in Ukraine (and Russia)
Trend 1. The President reaffirms his status as the only
subject of power, just to make sure.
No, I do not mean his extraordinary message to Parliament. In fact,
the firing of the Ukrainian National Television Company's President drew
much keener and longer attention in the media and among politicians than
the message and the budget bill put together (a significant fact in itself,
showing that people can tell really important issues when they see them).
Getting channels and periodicals under control appears the most arresting
game for the President's team these days, being regarded as an effective
means of reasserting oneself and stressing one's role in the next election
campaign. Looking back at Messrs. Yeltsin's and Kuchma's campaigns, it
is not difficult to believe that a second term in office can be obtained
without too much trouble, just by using the right election techniques.
Whether they will parrot Lisovsky's or Chubais's stratagems or will come
up with a brand new Ukrainian version is not that important. One feels
strongly tempted to make the coming elections yet another computer game.
Someone makes promises that everyone knows will never be kept and others
make no promises at all, as if admitting that they will not lift a finger
to reach any lofty goals.
Of course, no one is deceiving the electorate. It is just an imagemaking
move. And the electorate either knows or can guess it. Statistics in the
poll carried by The Day are graphic evidence of the Ukrainian people's
fatalism: 50% believe a falsified result in the next election quite possible;
19% are certain of it. In other words, for want of anything better, the
voters accept the existing rules for a game that could be called "candidate
and his quarry." But even if it were a computer game, it seems worth remembering
that 1994 the people voted for a lean truth-seeking man with thinning hair
and now it takes some effort to find in this stately person, a bit on the
heavy side, that painful sensitivity toward the long-suffering people.
To return to the main thing, no matter what they say, it is not the
entourage that influences the President but the President who selects people
to form his entourage. In this sense the competition between his two aides,
the present and the former one, turned out lost by the present, now former
one. The latter is still a lawmaker and presidential adviser. It is anyone's
guess what tipped the scales: Mr. Syvkovych's slackening influence victimizing
Mr. Kniazhytsky or the latter's actions being used to rock the first Presidential
aide's boat. In such cases the usual clichО is, "The contenders should
not lose heart." The show goes on. Ihor Bakai is believed to have invented
an excellent formula for presidential favorites when describing in vivid
detail the competence and agility of those who got a sheriff's star and
power over a certain territory. Now seems the right time to hunt for such
stars in the key industries - natural gas, oil, and power -
as well as in the privatization and banking spheres. And in the media.
This is how "administrative resources" are collected. It is also true,
however, that in a year or eighteen months every such sheriff may well
find himself in bad odor with the President, as evidenced by the entire
history of Mr. Kuchma's entourage. Of his 1994 team perhaps only Messrs.
Horbulin and Ryzhov plus the newly "reinstated" Volkov are still there.
The life of the elect is rich in inner and outer conflicts. Those who
failed to get the lucky numbers are already crowding outside eager to get
in. The competition is mind-boggling and the rules are very tough. However,
the President proves an eager spectator. The important thing is not who
wins but what he presents on a silver platter to the umpire. People can
be shuffled and reshuffled endlessly, but the pattern remains unchanged.
He who brings more to the altar will get the laurels.
Who says there is no power center in Ukraine? Perhaps there is no political
will, but there is the President's will and a very tangible one. He can
and does control the alignment of influence groups, programming their movement
vectors. It is not some mythical elite groups' but the President's interests
that form and balance those of all the influence groups put together. They
all move in the channel of the President's personal interests. Not some
group's but his and his alone.
It gets so that one starts having doubts about all those jostling influence
groups being able to determine their own strategic interests in politics
without constantly looking back at the Guarantor of the Constitution. Probably
what we have is not an elite but some precursor of an elite formation in
a state of political infantilism. Let us leave the issue open for the time
being.
Trend 2. "We need a state resolute and flexible, capable of serving
the interests of the broadest masses and implementing the will of the ruling
class."
This concept does not originate from Ukraine. Lev Chernoi, a Russian
oligarch not very much in the media limelight, thus commented on his strategic
objectives in the Komsomolskaya Pravda (November 19). The man is
known to be especially active in the iron and steel industry. It was his
second appearance in the press, causing quite some reverberations in the
Russian beau monde. What made the situation unusual was that Mr.
Chernoi had never before made any political moves. The reason I quoted
him is that this statement sounds more "strategic" than, say, our President's
message to Parliament, the more so that both were made public the same
day. Anyone who cared could compare and draw conclusions.
To begin with, Mr. Chernoi considers himself a member of the ruling
class and declares its complete and unconditional responsibility for the
country before the nation and history. In fact, capitalists turn into the
ruling class only when putting forth a historic project supported by the
people. In his words, there are two conflicting approaches: holding and
strengthening power or "being parasitic on the budget and going through
the motions of doing something, the way it was until August 17, 1998."
Those adopting the latter approach are not in power, they just pretend
to have it and this pretense is short-lived. Once their pockets are full
and bulging, they will take to their heels and vanish somewhere overseas,
leaving real capitalists to struggle to resuscitate Russia. These real
big-time capitalists must form an alliance and reach an understanding with
those staying in power, skipping the subject of what comes first, capital
or power. Both are equally important. And this does not mean ruling with
an iron hand. "Authoritarianism in Russia will bring not order but chaos."
This means an inter-class agreement which must be made before a mass revolt
destroys everything and everybody. Summing it all up: "Gentlemen, time
to grow up!"
In short, Mr. Chernoi wants big capital to have the right to participate
in the decision-making process, reasoning that there is a positive program
to modernize the state. His concepts are provided here because everything
he says fully applies to Ukraine. Yes, a people has the kind of government
it deserves. We know it, but only that people can say so, not those who
consider themselves the ruling class. Regarding oneself as something thrown
up the voters' attitudes is delirium.
The dynamism of Russian politics following the August 17 crisis is perfectly
justified by the acuteness of the situation. They are getting ready for
elections. But look at how different these preparations are in Russia and
Ukraine. While they are struggling to work out an ideology of state building,
we are still fighting for sheriff's stars.
Trend 3. The Greens as an indicator of attitudes widespread in
Parliament.
The Greens in the Verkhovna Rada have once again attested to their straightforwardness.
This time Ihor Kyriushyn, with a young politician's charming directness,
told about how his colleague Mr. Khmelnytsky voiced last week what worries
many portfolio-seeking Solons. According to him, the Greens are prepared
to enter the Cabinet, because "the Premier is now surrounded by people
not his own" (Great! In other words "his people" are to be found among
the Greens!), subject to the condition, however, that they retain their
lawmaker status. Smart, isn't it? That's what they are all worried about.
There is obviously something the authors of the Constitution and Law on
People's Deputies overlooked. Something which every interested observer
will notice almost instantly. But to quote on, "...we want insurance...
The only thing an ex-minister or deputy premier can expect is criminal
investigation." What is this? An assessment of business performance or
the way the country thanks its best sons for their selfless service? Or
maybe it is a normal reaction, remembering that one can't be too careful?
By Olha LEN






