The demonstrators are repudiating not just a man but a system, or perhaps more accurately, the lack of one
Ukraine has the potential to become one of the pillars of the European Union. It is vast in extent, rich in agricultural and other resources, possessed of a respectable industrial base and a large and educated population. It could in time join Germany, France, Spain, Britain, Italy and Poland in the upper league of the EU, as defined by size, numbers and economic importance. It is, in other words, a prize, but is it a prize that in a few disappointing days in Vilnius, and in spite of years of preparatory work, has just slipped out of Europe's grasp?
The answer to that question depends in part on the people of Ukraine. In demonstrations on a scale unprecedented in recent years, many of them have been out on the streets of Kiev and other cities, including some in the Russian-speaking half of the country, protesting against the decision of their president, Viktor Yanukovych, to back out of a trade deal with the EU that was to have been signed last week in Lithuania.
That deal could have led over time to membership of the EU for Ukraine. The demonstrations have emboldened opposition groups and clearly rattled the Ukrainian government, with several defections already from the president's party. But it is the broad opposition manifest on the streets that must worry Mr Yanukovych most. The anger at what the president has done suggests that a substantial proportion of Ukrainians are tired not just of Mr Yanukovych but of all the failed and incompetent politicians and business leaders who have squandered Ukraine's possibilities in the years since the end of the Soviet Union.
The demonstrators are repudiating not just a man but a system, or perhaps more accurately, the lack of one. They have only to look across the border to a prosperous and orderly Poland to see where they could have been now had they had different leaders, different attitudes and different mentors. The main mentor has, of course, been Russia, never fully reconciled to Ukraine's separation.
The spoiler in Ukraine's affair with the union has been Vladimir Putin. His vision of a Eurasian community that would preserve the relationship between Russia and the kindred states of Belarus and Ukraine as well as that with Soviet Union successor states in the Caucasus and Central Asia is not without a certain historical validity. There is no need to deny that there are sentimental and cultural ties between these countries to set against memories of coercion and oppression. But for all Europe's current troubles it has more to offer Ukraine, and the other, smaller candidates aspiring to membership, than Russia.
How can one corrupt country lead another one out of corruption ? How can one inefficient economy help another to become more efficient? And how can one politically backward country, a semi-autocracy, advance another toward democracy and the rule of law? However, for Mr Putin, Ukraine is not only a desirable partner but a vital one.
Without Ukraine, his Eurasian community would be a ramshackle structure gluing Russia to poor Muslim republics with which there are serious religious and racial strains, not a great recipe for success. But Mr Putin's courtship of Kiev has been a brutal one. Mr Putin blocked Ukrainian exports to Russia, made the threats about oil prices, and tightened border controls to further sabotage trade. He behaved even more badly with Armenia, which gave up on Europe after Russia implied it would not help should there be fresh hostilities with Azerbaijan.
All this is playing dirty with a vengeance. The European commission president, José Manuel Barroso, and the EU council president, Herman Van Rompuy, were both right to brand it unacceptable.
Russia will pay a price in damaged relations with European states for a victory that is in any case incomplete. Given the popular uproar, it is to be doubted that Mr Yanukovych can safely go on to commit the country definitively to the Eurasian community. Ukraine's road to Europe is still open. Reported by guardian.co.uk 7 hours ago.
Ukraine has the potential to become one of the pillars of the European Union. It is vast in extent, rich in agricultural and other resources, possessed of a respectable industrial base and a large and educated population. It could in time join Germany, France, Spain, Britain, Italy and Poland in the upper league of the EU, as defined by size, numbers and economic importance. It is, in other words, a prize, but is it a prize that in a few disappointing days in Vilnius, and in spite of years of preparatory work, has just slipped out of Europe's grasp?
The answer to that question depends in part on the people of Ukraine. In demonstrations on a scale unprecedented in recent years, many of them have been out on the streets of Kiev and other cities, including some in the Russian-speaking half of the country, protesting against the decision of their president, Viktor Yanukovych, to back out of a trade deal with the EU that was to have been signed last week in Lithuania.
That deal could have led over time to membership of the EU for Ukraine. The demonstrations have emboldened opposition groups and clearly rattled the Ukrainian government, with several defections already from the president's party. But it is the broad opposition manifest on the streets that must worry Mr Yanukovych most. The anger at what the president has done suggests that a substantial proportion of Ukrainians are tired not just of Mr Yanukovych but of all the failed and incompetent politicians and business leaders who have squandered Ukraine's possibilities in the years since the end of the Soviet Union.
The demonstrators are repudiating not just a man but a system, or perhaps more accurately, the lack of one. They have only to look across the border to a prosperous and orderly Poland to see where they could have been now had they had different leaders, different attitudes and different mentors. The main mentor has, of course, been Russia, never fully reconciled to Ukraine's separation.
The spoiler in Ukraine's affair with the union has been Vladimir Putin. His vision of a Eurasian community that would preserve the relationship between Russia and the kindred states of Belarus and Ukraine as well as that with Soviet Union successor states in the Caucasus and Central Asia is not without a certain historical validity. There is no need to deny that there are sentimental and cultural ties between these countries to set against memories of coercion and oppression. But for all Europe's current troubles it has more to offer Ukraine, and the other, smaller candidates aspiring to membership, than Russia.
How can one corrupt country lead another one out of corruption ? How can one inefficient economy help another to become more efficient? And how can one politically backward country, a semi-autocracy, advance another toward democracy and the rule of law? However, for Mr Putin, Ukraine is not only a desirable partner but a vital one.
Without Ukraine, his Eurasian community would be a ramshackle structure gluing Russia to poor Muslim republics with which there are serious religious and racial strains, not a great recipe for success. But Mr Putin's courtship of Kiev has been a brutal one. Mr Putin blocked Ukrainian exports to Russia, made the threats about oil prices, and tightened border controls to further sabotage trade. He behaved even more badly with Armenia, which gave up on Europe after Russia implied it would not help should there be fresh hostilities with Azerbaijan.
All this is playing dirty with a vengeance. The European commission president, José Manuel Barroso, and the EU council president, Herman Van Rompuy, were both right to brand it unacceptable.
Russia will pay a price in damaged relations with European states for a victory that is in any case incomplete. Given the popular uproar, it is to be doubted that Mr Yanukovych can safely go on to commit the country definitively to the Eurasian community. Ukraine's road to Europe is still open. Reported by guardian.co.uk 7 hours ago.