Despite the fact that the MPs have not yet decided on the date of the presidential elections, the electioneering wave has de facto swept across Ukraine. Politicians of different colors and calibers have announced about their intention to run for president.
Viktor Yushchenko was among the first people to express his readiness to take part in the elections. He was followed, in a quick succession, by Viktor Yanukovych, Yulia Tymoshenko, Serhii Tihipko, Anatolii Hrytsenko, and Arsenii Yatseniuk. Some stated their intentions clearly and distinctly, while others used hints to tell society that they are going to struggle, persuade, and win.
Considering the fact that the presidential campaign has not officially started, the Central Election Committee is not registering the candidates. Rumor has it that their number will exceed 50.
Experts have already noted some trends of the approaching election campaign. First, they predict that the presidential elections will be a competition of names, images, charismas, and technologies, rather than deep programmatic and ideological content.
Second, in conditions of the financial-economic crisis, every presidential hopeful will apparently try on the laurels of an anti-crisis leader capable of putting things in order in Ukraine and painlessly leading the country out of the crisis dive.
Finally, the third trend is that the following elections will be, figuratively speaking, a struggle of new politicians against the old or very old ones. The first group includes Yatseniuk, Tihipko, and Hrytsenko. The second one includes Tymoshenko and Yanukovych. Facts are facts: neither political scientists nor sociologists view Yushchenko as a serious player. Perhaps, they are mistaken, but at the current stage I am speaking about the two heavyweight candidates — Tymoshenko and Yanukovysh. Others have record-breaking lows of electoral support.
The novice candidates are developing their electoral muscles quickly, nearly in leaps and bounds.
This is a widely known fact not only in the narrow expert circles, but also in the headquarters of the BYuT and the Party of Regions. However, instead of strengthening their own positions with the help of programmatic and, above all, anti-crisis initiatives, which would be logical under the given circumstances, Tymoshenko’s and Yanukovych’s aides are inclined to go along an easier, but trickier way from the democratic point of view.
The halls and lobby of the Verkhovna Rada have recently been full of talks about the renewed cooperation between the two party leaders. Realizing that they may lose everything in the elections, the starting point of their negotiations is the Constitution, in particular its reform, which vests the right to elect the president in parliament. According to the plan, Yanukovych would become the president, whereas Tymoshenko would take the premier’s office with the wide-ranging powers of a chancellor.
A total of 300 votes are needed to make amendments to the Constitution, and the factions of the Party of Regions and the BYuT have them. Last autumn similar constitution negotiations between the two parties failed at the last moment, because the BYuT refused to meet the regionalists’ demands — change the procedure for presidential elections. But today, considering the plunge in ratings that Tymoshenko and her bloc have taken, the regionalists are the ones who call the tune.
The political situation is changing rapidly, so the elections formula may also be modified. If Tymoshenko and Yanukovych count on the presidential elections in parliament, they should launch the necessary constitutional amendments during the current session of the Verkhovna Rada. Then they will need to submit the draft constitution to the Constitutional Court. The amendments may be approved during the autumn session at the earliest.
The Day spoke about the election rules and possible exceptions with representatives of different parliamentary factions. We asked them three questions:
1. Will the future presidential election campaign be a struggle of names or ideas?
2. What is the composite image of an ideal president on the current path of Ukraine’s development?
3. Do novice candidates have any chances of matching their rival heavyweight candidates?
Andrii PARUBII, NU-NS:
1. “I think that election campaigns are never a mere struggle of names, because every name is connected with a certain conception. During the previous elections the conceptual systems of Yushchenko and Yanukovych were absolutely clear to every voter.
“Without doubt, the personification lines in Ukrainian politics remain very strong. Thus, on the one hand, this is again a struggle of names, but on the other hand, each of the names is a symbol of a certain conception. Therefore, I think that we will see both: a struggle of names and a struggle of conceptions in these presidential elections.”
2. “I would say that the head of state should firmly stand for Ukraine’s national interests. This is very important, because in the current development phase, when many questions remain open (including national security issues), it is very important that the president would not permit the national interests to become an object of trade under any circumstances.
