November 7, commemorating another anniversary of the Bolshevik coup (still remembered by many as the Great October Socialist Revolution of 1917), will no longer be observed in Ukraine. Toward the end of the session held by the Verkhovna Rada’s parliamentary majority at the Ukraine House, the lawmakers were childishly happy to relieve Ukraine’s toiling masses of another two annual days off. Meanwhile observers in the lobby wondered why precious session time should be wasted debating trifling issues like renaming the fourteenth Verkhovna Rada session the third (it is third if counted from the date on which Ukraine’s independence was proclaimed). Ukraine had its statehood even before 1991, with all the formal attributes; it was represented at the United Nations, and it had a parliament passing bills having force within the borders of the republic. Of course, the political system was different and the structure of power has since changed somewhat, yet the supreme legislative body has always been there. The reason for renaming, it later transpired, is far-reaching, having in mind the coming referendum that will pass a vote of no confidence in Verkhovna Rada. The ballots will carry questions, inter alia, on the people’s attitude toward the Verkhovna Rada of the fourteenth convocation. At present, this status applies to the minority working round the clock at the old building on Hrushevsky Street. And this minority recognizes no decisions made by the majority. Now the majority is formally one of the third convocation. In other words, the question put forth by the referendum formally does not apply to it, so if the people decide to dissolve Parliament it will apply only to the Left minority. Who was so clever and prompted the Right and Center to make this tactical move is difficult to say. Considering that the statement was made by the Presidential Press Secretary Oleksandr Martynenko, delivering the message with a cunning smile, the matter must have been agreed upon at all levels.
The Ukrainian Parliament has split and there is no end to it in sight. A week ago there was still hope that the former colleagues would come to terms and convene on the regular premises. Primarily the Left spoke for reaching an understanding, it should be noted. The majority practically unanimously moved that holding a joint sitting would be possible only if the minority recognized all of the majority’s previous decisions and would not try to block the session, which would be called to order by Viktor Medvedchuk, of course. The stand taken by the Left became shakier with each passing day. They came up with various scenarios aimed at opening a joint session where the Speaker’s role would be reduced to a minimum (e.g., Tkachenko calls the session to order from the podium, then steps down and takes a seat with the Peasants’ Party faction, while the Speaker’s seat is occupied by representatives of all factions taking turns every two hours). On Tuesday, when the majority convened at Ukraine House, independent Serhiy Holovaty declared that he had seen with his own eyes a letter addressed to the majority and signed by Oleksandr Tkachenko, offering his resignation, so the Right and Center “lost sheep” could gather in Verkhovna Rada. But now the premises was no longer the point. The principle was. Proceeding from what happened previously, any concession on the majority’s part would mean acknowledging its illegitimacy. No room to back down with Volkov standing behind.
The Small Parliament is cut off from all lines of communications and logistics, yet it is alive and kicking, showing no sign of giving up. Its audience is protected round the clock by a living shield of People’s Deputies. Sittings are held every day, albeit of little consequence for lack of a quorum but with much verbiage and pathos. Journalists covering the small battlefield are secured a corridor through the reinforced security cordons. One positive thing is that parliamentary immunity prevents the legislators from being manhandled by people wearing uniforms. The Comrades, however, must be constantly vigilant, for majority people are lurking behind every corner, ready to pounce, blocking corridors and entrances, hunting down, surrounding, and liquidating — not physically, of course, but politically. The minority has been driven all the way down the blind alley. There is now no way out, meaning for the Verkhovna Rada audience and the entire situation. Worst of all, the Reds cannot stir public opinion, as some 1,500 demonstrators waving red flags outside are numerically pitiful compared to the powerful and well-organized national democratic columns. The Left appealed to the West, but the latter is apparently content with its spectator’s role and is no hurry to come out in protest against transgressions of democracy and parliamentary rules. Most likely, it remembers only too well the dark past of the current minority martyrs. Russia? The Duma’s Left factions will, of course, render the best of moral support, yet they have their hands full with their own parliamentary crisis and other problems. Hunger strike? Interesting idea; people would like to see the well-fed and clothed People’s Deputies get first-hand experience of how so many people have been living for the past several years. In addition, after they lose some weight carrying them out of the Verkhovna Rada and seating them on rows of chairs placed in the square facing Verkhovna Rada will be so much easier for the guards. A joke, of course. Hopefully. The fact remains, however, that precisely this scenario is being actively discussed by hotheads among the majority.
