Candidate of Philological Sciences

Shpak I.V.

Oles Honchar Dnipropetrovsk National University

Implications in presidential discourse of Independent Ukraine in the first quarter of the 21^st century

It is obvious that among other directions in the field of discursive analysis political discourse is much more ideological, than any other. This study is a mere attempt to research ideologies and implications of the presidential discourse of Ukraine in the first quarter of the 21^st century. According to Teun A. van Dijk when one attempts at such a research one should keep in mind that the approach of the analysis might be a multidisciplinary one as one may be dealing with a) political cognition; b) discourse structure; and, of course, c) socio-political context, in which such cognitions and discourses have their meanings and functions. (4; 84-86) As far as this problem is extremely wide and complex, we might address only some of its issues.

The most important figure on the political arena of Ukraine is an incumbent president. To be successful it is crucial for a president to announce a vision, a long-term strategy of what a president intends to achieve while in the office. In the world history all successful presidents in terms of vision had a slogan, which technically is coherent and succinct was to express in words what it is they are trying to accomplish. Slogans are crucial in communication to the citizens, of the given country, the hope, sustained ambition, prosperity, success, etc. With the rise of media discourse, with the widespread of telecommunications it is of high importance for a president to have a hold on the public’s imagination. In the process of gaining presidency language plays a critical role, for every political action in enforced into life by language. Our attempt is to analyze political speaking of Ukrainian presidents, namely the inaugural address of President Petro Poroshenko.

Presidential address should be aimed at the citizens of the given country. And taking into account the time of turmoil in Ukraine in 2014 the importance of the inaugural speech was enormous, so is important an attempt to decipher ideological traits implied in the inaugural address of President Poroshenko. Having analyzed inaugural addresses of Ukrainian Presidents, the following conclusion has been made. The second President of Ukraine Leonid Kuchma had the longest inaugural address, which contained 2713 words, while the fourth President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovich pronounced the shortest inaugural speech, containing 1094 words. In his inauguration address the newly elected President Petro Poroshenko “stressed on the importance of securing the sovereignty of the country and emphasized the permanent direction toward the EU integration of Ukraine” (2)

It is worth noting that all Presidents of Ukraine most often mentioned Ukraine in their inaugural addresses. The fifth President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko says: “The return of Ukraine to its natural, European state was dreamt of throughout many generations” (1), then he goes with: “The country became different. The people became different.”(1), as well as “I am asking to commemorate those who fell for the will and independence of Ukraine in a moment of silence”(1), etc. However, the fourth President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovich chose to mention primarily himself: “I have just been sworn in as the President of Ukraine. What did I feel as my hand rested upon the Holy Peresopnytsia Gospel?”(3), The fourth President’s inaugural address is dominated with ‘first person singular’, e.g.: “I wish to emphasize: I see the Parliament playing a special role in reforming the public administration.”(3), and “I have always put deeds above words and in my new office I shall not abandon this rule.”(3), etc.

The inaugural address in question, the one of President Poroshenko’s can be internally divided into the following parts: a) Addressing the whole nation, stressing Ukraine’s citizens’ belonging to the European Community; b) Acknowledging the Revolution of Dignity and time of change as well the difficult challenges the country will face; pointing out the crisis of the past; c) Outlining the plan to restore peace in the region; insisting on the importance of the dialogue; d) Specific address to the people from regions suffering from the military aggression; e) Mentioning his predecessor; f) Promises to the nation; outlining the things, which must be done in the future in economics, legal system, judicial system, legislative system, etc.; outlying his vision for the development of the country; g) The solution lies not solely with the Government, Parliament and the Presidents, the solution lies with the people as well.

At this point we are making at attempt of interpreting the ideological aspect of President Poroshenko’s inaugural address to have a possibility to link the inaugural discourse with the socio-cultural situation in Ukraine in 2014 and to understand the covert ideology of his political discourse. However, we will as well try to contrast President Poroshenko’s discourse with the one of his predecessor President Yanukovich.

President Porosheko’s inaugural address’s opening line is “Dear compatriots from Lviv to Donetsk, from Chernihiv to Sevastopol!”(1), while President Yanukovich started his with: “Dear Members of Parliament! Dear compatriots!”.(3) The shift in discourse and ideology in President Porosheko’s is drastic. Poroshenko’s form of address in much more inclusive, it includes all the people throughout the country, it represents grass-root diplomacy, while Yanukovich’s speech, starting from the opening line, demonstrates his exclusive and elitist system.

