Politics on pause or start of campaign? What lies behind talk of elections
Recently, talk of possible elections has been heard increasingly often in the information space. A likely reference point is even being named: November of this year. Various assumptions, expert comments, statements by politicians, and numerous discussions in society are emerging.
The reason for such discussions was a media report about an alleged closed-door meeting involving President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Head of the President's Office Kyrylo Budanov, his deputy Oleh Tatarov, Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council Rustem Umerov, and head of the "Servant of the People" parliamentary faction Davyd Arakhamiia. Supposedly, it was there that this topic was raised.
However, for now, this is not about an official announcement of elections — no such decision has been made. Under current legislation, holding them during martial law is impossible. At the same time, a growing number of signs suggest that political players are already assessing possible scenarios in the event that the security situation and legislative conditions allow such a step to be taken. An important marker here was also the publication of new sociological polling results. They show that the political field is gradually taking on the features of a future election campaign: apart from the incumbent president, several potential contenders consistently appear in the ratings, but Ukraine's ambassador to the United Kingdom, Valerii Zaluzhnyi, remains the most competitive figure. Against this backdrop, Zelenskyy's meeting with the former Commander-in-Chief also drew additional attention. These assumptions are further reinforced by the president's communication with Oleh Liashko, a former member of parliament who twice ran for the highest state office and is now commander of the 432nd Separate Unmanned Systems Regiment of the 11th Army Corps. In political circles, some view these contacts also through the prism of possible elections. At the same time, officially, they were explained by issues of diplomatic work, defense, and support for Ukrainian service members. In any case, these episodes only fuel the view that the political system is gradually preparing for different scenarios of how events may develop.
Censor.NET asked representatives of the political and expert community how they interpret the latest political signals and whether they see them as preconditions for an electoral process.
"ELECTIONS ARE IMPOSSIBLE WITHOUT A LASTING CEASEFIRE"
The Verkhovna Rada is not currently raising the issue of elections, Mykyta Poturaiev, an MP from the "Servant of the People" faction, assures:
- Here the answer is simple and one-word: no, the issue of holding elections is not being discussed in parliament — neither in our faction nor in general. There is nothing of the kind. There have not even been any rumors about it. As far as I know, no one has discussed this issue anywhere. The country is not ready to hold elections, including the electoral system. And no demand from society for this has emerged under the current conditions.
As of today, there can be no preconditions for holding elections. They are impossible without a ceasefire. Everyone can see that the war is continuing, while the rear is constantly being attacked, including with ballistic missiles hitting residential areas. The Russians are trying with all their might to increase the production of ballistic missiles because they know we have an extreme shortage of interceptors. Holding elections in such a situation would be complete madness, and no one will do that. That is, no elections are possible without a lasting ceasefire. And Putin publicly stated that he had rejected all four of President Zelenskyy's proposals for different ceasefire options — from a full to a partial one.
I understand the logic of Ukrainska Pravda's article about elections. As of today, we are conducting a successful campaign to weaken Russia and hope to achieve such successes in it that they will force Moscow into real negotiations, rather than an imitation of them. Their result could be an agreement on a ceasefire. And if that is achieved, conditions will open up to prepare and hold elections. In fact, this is set out correctly in the article. The only thing that surprised me was that it mentioned timeframes for when they could be held — November. President Zelenskyy also spoke about the last month of autumn at his most recent meeting with the faction, but he meant something else. At that time, our "air campaign" had only just begun, and its scale was not yet clear. So he spoke of November as a reference point when he hoped it would be possible to force the Russians into real negotiations, not about the electoral process.
Even if we theoretically assume that a ceasefire takes place, three months will not be enough to prepare elections. Six months are needed. This is my personal assessment. However, we must not forget that even under such conditions, Russia may attack us again at any moment.
"NO ONE CAN NOW SAY WHEN ELECTIONS WILL TAKE PLACE"
Serhii Yevtushok, an MP from the "Batkivshchyna" faction, confirms that parliamentarians are not focusing on elections:
- Pre-election moods are certainly not 'in the air' in the corridors. There is no discussion about this. At least during the previous parliamentary week, there were conversations on various topics, but not about elections. On the contrary, there is a view that the war will last for a long time.
