Deržavnyj ustrij Ukraïny: polityko-istoryčnyj aspekt
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Buch |
| Sprache: | Ukrainian |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Černivci
Ruta
2007
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Inhaltsverzeichnis Abstract |
| Beschreibung: | In kyrill. Schr., ukrain. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache Includes bibliographical references (p. [144]-158) and index |
| Beschreibung: | 167 p. 21 cm |
| ISBN: | 9789665689119 |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 c 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV035100272 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20100722 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 081015s2007 |||| 00||| ukr d | ||
| 020 | |a 9789665689119 |9 978-966-568-911-9 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)190921453 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV035100272 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a ukr | |
| 049 | |a DE-12 | ||
| 050 | 0 | |a JN6635 | |
| 084 | |a 7,41 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Hdyčynsʹkyj, Bohdan P. |d 1957- |e Verfasser |0 (DE-588)136421296 |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Deržavnyj ustrij Ukraïny |b polityko-istoryčnyj aspekt |c Bohdan Hdyčynsʹkyj |
| 264 | 1 | |a Černivci |b Ruta |c 2007 | |
| 300 | |a 167 p. |c 21 cm | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a In kyrill. Schr., ukrain. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache | ||
| 500 | |a Includes bibliographical references (p. [144]-158) and index | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Politik | |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Politisches System |0 (DE-588)4046584-6 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 651 | 4 | |a Ukraine / Politics and government / 1991- | |
| 651 | 4 | |a Ukraine |x Politics and government |y 1991- | |
| 651 | 7 | |a Ukraine |0 (DE-588)4061496-7 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Ukraine |0 (DE-588)4061496-7 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 1 | |a Politisches System |0 (DE-588)4046584-6 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016768255&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016768255&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Abstract |
| 940 | 1 | |n oe | |
| 999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-016768255 | ||
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1804138062046822400 |
|---|---|
| adam_text | ЗМІСТ
ВІД АВТОРА
.......................................................................................................5
СПИСОК СКОРОЧЕНЬ
....................................................................................6
ВСТУП
.................................................................................................................9
РОЗДІЛ
1
ТЕОРЕТИЧНІ ТА МЕТОДОЛОГІЧНІ ПІДХОДИ ДО ПОШУКУ
ОПТИМАЛЬНОЇ ФОРМИ ДЕРЖАВНОГО УСТРОЮ В УКРАЇНІ
...........14
1.1.
Федералізм і федеративні системи як явища політики
................14
1.2.
Ідея федералізму в українській політичній науці
........................22
1.3.
Теоретичні підходи до розуміння сутності політичних партій
та аналіз джерельної бази дослідження
................................................33
РОЗДІЛ
2
ПРОБЛЕМИ ДЕРЖАВНОГО УСТРОЮ У ПРОГРАМАХ І
ДІЯЛЬНОСТІ ПОЛІТИЧНИХ ПАРТІЙ УКРАЇНИ В 90-Х РОКАХ
XX
-
НА ПОЧАТКУ
XXI
СТОЛІТТЯ
....................................................................44
2.1.
Формування багатопартійної системи в Україні та її вплив на
вибір форми державного устрою
.........................................................44
2.2.
Еволюція підходів українських політичних партій щодо
вибору форми державного устрою в
1991-1996
рр
............................64
2.3.
Позиція новостворених українських політичних партій
стосовно питання державного устрою в
1996-1998
рр
.......................91
2.4.
Тенденції розвитку українських політичних партій та їх став¬
лення до проблеми державного устрою України в
1999-2004
рр
.........101
РОЗДІЛ З
ОСНОВНІ ТЕНДЕНЦІЇ РОЗВИТКУ ВІДНОСИН МІЖ ЦЕНТРОМ І
РЕГІОНАМИ В УКРАЇНІ У КОНТЕКСТІ ДІЯЛЬНОСТІ
УКРАЇНСЬКИХ ПОЛІТИЧНИХ ПАРТІЙ
..................................................116
3.1.
Регіональний чинник партійного будівництва в Україні та його
вплив на взаємини між центром і регіонами
.....................................116
3.2.
Проблема центр-регіони у пострадянській трансформації в
Україні
....................................................................................................128
ВИСНОВКИ
....................................................................................................138
СПИСОК ВИКОРИСТАНИХ ДЖЕРЕЛ
......................................................144
ІМЕННИЙ ПОКАЖЧИК
..............................................................................159
CONCLUSIONS
.............................................................................................162
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
..................................................................................5
ABBREVIATION
.................................................................................................6
INTRODUCTION
.................................................................................................9
CHAPTER I.
THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO
OPTIMUM FORM OF THE STATE STRUCTURE OF UKRAINE
................14
1.1.
Federalism and federal systems as political phenomena
.....................14
1.2.
Federalism idea in Ukraine s political science
.....................................22
1.3.
Theoretical approaches to understanding of political parties essence
and analysis of source database
..................................................................33
CHAPTER II.
STATE STRUCTURE ISSUES IN POLITICAL PARTIES PROGRAMMES
AND THEIR ACTIVITIES IN 1990 S AND EARLY 21ST CENTURY
.........44
2.1.
Multiparty system formation in Ukraine and its influence on the
choice of the state structure form
...............................................................44
2.2.
Evolution of the Ukrainian political parties approaches to the state
structure forms choice in
1991-1996...........................................................64
2.3.
Newly established political parties attitude to the issue of Ukraine s
state structure in
1996-1998........................................................................91
2.4.
Tendencies in political parties developments and the attitude
towards the issues of the state structure of Ukraine in
1999-2004...........101
CHAPTER III.
MAJOR TENDENCIES IN RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CENTRE
AND REGIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE UKRAINIAN POLITICAL
PARTIES ACTIVITIES
.................................................................................116
3.1.
Regional factor of the party development in Ukraine and its influence
on relationship between the centre and regions
........................................116
3.2.
The issue Centre-Regions in post-Soviet transformation processes
in Ukraine
.................................................................................................128
EPILOGUE
........................................................................................................138
BIBLIOGRAPHY
.............................................................................................144
INDEX
...............................................................................................................159
CONCLUSIONS
...............................................................................................162
CONCLUSION
While making a thorough analysis of a present-day Ukrainian
political parties preferences of a certain state structure, we can draw a
conclusion.
It should be noted, that the discussion on the best Ukrainian state,
administrative and territory structure has been lasting for a long span of
time in the Ukrainian social and political thought. Regardless the unitary
status of Ukraine, the idea of federative system occasionally becomes
quite topical. It could be explained by the fact that Ukraine has a row of
regional specifications and it urges lively interest. In particular,
autonomous formation and powerful regions within Ukrainian borders,
alongside with the researchers opinion of archaic structure of the
territorial division requires reinterpretation of the perspective outlook of
state structure and territorial organization improvement.
Notwithstanding the old traces of unitary Ukrainian state,
federalism has its deep roots dating back to autonomous tradition of the
16-1
8th centuries. Throughout the forthcoming period there were lasting
discussions concerning probability and expedience of some federal
system elements borrowing.
Up to day, mainly in the late 80 s there was a spring up of several
camps of the Ukrainian politicians and political scientists, whose
prerogatives were to consider the Ukrainian state structure perspectives
under such circumstances. Different political parties approaches could
be clearly defined on the basis of their program documents and activities
analysis. At that time, before having declared Ukraine a sovereign state,
acting political parties could be split into three groups concerning their
opinion on state structure:
1.
federalists, that is political parties desiring to see Ukraine
incorporated in a renewed Soviet federation. Primarily, we should
emphasize on the Communist Parry of Ukraine;
2.
confederation adherents, standing for Commonwealth of
independent states establishing. Namely, United Party of Social
Democrats of Ukraine (UPSDU), Party of Social Democrats of
Ukraine (PSDU), Liberal Democratic Party of Ukraine (LDPU),
Party of Democratic Choice of Ukraine (PDCU), Peoples Party,
etc. Furthermore, above-mentioned parties are constantly
===========—===== 163 =============
emending their programs with substituting
oblast
division for
allotment and, consequently, unitary state structure for federal one;
3.
the third group consisted of incorporations, striving for
establishing of independent and sovereign Ukrainian state. To the
point, the latter group had two sub-groups. The first one comprised
the parties aiming to see Ukraine independent by means of active
parliamentary work, using the system of state authorities
(Democratic Party of Ukraine (DPU), Ukrainian Republican Party
(URP), PSDU and others). The second group advocates didn t
recognize acting government organs and supposed union
agreement of December 30th,
1922
illegal. The main goal of the
parties was a sovereign independent Ukraine s revival, which was
considered the legal successor of the Ukrainian People s Republic,
by means of establishing of alternative structures of authority,
committees on Ukrainian citizens registration. Consequently, the
Ukrainian National Assembly (UNA) was formed, its members
were the Ukrainian National Party (UNP), the Ukrainian People s
Democratic Party (UPDP), the Ukrainian Peasant Democratic
Party (UPDP), etc.
