It is perhaps the greatest achievement of independent Ukraine that we have lived for 20 years in the freest post-Soviet state (in addition to the Baltic countries). But we woke up in a different country on October 11. The Pechersky Court verdict put Ukraine in the spotlight of the world community. The sentence read out by Judge Kirieiev only aggravated the longtime political crisis, which may have unpredictable consequences. But, on the other hand, the consequences may well be very predictable – pulling the plug on Ukraine’s European aspirations.
Yet things are not totally bad so far. The point of no return has not yet been passed. It is not too late to backpedal on the Tymoshenko case if the president wishes to do so, the well-known sociologist Yevhen HOLOVAKHA believes.
Mr. Holovakha, the president was to stop over in Brussels on October 20, but this did not happen. Moreover, Brussels denied Yanukovych an air corridor to fly to Cuba. He had to fly to Latin America via the Middle East, China, the Pacific, and Mexico. What do you think of this first warning about the Tymoshenko case?
“The leadership cannot assess properly the consequences of opposition leader trials. It looks like Yanukovych will only be able to travel to Cuba, Belarus, and Russia. But it seems to me the ‘Regionnaires’ will be wise after the event and eventually think better of it. They are so far unaware of the stupidity of what they have done.”
Really? Many Regionnaires are very well aware. They say Ukraine is at last living by its own wits instead of obeying Western instructions.
“It is terrible that Ukraine is living by such kind of wits. They don’t understand who they are challenging. This has already happened before. Take, for example, Milosevic who met an ignominious end [Milosevic was arrested and taken to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. – Author]. Lukashenko, too, faces a not so radiant future. The point is the Belarusians are not the Ukrainians: they are more patient.
“Luckily, some options are still open in our case. Ukraine can still improve its somewhat tarnished reputation.”
What do you think their logic is?
“Let me tell you. They are the government of pragmatics and think that Westerners are as much pragmatic as they are. What is good for us is good for you. But a certain Tymoshenko is standing in their way. They don’t understand that Westerners have a slightly different mentality.”
When almost everybody believed that the article under which Tymoshenko was convicted will be decriminalized, the situation took a new, unexpected, turn. On October 12 the Security Service instituted new criminal proceedings against Tymoshenko about her role in the notorious United Energy Systems of Ukraine. She has already been questioned on this matter.
“These tings are interlinked – decriminalize the article, on the one hand, and keep her by the short hairs, on the other. Even if the viewpoint that she should be released takes the upper hand, she still cannot be fully freed. This means there must be some way to keep her under control.”
Incidentally, the Tymoshenko case has triggered a unique geopolitical phenomenon. For the first time, Washington, Brussels, and Moscow have taken the same stand. Medvedev said it is an anti-Russian conviction. Putin added that the contract had been signed by the state-run entities Gazprom and Naftohaz, not by Tymoshenko.
“Putin’s words should not be interpreted unambiguously. The point is that, apart from Putin’s interests, Russia also has some long-term great-power strategies. While restoring centuries-old imperial traditions, the Russian government may well swallow its current grudges for the sake of reintegrating Ukraine forever. Putin may be saying that [Tymoshenko’s conviction] is aimed against Russia and explaining behind the scenes: ‘Well, if the West does not accept you, come to us even if you have hurt me.’”
In general, is there any likelihood of Ukraine throwing itself to the tender mercies of Russia?
“It is not yet on the agenda. Only some extremely radical Regionnaires are saying we need a vector, where we are humiliated. All the other keep saying that, no matter what the situation may be, we have made our choice once and for all.”
But the West is saying rather firmly that it is necessary to cancel diplomatic passports for Ukraine.
“This is what restrains our authorities. I say it again that no final decision has been made yet, for there are some other ways left to solve this problem – without imprisonment. It is not too late to change this situation. And this will be a good way to check the sincerity of Euro integration declarations. Maybe, they are not yet finally aware that the West never changes its strategic position. Never! While, in our hierarchy of values, freedom is inferior to pragmatism, the opposite case is in the West.”
We can always judge about the solution of a question by the way another is being tackled. It took the Verkhovna Rada three (!) attempts to reintroduce the winter time. Of course, setting the clock back and convicting Tymoshenko are incomparable things. But this is a good illustration of the way decisions are made in this country.
