“Every one is to blame for our lack of unity , but Viktor Yushchenko bears most of the responsibility for this” — Leonid Kravchuk

In the following exclusive interview with The Day, Leonid Kravchuk explains the tragedy of independent Ukraine.

What is your assessment of the latest upheavals in Kyiv, the coalition, and the general political scene?

“There are many reasons behind these upheavals, as you say. However, the first and main reason is that there is no longer any real, efficient, and responsible government in Ukraine, a government that would wield authority and enjoy people’s respect, and together jointly implement the changes that, unfortunately, are not being introduced at the present time.”

What should be done? Where should one start?

“As you know, I have always followed the philosophy of reaching a compromise, agreement, a coordinated position, and, in general, a peaceful way out of a situation. Peaceful does not mean illegal actions. I am not talking about a real war. A war for me is when the Constitution of Ukraine is violated as well as other laws, when nobody is maintaining order in the country as established by the Constitution and the laws. Therefore my opinion is as follows. The government in power is unable to find a real solution so that Ukraine can stop being a laughing- stock both in the eyes of our people and the international community. Our neighbors, who do not always wish Ukraine well, are exploiting this. Today an opportunity should be given to the leaders to leave the government with dignity. If they have been unable to organize the government (and this is a real fact, I don’t exaggerate), if they haven’t been able to perform their duties, to organize themselves, overcome the crisis and various difficulties, there should be at least a single responsible action. They should leave the government with dignity.”

But in recent years nobody in our country has left their high offices of their own free will. Where should one look for a new link that will open this vicious circle?

“The only way is through elections. Today the mass media provides 80 percent of the information in our country. If the whole press finds the courage to speak the truth and nothing but the truth, no matter what the subject — the president, the prime minister, or parliament — the situation will change. Today I can see many mass media conforming to the government or its closest milieu. Milieu? It is clear that it lives at the expense of its leaders, because in being close to a leader, they are able to buy something, find something, or cut off something. This is a tendency that is typical not just of Ukraine. However, if we don’t tell people that one cannot go on like this, the politicians will always behave the same way and we will be caught in a vicious circle.

“Do you know what the tragedy of our government and Ukraine is? I have never said this, but I will tell you. The tragedy is that it is retired people — people from the past — who have been electing the government for the last 15 or 16 years. We have 15 million people like this. I don’t say that all of them are biased. No. But I know this because I campaigned in the elections and met them. Believe me, they have no understanding of the fact that Ukraine should change its course and march along a civilized path to Europe, that Ukraine should live and act according to the new laws, and that the lifestyle should change. Nobody wants to listen. They have their own vision and philosophy formed over many decades.”

You mean that we should follow the path of evolution? But again, is there any guarantee that young people will be better in terms of their aspirations, desires, patriotism, and political positions? Where are the guarantees?

“There are guarantees. Today there is one problem with young people: they are not voting because they think it’s not necessary, that voting won’t change anything. I tell them: you elect the government for yourself, so elect the government that corresponds to your philosophy, one that will be responsible to you and your children. One cannot be so passive. For example, my bodyguards say frankly that they cannot convince their parents about anything. I tell them that they will never do this because their beliefs have already been formed and cemented. They are accustomed to Lenin being used as an example of modesty, cordiality, and love for the people. This was propaganda, but they were brought up on this, and then they see who surrounds the president, the prime minister, and other state officials, and it is a real tragedy for them. So, they don’t want to vote for this government. They vote either for money or with their emotions.

“However, in reality they want to return to those distant times when there was order and morality, in their opinion. Today there is nothing of the kind. I am deeply convinced that our government and our leaders do not understand that if you are a president, prime minister, or head of the Verkhovna Rada, you cannot be surrounded by people with a bad reputation. This cannot be. This means only one thing: Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas.”

What do you feel when you look at politics and politicians and compare them with the politics and politicians the days when you had an opportunity to make decisions, including ones that were of key importance to the country’s destiny?

“Right after you asked this question, I recalled the words of Ivan Franko: ‘The time has come for Ukraine to live.’ I want to add: the time has come to listen to Franko’s words. But today none of the leaders that we have — both in the ruling government and the opposition — thinks about the fact that they bear Ukraine on his shoulders. They have become so enthusiastic about the fight for seats that they can hardly see anything around them. But tell me, what kind of government is needed to jointly fight corruption, inflation, the rising prices — in a word, to act jointly, and not rub one’s hands quietly over someone’s mistake? Is power needed here? One needs basic honor, dignity, and responsibility to the people. So you can blame anyone you want within your power circles, but it won’t be better for the people, it will be worse.

“People tell me: ‘I support some people and don’t support others.’ But I support only one thing — I want order finally to come to Ukraine. I am very ashamed, frankly speaking, whenever I hear empty conversations, when I hear words and know that they will do everything exactly vice versa. It is impossible to observe this calmly. Who will respect this kind of government? Believe me: I have no hatred for any of them. But I can’t watch everything slip out of their hands. They talk about the unification of Ukraine, but do everything to disunite it. They have found another topic — “Great Ukrainians” — and they discuss it in the Verkhovna Rada.”

