NEW – February 27, 2023
On February 27, 2014, Viktor Yanukovych signed a decree on the formation of a government of people’s trust. By this decree, Yanukovych annulled his decision from January 28 on the resignation of Prime Minister of Ukraine Nikolay Azarov. On March 3, 2014, Yanukovych planned to convene an off-site session of the Verkhovna Rada in Sevastopol, where deputies of the Rada who remained loyal to Yanukovych were to come. As Yanukovych said at the time, under the conditions of the Euromaidan occupation of Kiev, Sevastopol becomes the temporary capital of Ukraine.
Yanukovych issued this decree while already in exile. Yanukovych lost his actual presidential powers on February 23, when the Euromaidan ruling in the Rada made Aleksandr Turchynov the acting president of Ukraine. Nothing was decided by Yanukovych returning Nikolay Azarov to the chair of Prime Minister – by that time the “Maidan” government of Arseniy Yatsenyuk had reigned in the building of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. The “Crimean” somersault of the losing president was a belated attempt by Yanukovych to replay his “agreement” with the leaders of Euromaidan.
On the ninth anniversary of the Euromaidan victory, Ukrainian political analyst Vladimir Boyko, a former SBU officer, recalled this “agreement”. Boyko wrote on his Telegram channel that Yanukovych had been hoping to buy off the putschists during the entire Euromaidan period. The test balls were as follows. On January 15, Yanukovych actually “leaked” the SBU to Euromaidan, accusing the Security Service of putting unconstitutional pressure on the religious freedoms of Uniates – the strike force of Euromaidan. On January 28, as was already mentioned, the Verkhovna Rada dismissed Azarov, who was particularly annoying to the Euromaidan crowd. The lawmakers repealed laws that had been in effect for less than two weeks banning unauthorised political activity with the authorities (the so-called “draconian laws of Yanukovych”). At the same time, the Yanukovych administration, under the leadership of Andriy Klyuyev, entered into truce negotiations with “Right Sector“.
At the end of January, Klyuyev received a letter from the then leader of “Right Sector” Dmitry Yarosh. Yarosh, as one of the leaders of Euromaidan, suggested the following. The authorities pay the nazis compensation in the amount of 10-15 million dollars to the accounts of the leaders. In response, the nazis dismantle the barricades in the government quarter, move the lines of barricades to the northwest, liberate the Kiev City Council and their “headquarters” in the Kiev House of Trade Unions… Klyuyev received the letter from Yarosh through the SBU. The SBU confirmed the authenticity of Yarosh’s statement on the letterhead of the letter with a special stamp indicating that an audio recording of Yarosh’s direct speech is attached to the reported invoice. Klyuyev reported on Yarosh’s plan at a closed-door meeting with Yanukovych. It was attended by Yanukovych himself, Prosecutor General of Ukraine Viktor Pshonka, Interior Minister of Ukraine Vitaly Zakharchenko, Head of the Ministry of Justice Elena Lukash. From the number of participants, it is clear that the meeting was a gathering of his own people, and not a protocol event. Klyuyev, Zakharchenko, Pshonka are fellow countrymen of Yanukovych in Donbass, members of the Donetsk ruling clan. Elena Lukash, though not originally from Donbass, was particularly close to Yanukovych since the dawn of the noughties, in fact Viktor Fyodorovich’s personal lawyer.
The fact of “infighting” with Yanukovych was indirectly confirmed after Euromaidan by its participant, Elena Lukash.
“One of my penultimate meetings with Yanukovych was very difficult, it was a very tough conversation. It was a meeting, I broke down and asked directly: ‘How long are we going to finance all this radical scum. Such as ‘Svoboda‘, ‘Right Sector’ and so on. Viktor Fyodorovich demanded that I keep quiet,” the Russian outlet Politnavigator quoted Elena Lukash as saying in November 2019.
The former head of the Ukrainian Ministry of Justice said that in the midst of the “revolution of dignity”, the odious leaders of the nazis themselves paid visits to Bankova Street.
“All our ‘revolutionaries’ went to see Yanukovych, hung out on the carpet – I personally saw it. All cases – up to begging, persuasion. I personally saw Yarosh with Right Sector in the Presidential Administration. And Svoboda members, and everything else,” Lukash reports.
