Ukraine - Almost A Basket Case

The electoral mess in Ukraine is obviously a reflection of the economic and political state of a country which has not been able to move very far away from its sorry state under the heel of the Soviet Union. As in Russia, much of its movement towards the creation of a new economy is based on criminal or semi-criminal organizations, similar to the amassing of private wealth by the 19th century robber barons in countries like the U.S. and Canada. The leading figures in government have either been part of these organizations or dependent on them. In Ukraine the wealthy entrepreneurs who also wield political power are called "oligarchs". These are the people whose "friends" made a strong and effective effort to derail the electoral wishes of most of the citizenry, through threats, firings and other forms of intimidation of students, civil servants, army rank and file and any other groups that they could get at, and through using "absentee ballots" to permit their goons to stuff ballot boxes by multiple voting. It is interesting that in the industrialized and heavily ethnic-Russian east side of Ukraine many union members acted as goons and hooligans in support of the pro-Russian candidate Yanukovitch and his mentor, the outgoing-president. Yanukovitch is a twice-convicted criminal and Kuchma has been accused of some involvement in the death of a journalist who reported unfavourably about his government and its corruption.

The ordinary people, who are poor and near desparation, yearn for betterment, and look to democratic elections as at least one way to improve their lots. It was heartening, in the few days prior to the October 31st presidential election, to see the enthusiasm of the local election officials and the voters, who mastered a rather extensive set of laws and procedures, and then put them into effect in conducting what was, in most locations, an honest and effective election. This can be contrasted with some of the stumbling and uncertainties that accompanied the parliamentary election just two years ago.

The main "opposition" challenger, Yuschenko, while no "man of the people", personified two things - 1. opposition to the corrupt Kuchma regime; and 2. support for stronger ties with Europe - and for those reasons he had almost overwhelming support from the western side of Ukraine, the economy ofwhich is more agriculturally based, and which identifies more with Europe than with Russia.

Anu visitor to Ukraine who ventures into the agricultural countryside cannot fail to be impressed with two things: 1. the rich potential of its landbase for surplus food production; and 2. the equally dismal state of its productive capacity. The Soviet-created collective farms have not given way to more productive forms of organization, the workers on the farms are increasingly elderly and incapable of moving forward (many of the young people have left for the cities), and much of what is produced rots in the fields. As well, there is little storage capacity or ability to move large crops to market. Forms of land ownership, financing of ownership and of infrastructure, as well as of equipment acquisition, have not been developed so as to enable a transition from collective farming to other, more effective ways. Old attitudes, fostered by dependence on political decision making, did not educate people so as to enable them to exercise initiative and independence. Not much is being done to overcome these problems. In the rural areas people live in conditions equivalent to those in some third-world countries. I was warned not to get to close to any nuclear power facilities because their state of repair and maintenance was poor and another Chernobyl could happen at any time.

Such facts as these help to explain why the Ukrainian people were ready to demonstrate for days in Kyiv in order to force a new election.