NEWS ANALYSIS: Will the West lose Ukraine? (02/04/96)

NEWS ANALYSIS

Will the West lose Ukraine?

by Victor Basiuk

In the past couple of months, the eyes of the West have been focused on Russia. When the Communists surged to gain 22.3 percent of the parliamentary vote on December 17, 1995, most commentators and government officials chose to view this development with relative complacency. After all, the share of the vote by Vladimir Zhirinovsky's Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) has declined since the election of 1993, and the total vote of the two principal autocratic par ties - the Communists and the LDP - has remained about the same. Therefore, not much has changed.

Hardly any attention has been paid to the implications of the Russian election for Ukraine and developments in Ukraine itself.

"The cosmopolitical trend"

In the past year or so, Ukraine witnessed the growth of what has become known as "the cosmopolitical trend Unlike the national-democratic concept prevalent during the presidency, Leonid Kravchuk, which was focused Ukraine as a political and cultural entity and was leaning towards the West, the cosmopolitical trend gravitated towards Eurasia, and particularly toward Russia.

Its single most important center has been the staff of the president of Ukrainian Leonid Kuchma, from which its influence - mainly through appointments - was being extended to the various ministries. However, largely independently from this center, the cosmopolitical views have also, penetrated certain parties, including those in the democratic camp.

The event that was instrumental in triggering the rise of the cosmopolitical trend as a major political issue was publication of a book, "Ukraine on the Threshold of the 21st Century: A Political Aspect," in the fall of 1995. The authors of the book were Dmytro Vydrin, adviser to the president, and Dmytro Tabachnyk, the president's chief of staff. The thesis of the book was that the future of Ukraine lies not in Europe, but in the Eurasian continent, where Ukraine should be "a strategic partner" of Russia.

The appearance of review copies created a political uproar, and the authors promptly withdrew the book from circulation. However, the book became a factor in the convening of the Congress of Ukrainian Intelligentsia on December 10, 1995, in Kyiv. With nearly 2,000 delegates from the various regions of Ukraine, the congress was the first of its kind in Ukraine's history. Its "Manifesto" condemned the cosmopolitical trend and the people around the president as stifling Ukrainian language and culture and endangering the nation's independence. As evidence, it pointed out that only 3 percent of books published in Ukraine are in the Ukrainian language.

Enter Yevhen Marchuk

The Congress of Ukrainian Intelligentsia created an organizational structure to continue to fight for its cause. Its chances for success would have been limited if not for the fact that it found a powerful, if undeclared, ally within the president's administration.

Prime Minister Yevhen Marchuk did not share the cosmopolitical views and a struggle, aimed at replacing Mr. Marchuk, ensued around the president. Losing in the internal bureaucratic in-fighting, Mr. Marchuk dramatically turned the tables by raising the conflict to a political level. He declared his candidacy for Parliament (the Supreme Council) from the Poltava Oblast in the by-election of December 10, 1995, obtained support from Parliament Chairman Oleksander Moroz, and won handily with 84 percent of the electoral vote in his favor.

The election greatly strengthened Mr. Marchuk's position. The prime minister is the only person who, in accordance with existing Ukrainian laws, can remain in his position in the executive and be a member of the Parliament at the time. Moreover, a dismissal of the prime minister by the president requires consent of the Parliament. Being a member of the Parliament and influential in it, Mr. Marchuk is now in a position to prevent his own dismissal.

Perhaps even more important, this development took place during a struggle between the president and the Parliament for a new constitution. The president threatened that, if his version of the draft constitution is not accepted by the Parliament he would submit it to a referendum instead. If approved by the referendum, he would dissolve the Parliament and call for an election. In the face of such a possibility, many parliamentarians believe that Mr. Marchuk as speaker, is the only sufficiently strong personality to stand up to the president and prevent this from happening.

