Soviet Bank Deposits and and Fulfilling Election Promises
June 2, 2009 – 11:02 amSoviet Bank Deposits
The question of Soviet bank deposits lost to Ukrainian citizens after the disintegration of the USSR and during the hyperinflation of 1993 continues to be both applauded and condemned. On 22 May the Yulia Tymosahenko government issued a resolution to repay 250 million hryvni in 2009 towards the lost deposit’s by giving 1,000 hryvni to individuals. Grytsenko believes that they should be returned as this would return public trust to the Ukrainian state. ‘The state should take responsibility and return these lost savings. But this should be done without provoking inflation’. Grytsenko did not explain how one (returning the deposits) can be undertaken without the other (inflation), especially during a global financial crisis when proceeds to the budget have declined. Grytsenko simply explains that it is necessary to, ‘balance between financing of the budget and a returning the lost costs’. The presidential secretariat’s socio-economic department thinks otherwise. They believe that returning the deposits will be a farce and again reduce public trust in the state. The secretariat pointed out that in 2008, when the process of returning the deposits was first undertaken, 12.8 million Ukrainians registered of whom only 6.4 million obtained 1,000 hryvni each. To compensate all 12.8 million Ukrainians would have required an additional 5.8 to 6.4 million hryvni. Similarly in 2009, the majority of Ukrainians registered to receive compensation will not receive it, according to the presidential secretariat.
In the 2004 elections, Grytsenko headed the Razumkov Centre (Ukrainian Centre for Economic and Political Studies) and then went on to head the analytical-research division of Viktor Yushchenko’s election campaign. Grytsenko and other experts in the Razumkov Centre wrote the majority of Yushchenko’s social-populist election programme (‘Ten Steps’) and 14 draft decrees. Draft decree number 2 outlines how businessmen and oligarchs would be required to pay a one-off tax surcharge for enterprises they privatised at below-market prices. The monies collected from the one-off tax would be used to re-pay the lost bank deposits.
What conclusions can be drawn from the bank deposit affair? Grytsenko is being consistent in supporting this policy in 2004 and today. Yushchenko ignored his 2004 election programme after he became president while his condemnation of the government’s ‘populism’ in seeking to fulfill his own election programme by repaying the deposits is duplicitious. The Tymoshenko bloc included this policy in its 2007 election programme and began fulfilling the election pledge in 2008. The method of how it was undertaken and if it caused inflation should be subject to public discussion. At the same time, the message is very clear: if you fulfill your election programme Ukrainian voters will back you (in the first half of 2008 Tymoshenko rose to first place in popularity of Ukrainian politicians). If you don’t – as seen with Oleksandr Moroz’s Socialist Party and President Yushchenko – Ukrainian voters will drop their support. It is time that Ukrainian politicians began to realise that Ukrainian voters are far more savvy than they realise.
14 Responses to “Soviet Bank Deposits and and Fulfilling Election Promises”
Hello.
I like your site and wanted to know if you would be interested in exchanging blogroll links.
Thanks in advance
By Mike Harmon on Jun 2, 2009
What interesting article, but where took information?
By MusLopil on Jun 2, 2009
Why no opinion article about the Tymoshenko/Yanukovich coup? Do you really expect to divert attention away with a piece on Soviet Bank Deposits? Not very academic Taras.
By Wolodymir on Jun 3, 2009
Has the coalition been formed? If it is then there can be comments. I do not comment on rumours.
By Taras Kuzio on Jun 3, 2009
Dr. Kuzio, you might want to check out Pavel Korduban’s article about the “shyrka” at the Eurasia Daily Monitor (a publication with which you are very familiar).
By elmer on Jun 4, 2009
I read Korduban and, as usual, found it weak in its analysis.
There has been no coup yet. When and if a coalition is formed then we can comment on whether it is a coup. By the way, why is a grand coalition of BYuT-Regions a “coup” while a grand coalition of Our Ukraine-Regions an act of unifying eastern and western Ukraine?
By Taras Kuzio on Jun 4, 2009
Because Tymoshenko and Yanukovich are agreeing to a Putenesque Dictatorship under the guise of democracy, whereby they will both retain power for at least 10 years, without the say of the people, that’s why Taras. Yushchenko has himself stated he is all for a grand coalition who’s aim is working to solve the current financial crisis, but, for some reason you refuse to either see that or admit it. Yushchenko’s inability to work with Tymoshenko? Surely you jest. It’s now becoming quite clear that Yushchenko has known for some time now what you and many others have not. Tymoshenko is out for herself and no one else, how could one possibly work with a Priemier who’s priorities are not in her countries best interests. Now she’s even buttering up to Baloga, amazing, just purely amazing.
