Ukraine

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


can we please get a ukrainian to explain what those laws are, and what the basis for the courts decision was?

It seems that there are no Ukrainians here. But we don't need Ukrainians in order to know what the laws are. The laws say that if an election is declared invalid, a new election is convened.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Spiff - you ARE aware, that this was NOT a priority of the govt side when THEY held the presidency, or when they thought their man would win?

The govt already proposed the reform a while ago, but it failed in the parlament. It was a priority.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor

DUH. Of course. In a winner-takes-all system, the winner doesn't like to lose his power. It's the same basic politicking everywhere.

For instance, Bush had less votes than Gore and yet won the presidency... For some odd reson, a modification of the electoral system was not on the Republican agenda for the past 4 years (I could provide an example of the consensus between the two main French parties to keep the power for themselves as well... such politicking is not limited to "evil" countries )

but spiff, the GOP hadnt spent the previous 10 years asking for electoral system change. Kuchma was a firm proponent of presidential power UNTIL he realized a second direct election meant that the new prez would be someone who wanted to prosecute him and his cronies. The cynisism is breathtaking, even by the standards of our two countries. ( I will note i have read that in Israel there have been politicians who opposed Prop Rep when members of large parties, who HELD to that position when they joined small parties, because it was considered impossible to flip so completely) Look at how Putin elminates single member reps from Russias parliament, knowing the only independents are in those seats, and changes the means of selecting governors, knowing them to be one of the few sources of independence left. And persecutes ONLY those magnates who fund his opposition, and opposition media. And how in Ukraine the only magnate who is villified is the one who opposes the Kremlins candidate, while the other magnates get a free pass. Its a fairly consistent pattern. Europeans should think about this.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
spiff, first of all, youre taking a charicture of the Western view.

True But the western media, whenever it took a stance, has been consistently positive about Yushchenko while being consistently negative to Yanukovich.

and from all ive read theyre not a mob trying to impose their will, but people outraged at a stolen election, and with good reason. They didnt want to impose a result, they did want a fair election.

From the BBC (last updated 8 December):

Mr Yushchenko, a pro-Western liberal, is still the firm favourite to win the re-run of the disputed second round of the presidential election. Huge crowds of his supporters are still on the streets of the capital Kiev, vowing to stay there until he takes office.

Maybe they'll stop if Yanukovych wins the re-run, and if they feel he does so fair and square. But so far, this behaviour doesn't look democratic to me. Especially since these lines were drawn after the decision of holding new elections was known.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Look at how Putin elminates single member reps from Russias parliament, knowing the only independents are in those seats, and changes the means of selecting governors, knowing them to be one of the few sources of independence left. And persecutes ONLY those magnates who fund his opposition, and opposition media. And how in Ukraine the only magnate who is villified is the one who opposes the Kremlins candidate, while the other magnates get a free pass. Its a fairly consistent pattern. Europeans should think about this.

I am aware of Putin's doings (I didn't know that Kuchma selectively villified his own magnates as well), and I am horrified by what he is doing. For some time, I thought Putin was creating a strongman plebiscitarian democracy, but he seems keen of creating a softcore dictatorship :vomit:

The EU is very concerned about the evolutions in Russia. Some of it can be attributed to us losing our *****es, but most of this concern can be attributed to us seeing Russia drifting away from democracy again.

I am glad that the election fraud in Ukraine was challenged. Because it shows the civil society in Ukraine (at least in western Ukraine) is much less prone to accept authoritarianism as the Russians. However, I am far less glad that Yushchenko has tried to crown himself the winner through (nonviolent) pressure.

This is why I welcome this constitutional change (adopted by the overwhelming majority of the parliament IIUC, Kuchma and Yushchenko supporters alike) so much. More than the election of any candidate, this reform is what really gives me hopes in the possibility for Ukraine to avoid a Russia-like scenario.

[lord of the mark]

BBC:

"In Ukraine, Mr Yushchenko's orange army of supporters lifted blockades around government buildings, allowing public sector workers through after 17 days of protest.

A member of staff with the cabinet of ministers appeared relieved. "I am glad it's over," said Ivan Volkov. "It was incredibly irritating."

A few days are left to us for final victory. I call on you to be especially active in these days

Opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko

But, although the protest is scaling down, many say they will stay on the street until Mr Yushchenko wins.

Mr Yushchenko himself said the mini tent city that has sprung up would be reorganised but not removed.

"A few days are left to us for final victory. I call on you to be especially active in these days," he told thousands of supporters in Kiev's Independence Square. "

If i read, them right, they are 100% confident of victory in a fair election, and are staying so that if the new election is fraudulent, they cant be blocked. (since this time the govt might be more prepared) Given the scale of fraud in the last election, their confidence is probably reasonable. Given that Kremlin apologists are still decrying the compromise, id say their concerns about further mischief are also reasonable.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor

True But the western media, whenever it took a stance, has been consistently positive about Yushchenko while being consistently negative to Yanukovich.