Thus, Mr. Marchuk's options have broadened to the distinct possibility that he may chair the Parliament and use it as a springboard to the presidency. His prospects in this capacity have been significantly strengthened since key figures in the national-democratic camp, apprehensive of the cosmopolitical forces, have rallied in support of Marchuk even though he has never asked for their support and is maintaining an independent position.

The above political developments put President Kuchma - who, ostensibly, has remained above the fray - in a quandary. If he continues to tolerate cosmopolitical views in his immediate surroundings, he may have to face Mr. Marchuk as the speaker of Parliament, standing firmly on a national and pro-Western platform. Alternatively, he could purge his staff of cosmopolitical elements in order to avoid or tone down the conflict.

This problem is yet to be resolved, but it is noteworthy that three of the president's key advisers - Dmytro Vydrin, Anatoliy Halchynsky and Oleksandr Razumkov - resigned in late December, 1995 ostensibly for personal reasons.

The dark shadow of Russia

Political developments in Russia have exacerbated the seriousness of the situation in Ukraine. Unlike Italy, Ukraine does not have a national Communist party. Its Communists maintain close ties with Russian Communists, and the latter exert strong influence over their Ukrainian comrades. The avowed intent of the Russian Communists is to restore the Soviet Union within its old boundaries. The Communists have 157 seats (out of 450) in the Russian Duma the lower House of Parliament but with their allies they control nearly a half of the total. The speaker of the Duma is a Communist, which gives his party an advantage.

Like the Communists, Vladimir Zhirinovsky also is committed to the restoration of the Russian Federation to the old boundaries of the Soviet Union. Therefore, on issues involving opportunities to draw Ukraine into Russia's orbit, the Communists can expect cooperation from the 51 members of Mr. Zhirinovsky's LDP. Thus, there is a comfortable majority in the Duma to support imperial ambitions.

In response to the changed composition of the Duma and with an eye on-the presidential election of June, President Boris Yeltsin has made significant changes in his administration. Gone is the pro-Western foreign minister, Andrei Kozyrev. His successor is a hard-liner, former spy chief Yevgeny Primakov. He is likely to cooperate with the ambitions of the Communists and nationalists in the Duma to expand the Russian Federation to the old boundaries of the USSR. Key remaining reformers in the Russian government have also lost their jobs; Deputy Prime Minister Anatoly Chubais and the president's chief of staff, Sergei Filatov.

This turn of Boris Yeltsin to the right is ominous in itself, and yet it does not preclude the possibility of even more serious consequences: the election of a Communist or a nationalist to the helm of Russia and a turn of Russia to autocracy.

Conclusion

Given the above political developments in Russia, the close ties between Ukrainian and Russian Communists, and the spread of the cosmopolitical trend in the Ukrainian government and society, Ukraine's independence - or, at least, its internal stability - is at risk. Ukraine has 11 million ethnic Russians (out of a total population of 52 million) within its borders, and millions of Ukrainians are Russified. Although the nation's excellent legislation on minorities has been successful in helping to prevent inter-ethnic conflicts, among many the pull to Russia is strong. Equally strong is the determination of those who want to see their country remain free from Russian domination.

The present focus of U.S. and Western policy on economic reforms in Ukraine is understandable and must continue, but greater attention to subsurface political trends is in order. In particular, an antidole to the cosmopolitical trend needs to be found. This requires not only closer attention to the nuances of Ukrainian domestic politics, but a better understanding of the influence of cultural and linguistic elements within Ukraine than our policymakers appear to display. A government to-government relationship alone does not meet America's national interest in present-day Ukraine, especially since its fate is pivotal for the entire Eastern and Central European region. It may be appropriate to be reminded of the case of Iran. U.S policy-makers closely interacted with the shah and his, government, but paid little attention to the mullahs and societal trends. We learned to regret it.

Victor Basiuk, a Washington consultant in national security policy, spent five weeks in Kyiv in November and December 1995 as part of a Brookings Institution team conducting seminars on political and economic reforms for Ukrainian parliamentarians.

| Home Page |