Communists triumph over Democrats augers well for Ukraine’s birthing democracy…

After the most recent article on my favorite “ex-communists”, the Ukrainians, a number of you emailed to ask: why them, and not the Lithuanians, Georgians or nationals of any number of other countries that comprised the former Soviet Union? And, as much I would have liked to cite some historical or geo-strategic reason, I was obliged to concede that it stems entirely from my prurient interest in the political drama that has made Ukraine completely ungovernable for the past 2 years.

But just when I thought those whacky Ukrainians could not titillate me any further, they did just that again last week. Before I get to the latest, however, here’s a soap-opera digest recap (and I promise, except for developments with extraordinary international implications, this shall be my final word on Ukraine):

In the fall of 2004, under pressure from the United States, the communist government of newly independent Ukraine condescended to schedule the country’s first democratic general elections. But as the campaign became surprisingly competitive and contentious, it is alleged that communist leader Viktor Yanukovych (left) ordered the assassination of his rival, the charismatic and telegenic leader of democratic reformers, Viktor Yushchenko (right).

Alas, though horribly disfigured, Yushchenko survived. And many believe that his condition inspired an overwhelming sympathy vote that helped the democrats unseat the communists on election day. Unfortunately, the communists had no intention of giving up power, and refused to do so. This in turn prompted the sit-in of the 21st century (the Orange Revolution), during which hundreds of thousands of democratic reformers camped-out around the capital Kiev for 34 days (while others protested all over the country), and brought all political and economic activities in Ukraine to a screeching halt.

Then, with international suspicion growing that he may have had a hand in the communist plot to assassinate Yushchenko, Russian President Vladimir Putin prevailed on Yanukovych to concede defeat. He did, and U.S. President George W. Bush claimed another convert on his world democracy crusade, and even invited Yushchenko to Washington to receive his official blessing, which I chronicled here.

Unfortunately, Ukraine’s democratic reformers proved far more effective as revolutionaries than they did as government functionaries. And soon they were spending more time and effort fighting over government portfolios than governing the country.

Meanwhile, poor Ukrainians were becoming thoroughly disillusioned with democracy. Because, instead of the western fruits of democratic freedoms they were promised, all they got was reduced welfare benefits, including Russia’s spiteful cut in the supply of their cheap oil. Indeed, things got so bad that, after less than one year in power, Yushchenko was forced to dissolve his governing coalition and call new elections, which I chronicled here.

Of course, none of the democratic reformers vying for power thought the communists were legitimate contenders. Yet, when the votes were counted in March, Yanukovych and his communists had, in fact, pulled-off a stunning upset victory. But, ironically, this time the democrats had no intention of giving up power, and refused to do so, which I chronicled here.

Thus ensued months of political brinksmanship, during which Yushchenko and his disaffected cohorts did all they could to fashion another coalition to prevent Yanukovych from returning to power. And it is noteworthy that this period of turmoil was conspicuous by the absence of any pressure from Bush for these putative democrats to honor the results of their free and fair elections.