“I am prepared for a long struggle,” said People’s Deputy Volodymyr FILENKO, one of the founders of the Forum of National Salvation, in an interview with The Day . He added he favors an evolutionary path of development. What distinguishes Mr. Filenko from many other opposition leaders is that he never repeats such phrases as “Down with,” “Shame,” and never opts for confrontation where dialogue is possible. He usually takes a clearly defined but not unconditional stand. Mr. Filenko knows very well the difference between the Viktor Yushchenko reality and myth, which he thinks is the result of a series of mistakes made by the national democrats, does not believe in the threat of any revenge of the Left, but considers the Communists as an important part of the party of power. The Day ’s questions and Mr. Filenko’s answers clarify how the bearers of liberal views have found themselves in the ranks of a motley anti-ideological opposition.
THERE CAN BE NO 100% GUARANTEES IN POLITICS
“Mr. Filenko, how did you assess the Appeal to the People signed by the President, Verkhovna Rada Speaker, and Prime Minister Viktor Yushchenko?”
“The appeal was preceded by a very strong reaction of the president and his entourage to the establishment of our forum. They felt more free during the Ukraine Without Kuchma campaign. But it was the emergence of the forum that united on a certain basis both the Right and the Left, and this clearly disturbed them. It was suggested that those who did not join Ukraine Without Kuchma launch the Ukraine for Truth campaign. Obviously, a certain public movement started to be formed, and the leadership feared this dangerous forum. The leadership de facto recognized us as the opposition, so a dialogue is now underway along the leadership-forum line. This is why came up with an appeal of our own.
“We first planned to write a statement in reply to the appeal of this country’s top officials, but then opted for an appeal. The forum expressed surprise over of Viktor Yushchenko’s signature on this document. We have been expecting something unusual from Mr. Kuchma for a long time, as we have from Mr. Pliushch who has long ceased to be an independent political figure and just carries out his official duties. We noted that Mr. Pliushch had to sign this document primarily as a citizen and a people’s deputy. The point is that he, as Verkhovna Rada chairman, has the right to sign only the documents discussed and passed by Verkhovna Rada by a margin of 226 or in other cases 300 votes.”
“Mr. Pliushch can only speak on behalf of Verkhovna Rada when the latter has discussed and accordingly passed a resolution on an item according to its rules. But what was unexpected for us was the signature of Mr. Yushchenko. So we considered two antagonistic and pluralistic viewpoints. Some said they didn’t know what circumstances made Mr. Yushchenko sign the appeal: this had first to be looked into. So we decided to condemn his actions but still not write him off as a democrat. The other approach is to condemn the premier’s actions and consider him dead and buried. Life is very multifaceted: if you lose something, you always find something else. The more so that our most recent history knows many instances of defecting from one camp to another. The Reforms and Order fraction recently had a brief meeting with the premier, and we could get answers to some of our questions.”
“In other words, there was no dialogue such as we mentioned at the beginning?”
“No, there is no dialogue yet, or, to be more exact, the dialogue is so far going at the level of signs and correspondence.”
“You were disappointed at Mr. Yushchenko’s signature on the document of three. Did you have earlier any reasons to consider him a leader? Did he ever give you any guarantees? On what grounds could he be assigned to this camp? Why has this been a surprise only now?”
“There can be no 100% guarantees in politics. Speaking of facts more or less resembling guarantees, I can mention a party membership card, certain relevant political agreements, and exchange of cadres. We’ve been saying until recently that Mr. Yushchenko’s actions were as close as possible to our ideological foundations, although our relationship was never formalized.”
“What are your minimum and maximum programs?”
“The minimum program is to clear the way to open democratic elections, both presidential and parliamentary. And it seems to me it should be the question of an early presidential election because the president is now, to put it mildly, in not the best situation. But we understand that replacing one president with another will not solve our pressing problems. We think we must simultaneously discuss a range of issues concerning the redistribution of power and responsibilities within the triangle of the president, parliament, and cabinet.”
“Do you think your forum, as an association of natural persons, can assume responsibility for carrying out such broad actions?”
“The forum itself cannot do this, but, obviously, it was the first to raise these problems, which means that in order to solve the problems, the forum should be expanded and reinforced. This process should also embrace official structures: the president should display goodwill if he has some, and so should the parliament and parliamentary majority. Two options are possible here. The first is when the opposition and executive sit down at the negotiating table and solve all the problems, including providing certain guarantees. The other is solving the problems in the streets. Obviously, this is a less desirable alternative, but we should not forget there also is a third option, an active offensive by the regime which, by resorting to reprisals, intimidation, orchestrating splits, and provocation, would seem to finally establish and strengthen itself. I must note, however, this would be a short-term affair completely unacceptable in the historical perspective because this is not the way to solve the problems that exist.”
