Oleksandr TKACHENKO: “I am pleased that my opponent is the President himself, and he must also feel good”

“Mr. Tkachenko, in what way does the current executive power intend to convince the people that it should be the one to continue the so-called course of reforms, i.e., to stay in office, when the situation literally cries out: you boys, go?..”

“In 1991, when Ukraine's independence was proclaimed, with all that this implies, head of the then parliament of the 12th convocation Leonid Kravchuk was elected first President. The first years went by. Ukraine saw a devaluation of the promises of the first President who spellbound the people with his speeches, his cordiality, and his claims to understanding what kind of country was to be built... Then parliament demanded the urgent election of a new president. With all his ‘pros' and ‘cons,' Mr. Kravchuk, to whom I have a special attitude, did not put up any rebellion, nor did he turn to the army, police or people as a whole for protection, but he said: I agree, let the people say their decisive word. And in 1994, when the four years of his economic and political activities had been summed up, we saw a 22.9-% slump in Ukraine. This could be compared either with a great disaster or a large- scale economic war against this country. A new law on presidential elections was adopted, so we elected a new president with a new vision; and I would like everybody to see the placards of that election campaign. These were very interesting, hard-hitting placards that said: In the first month I will resolve the problem of corruption, bring back the $15 billion taken abroad, etc. You couldn't but trust a person like this! The more so that the country was being ruined. Although nobody speaks of this, Mr. Kravchuk indeed waived his presidency; he did it voluntarily. Then comes the year 1994. All voted for a practically new political and economic formation, new industrial relations, and a new vision of the future of this country. Mr. Kuchma was elected. Now take the years 1994-1999. We see a 24.7-% slump. Mr. Kravchuk abandoned office at 22.9%, while Mr. Kuchma does not even at 25%. But in the former case there was something to fall from, while in the latter there is nothing to fall from, for an over 20- % drop had already been recorded before. Now I can ask the readers a simple and clear question: what does the President think of today, and does he have any right to contend for the next period and demand this?! Only to add another 30 percent? By living standards, we are no longer among the first seven, we've dropped to 92nd place out of 156 countries of the world! Throughout its history, Ukraine has never ranked so low, even after the Tatar-Mongol invasion!

“We have compared two periods. And Kuchma does not waive power: on the contrary, he tries to force the country and its people to vote for him. He acts via coercive agencies, i.e., via Derkach and Kravchenko (Security Service chief and Minister of the Interior, respectively, — Ed. ). But 1999 is no 1994. At that time Ukraine produced per capita so many products, bread... And now there is even nothing to harvest grain with! Nature has rewarded human toil with copious results, but the executive power has forgotten that sowing is always followed by harvesting. They've forgotten about this! Your article ‘The Dream of Reason' said this about the President: had he known this, he would be solving the problem, but in fact he made a discovery for himself... So I think the situation itself has drawn the conclusion that he is unable to rule the state. And I have never seen horses changed while crossing the river or a minister of agriculture fired when harvesting begins! Look, if a man beats his wife, I don't understand this man. He also does it out of helplessness. So I think the President should publicly repent to the people in September. One mustn't ‘rape' people...”

“You said recently somewhere that Mr. Kuchma might be a good person by nature, but he is not destined to fulfill the great task he assumed by becoming president, for he lacks God's sign to do so...”

“The point of being good is not a profession. He got down to governing, but he doesn't know how...”

“There is the following motive in today's pro-Kuchma canvassing: he has already learned things over five years, let him rule, he now knows how.”

“If he had begun to see through things in 5 years, we would have felt it at least at the turning point... I think if such mutation had taken place, we could ask if there was a program. He has offered no program over five years. There was only one program called the IMF Memorandum. This program was hidden from Parliament. Only in February- March was this program unearthed by our National Security and Defense Committee with Kriuchkov at the head. Only then did it become clear who sternly dictates to this country what to do. And if the President has learned something over 5 years and does not want to lose these gains, I would give him, for example, a region of Ukraine: let him prove that, although he failed at the national level, he will ‘run rings round' everybody at the regional level.”

“But how do you know you are cut out to rule under different economic and political conditions such a complex and variegated country in such an alarming time? Why are you so self-confident?”

