“The Communist Party was bought and tamed in the Kuchma era”

August 22, 1991, saw the end of the so-called August Putsch, when the State of Emergency Committee (GKChP), established a few days before, ceased to exist. The past 21 years have been a historic period for the post-Soviet space, including Ukraine which gained independence three days later. It was the time when the foundations of a Ukrainian state began to be laid. Ukraine formed its first and perhaps the best national parliament, for which parliamentarianism is not an empty phrase. What happened further on and why is it that now, 21 years after the last and abortive attempt of the GKChP to retain the communist system, the Communist Party of Ukraine steadily overcomes the five-percent election barrier and the Verkhovna Rada votes for anti-Ukrainian laws? It is the topic of a Day interview with Levko LUKIANENKO, member of the first-convocation parliament.

“The first Verkhovna Rada consisted of deputies who lived off their wages only, but still financial enrichment was not on their agenda. From this angle, they were closer to ordinary people. We rode the wave of universal enthusiasm and elation caused by developments not only in Ukraine, but also throughout the world: a huge space – in Europe, Russia, and post-communist states – was changing. People were nursing hopes for the better, taking an active part in rallies, marches, etc. Ukraine was in turmoil all around.

“However, Moscow communist decided to take revenge and stem the tide of national liberation movements in the USSR by setting up the GKChP. As a result, this speeded up the proclamation of Ukraine as an independent state. December 1, 1991, saw a referendum on the Act of Independence as well as the first presidential elections. This touched off a wave of the recognition of Ukraine by other states, which raised the public mood: the state was at last on the same level with the world’s independent countries.

“The active part of the people achieved their goal – Ukraine was proclaimed an independent state. People no longer needed to travel to Kyiv from various regions in order to hold rallies in support of patriots (national democrats). 1992 was the year when privatization laws began to be made. Parliament continued to work by an arithmetic formula: the side that has more votes will have its version of laws approved. The national democratic forces found themselves in the minority. They kept proposing amendments and debating, but the majority-backed bills were usually voted into law.

“As the privatization began, the communists turned into owners. In the Kuchma era, the Communist Party was bought and tamed. Meanwhile, the privatization gradually changed to ‘grabatization.’ Factory managers proved unable to manage on their own, without an instruction from those on top about how to distribute resources. The economy was ruined. Life was going worse and worse. This opened the period of disillusionment. Everybody had expected life to improve after the declaration of independence, but things went the other way round. This was caused by objective factors: having proclaimed independence, we were still not strong enough to put an end to administrative occupation.

“The occupation administration, a Soviet-era rudiment brought up in an anti-Ukrainian and pro-Moscow spirit, continued to rule Ukraine. The ruling upper crust was doing its utmost to reduce people to a condition when they will rise up and cry out: ‘Let’s go back under Moscow, for it was better there!’

“The mass media, which had almost never belonged to the people, are also to blame. Before the declaration of independence, Ukraine was the object of ideological brainwashing on the part of the media, but when it became independent, the media went into the private sector. In the hands of oligarchs, they promoted the acquisition and proliferation of false values. All this resulted in the current condition of Ukraine.

“In their turn, the national democratic forces made a grave mistake by refusing to cooperate with President Leonid Kravchuk. If the Rukh had become a force for the head of state to rely upon, Ukraine would have developed differently. Kravchuk had to seek support in the milieu from which he himself came out – the communist milieu which had already begun to turn into criminal bands and oligarchic groups and plunder the economic potential of Ukraine.

“The national democratic idea was reduced from a theoretical level to that of practical politics. Well before Lazarenko, embezzlers used to steal money and remit it abroad in the hope of fleeing there if they had to face a prison term here. However, the case of Lazarenko, who remitted money to an offshore area but ended up in prison when he went abroad, was a lesson for others. The oligarchs chose to form political parties and go to parliament in order to guarantee their freedoms and protect their own business by political means. All the newly-formed non-ideological parties were intended to lobby the business interests of the people who are guided by material interests in their everyday life. The top governmental officials compete with one another not for being able to offer the best theory or ideological concept but for being able to have a more expensive watch, suit, or shoes. The degradation of the ideological upper crust has resulted in the rivalry of money bags.”