The Kyiv Post published on May 24 Olexiy Haran’s commentary on an interview with political scientist Mykhailo Pohrebinsky that appeared on the Russian Web site strana.ru. Pohrebinsky’s response to this commentary appeared on June 7. Here is Haran’s final response to Pohrebinsky.
In the course of our debate on Voice of America on May 26 Mykhailo Pohrebinsky assured listeners that his words in the interview with strana.ru were distorted by a Russian journalist, and soon the corrected version would be published on the site (that is without “fuehrers of the opposition” and allegations against Rukh and Reforms and Order). He repeated it in his comment in The Kyiv Post. I would have liked to believe that.
The blurb on the site now looks like this: “Washington sponsors national-democrats: For the most part, American grants are given to those organizations of the third sector who are ideologically close to national-democratic parties.”
It is possible to disagree with this more-recent thesis as well, but the style is acceptable, and different opinions, after all, should be respected.
How surprised I was when after clicking on the highlighted file, I saw the totally unchanged text under the same name “Fuehrers of the Ukrainian opposition play super-active on U.S. money” !!!
It is not necessary to further discuss the essence of the article, since nothing was changed as my colleague claimed.
Let us be straightforward: strana.ru only camouflaged the main thesis. Either Pohrebinsky did not protest the distortion of his words energetically enough, or strana.ru did not listen to him. The second option should have evoked an even louder protest from Pohrebinsky.
Thus, the negation of facts and not the interpretation evoked my surprise, as well as the “ethics” used in propagandistic war.
Interestingly enough, in the comment made by strana.ru I was referred to as “ideolog Rukha,” the one who determined Rukh’s ideology. If this were true, it would have been a great honor for me. Yes, I participated in creating this organization, but left it in 1990! Thus, strana.ru again used distorted information. After publication of my book on Rukh in 1993, I was considered “Right.” After publication of a book on the Ukrainian Left, I was considered by some people, including Pohrebinsky, as “Left.” It is the usual story for those who try to assess current events from an academic viewpoint.
Our polemic pushed me into preparing an article about the responsibility of intellectuals in Ukraine which was published in Kievsky Telegraf (June 5). Unfortunately, since authoritarian trend in my country gained momentum, I have less means than Pohrebinsky to present my point of view on television, Ukrainian radio and many of widely circulating newspapers for reasons that are understandable. I appreciate www.for-com.ua for publishing the Ukrainian variant of my original article, which was followed by Pohrebinsky’s comment – it is pluralism. But I have unsuccessfully tried to publish this response on the same site, and I have not heard from the editor. Unfortunately, in my country communication wires are not good. By the way, Americans are going to financially support the development of free press, including the internet, in Ukraine. Is this also a part of the “Brzezinski plan?”
Olexiy Haran
Director, Center for National Security Studies
Kyiv Mohyla Academy
