Further Evidence that the Presidential Campaign Scenario was Rehearsed in Kyiv?
Hryhory Surkis will not run for the Mayor of Kyiv during the run-off. He also believes that Oleksandr Omelchenko should follow suit, Kievskie Vedomosti reported last Monday.
“I think that I have proved to one and all that no one can break or bully me,” Mr. Surkis declared, adding that “the mayor's seat is not an end in itself for me; no one will ever make Surkis and his team into indifferent onlookers in our beloved city.” He also said that SDPU (U) has quite a few worthy functionaries.
Is one to assume that Hryhory Surkis ran in the elections just to find himself placed second and then prove that the elections were illegitimate? Something must have been at play to alter his stand. Here the starting premise is that, if the President wanted, his part-time consultant Surkis would have never been nominated in the first place.
Oleksandr Lavrynovych disagrees, believing that the President's opinion could not have played the decisive role in changing Mr. Surkis' approach to the elections. He suggests that the man's stand was changed by the course the campaign took. It was “practically the first time he publicly opposed two political groups.” “Far from all enjoyment being X-rayed from all sides,” Mr. Lavrynovych pointed out, adding that this was probably why Hryhory Surkis thought better of getting involved in any other such campaigns. Mykhailo Brodsky, MP, believes that more likely, Mr. Surkis' decision is explained by the fact that “the Omelchenko team showed anti- Semitism during the elections that has had no precedent over the past several years.” Reforms & Order leader Viktor Pynzenyk regards the Vyshgorod Court ruling as a dress rehearsal for the presidential elections. According to Interfax Ukraine, Mr. Pynzenyk finds that, should the current President lose the campaign, events would take a similar course — e.g., declaring the elections illegitimate, leaving Mr. Kuchma in office.
Hryhory Surkis will not run for the Mayor of Kyiv during the run-off. He also believes that Oleksandr Omelchenko should follow suit, Kievskie Vedomosti reported last Monday.
“I think that I have proved to one and all that no one can break or bully me,” Mr. Surkis declared, adding that “the mayor's seat is not an end in itself for me; no one will ever make Surkis and his team into indifferent onlookers in our beloved city.” He also said that SDPU (U) has quite a few worthy functionaries.
Is one to assume that Hryhory Surkis ran in the elections just to find himself placed second and then prove that the elections were illegitimate? Something must have been at play to alter his stand. Here the starting premise is that, if the President wanted, his part-time consultant Surkis would have never been nominated in the first place.
Oleksandr Lavrynovych disagrees, believing that the President's opinion could not have played the decisive role in changing Mr. Surkis' approach to the elections. He suggests that the man's stand was changed by the course the campaign took. It was “practically the first time he publicly opposed two political groups.” “Far from all enjoyment being X-rayed from all sides,” Mr. Lavrynovych pointed out, adding that this was probably why Hryhory Surkis thought better of getting involved in any other such campaigns. Mykhailo Brodsky, MP, believes that more likely, Mr. Surkis' decision is explained by the fact that “the Omelchenko team showed anti- Semitism during the elections that has had no precedent over the past several years.” Reforms & Order leader Viktor Pynzenyk regards the Vyshgorod Court ruling as a dress rehearsal for the presidential elections. According to Interfax Ukraine, Mr. Pynzenyk finds that, should the current President lose the campaign, events would take a similar course — e.g., declaring the elections illegitimate, leaving Mr. Kuchma in office.
Newspaper output №:
№29, (1999)Section
Day After Day
