Having passed a long and difficult path from head Enakievskiy carpool to the Prime Minister of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych in 2004, stumbled in from the top step.
Become president if he was prevented massive popular protests, known as the "orange revolution».
Needed to survive emigration, albeit short-term, try the role of opposition political leaders, after a difficult election campaign to win a democratic election - to 6 years finally get cherished presidential mace.
Again, thanks to the will of the Ukrainian people. It would seem that after this experience in 2004 should forever be imprinted in the brain of any politician.
This, in general, and counted millions of voters: that Viktor Yanukovych learned the right lessons from what has happened and will not be a second time step on a rake.
But just some 3 years - and he was on the verge of to lose again the highest state authority.
And not in a palace coup organized by a handful of close to the body. And yet again due to massive popular protests.
Although it seemed less than a year after the protest action "Arise Ukraine!" Which was a failure for the organizers, the current leaders of the parliamentary opposition.
Yes, now we can say that Yanukovych and his team have made this the wrong conclusions. The fact that people do not go then for Arseniy Yatsenyuk, Vitali Klitschko and Oleg Tyagnibok - does not mean that they support the authorities.
Or, at least, are willing to continue to tolerate her outrage. Just opposition leaders were not those who are ready to lead the assault. And who will go for.
Thus, the president missed the last wake-up call for yourself, even when it was possible to rebuild their economic policies.
A fatal error Viktor Yanukovych started doing much earlier, just six months after taking office. Ie barely getting used to a new chair.
Error №1: «cut» cake
Strong power, which always dreamed of Yanukovych, it is possible only under one condition - when there is a strong public sector in the economy.
If the state mechanism is not based on their own economic base - he is doomed. This colossus with feet of clay, which will collapse at the first impact. Even not very strong.
China, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Venezuela, Iran, Belarus, etc. - Wherever there is a "strong hand", the public sector in the economy is predominant.
Although in these countries there are private property, but it is concentrated mainly in the service sector, light and food industries, and tourism. Strategic industries are in the state.
For example, in the same Russia - "Gazprom". This means that the president of the country in its economic policy does not depend on the moods and whims of the local oligarchs.
Ie if the same Alexander Lukashenko has decided to pay the depositors of the Savings Bank of the USSR impaired savings, as it promised to do Viktor Yanukovych in the election program - it does not need to go for it to pay homage to the Belarusian bosses of big business.
If Ilham Aliyev is necessary to finance his election campaign at the next election - it does not come with an outstretched hand to the local aces. All the resources of the national economy, and so in his power.
Of course, a significant portion of the state pie oligarchs in Ukraine had time to "cut it" long before the arrival of Viktor Yanukovych on ul.Bankovuyu.
Process began under Leonid Kuchma and continued under Viktor Yushchenko. But Yanukovych did not depart from them secure with management model. Where policies enlists financial and media support for several major business groups in exchange for a promise of preferences in case of winning the election.
Including assistance in obtaining state assets at bargain prices. Thus further restricting their opportunities for independent games.
All the disadvantages of this approach are obvious: the president is not an independent figure and is entirely dependent on the goodwill of FPG, which, in fact, brought him to the throne.
He is unable to carry out social policies to increase living standards: salaries, pensions, allowances and scholarships. And that would ensure the loyalty of voters.
All this is possible only in those meager limits that agree to "detach" from his master's shoulder to the state budget owners FPG (financial and industrial groups).
So, Yanukovych in 2010-2013. begins a new wave of privatization and transfers from the state to private ownership "Zakhidenergo", "Dniproenergo", "Krymenergo", "Donbasenergo", "Dneproblenergo", "Vinnitsaoblenergo", "Zakarpatieoblenergo».
And Zaporozhye Titanium-Magnesium Works, Irshansky Mining and Processing Plant, Volnogorskiy Mining and Metallurgical Combine, association "Crimean Titan" mine im.A.Zasyadko and 18 regional gas companies.
Happy owners of state-owned shares of these companies have mainly structure related to the owner of the holding SCM Rinat Akhmetov and Group DF Dmitry Firtash.
In addition, the current president of the state-owned monopoly canceled "Naftogaz of Ukraine" for gas imports into the country, as well as its supply of industrial consumers - the most profitable segment of the gas business.
Permission to engage in import and supply of gas were also DTEK R.Ahmetova and OstChem Holding Firtash. Thus, Viktor Yanukovych with his hands more sawed off the branch on which it sits.
On the one hand, he deprived himself of the opportunity to influence the activities under the control of this business enterprise groups through the supply of gas (which can be, and in which case the block).
