“I have never been a voice in the chorus...”

“THE SBU FORMER DIRECTOR HAS NO MORAL RIGHT TO RUN FOR PARLIAMENT”

“Mr. Horbulin, would you comment on the situation that emerged after Oleksandr Omelchenko had gone on leave? The press has already hinted that the appointment of Ihor Shovkun (twentieth on the list of the bloc you head) as acting chief of the Kyiv City Administration is to the Democratic Union’s advantage (the interview was conducted before the Omelchenko decree was revoked —Ed.). Let us put it bluntly: are you involved in this? At the same time, many are quite skeptical about your bloc’s chances to overcome the 4% barrier, and the recent turn of events in Kyiv looks all too good for you.”

“First of all, the Democratic Union (DU — Ed.) and Democratic Party bloc’s rating is quite sufficient to surmount the 4% barrier. Now about what happened in Kyiv. The Omelchenko situation itself is, of course, to the DU’s advantage, for it is free advertising. The DU, with its absolutely correct behavior, has suddenly become the center of the most resounding sensation of the past month. Mr. Omelchenko was aware that Mr. Shovkun orchestrated the actions of Kyiv DU activists. I repeatedly discussed this matter with him, and he did not mind Mr. Shovkun participating in political activities for somebody other than the Yednist (Unity) Party. As to the conflict itself, I could not have anything to do with it because I was out of Kyiv during the two days that ‘shook’ the city, and the only high official I met at that time was Mr. Omelchenko himself. We were flying together from Vienna to Kyiv: I was coming back from a US official trip and he from a Hamburg boxing match. I talked for quite a long time to the president on the phone on Sunday because I was to report him the results of my US mission. I feel very calm, and even this stirs resentment. I was not involved in that action but still it was ascribed to me. Well, I’m used to this. Shortly before the 1998 elections, Russia’s Niezavisimaya gazeta published an article, allegedly signed by me, on a plan to ‘destroy’ Hromada. The article was immediately reprinted by the Ukrainian press, and I came under a barrage of denunciations. But I could not possibly be the author of such a letter if only because it was first written To the President of Ukraine and then marked Top Secret. A person who has worked in high security agencies for forty years would never write like this: he will first put Top Secret and only then To the President of Ukraine. The letter also said the author would make other proposals to the president during a personal meeting. But in the spring of 1998 I met the president three times a day on average.”

“Then why are you missing from the Melnychenko tapes?”

“I saw the president very seldom in 2000. And even if there were some conversations, they were apparently not worth being taped. Yet, I must note I used to sit more than once on that sofa. I don’t believe this sofa was a very suitable place for a bug.

“Of course, it is very easy to blame the DU for stirring up the Kyiv mayoral crisis. I absolutely reject spin control, for it disgusts me. One must be able to apply logic and facts to prove that one is right. A short strengthening of DU positions cannot bring us victory because the point was to place Mr. Shovkun temporarily in this office rather than to dismiss Mr. Omelchenko altogether. I am far more hopeful that the well-developed structure of our party will enable us to find a proper place in other activities. I believe our sincere struggle for the 1+1 television channel and, hence, the freedom of information will give us much greater chances to gain points than reshuffling officials in Kyiv.”

“Incidentally, what do you think the cassette scandal was in fact?”

“This is a political provocation, which can only occur if the law enforcement services do not carry out their immediate duties. No matter what factors actually touched off this cassette scandal, I think it is a totally abnormal situation. It cannot and should not exist. Who stood to gain and why? This is an entirely different question. Somebody had to be held responsible for what happened, but this was not done. And all the subsequent whipping-up of the scandal, protests, statements, etc., is a parody on all kinds of so-called gates.”

“Obviously, the then SBU (Security Service —Ed.) Director Leonid Derkach who compared once in an interview Mr. Mohylevych with Ford to the utter amazement of everybody on both sides of the ocean should have been held far more responsible. However, Mr. Derkach resigned quietly, and now he is running for the parliament, having enlisted the support of the pro-presidential For a United Ukraine bloc, thus contributing to further upward spiral of the cassette scandal. What can you say on this?”

“I see no direct link between him being supported by For a United Ukraine and the likelihood of new cassette scandal revelations. Yet, in my opinion, he has no moral right to run for the parliament after the Chernihiv mushroom hunters story and top secret information leak when he was the SBU chief.”

