Yuriy Lutsenko is a former Maidan “field commander”, ex-“Terminator” and a recent favorite of the President of Ukraine… Much has changed in Yuriy Lutsenko lately. Today, he and his political force are on the threshold of new changes. The acting Interior Minister is undoubtedly a politician who is absolutely not interested in an early parliamentary election campaign. Nevertheless, the conversation with him left the following feeling: the leader of the People’s Self-defense faction unconsciously reckons that the early elections are some kind of rescue or emergency exit from the temporary political dead-end.

— Yuriy Vitalyevych, if early parliamentary elections are held, will People’s Self-defense run independently or (as many forecast) become a part of the Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc?

— Warring adventurers from the President’s circle might prompt him to sign a decree to dissolve the Verkhovna Rada. I consider these elections to be quite possible and very dangerous. They will start a series of campaigns which will follow one another: first, a parliamentary election campaign, then, a presidential campaign and finally, local governments’ elections. Possessing profound information on the situation in the country, I dare to assert that such stress can be extremely dangerous for Ukraine.

People’s Self-defense faction has two options – to run an independent campaign or enter some other democratic bloc. It could be an existing bloc or a newly created one. The final decision will, certainly, be made by our political force and not by me on my own. Our choice will partially depend on the elections’ format.

— What do you mean?

— It is possible that early parliamentary elections will be held along with early presidential elections.

— However, the mechanism of holding early elections of the head of the state doesn’t exist.

— The constitutional majority of the Verkhovna Rada is able to pass such a decision. Baloha’s cynical and irresponsible adventurism might cause similar a cynical and irresponsible response.

If somebody doesn’t agree with such a decision, he or she has the right to contest it in the Constitutional Court. However, they should keep in mind that the high-ranking conspiring parties have strong backing in the Central Election Commission and the Constitutional Court. It is quite possible that the parliament’s decision will serve as a guide to action for the Central Election Commission and the Constitutional Court will start examining the case after, perhaps, Christmas leave.

— It is clear that Yushchenko will ignore such a decision. What will the Interior Ministry undertake in this situation?

— People can sleep calmly. There won’t be any military upheavals in our country.

— One of the MP’s from Our Ukraine-People’s Self-defense who belongs to the President’s circle proposed during a private conversation to limit Lutsenko’s influence on the Interior Ministry by appointing Korniyenko to the post of the first deputy Minister.

— And who is going to appoint him? And with what purpose? I am pleased with my current team. I consider it to be most optimal from the point of quantity and qualification. I don’t see any necessity to change anything or anybody.

I have normal relations with Mr. Korniyenko. By the way, I congratulated him on his anniversary recently. However, he is a representative of a different ideology. Incidentally, I am ready to listen to alternative viewpoints; that’s why Mr. Dzhyga is a member of the Interior Ministry’s board due to my initiative. I could think about offering Mr. Korniyenko the same. However, the question about his appointment to the post of the first deputy Minister has never been discussed.

— Today, there are a lot of talks about readiness of the President to employ law enforcement measures and about the possibility to block the parliament with the internal troops. Do you believe this?

— The President can only give orders which are within his authority. Employing the internal troops to block the state bodies of power is a violation of the Constitution and the laws with all following implications for initiators of such actions.

— Not so long ago, the President conferred commander of the internal troops Kykhtenko the rank of General of the Armed Forces. Some perceived this as the President’s attempt to receive commander’s loyalty.

— I have known Oleksandr Tymofeyevych for quite a long time. I know him as an intelligent person and responsible leader who has passed through such challenges with honor.

Generally speaking, I reckon on common sense of the politicians. Ukraine’s image in the international arena is… to put it mildly, the same as it was during the 2004 elections. Let’s not aggravate the situation with grave scenarios. Everything will be calm. My word can be counted on.

— Is everything also calm in Crimea?

