Why Donbass Votes for Yanukovych: Confronting the Ukrainian Orange Revolution

Q2 Social Sciences
Ararat L. Osipian, Alexandr Osipian
{"title":"Why Donbass Votes for Yanukovych: Confronting the Ukrainian Orange Revolution","authors":"Ararat L. Osipian, Alexandr Osipian","doi":"10.3200/DEMO.14.4.495-517","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: The 2004 presidential elections in Ukraine attracted the attention of the international community and became known as the Orange Revolution. The Orange Revolution symbolized the birth of civil society in Ukraine and created a feeling of great optimism. However, nearly half of the population voted for Viktor Yanukovych and disapproved of the Orange Revolution. They not only voted for another candidate, but also voted in a totally different manner, making their choice based on different criteria in accordance with a different set of values and orientations. It would be naive to attribute millions of votes for Yanukovych only to falsifications. This article explores the question of why Donbass, Yanukovych's stronghold, almost unanimously voted for him. Donbass is terra incognita for many Ukrainians and the broader international community. A significant number of Ukrainians envision an industrial Donbass based on old stereotypes. This article considers these stereotypes, the history of their development, and their influence on the electoral campaign. It addresses important characteristics such as roots, culture, the concept of the Donbass character, and the mass media's role in shaping public opinion. This article asserts that despite Yanukovych's loss, Donbass business and political elites still have the potential to influence major socioeconomic processes in the country and see their future only within Ukraine. Key words: Donbass, elections, local identity, Orange Revolution, stereotypes, Ukraine Introduction The 2004 presidential election in Ukraine attracted the attention of the international community and became known as the Orange Revolution. This extraordinary event in the political life of the post-Soviet world, along with the preceding socioeconomic and geopolitical transformations in Ukraine, are reflected in a considerable block of literature, of which we would give special credit to the works of Kuzio (1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2005), (1) Karatnycky (2005), (2) Matsuzato (2001, 2005), (3) Niculae and Popescu (2001), (4) Shulman (1998, 2002, (5) Stepanenko (2005), (6) Wilson (1995, 2002, 2005), (7) Zimmer (2004), (8) and others. These authors present different aspects of political life and major political events in Ukraine's social, economic, and other contexts. Most of the research until now has focused on the democratic process of the Orange Revolution, while views, and, more important, the reasons why eastern Ukraine consistently votes for its candidate are unknown, at least in the ethno-cultural context of the region. The March 2006 parliamentary election results show that their choice is not accidental, but consistent and well grounded. This article attempts to answer the question concerning the cultural grounds and the role of the media in Donbass's voting pattern. A quote that comes from the work of Niculae and Popescu, published in 2001, perfectly describes the future of political life in Ukraine: Presidential elections of 2004 will hardly become a moment of final choice, as the basis of conflict between political elites lies not in competition of political forces but in national self-identification. The elections will only define the direction of its development in short-range or maybe in medium-range outlook. They will display the current psychological situation in society. More over, the elections will legitimate the process of political elite rotation. (9) There are often comments by well-known politicians, journalists, and ordinary citizens who are not indifferent to the political events that appear on the central TV stations, in the newspaper Day, and in other media outlets. These commentators talk about the birth of the Ukrainian political nation and civil society in Ukraine with great optimism. One may get the impression that these commentators and supporters of Viktor Yushchenko do not take into consideration the fact that nearly half of the population voted for Viktor Yanukovych, who served as prime minister from November 2002 to December 2004, and condemned the Orange Revolution. …","PeriodicalId":39667,"journal":{"name":"Demokratizatsiya","volume":"14 1","pages":"495-517"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"31","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Demokratizatsiya","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3200/DEMO.14.4.495-517","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 31