.

I take it you havent been reading certain columnists in the Guardian?

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

Kuchma was a firm proponent of presidential power UNTIL he realized a second direct election meant that the new prez would be someone who wanted to prosecute him and his cronies. The cynisism is breathtaking, even by the standards of our two countries.

True. Kuchma is a shrewd bastard. But this does not mean that the reform is not objectively necessary. Such a divided country as Ukraine would be better off with the new system.

And how in Ukraine the only magnate who is villified is the one who opposes the Kremlins candidate, while the other magnates get a free pass.

Do you mean Timoshenko? If so, the first time she got "villified" was long before she became an opposition leader.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
If i read, them right, they are 100% confident of victory in a fair election, and are staying so that if the new election is fraudulent, they cant be blocked. (since this time the govt might be more prepared) Given the scale of fraud in the last election, their confidence is probably reasonable. Given that Kremlin apologists are still decrying the compromise, id say their concerns about further mischief are also reasonable.

Your interpretation is as sound as mine. And I hope you're right (well, if Yushchenko actually wins, you'll be right for sure ). I guess time will tell.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Spiffor

I am aware of Putin's doings (I didn't know that Kuchma selectively villified his own magnates as well), and I am horrified by what he is doing. For some time, I thought Putin was creating a strongman plebiscitarian democracy, but he seems keen of creating a softcore dictatorship :vomit:

Just remember that Russia is a poor country desperately struggling for survival. Certain things inevitably get ugly in the process.

The EU is very concerned about the evolutions in Russia. Some of it can be attributed to us losing our *****es, but most of this concern can be attributed to us seeing Russia drifting away from democracy again.

If you in the West were truly concerned about democracy in Russia, you would not expand your Evil Union and other evil alliaces without taking Russia's concerns into account. Russia has been consistently isolated behind a new iron curtain during the last decade.

I am glad that the election fraud in Ukraine was challenged. Because it shows the civil society in Ukraine (at least in western Ukraine) is much less prone to accept authoritarianism as the Russians. However, I am far less glad that Yushchenko has tried to crown himself the winner through (nonviolent) pressure.

What you don't get here is that it was not the fraud that was challenged, but rather the outcome.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by The Vagabond
Just remember that Russia is a poor country desperately struggling for survival. Certain things inevitably get ugly in the process.

True, but there is Ugly and UGLY. I would have seen it as perfectly normal if Putin had been a strongman supported by plebiscitarian politics (akin to what Napoleon III was at the beginning of his reign). After the general degenerescence of Russia during the Eltsin's years, a strong central authority was needed, and still is.
However, when local layers of government get silenced, it is extremely worrisome: for local layers of government do not oppose stability (if they are doing too much crap, one can easily lower their competences), and they are a great tool to make democracy progress at little cost.

If you in the West were truly concerned about democracy in Russia, you would not expand your Evil Union and other evil alliaces without taking Russia's concerns into account.

I think you can understand we think more of our interests than of Russia's. It's not evil or anything. Any country thinks about itself first.

Russia has been consistently isolated behind a new iron curtain during the last decade.

I don't know where you Russians (I think this opinion is held by 100% of the Russians of this board, and I'd imagine an immense majority of Russians in general) got this idea.
Initiated by Germany, the EU has increasingly considered you as a trade partner. We now import so much oil from Russia that your country now considers labeling its prices in Euros instead of dollars.
Politically speaking, France and Germany have operated a real rapprochement with Russia over the Iraqi war. Besides, the Russian cooperation in Bush's war on terror means that the relations between Russia and the US are considerably less strained than they could be (The US might have actively supported the Chechen separatists, for example).
Internationally speaking, Russia has been accepted as a member of the G8 (formerly G7) right after the fall of the USSR. At one point, Putin even considered joining NATO.

Now, it is true that Russia has interests that collide against the EU's or the US's. And in these matters, Russia's influence has considerably weakened in Europe, as central Europe has adhered to NATO and the EU. But guess what: These countries wanted in. Very much. One of the reasons why these countries' leaders followed Bush in Iraq is because they want to get as close of the US as possible, or rather: as far as Russia as possible.

The EU in general sees Russia as one of our great trade partners. Like China, like Japan, like Brazil. We don't want to isolate you (even though the anti-Russianb sentiment is now represented since the EU's enlargement). You go your merry way, we go ours, and we trade together. Of course there is some power play involved (like currently in Ukraine), but it doesn't mean that we hate you. Heck, there was a terrible power play between France-Germany and the US over Iraq, and yet we belong to NATO all the same.

