Yes, Marchuk!

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