• 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

Ivan SALIY:"I am now a wise and cautious person" 

8 December, 1998 - 00:00

Ivan Saliy belongs to the perestroika generation of politicians. He can
hardly be identified as a democrat or reformer, but he was also not typical
of the party nomenklatura of the period. He did his job well, and the results
were obvious in the restoration of the Podil section of Kyiv. All this
is most likely the result of his character, not outlook or ideology. Evidence
of this is the fact that Mr. Saliy is still unaffiliated politically, although
he has done his homework well, closely following all the trends, and is
on friendly terms with almost every party, political analyst, etc. On the
one hand, this has resulted in a degree of eclecticism in his approach
and on the other - which is perhaps even more important - in a desire to
figure out everything for himself and act proceeding from such analysis.
The latter is probably why the man is still out of big-time politics, but
he has seen and knows many interesting things. In a word, here was another
welcome guest at The Day's round table.

Q: Mr. Saliy, you took up public politics in the late 1980s, on the
crest of the Communist Party's democratization and reform, at a time when
the national democratic movement was quickly gaining momentum. You and
other politicians like you at the time caused tremendous reverberations
in society; people started believing that power itself would change and
turn its face to them. We know this never happened. Why do you think that
democratic potential was not realized?

A: I have often thought this over. The twentieth century is drawing
to a close. Suppose we look back and try to sum it all up. We will see
Left and Right extremism. We have always been led by someone somewhere,
and more often than not the tasks proclaimed verged on absurdity. Not once
in this century has anyone attempted to proclaim, let alone try to implement,
man's priority before the state. Now if the state has never allowed man
to realize himself as a normal conscious individual, how can we expect
to realize ourselves as a country and a people?

I think that I was one of the best Communists, because I was aware of
the CPSU dogmatism and I warned them in no uncertain terms that we were
doing what we did the wrong way. At least I could say so at party plenums
and conferences then. Another thing is that the worse the situation got
in the country the harsher and less adequate became the Party's reaction.
It was as though the times and the Party acted separately.

Q: How would you explain the fact that both the Communists and Rukh
have lost their popularity?

A: They stirred the people to action and then it turned out that
nationalism was not of nationwide scope. The national idea alone proved
inadequate to help Ukraine join the community of European nations. And
nationalism does not seem terribly up to date today. Besides, Rukh seems
too preoccupied with ascertaining who is a hundred percent Rukh adherent
and who isn't. They lack professionalism. They often pick up someone else's
reform tune without bothering to study the actual economic vehicles.

Q: You said in an interview once that we have unlearned to love freedom.
Do you still think so?

A: I still think that we haven't learned to be free. We were
given freedom and democracy, but I wouldn't know who actually believes
in Ukraine's future these days. I won't say that we haven't found a way
into the twenty-first century, but I will say that we are getting farther
and farther away from it, and this is terrible.

Q: In other words, we have no cause for optimism, but we can't acknowledge
our own impotence at the end of the century.

A: We already have, considering that from 1986 to this day we
haven't developed a definite structure of power, economic concept, moral
guidelines, or ideology. We are still at the starting gate. Any other people
given the kind of shock we experienced would have long found a way out
and ahead. Not we. Once a young Kyiv philosopher by the name of Serhiy
Datsiuk told me one thing: there is no limit to the degradation. In Ukraine
this degradation is developing gradually, meaning that each successive
stage comes without us noticing it, so we slip further down this ethical
abyss and the process is endless, perhaps until we get back to the prehistoric
level. We are not even fully aware of where we are now. We say we are approaching
the twenty-first century and we have barter, but barter dates back to the
time when they did not use money. The trouble is, Ukraine has no economic
or political model. Our economic policy cries our for serious change. Who
will make them? Time will tell.

Q: Don't we have economists capable of working out such changes?

A: We certainly do. Enough and to spare. They have studied world
economic experience and they know that there is not a single lasting model,
just as the macroeconomic model is meant to work for a certain period.
The problem is that no one listens to them, because there are different
interests at work that do not always coincide with those of the nation.
We are totally confused about our reforms. Can you tell me whether reforms
should be radical or effective?

Q: Could they be both?

A: No, not as a rule. Practice shows that cardinal change in
a society takes place gradually. I think that they have completely discarded
professionalism in our society, and professionalism implies knowledge of
European or US experience. We opened all our doors: market, frontier, even
our souls in terms of ideology and morals. But this turned out a one-way
street.

Q: What about integration, building a united Europe, and so on?

A: Like I said, it is a one-way street. We are supposed to be approaching
Europe, yet our living standards go from bad to worse. Then comes the drop
in morals, the loss of all moral values. Do you know who is Ukraine's number
one ideologue or the greatest moral authority?

Q: Suppose you give us an example of an act showing true moral fortitude?

A: Recently, someone actually gave something up.

Q: Mr. Chernomyrdin declined the Russian premiership. If we had people
like him it would be easier to give an example


or two.

You have a lot of administrative experience, starting as secretary
of Podil district Party committee, later as Mayor of Kyiv. You have worked
with Leonid Kravchuk, then in Leonid Kuchma's administration. You have
been Pavlo Lazarenko's adviser and member of Parliament. It was your empirical
way to study the political situation in Ukraine and its political elite.
Let's take the elite. What do you think of it?