“It is not today that I felt I could deliver the goods. As early as 1991, at the dawn of national statehood, I was aware I could manage with the tasks I had to do, but 2-3 years later I felt I deserved more than that. When I was entrusted with a district, I accepted it as great confidence in me, a wide scale of work to do. After I had worked about 3- 4 years, I felt I could fly — not because of my ambitions or ‘alter ego' but because I merely knew this was too little for me, I was capable of being more useful. I felt we must search for some new forms of industrial relations. So I developed the first model of specialization in the agro-industrial complex, for which I was awarded a gold medal. And our Tarashcha district represented Ukraine at the 25th congress of the CPSU in 1976. This was followed by a CPSU CC resolution. The newspaper Pravda carried a solid article on me. This article dropped a bombshell in all of Ukraine. Just fancy Shcherbytsky (former Communist Party leader in Ukraine — Ed. ) writing about a modest district chief! What an honor! Then I worked as inspector for less than a year and went to Ternopil. The oblast had been taking losses, but I managed to pull it up, using the same people, without taking my roots there or changing personnel. Three years later the oblast became one of the most advanced. Then I was invited to take over as minister of agriculture, and we increased the output of bread from 39.6 million to 53 million tons in 5 years. This was what the Ukrainian government and the Party Central Committee dreamed of: to get one ton of bread per capita. I did it together with my colleagues. Shcherbytsky was awarded two gold stars, but I have only now been given what I deserved in 1978 (when I was an obscure district Party secretary). And the last thing. I came to parliament. I was a non-entity. I became a rank-and- file deputy without presidential instruction, without any perks. I don't know why, but deputies suggested I become first deputy speaker. I guess Mr. Moroz was a totally new person for them: they saw him as a good, intelligent, good-looking and well-read man... But Mr. Moroz, so to speak, never sowed or reaped in his lifetime. He had only been a teacher, a middle-level Party functionary, but had never done any top executive work, nothing of the sort that suggested he could cope with a sensitive task. The point must have been in the fact that all were sick and tired of his predecessor Mr. Pliushch. Pliushch was a byword for all deputies, as far as his intellect was concerned... So Moroz then managed to gain 173 votes. For four years, he was an illegitimate chairman of Verkhovna Rada, for he was to have gained 226 votes. But at that time parliament was understaffed, with only 334 deputies. Moroz was aware of who could become Speaker. He knew and saw me when I was the district Party secretary and he worked at a technical college under my jurisdiction... Moroz, as an intelligent person, felt my potential: ‘I know you and think you are capable of being my first deputy — you are a well-known and respected person in the republic and among the deputies...' But over 3-4 years, I defended Moroz three times, almost like a kamikaze in a war. He was ‘lined up against the wall' three times. And if I had put the question about him to the secret-ballot vote, as I was supposed to do... And when Mr. Kuchma last sent Pavlo Lazarenko, then premier, to me, he says in my office: ‘I'm ready to kneel before you. Everything, my destiny included, depends on you. We guarantee you chairmanship!' “

“Did Mr. Lazarenko hint then that Mr. Kuchma wanted to fire Mr.Moroz?”

“He dropped no hints. But it was clear. There were lists with 228 signatures. I told him: ‘Pavlo, don't kneel down, I will never sell out decent people, let alone friends, even if I don't like somebody. I'll never stoop to this.' So that session was over, Moroz was left at his post; I came into my office and got a direct call from the President who was offensive and blinding. I said: ‘Go fly a kite!' and hung up. Two hours later he phones me again: ‘Please don't be angry with me...' and so on.”

“The President is very much afraid of you, isn't he? It seems to me he, as a weak person, buckles and bows down to force.”

“He is very much afraid. I think he is at a loss when we begin to discuss something. But at that time he flew off the handle. I saw an aggressive President for the first time. He was so upset that things did not go the way he wanted them to, that was the last straw. So we kept clear of each other for about two weeks...

“As time went by, a new parliament was elected...A new Verkhovna Rada speaker was to be voted in. Believe me, I had never set myself a specific task, I was so tired, so fed up with all that. But I was voted in office. And when I came here after the ‘speakeriad' I said that I'd bring over a team of my own choice and that we needed a program of revival, of revitalizing this country's economy. And I recollected my appointment when the task was to raise one ton of bread per capita ... I said that what we needed was not a certain number — 150 or 350 — of laws but a program that has the force of a law. What we needed was legislative compulsion to work better. In other words, I felt Verkhovna Rada must work on a wider scale, so hence came the idea of the Ukrainian Revival program.”

“You have assessed Mr. Moroz's personal qualities as follows: everything seems good, but no practical experience — he never sowed or reaped... This is a drawback, isn't it?”

“You could have asked me: ‘And what will be your attitude to Moroz tomorrow, when you become president?' As to any other candidate — Marchuk, Kuchma...”

“In other words, you have already ranked them...”

“Yes, but I won't say how so far.”

“And what are we going to do with Mr. Symonenko? On the one hand, he is your ally, on the other, we know that today Symonenko, knowing what place he is assigned in the presidential administration's techniques, is coping well with this task. This means: to stand steadfast, categorically reject any blocs, and not bow down to anybody. What is to be done about this?”

“I think Mr. Symonenko might work at Verkhovna Rada — I won't reveal at what post... If Mr. Symonenko and I joined forces, we would win in the first round...”

“But Mr. Symonenko will never accept this, for Bankova St. will allow this under no circumstances, and Adam Martyniuk (President's chief of staff — Ed.) will keep it under control because he builds his own plan of life based on the Communist leader's fiasco.”

“Given Mr. Symonenko's age, work experience, and breadth of views, I think he could be working in the parliament's leadership. And I think this would also be conducive to the consolidation of society. For a president with my philosophy, the approaches and vision of Ukraine's today and tomorrow would, of course, manage to join the efforts of the executive, legislative and judicial powers into a single trouble-free mechanism of state. What is Mr. Kuchma losing out on? He can't imagine work without a conflict, he is a conflict-prone person by birth. He can't live without a conflict. He is not inclined to do concrete work and achieve concrete results. I can't believe it was impossible to revitalize three, four or five industries over 5 years. For example, if there is no meat, why not restore the poultry- making industry to make do without supplies from America? This could be done in six months. It is so simple: take an egg, put it in the incubator, take good care of it, and get a chicken...”

