Home Staff Courses DocumentsEventsLinks Contact

 

 

Ukraine: nothing irrevocable

31/05/07- MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Dmitry Shusharin) –

Triumvirates worked well for ancient Rome, albeit never survived for long. The triple
alliance of President Viktor Yushchenko, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych
and Parliament Speaker Alexander Moroz was formed under the pressure of an
imminent armed conflict, and consequently implied no parity.

It was clear from the very beginning that the president and prime minister
would keep their offices, while the speaker would probably have to go. His
opponents have been quite open about it.

However, the problem is deeper than the three politicians’ prospects. It
looks like Ukraine’s political culture in general does not require strict
observance of agreements, especially of bizarre ones like the “triple
union.” None of its parties could guarantee commitment, because none of them
possessed any levers to pressure the Rada members into acting within the
outlined framework.

The three officials have eventually failed to find common ground.

Yanukovych confessed to having disagreements with Yushchenko and demanded
the extension of parliament’s session by more than two days so that it would
have time to pass a series of socio-economic development bills.

Moroz, the main trouble-maker, predictably threw out the agenda, thus
violating the triple agreement.

The above is evidence that democracy actually reigns in Ukraine. The triple
deal was made for a reason, and was a good thing for the time being. The
three politicians seemed to realize that their brawl could grow into an
armed conflict, and armed people would be almost impossible to control.

When the president and the interior minister issue mutually exclusive
orders, regular army commanders turn into field commanders. But the
politicians who allowed this to happen will be held responsible for the
consequences.

That is why the Ukrainian president, prime minister and speaker chose to
strike a union deal, feeble as it was. But their agreement was not confirmed
by any procedures. The parliament-dissolving decree was never considered by
the Constitutional Court. Moreover, the triple agreement excluded the
Constitutional Court’s contribution to the settlement of the crisis. And of
course, no laws stipulate that a parliament session should last for a
specified period of time and strictly adhere to a specific agenda.

Despite the odd situation, the three politicians have attained their most
important goal – they have avoided the armed conflict scenario. As for the
prospects, it has become clearer than ever that Ukraine is a lucky country
which abhors final decisions.

The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not
necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.-0-