????本周，有關烏克蘭政治沖突的消息繼續占領各大媒體頭版頭條，當地武裝人員也于周五占領了親俄羅斯地區克里米亞。面對鋪天蓋地的新聞報導，人們很容易迷失。

????過去三年，全球各地的起義與示威此起彼伏，而記者、權威人士與分析師都喜歡將這些事件進行不恰當的類比。去年春天，伊斯坦布爾爆發抗議示威時，一些媒體猜測，塔克西姆廣場會不會成為土耳其的“解放廣場”。2011年初，埃及民眾在位于開羅市中心的“解放廣場”舉行游行示威，最終終結了當時埃及總統胡斯尼?穆巴拉克的統治?，F在，解放廣場這個交通環島已經成了起義成功的標志。

????更近一些，最近烏克蘭起義者們將總統維克托?亞努科維奇趕下了臺，記者們更直接將烏克蘭起義與“解放廣場”相提并論。這種比較或許能帶來不錯的版面效果，讀者也可能對此很感興趣，但在很大程度上，這種類比很膚淺。不錯，打倒穆巴拉克和亞努科維奇的抗議活動都是在廣場上舉行的，廣場的名字也有類似的來歷，但除了這種最抽象的相似性以外，埃及和烏克蘭兩個國家的政治動向完全不是一回事。

????然而在某一方面，埃及和烏克蘭民眾確實面臨著相同的挑戰：他們的國家都已破產。這種境況進一步增加了這兩個國家政治前景的不確定性。

????不管是2011年的埃及起義，還是最近的烏克蘭游行，原因都不僅僅是民眾對經濟條件的不滿。埃及人之所以走上街頭，是因為想追求一個更自由、公平的社會；烏克蘭民眾舉行示，則是為了表達對亞努科維奇的抗議——為了保住俄羅斯的一大筆財政援助，亞努科維奇拒絕簽署一項歐盟協議。基輔爆發抗議活動的導火索可能直接與貿易、金融及國家經濟福利相關。但對許多烏克蘭人而言，這場游行更關乎國家的身份認同。

????西方分析人士和決策者們很可能在烏克蘭政治問題還未解決、經濟環境還相當脆弱的情況下就忍不住立即許諾經濟援助、貸款擔保、免除債務或簽訂國際貨幣基金組織（International Monetary Fund）合約。這些做法是積極的，而且政府官員深諳此道，但對烏克蘭民眾來說，他們有責任通過艱難的政治改革，來挽救國家經濟，使它免于崩潰。

????長期以來，政策及學術界在“排序”問題上一直存有爭議，即對于一個處于政治過渡期的國家來說，應該先發展經濟還是先進行民主改革？解答這個問題的文章連篇累牘，但實際上，這個問題給出的選擇根本就是錯誤的：這兩件事應該打包進行。以埃及為例，穆巴拉克剛剛下臺，人們就清晰地看到，經濟的惡化會嚴重影響國家的政治局勢與穩定性。2000年中期，埃及對外鼓吹宏觀經濟指標良好，民眾起義后才發現國家已欠下巨額債務，補貼無法維持，貧困率和失業率（尤其在年輕人中）也高得驚人。政治局勢的不確定性及穆巴拉克下臺引起的騷亂也使得外匯的主要來源——旅游業急劇下滑，而在搖搖欲墜的油氣行業，外資也大量出逃。

????As Ukraine's political strife continue making headlines this week, and as armed men on Friday occupy the country's pro-Russia region of Crimea, it's easy to get lost in the news.

????Over the last three years, as uprisings and demonstrations have erupted around the world, journalists, pundits, and other analysts have wrongly drawn parallels between these events. When protests broke out in Istanbul last spring, some news outlets wondered whether Taksim Square was Turkey's "Tahrir Square" -- a reference to the now iconic traffic roundabout in central Cairo where Egyptian demonstrations brought an end to then president Hosni Mubarak's rule in early 2011.

????More recently, journalists covering Ukraine's uprising against ousted President Viktor Yanukovych have made direct comparison to Tahrir Square. These comparisons make great copy and perhaps keep viewers interested, but they are largely superficial. It is true that the protests that brought down both Mubarak and Yanukovych were in squares whose names are derived similarly, but other than at that most abstract level, the political dynamics in Egypt and Ukraine are hardly analogous.

????Yet there is one specific area where the Egyptians and the Ukrainians have strikingly similar challenges: Both countries are broke. And this raises the prospects for further political instability.

????Neither Egypt's 2011 uprising nor the recent demonstrations in Ukraine was principally about economic grievances, however. Egyptians poured into the streets wanting to live in a freer and more just society. Ukrainians were responding to Yanukovych's rejection of an agreement with the European Union in favor of a generous financial assistance package from Moscow. Although the trigger for the protests in Kiev may have been linked directly to trade, finance, and the country's economic well-being, for many Ukrainians, the demonstrations were about their country's identity.

????There is a temptation for Western analysts and policymakers to rush into Ukraine's currently unsettled political and tenuous economic environment with promises of aid, loan guarantees, debt relief, and an International Monetary Fund agreement. This is positive -- and something that bureaucrats know how to do -- but Ukrainians have an obligation to undertake difficult political reforms to improve the chances that the country's economy does not collapse.

????Within the policy and academic communities there has long been a debate about what is often referred to as "sequencing." That is, should countries that are undergoing political transitions focus on economic development or democratic reform? Although efforts to answer this question have taken up reams of paper, it actually sets up a false choice. Countries need to do both simultaneously. Consider, for example, Egypt. It became clear relatively quickly after Mubarak's fall that a deteriorating economy would have an impact on the country's politics and stability. Although Egypt boasted good macroeconomic indicators during the mid-2000s, the uprising laid bare a reality of massive debt, unsustainable subsidies, stunning rates of poverty, and high unemployment, especially among young Egyptians. The political uncertainty and chaos around Mubarak's fall also contributed to steep declines in tourism -- a principal source of foreign currency -- and also chased away foreign investments outside a faltering hydrocarbon sector.