Spitfire List Web site and blog of anti-fascist researcher and radio personality Dave Emory.

For The Record  

FTR #817 Can You Put Lipstick on a Nazi? (Part 2): Update on Ukraine

Dave Emory’s entire life­time of work is avail­able on a flash drive that can be obtained here. The new drive is a 32-gigabyte drive that is current as of the programs and articles posted by 10/02/2014. The new drive (available for a tax-deductible contribution of $65.00 or more) contains FTR #812.  (The previous flash drive was current through the end of May of 2012 and contained FTR #748.)

You can subscribe to e-mail alerts from Spitfirelist.com HERE

You can subscribe to RSS feed from Spitfirelist.com HERE.

You can subscribe to the comments made on programs and posts–an excellent source of information in, and of, itself HERE.

Listen: MP3

FTR #817 features ONE SIDE of approximately 60 minutes, available HERE.    

Svoboda leader Oleh Tiahnybok salutes.

NB: This description contains information not contained in the original broadcast.

Introduction: In journalistic coverage of Ukraine, there is a tendency to differentiate between the “neo-Nazi” militia combatants and their associated political parties and “mainstream,” “centrist” and, therefore, somewhat more respectable elements. Recent events in that unfortunate country illustrate that such a dichotomy is essentially false.

Both parties like Svoboda and Pravy Sektor (and their associated combatant elements) and the so-called “conservative” parties such as those of President Poroshenko and Arseniy Yatsenyuk incorporate fascist heirs to the OUN/B Nazis of Stephan Bandera. Advised by Roman Svarych, OUN/B World War II leader Jaroslav Stetsko’s personal secretary, Poroshenko is also advised by Oleh Makhnitsky, the former Justice Minister from Svoboda.

Maidan demonstrators celebrating the Nachtigall Battalion (Einsatzgruppe Nachtigall) that liquidated Jews and Poles during World War II.

In a signature gesture, Poroshenko advocated providing veterans’ entitlements to members of the UPA (UIA)–the combat wing of the OUN/B and a military ally of the Third Reich. The UPA continued its guerilla war against the Red Army until 1952, with the assistance of the OPC, a faction of the CIA.

Lvov Pogrom, 1941--Einsatzgruppe Nachtigall youth in action. See Nachtigall celebrants at the EuroMaidan demonstrations at right. A street in Lvov was renamed in honor of this group.

Yatsenyuk’s People’s Front (or National Front) has incorporated members of the Nazi Azov Battalion, including Andriy Biletsky, its founder. Biletsky has weighed in that: “the his­toric mis­sion of our nation in this crit­i­cal moment is to lead the White Races of the world in a final cru­sade for their sur­vival,” in “a cru­sade against the Semite-led Unter­men­schen.”

Hey, sure sounds moderate to us, no?!

As the smoke clears following the Ukrainian elections, not only have the parties of Poroshenko and Yatsenyuk won seats in parliament, so has Svoboda. Dimitry Yarosh, leader of Pravy Sektor has also won a seat. The Radical Party of Oleh Lyashko also had a strong showing. (Lyashko helped form some of the fascist militia battalions, including.)

Azov battalion's insignia

The recent combat in Eastern Ukraine has minimized electoral participation by the Russian ethnic minority, in effect, realizing an ethnic cleansing dynamic.

Illustrating the type of governance instituted by the OUN/B heirs, an investigation of the Maidan shootings earlier in the year has omitted any substantive investigation of the shooters of policemen, and focused on a former government security officer, Dmytro Sadovnyk, who–supposedly–was photographed holding a rifle. Supposedly, he was using the rifle in the sniper attacks on the Maidan demonstrators.

The problem with that analysis lies in the fundamental fact that Sadovnyk only has one hand, having lost the other to a grenade in a training accident!

Insignia on Azov soldiers' helmets

This “evidence” was unearthed during the “investigation” presided over by the Justice Minister of the provisional government, Oleh Makhnitsky of the Svoboda party. Makhnitsky is now an adviser to Poroshenko.

Program Highlights Include: Discussion of Ukrainian fascist sabotage in the U.S. during World War II; American journalistic mockery of Putin’s accurate statement that the U.S. is supporting “neo-Nazis” and “Islamic radicals;” a Ukrainian militia fighter’s nickname of “Panzer;” the Ukrainian government’s use of cluster munitions against its own citizens; Svoboda’s participation in street demonstrations in support of establishing a Ukrainian holiday to commemorate the founding of the UPA; the role of Citizen Greenwald’s financial patron Pierre Omidyar in promoting fascist sympathizers within Poroshenko’s party; the appointment of the deputy commander of the Azov Battalion to be mayor of Kiev; Poroshenko’s comemoration of October 14–the anniversary of the founding of the OUN-UPA–as a national holiday.

