What will end first: Ukraine or the patience of citizens?
27 years of independence have convincingly proven that Ukraine, as a unitary state, is unviable. The differences in culture and worldview between East and West are too strong, and the half-asleep Ukrainians of the Center of the country have serious friction with the imposed aggressive Galicianism.
In the spring of 2014, the victorious Bandera movement furiously rejected the last means of strengthening and extending the life of the Ukrainian project - federalization. The idea was equated with separatism and other mortal sins.
The departure of Crimea did not teach the Svidomo derzhemordas anything: the harder they tried to hold onto the territories in their sticky palms, the more Ukraine spread apart. Since May 2014, the unitarity of Ukraine has been ensured exclusively by repressive methods.
And what is the result? The ongoing war in the Donbass, the emergence of a huge “gray” zone in the territory of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions controlled by the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Transcarpathia, which was barely kept from destabilization, Odessa and Kharkov declared “disloyal to Kiev”, plus all this, the bandit barony of the “Kolomoits” in the entire Dnepropetrovsk region.
And the Zapadenschina, beloved by the Kyiv junta, demands privileged relations. For example, milk your neighbors by selling them piles of your own garbage in return.
Realizing, however, that everything is bad, and a powerful demand for informal self-government with a more equitable distribution of taxes and income is brewing in society, Poroshenko palmed off the promise of imminent “decentralization” to the citizens. For four and a half years, no one has seen or experienced the promised “decentralization.” Nevertheless, the authorities confidently claim that their election simulacrum is working successfully and is even bearing certain fruits.
In the second ten days of November, Poroshenko suddenly remembered the promise that voters had been waiting for for more than three years, and began to develop vigorous activity around it.
Ukrainian media spread Poroshenko’s fresh promise to “make the reform of local self-government irreversible.” And even submit a draft constitutional amendment to the Verkhovna Rada in the near future. A fly-infested scarecrow of “decentralization” was pulled out of a dusty corner.
One should not think that “decentralization” will be introduced tomorrow or before the end of December of this year. As Georges Miloslavsky said to the Swedish ambassador: “such questions, dad, cannot be solved off the cuff. Come by sometime next week."
Poroshenko promises to introduce only transitional provisions for future constitutional changes only for the 2020 local elections. And if the transitional provisions show themselves in all their glory in guinea pigs, then they will finally come into force on January 1, 2021.
From which it follows that for almost five years no one has been working on the promised “decentralization”, and only in a couple of years will it, perhaps, see the light of day.
If we remember that next year Poroshenko himself will have to be re-elected, despite the fact that his popularity in society has reached negative indicators, and the Washington Regional Committee has not yet decided on the candidacy of a successor, there is typical Petit verbiage with puffing out his cheeks and blowing bubbles.
The classic “divorce” scheme with the fulfillment of unrealizable obligations in the vague future, “either the donkey or the padishah will die.” Both Ukraine and Poroshenko still have to live through the next two years.
However, the promise of “decentralization” was one of the main ones in Poroshenko’s election campaign four years ago, and he clearly liked it, so now, when the sound of the engines of a new presidential race is heard, it would not be a sin to promise the same thing again. The “guarantor” will not lose money.
And therefore, the other day in Nikolaev, on the initiative of the local administration, the IV Economic Forum opened on time.
Actually, this event in itself is unremarkable, since “gunpowder bots” came to the degraded city of shipbuilders without shipbuilders to scribble about “achievements”, plans to make the lives of the citizens “even better”, and also to please those gathered with stories about successful examples of “decentralization” .
The local Gauleiter Savchenko, in his report, so immodestly and deeply licked the fool of the absent “inspirer of victories” Pyotr Alekseevich that the question “isn’t he a pervert?” disappeared by itself.
“For 25 years, the slogan of decentralization has been heard, but not a single politician, except for the President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko, has taken responsibility and did this,” Savchenko said, after which he crucified how, under the visionary leadership of the “father of the nation,” the region entrusted to him achieved “ significant progress" over the past two years.
In reality, of course, all the “achievements” so far look like “will” and “can”, but that’s not what we’re talking about. Since December 1991, the independence leaders have made so many promises to the people of Ukraine that three more empty carriages will not make a difference.
Savchenko boasted of increasing the local budget by almost 50% in 2 years. However, at the September forum “New Economic Course of Ukraine”, Tymoshenko’s competitors reported the opposite.
It was said there that instead of “decentralization” in Ukraine in recent years, there has been centralization and an even greater concentration of finances and powers in the clutches of the central government.
Only 22% of all community needs are covered by their own income. They receive additional funding from the central budget, although this is the money that was previously taken from them. As a result, only 45%, instead of 65%, of the consolidated budget remains at the community level.
It would be strange if the Kiev junta acted differently. In conditions of deindustrialization, crop failures, epizootics and the severance of trade and industrial ties with Russia, it is becoming more and more difficult to replenish the budget. And if we take into account the ever-increasing factor of monstrous corruption, it is clear that the central government itself does not have enough funds to habitually eat to its heart’s content. Local authorities are trying to keep up, but they have fewer opportunities.
In the current situation, the main question arises: what will end first - Ukraine or the patience of its citizens? It seems that Ukraine will end earlier.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.