Ukraine debates the role of civil society (03/03/02)

Ukraine debates the role of civil society

by Taras Kuzio

On February 16-17 Ukraine held a forum of Civic Organizations titled "Society Before the Elections." The aims of the forum were to assist in the holding of free and fair parliamentary and local elections on March 31 through civic control over the election process, prevention of the use of "administrative resources," equal access to the media and high voter turnout.

Two-thirds of Ukrainians do not believe that the authorities will ensure a free and fair election, and half do not believe Ukraine is a democracy. Three-quarters of election irregularities last month were undertaken by the pro-Kuchma For a United Ukraine, the Committee of Voters of Ukraine reported.

The forum, which was attended by 300 civic groups from throughout Ukraine, as well as foundations, political parties and election blocs, also debated the role, function and expansion of the activity of civic organizations and civil society within Ukraine.

The number of civic groups in post-Soviet Ukraine has grown each year, with 1999-2000 recording the largest expansion. Young people and students participated in the Ukraine without Kuchma movement and the For Truth civic group that grew out of "Kuchmagate." Many of the young leaders of both of these groups were well-known activists from the 1990-1991 student movement, such as Oles Donii, who is now a member of the radical anti-Kuchma Yulia Tymoshenko election bloc. In the last decade, civil society in Ukraine has become more professional and efficient in its activity, but civic groups remain fragmented.

Two laws on civic associations were adopted in 1992; these underwent changes in 1993, 1997 and 1998. A law on charity and charitable organizations was passed in 1997. By 2000 the Kyiv-based Innovation and Documentation Center (IDC) recorded 28,000 civic groups in Ukraine - of which 23,065 were civic organizations and the remainder charitable foundations.

In the period 1991-1996, Democratic Initiatives found that public faith in civic organizations had declined from 30 to 13 percent. Only 7.8 percent of Ukrainians were members of the 28,000 civic groups, compared to 4.6 percent who were members of the country's 130 political parties, according to a 1999 poll conducted by the IDC. The poll also revealed that two-thirds of Ukrainians have never participated in civic activities, primarily due to a lack of time, distrust or lack of information about them.

A major problem facing civic groups is financial. Only a third of civic groups actually collect membership dues; another third have no funds; and the remainder survive on less than $2,000 a year. The major source of financing remains Western, particularly U.S. foundations. The leader of the Social Democratic Party (United), Viktor Medvedchuk, recently complained that as a result, American influence over Ukraine's civil society is "unrivaled."

Volodymyr Lytvyn's article "Civil Society: Myths and Realities," published on January 19 in the pro-Kuchma Fakty i Komentari, newspaper provided the backdrop to the February forum. Mr. Lytvyn is head of the presidential administration and the For a United Ukraine election bloc. Mr. Lytvyn's article plagiarized an article by Thomas Carothers titled "Civil Society" that appeared in the Winter 1999-2000 issue of "Foreign Policy," a journal published by the Washington-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The intellectual reputation of Mr. Lytvyn, a professor of history and member of the National Academy of Sciences, was severely damaged by this revelation of plagiarism. Hryhorii Nemiria, chairman of the board of the Renaissance (Soros) Foundation, said, "Except for microscopic fragments, it's essentially the same article."

Mr. Lytvyn was forced to admit that he had "re-written" Mr. Carothers' article, but refused to apologize or accept responsibility for his act of academic dishonesty. Subsequently, other Ukrainian academics and scholars have come forward to list a history of plagiarism by Mr. Lytvyn stretching back to 1990. This refusal to respect intellectual property by such a high-ranking official, as well as Ukraine's unwillingness to deal with CD music and computer piracy - a factor that led to U.S. sanctions being imposed on Ukraine last month, are symptomatic of a deeper psychological problem facing post-Soviet Ukraine.

The issue of plagiarism was made worse, Mr. Carothers believes, by the manner in which Mr. Lytvyn's article was used to undermine civil society, the very opposite of what Mr. Carothers had intended. Mr. Lytvyn's (and President Kuchma's) fear of civil society is influenced by the growth of civic activism and public awareness since "Kuchmagate" and during the current election campaign.

The authorities feel threatened by the growth of civic activism in support of democratization and against corruption at a time when between 50 and 57 percent of Ukrainians believe that political and economic reforms, respectively, are moving too slowly, according to a December 2001 poll by the International Foundation for Electoral Systems.

Anatolii Grytsenko, president of the Ukrainian Center for Economic and Political Studies, gave the sharpest rebuttal to Mr. Lytvyn. Reading between the lines, Mr. Grytsenko said he understands Mr. Lytvyn's views as saying defense of citizens' rights lies not within the realm of civil society but through a "strong state and president."

"The authorities would like citizens to remain silent, to not react to provocations against civil society, to not destabilize the situation or create a threat to national security," Mr. Grytsenko concluded.

Mr. Lytvyn's views on civil society represent the ideology of For a United Ukraine, the election bloc that is the official face of the "party of power," which a presidential decree on January 28 openly ordered state officials to back. Its views on civil society, business and politics are influenced by the Soviet legacy that has evolved in the post-Soviet era into supporting a corporatist model for the state that plays a guiding and controlling role within society. The state sees civic activism and the mobilization of citizens as a threat to its capture, and perceived ownership, of the state. Citizens are meant only to display activism during elections, as in a delegative democracy, when they need to be guided for whom to cast their votes.

The ruling ideology of Ukraine's post-Soviet elites and For a United Ukraine, therefore, has been "zlahoda" (concord), civic stability and social peace. "Stability," therefore, is the "fundamental idea" upon which For a United Ukraine is campaigning. To them, civil society and citizens are not something with which to negotiate, respect, to which responsibility for one's actions should be admitted. Therefore, state policies have, served to dampen the growth of civil society and reduce feelings of efficacy - something the forum of civic groups is striving to change.

| Home Page |