The UCCA's 13th: congress or circus

by Andrij Shevchenko

The following commentary by Andrij Shevchenko appeared in the December 4 issue of The Phoenix, the official newsletter of the Ukrainian Student Coalition of Philadelphia. We reprint it here in full by permission of the author.

Now they'd come so far

  and they'd waited so long
Just to end up caught in a dream
  where everything does wrong.
Were the dark of the night
  holds back the light of the day
And you've gotta stand and fight
  for the price you pay

It is a generally recognized superstitious myth that the number 13 is an unlucky digit. That myth, however, became reality during the weekend of October 10-12 at the 13th Congress of Ukrainians of America held in Philadelphia.

For the record, it will be written that 20 national Ukrainian organizations walked out of the congress proceedings to protest irregularities and procedural inconsistencies surrounding the running of the congress. True, the general conduct of this congress is in question, but the problems causing the misconduct can be traced back in history. The perplexities which arose in Philadelphia were a result of the Ukrainian community's stubbornness in clinging to the past.

Indeed, the tragedy of the Ukrainian community has been the conduct of its emigre political parties which have from their very arrival in America been utterly unobjective, irrational, intolerant and uncompromising toward each other and the rest of the Ukrainian community. In so being, they have become immune to the changing times. An inherent part of this attitude has been the parties' passionate glorification of the great romantic past of the Ukrainian nation and the belief that they may one day return to an independent homeland - to run the political situation there.

These attitudes have embedded the Ukrainian American community into a "ghetto of the past," alienated from the real world of big business and multinational corporations which dominate the environment. As a result, the basic question of preserving Ukrainian ethnicity, essentially the last bastion of survival for the Ukrainian nation in its long and tragic history, has been neglected.

Political and ideological haggling on questions which are not relevant to today's Ukrainian American community have dominated gatherings, leaving us virtually unprepared to face the challenges of the future. But perhaps the real tragedy is that it has caused many gifted and talented Ukrainian Americans, especially the young, to become alienated into the computerized and hectic lifestyle of American society, where culture and ethnicity are irrelevant.

The Ukrainian Congress Committee of America, organized in 1940 as "an organization for all organizations" has not escaped the wrath of this political and ideological warfare. The essential goal of the UCCA was to unite all Ukrainians in the United States into one organized commonwealth.

But this has not always been possible. Since the early 1950s, the UCCA has had to accommodate an intensive power struggle between the leadership of splinter groups of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (more commonly known as "Melnykivtsi" and "Banderivtsi"). Joining the fray in recent years have been groups comprising the so-called "Ukrainian democratic bloc."

Having been dominated by these emigre political groups, the UCCA has been transformed from a constructive community organization, into a political and ideological battleground in which the parties have indulged in sometimes forceful propagandistic campaigns against each other. It is no wonder then that the events of the 13th congress served as a culmination of many years of destructive bifurcation of the Ukrainian community.

One basic theme which has constantly dominated the life of the Ukrainian American community has been the recurring topic of unity. Although many in the Ukrainian community have spoken out on this topic and the need for a united Ukrainian commonwealth, few have taken steps to alleviate the situation which now exists. This now exhausted subject was repeatedly brought up at this congress but, as in preceeding years, it was dissolved and swallowed up by the more immediate interests of the dominant political groups.

In his opening remarks at the first congress session, Dr. Petro Stercho, chairman of the Philadelphia UCCA branch, host to the congress, cited with obvious pride that this congress, was being held in the "City of Brotherly Love" and that the delegates should work together in that spirit for the UCCA to achieve its goals.

The delegates didn't need to look far for inspiration to help them achieve unity or to be reminded of their obligations to the Ukrainian American community. This was evident in the addresses of dissidents Nina and Sviatoslav Karavansky during Friday's luncheon. The Karavanskys reminded the delegates of the tragic plight of the Ukrainian nation in light of dictatorial and Russification policies of the Soviet leadership. They called for renewed, strengthened and united actions in defense of the rights of Ukraine and Ukrainian human rights activists. They even went so far as to announce the formation of an initiative group for the establishment of a Fund for Solitary Actions, a group whose stated aim was to unite all patriotic Ukrainian groups in conducting defense activities on behalf of Ukraine.

The delegates could have grasped the unity and "brotherly love" on the second day of the congress at the manifestation for the independence of Ukraine, where moving, patriotic speeches rang throughout Independence Mall and seven pigeons were released as a symbol for the freedom of seven incarcerated Ukrainian human-rights activists.

Finally, the delegates were given the opportunity to ponder and contemplate their obligations and responsibilities to the Ukrainian community, during the congress banquet, where they were addressed by U.S. government leaders Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski and Gen. Alexander Haig.

But as fate would have it, none of this was enough to remedy the chaotic turn of events which was to unfold.

From its very commencement, the aura surrounding the 13th Congress was one of a political circus. All principles of basic parliamentary procedure were disregarded as the delegates conducted their own version of "Ukrainian rules of order." These rules consisted of constant out-of-order discussions, and in some cases, outright shouting and jeering by the delegates. Along the way, the delegates adhered to the Ukrainian "tradition" of everyone saying their piece, regardless of how relevant it was to the discussion.

