Korrespondent magazine, the Russian-language sister publication of the Kyiv Post, interviewed President Victor Yushchenko on Feb. 12. Reaffirming his reputation for lengthy monologues, the president took more than an hour to answer only six questions. He sounded competent and confident on the economy, in contrast to the acidic attacks on his former ally, Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, in recent months. He also left the impression that he will run for re-election in January. If he is to win, he has a lot of catching up to do. Polls show his support is below 5 percent.

K: In terms of speed of devaluation, Ukraine’s hryvnia trails only the Icelandic Krona. Economists expected the fall of Ukraine’s economy to stop by March, but it’s clear now that it is not going to happen. When will Ukraine come out of the crisis, and what needs to be done for it?

VY: If the crisis is in the banking sector, it can be dealt with in three to seven months. If it’s a stock market crisis — it takes three months. If it’s a currency crisis — it takes several weeks or months. But if the first, second and third types have grown into the body of the economy, the economy starts to cough and this sort of crisis is not curable in a calendar year. Ukraine has to be prepared for what any country is preparing for, including Western ones.

The rate of the hryvnia is an effect; the rate is not a cause. The rate is something that is reflected by the National Bank – and I want to point out it does not set the official rate [on its own]. No central bank sets the rate, they reflect it. We needn’t break the mirror that fails to reflect the view we would like to see. We need to work to change the view. The fuss around the central bank’s policy will cause the following: with the effort of prime minister, the political circles, the central bank’s chief, with the effort of other circles, including journalists, we shook something that was sacred since – at least – 1996 [the currency].

The crisis is not a verdict. It has two sides. One of them is complication of a number of processes, and we have to reinterpret in a new way how we are going to service them, starting from reorganization of our internal market. And the second side that I would say I am more interested in is that the crisis gives us a chance.

But the No. 1 issue today is: the ability of the government, the ability of the executive power branch, the ability of the prime minister to change the budget, approve anti-crisis legislation and cooperate with various institutions. If they are ready, I would have a calm answer that Ukraine will manage the crisis. Certainly, we’ll manage, I should think so. The question is what price we’ll pay.

K: Why are you not talking about whether Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko suits her job?

VY: What is a government in charge of? The national economic policy, which it authors and executes. Now we’re talking about nuances of the program… I am convinced we have a conflict of ideologies, and the policy conducted in 2005 and 2008 by some governments – it’s difficult to call it market-oriented.

For example, [we have a] country that has 6.5 million tons of surplus grain, [but] it’s forbidden to export it. The same prohibition exists for sunflower oil, and we have much of it in the world. We’re a leading producer in the world, we produce seven times more than we consume. This is a dangerous leftist policy. You can not treat private property this way. It’s not state property.

Or when it’s announced that we can pay Hr 135 billion of debts on old deposits of the population. It’s unrealistic! And then 2008 starts and Hr 6 billion is handed out in the first three months, provoking years’ worth of inflation in these three months of 2008. In the first quarter we had 9.5 percent. This is [forecasted] annual inflation. In the second quarter we had 16 percent, and 23 percent for the whole year. Just look at this nonsense.

Populism is the sort of [action] when you deliver good news – however empty and deceitful, but people like to listen to it. A month later when it dawns what price one pays for it, reactions change.

How did the economy behave? What was the price? Here it is: nominal income grew by 51 percent, pensions by 49 percent. But in real terms income and pensions grew by eight percent. This is the lowest growth in the last eight years.

K: How long will Ukraine have a government that makes mistakes in the economy one after another?

VY: You know I don’t want to send signals [spurring] conflict. There are procedures for evaluating the work of the government. We’re premised that it’s out of the president’s competence to dismiss the prime minister or one of the ministers. It’s not in my competence according to the Constitution. I cannot throw around words that would be emotional but not pragmatic, as a president.

K: Everyone is tired of endless infighting between the president and the prime minister. The country’s reputation is suffering. Polls show that 80 percent of Ukrainians want Ukraine to have a single pair of strong hands. Doesn’t that frighten you?

VY:  No, it does not frighten me. It shows that the structure that was introduced to the Constitution is deeply irrational. The people who initiated the Constitutional reforms dreamt of one thing: When the star of the third term of presidency stopped shining for them, they did everything to give the president’s powers to the prime minister ... and a part of them was transferred to parliament. There was one serious mistake made. We lost the balance of power.

A single unstable institution such as the parliament of Ukraine cannot form stable politics and stable power. Instability cannot breed stability. But the parliament received a mandate from the people, and today two mega-parties are polarizing it. And the institute of stability that the presidency used to represent is out of the game today.

That’s why I would say that polls show us one thing. We have to seriously reconstruct political order in the country, and to find the answer we have to choose the most democratic method. I am deeply convinced that a national referendum on the constitution can be the only compromise that suits all political powers.

