Does Ukraine deserve such politicians?

It would seem that all sides have agreed: parliament will be disbanded, and the elections will be held on Sept. 30. Be that as it may, political feuds are gaining momentum.

The devil himself would be stumped by this legislative conundrum. By now everyone is as confused as can be: is the Verkhovna Rada legitimate or not? The well- known lawyer Serhii Vlasenko maintains that the Constitution of Ukraine (Article 81, Paragraph 5) states that the Verkhovna Rada’s powers terminate immediately after MPs resign by submitting a written declaration. That is to say, the Verkhovna Rada of the fifth convocation does not exist anymore — with or without presidential edicts.

But who says that agreements or laws have any significance whatsoever for our politicians? The country may be agitated, its international image may be going down the drain, but all they are preoccupied with is prolonging their political life for another month and sitting in the warm speaker’s chair or their seats a little while longer. The worst thing is that we are going to witness these political spats until the elections and, most probably, after Sept. 30.

WE ASKED THE DAY’S REGIONAL EXPERTS: What thoughts and feelings do politicians evoke in you?

Mykola VASKIV, Associate Professor, Department of the Theory and History of Journalism and Ukrainian Literature, Kamianets-Podilsky State University:

“The majority of Ukrainian political figures can hardly be called “our politicians.” This is not so much because a significant proportion of them are patent or covert lobbyists of other countries’ interests. The main reason for their “alien” status is that they are anything but representatives and advocates of our interests. Whether the majority or the proportional voting system is used in the elections has no effect on the status quo. Politicians strive for power primarily in order to resolve their own problems-primarily financial ones, of course. That is why MPs switching from factions losing power to richer factions that are closer to the government have become a common occurrence.

“Here is another feature of our current political circles. In the 1990s politicians were more naive, practically dilettantes, but they were more open, sincere, and even more honest (if this term is applicable here) in stating their views and aspirations (rightwing, leftwing, financial, cultural, and others).

By now they have mastered, almost without exception, the art of rhetoric and the skill of formulating smart phrases that they use to convince others that their every move is dictated by the interests of Ukraine and its people, democratic values, and strict adherence to the law. You can continue this time-honored series of political cliches however you like.

“But this verbiage conceals the fact that politicians today are even greedier and more unscrupulous and insolent than in the 1990s. It is interesting to observe how communists engage in rhetoric that targets the lower social strata while at the same time they ride around in their luxurious imported cars, wear suits worth several thousand dollars, and own enviable personal property and real estate. Or take a look at the members of the so-called crisis coalition: they are doing everything possible to hinder Ukraine’s entry into the WTO and NATO, and, hence, the EU. They are making an all-out effort to push the country toward the Common Economic Space, but as soon as they smell trouble they start shouting in unison about European democratic values, rush to PACE as the highest arbiter, and begin intimidating Europe by trying to show how seemingly undemocratic their opponents are.

“The rivals of these politicians are not much better. I believe that people will not be terribly surprised when one of the “democratic” politicians deserts his former fellow party members, like Oleksandr Lavrynovych or Taras Chornovil. (Oleksandr Moroz, of course, beat them all by far.) Politicians of the older school inherited from Soviet times the dubious art of double-dealing and putting flowery rhetoric on a sorry business. There is only a handful of individuals who have not gone through the Communist Party and Komsomol nomenklatura school, which raised so-called advocates of people’s interests (Soviet-era cliches: “The bloc of communists and the unaffiliated,” “The people and the party are one,” etc.)

“That is why I don’t have a special liking for any of the old-time politicians. The only exception in recent days is Viktor Yushchenko-I finally want to refer to him as “my president” (in the spirit of his “my nation”). If he continues to demonstrate the same resolve, persistence, principled position, and consistency in his actions, he will truly be a president with a capital P. If, on the contrary, he fails, my personal disappointment as well as that of most Ukrainians will be enormous.

“The political circles in today’s Ukraine desperately need an infusion of new blood. Unfortunately, the same old deck of political figures is being reshuffled over and over again. A recent confirmation was the appointment of Ivan Pliushch as secretary of the National Security and Defense Council. I remember an April Fools’ Day joke that I heard on one of our TV channels: both the Orange and the Blue-and-White camps are going to hire political old-timers, including Viktor Medvedchuk, to work in the President’s Secretariat. There were quite a few viewers who took this news absolutely seriously. Not a bit surprised, they started assessing future prospects for both these camps. But who knows, this situation may be for the better because sometimes in their Jesuitical craftiness and weaving of the verbal cobweb young politicians go much further than their older colleagues. Yurii Miroshnyshenko is someone to watch: since 2004, with appealing sincerity and eyebrows arched in a surge of noble impulse, he has been trying to prove his impartiality and objectivity; or take the unbribable Vladyslav Kaskiv.

