Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

New Ukraine PM Nominee voted down!

by whataboutbob Wed Sep 21st, 2005 at 07:57:06 AM EST

Up right now at the BBC World News is this article: Ukraine PM Rebuff deepens crisis

Ukraine's parliament has dealt a new blow to President Viktor Yushchenko 12 days after he sacked his government, by rejecting his choice of prime minister. Yuri Yekhanurov was three votes short of the 226 needed for approval.

Some MPs deserted Mr Yushchenko after he sacked Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, accusing her of corruption. Correspondents say few MPs have strong objections to Mr Yekhanurov, but many witheld their votes to demonstrate a lack of confidence in Mr Yushchenko.(...)

Mr Yushchenko has the right to propose Mr Yekhanurov to parliament again, and an aide suggested he would do this in several days.

So it looks like there will be another vote, but if that fails again, where to next?


Yuri Karmazin, a member of Mr Yushchenko's Our Ukraine faction, said: "They intentionally created a crisis to show that it was possible to work with Yulia, and without Yulia it's impossible."

Ms Tymoshenko's supporters are furious with Mr Yushchenko for sacking her while refusing to believe allegations of corruption against her main rival, Petro Poroshenko, the head of the national security council.(...)

Ms Tymoshenko has sworn to regain the premiership by winning parliamentary elections in March. Her political umbrella group, the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc, has been strengthened by a number of defections from Mr Yushchenko's Our Ukraine bloc, including the Party of Reforms and Order, led by the economist Viktor Pynzenyk.

Well, it looks like there is a full blown power struggle going on, whoever gets in next. Can anyone out there explain the positions of these players?

Display:
Some MPs deserted Mr Yushchenko after he sacked Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, accusing her of corruption.

Oooh, I believe the BBC is contracting facts here.

Yushchenko sacked Tymoshenko with her entire government on the charge of corruption, a charge based on one of the Tymoshenko-allied ministers publicly exposing a Yushchenko.allied minister as corrupt.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Wed Sep 21st, 2005 at 08:31:21 AM EST
It's a bit difficult to keep track of all this, but wasn't Tymoshenko doing the dirty work of firing everyone for Yushchenko, only to be canned then...and to boot, she is painted with the same corruption brush. I don't know if she is tends towards being a privatizer or a nationalizer...our last converstations here were conflicting on this....but either way, you hate to see this kind of stuff going on.

"Once in awhile we get shown the light, in the strangest of places, if we look at it right" - Hunter/Garcia
by whataboutbob on Wed Sep 21st, 2005 at 09:27:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think both groups are privatizers, but thinking of somewhat different branches for privatisation and eyeing slightly different groups of private buyers.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Sep 21st, 2005 at 09:31:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Where is Mr Barosos Comment on this?

</snark>

go away and look for it now...

by PeWi on Wed Sep 21st, 2005 at 12:22:45 PM EST
Coming from someone in Kiev, a lot of personal opinion on the matter...

I am a believer in capitalism but not a slave to the idea that markets are always right.  Yulia upset the markets and scared away a lot of investors because of her populism.  I think she wants to see a capitalist economy here but wants to step back a bit from what has been a grabfest over the past 14 years by the well-connected.  Essentially, she wanted to bring back most of the companies that were privtized to the hands of government and then reprivatize them under transparent and open-market conditions, using the proceeds to improve conditions for the bulk of the people here who live very poorly (schools, roads, medical care, etc.).  This pissed off the connected who are 90% of anyone who holds any post of any kind of authority whatsoever (the other 10% is the courts).

She is not necessarily immune to charges of corruption but I don't know all the inside facts.  I figure anyone who becomes as rich as she is under the system in play at the time had their hands in the public till or were getting special favors somewhere.  I know that the courts threw out the Kuchma-era charges against her, though, which Yuschenko has since reiterated, with the reply from Yulia, "We've been through this before."  The reason that I think she is much, much cleaner than most is simply that she seems so much freer to speak her mind than others.  Plus, anyone who is willing to level charges of corruption here is usually of the cleaner variety or so well protected that they know there will be no reverb against them.

This is all due to the system that has been in place here for the past few hundred years.  Only the corrupted are trusted into positions of authority because those skeletons can be used against the person should they decide to not want to play ball the way the rules of the game state.

This, in my opinion, is why Yulia had to go.  She was going after everything that looked to be tainted with corruption including holdings by Poroshenko and friends.  When the charges were leveled against Poroshenko, there was public trust in Tymoshenko's people.  So, the charges were taken very seriously by the public...a public, though, that had already tired of the infighting in the administration and the lack of progress and, so, may have been more open to such charges.

However, when Poroshenko resigned, he would not go down alone.  As Yuschenko's friend and financial backer, he knows the skeletons in Yuschenko's closet and essentially forced the president's hand to get rid of Poroshenko's main rival.  Plus, Yuschenko has been able to win the favor of oligarchs and Russia-supporters by calling off further reviews of privatizations.  Not that it will come as a surprise to anyone here but the lesson in this is obviously that crime pays.

I don't think that Yulia is necessarily behind the lack of support for Yekhanurov (I haven't seen the breakdown of the vote) although there could be some of that.  I think this is more the doing of the Russians and their allies than anything else.  Why?  If they can stir enough resentment among the people towards Yuschenko's presidency and his lack of fulfillment of his promises on the campaign trail last year, they could force a new election sooner rather later and see one of two scenarios favorable to them: 1) a pro-Russian candidate who does their bidding takes the office; or, 2) Yulia takes the office and they can use her polarizing figure as a cudgel with which to excuse their imperial behaviour towards Ukraine.  Of course, if it turns out that Yuschenko takes the office anyway, they won't be happy but that's what they have now so it wouldn't be much of a loss for them.

This is not to say that the Russians are bad guys.  They are looking after their own interests which any reasonable people would be expected to do.  In any event, they have little to lose because Ukraine needs them much more than they need Ukraine.

Those are my thoughts, at least.

by lgrooney (kns@kns.net) on Thu Sep 22nd, 2005 at 09:33:39 AM EST
And, if anyone had any doubts about which side may or may not have the corrupt conenctions, Yanukovych came through with the votes for Yekhanurov.  Now Yuschenko owes Yanukovych big or he was repaying a debt of some sort.
by lgrooney (kns@kns.net) on Thu Sep 22nd, 2005 at 09:35:59 AM EST


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]

Top Diaries

UK election thread

by fjallstrom - Dec 12
64 comments

It's Tory Austerity Stupid!

by Oui - Dec 9
64 comments

Leave UK <dot> DT

by Oui - Dec 4
71 comments