These days Ukraine marks the 20th anniversary of the People’s Movement of Ukraine (Narodnyi Rukh Ukrainy, NRU). On Sept. 8-10, 1989, the NRU Constituent Assembly was held in Kyiv, where the First NRU Congress elected the writer Ivan Drach head of the Rukh. According to Drach, people of various walks of life were represented in the NRU: from intelligentsia to housewives. Initially, this was a great advantage for the Rukh, but later it came to building up the state, it caused a lack of unity. We should not forget, though, that the national-democratic movement has achieved its aim: Ukraine’s independence was declared, and this has become an integral part of our history.
Largely thanks to President Viktor Yushchenko’s efforts and despite great difficulties, Ukrainian authorities decided to mark Rukh’s 20th anniversary. Unfortunately, many politicians cannot or do not want to understand the role the NRU played in restoring of Ukraine’s statehood — they regard it as a destructive force. Perhaps, these people need time to understand that Soviet times are over, and we live in a new country. For example, the Baltic States marked the 20th anniversary of the Popular Fronts with certain support from the government, mass media, and citizenry.
Why doesn’t Ukraine have any of this? What role was played by the national-democratic forces in reviving the Ukrainian state? What were the reasons for the Rukh’s decline? These and other questions are raised in The Day’s interview with the well-known public and political figure Ivan DRACH.
Mr. Drach, you were among those who made a great contribution to the NRU’s development and Ukraine’s independence. Twenty years later, how do you assess the Rukh’s activity? Has it achieved all of its tasks?
“The launch of the People’s Movement of Ukraine is in the same category as the fall of the Berlin wall, creation of the Polish Solidarno , and Popular fronts in the Baltic states, Moldova etc. Ukraine was no different here; we had the same problems as the other countries of Eastern Europe. Therefore, we tried to resolve them by launching a similar movement, which was later received the Ukrainian name ‘Rukh.’ In general, all these events were part of the all-European wave that swept over every country, including Russia. The ‘orange’ events were the second wave for Ukraine, and now various indicators show that a kind of the third wave is picking up steam. Nobody knows so far when it will take place and in what form.
“Our first goal was to withdraw from the Soviet Union and declare the independent state of Ukraine. Our second aim was to create a free and independent individual. I should mention that people of various walks of life were represented in the Rukh: from intelligentsia to housewives. Our main achievement was the revival of the independent Ukrainian state. But we were naїve to think that after the declaration of independence the remaining problems would simply disappear. This was a mistake.”
On Nov. 9, 1989, Nikolay Ryzhkov, head of the USSR Council of Ministers noted at a session of the Soviet Politburo: “We should be afraid of Russia and Ukraine rather than the Baltic states. It smacks of a total collapse.” In your opinion, what role did the Ukrainian national-democratic movement play in the USSR’s collapse?
“The Soviet Union was based on two huge powers—Russia and Ukraine. The latter had a special status in the USSR: the Communist Party of Ukraine included nearly three million people; the CP(b)U had its own Politburo, etc. It was a state inside a state. For example, more than a half of the total number of inmates in Russian prisons were Ukrainian dissidents. Because of this Ukraine was being carefully watched all the time ... Things were made more complicated by the fact that for 20 years the CP(b)U was headed by the intelligent and cunning Volodymyr Shcherbytsky, a faithful servant of Moscow.
“Therefore, when Moscow viewed different democratic movements in one way or another, it paid special attention to Ukraine. I should say that here we were assisted by God: the struggle for power between Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin was taking place in Russia. This greatly facilitates faster resolution of Ukrainian problems. On the other hand, many Ukrainian communists, including Leonid Kravchuk and Ivan Plushch, entered the picture, seeking for ways to make themselves known and establish a state. Thus, the Ukrainian national-democratic movement has played one of the key roles in overthrowing of the communist regime.”
Compared to Ukraine, representatives of national-democratic forces managed to come to power in other countries of the former social camp like Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Poland, and the Czech Republic. As a result, all these countries are in the European Union. What prevented Ukraine from doing the same?
“The Czech Republic and Poland were considerably different from us and the Baltic States. They had a state of their own for many centuries, so it was much easier for them to restore it. Even the Baltic States had their own state from 1920 until 1940 and were ready in one way or another to revive their statehood. Just like Ukraine, the Baltic States had a special status within the Soviet Union. When a person came to Vilnius, Tallinn, or Riga he or she felt at once that this was something different than the Soviet Union. This is the reason why all these republics found their feet much sooner.
“Our state was only 24-percent ready for independence. Why? First, after the first elections only a quarter of the Ukrainian MPs were national democrats, headed by Ihor Yukhnovsky. The same thing happened in the vote for Kravchuk vs. Viacheslav Chornovil: only a quarter of all citizens voted for Chornovil. These examples really prove the extent to which Ukraine was ready for this situation. However, even with such a low number, but under the general influence of the rest of the countries, our people achieved their aim — Ukraine’s independence. The 1991 referendum was a vivid confirmation of this.”
In his article entitled “The Regularities of Collapse” and carried by Den’ Oleksandr Suhoniako wrote that “the Rukh’s collapse was a naturally determined and programmed state of all the strata of Ukrainian society.” Do you agree with this opinion?
“I read this article and I want to say that it contains more of Yevhen Sverstiuk’s ideas than those of Suhoniako. I will respond in the following way: What would have happened if there had been no Rukh, and Ukraine had not acquired its statehood? Kravchuk would be heading the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine. Sverstiuk would still be serving his sentence in prison, and Suhoniako would be a banking clerk. And now we have the following state of affairs: Kravchuk was Ukraine’s president, Sverstiuk is a philosopher, and Suhoniako — the head of the Ukrainian Association of Banks. Everyone is blaming the Rukh for having failed to do one thing or another, but they all forget that it has done the main thing — in a complicated situation it brought Ukraine to independence.”
It seems to me that Rukh’s example should have taught national-democratic forces to avoid making similar mistakes in the future. But Our Ukraine headed by Yushchenko has followed in Rukh’s footsteps. Why can’t Ukrainian politicians learn any lessons from this?
“It seems to me that other countries have similar problems. The only difference with Ukraine is that it has no state-building knowledge. That is why what she failed to do in the early 1990s was done in 2004 — gaining the freedom of speech. Thus, we are evolving little by little, acquiring these or other features. This is a natural development of an embryo: nine months should pass.”
How much is the government helping to mark Rukh’s 20th anniversary?
“Last year I attended the celebration of the 20th anniversary of the Lithuanian S judis in Vilnius. I should note that everything was done on the highest level there with the assistance of all branches of power and institutions: the president, Cabinet of Ministers, parliament, and mass media. We have a much more complicated situation; the President has issued an edict, and then parliament had 34 sessions before it passed a resolution on marking the Rukh’s 20th anniversary. The Party of Regions and the communists opine that the Rukh emerged as a destructive force. Thus, people simply do not understand the essence and the meaning of the Rukh for Ukraine.”
In your opinion, can the coming presidential elections bring about any surprise?
“The Ukrainian nation always made some right decisions in critical periods, so I don’t think that we are doomed to a setback. Ukrainians should find a positive decision so that our state-building process and the strengthening of the free individual will continue.”
