The more things change...

[gunnergoz]

I know that many of you are very worldly and have traveled and experienced much; so this won't come as a surprise to you. But I thought it would be interesting to most if I were to relay some "news" from a friend living in Ukraine.

She is a veterinarian living in one of the large industrial cities of the East, and in addition to her veterinary services at a clinic, also runs her own little pet supply store. It's not uncommon for professional people over there to have storefront businesses on the side. The entrepreneurial spirit is alive and well there, for now.

Anyway, the pro-Russian hack politician Yanukovich has all but won the Ukrainian elections. Representing the Eastern, industrialized side of the country, he has a lot of backing from industrial magnates, wealthy businessmen and of course the security services. He basically wants Ukraine closer to Russia than to the West.

So, the who's boss having been sorted out, this morning our friend was in her pet store when several policemen (they call them "militia" over there) appeared and demanded that they supply them with products off her shelves. She could not complain, could not protest, could do nothing other than to hand over what turned out to be 70 per cent of her inventory, purchased out of her own pocket.

This was not unexpected, mind you. Our friend knows that the militia are so poorly paid that extortion or robbery is considered a job perk, intended to supplement what little the state pays. That is why traffic stops are so popular with police there.

In the old days of President Kuchma, the police would come in and simply open the registers and take what they wanted. Cash and carry, so to speak.

In the "enlightened" days post Orange Revolution, the police came in and quietly asked for things they would like; a bit more respectful, but still not backing off until they got what they wanted.

Today, our friend told us, the police literally strutted in, one even commenting that "The good times are beginning again." They know that with Yanukovich in charge, they can do whatever they please. Anyone with the gall to confront them or to complain, will likely not be around for long. All sorts of things can happen...you get run over, you get shot in front of your home, you disappear...

Such is life in the post-Soviet era of "democracy" and "capitalism." Ordinary people do not see much change except now, every so often, they are asked to vote for someone else to rob them.

It is too bad that, back in the post-downfall of the SU days, the US did not take an active role in helping the FSU counties establish a different rule of law and system of governance. My personal opinion is that Washington was too busy celebrating its victory in the Cold War to bother to think about what was going to replace the old order in these countries, assuming that democracy and capitalism would automatically take seed out of nowhere. The sad fact is that most corrupt communist politicians simply changed their purported party affiliation and continued to run the country the old way, skimming the nation's wealth off the top and making sure that their cronies were well cared for, while suppressing those who would attempt to go after corruption, etc.

With Yanukovich in power, we can expect that, over time, Ukraine's media will be muzzled as has been the one in Russia. Then there will be crackdowns on dissidents, reprisals against those who would complain or protest, and assassinations of the ones who don't stay in line. Ukrainians won't accept this as readily as have the Russians, however, and the nation of Ukraine may find itself one day soon severely divided as its Eastern (pro-Russian) and Western (Nationalist, semi-pro-Western) sides square off to see who will really run the country. It is not a day I relish to see coming.

[Affentitten]

Bummer. And just as with Iraq and Afghanistan, the exact system of government doesn't matter a toss to them. They just want to be able to go about their daily business feeling safe from the perils of being arbitrarily robbed, beaten and killed.

[Michael Emrys]

It is too bad that, back in the post-downfall of the SU days, the US did not take an active role in helping the FSU counties establish a different rule of law and system of governance. My personal opinion is that Washington was too busy celebrating its victory in the Cold War to bother to think about what was going to replace the old order in these countries, assuming that democracy and capitalism would automatically take seed out of nowhere. The sad fact is that most corrupt communist politicians simply changed their purported party affiliation and continued to run the country the old way, skimming the nation's wealth off the top and making sure that their cronies were well cared for, while suppressing those who would attempt to go after corruption, etc.

This was my opinion at the time. Now I am less certain that we in the West could have influenced that much, but I am still saddened that we didn't even try. I think there was for a while a real spirit for change and reform. Maybe with some determined leadership they would have moved farther in that direction. What they got instead was empty promises and more of the same...only worse, as if that were possible.

Michael

[dieseltaylor]

Very sad. I am not sure that the West could have done a lot .

