Petro Poroshenko becomes focus of Ukraine’s disillusion

Roman Olearchyk

Two years after the revolution that toppled Ukraine’s pro-Russia president Viktor Yanukovich, dozens of demonstrators were burning tyres outside Kiev’s presidential building again on Friday, amid scuffles with riot police.

“We want him to come out here and talk to us, to look him in the eyes and ask: what is going on in our country?” said Serhiy Koba, a protest leader — referring not to Mr Yanukovich, but to his successor: pro-western president Petro Poroshenko.

The street protest capped a bad week for Mr Poroshenko. It began with disclosures in the Panama Papers that he had set up an offshore holding company to move his confectionery business — a pillar of his billion-dollar fortune — to the British Virgin Islands.

Then came another calamity as Dutch voters in a referendum rejected ratification of an EU-Ukraine integration agreement, dealing a heavy blow to Kiev. It was Mr Yanukovich’s refusal to sign that EU accord, amid threats from Moscow, that sparked the 2014 revolution.

“This is a verdict on a president who . . . for the past two years has systematically and persistently chosen the past over the future,” said Mustafa Nayem, an instigator of the 2014 “Maidan” protests and now a reformist MP in Mr Poroshenko’s parliament faction.

Another activist MP, Serhiy Leshchenko, said the Dutch vote was a “cold shower for Ukraine’s political elite” and showed Kiev was “losing international support because of the lack of reforms”.

Mr Leshchenko said the offshore revelations may have contributed to the Dutch “no” vote after front-page photographs in the Netherlands showed Mr Poroshenko alongside Russian president Vladimir Putin, whose associates were also ensnared by the Panama leaks.

Even though the president, and his advisers Rothschild Trust, said that he had not broken rules or evaded tax, the disclosures have crystallised disillusionment with the smooth, English-speaking Mr Poroshenko.

The man who swept to a first-round victory with 53 per cent of the vote in May 2014 elections has since seen his approval rating slip to barely 20 per cent, according to recent polls. Since the revolution that brought him to power, Ukrainians have suffered the Russian annexation of Crimea, the conflict with Moscow-backed separatists in the east, and a slump in living standards.

“Not enough has changed,” explained an employee of Ukraine’s central bank watching Friday’s protest. His comment reflects a widespread view that the country is still dominated by vested interests and oligarchs, of whom Mr Poroshenko has long been one, who are blocking reforms to curb corruption and boost the rule of law.

Criticism over the slow reforms was previously targeted largely at prime minister Arseniy Yatseniuk, who resigned on Sunday after a two-month political crisis.

As the Kiev infighting has continued, discontent has shifted towards his rival — Mr Poroshenko.

Anders Aslund, a Ukraine expert at the Atlantic Council think-tank in Washington, said that the crisis had been precipitated by attempts by the Poroshenko camp to consolidate more power over the government.

It began with February’s resignation of Aivaras Abromavicius, the technocratic, Lithuania-born economy minister. Mr Abromavicius accused a prominent MP and business partner of Mr Poroshenko of exerting pressure to stack the management of state companies, which offer lucrative opportunities for rent-seeking, with presidential loyalists.

Ukraine’s ruling pro-western coalition then splintered when Mr Yatseniuk narrowly survived a parliamentary no-confidence vote, stalling the next payment from a $17.5bn International Monetary Fund support package.

Mr Poroshenko was criticised for failing to muster parliamentary backing for a mooted all-technocrat government led by the US-born finance minister, Natalie Jaresko — favoured by foreign investors.

Instead, the president appeared on Sunday to have succeeded in efforts to appoint a new government headed by a close ally, the parliament speaker Volodymyr Groysman, leading to concerns that the president could monopolise political power.

Mr Poroshenko’s image was dealt another blow last month even as he allowed another presidential loyalist to be removed as Ukraine’s general prosecutor. The US had openly urged Mr Poroshenko to sack Viktor Shokin, who had failed to prosecute a single member of the Yanukovich regime or the post-revolutionary elite.

But before leaving office, Mr Shokin managed to dismiss the deputy prosecutor-general, Davit Sakvarelidze, widely seen as honest and effective.

For now, Friday’s protests seem unlikely to persist. Some in Kiev say that their leader, Mr Koba, has been discredited. He is facing government investigations into his affairs. But there are warning signals.

Ukraine’s presidential building was guarded by an elite police unit largely made up of former Maidan protesters who later served in “volunteer” battalions in the east Ukraine conflict. Some expressed sympathy with protesters; one, giving his name as Alexander, said that their demands were “fair”.

So was he on the president’s or protesters’ side? “I will follow orders to protect the people,” he said carefully. “We were with the people two years ago on Maidan; we will be with them today.”

 Original