On the other - significantly cut the revenue part of the largest state-owned companies. Which is the largest taxpayer. However, until recently, Viktor Yanukovych and control financial flows "Naftogaz».
It was only on January 13 of this year, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine by its decree ordered the "Naftogaz" to coordinate all payments in excess of $ 1 million.
However, Yanukovych has left the company at the head of Yevhen Bakulin, which is considered a man of the present Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Boiko, one of the main figures of influence groups Firtash.
Error №2: Bet on FPG
A significant part of the positions in government and went to the other representatives of big business.
For example, the new head of the Presidential Administration (PA) Andriy Klyuyev - one of the ultimate owners of the corporation "Ukrpodshipnik" and registered in Austria holding company Slav AG.
The previous head of the AP Sergei Lyovochkin - also one of the key figures of the group Firtash. Minister of Social Policy Natalie King is related to the coal business, and ice cream, etc.
In addition, a number of people in the government and in the field - former top managers of PPG R.Ahmetova. For example, the Minister of Economic Development and Trade Minister Igor Prasolov in 2000-2005. was CEO of SCM.
And Infrastructure Minister Vladimir Kozak in 2000-2001. was CEO of the company "Lemtrans", now part of SCM, in 2001-2006. - The corporation "Interregional Industrial Union", at the time the joint business ex-deputy of the Verkhovna Rada of the Party of Regions Anton Prigodskiy and R.Ahmetova.
The governor of the Donetsk region. Andrew Shishatskiy in 2003-2007. led Khartsyzsk Tubes included in "Metinvest" R.Ahmetova.
The head of the State Property Fund, Alexander Ryabchenko appointed under the quota of the Communist Party of Ukraine, which the nomination, according to unofficial data, advised the owner of the group "Power standard" Konstantin Grigorishin.
Continue the transfer does not make sense. As the saying goes, and so on. It is obvious that with such a team to conduct an independent economic policy will not work, no one.
Thus, Yanukovych failed to stop the withdrawal of the Ukrainian economy in the offshore.
Even despite the fact that the head of the Ministry of income and fees, united tax and customs services, was raised personally loyal to the president's family, Alexander Klimenko.
Only in January-September 2013 "under the bridge" 33 billion UAH., According to Mindohodov. Withdrawal of capital through various schemes implemented by oligarchs for tax evasion in the budget.
And just because the money received in Ukraine, they prefer to spend the West. By investing in the purchase of real estate, works of art, there arranging their families for permanent residence.
And the government to support the social benefits at the minimum level is forced to take more and more new loans.
By the end of 2013 direct and guaranteed public debt grew by 13%, to $ 73, 078 billion in 2012 - 8, 9%, to $ 64, 495 billion in 2011 - 9, 1%, to $ 59, 216 billion in 2010 - 36, 4%, to $ 54, 289 billion.
And this, again, the price paid for the promotion of PPG in the electoral struggle for power.
Acute shortage of managerial positions "technical" managers of the same type, the now ex-prime minister, Mykola Azarov, do not have their own big business and not belonging to different groups of influence is definitely linked to the failed economic policies.
However, the deficit does not mean absence. Yanukovych just such technical managers did not want to notice, relying on their ability in which case all agree with FPG.
But Ramsey dissolve as they used to say criminals, and now expressed the current Ukrainian politicians and high-ranking civil servants - receive only up to a point.
At PPG be prohibitive developed an appetite. Swallowing investment attractive state assets and obtaining leadership positions, they demanded more and more preferences: tax incentives, provision of credit under the state guarantees, etc.
All this took place against the backdrop of the global crisis and reduce the cost of options. Ie automatically led to a reduction in social spending (increase of pensions by 11 UAH. by Azarov in an ever-rising prices not taken into account) and the deterioration of the situation of the vast majority of citizens.
State Statistics Service data show that on handouts (another definition does not fit here, because they do not provide even the minimum subsistence level) in the form of pensions, scholarships and sotsposoby accounted for 60% (!) In the total income of citizens.
Only 40% is wages and other types of income. These are the economic results of three years of continuous "pokraschennya" by Yanukovych and his team - announced policy reforms that turned into outright mockery of its own people.
Do I have to then wonder why people come out not just on protests, and went to the barricades and storm the governors?
On the other hand, some of FPG were also ungrateful.
For example, a group of Firtash quickly forgotten that in May 2011, with the blessing of Yanukovych's parliament passed a law "On some issues of debt for the consumed natural gas and electricity».
In accordance with a generous hand with the regional gas blamed 7, 4 billion USD. debts to the state. At the same time, according to energy experts, about 2/3 of Ukrainian regional gas companies controlled by just a group of Firtash.
