• 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

Trap for the Electorate

23 March, 1999 - 00:00

To create a myth of a "Left threat," the authorities ruin the Right and
support extremists

By Tetiana Korobova, The Day
Leonid Kuchma has again expressed himself. He thinks that after the presidential
elections "those who wanted revenge will part with their dreams." Did he
mean this or only hinted that he would remain in his seat, and those seeking
revenge be greatly disappointed?

Of course, if we go by what the ever-expanding circle of political science
and sociological courtiers say, Mr. Kuchma will have no rivals in the second
round, according to latest forecasts. The exception is Presidential Administration's
beloved daughter, the indefatigable Natalia Vitrenko. We are being served
an absolutely "a la Russe" modernized scenario: not merely Left menace
- "reformer," but: either Kuchma or "uranium mines" (a place to serve a
hard labor term). It was in Dnipropetrovsk, the birthplace of cadres, that
Ms. Vitrenko outlined the prospects after her Progressive Socialist Party
of Ukraine (PSPU) comes to power: those guilty of all current woes will
be dispatched to those same uranium mines.

We may thus assume that one of Mr. Kuchma's election headquarters tentatively
called "Family" and guided by the best political scientists has come to
the conclusion that Communist leader Mr. Symonenko will make a pale and
unconvincing bugaboo, while Socialist leader Mr. Moroz is not fit for this
role at all. Verkhovna Rada Speaker Mr. Tkachenko has not yet laid claim
to this role, so it is time to bring in Mr. Zhirinovsky, for Ms. Vitrenko
has suitable charisma, on the one hand, and he is coping very well with
the role she was assigned, on the other.

Then another political scientist informed us that it is best to elect
Mr. Kuchma, for (loose translation), since he is running for his last term,
he will not be plagued by problem of reelection and will get down to doing
real deeds for the benefit of the country, rather than for himself, as
others do. This must mean we should understand: Mr. Kuchma has objectively
thrown this country into such dire straits not because this is what he
could do, but because "reform" was confined to an objective desire to steer
the boat for one more term. Now we are told: if you behave well, you'll
have Kuchma again; if badly, then Ms. Vitrenko will come. The best political
scientists have estimated the flamboyant progressive lady will grab thirty
plus percent of the votes of all those eligible to vote to defeat the "reformer"
in the second round.

The most interesting point, however, is that brandishing the threat
of uranium mines may in fact strengthen the Left, but not so revealing
in his intentions and promises, candidate (Ms. Vitrenko's comrade Volodymyr
Marchenko, incidentally, denies that the Progressive Socialists belong
to the Left). The prospect of the resolute Comrade Vitrenko coming to power,
with due account of Mr. Kuchma's chances, must inevitably provoke still
more active commotion among those who either do not make up part of the
current authorities' oligarchic clan foundation or have doubts about preserving
their positions in the future. In other words, will the struggle of the
potential and "needed" clans shape the destiny of the elections and ourselves?

People's Democratic Party (NDP) leader Anatoly Matviyenko says that
one of the contradictions tearing apart his party (and not only this one)
is that "the authorities rely in their policies either on the public political
or oligarchic clan forces." And, in his opinion, we should not tolerate
the latter: "we are already fed up with this practice." The continuation
of it, the NDP leader believes, "may push us to the much talked about Red
revenge, anarchy, and powerlessness, and then to the most terrible thing
- loss of statehood." "And the point is not whether or not Mr. Kuchma remains,"
Mr. Filenko adds, "the point is different: whether or not we will preserve
the bridgehead for a victory of a person who will really march on. Or shall
we lose everything?" So, according to NDP leaders, there remains "a last
chance, and if the situation further develops the way it does now, this
will accelerate the adoption of an unequivocal decision before the congress,
for it will be too late in May."

NDP has got into a more than complicated situation and tried to find
a befitting way out of it. The political executive committee decision,
whereby the nomenklatura part came out in support of Mr. Kuchma's
candidacy and the political part opposed it, is a Solomon's decision making
it possible to preserve the party and not to deprive its leaders of the
party. However, there is quite a real possibility to do just that - more
real than a split. On the other hand, this also allows the nomenklatura
with Premier Pustovoitenko at the head to keep their power-wielding posts.
So far, of course.

