On the «Wise Airs» of Ukrainian Politics

Tetiana KOROBOVA, «Oleksandr TKACHENKO : ‘I am pleased that my opponent is the President himself, and he must also feel good',» The Day, No. 30.

A showpiece interview of a political figure with sincerity on both parts, pointed questions, and witty answers. The Verkhovna Rada speaker brilliantly showed himself not only as a maximalist (he even recalled the Tatar-Mongol invasion and a Pravda article on himself) but also as a master of aphorism («to be good is not a profession») and psychological portraits (the example of Leonid Kuchma, whose conflict-ridden personality Mr. Tkachenko painted so successfully and thoroughly).

Even though Mr. Tkachenko's utterances may not always be completely correct and at times even boastful, I think it is he who could put agriculture in order, for he has great managerial experience in this sec n policy he would pursue.

A brilliant interview by a journalist with our speaker! I am aware that «we all come from the common people,» but Mr. Tkachenko has had time to get into shape among the Party nomenklatura, which included quite a few intelligent and broad-minded people. They had an unlimited access to world intellect, for I remember feeling unbridled envy at a neighbor of mine who was on the district party committee staff and had a world literature library against the backdrop of the overall deficit of books. But this did not happen to Mr. Tkachenko: this was vividly d st have added some intellect so that this person was not smothered in the mockery of readers. This impression resembles the one I felt watching «Women's Stories» (Inter) dealing with Liudmyla Kuchma and her crowned husband. The whole world saw the so-called khokhly (abusive term for Ukrainians — Ed. ), their grayness and wretchedness. Compared to the Ukrainian President, any provincial Russian governor looks like an Oxford or Sorbonne graduate. And this interview with Mr. Tkachenko adds a touch to the general picture of Ukrainian politicians. It is just terrible! Maybe one must indeed change the people who elect such dim helmsmen.

In this interview, Mr. Tkachenko at last expressed what he had harbored so long. It turned out that his friendship with the President was only a political game Mr. Tkachenko played until he was registered as presidential candidate. His close cooperation with the Communist and Socialist Parties before being elected Verkhovna Rada Chairman and the last phrase in this interview («Did you ever hear me say I am going to build socialism?») show that he holds no firm political views and only dreams of the top office.

I personally liked very much Ms. Korobova's bold, somewhat good-humored, but correct in principle advice: «Don't put on the airs of a wise man, Mr. Tkachenko, this guise spoils you, go easy and people will like you.» All politicians should heed this advice. One must be sincere, simple, and easily understood by the audience: this is the guarantee of a politician's success. Ms. Korobova's carefully-worded questions forced Mr. Tkachenko to raise, if only partially, the curtain over the so-called court intrigues and show the true face of our President and his violence against the Ukrainian people. Yes, Mr. Tkachenko will never perish from excess modesty. There is so much self-advertising in his answers. The people of Ukraine know him as an outstanding manager, an able organizer, but I think he, as a politician, is at the level of the late Nikita Khrushchev who could thumb his nose at anybody. Mr. Tkachenko would be ideal in the post of prime minister, given his active position-taking, broad thinking, and a peasant-like grasp of things. A president should be a more restrained and refined politician, a more modest and at the same time wiser and more resolute person who puts the national interests before his own. The one who best fits this post at this historical moment is Yevhen Marchuk.

The interview is very interesting and readable, the questions are meaningful and the conclusions are correct, for example, that Mr. Tkachenko will never perish from excessive modesty.» In all probability, in such hard times, when the state is on the verge of collapse, one should praise himself in precisely this way, so that people make the right choice in the pre-election situation and elect a worthy president who would give all his effort, health, and experience to save Ukraine.

PS. As is known, this interview was also taken to heart by President Kuchma, which he announced in the «7 Days» program (UT-1) on August 15. (— Ed.)

James MACE, «Freedom of Libel or Libel of Freedom,» The Day, No. 30

This article traces the making of the freedom of the press in the US. The article's main provisions are as follows:

- freedom and licentiousness are different things;

- freedom has its bounds;

- freedom has to be won;

- an official suing a newspaper can only be compensated for moral losses if he/she manages to prove the journalist's bias and malice or absolute indifference to whether the information is true or false.

This is an article on the history of the development of democracy and freedom of speech in the US. It is very instructive. But you become to feel very sad after reading it, for you see how much we are lagging behind them. The level of the freedom of speech in this country is still that of England's American colonies in the eighteenth century.

Mr. Kuchma declares he is building a democratic state. But I only see pro-Kuchma publications on sale, the only copy of The Day on sale being put aside for me by the seller. When I switch on the television in the evening and watch the news on all the channels, I also see nothing but the «non-alternative» personality. I ask people who they are going to vote for and hear in reply: for Kuchma. Why? But who else is there? We see and hear only him. This is the freedom of information, Kuchma style, in a «democratic» society. I wish there were more publications like this. And the Kuchma team should learn the procedure of installing the freedom of speech, otherwise they will have people see through things and strike a blow powerful enough to reverberate in the forests.

James Mace's article draws attention with its deep analysis and interesting comparative approach, which strikingly harmonize with a brilliant title and a very witty illustration. I was especially attracted by the author's opinion that concord in an open society is a myth, and changes are triggered by conflicts (symbolically, it is the word «harmony» that is most often bandied about by the entourage of a President who thinks «people do want change»). I share Mr. Mace's opinion: «Ukraine has every chance to be no worse, albeit different.»

Volodymyr ZOLOTARIOV, «Why Do We Fail in Everything?» The Day, No. 29

The author shows the way the totalitarian past is dragging into the grave all the new things that are being or might have been born in this country.

The article's drawback is that the author tries to complicate and make pseudoscientific even some simple things. This makes it difficult to read. But, as a whole, the article is very useful.

An absolutely original coverage of a problem urgent for all post-totalitarian countries: the building of civil society. The article slightly lacks a scholarly and systematic approach, but, on the other hand, is rich in fresh generalizations and observations... It is essentially a quality piece of popular-science political journalism dealing with our pressing issues. I think this is The Day's hobby horse. The newspaper's future lies in this very direction.

Jerzy Bahr: «The number of problems depends on the distance from the ‘hit point'», The Day, No. 31

I would like to complement with the following points:

1. The Poles were extraordinarily lucky to have Lech Walesa as president: I think he is the example of a sacrificing and wise patriotic president. What we have is just the opposite: as people say, raking everything in and being a bull in a china shop as far as foreign policy is concerned.

2. In the early 1990s Ukrainians took to Poland various goods to sell for a song, thus investing more than one billion in its economy. At that time, a Polish pensioner could eat and clothe himself quite well on 30 dollars thanks to their nearby Ukrainians, Belarusians, and Russians.

3. Private property in Poland allowed one to feel oneself responsible. In contrast, people were in bondage in this country, especially in agriculture. This shows how we lag behind the Poles by a whole epoch.

See page CULTURE