Keep the power

The revolution in Ukraine won, and this victory to a large extent, without suspecting it, was facilitated by Putin's Russia. If it were not for the pressure of Moscow on Yanukovych, who forced him to refuse to sign the Association Agreement with the European Union, there would be no Euromaidan. In the Kremlin, they seriously hoped that after the failure in Vilnius, Ukraine would have nowhere to go, except to join the Customs Union. But the Kremlin strategists did not take into account that not only the West of Ukraine, but also a significant part of the population of the East of the country, including most local oligarchs, strove for an agreement with the EU. Moscow, having torpedoing the Association of Ukraine with the EU, not only undermined Yanukovych’s popularity among its potential voters, but also complicated his relations with the main sponsors who hoped for duty -free export of Ukrainian metals to the European Union.

And then Yanukovych himself, making a mistake by the mistake, helped the revolution win. He did not shift the Azarov government at the moment when this could still stop protests. The president resigned him only when the Maidan was no longer agreeing to less than the resignation of the president.

Yanukovych tried to suppress the protest by force without having enough resources for this. He underestimated the power, determination, organization and degree of folk support of his opponents, gathered on the Maidan. And then he himself did not notice how he turned into a wandering president, with whom no one in the country or in the world wants to deal.

The emergency, without which it was impossible to suppress the Maidan, could not be introduced without the participation of the army. And the army’s position was undoubtedly influenced by the plans of the then Minister of Defense Pavel Lebedev, the plans to dismiss 10.3 thousand officers with the payment of ridiculous compensation announced on December 26, 2013. Such a decision in the midst of the crisis was simply crazy, and it once again proves that the Yanukovych government inadequately assessed the situation.

But the main factor in the victory of the revolution was the stamina and selflessness of those who rally and fought on the Maidan. The “Right Sector” movement dominated here, few people know little yesterday. It unites extremely right, extreme left and anarchists and is distrustful of leading Ukrainian politicians, including a former opposition. But on the Maidan there were members of "Freedom", strikes and "Fatherland", and Afghan veterans, and just thousands of Kiev and who came to the capital of Ukraine from all over the country. Among the dead defenders of the Maidan there are not only immigrants from Western and Central Ukraine, but also natives of Kharkov and Kerch. Those who did not flinch under the bullets of the Berkut and snipers from the Goshrami Department were inspired by the idea of ​​the independence of Ukraine and the construction of a Ukrainian national state there. Yes, from the point of view of the beginning of the 21st century, the national state looks largely an anachronism. But Ukraine has never been such a state, and the country is still facing the task of developing general Ukrainian identity in conditions when almost half of the population is Russian or Ukrainians with their native Russian language.

But the opponents of the Maidan did not have any idea for which it was worth risking life. The natives of the eastern regions, who fought in the ranks of the Berkut, could not be enthusiastic idea of ​​any national idea - not to consider such an idea the desire to preserve the dominance of the Donetsk clan. They do not want to Russia, but they do not feel real Ukrainians and do not really know the Ukrainian language. And their self -consciousness is more likely Soviet than Ukrainian. And the natives of Crimea who fought with them on the side, perhaps, would like to make the peninsula part of Russia. But for this there was no need to fight for Yanukovych, which Crimean separatism never supported. And the bandits-"Titles" participated in battles only for money.

The idea of ​​the separatism of the southeast of Ukraine, which they tried to scare the revolutionary Kyiv, resulted in a miserable farce. The convening congress of the deputies of the South-East in order to protect the "constitutional order" Governor of the Kharkov region Mikhail Dobkin and the mayor of Kharkov Gennady Kernes immediately after the congress fled to Russia. Among the leaders of Eastern Ukraine, there is not a single one that is widely known outside their region and capable of replacing Yanukovych politics.

The separatist movement in eastern Ukraine without powerful feeding from Russia can hardly get real development. The split of Ukraine is objectively extremely unprofitable to Russia: it would become almost the same as the German section after the Second World War. In this case, the West -Ukrainian state will be extremely hostile to Moscow between Russia and Western Europe, which will inevitably lead to a cold war between Russia and the West. The same war can provoke the mini-Raskol of Ukraine-joining the Crimea to Russia. In this case, a single Ukrainian state will be hostile to Russia.

However, the objective disadvantage of the development of events in Ukraine according to the separatist scenario does not mean at all that Moscow will not take steps aimed at the split of Ukraine or the department of Crimea. In the end, having shutting down the digging under the European integration of Ukraine, in Moscow they did not intend to call Yanukovych to do this. Events in Ukraine developed so rapidly that in the actions of the Kremlin no particular strategy was visible. But this does not mean that in the near future such a strategy will not be developed, and there is no doubt that it will be directed against the new Ukrainian government.

The European Union and the United States also do not want the split of Ukraine and the new Cold War. It was the intervention of the Western powers, which threatened the introduction of sanctions against the first persons of the Ukrainian state and Ukrainian oligarchs, that helped stop the bloodshed and contributed to the actual surrender of Yanukovych. But just the inattention of the European Union to Ukraine during the period when it was subjected to powerful Russian pressure in connection with the expected signing of the Association with the EU, contributed to the emergence of the current crisis. And the European Union and the United States will be able to provide serious assistance to Ukraine only if stable democracy is established in Ukraine, and assistance will go to carry out the urgently necessary economic reforms, and will not, as before, to plunder.

There is no doubt that in order to create a stable democracy in Ukraine, it is necessary to preserve the unity of the former opposition forces, at least for the time of conducting political and economic reforms that are acutely necessary for Ukraine. If earlier the opposition was a "three -headed dragon" (Yatsenyuk - Klitschko - Tyagnibok), then with the liberation of Tymoshenko the dragon became quadrous. And most likely he will also have to find the fifth head in the form of the regions that have broken off from the Party and non -fractional deputies of the East of Ukraine, without whose voices the new government does not have a parliamentary majority. The deputies of the ramps, apparently, will unite in a new party led by Sergey Tigipko. The split of the Party of Regions and the formation in the east of Ukraine of the new party, capable of joining the coalition with the former opposition, is a necessary guarantee of stabilization of the political situation in Ukraine.

For stability, it is also absolutely necessary that the Government be represented both by the East of Ukraine and the right-wing party "Freedom", which has at least some influence on the radicals of the Maidan. And the Maidan self -defense must be integrated as soon as possible to the composition of the power structures, otherwise the revolution threatens to continue with unpredictable consequences.

In addition to creating a wide ruling coalition, it is also necessary to reform the 2004 Constitution, which Ukraine has now returned. First of all, it is necessary to clearly distinguish between the powers of the president, government and the Verkhovna Rada. This was not done in the original text of the Constitution, which was literally “on the knee” in the midst of the orange revolution and representing the result of the compromise of the elites. In addition, it is necessary to equally clearly register in the Constitution the provision on the imperative mandate, according to which a deputy who leaves the faction in parliament is mandatory for his mandate. Let me remind you that after the election of President Yanukovych was able to secure the majority and establish the anti-democratic regime using the “carcasses” from the “orange” fractions.

It is difficult to say how likely such a scenario is now. But only if the forces of Ukrainian democrats strive for its implementation, one can hope to establish a stable democratic order in Ukraine.