Mykhailo HORYN:

Mykhailo Horyn, 74, is undoubtedly a unique figure among Ukraine’s current politicians. He is one of the few whom the totalitarian machine of the 1960s and 1980s failed to suppress and who would later stand at the helm of the first national democratic organizations that worked tirelessly for Ukrainian independence. Over the past few years Mr. Horyn has concentrated on his work on the Ukrainian World Coordinating Council, an umbrella organization that unifies our compatriots from the Western and Eastern diasporas. What kind of Ukraine did he struggle for and is now dreaming about? This is the topic of the well-known dissident’s interview with The Day.

A FATEFUL CHOICE

“What, in your opinion, are the main results, achievements, and losses of Ukraine’s independent existence?”

“Thirteen years have passed since the independent Ukrainian state was proclaimed. For many people in the world this was a centuries-old dream that a great European nation should have its own home and be master in it. In this respect, August 24, 1991, is a red-letter day in the history of the Ukrainian people and Ukrainian statehood. However, if we ask ourselves whether the hopes that millions of people cherished in their hearts have come true, we must admit that today’s Ukraine does not look the way it was painted in the dreams of those who fought and yearned for it.

“In 1991 there was not a single political grouping or party in Ukraine that had at least some political experience. Practice shows that political structures that seek to bring about essential changes should have certain amount of experience under their belt. When Vladimir Lenin wanted to build a socialist state in 1905, he failed to do so. All his plans and schemes were so inadequate that he came a cropper, like a common shepherd. A few thousand of Lenin’s party militants with decades-long experience were unable to overthrow a huge empire. It was not until twelve years later that Lenin was able to implement his plans — of course, in an imperialistic spirit. In contrast to Ukraine, which had a democratic hetman-ruled state in the 17th century, the history of Russia in general has never experienced any processes of democratization. Moreover, Ukraine was Europe’s first country to establish the democratic principle of government: a publicly elected hetman was the head of state.

“But when the Soviet empire caved in like a rotten woodshed in 1991, power was taken mostly by people with ‘yesterday’s mentality.’ To a large extent the Soviet-era Communist Party of Ukraine, which was still saddled with communist ideology, infiltrated the structures of the independent Ukrainian state. So the current situation — in the fourteenth year of independence — has come about because Ukraine is just taking its first steps toward political structuring. So from this viewpoint, this country is the way it should be. If we had a system today in which our political forces, no matter which part of the political spectrum they represent, wanted to have an independent state, then we could be marching on. It will take a long time to firmly establish the Ukrainian state because this is a two- pronged process: the building of a state, on the one hand, and the political structure of this state, on the other.”

“Why did the powerful and popular national democratic forces, which came into being at the dawn of Ukrainian independence and were initially very close to taking power, fail to do so and are now in opposition?”

“This was indeed a powerful movement, but it consisted of intellectuals, most of whom (perhaps 90%) were Communist Party members. Of course, they nurtured the idea of a Ukrainian state deep in their hearts, but they were still people of yesterday. At the dawn of independence, in 1989, those present at a Popular Movement of Ukraine (Rukh) meeting were mostly speaking about democratizing Soviet Ukraine, not about independence. There were just a few exceptions, including Levko Lukyanenko, Pavlo Movchan, and me. In 1989 Rukh, the first sociopolitical organization, did not raise the question of Ukraine becoming an independent state.

“The political awareness of many Rukh militants, as well as of many Ukrainian political figures in general, was so low in the early 1990s that they could not understand the role of the state or governmental authority in the implementation of a great idea and were ready to struggle for democracy, not for power. Rukh managed to put forward just a few persons to take ministerial portfolios in the new Ukrainian state. When [President Leonid] Kravchuk suggested that Rukh took a more active part in governing the state, many Rukh members struck a pose of injured innocence: ‘No, I’d rather stay in the opposition’.”

“They must be feeling sorry that they missed their chance. Do they want to be in power now?”