Can you comment on the scandal surrounding the “Great Ukrainians”?

“You know, I don’t want to discuss this topic and I will tell you why. First of all, this is not a real analysis but a show. No show ever produces objective results. Second, if people were permitted to make as many calls as they wanted from a single phone number, this means that these were not real votes but simply phone calls. I received letters from different regions of Ukraine, including the following one: ‘Leonid Makarovych, you are involved in this. Tell us what to do, whom to vote for. We know people who sold their votes, and they are now barricaded at home, calling all day in favor of a certain candidate.’ How can one organize anything this way? There should be a principle: one vote — one call. Let them publicize who voted and from what regions — and you will see the picture. However, if we go deeper into this topic, we will show that we can do nothing for this country anymore.”

What did you think when you heard your name and a description of your activity among the Greats? You seemed to be displeased.

“Man can fight and die, but he won’t leave anything after himself besides the desire to fight. Along with that, a man can leave a real result without a saber and a white horse. I am happy that I signed the documents that define the independence of Ukraine. I can say that I headed that process and through joint efforts, including those of the people, we attained the result — an independent state. It is a different topic whether this state is bad or good, but it exists! The state would be good if people who are incapable of governing did not come to power. They have no knowledge, no responsibility, or historical vision that is even the slightest bit forward-looking. I was sitting on that program and thinking, what comparisons can be made here? Yaroslav the Wise left Ukraine after him. This is a criterion for statesmen. Bohdan Khmelnytsky is fair to middling: he fought, but finally Shevchenko gave an assessment of his act with Russia. So, here one should have defined who did what for the state and the people. Fighting to the death is a heroic deed, but it has little result. So I ask myself, recalling Maiakovsky, ‘Who is the most valuable for our mother-fatherland?’

“For example, I have a lot criticism for Kuchma. But tell me, did Kuchma do absolutely nothing for independent Ukraine in 10 years? Yes, there were mistakes, but he maintained Ukraine for 10 years and he passed Ukraine on, not ruins. Why was his name not on the list? I was sitting and thinking about this. But from the very beginning I knew that this was a show, and it would not be a tragedy for me if my name were not on this list because I know that this is a game, a contradiction that somebody needs. But this is not a real assessment.”

What is the reason behind the current government’s problems: it’s not mature enough to govern, cannot govern, or doesn’t want to govern?

“Before I attained the office of the secretary of the Central Committee, I had gone from being a consultant, instructor, inspector, head of a sector, to a head of a department, etc. Afterwards I studied at the Academy of Social Studies for three years. I wrote a thesis, studied management, and after all this I became the secretary of the Central Committee. I don’t want to cast aspersions on anybody, but take any of today’s leaders and you will see their path. I don’t say that they have lived their lives in vain, no. But they did things that do not require independence and everyday responsibility from morning till night. And when a person that has not covered these steppingstones of responsibility in order to reach the highest echelons of power, he or she lives according to the principle of the past, with no understanding of what a fundamental responsibility is, what it means to sit on the historical throne and be responsible for millions of people.

“I have a few observations about the Kyiv mayoral elections. I have received 28 letters and dozens of phone calls. The people around me — my bodyguards and drivers — tell me that people are visiting their parents and offering them money and candies. I have collected 45 reports of such incidents, about which I am telling only you: I won’t go anywhere with them. But when I hear Nalyvaichenko (the head of the SBU — Ed.) saying that he has only 16 facts proving that the votes of Kyiv residents are being bought, I have nothing to say. Everybody in Kyiv is aware of the scale of bribery, but the SBU appear to have only 16 facts. They are only pretending to fight, nothing more. They fight in reality only when it is about an order of the highest leadership.”

Is there a light at the end of the tunnel? Can you see any worthy potential for staffing our government?

“I repeat, the only way out is through elections and elections again. This is, as you say, the light at the end of the tunnel. You know, in the last two and a half years I have performed the role of persuader. I wrote appeals to the president and the prime minister. The Council of Seniors publicized several appeals to the highest leadership of the country. But the situation is growing more acute and is turning into a war. It cannot be like this. The country is being looted. Everything that has not been taken yet is being stolen, and people’s lives are getting worse. Can’t the government understand this and sit down at the table, and together write a general plan that would become the country’s path? The politicians would show their real face and level of responsibility to the Ukrainian people. If this does not happen, elections are the only light at the end of the tunnel, there is no other.”

Do you agree with the statement that people get the government they deserve?

“Of course. It was Hegel who coined this clever phrase, which is very appropriate for our current situation. Yes, we have the government we deserve.”

What is your opinion of the constitutional initiatives? Can a single constitutional denominator be found?

