Parliamentary elections 2012 in ukraine for iapc

Uploaded on

Presentation on Parliamentary Elections in Ukraine (2012) by Andriy Kruglashov for International Association of Political Consultants conference,

Presentation on Parliamentary Elections in Ukraine (2012) by Andriy Kruglashov for International Association of Political Consultants conference,

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide


  • 1. Parliamentary Elections in Ukraine, October 28 2012 KRUGLASHOV ANDRIY November 10, 2012. IAPC, New York, New York
  • 2. PlanElectoral SYSTEMCONTEXT: Kharkiv treaties (or treachery?) Vae victis! Yulia and Yura go to jail. “Enterpreneural Maidan*” “Language Maidan”CONTENTS: Electoral campaign: key messages and channels of delivery Winners (Party of Regions, Fatherland, Freedom, UDAR, Communist party of Ukraine, 47 independents) Losers (“Ukraine-Forward”, “moneybags”, Ex-President) Challengers (Montyan) Hero (Grandma and Cat)FRAUD and GerrymanderingOUTCOMESCivil society and electionsKey trends
  • 3. Ukrainian Electoral System: mixed (50-50)225 elected in single member districts 225 in single proportional district(140.000-180.000 voters in average) for partisan or independent Vote for a Political Partycandidate Map was created by Serhij Vasylchenko
  • 4. CONTEXT Kharkiv treaties (or treachery?) Russian fleet in Crimea till 2042! Ukraine bought sales on gas,but still pays more than marketprice for gas Moment of glory - Moment of shame Signing Kharkiv Treaties D. Medvedev and V. Yanukovich April 21, 2010
  • 5. CONTEXTVae victis! Yulia and Yura go to jail Ukraine’s former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko (AP Photo/Ukrafoto, File) Ukraines former Minister of Internal Affairs Yuri Lutsenko (photo: REUTERS/Gleb Garanich)
  • 6. CONTEXT Enterpreneural “Maidan” Character:All-Ukrainian action(no political or ethnic split)Cause:Against “taxation terror”Main advocates:small businessmenOutcomes:- Minor step-backs in taxation- Major participants in jail Revolution YET TO BE!
  • 7. CONTEXT Language Law  “Language Maidan” July, 3, 2012 Parliament passed Law that made Russian language official in 10 administrative units of Ukraine. So-called bilingual approach in fact was about making Ukrainian language useless and redundant.People protested. Few starved for more than 12 days as an act of protest.Giving up on language was perceived by protesters as giving up sovereignty
  • 8. Key players who won, political positioning and results All-Ukrainian Union "Fatherland" ("Batkivshchyna”) Ruling party – Party of Regions,(all over the map: center-left, center-right, (Federalism, “liberalism for one family”) populist) 25.54% 30% Ukrainian Democratic Alliance for Reforms Vitaliy Klitchko’s party (Center-right, liberal) All-Ukrainian union 13.96 % Communist Party of “FREEDOM” (Social-nationalist, Ukraine (Communist, retrospective conservative) conservatism) Turnout = 57.98% out of 10. 44% 36 213 010 registered voters 13.18 %
  • 9. Party of Regions: Party that builds We overcame destruction - Stability is reached!
  • 10. Party of Regions: from stability to well-being
  • 11. Ways towards well-being: social bribery Goods were delivered by the charitable fund of one of the candidates, Prime-Minister’s son door to door
  • 12. Charity foundations proliferatedSome candidates spent up to $100 per voter on direct social bribery
  • 13. How they made it Front Zmin (Front of Changes) and Batkivschina (Fatherland) united to create common partisan list FOR FATHERLAND. We united for Ukraine
  • 14. Tymoshenko took part in campaignas a symbol
  • 15. Key message for the last weeks of campaign WE WILL STOP THEM!
  • 16. Tactics: Black vs White polarization Battle of EVIL vs GOOD Mykola Katerynchuk – candidate of United Opposition “Fatherland” Runs for Parliament to protect peopleGot < 61%. Opponent – Petro Yurchyshyn bulldozed the road he previously built to please people
  • 17. Competitive positioning of Fatherland: Don’t trust! (Vitaliy Klitchko) Don’t be afraid! (Yanukovich) Don’t beg! (Independent candidates) MAKE YOUR CHOICE
  • 18. Vitaliy Klitchko hits hardUkrainian Democratic Alliance for Reforms (V. Klitchko’s party “UDAR” )FORCE OF DECENT PEOPLE
  • 19. Numerous candidates,backed up by Vitaliy’s reputationwere drivers of campaign message Force of decent people From success of the man to success of the country
  • 20. Non-intrusive image positioning of V. Klitchko Politics can be plain/frank. Vitaliy Klitchko
