I really love this 80's rock song. Yeah, it's the final countdown for the 2010 Presidential Election in Ukraine. This Sunday Ukrainian voters will chose their next president. Will it be an odious former PM Viktor Yanukovich who was officially backed by the Kremlin in 2004 and tarnished his political reputation by using his de jure political power to rig the 2004 presidential election? Btw, the law suit against Mr. Yanukovich never made it to the Supreme Courte. Will it be another nevertheless odious incumbent PM Yulia Tymoshenko who drove Ukraine's economy to the brink of collapse by using command-control approach and choking individual economic freedom? Btw, the Kremlin considers Mrs. Tymoshenko the second BFF (after Mr. Yanukovich) since she can take all credits for the recent gas deal between Russia's state-owned Gazprom and Ukraine. According to the newly signed gas contract, among all European countries, Ukraine will pay the highest price for the Russian gas.
 |
| From UkraineWatch |
Anyways, whoever wins this election should make it in a true democratic process! Nobody wants to repeat the Orange Revolution. Moreover, Ukrainians are not really psyched about the upcoming 2nd round because very few voters can tell a difference between candidate Y and candidate T. Honestly, what's the difference? Mr. Yanukovich never disguised his pro-Russian political and economic preferences. PM Yulia Tymoshenko's economic policy did not leave much of a choice for Ukrainian business. At the present moment, Ukraine has the largest number of international trade restrictions. Russia does not really care about it because the Kremlin still apathetically negotiates its WTO membership. I am surprised that the WTO has not addressed the Ukrainian situation yet. Well, it's understandable because the Sino-US trade war is much more fun to watch. Plus, the global economic crisis is not over yet. And some countries kind of overreacted with their own trade policies. All this together keeps WTO busy.
Honestly, the previous presidential elections were much more interesting because there was always something at stake (see figures below). The 1991 presidential election was important in terms of state-building. The newly independent state needed a democratic leader such as Mr. Leonid Kravchuk (1991-1994). However, the incumbent president Kravchuk catered more to the nationalist constituency in the Western Ukraine so that the 1994 presidential election allowed the Eastern Ukraine to bring pro-Russian technocrat, Mr. Leonid Kuchma, to the power.
 |
| From UkraineWatch |
The 1994 presidential election played a seminal role in the emergence of the region-based division among Ukrainian voters. In 1994 it became clear that the Western provinces held a strong preference for nationalist pro-Western politics, while the Eastern and Southern provinces strongly supported technocratic pro-Russian politics. Another interesting observation was that the Central provinces turned out to become the potential swing constituencies.
The 1999 presidential election also spiced up the Ukrainian politics. That year the Ukrainian voters had to make a crucial choice between two antagonistically ideological candidates: a left-wing pro-Russian Mr. Petro Symonenko, a leader of the Communist Party, and a right-wing incumbent president Kuchma (1994-2004) who learned to balance out his foreign policy between both EU and Russia. The leader of the Communist Party failed to capitalize on nostalgic political preferences of the Soviet-generation constituency. By receiving only 37.8% of votes, Mr. Symonenko succeeded in swinging only several Central and couple Southern provinces. In the meanwhile, most of the former Kravchuk constituency located in the Western provinces and the stronghold pro-Kuchma constituency in the Eastern provinces came united against the ghost of the communism. Since then the left-wing politicians witnessed a tremendous drop in their popularity. The communist front-runner Petro Symonenko received only 4.97% and 3.54% of votes in the 2004 and 2010 presidential elections, correspondingly.
Then Ukraine had the Orange Revolution in 2004. The 2004 presidential election will always be a historical landmark of Ukraine's state-building. After all calamities surrounding rigged 2nd round and its rerun in the late December, a nationalist liberal pro-Western candidate and former PM Viktor Yuschchenko won the election with 51.99% of votes. Once again the same swing Central provinces gave Mr. Yushchenko so needed handicap. The incumbent PM Viktor Yanukovich lost not only election but also his PM position. Furthermore, the authoritarian glitch in the Kuchma administration tarnished former PM's political reputation significantly. While Mr. Yanukovich received 44.25% of votes in 2004, his popularity dropped to 35.3% votes in the 1st round of the 2010 presidential election. Nonetheless, Mr. Yanukovich received a ten-percent lead over the incumbent PM Tymoshenko. The incumbent president Yushchenko (2005-2010) who became ultra-nationalist closer to the end of his term received only 5.45% of votes. It's actually very interesting fact about the 2010 presidential election that for the first time in the recent political history of Ukraine the incumbent president did not make it to the 2nd round. On the other hand, the 2nd round offers Ukrainian voters a cliché choice between two PMs: the former and the incumbent. Once again, what's the difference?
 |
| From UkraineWatch |
Nonetheless, I am sure that the final results of the 2010 presidential election will give us more fodder for further discussion of Ukraine's political institutional development. The key to a victory in the 2nd round of this presidential election is a candidate's ability to capitalize on constituencies in the swing Central and Southern provinces. But I guess it's too late to give this piece of advice, ha!
 |
| From UkraineWatch |
 |
| From UkraineWatch |
No comments:
Post a Comment