Although the Ukrainian Parliament’s decision on Tuesday to repeal the country’s controversial anti-protest law is a step in the right direction, there are few signs of the country’s political crisis coming to an end. Indeed, the anti-government demonstrators in Kiev and elsewhere remain on the streets.

More needs to be done by President Viktor Yanukovych to return the situation to normality, and he has certainly not helped the situation by going on sick leave while the country descends into chaos.

On Friday, for example, a leading Ukrainian opposition activist who vanished for eight days said he was abducted and tortured before being left to die in the cold. Dmytro Bulatov is now being treated in hospital after being found on the outskirts of Kiev.

Mr Bulatov claimed he was left to die by his captors, repeatedly beaten, “crucified” and hung up by his wrists. He said he did not know who had kidnapped him but his abductors had spoken with Russian accents.

The annulment of the law came shortly after Prime Minister Mykola Azarov, a deeply unpopular figure, submitted his resignation “with the aim of creating extra means for finding a social-political compromise, for the sake of a peaceful settlement of the conflict”. Azarov’s resignation, and that of the entire Cabinet, has been accepted by Yanukovych, who appointed Serhiy Arbuzov, Azarov’s deputy, as interim Prime Minister.

Ukraine has been dominating the headlines since November, when people first took to the streets to protest against the government’s decision not to sign an association agreement with the European Union, despite years of negotiations between the two sides. The situation has deteriorated ever since, and has raised eyebrows in a number of European capitals. Indeed, Ukraine did not even witness this level of violence and division during the breakup of the Soviet Union or during its 2004 Orange Revolution.

The polarisation has been so bad that on Wednesday, the country’s first post-independence president, Leonid Kravchuk, warned that Ukraine was on the “brink of civil war” when he addressed Parliament during a debate on an amnesty for protesters, which was passed. Kravchuk urged everyone involved to “act with the greatest responsibility”.

He said: “We need to ease the confrontation between the sides and agree a plan to solve the conflict. We need to work on this plan step by step to ease the confrontation”.

The deal between Brussels and Kiev which Yanukovych refused to sign in November would have increased political and economic ties between the two sides, paved the way for trade liberalisation and promoted democratic values in Ukraine. It was for this reason that so many people were angered by the President’s U-turn; in effect, Yanukovych was turning his back on Europe, despite an electoral pledge to continue integrating his country into the EU.

Ukrainians’ fears of Yanukovych turning to Moscow instead of the EU seemed to be justified when in mid-December, Russia announced that it had agreed to buy $15 billion of Ukrainian government bonds; it also declared that it would reduce the price of gas it sells to Ukraine. This move towards Russia further antagonised the protesters, who demanded Yanukovych’s resignation.

The country’s first post-independence president, Leonid Kravchuk, warned that Ukraine was on the ‘brink of civil war’

The final straw for the demonstrators was the enactment of the law restricting the right to protest and increasing prison sentences for creating disorder. The law banned the wearing of helmets by protesters, the placement of unauthorised tents and the slandering government officials. It was also an attack on the freedom of the press.

This law has now been re­pealed, but it served to turn the protests into a mass movement against Yanukovych and his government’s alleged mismanagement and corruption, and even spread to the Russian-speaking east of the country, Yanu­kovych’s stronghold.

It was when this notorious law was passed that violent clashes erupted between demonstrators and the police, resulting in the deaths of five protesters. The Opposition has said that four people died from police gunshots, while a fifth person was found dead with torture marks in a forest near Kiev. Three policemen were also killed in the clashes. The situation was so bad that the country’s Justice Minister said she was prepared to ask for a state of emergency to be declared if protesters refused to leave her ministry.

Events were getting out of control, and a week ago, Yanu­kovych, in an attempt to calm the situation, offered senior government positions to the Opposition, including that of Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister; these offers were rejected outright.

However, the repeal of the anti-protest law, the resignation of Prime Minister Azarov, as well as a promise by Yanukovych to curb some of his own powers, could serve as a basis for a compromise agreement between the government and Opposition.

Yanukovych has now appoin­ted an interim Prime Minister; presumably his next move will be to appoint an interim government. Ideally, this should be followed by immediate free and fair parliamentary elections, in return for an end to the protests.

Whether the Opposition will agree to Yanukovych remaining in office until his term expires next year, is another matter. It may do so as long as the President pledges to respect the outcome of the parliamentary elections, as well as the rule of law and full freedom of expression and association. He must also promise not to hinder any new government in its attempts to integrate Ukraine into the EU.

The EU has an important role to play in Ukraine. It must make it clear that the door remains open to Kiev to seek closer ties with the bloc, and it must continue to attempt to broker an agreement between the government and Opposition.

The EU’s foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, was in Kiev last week to talk to political leaders, and she said she was “shocked” by the violence in the country. Ashton remarked that Ukraine needed “a political process that is engaged in quickly and properly by everyone”.

Moscow, on the other hand, must be told in no uncertain terms that the Ukrainian people have a right to choose their own destiny, and that the EU is not seeking to harm Russia as a result of its policy towards Ukraine.

As European Commission President José Manuel Barroso said at Tuesday’s EU-Russia summit in Brussels: “We need to change the perception that one region’s gain is another region’s pain. We are against the mentality of bloc against bloc”.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.