|
BBC Monitoring Service, UK, in English, May 11, 2004
|
Oleksandr Moroz, Ukrainian Socialist Leader
|
Socialist leader Oleksandr Moroz has said that his party is ready to
nominate him as a candidate in the presidential election this autumn.
Speaking in an interview with an opposition web site, he criticized fellow
opposition leader Yuliya Tymoshenko for alleging that he was being promoted
as a candidate by presidential administration chief Viktor Medvedchuk.
He also speculated that President Kuchma might still take part in the
election, despite repeated pledges that he would not do so. Moroz said there
are no legal reasons why parliament should not vote on another version of a
controversial bill on amendments to the constitution. The amendments, which
are designed to shift significant power from the presidency to the
parliament, failed to gain the 300 votes needed on 8 April, which was seen
as a victory for the centre-right opposition.
The following is the text of the interview with Leonid Amchuk, which was
posted on the Ukrainian opposition web site Ukrayinska Pravda on 30 April;
subheadings have been inserted editorially:
Oleksandr Moroz is no longer concealing that he is ready to run for the
presidency and that the only thing that theoretically could stop him is the
implementation of political reform. One other impression from Moroz's latest
interview with Ukrayinska Pravda is his harsh criticism of his former
colleagues. There is clearly a crisis in relations within the opposition
troika [made up of the Socialist Party, and the centre right Our Ukraine and
Yuliya Tymoshenko blocs], which it appears no longer exists.
Prospects for political reform
[Amchuk] What is the current position of the coalition in support of
political reform that includes the majority, the Socialist Party and the
Communist Party?
[Moroz] Such a coalition does not exist at present. As for political reform,
the socialist faction and I favour completing the procedure of considering
this issue. On 8 April, the bill that was proposed by the majority on the
special interim commission was voted on. But the version that received less
support on the commission was not voted on. According to procedure, they
have an equal right to be voted on.
[Amchuk] What about the position of parliament speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn, who
said a few days ago that there were no prospects for considering alternative
bills on amending the constitution either from the legal or the political
point of view?
[Moroz] From the legal point of view, this is a clear issue... [ellipsis as
published] And from the political point of view, this is an issue that does
not depend just on Lytvyn, but on many factors.
[Amchuk] After the failure [of the parliamentary vote on political reform]
on 8 April, are talks being held about holding another vote on amendments to
the constitution?
[Moroz] During the last week of the session, the special interim commission
decided to meet on 11 May after discussions in the factions and determine
the procedure, mechanism and content of the question.
At the meeting the majority of factions showed their willingness to support
the bill that I presented at the 8 April meeting and which about a third of
the participants in the discussion supported.
[Amchuk] Have you had discussions since the 8 April events with the Yuliya
Tymoshenko Bloc and Our Ukraine about their support for political reform?
[Moroz] Yes, I talked about this with Yuliya Tymoshenko, [Yuliya Tymoshenko
Bloc MP] Anatoliy Matviyenko and Our Ukraine activists. There was a
diversity of views. I feel there is an understanding of the need to vote for
this version, but today they are still not ready to take the political
decision.
[Amchuk] Have you spoken with [Our Ukraine leader Viktor] Yushchenko?
[Moroz] Not about political reform. But we have spoken about other things,
since for them the Mukacheve events have moved into the foreground. [A
representative of the pro-presidential United Social Democratic Party was
declared the winner of the Mukacheve mayor election on 18 April. The
opposition, however, said that the result had been falsified to deprive Our
Ukraine's candidate of a landslide victory.]
In fact, the consideration of the Mukacheve issue is another proof of the
procedural legitimacy of returning to No 4105 [the reform bill that failed
to pass on 8 April]. You remember that we considered the issue of the events
at the election, and then the following day we returned to it because not
all the versions of the resolutions had been considered.
[Amchuk] But the constitution stipulates a special procedure for amendments
to the constitution. It prevents returning to amendments that were not
supported for a year's time.
[Moroz] You should read article 158 of the constitution more carefully. I am
not saying that we should return to considering these issues "after
finishing considering them". I am saying that on 8 April the procedure for
considering changes to the constitution was not completed.
