Felip Daza // NOVACT opens its area of action to the region of Eastern Europe and the Caucasus. A region that has experienced some of the more massive and effective nonviolent revolutions in recent years. For example, the Otpor movement against Milosevic in 2000 (Serbia), Rosa revolution against political corruption of President Eduard Shvardnadze in 2003 (Georgia) and the Orange Revolution against electoral fraud in the 2004 presidential elections (Ukraine).
Despite a clear external influence, today, those who occupied squares are aware of their role in civil society and the importance of developing structural changes in society that go through the self-organization and the development of a democratic culture based on trust and tolerance among its citizens.
In this context, on October 7th NOVACT participated in a meeting of young activists in Chernivtsi, south western Ukraine, to identify potential partners. One group was OPORA, composed by activists and organizers of the Orange Revolution. Grygorii Sorochan, one of the coordinators of OPORA in Chernivtsi region, offers us the opportunity to this interview.
Who are you and what is your position?
I am Grygorii of Chernivtsi, a city in western Ukraine. I am an activist of the Ukrainian network OPORA. Translated into English is something similar to the base and it seems that translated into Arabic is Al Qaeda. We had no idea, but it seems that is the translation.
What happened in Ukraine in 2004 ?
To talk about what happened in those years, I have to do it through my experience. At that time, I was a student in last course at the University. In that period the citizens of Ukraine had to choose between two options: orienting towards the model of Russia or European Union approach and the values of Western civilization. Everything was based on expectations accordingly different groups of power in Ukraine. This decision should be taken through the 2004 elections.
Most people wanted to take the European option, so the pro-Russian sectors tried to influence this positioning and even some groups claimed that the decision of the majority was not enough to get closer to the European Union.
The situation took a blatant electoral fraud that gave victory to the pro-Russian candidate Viktor Yanukovych. This triggered the Orange Revolution. Although now we call revolution in quotes because It was not a revolution, but something like an expression of an important sector of the population, not the entire country.
After a while we realized that the Orange Revolution was not enough. We must work harder and that’s why I’m currently working to make this country a better place.
What reasons led you to join in the Orange Revolution?
As I said, I was fifth-year student at University, and although I was interested in politics, I was a normal citizen of Ukraine. When it all began, I met an activist that was same age as me. He was in a group called PORA [is the time], the time to do something.
I became interested in this group and after a few days I organized a meeting in a small town in the Chernivtsi region to inform people of the situation and what could happen during elections. I went with them and I was part of these activities, but on the way back we were stopped by police for several hours by direct order from a local political leader. It was a shock to me because I was a normal citizen, not doing anything. I was just handing out leaflets not with too radical information. From this moment, I began to be more active in the organization. I was an observer at the elections in my city and elsewhere in the south. After 2004 , the group was reorganized into the civil network OPORA and since then I work on it.
What kind of people took to the streets?
Basically young people by my age. Between 18 and 23 years. Today they are the ones that are part of OPORA. We became friends, and after 10 years we are increasingly working together.
During this time we talked to people of different ages. However, with the generation of our parents is difficult to speak, because they have lived in the time of the Soviet Union and that has an influence.
What is the main conclusion of the Orange Revolution?
Two months of work were not enough, it was not enough to take places, not enough to express our choice and elections were not enough to achieve democracy. We should be active only during elections, or at times of greater political tension, we have to be active always, every day. The problem was that people took the streets for a month, and then came home and did nothing. They were waiting for someone to do something for them. When it became clear that Yushchenko could not improve the situation, there was a collective frustration.
In 2010, Viktor Yanukovych, Yushchenko’s opponent in 2004, was elected president and took the revenge against the entire system. And honestly, was elected in a fair election. OPORA election observation made that process and can say it was a process “clean”.
The Orange Revolution is considered one of the most important nonviolent revolutions, but what do you think today people on the street about nonviolence?
For Ukrainians, nonviolent movements were new because we did not practice. These tactics were brought from outside. Like us, there were other groups that worked against election fraud in other areas, but in the end we were all coordinated. Before the events of 2004, we were organizing different nonviolent tactics and we were coordinated with nonviolent movements such us Otpor movement in Serbia and Camara. But there was also a fear that things went wrong. The police were ready to use their weapons.
Still, nonviolent action was successful for two reasons: firstly, it was massive, I think if there were fewer people on the street, the police had used violence. On the other hand, the level of organization of people in Kiev and other cities of the country was very high. Some participated in the actions in their villages and, the next day, they participated in demonstrations in Kiev. These events showed to the Ukrainian people that they can influence in policy changes, not through the power and the government, but through the popular self-organization.
Now, in Ukraine nonviolent actions remain, but are not massive as in 2004.
What are the main challenges of Ukrainian civil society?
The main objective is to improve the quality of life, although not involving democracy. That’s why some groups would favor “strong arm”. The Ukrainians are not living very well when compared to European standards.
Today Ukraine is in a situation of choice, we are between two blocks. But it is said it is not good to choose between one thing or another, as there are people who have good relations with Russia and want to have also good relations with the U.S. The problem is that we are not a strong country to decide unilaterally and, in addition, Russia is exerting a great influence because in November it was decided the accession of Ukraine to the European Union, in Vilnius (Lithuania ). It is using to advocacy institutions such us the Orthodox Church, radical groups, media and public relations strategies to influence Ukrainian groups. In economic terms, for example, Russia don’t allow vehicles to enter in their country with Ukrainian products, there is a conflict over the use of gas, etc.
In this context, what is the role and purpose of OPORA?
We work in different areas. The main thing we do is electoral observation, but we also work in education. In this issue of the choice between the Russian model or the European Union model, our goal is to enable young people and create open minds, using different instruments to create young leaders. We believe that the more people of this type we have, the better our country and decision will be.
What are your plans for the presidential election?
To observe and monitor the conduct of political parties.
What kind of solidarity relationship you want to establish with European civil society organizations and other world regions?
As OPORA is a watchdog from society, we are very interested in Europe. So, for the moment, we are working with networks in Poland. We are also interested in communicating with organizations in Turkey and Georgia, because of their experiences.
The Slavic literature and culture is well-known for good dreamer, I wonder what is your dream for Ukraine?
It depends on the period and the issue we speak about. In economic terms, in 10 years I want to see Ukraine as Turkey: a country that has had a great development . In terms of quality of life, as the northern European states. In cultural terms, I want to see Ukraine as it is today. We have a rich culture and I don’t want to change it as happened in other countries where they have lost this cultural component. If we talk about freedom, I want to see a more democratic Ukraine , but not only in terms of elections, but with people who are organized at local and national level to solve their problems. The problems are solved from the root, not from above.
So, my dream for Ukraine is the self-organization, local structures and troubleshooting bottom up. It’s a challenge for us to find understanding between neighbors, organized in communities to solve their own problems. In Ukraine, people lost this opportunity and we must get it back.
