About Viktor Tkachuk

Author Website:
Author Bio:

Articles by Viktor Tkachuk

Charity for Ukrainian democracy

Posted by Viktor Tkachuk on 22/11/12

More and more western billionaires give the most part of their assets in favor of the society. In Ukraine, apart from cases of direct help for treatment, we have no real philanthropy. In charity we can trace an accurate binding to territories, or spheres of their concrete influence.

Semi-criminal rules of doing business create the same culture of charity. Projects financed in such a way should to be necessarily profitable. They are mainly viewed by Ukrainian patrons as whitening of their own image, or “admission” to the European business.

The majority of Ukrainian “investors” registered in the EU regularly fills up local European budgets and doesn’t violate laws. Therefore, their activity doesn’t disturb Europe. On the contrary, the availability of elite real estate there becomes an indispensable condition for the legitimization and recognition of Ukrainian oligarchs in Europe. And the luxurious way of life is the admission to the elite “business club of the EU”.

Where is the truth, and where is cynicism? In such a way Europe acts as the criterion of double standards. Is it possible to consider money from Europe, directed by Ukrainian oligarchs on charity, clean? If so, tell me the address where to send offers?

As for today, we are fixing the lowest indicator of support of Ukraine entering the EU by citizens. The amount of such supporters is only one third of the population. Recently there were about 50%.


Dreams of A.Merkel and D.Tusk about European Ukraine

Posted by Viktor Tkachuk on 16/11/12

During the last German-Polish intergovernmental consultations the parties have discussed the state of affairs in the countries which are the part of the “Eastern Partnership” program. The meeting has testified that the German chancellor A.Merkel and the prime-minister of Poland D.Tusk estimate internal political processes in Ukraine differently. Especially, when it comes to the democratic character of the parliamentary elections and prospects of the European integration.

In her estimations Mrs. Merkel was categorical – as for today there no preconditions for signing of the Association Agreement. The reasons of such position haven’t been named. Her previous sharp statements about the procedure of the elections remain in force. German pedantry and consistency have played their role.

The prime-minister of Poland was less categorical. Having immersed into the atmosphere of good neighborhood, D.Tusk has even outlined the time frameworks of signing of the Association Agreement. The following Rubicon for Ukraine is November, 2013.

Poland continues to present its services in the EU for intermediation in negotiations with Ukraine. Thus, it isn’t the spokesman of interests of Germany in estimations of the Ukrainian parliamentary elections. D.Tusk’s caution is understandable. Mutual relations with the basic donor of the EU are primary. Although, the EU can always make Poland guilty for the failure of Ukraine’s participation in the “Eastern Partnership”.

“Eastern Partnership” unfortunately is getting more and more signs of the unrealized dream of Poland. Having the mutual border with Ukraine, it risks to become the hostage of introduction of the dialogue with the existing Ukrainian authorities. It seems that the EU in the face of Germany starts to use both countries in its own geopolitical games. Probably, Poland has received a mandate to become the main intermediary between the EU and the present President of Ukraine till the end of his powers not only from the US, but from Germany as well. We’ll see how effective these puzzles will be.


For Whom Europe is Silent?

Posted by Viktor Tkachuk on 02/11/12

Ukrainian officials have constantly underlined deep awareness of international observers in subtleties of the Ukrainian electoral legislation. The latter have returned thanks in the same way. A new quantitative record has been set – almost 4 thousand observers observed, ascertained and recognized that elections were democratic. As of 20:00 on October 28 the peak of non-interference into the internal processes of Ukraine has taken place. Voting stations have closed – elections for the international observers have ended. And everything has only started for the participants of the electoral process. Also proceeds till now.

The assessment of elections by Russian observers was expected and clear. Supporters of introduction of the Russian model of “managed democracy” in Ukraine noticed that they took place and passed transparently.

The chairman of the European Parliament Committee on Foreign Affairs Elmar Brok called these elections the worst ones since 2004. He underlined that the EU strives for the right of Ukrainians to democracy and the rule of law in the state.

