The hysteria surrounding the ouster of Prime Minister Viktor Yushchenko is not particularly constructive. After all, far from being a catastrophe for Ukraine, Yushchenko’s downfall provides Ukrainians with several valuable lessons – and several reasons to be hopeful about the future.
First, let’s look at why the political right and the West are so up in arms about Yushchenko’s downfall. Last year at this time we were talking about a variety of firsts for Ukraine – a parliamentary majority, a popular and enlightened prime minister, the first signs of economic growth and an ambitious privatization program, just to name a few. Now the rich potential of those lofty goals has been all but shattered. Is not that reason enough for despair?
It is and it isn’t. Of course, the country would have been better had Yushchenko been left to continue his reforms and shadow-fighting ways. But in a country as corrupt as Ukraine, it’s a miracle he was ever allowed to proceed with those reforms in the first place, much less pursue those reforms for 16 months.
While a lot of good happened in those 16 months, the most encouraging aspect of Yushchenko’s legacy is the prospect of better things to come. Today the country is also experiencing several firsts that are no less important than those it was experiencing a year ago. For the first time parliament is rigidly and logically structured – by the communists on the left, by the “shadow capitalists” in that gray area known as the center, and by the pro-Yushchenko liberal right. For the first time, the liberal right is relatively united, and for the first time they have a popular and viable leader in Yushchenko, in contrast to the somewhat divisive Vyacheslav Chornovil in the 1990s.
A more important first is that Yushchenko has exposed the criminal nature of the way our country is run. In order to triumph over the enemy, one must first identify him. Yushchenko identified how powerful business interests operating in the shadow economy were stealing money from the country. Previous governments sanctioned and participated in that theft. Yushchenko spearheaded the effort to combat it. Did he lose? To my mind, hardly. Much of the nation was exposed to the parliamentary factions who control Ukraine’s economic underworld. They saw how they cooperated with leftist lunatics and, most likely, various officials of the executive branch. The myth about some oligarchs being good and some being bad ended – like it ended in Russia when Putin ascended to power. For the first time, our government has painfully stepped upon the shadow’s tail. Quite logically, the shadow clawed and bit back. But the shadow capitalists’ long-term prospects have been damaged considerably by Yushchenko, who emerged from the battle as still the country’s most popular politician.
Those who say President Kuchma engineered Yushchenko’s resignation are off base. The no-confidence vote was a powerful show of force by the many Yushchenko haters in parliament. They were able to exploit two major loopholes in order to justify their drive to get rid of this unwanted shadow-fighting technocrat. One loophole was Yushchenko’s own “Reforms for Welfare” government program. The program was vague, declarative and, ultimately, suicidal. Its vague language allowed opponents to claim that Yushchenko wasn’t living up to many of the program’s goals. Given that none of his opponents in parliament were ever interested in real economic data, they brushed off the numbers and seized on arguments about decaying kindergartens in order to tarnish Yushchenko. The other major loophole was that, as the opposition demonstrations became increasingly Yushchenko-colored, the president was less inclined to support Yushchenko’s autonomy and cajole our carpetbagger commies into supporting him. So Yushchenko grew increasingly defenseless.
There are other things that we are seeing or will see for the first time this spring. For the first time we watch our prime minister leave office with his honor and dignity intact. There have been none of the claims of mismanagement that accompanied the exits of past premiers. On the contrary, there have been broad gestures of support for Yushchenko, who stands to be the first strong right-leaning candidate for presidency in Ukraine’s history in 2004.
At some point in the near future, we will probably have our first coalition Cabinet, for better or for worse. The constitutional might demonstrated by parliament in April is a sign that supreme power in this country is destined to lie with the parliament. For now we are looking at the grim prospect of an alliance between the shadow capitalists and the leftists. As Ukraine’s party system matures, however, a coalition government will be a good thing. It will be a needed check on the president, whose power has grown out of control, as the recent crisis has shown. And it will prevent the sort of instability and scandals that have rocked the Cabinet in recent months.
The last “first time” to be speculated about is whether we shall have a young and popular professional elected president. In 2004 or earlier.