We must admit that the NDP, the party of power, has been "dealing" quite
consistently the issues of corruption and the shadow economy - from its
second congress to recent demands on candidate Kuchma. Perhaps its insider
knowledge of the question kept its members from observing pin-drop silence,
although today's outright bell-ringing is somewhat belated. "I am worried
over the situation in the state," says Mr. Matviyenko, "Don't we see or
are afraid of this? If you display or demonstrate loyalty to the authorities,
you can be allowed to do anything you want. If not, even what you have
never done at all may be charged against you as an offense." Naturally,
if one-third of the party are businesspeople and the party is desperately
searching for a decision on the eve of elections, then Mr. Matviyenko is
right: "There is a huge danger to 'disloyal' business: to be not only destroyed
but also deprived of freedom." This is no secret at all, but the price
of this conclusion rises, for the NDP still does not belong to the opposition
and its leaders do not consider the definition "party of power" as reflecting
reality. Then who is the party of power? An always melancholic and derisive,
Mr. Filenko says: "We are against the state where 1-2% are "classy" oligarchs.
It's like in a Soviet period joke, when somebody says from the rostrum:
"We live very well and will live still better." The audience cries out:
"And we?" And Mr. Filenko proposed to define the problem of today's choice
as follows: "Here's a leather-clad Communist commissar with a gun on the
one side, and a pistol-armed gangster on the other. And you're told to
choose. This is about the red and other menaces." Mr. Filenko once told
split-up Rukh: "You are not alone in your grief. We've got the same problems.
And there is a certain logic in trying to burn the Right flank to ashes."

The government is not sure it is safe. And then the advent of a fourth
Cabinet during Mr. Kuchma's rule will bring to life, among other things,
the rabbi's question of whether the right Jew was circumcised. That is,
if each government under Mr. Kuchma only worsens our life, the problem
is in Mr. Kuchma, not the government. But, in addition, some sources close
to the administration claim that a certain clan will be steadily bringing
home to the President that he has no chances and should himself decide
in favor of Verkhovna Rada Speaker Tkachenko. They will make it clear to
the President that "if he participates in the elections, he will not be
elected and it will be very sad for the President himself and his team,
so the alternative to Mr. Moroz is Mr. Kuchma's non-participation in the
elections. Besides, Mr. Tkachenko will be at hand, guaranteeing Mr. Kuchma
everything - from a new and finished dacha to honorary status and everything
that will ensure a trouble-free life for the now former President."

And here comes (in advance or in reply?) the staggering ranking of Ms.
Vitrenko who promises him safe haven, forgetting how fervently the PSPU
supported Mr. Tkachenko.

In this connection, Mr. Matviyenko's and his colleagues' appeal to unite
under the motto "Ukraine in danger!" is more than relevant. Moreover, NDP
political leaders do not rule out that, if the Zlahoda association, to
which they belong "to democratically influence the process," does not fulfill
"its declared mission of saving Ukraine," this may necessitate the creation
of an alternative "consisting of the forces which really love Ukraine."

INCIDENTALLY

One Hromada faction leader Oleksandr YELIASHKEVYCH called upon
the People's Democratic Party not to nominate Mr. Kuchma as presidential
candidate at the autumn 1999 elections. Speaking in Parliament last Thursday,
Mr. Yeliashkevych noted that the President "is conducting his presidential
campaign not because he really wants to become president for the second
time to improve the life in this country; he has to do so for want of any
other option: either he and his entourage will be subject to prosecution
for violations of law, or they will manage to evade responsibility by playing
to the electorate and distracting them from issues of principle." Mr. Yeliashkevych
is also convinced that the elections will be fixed in favor of the current
President. He also thinks it necessary to consider in the nearest future
a range of issues connected with the Constitutional Court which, in his
words, "is in fact being used by the President as a parallel branch of
legislative authority in order to push through the Court what will fail
in Parliament." The Hromada member also suggested moving the Constitutional
Court headquarters to Kharkiv, Interfax-Ukraine reports.

 

Rubric: