• Українська
  • Русский
  • English
Where there is no law, but every man does what is right in his own eyes, there is the least of real liberty
Henry M. Robert

A CORNUCOPIA OF CONGRESSES 

25 May, 1999 - 00:00

 

 

LIBERALS ADVISED NOT TO CHANGE FURNITURE

The sixth extraordinary congress of the Liberal Party of Ukraine (LPU)
has nominated incumbent President Leonid Kuchma for a second five year
term as head of state.

The election support Mr. Kuchma got from the Liberals is not exactly
front page news, for it was known a month and a half ago, when the President
appointed Volodymyr Shcherban head of the Sumy oblast state administration.

The main argument for giving Kuchma the nod was the presidential team's
use of the Left bogey, which is twice as dangerous for the Liberal Party,
consisting mainly of business people, as for the rest of Ukraine's people.
According to the LPU leader, the redistribution of property, inevitable
after the head of state is changed, would lead to bloodshed among liberal
business people and the death of their party. This argument seems to have
been most convincing for the delegates, though many party veterans noted
ironically that a corpse could hardly be frightened by a second death.
The congress resolution was only opposed by eight votes, including that
of Serhiy Chabanenko, head of the Luhansk oblast organization, who thinks
it is Mr. Kuchma who has pushed Ukraine to the victory of communism by
his pseudo-reforms and pandering to the Left. The Luhansk leader believes
that by creating pseudo-Left entities like the Progressive Socialists (ostensibly
to split and weaken the Left as a whole), the current government is thinking
primarily about its own self-preservation, the lumpenization of society
being their last chance to keep their posts. It is here that the Liberals,
who have been boasting since their birth of a powerful analytical center,
should suspect, if not understand, that they ought to avoid Mr. Kuchma.
One need not be a great prophet to see a direct relationship between the
number of the downtrodden in the country and the complacency of private
owners. The prospect of a new 1917, when utterly impoverished masses began
to "expropriate the expropriators," should have worried the Liberals more
than that of Mr. Kuchma's replacement.

"The party has finally been privatized, in the best tradition of Ukrainian
privatization at that, i.e., without payment," LPU veterans and supporters
of liberal ideology complained bitterly to this writer.

"We should not wait or trail behind. Liberal politics should become
public," the LPU leader appealed, apparently pleased with the congress
resolution.

So the minimum program has been fulfilled, as far as the noble cause
is concerned. However, the second item flopped. As The Day forecast, another
purpose of appointing the Liberal leader as Sumy oblast head was to neutralize
Natalia Vitrenko in her own "fief." As Mr. Shcherban admitted, he offered
Ms. Vitrenko the post of deputy head of the Sumy Oblast State Administration
for economic matters.

"But she turned it down. She says she'll be running for president,"
the brand-new oblast chief said regretfully.

The sixth congress also solemnly admitted to the party Ihor Nosalik,
People's Deputy and member of the Renaissance of the Regions faction, which
raises hopes for improving the party's extremely poor financial situation.

Meanwhile, Hennady Balashov, welcoming his comrades-in-arms and approving
their decision to support Mr. Kuchma, advised to do with the Ukrainian
rulers what is usually done with an unprofitable whorehouse: "Don't change
the furniture! You have to change the whores!"

This is a good and timely recipe. Now the Liberals only have to identify
who is who among the Ukrainian rulers and, what is more, not to mix them
up.

By Olha BURDA

WILL NATIONAL-DEMOCRATS' "NEGOTIATING PROCESS" END AFTER ELECTIONS?

The congresses of both Popular Movements of Ukraine (Rukh), Kostenko's
and Udovenko's, brought no special surprises. Each nominated its candidate
for President (the nominations were "ensured" by voters' meetings), each
one urged "the unity of democratic forces."

However, except for words no  serious attempts either to solve
the prolonged conflict within the party or to rescue Ukrainian national
democracy as such were seen. On the contrary, after the candidates' nomination
the situation worsened, and one can safely assume that Rukh will never
reunite.