No one can now say when elections will take place. As of now, there are no signs that hostilities may end in the near future. At the same time, however, we can analyze statements by certain politicians, and not only Ukrainian ones. Some international political figures have said that hostilities could stop in the autumn. How this will happen — so far, no one understands or knows the mechanics. But we remember that elections to the Russian State Duma are also due to take place in the autumn, which also matters for the overall situation.
Is our political force preparing for elections? In any case, all our primary party organizations are staying active, but at the same time we are more focused on volunteering and helping our Armed Forces of Ukraine. In their own areas, everyone helps the front with whatever they can. There are no circulars, tasks, or campaign policy documents. Yes, we communicate with the central office, with the leader, and with grassroots party branches. We are gradually working through the paperwork. If we are talking about work to bring the party structure into compliance, especially in the context of reforms to the administrative-territorial system, some registration processes are ongoing or are already at the final stage. But overall, I would not say that an election campaign is starting in our political force, or that we are already preparing strategic or tactical plans.
But in general, I clearly understand that "Batkivshchyna" and its leader will take part in the elections if they are scheduled. A case has now been opened against Yuliia Volodymyrivna, one that has long gone beyond Ukraine's borders and in which, in our view, there are many violations of international law that are not being properly applied to Yuliia Volodymyrivna. There are already a number of different resolutions and statements by European institutions, in particular the European People's Party, which is also drawing the attention of Ukraine's leadership and law enforcement agencies to this process, where there is no adversarial procedure and no possibility of a full-fledged defense. The unprecedented search, which has already made headlines not only across Europe but around the world, when they entered and searched the office not only of Tymoshenko but also of Vlasenko without a court order, is impossible to explain at all. Our law enforcement agencies justify this by the urgency of investigative actions, although urgency, in the view of the legislator who made it possible to carry out such actions without a court order, is about preventing the commission of a crime. In Tymoshenko's case, there were precisely no recorded actions involving the transfer of money or any other things. So all these planted narratives and actions are designed to lower her rating and try to remove a political competitor. It is quite a story. That is why the case has already gone beyond Ukraine's borders, and it will now be closely monitored not only in our country.
"ZELENSKYY IS ACTING WITHIN THE PARADIGM OF HOLDING ON TO POWER"
"European Solidarity" is always ready for elections, Volodymyr Ariev, an MP from the faction, emphasizes:
- Because we have a real party, not some project created for elections for certain purposes. It has existed since 2014 and has already gone through several periods of formation, cleansing, renewal, and development. Our party structure is functioning even despite the fact that many of our party members are now serving in the Armed Forces of Ukraine and other military formations. But we understand that with the kind of power Zelenskyy has, everything can change quickly, so we keep our party organization active.
Are there grounds today to talk about elections? There is a certain option here, one I am skeptical about. Ahead of the State Duma elections, when Putin's rating began to fall sharply, he needed new moves. He usually boosts his rating either through horrific terrorist attacks inside the country or through war — whether with Chechnya, Georgia, or Ukraine. And the second point is that he needs Ukraine, which is inflicting real damage on them, to agree to a truce. As far as I know, this is why Kirill Dmitriev came to the Americans with a proposal to declare a pre-election truce in order to hold elections both in Ukraine and in Russia. I consider this a trap because, first, there are effectively no elections in the Russian Federation. Second, holding elections in Ukraine requires a decision by the Verkhovna Rada. Third, the preparation timelines are much longer than 30 days. And here another problem arises: we are already effectively not fitting into the timeframe. If Russian elections are in September, then we would have to urgently change the legislation. Will there be the required number of votes for this? If there is strong pressure, yes. But there is another important point: our presidential elections are held in two rounds. Here, too, we have time limits. Who guarantees that after the first round it will be possible to hold the second? If not, then the authorities will be left hanging, and Zelenskyy will become a "lame duck," continuing to perform his duties, but the elections will be disrupted. From the point of view of the international community, this will create a difficult situation: formally, Western support may continue, but real political processes will be far less clear-cut than this is supposed to look in sociology. That is, support will shift not for the better, but for the worse. This "suspends" the position of the head of state during the war. I understand that Zelenskyy is now trying to calculate his steps and is acting within the paradigm of holding on to power. But even if the Americans propose a "Korean truce" scenario — when it was declared for 90 days and has held for years — I very much doubt that this will work with Russia. This country does not stop. And I do not believe that a truce with them can be stable at all.