K: We conducted an investigation into how much money is allocated by the state for some humanitarian projects, including the Memorial to victims of Holodomor and Mystetskiy Arsenal art museum (both are campaigns spearheaded by Yushchenko). We’re talking about big money – Hr 750 million for the Memorial, and Hr 300 million for Arsenal. At the same time, the projects that deal with prevention of AIDS and tuberculosis receive significantly less money. Is it worth spending more on things that directly concern people rather than on things that could be postponed – at least during the crisis?

VY: I have several feelings, and I am thinking where to start. I think I should start by saying when we offer arguments, we should be precise and sensitive.

When I came to power, the AIDS and tuberculosis programs were receiving Hr 5 million each. If we talk about these programs’ budgets – it’s half a billion already, not even 10 times more. This will radically change our attitude to this issue – although the tendency the problem is developing with, is very difficult.

I would like us not to make an insensitive parallel. Because a human being wants to live, fight for their health, a normal social status, have satisfaction from the feelings that make you human. A human being is not an animal. It can see the world in many colors. This is not a matter of discussion, whether it’s economical or not. We are talking about our attitude to your grandfather and great-grandfather who was artificially murdered, and you are offering me as a president a deal to forget your grandfather…

K: I did not make an offer like that…

VY: Yes you did. But you transformed it into a bill. You’re naming figures that are seven-fold different from reality. One day we have to throw aside all these speculations. I’m worried about it, frankly speaking. I am not addressing this to you personally. I am convinced that a Western journalist, a Jewish one, for example, would not ask this sort of question about the Holocaust. Because he understands very well that we should never look at the tragedy of our people with the eyes of a neighbor. We should always look at the tragedy of our father or grandfather with our own eyes. This is your personal biography, your history. The future grows through history. I have not come across a state that does not talk about its history – that does not care about its history.

When we are talking – here I would like to answer your trite question – about Holodomor, I can say one thing to you. At the time when you were born, you could not find a single book that would mention the death, artificial deaths of ten million people. You could not watch films, not one of them – not because you did not want to, but because they did not exist.

If I had asked five years ago: “Have you seen a single monument to the victims of hunger?” you would have had to say “No.” Ten million people were destroyed with artificial hunger. It was Genocide against the Ukrainian people. And the great-grandchildren failed to erect a monument.

This whole discussion reminds me of a situation as if your father has died, and we’re debating whether it’s necessary to put a cross on his grave. Maybe we should economize, and buy eggs, sausage and salo (pork fat) instead? It’s cynical.

K: How satisfied are you with your achievements as president. And why have you not managed to fulfill some points of your program – fighting corruption, for example?

VY: Believe me, the last four years have not been the worst time in the life of Ukraine. Unfortunately, the year 2009 cannot become like that.

I do not want the nation to live as it did in 1990, 1991, 1993 or 2000 – any of those years. I want the nation to repeat the tendencies we have had in the last four years.

One may say: Was this the maximum of what was possible to achieve? This is far from being so. We could have achieved more if the constitution had not been touched, if we had constitutional balances. If there weren’t such deeply implanted party-based and proportional political models, we would not have a clear tendency for power usurpation we have now.

Today the prosecutor general is practically controlled by a single person because his destiny is decided by 226 [parliamentary majority], united communists and what we call a coalition. The same goes for head of the Supreme Court, the interior minister, and the whole law enforcement system is under the influence of a single person. There is no counterbalance.

The land scandals created by one of the political forces within the coalition – we cannot make justice in this system, over this crime because who are the judges? Whoever holds the cover decides whether justice is going to happen or not.

The judge [Ihor] Zvarych was caught [taking a $100,000 bribe in Lviv]. You cannot find a greater fact of corruption. It’s not just Zvarych. I will not uncover a great secret if I say we’re talking about more than just one judge. The next day I file a petition to the council of judges to remove him from his job, and [another petition] to the High Justice Council to remove him from the administrative part of his job. Three days later in Kyiv, in Pechersk court, using a petition from the prime minister, people’s deputy [Andriy] Portnov [from Tymoshenko’s faction] opens a case to close this criminal case.

You know, in any country if a parliament member shows up in court, it would cost him his job because it would be interpreted as pressure. But today it has become a model for manual control over courts, starting from the high court.

K: Will you participate in the next presidential election?

VY: The greatest service that can be performed by those people who are supposed to solve the current situation is not to set the presidential election as their number one aim, as a priority that subjugates their activities, their office and their status. The great mistake of the prime minister today is [that she is too] busy with the presidential election. I am convinced that one will be judged worthy or not by their actions, not demagogy, not populism, and other things.

That’s why I would say that now we need to calmly perform out functions in an honest and dignified way, until it’s time to decide, in mid-summer.

Later, in the middle of summer, the nation will have a magnificent choice of candidates, and I will appeal to people, what sort of a country Ukraine should be, what road it should take, and who can better assert this interest. This is when we should talk about my candidacy, about the situation, the choice we have, and where I have to be personally as Yushchenko Victor Andriyovych.