The majority of the third-group parties molded their state structure
form attitude, based on the conservatism ideas: the inevitability of the
administrative and territorial division preserving, and state structure
unitary principle were stipulated by the fact that decentralized system
can be efficient only providing if economical and political relations
between its subjects are ascertained.
Throughout
1992-1993
some public and political institutions
changed their positions. Namely, the People Movement
(Ruh)
of
Ukraine (PMU) edited its program principles concerning state structure.
Under well-known Ukrainian politician
V.Chomoviľs
leadership of
PMU some of his adherents started agitating for allotment, whilst the
other leaders of the Movement, in particular, I.Drach, M.Horyn
defended unitary principles. Antagonism came to an end in
1992,
when
V.Chornovil alone became Movement leader, and the public
organization theorists fixed in State Molding Concepts in Ukraine ,
that PMU assumes the necessity of reconsidering of administrative and
territorial division, changing
oblast
division to allotment, taking into
consideration the specific regional development. Simultaneously they
confirmed their support of unitary state structure in the nearest future
===«=== 164 ====================
and stated administrative allotment shouldn t induce automatically to
state structure substitution for federal one.
A number of parties and public organizations made some
revaluation of their program requirements. Thus, taking into account
these changes we can determine three conditional groups of organization
according to their state structure position.
The first group of parties and public organizations (unitarists) motivate
their position in the following way: the state requires stability; no way to
tendencies of separatism; making conditions for efficient and effective
reform. To the point, it predominantly concerns unitary, centralized
state. The first group represent the interest of the Democratic Party of
Ukraine (DPU), Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists (CUN),
Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), Ukrainian Conservative
Republican Party (UCRP), Ukrainian National Assembly and Ukrainian
National Samooborona (Self-defense) (UNA-UNSO), Ukrainian
Republican Party (URP) and others. The representatives of such
inclination are in a habit of using the term
soborna
Ukraine in the
context of unitary centralized state. That s why the term the Ukrainian
independent
soborna
state building up is often applied in the program
documents of aforesaid structures.
The second-group parties and public organizations (federalists)
support quite opposite conception, considering federal structure is the
only possible and optimum choice for Ukraine. It is worth mentioning
primarily regional organizations: Constitutional Democratic Party
(CDP), Civil Congress (CC), Labour Party (LP), The Party Economic
Revival of Crimea
(PERC),
etc.
The third group is made up of the parties and public organizations,
undergoing some evolution of approaches to this problem. Namely,
Party of Democratic Revival of Ukraine (PDRU), Liberal Democratic
Party of Ukraine (LDPU), Liberal Party of Ukraine (LPU) and others
consider the federal state the optimal model of would-be Ukraine.
Consequently, they assume regions should be given the most favorable
social and economical autonomy. A certain part of the group is
represented by scientists and politicians, whose opinion changed from
ideas of centralized unitary state to decentralized unitary one. The
former President of Ukraine L-Kravchuk made a significant contribution
into working out of such conception. The last variants of the Ukrainian
Constitution Draft were based on these very principles. It should be
noted, that in mid
90
s
of the 20th century the Ukrainian President
.... 165 ========
L-Kuchma s position were based predominantly on the third model, and
in some cases even involving the
1st
model elements. To the point, his
political creed was totally identified with federalists position throughout
elections.
With the upcoming statehood development the problem of regions
large powers grew in its importance. Firstly, the idea of federalism
became very popular, its adherents proved that the state will be powerful
and influential only having strong and mighty regions, the latter will be
such, providing their specific features: natural and geographical,
economical, historical, etihnocultural, linguistic, religious ones will be
taken into consideration. Secondly, mll-fledged regional policy can t be
formed and made in the center. Federalism tendencies were different in
different regions. In the Crimea, autonomous republic, there was worked
out Constitution, guarantying large powers to autonomy. Moreover, in
Transcarpathia
(Zakarpatí
a region), Bukovyna and
Odesa
region there
were worked out projects of Free Economic Zone creation.
Ukrainian multiparty system, being established after
1994
election,
gained two new specific features. Firstly, political parties of Eastern and
Southern regional origin emerged in Ukraine (LPU, CCU, PECU (Party
of European Choice of Ukraine), Party of Pensioners of Ukraine (PPU).
Secondly, forming political parties from influential lobbyist groups,
entrepreneurs, managers of state and rental business, collective peasant
farming, and others, who had their own point of view of the Ukrainian
statehood in general and state structure in particular (i.e. LPU, PPU,
Rural Party of Ukraine (SelPU), UPS, UPSSS).
Right after the
1994
election federalism was being less and less
discussed in political parties activities, meanwhile it was completely
forgotten. However, the closer was the
1988
election, me more sporadic
were declarations in support of strong regions . Moreover, they were
accepted both in the East and in the West, stipulated by the
corresponding center s attitude to this issue.