A stalemate, indeed, except that one side has an apparent advantage over the other. Despite Leonid Kravchuk’s assurances that the majority will return to Verkhovna Rada in the next couple of days and that there are real opportunities to come to terms with the minority, this is easier said than done. The problem will not be solved by itself. In fact, even imagining a “joint” minority-majority session gives one the shivers. After a brief yet heated encounter in the lobby when Ivan Pliushch ventured a visit to talk to the Left, the newly appointed Speaker will never believe that the Left zealots will watch calmly as he takes his seat behind the podium. Even if the morally balanced Socialists, Peasants, and more sober-minded part of the Communists agree to peaceful coexistence, anything can be expected from the Progressive Socialists and certain other Left activists. Be it as it may, the “normal work in Parliament” the President promised simply will not happen. Under the circumstances the rostrum would at least be besieged and fisticuffs could break out. What kind of democracy can be expected in this situation? Solving the problem by force, using law enforcement and criminal proceedings, would only play into the Left’s hand. Although the National Guard, this traditional defender of Parliament, was disbanded just in time, pitched resistance is a very likely probability. Without doubt, videos showing resisting lawmakers being dragged out of Verkhovna Rada and lined up along its walls would be highlighted the world over. To render the whole thing legitimate and untie law enforcement hands, the dissenting legislators would have to be stripped of their immunity. This calls for 300, not 226 votes, something the majority cannot muster, so the only scenario left is one of further escalating confrontation.
In any case, Parliament has to resume work in the immediate future, in whatever premises, although without the Left it will not look very convincing. In fact, the new Speaker, Ivan Pliushch, admitted that “those doubting the legitimacy of the decisions made by the majority are right” because “in all the time after the enactment of the Constitution Verkhovna Rada has not been able to adopt new rules” conforming to its status. Yet, in his words, “one can regard this Parliament as functioning and passing decisions.” He added, however, that this Parliament “will not be pro- Presidential,” but there is no doubt that it will ever be opposed to the President.
Mykhailo Syrota, father of the new Ukrainian Constitution, does not see any alternative to returning to Verkhovna Rada and working jointly with the Left. Recalling his heroic constitutional past, Mr. Syrota notes certain “limitations of the rights and possibilities of the current majority” in terms of decision-making, and muses that “back in 1995 when we adopted the Constitution, if its exponents moved to Ukraine House, rather than stay in Parliament with their adversaries, the fundamental law would never have passed.” In this context, NDSC Secretary Yevhen Marchuk’s doubts about whether the “Bolsheviks,” as the majority has been dubbed, will be able to report for work, securing full representation at least every Thursday, the traditional vote time, let alone maintain a level of understanding such that decisions could be made by consensus.
Many point to another important factor: after solving the internal parliamentary crisis, the majority will have to pass a number of unpopular decisions to live up to its constructive image, which, in turn, will place it under a barrage of social fire. Conducting elections in so strained a situation would be practically senseless for the Right, as the new convocation would turn out even redder, and who would be the majority then is anyone’s guess. Precisely this is regarded by some a guarantee, albeit a weak one, that it will be some time before Parliament is ordered dissolved — or maybe the People’s Deputies will be given until their set date in 2002. Although Reforms & Order’s Volodymyr Filenko still believes that “it’s better to hold the elections ahead of term than wait to be told you are no longer trusted ‘on the people’s initiative,’” considering the change in the numeration of the Verkhovna Rada sessions, he would be happy to know “which of the bills passed by the majority will be signed by the President in the first place.” Indeed, this will be very interesting.
