Interview to Segodnya.ua

 

- This is your first interview after the scandal broke out around the Inter TV Channel. Let's start with that...

- What happened around the Inter Channel on September 4-6 is not a rally or an event, it is a crime. People who burst into the channel building and set it on fire are called terrorists, as the channel has filed a relevant crime report to the PGO and the SBU, and now we are waiting for results of the investigation. Besides, we expect a report from the Prosecutor General on the implementation of the President’s instruction regarding the investigation into the Inter arson and the blocking of its work. Today, it is a test of democracy: can the government protect the media in Ukraine, protect journalists, whose life and health were exposed to danger, can they tell the public that the criminals will suffer punishment?

- About the arson ... Immediately after the incident, nearly all experts, advisers to certain Ministers and MPs agreed that the arson was an internal job.

- Are you a journalist? Talk to your Inter colleagues to find out what really happened there...

- We did...

- First of all, it was a planned and politically motivated terror attack. Secondly, and more importantly, those who planned the attack, knew that people could be injured - journalists, your colleagues, but it did not stop them. The attack was carried out with confidence in total impunity - the attackers did not even get hold of the video from surveillance cameras from nearby shops and a pharmacy. Besides, the masterminds behind the attack did not expect that the attackers would fail to destroy all the video from CCTV cameras inside the TV station building. The analysis of all these video records allowed us to completely reconstruct the attack and identify the attackers.

- About this video. Advisers to the Interior Minister complained about the fact that the Inter Channel intentionally delayed the transfer of video records from its surveillance cameras to the investigation and stated that it was, just like the ‘self-arson’, something you could benefit from.

- Not advisers, but one adviser (Zorian Shkiriak). Not activists, but criminals. I would ask you to be more precise in your wording, some of your colleagues were injured, after all. The first thing that police representatives did before the attack - they withdrew from the building on Shchusev Street (according to the press service of the Kiev police, they detained nine former servicemen of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, then interviewed and released them - editors). The second thing the police did - following the orders of their bosses, they ran to seize video from internal surveillance cameras (unsalaried advisor to the Interior Minister Anton Herashchenko wrote in his Facebook, that the Inter management had refused to provide the video to the team of investigators, who promptly arrived at the scene, so it I had to be withdrawn late at night under the decision of the investigator - author). Some drives that they took in a hurry had been damaged by fire and water, other disks were empty or old... Besides, the attack failed and the building did not burn to the ground only because journalists resisted the attackers, the building had a small internal security force, and so they all together confronted vandalism and terrorism... The terrorists were forced to flee from the building, despite the fact that they had failed to fulfill their task - to cease the broadcasting of the Inter newsroom on Shchusev Street. The studio went on air on the same day. We were able to recover those drives that had been affected and remained at the TV station, we managed to get video from a nearby shop and a pharmacy and were able to collect and reconstruct the whole picture of the crime. The whole world and the entire Ukraine saw it. The picture of the crime has been made known to the society, and the perpetrators are known to the public. Why don’t the authorities do anything, why don’t the police do anything - officials, who are conducting the investigation? Because they are well aware, who attacked Inter, they know that these people are close to the Interior Ministry leadership. Now, after the terror attack, another crime takes place - the criminals are being covered up. We are waiting for results of the investigation from the SBU and the PGO.

- Have they completed investigative actions involving the channel staff?

- We are not aware of that. The law firm that works with the Inter TV channel documents the crime collecting testimonies from all individuals, who had been present in the building at the time of the crime. This involves dozens of people. The reconstruction of a minute-by-minute timeline of the terror attack is in progress. We are convinced that sooner or later all those, who attacked the Inter TV Channel on September 4, 2016 and blocked its work in subsequent days, will be brought to justice.

- “I received insistent demands to sell my television station at ‘fire-sale prices’. You wrote this in your article that came out on Politico in mid-September. Who offered you to sell Inter?

- I have had such conversations with several high-ranking officials. I do not provide any further comments on this subject at the moment.