Taking into consideration completed analysis of the existing and
newly formed Ukrainian political parties stand during parliamentary
and presidential campaigns in 90 s of the 20th century, we admit that the
majority of parties do not support federalism and concentrate on the
abstract declaration to expand regional self-governing, without any
intentions to transgress the unitary limits. Only for that time powerless
organizations backed country s federalization. They envisaged the
change of the existing administrative structure and Ukraine s division
into lands, which approximately coincide with well-known cultural-
historical provinces.
It is worth mentioning that the political parties significance in the
process of the relationship between centre and regions, caused by
different circumstances active development of the regional identity and
connected with it political cultures in Ukraine appeared braked and
strongly localized. Firstly, within the frames of unitary Ukraine,
developing in accordance with national state model, regional political
activity was suppressed and the regions could not compete with Kyiv,
moreover, resist it. The example of the Crimea is quite vivid.
Furthermore, we experienced the situation when virtually all the regions,
except for the Crimea, suggested their own vision of the Ukrainian
statehood, but not an autonomous self-development.
Secondly, but for democratic traditions infirmity put the breaks on
developing of such types of political participation as establishing of
regional political parties at the bottom having local inhabitants
support. Noteworthy, in the Crimea the period of local parties
domineering appeared very short. In other regions similar parties ranked
with national ones at best and their establishing revealed latent need in
political self-realization. Nonetheless, these parties could not turn into
leading ones on their territories.
In general it should be pointed out that we can t visualize in
common Ukraine s future in the contemporary Ukrainian political
thought. Three main directions of our country s administrative-territorial
system shaping could be singled out:
Firstly, representatives of the unitary system supporters, refusing
from any experiments concerning federative states experience
implementing.
Secondly, adherents of some federalism elements borrowing aim at
improving of existing unitary system by means of its gradual
decentralization.
Thirdly, supporters of Ukraine s transforming into federation with
all its relevant specifics by means of drastic change of its administrative-
territorial system.
Alongside most Ukrainians do not need any state structure change,
which can be partly explained by their ignorance concerning unitary and
federative state models.
We consider that the most practical and efficient way of the state
structure issue solution is implementing of the unitary decentralized
============================ 167
^====*e=====*=======
model, that is practical decentralization of state power without radical
change of administrative-territorial system and state structure type. The
Crimean autonomous status, free economic zones testify to absence of
the unitary system in Ukraine. Yet, it does not mean that there must not
be any exceptions concerning territorial changes within the borders of
some regions or districts because of economic development peculiarities
of certain regions. Probable future models of Ukraine s state structure
transformation should be elaborated.
Consequently, without integral comprehension and mastering of
the western political thought, home and world experience of political
practice we cannot expect some positive results from the discussions on
Ukraine s state structure model choosing. We need mastering of
democratic countries experience in the sphere of administrative-
territorial system, self-governing and local self-governing aiming at
distinguishing our system place in the horizontal scale, making an idea
of all possible administrative-territorial system variants, seeking for
possible analogies, clear-cut defining of its transformation strategic goal.
These transformations should take place in the conditions of dynamic
scientific and political discussion.
|
| adam_txt |
ЗМІСТ
ВІД АВТОРА
.5
СПИСОК СКОРОЧЕНЬ
.6
ВСТУП
.9
РОЗДІЛ
1
ТЕОРЕТИЧНІ ТА МЕТОДОЛОГІЧНІ ПІДХОДИ ДО ПОШУКУ
ОПТИМАЛЬНОЇ ФОРМИ ДЕРЖАВНОГО УСТРОЮ В УКРАЇНІ
.14
1.1.
Федералізм і федеративні системи як явища політики
.14
1.2.
Ідея федералізму в українській політичній науці
.22
1.3.
Теоретичні підходи до розуміння сутності політичних партій
та аналіз джерельної бази дослідження
.33
РОЗДІЛ
2
ПРОБЛЕМИ ДЕРЖАВНОГО УСТРОЮ У ПРОГРАМАХ І
ДІЯЛЬНОСТІ ПОЛІТИЧНИХ ПАРТІЙ УКРАЇНИ В 90-Х РОКАХ
XX
-
НА ПОЧАТКУ
XXI
СТОЛІТТЯ
.44
2.1.
Формування багатопартійної системи в Україні та її вплив на
вибір форми державного устрою
.44
2.2.
Еволюція підходів українських політичних партій щодо
вибору форми державного устрою в
1991-1996
рр
.64
2.3.