1a.  In a recent talk, President Putin got it right, when he charged that the U.S. was backing “neo-Nazis” and “Islamic radicals.”

Since the “New Cold War” began in Ukraine, with the Maidan Coup of 2014, things in the U.S. have disintegrated to such an extent that Puting or Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov could say that 2 + 2 equald 4 and that would be dismissed by our main stream media as “typical Russian mathematical propaganda.”

“Putin Lashes Out at U.S. for Backing ‘neo-Fascists’ and Islamic Radicals’ ” by Neil MacFarquhar; The New York Times; 10/25/2014.

President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia on Friday unleashed perhaps his strongest diatribe against the United States yet, using an international meeting of Russia experts to sell Moscow’s view that American meddling has sparked most of the world’s recent crises, including those in Ukraine and the Middle East.

Instead of supporting democracy and sovereign states, Mr. Putin said during a three-hour appearance at the conference, the United States supports “dubious” groups ranging from “open neo-fascists to Islamic radicals.”

“Why do they support such people,” he asked the annual gathering known as the Valdai Club, which met this year in the southern resort town of Sochi. “They do this because they decide to use them as instruments along the way in achieving their goals, but then burn their fingers and recoil.” . . . .

 . . . . . Mr. Putin, however, specifically denied trying to restore the Russian Empire. He argued Russia was compelled to intervene in Ukraine because that country was in the midst of a “civilized dialogue” over its political future when the West staged a coup to oust the president last February, pushing the country into chaos and civil war.

“We did not start this,” he said. “Statements that Russia is trying to reinstate some sort of empire, that it is encroaching on the sovereignty of its neighbors, are groundless.” . . . .

1b. Robert Parry nailed it, as well, noting the retreat from reality in the main stream media and Washington D.C.

“Treating Putin Like a Lunatic” by Robert Parry; Consortium News; 10/25/2014.

. . . . Of course, all the “smart people” of Official Washington know how to react to such statements from Putin, with a snicker and a roll of the eyes. After all, they’ve been reading the narratives of these crises as fictionalized by the New York Times, the Washington Post, etc.

Rationality and realism seem to have lost any place in the workings of the mainstream U.S. news media. . . .

1c. A passing tidbit in a New York Times story about Ukraine caught our eye. The Gray Lady–predictably–didn’t expound on it. A fighter in one of the Ukrainian government’s “volunteer” battalions was opining about the Russian army and gave “only his nickname, Panzer.”

Funny nickname–“Panzer.” Wonder where he got it?

“Ukraine Town Bears Scars of Russian Offensive That Turned Tide in Conflict” by Carlotta Gall; The New York Times; 9/9/2014.

. . . . ‘The Russian Army is very good,” said a soldier in one of Ukraine’s volunteer battalions farther south, who gave only his nickname, Panzer. . . .

2. Ukrainian president Poroshenko is leaning toward giving government entitlements to veterans of the UPA–the Nazi collaborators comprising the military wing of the OUN/B.

The UPA overlapped the Waffen SS and Gestapo and was deeply involved with ethnic cleansing liquidations of Jewish and Polish citizens of Ukraine.

After V-E Day, they comprised the core of the “fascist freedom fighter” program in Ukraine, supported by the OPC/CIA. (For more about this, see AFA #1, FTR #465, 777.)

As discussed in FTR #800, Poroshenko has basically reconstituted the old Yuschenko team, including Jaroslav Stetsko’s personal secretary, Roman Svarych. Yuschenko, in turn, manifested an OUN/B revisionist agenda, as discussed in FTR #781. Svarych was his Minister of Justice, as he was during both Tymoshenko governments.

“OUN-UPA Veterans Could Be Given Combatant Status—Poroshenko”; Interfax-Ukraine; 9/25/2014.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko said it is worth considering assigning the status of combatant to veterans of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists – Ukrainian Insurgent Army (OUN-UPA).

“This is a very important issue and one that was raised in a very timely manner. Previously, this issue split the country and was not on the agenda… Now is the right time,” he told a press conference in Kyiv on Thursday.

The president also added that he sees OUN-UPA fighters as examples of heroism.

