OSTROH – Yevhen Marchuk once said that Ostroh Academy is an establishment where presidential candidates should pass a sort of exam in history in a TV broadcast with the university’s teachers and students as examiners. Despite the fact that politicians have not understood this yet and the condition of a TV broadcast is not fulfilled, can these elections be a start?
The students of Ostroh Academy recently had a meeting with Arsenii Yatseniuk, the leader of the political force “Front of Changes” (Front zmin). People say various things about him. Some say he is too young, while others criticize him for his aggressive speeches.
I suggest putting aside criticism and assessments and taking a look at Yatseniuk’s ideas, which he presented before the Ostroh Academy students. The meeting with this politician turned into an interesting discussion. Not all people dare move from the programmed formats to a live talk, which, by the way, was a spontaneous and quick one, so much so it was often impossible to put down the names of its participants.
QUESTIONS AND HISTORICAL REFLECTIONS BY YATSENIUK
Arsenii Yatseniuk: “I would like all of us to think on the nature of Ukraine and the world, and how Ukraine should act in the framework of the new model of the world that has undergone changes. What conclusions should we made? What should we do? I would like to discuss your feelings and reflections concerning the global crisis and the impact it has on economy, politics, humanitarian sector, spirituality, and culture.
“Also I would like to have a discussion with you on your vision of Ukraine in the future. Your personal stance is very important for me, because it is you who will build our country in the future and carry this huge responsibility on your shoulders. For me it is very important to understand whether the people present in this hall are able to take up this responsibility and bear this cross.
“A similar discussion should take place in every university, and Ostroh Academy is Ukraine’s top university, just like you are the best students in our country. Let us assess the events that have taken place in the world. And I would like to start right away with a discussion. So, my first question to the audience will be: What has taken place in the world – an economic crisis, financial crisis, or a geopolitical crisis?”
Student 1: “Of course, we all qualify it as a crisis, but I want to note that this crisis was man-made. As a result, Ukraine has become economically dependent on other countries. Our children and grandchildren will have to pay off the loans Ukraine has taken out this year.”
Student 2: “The year 2008 was symbolic for both Ukraine and the world in general, because it was an indicator of the changes that have taken place in the geopolitical sphere. These events were a vivid proof of the world’s new division, the redistribution of the spheres of influence with the tacit consent of Western politicians. And Ukraine, a state that, unfortunately, cannot be called a powerful player on the political arena, has also found itself in a certain zone of influence. So, we are becoming dependent. Therefore one should understand this as soon as possible and begin to act, not to be a puppet in the global game. ”
A.Ya.: “If all our politicians were thinking in the same manner as you, we would have lived in a quite different country. Two opinions have been expressed, and I will only try to supplement them. The division of the world was the main result of the Second World War. What emerged was a bipolar world, with the West and the USSR being its polar forces. After the USSR collapsed, the world became unipolar with the US dominating.
“What did the West fail to do at the time? It failed to reorient. The West thought that it could go on with the creation of a consumption society, with living in a reference system in which a strong enemy still existed. The fact that the West failed to change this model meant only that the West was actively producing its main world currency and actively moved its companies beyond its countries, and was forming a consumption society.
“The world crisis was an end to the consumption policy, and as a result the US, the global hegemonic power, stated that it stopped resolving other countries’ problems and started addressing its own. Ukraine, too, was left with a huge external debt, and all this money went to the consumption market: the imported goods and the financing of foreign economies.
“We thought we were the US. But, unfortunately, the hryvnia is not the world’s reserve currency. The financing of foreign economies and a lack of a well-developed domestic market led to Ukraine’s economic crisis. In your opinion, what should Ukraine do in this situation? Will it become a EU member?”
Student: “The EU as well as the US may ‘lock up’ and focus on its domestic problems. As a result, Ukraine will be left aside, because the EU will not care to resolve our problems on top of their own.”
A.Ya.: “Does Ukraine need EU membership?”
