Winning the election was the easy part, now the real work starts for Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, and few in the nation have any illusions about the scale of the challenge facing their new leader.
The burly billionaire businessman who built a vast fortune selling cakes and sweets has inherited a bitter legacy — a wrecked economy, rampant corruption, armed rebellion in eastern Ukraine and hostility from giant neighbor Russia.
His unprecedented feat of winning the election in Sunday’s first round of voting granted him an unexpectedly strong mandate, but it also reflected the anxiety among Ukrainians who took to heart his pre-election appeal for a swift victory because the country might otherwise face disaster.
The mood in Kiev, an elegant and normally relaxed city of 3 million people famed for its golden-domed churches and leafy boulevards, is somber, but also cautiously hopeful — not least in the business community, which broadly backs Poroshenko.
“I would say people are anxious for positive news. And they don’t want just declarations; they really want to see actions that can change perceptions of Ukraine,” said Anna Derevyanko, chief executive of the European Business Association in Kiev. “Of course the situation is tough, indeed unprecedented. We have never had such problems in the east and south... But if there is a change in the mindset of the people governing the country, if they tackle corruption and promote the rule of law, I would say there would be chances of improvement.”
The economy, still dominated by smokestack-heavy industry and reliant on exports of steel and grain 23 years after Kiev won its independence from Moscow, is expected to shrink by 3 percent this year as it reels from political turmoil and Russia’s annexation in March of the Crimea region.
Kiev clinched a US$17 billion bailout with the IMF to avoid defaulting on its large debt load, and Poroshenko has vowed to sign a deal on closer economic ties with the EU after his inauguration, expected on Saturday.
For Vadim Bodayev, vice president of agricultural firm Agro Generation, hope now lies with entrepreneurs who must be freed from the shackles of venal, intrusive bureaucrats.
“Only business can provide a way out. We need to review all the rules of the game,” he said, calling for cuts in the number of bureaucrats and higher salaries for those who remain so they will be less tempted to demand bribes from job-creating firms.
Ukrainians believe that Poroshenko, as a successful self-made businessman, understands such things very well.
“He is rich enough already, so we hope he will not steal from the state coffers,” said Katya, 22, a student.
Ukrainians say they can no longer be placated with fine words about reform, uttered by successive leaders in the past two decades, including former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych, the Moscow-backed leader ousted by street protests in February and whose name is now synonymous for many with sleaze and abuse of power.
Some Ukrainians doubt Poroshenko, even after his resounding election win, will get much done without the active cooperation of the oligarchs, the fabulously wealthy individuals who wield clout in parliament and own much of the economy.
“Changing things will depend more on the oligarchs than on the president,” said Tatyana Nesterenko, 43, owner of a beauty salon in Kiev. “The oligarchs have influence on investment and on the laws. If they don’t squirrel away their cash and instead invest it in companies and develop them, people will have work.”
Poroshenko, himself an oligarch with an estimated fortune of US$1.3 billion who has served in various governments, including Yanukovych’s, has promised to sell most of his business empire.
For all the anxiety over the economy, Ukrainians agree that his most urgent task is ending the revolt by pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine, the country’s industrial heartland, which accounts for 15 percent of national output.
“Yes, he has to rescue the economy, create jobs and revive factories. But first of all comes peace in the east,” said Inna Kulikova, 48, a public sector worker strolling in central Kiev.
Above Kiev’s main Khreshchatyk boulevard hangs a huge blue-and-yellow Ukrainian flag with the slogan “one country” — a forlorn aspiration after Russia’s seizure of Crimea and the revolt in eastern Ukraine.
The flag hangs on the side of a shopping mall, under renovation, which is owned by Ukraine’s richest man, Rinat Akhmetov, a steel-and-mining magnate who will likely be one of the people Poroshenko will have to deal with in his future plans.
Television channels, which also show the flag and slogan, beam images of carnage from the eastern city of Donetsk, where government forces are battling pro-Russian rebels who reject Kiev’s authority and have appealed to Moscow to intervene.
“What is happening there is very worrying,” Bodayev said.
At least 50 rebels were killed in a big government offensive last week, some of them Russian nationals who came to eastern Ukraine to defend its mainly Russian-speaking population against what they call a “fascist junta” in Kiev. On Thursday, rebels shot down an army helicopter, killing 14 Ukrainian servicemen.
In Kiev itself, the tent city erected by anti-Yanukovych protesters last winter still stands, despite the election of a new president, and the 1,000 or so people still camped out there have vowed to keep up their pro-democracy vigil for now.
“We want to see how the new president turns out. We are not ready to leave yet. I want to live in a normal country. I want Ukraine to be independent,” said Lidia Kravchuk, 18, speaking in the heavily accented Russian of her native western Ukraine.
The pressure on Poroshenko is huge, and the stakes could not be higher for this sprawling country of 45 million people pitched on the crossroads between central Europe and Russia.
“I understand this is all very, very difficult,” said Kulikova, the public sector worker. “But he is the president now, and so he has to deal with all these problems. But I am an optimist — we have stepped back from the abyss.”
Additional reporting by Natalia Zinets
Taiwan’s status in the world community is experiencing something really different; it’s being treated like a normal country. And not just a “normal” country, more like a valuable, constructive, democratic and generous country. This is not simply an artifact of Taiwan’s successes in combatting the novel coronavirus. It is a new attitude, weighing Taiwan’s democracy against China’s lack of it. Before I continue, I should apologize to the readers of the Taipei Times. I have not visited Taipei since the opening of the American Institute in Taiwan’s new chancery building in Neihu last year, so I was unprepared for the photograph
On Sept. 27, 2002, the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste (East Timor) joined the UN to become its 191st member. Since then, two other nations have joined, Montenegro on June 28, 2006, and South Sudan on July 14, 2011. The combined total of the populations of these three nations is just more than half that of Taiwan’s 23.7 million people. East Timor has 1.3 million, Montenegro has slightly more than half a million and South Sudan has 10.9 million. They all are members of the UN, yet much more populous Taiwan is denied membership. Of the three, East Timor, as a Southeast Asian
At a June 12 news conference held by the Talent Circulation Alliance to announce the release of its white paper for this year, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) emphasized that, in this era of globalization, Taiwan should focus on improving foreign language and digital abilities when cultivating talent, so that it stands out from global competitors. I suggest the government should consider building a professional translation industry. If the public believes that there is a relationship between learning English and national competitiveness, then the nation must consider the social cost of language education. This should be assessed to maximise educational effectiveness: Is
Taiwan has for decades singlehandedly borne the brunt of a revanchist, ultra-nationalist China — until now. Ever since Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison had the temerity to call for a transparent, international investigation into the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic, Beijing has been turning the screws on Canberra. This has included unleashing aggressive “wolf warrior” diplomats to intimidate Australian policymakers, enacting punitive tariffs on its exports, and threatening an embargo on Chinese tourists and students to the nation. A tense situation became more serious on June 19 after Morrison revealed that a “sophisticated state-based actor” — read: China — had launched a