According to one of the world’s most influential Ukrainians, Bohdan Havrylyshyn, Ukraine is not only at the forefront of Europe, but it is able to be a model for the whole world.

Havrylyshyn, an advisor to three Ukrainian presidents, an economist and founder of the World Economic Forum in Davos, explained the basis for his optimism in an interview with TV channel “24”.

Bohdan, you give Ukraine a very strong role in the development of the future of Europe and the world at large. Why Ukraine?

There are four good working main characteristics of effective countries: full political liberty; a certain level of economic well-being for the entire population – i.e. there are the rich but not the poor; social justice; symbiosis with the biosphere instead of the destruction of the environment and clogging up. The vast majority of countries except some of European ones do not have these four characteristics. In some sense, they are sick and need treatment.

Why they are sick?

First off, democratic countries are sick. In 1948, the remarkable Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted. There were great hopes then. But the governments of only a limited number of countries could ensure those rights. Therefore, there was a great disappointment and criticism of governments. It became more difficult to govern a country, harder to be an authority. By then, communication between institutions and between countries was already based on fierce competition. Therefore, the wealthiest could ensure their rights, but most people were deprived of this opportunity. USA gives a notable example. There are 50 million people there who are poor in regard to their rights, who do not have access to quality education, have no access to health care. Obama tried to change it but it did not work.

A similar situation is appearing among countries. Democratic countries are used to preaching a long sermon that all must adhere to that Universal Declaration of Human Rights. But the USA sells its product to African countries at high prices while buying raw materials at low prices, so that these countries remain very poor. Even those few countries that have good governments cannot ensure such basic life rights as the access to fresh water or some health care.

Do you think Ukraine can cure these countries and to change the world order?

The present situation in the world is such that losses increase and wins decrease. Therefore, we need to switch to a new paradigm where all would have won something. Two elements are required for this paradigm: the Universal Declaration of Human Duties (since the state should not do everything) and the transition to cooperation (since relationships can no longer be built only on the basis of competition.

How can Ukraine help to cure that world? Look at Maidan. When people were attacked there, they created certain services: medical, religious, psychological, educational. These services were created by concrete individuals. Olga Bogomolets started the first service. She simply said: “I do”. Then other people having some medical knowledge joined her. And this worked. And no other doctor appeared who would create an alternative medical service for better treatment. There was no competition there.

It is interesting that all these services were created not by government order, but by the sense of duty to their fellow citizens and the country. In the same manner many volunteers have decided now to go to ATO. They did it voluntarily without any order and knowing that they risk their lives.

We see that our people have already started to act in accordance with the new paradigm in which the world has to live. The world helps Ukraine a lot, with sanctions on the one side and financial aid on the other. But we can also help this world which is somehow deadlocked.

Can we, Ukrainians, help to get the world out of this deadlock?

Yes. I think it is wonderful even for ourselves to realise that we do not need to catch up with the world, either Europe or USA. No. In some things we are in front of the world. They should copy us.

On the other hand, it appeared that there were many people after Euromaidan who relaxed a bit, who said that they mandated new authorities to take care of them and to carry out reforms. People who wanted to be engaged only in their own lives…

I think there is a little bit different interpretation of this. It is normal, because people could not carry out reforms. Anybody from Maidan could no carry out them, but only some individuals who went into power. On the other hand, we see that demonstrations continue; soldiers who went to war fight on. This means that the people are not indifferent to this country.

Therefore, this is a certain disappointment. It’s there partially because we want to go too fast, partially because of the pressure of the outside world. All our actions should be totally consistent with the Constitution and current legislation. This makes our government impotent to a certain extent; it cannot carry out these reforms.

”The society trusts the government and President only if it is well informed”

What do you think the government should begin with?

The corruption. There are different vents of corruption. The biggest one is in the so many various licenses, permits, inspections, heaven knows. There is a huge bureaucracy around starting and running one’s own business. One comes to this bureaucrat to arrange something and one has to grease his palms, otherwise it does not work.

One young man from Odesa together with his colleagues has developed a wonderful deregulation program. According to him, we need deregulation rather than to create yet another bureaucracy that would have fought against corruption. It is thus possible to eliminate the cause: no license – no need to come and pay. Reducing the bureaucracy by one third or one quarter would result in its greater efficiency. And we could pay a bit more to those who will remain.

What prevents this program from being implemented?

Our Minister of Economy and Trade heard about this young man and called him for an appointment. The Minister invited him to become his deputy, but the young man refused. He said, “Me and my team, we will be your advisors as you want, but I will not be your deputy.” It seems that the Minister accepted this program as a very good approach. The intention is present.

But the government should approach this systematically. We need to act and this action should cover the entire front. Otherwise the existing bureaucracy will block these deregulations.

Does this mean that we can hope for its implementation in the near future?

Let us hope. Not only because we want to enjoy our life but also because we can even help this government. There are many clever people who would do it if they had the opportunity to volunteer.

How can one create such a possibility?

There will be soon a meeting of the December 1st Initiative. They will discuss an appeal to the President and to the government about broad communication with people and society. It is extremely important that the populace should have confidence in the President and government. In order to gain this, society must be well informed and moreover informed about the truth. When we have more confidence, we will help as best we can.

You can compare the openness of the different Ukrainian presidents and governments. In your opinion, is the current government open enough?