“In reality, it is a political issue. This is where the European and pro-Russian attitudes crossed. What did we do at first? We showed that it is very important for us to be in the same time zone with Russia. The other option, now in force, is to be closer to the West – if not in space or in awareness, then at least in time. And look at the way this decision was made. The MPs changed their mind several times.”
But the first decision was off the limits of common sense. In that case daylight hours in Transcarpathia would have begun at 9 a.m.
“On the other hand, it will begin to grow dark in Luhansk at 4 p.m. Luhansk is now outside its natural time zone. All the experts who vigorously protested against the summer time were West-oriented. Most of them were Kyiv-based weathermen and doctors. If eastern weathermen had been asked, they would have said the summer time is the best. So it is a political issue. Each of these times may satisfy some and dissatisfy the others. We have made a pro-Western choice. I strongly hope that the Tymoshenko decision will be made in a similar way.
“If they are saying they made a European choice, they must finally understand that Europe will not betray its principles while Tymoshenko is in prison. There will be no question of true European integration during these seven years. Of course, the West will be also making some attempts to maneuver, but there will be no tangible results.”
In reality, Yanukovych is the product of this society. He did not fly here from Mars. And many people are totally indifferent to Tymoshenko’s seven-year conviction.
“Moreover, a large number of people are welcoming this. But I will say that they would perhaps be even more exuberant if all politicians were put inside. Mistrust breeds malice. It is in fact very bad because this may lead to the restriction of all freedoms.
“We have always seen a powerful support for all kinds of authoritarian ways to solve social problems. Too many people believe that a strong hand must put things in order regardless of any consequences.
“One more thing. In general, the authorities are seldom successful in their informational campaigns. In this case, a large number of people were successfully persuaded that the gas contracts were so disadvantageous that somebody must answer for this one way or another. Some (the majority) believe that it was an unsound political decision, and a considerable part of the people (more than a third) agree with the leadership. The situation differs, of course, from region to region: there are more people like this in the east than in the west of Ukraine.”
And a fundamental question: how much has society changed in the past 15 years?
“It has changed in a very contradictory way. On the one hand, society tends to be developing in the common civilized direction, but we can also see regress in many fields even in comparison with the early 1990s. It is attitude to the basic democratic institutions, political pluralism, and privatization as a way to tackle economic problem. There is even more disappointment now than in the early 1990s. Things were also terrible at the time, but there was a hope that this situation will not last long.”
A short-time horror…
“Exactly. We had a shock without a therapy. For example, the Polish were taking a very dim view of their government, including Balcerowicz, for several years. Then the situation began to change, and his merits were duly appreciated. In Ukraine, expectations of the early-1990s had been totally wiped out by the end of that decade. Then there was a certain economic growth, and public attitudes began to change. There was a downturn in paternalistic expectations that somebody would do something for you. We saw a sharply rising demand for intensive labor activity. People began to feel the shortage of not only consumer goods but also of employment opportunities. Paternalistic attitudes are on the wane now, for people are more and more relying on themselves. By force of this they are more distrustful of all that is linked to politics, including the government and the opposition.”
Each man for himself…
“Unfortunately, this principle works. It is the result of disillusion. I will say that the political conflicts of the past few years – from 2005 to 2010 – played a very bad role. All these incomprehensible attempts to forge coalitions… And we must give Tymoshenko her due: she was pressing for the formation of a coalition with the Party of Regions. Do you remember the overall fear of this alliance and of its consequences? Luckily, the attempt failed. But, in principle, it was quite likely. The two leading political forces could have usurped power. Their failure to come to terms has led to the situation of today. It is difficult to say what would have happened if they had made a deal.”
There is a spoonful of honey in this barrel of pessimism – the newspaper Den is marking its 15th anniversary. You are a longtime contributor to our newspaper.
“Yes, and I often argue over Den. Some of my colleagues say it is a bit dull and might be more cheerful. I answer them: let there be at least one uncheerful newspaper. Oddly enough, Den has managed to maintain quite a high intellectual level of its publications over all these 15 years. For me it is ample proof that something can still be stably preserved and maintained. Den is also doing another, what I consider extremely important, thing: it attracts a lot of thinking readers. Other publicans refuse to give them the floor.
“Den relies not only on the journalist opinions, which often suggest interesting ideas, but also on expert conclusions. What is more, its experts are distinguished for high proficiency. This creates a synthesis of the work of journalists and the thought of readers and experts.”