What you don't get here is that it was not the fraud that was challenged, but rather the outcome.

True. I don't know how the eastern civil society would have reacted had Yushchenko won after massive frauds. If the eastern civil society had strongly reacted, however, it would have meant that the Ukrainian civil society at large is eager to defend its political rights.

[Atahualpa]

I don't know where you Russians (I think this opinion is held by 100% of the Russians of this board, and I'd imagine an immense majority of Russians in general) got this idea.
Initiated by Germany, the EU has increasingly considered you as a trade partner. We now import so much oil from Russia that your country now considers labeling its prices in Euros instead of dollars.
Politically speaking, France and Germany have operated a real rapprochement with Russia over the Iraqi war. Besides, the Russian cooperation in Bush's war on terror means that the relations between Russia and the US are considerably less strained than they could be (The US might have actively supported the Chechen separatists, for example).
Internationally speaking, Russia has been accepted as a member of the G8 (formerly G7) right after the fall of the USSR. At one point, Putin even considered joining NATO.

Now, it is true that Russia has interests that collide against the EU's or the US's. And in these matters, Russia's influence has considerably weakened in Europe, as central Europe has adhered to NATO and the EU. But guess what: These countries wanted in. Very much. One of the reasons why these countries' leaders followed Bush in Iraq is because they want to get as close of the US as possible, or rather: as far as Russia as possible.

The EU in general sees Russia as one of our great trade partners. Like China, like Japan, like Brazil. We don't want to isolate you (even though the anti-Russianb sentiment is now represented since the EU's enlargement). You go your merry way, we go ours, and we trade together. Of course there is some power play involved (like currently in Ukraine), but it doesn't mean that we hate you. Heck, there was a terrible power play between France-Germany and the US over Iraq, and yet we belong to NATO all the same.

Well put!
Though it's quite logical that Putin wants to make it look like everyone is against Russia. That will unite the country behind him.
Foreign relations have always been used to cover the inner situation and AFAIK countries have always been criticised therefore. So this is not really unique to russia.

The troubeling thing about this strategy is that the outcome can likely be a war.
If anyone has seen the movie "Wag the dog". I can only recommend it!

[Serb]

Looks like we have a new opposition leader here :


Ukrainian Premier Foresees New Crisis
Backers Would Block Defeat In Presidential Rerun, He Says

By Peter Finn
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, December 17, 2004; Page A01

Full story:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5969-2004Dec16.html?sub=new

[Serb]

Originally posted by Spiffor

I don't know where you Russians (I think this opinion is held by 100% of the Russians of this board, and I'd imagine an immense majority of Russians in general) got this idea.

I must be kidding. After the fall of the great and the mighty Evil Empire, the west pissed off Russia over every issue. You have double standards for national minorities. You are ready to bomb Serbia to the ground to give Albanian minority in Kosovo wide authonomy (de-facto their own independent state), but don't care a thing about Russian speaking minorities (that represent great % of population there) in Baltic states. You have a double standard for terrorist- those who fight against you are terroirsts, those who fight against Russia are freedom fighters. You surround Russia with NATO bases. Your media is carrying out anti-Russian and anti-Putin campaign, etc, etc...
And don't play an angel about trade between our countries. So far you do not have a real alternative for cheap Russian gas and oil.

[Saras]

You thoped that'd slip unnoticed...

Originally posted by Serb


I must be kidding. After the fall of the great and the mighty Evil Empire, the west pissed off Russia over every issue. You have double standards for national minorities. You are ready to bomb Serbia to the ground to give Albanian minority in Kosovo wide authonomy (de-facto their own independent state), but don't care a thing about Russian speaking minorities (that represent great % of population there) in Baltic states.

To compare like with like, the baltic states should have been engaging in ethnic cleansing. They were not - this argument is bs.

You have a double standard for terrorist- those who fight against you are terroirsts, those who fight against Russia are freedom fighters.

It is far from accepted majority opinion that Chechens are freedom fighters; what you fail to discern is criticism for Russia's style in dealing with Chechnya and outright support of terrorist acts.

You surround Russia with NATO bases.

You have to ask yourself and for once take a critical look at your countrys history - WHY do your neighbors want NATO bases to ensure their security?

Your media is carrying out anti-Russian and anti-Putin campaign,

Unlike in Russia, western media is free and independent, and may write or broadcast that Putin is Santa Claus for all I care - plus I don't think you're right with this statement.

And don't play an angel about trade between our countries. So far you do not have a real alternative for cheap Russian gas and oil.

You have plenty of a commodity that many other countries can provide; west has money. What would you rather have