On lost time

While some journalists and intellectuals are trying to popularize in the society the unbiased by the Soviet propaganda view on history of the 20th century and earlier time, it has turned out that almost everyone (including the larger part of journalists) have forgotten (or did not know) what was taking place some ten years ago. So, the modern history of Ukraine, from 1991 till present day, needs to be discussed separately on a broad social scale. What has been taking place in the past two decades? What processes had a crucial meaning? Who were the crucial positive and negative figures?

Are Ukrainian journalists able to assess this? Are they able to speak honestly about this?

Last week the TVi channel show “Vitalii Portnikov’s Political Club,” this time anchored by journalist Serhii Vysotsky broached quite an interesting topic: “Will Yanukovych’s time be the end of Kuchma’s time?” You must admit that the formulation is almost revolutionary. It was by far the first time when one dared to discuss this topic live on Ukrainian television. For since 2004, when Kuchma was driven away from Bankova St. almost by the people’s revolt, paradoxical as it may seem, nobody has ever insisted on an honest discussion of the consequences of his presidency. Basically, a kind of assessment of Kuchma given by the new epoch became evident back in the time when soon after the Orange Revolution Inter TV channel for several years in succession showed concerts with quite a demonstrative and even bold title “The flight is normal” dedicated to Kuchma’s anniversary.

However, for all these years everyone has shyly avoided making the final review (good or nothing), simply attributing the second president of Ukraine to historical archives. It was too soon. The Day has already written that Kuchma’s decade is still underway. And Kuchma, as well as members of his family are taking an active part in the sociopolitical processes. The anti-rules of the game they conserved continue to corrupt both the state, and the society. The proof is ample. The fact that the former president loudly celebrated his birthday with celebrities in Sardinia after Prosecutor General Renat Kuzmin stated publicly that the criminal action against him could be continued is the most recent demonstration. There was not even a hint of the worms of consciousness.

Surely it was not accidental that the photo reports on this “great” society event, which attracted much of our so-called beau monde, got into the press. Could it be anything but not a new demonstrative gesture and proof that Kuchma’s epoch is going on and he remains untouchable? Kuchma is in Sardinia, where’s Ukraine? “The Kuchma virus had such a harmful effect for the society in the time of his rule and after his cadency that there is no way we can say that Kuchma time is over,” says Oleksandr Yeliashkevych who in his time became a real victim of the regime.

Typically, the discussion offered by Serhii Vysotsky and TVi has coincided with the special August period. The anniversary of the Soviet coup d’etat attempt, the National Flag Day, the anniversary of Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, the European Day of Commemorating the Victims of Stalinism and Nazism, and finally, the Independence Day, when we feel the depth of collapse in an especially acute way. Two decades of Independent Ukrainian State have been accompanied by almost never-ending condition of uneasiness and apathy in the society, and one of these decades is connected with Leonid Kuchma’s name, who was the leader of a presidential-parliamentary rather than a parliamentary-presidential republic.

Sadly, we have to ascertain that many of present-day experts are simply unable to raise the topic of consequences of 1994-2004 (which was apparent during the TVi show in particular). Some of them originate from that decade. So, the system is working. People from the clan continue to appear on party lists. What about Viktor Yanukovych? Of course, unlike other bright political personalities, he did not come out of Kuchma’s overcoat, but he can absolutely be called Kuchma’s “stepson,” as The Day’s editor-in-chief Larysa Ivshyna admitted live on the Politklub show. At some point of time Viktor Yanukovych pitied Leonid Danylovych, say, the criminal action concerning his complicity in Gongadze’s missing, and the ex-president would sleep calmer. But Viktor Yanukovych may have the reasons to worry. That would be logical, taking into account the role the eternal rivalry between the Dnipropetrovsk and Donetsk clans has been playing throughout the modern Ukrainian history.

What we cannot put up with in present day did not start today and not the day Ukrainians voted for Viktor Yanukovych, but much earlier. That is why the conversation offered by TVi and Serhii Vysotsky is very timely. The Day resolved to support it.

“THE YANUKOVYCH ERA RESTS ON KUCHMA’S FOUNDATIONS”

Myroslava GONGADZE, journalist:

“Unfortunately, the Kuchma era, as an era of post-Soviet authoritarianism in Ukraine, is not just continuing – it has transformed into dictatorship of one political force and one person. It will be impossible to speak about the end of Kuchma’s era until Kuchma, a person accused of gravest crimes, goes through a judicial purgatory and suffers a punishment if the court finds him guilty. The Kuchma era will not end until after the misdeeds of his political henchmen and the people who made fortunes in that period have been investigated into. Society and the political elite need to be thoroughly cleansed. There will be no progress unless this occurs.

“I remember Kuchma’s election campaign, as it were today. I can remember listening to Kuchma and Tabachnyk at a Lviv press conference and thinking about only one thing – it is sort of a nightmare, for these people must not even contend for ruling Ukraine. My intuition came true, unfortunately: this nightmare has turned into a terrible reality for Ukraine. The state has lost the prospect of being strong and democratic, and people have been robbed of a chance to be free. The ten-year-long Kuchma era was not only a decade of lost opportunities – it set the tone for the development of this country for many centuries ahead.

