Posted by Marena on September 08, 2000 at 17:14:00:
I've been watching kuchma first hand since he became premier in '92 and have even spoken to him one-on-one, rather lengthily but only once. I think his (and Ukraine's) biggest problem may be that he is inarticulate. When I spoke to him his sentences were incomplete, there were long pauses, rhetorical questions in which he evidently saw obvious answers, but couldn't convey them himself. Of course, this doesn't mean he's an unintelligent man. I know wonderful writers who hem and haw when they speak. Thus, to give him the benefit of the doubt in having had good intentions when he started out as premier, and as president, it is evident he was unable to convey their substance to whoever was or is taking orders from him.
I give him a two with a historical view. When Kuchma first announced his 'course of radical reforms" in '94, those weren't merely empty words. Under his administration, the ridiculous fixed exchange rate of the karbovanets was rescinded, he gave free hand to the national bank to impose strict monetarism and opened up Ukraine to the IMF (the fact that Ukraine giving up its nukes also opened the IMF to it is a different matter, since Kravchuk began that process). Nevertheless, at that time, O.O. Moroz (or uh-oh Moroz)was head of the parliament and tho he talked centrist-left in private, his power base was hard core left and so, the parliament really did block a great deal of "reform" legislation{i think Moroz is now serving perfectly as someone in the opposition and I suport him 1000%, which I did not at all when he was in power)
During this period, I could imagine being Kuchma and saying "shit, here I am trying to do good stuff and these commie asses are blocking me. So, heck, why not get rich?!" I have few doubts that Kravchuk -- who didn't even try to do the right economic thing -- had the same thoughts though lacked the knowledge or skill or contacts to accomplish it to any great extent [that is, no one counts Kravchuk as an oligarch.] Thus, in the process of getting rich, Kuchma proceeded to slowly chip away at the two other institutes of power -- the courts and the parliament.
All this chipping proved fruitful so that today, everything that happens in Ukraine is decided not in the institutions designated by the constitution but in the president's administration. Therefore, all of Kuchma's public complaints that the parliament (now that the Medvedchuk-majority is in charge) or the the government aren't doing their jobs are hollow. Even though it is not his de jure job, de facto he is responsible for everything that happens in the country. Witness Timoshenko -- no one in a position to do anything (ie anyone with money or power) can have free hands because the Interior Ministry, the Tax Inspectorate or Procurator has dirt on all of them (because we all know its impossible to make big money, or even little money, in Ukraine keeping to the letter of the law.) And so, Kuchma is really the grey cardinal in his own administration, and yet he refuses to take responsibility for anything. It's all someone else's fault. This is a classically Ukrainian attitude. Always seeking someone else to blame. But, although part of me really did want to give a zero, I must note at the end that it seems like Kuchma is playing Zeus these days, standing on his Olympus, with firebolts at hand to strike down anyone who looks good compared to him ... (self-censorship) and watching all the oligarchs tear each other up. Oh, maybe Zeus is the wrong metaphor. Darwin, overseeing the survival of the fittest.