It is surely more open than Yanukovych’s government. But there were different phases of this issue, as far as I can judge from my experience as an advisor to those in the highest positions. Kravchuk had openness, but a big difficulty with him was that he did not know the first word about the economy. For example, there were three people in his circle who decided to issue Ukraine bonds in the amount of 10 billion dollars. What they did would be a disaster for Ukraine. When I asked them what the collateral for these bonds is, they told me: “Ukraine”. This would mean that, for example, the Italian mafia or some rich people of our northern neighbor could buy all these bonds for 10 billion, (this is not some incredible amount), and then tell Ukraine that it belongs to them if it cannot pay this money back. I tried to persuade Kravchuk to not come up with this proposal in the parliament, but I failed. He still passed the proposal in the Verkhovna Rada. Luckily, there were several people in the VR who understood the danger and they rejected the proposal. Meanwhile, these guys had started to sell the bonds and they managed to sell some of them in London. Our ambassador then intercepted them somehow and this case was closed. This is an example of an open one, though one lacking knowledge and competence.

Yushchenko as a prime minister was quite open and he worked very well. But it was fatal when he became president. When he was prime minister and Yulia Tymoshenko was his deputy it was a fantastic team. They had made a big push. Companies operating in the energy sector had agreements on the basis of barter. Thus they did not receive any income and did not pay taxes. Having a good knowledge of the matter, Tymoshenko proposed to force them to move to monetary transactions. Yushchenko agreed and the decision was taken. Profits began to come immediately; a large influx of revenue in the budget started. Heavily indebted pensions and salaries were paid. Economic growth of 9% growth was reached without inflation. It was very impressive.

Kuchma was totally open with me during his first mandate period and in the beginning of the second. When Medvedchuk came, he turned into a completely different person.

Therefore, all this varied. We do not have clear good examples to compare with the present government.

Can you estimate how effective will be the current team of the President and Prime Minister?

I know both of them very well and I do not want to criticize either of them. It would not be decent. But we can extrapolate taking into account how long it took to create the alliance. It is unlikely that they will work as a team.

What is then the solution for the country out of this situation?

Well, I hope that at least they will be able to agree on the key things.

On the other hand, there are many competent people in the government. For example, it would be desirable to have a Council of Ministers with a Chairman of the Council of Ministers. It may sound strange because it was so in the Soviet Union. But, for example, it is like this in Italy now. The Council of Ministers is a place for discussion which allows one to harmonize the actions. The Ministers submit their proposals and discuss them at the level of the Cabinet. After an agreement that the decision is good, the action begins.

What is the advantage of such a format?

For the President, it would be easier to communicate with the Cabinet if it acted in this way. The President would not submit his own proposals, but only would get approvals to the decisions already discussed by the entire Cabinet of Ministers. He would know that the government supports him.

I am trying to say that there is a certain way out rather than criticizing or making a poor prognosis. But we need goodwill and we have to resign ourselves to our goals. To think more of Ukraine but not of how much power or authority one has.

”Very little is needed to begin a Ukrainian economic miracle”

You wrote that the Ukrainians are able to create an economic miracle. On the other hand, many experts say now that the economy is in poor condition and Ukraine is closer to default. What is the basis for your optimism?

It looks a bit that we are approaching a default. On the other hand, we see that there is an agreement between the Ministry of Finance of Ukraine and [the Department of the Treasury of the] USA which says that the US guarantees loans for Ukraine totalling two billion dollars. In other words, if Ukraine borrows two billion at some institution and it cannot pay it back, then the USA should pay it. This is a very strong guarantee. This will automatically facilitate for Ukraine finding this two billion with a longer amortization period and lower interest rate than would be possible without that agreement. The EU also decided to give Ukraine 15 billion in aid.

So I do not think Ukraine will default. But it will take some time for the economy to equalize.

What about an economic miracle, is it real?

Yes, we have all the conditions for this.

What exactly?

We have the natural resources. We have qualified people. We are by nature hard-working people.

But we need some prerequisites. First, to have earnings sufficient for a normal life for our work. Second, to have intrinsic motivation. At all levels, people should be free to decide not what they must do but how they must do it, in their own way. They should feel a kind of ownership over their work. Such motivation is fantastic.

We need to adopt a clear law on ownership; to create a transparent judicial system and exact rules of the game. In addition, a lot of state-owned enterprises have to be converted to private ownership, unless some so called natural monopolies. You see, very little is needed for the Ukrainian economic miracle to begin.

Can you predict an approximate date of its beginning?

I think it can begin in two years. But we need the above prerequisites. Ukraine needs total transformations. Even the status of the country must be changed. It should really become a unitary state, but with greatly decentralized. Both the judicial and economic systems should be changed, as well as social policy.

It is my hope that this government and this President will carry out some reforms so that the transformation will progress a bit smoother than it did under Yanukovych.

What will Ukraine be like after the war with Russia?

We have already been converted from a pluriethnic people into a patriotic pluriethnic Ukrainian nation. It is really a very good result. I think we never turn back to become Soviet people. As to your question, I would say that Ukraine will come out cleaned. But very impaired, of course.

I think also that we will never have illusions about being a fraternal nation.

Will Ukraine’s territorial integrity be preserved?

I think yes. Moreover, I even think that Crimea will return some day. Not only because Crimean Tatars are there, although this is a very important factor. It will happen because everybody will remember that life as the Autonomous Republic within Ukraine is much better than life as a federal subject of Russia. It will not be a military operation. It will come from within.

Interviewed by Eugenia Mazur

Translated by Maria Holubeva

Source.