During the plenary session, the insolent conduct of the delegates added to the list of abhorrent acts. In some cases, insults were hurled between the delegates on the floor, especially during Friday evening's session. Common courtesy was disdained as each took advantage of every opportunity to teal into one another. At times, total chaos reigned on the congress floor. It was astonishing to find grown adults taunting each other like children on a playground.

Such behavior served as a detriment to those delegates who had come to the congress to deal with the problems facing the Ukrainian American community in a civilized and serious manner.

The topics that were discussed, especially during Friday evening's session, deserve special scrutiny here. The report by outgoing executive vice-president Wolodymyr Masur, but more importantly his comments on the UCCA decision of December 15, 1979, to censure Gen. Petro Grigorenko, head of the External Representation of the Ukrainian Helsinki Group, threw the entire evening's session into turmoil. Indeed, the meager issues of Gen. Grigorenko, the concept of "partokratia" and the rotational system of the executive vice-presidency of the UCCA Executive Board dominated the discussion.

Other issues, which merited far more attention, such as the UCCA stand on the Osidach trial in Philadelphia and similar cases in which the media takes an anti-Ukrainian stand, the status of the Ukrainian National Information Service in Washington (which is in disarray), the problem of approaching American-born Ukrainians were discussed briefly and subsequently pigeonholed by the Executive Board.

Other topics, which are even more important and pertinent to today's Ukrainian American community, such as the UCCA's stand toward each of the Presidential candidates at the time, the UCCA's stand on human-rights policies of the present administration in regard to the USSR, the Ukrainian community's role at the European security conference in Madrid, the problem of Ukrainian youth and assimilation, problems existing in schools of Ukrainian communities, the steady decrease of pupils in these schools, the initiation of Ukrainian courses in institutions of higher learning, moves by Slavic ethnic groups to be incorporated into this country's affirmative action policies, the establishment of a strong lobby group in Washington, and a host of other matters weren't even approached.

Most importantly, the goals of the UCCA (which to this day are still unclear except for the general statement that the organization unites all Ukrainian organizations in America) - indeed, the reason the UCCA exist in the first place - were never discussed. It seems that these key issues were not on the minds of the delegates but rather on who was going to "lead" them for the next four years.

The work of the 13 (yes, 13) congressional committees could also be termed a failure. Many delegates did not even attend the committee meetings. Most milled around the corridors engaging in conversations with acquaintances. Important committee meetings, such as the youth and external affairs committee received lukewarm, if any, attention from the delegates, and their impact on the congress was minimal.

The circus-like atmosphere of the congress reached its pinnacle on the third day. The underlying factors concerning the disorder and virtual break-up of the congress on this third day are rather complicated but must be discussed in order to give an adequate perspective of the problem at hand.

The dilemma revolved around the issue of the rotation system for the executive vice-presidency on the UCCA Executive Board.

Four years ago, at the 12th UCCA Congress held in New York this rotation system was established as a result of a "gentleman's agreement" reached by the four Ukrainian fraternal organizations (Ukrainian National Association, Ukrainian Fraternal Association, Providence Association of Ukrainian Catholics and the Ukrainian National Aid Association), whereby the president of each of these fraternal organizations would serve as executive vice-president on the Executive Board for each one-year term. Previously this position was exclusively reserved for the president of UNA. The delegates at that congress wholeheartedly approved that move. In and of itself this was a positive step taken by that 12th congress. It seemed to be an intense effort to democratize the organization.

It gave the opportunity for others to take part in the ruling apparatus of the UCCA and simultaneously put the administration of the UCCA into the hands of the four organizations which represented the largest cross-section of the Ukrainian community.

For a time it put an end to the political squabbling which had marred the work of the UCCA in previous years. As far as compromises go, this was a genuine compromise, for all sectors of the Ukrainian community were appeased. It wasn't perfect but it was the best way to deal with the delicate Ukrainian situation.

Unfortunately, this was an agreement which was "voided" by the delegates at this congress. With nothing more than a statement by one man, that being the chairman of the auditing committee, who asserted in his report that the rotation system of the executive vice-presidency had not been effective, this system was rescinded and all of the fraternal organizations were demoted to positions of lesser importance.

First of all it was not within the jurisdiction of the auditing committee to audit or comment on such matters as the rotational system. Its sole purpose is to audit all financial matters pertaining to the UCCA. Another irony in all this is that no reasons were given for the aforementioned evaluation. It was not pointed out just where the rotational system had failed. The chairman of the auditing committee simply stated that his comments concerning the rotation system were copied from the previous report of the auditing committee. (That is impossible since the rotational system was instituted in 1976 and the prior report of the auditing committee covered the UCCA's work prior to 1976).

The delegates simply threw out the rotational system without any discussion on the "evaluation" given by the chairman of the auditing committee. And with the rotational system went any hope of achieving unity and harmony in the Ukrainian community.

Copyright © The Ukrainian Weekly, December 28, 1980, No. 31, Vol. LXXXVII

| Home Page |