On January 12, Yulia Tymoshenko plunged a knife into the heart of the Maidan. It was on that day that parliament overrode the President's veto of the Law of Ukraine "On the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine." Were it not for the obedient votes of the BYuT faction, the "anti-crisis" coalition would not have had three hundred "bayonets" to overcome the Head of State's veto. Yulia Volodymyrivna, having cast off her "opposition" mask, demonstrated her true goals. She is absolutely uninterested in the will of millions of voters who voted against the dominance of the "Donetsk" people in power and the return of revanchist forces. She needs power—boundless and all-encompassing. For its sake, Tymoshenko is ready to pay any price, even by voting for an anti-democratic law and the return of authoritarianism, against which hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian citizens froze on the winter Maidan of 2004.
The law on the Cabinet is needed, but which one?
Of course, a law on the Cabinet of Ministers is needed. President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko has repeatedly emphasized this. The adoption of a coordinated, balanced document was supposed to put an end to the managerial crisis and the "war over powers" that has been ongoing in the country for more than a year—since the new edition of the Constitution came into force. However, the law adopted by BYuT and the "anti-crisis" members, written by the Party of Regions, crossed out these possibilities. The law completely monopolizes power in the hands of the Prime Minister. It nullifies the principle of "checks and balances," perpetuates the imbalance of the system of power, and unlawfully restricts the constitutional powers of the President of Ukraine.
The administration and "manual mode" of governance written into this law will inevitably increase corruption at the highest state positions, and will turn the country's regions into governmental "fiefdoms" governed by a few high-ranking officials. It also provides for interference by the Government in the activities of local authorities and self-government bodies. The President of Ukraine and the "Our Ukraine" faction submitted a large number of amendments to the Law "On the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine," but they were ignored.
Overcoming the presidential veto can be called nothing other than an anti-constitutional coup and the usurpation of power by the "anti-crisis" coalition together with their new satellite—the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc.
On January 12, all of us witnessed how the "anti-crisis" coalition transformed into an anti-constitutional quartet that plays only the music it is ordered to play. That day was another test for the orange forces and indeed all democratic forces of Ukraine. After betrayal No. 1—the collapse of the orange coalition by Oleksandr Moroz—this peculiar relay was "picked up" by the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc, joining the so-called "anti-crisis" coalition. This became betrayal No. 2. After the treacherous actions of BYuT, which supported the anti-constitutional coup with its votes, the only force remaining in parliament that will always defend the ideals of the Maidan is "Our Ukraine."
BYuT—Yanukovych's pocket opposition
In general, the Party of Regions never hid its intentions to take revenge for Viktor Yanukovych's defeat in the 2004 presidential campaign. On January 12, the regionalists got the opportunity to revise the will of the Maidan, having practically completely usurped the powers of the President. So how does BYuT behave in this situation, given that it so loudly declares its opposition at every step? Let us note: this is not the first principled vote by BYuT together with the regionalists and communists. Among the series of insidious, treacherous steps by Tymoshenko one can include the vote for the resignation of the orange Government of Yekhanurov, and the overriding of the President's veto on the moratorium on land sales, and the attempt to dismiss the Maidan field commander Yuriy Lutsenko from the post of Minister of Internal Affairs. These examples are far from accidental; they show the systematic nature of joint voting by BYuT and the "anti-crisis" members.
It is precisely thanks to Tymoshenko's treacherous behavior that the threat of creating a constitutional majority in parliament that is anti-constitutional in spirit (in the number of three hundred deputies) has become absolutely real, in which format BYuT will join the "anti-crisis" members. And then those anti-constitutional provisions of the law on the Cabinet that monopolize state power in the hands of the premier will be finally legalized by amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine, for which this newly formed majority will vote.
We have witnessed the distribution of political roles. Today BYuT is merely an opposition department attached to the Cabinet of Ministers, and a obedient opposition that acts in absolute sync with Yanukovych. On non-principled issues, the regionalists will allow their "pocket opposition"—BYuT—to imitate independence and opposition. And on other issues advantageous to themselves, they act in solidarity with Yanukovych against the President of Ukraine.
Tymoshenko's true plans
Let us recall: Tymoshenko repeatedly stated the need to cancel the political reform, since she dreamed of occupying the post of Head of State with the powers of the Kuchma era. However, the political reform "pushed through" during the Orange Revolution transformed our country from a presidential-parliamentary into a parliamentary-presidential republic, with the resulting redistribution of powers among all branches of government.
However, the law on the Cabinet "pushed through" by the "anti-crisis" members offered Tymoshenko another option—broad powers of the Premier. BYuT immediately seized upon this alternative, since there are no guarantees that the political reform will be canceled. Such inconsistency on Tymoshenko's part—on the one hand, the desire to cancel the political reform, and on the other, voting for the law on the Cabinet—testifies to the immoderate power ambitions of the BYuT leader, who stops at nothing. Yulia Tymoshenko's main goal is to obtain maximum power powers, regardless of the method of achieving them. One of them is an alliance with the declared "enemy"—the Party of Regions.
What is the price of such actions, of the actual betrayal of the values that the orange forces fought for together? Let us recall that Kuchmism as a phenomenon also began with the ignoring of the Constitution of Ukraine. Unfortunately, we are observing the evolution of BYuT from a political force that professed democratic values and participated in the Orange Revolution into an authoritarian structure with oppositional-populist rhetoric headed by a charismatic leader. The conclusion is one: BYuT is leading to tectonic destructive shifts in the foundation of still young Ukrainian democracy.