Ladies First
Julia Timoshenko hopes to “conquer” the entire “independent Ukraine”, to this end she acts rather ingeniously and step by step. For the beginning she wants to remove all her competitors in the democratic wing concurrently improving her relations with officials of the Party of Regions. Furthermore, the number of “Euro-Ukraine” supporters objectively increases. (It is a different story if the number of these “westerners” would be enough by the time of the election.) Julia plans her clash with the wing of the “pro-Russian” Party of Regions and other communists-socialists only as a next step. It should be recognized that this wing demonstrates less political energy and lower personal dominance of their leaders versus the “Euro-democratic” wing.
The today’s battlefield is the Parliament, a main shop-window of the country. The point is that last week the career opponents of Victor Yuschenko from the Block of Julia Timoshenko broke up their coalition with the President’s supporters and united with the President’s ideological opponents – the Party of Regions. This most probably tactical union enabled the MPs to adopt several laws not only restricting the power of the President but opening the way to his impeachment.
Formally the intra-parliamentary reformatting and subsequent coalition break-up were provoked by the dispute on a status of the Ukraine Security Service chief. Its actual chief Valentin Nalivaychenko is formally an acting chief only, i.e. his powers are restricted by the Constitution. Using the procedural ploys the opponents of Yuschenko made an effort “to subjugate” this “pro-Presidential” force structure.
In spite of the fact that they failed to succeed fully, the President faced the most impudent challenge during his entire presidential term.
Democracy of High Treasons
It is more interesting what has inspired the parliamentary conflict around the Security Service chief. In this context we unexpectedly again return to the crisis around Georgia. The case is that a rather moderate reaction of Julia Timoshenko to the Caucasus conflict was used as grounds to charge her with high treason as Moscow allegedly bribed her “for one billion Dollars”. This accusation was aired by Victor Baloga, Head of the President’s Secretariat (Administration). Baloga referred to information of the Security Service thus confirming that the state “keeps an eye” even on Julia Timoshenko, the second person in the state. But at this moment Julia’s supporters played their trump card – Baloga gaining the political weight is already perceived as an alternative to Yuschenko himself. The latent discredit of the key democratic competitor of Julia evoked another maneuver inherent to the Ukrainian political culture – the chief secretary of the President blamed the Prime Minister of the country for preparation of his assassination. In response according to the rules of the game Premier Timoshenko demanded to conduct the presidential election already this year. Such thrillers are customary in the developing countries.
President Yuschenko of course set up himself. His conduct in the light of the Georgian crisis was similar to the hysteria of his godfather Mishiko Saakashvili. How is it possible to look on a person as a serious politician if he discusses a way “to outlaw Russia”? What is an IQ of the Head of State who issued Degree “On Restriction of Movements of the Russian Black Sea Fleet”? Was he going to sink the cruiser Moskva in the Sevastopol Bay? Or lay sea mines in the Bay itself? Most probably Condoleezza Rice liked this and similar ad-libs of Victor Yuschenko. But they frightened common Ukrainians with the facility of decision-making when their President easily changed the relations with the key neighbor of Ukraine from a certain predictability level to a level of armed conflict risk.
And keep in mind that it happens on the eve of the cold season, which is traditionally opened by the “energy” talks with Russia. In so doing, the words and actions of the President were so obstructively decorated with the democratic demagogy that the President shadow fell on his Premier. After all Julia Timoshenko is cleverer that Victor Yuschenko. This fact is also confirmed with the creams of the President about the efforts of state revolt accompanied with new threats to dissolve the Parliament. It is boring already. However, it is not impossible that Yuschenko’s scandalous statements and actions are designed to detract the public attention from the imminent scandals relating to illegal arms shipments to his Georgian godfather.
"Sevastopol - Pride of Ukrainian Seamen”
They have changed the words of the well-known song about Sevastopol and sing it like this now. There is no need to have illusions about the parliamentary “flirtation” between Julia Timoshenko and Victor Yanukovich. We have to acknowledge that the problem of our fleet presence in the Crimea will become the most urgent during the current parliamentary movements and future presidential election. It relates to the vital foreign policy choice of the Ukrainian statehood – to remain a neutral state granting the right to Russia to deploy its fleet in Sevastopol, or denying this right, or to join the Western camp and stand against Moscow.
On August 13, the pro-President faction submitted to the Supreme Rada a draft law on denunciation of the agreement on Russian Black Sea Fleet presence in the territory of the Republic. A decision of this daft law is pending. If it is positive, it will entail a question on the mechanism of its implementation. But even such hot-headed “Euro-supporter” as Victor Yuschenko may hardly imagine that this decision would be implemented by Brussels or Washington. Besides, the agreement on the fleet not only “compensates” to a great extent Russian energy supplies to Ukraine but also may be interpreted as the recognition of the Ukraine’s territorial integrity by Moscow. The person who will introduce this subject into the political field will get consequences that seem reasonably frightening to Julia Timoshenko – Ukraine will just split.
Actually the Ukrainian Navy has 15 warships mainly of medium displacement (only one frigate), 4 ASW planes and 4 AWS helicopters. The life of the majority of the ships is more than 30 years. In other words, it is a tactical task force for support operations: mine laying/sweeping, joint patrol, or provision of pinpoint object security, e.g. oil wells. That’s all. The number of Russian Black Sea Fleet ships is 3-4 times more.
But is not the point, for we will never try strength against Ukraine. Our fleet will play a role in the Big Game of Kyev with the West and Russia, and this role will be far from being symbolic. Envoys of Timoshenko explore options to join NATO and simultaneously extend the Black Sea Fleet Agreement. Moreover, if the fleet is withdrawn, it will entail the necessary to evacuate residents of Sevastopol - more than 60 per cent of the 300-thousand city “of Ukrainian seamen” survives due to Russia and Luzkov in particular. It is not impossible that the proposed “compromise” will lay the basis of the foreign strategy of the future Ukrainian President. But even in this case a choice between our fleet and price on the energy of the same origin will determine the guides of the Ukrainian foreign policy - NATO or neutral status. This factor is much more significant than all propaganda campaign relating to the referendum on membership.
Most probably that Ukraine will receive the NATO Membership Action Plan. It may happen already in December 2008, and will be Western “Snickers” to Victor Yuschenko for his “the democratic choice” , and simultaneously an effort to reconcile him with Julia Timoshenko who strives to the same but more ingeniously. As for the date of joining the Alliance, it depends after all the others on these two main persons of the modern history of Ukraine. And on Ukraine itself too.
