In the West, some wonder whether Yanukovych and his coterie really understand Western ways.
In Ukraine, there is apprehension among some in the democratic setting that the West equates the actions of Ukraine’s present government with the ideas of the people.
Believable answers exist to both questions.
Yes, Yanukovych’s oligarchs and, most likely he, too, understands all the ropes. And they get plenty of help from paid American consultants, to boot.
No, no one in the West seriously equates anything with the ideas of the Ukrainian people — ideas that are often not at all clear and are complicated by regional differences and conflicting aspirations
There may be nuances, but Ukraine’s basics are sort of timeless. Its assets are not owned by the Ukrainian people.
At this time its economy is shaped by the proverbially predatory opus of capitalism. This arrangement, in its concentration of wealth in a narrow circle, exceeds by far the limits prevailing in the USA, where the assets of the top 400 oligarchs exceed those of the bottom 120 million Americans, while the top 1 percent own 34 percent of private wealth (“Our Banana Republic” by Nicholas D. Kristof, The New York Times, Nov. 6, 2010). No one can doubt that this segment of the “Western ways” is no mystery for Ukraine’s oligarchs.
They also know that capitalism of Western Europe differs greatly from the Anglo-Saxon model. The one in Europe is moderated by social and healthcare support systems, of which most Americans know or hear nothing from US mainstream media — except in the form of occasional snide potshots at Europe’s socialism.
Ukraine’s detailed statistics as to who owns the minutiae are shrouded in a Eurasian mist. What is well known is that the concentration of wealth and de facto privilege is off the scale in comparison with Europe’s.
Free and honest elections are the best and most telling yardstick of democracy. Members of Yanukovych’s entourage are masters of election-rigging.
It would be naive to assume that they have only scant knowledge of how election outcomes are influenced in Europe and the USA (within limits of the law most of the time). Again, American consultants have a long track record in Ukraine.
In any country, democracy constantly collides with privilege (which correlates with private wealth) and authoritarian tastes.
The drag in the USA is that the lawmakers listen primarily to big money contributors to political election campaigns — such as the US Chamber of Commerce, labor unions, and pharmaceutical industries, to name a few.
Upon leaving the Congress, many become lobbyists or high-level employees for the same groups, as in a revolving door. And then there is the media blitz, which is all money, the sound bites and brainwashing that steers many in the middle class to elect legislators inimical to the voters’ own economic interests. It should not be stipulated that Ukraine’s top oligarchs had established themselves where they are now without having a strong learning capacity along the way.
The dons undoubtedly have own notions of what works best in Ukraine to their advantage – a corrupt judicial system among other tools. If it works, why change it? Why imitate the West and maybe lose power in the process? (This is about 100 years after J.P. Morgan bragged that he has the best judges on the US Supreme Court money can buy).
As for the ideas of the Ukrainian people, polls showed that 38 percent believe that former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko was unjustly convicted, while 27 percent believe she got her desserts. All in all, 52 percent think she was or probably was convicted for political reasons, and 48 percent think otherwise.
Amazingly (or maybe not), the split is almost even — as it has always been in recent elections and political preferences. On the other hand, since not a shred of evidence was presented at Tymoshenko’s trial that could corroborate the charges against her, shouldn’t the public opinion’s verdict be nearly 100 percent in her favor? Enough said about “the ideas of the Ukrainian people.”
During the month of December, a whiff of fresh air came from anti-regime public demonstrations in Russia in the wake of fraudulent parliamentary elections. A possible turn toward democracy in Russia would be good news for Ukraine. It was the Russians who had laid to rest the Soviet system in August 1991 and thus cleared the way for Ukraine’s proclamation of independence. .
The opportunity of that historic moment was subsequently mostly squandered by the Ukrainians. The leadership not only failed to move the country forward with the vision of a national and social agenda, but became bloated in the politics of self-enrichment.
As Ukraine is held hostage by a government consisting of a consortium of thugs who have locked up legitimate opposition leaders in jail, the overriding question is: Where do we go from here?
The Tymoshenko factor is taken as a high-value human rights symbol by the European Union, the factor that many Ukrainians on the democratic side – who do not honor their heroes — failed to grasp.
They could, however, grasp some needed stimulus — which ironically may come from Russia. Cynics, and especially the Russia haters, may be fazed by the impressive recent demonstration of democratic spunk in Moscow — much more visible than the Ukrainian people’s recent modest response to the trashing of the human rights by the Regents Party in Ukraine.
Remarkably, a revival of democracy in Russia can be more hazardous to the Yanukovych regime than the challenge from the opposition in Ukraine.
Boris Danik is a retired Ukrainian-American living in North Caldwell, New Jersey.
.
