Oligarch's benefits are citizens' costs.

Some say “be careful of what you wish for, otherwise you might just get it,” sadly Ukrainians forgot to.

By coming out to Maidan Square and demanding Yanukovich’s ouster and close economic ties with the European Union, Ukraine’s citizens are digging their own grave.

At the end of 2013 president of Ukraine, Victor Yanukovich refused to sign already agreed upon association trade agreement with the European Union. In the future this agreement could’ve led Ukraine to join European Union as some Ukrainian citizens wished. Some people even believed that this trade agreement with the EU would improve Ukraine’s economic stability. Yanukovich’s revoke of the agreement drove Ukrainians to come out on Maidan Square in Kiev, capital of Ukraine. People began riots and demanded impeachment of the president for betraying their trust and driving economy of Ukraine into a crisis.

Yanukovich’s choice of keeping business and economic relationships with Russia is a no-brainer to understand. If Ukraine is to remain a political and economical partner of Russia, it can receive unconditional financial and political assistance as well as price relief on energy. Russia can offer so much more of the financial aid, no strings attached. While IMF, EU and USA’s money will come with extensive lists of conditionality that will put Ukraine’s economy even further in a deep debt-hole. The reality is that the EU still cannot afford to deliver on promises of significant financial aid. Nor will the USA, which is quietly trying in the background to convince western European governments to ‘backstop’ (restore) financial aid Europe may commit to the Ukraine. Obama will not risk a Ukraine aid package of any significant dimensions in a US election year.

If to think realistically in terms of colossal economical losses and gains, it is in Ukrainians’ best interest to stick with “big bear brother” Russia. Other wise, good luck to Ukraine’s people with suffering, loosing jobs and jumping off a ledge that they were balancing on through all of the revolution. Meanwhile, their oligarch’s are enjoying new opportunity of trading with more of Western partners through EU community than ever while expanding their business.

It’s very important for Ukrainians to understand that Yanukovich was never the problem of Ukrainian economy, or at least he wasn’t the one and only. He wasn’t the dictator who made all the decisions on his own in order to suppress and control people as well as increase personal gains. Right next to him were his two main supporters and two people that controlled half of Yanukovich’s party. These two men, Rinat Akhmetov and Dmitry Firtash, are the most influential oligarchs in the country.

All three, Yanukovich, Akhmetov and Firtash, became skyrocketing rich after USSR collapsed and all the businesses were in the hands of people. They split Ukraine’s market and worked back to back all the way to the top until they reached the highest point and made Yanukovich the president of Ukraine. All the decisions that were made by Yanukovich were made with the approval of the other two and never alone.

As Yanukovich’s popularity was on the decline, Akhmetov and Firtash realized that they need a plan of action that would allow them to stay in power and not let their businesses to suffer too much. They carefully began looking around for new candidates for power and shifted attention from Yanukovich to let him drown on his own. They began supporting new, inexperienced and ambitious people like Vitaliy Klitchko with his party UDAR and Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who took over Yuliya Timoshenko’s Fatherland alliance.

Ukrainian people can think that they’ve got a new, non-corrupted Westward looking type of politicians, but in the end it is the same people, Akhmetov and Firtash that are in charge of Ukrainian government. By changing the leader they couldn’t change the regime and instead of Yanukovich’s ‘crony capitalist’ regime they’ve got tons of new young and power-money hungry economic vultures that are manipulated by the same two.

If to blame Yanukovich for the entire Ukrainian economic crisis it is to overlook the bigger picture that is much more complicated. Any economic trends do not occur overnight or even in couple of years. It takes decades to build and even more time to rebuild or implement any drastic economic changes. It is a fact that Ukrainian GDP per capita was rising safely, compare to other former USSR countries, until the ‘Orange Revolution’ in 2004. It was happening because of tightly integrated economic relations with the Russian Federation. After the ‘Orange Revolution’ and attempts of shifting Ukrainian exports and financial flow to the West, Ukraine experienced natural adjustment period of slower economic growth. Further, it was negatively affected by oil price shocks, financial crash of 2008, inability of western economies to generate a robust sustained recovery since 2008, and emerging markets crisis today.

When Viktor Yanukovich came to power in 2010, Ukrainian economy was already all the way down the hill. That doesn’t mean that his golden mansions helped Ukrainian economy to rise. Contrary, corruption and policy ineptness of his regime may well be included among the various causes of the Ukraine’s current economic problems, but nonetheless broader historical economic causes are involved as well. The smartest and tactical of all his decisions was probably his refusal to sign the association agreement with the European Union, a major reason that encouraged the protests.

Energy reform was one of the main aspects of the association agreement. This reform would force Ukrainian government to lift up energy subsidies that are put in place to make it cheaper for regular citizens and small businesses. If to do so, a lot of business will be closed down and people will be cut off energy flow that they are not able to pay for.