A: I think that, no matter how this elite may change, it cannot
adequately assess the situation in and outside Ukraine at this transitory
stage. These people turned out professionally unprepared and lack of professionalism
leads to the loss of patriotism and inability to formulate and protect
the national interests. Unless we change our attitude to what we call cadre
policy, nothing will change in the government machine and society. When
morals are discarded and not replaced, society start to fall apart.

Q: Previously, if one were asked whose person he was, he would take
offense. Now many will reply self-contentedly, "I'm one of the President's
men." Any comment?

A: That's one of the reasons why our premiers come and go so
often. Here the main criterion is one's loyalty to the man on top and God
forbid any initiative or political independence. Now what can a weakling
possibly accomplish? How come there are just twenty "worthy personalities"
out of the fifty million living in Ukraine? I mean the polls carried by
the Kievskie Novosti [Kyiv News].

I joined Leonid Kuchma's Administration because I wanted to serve my
country. I came with my own moral approach to state administration. Well,
they did not understand me and almost at once labeled me uncontrollable.
I wanted to work in the Cabinet and the Finance Ministry. They had three
vacancies, but all were filled the moment I suggested myself as Deputy
Finance Minister. They could also use me at the Ministry of the Economy,
but even the Socialist Minister wouldn't have me (my problem was that the
Left thought I was Right and the Right vice versa).

As Premier Lazarenko's adviser, I suggested that he move out of his
dacha in Pushcha-Vodytsia. After that he wouldn't see me for a month. I
think that those of his shortcomings of which we all know would be neutralized
in a normal society. At a certain stage those in power consciously encouraged
everything they now blame him for.

Recently I talked to some of the reformers. They said they were in opposition
because they could not take part in the current administration and that
their opposition would stop as soon as they could. Those on high are making
a bad mistake destroying business structures just because their managers
are in opposition. I, for one, consider toppling the Republic Concern one
such mistake, because afterward no one could set up an entity capable of
doing business with Turkmenistan in natural gas. And the same applies to
the ruin of Unified Energy Systems of Ukraine, because those petty dealers
replacing it cannot deal with Mr. Viakhirev on equal terms.

Q: Is there a possibility of your running for Kyiv Mayor?

A: I have reached a certain level and accumulated enough experience
not to try to sell myself. I am not going to impose myself where not invited.
All I can say is that a good candidate must have at least twenty years
of experience studying the city and its problems.

Q: By the way, what is your attitude to the repair done on Khreshchatyk?

A: I think that a repair of such scope should be undertaken once
every 20-30 years. After the repair the street did not get any wider and
nor did it get lifted by 2-3 meters, and the houses lining it remain old
and peeling. All right, they did it, so why all the fuss? They didn't build
another Appian Way, did they? We say we want to become European. Fixing
up the main thoroughfare did not make the path we have to travel any shorter.
Or take Poshtova Ploshcha (Postal Square), I don't understand it: first
they fixed the square and then built a McDonald's. Wouldn't it be logical
to do it the other way around? And have McDonald's pay for the repair?
There are many other examples: St. Sophia Square, the Besarabian Market,
Central Registry, etc.

Q: You have long shown an interest in various regions of Ukraine.
Do you see them as a source of new politicians, meaning different from
what we have now?

A: I must say that the Center obviously underestimates by far
the new political elite that has formed in the regions. This phenomenon
is different from what happens in Russia's gubernias ruled by governors.
In Ukraine, this elite emerges from big cities, especially where mayors
were elected for a second term with their teams and local politicians were
marked by a quite high professional level. Another thing is that they are
so far unable to do everything they are capable of, because there is a
steady process of concentration of power, resources, and money, while everywhere
in the civilized world the opposite is the case: power and money are being
decentralized. In a word, the more we get centralized the lower living
standards fall.

Q: You speak in terms of macroeconomics, programs, and reforms. Yours
is a language meant for professionals. How would you explain to the man
in the street the difference between President Kravchuk's and President
Kuchma's economic policies?

A: Much as I respect Mr. Kravchuk, I think that he did not have
the slightest clue about the economy. I realized this when gasoline disappeared
in Kyiv and the rest of Ukraine. As the issue of large supplies from Russia
was raised he said, surprised, "I had no idea that we depended on Russia
so much." Being a law-abiding citizen, I can only say that Leonid Kuchma
must believe in his own people and cast aside traditional hopes for investment
and credit, because this demoralizes and demobilizes the entire executive
branch.

Q: What you have just said about Mr. Kravchuk tallies perfectly with
your character as a straightforward man. As for your opinion of Mr. Kuchma,
perhaps some time will pass before you can clearly state your attitude
toward his economic policy. Is that right?

A: Now don't you try to provoke me. I have celebrated my 55th
birthday, and I am now a wise and cautious person.

Q: Our editorial policy reflects what is going on in Ukraine in an
as unbiased manner as possible, so we try to get politicians to join us
in a frank dialogue.

A: Do you really believe that you'll succeed? In Ukraine? We
have reached a stage where there is only a handful of intellectuals prepared
for such a dialogue. Now we have less freedom than under Gorbachev, so
by and large we envy the media's status in other countries. In Ukraine
most newspapers are such that one can tell what each issue is all about
without reading it. Or take our TV program "7 Days." We all know what they
will talk about and who they will show, except that we can only guess how
low they will bow and how much they will scrape on a given occasion.

 

Rubric: