Yushchenko (Baloga) and Kuzio
July 1, 2008 – 6:46 amI never expected the ten questions I wrote on the eve of President Yushchenko’s state visit to Canada to have such an influence on the presidential secretariat. My Kyiv sources advise me that the presidential secretariat believed that they were written as part of a Tymoshenko bloc conspiracy against President Yushchenko as BYuT allegedly paid for the reprinting of the ten questions in local newspapers throughout Ukraine where they received a large audience. The presidential secretariat, according to my sources, believe that I am a ‘Tymoshenko propagandist’ and that this explains my ten questions. The presidential secretariat obviously fail to understand the role of the media, civil society and opposition in a democratic society who have a duty to ask why the president has not fulfilled his election promises and why his secretariat was acting unconstitutionally.
The two sets of questions were published in Ukrayinska Pravda (www.pravda.com.ua) on 23 May (http://pravda.com.ua/news/2008/5/23/76337.htm) and 3 June 2008 (http://blogs.pravda.com.ua/authors/kuzyo/).
An intellectually inept reply was published on 26 May by Our Ukraine deputy and singer Oksana Bilozir (http://pravda.com.ua/news/2008/5/26/76521.htm). The 150 comments on her response ridiculed the reply that most believed had been written by the secretariat, rather than Bilozir herself. Bilozir, along with a small number of other deputies, had resigned from Our Ukraine party although had remained in the Our Ukraine-Self Defence faction. Bilozir and her defectors joined the president’s new party of power, United Centre, which is being organised administratively.
Rather than write a response to Bilozir directly I was invited to write an opinion article for Business Ukraine magazine which is given below the two sets of questions.
Ten Questions to President Viktor Yushchenko During his State Visit to Canada
Taras Kuzio
1. Why do you believe that your public support from the Orange Revolution has remained during the last two years below ten percent?
2. Do you realistically believe, and if yes on what grounds, that you have a chance to win a second term in office?
3. Why are Ukrainian voters – including those who voted for you in 2004 – so disillusioned with your presidency?
4. On what constitutional, legal and moral grounds did you and the head of your “technical apparatus” give over 800 demands to the Tymoshenko government while only giving 200 demands to the Yanukovych government?
5. On what constitutional, legal or moral grounds is a senior bureaucrat of a “technical apparatus” able to act as a de facto Vice President and daily send demands, comments and insults to the Prime Minister, her government and the Tymoshenko bloc?
6. Why do Ukrainian citizens, international organisations and Western governments condemn the lack of progress in battling corruption in Ukraine?
7. Why do you continually defend Rosukrenergo – Europe’s largest corrupt money launderer- and support the corrupt Kyiv Mayor Chernovetsky?
8. Why are you using Socialist arguments to block the government’s privatisation? Why did you support the privatisation of the Odesa Port Plant in 2007 under Yanukovych but not under Tymoshenko in 2008?
9. Why have you not fulfilled your 2004 election promise to charge oligarchs a one-off tax surcharge and use some of the proceeds to repay lost Oshadbank savings to Ukrainian citizens?
10. Why can you not appreciate that your unpopular domestic policies – including your second undermining of a Tymoshenko government – prevents Ukraine’s receipt of a NATO Membership Action Plan and gives the EU the arguments to not change its negative position on Ukrainian membership?
Ten Questions to President Viktor Yushchenko on his Return to Ukraine from His State Visit to Canada
1. Do you agree with the viewpoint that foreigners have no right to criticise Ukraine? Do you then think it was wrong for the West to condemn the election fraud in 2004? Will you ignore NATO and the EU when they criticise Ukraine’s mistakes and poorly executed reforms on the path to membership of these organisations?
2. Why have you retreated from your 2004 election pledge to put “Bandits in Jail”?
3. Why do Ukraine’s elites continue to be above the rule of law in Ukraine? Why do Ukraine’s elites face criminal justice in Germany and the USA but not in Ukraine? Why are Ukraine’s criminal elites afraid of facing justice in the USA (Shcherban) but not in Ukraine?
4. Why have you ignored your pledge to the Parliamentary Assembly Council of Europe that it was a matter of your honour to bring the organisers of Georgi Gongadze’s murder to justice?
5. Why did you instead of fulfilling this pledge sign a presidential decree giving a state medal to former Prosecutor Hennadiy Potebenko?
6. Do you believe it is morally correct for the head of your “technical apparatus” to return to Soviet language used in February 2001 by President Kuchma, Prime Minister Yushchenko and Speaker Pliushch where opponents are labelled as “fascists”?
7. Why after agreeing to constitutional reform in December 2004 have you decided to reverse it? Why do you want a referendum on constitutional reform now but not in 2005 as the Constitutional Court ruled there should have been?
8. What factors will enable you to reach a final decision as to whether to support an orange or grand coalition? Or will you continue to remain undecided between them? Do you have a strategic plan what to do after the orange coalition and government are removed this year?
9. Why are you critical of separatism in Severdonetsk but permit your “technical cabinet” to promote it in Trans-Carpathia?
10. Following the reformatting of the orange coalition and removal of the Tymoshenko government what progress report will you give to the NATO Foreign Ministers meeting in December on Ukraine’s readiness to enter the Membership Action Plan?
5 Responses to “Yushchenko (Baloga) and Kuzio”
How about 10 questions to Tymochenko? Is she doing so well that there’s nothing to ask her? The Canadian diaspora have it right, the questions are completely biased. There not even genuine questions they’re all criticisms dressed up as questions. The point of the press is to critise but if it’s totally one sided and only ever directed in one direction than people quite rightly stop taking any notice and dismiss it as propaganda.
By anon on Jul 1, 2008
How about not hiding under an anonymous email?
By Taras Kuzio on Jul 1, 2008
What does asking questions of Tymoshenko have anything to do with the original 10 (still unanswered) questions posed to Yushchenko by Kuzio? The absence of the former does not negate the validity of the latter. In fact, I’m sure Kuzio could issue 10 question for the Prime Minister, but Bilozir seems to have partially taken care of this in her “Reply” (http://pravda.com.ua/news/2008/5/26/76521.htm).
The claim of bias is unsupported. Asking questions of the president, but not of the prime minister (PM), says nothing about an inquirer’s “biases.” For example, the questions for the PM may still be forthcoming. There may also be more reasons to ask the president (Yushchenko) rather than the prime minister; Yushchenko has been in power for almost three years, while Tymoshenko has been in and out. Lastly, on this particular occasion, Kuzio issued the 10 questions at a time of the president’s trip to Canada.
Nothing is wrong with asking tough questions. There should be more of this, not less. And yes, Tymoshenko should not be treated any less differently and ought to be held accountable for her (in)actions.
So “genuine questions” cannot be criticisms? If anything, a good question is critical in nature because it forces the queried party to reconsider its previous position.
I agree that the press should strive to be balanced. When it fails to be so, it looses credibility. However if a newspaper disagrees with Kuzio’s position, it can still publish his views as an op-ed, and write an editorial that would put forth its own view on the issue. This is what the giants like the Wall Street Journal and the Financial Times do – liberals and conservatives have published in both.
In conclusion, it’s unfortunate that so much of the furor has been in the form of back-at-you questions, and ad hominem attacks instead of a debate and reflection on the substance of the original ten. Politicians in Ukraine, be it Yushchenko, Tymoshenko or Yanukovych need to be held accountable and asked difficult questions. Gordon Brown, as Kuzio points out, knows how it feels.
So to get back on the topic…why indeed has Yushchenko “not fulfilled [his] 2004 election promise to charge oligarchs a one-off tax surcharge and use some of the proceeds to repay lost Oshadbank savings to Ukrainian citizens?”
By Vitaliy on Jul 1, 2008
Nice to see someone asking the tough questions!
Too bad that no one seems to be answering!
By Orest on Jul 2, 2008
There is one reply from Bilozir (if you know Ukrainian) but its gibberish!
By Taras Kuzio on Jul 2, 2008