The political crisis broke over widespread allegations of fraud in the elections. Ukraine’s electoral council had announced November 24 that Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich—favored by the Kremlin—won the republic’s presidency by nearly 50 percent of the vote. Mass demonstrations backing Yushchenko—who is favored by Washington and its imperialist allies—began in Kiev, followed by counterprotests in Donetz and eastern sections of Ukraine, where Yanukovich has his base of support.

A deal between the two candidates that helped pave the way for new elections was approved in parliament by a vote of 402 to 21. Pro-Moscow forces and others in parliament had sought a reduction in the powers of the presidency, in exchange for a shakeup in the leadership in the national electoral council, demanded by Yushchenko and his allies. President Leonid Kuchma immediately signed the bill into law, and pro-Yushchenko forces called for an end to the blockade of government buildings.

Washington and other imperialist powers have promoted the street protests in favor of Yushchenko. An editorial comment in the December 6 Financial Times of London, for example, crowed that “the orange revolt has empowered the nation” and that the supreme court decision to annul the election results and order a rerun “is a dramatic victory for democracy…liberty is growing by the day.” The editors of the Times and other big-business papers expect a Ukraine under Yushchenko to be more subservient to imperialist interests and offer more investment opportunities than the current regime.

At the same time, however, opposition in the European Union to Ukraine entering the EU is universal. “Brussels is already anticipating huge difficulties in absorbing Romania,” notes New York University professor Tony Judt in an Op-ed column in the December 5 New York Times. Romania is the least developed of the present candidate members to the EU, but is “less than half the size of Ukraine and much better off,” Judt says. The average monthly income in Ukraine is $95.

The two contending candidates in Ukraine come from the privileged bureaucratic caste that ruled the republic when it was part of the former Soviet Union. Yanukovich was an official in the coal industry in the eastern region and Yushchenko in the state banking system. They each served terms as prime minister during the presidency of Kuchma, who directed the regime in Kiev toward closer collaboration with Washington and other imperialist powers, while maintaining firm ties with Moscow.

The Russian government is trying to prevent the establishment of regimes in former Soviet republics on its borders that are more subservient to Washington and other imperialist powers. Substantial economic and military ties with Russia make Ukraine more important to Moscow than other former Soviet republics—from the Baltic Sea to the Caucasus.

Ukraine is dependent on Russia for 85 percent of its energy supplies, for example, and is a major transit route for Russia’s oil and natural gas exports. Ukraine generated nearly 18 percent of the Soviet Union’s gross national product—it is rich in iron ore and coal—and supplied much of the USSR’s heavy industry. The Black Sea port of Sevastopol is home to Russia’s southern naval fleet, and under an accord with Kiev, Moscow may station up to 25,000 troops at Sevastopol and its other bases on the Black Sea. (For more details see “Behind conflict in Ukraine” in last week’s Militant.)

Russia’s president Vladimir Putin, who along with Kuchma supported Yanukovich during the election campaign, ridiculed the idea of rerunning the election between the two candidates. On Russian state television December 2, Putin said, “What happens then? Will there have to be third, a fourth, a 25th round until one of the sides obtains the necessary result?”

The following day the Ukrainian supreme court annulled the November 21 elections, based on what the court described as election law violations by pro-Yanukovich forces.

As the Kiev protests gathered momentum and imperialist pressure mounted over claims of electoral fraud, outgoing Ukrainian president Leonid Kuchma and his allies sought a way out of the crisis without relinquishing power. Kuchma agreed to a deal in which much of the power of the presidency would be turned over to parliament, in exchange for changing personnel at the electoral council. The council then announced a new run-off election between the two contenders for the presidency would be held December 26.

Following this setback, Putin charged Washington with seeking a “dictatorship of international affairs.” Russian’s Itar-Tass news agency quoted the Russian president saying, “Even if a dictatorship is wrapped up in a beautiful package of pseudo-democratic phraseology, it will not be in a position to solve systematic problems.”

“I am certain that the Supreme Court’s decision is a violation of the Ukrainian constitution, and that it was taken under pressure from the street. I have no other choice but to run again,” said Yanukovich.

The deal between the two competing wings of the ruling bureaucracy collapsed December 4. When pro-Yushchenko members of parliament argued that constitutional changes to presidential powers should only be discussed following the elections, the Socialist and Communist parties sided with pro-government forces in refusing to vote for bills to change election law and the composition of the electoral council.

Unable to resolve the conflict, parliament announced a 10-day adjournment. Four days later the overwhelming majority of deputies agreed to simultaneously institute the changes to the electoral law and constitutional limits to the powers of the president.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home