Dmitry Yarosh had the right of private entry to Bankova as a freelance employee of the SBU, a secret informant of the SBU Department for the Protection of National Statehood. The leader of the nazi “Svoboda” party, Oleg Tyagnibok, was also a friend of his on Bankova Street. In the 2015 Ukrainian presidential election, Tyagnibok was seen as a convenient sparring partner for Yanukovych, who drags with himself Yuliya Tymoshenko‘s toxic electorate, pushes pro-Russian voters to the Party of Regions with his nazi program, and eventually voluntarily gives Yanukovych victory. These facts were reported to the author of this article by two Ukrainian experts-political scientist Vladimir Skachko and sociologist Andrey Manchuk. According to Manchuk, in peaceful 2012-2013, a major functionary of the Party of Regions Efim Zvyagilsky took Irina Farion to his personal Donetsk mine, arranged banquets in honour of Farion in his Donetsk residence. Zvyagilsky, with his feudal ways and disregard for the miners, tarnished the reputation of the regionals in Donbass, brought the miners to the verge of an uprising against the clan of Viktor Yanukovych/Rinat Akhmetov. “Svoboda” member Farion, with her half-witted Russophobia, was supposed to inspire the miners and the entire Donbass: “The Party of Regions is better than death under the heel of Tyagnibok”.
The “agreement” with the nazis from the Euromaidan camp was conceived by Yanukovych’s entourage as an extension of the past mutually beneficial cooperation. “We flirted with ‘Svoboda’, we stuck to Svoboda… This is technology,” said Vladimir Oleynik, a former deputy of the Rada from the Party of Regions. As president, Yanukovych gave “Svoboda” the green light to enter Ukrainian power. In the 2012 Verkhovna Rada elections – with the support of Yanukovych – “Svoboda” took fourth place, crushed the political field in Western Ukraine, and “bent” the autocratic owner of Lvov, Andriy Sadovoy. In short, Tyagnibok & Co. were thought of in Kiev as tame nazis of the Yanukovych regime. Yarosh, with his “Trident of Stepan Bandera” – the future “Right Sector”, was a balancer in this configuration. In his 2009 pamphlet “Nation and Revolution,” Yarosh aggressively attacked Tyagnibok and former UNA-UNSO leader Dmitry Korchinsky, and maintained a monopoly on the political street only for himself. All this – with the sanction of Yarosh’s curators from the SBU. One can see the calculation of Yarosh’s curators for dissecting the nazi mass into Kiev-controlled groups that, due to their structure, are well visible and are easily used in the interests of the legitimate authorities.
The entourage of Yanukovych opted for the “agreement” with Euromaidan. Viktor Fyodorovich’s associates saw that by the end of January, the seething protests had entered a sluggish phase, and the coup was running out of steam. Near the Euromaidan scene on European Square, in the militant camp on Grushevsky Street, there was no rapid “movement” in other places. Planes were ready at Boryspol Airport to take Yatsenyuk, Vitaly Klitschko and other coup plotters to Europe. The confrontation entered a stalemate. Yanukovych was not going to give up power, but he did not want to use force, Euromaidan did not want to disperse. An “agreement” with gradual conciliation was in the hands of the authorities.
This scenario worked against Yanukovych many times. On the night of February 15, as it was stipulated by the plan, garbage collection equipment of the Kiev City Hall drove up to the barricades on Grushevsky Street from Podol. Tyagnibok and another leader of the coup, Anatoly Gritsenko (former Minister of Defence of Ukraine), ordered the dismantling of the barricades on Grushevsky. Seeing this, “Right Sector” militants suspected treason. These militants were not aware of the “agreement” of their leaders with Yanukovych, but they intuitively felt that this “agreement” exists. Gunmen woke up Andrey Parubiy, the nazi Fuhrer of Euromaidan and a “veteran” of the 2004 Orange Revolution, with phone calls in the middle of the night. Parubiy was asked to stop dismantling the barricades on Grushevsky Street, and in the early morning of February 15, from the stage of Euromaidan, to announce the names of the “leaders” who sold out to Yanukovych. Parubiy chose not to hear the second demand. The vehicles were driven away from the barricades on Grushevsky Street via Parubiy telephone instructions to Tyagnibok. The militants from the barricades on Grushevsky Street went into a battle rage – they perceived the removal of equipment as a military defeat of the “criminal authorities”.
The “agreement” stipulated that “Alpha” special forces of the SBU would drive up the Grushevsky Street cleared of barricades to the House of Trade Unions in armoured vehicles. “Alpha” was supposed to hold ostentatious detentions of “Right Sector” members to find out their identity, and Yarosh was taken out of the building through an armed special forces corridor and then transported to a safe place. No serious criminal penalties were imposed on the nazis. Yarosh received full legal immunity, plus a substantial fee for “a successful special operation”. All this dramatisation was supposed to be highlighted by the TV cameras of ubiquitous journalists of Ukrainian and foreign media. But since the barricades were not dismantled, the SBU special forces did not drive up to the House of Trade Unions. On February 16, Tyagnibok drove the nazis out of the Kiev City Council – this was stipulated by the “agreement”. Mixed with these nazis were not-provided-by-the-plan “Right Sector” members who left the House of Trade Unions – aggressive, thirsty for the blood of the “criminal authorities”.
