KIEV, UKRAINE — The U.S. finished its presidential election in
one round. Not so Ukraine, the former Soviet republic in which the
two leading candidates, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych and former
Prime Minister Viktor Yushchenko, were forced into a run-off after
both polled about 40 percent of the vote on October 31.
The vote was not without problems, but observers generally found
it free of the sort of fraud feared by Yushchenko’s supporters.
Attempts by incumbent President Leonid Kuchma to bolster
Yanukovych’s campaign, much criticized in the West, did not prevent
Ukrainians from voting freely for someone else.
The election has generated interest in the U.S. and Europe out
of concern over Ukraine’s direction. Some see the poll determining
whether the country will lean towards the West or fall into
Russia’s orbit. Radek Sikorski of the American Enterprise Institute
worries about Washington having to take up arms “to face a threat
from a reconstituted empire.”
Yushchenko has portrayed himself as the Western-oriented
candidate and earned a warm embrace from foreign interests far and
wide, including in the U.S. In contrast, Yanukovych is seen as a
Russophile, preferring the company of Ukraine’s Slavic
neighbors.
Russians, if not Russia, are playing a role in the election.
“The Kremlin is very actively involved in the campaign,” charges
Yushchenko adviser Oleg Medvedev.
Russia’s Vladimir Putin has said nothing officially about
Ukraine’s election, though his recent visits to the country have
been perceived as intended to boost Yanukovych. Moreover, Russian
television, seen by most Ukrainians, has promoted Yanukovych’s
candidacy.
But Moscow’s direct involvement seems overstated. For instance,
some allegedly “pro-Russian” initiatives are primarily matters of
domestic politics.
Yanukovych has suggested raising the Russian language to
quasi-official status, hardly unreasonable in a nation where many
people speak only Russian, the language of the old Soviet Union.
The idea angers Ukrainian nationalists, who have worked to push
Russian out of schools and public life, but polls show Yanukovych’s
proposal winning wide popular support.
Moreover, the policy differences between the two candidates,
including relations towards the U.S. and Russia, seem much smaller
than commonly presented. Economically, Kiev has little choice but
to increase investment and trade ties with America and Europe;
geographically, Ukraine’s security inevitably will be linked to
Russia.
YUSHCHENKO HAS WON WESTERN plaudits from advocating membership in
the European Union and NATO. In contrast, Yanukovych is advancing
the so-called Single Economic Space, or free trade zone, with
Russia and two other former Soviet republics.
Yet the contrast is more apparent than real. Yanukovych sees no
conflict between the two strategies. Rather, he evokes caution,
promising: “Ukraine will move into the EU slowly.”
Similarly, says Sergei Tigipko, Yanukovych’s campaign manager —
and former governor of the National Bank — “We need to carefully
negotiate favorable terms for Ukraine.” He emphasizes that ties
with Russia “do not prevent Ukraine from getting integrated into
the WTO and cementing an association with the EU.” Adds Tigipko:
“The only pragmatic course is one that looks both east and
west.”
Overall, the question of integration with the West seems to be
largely one of timing. While Yushchenko hopes for membership in
five years, Tigipko thinks twice that time is more realistic.
Similar are the sentiments of Rostyslav Khotin, editor of the
Ukrainian section of the BBC: “There is a consensus amongst the
Ukrainian ruling elite that Ukraine must be in the EU and NATO.
Ukraine may find itself in NATO in 2006 or 2007 if the opposition
wins. If the other side wins, the delay may be three or four
years.”
Several other journalists shared his sentiment. “Ukraine is not
going to go away from Europe,” observes Petro Bilyan, a columnist
in the weekly Economic News. Dimitro Ponamarchuk of the
Union of Free Journalists worries that some in the West believe
that “to be perceived as pro-NATO you must be anti- Russian.”
Washington might inadvertently “push us into a large mouth that
would swallow us in no time.”