“What is your vision of the future center in parliament?”

“As to the bloc of the Democratic Party and the Democratic Union, this is, of course, an interesting tandem. The Democratic Party was one of Ukraine’s first parties bearing the slogan of national democratic revolution. It did very much for Ukraine to become an independent state. This party is ten years old. It failed, unfortunately, to retain the leading position it maintained in Ukraine’s political life previously. Conversely, the DU grew out of a strong technological center and in a short time gathered all kinds of intellectuals. It’s quite a logical strategic alliance.

“Now about what will occur after March 31 and which forces will form the center. There are many of those contending for a pivotal role in the future Verkhovna Rada. I don’t quite believe that Our Ukraine, SDPU(o), and For a United Ukraine could join forces. I picture them as a set of quite dissimilar forces united in this concrete situation by the desire to win the elections rather than by a common idea. I can’t clearly see even the outlines of such an alliance. So I find it difficult to name the axis on which the majority will pivot.”

“In other words, you think there will be no majority as such?”

“I think a majority will be formed, for, as the experience of 2000 showed, this is a necessary, if insufficient, condition for both Verkhovna Rada and the government to work fruitfully. I see no prospects for the development or progress of Ukraine as a state and a society unless parliament feels it is responsible to the government and vice versa. Besides, territorial seats are a very serious additional factor that will keep this process going. It is like a reserve regiment in the Battle of Kulikovo.”

“SUCH AN ALLIANCE CANNOT BE JUSTIFIED BY ANY POLITICAL EXPEDIENCY...”

“What do you think are the roots of conflict between the SBU former chief and his son and the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine (NSDC)? They also came into conflict with you. Whence comes this attitude of the Derkaches toward the NSDC?”

“I see the human factor here. The point is the former SBU chief and his offspring wished to be on top and uncontrollable in this extremely important governmental function. And the Derkaches came into conflict with the previous, not the current, NSDC secretary. The situation developed on a different basis, not as some foreign citizens claimed: at first the SBU was furnished — with my participation as well — a certain field of activities that then began to assume certain antidemocratic forms. The conflict itself began in 1999, when Yevhen Marchuk ran for president without any contact with Leonid Derkach. The Derkach family will always be in conflict with those who did, do, or will occupy the chair of NSDC secretary, for they lay claim to be the supreme arbiters in such an important state institution as the Security Service. They also think they have the right to freely turn this sphere to their personal advantage. So any situation, when the current or former security council secretary approached the sphere of Derkach family interests, provoked a conflict. This happened in 1999 and has now been going on for a year. I would search for the causes in the personal qualities of these people. And in general, this situation undoubtedly does harm to Ukraine as a fledgling democratic state.”

“If this situation tarnishes Ukraine’s reputation, why are no systemic attempts being made to suppress this phenomenon? How long do you think the SBU, the Prosecutor General’s Office, let alone the president, will put this off?”

“I think this situation is easy to settle. All that is needed is the political will. For what is going on is in fact an open table on which the cards have been laid. I say again that all we need is political will rather than search for difficult options.”

“Why do Ukrainian politicians often show a kind of political anemia instead of strong will? For instance, some time ago Andriy Derkach’s media maligned as much as they could the Ukrzaliznytsia (Ukrainian Railroads —Ed.) chief, but today they rank eleventh and tenth on the For a United Ukraine list. Why do we see no normal political reaction? Was he taken to Gestapo to accept this alliance so meekly?”

“I don’t know where he was taken to, but, from the moral angle, this kind of alliance cannot be justified by any political expediency.”

“On the one hand, there is a list with, so to speak, problem characters. On the other hand, this political force is going to become a single party after the elections. In addition, bloc leader Volodymyr Lytvyn said the president had agreed to lead this party. Could you comment on this?”

“In my opinion, Ukraine sees the beginning of an absolutely normal process of the politicization of executive power. And if the presidential elections show a competition of party-based political programs, this will mean the truly democratic development of Ukraine. Let us recall the Western democracies, where presidents openly declare their adherence to one political party or another.”

“And what is your attitude toward the fact that the president’s decisions are being made public by his chief of staff? What stands behind this way of transmitting the head of state’s intentions?”