In Ukraine-EU relations there really exists a problem of the channel of communication. Pro-ruling mass-media depict the position of Europe on the elections in Ukraine perversely. European observers and politicians have “actively” joined the distortion of information. They have drifted apart in their assessments of the elections, but they don’t put the legitimacy of the elected parliament into question.

It is possible to ascertain: the Ukrainian authorities have passed an examination not only on the electoral legislation, but also on the manipulation of the political process on the whole perfectly well. It’s time to receive awards. And for the EU countries to sign the Association Agreement?


Elections-2012: lost hopes for Ukrainian democracy

Posted by Viktor Tkachuk on 26/10/12

Since 2004 the political establishment in Ukraine has been making maximum efforts to prevent the emergence of the national unifying idea. This process takes place amid the progressing material impoverishment of the majority of the population. Citizens aspire to find the guilty. The current authorities continue to morally and financially destroy a well-to-do and self-sufficient Ukrainian. Since such primordial independence is a threat to its existence.

New political parties which the authorities will let pass into the parliament will hardly change this. The appearance of “UDAR” of boxer V.Klychko, “Svoboda” of nationalist O.Tyagnybok, or even “Ukraine-forward!” of economic populist N.Korolevska in the parliament won’t become the beginning of positive changes in the political life of the country. It will aggravate the parliamentarism crisis in Ukraine even more. Looks like this is what “the secret plan” of political long-livers – the Party of Regions, United Opposition and Communists consists in.

The demand for political leaders who will work for the growth of the middle class hasn’t disappeared anywhere in the Ukrainian society. However, none of the political parties-participants of the parliamentary elections sets itself such a goal. All political beau-monde shows citizens that its political culture is at the primitive level. Today we can observe the maximum peak of estrangement of the electorate from initiatives of the authorities and from the political life of the country on the whole.

A sharp feeling of probable deceit and disappointment that citizens of Ukraine have is the main, already reached result of the parliamentary elections – 2012. And, there is no need to wait for the announcement of the official results to understand this.


Ukraine-EU Summit – a Holiday Postponed till 2015?

Posted by Viktor Tkachuk on 18/10/12

Representatives of the European Union have informed that the Ukraine-EU summit is postponed till the next year. It is connected with expectations of results of the future parliamentary elections in Ukraine. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine has reacted right away – naming the beginning of 2013 the date of the summit. It has separately been highlighted that Europeans will have Christmas vacations in the foreground.

The European Commission which has shown “awareness” in the legislation of Ukraine hasn’t stood aside as well. Its representatives have connected the date of conduction of the summit with the change of structure of the government after the elections. However, the Constitution of Ukraine doesn’t foresee its obligatory change after the conduction of the parliamentary elections. Probably, official Europe has confused parliamentary elections with presidential elections!

We have two versions:

Either European leaders have some other vision of the date of conduction of the presidential elections in Ukraine (apart from 2015 according to the Constitution of Ukraine).

Or “Christmas vacations” in the EU will still continue till 2015 – due to the bankruptcy of the current and absence of any other new public strategy.


What does the EU embed into the concept of “fair elections” in Ukraine?

Posted by Viktor Tkachuk on 15/10/12

In reality, Ukraine-EU relations haven’t meant the achievement of partnership already for a long time. This process is characterized by the emergence of new risks and conditions for contacts. Citizens perceive eurointegration as an alternative to Ukraine’s entering unions where the key role is played by Russia. So far, citizens have no accurate understanding of advantages of EU integration.

Ukrainian politicians, who supported Ukraine’s entering the EU earlier, avoid this topic during this electoral campaign. “Pseudo-oppositionists” have built their electoral campaign on the idea of imprisonment of their leaders. They believe their release would guarantee honesty and transparency of the electoral process. In our opinion, this is the fact of the second-rate political platform.

Official representatives of the EU also mark this. That is, the future of eurointegration of Ukraine has actually become hostage of destiny of two people.