— Crimea, perhaps, is the only region causing worries. I am aware about a plan for the destabilization of the situation in the peninsula called “300 Spartans”. It was developed by a consultant of the Presidential Secretariat and proposes the organization of provocations directed against the Black Sea Fleet. These provocations are aimed at causing a chain reaction that might lead to unpredictable consequences. I hope that this dirty fudge will stay only on the paper.

The Internal Ministry is keeping a vigilant watch on the situation in Crimea and thoroughly selects ways to prevent provocations. Without exaggeration, much depends on our actions.

As an example. A lot of land plots in Crimea have been illegally appropriated by the Crimean Tatars. I just received a third letter from the Ministry of Justice with the order to re-establish the lawfulness in the peninsula with the help of militia forces, even though about five thousand radically disposed and resentful citizens will be unavoidably involved in this action.

What do I do? I propose to postpone this action until the resort season ends first, and then – until the political conflicts are settled. One of these days, we might receive a letter from the National Security and Defense Council ordering us to execute the corresponding court’s ruling immediately. From the judicial point of view, we are obliged to do this, however, from the political point of view – it would be a sheer madness. Everyone knows what this might cause.

My opinion is considering possible consequences, even representatives of the pro-Russian organizations should support my position, especially the Tatars, who were invited to Crimea and were promised that they would receive land whereas no land surveys were conducted and no plans or transparent rules for allotment of land plots were developed.

What should my reaction be at the recommendations to take away the land plots where lighthouses are situated from the Russians? It could be a perfect PR step within a hurrah-patriotic campaign. However, does anybody imagine the consequences?

The events in the Caucasus should have taught us a lot. The actions of both Russia and Georgia are unacceptable from the standpoints of law and morality. The USA doesn’t have the right to mediate on territorial integrity after its activities in Kosovo. And Russia shouldn’t vociferate about the people’s rights after Chechnya. However, they are great world powers employing double standards which are peculiar to their status.

In this situation, we have to make our own conclusions and develop our own policy based on the security of our citizens.

And what do we actually have today? Mr. Baloha conducts a dangerous policy of appeasement of separatists offering that the President sign a decree on decorating the speaker of the Crimean parliament and blocking the appointment of the full-fledged head of the Crimean militia.

The results of this policy are vivid: the Crimean parliament practically recognized the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Not so long ago, at the meeting of the National Security and Defense Council I asked: what will the central power do if the Verkhovna Rada of Crimean Autonomous Republic makes the same separatist decision? What will we do? Continue to decorate officials with orders? Continue to destroy the hierarchy of the Internal Ministry of Crimea? Continue to finance the internal troops according to the residual principal and recall them only when it is necessary to hold political maneuvers around the capital?

The situation in Crimea should have been discussed on a professional level long ago. However, this discussion never took place during the meetings of the National Security and Defense Council.

— May the central power employ force to retake the lighthouses?

— Last summer, when Ukrainian courts confirmed that the Russians stayed in the lighthouses illegally, we were ready to re-establish a Ukrainian status of those lighthouses. However today, I would weigh this matter another ten times before venturing to employ force. There are other ways. The Russians, certainly, don’t feel themselves like guests there, but they do follow the rules.

I will give you an example. As a part of the preparations for the Navy Day celebration, the divisions of the Black Sea Fleet were rehearsing a naval landing operation. They landed on the territory rented by the Black Sea Fleet and then, decided to march through Sevastopol equipped with arms and military equipment. They were stopped by the Interior Ministry because they hadn’t notified the local administration in advance as is required by the existing agreements. We explained that military units and armored vehicles could not go through the city without permission issued by the Ukrainian bodies of power.

Before undertaking that step, I tried to communicate with many high-ranking officials. The only official who responded was the Prime Minister. She supported our decision.

After that, I spent several hours negotiating with the Russians. Finally, the Russians decided to proceed further with a new stage of the operation – loading of the landing units on the ships.

Thus, we managed to avoid hysterical shouting, noisy pickets, official statements from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Presidential decrees. We acted according to the laws currently in force and as real masters of our land.