The congresses were interesting rather in the details, which enable
us to make assumptions about the character and future activities of the
two parties that emerged from the single Rukh. The people in the Kostenko
wing showed a more diplomatic attitude toward the other part of Rukh. At
their congress not a single bad word concerning yesterday's brothers-in-arms
was uttered. Moreover, both candidacies, Yuri Kostenko's and Hennady Udovenko's,
were put to the vote by Kostenko's Rukh: Kostenko won: 449 to two.

Udovenko's Rukh meanwhile were reaping dividends by criticizing Kostenko's,
demanding they repent, publicly admit their mistakes, and only then consider
who can be a party member and who not.

Obviously the future of Ukrainian national democracy is now dubious.
The problem is, we have too many national democrats. All will go to the
polls under basically the same banner, but divided into small groups. Other
national democratic parties still lean toward Rukh. The large number of
their representatives on hand at both Rukh congresses confirmed this. Yet
the attempts to patch things up in Rukh to save national democracy did
not seem realistic.

Even Yuri Kostenko is convinced that the national democrats cannot be
gathered under the same banner for the election. He told The Day that after
the candidates are nominated and signatures gathered, the negotiation process
can be continued to support a single candidate who would have a better
chance of winning. According to Mr. Kostenko, National Bank Governor Viktor
Yushchenko could be such a candidate - in case of his nomination.

The Udovenko wing's position is quite different. Their candidate, Hennady
Udovenko, sees no alternative to himself and assures everyone that he will
fight to the victorious end.

Most open in this situation is, as always, Oleksandr Lavrynovych, who
openly stated that by itself Rukh will lose the election.

By Tetiana SHULHACH, The Day

NOT ALL UNITED SOCIAL DEMOCRATS SUPPORTED KUCHMA'S CANDIDACY

As it was expected, the 15th congress of Social-Democratic Party of
Ukraine (united) that took place on May 15 nominated Leonid Kuchma as its
candidate for president.

The candidacy of Leonid Kuchma was supported by all regional organizations
of SDPU(u) except for Vinnytsia region which nominated the party leader
Viktor Medvedchuk as its candidate.

However, in spite of the congress's well-staged harmony (the delegates
in an organized manner and almost unanimously voted with their red credentials
for all the presidium's decisions), the United Social Democratic bosses
had a few unpleasant moments. Member of the political council and party
second-in-command Mykola Zarytsky announced at the congress his decision
to leave the party. In his opinion, "democracy within the party has been
destroyed, and only one candidate for president was imposed on the regional
organizations." During Mr. Zarytsky's speech the microphone went dead,
and the ex-member of party had to deliver the bulk of his speech without
a microphone.

The hall was particularly stirred by the speech of one delegate from
the Kyiv organization, Kyiv Dynamo's Andriy Shevchenko who, like Pioneers
in the 1970s reporting to a Communist Party congress, was reading from
a piece of paper "cordial words" about his boss both in the party and at
work, Hryhory Surkis, and about Leonid Kuchma as well. "We always affectionately
remember our meetings with the man who treats us like a father. We support
you, Leonid Danylovych," Andriy Shevchenko said.

By Vladyslav MIKHALIOV, Center for Journalistic Research

TIME IS COMMUNISTS' MAIN ENEMY

The 4th extraordinary congress of the CPU [Communist Party of Ukraine]
which took place the Saturday before last offered no surprises: CPU First
Secretary Petro Symonenko was nominated as the party's candidate for president.

All observers were interested in something else: is this nomination
final and irrevocable or would the Communists leave a chance for a hypothetical
single Left candidate? They did. The congress gave the CPU's Central Committee
the right to adopt "decisions dictated by the situation in order to achieve
the main goal - removing the current anti-popular regime and changing the
political direction."

However the delegates could not do without ritual complaints that "the
SPU [Socialist Party of Ukraine] is forcing the CPU organizations to agree
to play a secondary role."

In my view a unique characterization of the whole Communist ideology
was given to the CPU's candidate by Komsomol (Communist Youth League) members:
let us vote for the only Komsomol leader of the 1980s who remains loyal
to Communist ideals.

