Much has been said about the composition of Ukraine’s next parliament and the way it was voted in. The fallout from the results of the March 26 election won’t settle any time soon. Some continue to mourn for the spirit of Maidan, when hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians stood up for their rights to pick the country’s head of state. Whatever side you took at the time, it’s clear that a lot has improved in the country since the Orange Revolution, including the way last month’s vote was held. This has been possible due to changes in the media, the law and the outlook of Ukrainians themselves.
Some would argue that the more things change, the more they stay the same. President Yushchenko’s popularity has certainly taken a nosedive from the days when even his foes acknowledged his personal integrity. Now, former friends are rubbing his nose in it.
But, however tarnished Yushchenko’s presidency may seem, the newly elected parliament isn’t the worst thing to be born of Ukrainian democracy.
Extremists like Natalia Vitrenko didn’t get in, although her so-called Progressive Socialists would be the norm in the Russian Duma.
And has the 2002 parliamentary election really faded from public memory?
Within weeks of being elected, many independent lawmakers were forced, or bribed, into blocs that few Ukrainians were gullible enough to vote for. But these parties, dangerously empowered by their ties to the former presidency, have also disappeared from the newly elected parliament.
One might also mention the recent poor showing of the Communists, who used to get the most votes without resorting to bullying or buyouts.
Clearly, the Ukrainian electorate has come a long way in the relatively short time that has passed since the scandal-ridden presidential poll of 2004. Although the power of the people is still tenuous at best, the March 26 parliamentary elections weren’t bad, for a change.
