Another political entity appeared in Ukraine recently, the Coalition of Public and Political Forces “For the Dictatorship of the Law, Democracy, and Unity of the People of Ukraine.” The Web site ukrpartinform reads that the initiative of an association of political parties was supported by the Liberal Democratic Party of Patriots of Ukraine (led by S. Kryzhanivsky), NDP (L. Suprun), Communist Party of Workers and Peasants (O. Yakovenko), Party “New Force” (Yu. Zbitnev), Party of Protectors of Motherland (Yu. Kar mazin), Republican Christian Party (M. Porovsky), “Yedyna Rodyna” (United Family; O. Rzhavsky), and other political forces that did not make it to Parliament this March. “We are aware of the depth of the political crisis in Ukraine and we have united in order to jointly protect the rights of ordinary citizens. The parliamentary parties and their delegated and newly elected parliamentarians are too busy distributing posts while it is necessary to work out a breakthrough economic strategy for Ukraine,” Liudmyla Suprun told a coalition press conference. There are some specific clauses among the general ones concerning “lowering political tensions in society,” “forming a positive image of Ukraine,” and “creating a system of public-political control over the government.” Coalition members intend to start working on a new version of the constitution and other laws of Ukraine in the interest of the Ukrainian nation.
How serious is this political force? Yosyp Vinsky, the first secretary of the SPU political council, believes that “parties that collected 50-60 thousand votes during the [parliamentary] elections can hardly be described as a coalition,” but he agrees that every party should defend its stand, so it is good that they are doing so. This Socialist does not believe that the new coalition will exert any influence on the political situation in Ukraine, “otherwise the elections wouldn’t be in order. This coalition can only indulge in criticism but will never influence the situation. If its participants joined a singled party, this would probably make sense; as it is they remain disunited.”
Borys Bezpaly, a member of Our Ukraine’s presidium, is more optimistic: “I wish them success. Any steps taken in order to make Ukraine’s political community more solid are positive; however, only one outsider criterion during the elections is too little. Here we must have an ideological unity. The common destiny logic doesn’t work. We’ll hear what they will have to say. It would be good if it prove yet another center of intellectual thought.”
Andriy Shkil, a member of BYuT’s political council, is not a coalition of parties, although he believes that “an association of weak [forces] has never been reason enough to discuss the birth of a strong organization.” He further assumes that this coalition’s common goal may turn it into a strong party. “Otherwise this coalition will serve to justify the presence of these political parties at best. Those who lost [the parliamentary elections] will always be dissatisfied in the winners’ performance. If they want a new wording of the constitution, they should at least form an alternative parliament,” Shkil added ironically.
Naturally, this assumption sounds unrealistic, yet the fact remains that there is an alternative coalition. What other options are there for the parties that failed to get seats in parliament but wish to stay in politics? They have to act so their electorate remembers their existence until the next elections.
