What will happen after September 30?

The election campaign is not turning us on. It is boring and lacks energy. The sole exceptions are Viktor Yanukovych and Yulia Tymoshenko, who entertain people a bit as they tour the regions. (To be more precise, they are hopping around by helicopter, the latest fashion in political circles.)

The latest gem from Tymoshenko is: “If you suddenly decide to vote for the Party of Regions, please go to church to remove the evil curse that was placed on you.” Yanukovych’s sense of humor is earthier: Tymoshenko as prime-minister is “like a cow on ice” (with all the slippery implications).

It appears that the real entertainment will start only after the elections. There will be lawsuits, coalition games, and speaker election marathons. Or maybe there won’t be anything like this. Perhaps Viktor Baloha’s optimistic forecast will come true and a coalition will be formed in two hours-even though that is stretching the imagination.

Referendums are also being discussed. Both the Tymoshenko Bloc and the Party of Regions have collected three million signatures. However, at one time the social democrats also reached this much-desired mark and have been waiting for their referendum ever since.

We asked our regional experts to make some predictions: what will happen after Sept. 30? Are there going to be court examinations? Will we need to prepare ourselves for a coalition- forming saga? Will referendums take place?

Olena STIAZHKINA, professor at the Department of Slavic History, Donetsk National University:

“What will happen after the elections? There will be life. There will be classes, exams, and research conferences. Everything will be normal. In a country that has long stopped counting on any elites, everything is going to be normal. The lack of confidence in “good politicians” is a painful but effective means of civic self-identification. What we have is one nation. So we need to work and develop a new attitude toward ourselves, our work, and our duties. An understanding of our rights will come with these things. We will grow as a society. Good and evil as values that are useless for the elite will acquire their normal absolute outlines. People are likely to activate concepts of conscience, shame, and repentance in their lives.

“Politicians will continue to argue, reconcile, betray, join coalitions, and participate in the marathon of social promises. But against the background of the distinction between shame and conscience, normal people will perceive this as a reality show or jumping to and fro. Some interest in the so-called “political process” will still be there, but the political news will be of as much use as weather forecasts, which means: just in case, we take an umbrella with you, put on boots, and are not afraid of anything.

“Politics and our so-called “elite” will not last forever, which means they can be overcome. Of course, we would like to be transforming into a country led by leaders resembling Havel, Garibaldi, or de Gaulle. But what we have is what has grown in our land. Perhaps at some stage in the past we deserved this kind of elite. But today it is not up to the mark. We have grown up. After the elections we will again become more mature. There will be no miracles but as far as we are concerned, we will last.

“We can rely only on ourselves. These last 16 years have demonstrated that we can count on ourselves and do so in spite of the political situation rather than thanks to it.

“After the elections there will be life and there will be a show. There will be normal, large life with work, love, borshch, quarrels, and rebukes from your boss mixed with bonuses from the same boss. But there will also be crazy political shows purportedly aiming to defend ordinary people and effectively orchestrated from mansions, Bentleys, yachts, and boutiques.

“But the larger life will be the smaller and more ridiculous the show.

“Therefore, after the elections everything will be all right. Everything in people’s lives will be fine.”

Aider EMIROV, Director of the Hasprynsky All-Crimean Tatar Library:

“The problem is that the Ukrainian crisis is multifaceted. If you eliminate one factor during the elections, i.e., if you resolve the issue of who wields power, many others remain: the contradictions in the Constitution and legislation in general and flaws in the electoral, judicial, territorial-administrative, party, and other systems. Once the elections are over, they will be the object of fierce quarrels and the cause of new disagreements among the political forces. Therefore, this crisis will not end soon.

“Similar complex processes are characteristic of the initial, i.e., immature, developmental stage in every democracy. In one way or another, all the states that made the transition to this type of governmental system went through this phase.

“At the same time we cannot expect that life will be easier after the elections. After Sept. 30 the country is facing a round of clashes in the courts. It may be short, but it may well be protracted and complicated-this hinges on the parties’ ability to come to terms with one another. That is why I don’t think we are going to see another coalition saga. Life itself will force both camps to reach a prompt and effective agreement that will, however, be followed by complicated negotiations between the two political camps.

“In this situation many election pledges and suggestions, which seem so vital now, will become irrelevant, shunted aside, cancelled, or even forgotten. First, the attention of all political players will be focused on the preparation and adoption of the new Constitution. Second, such problems as the official language and other appealing pre-election topics will become irrelevant, and the issue of referendums will be removed from the agenda in this way or another. The political forces may sign some kind of agreement, like a new universal (manifesto), which will address the issues submitted for referendums.

