The interview with the head of the People’s Movement (Rukh) of Ukraine, agreed upon several days beforehand, had to be postponed for several hours, because at the time Hennady Udovenko was engaged in a very active discussion with People’s Deputies Yuri Kostenko and Viktor Pynzenyk. Naturally, when the interview started my first question was about the prospects for the two Rukh movements to work together.
H.U.: I would like to start by pointing out that issues relating to our cooperation with the factions headed by Viktor Pynzenyk and Yuri Kostenko in terms of the parliamentary majority and party affairs outside parliament should be considered separately.
The Day: Then, suppose we start with the parliamentary majority and its internal differences being so actively discussed these days. Part of the majority seems determined to mount verbal attacks on Yushchenko’s cabinet and analysts predict the majority’s split into the pro-presidential and pro-Yushchenko groups.
H.U.: Above all I would like to stress the crucial significance of the majority as such, although some prefer to describe it as situational. Its very presence in Verkhovna Rada has finally made it possible to work fruitfully on bills, which was impossible during the open confrontation between the Right and the Left. As result, all those originally distrustful of parliamentary work have under the new leadership returned to their committees and their seats in the session hall.
The Day: They did, but some of the majority appear in newspapers and on television, lashing out at the Cabinet, claiming that changes are necessary to avoid another crisis, and that first of all cadre changes are what we need. At the same time, others in the majority use other media outlets to claim that the policy of reform is effective, that the government is combating the oligarchy’s arbitrary rule, which is holding us back.
H.U.: I would like my colleagues in parliament and the media to be more reflective in their assessment. Yes, we have problems in terms of gas supplies, the Ukrainian-Russian relationship, and much else. However, I believe that criticism should not focus on certain persons in government. We entrusted Viktor Yushchenko with forming his Cabinet and now we are asking him what the helpers he has chosen are doing. October 10 will be Government Day in parliament, and we will do this then. I think that the time left until that day should be used to become better prepared for the debate without upsetting the Verkhovna Rada’s very tight schedule. The session will have to deal with several fundamental bills, primarily the tax and land codes, which are behind schedule. While the tax code requires a great deal of technical work, considering that the taxation systems in the developed countries evolved over centuries, the land code is a purely political matter.
The Day: And doesn’t the implementation of the referendum presents problems?
The People’s Movement is known to have received the referendum without any special enthusiasm. Yet, the nation has expressed its will. It must be carried out. President Kuchma could have implemented the referendum by issuing edicts, but he chose the parliamentary way. This makes it possible for us to legally ascertain the issues that were not properly prepared legally before being put on the referendum ballot. On September 20, our fraction submitted amendments to the draft resolution prepared by Deputies Kliuchkovsky, Zvarych, and Chornovil, intended to make certain that the final decisions on implementing the people’s will could be made legally correctly. I think this will help increase the number of lawmakers willing to vote for the constitutional changes.
The Day: If we speak about the blocking of certain forces within the majority, do you think it unproductive to talk about creating a national democratic political bloc has dragged on so long that nobody really believes in it and what we actually see now is not coming together but more and more new splits?
H.U.: I would speak not so much about an association of national democratic and patriotic forces as that of parties supporting the idea of a strong state, and we need this if we are serious about preparing for the next parliamentary elections. It so happened that I found myself at the head of Rukh after the rift, and for that reason I can’t consider myself responsible. Also, I am free of the burden of the differences that broke up the movement. If one takes an unbiased stand, it will become clear that after the presidential campaign there is no split in Rukh. You can’t imagine the number of letters and appeals we receive, urging us to stop the bickering and unite.
The Day: Then what keeps you from it?
H.U.: First, we must divide the issues into three parts: (a) getting both Rukh sections united, (b) setting up a bloc of parties, and (c) forming a broad coalition of the Right. We are working in all three directions. You saw Kostenko and me; we don’t avoid each other’s company, and we are constantly discussing all the issues, the People’s Rukh — Reform and Order — Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists bloc is a reality. And we are open to cooperation with other parties whose ideologies are close to ours.
The Day: Deputy Lavrynovych’s recent return to the Rukh faction impressed everybody. Some even understood your comment to the effect that he had come back to replace you as head of the movement.
H.U.: I have always treated the matter of my replacement with utmost responsibility. Whenever I left one post or another, I have openly groomed my replacement. Remember how Tarasiuk succeeded me as Foreign Minister. The same applies to Rukh. I wish to prepare a candidate for my post who would effectively continue my efforts and move take them farther. I never said that Lavrynovvych would replace me. I just said that a politician of his caliber would enhance our intellectual potential, as had been the case with Volodymyr Lanovy and Roman Zvarych. The more serious and respected politicians join our movement, the easier the choice of the future party leader will be.
The Day: How do you feel about Deputy Bohdan Boiko’s initiative to set yet another, United Rukh?
H.U.: I respect Mr. Boiko and we have had consultations with regard to the new initiative. We are going to invite him to the meeting of the NRU leadership. If the idea is to unite, something we are also after, we will always be able to reach an understanding.
The Day: Getting back to the Verkhovna Rada, do you think there is an actual threat to the majority’s solidity? Several votes showed there are internal differences. Some even now calculate the majority at 160.
H.U.: We have been able to overcome differences in Parliament by forming a majority. We must preserve it. Of course, different issues give rise to different views, even within a given fraction. Yet I want to stress again that the parliamentary majority must be preserved if we really want reform, considering that we are so late in carrying it out.
