During Viktor Yanukovych’s speech at a business luncheon with US financial and business representatives the Ukrainian prime minister frequently mentioned the word stability . “We have come to stay for a long time, for the next five to ten years. We don’t see any great obstacles,” said the Ukrainian government leader, emphasizing that political stability is very important for securing sustained economic growth. He added that stable forces that are able to secure this are now in power.
But Ukrainians have vastly different feelings about stability. Three-quarters of Ukrainian citizens assess the current political situation in the country as unstable, according to a poll conducted on Nov. 5-15 by the Research & Branding Group. Half of all respondents described the current economic situation in Ukraine as bad, 25 percent as average, 17 percent as very bad, and only 2 percent as good. That’s how the people view the situation.
We asked our experts at The Day to indicate when Ukraine will see the long-awaited stability that big money and investors like so much. What needs to be done for it to arrive?
“Ukraine continues to be in a stable state of instability. In other words, the electoral confrontation has turned into institutional confrontation. Whereas in the past there was a confrontation between East and West, today it has turned into a confrontation between two institutions of power - the Presidential Secretariat and the Cabinet of Ministers. Whereas one year ago many people considered this a problem, now we can see that no one is making a problem out of this. Virtually all economic entities, all businesses, and the executive power are functioning smoothly. And we can see that the master project “Ukraine as a country” is developing and working, but Ukraine as a state is shivering from a fever of instability.
“Investors are beginning to get accustomed to the existing diarchy in Ukraine, or so it seems. They see that businesses in the country are successfully operating despite the diarchy. That’s why I believe Ukraine has made the transition to a state of stable instability. Because this instability is stable, investors have already become used to it and are coming here with their money.
“What needs to be done to stabilize Ukraine as a state? The answer is simple: change the Constitution. Gather the representatives of all political forces for a roundtable discussion. Then develop general principles and create a constitutional commission. Then hold a referendum on its findings or have a constitutional assembly consider them.”
“I believe that if we want to be absolutely sincere about definitions, the concepts of stability and trust may differ. To the average citizen stability is a kind of local integral indicator that involves his life and workplace, his family income, and everything that pertains to his little microworld. I believe that from this angle, unless we politicize the issue, a relative equilibrium has indeed been maintained over the last 12 to 18 months. In any case, we have not had any crises with salaries, avalanche-like closures of businesses, or any major technological disasters with wide-ranging consequences. In this sense this microworld has definitely been stable lately.
“The last upheavals in our country took place in the late 1990s, which caused a wave of bankruptcies across the country and fluctuations of the national currency. All this, of course, seriously affected the standard of living. In other words, this shallow sociological study proves that all the discussions about instability are perceived by citizens from a very national angle. We can talk about political instability in the context of the following triad: stability-instability-evaluation of relationships. This is an evaluative parameter because we are assessing something, right? And when we talk about instability, we are somewhat bending the truth about this microworld because instability really exists in the sphere of political relationships, at the level of political entities, in the organization of cooperation among government institutions, and, correspondingly, at the level of relations between citizens and the government.
“Where does this instability manifest itself? In the instability of existing norms, because we log this year as the year when the rules were changed (a new political system); in the instability of relationships, which shows itself in the reorganization of power in terms of party representation and in the changed political rules. This is also demonstrated by changes in authority, blocking of cooperation, and threats of a constitutional crisis, when the subjects are unable to perform their constitutional duties.
“In this sense I believe that if we conducted a bona fide detailed sociological study, we would have, on the one hand, a balanced assessment of the personal situation and, on the other, a negative evaluation of the political situation.”
Valerii DANYLEVSKY, political scientist (Donetsk):
“First of all, it is strange that today we lack a legislative basis for establishing any kind of stability - we cannot overcome the constitutional and legal contradictions that are the source of all the problems. Therefore, I believe that the first thing that needs to be done is either to cancel the political reform that introduces an element of instability, or improve it by passing a series of important laws, such as laws on the Cabinet of Ministers, the President, and the Presidential Secretariat. This will be the first step on the way to a balanced situation.
“Second, a law on the opposition will have to be passed without fail because the opposition has no small share in the (de)stabilization of the situation in our country.
“Finally, although this is high-sounding, we need to seek to establish proper respect in Ukraine for the law and the Constitution. Today our country exhibits legal nihilism. For example, the judiciary ignores even court decisions. As a result, we cannot find a way to stop anyone now because there are no more authoritative institutions left.
