Ukraine's first televised debate watched by nationwide audience (11/21/04)

Ukraine's first televised debate watched by nationwide audience

by Roman Woronowycz
Kyiv Press Bureau

KYIV - On the one hand, it was far from a classic debate, but on the other, it was the first time that anything resembling a standard, direct exchange of opinions and positions between two finalists in a presidential marathon had occurred in Ukraine.

In the end, both Viktor Yushchenko, the opposition candidate and winner in the first round of voting, who had been blackballed by the national broadcast mass media, and Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, who had used the same television channels - owned by the business oligarchs who support his candidacy - to highlight and embellish his successes as head of government, said they had gained advantage from the debate, which was broadcast live by six television channels on November 15 and drew an extensive national audience.

"I am satisfied with the debate if only because it was the first time in three and a half years that I had a chance to come before the nation and present my positions on Ukrainian National Television," explained Mr. Yushchenko at a press conference a day after the debate.

Mr. Yushchenko was keen to explain that his opponent had distorted many facts to present him in a bad light, foremost of which was that as head of the National Bank of Ukraine in the mid-1990s he was responsible for the state of the economy.

Mr. Yanukovych rejected his opponent's allegation of distortions during his own press conference later that day. He said that, in his estimation, he had put on the better show.

"Time will tell who was wrong. I never feel hurt when people say they disagree with me. I will always respect them," noted Mr. Yanukovych.

The empathetic tone the prime minister used in his response was one he had utilized increasingly in the last weeks, as he responded to the sometimes shrill and emotional charges made by the Yushchenko camp of falsification of votes, misappropriation of government funds and intimidation of voters. It was a tone meant to portray understanding and sympathy, and paint Mr. Yushchenko as a beleaguered and panicked opponent willing to say and do most anything.

Yurii Karasov, a political consultant, noted on Channel 5 television after the debate had ended that beyond the point of who had won, the most important achievement was that the event was another step in the often awkward development of democracy in Ukraine.

"These debates were a breakthrough moment for Ukraine," explained Mr. Karasov, who added that, while "Mr. Yanukovych had done better than expected, Mr. Yushchenko had simply done better."

The most important difference between the candidates was in the way they wanted the voters to perceive them. Mr. Yanukovych presented himself as the diligent, hard-working manager of affairs, first in the Donetsk Oblast and for the last two years at the national level, who cared for the people and was above the political rhetoric.

Mr. Yushchenko tried to explain with numbers and specific ideas that he was the one who would get rid of the criminal element and free the economy so that society could prosper. His major point was that too little had been done for the Ukrainian people over the years and he had the concrete plans to move Ukraine to a more hopeful future.

Mr. Yushchenko skillfully summarized his political stance and explained his candidacy differed from that of his opponent in the final passage of his opening statement:

"These are the two pillars of my election campaign: First, jobs, wages and stable prices. Second, fighting corruption throughout the country. This, my people, is the goal. The mechanism for achieving it is transparency, trust and the law of Ukraine. This is where the clash arises between transparent politics and politicking.

"Here we do not have a conflict between two Viktors. This is a conflict of two world views, two moralities. Our choice is very simple: either we live according to the code of ethics of the criminal underworld or we live like free and affluent people."

Mr. Yanukovych, meanwhile, tried to cast Mr. Yushchenko, who in addition to being chairman of the National Bank of Ukraine also headed the government in 2000-2001, as a person who was the reason for the inability for Ukraine to right itself economically over the first decade of independence. Mr. Yanukovych told television viewers that Mr. Yushchenko was responsible for maintaining the huge shadow economy and the trade in barter that it entailed.

"There were many barter operations which propped up the shadow sector of the economy into which previous governments had driven business. This was also the fault of the National Bank, which the esteemed Mr. Yushchenko chaired," stated Mr. Yanukovych.

The comment brought a return from Mr. Yushchenko, who noted, "The National Bank does not have anything to do with barter, it only handles money."

Mr. Yanukovych retorted: "There is no escaping it, the National Bank controlled the flow of money, and when money is being driven away into the shadow economy, it is the duty of the National Bank to stop it."

The exchange was one of the few moments in which a semblance of a debate could be noted. For most of the 90 minutes the two presidential candidates stood across the room from one another behind transparent podiums that reached to their midsections and alternately addressed the four general topics that had been agreed upon after negotiations between the candidates and the Central Election Commission: social policy, the economy, domestic policy and foreign policy.

The two candidates were given up to 10 minutes to present their views on each of the four general topics, alternately going first. Each candidate also was allotted three minutes for an introduction and the same amount of time for a conclusion. A journalist who stood before them at the center of the stage kept time and acted as moderator.

Mr. Yanukovych, who went first with his introduction and gave the final summary as well, had the advantage in presentation and appearance. He seemed crisper. He had memorized his introduction and conclusion, and was quicker with a smile towards the camera.

Mr. Yushchenko, usually dapper, detached and self-assured, seemed less interested in appearances than with the facts. He read his introduction and conclusion, his head bobbing up and down from the text, and often was spotted shuffling through papers rather than listening to his opponent, as if trying to organize himself.

Several times during the debate, the TV cameras caught Mr. Yushchenko in unflatterring moments. During his press conference the day after the debates he explained that he had not been aware that the television cameras would be on him while he was not speaking.

Ukrainian National Television-1, the government-owned broadcast outlet that election law made responsible for the debates, managed to show its bias for the government candidate even as the debate rules sought to keep the two candidates equal.

While Mr. Yushchenko's current disfigured appearance, the result of a poisoning that left huge nodules covering his face, was covered with make-up, the lighting used on the television set cast a shadow over Mr. Yushchenko's features, making him look dark and tired. Cameras utilized tighter shots of Mr. Yushchenko, which only accented the disfigurement of his face. Mr. Yanukovych, meanwhile, was filmed from the shoulders up and lit from the front, making him appear bright and sunny.

The event was a national television spectacle, with one Ukrainian television rating firm, GFK-USM, stating that its survey showed that 55.6 percent of households in population centers with more than 50,000 inhabitants had watched at least five minutes, while 43.3 percent watched at least a half-hour, reported Interfax-Ukraine.

| Home Page |