By Roman KHYMYCH, The Day
I recently had a rare opportunity to watch all week long the work of one
of Ukraine's best-known politicians, chairman of the parliamentary Committee
for Social Policies and Labor Yevhen Marchuk during his working visit to
the Donetsk basin. It is an open secret that Mr. Marchuk attracts much
attention and his figure has for many years been shrouded in a cloud of
rumor and speculation.
One can best explain the most general impression Mr. Marchuk made on
me in terms of the Oriental calendar. He was born in the year of the snake.
Oriental tradition vests the snake with a powerful intellect and colossal
self-restraint. Taken together, they are manifested as wisdom which bestows
unlimited power on the one who has it. A typical picture looks approximately
as follows: having neatly coiled up his richly decorated body, the boa
(we are only going to speak about the boa) lies motionless, keeping an
indifferent unblinking gaze at a new visitor. You can come up, shout, and
knock at the glass barrier: all this will leave him totally unimpressed,
not because the boa is lazy or stupid. He has simply studied his territory
very well and is well aware of an invisible obstacle that separates him
from us. You are inaccessible and, hence, uninteresting. A rat, chucked
into the glass cage, scurries around in a businesslike manner, sniffing
about, and showing off: look, we've seen even worse.
Suddenly, something changes. The rat begins to rush frantically. The
boa turns his head toward the rat, fixing on it his merciless stare. The
rat squeals in desperation, jumps like an acrobat a meter or so up. No
chance! A lightning lunge, and the only thing left of the self-confident
rodent is its bare pink tail. Everything is finished in a few minutes.
The boa again lies motionless, watching quietly the contortions of a new
onlooker. And now imagine the same, but this time without the cage.
Actually, the attitude of our political beau monde toward Mr.
Marchuk reminds me of just such a zoo. The vociferous and self-confident
monkeys who populate our menagerie are genuinely surprised to see somebody
who thinks it unnecessary to jump and scream like they do. Encountering
such a really powerful and strong-minded personality as Mr. Marchuk, they
either shut up in deference or, climbing still higher, begin to let out
shrill screams. True, Mr. Marchuk does not race around and try to get into
a camera lens over and over again. So what? Does he need it that much?
THE POLITICIAN
Mr. Marchuk's attitude to political activity may be expressed as follows:
a politician must work and, hence, make and follow up on concrete decisions.
A politician unable to do so must leave this field of activity. He thinks
that television cameras are by far the greatest evil in the current Parliament,
for they completely deprive some lawmakers of the ability to think judiciously
and work constructively. In his words, work in the committees is as fruitful
as the sessions are devoid of content. One cannot work effectively in an
overly politicized Parliament. What makes him go on numerous tours of the
country is the desire to hear for himself, without intermediaries, any
remarks about and any criticism of his committee.
It would be wrong to reprove Mr. Marchuk for the amorphous nature of
his views. Even those who reproach him for using populist rhetoric admit
that any Ukrainian politician, who seeks truly broad support, is literally
forced to say what an audience wants to hear. The point is most of Ukrainians
have forgotten how to listen. Very indicative in this respect was the meeting
with Makiyivka Steel Plant workers. I was first stunned with the workers'
aggressive mood. "I expect nothing. I've come to see what he will say,"
the workers answered me bluntly when asked what they expected from the
meeting. Taking advantage of the manager's presence, one of them finally
blurted out to Mr. Marchuk, "You are talking about the responsibility of
factory managers for wage arrears. We have never received our wages on
time for six months. And how are you going to change anything, I wonder?"
The audience hummed in approval. The manager blew up. He reminded the listeners
that out of almost 11,000 of those working at the plant only a third at
most were filling orders, that the plant management knowingly does not
resort to lockouts to enable people to keep body and soul together in a
city without any jobs left. The worker sat down and, dissatisfied, grumbled
something. He was apparently not interested in explanations. What he needed
was wages - no matter where from. In principle, this is a question to the
President, but Mr. Marchuk reminded the workers the reasons why steel mills
get into a vicious circle. Although some of them have been incorporated
and others are still state-run, they all face absolutely the same problems.
Products have been shipped and not yet paid for, but taxes have already
been charged. The state, like a giant vacuum cleaner, sucks out the current
assets of enterprises, thus starting a stream of mutual non-payments. The
National Bank artificially limits the amount of money that services the
economy, thus depriving enterprises of credit resources. A rapid way out
of the crisis is no longer possible, he reiterated, but the situation can
and must be rectified.
The day before, a trade union militant, who spoke after Mr. Marchuk,
was interrupted by a sudden dispute. An old man sitting in the second row
began to complain out loud: "What the hell is he telling me?! I know this
only too well! What is he talking about?!," but he was hushed up by other
listeners; so the old man, flushed with indignation, left the hall. Answering
my questions, he said he was Mykola Zinin, 71, he had worked in a mine
for 42 years, first underground and then in the office. He was indignant
because he had believed nobody for a long time. "They just blather on.
There isn't any of this; there isn't any of that - I'm bored hearing this.
I like Marchuk much more, he is far more interesting. We have to break,
yes, break all those flourishing thieves!" Unfortunately, each only craves
for his own share and nothing else.
The most interesting and purposeful, if I may say so, meeting took place
at the Donetsk Tochmash plant. A shop steward, the production planning
manager, chief accountant, and the economist - the enterprise's elite -
rose one by one and asked specific clear-cut questions: "How can production
go up if the discount rate of commercial banks is 64-66%? Why does the
government make no effort to propagate national products? How can we restore
our crippled industry?" Mr. Marchuk gave equally clear-cut and convincing
answers with apparent satisfaction (he likes to have knowledgeable interlocutors!).
We cannot ride out the crisis without restoring the domestic market. The
latter, in turn, requires certain protectionist measures. If the government
lobbied for the AvtoZAZ-Daewoo project, it must do its utmost to encourage
demand for their products. Otherwise, it is not clear why the consumer
should suffer severe limitations. The policy of the strict limitation of
the money supply pursued by the NBU has obviously become a goal in itself,
or, to be more exact, a method to achieve the principal goal of the current
executive to receive a new IMF handout. He also spoke in detail about the
glaring examples of irresponsibility and unpunished misdeeds of local and
central authorities found by the Auditing Chamber and about a bitter resistance
of the presidential structures to the adoption of an Auditing Chamber law.
Mr. Marchuk thinks that the main question - "Where shall we get money?"
- can only be settled by an effective and stringent control over budget
expenditures. The meeting applauded him.
All asked about the Yugoslavia crisis. This also gave Mr. Marchuk a
chance to express his own views on this difficult and knotty problem. I
will note at once: there were no ambiguities, no smoke screens or political
fireworks. Yes, the actions of Milosevic led to genuine slaughter, and
this is a crime. Yes, NATO's massive military involvement in Yugoslavia
is also a crime. And these two things do not contradict each other. The
trouble is that bombings cannot stop ethnic cleansing, they are, at best,
senseless bloodshed. At worst, they show that the true motives of the alliance
and its leader, the US, are very far from their declared noble goals and
mean a desire to snub the world community and its institutions. "NATO has
bombed out the UN," thus thinks one of Ukraine's most experienced politicians.
Verkhovna Rada's hysterical reaction only causes him to grin bitterly.
"The Tax Code is waiting, the Civil Code is waiting, the law on trade unions
is waiting. They have long been ready for debate in session, but, instead,
the deputies debate whether or not Ukraine should become a nuclear power.
What nonsense! Ukraine has never been a nuclear power. All nuclear arms
were under Moscow's direct command. It is impossible for a poor country
to create its own arsenal. Moreover, we must ask: which oblast will be
the nuclear testing ground? Which oblast will be the site of a launch pad?"
Mr. Marchuk's political credo boils down to the need for Ukraine to
build a foreign policy of its own, oriented only toward its own interests.
Although Ukraine is poor and clearly dependent on the constellation of
external forces, it should not follow blindly in the wake of anyone else's
policy. Answering a head-on question if there are politicians in Ukraine
prepared for this complex game, for maneuvering between the main actors
of world politics and, after all, for intrigues, he said, "There are people
like this. Minister of Foreign Affairs Borys Tarasiuk is a capable and
highly qualified person. The trip to Slovenia which I admit was 99% his
initiative is a very successful step to save Ukraine's face. The Ministry
of Foreign Affairs and other places have a great many educated and qualified
people; many young talented people have come from our institutions of higher
education. The problem is that diplomats can only carry out instructions
from their superiors."