The EU is actually ready to ascertain the facts of violation of electoral laws, but this doesn’t mean it makes elections transparent. What the EU has done for the fair elections in Ukraine to take place is equal to zero today. Not one non-democratic step of the authorities has been stopped. Especially in terms of introduction of fair justice in Ukraine. Average citizens feel it directly almost every day. And the narrowing of attention of official representatives of European structures exclusively to two people already adds only irritations in the Ukrainian society.

The Ukraine-EU summit is again up in the air. However, even in case of its conduction, the threat will remain that the results of elections will become its main topic. Understanding it, the Ukrainian authorities will make maximum effort to keep relations with the EU in the frozen state. This pause will allow to begin preparations for the presidential elections in Ukraine, which hardly foresees the release of “political” prisoners. But an impression is made that the EU also has some benefits from these so-to-say frosts.


The Eastern Partnership is stuck

Posted by Viktor Tkachuk on 04/10/12

Today the Eastern Partnership initiative ceases to be the prime and obligatory tool of achievement, or understanding of prospects of the EU membership for Ukraine. Unfortunately, the Eastern Partnership has transformed into one of many international meetings which revive only in times of summits of heads of the states-participants. Since 2008 the uniqueness of each of 6 countries of Eastern Europe promised to become a competitive mechanism for leadership achievement in such sectors, as freedom of speech, law and justice. However, approaches and reality of observance of general values declared by the European Neighbourhood Policy differ very much. Expectations that EU-Ukraine relations will become a model for other Post-Soviet countries didn’t come true. And it looks like in the near future Ukraine won’t be able to share a successful experience of eurointegration. Hence, the leadership of Ukraine has concentrated on other contact points in relations with the EU. First of all, they have to do with visa-free regime and expansion of border infrastructure. In turn, the EU only ascertains democracy curtailment in Ukraine.

The overwhelming majority of official representatives of new EU members have concentrated on fair criticism of internal political processes in Ukraine. However, the tendency of them using “ascertaining of the Ukrainian negative” for their own PR can be traced clearly enough. Especially when electoral campaigns come closer in the countries they represent. It is clear that amid the euro zone crisis, Poland is building its own foreign policy, turning around to the main centers of force in Europe. Both Germany and Great Britain profess their own economic pragmatism in the sphere of EU enlargement.

The European tactics of criticism of Ukraine testifies to the absence of the long-term strategy of EU-Ukraine relations, and the Eastern Partnership has come down to short-term demands. We wouldn’t want to think that the diplomatic isolation of Ukraine is a part of the future EU enlargement strategy. Meanwhile, we are ascertaining that the question of eurointegration of Ukraine is postponed to the time when the economic crisis in Europe is overcome and once again is connected with the termination of another electoral cycle in Ukraine. In due time the Eastern Partnership initiative was supported not by particular politicians, but by the European states.

The authorities and opposition in Ukraine have mercantile interests prevailing over national ones. Ukrainian people know it. Half of the population of Ukraine supports Ukraine’s entering the EU. A large part hesitates. They are still thinking not because they have hope for the Ukrainian political establishment, but because that don’t hear the voice of Europeans. Hence, the necessity of a new dialogue and development of a new strategy of relations becomes as topical as ever.


Ukrainian elections: the first diagnosis

Posted by Viktor Tkachuk on 22/08/12

The statement of E.Brok, Chairman of the European Parliament Committee on Foreign Affairs, on undemocratic elections in Ukraine is the most sober foreign assessment of the situation in Ukraine since the beginning of the electoral campaign. The thing is not only in the second verdict for the former Minister of Internal Affairs Y.Lutsenko or a potential second verdict for the ex-prime minister Y.Tymoshenko. The thing is in the basic unwillingness of the Ukrainian establishment to change the situation in Ukraine towards democratization, transparency, approaching European standards, principles and values.

The acting Ukrainian authorities don’t share EU values. They perceive the decision of the European Court of Human Rights on rather unfair first verdict of Y.Lutsenko as nothing more than an unessential recommendation. An obligatory argument for them at the perception level is only personal discomfort.