“The period of political reawakening was very brief. Already in 1994 political leaders understood that a large number of problems could be solved much quicker and more effectively through public administration rather than strikes and protest demonstrations. But the situation had changed. Nobody was inviting them into the government any more — they had to struggle for this. I am drawing a very clear parallel between the slow progress of establishing a democratic and affluent state and the equally slow progress of developing a national identity on the part of huge numbers of people who championed an independent Ukrainian state. In other words, this movement was slowed down not only by the objective difficulties that followed the collapse of the USSR but also by the absence of a well thought out concept of the Ukrainian state’s further development. Hence, we are still making painstaking efforts to do what we failed to do in 1991. Each election is a hopeless struggle in which we usually win 20% of the vote and 120-150 parliamentary seats at the most.”

“A CIVIC EMBASSY”

“You say ‘we.’ Are you still a member of a national democratic- minded party?”

“I was a Republican Christian Party member in 2001, when I was elected president of the Ukrainian World Coordinating Council at the III World Forum of Ukrainians. Since then I have focused my efforts on searching for sources, primarily within the government, to fund this organization and on studying the state of Ukrainian communities in the world, including Russia. For we know very well the way 500,000- 800,000 of our fellow countrymen live in Canada and the US, but before 2002 we knew absolutely nothing about the life of the over ten-million-strong Ukrainian community in the Russian Federation. Although the latest census identified 2.8 million Ukrainians in Russia, practice shows that these figures emerged during the Russian elections. This is why we began a round of fact-finding tours of Russia — first of all, across the Ukrainian- Russian frontier, from Belgorod to Kuban, once known as Slobidska Ukraine that comprised five Cossack regiments. In other words, Ukrainians once populated this territory. Then we traveled to Tatarstan, Karelia, and the Far East (from Kamchatka to Vladivostok). Now we have a certain picture of how Russia’s Ukrainian community lives — quite a sad picture indeed. There is not a single Ukrainian school in the vast expanses of an enormous empire — just a few small Ukrainian-language classes. Compare this to 2,750 schools with Russian as the language of instruction in Ukraine. This should be changed if Ukraine and Russia want to have equal relations. I have often said this to Russian governors. More often than not I have heard in reply that Russia’s Ukrainians themselves do not wish to go to Ukrainian-language schools. I think this situation has been caused by still pervasive fear, for the Ukrainian community in Russia mostly consists of those who were deported in the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s. The second factor is that the Ukrainian government cares very little about the fate of Ukrainians abroad. We must do our utmost to help the Ukrainian communities in Russia to revive and be supported by our state. We must help them set up a system of educational, research, and cultural institutions. The Ukrainian community in Russia must live a full-fledged life, as their compatriots do here, in their native land.”

“You mentioned your estimates of many Ukrainians living in Russia and Canada. There are 47 million Ukrainians here in Ukraine. But how many of us are there worldwide?”

“This is a very difficult question and I don’t have a ready answer. I said I didn’t quite accept the official results of the latest census in Russia. In my opinion, this is a very minimized figure. We should not rule out, however, the ongoing objective process of denationalization of Ukrainians, i.e., Russification. Second-generation Ukrainians who were born in Russia do not know the Ukrainian language. This is quite natural. For in Soviet Ukraine, too, Russification was carried out for a very long time. As a result, more than 60% of our population speaks Russian today. We must reverse this process now, i.e., get back to the sources of our spirituality and national dignity, when every individual can say, ‘I am proud of being Ukrainian. My forefathers never used to conquer foreign lands, they only used to defend their own homes.’ Unfortunately, very little is being done to this effect in this country. The state acts very gingerly in this case.”

“‘Gingerly’ is too diplomatic a word, isn’t it?”

“It seems to me there should be more activity in this matter. Look: it took Mykola Skrypnyk ten years (1922-1933) to Ukrainianize Russian-speaking Kharkiv — all the bureaucrats spoke Ukrainian in those days. As for us, in thirteen years we have failed to ‘Ukrainianize’ Ukraine.”

“Do you think it’s good or bad that many people are living outside their native land? Should Ukraine try to repatriate its ‘prodigal sons and daughters’? Do the people from the diaspora that you have met express this kind of desire?”

