- They are not a solution to all our problems but a small step towards normalisation. Early elections offer good training for all political groupings as they are forced to negotiate and make compromises. It is also important for people to see, that they can elect or vote out their leaders, that politicians are not unchangeable, like in Russia or in Belarus. I believe that these elections will have a positive effect on the country - regardless of who will win.

- This crisis revealed the inefficiency of the system. Ukraine inherited extremely obsolete Soviet institutions that do not work in a democracy. These must be changed: Th judiciary, for instance, needs profound reforms. Elections are a very good reminder to politicians that they have to agree on reforms. If they don’t do this we will be confronted with one crisis after the other.

- People are sceptical, that is true. But the polls show that Ukrainians are still committed to democracy. I don’t think that the disappointment in society is so great that people will opt for an authoritarian leader. It doesn’t work that way in Ukraine. In this country nobody can get a clear majority.

- Civic freedoms are the most important achievements. We have free media now, we can openly discuss all issues, and nobody is immune from criticism - neither the Prime Minister nor the President. We have a lot of talk shows, among them a very popular TV-programme called "Freedom of Speech" that was transferred to Kiev from Moscow after it was banned in Russia. Ukraine today is an open country. Democracy is still weak and inefficient. But it is democracy.

- An interesting phenomenon! Despite all political troubles the economy goes its own way. People do business as usual. The free market is working in Ukraine.

- Very high. There was a decline after the revolution. The “Orange government”, and especially Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, did a lot to fight corruption. But since 2005 it has increased again.

- They are disappointed with all political leaders because they failed to keep their promises. But the attitude is not completely hostile. People regard politicians as "bad boys, but our bad boys".
The country was in a really bad mood in 2005 and 2006, when the Orange coalition collapsed and political chaos began. Today people see the economic growth and are becoming more self-sufficient and self-reliant. More than fifty percent of Ukrainians claim that they belong to the middle class – even though they only earn about 300 dollars a month.

- I think so. People feel that they are in charge of their lives . This feeling can be weakened by policy but not taken away. There’s a big difference between Ukraine and Russia: There is no tradition of absolutism here. We don’t have such obedience to authorities. People are more individualistic, and even have a rather ironic attitude towards power.

- Don’t exaggerate the common history! For many centuries we belonged to different civilisations. Russia was under the rule of Tartars whereas Ukraine belonged to the Polish commonwealth. The differences disappeared only in 19th and 20th centuries.

- Yes and no. We cannot exclude minor border conflicts but nobody thinks of a real military intervention. We see other ways in which Russia intervenes – in politics, in the economy or in the mass media. These interventions can be very aggressive.

- This idea is not supported by the majority of the people – neither in the eastern nor in the western part. Nevertheless people in the East and West have very different ideas about their past and their future: What is Ukraine? What does it mean to be a Ukrainian? They have different national projects but at the same time they claim that Ukraine should be undivided. They are fated to live with each other – in one country. So they have to get along .

- They are just learning how to go about this . Until the “Orange revolution” they had no opportunity because there was only one party of power that manipulated all sides: East and West, Left and Right. After the revolution this group around former president Leonid Kutchma just disappeared. Now we see a much sharper polarisation of the country because there is no centrist group any more. But despite all quarrels we also see the ability of the new political forces to make compromises. There is no bloodshed in Ukraine; there are no fights in the streets. This is not so bad at all.

- They represented a virtual world. As soon as this world disappeared we found out that there was no real force behind it.

- Ukraine is very pluralistic in these terms. There are many clans. Kutchma was skilful in playing one group off against the other and in taking the role of an arbiter. He was powerful as long his vassals agreed that they need the king to keep peace between them. But in 2004 they decided that they didn't need a king anymore. Since then they have negotiated directly.

- To some extent yes. But they have to adjust to their electorate. In Ukraine we have only two electoral groups: sovietophiles and ukrainophiles. After Ukraine became independent the sovietophiles voted for the communist party and the ukrainophiles for the liberal national movement "Ruch". Then the oligarchs privatized these electoral groups. The orange oligarchs took over the electorate of “Ruch”, the “Party of Regions” took over the sovietophiles. That is why the communist party nearly disappeared. Now Yanukovich and Yushenko have to adjust their rhetoric to their electorate although in reality they might not be so different.

- As soon as they came to power they re-established some corruption schemes that were abolished by Tymoshenko. That was very disturbing. They tend to be monopolistic. That is why I believe they are dangerous for our country. This party needs to remain in opposition until it manages to transform itself. I don’t want to idealize Orange politicians but they are more committed to certain rules. They are not as greedy as politicians from the Party of Regions. Orange politicians are as imperfect as other politicians in Central Europe. But they are manageable by society. The “Party of Regions” is not manageable. It tends to absorb all the power.

- I would like this to happen. But I’m afraid that the Party of Regions is in a better position because they are corrupt. They know how to bribe voters and they can bribe small parties to support them. They have a lot of money. So if the Orange parties want to rule the country they have to mobilise all their supporters and win overwhelmingly.

- Probably yes. And I don’t think that she would be a bad prime minister. She just needs a supervisor. I hope that she (and the president too) learned from their mistakes of the past. If not, they are in danger of committing political suicide.