• Українська
  • Русский
  • English
Where there is no law, but every man does what is right in his own eyes, there is the least of real liberty
Henry M. Robert

Yuliya Tymoshenko: “I prefer the national costume in politics, Dolce & Gabbana in everyday life”

13 November, 2012 - 00:00

Yuliya Tymoshenko

The Day recently played host to one of Ukraine’s best-known women and People’s Deputies, Yuliya Tymoshenko. She made her name at the helm of the Unified Energy Systems of Ukraine. It was also then that she was first suspected of being a figurehead, and not without reason. As a Deputy the same charge resurfaced. Finally, she made her party choice and people started questioning her independence. Her speech as a candidate for the Speaker’s post was quite independent, perhaps too much so, because many now consider Hromada’s internal differences a political maneuver. Be it as it may, she has become a celebrity, a status which no normal woman would shun.

The Day: There is an old anecdote about a Pentagon general and a State Department official returning from an inspection trip to Vietnam and reporting to the President. After listening them out the President asks, “Gentlemen, are you sure you were talking about the same country?” Considering that you and Mr. Lazarenko respond to the current situation differently, are you sure that you belong to the same party?

Y.T.: I have always tried to distinguish between big-time politics and high fashion. I am not impressed to hear about the need for impeachment and firing the Cabinet, and then about all political issues being of minor importance compared to the economic problems. Then the tables are turned again. First we wear red clothes then change for a variety of colors, then for green, and so on. Honestly, I am not at all impressed with all this. I think that a genuine leader must be different from a politico by not accepting the form of the vessel from which he drinks but shaping it himself, following a course corresponding to reality. In other words, one must wear a certain set of clothes in politics, without changing it. In this sense I prefer the national costume in politics and Dolce & Gabbana for everyday wear.

The Day: Such different opinions cannot coexist within a single party for long. We have all seen what the usual outcome is like. What do you think?

Y.T.: It will perhaps sound banal, but history shows that the old truths are forgotten first. I mean that evolution emerges from the struggle of opposites. For Hromada the appearance of a swamp of yes-men would indicate the beginning of the party’s end.

The Day: If a party’s candidate Speaker makes a statement which is publicly criticized by that party’s leader the very next day, one can hardly describe that party’s atmosphere as a healthy one. Internal party differences are possible in terms of big-time strategy or small-time tactics, but don’t you think that there must be no differences with regard to specific pressing political issues?

Y.T.: No, not in our case. Our party has small-time tactics and a big-time strategy. And this is our party’s advantage. Not all the other parties have it. Let me tell you this: whatever we do fits into the pattern of our carefully balanced strategy. Today I am prepared to repeat my speech in Parliament, every word of it. I cannot bring myself to discard my own views...

In every process of normal evolution where there is unity and struggle, strength wins, and strength is something eternal. It has a great many components, and everything depends upon whom at a given historical moment can take this force and truly realize its potential. This is a far cry from intrigue.

The Day: How do you personally feel about the government’s indulgence for another month, most likely till the end of the Parliament session?

Y.T.: You know, I am no longer satisfied with this rash decision. There is a certain legally established procedure. We should have considered the possibility of the Cabinet’s legitimate retirement at this stage first and raised the matter later. Really, I am not pleased about having this subject broached before electing the Speaker and before making this retirement quite objective. As for the retirement, it is an axiom and I don’t consider it worth discussing any further.

The Day: Stepping down the rostrum Mr. Pustovoitenko looked almost euphoric. He seemed extremely pleased by the decision. Was he really?

Y.T.: Under the circumstances perhaps every day is important in its own way, because the government has no strategic goals. More often than not their conduct is best described as self-congratulatory – morally, by doing what they believe increases their popularity, and materially, by setting up and lobbying their structures. Personally, I think that this decision does not do the Premier any credit, because he is only too well aware of the situation in Ukraine and prolonging his agony in his post is inhumane.

The Day: Two questions, if you please. First, how one should regard the multistage retirement of the Lazarenko Cabinet in view of the present circumstances? Second, who will be the next in line after Mr. Pustovoitenko retires?

Y.T.: We are faced with the need to form a new government. However, forming it in the current legal medium – I mean using the current Constitution and other laws governing the Cabinet – is simply impossible. Under the Constitution, the President has the right to shape the government single-handedly. He is unable to do this properly and nor will he allow others to do this for him. I think that Parliament should muster the courage to form a coalition government, but only after properly amending the Constitution, and I mean amendments worked out and coordinated between the four factions. These amendments should boil down to the creation of a parliamentary republic and coalition Cabinet, placing the political and economic spheres under more or less collective control.

The Day: Do you believe that after what Mr. Lazarenko has gone through his return as Prime Minister would be probable and advisable?

Y.T.: I think that our country needs more than one doctor. It needs a resuscitation crew and Mr. Lazarenko could well act as its leader.