Let's say a bill on amendments to the constitution is being considered.
There are two versions of the bill. Both were prepared from materials that
were approved by the Constitutional Court. Everything superfluous can be
dropped. That is what the Constitutional Court decided.
In my version of the bill, which was not voted on, I reduced the number of
amendments. For example, the president was left with the power to dismiss
the prosecutor general, appoint the head of the State Security Service [SBU]
and several other points. The document that emerged was put together from
the materials that were scrutinized by the constitutional court.
Only one bill was put to the vote on 8 April, but it is necessary for all
the versions to be considered.
[Amchuk] What do you think, is there going to be a repeat consideration of
the amendments to the constitution?
[Moroz] I repeat. This is not a repeat consideration, but the completion of
the procedure for considering this issue.
[Amchuk] Is this going to happen?
[Moroz] I hope so.
[Amchuk] And if it does, are there going to be 300 votes?
[Moroz] I hope so.
[Amchuk] And where are these 300 votes going to come from if they weren't
there on 8 April.
[Moroz] I am counting on the votes of Our Ukraine and the Yuliya Tymoshenko
Bloc, since my bill is in essence a reflection of the bill "No 4180
reworked", which Yushchenko, Tymoshenko and Moroz signed in January.
[Amchuk] How did you feel on 8 April when the number 294 appeared on the
board in support of political reform, and Our Ukraine and Yuliya Tymoshenko
Bloc did not conceal their delight at the failure of political reform?
[Moroz] Sympathy for those who were delighted.
Tension within opposition
[Amchuk] The last few weeks have seen conflict in the opposition. How would
you comment on [Socialist MP] Mykola Rudkovskyy's speech at the last meeting
of the session [23 April], when he said that the Socialists would sign a
coalition agreement with Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc only if Tymoshenko were to
give testimony at the trial of [disgraced former Prime Minister] Pavlo
Lazarenko in the United States and returned without handcuffs?
[Moroz] That was an emotional outburst.
[Amchuk] Yes, but Rudkovskyy touched on the topic of Tymoshenko's relations
with Lazarenko, which were always a taboo topic within the opposition. This
topic was never before raised from the rostrum on the initiative of the
opposition.
[Moroz] It's true that it was never raised, let alone by the opposition,
before Ukrayinska Pravda published some new testimony from the trial "The
United States against Lazarenko".
[Amchuk] But Rudkovskyy would hardly have raised it on his own initiative...
[ellipsis as published]
[Moroz] Where do you draw that conclusion from?
[Amchuk] Because it directly affects relations between the opposition
leaders... [ellipsis as published]
[Moroz] Didn't that question arise when Tymoshenko writes that [presidential
administration head Viktor] Medvedchuk has gone to Russia to convince them
that [Communist leader Petro] Symonenko supports Moroz, and there is a new
troika of the Communists, Socialists and United Social Democratic Party?
[Amchuk] But you were shoulder to shoulder for the last two years.
[Moroz] Yes, and especially over amendments to the constitution. We have a
jointly signed memorandum. It has been published. The version that I support
includes all, I repeat all, our joint demands.
[Amchuk] But they want the changes to come into force from 2006.
[Moroz] This issue was not up for discussion from the beginning, because
this would be to block the amendments to the constitution.
My proposal - and this was agreed with Our Ukraine and Yuliya Tymoshenko
Bloc - was to let the president retain until 2006 those functions linked to
the appointment and dismissal of heads of regional and district
administrations, that is where administrative resource [i.e. the use of
official positions for political purposes] operates.
[Amchuk] And how does Yushchenko explain why he does not want to support
this?
[Moroz] I have already spoken of this in the parliamentary session. His
entourage believe that his victory in the presidential election is settled.
This means that in that case no reform will be carried out.
[Amchuk] You said on Channel 5 that it would be wrong to "replace one mafia
with another". Do you believe that if Yushchenko wins without implementing
political reform "mafia" will come to power?
[Moroz] I always say what I think. But you notice that I didn't name any
names. You drew your own conclusions. It seems that you are aware of the
possibility of applying my metaphor to the teams of certain leaders. So you
have grounds for it.
