Ukraine: Playing The Populist Card

Ukrainians can read populism into the campaign (AFP) September 27, 2007 (RFE/RL) -- If Ukrainians are to believe the promises being made by the parties participating in the country's early parliamentary elections, their lives should improve regardless of who wins. The major players in the September 30 polls have all made generous pledges to the electorate. The question is how they plan to overcome the mathematical impossibility of paying for all that has been promised.

There are three clear frontrunners among the 20 parties and blocs registered for Ukraine's September 30 parliamentary elections -- the ruling Party of Regions led by Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, and the pro-presidential Our Ukraine-People's Self-Defense bloc and Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc -- two former allies in the 2004 Orange Revolution.

Opinion polls suggest that none of the three forces is set to win an outright majority in the 450-seat Verkhovna Rada. They also indicate that, as in the March 2006 elections, the Party of Regions' performance will likely be matched by Our-Ukraine-People's Self Defense and the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc combined.

Difference Makers

If such predictions turn out to be true, the fate of a future ruling coalition may hinge on the performance of two other parties that pollsters envision being in the next parliament: the Communist Party and the Lytvyn Bloc. Most polls forecast that the Socialist Party, which obtained 5.7 percent of the vote in 2006, will not overcome the 3 percent threshold for parliamentary representation this time around.

In contrast to the 2004 presidential and 2006 parliamentary elections, traditionally divisive foreign-policy thorns like Ukraine's potential NATO membership or domestic irritants like making Russian the second state language have been conspicuously muted or even eliminated as campaign issues.

Instead, the election frontrunners have focused on outdistancing one another in promises of socioeconomic windfalls.

Four expenditure items are present in the election manifestos of each of the three frontrunners: substantial payments to families bringing new Ukrainians into the world and monthly child support as a way to reverse the country's demographic decline; an increase in student allowances and stipends; the development of rural areas; and a considerable increase in military spending as part of the effort to develop a professional army.

Unfulfillable Promises?

In addition, each party has added its own unique promises to the mix. For example, the Our Ukraine-People's Self-Defense wants to increase the minimum wage and the average monthly wage by some 60 percent in 2008.

The Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc vows to return, within two years, more than $25 billion of savings lost by Ukrainians as a result of the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.

The Party of Regions pledges to provide workers with apartments upon the conclusion of 20 years working for the state.

The Communists want to increase the minimum pension level to 70 percent of the average monthly wage, a measure that would cost the state an extra $20 billion per year.

The Lytvyn Bloc proposes a dramatic wage hike that would cost an extra $60 billion per year.

Four Ukrainian economic experts commenting in the September 22-28 issue of the Kyiv-based weekly "Zerkalo nedeli" took the election promises at face value and tallied them up.

Promises made by the Party of Regions would cost $40 billion, while those by the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc and the Our Ukraine-People's Self-Defense bloc were estimated at $20 billion each. The most generous were the Communists, whose election program entails an extra $60 billion in spending, and the Lytvyn Bloc, which would need no less than an extra $90 billion to follow its program to the letter.

Adding a dose of reality to the situation, the four experts noted that Ukraine's consolidated budget revenues in 2007 were expected to be just $40 billion.

Zeal Over Immunity

A somewhat more realistic -- and no less populist -- goal is the solemn vow of both the current parliamentary opposition and the ruling coalition to cancel parliamentary immunity from prosecution, which is widely seen in Ukraine as a shield for corrupt politicians.

But even on this tricky constitutional issue, the Ukrainian political class could not avoid inflating the situation in an effort to garner cheap applause.

The proposal to strip lawmakers of immunity initially came from President Viktor Yushchenko and the Our Ukraine-People's Self-Defense. But this sound idea was subsequently blunted by the ruling coalition through their calls for the abolition of immunity not just for legislators, but also for the president, the prime minister, and other high-ranking officials, including judges.

Making the initial idea appear even more incongruous, the ruling coalition held a controversial parliamentary session earlier this month (which was condemned as illegal by the opposition) during which it voted to abolish immunity for parliamentarians and the president. For whatever reason, the prime minister and other government officials were ignored in the coalition's rush to contribute to the elimination of corruption in the country.

But it would be wrong to condemn Ukrainian politicians for exploiting the gullibility of the electorate to achieve political goals. As long as voters fail to hold politicians accountable for their promises, such practices will continue -- and not just in Ukraine.

However, what remains of utmost importance in Ukrainian politics is the continued perception among Ukrainians that, following the 2004 Orange Revolution, elections offer them genuine political choice. Under such circumstances, one day Ukrainian voters may also develop a taste for distinguishing between empty pledges and practical ideas.