Ukrainiana

NUNS' Suicidal PoRnification: Rumor or Reality?

Are we seeing what we think we’re seeing? Are NUNS morphing into sluts — again? As the Party of Regions continues love bombing Nasha Ukraina-Narodna Samooborona, the threat of their sweet surrender in favor of a shyrka, or grand coalition, becomes real.

Shyrka, short for shyroka koalitsiya — and slang for intravenous drug use — is a popular witticism that aptly extrapolates the effects of such an arrangement on Ukraine. In diagnosing the shyrka motives on the Orange side, we’re dealing with a good intentions-bad intentions axis.

Good intentions, Wilsonian designs. One way to interpret Yushchenko’s coalitioneering is to assume that he has again tasked himself with “mending Ukraine” and “making Donbas safe for democracy.” Consider this idealistic motif as the tip of the iceberg to a pragmatic dimension that underlies NUNS’ mediocre election score — and the Tymophobia that comes with it.

Will Orange voters buy into a Wilsonian shyrka? Not very likely. Should NUNS accept Yanukovych’s “stability and prosperity” proposition, they who put their trust in “one law for all” will experience high levels of cognitive dissonance. In their eyes, NUNS’ reliance on Yanukovych as the “white knight” will add up to a nymphomaniac bait-and-switch scheme.

They who voted for NUNS will make no peace with their electeds’ labor migration from church choir to Playboy party, no matter how lofty the rhetoric. Should NUNS swap “one law for all” for “one dough for all,” the next election will slap them with “one loathe for all.” Few voters will suffer gladly a bunch of promiscuous drones that sold them down the river, and then attempted to put a patriotic face on it.

If history is any guide, it teaches Yushchenko to avoid the trap of good intentions. In August 2006, Yushchenko tried to tame the tiger with the Universal of National Unity, only to end up being cornered by the Coalition of National Impunity, uh sorry, Unity.

Bad intentions, Machiavellian designs. Some analysts paint uglier pictures. One school of thought has it that Yushchenko might be interested in a zero coalition. Failure to form a coalition may result in an interregnum in which lame duck Yanukovych continues as PM on a short tether.

Still, others hypothesize that Yushchenko’s ambition to play “lord of the Oranges” supplies him with a stake in the Orange coalition’s “creative destruction.” Once the fragile Orange coalition falls apart — a process catalyzed by the President himself — the more stable shyrka will make him feel more comfortable, so they argue.

The most demonic way to look at it is to visualize a president who has nothing to lose in terms of reelection chances and thus opts for an exit strategy. He tells his lyubi druzi to get into the groove, grab as much as they can, and run.

Both Wilsonian and Machiavellian roads lead to hell — at least to the hell of public opinion. Should NUNS and Yushchenko chose to follow in Moroz’s footsteps, they will place Tymoshenko the martyr on a springboard to presidency.

However, it is not in Ukraine’s best interests to have a BYuT monopoly in the Orange camp. The PRU-BYuT duopoly that will arise from the ruins of NUNS will not benefit Ukraine any more than the two-party system benefits the United States.

With LyB as the indispensable margin of safety, BYuT and NUNS should discover the joys and challenges of team play. They should roll up their sleeves in the war on poverty. The turf wars of the past must be made taboo.

The Orange coalition should confront Yanukovych’s gatecrash behavior with a well-designed benefits package. This is not a winner-take-all election. The Blue camp should be provided with strong, but reasonable incentives to keep the opposition job.

Amid reports of Friday BYuT-NUNS coalition talks, there is hope that the Orange Revolution’s third anniversary will not be defiled by NUNS’ PoRnification.