President Poroshenko offers a line from works of a great Ukrainian poet and revolutionary Ivan Franko: “We, Ukrainians, are a living spark in the family of European nations and active members of European civilizational work"(1). The choice of quote is not insignificant, as far as on the one hand it clearly states the European choice of Ukraine, and on the other hand gives the implication of revolutionary events that might present themselves on the road to that European choice. Allusions to the righteous fight that involuntarily arise around the name of the poet may transform into implications of legitimization and justification of the anti-terroristic operation in the eastern part of the country

President Poroshenko addresses a very important question of economics and welfare. However he points out the importance of having a job and wanting to work – the importance and satisfaction of being valued by the State. He says: ‘So far, I got the greatest professional satisfaction from the creation of new jobs.”(1), which implies that citizens of the country should not expect enormous benefits from social programs, but should be able to work and support yourself.

Yet one of the most important challenges the Ukrainian society faces these days, and has been facing for quite some time, is still to be addressed to and concerns the question of state language. In this regard, President Poroshenko is adamant and referring to the Constitution of Ukraine he points out: “It defines the Ukrainian language as single state language, but guarantees free development of Russian and other languages.”(1) The implication is rather clear – with the support for the development of languages of ethnic minorities living on the territory of Ukraine there is only place for a single state language, which is Ukrainian. The ideology behind this issue is the importance of strengthening nation and it cannot be done without the support of the state language in all the spheres of cultural and social life of Ukraine.

President Poroshenko in his speech also mentions grand Ukrainian narrative and emphasizes the necessity of joining the forces and avoiding the mistakes of the past. He states: Volodymyr Vynnychenko fought against Mykhailo Hrushevskyi, Symon Petliura fought against Pavlo Skoropadskyi. And Nestor Makhno fought against all.Constant quarrels and conflicts among the prominent Ukrainians resulted in the loss of our independence. Conclusions should be done not only with old archives, but also with recent events. We must not repeat old mistakes and have to ensure coordinated work of the President, the Parliament and the Cabinet.”(1) However, what is implied is that all three active and mighty political players should reconcile in the face of greater problems and challenges that country faces. He reaches to the past and to the heroes of the past and prompts everyone to learn from the past and never repeat it again. In terms of political reform and effective governance President Yanukovich’s opinion was as follows: “First, we must restore the system of effective governance. We must quickly establish a competent executive power that will immediately proceed to manage the most affected sectors of the economy and the social sphere.’ (3) With right, understandable and straightforward words President Yanukovich sent to his country the message with absolutely different meaning; with the meaning that read the total control, lack of all kinds of freedom and constitutional reform, which meant going back to the presidential model of power, where a president had unlimited control. Several lines down in his speech, he confirmed the message regarding the amendments to the Constitution: “Such cooperation will be crucial for the effective reform of government, justice, and amending the Constitution. Today the state is controlled by the structure, "sewn" for the purposes of individual politicians.”(3) However, it became true only months later after the amendments were enforced. Leaving aside President Yanukovich’s vision regarding policy, it’s worth noting that the vision was extremely ambiguous in terms of language, however rather clear in terms of implications.

The use of the rule of three is also quite vivid in the speech of President Poroshenko.: “The country has changed. People have changed. The time of inevitable positive changes has come” or “To implement them, we need first of all peace, security and unity.” or “For unemployment, for poverty and for refugees.” (1) The same technique is largely used by other leaders, especially American presidents, e.g. Barak Obama.

To draw the conclusion, the overall theme for President Poroshenko’s inaugural address can be summarized as ‘plucking up the knowledge from our past, learning from our mistakes, we should pluck up the strength and courage in our future; should remember who we have always been, realize who we are, and know who we will be”.

References:

1. Address of the President of Ukraine during the ceremony of inauguration. [Online Article]: http://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/30488.html

2. Petro Poroshenko: I go into the office of the President of Ukraine to secure and enhance the integrity of Ukraine. [Online Article]: http://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/30490.html

3. President Viktor Yanukovych's Inauguration address to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine [Online Article]: http://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/16600.html

4. Van Dijk, T. 1996. Dscourse, Power and Access. In C.R. Caldas-Coulthard, and M. Coulthard (eds.) Texts and Practicies: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis, London: Routledge, pp. 84-86