Duma Does Not Have to Deliberate for Ukraine

Diplomatically speaking, the Russian Duma acted in an unexpected manner the very next day after ratifying the SES agreement with Ukraine, adopting a message to Verkhovna Rada, expressing concern over the memorandum of understanding between Ukraine and NATO, as well as the National Television and Radio Council’s recommendations to the effect that television and radio broadcasts be only in the Ukrainian language. The document stresses that the Duma deputies are “perplexed by Verkhovna Rada’s ratification of the Ukraine-NATO memorandum of understanding, it being another practical arrangement relating to NATO eastward movement plans... The attempts to administratively crowd out or ban the Russian language in Ukraine, a language that has for centuries served as a means of interethnic communication on the territories of our countries, ignore the Ukrainian- Russian bilingual tradition that took shape there, and damage civil rights in Ukraine, deserving criticism on the part of responsible Ukrainian politicians.” Below are Ukrainian deputies’ commentaries on the Duma’s message. It should be noted, however, that the Russian Duma has created a questionable information background for the Russian President who began a two-day visit to Ukraine, April 22.

Leonid KRAVCHUK (SDPU{O}):

I am constantly surprised by the Russian Duma’s stand. Now they are busy dealing with Sevastopol, then the Crimea, then Tuzla. This time they decided to recommend what kind of policy we have with regard to NATO and the official language. If we acted that way, in the same imperial spirit, we would supply them with a number of observations and admonitions. To our credit, we do no such things. We respect the Russian state and its stand. No one forbids the Russian language in Ukraine, it’s just that we would rather hear Ukrainian on the national channels. We’ve heard so much, for so long about some seventy-five percent songs being sung here in languages other than Ukrainian, that Russian is the only language spoken in the Ukrainian sports world, let alone the unfortunate condition of Ukrainian book-publishing. There are spheres of life where you almost never hear Ukrainian. It got so that we only see and hear Alla Pugacheva and Filip Kirkorov at the Ukraine Palace. Yet the instant someone tries to raise this matter, there are shouts about pressure, that such matters must be resolved only on a voluntary basis. We have our laws, our constitution. It is clearly laid down that the official Ukrainian language must be used in official places, such as the Verkhovna Rada, Cabinet of Ministers, Presidential Administration, local authorities. Daily usage is another matter. No one makes you speak Ukrainian at home, in the kitchen, having tea or sharing drinks with friends. You know English? Welcome to use it. Or French, German, Russian. That’s your private business. But on official premises, in offices, you can’t do as you wish, otherwise why enact all those laws, why proclaim that Ukrainian is the official language? I am firmly of the opinion that the Russian Duma should not really bother deliberating things for Ukraine. I can only describe their current stand as a manifestation of foreign political primitivism and provincialism, for they apparently consider their strategic neighbor part of their sphere of influence. We have people and structures entitled to make decisions, and we shall conduct the kind of domestic policy we deem necessary, a policy answering the national interests of Ukraine and the foreign political concept, including the European choice and the law on Ukrainian as the official language.

Mykola ZHULYNSKY (Our Ukraine):

We are witness to the Russian Duma’s constant attempts to teach us what kind of domestic policy we should carry out. Ukraine must focus on consolidating Ukrainian society in the first place. The language is an important consolidating factor. Our highest priority is to establish the status of Ukrainian as the official language. We must consider ways to introduce Ukrainian as the official language of instruction in school, college, and university, also in the latter-day technologies, so the Ukrainian people can finally have access to our nation’s books and radio... SES is apparently a tool, with which Russia wants to take a firm hold of Ukraine, not only economically, but also politically. Their attempt to prove that Ukraine is upsetting the Ukrainian-Russian bilingual harmony is a bottomless argument, for there is actually no such harmony; Ukraine is dominated by the Russian language and this dominance is clearly apparent. The Duma’s current stand is nothing new. In 1995, the then President Boris Yeltsin signed a document relating to Russia’s policy with regard to the CIS countries. It reads that Russian television and radio must be extended to the countries in Russia’s immediate neighborhood, that Russian publications must be supported, and that Russian must train cadre for the CIS countries. What’s the difference between these clauses and the policy waged by the late Soviet Union? Practically none. However, the current Duma’s statement is like when your neighbor visits to tell you that the pieces of your furniture are in the wrong places, that your lamp shade is the wrong color, that you should rearrange your potted flowers, and finally, that you’re speaking the wrong language, that you must communicate with him in the language your neighbor uses at home. I don’t think that any parliament, in any civilized country, would deem it possible to respond to the domestic situation in a neighboring country the way the Russian Parliament did. It’s now perfectly clear why Russia needs that single economic space. As a basis on which to restore the Soviet Union. We know from history that the treaty forming the USSR was preceded by Russia’s economic policy strongly reminiscent of today’s. Ukraine’s only alternative is NATO and EU membership, the sooner the better, so we can rid ourselves of Moscow’s offhand interferences.

Serhiy SHEVCHUK (NDP):

The Russian Duma formed only recently. They are faced with many domestic and foreign polici problems, so I was amazed at the speed with which the Duma responded to Ukraine’s foreign economic and domestic strategic initiatives, the more so that Ukraine has long worked to carry them out and made no secret of them. We believe that we are on the right path, moving in the direction of European and Euro- Atlantic integration. Our parliament supported the initiatives of the Ministry of Defense and the political leadership with a majority of votes; therefore, this statement of the Russian Duma can be regarded as a delicate (so far) interference into Ukrainian internal affairs. Needless to say, it will have a sequel, but I think it won’t be successful, that our parliament and the political leadership will not alter the course proclaimed by the president in his message, and laid down in other strategic documents.

As for the language, on my way to parliament, I’d tuned my car radio in to a dozen FM stations and heard Ukrainian on one or two. The rest were in Russian. Meaning that Russia is just trying to add fuel to the fire. Russia should better consider securing millions of ethnic Ukrainians their rights the way the Russians in Ukraine have them. Otherwise it is a brutally asymmetrical approach to the language issue and we must reject it.

Borys OLIYNYK (CPU):

The Russian Duma can’t tell us what to do, and we don’t censor their decisions. I have personally opposed and will continue to oppose Ukraine’s NATO membership, for I have witnessed them in action when I got under their bomb raid in Kosovo. Yet I stress that the resolution of our parliament is an expression of will of a sovereign country.

Volodymyr HOSHOVSKY (People’s Choice Groups of People’s Deputies):

This is evidence of not only the expansion of Russian capital in Ukraine, but also Russia’s interference in Ukrainian political affairs. This is not admissible. I think that the Duma had no right to come out with such statements if Russia really wants to have neighborly relations with Ukraine. But if Russia has other objectives in mind, any citizen of Ukraine, whatever his attitude toward Russian politics, will say mind to your own business. Of course, this statement will infuriate the Ukrainian Parliament.

Stepan KHMARA (BYuT):

This is flagrant interference in Ukrainian internal affairs. I wish our parliamentary majority had made the proper conclusions and revised their attitude toward SES. Russia is impudently mounting pressure on Ukraine, already openly meddling in our affairs. I think that our Foreign Ministry must forward a stern note in response to the Russian Duma’s statement, and the Ukrainian Parliament should, of course, show its reaction.