IN THE PRESS: Ukraine's ship of state, Russia and the G-8 (07/02/06)

IN THE PRESS

Ukraine's ship of state, Russia and the G-8

Ukraine: The Ship of State Has No Rudder," editorial, The Independent, United Kingdom, June 14:

" ... the ship of state's current rudderlessness is not a condition in which Ukraine can thrive. The lack of political direction is a far cry from the euphoric reform-fever that gripped Ukraine following the Orange Revolution. For many Ukrainians, buoyed by hope of change, recent months have meant lost opportunity and crushing disappointment.

"Nor does the inability to form a government send the most positive of messages to the outside world. The Orange Revolution in the winter of 2004 placed Ukraine in the international spotlight. Waves of goodwill flowed towards the thousands of democracy supporters who stood in the snow to protest against an unfair election. ...

"The sad reality is that the Orange Revolution failed to erase Ukraine's political faultlines. And no politician, President [Viktor] Yushchenko included, has possessed the statesmanship to span the divide. The Ukrainian protesters of Independence Square deserved better leadership than this.

"It is high time for Mr. Yushchenko, Ms. [Yulia] Tymoshenko and the members of the new Parliament to sit down in a constructive atmosphere and plan together for Ukraine's future. Too much time has been lost, and a mountain of work awaits."

"How to Understand Ukrainian President Yushchenko," analysis by Taras Kuzio in the Kyiv Post, June 15:

"Four out of five political forces in the Ukrainian parliament have described the political situation in Ukraine as a deep crisis. Only the pro-presidential Our Ukraine bloc seems to believe there is no crisis in Ukraine.

"At the root of this crisis is not the dragging out of coalition talks or even constitutional reform, but President Viktor Yushchenko's leadership style and political culture. Many Ukrainians feel there is no 'hospodar,' or master, in the house. ...

" ... Yushchenko and the business wing of Our Ukraine have always been closer to pro-Kuchma centrists than to the anti-Kuchma opposition (the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc and the Socialist Party of Ukraine). Our Ukraine business leaders are pulled towards what they sought in 2001-2002, an alliance with the Party of Regions. Our Ukraine leader Yurii Yekhanurov is more at home with the 'national bourgeoisie' in the Party of Regions than with the remainder of the Orange coalition [the Tymoshenko Bloc and the Socialist Party].

"... it should come as no surprise that [the Orange Revolution slogan] 'bandits to prison' was not acted upon. The lack of action in this arena has instead enabled the Party of Regions to come first by a wide margin, pushed Our Ukraine to third place, disillusioned many Orange supporters and damaged the concept of equality for all before the law."

"The Orange Order," editorial, The Times, London, June 22:

"... This coalition deal is not yet fully tied down. But Ukraine knows that it now faces new pressure from its neighbor over gas.

Moscow has just warned Kiev [sic] that gas prices may rise sharply again in January. Turkmenistan has threatened a cut-off in supplies to Gazprom if the giant Russian supplier does not agree to a 30 percent price rise, and Gazprom will certainly pass on any increase.

Ukraine, which has portrayed itself as the victim of Russian blackmail, needs to speak with one voice as Western nations, to whom the Orange leaders want to draw closer, prepare for a dispute with President [Vladimir] Putin over energy stability.

The Orange Revolution has one more chance to reform itself and the country. If the new coalition is to hold together, it must work out a pragmatic relationship with Russia, tackle endemic corruption, agree on a policy of economic reform and set aside corrosive personal enmities. The future, for the moment, is Orange. But is it bright?

"Crumbling Before Putin," column by Jackson Diehl, The Washington Post, June 19:

Vladimir Putin must wait another month before he can play the coveted role of host to the world's most powerful democratic leaders at the Group of Eight summit in St. Petersburg. But already the Russian president appears close to accomplishing his principal objective: preventing a serious response by the G-8 to his autocratic domestic policies and imperialist bullying of neighbors.

A couple of months ago Western officials were confidently promising that Putin would not be allowed to strut among the elected presidents and prime ministers in St. Petersburg without being reminded that he is not their political peer. ...

In the past few weeks, however, the Western will to stand up to Putin has crumbled. At a NATO ministerial meeting 10 days ago, France and several other European governments rejected U.S. talk of an "enhanced dialogue" with Georgia or a membership action plan for Ukraine - even as Russian-backed demonstrations in the Ukrainian Crimea forced NATO to withdraw U.S. Marines who had deployed there for an exercise. The White House then announced the cancellation of [President George W.] Bush's visit to Ukraine, largely because of the inability of the pro-Western parties to agree on a new government. ...

European policymakers ... are arguing straightforwardly that Putin's noxious policies should be tolerated - not just because of Iran but also because of Russia's importance as an energy supplier. Brussels has been intimidated: At a meeting at the Black Sea resort of Sochi in late May, Putin flatly rejected European Union appeals that Russia loosen its stranglehold on pipelines carrying gas and oil to Europe and allow greater European investment in Russian fields. Last week his government confirmed that Western companies will be allowed only minority stakes in all but the smallest projects.

Putin's intransigence has produced a response that a U.S. official summed up in one word: "appeasement." ...

| Home Page |