The Day: You are right in one thing, to have good administrators the road to these posts should be a long one. But what about you? Your premiership was instant...

Y.T.: We are talking about the shadow government...

The Day: Never mind. If your group of factions – the Left and Hromada – win and form a coalition government, the shadow Premier would be the most likely replacement for the old one. Have you considered the possibility?

Y.T.: I am for a coalition government, but I am seriously concerned about what could result from such a compromise. We have examples. The Constitution in the first place. If the coalition government turns out as underdeveloped as the Constitution, there is no sense starting in the first place. I will not mention any names in this government, because this is subject to political bargaining. What I want above all is for this bargaining to retain common sense.

The Day: If not Premier, then perhaps one of the ministers. Would you?

Y.T.: I would join the government under the circumstances. First, because the current Cabinet calls for no assessment, because there is nothing rational about it. There are different cabinets, people’s confidence, coalitions... but what we have is a national shame. This, knowing how to set things right, I would be willing to give it a try. You see, doing business in Ukraine today means wasting one’s time. I mean it is very hard to get down to business without putting the working conditions in order.

The Day: Are we to understand that a shadow government was formed even when Mr. Lazarenko was Prime Minister?

Y.T.: That’s right. It was a small group busy with what was then the most important problem, working out a concept of tax reform.

The Day: Suppose we get back to the time when you were not actively in politics. Is Unified Energy Systems of Ukraine still in the natural gas market? If so, do you have any stock or some of your people in this company?

Y.T.: All such questions should be addressed to the company management. I am a People’s Deputy, not a member of the UESU board. This company can be discussed in whatever way, but the fact remains that it is Ukraine’s only commercial structure to have proved that big business is possible here, and that it can be done with an eye to the national interests. A lot has been said about Mr. Lazarenko allegedly lobbying for this corporation. Take a look at today’s gas market. Isn’t anyone lobbying for someone or otherwise helping someone? The kind of lobbying we have there now would not have been dreamed of by our corporation. And the result? Perfectly incompetent organization and a billion and a half dollars owed Russia. Now my question: Is everything decided by lobbying these days? Normal cooperation with the government sounds reasonable, but it is important to remember who can do what and how effectively.

The Day: In the West, the situation is different, because business cooperates with the government in the sense that convenient rules are made for business, regardless of its origin. In Ukraine, it is providing advantages for certain companies, as was the case with UESU. Do you agree?

Y.T.: I am now perhaps the most outspoken exponent of precisely such rules as can provide equal opportunities for all market operators. I also think that UESU would be able to endure any type of fair competition.

The Day: You said “now.” Was that accidental?

Y.T.: I said that I am for equal rules and I think that now, as well as previously, when Mr. Lazarenko was Premier, this corporation was and remains a structure capable of enduring any competition. To say that there was no competition at the time would be wrong. It’s just that the corporation proved the strongest on the market and did it using fair play, as evidenced by subsequent events.

The Day: This sounds good, but it is also true that “free competition” on the gas market during Mr. Lazarenko’s premiership was often accompanied by shoot-outs using automatic weapons...

Y.T.: I have no such information. I know nothing about murders in any way connected with gas market redistribution.

The Day: You said that people donated money to your party’s campaign fund because they supported your ideas. All things considered, NDP is your main rival. Also, considering the tension, your party and the one in power hold polarized views. So what is the principal difference between Hromada’s program and that of NDP?

Y.T.: I think that writing a program is just the first step. The difference between the programs is that all NDP can do is write programs and Hromada can write one and carry it out. I suggest that you read the NDP one and check it against what has actually been done by the Cabinet – which is also NDP. You will notice the difference immediately.

The Day: Suppose NDP starts carrying out its program, would you support it?

Y.T.: Economics and politics are based on a simple thing known as national interests. To defend them, one must have the means. I think that the people in power, even if aware of the national interests, cannot defend them for some reason or another. Normal countries, negotiating certain issues, proceed from their respective interests. In the case of Ukraine, the overall impression is that all talks are centered on defending the throne occupied by a single person. And this throne is defended at all costs.

The Day: Your point could be accepted conceptually, but would you kindly mention specific steps taken by the Ukrainian side to the detriment of the national interests, for the sake of a single person?

Y.T.: There are quite enough examples. We surrender major and minor positions. But I wouldn’t want to exacerbate the matter...

The Day: Say, when did you realize you would take up politics? Was it at the institute?

Y.T.: I did not care for politics one way or the other, but somehow I was always in the lead. A born leader, you know. I took up politics when politics got to me. There is one thing about Ukrainian politics I find confusing. Judging from the performance of certain leaders it appears that going back on one’s word is a supreme political skill...

The Day: Indeed, as evidenced by the kind of reliability Hromada displayed when Kravchuk was put to the vote...

Y.T.: I want to change things, so nothing like that will ever happen again.

 

Rubric: