While the Constitutional Court debates Yushchenko’s decree, Yanukovych bids for Western approval

By Ilya Khineyko

According to a well-known saying, “the wheels of justice turn slowly.” Perhaps, that is what the Constitutional court of Ukraine might want to use in its defense to justify keeping the country in a legal limbo as it is taking time to hand out a verdict on the April 2 decree of the Ukrainian president. While both sides of the conflict have to wait patiently for the court to decide, by no means have they been idle in the past week. Each has accused each other of trying to sway the judges’ opinions. In addition, Suzanna Stanik has been involved in a corruption scandal of her own. However, even if it should turn out to be impossible to change the balance of power on the Ukrainian political scene, the ruling coalition has mounted a spirited and multi-faceted campaign to present its case abroad.

BORIS YELTSIN AND UKRAINE

By Ilya Khineyko

Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin, the first leader of the post-Soviet Russia, passed away on Monday, April 23. Political leaders around the world paid their tributes to the deceased Russian leader, stressing the key role he played in the demise of communism as well as his subsequent efforts to bring about a market economy and democratic reforms in Russia. Both, Viktor Yanukovych and Viktor Yushchenko have sent letters of sympathy to the current president, Vladimir Putin, and Yeltsin’s family. Leonid Kuchma also issued a statement of condolences. The spirit of their messages did not differ substantially from the sentiments expressed by other politicians as Kuchma praised Yeltsin’s commitment to democratic change while Yanukovych and Yuschenko called Yeltsin “a great statesman.” However, it seems that to many Russians and some foreign observers, Yeltsin’s legacy is mixed and will remain a subject of vigorous debate for the foreseeable future. Yeltsin has been criticized, even hated, by those who blamed him for the collapse of the Soviet Union and the loss of Russia’s prestige on the international scene, as well as the cruel nature of Russian economic reforms in the 90s. Further, liberal critics of Yeltsin have pointed out that his commitment to democracy was a dubious one. They point out that it was Yeltsin who laid the foundations of the system of oligarchic capitalism, which bequeathed the more authoritarian regime of Vladimir Putin, his official successor. Russia’s relationship with Ukraine is a relatively small party of his legacy. Yet, in many ways Yeltsin’s attitude towards the Ukrainian question reflects the ambiguities of his rule as a whole.

Ukraine to host Euro 2012

On 18 April, Ukraine and Poland scored a major victory in Cardiff, Wales, when UEFA announced its decision regarding the location of the Euro 2012 soccer finals. Although the stars, and sympathies of the UEFA hierarchy, appeared to be leaning in favor of the Poland-Ukraine bid for quite some time, only the official announcement finally convinced fans that the improbable has happened. According to the UNIAN report:

Poland and Ukraine have been chosen to co-host the European Championship soccer tournament in 2012, UEFA announced on Wednesday, according to Reuters. European soccer’s governing body said it had selected the Poland and Ukraine bid ahead of Italy and another joint bid from Croatia and Hungary to stage the finals.

The Tymoshenko Doctrine

Yulia Tymoshenko weighs in on the state of Russia-West relations with a harshly worded opinion piece to be published in Foreign Affairs.

By Ilya Khineyko

It is not hard to notice that since the beginning of the latest political crisis in Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko has been in the limelight, whereas Yulia Tymoshenko has taken a backseat in the negotiations between the opposition and the ruling coalition. Yet, while the President is preoccupied with domestic affairs, canceling his trips abroad (including a state visit to Russia), it appears that Yulia Tymoshenko has been engaged in an entirely different battle of her own, for the hearts and minds of Western political elites.

New Parliamentary Elections are Probable in Ukraine

While Yushchenko’s decision to dissolve the parliament may not be tenable from the legal point of view, there are several political factors that can play in his favor.

By Ilya Khineyko

While political wrangling is giving way to Orthodox Easter festivities, it is possible to pause and analyze the momentous events of the last week, which started from Yushchenko’s dramatic decision to dissolve the Verkhovna Rada.

Predictably enough, the Verkhovna Rada has refused to abide by this decision and has asked the Constitutional Court to rule on the legality of Yushchenko’s decree. The authority of the Central Electoral Committee headed by Serhiy Kivalov, notorious for its alleged involvement in mass falsification during the 2004 presidential elections, has been reinstated. Meanwhile, the Party of Regions has been trying to organize mass protests in Independence Square, bringing its supporters from eastern regions to the capital.

President plunges Ukraine into political crisis

Unilateral decree to dissolve Parliament and call May 27 election faces constitutional challenge, raises possibility of military involvement

David Marples

On Monday, President Viktor Yushchenko of Ukraine signed a decree that dissolved parliament and established May 27 as the date for new elections. However, both Parliament and the Cabinet of Ministers have rejected this decree as unconstitutional. In a televised meeting that ran into the early hours of Tuesday, the cabinet ordered all government institutions not to obey it.

How serious is this impasse and what does it mean for the future of Ukraine?
Yushchenko’s position is fairly weak. In an address to “the Ukrainian people,” which was published on the website of Ukrains’ka Pravda, he cited some objectionable occurrences in Parliament, particularly the changing of allegiance of several MPs at the behest of the governing Regions party, led by Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych.