By Lawrence Smallman
Dec. 1 — Western media are misrepresenting the Ukrainian
election crisis as a conflict between the forces of democracy and dictatorship,
according to numerous political analysts.
Without providing evidence that Viktor Yushchenko won the election,
newspapers and pundits in the US and Europe all but insist that the
West’s opposition candidate has been robbed of the presidency.
Although huge rallies in support of pro-Russian presidential candidate
and Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich barely make it to television screens,
audiences around the Western world have probably all seen the laser-lit,
plasma-screened Yushchenko rock concerts.
Speaking to Aljazeera.net on Tuesday, international relations expert
Bulent Gokay, a senior researcher at Keele University in Britain, pointed
out that a worryingly obvious fact is being overlooked.
“The two candidates, both Prime Minister Vickor Yanukovich and
Yushchenko, have their roots in the same anti-democratic ruling elite
which divided the wealth of the country after the collapse of the Soviet
Union.”
Geopolitics
Former US national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski noted in his
1997 book, The Grand Chessboard, that neither the West nor Russia can
afford to lose Ukraine to its strategic and economic adversary.
So far from being a struggle between the forces of democracy and authoritarianism,
the electoral battle being fought in Ukraine boils down to control of
an important gas transit system next to strategic Caspian Sea oil and
gas deposits, says Gokay.
“On the one hand Putin’s Russia wants to pull Ukraine into
a closer sphere of influence ... through various political, economic
and military agreements — most notably through the giant gas monopoly
Gazprom and UES.
“At the same time, the US and Western Europe are increasingly pursuing
aggressively militarized polices since the end of the Cold War.
“Ukraine is a member of the GUUAM — a loose NATO-funded alliance
essentially dominated by Anglo-American oil interests, ultimately aiming
to exclude Russia from the Caspian Sea.”
Such powerful interests have meant that Yushchenko has leapt from being
a boring banker and opposition leader to a heroic leader of a democratic
struggle.
No angel
The late Kiev-based analyst Professor James Mace was also taken aback
by the growing ferocity of media support for Yushchenko — mysteriously
promoted in the West as the cure for autocracy in the former Soviet
republic.
“I cannot say that Viktor Yushchenko is above reproach as a political
mastermind. He has a tendency to do things off the cuff ... a reputation
for inflexibility.”
He is “not aware that compromise is sometimes the soul of governance.
There are a number of people whom I know have either left his campaign
or are in despair because of these things,” Mace added.
Moreover, while newspapers in the West report on Yanukovich’s criminal
record dating back to the 70s - none have reported on rumors that Yushchenko
has a few much more recent skeletons in the closet.
Accused of stealing millions of dollars from the Central Bank, Yushchenko
is alleged to have pressured the General Prosecutor to drop yet more
charges against running-mate Yulia Tymoshenko for fraud and embezzlement.
Statistical truths
But if favorable coverage, pop music and young people demonstrating
on your TV screens are not enough to convince a Western audience of
Yushchenko’s amiability, some contorted “election facts”
may always prove useful.
The 96 percent turnout in the eastern Russian-speaking district of Donetsk,
the home town of Yanukovich, is cited as a highly suspicious indicator
of fraud, especially since — as has been reported repeatedly —
his voters were “bussed in” to vote.
But equally enormous turnouts in areas which support Yushchenko have
not received the same suspicion.
And whereas Yanukovich’s final official score was 54 percent, the
Western-backed president of Georgia, Mikhail Saakashvili, officially
polled 96.24 percent of the vote in his country in January.
But the same media organizations who now report critically on the Ukrainian
election welcomed January’s election results in Georgia, saying
that it “brought the country closer to meeting international standards.”
Double-edged accusations
Focusing on one of many “hypocritical” tendencies in Western
media coverage, Gokay condemned the fuss made about Russian President
Putin’s “interference” in the election campaign.
“Putin visited the country twice before the elections. There is
nothing exceptional in this. Russia and the Ukraine have long-standing
links and a large section of the Ukrainian population is Russian-speaking.
“But the interference by the Western states is presented as normal
and completely justified.
“This is totally hypocritical, particularly at a time when the
US-led section of the Western world is getting ready for a ‘democratic
election’ of a puppet regime in Iraq with a massive terror campaign
against the civilian population,” Gokay added.
The real players
But whether you back current Prime Minister Yanukovich or former premier
Yushchenko for president, the real winners in Ukraine will be the small
number of powerful interest groups that continue to maintain their grip
over the political landscape and the economy.
Yushchenko running-mate Tymoshenko, for instance, was regularly described
as an oligarch until she threw her support behind Yushchenko.
Now Reuters news agency describes her as a “firebrand deputy”
and makes no mention of her conviction for fraud.
However, there are many other local players vying for power who have
thrown their lot in with either East or West.
“This whole conflict ... is very much like a Cold War-style proxy
confrontation between the Western and Russian interests,” says
Gokay.
“Behind the two camps of the presidential candidates lie the interests
of the rival Ukrainian elite vision.
“Outgoing President Leonid Kuchma followed a middle way, close
to Moscow but also sending troops to Iraq -- but it no longer remains
possible to walk that tight-rope.”
And if sheer Western political pressure and favourable reporting on
Yushchenko results in new elections and a new president, at least half
of Ukraine’s population are going to ask whether they should dispute
the result with a similar media campaign in the Russian Federation.
Ukrainian businessman Oleksii Leschenko — who refused to vote for
either candidate — told Aljazeera.net on Wednesday that if Yanukovich
is a “pro-Russian agent, then Yushchenko is open to equally serious
charges of being pro-American.”
Interest and compromise
“After all, Yushchenko is married to Kateryna Chumachenko —
a former official with the US State Department, who refuses to give
up her US citizenship,” said Leschenko.
“Both the US and the EU have openly supported and financed Yushchenko
and have, as on so many other occasions, attempted to engineer favorable
leaderships by promoting civil disobedience.
“And nearly everyone knows that the so-called ‘pro-democracy’
group Pora was created and financed by Washington — just like other
American political groups set up in Georgia and Serbia.
“But nobody wants our country to end up in a similar situation
to those places, so maybe both candidates should step down,” Leschenko
added.
And according to Interfax on Nov. 30, Yanukovich has come to the exact
same conclusion.
The disputed election-winner said “we need to overcome the crisis
and for the sake of this I propose that neither Viktor Yushchenko nor
I participate in the [new] election if the result of the vote will be
declared falsified.”
Yushchenko has yet to respond to the suggestion, and in the meantime
the possibility of a civil war or partition of the country along ethnic
and religious lines becomes ever more likely.
Source: Aljazeera