“But supplies keep on coming from America, and somebody must be cashing in on this...”

“Let them cash in here. I would also allow them to cash in. But I would give them 5%, with the remaining 95% going to state coffers. And 5%, with a due account of Ukraine-wide output, would suffice for grandchildren and great grandchildren.”

“Word has it you will destroy independence, sell out the state, and take us to a new Union... At the same time, knowing the sentiments of the electorate, the President is running abreast with you in this pro-Russian, pro- Moscow direction, already selling out all things possible and impossible.”

“I think the newspaper should print in large characters: Tkachenko has finally crossed the t's and dotted the i's as far as Ukrainian independence is concerned. Not the President, or the Cabinet of Ministers, or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, but Parliament with Mr. Tkachenko at the head. And since I, without sparing my life, took up this task, together with my deputy colleagues, their counterparts in the Russian Duma and the Council of the Federation, with then Prime Minister Primakov, the minister of foreign affairs of Russia, with all factions — from Zhirinovsky's to Ziuganov's, I fulfilled it. So I say: Tkachenko cannot do twice the same thing and then go back on it. If it were the President who had ‘pressurized' the State Duma into ratifying this treaty, this would be the subject of articles and speeches even today. I think this would be a very useful factor of the election campaign. But when it is Tkachenko, it is better to hush this up and speak about ‘jeopardizing national interests...' “

“I am also interested in your relationship with SDPU (o). Is the President's most loyal party, which wants to be the ‘chief concubine,' going to combat you as a candidate?”

“I am more than sure it will support neither me nor the President... Take a simple example. The Social Democratic Party has a headquarters of its own in Transcarpathia. Now compare how many signatures have been gathered there for the President and for Tkachenko. How should we understand this?”

“Are you a wily or a guileless person? Some say you possess a kind of peasant's wisdom, but wisdom is intellect plus cunning. Others say you are straightforward and guileless, which allows you to disarm those used to building their policies on intrigues and games. All think there is a hidden sense in your words, but in reality your words only contain what you said, without any implicit meaning. And so many people have a pratfall here: they try to compute your ‘twice two' by means of integral formulas.”

“I have always been guileless. I don't think I could ever have stooped so low, wherever I worked, as to set somebody against somebody else or work out a scheme for winning a victory and reviling those people.”

“So intrigues are not your cup of tea?”

“I never did so. And perhaps I seriously differ in this from all others, and I have never allowed anybody else to hurt the people I worked with. And when these people feel my trust, they work confidently. They know I won't have them hurt. And if the President fires a person in my constituency, I at once come to his/her rescue and have him/her reinstated.”

“And does the President meet you halfway?”

“I think he does. Suppose he dismissed one yesterday, and we discussed this. Then this morning the President said to me: I did not dismiss him, I in fact appointed him deputy head of the oblast administration, i.e., promoted him.”

“Look how strong you are, Mr. Tkachenko! What is then the true meaning of presidential maneuvers, and why and how does he meet you halfway? He does not have a more serious political enemy than you, for your post allows you to speak ‘from above' and rob him of the electorate ‘from below.' “

“We must look at this a bit differently. Firstly, the President must be pleased to have the Verkhovna Rada Chairman, and nobody else, as the main opponent. And I am also pleased that my opponent is the President himself. This fits the situation.”

“And did you persuade the President to be proud of this?”

“I told him about this: you must be glad, you simply say: my chief opponent is Tkachenko. This elevates both you and me.”

“Did he get what you meant?”

“I think so. But this is his own business. So I say to him: when your entourage launches an attack on me, ban this, don't let it happen. For I will never call an aide and tell him to do something against this or that fellow... I can only pick up the phone and say to your chief of staff: hey, darling, you're doing silly things, but I'll forgive you, only stop interfering — who do you think you are? The point is he is illegitimate as official executive: neither the Constitution nor the Law stipulates a post like this. He has no right to summon or appoint a minister, etc. He can only bring over the papers and recommend somebody. Who is Biloblotsky? The President's chief of staff. No more, no less. The trouble is they have set up a new ‘Cabinet of Ministers' exactly here, on Hrushevsky St., another one on Bankova St., and have also put up the Security Council building in the middle, to boot... But, as for me, I am proud to have the President as my opponent.”

“The one who involved security agencies in the struggle against all, including you?”

“I guess the time will come when I meet the security people, but this will occur in September- October. I will say to the minister of the interior: please summon senior officers from all regions, I want to talk to them. He will not refuse me this. And if I meet them, the dialogue will be simple and clear for them. I will also summon Security Service people, all generals and senior officers... I, as Verkhovna Rada Chairman, must do this.”

“Are you fond of power?”

“I am.”

“Because you know how to wield it?”

“Yes, I do. So I need wide opportunities.”

“To build socialism for us?”

“Did you ever hear me say I was going to build socialism?..