“The Ukrainian government’s national program, Ukrainians Abroad, which will be in effect until 2005, notes that measures should be taken to bring Ukrainians back to their homeland. This is a very positive fact. From my conversations with Ukrainians abroad I concluded that they would like to come back, but what is holding back many are unequal income and employment opportunities. They would like to return to a different Ukraine. Unfortunately, we are unable to offer them the living standards they enjoy in various countries in both Europe and North America. On the other hand, it is not so bad that there are people who represent our country in various parts of the world. When asked what emigration is, I say it is our civic embassy, which promotes the Ukrainian state’s ideas abroad. This is very important. When we served our prison terms here, it was precisely representatives of Ukrainian communities that demonstrated in front of the US Congress. They would support us, write to newspapers, and speak on the radio. In other words, the Ukrainian community abroad is a very important factor, provided it is politically active and devoid of the bacillus of fear.”

UKRAINIANS WANT TO LIVE LIKE... UKRAINIANS

“Some people believe that our diaspora feels more Ukrainian than Ukrainian citizens proper, that only they are the true keepers of the much talked about self-identification code of the nation. Do you share this viewpoint? Do Ukrainians have this code in general?”

“Our diaspora in Canada and the US, especially second- and third-wave emigrants, have a really strong sense of national identity. But at the same time they are exposed to a very intensive process of denationalization. So the fourth generation — college students — very rarely speaks Ukrainian. They still consider themselves ethnic Ukrainians but no longer know the language. We once held, in cooperation with the Ministry of Culture, an international symposium of Ukrainian theater personalities from all over the world. The producer of a Philadelphia-based theater, a very talented lady, had written a script based on Lesia Ukrayinka’s dramatic poems. Before opening the show, the producer said she had taught the student actors the Ukrainian language for a year on the basis of Taras Shevchenko’s works, so that the Bard’s poetic language could strike a chord with American Ukrainians, something that everyday, prosaic language cannot do. The show lasted for two hours, but none of the spectators walked out. That was a unique production and unique acting.”

“Addressing a roundtable organized by The Day, People’s Deputy Refat Chubarov noted that the Crimean Tatar people has no fatherland apart from the Crimean peninsula and has no ethnically related state. The Ukrainian diaspora has Ukraine. Do they expect anything from their fatherland? What can Ukraine do for them? What can they do for Ukraine?”

“Ukraine in the making has always sought support from the diaspora. And the diaspora has really helped very much, especially non- governmental organizations and certain political parties; they have taken part in Ukrainian election campaigns, for example, by sending young people to encourage our compatriots to go to the polls.

“As for Ukraine helping the diaspora, I think our state pays too little attention to collaborating with the diaspora. Ukrainians in the Far East have complained to me that they have no Ukrainian consulate. In my opinion, Ukraine must do its utmost for the Ukrainian communities, especially in Russia, to be able to enjoy the same rights as the titular nation does and live a full cultural and educational life. This will, among other things, erect certain obstacles to the natural process of assimilation. I think this should be the focus of talks between Ukrainian government officials and their counterparts in the states where ethnic Ukrainians reside. The president of Poland often visits Lviv because there is a large Polish community there. Likewise, our political figures should be visiting Vladivostok, Khabarovsk, and Novorossiysk to support Russian Ukrainians, at least in a moral sense. The Ukrainian leadership must do its best to have the Russian government treat the Ukrainian communities the way Ukraine’s government treats the Russian communities, which have every opportunity for full-fledged development in Ukraine. In a word, the Ukrainian state’s help should consist of organizing and maintaining the full-fledged spiritual life of Ukrainian communities.”

“Seven million people have left to work outside Ukraine (the media and politicians very often cite this figure). Is this a new wave of emigration?”