“As far as I know, no decision has been made. When one is made, it will be made public in an appropriate manner.”

“In our opinion, there can only be two explanations: either the administration chief does not fit the role he was assigned in the elections or the president is going to run for a third term.”

“Political reality in this country is so changeable that it is futile and unrewarding to forecast what events could happen in two and a half years.”

“And would you comment on the following version of this situation: Volodymyr Lytvyn is thus being tipped as successor or, in more diplomatic terms, is going to accomplish a broader mission?”

“I know very well Mr. Lytvyn’s ceiling, as well as he does mine. We worked hand in hand for five years. He never even muttered anything of the sort. And, in this case, it would be good to know his point of view. In all his interviews I never noticed any exultation over being the For a United Ukraine leader. And it will be a revelation for me if he has lately developed some inner changes and shown readiness to be a leader.”

“He must have learned best how to handle the nature of our president. All those who try to shake Mr. Kuchma’s chair seem to arouse his righteous indignation. Only those who say ‘I don’t want your chair!’ can win his affection.”

“I am not after his chair either. So what?”

And, in general, what can you say about a presidential successor? The name of Medvedchuk is in the headlines, Symonenko is certain to make another attempt, Yushchenko is being ‘hyped by vested interests’...”

“This is quite a normal political subject. As we follow the democratic path (we really do, perhaps not so fast), this is an indispensable subject that must circulate in society. I don’t understand why so many people deny that they want the presidential chair. Then why are there so many candidates in every election? This vision is normal if an individual has real potential for this. Naturally, this being a very high office, each contender must feel whether he is capable of taking this post. But it is ridiculous to be in fear if you feel you are capable of it.”

“What do you think might be the signals that the president would give society to let it know that he is prepared to hand over power? Do you see any specific candidates? Is it possible to copy the Russian scenario in Ukraine, or should we expect some other pattern?”

“I will say frankly that I do not see today a likely candidate for a national leader. Maybe, my eyesight is already poor.”

“We don’t take that as a serious reason.”

“No, I really don’t see any...”

“This we take...”

“Of course, the current President should have laid if not the rails than at least the ties to build the format of power succession. It would have been very good. As to the Russian scenario, I think they conducted an induced childbirth. I don’t think something of the kind could happen in Ukraine.”

“You see nobody who could invent this here?”

“These are different things. I do know who could invent it.”

“And carry it out?”

“No, I don’t.”

“Incidentally, Russia bore quite a healthy child despite its induced childbirth.”

“Yes, and he is growing very fast. What I see myself and what others think really confirms my modest conclusions.”

“You have recently been to the US. Many think that Viktor Yushchenko is being hyped by certain American politicians who want our next president to be a person who will suit them.”

“All I can say is that I visited a number of high US offices and the name of Yushchenko was never mentioned in conversations with me. Draw your own conclusions, but I think this is a sign.”

“Maybe the reason is that they know your attitude toward him. “

“Whence is your presumption of negativism? How can they know if I never display my attitude at all? Maybe my mimics are so well endowed that they guess at once.”

“Do you think, from the angle of what you know, that Mr. Yushchenko’s potential as a politician is comparable to his image?”

“This question is like a death sentence. I don’t want to answer.”

“Well, that is already an answer... Will you comment upon external influences on our parliamentary campaign? We seem to have missed a chance in the past ten years to build a full-fledged state. And our house is still exposed to the gusts of northern and overseas winds.”

“I would not apply the word house to Ukraine. I take an extremely negative attitude toward exaggerating the role of the northern and overseas winds. Yes, this is a most vital component of the ongoing political processes. But if we fail to understand that we must elect deputies, supervise things, and manage this country by ourselves, there will be all kinds of winds from the east, southeast, and west... I think the external influence on Ukraine has been exaggerated, for the vast majority of those going to cast their votes in the elections do not feel this influence. This only worries a part of the political beau monde. I personally feel no influence. It is perhaps a my character trait that every attempt to influence my sentiments produces quite the opposite effect. It seems to me that most of our compatriots feel the same. One must draw a clear line between the political elite and the individuals who vote.”

“Who do you think will go to the parliament?”

“I don’t believe in ratings.”

“Then please make one of your own.”