Not totally in jest I believe that it is not uncoincidental that for the least corrupt countries - most of the top ten are monarchies. If you like it is enshrined corruption embedded in a family however in order to keep their throne they need to be reasonably straight. What it does is remove a level of patronage and corruption that exists when "politicians" lie scream and cheat to gain the top position for giving patronage to his/her supporters.

From the populations point of view they have a family who will be there decades hence and the succession is obvious. Loyalty to the embodiment of the state is more satisfying than to a politico.

Rationally you have two power channels. The elected , and the unelected monarch who should have the judiciary and the forces swearing fealty to him/her. This should provide a power balance. he long-term interests of the monarchy are a happy population whilst those of the politician and his cronies is money and power.

The US fathers thought that their fako Roman system would work well. I think not as it is effectively a two party system with rotating emperors - and the pork barrel to support their teams. And funnily enough the number of dynastic families does tend to show humans vote for them. Given that the US has a reasonable legal systerm and a free press it could be a lot worse. However the number of free press resources is declining coming under control of media companies. See Berlusconi?italy for what happens to country with few independent sources.

[Sergei]

They just had a free and fair democratic election that followed every western standard. There was no violence, no oppression, no rigging according to foreign observers. What do you guys think would have worked better, sending in NATO troops to ensure that people understand to vote for the 'right' candidate, like in Afghanistan? Tymoshenko had her shot but the majority didn't approve her, which probably is because of dissatisfaction to her ineffective and corrupt government, not because everyone is wanting the Soviet times back. Sounds like democracy to me. I'd be more concerned of Tymoshenko's lack of respect for the results.

International monitors described the election as an impressive display of democracy.

The OSCE's head of mission, Joao Soares, said Ukraine's electoral commission had been transparent and unbiased.

[costard]

Very sad. I am not sure that the West could have done a lot .

Not totally in jest I believe that it is not uncoincidental that for the least corrupt countries - most of the top ten are monarchies. If you like it is enshrined corruption embedded in a family however in order to keep their throne they need to be reasonably straight. What it does is remove a level of patronage and corruption that exists when "politicians" lie scream and cheat to gain the top position for giving patronage to his/her supporters.

From the populations point of view they have a family who will be there decades hence and the succession is obvious. Loyalty to the embodiment of the state is more satisfying than to a politico.

Rationally you have two power channels. The elected , and the unelected monarch who should have the judiciary and the forces swearing fealty to him/her. This should provide a power balance. he long-term interests of the monarchy are a happy population whilst those of the politician and his cronies is money and power.

The US fathers thought that their fako Roman system would work well. I think not as it is effectively a two party system with rotating emperors - and the pork barrel to support their teams. And funnily enough the number of dynastic families does tend to show humans vote for them. Given that the US has a reasonable legal systerm and a free press it could be a lot worse. However the number of free press resources is declining coming under control of media companies. See Berlusconi?italy for what happens to country with few independent sources.

Long term interests (like rule of law) holding the short termers to lawful behaviour. Not easy to do when your police force has a long standing and popularly accepted culture of lawbreaking. Even harder when the laws are re-written to legalise socially destructive behaviour (witness the banking law changes of 1997 in the US).

It's hard to strike the balance between stability (which a one or two party system tends to give) and progression: regular parliamentary terms and polls at least give some sort of chance for the populace to choose their leaders. I guess we'll have to wait to see how Ukraine's democratically elected government tackles corruption: there is no doubt that a modern economy cannot compete on terms where it's business owners are subject to theft by police or other organs of the state. Your tax base disappears right quick and your army ends up having to do the job of the police - and the politicians.

It's just people being people - there have only been about 100 generations of humans since Christ's birth so it's no wonder we still haven't got it right. We don't look like getting it right anytime soon, either.

[Sergei]

Not totally in jest I believe that it is not uncoincidental that for the least corrupt countries - most of the top ten are monarchies.

Even more of them are predominantly Protestant. How's that for correlation?