THE ASSUMPTION THAT YUSHCHENKO would better serve American
interests is common, but not necessarily accurate. For instance,
Yushchenko has promised to immediately withdraw Ukrainian troops
from Iraq. In contrast, the Yanukovych government ignored Ukrainian
public opinion and put 1,600 troops into Iraq. Yanukovych also has
indicated that Kiev is willing to help train and equip the Iraqi
military.
Both candidates also are likely to have similar policies towards
Moscow. After all, most Ukrainians desire close ties with Russia.
When asked whether they preferred life with their Slavic neighbors
or Europe, 50 percent of Ukrainians chose the former and only 30
percent approved the latter.
Although a Yanukovych government probably would be friendlier to
Moscow, Vyacheslav Igrunov, director of the Institute for
Humanitarian and Political Studies, says that “Russia will not lose
anything, no matter who wins the Ukrainian elections.” This is
certainly the impression being fostered by Yushchenko, who
denounced as a myth the perception that he was anti-Russian: “Not a
single political force which supports me is against developing
normal relations with Russia.”
At the same time, no leading Ukrainian wants to submit to
Moscow’s dictates. Dmytro Dobrovolsky, chief of Typa
newspaper, observes: “When Kuchma was going for his elections, he
played the Russia card. When he was elected, he realized that he
had to be president of Ukraine and learned the Ukrainian language.
To Moscow he threatened to go to the West, and he did the same
thing to the West. As a result, everything stayed where it
was.”
Konstantin Bondarenko, director of the Institute of National
Strategy, puts it another way: “Even though there are a lot of
simplistic assessments that Yushchenko is pro-West and Yanukovych
is pro-Russia, everyone understands that they will have to take a
center position that can go any way.” Indeed, Bondarenko suggests
that “if Yushchenko becomes president, his first visit will be to
Moscow. If Yanukovych wins, his first visit will be to
Washington.”
U.S. diplomatic officials recognize that some of Kiev’s moves
are simply “tactical” given Ukraine’s geographic position, but
nevertheless worry about Moscow’s influence. One American who
declined to speak for the record pointed to Kiev’s switch from
America to Russia regarding the Odessa-Brodsky oil pipeline as
something used by Yanukovych to “pay for” Russian support.
Yanukovych’s supporters respond that President Kuchma took
control of the issue for Kuchma’s benefit — to use as “a
bargaining chip,” an insurance policy for his own retirement, in
the words of American businessman and Ukrainian expatriate Alex
Kiselev. The latter also suggests that Washington didn’t press the
issue strongly enough: “the U.S. should have been more forceful.”
Contends Kiselev, “the Prime Minister was left hanging when he
declared his support for the western direction.”
Anyway, Washington is ill-positioned to complain about Russian
involvement in Ukraine’s election. After all, Russian President
Vladimir Putin expressed his preference for George W. Bush.
Finally, though the administration says it favors neither
candidate in Ukraine, its unstated preference seems clear. Sergei
Markov, a Russian political consultant active in the so-called
Russian Club denounced by Yushchenko’s supporters for backing
Yanukovych, observes: “Look at what the U.S. is doing here —
supporting foundations, analytical centers, round tables. It’s how
contemporary foreign policy is pursued. And it’s exactly what we’re
doing.”
UNFORTUNATELY, THE U.S. HAS become an issue in the election. In
early October opposition parliamentarians found tons of posters
attacking Yushchenko for allegedly being a pawn of the U.S. at a
government warehouse. The issue is politically potent: Oleg
Medvedev blames antagonism against America as an “inheritance from
Soviet times” which “is costing us several million votes.”
Whatever the election result, Washington will remain influential
in Ukraine. A top American concerned with U.S.- Ukrainian relations
admits that “We can live very comfortably with whoever wins.”
The run-off on November 21 is likely to be close. Yushchenko
long was the country’s most popular politician, but even Oleg
Medvedev acknowledged that through smart politics “Yanukovych was
able to do what he couldn’t do for the last two years, equal the
popularity ratings of Yushchenko.”
Washington should press for an honest, transparent poll. But
American policymakers should accept the result with equanimity. The
U.S. doesn’t have to worry about “losing” Ukraine. Whichever
candidate wins, Kiev will want remain a friend of America.