3. Svoboda demonstrated outside the parliament in Kiev on behalf of the UPA (UIA).

“Ukraine’s Par­lia­ment in Kiev” by Peter Leonard [AP]; Yahoo News; 10/14/2014.

Clashes broke out Tues­day between demon­stra­tors and police in front of Ukraine’s par­lia­ment in Kiev as deputies inside repeat­edly voted down pro­pos­als to rec­og­nize a con­tentious World War II-era Ukrain­ian par­ti­san group as national heroes.

Thou­sands of Svo­boda nation­al­ist party sup­port­ers ral­lied ear­lier in the cap­i­tal in cel­e­bra­tion of the Ukrain­ian Insur­gent Army, whose strug­gle for inde­pen­dence for Ukraine was tainted by its col­lab­o­ra­tion with the Nazis.

Later, masked men attacked and threw smoke grenades at lines of police out­side par­lia­ment as law­mak­ers met inside. The Inte­rior Min­istry said 36 peo­ple were detained by police.

Mean­while, at least 14 peo­ple, includ­ing seven civil­ians and seven ser­vice­men, were killed in fight­ing between pro-Russian sep­a­ratists and gov­ern­ment forces in east­ern Ukraine. A cease-fire has been in place since early Sep­tem­ber but vio­la­tions are reported daily.

Svo­boda said its mem­bers were not respon­si­ble for the unrest in Kiev, which police said was orches­trated by a small group of peo­ple at the rally.

The unrest over­shad­owed the pas­sage of laws the gov­ern­ment hopes will con­tain the gal­lop­ing cor­rup­tion that has long hin­dered Ukraine’s scle­rotic econ­omy. Pres­i­dent Petro Poroshenko urged law­mak­ers to keep up the fight against cor­rup­tion, a prob­lem that he equated with terrorism.

One law backed by 278 out of the 303 reg­is­tered deputies cre­ates an anti-corruption bureau to fight graft. Other approved pro­vi­sions included laws to stem money-laundering and to increase cor­po­rate transparency.

Par­lia­ment also approved a new defense min­is­ter — for­mer National Guard head Stepan Poltorak — a press­ing pri­or­ity con­sid­er­ing the clashes with pro-Russian sep­a­ratists in its indus­trial east­ern regions.

4a. More about Swoboda and their allies pushing for comemorating the UPA:

“Ukraine’s Neo-Nazis Demand Respect” by Robert Parry; Consortium News; 10/15/2014.

For months, the New York Times and other major U.S. news outlets have insisted that it’s just Russian propaganda to say that a significant neo-Nazi presence exists inside Ukraine, but thousands of these “non-existent” neo-Nazis battled police on Tuesday outside the parliament building in Kiev demanding recognition of their Hitler-collaborating forebears.

The parliament, aware of the obvious public relations fiasco that would follow if it bowed to far-right demands to honor members of the Nazi-affiliated Ukrainian Insurgent Army (or UIA), defeated the proposal. That touched off riots by an estimated 8,000 protesters led by Ukraine’s right-wing Svoboda party and the Right Sektor.

Historians blame the UIA and other Ukrainian fascist forces for the extermination of thousands of Poles and Jews during World War II as these right-wing Ukrainian paramilitaries sided with the German Nazis in their fight against the Soviet Union’s Red Army. Svoboda and the Right Sektor have elevated UIA leader Stepan Bandera to the level of a Ukrainian national hero. . . . .

4b. Poroshenko made October 14 a national holiday, honoring the founding of the OUN-UPA.

Ukrainian Schutzmannschaft, OUN/B Nazi Collaborators

5. In FTR #779. we noted the dominant presence of Svoboda and Pravy Sektor ministers in the interim government in Ukraine. This may well have affected the investigation of the sniper deaths that take place during the demonstrations that brought about the fall of Viktor Yanukovych.

Oleh Makhnitsky is from Svoboda and has been central to the “investigation” of the sniper attacks.

Evidence has been destroyed, investigators have made prejudicial public statements about the accused, the deaths of the policemen have not been investigated and at least one photograph of the accused has obviously been doctored.

“Spe­cial Report: Flaws Found in Ukraine’s Probe of Maidan Massacre” by Steve Steck­low and Olek­sandr Akymenko; reuters.com; 10/10/2014.

For mil­lions of Ukraini­ans, it was a crime against human­ity. In Feb­ru­ary, more than 100 pro­test­ers were gunned down in the Maidan upris­ing that top­pled the pres­i­dent, Vik­tor Yanukovich. The vic­tims are now known as “the Heav­enly Hundred.”