  • 21. One of the key messages – resonating in the times of Ukraine’s reputational pitfallUDAR will prove the world that Ukraine can be trusted!
  • 22. New channels of delivery 
  • 23. UDAR’s Message to entrepreneursEconomy of equal opportunities: we will cut the number oftaxes!New enterprise will get 3 years tax-off
  • 24. Results 13.96% of votes 40 seats in parliament Klitchko is now perceived as a candidate for PresidencyYet, from the point of view of missed opportunities…X Klitchko’s team can’t be suspected in the effort to squeeze the most out of the opportunity.X Klitchko lost opportunity to establish clear base, especially on Eastern UkraineX Overwhelming majority of candidates who ran on single-districts lost
  • 25. Winner: Oleg Liashko, leader of Radical Party1. Free Yulia, Gang – in prison! 2. Gang – get out! 3. Stand up,Ukraine! 4. We’ll protect people from mafia.
  • 26. Communist Party of Ukraine: empty left wing and good ads bring 13.18% of voters on their side In fact, Communists always vote with their “class enemies” – Party of Regions Their leader – Symonenko is in head of Party for 20 years. Corrupt. Hypocritical. But who cares? Message: Country back to people!Key program statements: free education! corrupt politicians – to jail! Tax on luxury, tax rich! Nationalization of strategic enterprises
  • 27. Winners: VO SVOBODA “The hand won’t shake to change everything”. Oleg Tyagnybok
  • 28. What helped marginal party with fascist rhetoric to get 10,5 % of votes?  Russian was institutionally made the regional official language in 10 out of 27 Ukrainian oblasts*  Inability of moderates to stood up and fight back against criminal methods of governing  Strategic voting: - to help “Svoboda” overcome 5% threshold - to have the party capable of literally fighting in parliament* Name of administrative units
  • 29. Why SVOBODA? Message from former political prisoner, who“Batkivshina” and spent 28 years in GULAG and ran for Presidency “UDAR” in 1991 - Levko LukyanenkoWill make it to the Parliament anyway.That is why Ukrainians must vote for “Svoboda” to bring patriots in power
  • 30. Looser: Natalya KorolevskaSecond Yulia?She was trying…But she is not.
  • 31. Fail story: going all over the map Promoting candidate via advertising front page of a magazine can turn to be bad idea Natalya Korolevskaya: SHE WILL PROTECT EVERYONE! (for sale starting from February, 3)
  • 32. Established party: “Ukraine Forward”Join the team of new leaders!
  • 33. Got forward in her teamSoccer legend - Andriy Shevchenko joins KorolevskaParty “Ukraine - Forward!”.Some claimed that he “played badly” with his head
  • 34. She could not get enough leadership and invited professional actor to be in a teamTravesty based on popular images from Russian version of Pinocchio, wherethe former (Andriy Shevchenko, on the right) gets tricked by Cat Bazilop(Ostap Stupka – actor, on the left, and Fox-Alice (Natalia Korolevskaya, in themiddle)PS: Andriy Shevchenko donated $ 1.250.000 for campaign.
  • 35. As a result: Constant battles with sociologist that did not show the “right level of support” About $ 90 millions on campaign 1.58% of votes Enormous level of disapproval for annoying ad. campaign
  • 36. LOSER? Depends on goals!Ex President managed to “steal” 1% from oppositionVictor Yuschenko – the only one beyond Kremlin control#14Our Ukraine
  • 37. LOSERS worth to be mentioned:Creative positioning of Independent Vasyl Kovalchuk THIS DUDE FOUGHT!
  • 38. Challenger: She really fought!Message: Montyan will defend! VOTE for MONTYAN - YOUR ADVOCATE IN PARLIAMENT
  • 39. WHAT IS SPECIAL in Montyan’s campaign?<9% of votes, 9.600 votesFirst time in Ukraine local, grassroot-based fundrising gave26.000$300 volunteers fulfilled for free the amount of work thatwould cost 200.000$ Information is provided by the manager of Montyan’s digital campaign, Mykola Malukha
  • 40. But no one stands close to the hero…
  • 41. Babussy Cat grand narrative derived from one mans creativeFound out that grand son voted for the “Regions”Rewrote my will and left house for the CAT
  • 42. Party of Regions didn’t like the joke Destroyed media with ad,displayed in Dniprodzerjynsk Started trial against author,claiming that it is illegal to mention Party of Regions hereAuthor replied with the next version “MADE BETTER* BY CENSORSHIP”Rewrote my will and left house for the CAT “Making better” now became a ironic metaphore for the actions of ruling party, which promised “making live better today” in 2007
