The Orange Revolution: A Critical Assessment

November/December 2005 marks the first anniversary of the Orange Revolution.  To commemorate this occasion, The New Pathway asked leading scholars to give us their answer to the following question:

“Now that a year has passed since the demonstrations on the Maidan, would you say that the Orange Revolution was successful? If so, why? If not, why not?”

 Ukraine's Unfinished Revolution

 Bohdan Harasymiw: “A revolution entails radical or fundamental change in leadership, institutions, and relations between rulers and ruled (more broadly, in the prevalent political culture and values).  Although the demonstrations of a year ago signalled the awakening of civil society, and thus the beginning of a change in state-society relations, a revolution in the full sense has still not yet occurred.

On the positive side, we may note the wholesale change in the composition of the cabinet that took place under Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko just after the New Year, the responses last December of the three branches of government–executive, legislative, and judicial–to the mass demonstrations, and the impending transformation of the presidential-parliamentary system into a parliamentary-presidential one.

But the achievement of a genuine political revolution will require further changes in personnel, new and responsive institutions, and political parties capable of linking the citizens with their government.  These further changes are happening slowly, if at all.

The flurry of resignations and dismissals, the allegations of corruption, and the evident turf wars, all exposed in the fall of 2005, could only be interpreted as a continuation of the elite political culture that had prevailed under President Leonid Kuchma.  Similarly, the persistent failure to resolve the Gongadze issue, and even Victor Yushchenko’s birthday greetings to Kuchma, can also be seen as indicating a less than clean break with the previous regime.  The dramatic and inspiring opening act of the Orange Revolution has yet to live up to its own expectations.”

Bohdan Harasymiw is Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Calgary; in 2005-7, a research associate of the Canadian Institute for Ukrainian Studies at the University of Alberta.  In 2002, the CIUS published his book, Post-Communist Ukraine.

 Very Good Start

O. Andriewsky:  “The Orange Revolution was very successful in narrow terms–it prevented the fixed election of Victor Yanukovych.  That was an extraordinary achievement and for all the subsequent missteps, mistakes, and failings of the Yushchenko government, the alternative would have been much worse.

But the gains of that tremendous movement for democracy have yet to be institutionalized.   The major political players are exactly the same, only their positions are different.  The Parliament is still very much a middle-aged men’s club for millionaires and that is unlikely to change with the March elections.

There remains a fundamental disconnect between the political elite and the grassroots–a democracy deficit, as we like to say in Canada.  Even so, the legend of the Orange Revolution continues to live and the collective memory of successful political engagement should continue to pay dividends in all sorts of interesting and important ways for years to come.”

O. Andriewsky is a professor in the Department of History, Trent University.

Ukraine Effectively Entered the 21st Century

Myroslav Shkandrij: “The Orange Revolution was successful in preventing massive and cynical manipulation of the electoral system from returning a candidate most voters rejected. Its immediate and long-term benefits are clearest in foreign policy: Ukraine has signalled its move toward the World Trade Organization and the European Union. Integration with Europe, while not an immediate prospect, is now being discussed and is finding increasing support.

The Revolution also made it clear that the country would not accept the idea of being controlled by Russia. These messages (pro-democracy, pro-Europe, and an independent course) were the ones  picked up from events by the world media, which focused heavily on the Orange Revolution for over a month. The publicity created an overwhelmingly positive image of the country and people, one that may prove to be the Revolution’s most important legacy.

Ukraine effectively entered the 21st century, and the world arena, with a bang. The youthful, peaceful, festive, but determined, atmosphere of the “revolutionaries” made an enormous impression around the globe. There may be other, still unassessed legacies. Citizens are less likely to be brow-beaten, more likely to demand accountability from officials, less ready to put up with old habits of corruption and graft.

If the generation that grew up after independence produced the Orange Revolution, the current generation, it is to be hoped, as it assumes leadership positions, will change the political culture.

