Triumph of Democracy or “Halloween” On Bankova Street

The radical Ukrainian opposition staged a rally “NATO, Hands Off Ukraine!” while President Yushchenko of Ukraine was visiting Brussels. The “liberation movement” was spearheaded by Natalia Vitrenko and Dmytro Korchynsky, leaders of the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine (PSPU) and the Brotherhood, respectively. These two personalities, as well as Viktor Yanukovych’s ex- campaign manager Taras Chornovil, who joined them, announced at the post-rally press conference that they have begun forming the “people’s opposition,” which will be nothing less than a “part of the worldwide anti-globalization front.”

This ostentatious statement was preceded by a march from the Arsenalna subway station, the traditional marshaling point of Ukrainian left-wing radicals. Everything was done in specific anti-globalization style. At the front of the line marched a motley crew of believers carrying icons, banners, blue ribbons, and bells, followed by a Tavria jalopy with a loudspeaker on top. The loudspeaker blared out rhyming Ukrainian slogans, such as “NATO, catch a grenade,” “NATO is ugly, Ukraine is free,” “Throw a grenade at NATO supporters,” “NATO is worse than the Gestapo,” and one that was addressed to the head of state, “Yushchenko! Suitcase — railway station — America!” As the protesters approached the former Presidential Administration, the odd policeman began to appear. The believers and their “spiritual leader,” a priest carrying the Apocrypha and a bullhorn adorned with a portrait of Yanukovych, were let in with hardly any problems. As for the protesters, the police first tried to stop them near the House with Chimeras but then cleared the way after a brief tussle with the main “combat unit” in the person of Volodymyr Marchenko, the PSPU leader’s trusted lieutenant. Democracy triumphed: just a couple of months ago they would have been stopped at the corner of Bankova and Instytutska Streets, but now the oppositionists settled themselves comfortably on the steps of the Secretariat.

Falling into a ragged line, the resistance fighters froze in solemn poses. “What are we waiting for?” Ms. Vitrenko asked. “Just fetchin’ a mike,” said a bald individual wearing a Brotherhood bandanna. But instead of a microphone, they suddenly saw the president’s first assistant Oleksandr Tretiakov exiting the building without security guards, only accompanied by a dashing young man with the air of a born diplomat. “Where is your permit to hold this rally? Show me the paper!” Mr. Tretiakov demanded. “What permission?” Ms. Vitrenko said in almost genuine surprise. “We are acting in compliance with the Constitution.” But Tretiakov stood his ground, called someone on his cell phone, appealed to the media for help, and the document was finally produced. Mr. Marchenko read it out as soon as the mike was switched on. However, the production of the permit cost the young man with the diplomatic appearance a few punches to the ribs. The protesters thought that he was going to pocket the coveted paper. The government representative listened attentively to the list of organizations allowed to protest near the Secretariat and flew into a rage when he saw that the Brotherhood was missing from the list. But his indignation resulted in no practical actions.

Meanwhile, the protesters’ leaders were trying out their oratorical skills. It turned out that the main danger from Ukraine’s membership in NATO is the need to celebrate Halloween (instead of the traditional Christian holidays); our Security Service is run by a US Army career officer; and Polish farmers are eking out a miserable existence because their country “joined NATO long ago” (!). The speeches were full of words like “morons,” “political impotents,” “toadies,” “freaks,” etc. What caused the greatest ripple was the Russian version of the Orange Revolution’s main slogan, “If we are united, we are invincible” as performed by Vitrenko.

“Why on earth are they so aggressive?” Mr. Tretiakov asked in bewilderment. Indeed, the 150 or so protesters were not peaceful looking by any means, but they did look colorful: well-dressed retired women hoarsely chanting slogans, their peers in plainer clothes, who tried to beat up a pushy granny wearing an orange symbol, teenage skinheads in army boots, elderly gentlemen in pompon-topped hats, holding darned polyethylene bags. Mr. Korchynsky called on this audience to take to the streets again but in much greater numbers. It makes for good television footage, after all.

COMMENTARY

What is this organization all about and what role can it play in the coming parliamentary election campaign?

Volodymyr POLOKHALO, editor-in-chief, journal Politychna dumka [Political Thought]:

“In brief, this kind of opposition has no prospects whatsoever, at least if it depends on its own resources. But as substitute players in the hands of more powerful forces, Vitrenko, Korchynsly and Chornovil may be hoping for something. This was precisely their role during the last presidential elections. Should some mighty ‘masters’ wish to support these people in the next parliamentary elections, they will have some chances, because 3% is an extremely low barrier that can be reached, in principle, even by means of the marginal and lumpenized strata in southern and eastern Ukraine. However, these loudmouthed politicians have no chances of winning more than a tenth of a percent of the electorate. After all, they are classical political stragglers of the post-Soviet epoch.”

Kostiantyn MATVIYENKO, Gardarika Corporation:

“From the standpoint of public interests, neither Korchynsky, nor Vitrenko, nor Chornovil are bearers of ideas that are generally interesting and could resonate with a wide range of voters. In other words, we can honestly say that these politicians became marginalized during the last election campaign and failed to propose any new goals. Their attempt to act as ‘parasites’ on old ‘mothballed’ ideas, be it the official status of the Russian language or rejection of Ukraine’s membership in NATO, is too weak a step to make them worthy ‘sparring partners’ in the eyes of the current leadership. The above-mentioned troika has also failed to generate any new social ideas or objectives.”