Student: “It is not important for Ukraine, because the EU cannot help us resolve our urgent domestic problems that will determine our future, the kind of country and nation we will be.”
Student: “The EU will not need us until Ukrainian elites consolidate. However, we need the EU membership, because in this case we will receive help from the countries of this supranational formation, for example, in case of external aggression, as well as economic and social support. But it should be taken into account that if Ukraine (the country we want it to become in order to acquire EU membership) becomes an EU member, it will be able offer certain positions for the EU.”
A.Ya.: “Ukraine needs a well-balanced foreign policy both in the European and Russian. Russia is an important economic partner for us. It is difficult to understand for me why we constantly seek to become dependent on some country. If we are not accepted to the EU, we should develop on our own, first of all internally, because we can have wonderful business and partnership ties with the EU member countries, apart from having a common membership.”
STUDENTS ASK YATSENIUK ON THE UPA, CONFLICTS, AND THE RELIGIOUS SITUATION
Roman KOVAL, student at the Department of Political-Informational Management, Ostroh Academy:
You have mentioned cooperation with Russia. What is your attitude to the fact that analysts predict a possible military conflict between our countries? If there is a probability that such a situation arises, what should Ukraine do?
“This situation is possible. The danger of getting into a trap is increasing with our further violations of the international agreement on the stationing of the Black Sea Navy. At the moment, the situation is being deliberately escalated, with politicians profiteering on this topic. We signed an international agreement, and being a country which respects international law, we have to fulfill the terms of the agreement.
“Forcing the Black Sea Navy out of the Crimea ahead of schedule is out of the question. It is clear either that Russia is interpreting the agreement improperly. Therefore, we should prevent ourselves from getting into a trap. In my opinion, the likelihood of this kind of conflict is very low, even though the elections may intensify the situation.
“Another thing is that Ukraine and Russia have plenty of marginal characters, and one should not pay attention to them. But in order to reduce their number, we should offer our own agenda within the framework of policies that would be common for the two countries. And then we will see whether Russia will keep them.
“Ukraine’s internal weakness means only one thing – other countries are able to take advantage of it. Russians are no different from Europeans or Americans in this respect. There is only one difference: Europeans and Americans smile, while Russians don’t. It is time for us to stop caving in to suit others’ interests and instead become more self-assertive.”
Lesia BENDIUK, student at the Department of Political-Information Management, Ostroh Academy:
On October 14 we will mark The Day of the Creation of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army. Our society is debating over whether we should recognize the UPA a combatant? What is your opinion concerning this question?
“We can assess such a historical phenomenon as the UPA in only one way: in the 1920s a civil war was taking place in eastern Ukraine, and after 20 years a similar war took place in Western Ukraine. They were fighting for their land, houses, language, and property. Why are people in the eastern part of our country debating that they don’t understand these events? Because no witnesses of this war have remained there and because these events took place there 20 years earlier.
“Do you know that the UPA was defined in 1993 in the Ukrainian Law ‘On the Status of Veterans’ as a separate category of servicemen? How else should the UPA be recognized? Recognition cannot be limited to increased pensions only. To achieve recognition, one should tell the truth all over Ukraine, form a unified position, in both eastern and western Ukraine. We cannot recognize the UPA as a combatant, because the question will arise, On whose side did it fight? This is a separate category which bears no relation either to the Soviet Army or World War II. These people were fighting for themselves, their families, and their country.”
Oleksii Kostiuchenko, Ph.D. student, Ostroh Academy:
Ideally, the church in Ukraine should be separate from the state. However, today the church is a powerful instrument of political propaganda. What steps would you take in order to make clergymen perform their primary function and satisfy people’s spiritual needs rather than someone’s political ambitions?
“The material crisis is a result of the spiritual one. I watch TV broadcasts on big holidays: this is something similar to politics. Spirituality cannot be ostentatious. The church is the only institution which enjoys the trust of Ukraine’s society. According to our data, 40 percent of citizens trust it, whereas only 5 to 6 percent trust the government.
