The coalition that assumed power in Ukraine, thanks to the “Orange Revolution”, broke up after nine months of existence. As our readers know, there was and underlying crisis among the different factions that were trying to control the political power and the economic wealth at the same time.

The conflict began as soon as Viktor Yushchenko took the victory. Both Yulia Tymoshenko and Petro Porochenko were aspiring to the post of Prime Minister on behalf of rival oligarchic clans, but it was the former who finally took the jackpot. However, the situation really deteriorated in the last days.

The Prime Minister wasted no opportunity to undermine the presidential authority. She took advantage of the economic difficulties caused by the rise of the dollar and the shortage of oil in an effort to concentrate more power in her hands. It was her who revealed the sumptuous way of life of the President’s son. She revealed that the young man had monopolized the term “Orange Revolution” by registering trade marks in the Institute of Intellectual Property and receiving royalties for any mention of it in any circumstance that dealt with national history.
The first direct harsh blow against the president was the resignation of Alexander Zintchenko, former campaign director for Yushchenko. In an interview with Izvestia, Zintchenko took the offensive and settled scores denouncing the corruption of Petro Porochenko and several other personalities, and also attacking Boris Berezovski, the Russian oligarch in exile.
At first, the President’s answer was to support Porochenko but later he began to analyze whose heads should start to roll in the fight against corruption and security services. In short, as he was unable to publicly put order among his allies, he decided to fire all the government officials when they were about to present the budget plan before Parliament. It is very likely that tensions between the two clans favored the Russian influence in Ukraine. President Yushchenko has just proposed a sort of stability pact to the Duma. Yesterday, his former rival, during the presidential campaign, Viktor Yanukovych, announced that he was considering an alliance with the followers of the former Prime Minister, which indicates that Tymoshenko may have got closer to Russia, after having become a nightmare.
In the face of this series of resignations and sudden changes of mind, former Ukrainian president Leonid Kravtchuk spoke before Parliament to denounce his successor’s inability to govern. Gazeta SNG, the news daily of the CIE, published his speech in which he stigmatizes the nepotism of President Viktor Yushchenko and the corruption in his government. In his opinion, the only choice of the government is to organize early presidential elections.

This political crisis could endanger the incorporation of Ukraine to the World Trade Organization and would affect its rapprochement to NATO and the European Union, a situation that would not upset Ukrainian Communist parliament member Georgi Kriutchkov, who reaffirms his opposition to this double entry in an interview with However, he notes that the Ukrainian pro-American elites will do everything within their reach to join the Atlantic organization. It would strengthen Washington’s position against Russia to the detriment of Moscow and Europe’s independence. Thus, he makes an appeal to the countries of the Old Europe, particularly to France, to oppose the Ukrainian integration.

In the meantime, in the face of a crisis that basically opposes oligarchic clans, the western media seem disconcerted. Clinging to their romantic description of the “Orange Revolution” that – in their opinion – opposed pro-western reformists and a corrupt and pro-Russian power, they are unable to explain the crisis. Today, they hesitate and fail to make a decision on which faction should be presented as the reformist and which should be denounced as the corrupt one.

The crisis in Ukraine takes place at a time when another incorporation to the European Union is under consideration and which the Atlantist media (though not only them) favor. Those who oppose Ankara’s integration to the European Union use the topic of the recognition of Cyprus aiming at blocking the opening of negotiations scheduled to begin on October 3rd. In response, the New York Times publishes articles that favor this integration.
Its European affiliate, the International Herald Tribune publishes two texts that encourage Ankara’s incorporation. It is not a debate in favor or against it but a distribution of the arguments that favor its integration.
British Foreign Affairs Minister Jack Straw uses the traditional arguments of the Atlantist media: Turkey is an ally in the war on terror, like it was during the Cold War, and it is essential to bring it to the western bloc. Referring to the terrorist attacks in Istanbul almost two years ago, he suggests that if that city was a target for Al-Qaeda it is because Turkey is an ally of the West. In the economic area, he is confident: Turkey’s economy is growing and its incorporation to the European Union will benefit everyone. Once the economic and military topics were analyzed by Tony Blair’s minister, Professor Soli Ozel, an expert of the Project Syndicate, speaks in favor of his country’s integration and he uses the argument of democratization. Retaking the issue of the future trial against writer Orhan Pamuk, who denounced the massacre of Kurds and Armenians, he affirms that this attack against the freedom of speech should be analyzed within the Turkish context. It is true that the trial is reprehensible but it is important, above all, to note the evolution of the country. Contrary to appearances and to what those who oppose the integration may try to make believe, Turkey is in the road of democratization.

In the Daily Star, an affiliate of the International Herald Tribune in the Middle East, Professor Duygu Bazoglu Sezer follows the same line of his colleague Soli Ozel. He notes that although Turkey is not a complete liberal democracy yet, it is on the right track. The authoritarianism for which the Turkish government has been criticized is only a dying remainder of the Kemalist revolution, authoritarian but necessary stage towards the westernization of the country.