I. Introduction
Much has already
been written about the events in Ukraine in November and December 2004, which
have gone down in history under the name of the Orange Revolution. The most
important participants of these events gave extensive interviews or wrote memoirs.
The topic has also been taken up by political scientists and historians. However, you can
still get the impression that we only know part of a larger whole.
The success of
the Orange Revolution is rightly attributed to the mobilization of civil
society in Ukraine. As far as foreign actors are concerned, in the literature
the role of the international observer mission is most appreciated in the
elections. Also emphasized, but overestimated is the role of declarations of
presidents, prime ministers, ministers and international institutions and
organizations.
As a consequence,
a certain one-sidedness of the description was created, where there is little
space for certain aspects of events, such as the course of internal political
processes in Ukraine, the attitude of neighboring countries, and last but not
least, the role of mediators, whose role is still not, in my opinion, either
adequately described or properly appreciated. It should be
noted that the discussions during the plenary meetings of the Ukrainian
"round table" have been described quite thoroughly[1]. However, mediation was not limited to public
meetings. Not all factors that ensured their success were identified in
sufficient detail.
The subject of
this article is to fill this gap by reconstructing and interpreting the course
and structure of the negotiation process with the participation of mediators.
 |
| Read more in this book: Three Revolutions: Mobilization and Change in Contemporary Ukraine |