- Immediately after the scandal around Inter the press reported that other stations would also be attacked after Inter. There were some hints being dropped that the government was trying to consolidate media resources in their hands.

- The drama of the terror attack against the Inter TV channel was drawn up taking into account two vectors. First - the actual attack - penetration, setting fire to buildings, destructing the studio on Shchusev Street and blocking the building on Dmitrivska Street. Second, there was a smear campaign that accompanied these actions. The society was fed the unflattering email communication between people who were indirectly involved in the work of the Inter TV channel, for about a month the channel had been accused of being pro-Russian, which, incidentally, was never confirmed by any independent monitoring. On the day of the attack, when they were not able to put Inter offline, the masterminds of the campaign against the channel dumped another provocation: “self-arson”. And then the same resources, the same speakers that pushed the messages about Inter’s “pro-Russian nature,” tried to push the “self-arson” message. Now they are somewhat confused, because the crime timeline has been reconstructed and made known to the public. Today our opponents returned to the pro-Russian message and are now trying to justify the actions of terrorists with “wrong information policies” of the TV station. But now it is already perfectly clear who planned the attack and for what purpose they did it. I am convinced that the main thing, which the Ukrainian society must demand from our law enforcement, and which the government must do, if we live in a democratic country, is to punish the guilty persons, however close to the government they may be.

- You briefly mentioned the Stoliarova’s correspondence. Do you think it was another element of pressure on the channel or was this correspondence genuine? After all, it was not the first scandal involving Stoliarova?

- You know, I don’t even want to know what it really was. Was there correspondence, wasn’t there correspondence. We have a pro-Ukrainian, patriotic TV station. Apparently, some members of the current coalition do not like the things they see on Inter. But that's their problem. And then, the way the so-called correspondence was pitched, and how key messages were pushed and cited as “evidence” of the pro-Russian nature of the station, it's basically a classic smear campaign, which had been designed to convince the public that this station should not exist. And so, following the logic of the people who devised the terror attack, they could go there and torch it... We have seen something like this somewhere else in the last century. But I could never imagine that this could happen in modern Ukraine. Journalists, cameramen, technicians, people present in the building - their lives were put on the line in the terror attack organized by people affiliated with the current government. What should a healthy society and a state governed by the rule of law do? They must give an answer to society, to the people and to the whole world, exposing the perpetrators and punishing those responsible.

- Well, according to the law, law enforcement agencies still have a month to finish the investigation...

- We’ll wait and see. At this stage, we demand to ensure the safety of all Inter staff, without exception, to ensure the normal operation of the station.

- Have you had a conflict with Dmytro Firtash? Firtash himself in a recent interview with RBC-Ukraine said that there was no conflict...

- No, there was no conflict. Such rumors are inspired by our detractors.

- Well, how long has it been since you talked to him?

- Half an hour ago on the phone...

- What does he have to say about Inter? According to him, he does not interfere in the editorial policy...

- I don’t do it either. Our task is to create normal working conditions for the staff. It is very difficult to do, because as you know, television in Ukraine today is a non-profit industry. The editorial policy is the work of journalists and channel management.

- What do you think will be the outcome of the Firtash case? Will he be extradited to the United States? Because it is rumored in Ukraine that he will be extradited...

- The case will be considered in the Vienna Court of Appeal and in the coming months, the court will make a decision. We won’t have to wait long, Firtash has a strong position, because, in my opinion, it is fair.

- However, in Ukraine there are three criminal proceedings filed against him. And here one can trace the similarities in the rhetoric of the head of one of the law enforcement agencies against you and Firtash...

- Again, these things are generated by one and the same head of the same law enforcement agency that has been involved in politically-motivated actions against Firtash’s businesses in Ukraine and against Firtash himself, including the show with men in military uniforms at the airport waiting for his arrival in Ukraine (on December 2, 2015 special operations troops were waiting for Firtash at the Boryspil Airport - author). This is not the first attack on Firtash’s business. These attacks continue for many years, and, unfortunately, even the holding management got used to them. In 2012, for example, here in this building (the Parus Business Center - editors) masked men from the tax police conducted searches. In 2012-2013, Firtash's companies were constantly audited by tax authorities, the amount of unrecovered VAT reached hundreds of millions of hryvnias. That is, the pressure was there even under the previous regime. It has always been there. This, unfortunately, is the style of interaction between the state and big business in Ukraine. And this applies not only to Firtash, but also to other business groups. I think our common goal is to ensure that the state treated small, medium, large and any other businesses with the same attention and support, stimulated business, because the business creates jobs for the people and generates taxes to the budget.