Позиція новостворених українських політичних партій
стосовно питання державного устрою в
1996-1998
рр
.91
2.4.
Тенденції розвитку українських політичних партій та їх став¬
лення до проблеми державного устрою України в
1999-2004
рр
.101
РОЗДІЛ З
ОСНОВНІ ТЕНДЕНЦІЇ РОЗВИТКУ ВІДНОСИН МІЖ ЦЕНТРОМ І
РЕГІОНАМИ В УКРАЇНІ У КОНТЕКСТІ ДІЯЛЬНОСТІ
УКРАЇНСЬКИХ ПОЛІТИЧНИХ ПАРТІЙ
.116
3.1.
Регіональний чинник партійного будівництва в Україні та його
вплив на взаємини між центром і регіонами
.116
3.2.
Проблема "центр-регіони" у пострадянській трансформації в
Україні
.128
ВИСНОВКИ
.138
СПИСОК ВИКОРИСТАНИХ ДЖЕРЕЛ
.144
ІМЕННИЙ ПОКАЖЧИК
.159
CONCLUSIONS
.162
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
.5
ABBREVIATION
.6
INTRODUCTION
.9
CHAPTER I.
THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO
OPTIMUM FORM OF THE STATE STRUCTURE OF UKRAINE
.14
1.1.
Federalism and federal systems as political phenomena
.14
1.2.
Federalism idea in Ukraine's political science
.22
1.3.
Theoretical approaches to understanding of political parties' essence
and analysis of source database
.33
CHAPTER II.
STATE STRUCTURE ISSUES IN POLITICAL PARTIES PROGRAMMES
AND THEIR ACTIVITIES IN 1990'S AND EARLY 21ST CENTURY
.44
2.1.
Multiparty system formation in Ukraine and its influence on the
choice of the state structure form
.44
2.2.
Evolution of the Ukrainian political parties' approaches to the state
structure forms choice in
1991-1996.64
2.3.
Newly established political parties attitude to the issue of Ukraine's
state structure in
1996-1998.91
2.4.
Tendencies in political parties' developments and the attitude
towards the issues of the state structure of Ukraine in
1999-2004.101
CHAPTER III.
MAJOR TENDENCIES IN RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CENTRE
AND REGIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE UKRAINIAN POLITICAL
PARTIES' ACTIVITIES
.116
3.1.
Regional factor of the party development in Ukraine and its influence
on relationship between the centre and regions
.116
3.2.
The issue "Centre-Regions" in post-Soviet transformation processes
in Ukraine
.128
EPILOGUE
.138
BIBLIOGRAPHY
.144
INDEX
.159
CONCLUSIONS
.162
CONCLUSION
While making a thorough analysis of a present-day Ukrainian
political parties' preferences of a certain state structure, we can draw a
conclusion.
It should be noted, that the discussion on the best Ukrainian state,
administrative and territory structure has been lasting for a long span of
time in the Ukrainian social and political thought. Regardless the unitary
status of Ukraine, the idea of federative system occasionally becomes
quite topical. It could be explained by the fact that Ukraine has a row of
regional specifications and it urges lively interest. In particular,
autonomous formation and powerful regions within Ukrainian borders,
alongside with the researchers' opinion of archaic structure of the
territorial division requires reinterpretation of the perspective outlook of
state structure and territorial organization improvement.
Notwithstanding the old traces of unitary Ukrainian state,
federalism has its deep roots dating back to autonomous tradition of the
16-1
8th centuries. Throughout the forthcoming period there were lasting
discussions concerning probability and expedience of some federal
system elements borrowing.
Up to day, mainly in the late 80's there was a spring up of several
camps of the Ukrainian politicians and political scientists, whose
prerogatives were to consider the Ukrainian state structure perspectives
under such circumstances. Different political parties' approaches could
be clearly defined on the basis of their program documents and activities
analysis. At that time, before having declared Ukraine a sovereign state,
acting political parties could be split into three groups concerning their
opinion on state structure:
1.
federalists, that is political parties desiring to see Ukraine
incorporated in a renewed Soviet federation. Primarily, we should
emphasize on the Communist Parry of Ukraine;
2.
confederation adherents, standing for Commonwealth of
independent states establishing. Namely, United Party of Social
Democrats of Ukraine (UPSDU), Party of Social Democrats of
Ukraine (PSDU), Liberal Democratic Party of Ukraine (LDPU),
Party of Democratic Choice of Ukraine (PDCU), Peoples' Party,
etc. Furthermore, above-mentioned parties are constantly
===========—===== 163 =============
emending their programs with substituting
oblast
division for
allotment and, consequently, unitary state structure for federal one;
3.