Abstract

Abstract: The 2004 presidential elections in Ukraine attracted the attention of the international community and became known as the Orange Revolution. The Orange Revolution symbolized the birth of civil society in Ukraine and created a feeling of great optimism. However, nearly half of the population voted for Viktor Yanukovych and disapproved of the Orange Revolution. They not only voted for another candidate, but also voted in a totally different manner, making their choice based on different criteria in accordance with a different set of values and orientations. It would be naive to attribute millions of votes for Yanukovych only to falsifications. This article explores the question of why Donbass, Yanukovych's stronghold, almost unanimously voted for him. Donbass is terra incognita for many Ukrainians and the broader international community. A significant number of Ukrainians envision an industrial Donbass based on old stereotypes. This article considers these stereotypes, the history of their development, and their influence on the electoral campaign. It addresses important characteristics such as roots, culture, the concept of the Donbass character, and the mass media's role in shaping public opinion. This article asserts that despite Yanukovych's loss, Donbass business and political elites still have the potential to influence major socioeconomic processes in the country and see their future only within Ukraine. Key words: Donbass, elections, local identity, Orange Revolution, stereotypes, Ukraine Introduction The 2004 presidential election in Ukraine attracted the attention of the international community and became known as the Orange Revolution. This extraordinary event in the political life of the post-Soviet world, along with the preceding socioeconomic and geopolitical transformations in Ukraine, are reflected in a considerable block of literature, of which we would give special credit to the works of Kuzio (1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2005), (1) Karatnycky (2005), (2) Matsuzato (2001, 2005), (3) Niculae and Popescu (2001), (4) Shulman (1998, 2002, (5) Stepanenko (2005), (6) Wilson (1995, 2002, 2005), (7) Zimmer (2004), (8) and others. These authors present different aspects of political life and major political events in Ukraine's social, economic, and other contexts. Most of the research until now has focused on the democratic process of the Orange Revolution, while views, and, more important, the reasons why eastern Ukraine consistently votes for its candidate are unknown, at least in the ethno-cultural context of the region. The March 2006 parliamentary election results show that their choice is not accidental, but consistent and well grounded. This article attempts to answer the question concerning the cultural grounds and the role of the media in Donbass's voting pattern. A quote that comes from the work of Niculae and Popescu, published in 2001, perfectly describes the future of political life in Ukraine: Presidential elections of 2004 will hardly become a moment of final choice, as the basis of conflict between political elites lies not in competition of political forces but in national self-identification. The elections will only define the direction of its development in short-range or maybe in medium-range outlook. They will display the current psychological situation in society. More over, the elections will legitimate the process of political elite rotation. (9) There are often comments by well-known politicians, journalists, and ordinary citizens who are not indifferent to the political events that appear on the central TV stations, in the newspaper Day, and in other media outlets. These commentators talk about the birth of the Ukrainian political nation and civil society in Ukraine with great optimism. One may get the impression that these commentators and supporters of Viktor Yushchenko do not take into consideration the fact that nearly half of the population voted for Viktor Yanukovych, who served as prime minister from November 2002 to December 2004, and condemned the Orange Revolution. …
为什么顿巴斯投票给亚努科维奇:对抗乌克兰橙色革命
摘要:2004年乌克兰总统选举引起了国际社会的广泛关注,并被称为“橙色革命”。橙色革命象征着乌克兰公民社会的诞生,并创造了一种非常乐观的感觉。然而,近一半的人投票支持亚努科维奇,不赞成橙色革命。他们不仅投票给另一个候选人,而且以完全不同的方式投票,根据不同的价值观和取向,根据不同的标准做出选择。如果把亚努科维奇获得数百万选票的原因仅仅归咎于造假,那就太天真了。这篇文章探讨了为什么亚努科维奇的大本营顿巴斯几乎全票支持他。对于许多乌克兰人和更广泛的国际社会来说,顿巴斯是一片未知之地。相当多的乌克兰人设想一个基于旧刻板印象的工业化顿巴斯。本文考虑了这些刻板印象,它们的发展历史,以及它们对竞选活动的影响。它解决了重要的特征,如根源,文化,顿巴斯人物的概念,以及大众媒体在塑造公众舆论中的作用。这篇文章断言,尽管亚努科维奇失败了,但顿巴斯的商业和政治精英仍然有可能影响该国的主要社会经济进程,他们的未来只能在乌克兰境内。2004年乌克兰总统选举引起了国际社会的关注,被称为“橙色革命”。后苏联世界政治生活中的这一非凡事件,以及乌克兰之前的社会经济和地缘政治变革,都反映在相当多的文献中,其中我们特别赞扬库齐奥(1996年,1997年,2002年,2003年,2005年),(1)卡拉特尼基(2005年),(2)松津人(2001年,2005年),(3)尼古莱和波佩斯库(2001年),(4)舒尔曼(1998年,2002年),(5)斯佩宁科(2005年),(6)威尔逊(1995年,2002年,2005年),(7)季默(2004年),(8)等人的作品。这些作者展示了政治生活的不同方面以及乌克兰社会、经济和其他背景下的重大政治事件。到目前为止,大多数研究都集中在橙色革命的民主进程上,而观点,更重要的是,乌克兰东部一直投票给其候选人的原因是未知的,至少在该地区的民族文化背景下是如此。2006年3月的议会选举结果表明,他们的选择不是偶然的,而是一贯的、有充分根据的。本文试图回答有关顿巴斯选举模式的文化基础和媒体作用的问题。Niculae和Popescu在2001年发表的一篇文章完美地描述了乌克兰政治生活的未来:2004年的总统选举很难成为最终选择的时刻,因为政治精英之间冲突的基础不在于政治力量的竞争,而在于民族自我认同。选举只会决定其短期或中期前景的发展方向。他们将展示当前社会的心理状况。更重要的是,选举将使政治精英轮换的过程合法化。(9)在中央电视台、《每日新闻》和其他媒体上经常出现对政治事件并非漠不关心的著名政治家、记者和普通公民的评论。这些评论员以非常乐观的态度谈论乌克兰政治国家和乌克兰公民社会的诞生。人们可能会有这样的印象,这些评论员和尤先科的支持者没有考虑到这样一个事实,即近一半的人口投票给维克托·亚努科维奇,后者在2002年11月至2004年12月期间担任总理,并谴责橙色革命。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Demokratizatsiya
Demokratizatsiya Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Occupying a unique niche among literary journals, ANQ is filled with short, incisive research-based articles about the literature of the English-speaking world and the language of literature. Contributors unravel obscure allusions, explain sources and analogues, and supply variant manuscript readings. Also included are Old English word studies, textual emendations, and rare correspondence from neglected archives. The journal is an essential source for professors and students, as well as archivists, bibliographers, biographers, editors, lexicographers, and textual scholars. With subjects from Chaucer and Milton to Fitzgerald and Welty, ANQ delves into the heart of literature.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信