“Gia’s assassination is the direct consequence of the policies from the times of Leonid Kuchma’s rule”

It has been two weeks since the Prosecutor General’s office initiated criminal proceedings against Leonid Kuchma. What do you think of the investigation so far? What can you make out of the public statements made by the people involved in it?

“It’s hard for me to evaluate the course of the investigation because I don’t know what kinds of questions they have asked the people whom they summoned for interrogations. I’m convinced that they let us know only what they want us to hear. Nevertheless, I am still worried that the investigation, judging by all the public statements, has not taken any critical measures which might help shed light on this and other crimes which, as Melnychenko’s tapes say, were committed during Kuchma’s term in office as president.

“The Prosecutor General has still not instituted criminal proceedings concerning the hushing up of Heorhii’s murder during all the four years of Kuchma’s presidency. I can’t see that they are trying to find out the real causes of Kravchenko’s death, either. Without these two inquests, which I believe to be critical in this case, it will be very difficult to evaluate the true extent of the guilt of ex-president Kuchma. If the investigation were interested in the objective disclosure of facts, half of Ukraine’s political figures would be staying in the country on recognizance and attending the prosecutor’s office on a daily basis.”

The mixed coverage of Kuchma’s case in the Ukrainian media shows that it’s necessary to analyze the entire system of factors which eventually resulted in the tragedy. All these problems are important in the context of the round table discussion which is to take place in Washington, D.C., on April 7, where the problems of Ukrainian journalism will be discussed. Is such a discussion possible outside the framework of the “Gongadze case” and the “Kuchma case”? What do you think the main problems of Ukrainian journalism are?

“The main problem of Ukrainian journalism is the direct dependence of the media on politics and the disregard for the basic principles of journalism by both media owners and journalists. Besides, and we have to openly admit it, it’s the insufficient professional training of our journalists.

“Unfortunately, during the years of Yushchenko’s presidency, when we enjoyed a relative freedom of the press, we failed to create stable and effective mass media. The media in Ukraine still remain a tool of influence in the hands of oligarchs and politicians rather than a means of information for citizens and, after all, just a business. Of course there are decent periodicals and good journalists, but they are too few. For a nation of 46  million it’s virtually nothing.”

The other day the former State Security Major Melnychenko said in an interview to the Internet agency Obozrevatel, “I did not vote for Yanukovych, and I really had not expected that during President Yanukovych’s rule a criminal case would be brought against Kuchma.” The “Kuchma case,” apparently, is not just about the condemnation of the ex-president, but also about the process of cleansing Ukraine, conscious or not on the part of the leadership. Does Ukraine (and our social and political life) have a chance for cleansing under the present circumstances? What can and must journalism do for it to happen?

“I see the initiation of criminal proceedings against Kuchma as a chance for the cleansing of the Ukrainian political sphere. The professional work of the prosecutor’s office is of primary importance for this. A strict observance of laws is crucial in this process.

“What journalists should do is just cover the facts, rather than keep describing their impressions about these facts. The authorial viewpoint is always explicit in the materials written by Ukrainian journalists. Do our journalists believe the people to be as stupid as to be incapable of making inferences? This craving for propaganda is deeply rooted in our subconscious. Personally I have been trying to get rid of it for 10 years already. This is the way we were brought up, and, unfortunately, are still being brought up at Ukrainian universities.

“If I could, I would make every Ukrainian journalist watch BBC, listen to NPR, and read The Guardian, The New York Times, or The Economist. As far as the case itself is concerned, I hope that Viktor Yanukovych does want to bring to a logical end this story, by convicting everyone implicated in it. Only in this case does he have a chance to make history not only as a person who is busy consolidating power and finance in every legal and illegal way, but as one who gave Ukraine a chance for purification.”

The opposition proved unprepared to support the regime’s initiative concerning bringing an end to the Gongadze case. Besides, in his interviews the journalist Oleksii Podolsky has put up a certain standard for politicians, as he has been consistently struggling for years for justice and against Kuchma’s regime. Is Kuchma’s case a challenge for the politicians?

“They have been using this case to manipulate people for a decade now. An entire generation of Ukrainian politicians have built their careers and made their fortunes on this case. Meanwhile, the voices of about half of them are recorded on Melnychenko’s tapes. This case really reveals who is who in Ukrainian politics.

“The institution of proceedings against Kuchma has become for Ukraine something like the publishing of the correspondence of the US diplomats by WikiLeaks. Many of those politicians who voice their skepticism about the possible progress in the investigation of this case are in fact voicing their fears concerning their position in politics.

“Sadly, it turns out that few care about the truth in this case. But, as Vaclav Havel once said, ‘If you don’t give full freedom to the truth, freedom won’t be full. There are times when we have to unearth the root of the secret in order to understand the truth…’ Today is precisely such a time for Ukraine. Only the truth will make us free.”

The other day Alexander Rahr, a German political scientists, said, “In the West, no one will mention the ‘cassette scandal.’ Kuchma is no Milosevic. No one wants to see him behind the bars. For several years now I have taken part in conferences in Ukraine, where Kuchma also has taken part, sitting next to people like Bill Clinton, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, or top leaders of the EU. And they would have never agreed to sit down at the same table with him, or come to those conferences, if there had been something to it.” What does this phrase by the German political scientist reveal? And what can you say about the response of the West to the “Kuchma case”?

“Such a reaction can reveal both his own political motivation for voicing this kind of opinion and his dependence, perhaps, even financial. I have never heard any similar statements from other Western analysts besides Rahr. The people I have spoken with here, in the US, welcome this turn of events and hope that the case will be brought to the desirable conclusion.

“Concerning people sitting at the same table with Kuchma – Rahr knows better than I do how much this sort of friendship and recognition costs. Unfortunately, the world is run by money and interests. The rehabilitation of the ex-president’s image has cost his son-in-law more than one million dollars already. The question remains, however, if you can whitewash your conscience — if you have one, of course.”

You have already commented on the statement made by Hanna Herman, who tried to defend Kuchma. But this kind of response is offered not only by certain politicians, but also by a considerable proportion of Ukraine’s society: people tend to feel sorry for Kuchma, and at the same time they cannot evaluate his contribution to what is going on in the country today. How can you account for this? What challenges does society face in relation to this case?

“During his years in power, Kuchma succeeded in building an oligarchic, corrupt Ukraine. He consolidated the system of post-Soviet thinking and acting. That is why today Ukraine is so hopelessly dragging behind, without any progress towards consolidating democratic values. In Kuchma’s time, everything sound in society was oppressed and destroyed. Gia’s assassination and the very Gongadze case were the direct consequence of this policy.

“Today our mission — and that’s where I include journalists as well — is to make this case a starting point for the purification of this society. I believe that healthy forces in Ukraine prevail over destructive ones. Ours is the truth, and God is with us, and that is why we are doomed to win, even if we have nothing more left.”