But he had only Yanukovych in 2013 to try to stick to the scheme of Russian gas supplies to Ukraine holding VETEK which analysts believe a business unit family - as the relationship with the president Firtash group immediately soured.
This is evidenced care S.Levochkina resigned voluntarily from his post as head of the AP in late January 2014.
By the time it coincided with the news that "Gazprom" no longer intends to supply gas to the structures Firtash, and will only work through "Naftogaz of Ukraine».
And now, the representatives of "firtashevskoy" groups forget about the debt relief to regional gas companies, and the fact that a total of state-owned stakes in 18 regional gas companies have paid about $ 50 million - which, according to experts, about 6 times (!) Less than their market value.
Because as it was before, and it is - now. Hence the December threat to withdraw from the parliamentary faction of the PR about 20 members, who are at S.Levochkina-Firtash, Boyko.
And without them at the regionals will not even this precarious minimum majority required for successful voting in parliament.
Error №3: Family consecutive
"As soon as children begin to do business president - expect trouble," - said the Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko, commenting on current events in Ukraine.
Fabulously growing assets of the holding IACS Alexander Yanukovych, including senior presidential son in the ratings of the richest Ukrainians, compiled annually business media - all this against the background of impoverishment of the majority of citizens did not add Yanukovych popularity among voters.
To put it mildly. But most importantly, this growth of family businesses inevitably led to conflict with the interests of the existing players, as is the case with attempts to establish new schemes with gas imports VETEKa, for example.
Thus, the dominance of FPG in Ukrainian politics and economics president decided not to answer the growing role of the state (which potentially has an advantage in front of them), and build their own business group.
In general, this is a mistake №3, stems from №1 and №2. In addition to collisions with other oligarchs in the fight for market share it created external vulnerability.
No one will deny that Western intervention in the internal affairs in Ukraine in connection with the recent political crisis - unprecedented.
But Yanukovych is not able, unlike his Belarusian counterpart, expel Western diplomats very presumptuous. Or at least give them a protest note.
Because it was clear and unequivocal message about the possible arrest of his bank accounts and other assets in the West.
It can not, unlike Alexander Lukashenko, has announced that European politicians gives all the money that they will find on his foreign accounts. And it is very hinders cope with the opposition, with support from the US and the EU.
Probably, family search for some alternatives for foreign investment. This is indicated by the fact that Sergei Arbuzov in 2011-2012. even as the head of the National Bank of Ukraine has visited China and Saudi Arabia.
But it seems that climate proved to be not very suitable for families. And in the end had to stop at a traditional form - a visit to Switzerland S.Arbuzov paid in November 2011.
Actually, the shadow income inner circle of President of Ukraine, which are often wrote the Western press - this is a consequence of errors №3.
It's no secret that one of the main causes of mass discontent Yanukovych - unprecedented corruption pressure on small and medium enterprises, on the brink of extinction because of the exorbitant exactions.
And often arrogant weaning assets on the principle "was your - was ours." Oddly enough, but the redistribution of economic benefits while also somehow always happened in favor of entrepreneurs who have in their own areas of reputation proxies Families, the so-called "Looking».
Meanwhile, small and medium entrepreneurs - the most organized part of the population. For all its relatively small size they became the basis of civil society. In this case - the best strike force protesters.
It is worth noting that the raiding and corruption in Ukraine is not an innovation of the current government and appeared long before Viktor Yanukovych settled in the presidential chair.
But it was with him they became something of a disaster. And not only for Ukrainian business. Foreign investors also got the full program.
So much so, that, for example, at the end of April 2013 the head of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development Suma Chakrabarti was forced to publicly announce in an interview with Western media that he was going to Kiev to discuss anti-corruption initiatives with local authorities.
However, he stressed that the publicity for the EBRD in anti-corruption measures is not commonplace. According S.Chakrabarti such things are discussed in private bank.
"But we're talking about this for years with the Ukrainian government and the situation has reached such a level that our shareholders and the Board of Directors of the Bank decided that I should go and convey this message to the President of Ukraine", - he explained.
Since no positive changes after it did not happen, we conclude that Yanukovych did not heed the arguments and the head of the EBRD. Although this is a very influential and authoritative international financial institution.
Of course, one might ask - how did the president will overcome corruption in all state institutions if the thief on the thief sitting and chases a thief? Where is the head of state to take as many honest people in our country, to put things in order?
Answer it really difficult ... if there was a need to respond.
But the fact of the matter is that Yanukovych with this very corruption did not even try to fight.