In any defense establishment, change is an ongoing process. However, despite the best of intentions, existing bureaucracies, bound by habit and years of socialization, have their limits in implementing transformative change.
Anit Mukherjee
{
"authors": [
"Ukraine Reform Monitor Team"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Europe"
],
"collections": [
"Europe’s Eastern Neighborhood",
"Ukraine Reform Monitor"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "russia",
"programs": [
"Russia and Eurasia"
],
"projects": [
"Reforming Ukraine"
],
"regions": [
"Eastern Europe",
"Ukraine",
"Europe"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Economy",
"Security",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}Source: Getty
Ukraine held local elections and made modest reform progress, while the economy improved slowly. But there are renewed concerns about the ceasefire in the east.
The Ukraine Reform Monitor provides an independent, rigorous assessment of the extent and quality of reforms in Ukraine. The Carnegie Endowment has assembled an independent team of Ukraine-based scholars to analyze reforms in four key areas. This third memo covers October and November 2015. The monitor is supported in part by a grant from the Open Society Foundations.
The main political event in Ukraine during the October–November period was the October 25 local elections. These much-anticipated elections did not fundamentally change the balance of political power in the country. However, they renewed concerns about the enduring power of oligarchs in some regions and demonstrated the residual strength of former president Viktor Yanukovych’s Party of Regions in others. The economic situation improved slowly, and the government approved a number of sectoral liberalization measures. In late November, violations of the ceasefire in Donbas in eastern Ukraine became more frequent, leading to fresh worries about the future of the Minsk agreement aimed at ending the fighting. Despite modest progress on the issue of decentralization, fundamental differences about the form this should take remained unresolved.
| Table 1. Results of Ukraine’s October 25 Local Elections | ||
| Party Name | Result (Number of Representatives) | Expected Position |
| Petro Poroshenko Bloc | Over 9,000 | Pro-presidential |
| Fatherland | Over 8,000 | Pro-Tymoshenko |
| Our Country | Over 4,500 | Pro-presidential |
| Opposition Bloc | Over 4,000 | Opposition, residual Party of Regions |
| Agrarian Party | Over 3,000 | Pro-presidential |
| Radical Party | Over 2,500 | Opposition, supports oligarch Ihor Kolomoyskyi |
| Ukrainian Association of Patriots | Over 2,000 | Opposition, pro-Kolomoyskyi |
| Revival | Over 1,500 | Opposition, pro-Kolomoyskyi |
| Freedom | Over 1,500 | Far-right opposition |
| Self-Reliance | Over 900 | Nominally a member of the ruling coalition |
| Source: Committee of Voters of Ukraine. | ||
The long-awaited local elections represented a notable step forward in democratization, helping improve the legitimacy of local government. In the aftermath of the elections, there was much debate about the strength of the ruling coalition in Kyiv. Overall, the elections provided a boost to Poroshenko and the ruling coalition. At the same time, the results also revealed the enduring power of oligarchs in local politics in some parts of the country.
There has been some modest progress on the thorny aspects of judicial reform and anti-corruption mechanisms. Economic performance has stabilized, and the steady pace of regulatory reform has been sustained. The Ukrainian government continues to strengthen the capacity and transparency of security-sector institutions, albeit in an uneven and fragmented fashion. There are renewed concerns about the resilience of the Donbas ceasefire.
The relatively technical aspects of decentralization have advanced. As in previous periods, the more systemic and political dimensions of decentralization remain unresolved and will be conditioned by the broader dynamics of the conflict in Donbas.
Ukraine Reform Monitor Team
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.
In any defense establishment, change is an ongoing process. However, despite the best of intentions, existing bureaucracies, bound by habit and years of socialization, have their limits in implementing transformative change.
Anit Mukherjee
After the chill in ties between 2020 and 2024 that brought India–China relations to their lowest point in several decades, the two countries have engaged each other afresh. This paper argues that there are predominantly four imperatives guiding India’s approach to China, and they exist in an order of priority.
Saheb Singh Chadha
This piece argues that India’s central challenge is not managing a single flashpoint but resolving the underlying tension between expansion and institutional coherency of the BRICS grouping.
Vrinda Sahai
The ASML MoU with Tata Electronics is an indicator of how far the Indian semiconductor ecosystem has come. This ecosystem has been years in the making and represents real commercial logic.
Konark Bhandari
A partnership between India, a country of subcontinental size, and Africa, a continent of fifty-four countries, may seem asymmetric until one notes that both are home to nearly the same number of people—1.4 billion. This essay spells out the existing challenges to the partnership, its optimal potential, and the possible pathways to realize it over the next quarter-century.
Rajiv Bhatia