Peterson Institute: Reflections on the Ukrainian Parliamentary Election:by Anders Aslund
Reflections on the Ukrainian Parliamentary Election:by Anders Aslund
The parliamentary elections on September 30, 2007 cemented Ukraine’s democracy. They were arguably freer and fairer than any other Ukrainian election. Participation remained high at 64 percent. As in all Central-East European countries, the dominant topic of the election was corruption. As corruption always is blamed on the incumbent government, virtually all Central-East European governments have lost elections, and the most effective critic of corruption has won, in this case Yuliya Tymoshenko. Because of such an election outcome, something is usually done to reduce corruption. Ukraine fits the democratic mold, and the electoral weight of critique of corruption should not be underestimated also in the future. It should lead to the fruitful instability that is most characteristic of the successful Baltic countries, where an average government lasts one year. The voting pattern has changed substantially, from region to class. All parties lost relatively in their strongholds and gained votes in enemy land. The Regions lost most votes in Donetsk, Kharkiv, and Luhansk but won throughout Western and Central Ukraine. Our Ukraine lost in West Ukraine (Ivano-Frankivsk, Lviv and Rovno) but acquired new votes in Kharkiv and Chernigiv.
