Nobel Prize, Ukrainian Version

What is the difference between the titles Miss Ukraine, Statesman of the Year, Politician of the Year, ets.? Among other things, it is that the beauties are not responsible for the awarding country’s condition. Thus, one felt very strange about the pomp of the Man of the Year ceremony with all its nominations staged on the eve of March 8, with episodes shown on the state-controlled UT-1 television. Personally, I have nothing against nominating and awarding popular men of the arts, scientists, and athletes, but in the political domain tact and consideration are vital, and these are precisely what those organizing the political show lacked most conspicuously. The best People’s Deputy was introduced by Dmytro Tabachnyk who has done much to discredit the very idea of Parliament in Ukraine and introduced the style of executive-legislative relationships which Mr. Kuchma has since used to often. So who was named the best Ukrainian Solon? Mr. Semynozhenko. I have been following Verkhovna Rada’s performance quite closely, but the jury’s train of thought on this particular occasion failed me. Instead, I remembered that the winner was in Mr. Pustovoitenko’s Cabinet and is now a member of a non-presidential faction.

As for Communist leader Symonenko getting the title of Politician of the Year, I was not surprised. My 10-year-old son, who happens to take a keen interest in politics, burst out crying. The poor kid did not know that this option had been mulled over by the media, since combating him in the second round of the presidential campaign is the best Mr. Kuchma can ask for. Therefore, why not raise the rival’s popularity a little while discrediting him, sending a clear message to the voter: See? The fellow is already part of the new system? Mr. Symonenko, however, knew better than attend the ceremony.

As the action on the screen was approaching its climax my wife said, “The way they go about it, I wouldn’t be surprised if they awarded Tkachenko next.” No sooner said than done! The Speaker turned out to be Statesman of the Year. And he, too, must have foreseen this piquant turn of events and decided to act diplomatically. He was not in the audience for the “valid” reason that the next day was his sixtieth birthday. He invited everybody present to the National Restaurant and the invitation was conveyed from the stage by none other than the President. The latter, of course, could not have expected the nomination a second time, yet he received consolation prizes from Philip Morris and Hennessy (perhaps among the investors “most concerned” about Ukraine’s future).

After that there was a spectacular lineup of past and present laureates on the stage: Messrs. Kuchma, Omelchenko, Medvedchuk, Surkis, Riabets, Shvets, and many others currently close to the President. In a word, all the king’s men. UT-1 made a special point of comparing the accolades to the Nobel Prize. The whole thing left a bitter taste in one’s mouth. Oligarchs and their hour of glory, their jokes using words from prison camp vocabulary, their undisguised scorn for the millions of plebeians waiting for months to be paid their token wages; cultural figures being drawn into the election campaign; pairs of emcees taking turns on the stage, of whom one would always speak Russian (the organizers were careful to include this in the scenario in view of the elections). And again one asked oneself: Will this vicious circle be ever broken? Will Ukraine become civilized in the long run? Or are oligarchs running a banana republic in their own way?