Oleksandr Yeliashkevych has proven to be one of few People’s Deputies to steer clear of the conflict in Parliament, siding with neither the majority nor minority, a decision prompted perhaps by many years of parliamentary experience. Or the determination to keep an independent stand. Be it as it may, it is interesting to know the opinion of a veteran Verkhovna Rada politician who, while being involved in the internal processes, found himself between the hammer and the anvil.
The Day: Mr. Yeliashkevych, you joined the informal group of People’s Deputies who remain nonaligned. Why? What do you have to propose ?
O. Y.: The current rift in Parliament is artificial. I cannot side with the orthodox Left for ideological reasons. I cannot join the majority, which was formed contrary to logic. Many lawmakers now in the majority could change their views in a matter of hours. This majority formed for the President who simply demonstrated that he had won and could now tame the Verkhovna Rada shrew. We now have an entirely, albeit only de facto, presidential state. The President forms the government; the President formulates all policy. But de jure it is presidential-parliamentary republic. Hence the current majority was formed just to go through the procedural formalities; Parliament approves what the President decides. Verkhovna Rada could well turn into a mere decoration, so under the circumstances I don’t see myself in this Parliament. I don’t want to be somebody’s puppet. Should this Parliament become something like a silent movie, I won’t take part in the film. This is why my colleagues and I formed our group, because we are concerned about the fate of the parliamentary system and democracy in Ukraine. This is why we are taking steps to unite the Deputies in a normal legislative body. We are taking steps in order to allow us to make sure the majority, minority, and the non-aligned People’s Deputies can work normally according to democratic principles. Our concept does not accept the dictatorship of either the majority or minority. If the majority gets the better of the minority using force it will be a Pyrrhic victory.
The Day: The way things are now, either the majority and minority come to terms or there will be early elections .
O. Y.: Everyone understands the old axiom: if Parliament cannot find a compromise solution, this Parliament is doomed. Verkhovna Rada with its current membership and quality cannot discharge its legislative functions normally. The majority understands this as well as those who did not join it. Yet there are people in both the majority and minority interested in Parliament’s dissolution and others actively opposing it, determined to preserve it as a legislative organ. I would categorize the latter as consisting of two parts: one wishing the legislature to counter the threat of totalitarianism and the other, numerically very substantial, that wants to preserve Verkhovna Rada the way it is now, being only too well aware that they would have no chance to get into the next Parliament.
The Day: NTV [television channel in Moscow] recently featured Communist leader Petro Symonenko saying that for jumping from one fraction to another legislators are paid $30,000-$50,000 apiece, followed by an allowance of $3000 to $5,000. This is a sign that this country needs serious efforts to clean the parliamentary stables. Can such a Parliament oppose anything, not to speak of totalitarianism ?
O. Y.: Leonid Kuchma said that our Parliament is sick. But it is just a section of our society and it is a venue of the same diseased processes currently affecting all branches of authority, above all the executive. It could not have been otherwise, for there are so many former executive bureaucrats among the Deputies and so many oligarchs. Thus Parliament gave rise to “market relationships.” Given rampant corruption, such relationships could not but form a legislative market selling and buying services, vote turnout, and relationships. This is confirmed, among other things, by the fact that the poor opposition suddenly began to show serious financial potential.
The Day: Who do you think is interested in early parliamentary elections and who isn’t?
O. Y.: Primarily the so-called oligarchs and the number one oligarch personifying Ukraine’s oligarchic system. I mean Oleksandr Volkov. He knows better than anyone else that he was not among the first to get a seat in this Parliament and that it was some time before he got things going his way. He still has a lot of problems, so it is only natural for him to secure a better place in the next convocation. Also, one must remember what kind of money his structures are using to form local substructures. Incidentally, Volkov is in the limelight not because he is especially odious compared to the others. The reason is different. It’s just that he does everything more or less in the open, unlike all those other oligarchs who try to keep a low profile, watching every step lest they draw fire. By doing so, he teaches very serious lessons to the politicians — those thinking that they are ones, actually being clumsy amateurs. In this sense Mr. Volkov’s activity deserves all possible praise; he is the first to jump out of the trenches under enemy fire, and he contributes elements of business to politics, doing so with enviable ease, so much so that those around him are embarrassed. He is the hero of foreign media publications, a man many have cause to fear. He feels like the boss in Parliament, and this is not strange. Once we had boss in the government, and now we have one in Parliament It is also true, however, that there are many claimants to this status.