POLITICS IS DONE NOT BY REFINED BUT REAL PEOPLE
“Many, being aware of the quality of power, ask why things are the way they are. Yet, watching the actions of those who call themselves the opposition, they have no affection for them, not because they think such people are bad but because they are highly skeptical about the opposition’s ability to create something positive. For the question is not replacing some people with others but to see if they are capable, by force of their educational level, skill, and adherence to certain political technologies, of proposing a different way of life. Many showed their inconsistency even when, as you said, Reforms and Order advised Mr. Yushchenko not to take Ms. Tymoshenko into the government. Yet, Mr. Stetskiv wrote recently in an open letter to Mr. Yushchenko: ‘Your signature on the appeal contravenes the laws of man and God because it was put on a day when a lady was arrested, who had been the most devoted supporter of your policy of reforms over the past year.’ Where is there any consistency?”
“One has to make a distinction between Ms. Tymoshenko’s activities as a businesswoman when she headed the United Energy Systems of Ukraine and her activities as a member of the government. Moreover, yours truly passed through a period of political competition with Pavlo Lazarenko and his team, where Ms. Tymoshenko played far from the last role. So we know the turf, as do those who affixed their signatures [to Stetskiv’s letter]. They took the latter period and appealed to Mr. Yushchenko in whose government she had been a vice premier for a year. There can be different assessments here. We thought Ms. Tymoshenko should not have been included in the government because of her past. Still, we assess positively her performance as a vice premier. Mr. Yushchenko must have taken her on as a professional who knew the energy system and many other things. And relying on her experience, she played a positive role because she knew and saw where and what was being stolen.”
“It is common knowledge that Leonid Kuchma cautioned Mr. Yushchenko about Ms. Tymoshenko’s past. So this raises the question if Ms. Tymoshenko has any moral grounds to attack Leonid Kuchma.”
“Politics is done not by refined people but by real ones, warts and all. Besides, there are almost no refined politicians in Ukraine, so we can only discuss the number of human faults and mistakes: some have more, others have less. It often happens in politics that people act together if their interests coincide. So today the interests of the forum and of Ms. Tymoshenko coincide. But I must emphasize that it is not Ms. Tymoshenko’s party which offers her leadership and is ready to support her. We will cooperate with Ms. Tymoshenko until we find the truth in matters of our common concern and pave the way for an open democratic election. As to Ms. Tymoshenko, let her be tried by prosecutors and judges on the one hand and by the voters on the other.”
EVOLUTION NEVER GOES AT A PRESET SPEED
“Some say Ms. Tymoshenko was arrested at an inappropriate moment, others claim the compromising materials were only just found. The Forum of National Salvation has poured more fuel on the fires, and I think many of those who raise the question of forum’s funding connect it with Ms. Tymoshenko, and nobody comments on it.”
“The forum as an independent organization has never been heavily funded: we’ve held a few sittings, which does not require much money. Now about the Ukraine Without Kuchma campaign. I can say nothing about funding because our party is not involved in it. What I can say is that we stand behind the Ukraine for Truth action and I assure you we don’t have Ms. Tymoshenko’s money. Moreover, this action doesn’t involve much money. Nevertheless, if all Tymoshenko-Lazarenko shenanigans occurred during the presidency of Mr. Kuchma who was unaware of them, then I begin to reflect on this. This raises further questions about the investigation of high profile cases. In fact none of them has been investigated to the end, while some of them are brought to light only in times of political tension. For Mr. Lazarenko might still be here had he not run for president. Accordingly, Ms. Tymoshenko might also be now free of any criminal charges if she hadn’t joined the Forum of National Salvation.”
“The point is that the situation we are discussing does not depend on whether Ukraine is with or without Kuchma. A similar situation exists in the executive branch supposedly headed by different people. This kind of situation is not subject to any revolutions. Many experts think that capitalization in Ukraine is on the decline, which provides very good starting opportunities for Russian capital, and the great friends of the Ukrainian people often behave worse than its enemies. Do you see a danger? Or let all this crumble but our logic prevail?”
“Yes, I see such a danger. Yet, I would like to note that capitalization dwindles contrary to reforms. Speaking in real terms, nobody has carried out any economic reforms. Suffice it to recall privatization by trusteeship. It’s very convenient.”
