With or Without Kuchma

I must confess that I read with some dismay George Soros’s March 1 letter in The Financial Times, calling on President Kuchma to step down in favor of the premier pending an investigation of what is called the cassette scandal here. First, this is naive: Mr. Yushchenko has his post because the West insisted on it, and those here with the clout to decide who will get the top spot are not in his camp. Secondly, this whole sorry affair could drag on endlessly. The International Press Institute statement, shamelessly mistranslated into Ukrainian by “three professors” under the guidance of Serhiy Holovaty, said that they could not confirm whether the cassette with the president talking about the late journalist is accurate or tampered with. This means we are likely to wind up with the old Scottish verdict of “not proven.” Third, and this will take a little explanation, the problem is not persons, whether we like them or not, but the process and the system itself.

I have a friend who runs Mr. Soros’s International Renaissance Foundation, and I might just know a bit better than most precisely how much George Soros has done to promote the development of civil society in Ukraine. I also have some friends in the cabinet and Verkhovna Rada who are trying to do the right thing and, more importantly, have some understanding of what the right thing is. However, in the absence of well developed institutions of civil society, that is, the absence of something to counter it, public opinion can be manipulated in virtually any way those with the levers to do so might please. Moreover, in the real world politics is not about knowing what should be done and doing it; it is about navigating within the framework of those with the power and influence to allow or not allow something to happen. I have argued long ago that the problem in Ukraine is the structure of such power and influence, and I also read with fear and loathing the prediction that the Belarus option is quite possible for Ukraine. It is. I said so when I first coined the phrase in 1994. Thus, I want to close with a word of friendly advice for the philanthropist who has done more here than anyone to try to help create the structures of civil society without which representative self-government cannot work, if only because without them there is nothing out there to represent. Focus on structure, not individuals, not even the head of state, for structure is what matters here. Ukraine without Kuchma the way it runs these days would be no better than with him. The problem is not who did what but why such things can be done at all.