the third group consisted of incorporations, striving for
establishing of independent and sovereign Ukrainian state. To the
point, the latter group had two sub-groups. The first one comprised
the parties aiming to see Ukraine independent by means of active
parliamentary work, using the system of state authorities
(Democratic Party of Ukraine (DPU), Ukrainian Republican Party
(URP), PSDU and others). The second group advocates didn't
recognize acting government organs and supposed union
agreement of December 30th,
1922
illegal. The main goal of the
parties was a sovereign independent Ukraine's revival, which was
considered the legal successor of the Ukrainian People's Republic,
by means of establishing of alternative structures of authority,
committees on Ukrainian citizens registration. Consequently, the
Ukrainian National Assembly (UNA) was formed, its members
were the Ukrainian National Party (UNP), the Ukrainian People's
Democratic Party (UPDP), the Ukrainian Peasant Democratic
Party (UPDP), etc.
The majority of the third-group parties molded their state structure
form attitude, based on the conservatism ideas: the inevitability of the
administrative and territorial division preserving, and state structure
unitary principle were stipulated by the fact that decentralized system
can be efficient only providing if economical and political relations
between its subjects are ascertained.
Throughout
1992-1993
some public and political institutions
changed their positions. Namely, the People Movement
(Ruh)
of
Ukraine (PMU) edited its program principles concerning state structure.
Under well-known Ukrainian politician
V.Chomoviľs
leadership of
PMU some of his adherents started agitating for allotment, whilst the
other leaders of the Movement, in particular, I.Drach, M.Horyn'
defended unitary principles. Antagonism came to an end in
1992,
when
V.Chornovil alone became Movement leader, and the public
organization theorists fixed in "State Molding Concepts in Ukraine",
that PMU assumes the necessity of reconsidering of administrative and
territorial division, changing
oblast
division to allotment, taking into
consideration the specific regional development. Simultaneously they
confirmed their support of unitary state structure in the nearest future
===«=== 164 ====================
and stated administrative allotment shouldn't induce automatically to
state structure substitution for federal one.
A number of parties and public organizations made some
revaluation of their program requirements. Thus, taking into account
these changes we can determine three conditional groups of organization
according to their state structure position.
The first group of parties and public organizations (unitarists) motivate
their position in the following way: the state requires stability; no way to
tendencies of separatism; making conditions for efficient and effective
reform. To the point, it predominantly concerns unitary, centralized
state. The first group represent the interest of the Democratic Party of
Ukraine (DPU), Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists (CUN),
Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), Ukrainian Conservative
Republican Party (UCRP), Ukrainian National Assembly and Ukrainian
National Samooborona (Self-defense) (UNA-UNSO), Ukrainian
Republican Party (URP) and others. The representatives of such
inclination are in a habit of using the term
"soborna"
Ukraine in the
context of unitary centralized state. That's why the term "the Ukrainian
independent
soborna
state building up" is often applied in the program
documents of aforesaid structures.
The second-group parties and public organizations (federalists)
support quite opposite conception, considering federal structure is the
only possible and optimum choice for Ukraine. It is worth mentioning
primarily regional organizations: Constitutional Democratic Party
(CDP), Civil Congress (CC), Labour Party (LP), The Party Economic
Revival of Crimea
(PERC),
etc.
The third group is made up of the parties and public organizations,
undergoing some evolution of approaches to this problem. Namely,
Party of Democratic Revival of Ukraine (PDRU), Liberal Democratic
Party of Ukraine (LDPU), Liberal Party of Ukraine (LPU) and others
consider the federal state the optimal model of would-be Ukraine.
Consequently, they assume regions should be given the most favorable
social and economical autonomy. A certain part of the group is
represented by scientists and politicians, whose opinion changed from
ideas of centralized unitary state to decentralized unitary one. The
former President of Ukraine L-Kravchuk made a significant contribution
into working out of such conception. The last variants of the Ukrainian
Constitution Draft were based on these very principles. It should be
noted, that in mid
90'
s
of the 20th century the Ukrainian President
. 165 ========
L-Kuchma's position were based predominantly on the third model, and
in some cases even involving the
1st
model elements. To the point, his
political creed was totally identified with federalists' position throughout
elections.
With the upcoming statehood development the problem of regions'
large powers grew in its importance. Firstly, the idea of federalism
became very popular, its adherents proved that the state will be powerful
and influential only having strong and mighty regions, the latter will be
such, providing their specific features: natural and geographical,
economical, historical, etihnocultural, linguistic, religious ones will be
taken into consideration. Secondly, mll-fledged regional policy can't be
formed and made in the center. Federalism tendencies were different in
different regions. In the Crimea, autonomous republic, there was worked
out Constitution, guarantying large powers to autonomy. Moreover, in
Transcarpathia
(Zakarpatí'
a region), Bukovyna and
Odesa
region there
were worked out projects of Free Economic Zone creation.