- Then something is missing here, as everyone talks about certain agreements signed in Vienna. So it turns out that one of the parties that came to power is not fulfilling its part of the deal, or how does it work?

- I think that we should better leave the existence, content and implementation of the agreements to history. We need to talk about something else - about how the government should interface with the business. The government should not attack the business, the government should help the business. Many businesses are now under attack by government institutions, and those attacks are often accompanied by raider activities, by a desire to take away or redistribute property. I see the task for the elite involved in public administration, in the management of large and medium-sized businesses in the country in the creation of atmosphere, the investment climate, where businesses would feel comfortable. As comfortable, for example, as in neighboring Slovakia and Poland, where businesses feel support, rather than pressure from the state. And this is the main demand from the business and the public to the government - create a climate, in which businesses will work well, and people will live well.

- Not so long ago the media wrote that the OPPOSITION BLOC represented by Serhiy Lovochkin had started tacit cooperation with Batkivshchyna.

- From the the moment of inception the OPPOSITION BLOC stated that there were two strategic priorities for us, two goals, which we strived to achieve. The first one is to achieve lasting peace. The second one is the creation of conditions for a normal life in the country. In my opinion, this is the main sense of work of all policy makers both in government and in the opposition. In order to achieve these two goals, we are ready to work with BPP, the People's Front, Samopomich, the Radical Party and Batkivshcnyna - with all parties.

- That makes for a good headline: the OPPOSITION BLOC is ready to work with BPP...

- With all the parties for these purposes. We see different ways to achieve these goals, and here contradictions will undoubtedly arise. But there may be only this one goal: peace, development and prosperity of the nation.

- Alright, I am going to ask a direct question. Eight Oblasts took the initiative of establishing contractual relations with the national government. These eight Oblasts undergo some interesting personnel rotations: Batkivshchyna together with the OPPOSITION BLOC rock the boat to knock BPP off-balance. And in many Oblasts these efforts are quite successful...

- Speaking about BPP, they are losing their approval rating because in the two years in power they have failed to deliver any positive results. On Friday (October 7 - editors) the Ptukha Institute of Demography and Social Studies published a survey, which showed that 58.3% of Ukrainians live below the actual cost of living. First of all, it includes families with two children and pensioners. It is the result of the current government’s work. The living standards of Ukrainians are deteriorating. The war continues in Ukraine. Ukraine does not make a progress, it is not attractive for investors. We see rampant corruption, life becomes more expensive, absolutely all prices are rising - from utility tariffs to food, clothing and medicines. Such is the result of the current coalition’s work. So whatever is happening to the support of the pro-government parties in oblasts is a consequence of the results of their work on the national level. Everything else is derived from this base.

- How do you feel about the plans to appoint Oleksandr Horhan - the current head of Vyshhorod Rayon State Administration the Governor of Kyiv oblast?

- You know, I have no opinion about this. I don’t know this man. Few people do, actually. There is only one assessment criterion for current government officials - there are no positive results. Besides, these comrades have no results to show before or after they get the job. The same is true both for our fellow-countrymen, and for the recruited Georgians and Lithuanians. This is a verdict to the government staffing policy.

- In a recent interview with Glavkom Oleh Liashko admitted that Serhiy Lovochkin helped him build an election list of the Radical Party in the parliamentary elections in 2014. Moreover, he said that he had included “defector Melnychuk” on your recommendation.

- I think that it would be better if you raise these questions to Liashko. Indeed, I supported him as a young politician for many years, treated him with sympathy as I saw him develop, including the support I provided to him during the last parliamentary campaign. But I refute any allegations that I took part in the drawing up of the Radical Party election list. It is the responsibility of Oleh Liashko himself.

