Ukraine celebrated the Day of Freedom and Dignity on November 21. This date marks two important anniversaries: 10 years since the Orange Revolution, also known as the first Maidan, and a year since the Euromaidan started. What does this date mean for the country’s business community? Overall, its feelings are somewhat bitter, as the Ukrainian economy is in recession. The analysis of accomplishments shows that major blocks of unfulfilled reforms were the same in both cases. In 2013 as in 2004, people protested against corruption and lawlessness, demanded curbs on the oligarchy’s appetites and protection of property rights. Last year, this set of demands was supplemented with expectations of the government’s greater openness to the public as it makes its economic policies. Why people who were twice brought to power by the Maidan, having received fantastically high popular support and enormous powers, have failed to introduce important reforms in Ukraine? The Day asked experts to answer this question.
COMMENTARIES
“PURGE LACKEYS, AND THE OLIGARCHY WILL TURN INTO USEFUL BUSINESS OWNERS”
Oleksandr PASKHAVER, president of the Center for Economic Development:
“The revolution always has a driving force, a motor. This is a stratum that makes the whole society to move. The passive public gains energy from them. Therefore, these people should be passionate and fairly active. The Orange Revolution was the first attempt of the Ukrainian bourgeoisie to change society, to bring it closer to the EU. However, the revolutionary force that carried out that movement proved to be still too weak then. Thus, what we saw in 2005 was, sadly, a failed attempt. Another try was more successful nine years later. Why was it so? Its creators, people from the street, came to the stage of the Euromaidan and became famous. Even so, this was only the beginning of the necessary changes, because these people have not been able to wake up the wider public, they have neither created parties of their own nor put forward their political leaders. Events of 2013-14 mark a more successful phase of the revolution which is, undoubtedly, still on. It may take decades, and many excesses await us, but the recent Euromaidan is a good model of proper revolution.
“Results of the fight to curb the oligarchy’s appetites in Ukraine are quite predictable. For a big business owner to turn into an oligarch, one needs a society having a critical mass of ‘lackeys’ who are ready to serve them. Purge lackeys, and the oligarchy will turn into nothing more than useful business owners. What do we need to do to get there? Reforms and personal changes in the bureaucracy are required. Big business’s appetites are limitless. It will be useful when the state will channel its immense energy in a useful direction. The new government has a chance to prove this statement.
“I have read the economic part of the coalition agreement, and all expected reforms are listed there. It looks like post-Euromaidan experts participated in writing the paper. It is still inconsistent, though. Even more importantly, it is still unclear who will carry it all out? There are currently no radical leaders who could lead revolutionary reforms. We need them to appear in six months at the latest. Still, the overall leap in the development of our political leaders in terms of their determination and liberal attitudes has been enormous. Increased efficiency of the reform potential is obvious. The first year of Viktor Yanukovych’s administration was a polar opposite of the first year of the current president and cabinet. The difference is felt everywhere: the regulations they have approved, the way they conduct themselves, openness of the government to the business community. These people are not ideal reformers yet, but undeniable progress has been made. We are so used to complaining bitterly of failure in advance of any actions that it makes me protest. I think we need to give a new team a benefit of doubt for at least six months, and then we will see if they understand the past lessons of the revolution, or intend to bury these lessons.”
“THE COUNTRY NEEDS PLAYING BY THE CONSTITUTION RATHER THAN WITH IT”
Roman SHPEK, chairman of the Independent Association of Ukrainian Banks, former Minister of Economy of Ukraine:
“We have not seen one principal change taking place, which would bring us a positive outcome, I mean the start of an economic recovery. Each Maidan protest led to an increase in freedom of speech, the formation and development of civil society. Unfortunately, it has not resulted in Ukraine moving to the category of consolidated democracies. Therefore, the triumph of law, working justice services, protection of infringed personal or property rights are just impossible as long as our system, including law-enforcement agencies, is as corrupt as it is now. Thus, Ukraine is now facing the state’s failure to perform its duties. In 2004 as well as more recently, popular resistance was fanned by slogans of the European choice. This means meeting the Copenhagen criteria, including developing Ukraine’s economy to the point so that it will be able to cope with competitive pressure from more developed EU member states. This was not achieved after 2004. The same errors are repeated by the current government, elected by the Euromaidan. They replace implementation of reforms with new plans that remain on paper. It is unfortunate that the coalition agreement as well is not built around economic reforms. Its scope and content should be smaller, but more pragmatic. It is full of verbose nonsense instead. It all comes down to the fight for positions and power. That is, whether we like it or not, everything (including fate of the economy) depends on the political struggle’s outcome. As a result, we see no ideological parties of the European type after 23 years of independence, but a lot of personal vanity projects. This is definitely misleading, as the political model for Ukraine should have been chosen first, if we are serious about making European choice. The country needs playing by the constitution rather than with it. As a result, we have no protection of property rights, because the law is eminently ‘flexible.’ After the Orange Revolution and the Euromaidan, the government has wasted energy of the masses, not transforming it into economic and political reforms. This is the root of the four problems it inherited from all its predecessors.”
“IF WE REALLY WANT CHANGES TO HAPPEN, LET US START WITH OURSELVES BY PROTECTING OUR RIGHTS AND REFUSING TO PAY BRIBES”
Anna DEREVIANKO, CEO of the European Business Association:
“We have not established the equal opportunities and rights for all entrepreneurs as a principle. Both foreign and domestic investors complain about it. This has not been done, because the judicial system has served short-term interests of individual politicians. To overcome this, and ultimately make the oligarchs equal to everyone else, we need high-quality, efficient public management team and changes to the judicial system. Out-of-control economy and barely controlled country allow everyone to act as they please.
“The phenomenon of tenacious Ukrainian corruption is primarily a result of conservative Ukrainian mentality and our everyday approaches. After all, we have the government and leaders which we deserve. If we really want changes to happen, let us start with ourselves by protecting our rights and refusing to pay bribes, even if it is easier and faster, as well as requiring the bureaucracy to perform its duties in an efficient and professional manner. When a society will start to demand such services, we will see the situation gradually changing. It would be faster if different branches of government harmonized their actions. For now, we see a power struggle between them, just as they all are shying away from responsibility for mistakes.
“What lessons should the new Cabinet and parliament draw from our economic setbacks? They need to find a common ground for the sake of the country, to put their interests below those of the nation. The two-week-long coalition formation is poorly received by the business community which is asking the logical question, ‘Why is it taking them so long?’ Should they keep misunderstanding the needs of society, they may bring people’s wrath on their heads. Brought to the verge of starvation, the public will not have anything to lose. Therefore, the danger of social unrest is quite high today, even though I believe that we do not need to go down this path as the evolutionary change path would be better.”
