Poroshenko’s “European Solidarity” anti-crisis plan: resignation of corrupt government, new coalition, reforms
Executive summary
Petro Poroshenko’s European Solidarity has publicly pushed an “anti‑crisis” package calling for the full resignation of the government, formation of a new parliamentary coalition and a suite of institutional reforms — including a reboot of the State Bureau of Investigation and stronger protections for anti‑corruption bodies — in response to an Energoatom‑related corruption scandal (portrayed as Operation Midas) and related prosecutions [1]. The party has moved from protests to formal parliamentary steps: blocking the rostrum, registering dismissal procedures and presenting demands to the president for a new cabinet and coalition [2] [3] [4].
1. What Poroshenko’s plan actually demands — a checklist for the Rada
European Solidarity’s immediate demands, as announced in Poroshenko’s address and party statements, include the government’s resignation, creation of a new coalition in the Verkhovna Rada, appointment of a new Cabinet, dismissal or reset of the President’s Office leadership, and structural anti‑corruption reforms such as restarting or reforming the State Bureau of Investigation with international experts and protecting NABU and SAPO as required by European Parliament resolutions [1] [3] [5].
2. The political context: from Operation Midas to podium blockades
The call for radical change followed revelations tied to “Operation Midas,” which European Solidarity and anti‑corruption agencies describe as exposing large‑scale theft connected to the energy sector; the party has used those revelations to justify both street‑style tactics (blocking the parliamentary rostrum) and formal parliamentary procedures to force the Cabinet’s dismissal [1] [2] [4].
3. Reform proposals and European leverage
Poroshenko frames the reforms not only as domestic fixes but as conditions tied to Ukraine’s EU candidacy pathway: he insists Parliament must adopt a roadmap to implement European Parliament resolutions and that anti‑corruption bodies must be insulated from political influence, mirroring language he highlights from the EP resolution supporting NABU and SAPO [1] [5].
4. Pushback and alternative readings inside Ukraine
Experts and political rivals cast a different light on Poroshenko’s push. Some analysts and media frame his moves as political bargaining — including claimed demands to lift sanctions against him, drop treason charges, or secure top posts such as prime minister — and describe his actions as destabilizing or self‑interested rather than purely public‑interest reform [6]. These critiques depict Poroshenko’s rhetoric about “trust, justice and responsibility” as doubling as political leverage [6].
5. Procedural reality: can Poroshenko force a government resignation?
European Solidarity has initiated parliamentary procedures and public pressure campaigns; they have registered dismissal initiatives and blocked the rostrum. But the available sources do not document successful removal of the Cabinet or a completed coalition reshuffle — they report demands, procedures launched and protests rather than final outcomes [4] [2] [3]. Available sources do not mention that Poroshenko’s plan has yet resulted in a new government.
6. Credibility, messaging and international optics
Poroshenko ties his program to European institutions, citing an EP resolution that calls for safeguards for anti‑corruption bodies and warns against politically motivated prosecutions — a deliberate attempt to internationalize the dispute and frame his demands as compliance with EU expectations [5]. Opponents, meanwhile, present the same moves as transactional and aimed at personal legal and political rescue, signaling competing narratives aimed at domestic and foreign audiences [1] [6].
7. What to watch next — immediate indicators of success or failure
Key indicators include whether Parliament votes a motion of no confidence or otherwise approves a new coalition and Cabinet, whether independent international experts are invited into any SBI reboot process, and whether European institutions publicly link any financial or political support to concrete reform steps as Poroshenko requests [1] [5]. Current reports show activism and procedural launches but not completed institutional change [4] [3].
Limitations and sourcing note: this analysis relies exclusively on the provided reporting and party statements; it cites European Solidarity’s public demands, parliamentary tactics and critical commentary as reported in those sources. Where outcomes (for example, formation of a new Cabinet or formal international commitments) are not described in the supplied material, those results are marked as not found in current reporting [1] [4] [3] [5] [6].