In April, pros­e­cu­tors arrested three sus­pects, mem­bers of an elite unit within the “Berkut” riot police. Senior among them was Dmytro Sadovnyk, 38, a dec­o­rated com­man­der, who was accused of order­ing his men to fire on the crowds on the morn­ing of Feb. 20. The three stand accused of mas­sacring 39 unarmed protesters.

On Sept. 19, the case took a turn when a judge released Sadovnyk into house arrest – and, two weeks later, he went missing.

Maidan activists were out­raged, con­vinced that a cor­rupt sys­tem had let a killer escape. The judge was placed under inves­ti­ga­tion. The pros­e­cu­tor said in a state­ment: “D. Sadovnyk, sus­pected of com­mit­ting an extremely griev­ous crime, aim­ing to avoid pun­ish­ment, dis­ap­peared from his place of per­ma­nent residence.”

But in a coun­try where jus­tice often isn’t blind, there’s another pos­si­bil­ity: Sadovnyk was being framed, and saw flight as his best option. In court last month, he called the case against him “a polit­i­cal lynch­ing.” In the days before he van­ished, his wife and his lawyer say, Sadovnyk and his fam­ily received death threats.

A Reuters exam­i­na­tion of Ukraine’s probes into the Maidan shoot­ings — based on inter­views with pros­e­cu­tors, defence attor­neys, pro­test­ers, police offi­cers and legal experts – has uncov­ered seri­ous flaws in the case against Sadovnyk and the other two Berkut officers.

Among the evi­dence pre­sented against Sadovnyk was a pho­to­graph. Pros­e­cu­tors say it shows him near Kiev’s Inde­pen­dence Square on Feb. 20, wear­ing a mask and hold­ing a rifle with two hands, his fin­gers clearly vis­i­ble.

The prob­lem: Sadovnyk doesn’t have two hands. His right hand, his wife told Reuters, was blown off by a grenade in a train­ing acci­dent six years ago. As pros­e­cu­tors intro­duced the image at a hear­ing in April, said Yuliya Sadovnyk, her hus­band removed a glove and dis­played his stump to the courtroom.

“He can’t really shoot,” said Ser­hiy Vilkov, Sadovnyk’s lawyer. “To blame him for the crime is a polit­i­cal game.”

The probes into the killings have been hin­dered by miss­ing evi­dence. Many guns allegedly used to shoot pro­test­ers have van­ished; many of the bul­lets fired were taken home as sou­venirs. Bar­ri­cades, bullet-pierced trees and other items of foren­sic evi­dence were removed, lawyers say.

A for­mer Berkut com­man­der told Reuters that Berkut offi­cers destroyed doc­u­men­tary evi­dence that poten­tially could iden­tify fel­low offi­cers. They did so, he said, because they feared the Berkut’s head­quar­ters would be attacked by a mob of revenge-seeking pro­test­ers after Yanukovich fled to Russia.

The for­mer pres­i­dent isn’t the only key fig­ure miss­ing. In an inter­view before Sadovnyk van­ished, Ukraine’s gen­eral pros­e­cu­tor, Vitaly Yarema, said inves­ti­ga­tors had iden­ti­fied 17 Berkut offi­cers as alleged par­tic­i­pants in the pro­tester shoot­ings, based on sur­veil­lance cam­era videos and mobile-phone loca­tion data. Of the 17, he said, 14 had fled to Rus­sia or Crimea, includ­ing the Berkut’s top com­man­der in Kiev. Sadovnyk and his two co-defendants were the only iden­ti­fied sus­pects who had remained behind.


Inde­pen­dence Square was the ral­ly­ing point in Kiev where the anti-Yanukovich rev­o­lu­tion largely unfolded between Novem­ber and Feb­ru­ary. (The word Maidan means “square” in Ukrain­ian.) The killings there quickly were recog­nised as a mile­stone in mod­ern Ukrain­ian his­tory, part of a chain of events that set off a sep­a­ratist con­flict and Russ­ian incur­sions that have shaken the coun­try to its core.

Videos and pho­tographs appear to show how Berkut offi­cers shot at pro­test­ers and beat them with sticks. In one video, the Berkut are seen mak­ing a man stand naked in the snow.

The pub­lic is demand­ing answers and jus­tice. But the inves­ti­ga­tions are test­ing Ukraine’s abil­ity to rise above the kinds of fail­ings that have hob­bled the coun­try ever since its inde­pen­dence from the Soviet Union in 1991.