The Day: The more so that our Deputies obviously expect this kind of conduct and it brings the desired dividends .
O. Y.: If the Deputies accept such methods they get the corresponding benefits. In this we have nothing to blame the oligarchs for. It has to be said that some of my colleagues yielded to, say, certain temptations and decided they could turn off their principles for awhile to survive this time of troubles. Yet the problem is that such a loss of principles will result in completely different people winding up in the next Parliament. And this is natural. I don’t think the oligarchs need such people who under one stimulus or another change their convictions. They are unreliable. We know that oligarchs have their ups and downs. Suffice it to recall recent events in Ukraine and Russia. Forming the future Parliament is very important for business groups and I think that the new Verkhovna Rada will have no room for most of those currently eager to cooperate with the oligarchs. I am convinced that oligarchs (in various senses of the word) know the exact price of what is being done by one politician or another. They draw their own conclusions. They need a new Parliament to secure reliable positions in a difficult time. They are fully aware that dragging feet with the elections is dangerous, for Leonid Kuchma’s favoritism could end.
Understand that a figure like Viktor Medvedchuk is interested in an alliance with Volkov and bloc with him in early parliamentary elections. It is no secret that Medvedchuk wants to succeed the President. Considering that other candidates could enter the race (the more so that certain hitherto obscure figures are taking certain positions), he must feel that it’s best to hold parliamentary elections now. Otherwise the cherished dream of one of those currently referred to as probable successor to Leonid Kuchma might never come true. Another important factor is that the forces interested in early elections are represented by two Vice Speakers in Parliament: Viktor Medvedchuk and Stepan Havrysh. But I think Volkov could have gone all the way and become Vice Speaker. On the Verkhovna Rada presidium, he could have provided serious support to Ivan Pliushch and controlled how the entire lawmaking process is organized.
The Day: Speaking of oligarchs, new Ukrainians might seem more precise.
O. Y.: In fact “Ukrainian oligarchs” would be more precise, because they are different from the universally accepted notion of oligarch, in terms of capital, behavior patterns, and so on. Anyway, this is a purely national phenomenon, just like Ukrainian fatback. It is a very special domestic product that only we have.
The Day: But perhaps we are vilifying their role, trying to make it easier to understand the complex processes going on. For example, we are in the phase of accumulating and newly distributing capital (which, of course, could have acquired a less primitive form). Thus all those accursed oligarchs could be interested in protecting their property to attract foreign investment. By becoming legitimate in power, they could turn into a catalyst without even realizing it of the next, stage of civilized reform.
O. Y.: I don’t think so. Getting to be an oligarch in the classical sense of the word takes a lot of time. They have to take a firmer stand, so they won’t have to worry about the future. As it is, our oligarchs make decisions regardless of any strategic considerations, but to reach immediate tactical goals — like avoiding criminal prosecution or making personal security arrangements. For this reason I can’t say that our oligarchs can act in a manner that could secure the national interests. Today, they are primarily concerned about their own interests and only then those of the country.
The Day: Could their own and the national interests coincide at any point?
O. Y.: No, and for one simple reason that they do not identify their own interests with those of the country.
The Day: Those who can’t leave Ukraine for the West already do. Anyway, what do you think will happen in Parliament?
O. Y. : The original scenario may or may not be played out. I don’t think that Mr. Pliushch has lost his knack for making quite unexpected decisions. In the past six years he has had enough time to become a totally different Pliushch, turning into a link that will enhance the parliamentary chain. He is in a difficult situation now. He is surrounded by people in Verkhovna Rada who want early elections. In the Presidential Administration there are also people with their own views of this process. Even in his party, the NDP, the referendum idea is favored. And, of course, there is former Premier and NDP leader Valery Pustovoitenko who can’t be fond of this Parliament, even considering that a fellow party member is Speaker. Sooner or later, the NDP will face the question of who is on top?
Pliushch, however, wouldn’t be Pliushch he didn’t rely on his quick wits and an assortment of means known only to him, which he knows how to use and which only he can use effectively.
