“All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” This quote from Edmund Burke begins and ends the book Plan of this Country’s Development, which was presented last Thursday by Viche Ukrayiny, a national civic organization. In fact, this was not the book’s first launch (in December 2004 I attended a similar event), but this time the drafters of a 20-year tactical and strategic program for Ukraine’s development presented it as an easy-to-read synopsis “for individual and collective consideration.” What is more, the organizers decided that the presentation should resemble as much as possible a viche (people’s assembly), an ancient type of Ukrainian democracy (both in form and in spirit). For this purpose they had to rent the Sports Palace because other halls could not house the 5,000 expected listeners. There was a green circle in the center of the hall instead of a stage, a head table, and a rostrum. The session kicked off with a drumming show, which was supposed to bring the viche closer to its ancient analogue. To tell the truth, it was difficult to call this event a “viche” because its main goal was to present a ready-made product. But this word is very apt if one means the involvement of 30,000 people from all walks of life in drafting the plan over two and a half years, as well as numerous tours of all Ukrainian regions by the viche’s organizers and ideologists.
In spite of its somewhat formal-sounding title, the book’s presentation was in no way a dull affair — not in the least owing to the oratorical talents of the plan’s ideologists Inna Bohoslovska, president of the Viche Ukrayiny national civic organization; Oleksandr Chaly, Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Ambassador of Ukraine, a renowned foreign-policy expert; entrepreneur Iryna Horina; and political scientist Vadym Karasiov, who is well known to The Day’s readers. However, owing to the free admission to the viche, there was no way to avoid surprises in the shape of some rather eccentric participants. One of them, instead of addressing a question to the speakers, offered his services to spacecraft designers. Perhaps because of the limited rental period in the Palace of Sports, some ideologues of the plan, who profess social tolerance in contrast to the theory of a class struggle, were themselves not always tolerant toward such members of our society.
I will not recapitulate the viche’s basic tactics and strategies for turning Ukraine into “a 21st-century Switzerland” because this is explained in the plan’s abridged version. Even its authors repeatedly urged members of the audience to read it through calmly and thoughtfully, rather than relying on a verbal summary. Briefly, the project to develop our country is based on three strategic elements: a unifying national idea “Ukraine — That’s Me!,” active neutrality in geopolitics, and national economic egoism in geoeconomy. According to one of the plan’s authors, former deputy foreign minister of Ukraine O. Chaly, the policy of active neutrality means that “we continue to pursue our Eurointegration policy, but we do not consider membership as a mandatory goal. We take Switzerland or Norway as our model. We continue cooperation with NATO and Euro-Atlantic integration, but we do not strive to join NATO.” In Mr. Chaly’s view, this policy will “reconcile us with ourselves and the world and give us the main thing: the ability to say the same in Washington, Brussels, and Moscow instead of furthering the policy of vacillation that sometimes causes nothing but shame.”
Still, the proposed plan of development is only one of countless theories being proposed with regard to the future of Ukraine. Concerned people will probably raise more than one objection to the proposed strategy. But, at the same time, its undoubted advantage is that it exists and, by virtue of this, can spur various sociopolitical forces to map out alternative projects for Ukraine’s development. This may also be, to quote Ms. Bohoslovska, “the beginning of a large-scale public debate on the future.” “Politics should not control the people. People, individuals, society must place a social order with politicians,” she pointed out.
Incidentally, it has not been ruled out that in due time the civic organization Viche Ukrayiny will emerge as a political party. According to Ms. Bohoslovska’s, a small number of those who would like to and will be able to engage in politics will form “a small professional party that will spread the viche’s ideas across the political space.” It is only natural to suggest that this kind of party, one that has a well-grounded program devoid of empty rhetoric, and also experience in communicating with ordinary people — may well assume the role of a much sought-after constructive opposition. It may also introduce into politics people who know how to heed the opinion of the masses.
