After the Verkhovna Rada failed to vote down Yulia Tymoshenko’s cabinet on February 5, 2009, The Day asked the political analyst Andrii YERMOLAIEV to comment on the situation.
What do you think happened at the Verkhovna Rada on February 5?
“I think that the outcome of the vote and debate itself were predictable, primarily because the key player in this situation, the President, who could have influenced the hearing of the cabinet’s progress report with his own facts and assessments, had simply stepped aside. The Party of Regions’ vote was easily predictable, and I think the Communists made the right political decision, considering that all those suspicions, criticism, and accusations leveled at the Communist Party for allegedly playing into the government’s hands were an increasing threat to their reputation.
“In Our Ukraine the President’s passivity is broadening the gap between his supporters and opponents. Proof of this is the stand taken by the faction leader Martynenko, the discord and hesitations within the faction, and, of course, the delicate stance of Viacheslav Kyrylenko, who has decided to single-handedly save this country.”
Does this mean that Yulia Tymoshenko is the winner?
“I don’t think so. Of course, after going through this trial the second time and retaining premiership, she now has a rather strong position. However, this can hardly count as victory, considering the prime minister’s progress report and the ensuing dialog in parliament. All this looked more like a show staged by the government after it received the signal that the President was not going to take part in the hearing.
“By and large, there are still problems to be solved. In fact, neither the coalition nor the cabinet has a clear-cut action plan with an answer to our question, “What will happen next?” All we hear is rhetoric. Regrettably, there is no solid strategic view of the situation and the steps to improve it. Moreover, despite the abortive attempt of a no-confidence vote, it is no secret that the cabinet is getting ready for rotations and that these rotations will be very deep-reaching. This means that the government is de facto changing its qualitative composition. In other words, it admits its virtual “retirement.”
“The prime minister is the only one who will remain, and it is safe to assume that the cabinet has been reduced to several figures who are actually controlling the government. This is one problem.
“Another problem is that the government does not have a political majority. I don’t mean the list of MPs who signed the coalition agreement, but an effective political majority capable of giving orders to the government. There are no such orders. Instead, there are wishes, entreaties, and suchlike things. Hence a question: who will implement and, most importantly, who will be responsible for policies of this kind? We can speak, with some reservations, about an actual threat of the economic power in Ukraine being usurped. This is when the government starts acting without any restraint.
“Suppose the President appears on television urging to use common sense and proposing his bills. However, the government will be free of all restraint, acting as it will please because it will again have carte blanche for the duration of the entire parliamentary session (Tymoshenko will be the sole master of the cabinet for at least six months since the VR parliamentary rules allow only one no-confidence vote per parliamentary session. — N.R.).
“The vote on the National Bank is a vivid example of the government’s initiatives. There is yet another aspect. Prior to the [NBU head’s] retirement they introduced the issue of privatizing large businesses, which means that large-scale privatization can become a source of compensation for the budget’s further losses. This is the ‘eating-away’ policy. Kryvorizhstal was consumed like this and now, it seems, it’s Ukrtelecom’s turn.”
What’s next?
“This is just the beginning. Judging by the events in the industries and the housing and communal services sectors, the real, official unemployment will inevitably lead to social pressure. I believe that major political “surprises” are in the offing. There are fears that after obtaining carte blanche again, the government will focus on escalating the conflict with the President.
“Even now we hear from the parliamentary rostrum open accusations of economic abuses and corruption addressing certain MPs and the President, although none has been corroborated by facts and findings presentable in court. And yet parliament is buying all this. What does this mean? It means that we are entering a period of unregulated, undisciplined, and uncontrolled politics in which all is fair.
“I’m afraid that the coming political fall will be unstable and be heavily affected by the crisis situation. After this vote in parliament the opposition will not give up but will try to find a way to change the political system, even through [early] elections.”
Do you regard as realistic the Party of Regions’ plan for 150 MPs to resign in order to have early parliamentary elections?
“Yanukovych has delivered the principal message today and it is early elections. True, the parliamentary resignation procedures are complicated, but the Regionals have a serious trump card to play: ordinary citizens’ mounting dissatisfaction with the situation in the country. This resentment is registered by all sociologists and it will keep rising. There is no way to avoid it, not even by the most skillful and artistic shows. It is quite possible that an essentially new situation will develop in parliament in March because the relations between the coalition forces are more complex than they may seem. All of us have witnessed hesitations in Tymoshenko’s and Lytvyn’s stand during the parliamentary hearing. They have different views on what needs be done and how it should be done. Therefore, the intrigue is still ahead. I think that the Regionals will shortly take a more radical stand and go to rally the masses.”