“There have been several pleasant exceptions in recent years-Arsenii Yatseniuk’s entry into great politics, for one. Yurii Lutsenko, with all his pluses and minuses, can still win people’s sympathies. Mykola Katerynchuk’s principled stance also commands respect. In a word, there are quite a few young politicians who can be entrusted with the future of the country. However, two questions arise: will they be given an opportunity to shape Ukraine’s future? Will they fall victim, like their older colleagues, to the temptations of power, money, politicking, and populism?”

Stepan SMOLIAK, Lviv-based attorney and president of a charity foundation for legal reforms and human rights advocacy:

“Quite a few of the cases that I have worked on recently are connected to property conflicts involving Members of Parliament-not always directly, but through their close aides or numerous relatives. Nevertheless, their presence has always been clearly felt. Whether they took Carpathian land away from its owners (a popular topic today) or “distributed” municipal land, in both cases they looked ugly. Therefore, I have grave doubts about whether you can respect and trust parliamentarians-they, however, consider themselves true politicians.

“Not long ago I was leafing through the pages of my favorite writer Schwebel and each time as I read his thoughts I would smile bitterly in agreement-they are all applicable to us and provide food for thought for us and an incentive to formulate conclusions: “The glory of some of today’s politicians is the curse of the next generations.” “Politicians are the kind of people who may not be forgiven anything, not even when they don’t know what they are doing.”

“We may not forgive politicians their actions, especially when they act with malice and adopt decisions that have a negative impact on individuals or the entire country. Therefore, before launching the elections, we need to change the relevant legislation and cancel the list-based practice of nominating candidates for MPs. We need to introduce criteria for holding MPs responsible for their actions. While they are in office they are supposed to serve people rather than their own pockets, like they are doing now. Then the words of politicians and MPs will not leave a bad taste in the mouths of ordinary people. All this damages Ukraine more than it may appear at first glance: distrust of the state, which is caused by such ruling politicians, lasts for years and turns into distrust of all government institutions.

“Unfortunately, certain theories of social development rule out the possibility of speedy development in countries where this is the case. A positive result may be obtained only through a civic agreement across the board. A top-down one will fail because in our case it will be loaded with corruption and the basic thievishness of both government structures and politicians lobbying for their businesses. We have to do some really deep thinking about this.”

Oleksandr IVANOV, political scientist (Donetsk):

“Ukraine has unique types of typical politicians. Without running through the whole gamut, let me mention the main two. The first type is a fat cat. These businessmen are not very interested in the intricacies of political dealings. They are content to have their needs and interests satisfied from time to time, whenever necessary. Irrespective of the political force with which they entered the Verkhovna Rada, and no matter who issued an edict or regulation about their appointment to an office, their self-seeking interest dominates over the necessity to work for the people.

“The second type is not abundantly represented but is more familiar to the average citizen. These politicians are the so-called “hawks,” big and small. They are capable (at least that’s what they think) of influencing the masses by their rhetoric (compliments of the mass media). They have almost no money, as compared with the first type, but they possess the valuable traits of seasoned political activists.

“Both types need each other like they need air. They are the yin and yang of Ukrainian politics. The first type provides the financing, while the second type has a high rating that brings both groups to power. Whatever the arrangement, their common or parallel activity is of very little benefit.

“The majority of Ukrainian politicians have one peculiar quality: a lack of strategic thinking coupled with immense laziness in setting goals and tasks. For example, in the 16th year of Ukraine’s independence, in the 21st century, some representatives of the two groups have not stopped playing their little games, like “raising salaries and pensions by 20 hryvnias.” Of course, systemic economic reforms are sometimes discussed, but words fail to translate into concrete accomplishments. As a result, after a while Ukraine may find itself among agrarian exporters rather than in the company of countries with highly developed financial, transportation, and information markets. But these politicians are busy with other things, like privatizing Ukrtelekom.

And now the most unpleasant thing: no matter what kind of politicians we have, good or bad, they are a mirror image of the problems of Ukrainian society. We elected them not because there is no better alternative, but because the country and its people have not yet raised individuals worthy of pursuing urgent reforms and transformations. When the next generation comes to power in 15 years, Ukraine will have a new caste of politicians capable of concrete actions rather than just empty speeches.

“Ukrainian politicians are not, of course, the cream of the crop but each and every contemporary society, no matter how developed, must have state political machinery. We simply need to understand and sharpen our civic responsibility for everything that is or is not taking place in our country. After all, this is our country and these politicians are its official representatives.”