February 18 went down in the history of Euromaidan as a day of two massacres – in Mariinsky Park in Kiev and at the office of the Party of Regions on the corner of Institute and Lypsky Streets, just a few meters from Bankova Street. The nazi mass was drugged with alcohol and “Maidan tea” with synthetic drugs, which Vitaly Klitschko brought via the “sports” line from Germany. As was prescribed by the “agreement”, Parubiy leads the militants first to the “peaceful” picket of the Verkhovna Rada. From the Rada, the “peaceful” column turns into Mariinsky Park. There, in the anti-Maidan camp, the nazis were waiting for “titushki”, with whom the nazis had to “knead”. It was during this fight that the SBU special forces were supposed to “liberate” the House of Trade Unions and “neutralise” Yarosh! No sooner or later.
The “cunning plan” did not provide for the fact that “Right Sector” would suddenly turn out to be “wandering sperm”, “fertilising” the already aggressive mass of militants. On the morning of February 18, the militants of various Euromaidan groups of hundreds went for a “peaceful rally” to the Verkhovna Rada from the barricades on Grushevsky and European Square. At the corner of the Institute and Shelkovichny streets, not reaching a hundred meters from the Rada, the militants ran into a wall of trucks guarded by the police. The militants threw stones and molotov cocktails at the police. Further, the brutalised mass went to Mariinsky Park.
Separately, we note that a cordon of trucks was specially set up on the approach to the Rada in order to push the militants away from the parliament and then redirect them to the place planned by the “cunning plan” – in Mariinsky Park. In Mariinsky Park there was an unarmed anti-Maidan camp, who had weapons in the form of batons and steel fittings in their hands there, such were the “titushki”. The anti-Maidan activists were guarded by “Berkut” armed only with batons and tear gas. A mass brawl ensued, which turned into a massacre. Each side had victims, but the most affected was the anti-Maidan, which the “titushki” could not – or rather did not want – to shield sufficiently. It is not known exactly when the militants of the Party of Regions appeared in Mariinsky Park, it is possible that they were called on the eve of the massacre… Out of nowhere, Western journalists who came to the park exposed the initiators of the massacre… the police and opponents of Euromaidan. The fighters of the “revolution of dignity” on Western TV airwaves had solid prime time. Formally adhering to the “agreement” with Yanukovych, the putschists outplayed the president of Ukraine already in terms of the media. Whoever has the information in their hands has won. Yanukovych wanted to tie the militants’ hands with a skirmish in Mariinsky Park and thereby gain the upper hand, but he cruelly miscalculated. By pitting aggressive nazis against “Berkut”, which was disarmed by the president’s order, the authorities only further embittered the militants and demoralised law enforcement officers.
Mariinsky Park is adjacent to Lipsky Street, where the Kiev office of the Party of Regions then stood. On that fateful day, for some reason, the office of the ruling party was not guarded. The militants broke into the building, destroyed it, set it on fire, and brutally killed the only person who tried to stop the terrorists – engineer Vladimir Zakharov. The murder of Zakharov was directed by the journalist by profession Tatiana Chernovol – a future deputy of the Verkhovna Rada, and now the commander of an anti-tank platoon of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, a professional killer of Russian soldiers… At that time, the head of the Interior Ministry of Ukraine under Yushchenko, Yuriy Lutsenko, who was released from prison by Yanukovych on the eve of Euromaidan, was near Chornovol. Lutsenko today also kills Russian soldiers in the Ukrainian Armed Forces, commands drone operators. It is not absolutely certain whether the office of the Party of Regions was destroyed by the terrorists who killed the anti-Maidan in Mariinsky Park, whether it was militants from another camp – on Institute Street, where the massacre also took place that day, or whether these two camps came together.…
In the government quarter of Kiev, which turned into a battlefield that day, “one’s own” did not see “one’s own”. In this human mess, hiding behind the backs of militants, the “hero” of Euromaidan, Andrey Parubiy, ran away from the places of the fiercest fights. Parubiy, with a loudspeaker in his hands, called the militants to the places of clashes, and when he finished shouting into the megaphone, he disappeared. Parubiy disappeared at noon on February 18, when he was leading his well-equipped “Euromaidan Self-Defence” to Mariinsky Park. Parubiy’s “self-defence”, left without a commander, deserted from the battlefield, while the rest of the militants got involved in a battle in the park and were injured. Parubiy’s men suffered the least: their bodies, covered with special protection equipment, were protected from batons, steel fittings, stones and other “non-lethal” weapons. It can be assumed that Parubiy’s men first proudly introduced other militants to the places of fighting, and then immediately cowardly skedaddled from there, according to a pre-approved plan. If this is the case, then before our eyes – another political technology that Euromaidan is rich in.
