KYIV – For Ukraine, the New Year has started with a roller-coaster effect, moving from seasonal festive joy to tragedy and mourning.
It began with an upbeat, unconventional New Year’s Eve address to the nation by the country’s new president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, which was warmly received by many, but antagonized those in opposition to him.
And, following Christmas celebrations according to the old Julian calendar, it was followed by a very different presidential message to the Ukrainian people – a declaration of a Day of Mourning on January 9 for the victims of the Ukraine International Airlines plane that crashed for unexplained reasons on January 8 after takeoff from Tehran, killing all 176 people on board.
In between, other controversies were stirred up at home, and a number of noteworthy developments occurred on the external front, all overshadowed by the escalation of tensions between the U.S. and Iran. Understandably, President Zelenskyy has since been discussing the air disaster with the Iranian president, and the leaders of Canada, Sweden, Afghanistan and the United Kingdom, whose citizens were aboard the ill-fated aircraft.
In his first New Year’s address, Mr. Zelenskyy sought to break with tradition and to give a new look and feel to the traditional speech from the country’s leader. It contained few details and did not elaborate any precise plans for the year ahead.
The main message was the need for unity at a time of war, economic difficulties and efforts to get reforms back on track. Mr. Zelenskyy challenged his listeners to reflect on what it is to be Ukrainian today, what should unite Ukrainians and what threatens to perpetuate mutual distrust, misunderstanding and antagonism, what should be the priorities today in this regard, and what can be addressed later or more gradually.
Mr. Zelenskyy pleaded for understanding and tact, patience and goodwill and, recognizing the diversity in the country, urged unity based on inclusive rather than exclusive values or premises, be they rooted in history, religion, ethnicity or regional differences. “In the new year, we need to be a single country every day,” he stressed. “This should be our national idea. Learning to live together in respect. For the future of the country.”
Mr. Zelenskyy was immediately attacked by his political opponents, who accused him of diluting patriotic Ukrainian elements in his address and promoting an attitude of “who cares” as regards Ukrainian national attributes. In his speech he had mentioned a situation, “Where it doesn’t matter what the name of the street is, because it is lit and paved. Where it makes no difference, at which monument are you waiting for the girl you are in love with. If we see the future equally, it should unite us.” This was construed as showing insensitivity, if not outright hostility, to efforts aimed at fostering Ukrainianization and de-communization.
President Zelenskyy’s message about the need to put differences aside and cement a political nation appears to have been well received, seen as timely and constructive, by the majority of the country’s population who voted for him and who evidently by and large still continue to support him. His political detractors, however, sought to present his address as unpatriotic.
The following day, several thousand of the latter manifested their own particular understanding of what it should mean to be a Ukrainian by holding rallies in Kyiv and other cities on January 1, the 111th anniversary of the birth of Ukrainian nationalist leader Stepan Bandera. In the capital, around 1,000 far-right activists and held a traditional torchlight procession though the city center. Outside of Ukraine, both Poland and Israel condemned the commemoration of this controversial Ukrainian hero.
The domestic controversies were rapidly overtaken by events in the foreign sphere. On January 1, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo postponed a visit to Kyiv because of rising U.S.-Iranian tensions in the Middle East. It would have been the first meeting of a senior U.S. official with the Zelenskyy administration since the impeachment process was launched in Washington. A few days later, it was announced that Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel would be meeting with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin on January 19 and that she intended to discuss the Russian-Ukrainian conflict with him.
Against this background, there was considerable surprise when on January 5 the Ukrainian news media began reporting that President Zelenskyy had been spotted in Oman. His presidential office hurried to provide an explanation for his unannounced trip abroad and linked it to business meetings with Omani officials. His critics made political capital out of it.
Whatever the reason for his visit to Oman, private or official, Mr. Zelenskyy was still there on January 8, when the crash of the Ukrainian airliner in Teheran was reported. It was there that he presumably also received a message of condolences from, among others, President Putin. He flew back to Kyiv during the night, and in the morning recorded a statement addressed to the Ukrainian people.
“Fellow Ukrainians,” he began. “The morning of January 8, 2020, became a dark page in the history of both Ukraine and the world…” Promising to ensure that the real reasons for the crash will be established, he requested “everyone – especially when Ukraine is in conditions of information warfare – to refrain from manipulation, speculation, conspiracy theories, hasty categorical evaluations and unverified versions… We need patience, endurance and wisdom.”
He concluded: ”this dreadful story should teach all of us – every citizen of Ukraine and every world leader – to appreciate human lives.”