• Research
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie India logoCarnegie lettermark logo
{
  "authors": [
    "Anders Aslund"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "russia",
  "programs": [
    "Russia and Eurasia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Caucasus",
    "Russia",
    "Ukraine"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Ukraine's voters do not need Moscow's advice

Link Copied
By Anders Aslund
Published on Nov 11, 2004

Source: Financial Times

The first round of Ukraine's presidential election was a close-run thing. According to the official returns - published 10 days after the October 31 poll - Viktor Yushchenko, the democratic opposition candidate, won 39.9 per cent of the vote, narrowly beating Viktor Yanukovich, the current prime minister, who won 39.3 per cent. On November 21, a run-off will determine the final outcome.
 
In spite of the slender margin, these elections were an outstanding victory for Mr Yushchenko and the democrats. The incumbent regime used all means against him. The national TV channels supported Mr Yanukovich. According to Mr Yushchenko's campaign, Mr Yanukovich's election budget amounted to $600m - that is, 1 per cent of Ukraine's gross domestic product and as much as George W. Bush's presidential campaign, although America's GDP is 100 times greater than Ukraine's. Mr Yushchenko even narrowly escaped an alleged poison attack that has left his face visibly scarred.

All credible international observers agree that fraud was rampant. Undoubtedly, some of the votes cast for Mr Yushchenko were illicitly reallocated to Mr Yanukovich. Yet the Ukrainians understood the stakes and stood up for their democratic choice with a participation of 75 per cent. Most of the votes for minor candidates are likely to go to Mr Yushchenko in the final round.

But why are Ukrainians dissatisfied with their current government? After all, Ukraine has currently one of the world's most vibrant economies. For the past five years, Ukraine's GDP has grown by an annual average of 9 per cent and so far this year it has surged by 13.4 per cent. Like Mr Yushchenko, Mr Yanukovich favours further market-orientated reforms.

What has brought so many to the polls is the contrast between the two candidates' visions for Ukraine's political system and geopolitical orientation. Mr Yushchenko stands for western-style democracy, against corruption and for a European orientation and membership of Nato; Mr Yanukovich represents the biggest oligarchic group in Donetsk in Russian-speaking eastern Ukraine and is seen as pro-Russian.

Rarely has any foreign country been as engaged in the elections of another as Russia has been in these. Russia's President Vladimir Putin even came to Kiev to campaign for Mr Yanukovich on national television five days before the elections. Dozens of Moscow's loud-mouthed political advisers have descended on Ukraine. On Ukrainian and Russian television, they have declared Mr Yushchenko a dreadful person and Mr Yanukovich wonderful (although he has served two prison sentences for violent crimes).

This heavy-handed interference appears to have backfired. Most Ukrainians have a positive view of Russia, but nobody likes this treatment. Contrary to expectations, Mr Yushchenko carried much of Russian-speaking Ukraine.

Not that a Yanukovich victory would necessarily benefit Russia. It is ironic that, after having defeated his own oligarchs, Mr Putin is supporting a much more oligarchic party in Ukraine. Mr Yanukovich is closely allied with Rinat Akhmetov, owner of System Capital Management, the Donetsk-based conglomerate that controls seven big steelworks. Mr Akhmetov seeks to keep Russian companies out of his Donetsk principality and his friend Mr Yanukovich might well take a similar line in the rest of Ukraine. By contrast, as prime minister in 2000, Mr Yushchenko settled the large arrears to Russia for gas imports and allowed big Russian companies to buy businesses.

The current Russian campaign seems to be motivated largely by a desire to keep Ukraine out of the arms of the west. But it is swimming against the economic tide. Regardless of who wins, Ukraine will sooner rather than later need to enter the World Trade Organisation because of its dependence on exports of sensitive commodities such as steel, chemicals and agricultural products. It must improve its poor relations with the European Union for similar reasons.

It is time for the Kremlin to wake up to the democratic facts. Viktor Chernomyrdin, Russia's ambassador to Ukraine, appeared to acknowledge that a Yanukovich victory was not vital for Russia when he remarked after the first-round election that "anybody who becomes Ukrainian president will be compelled to develop good-neighbourly relations with Russia".

A President Yushchenko could lead Ukraine to true democracy and western integration. Russia would be well advised to follow his lead.

The writer is director of the Russian and Eurasian Programme at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

About the Author

Anders Aslund

Former Senior Associate, Director, Russian and Eurasian Program

    Recent Work

  • Other
    Putin's Decline and America's Response

      Anders Aslund

  • Testimony
    Democracy in Retreat in Russia

      Anders Aslund

Anders Aslund
Former Senior Associate, Director, Russian and Eurasian Program
Anders Aslund
Political ReformForeign PolicyCaucasusRussiaUkraine

Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie India

  • Commentary
    The Impact of U.S. Sanctions and Tariffs on India’s Russian Oil Imports

    This piece examines India’s response to U.S. sanctions and tariffs, specifically assessing the immediate market consequences, such as alterations in import costs, and the broader strategic implications for India’s energy security and foreign policy orientation.

      Vrinda Sahai

  • Commentary
    NISAR Soars While India-U.S. Tariff Tensions Simmer

    On July 30, 2025, the United States announced 25 percent tariffs on Indian goods. While diplomatic tensions simmered on the trade front, a cosmic calm prevailed at the Sriharikota launch range. Officials from NASA and ISRO were preparing to launch an engineering marvel into space—the NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR), marking a significant milestone in the India-U.S. bilateral partnership.

      Tejas Bharadwaj

  • Commentary
    Indian Airstrikes in Pakistan: May 7, 2025

    On May 7, 2025, between 1:05 and 1:30 a.m. (IST), airstrikes carried out by the Indian Air Force hit nine locations inside Pakistan and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK). It was codenamed Operation Sindoor.

      Rudra Chaudhuri

  • Research
    Views From Taipei: Essays by Young Indian Scholars on China

    This compendium brings together three essays by scholars who participated in Carnegie India's Security Studies Dialogue in 2024, each examining a different aspect of China’s policies. Drawing on their expertise and research, the authors offer fresh perspectives on key geopolitical challenges.

      • +1

      Vijay Gokhale, Suyash Desai, Amit Kumar, …

  • Commentary
    The India-U.S. TRUST Initiative: Advancing Semiconductor Supply Chain Cooperation

    As part of the TRUST initiative, leaders of the two countries committed to building trusted and resilient supply chains, including for semiconductors and critical minerals. India and the United States have made steady progress in this area over the years. This essay explores the takeaways from discussions on semiconductor supply chains that took place at Carnegie India’s 9th Global Technology Summit.

      Konark Bhandari

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
Carnegie India logo, white
Unit C-4, 5, 6, EdenparkShaheed Jeet Singh MargNew Delhi – 110016, IndiaPhone: 011-40078687
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.