“I will say right off that there won’t be a uniting denominator, if we consider the reality. We should refuse to amend the Constitution by violating the Constitution’s 13th chapter. There are different drafts? Fine. Let them be submitted for consideration to the Verkhovna Rada. Then parliament will vote on the first reading, give it to the Constitutional Court, and it will say whether it’s good or not. If it is, the draft will go back to the Verkhovna Rada and if it gets 300 votes, they will vote for the Constitution. As I see it, this question is very problematic today, and a show is taking place around the Constitution rather than real work. Statements are being made that the Constitution can be submitted to a referendum, bypassing parliament. The Constitution does not provide for this. If somebody wants to submit it, let him do this, but this will be an illegitimate Constitution and the Verkhovna Rada will find 150 votes for appealing to the Constitutional Court with this submission.

“By the way, the Constitutional Court has stated that actions should be strictly carried out within the framework of the acting Constitution. Instead of the constitutional fuss, it would be better to focus on the powers of the acting Constitution, which are more than enough to unite and resolve the questions that have emerged in Ukrainian society. I repeat: there are enough powers. All the rest is chaff.”

Today our statesmen are accusing each other of betraying the national interests. What is your assessment of the government’s defense of Ukraine’s national interests?

“I give it two out of five. You can see what is going on. They have seen our weakness and started to bring claims against Ukraine from each side. Luzhkov came to Sevastopil and you heard what he said there. We know what Ukraine’s foreign ministry did instead of condemning this. Luzhkov declared that what he said was the opinion of the majority of Russians. But, excuse me, should we comply with the Russians’ wishes? There are no mechanisms in international law for returning the Crimea and Sevastopil to Russia. There is a single way to return it: by force and by means of war. If one is fomented, that would dangerous. Why are they fomenting one? They do this because our government is incapable of uniting even on this question.

“Everyone is to blame for our inability to unite, but Viktor Yushchenko bears most of the responsibility for this. He announced early parliamentary elections. The elections took place, but nothing has been done for the next Verkhovna Rada to be efficient. The question thus emerges: who was right — those who said that there was no need for early elections or those who insisted on holding them? That’s the first point.

“Second, a democratic government has been formed. After a while the Presidential Secretariat practically refused to cooperate with the Cabinet of Ministers. Third, the president’s milieu played a role (I know for a fact that the Presidential Secretariat is conducting negotiations with the Party of Regions). Whether the president is aware of this is another question. But when the head of state is wavering between the coalition and the opposition, there can be no order within the country. Such a situation gives signals to our enemies and those who think negatively about Ukraine to act openly and boorishly.

“Therefore, the government does not deserve any positive assessment concerning its defense of national interests because our national interests are not being defended by all the branches of power, for example, Zhvania. I have the same attitude to him as to others. They say that he received his citizenship illegally. Kuchma knew this and closed this topic. Didn’t they know this information on the Maidan in 2004? They did. But at the time they needed Zhvania because he was supplying money and he had acquaintances, he was on the staff, he defended, etc. But once he started to criticize the Presidential Secretariat together with Lutsenko, the question that was submitted by Pukshyn, the deputy head of the Presidential Secretariat, is raised. I am an experienced man, and I think that one can do anything, but to act so cynically, when there are certain laws for friends and other laws for enemies...This is the inability of a person to accept criticism.”

May I ask how you accepted criticism, including from the mass media and opponents, when you were president?

“I never argued with anyone. Even when the members of my milieu gathered during the elections to discuss the criticism by one of the TV channels, I said: if you behave like this, I will fire all of you. Nothing of the kind was ever repeated. At the time there was a newspaper called Koza (The Nanny Goat). There was hardly an issue that did not criticize me. I said that I would not shut down any newspapers, I knew what it was. I have never offended journalists, and I frequently gave interviews. I knew that this was their job and their right to criticize. And the level of criticism depends not only on my political culture but on theirs as well. Let everybody see them criticizing, see what words and arguments they find, how they prove themselves as Ukrainians and responsible journalists. One cannot, I repeat, one cannot build relations from the position of force. This is undemocratic; this means that freedom of speech is in question in our country. We are living in a difficult time, and not everybody has enough strength, will, and intelligence to understand all this and dot all the i’s so that we have democracy, not an illusion of democracy.”

Do you think the political crisis will end after the presidential elections in 2010?

“The response to this question depends on who will be elected president. In this case, under our conditions the subjective factor plays a crucial role. The character, responsibility, and honor of the person who becomes the head of state play a crucial role. If a person with all these qualities is elected (I cannot predict this now because I don’t know who will be running) and if he or she is experienced, ‘caned’ by political life, this will be good for the country. They say that a person who has been caned is worth two that have not. But this person with baggage will be able to say, ‘I devote myself completely to Ukraine.’ But it is too little to say this. One should keep one’s word.”