The Russian Factor
The world community has expressed sharply divided views of the presidential elections in Ukraine. In addition to Russian president Putin, the leaders of Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Belarus, and Armenia congratulated the prime minister on his victory. Meanwhile, the West claims that the vote was in violation of international standards and does not recognize Viktor Yanukovych as the winner. Russia opposes a revision of the vote results announced by the Central Electoral Commission. The Day asked some experts to comment on the Russian factor in the Ukrainian elections.
Alexander RAHR, expert, German Association of Foreign Policy; author of a book on Putin, called A German in the Kremlin:
“Russia exerted a rather strong influence on the election campaign in Ukraine and is now suffering defeat in the wake of the so-called revolution. The cause of this defeat still needs to be profoundly analysed. Moscow missed what the Russian elite considered a historic chance, when the EU, too concerned with its own affairs, turned its back on Ukraine, and Leonid Kuchma and Vikror Yanukovych were busy promoting economic integration with Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. I think this policy of the Kremlin will have very negative consequences. Russia may lose Ukraine for a long time. Now a third factor has come to the fore — the West. Neither Russia nor Yanukovych expected the West to have such a strong impact on Ukrainian politics — they thought the West was not interested in Ukraine. Meanwhile, the United States issued a much stronger statement than the ones it did during the elections in Azerbaijan and Belarus. The European Union backed the US stand. Yanukovych is not being recognized. Nor is there a way out for Russia, for it cannot promote the division of Ukraine. Supported by the West, Yushchenko feels quite strong.”
Sergei MARKOV, director, Institute of Political Studies, Moscow:
“The ‘Yushchenko Project’ is a Polish scheme aimed at reinforcing the positions of that country in the European Union. Viktor Yushchenko’s election campaign was devised by the Polish diaspora; it was an ideological brainchild of Zbigniew Brzezinski and his two sons. One of them, Mark Brzezinski, was president of the US-Ukraine Business Council; his other son, Ian, is the chief advisor to the Republican wing in the US Congress. Another active player in Ukraine is the Pole Andrian Karatnicki (Adrian Karatnycky is in fact a Ukrainian American — Ed.), president of the US-sponsored Freedom House, who hired Serb political technologists and brought them to Kyiv on the eve of the current elections. According to this scheme, Poland is supposed to be the patron of Ukraine. By doing so, the Polish political class wants to build up its clout in the EU, where it would like to play the same role as France and Germany. Poland’s chief aim in this case is to become the patron of all Central and Eastern Europe. As for the United States, by raising the status of Poland in the EU, it will be able to block France and Germany and, at the same time, break Ukraine loose from Russia.” (Markov’s opinion was cited by Interfax — Ed.)
Aleksei MAKHLAI, deputy executive director, Russian Civic and Political Center, Moscow:
“Russia is influencing developments in Ukraine the same way as the US and Poland are. We all want the elections to comply with the Constitution, the election law to be obeyed, and the Ukrainians to decide on their own, without foreign interference, who won the vote. President Putin’s congratulations to Viktor Yanukovych on his victory cannot be considered influence or pressure because the Supreme Court of Ukraine, which banned the publication of the election results, cannot make the final decision: all it can do is hand down a ruling on whether or not there was vote rigging. It is only the president of Ukraine who can break the impasse by imposing a state of emergency and canceling the election results.
“The Yushchenko team said way before the elections that it would not accept any results other than their victory. Besides, look at how well orchestrated and organized the rallies are! As an ex-serviceman, I can say there was no such good discipline and order in our army. Yet people are not aware that it is in fact a squabble between two clans. The people now participating in the rally will remain as poor as they were. No president or tsar will ever make their lives better. Only the people themselves can do this. I am very much alarmed over the likely split of Ukraine, but it is not Russia that will bear responsibility for this. Both Yanukovych and Yushchenko may become illegitimate presidents. For Ukraine has in fact split into two parts. Whoever comes to power will face a formidable challenge and be in an unenviable situation. But the main thing is not to stir up passions in the west and east.”
Mariya LIPMAN, editor-in-chief, journal Pro et Contra, Moscow:
“What is happening now in Ukraine is a full-scale political crisis rather than the victory of the Kremlin-friendly candidate. Naturally, there are lots of factors that caused this-not just clumsy policies. Although Russia fervently seeks to influence Ukraine, it proved to have rather limited resources to do this. Today, Russian officials, starting with the president, vehemently claim that Russia is not interfering at all into Ukraine’s affairs. They are trying quite successfully to convince the Russian public that interference is coming from the West. Indeed, Russia has considerably reduced its meddling in the public sphere.
“It looks doubtful that Russia will manage to turn the events in Ukraine to the Kremlin’s advantage. Moreover, we can say that Russia’s influence on Ukrainian policies will diminish in time. We see now that European countries are involved in defusing the crisis-not the Western European states that are exerting intense pressure but those that Ukraine itself has chosen as mediators, i.e., Poland and Lithuania, while Russia has lost its role as umpire.
“Even if the Ukrainian opposition now fails to bring its candidate to power, this struggle will by no means be over. Ukraine will strive to become a more democratic European country, while the influence of Russia will abate.
“It seems to me that lately Russia has been showing a tendency to resort to simplified and rather primitive administration methods - a practice that I think is doomed to failure, for the Russian government has to deal with a complex system both in its own country and in Ukraine. Accustomed to a very passive and disunited population in its home country, the Russian government conducted itself during the election campaign in Ukraine without taking into account the fact that the Ukrainian public behaves quite differently and takes an active civic stand. Russia totally ignored the factor of popular energy. This simplification stems from growing Russian authoritarianism. In Russia, critics of governmental policies have already been labeled a ‘fifth column.’ The opposition has been totally neutralized, and a narrow circle of individuals is making decisions without proper expert examination. It is this setup that is leading to shortsighted steps both in relations with Ukraine and in domestic policies.
“In the past few years, as the EU and NATO have been fast approaching the borders of Russia, this circumstance revived the mothballed idea that Ukraine is our last stronghold, a sphere of influence that belongs to us by right and which we must preserve at any cost. All countries have their spheres of interests. Naturally, large states try to strengthen their influence there. The only question is how effectively this is being done.”
Georgy SATAROV, president, Indem Foundation, Moscow:
“What the ‘Russian factor’ in the Ukrainian elections boils down to is extreme ineffectiveness and failure to forecast things. Russian politicians exaggerate the omnipotence of the Kremlin’s methods. Such methods occasionally work in Russia, but let me stress, not always. For some reason it seemed that they would also work in another country. At the moment, I see no changes in the Kremlin’s policy towards Ukraine. Putin is clinging to his position. I foresee no changes. Should this policy crumble the way it did in Abkhazia, everyone will be looking for explanations in somebody else’s schemes rather than their own mistakes.
“The Kremlin is responsible not only for the president whom it brings to power but also for the instability that this situation is fraught with. Instability may in turn lead to dangerous attempts to split Ukraine, which will only increase the existing tension. Is the Kremlin prepared to allow a schism in Ukraine? This is a question for them.
“The PR project of Russia’s ‘European leadership’ began showing cracks long before the elections in Ukraine. One should not simplistically treat Putin’s policies as something straightforward. These policies are shaped by different pressure groups at different times. Putin can in fact be very different in the same period of time and act along different vectors. Like before, he wants to be a member of the worldwide club, but, at the same time, another part of Putin wants to be a tough, Soviet-era Andropov-type guy, who can control as much territory as possible.”
