By Zoltán Dujisin
PRAGUE, Oct 5 2007 (IPS)

An exhausted public waits as Ukrainian political parties work out a coalition agreement following last week’s parliamentary elections. The governing Party of the Regions won the greatest share of the vote, but most likely the pro-Western opposition will outplay it.

The Party of the Regions won the Sep. 30 election with 34 percent of the vote, followed by Yuliya Timoshenko’s bloc with 31 percent, the pro-presidential Our Ukraine – People’s Self Defence bloc with 14 percent, the Communist Party with 5 percent and the neutral Lytvyn bloc with 4 percent.

Most political commentators in Ukraine see the election as a total victory of the populist Timoshenko over both her archrival Viktor Yanukovich from the Party of the Regions and her sporadic ally President Viktor Yushchenko.

Yanukovich has often been seen as pro-Russian, and Yushchenko and Timoshenko as part of the more pro-western ‘Orange’ camp.

No poll had predicted such a high turnout in favour of Timoshenko, who besides receiving strong backing in the traditionally supportive western regions, also managed to attract protest votes in the rest of the 50 million country.

The Party of the Regions hoped on an increase in support, but its southern and eastern strongholds saw lower turnout than anticipated.

Pundits speculate it is Yanukovich’s more pro-European and conciliatory stances the past year that alienated those voters who demand a more convincingly pro-Russian policy.

Ukraine’s elections were precipitated by an Apr. 2 presidential decree dissolving parliament and calling for fresh parliamentary elections. The President claimed the government was usurping power after some opposition parliamentarians moved to the ruling coalition.

The country’s Supreme Court proved unable to deliver a verdict due to intense political pressure, and the two sides agreed to hold an early election on Sep. 30 to avoid violence.

The Yanukovich-led government had been formed in August 2006 after the ‘Orange’, pro-western forces failed to reach an agreement over the distribution of portfolios.

“This time around voters seem to have been less excited but more serious about the elections,” Olena Fedyuk, a Marie Curie sociology fellow who observed the vote told IPS. “Ukrainians seem to have adopted a professional voter’s behaviour.

“Previous elections have always involved drama and excitement, but voters became tired, hence my impression of citizens’ disappointment and reduced interest,” she added.

The election campaign was ripe with accusations of plans for vote rigging and promises of street protests.

Small incidents and irregularities in favour of the main political forces indeed took place across the country, but Ukraine’s Committee of Voters, an election watchdog, and the 3,355 international observers declared the election’s compatibility with democratic standards.

“People are inclined to accept the results whatever they are, as long as they know the elections have been reasonably honest,” Fedyuk told IPS. “Everyone wanted to get the voting done and have parliament start working.”

Many have seen Timoshenko’s hand in Yushchenko’s bold call for early elections, and expect her to gradually sideline him as the leader of the “democratic” forces.

One likely outcome is that Timoshenko will be named prime minister, and the post of parliamentary speaker will go to a figure from a coalition partner, most probably the pro-presidential Our Ukraine – People’s Self Defence.

In his first speech after the elections, President Yushchenko asked all parliamentary forces to start consultations “on forming a majority” in parliament and on presenting a government. The President also said “there should not be two Ukraines after the elections.”

He also called on the new cabinet to stick to market mechanisms, abolish deputies’ immunity and initiate the process of adopting a new constitution, often blamed for the frequent political skirmishes in Ukraine.

His calls for understanding among all political forces have caused surprise and confusion among media and politicians alike. The Party of the Regions has saluted the President’s proposal, and interprets it as an invitation to form a grand coalition.

Timoshenko said the words of the President had been misinterpreted but warned that in case of an Our Ukraine-Party of the Regions coalition her party would remain in the opposition and eventually run against Yushchenko in the presidential elections scheduled for 2010.

The leader of the pro-presidential forces Yuriy Lutsenko excluded the formation of a grand alliance.

With political forces counting votes and considering available options, Ukrainian officials were caught off-guard by a statement by Russian gas monopoly Gazprom, which claimed a 1.3 billion dollar debt for gas supplies from Ukraine.

Ukraine is heavily reliant on Russian energy sources, but Moscow is also dependent on Ukrainian transit infrastructure.

Gazprom threatens to limit gas supplies in a move which some analysts have interpreted as a serious message to Ukraine’s political leadership before a coalition agreement is reached.

The energy giant executives are not pleased with Timoshenko’s threats to revise deals on gas prices, and would prefer the more conciliatory Yanukovich to take part in the cabinet.

The debt has been incurred by Ukrainian intermediary companies, but state officials have expressed interest in an inter-state meeting in Moscow to help resolve the impasse.

Excerpt: