It reminds
of the refusal of Vyacheslav Chornovil to face Leonid Kravchuk in a televised
debate on the eve of Ukraine’s first presidential election in 1991. No one
could convincingly explain that faux pas, except attribute it to insufficient
experience in political gaming.
Now, in the
wake of the recent election, taking the parliamentary seats by the opposition,
as it should be done, would not by itself diminish in any way their resolve to
solidify the pressure against the fraudulent regime or to weaken their hand.
At the same
time, the opposition must continue to demand re-voting in as many electoral
districts as it deems necessary, and not show willingness to “compromise” on
this issue – as inexplicably suggested in a recent op-ed in the Kyiv Post (“Advice
to Opposition: Take seats, organize,” https://archive.kyivpost.com/opinion/op-ed/advice-to-opposition-take-seats-organize-315798.html,
Nov. 8).
The
opposition should employ all tactics in the new parliament to prioritize the
re-voting demand, as a constant reminder that the elections of 2012 are
incomplete.
Even more
misfired in the same op-ed is the suggested similarity between such a “compromise”
and the putative compromise in the USA between the re-elected President Barack Obama and the obstructionist Republican
congressional House majority on the key budgetary and tax measures, which would
prevent the looming “fiscal cliff” at the end of this year.
It is
important to abandon any illusion of equivalence of contentious issues now
facing Ukraine and the USA.
“Fiscal
cliff” refers to a binding automatic action in the United States at the end of
December, authorized by a committee empowered by both sides two years ago, to
implement tax increases and to cut the budget across the board, while
preserving the key social entitlements such as Social Security.
There is
now a rising clamor from the Republican Party, staunchly opposed to any tax
hike for the rich, and from Wall Street predicting an economic disaster, unless
some more palatable (palatable to them) compromise is reached before the end of
2012. Never mind that Wall Street’s crystal ball has been utterly blindsided in
recent years.
Any
putative compromise in America is unrelated to any election fraud. Voting
issues, when they happen in the USA (as they do from time to time) are dealt
with in the courts, and are mostly resolved fairly – with some notable exceptions, as in the
election of George W. Bush with a
rarified Florida vote count in year 2000.
Moreover,
despite the ongoing political posturing on both sides on the subject of taxes
and spending in the USA, the possibility of some agreement this year is as
distant as one can see.
In fact,
the president now speaks from a position of strength, while the Republicans
have not yielded an inch. Many in the Democratic Party feel that a compromise
acceptable to the Republicans would mean capitulation by the president —
similar to that which he suffered in the wake of the 2010 mid-term congressional
election, when he agreed to extend for two years the tax cuts enacted in 2001
during the Bush presidency and due to expire at the end of 2010.
Writes Paul
Krugman, Nobel Prize laureate in economics, in his column in The New York Times
(”Let’s not make a deal, Nov. 9): “John Boehner, the [Repubican] speaker of the
House, wasted no time in declaring that his party remains as intransigent as
ever, utterly opposed to any rise in tax rates even as it whines about the size
of the deficit….. How far should President Obama go in accommodating the
Republicans’ demands? My answer is, not far at all. Mr. Obama should hang
tough….”
It is very
clear that the issues raised by fraudulent elections in Ukraine have nothing in
common with America’s political stakes.
The
cliffhanger in Ukraine that is destroying its democracy and independence as a
nation is the geographically Ukraine-based, but basically non-Ukrainian mafia
now in control of the government.
Compromise with this toxic structure is an oxymoron.
This
reality should compel the three opposition groups — Batkivshchyna Party, Ukrainian
Democratic Alliance for Reforms and Svoboda Party to work as one. Compromise
has meaning among themselves. We have seen Svoboda Party adopting a more mature
and responsible stance than it did in the past.
The eyes
should not be turned away from the plight of imprisoned ex-Prime Minister Yulia
Tymoshenko. Historically, Ukrainians as a nation have a tradition of misjudging
what is and is not important — until many years after the event. It is not an exaggeration to see Tymoshenko
now as the symbol of Ukraine’s ongoing predicament.
And it is
not an exaggeration to say, as did Polish parliamentarians visiting Ukraine in
2004, that the Orange Revolution would not have happened without Tymoshenko.
She was the only revolutionary among the top elite before and probably during
the events in late 2004. Her courage and patriotism shown right now while in
jail should make many Ukrainians rethink who they are and what they should be
doing.
Any talk of
compromise with the regime of political persecution, economic crime and rigged
elections is pointing the wrong way.
Boris Danik is a retired Ukrainian-American
living in North Caldwell, New Jersey.
