August 31 events in the Verkhovna Rada and outside its building tested the strength of the governing coalition in the parliament. The new level of violence, set by the grenade thrown at the police, poses a number of questions which test the MPs, political parties, and the public. It is obvious that the game of politicians and oligarchs has ascended to a new level, where bloodshed has become an acceptable means to win a stake. The Kremlin is thus offered an even greater field for provocations, where a push, a Molotov cocktail, a gunshot can be a detonator starting unmanageable processes. It is especially so given that in a state of war, it is already unclear who exactly manages these processes.
Amendments to the Constitution, massacre outside the Verkhovna Rada building, pickets and fiery speeches form in this case only the surface layer of the struggle for influence. At the same time, given the war conditions, this struggle can cause very destructive processes in the country. Regular appearances of the Opposition Bloc’s representatives on TV prove that this political force feels itself in the Ukrainian media space, if not comfortable, then in any case, more and more confident. The public’s changes of mood, involving excessive anger and compassion, confused stances and disorientation in the preferences, all reflect the conspicuous chaos at the top, which is being revealed, in particular, by the parliamentary crisis. Indeed, there is more than just a parliamentary crisis; it shows the lack of political guidelines, replaced by emotional appeals, focus on personalities rather than ideas, playing on the societal frustrations.
Oleh Liashko declared his party’s withdrawal from the coalition and the recall of its representatives from the positions of vice speaker and those of chairpersons of three parliamentary committees, currently held by Liashko’s Radical Party (LRP). All this was accompanied by flowery performances in front of TV cameras, night march on the Presidential Administration, broken ribs and a rumble in the presidium of the parliament. Note that the LRP blocked the speaker’s rostrum on August 31, but at the same time did nothing to block the voting process itself. We can say that the outcome of the vote was predetermined, and the voting itself was used as the pretext for the bloody show that followed. Self Reliance’s faction, in turn, proved to be ambivalent on the issue, for a majority of its MPs did not vote for amendments to the Constitution, and five rebel members who did have been expelled, but the party has still remained in the coalition. Thus, the LRP’s withdrawal from the coalition is not a threat for the latter by itself, but it has opened opportunities for political blackmail and bargaining. On the other hand, the observed consensus voting by the Poroshenko Bloc, People’s Front, and Opposition Bloc hint that the government is already preparing a fallback option should the current coalition break up.
The events of recent days have made it possible to identify a number of trends and issues:
♦ The resulting discreditation of the All-Ukrainian Union Svoboda, which was already poorly represented in the parliament, was hardly beneficial to anyone. Rather, this force acted as a tool used to launch into action an extremely dangerous mechanism. Firstly, the events once again raised the question of the role of the volunteer battalions in the rear areas. Secondly, it is unclear what was the role and the degree of competence of the security services who allowed a terrorist attack to occur in the city center. Thirdly, the high-profile tragedy has become the backdrop for political spokespersons’ hysterics and attempts to earn electoral dividends. Fourthly, the amendments to the Constitution have been relegated to the background.
♦ It should also be noted that law enforcement now has a free hand in the case of other such rallies occurring. In fact, the infamous Yanukovych-era Wave operation has been reenacted with new cast outside the Verkhovna Rada on August 31, intentionally or accidentally. While a TV picture of some protesters wielding chains and driving graders was enough to justify aggression against all of them on December 1, 2013, three deaths and the just indignation of society can now become a pretext for a more active use of force. However, here lies the danger that the security services, law-enforcement agencies, and responsible politicians have not drawn right conclusions from the events of late 2013.
♦ We have seen an open opposition to the president and his political force emerging in the Rada. In this regard, the LRP’s alliance of convenience with the Dnipropetrovsk-based UKROP team can result in true anti-government union taking shape. Self Reliance may join the opposition, seeing that prosecutors recently invited to an interview its head Andrii Sadovy. Thus, the presidential team will have to confront not only Ihor Kolomoisky’s resources, but also those of a number of other oligarchic forces which have never left the stage of battle for influence during the modern history of Ukraine.
♦ The Opposition Bloc joining forces with the pro-government factions to support the amendments to the Constitution demonstrates the potential to create an “undercover” broad coalition. The fact that a number of MPs spoke in the meeting chamber criticizing the amendments to the Constitution, but still voted for them, speaks volumes about their (in)sincerity on the issue. It looks like the Constitution itself, and the topic of decentralization, and at the same time, the topic of “the special regime of local government in some areas of Donetsk and Luhansk regions,” are merely pretexts for playing political games. For example, Serhii Liovochkin expressed concern in his comments for The Day that amendments to the Constitution carried the danger of bringing about an ineffective decentralization. However, such fears did not prevent him from casting his vote for these amendments.
♦ To reinforce appropriate lessons of history, it is worth recalling the events of the last year. Just as now, early September 2014 was marked by a lull at the front. A few days later, this lull ended with a few dozen of Aidar battalion soldiers being burned near the city of Shchastia. In a few days, the Minsk Accords and the law on the “special status” followed, which called for an amnesty to be proclaimed, “people’s militia” to be legalized, and even included a modest provision for “prohibition of discrimination due to the events that took place in Donetsk and Luhansk regions.” August 31, 2015 became the exemplary peaceful day in the Donbas, even as Kyiv witnessed the terrorist attack, a tragic reminder of the highly precarious nature of calm. On the same day, the legislature voted for amendments to the Basic Law, with its transitional provisions mentioning the so-called “special regime of local government.” However, a joint mobile group of Ukrainian soldiers was gunned down near Shchastia as soon as September 2, while an OSCE mission drone recorded a large concentration of heavy military equipment on the territory controlled by the “Donetsk People’s Republic” gang. Episodes, details, events and their recurrence in time force us to draw disturbing parallels.
COMMENTARY
Serhii VYSOTSKY, MP of the People’s Front faction:
“It is possible that Oleh Liashko’s withdrawal from the coalition was planned in advance. Ukraine is for the first time facing a real challenge to its existence at the level of statehood. It is time to think more about the state, than about one’s ratings before the local elections. Liashko is playing a big game because there is a room for his rating to grow. But that political logic is narrow-minded. The party can increase its vote share by three or five percent, but destroy the country in the process. Frankly, I do not understand that demarche about the changes to the Constitution on behalf of the Radical Party, Self Reliance, or even Svoboda factions. I do hope that the coalition will not collapse, because the coalition is the foundation of the structure which was built by the West concerning Ukraine. I cannot speak on behalf of the party, but there must be some fundamental goal. If in the pursuit of extra voters at the elections we failed our state, one would then be running for the deputy of the ‘People’s Republic of Stry’ or some ‘Western Ukrainian Democratic Republic.’ After all, we’ve had something like that in the history already. I do not understand why we need to repeat the chronic mistakes of Ukrainians starting from Khmelnytsky and ending with Skoropadsky and Vynnychenko.
“I think that Liashko’s union with Kolomoisky is too exaggerated in the press. He has now reached the political level, on which he is able to act independently when concluding some situational alliances with anyone he deems fit. Verkhovna Rada does not have any stable structures, with the exception of some deputies, who always were in certain groups.”
