Post-Soviet Ukraine: the Ruling Regime in the Political Space of Ukraine, European Choice and Russophobia (Political and Legal Analysis)

Abstract

This article is an attempt to understand what is happening in the system of power and public administration of modern Ukraine from the standpoint of scientific realism and socio - political objectivity. The author touches upon the problems of realization by the Ukrainian state of the interests of its people and values of the European choice, proves, in fact, the criminal essence of implementation in practice of the principles of ukrainism, nationalism and Russophobia, explores the «art» of anti-crisis management of the Maidan government and its effectiveness. The author also presents his vision of the historical lessons of the Ukrainian experience, the reasons for the impasse of many decisions of the current rigidly Pro-Western-oriented Ukrainian regime. The methodological basis of the research was made up of classical methods of scientific and legal research of relations, phenomena and processes in the sphere of modern Ukraine’s politics, public administration and its legal support. This analysis (including system-structural) and synthesis, abduction (hypotheses), induction ( from particular to General) and deduction ( from General to specif ic), history and comparativelaw, opinion polls and content analysis of documents, formal-logical method. The analysis is based on the relevant legal acts, sociological statistics, publications of government officials, scientists and publicists. The analysis shows that the conclusions and official statements of the current Ukrainian leadership in the vast majority of cases do not correspond to reality, that their strategic plans are wrong, contradictory and practically hopeless. At the same time, the Ukrainian experience teaches that even a wrong, not particularly effective and even destructive political course should remain in the field of close attention of the scientific community. The actual practice of political records should examine, assess and consider, trying to understand the essence of problems, investigate the causes of failures and deadlocks, and to draw the appropriate lessons. Objectivity of analysis, impartiality of assessments, sobriety of perception of alternative proposals are necessary in the process of state- building and the inevitable crisis stages with their numerous uncertainties, risks and legal conf licts. We need the ability to predict what difficulties and problems the country may face even in a highly developed economy and a fairly stable political and legal system. The easiest way to look for the reasons for failures on the side, shift the blame to predecessors or bad allies, blame foreign enemies or intractable opposition. It’s far harder to take responsibility, to admit to the lack of visioning and adaptability to constructive action.