“Precisely for this reason another step toward stabilization should be a reform of the law-enforcement and judicial systems. This will help maintain not only political stability in Ukraine but also public order. Law-enforcement bodies, courts, and the army have to be depoliticized; they need to fulfill state functions. This is a very important moment. An equally important stabilizing factor is the struggle against corruption: we simply must create a body, like a National Bureau of Investigation, which would directly address corruption in agencies of any branch of power.
“Finally, for a stable situation in the country we need clearly defined and easily recognizable political forces, because now everything’s in a jumble-both the pro-government forces and the opposition. As a result, Orange forces are uniting around the president and his branch of power, whereas members of the Party of Regions together with the socialists and communists are clinging to the executive branch, thus creating several teams that work at the national level and which are absolute opponents from an ideological, mental, and even historical perspective. There is also a lack of political culture that turns opponents into fierce and mortal archenemies. As a result, the political beliefs of one’s opponents are perceived as personal insults.
“As far as the terms for implementing these transformations are concerned, Ukraine has a chance to stabilize the situation by next spring or summer. Here everything depends on the efficiency of the Verkhovna Rada and the institutions with the right of legislative initiative-the president, the Cabinet of Ministers, and MPs. If they are willing to take responsibility and adopt the necessary legislation, the situation will gradually begin to stabilize. One only needs to clearly delimit the authority of all branches of power, so that no one can overstep his powers and assume more authority than accorded by law.”
Mykola VASKIV, associate professor, Kamianets-Podilsky State University:
“In addition to statements about the instability of the situation in Ukraine, there is increasingly more talk of the coalition majority and government attempting to usurp power. All this probably wouldn’t disturb the average citizen very much if this usurpation and the activity of the usurpers were for their benefit.
“There are two ways out of this situation. The first one is almost unreal-appeal to the Constitutional Court and have the constitutional reform canceled. With the existing balance of power this is likely to upset the situation even more. The second solution is to wait until February or March and then disband parliament and announce early elections. By that time the president will have more than enough formal grounds to dismiss the Verkhovna Rada. But most importantly, at that moment this decision will enjoy wide support from society, which by then will have felt all the “good” brought by the activity of the anti-crisis coalition and the government.
“To avoid the danger of power being usurped by the ruling coalition in the future, the election threshold evidently needs to be lowered to increase the number of political players. This will enable parliament to create a situational majority more often and to become more state- and society-oriented rather than clan-oriented.”
Yurii NOVAK, history lecturer (Vinnytsia):
“The lame, imperfect, and rash political reform resulted in a total imbalance of the branches of power. The reform was not elaborated to an acceptable degree, one that would allow the two power branches-the president and the prime minister-to have non-overlapping spheres of authority. One branch fired Tarasiuk. He went to court and reinstituted himself in the office, came to a meeting, but they won’t let him in. In this situation there are no clearly defined rights, duties, and instruments for the president and the prime minister to exercise their authority. Now people are outraged by the political tug of war in which the two of them are engaged. The presidential administration is all for canceling the reform, as can be elicited from Petro Poroshenko’s statements about coordinating joint actions with the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc. The political reform has to be at least restricted if not canceled altogether. The Party of Regions wants to bring everything under its control on the sly. People cannot actively influence the situation. Both branches of power were elected in accordance with the law, and now we are experiencing only a political crisis. An economic crisis, which would cause people to protest actively, has not come yet.”
Liubov MUCHNYK, rector of the Poltava Institute of Economics and Law, corresponding member of the Ukrainian National Progress Academy of Sciences:
“The instability of the present situation and the unsteadiness of all the political circles in Kyiv are evidenced not only by sociological polls conducted inside the country but also the reaction to our political demarches coming from abroad. The latest event, which is a fairly vivid illustration, is Prime Minister Yanukovych’s visit to the US. The Ukrainian diaspora resorting to obstruction of a Ukrainian prime minister is unheard of!
“But I believe that not only the prime minister but also the president and the MPs are guilty of causing the Ukrainian “lapse into sinfulness”, i.e., an abrupt reversal in the world’s public opinion of us and the general instability. Viktor Yushchenko fell in the world community’s esteem just as much as many other Ukrainian politicians did. Therefore, radical improvement and stabilization of all processes in society are possible only if today’s acting parliament is dismissed and new parliamentary and presidential elections are held.”
