In the elections in April 2014, Poroshenko was able to present himself as an obvious choice mainly because of the absence of credible challengers, except perhaps Yulia Tymoshenko, who by the time of her regaining freedom from fraudulent incarceration no longer had as much popular appeal as she had a few years earlier. Poroshenko’s “divide and rule” deal with ex-Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk and Klitschko helped him too.
To no small extent, the apparent shortage if not vacuum of capable and trustworthy leadership is perhaps a problem in Ukraine. There is no shortage of patriotic citizens and courageous fighters at the front line facing Russia’s aggression. Many people are making personal sacrifices. But finding honest politicians with public appeal and some nuts-and- bolts experience of leadership in public capacity is another story.
It appears that during the memorable winter two years ago, Poroshenko played a pro-Maidan card as a way for him to replace President Viktor Yanukovych, never mind later details. After becoming president, he would run the show the way he knows best, which means (surprise, surprise) with friendly oligarchs and the same cast of crony characters he knew before.
Now, as the anger rises in Ukraine at his machinations, Poroshenko keeps on stonewalling, putting at risk the International Monetary Fund support for Ukraine, and is now aiming at forcing out Natalie Jaresko as Finance Minister. It portends major trouble. Making top appointments he likes means more of the same. It is not a solution to corruption problems, and it could lead to another Maidan. The only other alternative could be snap elections, even if it carries other risks.
If either Tymoshenko’s Batkivshchyna or the Samopomich Party gets a majority in such elections, it probably would be the best outcome. If two of them would have to join forces to form a majority, some friction would be inevitable, and President Poroshenko could play games to take advantage. Yulia Tymoshenko would have to rise to the occasion, with unknown outcomes. On the plus side, dealing with the parliament no longer under his control, Poroshenko would have to get off the high horse, especially under the threat of public action.
It is no secret that Ukraine’s Western friends are negative about snap elections in Ukraine, because of the possible effect on Minsk II politics. But their view cannot be overriding in this case. They should stiffen their back dealing with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Fortunately, it is almost certain that the next American president will continue and perhaps will revitalize America’s role as leader of the Western alliance. The chance of The Donald becoming US president is nil (he has nearly 70 percent negative rating among public at large), even if he gets the Republican Party’s nomination. Very likely, his nomination will be contested at the Republican national convention.
Hillary Clinton will probably get the Democratic Party nomination for president, despite her 52 percent negative rating at large. Such poor rating, besides showing the bottom line, is also an indication that her politics are aimed at winning her party’s nomination first and foremost — by maximizing the appeal in the Democratic Party base and staying ahead of Bernie Sanders. But it also means that she may have a rough time in the November elections if the Republicans nominate someone like John Kasich, popular and well liked governor of Ohio.
One can hear in Ohio that “Kasich is only half-Republican”, meaning centrist on the key social topics such as the Social Security and public education aspects — unlike most of the recognized Republicans who were running in the primary elections this year before dropping out. This is an image that could give Kasich an edge in the middle-class America over Clinton, who relies heavily on the clamorous fringes of the Democratic Party constituency.
John Kasich has been in favor of providing defensive weapons for Ukraine, which would be helpful in the light of unpredictably aggressive Russian moves in Ukraine. Although Mr. Putin’s belligerence had somewhat slowed down by backsliding of Russia’s economy which is now squeezing its middle-class living standards, he remains unpredictable.
The ongoing worldwide economic slowdown is of top concern in most countries nowadays, and it is aggravated by migration crisis in the European Union. But Russia’s war on Ukraine, a huge drag on Ukraine’s economy besides the daily loss of lives is not of great concern in the West, except in terms of the sanctions placed on Russia. Some European states are eager to scupper the sanctions and close their eyes on Ukraine — as they had done over centuries past and eventually lost their own freedom to Russia’s tsars and then to Soviet Russia.
These European countries by now may have forgotten how American presidents Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower saved Western Europe from Joseph Stalin’s grab after World War II, and how Ronald Reagan’s rearmament of the USA led to Soviet Union’s collapse and liberation of Central Europe. What Europe does not need now is a relapse to what it was between World War I and Wold War II.
