Will Tymoshenko overtake Yanukovych? Today this is perhaps the most burning question. The 10-percent gap is hanging over as the sword of Damocles. The Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc takes courage, promises a consolidation of “democratic” electorate, and speaks about the famous finishing spurt of Tymoshenko, but it becomes more and more difficult to demonstrate irresistible optimism.
In the second round, in the opinion of many sociologists, a photofinish is expected. The difference will be minimal. Both candidates will accumulate approximately the same of votes. Nevertheless, some sociologists give the victory on February 7 to Viktor Yanukovych. (However, our sociologists are often mistaken.)
Actually there are a lot of questions to Yulia Tymoshenko, too. First, such a character as Lozynsky was not her list, no someone else’s. At the same time, the MPs on her “horrible” list didn’t have to say about the recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. In the critical moment of confrontation between Russia and Georgia, Tymoshenko thought it was better to keep silent. But she didn’t play up to the Kremlin, as Yanukovych did. Moreover, he did it awkwardly, in a toadying way…
The second point is collective security. Although due to considerations of momentary advantage Tymoshenko doesn’t campaign for NATO, she signed the “letter of three.” Therefore, there is a hope that the security policy won’t become small change for her.
The third one is the humanitarian question. Not so long ago Yanukovych blabbed out that, so to say, there was no Holodomor, and the “famine was everywhere.” The faction of Tymoshenko voted for the Holodomor-as-genocide law.
In 2004, Tymoshenko didn’t vote for the notorious political reform. This can be regarded as her merit as well. However, in this question Tymoshenko is not always consistent. At one point she spoke for a parliamentarian republic, then favored a presidential republic, and so on.
The Day already wrote that on February 7 many Ukrainians would vote not for Tymoshenko, but against Yanukovych. However, we asked our experts to give five reasons why one should vote for Tymoshenko. One of the experts managed to come up with only three. Nevertheless, this is also sufficient, you would agree.
Leonid KRAVCHUK, ex-president of Ukraine:
“First, if you paid attention to this fact, the European community states that Ukraine can have a chance to join the EU and NATO under three conditions: economic and political stabilization and fight against corruption. If Ukraine doesn’t reach these three factors, it cannot even begin to think about European integration. This was the statement of the European Union.
“So I ask the first question: Who truly fights corruption today? Who wants to return unlawfully privatized property to the state and is doing it? Yulia Tymoshenko. In this sense she has a very serious advantage over all the others, because she is doing it not in words, but in deeds.
“Second, regarding the political stability, Tymoshenko addressed all political forces many times with an offer to unite both in parliament and outside it. Now her position is that we shouldn’t ‘tear’ Ukraine to pieces.
“Third, about the economy. The economic crisis put Europe, and not only it, in a very difficult situation. The only structure in Ukraine that worked at that time was the government; owing to its efforts the situation was under control. I’m not saying it was something extraordinary, but the economy already now has a two-percent GDP growth: salaries and pensions are being paid, payments for imported gas are being made in time, etc. Such extensive spheres as metallurgy or the chemical industry didn’t decline thanks to government support. Despite these crisis conditions, the An-148 aircraft was launched; Europe’s largest Dniester Hydroelectric Power Station went into operation, and so on. Various forecasts about Ukraine’s default didn’t come true.
“The next one. We didn’t have a prime minister like this (and we had 17 or 18 of them) who would work in the conditions of the world economic crisis, Ukrainian political crisis, and the perpetual attack of all political forces, including the president. All these factors combined imply that Tymoshenko has advantages, both objective and subjective.
“Finally, if Tymoshenko wins, she has a ready government. Maybe some of its constituents should be reinforced, but for the first time in the history of independent Ukraine there will be no confrontation between the government and president. All these years they have “fighting” to see who is more senior and cleverer, but nobody has been fighting to prove who is more efficient.”
Myroslav POPOVYCH, Doctor of Philosophy, director of the Hryhorii Skovoroda Institute of Philosophy, academician of Ukraine’s National Academy of Sciences:
“First, I will vote for Yulia Tymoshenko because she clearly recognizes the European vector of our country’s development. This is reflected not only in the fact that she received support from the most influential European political party, but also because the entire program of modernization she represents is oriented to European values.
“Second, I will vote for her because her program is a program of development in the direction of society’s democratization. It is noticeable, in particular, in her support for local self-government and the reform of the judicial system. The question connected with the Constitution will not be discussed immediately, but the two principal directions I have mentioned above are what we badly need.
“Third, the line Tymoshenko is maintaining in the development of the economy is not simply growth of our manufacture in terms of percentages, but an orientation to research-intensive spheres, which can guide our economy from the obsolete framework and raise export of raw materials (particularly, semi-finished products) to a quite different level of economic development.”
Taras CHORNOVIL, MP:
“The first reason is that in the case of Yanukovych’s victory, the currently prevalent situation will remain: chaos, the war between president and prime minister (because Tymoshenko remains the prime minister). We’ll have what we have now or even a bit worse. Today there is a cold war going on between the president and the prime minister, and there will be a hot one [if Yanukovych wins]. We’ll have even more chaos. And nobody – neither Yanukovych nor Tymoshenko – will be able to realize their positive features in this situation. Both of them have these features. In the state of war they can’t be realized. At the same time, Tymoshenko as president will have some autocratic manners, but we will get more or less integral power.
“The second moment explaining why one can vote for Tymoshenko is that she wants to find approval in those spheres where democratic principles are appreciated. Having a very strong inclination to dictatorship, she, it seems to me, will not overstep this boundary for one reason: she wants to be loved in the EU. She wants to draw applause in the European parliament when she comes there so that she is accepted there as Yushchenko was in 2005. In other words, I guess she will not become an absolute dictator. A kind of autocratic regime will be introduced, but some limits will exist which she will not risk to cross. Therefore, because of this limit, one can vote for her.
“Finally, the third reason. It seems to me that, unlike Yanukovych, for example, she has colossal energy and ambition for power combined together. And she will try to do a lot in everything. Another thing is what she will do. Will it be wise or unwise? Right or wrong? A saying constantly comes to my mind: if only your energy could be used for peaceful purposes! And apathetic Yanukovych obviously will give away the whole power to some ‘Baloha.’ Therefore, Tymoshenko’s vigorousness is also a positive feature. I’m sick and tired of languid leaders, to tell the truth.”