Myroslav Shkandrij is the Head of the Department of German and Slavic Studies, University of Manitoba and the author of Russia and Ukraine. Literature and the Discourse of Empire (McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2001).

Ukraine's Media Has  Long Way to Go

Marta Dyczok: “Many Ukrainian politicians and analysts point to increased freedom of speech as one of the irrefutable gains of the Orange Revolution. However, a closer look reveals that although Ukraine has made a significant breakthrough on the road to free speech, it still has a long way to go before its media sector can be truly called democratic.

The heavy handed censorship of the late Kuchma era is certainly over, and Ukraine is no longer in the company of Russia, Syria and Zimbabwe as the worst enemies of the press. On the other hand, increased information flow has not led to improved government (elite) accountability or responsiveness, the state continues to own a significant portion of media outlets, and most politicians and journalists do not really understand the role media generally plays in a democracy.”

Marta Dyczok, DPhil (Oxon), is an Associate Professor in the Departments of History and Political Science, University of Western Ontario.

Revolution Set in Motion a Long-Term Project

Bohdan Kordan: “Was the Orange Revolution a hollow victory?  A cheap trick perpetrated by demagogues on the people of Ukraine?  Are we to believe that politics is a fool’s game?  Arguably not. 

The movement that gave birth to the Orange Revolution was an expression of change.  Moreover, for those who gathered in the Maidan and elsewhere, they believed themselves to be the instrument of that change.  This is extraordinary because Ukrainian society, endowed with the characteristics of personality, was for the first time conscious of its own destiny – a remarkable achievement given both the history of Ukraine and the seemingly intractable problems associated with post-communist transition.  Ukrainian society signalled a new direction for the country and in the choice between past and future, coercion and the rule of law, Russia and Europe, a divide was crossed.

This is also, however, where the story of the Orange Revolution becomes unclear.  The political leadership has stumbled and stumbled badly.  The continuing miasma of politics in post-Orange Ukraine–manipulation, corruption and ambition–reminds how the opportunity has been squandered.  But there is also no going back.  Neither forward nor backward, where does Ukraine go from here?

Critically, in signalling the desire to move along a new trajectory, Ukrainian society has alerted Europe and the West about its aspirations.  A different Western policy response is warranted and despite concerns in Europe about enlargement, there is now a willingness to entertain Ukraine as part of the European family.  The European Union’s ‘market economy’ designation for Ukraine is just not another economic incentive.  Nor is Washington’s stated intention of removing the restrictions associated with the economically crippling Jackson-Vanik Amendment. The intent of both initiatives is to help to consolidate recent sentiments expressed in Ukraine by strengthening the economic conditions that would lead to the growth and development of independent social formations–the foundation of a civil society and a functioning democracy.

This is a long-term project set in motion by the Revolution.  And, although in the interim the values that informed the ‘Orangists’ may be severely impeded by the politics of ambition, political ineptitude or external Russian influence and pressure, it is difficult to see how the process in favour of change may now be reversed.  This, in the end, is the meaning and legacy of the Orange Revolution.

Bohdan Kordan is a Professor of International Relations at the University of Saskatchewan. His most recent publication on Ukraine is Black Sea, Golden Steppes: Antiquarian Maps of the Black Sea Coast and the Steppes of Old Ukraine.

Was it Truly A Revolution?

David Marples: “The first question is whether the events of late 2004 constituted a revolution. Essentially, many elements of the previous government were left in place, and the former incumbent was not prosecuted or even detained, despite alleged crimes and obvious corruption. Yanukovych, the symbol of the worst elements of the past regime, currently leads the most popular faction in Parliament.

So what really changed? The grassroots revolution did not lead to fundamental changes at the level of the political elite; one can anticipate a power struggle within this elite in the coming year but essentially the players remain the same. The protests enhanced Ukraine’s standing in Europe as a potential partner, but European Union membership still seems an unrealistic hope, at least in the short term.”

David Marples is professor of history at the University of Alberta. His most recent book is The Collapse of the Soviet Union, 1985-1991 (Longman, 2004).