We should politely but constantly remind the Russians who is the master of this land. However, provoking them is a foolish and dangerous step.

By the way, the aforementioned story is quite demonstrative. I am often being blamed for approaching Tymoshenko and not approaching Yushchenko. Here is the question frequently asked by the voters: “Don’t Tymoshenko and Yushchenko have phones? Why do they write each other letters? Can’t they reach each other on the phone?”

I am not sure about Tymoshenko and Yushchenko, but that is exactly what is happening with me and Yushchenko. I can’t reach him.

— No phone?

— I have a phone for direct communication with the President on my table. However, I haven’t been able reach him since spring. Several times I have also been forced to leave the room during a law enforcement meeting despite the fact that I was officially invited. And I was, fortunately, relieved from responsibility to meet and see off the President in the airport by some clerk from the protocol service.

This is how we communicate with the President. Although, they say that in recent time, the President doesn’t answer even when the Prime Minister calls.

— Does Baloha often approach you?

— He hasn’t called me, thank God, for half a year now. However, if there is a necessity due to public service responsibilities, I am opened for any contacts. Perhaps, it is unpleasant for me to communicate with Renat Kuzmin, but I am obliged to do that since we participate in the same affairs. It is more unpleasant to communicate with Geletey. However, if Bush or Bartholomew arrive, I am obliged to have contact with him due to public service responsibilities.

— Is it easier and more pleasant for you to communicate with Tymoshenko?

— Our positions on the principal matters are the same. Both Tymoshenko and Lutsenko talk about the amorality of the capital’s power and consider the deal with Vanco to be unscrupulous. Just as Tymoshenko, I am irritated with decorating Khivalov, Kolesnikov, Chernovetskiy. Just as Tymoshenko, I believe that it is necessary to speed up privatization since the militia is powerless in the fight with corruption while the signature of the official costs from 100 thousand standard units.

The only divergence in our opinions is that I am against the accelerated transformation of the Armed Forces of Ukraine into a contract army. Perhaps, I am not very keen on military questions, but I know that such transformation in the internal troops will threaten safety on the streets. Every fourth militia patrol is a patrol of the internal troops. None of the contract soldiers will work in patrol every other day especially if he is not provided dwelling and is not paid a good salary.

And we have the same opinions on all other matters. Why should I feel embarrassed about this? Does this mean that we should unite in one political force? I don’t know.

— It’s hard to believe that you don’t discuss this question. According to some sources, not so long ago, Tymoshenko announced to the leaders of the regional organizations that every tenth place in the election roll will be given to the representatives of People’s Self-defense.

— I am not aware of these facts. We didn’t discuss this matter with her.

We have been discussing preserving the democratic coalition lately. It was my proposal to include Lytvyn in the coalition. It was also my proposal to collect signatures from those that support the idea of resuming the work of the coalition.

When it comes to elections – we will start negotiations. It is useless to talk about possible consolidation into one political bloc and especially about election rolls and quotas before that time.

— In what case is such consolidation possible?

If issue on hand would be about holding both and presidential and parliamentary election campaigns at the same time, then People’s Self-defense will, certainly, form a bloc with some other force. With that political force which is close to us in ideological matters and is headed by an outstanding candidate to the post of president. Most likely, it would be the Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc.

However, that is just my personal opinion, and the final decision should be made by our political force.

— Will David Zhvaniya’s position concerning further political fate of People’s Self-defense be a deciding factor?

— His position will be considered on equal terms with opinions of all other faction’s members. I don’t remember any cases when David Vazhayevych contradicted the faction or when his opinion was categorically not considered by the majority of People’s Self-defense faction’s members.

To tell the truth, we have only one problem with him: he wakes up too late. Zhvaniya’s position seldom evokes disputes in the faction since by the time he usually comes to the office, the discussion is already over.

To be serious, David Zhvaniya and I are totally different men and thus, we quite naturally complement each other in the process of achieving a common goal.