[Amchuk] What is your reaction to Yuliya Tymoshenko's article [see
"Ukrainian opposition leader hails end of Kuchma era", Ukrayinska Pravda web
site, Kiev, in Ukrainian 16 Apr 04] in which she says that "Medvedchuk sees
potential political prospects under the protection of Oleksandr Moroz" and
"Together with certain political circles in Russia, Medvedchuk will work
flat out `under the table' for Oleksandr Moroz's victory since he is the one
politician with whom he has been able to find a common `constitutional'
language"?
[Moroz] I reacted appropriately. It is a pity that the construction Yuliya
Tymoshenko has put together (and maybe not her - where did she get that
information about the intentions of the Social Democrats) is now going the
rounds of the media outlets.
The dirt will fall away in time. Remember in 1999 I was linked to Lazarenko.
Now the opposite has been shown in court: it turns out that those who
accused me had their snouts in the trough. It will be the same in this case.
And I don't think it will be necessary to wait five years.
You didn't mention that in that article Tymoshenko considers it a foregone
conclusion that Kuchma will support Viktor Yushchenko. Perhaps that is
closer to the truth. She knows better. But does that mean that, at the
insistence of Yuliya Tymoshenko, I should support Leonid Kuchma?
[Amchuk] Do you think it will be possible to put the opposition troika back
together again, or not?
[Moroz] It's possible, of course. It's necessary to amend the constitution
first.
Socialist Party ready for presidential election
[Amchuk] Now there is an impression that the Socialist Party is preparing to
nominating a presidential candidate. You are visiting the regions,
inspecting the party assets... [ellipsis as published]
[Moroz] We have no problem with nominating a candidate or activating our
work. The preparations for the campaign are under way. We have finished
forming local, constituency and regional headquarters. In fact, they were
not disbanded after the 2002 parliamentary elections. We have trained
workers.
[Amchuk] So we are to understand that Moroz is going to run for president?
[Moroz] You are to understand that the Socialist Party is ready to be a full
participant in the election campaign.
[Amchuk] And are you internally ready for the elections? Do you want to take
part?
[Moroz] I will take part in the election campaign unless political reform is
implemented.
[Amchuk] Do you think you can win?
[Moroz] Definitely.
[Amchuk] But your rating is lower than that of the three other favourites:
Yushchenko, Symonenko and [Prime Minister Viktor] Yanukovych?
[Moroz] In 1999, Kuchma's rating was even lower. Then I had the highest
rating, and I had the highest rating ahead of the poll. It's another
question how it occurred that I did not go into the second round. And there
is an answer to it.
We have a serious team, an effective party... [ellipsis as published] This
year alone, we have gained 5,000 new members, bringing our party membership
up 80,000. People are ready to work and they want to work. The techniques
have been mastered. There are many people who took part in earlier campaigns
using up-to-date techniques.
[Amchuk] Everyone - experts, political scientists, politicians - expects you
to take part in the election separately, but few believe that you will win
on the basis of your rating... [ellipsis as published]
[Moroz] In 1998, 1999 and 2002, all the preliminary ratings were three times
lower than the final result. How do you account for that?
[Amchuk] Because your voters live in rural areas.
[Moroz] Who says? The election results in every constituency prove that this
is not the case. This is not an argument.
The thing is that the ratings are produced to order. According to the
sociological surveys carried out by organizations that have not been
mistaken at earlier elections, including those that are delivered to the
authorities for internal use, Yushchenko has 18 per cent, Symonenko and I
have 12 per cent, Yanukovych has around 10 per cent, Yuliya Tymoshenko has
around 6 per cent, and all the rest are below 4 per cent.
[Amchuk] Whose data is that?
[Moroz] I just told you. Our specialists have analysed on the basis of the
original data the results of the sociological surveys carried out by Our
Ukraine specialists. The error is from 50 to 100 per cent. We talked about
this with Our Ukraine representatives. They said something like: "We'll
factor that in..."
[Amchuk] And how about the data from Razumkov centre, Socis?
[Moroz] Let's wait and see...
Kuchma may run for third term
[Amchuk] Will you take part in the election if political reform goes ahead?