[dieseltaylor]

Do you mean nominally Protestant? I am sure that the church-going Protestants are a minority in all the countries : )

[gunnergoz]

With many Ukrainians I know, Tymoschenko was seen as an alternative in the sense of the lesser of two evils. She is as greedy as most, but has a bit more accessibility and is less prone to violent tactics. She has too many rich friends that she has to keep happy, to really be seen as a populist. Yanukovich is disliked by many because, among other things, as a young man, he had criminal convictions for sexual assault and battery, which have been conveniently buried since. He is a thug and everyone knows it, no matter how expensive his suits, shoes and watch.

The real opportunity to change these countries might have been fleeting and perhaps might have been a long shot, but as it was, in the absence of other viable forces at work, the old-timers and economic predators jumped in when the FSU fell, bought up most of the economic infrastructure, and have gloried in the money and power ever since. The security forces in most FSU countries are staffed by canny folks who know how to use their positions to make them fairly wealthy, as well. So between the police and the security services (KGB, FSU or whatever they call themselves) you have a lock on physical power over the population and especially those who would protest or dissent.

Democracy? Only if you consider the fact that these countries have become less and less hospitable to dissent and journalistic integrity. The elections are as biased as in the US, where the influence of wealthy, powerful outside forces tends to shape who is put up for office. These are not citizens' democracies: they are showcases for a very vulnerable electoral system to work in, with the real power brokers sitting untouchable above it all. We just like to think our system works and that elections reflect our choices, conveniently forgetting that our choices are shaped by others whom, in many cases, we cannot directly influence.

[Bigduke6]

That said, and Gunner makes alot of a valid points, there are two things that might be worth remembering about Ukraine's elecion.

1. More than 3,300 international election monitors, and something like 300,000 local election monitors, watched the vote from end to end. The EU, OSCE, Russian government, whoever you want, they've pronounced the actual vote as essentially clean. It's true the choice of candidates sucked, but the election itself was free and fair.

2. The candidate that lost - Yulia Tymoshenko - was in power from 2005, and the prime minister of the country from 2007. During that time the economy has shrunk by about 20 per cent, and the Tymoshenko government has promised alot, and delivered very little. The guy that won, Yanukovych, had a pretty easy campaign pitch: "Vote for me, I wasn't in charge when your life really sucked, and the government lied to you about how they would fix it."

This is not to say things are wonderful in the former Soviet republic Ukraine, but the as for the election one can argue a politician that failed to deliver the goods to the voters, and happened to be in office during a serious economic downturn, got punished at the polls. Which is not something that is going to happen in Russia, Belarus, or any of the Central Asian republics.

As to the cops getting grabby now that Yanukovych is in charge, well we'll see. The media is pretty free here, and if the cops go nuts it's going to come out. Right now, there isn't alot of noise about cops extorting goods from small business, as compared to the traffic cops, who are routinely written up as corrupt.

Just my two kopecks...

[gunnergoz]

I know that a lot more of this "shopkeeper extortion" is going on, than reaches the media. My wife's friends and family, who live mostly in Eastern Ukraine, see it happening daily. Outsiders don't get to hear much about it, since if the people being victimized are heard to be openly complaining, they have bad things happen to them. So there is not much discussion, outside of the family or immediate associates, about what is happening. The usual victims tend to be small businesses that are making do, usually run by women (who are easy prey if they don't have men to protect them.) But men are also victimized, for instance:

During one of my early visits to Ukraine, I was riding in a taxi with several family members late at night when the taxi was violently pulled over by a big Mercedes; four thugs wearing badges and carrying guns in shoulder holsters, got out of the Mercedes and proceeded to try to pull the driver of our cab out of his seat, beating on him through the open door. Before I could react, my fiancee (we weren't married yet) got out and started yelling at them in their own language. They stopped the beating and came over to talk to her. This happened so quickly, I was still trying to get out of the back seat, past another passenger, when she got back into the car and we drove off. The taxi driver was thanking her profusely and I was trying to figure out what just happened. She finally explained that these guys were local FSB out having a good time punishing independent cabbies (the city mayor conveniently happened to own the competing cab company) and when she told them there was an American citizen in the car, the FSB guys beat feet. So victimizing independent businesses is something I've seen firsthand, and it just goes on and on, the militia and the FSB together putting the squeeze on whoever is there to be squeezed.