Eighteen months have passed since the Maidan events, but politicians haven’t gotten tired of giving to the society scandalous information products. The evident lack of reforms was stressed in mutual accusations, which have exceeded the limits of anything constructive. So far the top officials are fighting, trying to keep their interests intact and not take out one another’s eye. Maybe that is the reason why none of the representatives of the Opposition Bloc, i.e., reincarnated Party of Regions, is not in jail. Even the appointed scapegoats have a possibility to undertake hydrotherapeutic procedures in the center of Kyiv, without even taking off the ankle monitor.
The end of the past week was marked with open verbal insult of Prime Minister Arsenii Yatseniuk by Odesa Governor Mikheil Saakashvili. The lack of reforms was the reason for criticism. Yatseniuk hastily announced the liquidation of the tax police and reduction of the State Fiscal Service. But in society Arsenii Yatseniuk, clearly associated with the People’s Front, has lost its rating long ago, and even such messages as writing off four billion of debt by the West do not help. An ordinary citizen understands that over recent months his money was saved by summer, but the heating season will be catastrophic for family budgets. This catastrophe cannot be disguised by PR moves or bright speeches. The latter have been marked by demonstrative theatricality and avoiding answers to concrete questions. But the People’s Front, which has lost the trust of voters, is largely represented in parliament, and the president will have to count with this force. At the same time the People’s Front faction is not making any open demarches in Rada, staying in the coalition. At the same time, the complex structure of the coalition and the factions, whose interests are hardly based on common ideology, leaves space for reformatting.
Mikheil Saakashvili is not an independent political figure now, in spite of his presidential past. His name absolutely logically falls into the principles of PR moves of the incumbent power, which needs powerful information “bombs” due to the current crisis of credit. In fact, the appointment of Saakashvili the governor of Odesa oblast coincided with the anniversary of Petro Poroshenko’s presidency and to some extent distracted attention from the painful questions to the guarantor. Apart from that, the passionate statements made by Saakashvili, when he declared the fight against corruption for the broad public and was given a huge support of mass media, have become not only a lightning rod for criticizing the president, but in the background of the government’s inefficiency, a reason to create an alternative to Arsenii Yatseniuk. Odesa now is playing the role of an alternative to Crimea not only as a resort, but also in terms of reforms. However, it is quite doubtful that the reforms are real. We are observing localized strikes instead of systemic reforms. This refers both to Odesa, and generally Ukraine.
So, Saakashvili’s criticism of Yatseniuk in this case looks quite one-sided. Shouldn’t the respectful guest and express citizen of Ukraine (let’s recall the practice of issuing citizenship overnight) start with himself? It is not the first time we hear the complaints of invited specialists that the power is not ready for reforms. At the same time, the question remains: what are the proposals of the reformers, who have come mostly from Georgia? The criticism of the lack of reforms, like the criticism of the age-old phenomenon of corruption, in this case looks like a card one can take out of his sleeve while fighting against his opponent.
Personal accusations, however, prove that the question is not about the reforms or corruption, but the same localized strikes. Dragging the names of such oligarchs as Ihor Kolomoisky into the whirl of the conflict and accusations voiced by the governor of Odesa oblast gives reasons to understand once again that oligarchs are fighting for their interests and influence, and Kolomoisky is now opposing not only the president, but the Kuchma-Pinchuk clan above all. After all, certain personalities in these intrigues are used as torpedoes for attacks. For some politicians, especially those who have a well-recognized or imagined potential of credit, such role looks humiliating.
What is the role of the president in this story? The president is trying to reconcile all sides, stating, “There is no personal conflict between the prime minister and Saakashvili. Both the prime minister and Mikheil Saakashvili are willing to improve the situation.” Petro Poroshenko, whose party in Rada demonstratively votes on some questions in unison with the Opposition Bloc, looks as a referee, whereas the society still has a demand for the vector of reforms to be crystallized through the demonstrative rows, intrigues, and redistribution of power and offices. After all, who can formulate clearly what these reforms should be, except for selective dismissal of certain officials? Has the power used the carte blanche given to it by society and the world after the Euromaidan? So far the PR formulas are still considered by the sponsors of such shows as the rescuing crutches, when there is a lack of political ideas and national strategies. You shouldn’t forget that the shows fed to people after Maidan have a longtime taste of blood and hunger. The last two factors are a sufficient reason for a social explosion, which will be presented by the enemy as a civil conflict.