In other respects the congress looked like a time machine that took
everyone twenty years into the past. All the attributes of those days were
present, including the inevitable Lenin on the curtain, Adam Martyniuk's
statement, "there is such a party," an assertion that the Communists will
come to the elections with the same slogans as those the Bolsheviks carried
in 1917 to storm the old world.

Of course, there were some attributes of the 1990s at the congress.
Thus an appeal was made to use the mass media for election propaganda,
just like Clinton did when running for President. Comparisons humiliating
for Ukraine were made of our citizens' pitiful wages and salaries to those
in the USA and unemployment benefits in Western Europe. However, the speakers
passed over in silence the fact that "their" salaries and compensations
are so high because the Communists never took power there.

Having gone outdoors after the congress I returned to the present. Near
a metro station a group of teenagers were standing with their inevitable
roller skates. I came over and asked, "Boys, do you know who Lenin is?"

They shrugged their shoulders in amazement and honestly answered, "No."
And incidentally, at their age I was leading young October children (something
like Communist Cub Scouts) through a school museum of Lenin!

Hence, the Communists' main rival is neither the President, nor the
present authorities but TIME! The more generations are raised without the
stupefying influence of Communist propaganda at the state level, the less
the chances are for the Communists to have their revenge.

Undoubtedly, the Communists will enter the election campaign as their
decisive battle. The more so, since it is sure to be their final one.

By Dmytro SKRIABIN, The Day

"SINGLE LEFT" CANDIDATE MOROZ BECOMES "PEOPLE'S" CANDIDATE

May 15 saw the second stage of the sixth congress of the Socialist Party
of Ukraine (SPU). At the same time, Buzduhan's Social Democratic congress
was held for the same purpose: to nominate Oleksandr Moroz as presidential
candidate.

Like all the other "nominators," the SPU insured itself against possible
"tendentious verifications" by the Central Election Commission of the results
of electoral meetings held recently all over Ukraine under the slogan "Yes
to people's President Moroz!"

Incidentally, the congress was also visited by a Communist representative,
although many had predicted that the Communists would pronounce anathema
on the SPU after saying good-bye to Moroz. In any case, Comrade Tsybenko
addressed his former allies with a speech boiling down to the following:
you, Center-Leftists, and we, Communists, have different wedding-parties.
He was immediately answered, "so be it". SPU Political Council Chairman
Yosyp Vinsky stressed that "ultra-political forces of different hues had
never been a threat to the regime," broadly hinting that Kuchma and Symonenko
needed each other. Mr. Moroz, in his turn, said in the report that "the
Communist Party does not bear an ideology that could unite society. Public
opinion polls show that both the Communists and SPU enjoy the support of
a fourth of the electorate." This conclusion was at once confirmed by delegates
from the regions, who demanded "to take an unequivocal stand on 'Communist
treachery' and Petro Symonenko personally who holds an anti-Moroz position."
Such a categorical statement was perhaps caused by being sure of one's
strength, and, particularly, by the fact that about a tenth of local Communist
cells openly support Mr. Moroz. The same number must also be harboring
the thought of supporting the former Verkhovna Rada Speaker.

But, although the Communist Party has distanced itself from the Socialists,
the latter are likely to continue attempting to create the illusion of
a single Leftist candidate, only to browbeat the President's staff. Otherwise,
why should Mr. Moroz announce on-going "consultations," "joint congresses
in early October," and "a probable positive result?"

Mr. Moroz will probably choose a new tactic at this stage: a semblance
of rapprochement with the Center-Right or, to be more exact, their democratic
vestiges. Mr. Moroz repeatedly stressed he would not criticize Kostenko,
Matviyenko, and Pynzenyk "at least because they take votes away from Kuchma.
Their actions and intentions happen to objectively coincide with ours."
The President's aides-de-camp are also likely to have to cover the Moroz-Marchuk
flank: the Socialist leader said there is a secret "non-aggression pact"
and did not rule out that he would express himself more clearly in August
(probably when both politicians' popularity peaks).

By Iryna HAVRYLOVA, The Day

 

Rubric: