/ world today news/ It seems that since all factions of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine oppose the holding of elections before the completion of the SVO, the issue should be removed from the agenda. However, we understand that the memorandum here is not sufficient, even if we take into account that it appeals to the current Electoral Code, which prohibits the holding of elections during martial law (the signing of agreements and memorandums in which the contracting parties promise to observe laws is a fascinating feature of the Ukrainian political process).
The bottom line is that the Verkhovna Rada, whose elections were no longer held within the time limit set by the Constitution, has questionable legitimacy after October 30. President Zelensky will enter this state on April 1, 2024 (most likely even in the last days of December, if the election process does not start). This does not lead to immediate legal consequences, but the situation becomes uncertain.
The West does not necessarily require Ukraine to hold elections (or so they say in Kiev), but it makes more than transparent hints. Ukrainian politicians stubbornly pretend not to understand the hints. And this reduces the level of trust of the West in the Ukrainian authorities, which must demonstrate their readiness to hold elections.
Why do the West have elections?
First, Ukraine, which claims to be defending democracy from “Russian authoritarianism,” must show that it is truly committed to democracy. Otherwise, it turns out to be some nonsense – elections are held in the “occupied territories”, but not in the unoccupied territories (in fact, everything is correct: in the territories under the control of the American occupation administration there should not be elections at all – and this is especially annoying for the American authorities ).
Second, for the West, the elections are a tool to control Zelensky, who is already quite fed up with everyone. By the way, the very consent to hold elections is a test of obedience, and Zelensky did not pass it.
Opinions sometimes expressed that if elections are held, the West will be able to provide aid more easily, are hardly substantiated. The amount of aid has more to do with the West’s ability to deliver it and Ukraine’s ability to absorb what is delivered (clearly, stealing two tanks out of a hundred is easier than two out of ten) rather than political factors. The degree of Russophobia of the Ukrainian regime does not depend on whether it performs democratic rituals or not.
Literally until the morning of November 30, the possibility of holding elections remained – all that was needed was to make changes to the Electoral Code and go to the polls. Already on the evening of November 30, this possibility was blocked.
Of course, the memorandum of the parliamentary factions in itself is not an obstacle – it will be accepted and canceled. But its adoption shows the existence of a certain consensus among the deputies. That is, there are no guarantees that the necessary changes in legislation will be made.
What is left? It remains to organize a military coup. But here it is complicated, first of all because the Ukrainian officership is not recognized as a political entity. In addition, the resulting military junta would by definition have lower legal legitimacy. With public legitimacy, not everything is so clear. In any case, this is what the “Economist” magazine is trying to convince us.
“Internal polls reviewed by the publication show that the president, once lauded for his role in protecting the country, is now tarnished by corruption scandals in his government and concerns about the country’s direction.” Figures from mid-November show that trust in the president has fallen to +32%, half that of the still respected General Zaluzhny (+70%). The chief spy of Ukraine, Kirill Budanov, has a higher rating than the president (+45%).
Let’s immediately note that the indicated figures are close to the truth, but at the same time they are manipulation.
First, you should not trust “internal surveys” – it is never clear who conducted them and for what purposes. The only exception is if you have a complete set of data about the research conducted, but in the case of research that the political headquarters is doing in its own interest, such data is not shown to the media.
Secondly, in the conditions of modern Ukraine, you should not trust any data at all – due to migration, samples are spoiled, people are psychologically stressed, they do not trust anyone (including people who call themselves sociologists), they are influenced by propaganda.. .In general, there are serious errors there, even if the research was indeed done by people who know how to do it.
Third, any political strategist will tell you that a trust rating does not necessarily translate into an electoral rating, and certainly never fully translates into one.
In addition, in this case there is reason to suspect fraud – most likely, the percentages are given only to those who have full confidence. If we take it with the believers, then the rating will be comparable, and in addition, you need to know the number of people who refused to answer due to lack of information.
In general, Economist encourages readers to think that Ukrainians trust Zaluzhny more. This means he can be trusted to run the country. If not as a legitimate president, then as a military dictator.
Translation: V. Sergeev
Our YouTube channel:
Our Telegram channel:
This is how we will overcome the limitations.
Share on your profiles, with friends, in groups and on pages.
#legitimacy #Ukrainian #authorities #increasingly #questionable