“Furthermore, the future president has a good understanding of the current economic processes in our country. This should be a manager capable of harnessing the power system to make it effectively solve problems.
“At the same time, I should note that with the power given to the president by the Constitution, it is extremely difficult to run the system of state management, using only presidential leverage. The parliamentary support will be crucial, coming from a coalition or at least a large part of the MPs, in order to get legislation through in an efficient way.”
3. “I don’t think that their chances are as high as one might surmise today, looking at the ratings. Why? Because the candidate’s support should include not only ratings, but also a ramified regional network that reaches the remotest villages. This is very important, because these structures should set up local headquarters and carry out propaganda. Therefore, in my opinion, the new candidates have good chance to win an honorable place but poor chances of entering the key competition (I mean advancing to the run-off).
“Finally and most importantly, it is still an open question whether the elite will sponsor amendments to the Constitution, in particular the president elected in parliament. This is a topic that can turn around both the conception and the result of the approaching presidential elections.”
Oleksandr HOLUB, CPU:
1. “I am sure that, unfortunately, these elections won’t be a struggle of ideas in any case. This will be a competition of names, personalities, and PR actions. One of the candidates, Yatseniuk, positions himself in his campaign as the future versus the past, but today this concept has not found any mass support and social response. And this means that people are not looking at the programs, and there will not be any competition of programs and ideas.”
2. “Speaking of the composite image of the future president, in my opinion, it should be, above all, taken into account that people have gotten tired practically of all politicians. Even the candidates that are most likely to win are not getting the needed number of votes, support, and ratings in order to aspire to the role of the national leader. Therefore, I think that the ideal option is no presidential office at all in Ukraine.”
3. “In my view, the so-called new figures have no chances in these elections. Politicians who are known to people will be the key candidates and advance to the run-off. First, time, or, more precisely, the lack of it, is playing its role here (there is too little time for a candidate to bring his/her views to the attention of the voters). Second, the mentality of Ukrainians make them support people, who are “familiar,” despite the fact that there are many complaints about them. So, conservatism will play a part in the future elections.”
Volodymyr POLOKHALO, BYuT:
“I will give a single answer to all three questions. There is a concept of political leadership, which includes a certain brand. There are short-term brands (like flashes), which we have observed on the horizon of Ukrainian politics, and there are brands that have been forming for a long period of time and have a stable character. The bearer of this brand or, if you like, trademark, has a stable electorate.
“I believe that today there are two political figures, Yulia Tymoshenko and Viktor Yanukovych, who are the bearers of such brands.
“At the same time, these elections will be a struggle of ideas. It seems to me that Tymoshenko’s brand is improving. Now she is more accepted both by the stable electorate and the undecided, as a person trying to unite the east and the west, unite elites through her programs. Today it is very important not to allow a split, political dichotomy, and political and ideological idiosyncrasies. If in 2004 Yanukovych and political technologists bet on the split, today Tymoshenko is trying to unite the country and its elite, although, it should be noted, a part of the electorate likes radicalism, categorical approach, and the black–and–white, friends–vs–enemies mentality.
“There are also people who have lost their brand — Viktor Yushchenko, for one. I think that there will be no re-branding for Yushchenko. Yushchenko’s brand was prepared by Viktor Baloha as a confrontation brand. In a sense, he took over Yanukovych’s concept of a split and targeted a certain electoral segment but with no success.
“The brand of Arsenii Yatseniuk is being actively shaped. However, this is a shaky process, because this brand does not, as yet, have stable sympathizers, who would ‘buy’ it regardless of the political weather and cataclysms. When the struggle unfolds, the key competition will be between the key brands. And new names and brands will simply have no time to mature enough in six months to play a self-sufficient and independent role in this political game.”
Taras CHORNOVIL, faction of the Party of Regions (nonpartisan):
1. “In my opinion, we will again see the struggle of names, and, unfortunately nobody is speaking about ideas. Can the BYuT or the Party of Regions formulate their main idea? They are leftist today and rightist tomorrow. Everyone considers Yatseniuk the right politician, because he is young, good-looking, and seems to be pro-European. But there is too much populism here, and many other things that are added to it. Therefore, for me it is difficult to give an explicit outline of Yatseniuk’s position. Tihipko and Yushchenko have fairly measurable ideological direction. But, it seems to me, during the elections the attitude to these figures will be playing a greater role than the ideas they profess.”