— You talked about the possibility to consolidate Lutsenko, Gritsenko and Yatsenyuk into one political force. Is it your personal idea or have you had some consultations?

This idea has been around for some time. There is, certainly, a demand for some third force. We are going to study what level of support this force might get from the society. We are going search for common grounds with ideologically close politicians. It is hard to make any predictions yet.

A head-on collision of Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc and the Party of Regions is very dangerous for the country as is an unreserved unification of these forces. In both cases it is desirable to have a third full-fledged political force. We would like it to be supported by at least 10% of voters. Bearing only 3% will make this force ineffective because in case of emergency it should be able to either back up or oppose some other force.

As the well-known joke goes, the driver of a truck is interested in the road signs just out of idle curiosity. Can you imagine that there are two such drivers on the road? That’s why it is worthwhile to have a traffic inspectors’ car there to make both obey the rules.

— Don’t you think that creation of such a political force might reduce the chances of Our Ukraine?

— Our Ukraine has no chances to remain a serious political force. It unavoidably will become a political trifle.

Viktor Andriyovych has destroyed a bloc with 14% of support with his own hands and will receive (at best) two or three forces with 3-4% of support instead.

If the election campaign starts, I will personally ask the voters: What political force is Our Ukraine going to form a coalition with? With BYuT? Why have they destroyed the democratic coalition then? With the Party of Regions? Why have they told lies then?

It is obvious that they will have no clear, honest and suitable answer for society on these questions. It is also obvious that Our Ukraine will disappear as an independent democratic political force.

— Why do you stand up for re-establishing of the democratic coalition then? It is obvious that it is not viable.

— Let’s call things by their proper names. If the democratic coalition is re-established, then it would be a serpentine of like-minded politicians. However, it would be better then chaos.

Actually, I want to talk about the elections least of all. I consider early parliamentary election to be a real threat for the country, and it is not very pleasant for me to view the level of my involvement in this process.

— If that is the case, are you ready to refuse to participate in an early election campaign?

— If everything depended on just me, I wouldn’t participate in the elections. However, it would not be fair to my team and our voters.

— But do you understand that the level of trust to your team is not high, and your chances to succeed on your own are small? The initial idea of the People’s Self-defense faction as a union of young regional leaders and non-conformist forces has failed…

— The People’s Self-defense faction originated as a social and political project which should have been able to balance the adventurism of some forces and revanchism of others, aimed to urge people to oppose political corruption. Our main tasks were – to hold early elections and end the war between BYuT and Our Ukraine. From this point of view, our project was successful.

We understood that holding early elections was a force majeur for us. It could have been useful for us to work in opposition for several years, develop local organizations and become stronger.

Frankly speaking, over the past year, I haven’t had the opportunity to develop and improve our political force since I was focused on my work as a Minister. Unfortunately, there were no good managers able to devote themselves to party-building in our faction. The headquarters of the People’s Self-defense have been dormant and were not used for any development.

Concerning the low ratings of the People’s Self-defense, they might show that our faction’s historical mission is finished. The creation of our faction gave an opportunity to create a democratic coalition and another chance for the country.

— Is it possible to say that the People’s Self-defense project is finished?

— If we talk about it as about a politically-rebellious project, then I think yes. Nevertheless, the fundamental force of People’s Self-defense is the party “Go further, Ukraine!”. Perhaps, it is worthwhile to develop this project which should be supported by the middle class.

Many notice today some kind of disappointment in the society; I personally consider this to be a positive feature. My opinion is that the time when it will be possible to reach people’s minds and not just hearts, is coming. The time when ideas will mean more than last names.

— And if the man whose last name is Yushchenko declares the creation of yet another broad coalition of the democratic forces, calls Lutsenko on the phone and offers him the first place on the election list?