“Meanwhile, political parties and government agencies in Ukraine need to remember that the external pressure on our country today is strong, like never before. Some of our neighbors would like to take advantage of the situation in which the country is said to be lacking a “strong hand” and a “master” and suffering from the ongoing ideological social conflict. And they will try to make use of this. It is in Ukraine’s interests to put an end to discord and hurry to reach an agreement on ideology in order to strengthen Ukraine and avoid putting our country’s independence to unnecessary tests.”

Oleksandr ZAHLADA, head of the Department of Philosophy, Political Science, and History, State Agroecological University, Zhytomyr:

“In general, however, this looks like a power struggle between different oligarchic clans. The majority of Ukrainians are sick and tired of this. They perceive the latest political events this way: they are wrangling up there but this has little significance on our lives. In principle, elections are a run-of-the-mill event in European democratic countries. Hold the elections and continue living a normal life. And we, too, should perceive the elections as something normal. Actually, the majority of our citizens are reaching this point. I don’t see any crisis, and I think that there won’t be any after the elections-the economy is growing, there is no mass unemployment, and people are working and buying things. I believe that the current high prices can be attributed to the fact that large sums may have been put into circulation. At the same time, this is a typical pre-election syndrome, when prices become elements of election technologies.”

Volodymyr PRYTULA, political scientist, Crimea:

“Ukrainian politics are unpredictable. I believe that there are over 10 different scenarios for post-election Ukraine. All of them include prolonged judicial hearings after the event. Ukraine is destined to this. Suits will most probably be filed either by the Tymoshenko Bloc or small outsider parties. It is unlikely that the results will be challenged by either the Party of Regions or the Our Ukraine-People’s Self-Defense Bloc.

“They are likely to be content with the people’s choice. Therefore, the strongest (and most favored by the president) composition of the coalition would be the union of the Party of Regions, Our Ukraine- People’s Self-Defense Bloc, and the Tymoshenko Bloc which is, however, very improbable because of the stance of the Tymoshenko Bloc. But the coalition involving only the first two forces may be fairly stable and enduring. In any case, a long-lasting coalition building ordeal is unlikely. Major Ukrainian parties have a vested interest in reaching a prompt and effective agreement.

“After the elections the well-coordinated work of these parties will make the much-discussed referendums unnecessary. Instead, a new Constitution will need to be written, which will demand a lot of effort, initiative, brainpower, and research. It appears that the Constitution will be the number-one issue on Ukraine’s post-election agenda. Perhaps the initiative to convene a constitutional assembly should be given support-after long and difficult negotiations and discussions it will determine Ukraine’s future course.

“To summarize, the crisis is far from being resolved, but there is a chance because after the elections there will be far less discord among the political forces and they will be better positioned to agree.”

Serhii BILOSHYTSKY, historian, Khmelnytsky:

“I believe that, at the latest, two weeks before the elections the major political forces-Our Ukraine-People’s Self-Defense Bloc, BYuT, and the Party of Regions-will agree on what the post-election government will look like. Obviously, all the political players will recognize the election returns. Each of them will solve their tactical tasks and continue building their strength to resolve strategic tasks.

“The Party of Regions will join a broad coalition with the Our Ukraine-People’s Self-Defense Bloc. This will allow the Party of Regions to exercise control over the economy-related ministries in the government, while the president and Our Ukraine will get a chance to lobby certain interests and prevent the Party of Regions from monopolizing the decision-making process pertaining to the “gray” economy. In this case, Our Ukraine will reserve for itself such areas as foreign affairs, security, and the army.

“Clearly, Our Ukraine will play according to a scenario in which some of the oppositionists led by Yurii Lutsenko, who are bound by the promise not to join a broad coalition, will leave the faction and resign from the parliament. I believe that a scenario is also possible in which Lutsenko, with the president’s consent, will leave the Verkhovna Rada to retain his image of a passionate and principled advocate of the people and as compensation will receive the post of secretary of the National Security and Defense Council, which will enable him to maintain his presence in politics and keep him afloat until the 2009 presidential election campaign.

“Yulia Tymoshenko will remain as leader of the opposition, reinforce her image of an implacable enemy of corruption, and preserve her anticorruption rhetoric. This will permit her to accuse Our Ukraine of betraying the ideals of the Orange Revolution and monopolize the political space of “Orange” resistance.

