Turning the pages back... August 24, 1991 (08/22/99)

Turning the pages back...

August 24, 1991

In "The Ukrainian Resurgence," a new book covering the modern political history of Ukraine, author Bohdan Nahaylo offers a fascinating account of 1991's failed coup in Moscow and developments in Ukraine that led to the declaration of the country's independence eight years ago on August 24.

The putsch that began on August 19 collapsed merely two days later. National democratic members of Ukrainian SSR's Parliament demanded that an extraordinary session be convened on Saturday, August 24, to assess the political situation of Ukraine in the aftermath of the failed coup.

Mr. Nahaylo notes that Parliament Chairman Leonid Kravchuk, who had waffled during the crisis, knew "full well that the parliamentary opposition [the democrats] would be after his blood and that his political future was at stake."

The author goes on to report on Mr. Kravchuk's performance:

"Kravchuk defended himself by maintaining that in very dangerous and unpredictable conditions, with the military on alert and the picture of what was happening in Moscow remaining unclear, he and his colleagues in the Presidium, which were themselves divided, 'did everything in order that a state of emergency not be introduced [in Ukraine], that people were not crushed, that there were no victims and that innocent blood was not spilt'. ...

"Kravchuk claimed that [the putschists' representative Gen. Valentin] Varennikov had called on the Ukrainian leaders to support the GKChP [the Russian acronym for the State Committee on the State Emergency in the USSR] and to consider imposing a state of emergency in western Ukraine and Kyiv. The general had threatened the use of military force in the event of their failing to support the putschists. In a telephone call made to Kravchuk during the meeting, the chief of the KGB, [Vladimir] Kriuchkov, had reinforced this ultimatum. The head of the Ukrainian Parliament said he had responded by declaring that the GKChP was unconstitutional and that Ukraine would continue to abide by its own laws and Constitution and to uphold its sovereignty. ...

"The Ukrainian leader emphasized that the attempted coup had revealed the limited nature of the republic's sovereignty and that new laws would have to be passed, and 'more decisive and concrete steps' taken, to broaden it. Because of what had occurred, it was also necessary to review Ukraine's position with regard to the union treaty. 'Ukraine can only join the kind of union,' he now declared, 'participation in which would exclude the possibility of encroachments by anyone on our state sovereignty'. ..."

Chairman Kravchuk was subjected to intense questioning by national deputies who criticized his behavior during the coup and doubted his version of the unfolding events.

According to Mr. Nahaylo, this is what happened next:

"... On behalf of the opposition, [Dmytro] Pavlychko called on the Parliament not to get carried away by emotions but to concentrate on three critical issues which he and his colleagues believed had to be decided that day, namely, the proclamation of Ukraine's independence, that the Presidium of the Parliament take control over all military units deployed on the republic's territory, and the complete departization of Ukraine's state structures. [Communist leader Stanislav] Hurenko responded by protesting against what he claimed were attempts to turn the session into a 'lynch court'. ... and appealed to the Parliament not to go along with the democrats' 'dyktat,' which he compared to a virtual coup d'état. ...

"... Unlike Hurenko, the leader of the majority, [Oleksander] Moroz, delivered a reasonably constructive and conciliatory speech which also contained a few surprises. He condemned what he described as the putschists' attempt to use the CPSU [Communist Party of the Soviet Union] in carrying out their coup d'état, but also emphasized that he had protested to [Soviet leader Mikhail] Gorbachev as far back as February 1989 that the party was not developing in the direction of democracy and in the spirit of restructuring.

"... He went on to propose that, while asserting Ukraine's 'unchanging course towards independence,' the Parliament should approve, without delay, a number of measures which were essential for bolstering the republic's sovereignty, the most important of which he argued were the creation of a national army and the introduction of a national currency. ..."

Ihor Yukhnovsky, the leader of the democratic opposition, the National Council, referred to the new situation that had arisen in the wake of the failed coup.

According to Mr. Nayalo:

"... [Yukhnovsky] maintained that: 'In fact, the union no longer exists as a state. The republics are de facto independent states; they should take power fully into their own hands. Russia is doing so.' The question was: 'How are we to do this in Ukraine?'

"Yukhnovsky argued that it was not enough simply to declare Ukraine's independence without ensuring the triumph of democracy through the 'decommunization' of the republic. Otherwise, the independent but still 'Communist' Ukraine would be hostile to Yeltsin's 'democratic' Russia and would be recognized only by 'Saddam [Hussein] and other dictators.' Yukhnovsky, therefore, made the following proposals, which he said he had prepared himself, thereby suggesting that they had not been cleared in advance with the People's [National] Council: that the Parliament declare Ukraine an independent and democratic state and that this decision be endorsed by a referendum ...; that the activity of the Communist Party on Ukraine's territory be stopped, but that all party functionaries who did not support the coup retain their current level of earnings and be found new jobs; that the Presidium of the Parliament resign and a new Presidium be elected; and that all activity promoting 'violence, discord and enmity' be banned in Ukraine. ..."

The Parliament chairman announced a break after Volodymyr Yavorivsky read a proposed version of the declaration of independence. With the democratic and Communist deputies meeting in separate caucuses, the democratic opposition sent its representatives to appeal to the Communists to support the declaration. "Their arguments ran along the lines that: 'we were all once Communists under Moscow, but now a point of no return has been reached and independence is the only way forward,'" reports Mr. Nahaylo.

Finally, at a little before 6 p.m., the Act of Declaration of the Independence of Ukraine was read and subsequently approved by a vote of 346 for, one against (Albert Korneiev, a Russian deputy from the Donbas) and three abstentions.

Source: Bohdan Nahaylo, "The Ukrainian Resurgence." (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999).

| Home Page |