— The broad bloc of Our Ukraine and People’s Self-defense included nine parties. In order to protect the smallest parties, a political board has been established. It is a democratic mechanism protecting interests of all participants of the union. And so what? Our Ukraine with its own initiative and in a unilateral way destroyed the coalition in one night. And Our Ukraine is far from the majority of the bloc at that. When the representatives of other parties expressed their indignation they received the following answer: “You should get used to Our Ukraine dictating its rules since Our Ukraine is the President’s party!” I don’t see any possibilities to have further relations with such a political force.

— However, it was a representative of People’s Self-defense Yuriy But who initially started ruining the coalition. Who appointed him to your faction?

— He was appointed by one of the church hierarchs. The thing is that in a number of the regions, the relations between the supporters of Our Ukraine and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow patriarchy were tense. We, representatives of People’s Self-defense, considered it to be our duty to renew normal relations between churches of different Christian concessions. Mr. But was supposed to contribute to this matter and become a member of a corresponding profile committee. However, Mr. Zvarych included him into the juridical committee as a deputy of Mr. Khivalov for some reason. And then, guided by Baloha and, maybe, in exchange for some promises, he betrayed us.

— Yuriy Vitalyevych, why do you say Baloha and Baloha? Isn’t the President responsible for the current situation?

— As a head of the state, Yushchenko is responsible for being guided by a single source of information when making decisions. It is the President’s fault that an uncontrollable adventurist has appeared on the post of the head of the Presidential Secretariat. I can’t discuss other mistakes of the President since I am still the Minister of Internal Affairs…

You know, immediately after the 2007 elections, I had a fateful conversion with Viktor Yushchenko that, apparently, finally broke our relations. I said: “Viktor Andriyovych, maybe it is not worth thinking about the second term so early and so much? As a part of the new coalition between Our Ukraine-People’s Self-defense and BYuT, it is possible to become a president of the Maidan, the EU and NATO. And it is also possible, if the confrontation in the democratic camp continues to take place, to be responsible for ruined hopes…” He considered this approach to be unpatriotic and against team values.

Instead of the Maidan’s ideals and goal to become a full-fledged part of Europe, we received other ideals and a different goal – the second term of Yushchenko without Tymoshenko. If employment of the leaders is becoming a main goal of the team, then I don’t see any use in being a member of such team.

In my opinion, Yushchenko should have dismissed Baloha immediately after the elections of the Kyiv city Mayor, obliged Tymoshenko to preserve a constitutional status-quo and continued working in the democratic team for the good of the country. However, he didn’t do that.

This is not the Yushchenko who was in the Maidan. I am being reproached for not supporting the President; they almost call me a betrayer. It is not me who has betrayed but it is him who has changed a lot. And, to tell the truth, I feel sad about that.

Once, I was at the President’ birthday party in a company of the different people some way or another connected with the Maidan. That social event resembled a scene from the movie about Alexander Macedonian. The king banqueted with beaten Persians who were dressed in silks and gold jewelry. The king’s companion-in-arms dressed in tunics and chain armors and asked their leader: “Alexander, why are we sitting father down the banquet table then those whom we have defeated?” The king answered: “Put on silks and gold jewelry and sit closer…”

Today, Viktor Andriyovych is not tolerating anybody who criticizes his position. After he has settled Baloha down in his mind, there is no place for anybody else.

Zhvanetskiy [famous Soviet humorist] noted: “Any governor’s rule ends when shadows of his court dwarfs are longer than his own height.” The dwarfs are ruling today on behalf of their leader in our country. Sometimes they fulfill his will, and sometime they act against it.

— If the situation is like that, why don’t you resign as any decent person would do in your place?

— To resign for the sake of what? Why should I further a possible appointment of someone possessing no moral or legal boundaries to this post? Imagine that this post is occupied by someone who is conductive to Pukshyn’s dealings with the judges. Imagine that this post is occupied by Geletey, who is ready to employ his (thanks God) small unit to storm the objects under the protection of other law enforcement structures.