By Wolodymir on Jun 4, 2009
Dr. Kuzio, the coup has been in the planning for quite a long time.
I think prevention is better than cure.
In Ukraine, with its Chernobyl syndrome, one lets the tragedy happen, and then moans and groans and weeps and wrings one’s hands abou it.
Why is a grand coalition of BYuT-Regions a coup, as opposed to a shyrka of Our Ukraine-Regions?
Well, because as I recall, the only thing that happened was a “universal agreement,” which was universally ignored. It did not involved rigging the democracy for the convenience of maggot oligarchs – including Tymonatrix.
Now, Tymoshenko is hell bent on staying in power, conveniently, and she will make a deal with the devil – the maggots from the Donbass Mafia – to do so.
Neither the “universal agreement” nor the current “constitutional reform” is any good.
But it’s a matter of degree.
The “universal agreement” was bad, as a shyrka with the Party of Regions.
The current “proposed” shyrka is worse.
In a word, or maybe several -
.
By elmer on Jun 4, 2009
I will edit out defamatory words, please be aware. Discussion does not need to reach low depths.
“Yushchenko has himself stated he is all for a grand coalition who’s aim is working to solve the current financial crisis, but, for some reason you refuse to either see that or admit it. Yushchenko’s inability to work with Tymoshenko?”
Most Western and Ukrainian commentators believe the cause of their inability to work together is Yushchenko and his former side kick Baloga. I know for a fact that in December 2007-January 2008, after Tymoshenko came back as Premier, that the BYuT/Tymoshenko side offered to support Yushchenko’s election for a second term. There was no reciprocity from Yushchenko and instead daily attacks and attempt at undermining the government. Yushchenko’s ratings collapsed to 2-3% in the course of 2008.
Re-read my Moscow Times op ed: you are obviously wrong to say that I have ignored the un-democratic aspects of the coalition (such as prolonging the Rada, giving Yanukovych two terms as president elected in the Rada and giving him greater powers than Yushchenko has under the 2006 constitution). I condemned this in the op ed and condemn it now (and will continue to do so).
“the coup has been in the planning for quite a long time”. Do you have inside information to make this claim? Ukrainian politics is never long term! Ukrainian politics is always undertaken for short term gain.
“I think prevention is better than cure.” I agree – its now up to Yushchenko. Maybe this will become his finest hour (and ride back to power)???? I bet Yushchenko wishes he had never released Baloga!
I am surprised at how weak is the BYuT media counter-attack.
This coming week will decide if it happens or not. Look out for a rocky week.
By Taras Kuzio on Jun 5, 2009
Hmmn, Yushchenko refused to work with Tymoshenko, I guess thats why he went through the whole process of disbanding the VR, holding new elections and appointing Tymoshenko as Premier yet again. Lotta work for someone he doesnt want to work with. Yushchenko and Tymoshenko made agreements, its quite clear Tymoshenko refused to live up to her end of the bargain once she was appointed Premier. I guess thats Yushchenko’s fault also.
I find it remarkable that so called educated people in this world cant see their face for their thumb.
By Wolodymir on Jun 5, 2009
Re: the coup has been in the planning for a long time.
1) Ukrainian Pravda has run several articles about the secret meetings between Tymo and Yanuk, which have taken place over the past year. Now, several members of both BYuT and PoR have admitted that talks have taken place, despite previous denials.
And it’s all bubbled to the surface – witness the proceedings in Parliament, where the main talk is about who called who names in the past, whether people’s feelings were hurt, “who’s on top,” and the mega-coalition.
2) There were quite a few bombardments started in Ukrainian media and even blogs, etc. regarding a) the need to reform the consitution and b) converting to a Parliamentary form of government.
Tymo has made sure not to show up.
And as one article pointed out, neither side wants to be the first to agree, as this will alienate their voters.
Tymo vowed, in the past, that she would never get into bed with PoR.
Similar noises from PoR.
Kind of odd that they think that only the side that is the first to announce will have its support crater.
Politics sure makes strange bedfellows.
By elmer on Jun 5, 2009
The draft decree is published in Viktor Yushchenko. 100 dniv prezydetstva: priama mova (Kharkiv: Folio, 2005).
See also my paper on Populism in Ukraine that can be downloaded from my home page.
By Taras Kuzio on Jun 9, 2009
I do not know what a blogroll link is!!!
By Taras Kuzio on Jun 9, 2009