“A question on Reforms and Order as such. We have already concluded there are grounds to doubt Mr. Yushchenko’s qualities as a leader, and there is a record of your party’s relationship with this politician. Does it simply regard Yushchenko as a promising brand name on the political market? For it would be wrong to say that Reforms and Order is a bunch of philanthropists who have no interests of their own in privatization and other processes.”
“I can say our party is an attempt to create a systemic political and ideological force. If we have not yet become one, the causes of this lie not so much in us as in the environment we are really in. Nobody else in Ukraine has managed to do what we are trying to. What is more, the leadership, particularly the president, who is outside the political system as such, is an obstacle to forming systemic and organized political forces. Our main goal is to draw up a program which envisions an active role for our party and a model of government structure and public administration, which we want to implement through legislative, executive, and other activities. So ideological proximity is the decisive factor. As to interests, we favor the formula that there are nationwide, party-related, and personal interests. These are the priorities we have chosen. I am aware this is an ideal pattern, but Reforms and Order is not going to seek anything else.”
“This might create the impression that the forum’s statement is a bargaining chip for Mr. Yushchenko.”
“When it comes to bargaining, we accept these types: either we unite our political capacities and go to the elections together or we will be able to become a serious factor in a future parliamentary coalition and coalition government. Until this is achieved, there will be no question of serious influence.”
THE PRESIDENT’S BURDEN SHOULD BE LIGHTENED
“Is the Forum of National Salvation aware of who will save Ukraine without Kuchma?”
“We do not suggest replacing one president with another without altering the very mechanism of relationships. So the question is whether it is necessary to make some fundamental decisions. Elections should be on the basis of proportional representation with parliament being able to form the government.”
“Could this be a coalition of the party of power with the Communists?”
“This is very possible. We are not so much for this option as for the clarity of who has formed the government and who is politically responsible, for nobody now bears responsibility.”
“What would this responsibility mean?”
“If we create a system whereby the parliament is authorized to form the government and certain political forces bear responsibility, we will at least show that the Communists are a major component of the party of power which assigned them the role of Her Majesty’s opposition in order to show the West that we have an opposition, which they embody, and, on the other hand, to scare a certain part of the electorate with the possibility of a supposed revenge of the Left. This implies direct agreements on actions and tactics between Bankova Street (the Presidential Administration — Ed.) and the Politburo of the Communist Party of Ukraine, as well as personally between President Kuchma and Petro Symonenko. This kind of situation suits the leadership quite well: what caused quite a ripple about the forum is that it has admitted representatives of the Right. The leadership, on their part, claim they are from the Right and shift all blame onto the Left. On the other hand, this leadership also to some extent suits the Communists, because the former does not pursue any real counter-policy against the Left. With due account of certain economic interests, it is quite possible that the formation of a workable oligarch-Communist majority in Verkhovna Rada is just the matter of time. Should this happen, I want it to occur not only de facto but also de jure so that one could know who formed and bears political responsibility for it. And those who failed to enter the governing bodies, will be able to form a real opposition and criticize some actions or other of the regime. This would in any case be positive.”
“But there already is a way out: the law on proportional representation. All you have to do is override the presidential veto.”
“No, there are a few weak points here. First, the law should set out all the details on forming a government. If you look at the developed democratic countries, such as Britain, France, or Germany, you’ll see they form governments according to the real results of elections. We don’t. The reason is that we lack elementary experience, political culture, and the sense of pragmatic expediency from which we must proceed. With this in view, we should amend the Constitution. This is one thing. Secondly, I think Mr. Kuchma is overburdened by the huge number of duties he must carry out. It’s hard physically. Any president should have his burden eased by having some of his duties removed. But a proportional representation election law will not, unfortunately, solve all the problems. In addition to all this, the political elite must analyze its past mistakes to be able to march on. Take the Gongadze case, for instance: it has to be analyzed and the murderers found so that nobody else will be killed in the future. The president admits the fact of recording and bugging in the interview your newspaper published; yet, he doesn’t answer the question of who killed the journalist.”
“Most Ukrainians will agree to the names you have given to some extent. But opinions differ about ways of improving the current situation and achieving the desired results. Do you think the methods you suggest will help carry out the first stage in reforming the system of power, which is, after all, quite a positive thing? And suppose the law on the proportional representation helps the Communists to come to power as a result of an election. Who would bear responsibility in this case?”
“Well, the number of Communists in the parliament is steadily declining. I personally think there are no reasons why we should speak about a Left parliamentary majority. But I can say that even if this happened, it would bring about a fatal situation, even in the historical dimension, because this would simplify the situation for the Left and Right alike, which is something we dream of. They would in turn simplify the situation by doing normal work instead of indulging in demagogy. So it would be absolutely normal in the historical dimension.”