“In 1993 I met Zbigniew Brzezinski, the prominent US political scientist of Polish origin. He said that Ukraine might have to go through a serious migration process and that quite possibly the population of Ukraine would shrink to 25 million in a few years’ time. I don’t know exactly how many Ukrainians are now working abroad, but it is clear that some of them will remain there forever if they manage to do so. Take, for example, the current influx of our compatriots into Italy — I don’t think Italy will be able to absorb it. So far Italy is tolerant, but the time will come when there will be job redundancies not only among the Ukrainians who work there but also among the Italians. If the Ukrainian leadership does not want its citizens to leave this country in search of jobs or better opportunities, it must take measures to improve the living standards in Ukraine. After all, 25 million people make one kind of state, but 55 million people comprise an altogether different one.”

“The Ukrainian World Coordinating Council (UWCC) is the organizer of the World Forums of Ukrainians. What have been the gains and shortcomings of past forums? What will be the main result of the IV Forum?”

“There have been different attitudes to the forums at different times. The first forum in 1992 was full of frenzied patriotic sentiments. It gathered over 1,000 Ukrainians from all parts of the world — for many of them this was the first opportunity to see their historical fatherland. The second forum in 1997 was more business-like. The third forum in 2001 was more critical, but very weak in terms of organization. This even raised the question: is it worth holding such a huge forum of Ukrainians; wouldn’t it be better to gather only members of the Coordinating Council? (The UWCC is comprised of a total of 48 persons: 16 in the West, 16 in Russia, and 16 in Ukraine). A scaled-down assembly would be more effective and productive: it would be able to make a number of interesting decisions that would lay the groundwork even for governmental programs. We are now seriously considering this idea. I hope the fourth will be a more businesslike and optimistic forum. It must solve a string of problems and, first of all, develop a program for restructuring the world’s Ukrainian communities in order to achieve a psychological unity of all Ukrainians.”

SOCIOLOGISTS DO NOT MAKE MISTAKES

“How would you assess the ongoing presidential campaign?”

“In my opinion, state institutions have not provided all the presidential candidates with equal access to the mass media. If this kind of equality existed, I think the lineup of forces would be somewhat different now. I am inclined to trust the results of opinion polls and so-called ratings because the practice of previous elections shows that sociologists do not make mistakes. These surveys indicate that there will be a neck-and-neck race between the two candidates Viktor Yushchenko and Viktor Yanukovych. It is difficult to say which of them will win. The main thing is that this should be a fair election which is difficult to achieve because of the high stakes and strong temptations. Therefore, this requires very strict control on the part of the relevant state institutions over the election campaign, the voting, and the vote count.”

“Is the UWCC going to make any statements during these elections? For example, about supporting a certain candidate?”

“I’ll ask you as a joke: what intelligence service do you work for? The point is that we, the Kyiv branch of the UWCC, have just made this kind of statement. In particular, we have urged the Central Electoral Commission, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Verkhovna Rada to increase the number of polling stations for citizens of Ukraine who are temporarily residing abroad in proportion to their actual number in one country or another, as well as to ensure proper voting conditions and to make sure that the law is upheld and that the rights of all voters and candidates at each polling station are respected. We also strongly recommend that Ukrainian citizens temporarily residing abroad take an active part in the Ukrainian presidential elections.”

THE DAY’S NOTE

Mykhailo HORYN was born on June 17, 1930, in the village of Kniselo, now in Lviv oblast. A trained psychologist, he was arrested in 1965 and sentenced in 1966 to six years in a prison camp for anti-Soviet propaganda. He was sentenced in 1967 to three years’ imprisonment at Vladimir Penitentiary for spreading illegal (Samizdat) literature among political prisoners. Released in 1971, he began publishing the Helsinki Group Bulletin. He was rearrested in 1981 and sentenced to ten years’ in strict regime camps and five-year internal exile. Released in 1987, he took part in the formation of the Ukrainian Helsinki Group, the Popular Movement (Rukh) of Ukraine, the Ukrainian Republican Party, etc. He was Chief Secretary of Rukh in 1989-1999, first deputy head of Rukh and Member of Parliament in 1991-1992, and has been a member of the Central Committee of the Republican Christian Party since 1997. He has headed the Ukrainian World Coordinating Council since May 19, 2000.