In con­trast to, say, Poland, Ukraine has never gelled into a robust state. Kiev has had two rev­o­lu­tions since inde­pen­dence. A host of endemic prob­lems — polit­i­cal cor­rup­tion, rack­e­teer­ing, a divide between speak­ers of Ukrain­ian and Russ­ian — have left it fee­ble and frac­tious. Another of the state’s chief fail­ings, out­side observers say, is a bro­ken jus­tice system.

Under Yanukovich and his rivals before him, courts and cops were polit­i­cal instru­ments. Yulia Tymoshenko, runner-up to Yanukovich in the 2010 pres­i­den­tial elec­tion, later was jailed in a case widely crit­i­cised as political.

In its 2013 report on human rights, the U.S. State Depart­ment cited the Tymoshenko con­vic­tion in observ­ing that Ukraine’s courts “remained vul­ner­a­ble to polit­i­cal pres­sure and cor­rup­tion, were inef­fi­cient, and lacked pub­lic con­fi­dence. In cer­tain cases the out­come of tri­als appeared to be predetermined.”

The post-Yanukovich gov­ern­ment acknowl­edged as much this July, in a report it pre­pared with the Inter­na­tional Mon­e­tary Fund. “The tax admin­is­tra­tion, the police, the Pros­e­cu­tor General’s Office, the State Enforce­ment Ser­vice, and the judi­ciary were noted as hav­ing tra­di­tion­ally been viewed as among the most cor­rupt pub­lic insti­tu­tions,” the report found.

The past shows signs of repeat­ing itself.

The two pros­e­cu­tors and a gov­ern­ment min­is­ter who have led the Maidan shoot­ing probes all played roles in sup­port­ing the upris­ing. One of these offi­cials told Reuters that the inves­ti­ga­tors gath­er­ing the evi­dence are com­pletely independent.

Another gap in the pros­e­cu­tion: To date, no one has been appre­hended in the shoot­ing of police­men. Accord­ing to Ukraine’s Min­istry of Inte­rior Affairs, between Feb. 18 and 20, 189 police offi­cers suf­fered gun­shot wounds. Thir­teen died.

In addi­tion, the for­mer act­ing gen­eral pros­e­cu­tor who over­saw the arrests of the three Berkut offi­cers declared on tele­vi­sion that they “have already been shown to be guilty.” That state­ment, said legal experts, could prej­u­dice the cases. Ukraine is a party to the Euro­pean Con­ven­tion on Human Rights, which states that crim­i­nal defen­dants are pre­sumed inno­cent until proven guilty.

“A pub­lic state­ment by a pros­e­cu­tor that directly chal­lenges that pre­sump­tion is a denial of due process,” said Richard Har­vey, a British bar­ris­ter who spe­cialises in inter­na­tional crim­i­nal law.

Even some of the bereaved fam­i­lies ques­tion the fair­ness of the pro­ceed­ings. Ser­hiy Bon­darchuk, a physics teacher, died of a gun­shot wound to the back on the morn­ing of Feb. 20. His son, Volodymyr Bon­darchuk, said the killing is one of the 39 in which Sadovnyk and his two col­leagues are sus­pected. Volodymyr said that based on his own inquiries, he doubts the three were respon­si­ble for his father’s death.

“They are try­ing to close the case because their bosses and the com­mu­nity just want to have some­one to pun­ish,” he said. “The inves­ti­ga­tion does not have enough evi­dence to prove the guilt of these three people.”

Volodymyr Bon­darchuk recently helped organ­ise an asso­ci­a­tion of about 70 fam­i­lies of dead pro­test­ers. “The main aim for us,” he said, “is an objec­tive and accu­rate investigation.”


Feb­ru­ary 20 was the blood­i­est day of the Maidan upris­ing. Scores of pro­test­ers and police offi­cers were shot and killed. A day later, oppo­si­tion lead­ers signed a Euro­pean Union-mediated peace pact.

Pub­lic pres­sure mounted to pros­e­cute the per­pe­tra­tors. Within a week, Yanukovich, by then a fugi­tive, was indicted for the mass mur­der of pro­test­ers. An interim gov­ern­ment dis­banded the Berkut, a force of sev­eral thou­sand whose name means “golden eagle.”

