It
is clear now that Yanukovych can and may go much further to secure
his political future and the continual enrichment of his family and
his cronies.
His infamous loss in
the 2004 presidential bid and the regret that followed taught him
that a bad victory is better than a fair loss. International
observers found the 2004 presidential vote fixed in favor of
then-candidate Yanukovych, the nation’s prime minister at the time.
Viktor Yushchenko won a second vote that year, becoming president.
Since then,
Yanukovych and members of his team have long regretted not reaching
the presidency in 2004. They still keep saying that Yanukovych’s
victory was stolen from him.
Considering this
history, the odds are high that the guys in power will not make such
a mistake again during the Oct. 28 parliamentary elections.
Earlier this year,
ex-Interior Minister Yuriy Lutsenko was sentenced to four years in
prison. A number of other former government officials during that
time managed to get away with suspended sentences. Meanwhile, more
criminal changes pile up against Tymoshenko and Lutsenko, who are
Yanukovych’s major political opponents.
There has been much
criticism of Yanukovych’s backtracking on democracy, freedom of
speech and rule of law. Human rights violations, censorship,
self-censorship and blatantly slanted coverage in the news media are
all on the rise. There have been numerous dubious court decisions and
criminal charges against politicians and civil activists in the last
year.
All the while,
Yanukovych has gotten used to such
criticism – regarding it as little more than a nuisance. There are
many clear-cut signs that Yanukovych and his team are not going to
turn around and start improving the situation, but instead are
driving a high-speed train in the same direction.
The recent
out-of-the-blue criminal cases launched
against Ukrainian news website LB.ua and TVi television channel are
reminders that the criminal justice system is enforced from above.
These cases – and the fear they generate – may spawn even more
self-censorship as journalists and media owners try to stay out of
harm’s way.
Yanukovych also seems to
be marching away from democracy and into autocracy in other ways.
In June 2011, for
instance, two months before Tymoshenko’s arrest, Yanukovych bowed
to Western criticism and vetoed legislation that would have exempted
state-owned companies and publicly-financed enterprises from holding
competitive bids. The procurement measure also allowed excused these
enterprises from publishing the amounts of their orders and the
winning bidder.
At a government
anti-corruption meeting on June 8, 2011, Yanukovych acknowledged that
crooked deals amount to 10 to 15 percent of the state budget, or
roughly $7.4 billion, ending up in the pockets of corrupt officials.
But earlier this
week, more than a year after the earlier veto, Yanukovych signed
nearly identical legislation to the measure that he vetoed and
ferociously criticized just one year ago.
While such hypocrisy
is no surprise on the political arena, his flip-flop on the
procurement issue is another signal that Yanukovych is more resistant
to criticism.
This
“I-could-care-less” style of governing shows that he does not
fear Ukraine losing hundreds of millions of euros in European Union
grant money because of the state procurement law, which many critics
say will fuel corruption in public spending. What’s more important
for the president is that his close allies are allowed to make huge
profits on providing overpriced goods and services to state-owned
enterprises at taxpayers’ expense.
Yanukovych and Prime
Minister Mykola Azarov have pledged repeatedly that they will do
everything to make sure the Oct. 28 parliamentary elections are free
and fair. But if it appears their team is losing – and the polls
show it might – the ruling party will have two options on Election
Day.
The first
option is to lose the elections fair and square, and live with it –
including loss of control of parliament.
The second option is
to have a dirty victory with cheating. Such a vote will not be
recognized by international observer missions as meeting democratic
standards. This will lead to more condemnation from the EU and the
United States and, potentially, from even from Russia if President
Vladimir Putin decides to put more pressure on a weakened Yanukovych.
But winning
– even winning a dirty election — will ensure that Yanukovych and
his Party of Regions remain in full control of the country.
What do they have
to lose in such a scenario?
Plenty,
but not enough for them.
It will be even
harder for the Ukrainian government to get a low interest loan from
the West or any financial assistance. Yanukovych will not be welcome
in major Western capitals. Some Ukrainian officials in law
enforcement and some politicians, even, could be banned from getting
visas to the EU and America.
But these
measures are not likely to scare the administration. Yanukovych has
gotten used to the company of his post-Soviet partners. Thus, in the
year since Tymoshenko’s imprisonment, the president and his team
have shown that they’re aim is to win at all costs.
Kyiv Post staff
writer Yuriy Onyshkiv can be reached at [email protected]