COMMENTARY
Maksym ROZUMNY, Doctor of Political Science, head of the political strategies department at the National Institute for Strategic Studies:
“What we see emerging now is actually a kind of a ‘party of power.’ Under Viktor Yanukovych, the party of power was embodied in the centralized Party of Regions, which was built to exist forever. In the present case, the ruling party is more situational in its nature, consisting currently of those who have shared the power resource between themselves. These are Petro Poroshenko and the People’s Front, the latter being a complex combination of various politicians and political forces, such as Arsen Avakov, Oleksandr Turchynov, Arsenii Yatseniuk, and Andrii Parubii. That is, the People’s Front is not a monolithic bloc, and not all its members support Yatseniuk.”
“Quite a complex structure has emerged, but what is really important now is that together with the Petro Poroshenko Bloc (PPB), that is, with the presidential resource, they make up the party of power now. This structure is still quite robust at the moment, and it is too early to talk about its eventual split. It has so far only strengthened, although its internal priorities and seniority may change, as it recently happened between the PPB and the UDAR. We see a kind of an evolutionary process unfolding here.
“As for the coalition, the paradox of the situation is that the party of power is not including Yulia Tymoshenko’s political force, despite it being a coalition member, and the Liashko’s Radical Party (LRP) was not included either even before it left the coalition. There is a yawning gap between these two forces and the party of power, even though the Fatherland party has remained a member of the coalition. Similarly, the Self Reliance party is, so to speak, somewhat left out of the distribution of the power resource. These parties will finally leave the coalition if it becomes clear what the next coalition will look like. All these forces are engaging in mutual blackmail at the moment. The PPB has shown that it can work with different groups like the Revival and even the Opposition Bloc, that is, political forces and individual members from outside the coalition. On the other hand, the LRP and the Self Reliance have shown that they can undermine the coalition at any moment, and thus take away the Cabinet’s legitimacy. This balance is currently riven by conflict, and it will disappear if a new coalition will take a clear shape, be it anti-presidential, anti-prime-ministerial, or so-called broad pro-presidential one.
“As for the scandal involving Mikheil Saakashvili and Yatseniuk, it is felt that the real ruling coalition, that of the PPB and the People’s Front, suffers from internal conflicts. They do not arise just from any personal or institutional jealousy, but from the fact that these two centers of power resources are supported by different oligarchic groups that have serious economic interests to protect. In this case, it is obvious that Dmytro Firtash’s group has made its choice clear, for they support Poroshenko more and lay more criticism on Yatseniuk. Ihor Kolomoisky’s group, in its turn, supports Yatseniuk more and criticizes Poroshenko. Firtash and Kolomoisky have economic quarrels as well, which provide additional dimension to the political debate. As for the figure of Saakashvili, he has found himself at the forefront of these processes. He clearly belongs to the presidential party, to Poroshenko’s team. His demarches and this scandal include many different components. On the one hand, it is a war between different oligarchic groups and their representations in the party of power, on the other, Saakashvili has ambitions of his own, and people are already quite serious about his chances to get the prime minister’s job. With Yatseniuk sliding in the opinion polls, the latter option is becoming a quite realistic prospect. I also tend to think that Saakashvili was really sincere when he said that many issues could not be properly addressed due to not just bureaucratic obstacles, but also those having to do with corruption and the distribution of spheres of influence between the shadow centers of power.
“Saakashvili is unlikely to succeed, because he cannot rely on some resource base in Ukraine, be it human, institutional, party, or oligarchic one. He cannot really intervene in the distribution of spheres of influence and power struggle. However, his emotional nature and innate ability of a political player force him to enter this fight while staying vigilant and cautious. He goes for broke, betting on open conflict and confrontation. He manages to win in this way sometimes, as shown by the story of his ascent to the Georgian presidency. He acted this way in the 2008 conflict with Russia as well, he acts so now. I think those who invited him to Ukraine made provision for his behavior. Thus, the elite may allow Saakashvili to claim victory via getting some symbolic satisfaction, but he will be unable to become a really influential center of power in the long run.”
