BY
Following on from yesterday’s
entry that highlighted the rumour (which is gaining momentum) of a new Cabinet
of Ministers by 15th March and possibly a new #Prime_Minister in Natalia
Jaresko, aside from the problems faced by any new appointees that were faced by
the current incumbents, there is perhaps one unique, albeit unlikely,
possibility that presents itself – and yes, pigs will probably fly first.
As stated in
the aforementioned entry, “Nevertheless, regardless of any subsequent Cabinet composition
or new PM, whatever policy then flows from it will require the support of the
current parliamentarians (and those behind many of them) for it to be effective
– and those policies are not likely to be very different from those of PM
Yatseniuk and current Cabinet as many are shaped by IMF and Association
Agreement obligations.” – In short, would the oligarchy that
support so many political parties and dozens of individual parliamentarians,
provide more support for similar policies from a Jaresko Cabinet than it has
offered to the current incumbents?
That Ms
Jaresko would be probably the only consensus candidate to replace PM Yatseniuk
was stated in October last year – “To be blunt, Ms Jaresko would be the only realistic possibility
that could gather a domestic political consensus and also enjoy the support of
friendly external supporters and donors in a change of Cabinet (rather than
elections) – but is she interested? She would probably take the role out
of a sense of obligation to Ukraine to avoid internal implosion, but that does
not equate to wanting the role. Notwithstanding a serious corruption
fumble between now and any ouster/resignation of PM Yatseniuk, she is perhaps
the only “consensus alternative.”
She is the
only possible consensus domestic candidate for she is the only realistic
possibility not beholding to a specific oligarch or the oligarchy collectively.
She is free of nefarious political history or business dealings in
Ukraine, and entered Ukrainian politics at the behest of the Ukrainian
political class. She would also enjoy, and does enjoy, support from all
of Ukraine’s external supporters and institutions. In this regard she
would be absolutely unique as a Prime Minister as far as Ukraine is concerned,
for all previous incumbents have either been oligarchy themselves, or beholding
to one or more oligarch. No previous incumbent has been so politically
clean.
Whether her
Cabinet lasts 6 months or 12 (or perhaps longer) very much depends upon the
individual and/or collective will of certain oligarchs via the parties and
individual parliamentary votes the “own”.
The
opportunity, as slim and as unlikely as it may be, is a chance to negotiate
with the oligarchy to remove/dramatically reduce their odious presence in
politics and contain them within the business/economic sphere where they
belong.
For those that
have ever had the opportunity to speak to the oligarchs alone (and many of the
minigarchs), there seems to be a general consensus that all would
(theoretically) reduce their political machinations if only they could be
certain the others would do the same. Most seem quite aware that society
will suffer their continued games only for so long. They are getting
older and there is an ever-growing politically active younger generation that
simply holds them in contempt.
The next
Maidan happens either within the Verkhovna Rada or with the oligarchy (and
their puppets) as the target of public ire.
(Indeed sooner
rather than later perhaps, it seems probable that Governor Saakashvili is going
to have to call out President Poroshenko for hindering reform and
anti-corruption efforts. As Governor Saakashvili is constitutionally
barred for many years hence from becoming President, he may well back Andri
Sadovy, (head of Samopomich and Lviv Mayor) in the next Presidential elections
with a view to becoming his Prime Minister. We may also see Yulia
Tymoshenko lurch to the political left in an attempt to gather in the
unrepresented socialist/communist voters via her usual populist policy
necrophilia (populist policies that have long since proven to be dead but which
she cannot let go of).
A persistent
problem regarding negotiations with the oligarchy has been one of trust.
The oligarchy do not trust each other, and as one or several have always
backed any sitting President or Prime Minister to the cost of the others, there
has been limited (or no) trust in any political leader when it comes to
negotiations and guarantees of solutions to remove them (and the costs they
incur) from politics thereafter.
What has been
consistently lacking is somebody that they can all trust – or perhaps better
written, somebody none of them distrust. Somebody that does not work with
any of them and is beholding to none of them. Somebody who will also
defend the interests of the State whilst also defending the interests of
business – or in the case of the oligarchy, big business, fairly.
Ms Jaresko has
given none of them reason to distrust her. Neither is she somebody
beholding to any of them. She answered the call of the Ukrainian State
yet clearly has an understanding of the interests of big business.
