Dangers and the Vote
By
Oksana Bashuk Hepburn
As Ukraine nears the September 30 election,
voters are splitting three ways: one third favours the Orange forces led by
Yulia Tymoshneko’s Bloc; one third
supports Prime Minister Victor Yanukovych and his Party of Regions; and the
rest won’t say.
Who will win? That depends on the undecided vote and its
view of front runners like the Party of Regions. After 18 months of parliamentary power, it
reaps the benefits of office. The Prime
Minister has projected a respectable image shedding the somewhat bumbling,
goon-like one from the 2004 Presidential Elections. Ukraine’s robust economy favours
him as well. Foreign investments have
surpassed five billion dollars, almost three times the 2003 figures.
For Western minded
Ukrainians, his negatives include a wobbly stand on NATO and charges of
corruption. To them, the most dangerous
aspect of his candidature lie in taped messages from a secret meeting last
month with Russia’s
President Vladimir Putin. Realnaya
Polityka, a Russian website, reported that among others, the two leaders
agreed that Ukraine’s state language should be Russian; Ukraine will guarantee
Russia’s energy passage to Europe; they will work on a new global pan-Slavism
strategy; and, according to Putin “…things will not change in
Ukraine…Yanukovych will be Prime Minister.”
Whether the tape is real or
not is a moot point: the issues are real.
The danger to Ukraine’s
free election is Russia’s
determination to control it through the Party of Regions regardless of Ukraine’s
national will. Russia needs Ukraine for
its energy dominance, as a global counterweight to the United States and the
West, and for Ukraine’s strategic attributes both geographic—proximity to
Europe, the Black Sea, and economic—agriculture, metallurgy, space
industry. Its empire-building strategies
depend on it.
The alternative to
Yanukovych is Yulia Tymoshenko’s Bloc united with other Orange
parties, supported by 1/3 of the electorate and making headway. Once the lone standard bearer of the Orange
Revolution, she articulates Ukraine’s
national aspirations and couples them with good-for-Ukraine economic policies.
She is seen by the pro-West minded electorate as its champion. She is credited for a rapprochement
among the Orange forces - Our Ukraine and
Yurij Lutsenko’s Peoples Self Defence party.
She achieved similar unity during the Orange Revolution only to see
President Yushchenko, to whom she handed power, turn on her. Many of the undecided voters must be
wondering about the dangers facing her victory. It’s hard to believe that Russia will let
her, and the West, win outright
In previous Ukrainian
elections, fraud occurred at all three levels of voting, the most blatant in
2004 at the Central Elections Commission where Yanukovych supporters introduced
false results into the computer to give him a slight win. This precipitated the
Orange Revolution.
At the local polling station
level, dead people’s names, mertvi dushi, have appeared on voters lists;
corrupt election official have been video taped adding rolls of ballots during
the count. Now, there are complaints
that the electoral lists vary by about as much as 20% from the previous
year. Is the accusation real or
not? Either way, it can be used to trip
the election.
Any transfer of ballots is
open to abuse. Concern about voting at
home, where election urns are carried to the sick, needs attention. Moving hundreds of sacks of ballots and documents
from local voting stations to regional centres is opportunity for massive
falsification. Election observers need
to be trained and the electorate assured that there are checks throughout the
system preventing fraud.
Punishment of corrupt
officials could be a serious deterrent.
However, during the last election there was only one television
advertisement showing that election law violation—threats of job dismissal for
not voting as told--is punishable in jail. Serhij Kivalov, the dismissed Chief
of Ukraine’s Central Election Commission, went un-punished for running two fraudulent
presidential elections is running again for parliamentary office as a leading
member of the Party of Regions.
However, the ultimate
election sabotage could happen after the vote. After the Orange
forces’ experienced their slight win in the last parliamentary elections,
parliamentarians were prevented from taking office for months by which time
some of them crossed over to the Yanukovych side. It could happen again—by threat of life or
corruption. Allegedly, the price for
switching sides in the last election surpassed a million dollars. The evidence being fancy cars, Rolexes and
Savile Row suits some parliamentarians suddenly boasted.
The best enforcer of
electoral law has been Ukraine’s
free press. It needs to keep up the
pressure on politicians; keep them honest.
Make them provide assurances that during the transition period, Ukraine’s
wealth is protected from raiders; that positions are not being offered to pals
or lubi druzi. The media needs to
keep asking the hard questions. Will the
Orange coalition hold? Will parliamentarians switch parties? Who
will comprise cabinet? Will there be
grand victory celebrations abroad like there were before or will the new
government get down to the business of governing?
The post election transition
period is ripe with opportunities for Russia’s
Mr. Putin to make a power play should Yulia and the Orange
forces win. The last parliamentary
election chaos allowed Russia
to place its people in high offices and demoralized much of Ukraine’s
electorate - one third of which is controlling the outcome of this election.
Oksana Bashuk Hepburn is the President of
U*CAN, a consulting firm specializing in relations with Ukraine, and a
commentator.