- Alright, you have previously supported Oleh Liashko. Whom do you support now? Are there any promising new political parties?

- My colleagues are now developing and strengthening the OPPOSITION BLOC. With regard to, say, a non-partisan, philosophical dimension, my priority is to the consolidation of elites. I believe that today the most important thing for all of us, regardless of political views, is to find the courage to unite on the level of elites, not only on inter-party level. We need to form demands for the government and for the opposition: how the state should develop, how the problem of peace should be solved, what the future development path for Ukraine will be. These issues and this process are what is on the front burner for me now.

- In the next few days a new deputy group “Our Land” will be formed in the parliament. More exactly, today's People's Will is going to be renamed into “Our Land,” and will further be diluted with MPs from "Renaissance". Were there any attempts to entice OPPOSITION BLOC MPs to join in?

- In general, to be honest, I have a negative opinion about the creation of some fake opposition groups. I am not worried about how it may influence the approval ratings of the OPPOSITION BLOC. It’s just when the government is engaged in political con games, creating a fake opposition, they are making a mistake, because they spend their energy on these political games, rather than on running the state. Therefore, “Our Land,” “Renaissance,” “For Life” - whatever they can come up with, this sort of thing is something you can invest your resources in, round up the people, get some percentage points, but all of it does not make sense, because it has no future. Because these are faces of the same government, people who work with the government and for the government. Maybe someone will find self-fulfillment somewhere along this way - in financial or PR terms, but it will still be short lived and will not give anything to the country or the people.

- You never commented on how the parting with Muraiev and Rabinovych go.

- They both left the same way they came to us - they are just ridealongs.  Any political process has people jumping on the bandwagon. There are both good and bad ones among them. Thank God, these ones are gone. Let them go their own way.

- Rumor has it that Rabinovych got already disillusioned with “For life” project and asks to let him back to the OPPOSITION BLOC.

- What is this “Za Zhyttia” project? It’s the same thing as Our Land or Vidrodzhennia (Renaissance). The government uses different PR opportunities to chip off a few points from the Opposition Bloc rating, deceive the public with another fake opposition front, puling through this pseudo-opposition some messages that are currently useful to them. But those are all dirty tricks. All of these projects can only survive if they are propped by the government, have the support of oblast administrations, that is, in fact, they need to be the government, just a different iteration of it.

- You defined Our Land, Vidrodzhennia, Za Zhyttia as fake opposition projects of the current government. But still, they will ultimately dig into the Opposition Bloc support. It's no secret that there are MPs in the BPP faction, who are affiliated with Serhiy Lovochkin... Will you give any response to the establishment of Our Land under the Rada dome?

- In general, I believe that any fight against this process is pointless, since as they create Our Land, Renaissance, For life, the government is actually fighting itself. When they spend their energy on a fake, a decoy, on political manipulation, they ultimately work against their own approval rating in the medium term. When the government does nothing to enhance their management effectiveness, create jobs or form an adequate foreign policy agenda, they work against themselves. They work against themselves, when they spend their energy on the manipulation of members of parliament in the Rada hall, on deceiving people through some fake political projects.

- We all remember the statement of Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko that the PGO is planning to submit to the Verkhovna Rada a request on the withdrawal of immunity from MP Mykola Skoryk (OPPOSITION BLOC) allegedly because of his involvement in the events in Odesa in February 2014. At the same time, Skoryk is called Serhiy Lovochkin’s man in the OPPOSITION BLOC faction.