Further Ms Jaresko is clearly a more than reasonable negotiator, having
reached agreements with the IMF and those holding substantial Ukrainian debt
successfully. Even if those negotiations have done little more than kick
the can 5 years or so down the road, kicking that can was successfully achieved
in very difficult circumstances. It was in fact essential.
If a Prime
Minister Jaresko is to become reality – and it is by no means certain – then
she is uniquely placed to attempt to have these discussions with the oligarchy.
They may even take her up on the offer of renegotiating the political and
economic rules if their concerns are somehow met.
The first
concern is that any reduction in influence occurs across the oligarchical board
at the same time and to the same level. A strong driver for their
continued interference is to be able to protect their (questionably/nefariously
acquired) property rights. Political influence and oligarchical property
rights ebb and flow in unison historically, depending upon who backed who at
the political pinnacle of any incumbent power.
Ergo, the
sensitive topic of guaranteeing their already misappropriated and misused
assets from future State and peer attempts to remove them would seemingly be a
prerequisite. In short, a line drawn over historical acquisitions of
years past, yet a line that clearly defines further nefarious acts as unprotected
by the agreement.
It is not
something this blog would necessarily agree with, but it is a policy option
that could provide the opportunity of removing/reducing the oligarchy within
politics by agreement. Over the next few years there seem few alternatives
other than to see the oligarchy swinging from lampposts due to an angry mob, or
to simply allow matters to continue (perhaps until they are all dead due to old
age).
If that option
be pursued, the question is then how such property rights are guaranteed
without their nefarious and cancerous hands pulling the strings within
Ukrainian politics. Passing such a law is of course no problem should
they all agree considering the parties and individual parliamentarians they
control – but setting such a deal in law sits extremely uncomfortably with the
blog (and no doubt many others). Ergo some form of legal contract (rather
than law) between “the State” and the oligarchy could be reached, the penalties
within so onerous on either party to that contract, that breaking it would be
folly.
In short the
creation of conditions whereby the oligarchy have more interest in playing in
business than in politics – and that seemingly requires a guarantee of property
rights for existing assets first and foremost. It will also require an
end to government subsidies, bad debt write-offs and State recapitalisations
across all State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) both in which the oligarchy currently
own shares and also those they do not (yet) in order to avoid temptation for
one party, and ease the economic burden for the other.
A Prime
Minister Jaresko, though unique in her distance from oligarch contamination,
would still require extremely robust and forceful external support (and perhaps
deal guarantors) not only to be successful, but perhaps simply to begin such
negotiations. (Incentivising rumours of yet more sealed indictments or
money laundering probes ala Firtash perhaps?) Some of those external
guarantors would be hesitant to put it mildly – but if any Jaresko government
is to succeed it requires the oligarchy not to obstruct it, and for her to
treat them all equitably in return.
This is of
course, all hypothetical. Firstly PM Yatseniuk still sits in his chair as
PM. Secondly a PM Jaresko would want to take such a negotiation path and
strike such a grubby deal. The oligarchy would also have to want to
negotiate too. Lastly any deal made over irrevocable property rights for
a significant and permanent political retreat would require guarantees (and guarantors)
that would last far into the political future.
Looking past
the possibility of a Prime Minister Jaresko appearing in the next few weeks
(for however long that tenure prove to be), and to the results of any early
Verkhovna Rada elections, there are but few even remotely possible outcomes
that would produce any Prime Minister free from oligarchy influence.
Mikhail Saakashvili or………? Certainly not Andri Sadovy, for his eye
remains firmly on the presidency. If, (and it is an if given the political
mathematics and undoubted TV campaigning issues he will face) a PM Saakashvili
were to appear, would the oligarchy rue having missed the chance to negotiate a
deal (with guarantees and guarantors) with a PM Jaresko, (and in doing so also
insured her tenure lasting longer)?
Nevertheless,
despite the fact that a PM Jaresko and Cabinet may have a short tenure ahead
due to the probability of early Verkhovna Rada elections prevailing, she would
present a unique opportunity to negotiate with the oligarchy that has
previously never presented itself.
Flying pigs,
naturally, are more likely however!
No comments:
Post a Comment