A distinctive feature of Marchuk as a politician that at once drew my
attention was his politeness toward his counterparts in Parliament irrespective
of their political leanings. Other members of the committee he heads happened
to be in Donetsk at the same time: chairman of the Trade Union Federation
of Ukraine Oleksandr Stoyan and head of Donetsk trade unions Vasyl Khara.
Mr. Marchuk found time for each of them, inviting them to his rally and
allowing them to speak. When, at the end of his fiery speech, Mr. Khara
issued quite an interesting call, "In the elections, each should vote as
his conscience dictates. But I'll tell you this: we must all vote (a slight
pause) against Kuchma!," the audience burst out laughing and applauding.
The chairman of the Committee for Social Policy and Labor has absolutely
nothing to hide from his colleagues. Mr. Marchuk often repeats that the
committee also includes representatives of the Communists, Socialists and
Rukh who work very well. Mr. Marchuk mentions with exceptional respect
all those who demonstrate in practice their interest in solving the most
intricate problems. This does not refer to the parties which, pursuing
the narrowly selfish interests of their leaders, give preference to "financial,"
"oil," and other fat-cat committees. I gained the impression that Mr. Marchuk
cannot forgive the affluent their explicit contempt for such "uninteresting"
things as social security for the underprivileged.
I will say frankly that sometimes I think Mr. Marchuk overdoes it. He
may not wear a Hollywood-style smile. He may not exude a radiant self-centered
optimism the way the first president did. And let him not try. I suspect
his image-makers offer him a dubious benefit, imposing on him a somewhat
non-organic image. To my mind, a Capital front page with the motto of "quiet
strength" does not convey his essence properly. It is not strength but
might. And not so quiet as latent. Indeed, an iron fist in a velvet glove.
THE GENERAL
Like it or not, Mr. Marchuk is, above all, a general for a large section
of people. Thank God! He is the only first-rank politician who can immediately
be called a fighter, always composed, vigilant, and prepared to face any
hardship. It is not aggressiveness, it is actually readiness for a serious
clash. A quality quite to the liking of those already sick and tired of
the drab and utterly faceless "European-type leaders."
Most of those who gathered at the former Donetsk Oblast Trade Union
Council were entrepreneurs, intellectuals (teachers, journalists, and engineers),
and medium- and higher-level civil servants. They willingly applauded and
laughed. After the meeting, the chief of the local branch of the League
of Small and Private Business People handed Mr. Marchuk the Inspectors'
Logbook No. 1001 and cried out solemnly: "Mr. Marchuk, We will not let
you be bossed around! We are ready to fight for our rights. Rely on us."
Anatoly Andreyev from Artemivsk, a 52-year-old activist of this league,
tried to express the general mood after the meeting: "What does the most
active segment of voters want? A firm hand. An economically liberal, but
rather strict, leader. Liberalism in the economy would appeal to entrepreneurs,
to those who do and earn something. On the other hand, there are also pensioners
who remember well the situation in the times of their youth. This combination,
perhaps not so severe as in the case of Pinochet, would be very popular."
This is why I cannot agree that the future presidential candidate Marchuk
has no electorate of his own. It exists, and it is a high-quality segment
of voters. Incidentally, Mr. Marchuk does not complain, either, about lack
of attention from regional elites. Wherever he appeared, well-respected
local citizens always found the time and desire to show Mr. Marchuk their
esteem.
It is interesting that Mr. Marchuk himself does not care for Pinochet.
The "economic miracle," for which many are ready to condone any crimes,
only started almost ten years after the military junta came to power, when
a US team of economists came to the fore. Harsh reprisals that claimed
thousands of human lives is also unprofessional.
Speaking of General Marchuk, one must remember that he is a special
general. The army aims to destroy the enemy at all costs. The security
services are different in their specifics. The adversary has to be outwitted
and outplayed. What is required of one to make a career in a security agency
is the ability to go with his best foot forward. By the way, it is utterly
wrong to accuse Mr. Marchuk of having nothing to demonstrate to his electorate.