On April 3, Ukrain­ian author­i­ties announced the arrests of sev­eral mem­bers of an elite spe­cial unit within the Berkut. One was Sadovnyk, the unit’s com­man­der. A father of three, he first joined the Berkut in 1996 after serv­ing in the Ukrain­ian army. He later won numer­ous com­men­da­tions for his police service.

Also detained were two younger offi­cers: Ser­hiy Zinchenko, 23, and Pavel Abroskin, 24.

An inter­nal pros­e­cu­tion doc­u­ment, reviewed by Reuters, sketches out inves­ti­ga­tors’ ver­sion of events. It is a “Notice of Sus­pi­cion” for Zinchenko, dated April 3.

The doc­u­ment alleges that on Feb. 18, the Berkut’s top com­man­der, Ser­hiy Kusiuk, gave an oral order to Sadovnyk to deliver auto­matic rifles to his unit. Kusiuk is among the Berkut offi­cers who fled to Rus­sia, pros­e­cu­tors say. He couldn’t be reached for comment.

On the morn­ing of Feb. 20, sev­eral mem­bers of Sadovnyk’s unit were shot. At around 9 a.m., the doc­u­ment alleges, Sadovnyk ordered his men to fire in the direc­tion of unarmed pro­test­ers walk­ing up Insty­tut­ska Street in down­town Kiev. The shoot­ing lasted nearly two hours, and more than nine pro­test­ers were killed, the doc­u­ment states.

Sadovnyk’s order to shoot was an abuse of power, “given that there was no imme­di­ate threat to the lives of the police offi­cers,” the doc­u­ment alleges.

Vilkov, Sadovnyk’s lawyer, dis­putes that account. Although the doc­u­ment indi­cates Sadovnyk was at the scene, Vilkov said his client was not on Insty­tut­ska Street when the pro­test­ers were killed the morn­ing of Feb. 20. Vilkov declined to dis­cuss Sadovnyk’s whereabouts.

In a tele­phone inter­view on Sept. 30, Sadovnyk told Reuters he was at a meet­ing on the morn­ing of Feb. 20 at Kiev police head­quar­ters. It began some­time between 8 a.m. and 8:30 a.m., he said. The pur­pose, he said, was to deal with reports that many armed pro­test­ers would be arriv­ing in Kiev after a call by protest lead­ers to mobilise.

Sadovnyk said about seven police offi­cials and offi­cers were present, and he named three of them. Reuters was unable to locate the three for comment.

At the meet­ing, Sadovnyk said, the atten­dees heard gun­shots and screams over police radios. The radios car­ried reports of the death of a Berkut offi­cer and of other police wounded on Insty­tut­ska Street.

Sadovnyk said at that point, he left and drove to the scene, tak­ing about 15 min­utes to get there. He said he does not remem­ber what time he arrived, but that inves­ti­ga­tors could fig­ure it out by track­ing his mobile phone. He said he brought a gun and pro­tec­tive equipment.

When he arrived, he said, he found a nearly empty scene, with police offi­cers run­ning and the sound of ric­o­chet­ing bul­lets. He said he nei­ther received nor gave any order for his unit’s mem­bers to shoot at pro­test­ers, nor did he fire at any­one himself.

“I deny killing,” he said.

Vadim Ostanin, an attor­ney for the Berkut’s Kiev branch, gave a sim­i­lar account to Reuters. He said there is a video show­ing that Sadovnyk attended the meet­ing at police head­quar­ters. Ostanin said that when Sadovnyk arrived at the scene of the shoot­ing, his unit’s men already were retreating.


The gen­eral prosecutor’s office declined to dis­cuss the defence’s account. In a state­ment, the office said it has plenty of evi­dence against Sadovnyk. This includes videos of a pro­tester being shot by a gun­man. The office believes the gun­man is Sadovnyk, based on the “spe­cial way” the shooter is hold­ing the weapon. In a pre­vi­ous state­ment, the office said: “The ques­tion of guilt or, con­versely, inno­cence of men­tioned per­sons will be resolved by the court.”

Oleh Makhnit­sky was Ukraine’s act­ing gen­eral pros­e­cu­tor until June. In an inter­view, Reuters asked him about the pur­ported pho­to­graph of a two-handed Sadovnyk, which was cited at a hear­ing in April.

The pur­pose of that hear­ing, Makhnit­sky said, was not to judge the reli­a­bil­ity of the evi­dence but to deter­mine whether Sadovnyk was a flight risk. He said the evi­dence against Sadovnyk would be pre­sented at a future trial.

