420 7th Street SE, Washington, DC 20003

Phone: (202) 986-2433 – Fax: (202) 546-3749

info@streitcouncil.org
www.streitcouncil.org

One Hundred Days of Yanukovych: Where is Ukraine Heading?

Sarah Smith

On June 3, 2010, the SAIS Center for Transatlantic Relations hosted a discussion entitled, “One
Hundred Days of Yanukovych: Where is Ukraine Heading?” Dr. Michael Haltzel, Senior Fellow
at the CTR, moderated the discussion, and Dr. Taras Kuzio, a noted expert on Ukraine and
central Europe, gave the main presentation.

Dr. Kuzio focused on the domestic and foreign policy decisions made by the Yanukovych
presidency during his first one hundred days in office. He first argued that, although Yanukovych
was seen as the more democratic candidate during the election, elites still remain above the law
in Ukraine. In addition, while promising to provide increased stability and national unity, the
reality is that stability has only decreased and there have been no attempts at national integration.
Kuzio also discussed the Party of Regions, once led by Yanukovych, which is characterized as
having an Eastern Slavic identity. While the party and Yanukovych are often compared to
Kuchma, Kuzio argued that it is in fact the emergence of a new party, attracting members from
the former Communist Party. Much attention was also given to the Black Sea Fleet Treaty that
extended the Russian presence of Sebastopol until 2042, an infringement of the Ukrainian
constitution, according to Kuzio. Under Yanukovych, the gas lobbyists, not the oligarchs, have
gained more power. There have, however, been positive effects from his victory. For example,
journalists are actively criticizing censorship, a sign that while Ukrainians may be disillusioned
with Orange leaders, they are not disillusioned with Orange values. Yanukovych has
implemented a transition from pro-European to pro-Russian policies. Yanukovych is the first
president to turn his back from NATO. Ukraine has increasingly adopted an anti-Georgian
stance, although not popular among the public. Meanwhile, Kuzio argued that the European
Union has not done enough to counteract Ukraine’s controversial energy policy. Kuzio was
skeptical of Yanukovych’s claims that he is seeking membership since the EU has not asked
Ukraine to join and the country has still not adopted many democratic values deemed essential
by the organization.

Haltzel countered that the Black Sea Fleet Treaty was no breach of the constitution. He also
pointed to the fact that, while only twenty percent of Ukrainians are in favor of NATO
membership, only 30% are opposed. Kuzio added that because Ukrainians tend to associate
NATO with the United States, the war in Iraq has undermined public support of the security
organization. When asked where the West was failing in working with Ukraine, Kuzio responded
that Ukraine is ultimately to blame for its movement away from Europe, largely caused by
‘Yushchenko fatigue’. However, the western governments are also partly to blame because they
largely believed the myths surrounding the election. There is a general belief that the West
should not be too critical of the government as of yet. In other words, Kuzio believed the EU is
not doing enough. One solution, though proving difficult, would be an internal audit of the
opposition party. Kuzio also argued that the Obama administration is less interested in Ukraine.
Haltzel staunchly disagreed, pointing to Biden’s recent visit to Ukraine as a huge success.

The discussion raised several issues that are important, not only for the future of Ukraine, but
also the future of Europe. Kuzio’s presentation implied that the election of Yanukovych into
presidential office is a setback to the country’s transnational ties with the rest of Europe and the
United States. However, there still remains hope that Europe and Ukraine can counteract these
recent events. The key is for the country to find a balance between its Russian identity and its
European identity. It certainly cannot ignore the many Russian nationals living within its
borders. However, even in eastern Ukraine, for example, where many Russians live, the citizens
are against having monuments dedicated to Stalin. This shows that there is a disconnect between
the public and the government. More than likely, however, public opinion will eventually win
out over the government, particularly if the country remains even somewhat democratic. The
recent push against censorship by journalist shows that Ukrainians are not willing to give the
country over to oligarchies. The European Union must also work more closely with Ukraine in
order to establish EU membership. In order for Ukraine to become part of a regional
organization, however, it must first become stable and have a fixed Ukrainian identity. In the
end, helping Ukraine create a stable political system will more likely create a state that is willing
to work with its European neighbors.

Sarah Smith is a Research Assistant at the Streit Council.