Obviously, Zelenskyy is organizing all these meetings (with Budanov, Tatarov, Umierov, Arakhamiia, as well as separately with Zaluzhnyi and Liashko. — O.M.) believing that he can gain some political benefit. That is, if he agrees to these elections, he may try to convince everyone not to run and become the only candidate on the ballot. That happened in the Soviet Union, but Ukraine is not the USSR. That is why I believe the competitiveness of these elections will become the main obstacle to Zelenskyy agreeing to this scenario. Although he understands that the more time passes, the less popular he becomes, despite all sociological surveys. Because the sociology currently being presented has one serious flaw — a huge number of citizens are keeping their true views to themselves. This is indicated by a figure that is usually not disclosed: the number of refusals to take part in the survey. Some sociologists have told me that sometimes the number of such refusals reaches 90 percent. That is a very large number. In effect, these are people who simply do not want to share their political preferences, but who will then go to polling stations and vote. That is why I am very skeptical of sociology, especially telephone polling, as something that does not reflect the real political balance in Ukraine.
But, to repeat, elections in Russia are due this autumn, and for a wow effect, Putin will be looking for a new target — it seems to me it is hard to come up with a better one than Europe, Poland in particular. However, he understands that NATO's red line cannot be crossed. He needs to act in such a way that the Alliance remains in a zone of indecision. That is, he may attack facilities, for example Polish ones, that are connected to support for Ukraine. Against the backdrop of the scandals and hysteria now being whipped up by the far right in Poland regarding Ukraine, such attacks would not simply fail to unite the country — on the contrary, they would deepen the split. Poles would say: "This is happening to us because we are helping Ukraine." I expect that Putin will indeed try to act this way. At the same time, he may try through the Americans to force Ukraine into a temporary truce. He will try to play on this. If it does not work, there will be limited aggression against one of the NATO countries in such a way as not to trigger an unequivocal application of Article 5. That is, to act on the edge without crossing it completely. I look at this taking into account many factors, including statements coming from Russia. Peskov, for instance, said that the SMO had turned into a war because of Western assistance. The Russians' constant threats against Western countries usually end in something. But it will more likely be a hybrid scenario or a limited attack. A full-scale land or naval operation against NATO countries seems unlikely — Russia currently does not have sufficient resources for that. Therefore, a hybrid path is more likely, in order to create an effect for the domestic audience. Russians do not need bread as much as they need "greatness." And such a wow show could override the effect of the actions of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
"THESE GUYS HAVE A TRADITION: PREPARING FOR ELECTIONS EVERY SPRING AND EVERY AUTUMN, AND FIRING SHMYHAL EVERY SUMMER"
Yaroslav Zhelezniak, an MP from the "Holos" faction, agrees that the president and his entourage may be considering a scenario for holding elections in Ukraine:
- Do they think about elections? Of course they do! Are they planning anything on this issue? Yes. Will they manage to do anything? They can try. In the Verkhovna Rada, this issue is not the main one because no one there decides it. If I were president, I would not raise this topic with his MPs either. Although, in general, they are preparing for elections. That is a fact. If there is a chance, why not use it?! There is only one main obstacle — the war. That is the only thing stopping it.
But why, then, are they holding these meetings if it is obvious that the war will not end? There have been talks about elections before as well. Even without any preconditions for holding them, as, for example, a year ago, elections were still being dealt with. They are constantly in this process. These guys have a tradition: preparing for elections every spring and every autumn, and firing Shmyhal every summer. So far, they have managed to do it only once. And that was with Shmyhal.
I am convinced that if there were such an opportunity — the war stops, and then elections take place — they would hold them. There would be no problems either with electoral legislation or with anything else. But the first and main obstacle remains, as I said, the war. The second is the story with competitors. And this may concern not only Zaluzhnyi, but others as well.
In general, six months should pass after a ceasefire before elections are held. Yes, during this time Zelenskyy and the current parliament will still remain in power. However, that is better than having some idiots elected again. The fact that after a ceasefire, service members will return and "merge" with the rear may somehow affect public opinion. But this takes time. Who will people ultimately vote for? Unknown. We do not know what sociology will look like after the war. Nor do we know the possible candidates. That is, who knows how it will really be. Those who say they know are lying.