Ukrainian multiparty system, being established after
1994
election,
gained two new specific features. Firstly, political parties of Eastern and
Southern regional origin emerged in Ukraine (LPU, CCU, PECU (Party
of European Choice of Ukraine), Party of Pensioners of Ukraine (PPU).
Secondly, forming political parties from influential lobbyist groups,
entrepreneurs, managers of state and rental business, collective peasant
farming, and others, who had their own point of view of the Ukrainian
statehood in general and state structure in particular (i.e. LPU, PPU,
Rural Party of Ukraine (SelPU), UPS, UPSSS).
Right after the
1994
election federalism was being less and less
discussed in political parties' activities, meanwhile it was completely
forgotten. However, the closer was the
1988
election, me more sporadic
were declarations in support of "strong regions". Moreover, they were
accepted both in the East and in the West, stipulated by the
corresponding center's attitude to this issue.
Taking into consideration completed analysis of the existing and
newly formed Ukrainian political parties' stand during parliamentary
and presidential campaigns in 90's of the 20th century, we admit that the
majority of parties do not support federalism and concentrate on the
abstract declaration to expand regional self-governing, without any
intentions to transgress the unitary limits. Only for that time powerless
organizations backed country's federalization. They envisaged the
change of the existing administrative structure and Ukraine's division
into lands, which approximately coincide with well-known cultural-
historical provinces.
It is worth mentioning that the political parties' significance in the
process of the relationship between centre and regions, caused by
different circumstances active development of the regional identity and
connected with it political cultures in Ukraine appeared braked and
strongly localized. Firstly, within the frames of unitary Ukraine,
developing in accordance with national state model, regional political
activity was suppressed and the regions could not compete with Kyiv,
moreover, resist it. The example of the Crimea is quite vivid.
Furthermore, we experienced the situation when virtually all the regions,
except for the Crimea, suggested their own vision of the Ukrainian
statehood, but not an autonomous self-development.
Secondly, but for democratic traditions infirmity put the breaks on
developing of such types of political participation as establishing of
regional political parties "at the bottom" having local inhabitants'
support. Noteworthy, in the Crimea the period of local parties'
domineering appeared very short. In other regions similar parties ranked
with national ones at best and their establishing revealed latent need in
political self-realization. Nonetheless, these parties could not turn into
leading ones on "their" territories.
In general it should be pointed out that we can't visualize in
common Ukraine's future in the contemporary Ukrainian political
thought. Three main directions of our country's administrative-territorial
system shaping could be singled out:
Firstly, representatives of the unitary system supporters, refusing
from any experiments concerning federative states' experience
implementing.
Secondly, adherents of some federalism elements borrowing aim at
improving of existing unitary system by means of its gradual
decentralization.
Thirdly, supporters of Ukraine's transforming into federation with
all its relevant specifics by means of drastic change of its administrative-
territorial system.
Alongside most Ukrainians do not need any state structure change,
which can be partly explained by their ignorance concerning unitary and
federative state models.
We consider that the most practical and efficient way of the state
structure issue solution is implementing of the unitary decentralized
============================ 167
^====*e=====*=======
model, that is practical decentralization of state power without radical
change of administrative-territorial system and state structure type. The
Crimean autonomous status, free economic zones testify to absence of
the unitary system in Ukraine. Yet, it does not mean that there must not
be any exceptions concerning territorial changes within the borders of
some regions or districts because of economic development peculiarities
of certain regions. Probable future models of Ukraine's state structure
transformation should be elaborated.
Consequently, without integral comprehension and mastering of
the western political thought, home and world experience of political
practice we cannot expect some positive results from the discussions on
Ukraine's state structure model choosing. We need mastering of
democratic countries' experience in the sphere of administrative-
territorial system, self-governing and local self-governing aiming at
distinguishing our system place in the "horizontal" scale, making an idea
of all possible administrative-territorial system variants, seeking for
possible analogies, clear-cut defining of its transformation strategic goal.