- In the last six weeks there has been a campaign of persecution launched against the leaders of the OPPOSITION BLOC regional branches. This idea is imposed onto the society that the main problem today is that sometime back in 2013, people in Odesa or in other regions of Ukraine apparently did something. Why and for what purpose is it done now, three years later? The answer is that the government is trying to distract Ukrainians from the problems with rising prices, utility tariffs, the heating season, foreign policy failures, the dysfunctional coalition and incompetent management. In the realm of political technologies it is called changing the agenda. With regard to Skoryk, he is the leader of the Odesa Oblast branch of the OPPOSITION BLOC, which has a double lead over any other political force in that oblast. Therefore, there is a huge desire to somehow find ways to lower the OPPOSITION BLOC popularity, and I think that is the primary reason of the attack on Skoryk. I am convinced that if the counter-arguments, which Skoryk and his defense presented publicly, will be analyzed by the PGO, then, from the legal point of view, Skoryk will be found not guilty. At the same time, I believe that the PGO should muster the political will to investigate the tragedy of May 2 in Odesa. 42 people got burnt in the Trade Unions building. Was anybody charged? Although it is known that when it had become clear that confrontation was possible in Odesa, then some of the highest officials of the country arrived in the city. So we should just ask a question, what they were doing there, why didn’t they prevent those events through their action or inaction? I am talking about the lost lives of the people.

- A framework agreement on the separation of forces in Stanitsa Luhanska, Petrovske and Zolote was signed in Minsk a couple of weeks ago. So the process is underway, although not without difficulties. Could it be the beginning of a large-scale settlement?

- There are two dimensions to the problem. First, and it is a fundamental position of the Opposition Bloc - there is no alternative to the Minsk agreements, they need to be implemented. The fact that we actually see the separation of forces in three locations is a positive thing, because it is the beginning of the implementation of a general roadmap for the demilitarization of the conflict zone and, ultimately, for a political settlement and reconstruction of Ukraine within the borders that existed prior to the war in Donbas. Secondly, the President signed the Minsk agreements, Ukraine has committed to undertake those obligations. Now those people in the country, who are part of the government and bear the responsibility with the President for the state of affairs in the nation, torpedo the Minsk agreements. I think that it is a betrayal on their part, not only of the President, I believe that they are discrediting the state of Ukraine. They need to bear responsibility for this.

- But the security part of the Minsk agreements has not yet been implemented. At the same time, French President Francois Hollande urges Ukraine to hold elections in Donbas, and only then, according to him, Ukraine will resume control over the border.

- We have little information about what has been said behind closed doors in the Normandy format over the course of the last eighteen months. And the emergence of such public statements only confirms that we do not know everything. The President of France cannot give signals that have not been discussed and are not supposed to be implemented. It is clear that the statement of the French President is the result of long negotiations. In the meantime, the Ukrainian authorities have no official response except a clumsy lunge of the notorious minister. All of this suggests a failure of the Ukrainian diplomatic service and foreign policy in general. That this is the main problem, not Hollande’s statement. This is my first thought. The second one is a bit more complex. Ukraine now needs to respond to a new challenge. We had a foreign policy doctrine centered around our cooperation with the EU in the framework of the Association Agreement. This was the primary goal, the leitmotif of our ​​foreign policy. Now it has collapsed, along with another component of the foreign policy doctrine of the current government - the Euro-Atlantic integration. Today it is clear that no one is waiting for Ukraine either as an associate member of the EU, or as a member of the Euro-Atlantic community. The government must answer the question: what is our foreign policy doctrine now? Are we knocking on the closed door? Why do we continue to adopt laws destroying our domestic market, depriving Ukrainians of their jobs? Starting with fertilizers, which we can produce here, food products that we can also produce here. We need a revision, we need to offer something new.

- Russia interprets Minsk agreements as it deems fit. And the Russians impose what works for them using the Russian lobby in the European Union - the leaders of Germany and France. The latter, in view of upcoming elections in their countries, are putting pressure on Ukraine. They say, you pass all [these laws] as soon as possible, because we need to close the Ukrainian issue.

