Reacting to Uncertainty in Partial Democracies: the Role of Negative Framing in Power Struggles in Ukrainian Energy Politics, 1990S-2000S

Reacting to uncertainty in partial democracies: the role of negative framing in power struggles in Ukrainian energy politics, 1990s-2000s. by Katerina Bosko a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science at the University of Bremen Bremen 2017 Abstract This research project is about the processes and effects of strategic public elite communication in partial democracies, and Ukraine is used as a case study. This study is situated within the field of comparative politics that investigates the internal dynamics of hybrid regimes, i.e., regimes that combine features of democracies and autocracies. Partial democracies are defined here as highly competitive and institutionally weak hybrid regimes. While many authoritarian regimes prefer either to avoid or to regulate public discussions, polarizing debates are not uncommon in partial democracies. Moreover, unlike authoritarian regimes, many partial democracies often have “islands” of media freedom. Together with partially free media, the lively public sphere is the democratic component of partial democracies in which, however, corruption is widespread and laws are often disregarded. Such a political context is highly uncertain, and the outcomes of elite interactions are unpredictable. At the same time, the majority of the population is passive and disaffected. Therefore, how do elites convey a political message in a highly uncertain environment, in which the public does not trust politicians? What are the effects of such debates on the political system? The central argument of this thesis is that the contextual uncertainty inherent in partial democracies produces incentives for political actors to rely on negative framing as a strategy in power struggles, which, in effect, reproduces contextual uncertainty. Negative framing is defined as a one-sided presentation of events or people, predominantly in negative terms. The concept is based on insights from cognitive psychology that have identified negativity bias in our information processing. According to these insights, negative information has a greater impact on humans’ decision-making than neutral or positive information. Under conditions of uncertainty, people prefer to avoid losses than to acquire gains. This effect has been summarized in prospect theory, which provides an alternative to rational choice theory. Due to negativity bias, strategies based on negative framing that activate loss aversion have greater chances of winning mass support and defining social reality in a highly uncertain environment. In this respect, partial democracies are particularly vulnerable to any rhetorical manipulation, as discourses become means of power maintenance or delegitimization. To understand how negativity functions in partial democracies, this thesis explores the psychological mechanisms of negative framing, its characteristics as a strategy, its conditions of success and its possible effects on the political system. It advances an innovative analytical framework that connects literatures across different subdisciplines of the social sciences. This study’s approach is developed based on two theory-centered case studies; methodologically, the study uses process tracing and framing analysis. The theoretical model is derived from a qualitative study of the delegitimization of two state patronage i schemes in Ukrainian gas politics. Ukraine was chosen as a typical example of partial democracy, and until recently, gas politics was one of its most corruption-prone and yet publicly discussed policy fields, involving a number of state and private actors who regarded the gas industry as a relevant source of political influence and economic power. The first case study is confined to a detailed analysis of events and discourses in 1997-1998, i.e., the period when the gas patronage scheme built by the Prime Minister Pavlo Lazarenko became contested and actors involved in its operation were delegitimized. The second case study is devoted to the power struggle around the gas intermediary within the Orange coalition during the presidency of Viktor Yushchenko in 2005-2009. In both cases, I analyze how key political actors involved in these struggles construct their frames, legitimize certain actions and address accusations of misconduct and corruption. The research results show that negative framing aimed at discrediting a political opponent is standard behavior in Ukraine, which can lead to a permanent escalation of negative rhetoric within the so-called spiral of negativity. Overall, such discursive practices have a very negative effect on the political system and political culture of Ukraine. The result is a cynical population that mistrusts politics and politicians, which in turn reinforces political uncertainty and contributes to the dwindling legitimacy of the government. ii Acknowledgements My journey as a PhD student has been long and arduous. It began in 2009 with my pure desire to earn a doctoral degree. I had overestimated both my initial knowledge of political science literature and my writing abilities. I thus spent my first few years as a doctoral student educating myself, jumping from one fascinating concept to another. Since then, my initial analytical framework has undergone several radical changes, and I have finally found a satisfying explanation for the questions I wanted to answer in my research. The first general question that guided my inquiry concerns the appropriate framework for understanding politics in Ukraine; this is a question shared by other scholars specializing in Ukraine. The country has always been an outlier in the post-Soviet region, characterized by numerous paradoxes and unexpected changes. My second question, which directed my research to the role of negativity in partial democracies, emerged after a remark by my supervisor, Prof. Dr. Heiko Pleines, on the predominance of accusations of treason in Ukraine. This remark occurred at the very start of my doctoral studies, prompting me to think about how to explain this phenomenon. To my disappointment, neither of the theories on post-Soviet politics could account for it, so I sought to formulate my own theory by integrating diverse literatures from different domains. The final outcome of this research would not have been possible without the constant advice, guidance, encouragement and patience of my thesis supervisor Prof. Dr. Heiko Pleines, to whom I am extremely grateful. His valuable feedback helped me focus on my main argument and better align it with my empirical chapters. I cannot thank him enough for reading different drafts of this thesis, even when my revisions seemed endless. His own style of argumentation – precise and convincing – has always been a source of inspiration for me. I would like to thank Prof. Dr. Margarita Balmaceda for framing my thinking about writing a book. Our fruitful discussions about the nature of my “animal” made me think about the bigger picture and how the different chapters fit together. She also taught me to keep future readers in mind and to concentrate on the story between the lines. The setting of my scientific maturation was the graduate colloquium at the Research Center for East European Studies (FSO) at the University of Bremen. It was here that I learned how to argue and provide feedback, and I came to love the vibrant scientific discussions during our regular meetings. I am also grateful to the colloquium’s participants for providing helpful comments on some parts of this dissertation, especially to Nozima, Farid, Vera, Saipira, Alla, Eduard, Tatia, Gulnaz, Florian, Jan Matti and Esther. I gratefully acknowledge the financial support of two organizations who funded the initial and final stages of my doctoral studies – the Friedrich Ebert Foundation (FES) and iii Centre for East European and International Studies (ZOIS). I would also like to thank Prof. Dr. Susanne Schattenberg for agreeing to be my second supervisor. I am also grateful to my family, especially my parents Aleksandr Malygin and Valentina Malygina and sister Nataliya, for encouraging me and supporting me through moments of crisis and despair. My husband Sergey never stopped believing in the usefulness of my research and was always confident about my scientific abilities, even at times when my self-esteem and self-evaluation were low. Finally yet importantly, I would like to acknowledge the role of a number of modern thinkers who expanded my intellectual horizons and shaped my thinking, including on this very project. These authors are: Daniel Kahneman (“Thinking, fast and slow”), Robert B. Chialdini (“Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion”), Nassim N. Taleb (“The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable” and “Antifragile: Things That Gain From Disorder”), Silver Nate (“The Signal and the Noise”), Susan Cain (“Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking”), Adam Grant (“Originals: How Non- Conformists Move the World ”) and Charles Duhigg (“The Power of Habit : Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business”). These people sparked my interest in (cognitive) psychology and statistics, made me reconsider my values and helped me through a process of transformation: I went from being a firm believer in objective reality into a persuaded constructivist, without losing meaning in life. Katerina Bosko (born Malygina) Bremen, December 2016 iv Note on Transliterations Transliteration of Cyrillic was done according to the U.S. Library of Congress transliteration

Load more