Malorossiya Constitutional Act – English Translation – Part II

Dear Readers:

Alexander Zakharchenko: a Russian leader tested in battle.

Today, as promised, completing my translation of the Constitutional Act announcing the new state of Malorossiya.  Please recall:  A couple of days ago, Donetsk Peoples Republic (DPR) elected leader Alexander Zakharchenko announced a project to replace the current state of Ukraine, which fell into the hands of Ukrainian Nationalists, and subsequently fell apart into 4 pieces, –, with a new entity called “Malorossiya”, which means “Little Russia”, or perhaps “Russia Minor”, the traditional name for this territory in Tsarist times.  The new entity would gather back together 3 of the 4 pieces of the former Ukraine and have its capital city in Donetsk.  Which, just coincidentally, is Zakharchenko’s home town!

This news came as a whammy in the international press, with most Westie media piling on to condemn and/or ridicule the announcement.  Understandable, since Westie governments are heavily invested in their Banderite Ukraine project and can’t tolerate the idea that they failed very badly in this arena.  Very few Westies actually bothered to read the Malorossiya document, let alone translate it (as far as I could tell).  Therefore, I took it upon myself to read and translate into English, to bring to wider audience.  Yesterday I got about halfway done, and today I will finish.

Ukrainian Nationalists destroyed a once-thriving nation.

In my opinion, I don’t think this announcement is as radical as it sounds, at first blush.  In essence, Zakharchenko’s plan is to reunite the former-Ukraine (minus Crimea) around a government of newly built [something like] Party of Regions, but without Yanukovych, and without the oligarchs.  A careful reading of the document shows that many of the bullet points are repetitions of old debating points, such as EU vs. CIS, etc.  These are political and economic debates which  never got properly resolved in the Ukrainian Parliament nor the corridors of power, despite attempts of Ukrainian Nationalists to resolve these debates by force of violence alone.  If the Ukrainian Nationalists, after their coup, had built a strong nation and army, then they would have won the bully’s debate.  But since they ended up destroying the economy, army, navy, and statehood of Ukraine, in the short space of just three years, then all the debating points are still on the table.  And the Malorossiyans have every right to point and say, “I told you so!”

TRANSLATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL ACT OF MALOROSSIYA (continued)

While preparing the new constitution we consider it obligatory to rely on the following basic principles:

An independent, sovereign state.

Territorial integrity; while recognizing the legality of the choice (Referendum) made by the people of Crimea [to reunite with the Russian Federation].

A neutral non-bloc military status.

Reliance on the traditional values of our peoples, which are based on the Orthodox view of the world.

Equality of all traditional religions and faiths, while opposing Schismatics and totalitarian sects.

In the economy:  a multi-vectored approach, becoming a “bridge” between East and West, North and South.

A renewal of the activities of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS, Russian СНГ), and ratification of the membership of Malorossiya in the CIS.

A course towards uniting with the Allied State of Russia and Belorussia, while still retaining independence and sovereignty.

Renewal of cooperative ties with Russia and renewal of cooperation with the Eurasian Economic Union; conducting of tripartite talks in the format Malorossiya-Russia-European Union, in order to harmonize our mutual relationships in the general [European] system.

Retaining a non-visa relationship with the EU (assuming the EU agrees).

Rebuilding of the industrial potential of the country;  creation of state enterprises in key sectors of industry.

Development of the system of public (social) control of the economy and in the political sphere; among other things, in the area of the fight against corruption.

Fighting against corruption as a key indicator; strengthening of accountability (including criminal liability) for crimes of corruption; monitoring of legislation with the goal of liquidating corruptionist loopholes.

De-oligarchization, including on the legislative front.

Rejection of political parties as the subject of politics, and a transition to the “personal” principle of representative government.

Introduction of the elements of direct democracy.

Being the legitimate and legal heir [government] of pre-Maidan “Ukraine”.

Will not pay the debts incurred by the Maidan government.

Will not raise the pension age.

Freezing of (price raises) in communal fees and attempting to lower them again.

Guarantee of a job for each graduate of a higher education institution.

Right to bear arms.

Systematic de-Nazification.

Administrative and criminal liability for the propaganda of neo-Nazi ideas, and for the heroization of Nazis and their assistants (Bandera, Shukhevych, the OUN-UPA, etc.)

Administrative and criminal liability for attempts to revise the history of the Great Patriotic War [World War II].

Rehabilitation of the Soviet heritage.

Restoration of the state holiday 9 May as Victory Day.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Breaking News, Russian History and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Malorossiya Constitutional Act – English Translation – Part II

  1. Lyttenburgh says:

    As the declarations of plans and future agenda go, this list is… not… that… bad. But, even I see here some very serious inner contradictions.

    “Reliance on the traditional values of our peoples, which are based on the Orthodox view of the world.

    Equality of all traditional religions and faiths, while opposing Schismatics and totalitarian sects.

    […]

    Rehabilitation of the Soviet heritage.”

    First of all, I’d like to know what is this “Orthodox view” of the world. And if I’m asking this now, imagine what all “progressives” will do to them. How do you articulate that? One might say, that (any traditional denomination of) Christianity speaks of duties, not rights, and the idea of intrinsic rights (let alone “Nature” or “God-given” ones) was utterly alien to traditional Christian theology for the first 1700 years of its existence. At the same time, the Orthodox mindset demands the faithful to be their own greatest critics and, when in doubt, consider yourself the greatest of sinners while trying to take measures to ameliorate this. But to say it out loud in the modern world?

