EDITORIAL: Unity for Rukh (04/11/99)

EDITORIAL

Unity for Rukh

For all the vitriolic language, for all the bitter accusations of betrayal, for all the bad blood that is developing, the possibility of a reunion between the two estranged Rukhs still exists.

Since a group of young turks headed by National Deputies Yurii Kostenko and Bohdan Boiko decided that Rukh would be better off without Vyacheslav Chornovil at the helm, little love has been lost between the groups.

However, neither the Rukh Party now led by Hennadii Udovenko (elected after the death of Mr. Chornovil) nor the one chaired by Mr. Kostenko has gone so far as to state that the split is irreconcilable.

To a large extent, the two groups merely have exchanged vocal volleys to discredit one another or to substantiate the legitimacy of their democratic movement - all of which seems aimed at gaining the sympathy of the general public and Rukh supporters. What is truly disconcerting, however, is the emotion and rhetoric that have engulfed the debate, especially the words being hurled by the Rukh Party that stuck with Mr. Chornovil before his untimely and tragic death.

What do some members of the Udovenko Rukh hope to accomplish by accusing the Kostenko Rukh of being "pimps of the idea of a Ukrainian national identity?"

Sure, the split between longtime political partners is as emotional as a disintegrating marriage - especially when it involves people who have fought together for so long in the trenches of the difficult political battle to build a united, democratic country called Ukraine.

There should have been no room, however, for politics at the burial ceremony for Mr. Chornovil at the Baikove Cemetery.

It was a time to remember the great Ukrainian patriot and democratic leader, and an opportunity to promote the position that now is the time to unite - with the death of the long-time Rukh leader acting as the propelling force to continue the idea for which he persistently and unwaveringly fought: that Ukraine must be free of its Communist past and must move toward an open and democratic society aligned with Europe.

That opportunity was lost when some eulogizers took the low road and decided that, for some reason, the funeral of the Rukh leader was the time to belittle others.

Mr. Chornovil's press secretary, Dmytro Ponomarchuk, who was traveling with Mr. Chornovil in the ill-fated automobile at the time of the accident and who is currently hospitalized, first suggested that the death of Mr. Chornovil should be the catalyst for reunion from his hospital bed. "Rukh should unite in honor of the memory of Vyacheslav Chornovil," said Mr. Ponomarchuk, who had recently named his newborn son, Viacheslav, in honor of the late Rukh leader.

Indeed, it is an idea that the Kostenko-led Rukh has not rejected. Although the new party had its problems with Mr. Chornovil, a portrait of the man they removed as head of their parliamentary faction and party chairman still hangs in a prominent place in the party's new headquarters.

And though Ivan Zayets, a leading member of the Kostenko Rukh, has said that the split in the party had developed over time as new political ideas and strategies divided the party, Mr. Kostenko has said that political reunion is not out of the question.

Yes, the Ministry of Justice recently certified the Udovenko-led Rukh as the only legitimate Rukh. But the reunion of Rukh is not dependant upon a political decision by the government, more so because some observers say the decision looks like a political move to keep Rukh divided in order to draw voters away from a Rukh candidate and towards President Leonid Kuchma.

The first thing that both parties need to do is stop the senseless emotional rhetoric and begin a constructive dialogue, which also means that the Udovenko Rukh must stop degrading its counterpart by calling on the other side to repent or recant and return to the flock.

Emotional rhetoric accomplishes little in the political arena. Successful politics is played coldly and calculatedly, and with compromise.

The Rukh Party, one or the other, has nothing to gain by maintaining the split. Both however, could lose a large following that might opt to move to the far right or to President Kuchma's "party of power" as its distaste for the infighting grows. That would make both Rukh groups irrelevant in the next presidential elections, and a sideline player for years to come. Rukh has battled for too long and has come too far for that.

| Home Page |