Cons and pros of mono-coalition in Ukraine's ParliamentAndriy Zolotariov
The vote count at the snap parliamentary elections is almost complete, and it is clear that the pro-presidential party today has all the conditions for creating a mono-coalition with at least 235-240 seats secured.
Mono-coalition rules out the traditional format of "coalition agreements"
The positive moment of such developments is that the mono-coalition rules out the traditional format of "coalition agreements", a rather difficult process of forming ministerial quotas (the so-called chessboard) in the future Cabinet. With the mono-coalition formed in the Rada, everything will be resolved much faster, more efficiently and with lower costs in the form of obligations.
However, the Servant of the People will not be able to shape the Cabinet single-handedly because they will have to consider the opinion of foreign partners. For example, it is now being discussed that the prime minister’s seat may be given to Vladyslav Rashkovan, Ukraine's envoy to the IMF. Since his nomination is lobbied by Ukraine's key creditor, it is impossible to ignore it.
A mono-coalition also has a negative feature: any monopoly, especially in the sphere of state power, is risky, as it sometimes awakens in people some of their bad habits and a feeling of permissiveness.
Any monopoly, especially in the sphere of state power, is risky, as it sometimes awakens in people some of their bad habits and a feeling of permissiveness
Here it is worth recalling Article 83 of the Constitution, stating that the party with a majority of mandates has coalition rights. However, in this case, full power is directly proportional to full responsibility. It is clear that in this situation, on such party's shoulders lays full responsibility for what is happening in the country, and it’s not some abstract "servant of the people" who will be held accountable, it's specifically Volodymyr Zelensky. That is, he will have to bear responsibility for pretty much anything – for the pits on Ukrainian roads, for high mortality rates, for high tariffs, or police arbitrariness ... And, considering that more than 40% of the country's TV channels remain in the hands of the opposition, any mistake of today's authorities will be looked into, literally, through a magnifying glass.
Considering that more than 40% of the country's TV channels remain in the hands of the opposition, any mistake of today's authorities will be looked into, literally, through a magnifying glass
However, even with a mono-majority, Zelensky's party can still create a coalition with someone else: both with a view to obtaining a constitutional majority and to ensure the stability of power. The thing is that, firstly, when there are several coalition entities (several parties that are part of it), then, by definition, political stability will be higher. Secondly, when there are too many players in the opposition, this factor adds risks.
For example, such a risk exists if Holos and Batkivshchyna are not accepted into a coalition. But if it is still possible to talk about the Servant merging with Svyatoslav Vakarchuk's Holos, such union with Yulia Tymoshenko's Batkivshchyna is not their objective, judging by the latest hints voiced by the leading party. First of all, that's because her political force, in fact, represents the old elites. On the other hand, having Yulia Tymoshenko in the opposition is a nightmare for any government. And it is precisely for this reason that no one is in a hurry to state that a coalition with Batkivshchyna is a no-go.