What about the Security Service of Ukraine set up under his guidance? Is
it not enough? Could you try to make your way (in intelligence) up from
a junior operative to the State Security Committee chairman, of all places,
in Ukraine, the second Soviet republic? If it comes to this, what did other
presidents lead in Soviet times? A Party committee? A collective farm?
A factory?
Military service is based on a very simple principle: the loser should
be punished. Incompetence is revealed very fast and should be punished
equally fast. This is exactly what the current leadership of the country
lack, when they make such crass statements as "people who come to the government
require some time to look around and understand the mechanics of what is
going on. You cannot demand perfection from them." If you so lack pity,
experiment on dogs, not people!
According to Mr. Marchuk, his sympathies lie with Charles de Gaulle
and Tunisian President Ben Ali. The former appeals to him with his high
political culture. Enjoying tremendous authority and wide powers, de Gaulle
did not try to suppress the opposition, reiterating, "The opposition is
also French. And I am President of the whole French people." Having lost
his political battle in 1968, de Gaulle resigned. He went with dignity
and a clear understanding that his time had passed. Ben Ali showed a resolute
and consistent policy, turning a stagnant country with a decayed political
system into a dynamic society in the course of a few years, and again without
putting down his political opposition, the local Islamic fundamentalists.
THE PERSON
Marchuk the man does not much differ from Marchuk the politician and
Marchuk the general. Even in private conversations not for publication
among intimates, I was happy to witness, Mr. Marchuk demonstrated extraordinary
correctness. He speaks of his political opponents (he never says "enemies")
approximately like this: Natalia Vitrenko is a clever and brilliant lady,
a talented politician. He carefully characterizes the specific humor of
Speaker Tkachenko as "salty." He himself never resorts to obscenities and
the four-letter words with which so many representatives of our "elite"
like to enrich their already butchered language. It is very significant
when a true leader remains so everywhere and always. A person who loses
face due to failures or not-so-pleasant questions and is unable to hold
back his anger or fear does not deserve to be called a leader. Even if
he bears the highest title. Ask The Day's Tetiana Korobova.
Reserved and affable, Mr. Marchuk does not overbear an interlocutor,
aptly demonstrating interest and respect in conversation. He seems averse
to displaying anger or irritation. One of the few things that can really
make him lose his temper is the horrible, unthinkable, condition of the
old, disabled, impoverished, and downtrodden, betrayed and sold out by
the state. You cannot look calmly at the old women who attended the meetings
unable to say a word: they only sobbed quietly, for they could not bear
the horrors of dire poverty. Mr. Marchuk admits that what most depresses
him is when people demand nothing for themselves but only ask if there
is hope for their children and grandchildren.
During a visit to the Donetsk oblast veterans' hospital, he asked journalists
and his retinue not to go with him to the wards of the disabled in order
not to cause the latter any new spiritual traumas. Later on, during a meeting
in the assembly hall, old men and women with chests decorated with a host
of war medals would rise one by one and ask over and over again: how did
it happen that the liberators and toilers, those who lived through the
hell of war and the exhausting years of rebuilding a totally ruined country,
are now rummaging in garbage cans? Mr. Marchuk listened silently and attentively,
without interrupting. Then, at a proper moment, he raised a hand and quietly
told the senior citizens: "I am very well aware of your problems. My father
fought in the infantry of the Third Ukrainian Front from June 23, he was
happy to remain alive but was wounded three times, taken prisoner twice
and shell-shocked! He could barely reach his home in September, not May,
of 1945. Wounded and exhausted, he, like other veterans, took part in rehabilitating
the country and then died of his wounds."
"I only hope he makes it," a lady veteran next to me kept whispering.
His looks and accent leave no doubts: he, like all of us, is part of
the common people, the same, but not quite. In a country where restraint
is replaced with aloofness and freedom with license, where a top official
who speaks at least one foreign language evokes delight, Mr. Marchuk demonstrates
what is known as leadership, i.e., the ability to be first. Mr. Marchuk
is no better and no worse than other Ukrainian politicians, but he is different.
Paraphrasing a well-known proverb, he speaks, keeps silent, stands, and
sits differently from any of his opponents. And I will say frankly I would
personally like to borrow many things from him.
Donetsk - Makiyivka -
Yenakiyeve - Zaporizhzhia







