Fundamentals of Ukrainian political regime have remained unchanged; Volodymyr Ishchenko tells ILNA
The political regime has become even less democratic and still dominated by a few powerful oligarchs. What has changed since the Maidan protests is the level of dependency on the foreign powers; Ukraine is now much more dependent on the United States to the level it has never been dependent on Russia, at least since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Volodymyr Ishchenko is a research fellow at the Institute of Slavic Studies, Technical University of Dresden. His research focused on protests and social movements, revolutions, right and left politics, nationalism, civil society. He authored a number of articles and interviews on contemporary Ukrainian politics, the Maidan uprising and the following war in 2013-14. He is currently working on a collective monograph "The Maidan Uprising: Mobilization, Radicalization, and Revolution in Ukraine, 2013-14".
Below is ILNA's interview with this distinguished figure on the anniversary of Euromaidan:
Q: Some experts believe that although the ruling class was changed, two key demands of Maidan were not fulfilled. First of all, the anti-corruption system is not working well. Secondly, the system of the ruling establishment has not been reloaded which blocked the emergence of new elites. Have the main goals of the Maidan protest achieved?
At first, I need to remind that the Maidan protest coalition was diverse and included various forces with rather distinct goals – the oppositional parties, radical nationalists, neoliberal pro-Western NGOs among the most important. Many of their goals have been actually achieved. The oppositional parties came to power, Ukraine has become more nationalist and at the same time, more Western-dependent and neoliberal reforms accelerated. Many people in Maidan believed they were fighting against corruption and indeed many protestors claimed that they were against that. But the leaders of the protest were from the same corrupt parties. The opposition parties were not so different from the ruling parties. So, it’s not surprising at all that corruption in Ukraine has not been decreased when they came to power. Because what people wanted and the interests of the people who actually came to power were different. The fundamentals of the Ukrainian political regime have remained unchanged. The political regime has become even less democratic and still dominated by a few powerful oligarchs. What has changed since the Maidan protests is the level of dependency on the foreign powers; Ukraine is now much more dependent on the United States to the level it has never been dependent on Russia, at least since the collapse of the Soviet Union. On this level, things have become even worse.
Q: Do you consider the victory of Volodymyr Zelenskiy in the presidential elections and his party “Sluha Narodu” (Servant of People) success in the parliamentary elections as a kind of “electoral Maidan”?
I don’t like the metaphor of “electoral Maidan”, because it’s very superficial. It’s very typical for Ukrainian experts to analyze any change of power in this country with such idiom. Euromaidan was something different; large protests with the occupation of public space and specific ideology combining Ukrainian nationalism with pro-Western liberalism. Besides, the victory of Zelensky was brought primarily by the people who were tired of the consequences of Euromaidan – the war in Donbass, the rise of nationalism, IMF austerity. Despite Zelensky won in almost all Ukrainian regions, the highest support for him concentrated in southern and eastern regions of Ukraine which didn’t embrace Maidan protests. Most of the people who supported Maidan are from the western and central regions of the country. The parties that rely on appeals to the legacy of Maidan are now in opposition to Zelensky.
Q: In some recent surveys, we can see that more respondents suppose the probability of a new “Maidan-3”. Many experts believe that it can be caused by the obscure policy of the current president toward Russia and unacceptable terms of peace resolution in Donbas. Do you think we'll be witnessing another round of Euromaidan?
I think this is highly unlikely for several reasons. First of all, the peaceful initiatives of Zelensky are supported by the overwhelming majority of Ukrainian society. The recent polls show that 75 percent of Ukrainian citizens support negotiations with Russia. Also, 60 percent of the people support the disengagement of military forces in Donbas. Only 25 percent of the Ukrainian people are in favor of the nationalist protests against Zelensky. The Maidan protest in 2014 was supported by a much larger number of people (about half of the society). On the other hand, Zelensky's peaceful initiative is supported by western governments. France and Germany are pushing him to make some compromise with Russia. Donald Trump also said openly to Zelensky that he need to see Putin and solve the problems between Ukraine and Russia. In 2014, the western governments not only turn their back from Viktor Yanukovych but also showed symbolic support for the Maidan protests. Since the demonstrations against Zelensky are neither supported by the people nor by Western governments, I doubt something like Euromaidan could happen again. Of course, if Zelensky fails the negotiations with Russia, it may turn differently. Importantly, these negotiations now include not only the issue of Donbass but also of Russian natural gas transit to Europe through the territory of Ukraine and buying cheaper Russian gas. If Zelensky fails on a crucial promise to decrease the unbearably high prices for the heating and hot water for Ukrainian households, he may face now not a weak nationalist but a larger socially-driven opposition.
Q: What political lessons should the European and the international left draw from the political events in Ukraine and what were their results for the local left?
One of the most important lessons that the global Left may take form the negative experience of Ukrainian Left in Maidan protests is that it should be soberer and more skeptical towards the mass protests. When masses of people come to the streets, it’s not necessarily a good thing. Some of these movements may be in essence nationalist mobilizations and might have disastrous consequences for their countries. Maidan triggered a chain of events – annexation of Crimea by Russia, the war in Donbass, economic decline, nationalist and anti-democratic trends in civil society and political regime – that all led to disastrous outcomes in politics and the economy. One of the consequences of the 2014 demonstrations was the marginalization of Ukrainian left. The left was too weak to make in difference in the course of the Maidan events and, moreover, didn’t get any political benefits from participating in and supporting the Euromaidan. Instead, the left was marginalized and many of them drifted to the right-wing positions. There are no significant left parties in Ukraine anymore. The Communist Party used to be a major party and got 13 percent of votes in the national election in 2012 and now it’s banned from any public activities. Other leftist groups are very small and frightened and under constant nationalist attacks.
Q: How do you evaluate the role of nationalism in Ukraine after the Maidan protest?
There was only a limited increase in nationalism in Ukraine’s public opinion. The victory of Zelensky over Petro Poroshenko who balloted on a very nationalist platform showed that this ideology is mostly rejected in the country. Nationalism didn’t become a dominant ideology in Ukraine. However, the government since the Maidan pursued nationalist policies in language, history, religious spheres. Besides Russia, Ukraine worsened relations with Poland and Hungary because of the language and historical politics. On the other hand, many people still underestimate the power of the extra-parliamentary extreme right. They are not popular and got only 2 percent in the elections this year. However, they are the strongest force on the streets. No other political party or a coalition of NGOs can mobilize so many people as radical nationalists can! They also have arms and strong ideological organizations. They are small and yet very powerful none the less! They are so strong that Zelensky, unfortunately, had met with very extreme nationalist groups and negotiate with them. It’s a big problem for today’s government. On one hand, the government is trying to calm them down, but on the other hand that legitimizes radical nationalists and neo-Nazis for the public opinion.
Interview by: Kamran Baradaran
END