  • 43. But Party of Regions were not satisfiedand destroyed that ad as well It provoked huge public campaign HELP TO SPREAD “BABA AND CAT”
  • 44. Party of Regions members? Hasta la vista!
  • 45. Found out that grand son voted for the “Regions”…Cannot calm down the cat!
  • 46. Found out that dadvoted for the“Regions”…MOVED TO THE CAT’sHOUSE
  • 47. Citizens movementFound out that tomorrow is the electionday… subscribed friends to be observers
  • 48. Measuring average turnout on polling stations vs number of people voted for each party clearlyshows that on the stations, where 75 of more % of registered voters showed up, numbers of Partyof Regions supporters were raising dramatically. Usually as a results of “dead souls” voting. Average number of voters per station / turnout
  • 49. Gerrymandering example visualization (weird way to cut districts) Other examples are provided by Serhij Vasylchenko here –
  • 50. Electoral results map. Proportional basisThe grey-blue area on a left is the domain of Svoboda (Freedom)Everything else is divided between Batkivschyna and Party of Regions
  • 52. New parliament (balance of seats)COMMUNISTS – 32; UDAR – 40; PARTY OF REGIONS –185; Fatherland – 101; SVOBODA – 37; INDEPENDENTS –43; OTHER PARTIES – 7
  • 53. Civil Society Projects and Elections
  • 54. Powermeter:measuringresponsibilityPROJECT OF PROMISESMONITORING 12Aim — transparent and less populist виконаноpolitics. ----------------Project answers next questions: 486 всьогоWhat was promised?What is fulfilled and what is not?Who in Ukrainian politics complies his wordthe least?Which promises are bizarre and conflictprevious ones?Objects of monitoring: President,Prime-Minister, members of cabinet, 13 не виконаноparliamentary deputies , politicians and ----------------bureaucrats from head of village council to 486 всьогоthe top level.Powermeter helps to establish freedomof speech and prevents censorship due toactivation of journalist environment.
  • 55. Civic Society: Putting our eyes at candidateslivesCANDIDATE’S GOODWILL CRITERIASEVALUATED BY “FAIR” MOVEMENT 1. Absence of facts of human right violations 2. Continuing political position according to the will of the voters 3. Absence of involvement in corruptive activities 4. Incomes transparency and relevance of life style to the income rate 5. Personal participation in voting in parliament; 6. Participation in parliamentary activities and in committee meetings Civil society must control government, otherwise they will control us! Natalia Kruglashova, civil activist, my mother
  • 56. “Chesno” movement:overt and covert outcomes Deputies now know: they are watched Practical tools to Integrity, honesty and measure integrity accountability are no are now available longer just “words” Ties between journalists and civic activist became stronger no longer can voters say: “all politicians “Cemetery” of candidates, are the same ” filtered by partisan machinery due to the failure to meet “Chesno” criteria
  • 57. Key trends exposed by 2012 Elections Ideas beat money Administrative resource is far from being omnipotent Radicalization, readiness to protest Increasing demand for national interest Many ways to vote against Party of Regions (each party claimed to be in opposition) Civil society is waking up
  • 58. Thank you very much for your attention!I would love to answer your questions and to cooperate with youin making politics better and democracy stronger around the globeby leading decent candidates and parties to victory Sincerely yours, Andriy Kruglashov NiKAA Consulting 1 404 451 7199 PS: For those, who helped me and Veronika Kruglashova to earn the place in history as the first Ukrainians ever at IAPC and to be the first to speak on the panel… See next page
  • 59. Acknowledgements: Denis Bohush, president of Bohush Communications, who worked for V. Yuschenko’s Campaign in 2002-2004 Mikhail Minakov, president of the foundation for Good Politics, Harvard University scholar Ruslan Shtogrin, political consultant, field-specialist Vitaliy Sharlay, chief analyst of “Chesno” movement Mykola Malukha, manager of Montyan’s digital campaign Serhij Vasylchenko, specialist on electoral geography.All maps introduced in presentation were made by Serhij.You can look at Ukrainian electoral maps at Ekaterina Egorova, President of Niccolo M for inspiring to speak out Veronika Kruglashova, my wife and partner for supporting and cheering Last, but not the least, Igor Mintusov, for being an example for many years