“I think the Communist Party, Our Ukraine, SDPU(o), and For a United Ukraine will make it. I don’t want to speak about my bloc because we were relegated to different leagues. I don’t want to jump from the second division right into the Champions League finals. I think we will make it but very modestly.”

“What about Women for the Future and the Greens?”

“The Greens can make it, for it is a special-identity party. As to Women... I highly esteem all women, but I do not trust party organizations based on any gender principle.”

“WE WILL LIVE ON THE LEVEL OF SYMBIOSIS UNLESS WE HAVE NORMAL PARTIES”

“It was difficult not to become a cynic, working in the decision- making center... Looking at the what extent has everything changed during all these years? Clearly, we have failed to develop well-structured political institutions. Our parties and blocs are very complex things. For example, Our Ukraine does not hide its alliance with Ukrainian nationalist leader Slava Stetsko and Ernest Haliyev from Ukrsibbank...”

“This is a symbiosis.”

“But these symbioses also characterize a certain tendency, namely, the complete loss of ideological landmarks. Plus another new thing in the parliamentary campaign is the large number of relatives on the election lists. How can all this be managed, what is to be done to make the future parliament appear organized? You say you also hope to influence this with your ‘very modest’ efforts. How exactly, taking into account everything said previously?”

“Ukraine must be a trailblazer in compiling family tickets. I think this is a completely freakish manifestation of our democracy, no matter what slogans are used to justify it. I think that, politically, we are still sitting out on a limb, but we begin to climb down, not up, the tree. As to motley lists, it is absolutely clear that every political party or bloc needs serious funding. What is being set up are unnatural creations. They are not based on political views — this is the second main drawback of the Ukrainian political process. In 1998 I wrote an article on our political parties, in which I described the way they must go in order to become true representatives of people. That article was enthusiastically trashed by all the existing political parties, which saw a mirror reflection of themselves.”

“And who is responsible for Ukraine’s failure to create conditions for the formation of full-fledged parties?”

“There is a host of factors. Today’s society does not understand the authorities. The authorities do not want to help society understand them. This reminds me of a city with suspension bridges over an abyss. As soon as head-on traffic begins, it triggers such a vibration that everybody begins to think whether it is worth surmounting the abyss at all. Unless we build a good concrete bridge, we will live at the level of symbiosis.”

“Mr. Horbulin, how can we, given such a primitive level of politics, achieve the president’s goal to approach European Union standards?”

“Not by politics alone. This is quite a realistic task, given the educational, scientific and technological potential of Ukraine. The main thing is self-organization, the tone of which must be set, of course, by the authorities.”

“And do you think we should seek EU and NATO membership at the same time?”

“This is an interesting situation. Last year, addressing a Ukraine-NATO workshop, I asked a rhetorical question: today, far from all EU members are NATO members. Yet, NATO is being expanded, leaving the situation to develop in practically two ways. Since Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary have joined NATO, I think they will undoubtedly be admitted to the EU. Simultaneously, some EU members begin to be drawn politically to the NATO bloc. Although this does not mean automatic switching, a parallel course of events is already a tendency in my opinion, and we must proceed from this. I look forward to the December, 2002, NATO summit in Prague, which I think will somewhat clarify the situation about membership in this alliance. On the one hand, this could lead to a very serious redivision of Europe’s political map. But if the point is about, say, Slovenia and Slovakia, this will be the continuation of what was discussed in Madrid: that summit also scrutinized five to seven NATO candidates, They selected three, leaving Slovenia and Slovakia aside. But if there is a Baltic country among the candidates, the situation will be entirely different. Look, all of these countries are equally eager to join both the European Union and NATO. I don’t think they’ll catch up with Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, but they’ve chosen their course and won’t veer off from it.”

“And we?”

“We are now a neutral state. And, given our geostrategic, as the trendy word goes, situation, this neutrality and nonaligned status is an indispensable condition of political coexistence. As to the economy, we can declare — please note the verb — our wish to join the European Union: I see nothing objectionable in this. Now about NATO. We have quite a clear document called a charter, although it is worse than Russia’s fundamental act. Besides, we have a second program of cooperation between Ukraine and NATO. The so-called candidate countries do not have any document like this; they are only striving to have one, and, in fact, our experience prompts some countries, especially Romania, to take the steps they have been telling the US side and NATO about constantly.”