clearly favor accession to the European Union. It is a proven fact. It is Fatherland, UDAR, and the Party of Regions. We can presume, with some reservations, that Freedom also supports EU membership. Therefore, the parties that favor the EU enjoy the greatest popular support. So you should not miss this chance. The emergence of new parties on the political stage has shown that there may be a party that takes an entirely different look at this issue. For example, the Communist Party of Ukraine is the one now. We can say this, taking into account the current shape of the political arena. The problem is whether these parties will make a deal, whether they will have some kind of a joint European program, and whether they trust each other. But people have sent a clear signal.”

All the more so that Hryshchenko pointed out that the voting results allow us to affirm that the main principles of Ukraine’s domestic and foreign policy will remain unchanged.

“This means we can agree with the minister here. We have similar points of view.”

According to a Ukrainian official, the EU is now asking Ukraine to help it break the deadlock in which Brussels found itself by demanding that Tymoshenko and Lutsenko be freed. What will you say to this?

“I think a clear gesture about Tymoshenko and Lutsenko after the elections would mean that we can open up our relations and start over with a clean slate. It is time for us to tell each other that we must do something new. And this issue demands that we make a new beginning.”

Freeing Tymoshenko and Lutsenko?

“Exactly.”