[Moroz] I have been saying for three years: let's reform the system of
power, amend the constitution, and then we can agree.
[Amchuk] Why didn't you agree to Yuliya Tymoshenko's proposal during the
debate on Channel 5 to draw up a coalition agreement on fielding a single
presidential candidate and on the basis of this agreement amend the
constitution by 31 October, 2004?
[Moroz] This was not a proposal, but blackmail. These things are
incommensurate. I am proposing something that is derived from the interests
of society and the state for many decades ahead. She is proposing something
that concerns the private interests of a few citizens. It is necessary to
amend the constitution, and then agree on something.
[Amchuk] One gets the impression there are varying views within the
Socialist Party faction on your participation in the elections?
[Moroz] There is a single position in the faction. Unless there are changes
to the system of power, changing one team for another won't improve
anything. Second, it will be a problem for a candidate who believes he has
already won to win even with our help. What's more, they are not taking
account of the fact that Kuchma too may run.
[Amchuk] ?! [Surprise]
[Moroz] Then all the administrative resource will be mobilized to ensure his
victory. Otherwise it is hard to see why [National Bank head Serhiy]
Tyhypko, [People's Democratic Party leader Valeriy] Pustovoytenko, [Party of
Industrialists and Entrepreneurs leader Anatoliy] Kinakh would have
announced their intention to run after Yanukovych was named as the single
candidate [from the pro-presidential majority in parliament]. These things
are obvious.
[Amchuk] Why are you sure Kuchma will run?
[Moroz] I said this was possible. It is possible because he wants it very
much. Russia wants it. Kuchma needs guarantees, and he thinks that the best
guarantee is presidential status. The fielding of various candidates from
the authorities is also not a coincidence, the more so since none of them
would dare to do this without the president's agreement.
His views about the majority which he voiced at his press-conference also
point to this conclusion. His meetings with the leaders of the majority
factions, when he advised them to wait till the autumn and sort things out
then. There are a lot of other signs.
A staged act of provocation in Crimea can also be expected in May, after
which there will be an appeal "from the people" (for Kuchma to run).
So I say once more: it is necessary not to play foolish games but to make
changes to the constitution. Then it will be possible to influence the
situation.
Yanukovych not a serious contender
[Amchuk] How would you comment on the nomination of Viktor Yanukovych
as the single candidate from the authorities? Will this help or harm him?
[Moroz] Unfortunately, Viktor Yanukovych, even though he is the candidate
from the authorities with the highest rating, was not able to stand out
among them. He was constantly emphasizing his loyalty to the president, the
system, its policy. That was his mistake.
This is confirmed by the procedure and the essence of the nomination, which
in fact did not take place. The authorities are unpopular with the public,
so such deliberately emphasized support by the pro-presidential forces (even
with reservations) is, of course, harmful. Especially since the "unanimously
agreed" nomination of the prime minister has already been accompanied by
announcements about the separate nomination of the leaders of certain parts
of the "democratic forum". This was talked about earlier.
Mr Yanukovych has concentrated his attention on resolving issues of raising
pensions and paying public sector workers (at what cost is another issue).
But that is not enough. If Yanukovych had built up an image of a strong
oppositionist prime minister, a rebel prime minister, then he really would
have stood a chance of occupying the president's chair in the autumn of
2004.
It is also necessary to bear in mind that, with any of its nominees, the
authorities can count on success only if they apply Mukacheve methods, with
all the ensuing consequences for relations between the authorities and
society.
[Amchuk] Do you think the nomination of Yanukovych could serve as an
incentive for Our Ukraine and Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc to support reform?
[Moroz] If they really belong to the opposition and are different from the
pro-presidential structures, then the understanding of the need for a change
in the system of power should be an incentive for them.
For the moment, the main incentive for these forces is the desire to
preserve the existing powers of the presidency at any cost, with the
intention that these powers will pass to one of them.
[Amchuk] If political reforms are conducted before the presidential
election, do you think it will be possible to change those in power, their
team after 31 October 2004.
[Moroz] If political reforms are conducted before the presidential election,
that means it will be possible to change the people in power in all their
structures.
FOR PERSONAL AND ACADEMIC
USE ONLY |
|
back