These transformations should take place in the conditions of dynamic
scientific and political discussion. |
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| any_adam_object_boolean | 1 |
| author | Hdyčynsʹkyj, Bohdan P. 1957- |
| author_GND | (DE-588)136421296 |
| author_facet | Hdyčynsʹkyj, Bohdan P. 1957- |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Hdyčynsʹkyj, Bohdan P. 1957- |
| author_variant | b p h bp bph |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV035100272 |
| callnumber-first | J - Political Science |
| callnumber-label | JN6635 |
| callnumber-raw | JN6635 |
| callnumber-search | JN6635 |
| callnumber-sort | JN 46635 |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)190921453 (DE-599)BVBBV035100272 |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01859nam a2200433 c 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV035100272</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20100722 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">081015s2007 |||| 00||| ukr d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9789665689119</subfield><subfield code="9">978-966-568-911-9</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)190921453</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV035100272</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ukr</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">JN6635</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7,41</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hdyčynsʹkyj, Bohdan P.</subfield><subfield code="d">1957-</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)136421296</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Deržavnyj ustrij Ukraïny</subfield><subfield code="b">polityko-istoryčnyj aspekt</subfield><subfield code="c">Bohdan Hdyčynsʹkyj</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Černivci</subfield><subfield code="b">Ruta</subfield><subfield code="c">2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">167 p.</subfield><subfield code="c">21 cm</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">In kyrill. Schr., ukrain. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Includes bibliographical references (p. [144]-158) and index</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Politik</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Politisches System</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4046584-6</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ukraine / Politics and government / 1991-</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ukraine</subfield><subfield code="x">Politics and government</subfield><subfield code="y">1991-</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Ukraine</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4061496-7</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Ukraine</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4061496-7</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Politisches System</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4046584-6</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016768255&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016768255&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-016768255</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| geographic | Ukraine / Politics and government / 1991- Ukraine Politics and government 1991- Ukraine (DE-588)4061496-7 gnd |
| geographic_facet | Ukraine / Politics and government / 1991- Ukraine Politics and government 1991- Ukraine |
| id | DE-604.BV035100272 |
| illustrated | Not Illustrated |
| index_date | 2024-07-02T22:13:58Z |
| indexdate | 2024-07-09T21:22:12Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9789665689119 |
| language | Ukrainian |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-016768255 |
| oclc_num | 190921453 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-12 |
| owner_facet | DE-12 |
| physical | 167 p. 21 cm |
| publishDate | 2007 |
| publishDateSearch | 2007 |
| publishDateSort | 2007 |
| publisher | Ruta |
| record_format | marc |
| spelling | Hdyčynsʹkyj, Bohdan P. 1957- Verfasser (DE-588)136421296 aut Deržavnyj ustrij Ukraïny polityko-istoryčnyj aspekt Bohdan Hdyčynsʹkyj Černivci Ruta 2007 167 p. 21 cm txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier In kyrill. Schr., ukrain. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache Includes bibliographical references (p. [144]-158) and index Politik Politisches System (DE-588)4046584-6 gnd rswk-swf Ukraine / Politics and government / 1991- Ukraine Politics and government 1991- Ukraine (DE-588)4061496-7 gnd rswk-swf Ukraine (DE-588)4061496-7 g Politisches System (DE-588)4046584-6 s DE-604 Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016768255&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016768255&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Abstract |
| spellingShingle | Hdyčynsʹkyj, Bohdan P. 1957- Deržavnyj ustrij Ukraïny polityko-istoryčnyj aspekt Politik Politisches System (DE-588)4046584-6 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)4046584-6 (DE-588)4061496-7 |
| title | Deržavnyj ustrij Ukraïny polityko-istoryčnyj aspekt |
| title_auth | Deržavnyj ustrij Ukraïny polityko-istoryčnyj aspekt |
| title_exact_search | Deržavnyj ustrij Ukraïny polityko-istoryčnyj aspekt |
| title_exact_search_txtP | Deržavnyj ustrij Ukraïny polityko-istoryčnyj aspekt |
| title_full | Deržavnyj ustrij Ukraïny polityko-istoryčnyj aspekt Bohdan Hdyčynsʹkyj |
| title_fullStr | Deržavnyj ustrij Ukraïny polityko-istoryčnyj aspekt Bohdan Hdyčynsʹkyj |
| title_full_unstemmed | Deržavnyj ustrij Ukraïny polityko-istoryčnyj aspekt Bohdan Hdyčynsʹkyj |
| title_short | Deržavnyj ustrij Ukraïny |
| title_sort | derzavnyj ustrij ukrainy polityko istorycnyj aspekt |
| title_sub | polityko-istoryčnyj aspekt |
| topic | Politik Politisches System (DE-588)4046584-6 gnd |
| topic_facet | Politik Politisches System Ukraine / Politics and government / 1991- Ukraine Politics and government 1991- Ukraine |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016768255&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016768255&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT hdycynsʹkyjbohdanp derzavnyjustrijukrainypolitykoistorycnyjaspekt |