Ukrainian situation and world context: diagnosis and remedies

The developments in this country make it always necessary to broach the subject of alternative as a phenomenon that has not yet been established in Ukraine on both institutional and social levels. We are rather unlikely to see this, say, in the coming parliamentary elections. But society is becoming more and more aware of the necessity to work hard at all levels in order to form an alternative that will reach critical mass in the course of time. The long-awaited leader will only emerge if society creates a demand for him or her. Meanwhile, the world, including Ukraine, is entering a new period of transformations. Is Ukraine ready, with due account of its plight, to adequately respond to the latest challenges? This is the subject of a Den/The Day roundtable attended by Bohdan HAWRYLYSHYN, noted economist, Roman Club member, former Director of the International Management Institute in Geneva, a founder of the Davos Economic Forum; Volodymyr FESENKO, well-known political scientist; and Ihor KOHUT, public figure, chairman of the board of the Legislative Initiatives Laboratory.

Recently we published a photo, one of this year’s World Press Photo winners, which shows Maria, a Ukrainian woman from Kryvy Rih, a drug addict and prostitute. She is 32 and has a nine-year-old daughter. When we, editors, were pondering over this topic, we understood that this photo had very many meanings. For example, when Ukraine gained independence, this woman was 12, and now her situation seems to be typical. What has been happening, particularly in the Dnipropetrovsk region, over the past 20 years? The answer is: spiritual, cultural, and financial devastation. This picture is also stunning against the backdrop of what is going on in this country today – international isolation, on the one hand, and the government’s dwindling popularity inside the country, on the other. Who is to respond to the challenges this country is facing today?

Bohdan HAWRYLYSHYN: “The Ukrainian opposition perhaps considers itself the only one who can respond to this challenge. But I do not think it can do so.

“In reality, this challenge is already being responded to. A lot of youth networks have beet set up in the past six to seven months. This has changed the situation because just a year ago, according to sociological surveys, apathy and remaining outside the political field was the factor that made students and other young people to leave Ukraine.

“For example, an alliance of Christian professionals was formed recently. This organization numbers over 1,000 members, including doctors, lawyers, journalists, and educators. Their goal is to be professional and adhere to the principles of Christian ethics. Incidentally, there are also atheists among these people.

“An association of Kyiv Mohyla Academy alumni has also been formed. Its goal is to help the Academy top up its funds. They recently sought my advice about not only how to top up their funds but also about what to do today in general. I suggested that they organize groups with a lawyer, a political scientist, and a sociologist in each of them. Each group should choose a normal country (in my view, there are not more than five of them in the world, while the rest have a degraded form of democracy) and study that country’s constitutional, economic, and political setup, as well as its humanitarian sphere.

“I also know about other civic youth movements. For instance, there was recently a very interesting contest, Ukraine of My Dream. No matter how naive it may sound, I think it is a very interesting initiative that will produce a good result.

“We must stop ‘training’ leaders, for we have a lot of self-appointed ones. We must learn to work in teams. We should understand that leaders emerge wherever they are in demand and there is a clear vision of what and how should be done. Besides, there is such thing as ‘situational leader, for there can be no eternal leaders. Different people will fit different situations.

“I do not think the opposition is capable of giving a proper response to the challenges this country is facing today. We will perhaps have to wait for new people to come and tackle this matter. But the problem is also in that we are missing this kind of chances. For example, in January 2005, 300 Ukrainians who studied abroad wished to return to Ukraine. They knew they would be paid less but they would have an opportunity to work for the future of Ukraine. We forwarded these proposals to the Presidential Administration, but the latter seems to have either burned or hidden them. Those people did not even get an answer.

“Is this possible in Georgia? They know how to make use of young talents, especially those who know what is going on around and have no illusions about ‘that wonderful and civilized world.’ We also need this kind of people.”

Volodymyr FESENKO: “Indeed, society must respond to these challenges. But the problem is that this obviously requires ‘surgery’ and it is only the authorities that have the possibilities and instruments to do this. Unfortunately, the entire Ukrainian political class is sick – not only the ones who hold the topmost offices but also the opposition. How can we break this vicious circle? The only way out, in my opinion, is to update the power-wielding institutions and seek new people, healthy cells, in society. The next step should be, as Mr. Hawrylyshyn has just said, to rally them together. Then they should size up the situation and shape a specific vision of, say, combating corruption. Legal and political practices should be changed, as should the relations between state and society. We are all used to corruption. Here is a simple example. An opposition politician, one of the Orange Revolution’s ‘field commanders,’ was recently reflecting in my presence: look, we have a chance to regain power – we derive support from, say, smugglers who are also dissatisfied with the government. But the way they earn money is objectionable.