“But people have still reawakened. In 2004-05, during the Orange Revolution, the Ukrainians won back the freedom of expression and showed their aspiration for democracy. Regrettably, the leaders whom people had brought to power, not only failed to come up to expectations: in many cases, they betrayed their voters. This is why we can see today the beginning of the Yanukovych era which rests on the foundations of that of Kuchma.”

“THE OLIGARCHIC SYSTEM BEGAN TO FORM WAY BACK IN THE TIMES OF KRAVCHUK”

Oles DONII, public figure:

“In my opinion, it is wrong to divide the periods of Ukraine’s contemporary history on the basis of who has held the presidency. I do not single out Kuchma’s decade from the period of Ukrainian independence. There have been very many common features in the 20 years of independence, no matter who was in power – Kravchuk, Yushchenko, or Yanukovych. Naturally, there were also some differences, but this depended not on the presidents but on some far more serious circumstances. The pivotal problem of the entire period of Ukraine’s existence is a low cultural level which needs to be raised. This was also a topical problem in the Soviet era, but no measures were taken to solve it – and now we are reaping the results. But this is in no way linked with the Kuchma regime. We should not personify problems or periods to such an extent – otherwise this will mean that we have fully built a totalitarian system. Which is not so: luckily, we are somehow trying to fight the latter.

“The question should be put differently: when will Ukraine learn democracy? When will the cultural level increase?

“The oligarchic system began to form way back in the times of Kravchuk, i.e., at the very beginning of independence. The populace was reduced to a wretched condition, financial flows were redistributed, and former Communist Party and Young Communist League functionaries became businesspeople. Then criminal element joined them. During Kuchma’s presidency, the nucleus of oligarchs rallied together around the president, which essentially strengthened the tendency of building an oligarchic society. However, the system itself had been formed much earlier, and it is too much of an honor to call this period an ‘era.’

“The point is that no qualitative changes were made in 1991 – there was no lustration, replacement of the nomenklatura, etc. So we must speak about that very period. That period saw an unfinished revolution, which is the key problem.

“Ukraine needs a stronger history and political science school. This in turn requires independent universities around which intellectuals will be rallying together. We so far don’t have any: our universities do not perform the function of a knowledge producer. And the available political scientists have to moonlight as spin masters and cooperate with one political force or another, which affects their ability to make an unbiased analysis.”

“I DO NOT THINK THAT THE END OF YANUKOVYCH’S PRESIDENCY WILL ALSO PUT AN END TO THE KUCHMA ERA”

Oleksii PODOLSKY, journalist, public figure:

“There is so far no question of the end of the Kuchma era because we can see the creatures of this ‘statesman’ all over the place in politics. Even those who call themselves the United Opposition, including their leader Yatseniuk, are the result of this era. Yatseniuk, whom the Kuchma family ‘raised,’ making him a very young minister and then parliamentary speaker, etc., cannot be the leader who will break down ‘Kuchmism.’ On the other hand, we can see the consequences of the Kuchma era in Yanukovych’s inner circle. Suffice it to see who watches soccer or hunts with him. In a word, what the Ukrainian people can see now is a government-opposition game. This game is in fact a struggle for the resource. So I do not think that the end of Yanukovych’s presidency will also put an end to the Kuchma era. The Kuchma family will remain in power and continue to set the rules of the game in the Kuchma-designed frame of reference. Even today, Kuchma’s hand is reaching out to redistribute Ukrainian property, including land. The people who personify the Kuchma era today are just criminals who have stolen everything. The trouble is that they failed to be effective owners of what they grabbed. So they had to sell everything. This was the case with factories, and the same will happen with land.

“Kuchma’s people, no matter what names they bear, will go on just talking about European integration. But, in reality, they are not interested in a full-fledged integration with the Western world until they grab all the land. Why? Because, otherwise, they will be forced to play by the rules of the civilized world, but they don’t want to play in this way.

“It is very difficult but possible to resist this. All over the world, when the elite stops serving the people, the people rise up. It is easy to hear the voice of the people in the times of democracy, but classical democracy, which successfully works in the world, is impossible in the Kuchma era. So what we need is a bottom-to-top movement. Workforce units should go on mass-scale strikes and express their political stand. Today, conversely, politicians themselves hire people and take them onto the streets as ‘rally fodder.’

“Unless society comes to understand that its elite is antisocial and unless the grassroots begin to self-organize, the Kuchma era will not be overcome. Our problem is that today’s society does not condemn what the authorities are doing. It is the result of the destruction of the feeling of ownership. Whenever people had their property seized during the Civil War, they took up arms. And today we are brazenly told that what is being redistributed is nobody’s property. When we speak about the Kuchma era and try to guess when it will go, we should not forget that the problem is not only in the system he built and the ‘bad guys’ whom he brought to power. The problem is in ourselves. We are being ruled by a mirror reflection of most Ukrainians. We will only be able to say that we are prepared to debate on the Kuchma era when we rally together on the grassroots level and decide by ourselves what is right and what is wrong.”

Prepared by Vadym LUBCHAK, The Day