Lutsenko is being treated by the representatives of different political forces differently. However, believe me, all of them admit that Lutsenko’s actions are limited by moral and legal boundaries. A person without such boundaries is dangerous for the country.

Yes, without support of the General Prosecutor’s Office, the work of the Interior Ministry is not as effective as I would like it to be. I was not very enthusiastic when accepting the post of the Minister of Interior Affairs for the second time. I did that only because I received guarantees from the President that there would be changes in the heads of the General Prosecutor’s Office. However, the President didn’t fulfill his promise.

— So, was there any sense to stay?

— Yes, there was a sense for me to stay for the sake of a considerable reduction of the death-rate on the roads, for a sufficient success in the fight with drug-trafficking, for lowering the number of juvenile crimes and crimes on the racial grounds. We have doubled the number of detected cases with giving big bribes.

In my opinion, the bodies of the Interior Ministry have gathered a sufficient amount of information on violations in Kyiv, Kharkov, Zakarpatyie, and Crimea, to make the Prosecutor’s office start decisive actions.

— But it didn’t happen; so what’s the point of your hard work?

— The General Prosecutor’s office should be seriously changed. The entire law enforcement system needs some systemic changes as stated in the legislature. Today we have a Soviet militia and a Soviet Prosecutor’s office. And the state is not worried about this.

Do you know when was the last time the secretary of the National Security and Defense Council (who is a coordinator of the law enforcement bodies) held a meeting with the heads of the structures responsible for the fight with the crime? In 2006. Once we were gathered by Poroshenko, and once – by Khinakh. And that’s all!

Another example. Of 50 draft laws necessary for adaptation of our militia to the modern European standards, only one draft has been examined – on road traffic.

Henadiy Moskal’ and Svyatoslav Oliynyk introduced an absolutely rational draft law on alternative investigative jurisdiction. Under this law, the officer of any law enforcement body has the right to finish any investigation started by him. Why should militia give a bribe taker to the Prosecutor’s office and a smuggler to the Security Service of Ukraine? Where is the logic here?

There have been many talks about the militia not coping with their investigations! A year ago, we investigated all murder cases. The militia coped with this task perfectly proving that it is able to manage even such an amount of complicated cases. Our investigators who work on 450 thousand criminal cases can easily take another 20 thousand cases on malfeasance which are in the Prosecutor’s office now. There are no grounds to doubt the capabilities of the Ministry of Internal Affairs to cope with all those cases.

And the Prosecutor’s Office (as according to world-wide practice) should observe that preliminary investigations are conducted according to the law and support the indictments in the court.

— Imagine that the Party of Regions and BYuT form a parliamentary majority. Are you ready to be a Minister of Internal Affairs under such a ruling coalition?

— If such coalition is created, it would be wiser to appoint someone from this very coalition to the leading posts in the law enforcement bodies.

— People’s Self-defense won’t enter this coalition, not least because coalition should be formed by factions. However, it may vote together with the coalition…

— The position of People’s Self-defense is totally different from the position of Our Ukraine. People’s Self-defense doesn’t miss plenary sittings as some kind of protest. It votes either “for” or “against”. It votes against the law on criminal responsibility for illegal dissolution of the parliament since such decision is not a legal act but a mechanism of psychological pressure. At the same time, it votes for the law on the temporary investigation commissions since five years ago, Yushchenko said that democracy is impossible without those temporary investigation commissions.

— If the parliament examines the draft of the Constitutional amendments limiting the president’s authority, will People’s Self-defense vote for or against it?

— As far as I know, there is only one politician supporting strong presidential power in People’s Self-defense. It is Taras Stetskiv who considers that the head of the state with broad authorities is a real guarantor of sovereignty. All the rest are supporters of the parliamentary-presidential model.

I personally support the amendment to the Constitution which would preserve the nation-wide election of the president, but would give the most of governing functions to the parliament and government.

And the sooner this happens the better it would be for the country. Everybody, including the candidates, is tired of this fight for the seat…