The undeniable answer is: truth. The life story of The Day’s interview subject Yevhen MARCHUK, leader of the Party of Freedom and the Yevhen Marchuk-Unity election bloc, provides additional answers to this question: strength also resides in wisdom and in unity, for without unity the country may sink into chaos. Mr. Marchuk celebrated his birthday on Jan. 28. The Day sincerely wishes the well-known politician good health, something that he has lacked in the past few months, and strength to fulfill all his plans. Our conversation with Mr. Marchuk was not confined to festive subjects.
“How long do you think the current government crisis will last?”
“It may turn out that no effective way to end this crisis will be found before the elections, and it may well assume a kind of permanent nature. The worst thing is that parliament will be putting the skids under laws that could stand a good chance of being passed under normal conditions — for example, those related to WTO membership. In my view, this is not Divine punishment, this is a manmade crisis ‘authored’ by five to seven of the highest-ranking Ukrainian politicians. After the elections, the situation will remain difficult until the new parliament is organized in the summer or even the fall. At the moment, the president’s initiatives to overcome the crisis are not working, and Roman Bezsmertny’s proposal for a coalition seems to be unacceptable. Volodymyr Lytvyn is apparently unwilling to join this agreement. What does this mean? It means that even new partners are not inclined to ride out the current situation. I think the time will come when the question of responsibility will arise. The point here is not just chaos and the disorganization of governmental institutions and administration but also the fact that Ukraine is incurring serious losses, first and foremost in the economy. I am talking about the drop in GDP, dwindling investments, and many other things, not to mention the delay in establishing a strong vertical structure of power — center, regions, and local government — within the framework of the updated Constitution. Even now it is clear what kind of political responsibility the president’s team, cabinet, and parliamentary leadership will have to bear. They say in their defense that reforms and transformations always cause pain and difficulties. That’s right, but not in this case. Today we don’t need any reconciliation commissions, protracted talks, etc.! We need responsible and determined professionals (top managers, according to the current buzzword) who are capable of creating mechanisms to avert, block, and suppress these kinds of crisis situations. Like it or not, governing the state is a difficult job that requires certain abilities and skills. Otherwise there may be undesirable consequences. A realistic analysis of the situation shows that today there is a danger that should not be ignored. There are signs that tensions in the higher echelons of power are not abating but are gradually increasing. I would like to be wrong, as they say, but there is a great danger of chaos.
“We cannot ignore the election topic. Some people say the coming elections in Ukraine will also be dirty. Do you think a political force that plays fairly has a chance of getting through to the voters?”
“I think the dirtiest tricks have not been used yet; maybe they’re still ahead. Today’s most widespread ploy is use of the administrative resource. The current government also seems to be suffering from this disease, whether in a centralized or decentralized way.
“As for how to get through to the voters, unfortunately, this is really very difficult for politicians who do not resort to populism, even wild populism. This reflects the condition of our society: the poorer the people the more they yield to the influence of populists and believe promises that either will never be fulfilled or will be, but many years later and by other politicians. This complicates matters for those political forces that adhere to the principle of objectivity, particularly where informing people is concerned, so that people can make the correct choice out of the huge electoral conglomerate. Voters should have an opportunity (I think this is the most important thing in the election campaign) to ask themselves, journalists, or another politician: dear friend, what are you capable of and what have you done in your lifetime? Could all the participants in the current race give an answer that would arouse a voter’s interest? The point is not whether a certain party or politician has the image of an oppositionist — some political forces and figures have long been in opposition to everyone. They have never worked in executive or administrative bodies, but they have been making promises throughout their political lifetime, and nobody seems to be asking them to report on the fulfillment of their promises. The vast majority of them even get away with speculating about establishing a new USSR-style union or making almost separatist statements that verge on violations of the constitutional provisions on the official language, etc. In reality, it is rather easy for the voter to assess all this, even though many people are still ready to swallow the bait when they are told that it was better before, there was a guaranteed future, and so on. In other words, the idea of ‘equality in poverty’ is being easily packaged and toyed with today. The statements of some participants in the current electoral process even deserve the epithet ‘maniacal.’ You must not say that white is black, but some do. We can only hope that in the course of time, our citizens will grow up to understand the difference between politicians who tell the truth and those who lull their compatriots with sweet fairy tales.
“In my view, it would be a good idea if the MPs who are holding on to their parliamentary seats first gave a public explanation of what they have done in the Verkhovna Rada. Some of them have not made even one speech or proposed at least one bill during the entire time of their mandate. Today it is not enough to know how laws are made and how complicated the procedure is: you have to know how to push a bill through parliamentary committees, ministries, the plenary session, etc. This also applies to politicians who eventually opt for the executive branch: it is not enough to just understand what and how to do things, although this is very important. One must know how to move (in the contemporary meaning of the word) not only declarations but also concrete decisions, including unpopular ones. When I worked in the executive branch, sometimes I not only had to make unpopular decisions but ‘push them through.’ I can recall the very difficult path of the laws on state social standards, on trade unions, and others. This took up a lot of time and nerves and required much energy and persistence. I saw political ‘cowards,’ who were unable, for instance, to go to the parliamentary rostrum and stand up for an unpopular but very necessary decision. This too is a great political risk.”
“Incidentally, what is your attitude to extending immunity even to deputies of local councils?”
“I think that in time the current scope of parliamentarians’ immunity in Ukraine will be abolished. I am in favor of this. I am convinced that the current Verkhovna Rada must do this during its last session.”
“What kind of present would be the most desirable one for you this year?”
“It’s difficult to respond immediately to such a question. Undoubtedly, it would be the success of our parliamentary election political project, which I joined a little belatedly because of illness. But I don’t think this would be the best present for me. I’d like to carry out all my intentions and plans for this year. I’d also like to finish the book I am writing. It is not a memoir but reflections on Ukraine’s present and future.”