Makhnit­sky, now an adviser to Pres­i­dent Petro Poroshenko, said he was a leader of a lawyers’ group that pro­vided legal assis­tance to anti-Yanukovich pro­test­ers dur­ing the Maidan demon­stra­tions. He said pol­i­tics played no role in the pros­e­cu­tion of the three Berkut officers. . . .

6. The result of the ascent of Swoboda, Pravy Sektor and the other OUN/B-related elements in Ukraine has had the effect of elminating much of the pro-Russian voting bloc in the Eastern part of the country.

“War Heroes and Activists to Shape New-Look Ukraine Parliament” by Richard Balm­forth and Pavel Polityuk[Reuters]; NewsWires:euronews; 10/21/2014.

Out will go the body­guards and mis­tresses, in are likely to come the street activists and war vet­er­ans: Ukraine’s next par­lia­ment will be pro-Western and strongly nation­al­ist, and it won’t be to Russia’s liking.

Can­di­date lists for the Oct. 26 elec­tions show how per­sonal favourites backed by old school power­bro­kers in the out­go­ing par­lia­ment are set to make way for peo­ple who made their names in Kiev’s “Maidan” rev­o­lu­tion last win­ter, or in resist­ing Russ­ian encroach­ment in east­ern Ukraine.

> Army pilot Nadia Savchenko is top can­di­date for one of Ukraine’s biggest par­ties – even though she is being held in a Moscow psy­chi­atric clinic, accused of involve­ment in the deaths of Russ­ian journalists.

> Air­force colonel Yuly Mam­chur – who became an instant hero in March when he defied pro-Russian forces by refus­ing to leave his post in Crimea – is run­ning for the bloc of Pres­i­dent Petro Poroshenko and is set to win a seat on Sunday.

> The bat­tered face of Tetyana Chornovil, an activist beaten by thugs of the ousted rul­ing elite, made her a Maidan icon. Already a war widow at 35, she is a can­di­date for Prime Min­is­ter Arseny Yatseniuk’s party.

With many out­go­ing deputies in the pay of busi­ness oli­garchs, the old 450-seat par­lia­ment was a mar­ket place for deals to be cut rather than vot­ers’ inter­ests to be defended. This may be about to change.

“We shan’t be see­ing any more body­guards and mis­tresses in the new par­lia­ment. We will see peo­ple with a mil­i­tary back­ground, though they will not have polit­i­cal and juridi­cal knowl­edge,” said polit­i­cal ana­lyst Mikhailo Pogrebinsky.

The make-up of the new assem­bly will reflect months of war and a con­fronta­tion with Rus­sia that has cre­ated a Cold War-style cri­sis between Moscow and the West around Ukraine and redrawn its polit­i­cal landscape.

The Maidan rev­o­lu­tion drove out Moscow-backed pres­i­dent Vik­tor Yanukovich in Feb­ru­ary. Krem­lin alarm at his oust­ing and the prospect of a pro­nounced shift west­wards by Kiev led to Rus­sia annex­ing Crimea in March and pro­voked pro-Moscow sep­a­ratist rebel­lions in Ukraine’s east.

The loss of Crimea and pre­ven­tion of nor­mal vot­ing in the east, where vio­lence per­sists despite a cease­fire between Ukrain­ian forces and the rebels, will mean the num­ber of seats occu­pied in the new par­lia­ment will shrink to 424, accord­ing to cen­tral elec­tion author­i­ties. The oth­ers – and Savchenko’s if as expected she is elected – will remain vacant.

Com­men­ta­tors expect a strong pro-Europe major­ity to emerge. “At least half of par­lia­ment, at the very least, will be changed now. There will be utterly dif­fer­ent party struc­ture in par­lia­ment,” said Volodymyr Fes­enko of the Penta think-tank. “The absolute major­ity will be with those polit­i­cal forces linked to Euro­pean inte­gra­tion and the ‘Maidan’.”

Even in the new-look assem­bly, Poroshenko will have to work hard to win sup­port for his plan to bring peace in the east as sev­eral other pro-Europe par­ties fear a sell-out to Rus­sia and the separatists.

Pro-Western Poroshenko called the elec­tion to secure fur­ther legit­i­macy after the rev­o­lu­tion, which Rus­sia denounced as a fas­cist coup to jus­tify its back­ing of the separatists.

But there is lit­tle sign of national rec­on­cil­i­a­tion, with the rebels threat­en­ing to hold their own elec­tions in early Novem­ber, peo­ple still dying every day in the east despite the cease­fire and anti-Russian feel­ing high in the capital.

