MENU
Documenting
war crimes in Ukraine

The Tribunal for Putin (T4P) global initiative was set up in response to the all-out war launched by Russia against Ukraine in February 2022.

COMMENTARY OF THE KHARKIV HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION GROUP ON THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN

08.09.2005   

As has already been noted in the Ukrainian media, the presidential election campaign of 2004 has been marked not only by savage, even extremely savage confrontation between candidates from different political groupings, but by the appallingly low moral standards of behavior of current executive authorities.

It is not only, however, a question of the notorious State administrative resources, the unashamed coercion, pressure, or intimidation of the population, which can hardly be considered mere election campaigning «for» and «against». Pressure and intimidation are nothing new for the Ukrainian voter. In Soviet times, coercion was standard. Dissidents were force-fed in Soviet psychiatric hospitals, the Ukrainian population is now being force-fed pre-election billboards with Viktor Yanukovych. It is not difficult to foresee that the reaction to the information force-feeding will be the same as the tube forced into the stomachs of Andrei Sakharov or Petro Grigorenko. «You can’t force love», – the Russian proverb says, so the state authorities might even be pitied.

Of greater importance in the current election campaign is the obvious ethical confrontation between the state authorities and civic society, moreover, the confrontation is not so much on the level of political opposition, as of that of moral revolution. Once again, in the mood of the country one can feel the breath of the «Prague Spring», drawn out during the Velvet Revolution. The masses don’t want to live by the old rules; those in power want to, but don’t seem to know how.

In this connection, V. Lefevre’s socio-psychological theory about «the logic of conscience» comes to mind. According to the well-known western academic, the Soviet establishment clung to the slogan: the end justifies the means; all that serves to bring about the victory of communism is moral. In those times, Stalin’s well-known joke «How many divisions does the Pope have?» could actually seem witty.

Yet soon, despite hundreds of divisions and the iron discipline of communist ranks, the wit himself was, all the same, flung out of the communist mausoleum. The emotions of life overcame the rationality of order. The divisions were scattered on the fields of history, as Engels’ ashes over the sea, while the Pope’s realm continues to thrive. And the contemporary movement «Greenpeace» is influential because its sole weapon is its ethical force. In the present circumstances in Ukraine, ethical force is also used by Viktor Yushchenko.

Thus, the confrontation between Yushchenko and Yanukovych is not as much a battle between those in power and the opposition, as a confrontation between the politics of a state bureaucratic machine and common sense; between hypocrisy and openness; between the «paradoxicalism» of Dzhangirov-Korchinsky-Pikhovshek[1] and intellectual honesty; between bureaucratic ethos and people’s freedom.

At one time the political scientists V. Pareto and G. Moska, on the basis of a wide range of historical material, showed that all political elites without exception are doomed to degradation. The most striking aspect of their descriptions is the logical pattern for the dying out of political classes. Morally bankrupt elites resort to any means of self-protection: they call in the military, hire spies, bribe or blackmail people. However the internal decay cannot be averted, and with time, speaking metaphorically, the entire fresco in the palaces of the elite turns into the portrait of Dorian Grey…

Something similar is happening today with the Ukrainian post-communist regime. Despite all official, ideological and rhetorical layers on the background of our independence, the image of the present executive powers is ever more reminiscent of a fake icon, «old writing» with fresh paint on a murky palate. An overview of motives and actual patterns of behavior of the regime are more reminiscent of Yaruzelsky and Ceausescu, than of Lech Walęsa and Vaclav Havel. The parallels if we speak of victims are also undeniable: our Georgiy Gongadze, their Yan Palach and Jerzy Popełuszko…

Thus it is no surprise that the political elite seem to be losing their healthy vigor. A number of tactical information failures are now being added to the strategic flops seen in «Referendum – 2000» and «Constitutional reform – 2004». Whether this really augurs the failure of the regime’s candidate as well, we will not make any forecasts here. Whether contemporary Ukraine becomes more and more like Mordor in Tolkien’s work, or «Animal Farm» as in George Orwell’s vision, also remains an open question.

In this sense, however, one recalls the entirely unambiguous and quite recent statement by Viktor Medvedchuk in an interview: «Yushchenko will not be President». Considering the later development of events that we are all familiar with[2], it would be interesting to know what that statement really reflected: a passionate hope, subtle intuition or a specific plan?

10 October 2004

[1] Dzhangirov-Korchinsky-Pikhovshek – in fact, three different people, all television presenters, who on an apparently educated level followed the ‘party line’. The first two produced a program called ‘About that’, which many called ‘Five Minutes of Hatred’, recalling in this George Orwell’s ‘1984’ (translator’s note)

[2] The author is probably referring to the systematic attempts to discredit Yushchenko and to ensure he did not become President. (translator’s note)

 Share this