The only goal of the present top officials of the Ukrainian state is converting of power into business assets. And not necessarily at the territory of Ukraine. Investments are made into the most respectable economies of the EU. “And this is correct”. Therefore, the parliamentary elections are means of insuring of their assets. It is logical that they will do all but impossible to get victory by all means. The calmness of the Presidential Administration suggests that results of the elections are already known to it.

Unfortunately, the opposition looks primitively. Its electoral lists look like a well disguised alternative. But citizens already know the taste of bluff.

Opposition vs. President?

Posted by Viktor Tkachuk on 18/07/12

The Ukrainian opposition has declared it is going to sue the President of Ukraine V.Yanukovych for misappropriation of additional powers. Oppositional politicians have pointed out the start of collecting Ukrainian citizens’ signatures for the lawsuit against the President of Ukraine. In such a way oppositionists have begun an anti-presidential interactive political game with voters. It doesn’t mean actions of opposition are wrong. It’s true that V.Yanukovych’s administration is inefficient. But this offer amid the absence of constructive strategy for the Ukrainian society again smells of populism.

Oppositionists hope for impeachment procedure after they win parliamentary elections on October 28. But by playing political games, the opposition weakens itself, because voters are losing faith in the possibility of changing the political and economic situation in the country. Ukrainian citizens aren’t offered alternative economic and social platforms or strategies with lists of consecutive reforms; they aren’t offered plans of restructuring the society and the country in times of crisis in the world.

Instead, the opposition offers the game “win a lawsuit against the president” with the result programmed for failure. The Ukrainian legislation which has no detailed mechanism of impeachment practically protects the President of Ukraine from such procedure. The authorities are wonderfully informed about it; therefore, there won’t be any rigid counteraction to the initiative of the opposition. But then it is not clear whose scenario is used by the opposition.




What’s the price of “truth” at BBC?

Posted by Viktor Tkachuk on 05/07/12

Already since the USSR times the BBC news agency was the guarantor of trustworthy information and almost a truth icon. But time runs “… and this passes off…”. An example of changes is a documentary film in the “Panorama” program concerning widespread racism and anti-Semitism in the countries-organizers of the Euro-2012. BBC has created accents and resorted to a manipulative scenario. And this was aimed for the European and Ukrainian audience. Self-advertisement based on scandals probably for the sake of solving its financial problems has apparently become a part of BBC’s reputation.

BBC becomes more and more dependent on financing. This is especially acute after the year of 2010, when the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Britain limited its funding. But Great Britain citizens continue to pay for its activity.

How justified and legitimate is the use of citizens’ means by BBC for fantasies on a racist issue, in particular, in Ukraine? Maybe, the program release will raise a set of questions before the House of Commons and become a subject of a parliamentary investigation? And what should fans of the English national football team do; those who didn’t go to Ukraine and couldn’t support their national team at the championship? And football players experienced some hard moments as well.

I’d like to remind that the activity of BBC is determined by the Charter. One of the main values designated in it is: “Trust is the foundation of the BBC; we are independent, impartial and honest “…

During the last couple months western mass-media have been conducting a real “cold” informational war against Ukraine. And if the constructive criticism of the authorities is perceived positively by the society, the accusations of intolerance presented to Ukrainians are simply shameful! When this process is joined by the “impartial” and “honest” BBC, there arise suspicions that the company is inclined to the practice of paid-up materials.

We’ll be tolerant. We won’t appeal to boycott BBC and advertise ourselves on this topic. This is not what we aim for.

Today, it is clear that the Euro-2012 has defined not only winners, but also outsiders. It is BBC. In chase for sensations it “grows more and more yellow”.


Victor Tkachuk on Democracy, Ukraine & the EU rss

Cooperation between Ukraine and EU, exchange of thoughts and ideas regarding the further effective development of democracy in Ukraine and Europe, the place of Ukraine in the modern world. Political innovations today in the name of common European future, the role of civil organizations and analytical institutions in the modernization of European civilization. more.