    It’s quite impossible to have a state run according to Christian principles, because Christianity is about the eternal, whereas worldly law is about the temporal. Christian “law” can’t lock people up for tax evasion, only temporal law can.

    Did the same thoughts crossed the minds of the DNR upper echelons (or the mind of one particular Zakhar Prilepin), when they (or just he) penned this list of “values”, directives and plans? Somehow, I doubt that.

    And to couple that with the plan to rehabilitate the USSR legacy… Well, immediately it raises a concern, that they might “rehabilitate” not the Soviet Union (an officially materialist state which, still, possessed a strict code of societal morality) that was, but some dumbed down “theme park version” ™ of it, in order to avoid controversies. To which it leads – see Nyash-Myash going bonkers over Nicky II and for various hierarchs calling the Nazi’s invasion “a Heavenly punishment”.

    And while we are at it – why not rename Donetsk back to Stalino?

    “De-oligarchization, including on the legislative front.

    Rejection of political parties as the subject of politics, and a transition to the “personal” principle of representative government.

    Introduction of the elements of direct democracy.”

    As long as I don’t see here “the creation of the Soviets as the local bodies of authorities” and “introduction of the course on the building of socialism”, I fail to see how this gonna happened in reality.

    “Renewal of cooperative ties with Russia and renewal of cooperation with the Eurasian Economic Union; conducting of tripartite talks in the format Malorossiya-Russia-European Union, in order to harmonize our mutual relationships in the general [European] system.

    […]

    Will not pay the debts incurred by the Maydan government.”

    This. This is the biggest stumbling block I see here. Did anyone SUDDENLY forgot why the Maydan happened in the first place? Neither EU, nor Russia-lead Customs Union want the Ukraine to become a proverbial calf, that sucks two udders. Russia is not interested in the Ukraine becoming a transit point for the EU goods, undermining its own producers – ESPECALLY if it becomes a part of the Union State (rus. “Союзное государство”) with Byelarus and Russia.

    Meanwhile the EU will NEVER see the revocation of all already signed treaties since the “Revolution of Dignity”, which permit their businesses to plunder the Ukraine at their will (paying peanuts to strip bare the Ukraine from its natural resources – including the black soil).

    Yanukovich-era indecisiveness won’t magically return those “blessed” (by today’s Ukraine standards) times of 8 hryvnas for 1$ and cheap gas. There is only one way for them – to proclaim the joining of the Eurasian Union as their alternative to the ascension to the EU.

    What I see here is broadstroked populism that bound to more or less interest large swathes of already sympathetic to the idea populace. The plan lacks tougher rhetoric and principle stands on some potentially “explosive” topics – but they have to make such stand, if they want to differ from their ideological opponents.

    Yet, judging by the joint howl and whining of various Russophobes and putinslivschinks this is definitely a move in the right direction. There is war being fought. Soldiers on the frontlines must be ready to answer without thinking what they are fighting for – not only against whom and what. That’s a must everywhere, anytime and that’s the direction the ideology promoters of the People Republics must work most intesively upon. One “achievement” unlocked by such declaration was that from now on, it would be incorrect to call them “separatists”. A small bit, but still!

    Like

    • yalensis says:

      Yeah, there is a certain degree to which the document looks like it was drafted by a committee. A committee that took a lot of input from everyone and wanted to please everyone.
      You pointed out the obvious contradiction between the “Orthodox worldview” and the Soviet legacy. Personally, being an atheist myself, I prefer the wording of the American constitution in this one regard – “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…”

      However, I believe I understand the context: Banderite Ukraine looks like it is morphing in the direction of Uniatism and Catholicism; Porky has even made some noises to the effect that Ukrainian Orthodox Church will follow the schismatic Patriarch in Kiev rather than the Moscow Patriarch (as part of the de-Russification process). Hence, the Malorossiyans are counterposing to this the fact that the Donbassians are traditional Orthodox. Even the atheists are “Orthodox atheists”, to borrow a phrase from our friend Anatole Karlin.

      The emphasis on religion and family values is also used to counterpose to the EU’s official ideology of atheism, secularism, and fluid gender identity. Most Ukrainians don’t agree with those philosophies but still want a visa. Zakharchenko will please those voters as well.

      Remember that Zakharchenko is positioning himself to be the President of ALL Malorossiyans, not just Donbassians, therefore this populism is meant to appeal to the massive Ukrainian Deplorable vote! Otherwise known as the Silent Majority.

      As for “preservation of Soviet heritage” – yeah, unfortunately, I don’t think they mean to rebuild a socialist economy, I think it just means, say, teaching Fadeev in school, and not tearing down the Lenin statues. Still, it’s good that they intend to rebuild the industrial sector based on state-owned industries. If they do that, then they can possibly rebuild the elusive proletarian class.

      All in all, I reckon it’s a good start, and I honestly think if Zakharchenko were to campaign for Prez just based on this platform (not that he would be allowed to, of course), then he would win all of the regions except maybe Lviv.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s