abia am revenit din africa de sud, careia ii voi dedica un post separat. intre timp – iata un event report de la o masa rotunda la bruxelles despre ucraina. DC21 e un club initiat de cercetatori polonezi din mai multe think-tankuri din bruxelles (ceps, epc, the centre etc) care vor sa creeze o platforma pentru noile state membre ale ue sa promoveze mai intens subiectele de discutie pe care le intereseaza.

Quo Vadis, Ukraine?
The country ahead of the elections

30 September 2009
Event Report

On 30 September Discussion Club 21 (DC21) held its first meeting. The subject of the debate was the political situation in Ukraine ahead of the presidential elections, which are scheduled for January 2010. The meeting began with a short overview of the situation in Ukraine and was followed by three presentations given by the distinguished speakers: Olena Prystayko of EURussia Centre, Nicu Popescu of European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) and Vsevolod Chentsov from the Ukrainian Mission to the EU. The interventions and ensuing discussion were extremely rich in topics and the following summary reflects the main discussion points.

The political situation in Ukraine in the run up to the presidential elections seems to be stable and fears of the repetition of the 2004 events are unfounded. Although Ukraine was exposed to numerous internal crises in the last years, it has managed to maintain the main fruits of the
Orange Revolution: it enjoys good democratic standards, free media and pluralistic society. This leads to believe that Ukraine is one of the most stable democracies in the post-soviet bloc.
Contrary to the political stability, the economic situation in Ukraine is fairly dramatic. The global economic recession of 2008 has taken a great toll on Ukraine. All the major economic indices and figures plunged deeply. The prices of raw materials and external demand for metal products (which represent a very important segment of Ukrainian economy) decreased manifold. Only during the first half of 2009 the industrial production declined by 30% when compared with the same period of 2008. In consequence, the recession has hit the Ukrainian economy so badly that the country found itself on the verge of bankruptcy. The economic crisis
has heavily affected public finances and the country’s deficit is expected to reach 6.5% this year. The fear of government insolvency is a major concern for external debt owners and trade partners, most notably in Russia. While recently the situation has slightly improved, the World Bank economic forecast for Ukraine predicts that the economy will contract by 15% this year and the unemployment rate is expected to triple and reach 9% by the end of 2009.

While Ukraine faces many problems, be it rule of law or public finance management, its main ill remains systemic corruption that borders on so called state-capture: a situation where state institutions are used for private gains. The phenomenon is so widely spread that it runs through all sectors of economy, and is most visible in the energy sector. This problem raises many questions about Ukrainian governance as well as the quality and capacity of the political elites. One participant expressed a view that Ukraine might be democratic, but it might not be governable. The political conflicts have paralysing effect on any attempt to address the issue,
let alone undergo serious reforms. Also any engagement and attempts to root out the corruption by the external actors seems futile. The situation is complex and the rescue can only come from the Ukrainian political elites who are closely linked to business.

Since the January energy crisis, the energy security has been very high on the EU agenda and there are serious concerns about yet another disturbance in gas supply. However, the situation has stabilised now and the 2009 agreement of the three parties (EU, Ukrainian and Russian
gas companies) is a major guarantor that Europe should not be held hostage to another commercial dispute this winter.

Following the 2008 war in Georgia, in Europe there has been a growing concern over the stability in the Crimean Peninsula. While the situation in Crimea is fragile thanks to its political, ethnic, religious or linguistic divisions, which might lead to various provocations, the general understanding is that Crimea is quite far from destabilisation, let alone an open conflict. However, the presence of the Russian fleet in Sevastopol can be viewed as highly problematic. The more specific questions of the debate related to the elections are set out below.

Who are the main players in the elections?
According to Razumkov Centre Viktor Yanukovych, the leader of the opposition Party of Regions, enjoys the support of 21% of electorate, followed by the current Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko with 13% of public support. The next place with popularity of 10% is held by
Arseniy Yatseniuk, former Speaker of the Verkhovna Rada, who is followed by the current President, Viktor Yushchenko with support of around 4%.

What is the attitude to EU and NATO in the presidential elections debate?
Issues concerning Ukraine membership in the EU and in NATO are almost absent in the presidential campaign. Three leading candidates avoid addressing the NATO issue and seem to have preference for keeping stronger ties with Moscow rather than the EU. Unlike the three,
Viktor Yushchenko builds his profile on the opposite message: he is a vocal supporter of Ukraine’s membership of both the EU and NATO.

Why is the EU missing in the debate?
The issue of European integration seems divisive in Ukrainian society. The support for joining the EU dropped by nearly two thirds in last few years. This can be attributed to the overall dissatisfaction with the EU in the post 2004 Orange Revolution era. The lack of a clear message about the EU membership perspective and the visa regime still in place amount to
very few incentives to like the EU. This has also been the reason behind Ukraine’s lukewarm reception of the Eastern Partnership, which comes short of EU accession promises. The newest EC initiative is not appealing to Ukraine because it has no qualitative added value to the relationship the country has already been enjoying with the EU. Quite a separate issue is also the fact that Ukrainian society at large has very low awareness of the EU and its activities. The nearest future should bring a good chance of deepening the relations between Ukraine and the EU thanks to the nearly finalised negotiations of the Association Agreement and Free Trade
Agreement, though the latter is still lagging behind. Yet another step to strengthen the links could be the introduction of the visa free regime, though it still seems a distant prospect.

At the same time, Ukraine continues to divide the EU. It was advocated that Europe should realise that Ukraine is crucial for the region’s future from the geostrategic viewpoint. Located between the EU to the west and Russia to the east, Ukraine is the most advanced of all Soviet republics hence is often regarded as a role model. Described as the gatekeeper of democracy Ukraine is a guarantor of stability in the whole post-Soviet space. Europe should recognise the unique position of Ukraine not only because of Ukrainian interests but also because of its own interest as stability of Ukraine adds to stability of Europe.

Is there a risk of instability during the elections?
The instability of 2004 is highly unlikely. All parties respect the rules of the democratic process, the freedom of media is well established and subject to healthy competition among different media sources. The role of external observers such as EU, OSCE or Council of Europe should be limited to ensuring the transparency and fairness of the electoral process.

What will be the outcome of elections?
It is very difficult to predict the outcome of the elections. What seems to remain certain is that Ukraine will remain a democratic state. Whoever wins the incoming elections, this new chapter in Ukrainian politics should be treated as a new opportunity for strengthening Ukraine-EU
relations.