- Minsk does not need to be interpreted. These are not very long documents, they must be read and implemented. It is outrageous, when someone from the Ukrainian ruling elite begins to say “you are forcing us to fulfill Minsk agreements.” First of all, the President signed those documents on behalf of Ukraine, and they became our state’s commitments. Secondly, establishing peace in Ukraine is the main task of the government, they should be running around on their knees chasing everyone, who can help us reach it. And there is no need to shout “we do not want peace on such terms.” We are not offered a defeat. Our Western partners offer us peace and development, which is going to follow as a consequence of this peace. It is clear that peace in Donbas will cost someone their approval rating. Because earlier these people were gaining political capital and votes using the military rhetoric. This is how members of the current coalition won the majority in parliament and earned their political capital. Now it is time to fork it out and pay the price to bring a better life to the people, to bring peace to the [occupied] territories of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts, so that the entire Ukraine may shed the burden of war. Because for this war Ukraine pays with people’s lives, every Ukrainian taxpayer pays for it now.

- You say that Ukraine’s foreign policy doctrine failed. But soon Ukraine will be granted visa-free travel with the EU. This can be considered a clear victory of the Ukrainian diplomacy.

- When someone tries to make the visa-free regime one of the main foreign policy objectives, he is making a mistake. To begin with, it is a visa-free regime with EU member states only, not with the entire world. Besides, this issue concerns not more than 4% of people in the country, who are already able to travel abroad. And it is possible that the procedure for obtaining permission to enter at the border will be more complex comparing to obtaining a visa here in the embassies of the EU countries. That’s one thing. The other thing, the visa-free regime is not a valid target in terms of the state development, and will not improve the lives of 96% of Ukrainians. This is no integration into the European Union, this is not an additional opportunity to get a job or a salary raise. When they sell it to us as some target or as a signal that we are treated well by the EU, this is nonsense. Because the attitude to us is largely determined by the fate of the Association Agreement.

- It's because of the referendum in the Netherlands: the EU is now seeking legal loopholes in order to take into account the results of the referendum, and also complete the ratification.

- So far it looks like a complete failure of the Ukrainian diplomacy and foreign policy.

- At his first press conference, a new EU Ambassador to Ukraine said that Ukraine would receive 600 million euro of EU financial assistance if we lifted the moratorium on the export of round timber. The Cabinet is already preparing a legislative proposal. Will the OPPOSITION BLOC back this initiative?

- What do foreigners praise the government for now, what do they call “reforms”? For something that in fact is not a Ukrainian intellectual or reformist product. Indeed, it usually is the implementation of questionable IMF recommendations. How do IMF recommendations get formed? They are based on analytical reports compiled in the structural units of the Fund, which includes a number of requirements, among them - the unconditional consolidation in the hands of the state of the maximum amount of financial resources. This, for example, is not conducive to creating jobs and improving the financial performance of Ukrainian enterprises. So I would use greater caution to the requirements that are put forward to us, compared to how the government treats them now. Here is another important issue: on every corner the government flaunts getting another loan as their “achievement.” We received a loan, we are real stand-up guys. But this is only a loan, and Ukrainians will have to pay it back. In this particular case, for example, in order to get another loan, we should give a green light to round timber exports. Is it really a legitimate discourse? In order to get a loan, which we will have to return with interest, we need to give something away now?

- IMF requirements also include a pension reform. In particular, raising the retirement age.

- Ukraine shows all the signs of an economic catastrophe. You know that one of the main indicators of economic performance is the per capita income. Based on this indicator Ukraine is now the last country in Europe. 90-95% of pensioners live below the subsistence level. The country is driven into poverty. The pension fund runs a deficit and therefore we are offered the following: let's reduce pensions even more, and let’s do something to reduce the number of pensioners, too. How can we back something like this? It is very difficult to support it. All the more so that in return we don’t get any free help, Ukraine takes loans, on which it pays interest, and which will eventually have to be paid back.

First part of the interview: http://www.segodnya.ua/politics/pnews/intervyu-s-sergeem-levochkinym-nekotorym-predstavitelyam-koalicii-ne-nravitsya-chto-to-chto-oni-vidyat-na-intere-760925.html

Second part of the interview: http://www.segodnya.ua/politics/pnews/intervyu-s-sergeem-levochkinym-na-puti-k-miru-na-donbasse-komu-to-pridetsya-zaplatit-reytingom-761057.html