Two views of Ukraine

The most recent session of the Diplomatic Club of the Open Ukraine Foundation turned out to be quite out of the ordinary. The US managing Editor of The Financial Times Chrystia Freeland spoke before the Ukrainian diplomats, including three ex-ministers of foreign affairs, the acting Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, an ex-president of Ukraine, a dozen heads of Ukrainian research centers, and journalists.

The fact that Freeland started her journalist career in Ukraine in the early 1990s made the event even more interesting. Ten years ago she was putting questions to many of the politicians present at the session, whereas now the situation has changed. This time she was quizzed, and the questions were complicated: from the causes behind the current world crisis and the ways to overcome it to Washington’s views on Ukraine’s role in meeting the challenges the world is faced with at the moment. “It would be easier for me to interview you,” Freeland admitted, speaking to Ukrainians only in Ukrainian. In her exclusive interview to The Day she shares her impressions of the changes in Ukraine and the Ukrainian mass media and speaks about how the US perceives our country.

Ms. Freeland, how has Ukraine changed since the time you worked here?

“My impression is very superficial. I lived here very long ago, so I apparently have an impression that Ukraine has changed in a positive way. I know that life is hard for people now, so it is not easy for them to understand this. But for me everything is new here: all these boutiques, the way people dress here, life in general, and international ties. When I compare this to the Ukraine I saw in 1988 when I first came here, now it is a country that is very open, friendly, and lively. But I understand that things may not seem so for people who have lost their jobs or money on bank deposits.”

Comparing contemporary politicians and those of the past times, what changes have you noticed?

“Present-day politicians are much more open. I have intentionally emphasized this. I’ve received an impression that the whole society has become much more open. And I think that this is your society’s, rather than politicians’, merit. In my opinion, Ukrainian people have achieved an open society and open politicians. Ukrainians have forced their politicians to speak with society in a more open way. This is a great victory. This was not easy to do.”

In your opinion, what should society to help the world and, in particular, Washington understand what is going on in our country?

“It is difficult for me to answer this question. I left Ukraine a long time ago, and I don’t think that I can really give advice to Ukrainians.”

Can you possibly tell us how Washington and New York, where you are working now, view Ukraine?

“In my opinion, there are two viewpoints concerning Ukraine. On the one hand, there is really an understanding that Ukraine has built a democratic society and a democratic country. And this was not easy to do after difficult historical events. Americans do understand and appreciate this and see what great results Ukraine has achieved.

“On the other hand, there is also an impression (which may be wrong) that Ukraine’s current policy is unclear and difficult to understand. The state’s course is not quite clear to Americans. I think that for people beyond Ukraine, in particular businessmen and politicians, it is hard to assess how Ukraine should be treated, when it is not clear in which direction it is moving. But this may be our fault that we don’t understand what is going on here. However, this opinion does exist.”

Ms. Freeland, I would like to hear your opinion about the Ukrainian mass media. Have they changed in the recent decade?

“I very highly assess the work of Ukrainian journalists. I think the fact that Ukrainian democracy is developing so quickly is partially explained by the active work of the Ukrainian journalists. In my opinion, Ukraine should be really proud of its journalists.”

What Ukrainian newspapers do you read?

“I cannot speak about single publications. Moreover, living in New York, I cannot say that I read anything about Ukraine every day. But I must admit that it is wonderful that the Internet exists, because thanks to it I can obtain information from the primary sources and understand the situation. I can also read the publications of the Ukrainian press. And this is very interesting.”

By the way, our newspaper has an English-language digest. In your opinion, how important is it for Ukraine to have English-language publications?

“I think this may be very helpful. I would answer this question from an economic point of view. As an editor, thinking about what The Financial Times should do, I first and foremost think about what the audience wants. It is worth publishing English-language newspapers if you have an English-speaking audience, because this is economic goods. It would be nice for Ukraine if a part of its press were published in English, because, unfortunately, Ukrainian is not spoken in the entire world.”

Ms. Freeland, what prospects do you see for your periodical, considering the difficulties that the world press is facing? Some US publications are closing, reducing their pressrun, or cutting their personnel.

“This economic and financial crisis is affecting our publication in the same way as the others. I think that The Financial Times is a newspaper that will come out of the crisis in a stronger position, because our niche fits the world’s needs very well now. Our niche is international finance and politics. These questions pique interest. At the same time many newspapers pay less attention to this topic because they simply don’t have enough resources for this.”

In your opinion, is the Internet a threat to the printed press in general and your newspaper in particular?

“The Internet shows an obvious tendency to spread. Nonetheless, printed newspapers will continue to exist.”