“The state and the church should heal the society jointly, with the state working in the economic sphere and the church securing spiritual growth. I support the idea of having a local Ukrainian church. However, it should be understood that it is impossible to do this merely by a presidential decree. This is a very complicated path, which should be headed by the church and its congregation and supported by the state. Let me underline – the state should support, not lead.
“I support the idea to let the church have access to educational establishments. We should let the church into the schools, and everyone should decide what church should go where. The main thing is that we need to have the church fulfill its main function – healing society.”
THE IDEA OF “FOUR TYPES OF POLICIES” IN THE EAST DIRECTION OF UKRAINE’S FOREIGN POLICY SHOULD CONSOLIDATE SOCIETY
“Let us stop believing that there is a good uncle who wants Ukrainians to live better. Every country cares about its own national interests: Americans, Germans, Russians, etc. Our paradox and tragedy is that we, too, are thinking about Americans, Germans, and Russians. Ukraine is in the clutches between Russian and EU interests. What should we do, understanding that we stand no chance of joining the EU and a union with Russia in the imperialist sense of this word is out of the question?” said Yatseniuk, sharing his view of Ukraine’s strategic development. This is an idea of multivector cooperation, with both Europe and Russia. However, this should not be oscillation between the West and East like before. These are the proposals of a country pursuing clear strategic purposes.
With due respect for the EU countries, our strategic partners, we should keep in mind that there is another part of great Europe, which starts in Uzhhorod and ends in Vladivostok. Yatseniuk speaks about four “types of common policies” in the eastern direction: energy, food, transport, and military armament.
Yatseniuk’s ideas remind one better than anything else that Ukraine has no reasons to kneel down, because a mere 30 years ago we were called Europe’s bread basket and five years ago we were the leaders in weapon production and repair. Just like in the first millenium, we are on the crossroads of strong trade routes between the European and Russian markets. Today we are the country giving the greatest donations to Russia in the gas sphere. Today we should keep all this in mind and start offering cooperation in the Eastern European direction. Only this, according to Yatseniuk, will give us chances to return to the idea of Great Europe.
Young age can be regarded a drawback, but it should never be forgotten that youth also means creativity and inspiration. Yatseniuk shared with Ostroh Adademy his concept of the “Ukrainian breakthrough.” In conclusion he said, “We should become wiser, stop refusing, and begin to offer” became a sort of appeal to the Ostroh students, whose assessment of the state of affairs, in his opinion, is the most adequate than in all of Ukraine. The audience applauded, thus expressing its support. So, Yatseniuk has passed the exam. Who will be the next?
Vita BAZAN, student at the Department of Political-Information Management, Ostroh Academy:
“Analyzing voters’ expectations of the candidates, one may distinguish certain priorities – a clear of stance, cool rationalism in diagnosing the problems of the contemporary Ukrainian state, both internal and external, and, of course, morality with a minimum criticism of opponents. In other words, a good candidate must emphasize the question, What do we do next?
“I can say without exaggeration that all of this was present in Yatseniuk’s position, but the chronically misguided electioneering remains uncured. Today everyone who is at least vaguely familiar with the country’s political situation will agree that the Ukrainian version of the parliamentary-presidential republic is total obscurantism, with different political forces having maximum conditions to obstruct reasonable reforms.”
Lesia BENDIUK, student at the Department of Political-Information Management, Ostroh Academy:
“The meeting with Yatseniuk was quite out of the ordinary as it had an unusual form. Interaction in the form of a monologue, dialogue, and polylogue resembled a seminar with a teacher and students. I did not feel any barrier between the politician and the audience, which helped create a good atmosphere in the hall. He is a professional in the sphere of economics, so it was interesting to listen to his speech, all the more so that he is a good orator. I felt that the students present at the meeting enjoyed listening and analyzing the guest’s thought, which was, no doubt, pleasant for Yatseniuk.”