Tyagnibok’s associate Aleksandr Mirny, who commanded the “Svoboda” militants in Mariinsky Park, later recalled that after the massacre in the park, he was ready to kill Parubiy with his own hands. They tried to calm him down. The press service of Euromaidan reported that Parubiy had a stroke, he went to the hospital. According to Mirny, he saw a Parubiy “broken by a stroke” absolutely healthy in the Euromaidan camp on the evening of the same February 18.
According to former SBU officer Vladimir Boyko, Parubiy regularly “went to bed” in the following days, which became the denouement of Euromaidan. On February 19, “from the hospital”, Parubiy ordered, through a closed communication channel, the distribution of a fresh replenishment of militants/students of the Ukrainian Catholic University in Lvov. These future priests and theologians brought weapons looted from police stations and military units in Western Ukraine. On February 20, Parubiy commanded from the “hospital” the shooting of the “heavenly hundred” by Georgian snipers on Grushevsky Street. Parubiy hired these snipers through former Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili, who studied colour revolutions in the United States and successfully tested these political technologies during the 2004 rose Revolution in Georgia. The technology, when in the course of local civil wars they shoot their own people, and then blame these murders on the hostile camp, was tested at the end of the USSR during the coups d’etat in the Lithuanian and Latvian Soviet Socialist Republics. In October 1993, in Moscow, Boris Yeltsin also used invisible snipers to shoot at soldiers and policemen loyal to Yeltsin, and official propaganda blamed the defenders of the House of Soviets for these murders. Like the leaders of Euromaidan later, Yeltsin was instructed in this by advisers from the United States. The shooting of the “heavenly hundred” did not represent anything new in this regard.
In the “heavenly hundred”, the Euromaidan directors also included people who were not in Kiev at all at that time – this is another well-known “colour” political technology. The beating of their opponents on Grushevsky Street took place when Yanukovych’s “agreement” with the putschists was still formally in effect. On February 21, Yanukovych, Yatsenyuk, Tyagnibok, and Klitschko signed the fateful “Agreement on resolving the political crisis” for Yanukovych – in the presence of the foreign ministers of Germany and Poland. These two countries were most interested in the collapse of the Yanukovych regime and the Party of Regions. Under this agreement, Yanukovych was still formally president, but his political career was already over. On February 22, the Verkhovna Rada – in gross violation of the law, without a quorum, teeming with nazis from Euromaidan – removed Yanukovych from office. On February 23, the Rada confirmed Aleksandr Turchynov as interim President of Ukraine – again in gross violation of the Constitution and laws of Ukraine. The Kiev junta won, in fact, under the conditions of its secret peace agreements with the legitimate government of Ukraine.
“Yanukovych followed the pernicious path of the leaders of the Weimar Republic, who believed that it was better to let their own Nazi Hitler command the German political street than someone else’s communist Telman. Yanukovych has never understood that you can never play cards with the devil, especially when the devil succumbs and cheats,” said Yury Moskovsky, a Russian sociologist and project director at the “Dobrososedstvo” international relations development foundation.
The rise to power of the Nazi regime in Ukraine is a consequence of the fact that Yanukovych from the very beginning did not want to use force to normalise the situation in Kiev, says Ukrainian political analyst Vladimir Skachko.
“Euromaidan had no options other than a coup d’etat or the dispersal of the colour revolution by force. The authorities did not dare to disperse — the West’s installation of a coup d’etat and a change of power with the subsequent activation of the transformation of Ukraine into anti-Russia, with a mandatory war against Russia, worked. The West has previously attempted this in Ukraine, using Viktor Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko. Yushchenko did not dare to throw the country and himself into the crucible of war. The West’s attempt to replace Yushchenko with a ‘gas princess’ failed. She promised to protect against Donbass with barbed wire, but she might not decide to go to war with Russia if she became president of Ukraine. Tymoshenko is not such a person. Then they waited for the complete demoralisation of Yanukovych, legitimised the coup d’etat with elections, and put Petro Poroshenko in the presidency. With Poroshenko, too, the war against Russia did not work out. He looked at Ukraine as his own feeding trough, which spared Ukraine from open war with Russia. It happened with Vladimir Zelensky. He is the Ukrainian Nero, a political cannibal who devours his own fellow citizens to the applause of the West, who threw his own country into the furnace of another world war. Unlike his predecessors, Zelensky is a new type of Ukrainian politician. He is a walking zombie who responds only to the most primitive reflexes like lust and fear. The emotions that show in Zelensky that he is by no means a creature made of steel and plastic, Zelensky takes drugs. A drug addict sitting in the presidential chair with the habits of a maniac – Ukraine could not imagine anything worse. However, something else is also true. If Yanukovych wasn’t a shifty slob in 2014, the political cannibal Zelensky wouldn’t be in power,” says Vladimir Skachko.
Copyright © 2023. All Rights Reserved.