“To summarize, the Party of Regions will keep its grip on the economy, Our Ukraine will increase its political presence, and BYuT will wait for the presidential elections. Virtually all the political forces are thinking in terms of the 2009 elections. Therefore, if all the agreements are not broken, the Party of Regions will obviously support Viktor Yushchenko as the presidential candidate. Lutsenko will perform the anti-Tymoshenko function, so to speak. It is crucial for the president to keep Lutsenko in politics because he needs to neutralize Tymoshenko, a charismatic anticorruption crusader. So, as far as political circles are concerned, they are already thinking along the lines that the parliamentary elections will merge into the presidential election campaign.

“There will be no referendums. The much-touted referendums are nothing more than a way to mobilize the electorate and put pressure on other players in order to blackmail them before the elections or spur them to fulfill previous agreements. Therefore, the referendum topic effectively served its purpose: the electorate was mobilized, and we saw how all the political agreements were made, which rendered the referendums unnecessary. The shadow of the referendum on amending the Constitution is still looming, though. From time to time this topic will surface in the context of the future presidential election campaign. But there will be nothing more to it.”

Ihor BALYNSKY, lecturer at Ivan Franko Lviv National University, chief editor of the Internet site www.Zaxid.net:

“We can talk about several post-election scenarios. The first, ‘soft,’ scenario is that the future parliamentary coalition will be of one color, either orange or white-and-blue. In this situation we will effectively witness the preparations for the presidential election campaign. This will be launched by the Party of Regions or BYuT, depending on who ends up in the opposition. If Tymoshenko finds herself in the opposition, she will easily claim the lion’s share of Our Ukraine’s votes provided, of course, that Yushchenko finally opts for a broad coalition.

“If, however, Tymoshenko enters the Cabinet of Ministers as the leader of the Orange coalition, we will witness the start of an aggressive presidential campaign led by Viktor Yanukovych. It is also very important to understand Viktor Yushchenko’s reasoning and ambitions after Sept. 30. It seems to me that Yushchenko is capable of forming a broad coalition but with a series of provisos. The first one is the expansion of the president’s authority, a guarantee of Yanukovych’s non-participation in the presidential elections, and the reduction of the personal ambitions and leverage of Yanukovych and his closest aides. In my opinion, under these circumstances Yushchenko may once again risk a broad coalition. In this case, Rinat Akhmetov himself will have to act as the guarantor of the coalition on behalf of the Donetsk group.

“The most complicated scenario is the one in which the Party of Regions once again forms a coalition, say, with the communists while Yushchenko and Tymoshenko end up in the opposition camp. In this case, it will be almost unrealistic to speak about one presidential candidate from the opposition, which will shatter the Orange camp.

“Paradoxically, a broad coalition is extremely advantageous for Tymoshenko. She will get a unique opportunity before the presidential elections to become the only Orange opposition leader by winning the lion’s share of voters who support the Party of Regions, thereby emerging as a real competitor to Yanukovych. It is my conviction that virtually any outcome of the elections will create the next conflict rather than resolve old ones. Of course, the so-called technical broad coalition would be something ideal to have until 2009: the position of the prime minister or the parliamentary speaker will be merely nominal, i.e., neither Tymoshenko nor Yanukovych will claim them. But today this scenario may be regarded as utopian.

“So the Sept. 30 elections are most probably a struggle for the start of the future presidential election campaign.

“I don’t believe that the political crisis, which has been plaguing the political government in Ukraine for the last five years, gives any serious grounds for reduced trust in the government as such. Whether we like it or not, the level of mobilization capacity among the supporters of Yushchenko, Tymoshenko, and Yanukovych remains extremely high. Each of these three politicians is capable of mobilizing their electorate to vote for them many more times. The issue of trust in the government is a question of pragmatism and political culture, which in our country, especially in the west and east, is still affected by emotions. As of today, politicians will find words that once again will elicit confidence for one, two, and perhaps even three elections.

“It seems to me that the ongoing referendum war is a kind of technological war. The referendum proposed by the Party of Regions is a normal technological attempt to provide an adequate response to the constitutional referendum advocated by Tymoshenko. I am certain that neither the Constitution nor the question of language, NATO, etc., will be proposed for a referendum without a political compromise between the three political forces. Referendums are tricks to rally the electorate around supporting competing political parties. However, the constitutional referendum is still the most feasible one. But it can take place only after the three political forces agree on the draft of the new Constitution. Individually, none of the three key politicians is capable of carrying through a referendum on any issue.

“In my opinion, we are not likely to experience a political crisis that will adversely affect the economic situation in Ukraine. The investment— financial market may be the most vulnerable one, as it definitively depends on the government’s stability. The economy as such is now operating virtually independently of the government. Everyone knows that any economic system develops despite a government’s instability. There is just one problem: the rate at which our economy is going to develop. A shaky government means the growth rate is extremely low.”