Arsenii Yatseniuk, ex-Speaker, ex-banker, ex-minister, albeit not the leader of a specific political force for the time being, knows the price of selling and purchasing one half of Ukraine. He says it won’t cost too much, given today’s financial crisis and the hryvnia devaluation rate: a mere ten billion dollars. Just about the right time for an expansion of Russian capital. Our young ad promising politician declared this in an interview with an Internet periodical and went to say, relying on three eyewitness sources, how property rights, including titles to national banks, are being bought in Ukraine:
“Suppose a bank in a neighboring country is ordered to issue loans. The banknotes are printed and loans are given to the right people. Then they visit [a Ukrainian - V.K.] bank and say, ‘Hi, fellas, we want a deposit account worth, let’s say, one billion dollars. We let you have it at 18 percent annual interest, of course, but you’ll have to give us 20 percent of your bank interest. I have heard this story from at least three persons,” says Arsenii Yatseniuk and adds, “I can’t rule out the possibility of some ten billion dollars being brought to Ukraine. What is ten billion dollars? Under the circumstances it is enough to buy one half of Ukraine.”
Why did he make this statement now? A statement made by a man who, during his recent visit to the United States, arranged for a IMF loan worth 16.5 billion dollars for Ukraine? There are countless answers to this question, including one to the effect that, under current conditions, any financial-industrial group upon which a politician trying to build his own political force has to relay, is trying to lower the competition risks, thus to raise them for the most dangerous competitors.
However, the most likely reasons behind this statement have to do with the incumbent government’s intention of unblocking the privatization process. If so, Yatseniuk is most likely playing for the Ukrainian team, warning against selling public property cheap, which is precisely what our government is forced under the circumstances.
Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko of Ukraine stated earlier that she would find it necessary to unblock the privatization process after reviving the Verkhovna Rada coalition. She promised to make every effort to revive this process in Ukraine. Yatseniuk’s admonitions appear to be especially topical during this complicated period probably because there are suspicions about the prime minister being prepared to make concessions to Russia. In fact, President Viktor Yushchenko of Ukraine, who had previously resolutely blocked this hard cash input, due to his lack of confidence in the prime minister and the danger of spending this money for only consumption purposes, relented in November and okayed the sale of Odesa’s seaport factory (OPZ) (which the State Property Fund’s ex-head Mykhailo Chechetov would have described as a “gem in the crown of Ukraine.’’ The Ukrainian cabinet has declared that both the OPZ and Ukrtelecom will be up for sale.
Will there be buyers? There will be, no question about that. The point in question is who will get hold of our national assets and how they will be used from then on. Mukhtar Ablyazov, chairman of the board, BTA Bank (Russia), made a statement on Dec. 10, saying that “Ukraine has a staggering economic potential; it ranks with Europe’s most foreign-inland-investment-attractive countries.” He went on to say that Ukraine’s current temporary economic hardships stem from the global economic crisis; that Ukraine’s highly qualified manpower, ample natural resources, its advantageous location in [the heart of] Europe, operating one of Europe’s most active domestic consumer markets, as well as other factors, add up to a most favorable investment climate, in terms of both existing and prospective businesses. Ablyazov practically confirmed Yatseniuk’s information by saying that “Our business is expanding investments in your country because it believes in Ukraine’s future.” He further informed that the Ukrainian BTA Bank stockholders have invested more than 280 million in its stock this fall.
The Day asked Oleksandr Riabchenko, director of the International Privatization, Property and Investment Management Institute, for comment on Yatseniuk’s statement. Riabchenko said that only commodities put up for sale can be purchased. He believes that there is a little likelihood of anyone willing to sell real estate in Ukraine because of the plummeting prices: “Those willing to make such transactions will have to wait.” Riabchenko says that privatization is hardly realistic under the circumstances, considering that the government has announced the revival of the process for a number of years. Such auctions must be announced by the State Property Fund. As one of Ukraine’s leading experts in the privatization realm. Riabchenko says there will be a “special situation” created for the OPZ: “I don’t believe that Ukraine will put the OPZ up for sale for the highest bidder on a large scale. I think there will be special clauses imposing tangible restrictions. I hope this will be meant for the national investor’s benefit, although we have never practiced anything like this. Anyway, this factory is very special; it has a special place in Ukraine’s economy, as well as in the relationships between Ukraine and Russia.” As for the possibility of selling Ukrtelecom, Riabchenko has his doubts. He agrees that this business has to be sold [in order to be better managed], but notes, “Those who are opposed to this have always been stronger than those who are supporting the idea. I don’t see any forces in this country that are capable of putting Ukrtelecom up for sale and actually selling this company.” In regard to banks, Riabchenko believes there are organizations in Ukraine that are tasked with monitoring the situation and preventing a purposeful political expansion on the part of one country against any other one, because such expansion is fraught with danger; no country should look the other way. Ukraine has passed the danger point over the past years, when foreign capital found its way into this country’s largest systemic banks. Riabchenko says that upholding this process is more dangerous now than ever before: “Market economy crises are perfectly normal phenomena, but we cannot allow any IMF loans being received by the National Bank of Ukraine without knowing how this money is going to be used.”
I might as well end at this point, except that I would like to quote from Yatseniuk’s interview with a Russian newspaper: “The weaker we are within, the stronger the pressure from outside. Any powerful country strives to benefit from its weaker neighbors’ inner problems. Such is the Big Brother’s Rule.