"PUTIN WILL NOT STOP — HE WILL KEEP FIGHTING. AND THIS MEANS THAT ANY FURTHER MENTION OF ELECTIONS LOSES MEANING"
Politician Roman Bezsmertnyi explains why the issue of elections may have become more active within the authorities:
- The message behind such steps was and remains the hope that, through the 'sanctions actions' of Ukrainian missiles, drones, and so on, it will be possible to force that Moscow snot into some kind of pause — a ceasefire. This is the first thing that is an absolutely mistaken position. I simply advise those who believe this can be done to read the recent Bloomberg article about what Trump and Putin discussed when the latter called to congratulate the American president on Independence Day. It was being written for a day — changes were constantly being made right up until the moment the conversation between Trump and Zelenskyy took place, when the president of Ukraine offered his congratulations. What does the development between these two conversations show? Putin will not stop — he will not agree to any truce, but will keep fighting. And this means that any further mention of elections loses meaning.
Was there a meeting at Zelenskyy's where elections were discussed? There was. As was a conversation with Valerii Zaluzhnyi, which can be seen from what he says in subsequent interviews. It is also noticeable from Zelenskyy himself. I am not even talking about the sociology that has been published, and so on. Another thing is that these are conversations that again take us back, for example, to my political youth — when people gather who, in essence, have no direct relation to the political process. Which of them will deal with this? Tatarov? Or Budanov? Let him solve the problems of relations with Poland. Umerov is Secretary of the NSDC. Is he supposed to talk about how to elect a president?! Does he have no other work?! Arakhamiia generally deals with everything: he knows how to do everything, he can do everything — fly into space and hold negotiations with anyone. A universal person. I understand why he appears in any situation, sometimes in the most difficult ones. However, the question is different. In reality, what lies on the surface is that there will be no pause anyway. Until that Moscow snot is crushed (in what way is another question) there will be no stops in the war. And yet we are already seeing some "movement" begin. It shows that the tragic nature of the situation can be stated, because it means that neither President Zelenskyy nor those who gathered there have, in essence, heard what a political process is. How will they make decisions on elections? This is not their business! Parliament will deal with this. And if Zelenskyy tells MPs: "Vote for elections," where does the confidence come from that parliament will vote?! We have not forgotten that a significant part of the "servants" are people of the former head of the President's Office. Therefore, the talk around this is fantasy on the level of 95th Kvartal, KVN sketches. It is difficult to assess it any other way.
Add to this the influence of the front, of those who today, due to circumstances, have become leaders of public opinion. Because His Majesty the soldier and the officer will now dictate this situation. Not to mention that as soon as the front and the rear unite into a political alliance, this sociology will have to be forgotten altogether. Someone needs to explain to President Zelenskyy that sociology conducted during the war is about politics specifically during the war. As soon as the "switch is flipped" and darkness turns into light, it will turn upside down in a way that is hard even to imagine. Therefore, I want to emphasize once again: if the current military-political leadership sees some pause on the horizon or the conclusion of some kind of agreement (obviously, you and I cannot know everything) this is still not about elections. Because if Trump now says in Ankara that he is giving Ukraine 100 Tomahawks, and in a few weeks plants producing UAVs and cruise missiles in Russia are destroyed, plus the Moscow runt is smothered with a pillow by representatives of his own entourage, only then will real "movement" begin. However, even if something begins under such circumstances, we understand that it has to start with Trump. And Trump will say: "Who will pay?!" Then it will be necessary to run to Europe: "Pay!" They will say there: "With what?! We are already spending as it is." This is a complicated structure. The maximum Ukraine's leadership can count on is temporary administration for a transitional period while elections are being prepared. And the idea that any of the candidates being named could actually be elected is a real exaggeration. I emphasize again: these people do not know what politics is. The fact that they organized that meeting is further proof that they do not understand how political mechanisms work. There is no future for them.
In general, an article should have been written with the following headline: "The 'Eisenhowers' will come to power." And this applies at the central, regional, and subregional levels. This was the case after Afghanistan in Soviet times. And this will be the case under today's conditions in Ukraine when it wins. I am not now raising the question of how much time is needed to live to see this. Because it may happen that this will already be beyond our lifetimes. Therefore, I wish everyone good health and many years of life, but at the same time, under no circumstances should common sense be lost or time wasted on empty talk that no one needs.
Olha Moskaliuk, "Censor.NET"
