The next time some bastard mentions journalistic standards, be sure to show them "Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma's interview with the BBC's Ukrainian service."
This isn't just a long string of letters from a worthless old faggot. This is something we're not even sure of its authorship. Oleg Kalita and Nikita Afanasyev write on the website UkrRudProm.
This is the creation of an anonymous PR man. Pinchuka, which is presented as the thoughts of the oligarchs' 87-year-old father-in-law. "The interview was conducted in writing." Apparently, this was done to please the current president and slightly sanitize his biography, which is now part of the family history of one of Ukraine's most powerful clans. And, at the same time, to avoid controversial questions, without which an interview with an accused like Kuchma would be meaningless from the reader's perspective.
But apparently not for the editorial staff, who were pelted with a wad of cash. It's especially annoying that this "city on a hill" is maintained the rest of the time by British taxpayers. A public service broadcaster, yes. In all its dismal glory.
We seem to have sorted out the standards. Now let's return to the clan's apology itself, written in 10 pages of tiny handwriting. If you boil down the "Kuchma interview" to a single sentence, it would be a mixture of "anti-election" pragmatism in the interests of the current president and selective amnesia for 1999-2004 (Leonid Danylych's second term). But let's review the key points of the text.
Early elections during a war are harmful, Zelenskyy's course is "clearly pro-Ukrainian" and "he has a great future."
Essentially, this is overt support for the current regime: it strengthens the OP's argument against elections under martial law. This position is rational (logistics, security, and equal access to campaigning are indeed limited), but it's also politically convenient for the incumbent. Since 2022, democratic procedures in Ukraine have been objectively "squeezed" by the war (suspension of elections, centralization of decisions, censorship), and the situation is only worsening with each passing year—as evidenced by even your access to this text.UkrRudProm».
I was "satisfied" with Yanukovych as prime minister, but he became a poor candidate and president; he was promoted "not by Kuchma, but by Putin."
This is selective memory. The oligarchic model emerged precisely in the late 1990s and early 2000s, that is, during the second half of Kuchma's reign: privatizations exclusively for "insiders," the merging of business and executive power, and the takeover of the media. By the early 2000s, Ukraine was already an oligarchic economy; the "third wave" of oligarchs rose to prominence after 2000; the media landscape was shaped by large owners led by Akhmetov and Pinchuk. This is the institutional responsibility of all six presidents, not "one bad successor."
Well, and if all of Kuchma's personnel mistakes were limited to Yanukovych. But there were others Medvedchuk и TobacconistNow he calls them "effective bureaucrats" and says their anti-Ukrainian course later became an "unacceptable obstacle." In other words, he's once again trying to shirk responsibility for his own personnel decisions and oversight mechanisms.
Kuchma's interview: "Oligarchs? By today's standards, there weren't any under my rule."
Kuchma disputes the label of "father of the oligarchy." But it was precisely in the late 1990s and early 2000s that the largest redistribution of assets in Ukraine took place. Family and clan ties are not a journalistic metaphor: Pinchuk, for example, acquired key assets in metallurgy, finance, and media during this period. In other words, the oligarchic system is not "after him," but "under him"—even if its configuration changed slightly under Yushchenko/Yanukovych.Poroshenko.
The Gongadze Murder and Kolchuga: Russia's "Operations Against Ukraine"
This shifts the blame from personal/institutional responsibility to "external intrigue." Absolutely all investigations into the "tape scandal" and the mechanics of state privatization under Kuchma paint a different picture—one in which the executive branch and close business groups played a key role. Giya, for example, was strangled and beheaded not by FSB agents, but by high-ranking officials of the Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs, well-known from court documents. Yes, Russia exploited these scandals for its own gain. But their root cause was the actions of Kuchma and the vertical power structure he created.
Although police general Pukach received a life sentence, and his three accomplices received sentences of 12 years or more, the question of who ordered Gongadze's murder remains legally unresolved. European documents explicitly emphasized that the identity of those who initiated and organized the crime remains unresolved: they have not been identified by the courts and have not been held accountable. This was noted, in particular, in PACE documents and human rights reports following the sentencing of the perpetrators. In the case of Gongadze v. Ukraine (2005), the ECHR found a violation of Article 2 (right to life) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) due to shortcomings in protecting the journalist's life and the ineffectiveness of the early investigation. This is separate, stratified confirmation that the Ukrainian law enforcement system failed to identify and bring to justice all those responsible. Consequently, Kuchma remains a suspect.
Subscribe to our channel in X, Telegram channel and page in Facebook!
Stay informed about who is doing business, in politics, and supporting corruption in Ukraine!
And finally, the socio-economic background of Ukraine’s 34 years of independence, which the “Kuchma interview” simply ignores.
Poverty. Before the full-scale war, Ukraine consistently ranked last in Europe in terms of income (GDP per capita, and especially purchasing power parity). This is a systemic result of decades of "misguided thinking." While Yanukovych alone can be blamed for this, it's clear that it's the result of the systematic "result-oriented" work of all six presidents, of whom Kuchma held the chair on Bankova Street for the longest time.
Demography. From 52 million people at the time of independence to, according to the most optimistic estimates, 36 million (estimate for 2019, excluding Crimea and the occupied parts of Donbas), and after 2022, a drop of another 10 million due to refugees, loss of territory, excess mortality, and a collapse in the birth rate.
No war in itself can compare to such losses—massive demographic decline began long before 2022 and has been going on at a rate of "minus half a million a year" for three decades straight. The current war has merely compounded the foundation of a happy and long life for Ukrainians already built over seven presidential terms.
Unfortunately, modern Ukraine is not only a depopulated and impoverished state, but also a rather shameless place. And the "interview" is a striking example of this. The problem here doesn't end with the exhibitionism of the BBC's Ukrainian editorial team under the slogan "look what we can do." And it doesn't even end with Pinchuk, who drags his father-in-law's remains into the light of day and forces him to do some crazy things. Ultimately, the motivations of the nouveau riche are simple and straightforward.
The question is the reaction of that part of society that, 10 years ago, would have exploded at such a "Kuchma interview," but is now meekly chewing the crumpled bills carefully placed in their mouths. For example, Gongadze's friends and colleagues. Where "black widow" Alena Pritula, her deviant fucker Sergei Leshchenko, and finally, Miroslava Gongadze and her daughters? They're gone, simply because over the past 25 years, they've all been dealt with one way or another.
Gongadze is gone, but they still have to live somehow. So they do. Some with millions under their belts. And some are still playing the victim on the supervisory board of Ukrzaliznytsia.
When I was young, it seemed like Gia's life was akin to promiscuity. Now we realize that the real public shaming began after his death. And who's to be ashamed of?
Skelet.Org
On topic: About Kuchma's generals: Pinchuk's channel talked about the thieves, but forgot about the organizer.
Renat Kuzmin claims a billion-dollar bribe was paid for Kuchma's sake.
Nikolai Azarov. The Survivor. Part 2
Kuchma's interview
Subscribe to our channels in Telegram, Facebook, Twitter, VC — Only new faces from the section CRYPT!