2. “The ideal candidate is the one who, before running for president, will read the Constitution in the part that speaks about the powers of the president, and will not be telling people during the election campaign that s/he will raise wages or do other things that are within the purview of the government, rather than the president. During the election campaign, if somebody shows how s/he will carry out these or other things, based on the constitutional powers of the president, s/he will automatically be a good president.
“Of course, this should be a non-contentious person. His role is to be the guarantor of the Constitution and the state’s independence. On top of everything else, the guarantor is also an arbiter. An arbiter cannot support any part of the conflict.”
3. “The chances of the so-called novices, I think, are absolutely equal to the chances of the so-called heavyweight candidates. We have a situation that I would call a four-plus-one situation, when we have four candidates and a person who wants to be a president, but cannot (Yushchenko). Yushchenko, who is very eager to go for a second presidential term and has certain mechanisms of influence, may bring lots of “surprises.” But he won’t become a president, although his activity, in my view, may affect the ratings of other candidates.
“Speaking about the other four candidates, the first pair is an old one — Tymoshenko and Yanukovych, whereas the second one is new — Yatseniuk and Tihipko. If there were no Tihipko, Yatseniuk would have colossal chances to catch up with the two old candidates, and perhaps, outstrip them. The appearance of Tihipko has destroyed his monopoly on a new face.
“In my opinion, the situation in the second round will develop according to one of the following two scenarios. The pair of Yanukovych and Yatseniuk may enter the final duel, or Tymoshenko and Tihipko will meet there.
“It is unlikely that Tymoshenko will meet Yatseniuk in the run-off, because they are “grazing” on the same electoral field. In principle, it is possible that Yanukovych and Tihipko will both find themselves there, but, in my opinion, such a scenario is quite unlikely.”
COMMENTARY
Yevhen HOLOVAKHA, deputy director of the Institute of Sociology, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine:
“I think that during the future presidential election campaign we will witness a struggle of names, because, frankly, we have a deficit of ideas. The groups of candidates will throw themselves at a single idea. This, I can say, is an electoral peculiarity of Ukrainians.
“Let us take our neighbor Russia as an example. They have one main candidate and ‘technical’ ones. In contrast to this, we have several politicians representing very influential political forces. These have their own political interests, which are supported by the economic interests of the people backing them.
“Regarding the generalized character of an ideal president, I will note that my demands are very modest. I may be the least demanding of all Ukrainians. In my opinion, three qualities are necessary, whereas others are a matter of taste, as the saying goes. First, she should be mentally sound. Second, she should not be a xenophobe. Third, she should have a minimum administrative experience … Our citizens’ demands are much higher, especially the moral ones, which is a great utopia on their part.
“Novice candidates, in my opinion, cannot match heavyweight candidates. One exception is Yatseniuk, provided that he becomes Yushchenko’s successor, because this figure is backed by very influential forces as well as the so-called national-democratic orientation. All the others cannot make good competition to Tymoshenko or Yanukovych. Why? Because our culture is quite traditional. We get accustomed and tolerate for a long time. As they say, ‘Bad but ours.’
“Regarding Yushchenko, our patience has snapped. In spite of everything, no matter what power the president has, people view this post as the summit of hierarchy. That is why all our presidents have inevitably become scapegoats, and as a result the entire disappointment was concentrated around them.
“It is hard to name the key similarities and differences between the 2004 election campaign and the current one. These two campaigns are alike because similar forces are taking part in them — the ‘White-and-Blues’ and the ‘Orange people.’ There will be the same split in political orientation. And the key difference is that this time the elections won’t be followed by a same kind of drama as in 2004. Neither will there be a similar tension, because Kuchma’s figure was much more irritating than Yushchenko’s. The rest will be the same: the same passions, collisions, and mutual dissatisfaction.”