“This is a very difficult problem which shows that it is not enough to replace the government or some of its officials – what must be changed is social relations, relations between the government and the society, inside the government and inside the society itself. It is very important to know how this should be done. There is a need today in the people who can assume responsibility, are capable of managing effectively, and are bearers of political will and fundamentally different practices. For example, the young people who came to power in Georgia find it interesting and thrilling to change their country rather than reap benefits from being in power. Unfortunately, many of our oppositionists are used to taking advantage from being in power – this is why they want to come back.”

A SERIOUS SYMPTOM

When did this warp occur? When did being an official begin to be viewed as a way to get access to the “feeding trough”?

Ihor KOHUT: “I do not think it is a warp. Rather, it is a vestige of the previous system. Unfortunately, in the context of contemporary capitalism, Ukraine can be referred to as a country with feudal relations…”

V.F.: “…A country of underdeveloped feudalism.”

I.K.: “These circumstances have reinforced such negative features as the government’s increased impact on society by means of its resources, its impunity, irresponsibility, etc. To get access to the ‘trough,’ you had once to join the Communist Party and work loyally. You could also pull the family strings. There was no other way out.

“When Ukraine recently stole the global spotlight with its statistics of hypothermia-caused deaths, the previous minister of public health said that, unfortunately, our statistics worked very well. What does this mean? This means that an individual is worth nothing in our society. When the government does not consider the death of a human being, even a homeless one, as a matter of critical comment or response, it is a very serious symptom.

“We need responsibility and the ability to assume risks, embrace certain values, put them across to society and instill confidences in them. I share Mr. Hawrylyshyn’s viewpoint that lack of leaders is not a key problem – there are some more important things, such as interpersonal relationships and trust. Ukraine is a society of total mistrust. But a society cannot be effective without trust. Back in the 1970s the US academic Robert Putnam did an interesting survey in Italy after an administrative-territorial reform. It turned out that the north was administratively more developed and progressive, while the south was lagging behind. The researcher explains this by the formation of special varieties of trust, such as the degree of the involvement of individuals and civic organizations in governance. This degree of involvement was much higher in the north than in the south.

“It is a difficult job to rally leaders together so they could find mutual understanding on the basis of certain principles. Neither the opposition nor the government is capable today of doing so. It is the question of an alternative. But the latter will not emerge just with the wave of a magic wand. Society will have to work long and hard to this end. Volodymyr spoke about political will, but, according to Habermas, political will can only be shaped as practices: when people communicate, they work out a certain common vision.”

B.H.: “This will take five to seven years.”

I.K.: “People from other milieus will be gradually coming to power.”

B.H.: “The challenge we are facing now is not only to clean up the Soviet legacy. There was also something positive, one way or another, in that system. In particular, there was a better system of health care, research, and even education (except for liberal arts and social sciences). But now we should also clean up independent Ukraine. So we are facing a double challenge. But if we had coped with the former in good time, the latter would not have emerged.

“All this began in the early 1990s, on the eve of the proclamation of independence. At the time, some nomenklatura members began to promptly sell out state-owned property and make money on this. Besides, the Americans also helped us increase corruption. Here is an instance: when a contract with the Netherlands on modernizing our telephone system was almost ready for signing, an American came and said he represented a powerful company. He paid 500 dollars to one minister to arrange a meeting with another minister, and, finally, the matter was entrusted to him. But it turned out that the man did not even have an office of his own. I think American society is in a far worse situation. The degradation and crisis of capitalism makes an individual totally worthless in that system. This outlook is deeply rooted in America itself, even in the language. When I was just learning English, I came across the expression ‘What is he worth?’ and thought it was about a man’s personal values and merits. But it turned out that the expression in fact means ‘How much money does he have?’

“Learning the meaning of this phrase in the fall of 1948 was one of the reasons why I did not want to live and work in the US, even though I could have been paid 40 percent more in that country than in Canada.

“In my view, one of our biggest tragedies is that we have borrowed American experience too easily. We should have paid attention in the very beginning not only to the US but also to, say, Sweden and Norway. Just fancy that: a referendum showed that society was ready to sacrifice further GDP growth in favor of nature conservation!

“I am not an anti-American. I have spent a very long time in the US and know a lot of good people there. But it is not the country we should learn from.”

(To be continued in the next issue)