Shadow of victory

Only recently the world was closely following events in Ukraine when the opposition’s presidential candidate Viktor Yushchenko was achieving his long-suffering victory owing to an unprecedentedly united stand taken by the people. Only recently a large part of the Ukrainian population sincerely referred to him as the people’s president. Only recently the orange color symbolized the long-awaited victory and people out in the street chanted “Yushchenko! Yushchenko!” Only two years have elapsed, but the situation has changed. The world press calls Viktor Yushchenko a lame duck and various polls in Ukraine indicate that the nation has adopted an essentially different attitude toward the “people’s president” and that this attitude is not in favor of the guarantor of the constitution...

The Central Election Commission finished counting votes after the third round of the presidential campaign and announced the result on the night of Dec. 27, 2004. Viktor Yushchenko had collected 51.99 percent of the votes (15,115,000 ballots). Viktor Yanukovych was seven percent behind (44.22 percent). That night champagne was served in orange plastic cups at Yushchenko’s campaign headquarters. In the half-empty audience of the movie theater Zoriany (Party of the regions’ HQ) Taras Chornovil said, “Even if we lose the elections, we will have our victory.” Two years later one has to admit that he was right.

On Jan. 27, 2005, Viktor Yushchenko was sworn in parliament and before the Ukrainian nation. The ceremony was attended by delegates from more than 40 countries and international organizations, including US Secretary of State Colin Powell, CE Secretary General Terry Davis, UN Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs Danilo Turk, and Russia’s Federation Council Chairman Sergei Mironov. Leonid Kuchma also visited the Verkhovna Rada.

The ceremony was commenced by CEC Chairman Yaroslav Davydovych who announced the results of the election. After that the newly elected president entered the audience and all rose to greet him. Taking an oath of office, Yushchenko first placed a hand on the Constitution of Ukraine and then on the Peresopnytsia Gospel, the only surviving handwritten relic of old literary Ukrainian.

“I, Viktor Yushchenko, having been elected President of Ukraine by the will of the people, am taking this office and solemnly pledge allegiance to Ukraine,” read the text of the oath signed by Yushchenko. “I pledge with all my deeds to protect the sovereignty and independence of Ukraine, to work for the benefit of my homeland and for the well-being of the Ukrainian people; to defend the rights and freedoms of all citizens, adhere to the Constitution and laws of Ukraine, carry out my obligations in the interests of all my fellow countrymen, and enhance Ukraine’s international prestige.”

After that Viktor Yushchenko signed the text of the oath and gave it to the head of the Constitutional Court who, acting under the constitution, proclaimed him President of Ukraine and handed him the symbols of office. The CEC chairman gave him the president’s certificate. After the official ceremony Viktor Yushchenko was driven to the Maidan to take part in what was termed a public inaugural ceremony. Interior ministry statistics indicate that the ceremony was attended by more than 300,000 people. The militia installed metal barriers on both sides of Khreshchatyk St. to prevent body injuries in the thick crowd.

Incidentally, Yushchenko’s inauguration cost the Ukrainian budget 4.3 million hryvnias. This is how much it has taken the president to have public opinion change eventually and register a level of disillusionment close to that the nation felt about ex-President Kuchma.

Naturally, the Orange president’s ratings dropped with the aid of open enemy and false friends, but the fact remains that he has been playing his role in the process.

Over a short period of time he succeeded in triumphantly marching from the Maidan to his presidential office and winning 60% of people’s confidence in March 2005, the highest rating shown by an acting politician in recent years (according to a poll carried out by the Kyiv International Institute of Social Studies and the Democratic Initiatives Foundation).

By July 2006 he had achieved a stunning result: 48.6 percent of the respondents from among the Ukrainian population declared that Viktor Yushchenko’s election as president was a mistake; 57.8 percent believed that it was the end of the “Maidan tale” (courtesy of the Institute of Social and Political Psychology under the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences of Ukraine).

By the end of Sept. 2006 the level of public support of the president had dropped to that registered under Kuchma. According to the Razumkov Center, a mere 9.5 percent supported him completely. However, even the first signals of public displeasure did not seem to affect the president and make him think things over. In the fall of 2005, after a series of scandalous retirements (especially Tymoshenko’s cabinet’s), the president told journalists that he was not worried by the sharp decline in the sociological ratings of the central government. He believed the reason was that the people were not properly informed about many important decisions being made; that was why the people could not take a clear-cut stand in the matter; they still did not understand the meaning of the scandalous replacement and positive changes did not always yield results quickly. The situation has not changed since then. Viktor Yushchenko keeps making mistakes that are often lashed out by critics. Or maybe there is another reason.

EXPERT VIEW

Andrii YERMOLAIEV, journalist:

I think that this date should be treated seriously because two years of presidency is almost have the road left to travel.

Comparing Viktor Yushchenko’s activities to those of Leonid Kuchma, the latter’s first two years in office were sufficiently dynamic. Half a year after taking office Kuchma offered his plan of market reform; a year later he built a vertical line of command, and in two years the president and parliament agreed on a new constitution.

Regrettably In the case of Yushchenko we see passivity and inconsistency. The result is logical: toward the end of 2006 the president found himself placed third in terms of political ratings, in regard to a number of issues. I think it is a serious and alarming signal for the president; he his losing the national leader’s status while remaining head of state. It is more than enough food for thought, because, like I said, almost half the road has been traveled.

* * *

If a presidential campaign started now, Yulia Tymoshenko would place first (21.22%), followed by Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych (20.52%). Viktor Yushchenko would place third (8.34%); CPU leader Petro Symonenko, fourth (4.74%); People’s Opposition leader Natalia Vitrenko, fifth (3.49%); Speaker Oleksandr Moroz, sixth; ex-Speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn, seventh; former Interior Minister Yuri Lutsenko, eighth (1.9%). Such are the results of a social study carried out by the Horshenin Institute for Managerial Problems (Kyiv).