While Yuliya Tymoshenko is attaching her name to election blocs and preparing for a triumphal entry of her very special alleged beauty into a new parliament, another most popular lady politician, Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine (PSPU) leader Natalia Vitrenko, is racking her brains on how to borrow money to pay a deposit so that her party can register as eligible to run in the election. In the high emotional pitch so typical of her, she is also trying to keep the electorate from rash decisions, such as voting for the political forces which, in her opinion, contribute to turning Ukraine into what she calls a reservation of the West. Although Ms. Vitrenko takes a very unusual stand, she has a very stable electorate of her own in our society, so her sometimes all too categorical judgments still present interest for journalists. As all kinds of forecasts are now in vogue, The Day has requested political veteran Natalia Vitrenko to comment on the election campaign. Yet, the interview began with discussing the know-how recently invented by one of her political opponents.
“Ms. Vitrenko, were you, as leader of a party and perhaps an election alliance, surprised with the phrase ‘visit in the rank of a bloc leader’ occurring in media reports on Viktor Yushchenko’s visit to the US?”
“All this is natural. Let me start from afar: Yushchenko chaired the National Bank of Ukraine starting in 1992. As an economist, I am only too well aware of the role the banking system can play in the destruction of the nation’s economy. I emphasize that the banking system of Ukraine worked to the detriment of Ukraine’s national interests. Yushchenko could not help but be aware of this. The expropriation of public savings, the confiscation of current assets from enterprises, free circulation of the dollar (a foreign currency accounted to almost half the total money circulation in this country), the lost money of the Ostarbeiteren, the scandal about the placement of gold and hard currency reserves, and, finally, the latest developments concerning the Slovyansky and Ukrayina banks, are all the handiwork of Mr. Yushchenko as chairman of the NBU Board of Governors. I insist that he defends the interests of foreign capital, which now circulates freely in our country, rather than of the people of Ukraine. In other words, Viktor Yushchenko has repeatedly shown that he is not an independent politician but one who does what he is told. Thisis why he was dismissed from the office of prime minister because an anti- American coalition had in fact been formed in parliament. The ideologically-different factions understood the need to counter the US influence. For the businessmen sitting in the session room also had other ties: some with Russia, some with Germany, some with Kazakhstan, etc. However, the business ties of some deputies make the latter dependent: they are afraid to blurt out a wrong word. But we, proletarians, have nothing to lose but our chains. This is why now I am often approached by my colleagues, even those who earlier made up part of the so-called parliamentary majority, and asked, ‘Ms. Vitrenko, please speak this from the rostrum, and we will support you!’ This is why we managed to dismiss Yushchenko.”
“But the ‘anti-American coalition’ then collapsed.”
“Look what happened then. Anatoly Kinakh became premier. I didn’t vote for him; I didn’t create him. Nonetheless, I can’t help admitting he thinks more about the interests of Ukraine. Of course, he is also under IMF pressure, he failed to follow the suit of Russian Premier Kasianov who began to pursue a more independent policy, but still he cannot be compared to Yushchenko. Besides, Kinakh inherited a most difficult legacy. Aware of Ukraine’s huge political, economic and financial dependence on the US, of course, he is trying to keep relations going in this direction. But see what is going on. Kinakh went to the United States as a full-fledged premier of an independent country: whether or not you like it, this action is quite clear. And suddenly we learn that the ex-premier’s trip was also scheduled for the same time, and they did not cross paths only by a pure chance! This raises a question: who does Yushchenko think he is to be so fervently trumpeted up in the pro-American media? Our party has held 400 rallies all over Ukraine during the past two weeks. Has anybody reported it anywhere? Yushchenko went to climb Hoverla mountain this became known to each and all. Obviously, the same American capital, the same Western circles are still very interested in him. They invited him there to offset the effect of Kinakh’s visit. As to Yushchenko and company, they are happy to enlist US political, or even financial, support, for his election campaign will cost him a fortune. It is our people who campaign door to door and circulate our party newspapers and leaflets, but they have to pay for everything, including information services.”
“As we have already began to talk about the pre-election lineup, let’s continue with this. How do you think the situation will further unfold in and around Our Ukraine?”
“There could be a scenario of Verkhovna Rada being occupied by purely pro-American forces, with Yushchenko on the right flank, Tymoshenko and Horbulin in the center, and Moroz on the left flank. The Communist position is ambiguous and hard to grasp. Let me dwell on two points. Number one: they once voted for the electric power bill introduced by Yuliya Tymoshenko. Do you remember Ms. Tymoshenko crossing the session room and shaking Petro Symonenko’s hand in an outburst of gratitude? Number two: when the 2002 budget was put to a vote, they supported the bill drafted by the Turchynov’s budget committee and envisaging UAH 5 billion in revenues from privatization. But on November 7, addressing a rally, Petro Symonenko clamored that the Communists were against the privatization of the oblenerho (regional electricity generation and supply enterprises — Ed.). Is Mr. Symonenko unaware that next year’s privatization program calls for privatizing 19 oblenerho enterprises? In this way Yushchenko is being supported on the Left by not only the Moroz people but also the Communists. This is a national disaster! Even the construction of capitalism based on the national bourgeoisie (or national capitalism, like in China) is a more progressive step compared to the feudalism and small-scale rural economy widely practiced today in Ukraine. But the Yushchenko clan is not the national but the comprador (parasitic) bourgeoisie, which in this country is creating a draft that sucks everything possible out of here and presents the greatest threat to our national security. What do they want to turn our state into, could it be some kind of reservation?”
“How would you explain this attitude of the Communists toward what you call the comprador bourgeoisie?”
“Our Communists are of a very complex economic nature. On the one hand, they are obviously working toward integration with Russia and Belarus. On the other hand, they supported Lazarenko (a historical fact), turned a blind eye on what Tymoshenko was doing in the energy market, and, a year ago, voted against the Yushchenko government’s report on preparations for winter, etc. I don’t know what makes them do such things. Could they be doing so in the hope of getting financial aid because they need money? Meanwhile, if Yushchenko, Tymoshenko, Horbulin, and Moroz are joined by the Communists, this grouping will account for 85% of parliamentary seats.”
“What role will you in this case assign to yourself and your party in the struggle for votes?”
“I do not overestimate my own role in these processes. You know, if I fail to make it into parliament, it won’t be the end of my life. I will go to work at the Academy of Sciences and will, after all, be doing research: there is a lot of material. But I just don’t see today any other political force which could stop this clan. Who else could? This beheaded TUNDRA? They can’t say anything clearly.”
“Have you decided yet whether you will be running on your party ticket or in your district?”
“Not yet. I just cannot imagine telling people in my district that I’m not running there. It would be a psychological trauma for them. But it would be equally bad if my name is missing from the party list or, say, the Vitrenko bloc list. There’s nothing to be done: we passed this stupid law, so we’ll have to choose. Also outrageous is the clause on money deposits. I used to say: let us allow parties to choose whether to gather support signatures or to make a money deposit. If we do not have the money, why should I think about who I have to borrow it from? Why am I being put in such a dependent situation? In other words, there are real problems.”