Ukraini­ans are also express­ing increas­ing dis­en­chant­ment with the slow pace of reforms to improve liv­ing standards.

“There is a risk of a protest mood spring­ing up again if there is no reform. Time is not on Poroshenko’s side. I hope he under­stands this and will under­take steps towards reform,” said Mustafa Nayem, a jour­nal­ist and Maidan activist who is run­ning for the Poroshenko bloc.


Pro-Russian forces, includ­ing Yanukovich’s Regions Party, are cer­tain to go from the assem­bly. The Com­mu­nists, who usu­ally backed him, might lose all rep­re­sen­ta­tion for the first time since inde­pen­dence in 1991.

All other par­ties are seek­ing the vote of the Maidan – the local name for Kiev’s Inde­pen­dence Square where tens of thou­sands protested against Yanukovich and which com­mands moral author­ity in polit­i­cal life.

With the par­ties enlist­ing war vet­er­ans, vol­un­teer bat­tal­ion lead­ers and heroes such as Savchenko, Chornovil, Mam­chur, the new assem­bly is likely to be hos­tile to Moscow.

“There might be no oppo­si­tion at all in this par­lia­ment. But there might be com­pe­ti­tion to see who can be the best nation­al­ist and the biggest enemy of Rus­sia,” Pogre­bin­sky said.

Poroshenko is hop­ing for a man­date to pur­sue the peace plan for the east which he reluc­tantly accepted after bat­tle­field defeats in which hun­dreds of Ukrain­ian sol­diers may have died.

But even with a strong pro-European major­ity, Poroshenko, a 49-year-old con­fec­tionery tycoon, may not find it easy to win sup­port for his plan and his deal­ings with Russ­ian Pres­i­dent Vladimir Putin.

Anti-Kremlin feel­ing runs high in the cap­i­tal. On the Maidan, stalls are sell­ing toi­let paper printed with Putin’s image. At inter­na­tional foot­ball matches an obscene chant about Putin is now as much a fix­ture as the singing of the Ukrain­ian national anthem.

Some sup­port­ers of the old elite have come under attack while out cam­paign­ing. Sev­eral have been seized, pelted with eggs and dumped in rub­bish bins.


Opin­ion polls sug­gest Poroshenko’s bloc, which includes the Udar party of retired heavy­weight box­ing cham­pion Vitaly Klitschko, could take up to 30 per­cent of the party list vote which decides 225 of parliament’s seats.

He is assured of the sup­port of Prime Min­is­ter Yatseniuk’s People’s Front Party if the lat­ter – a favourite of the West because of his role in nego­ti­at­ing a $17 bil­lion bailout from the IMF – man­ages to reach the five per­cent thresh­old for rep­re­sen­ta­tion in parliament.

But he could still find him­self in need of sup­port from two poten­tially cru­cial play­ers – for­mer prime min­is­ter Yulia Tymoshenko, an old adver­sary who heads the Father­land party, and pop­ulist fire­brand Oleh Lyashko who leads the Rad­i­cal Party.

Both have sharply crit­i­cised parts of Poroshenko’s peace plan and say his pro­posal for giv­ing lim­ited self-rule to the sep­a­ratists for a pro­vi­sional period will only encour­age the rebels to press ahead with plans to form a break­away entity.

7. Dmitro Yarosh, leader of Pravy Sektor, is head­ing to par­lia­ment:

“Poroshenko Claims Land­slide Vic­tory for Pro-Western Par­ties in Ukraine Elec­tionsby Andreas Stein, Niko­laus von Twickel; Haaretz ; 10/27/2014.

Over 75% of vot­ers sup­ported Ukraine’s ‘course towards Europe,’ says Poroshenko.
Ukrain­ian Pres­i­dent Petro Poroshenko on Sun­day claimed a landl­side vic­tory for pro-western par­ties in the country’s key par­lia­men­tary elections.

More than half of the votes went to pro-government par­ties, and “a con­sti­tu­tional major­ity” of more than 75 per cent of vot­ers sup­ported the country’s course towards Europe, Poroshenko said in a statement.

“The Ukrain­ian gov­ern­ment won a com­pelling vote of con­fi­dence from the peo­ple,” he said, adding that he will speed up reforms in the crisis-hit country.

And exit poll released after polls closed on Sun­day said that the President’s newly formed party, the Poroshenko Bloc, stands to get 23 per cent, fol­lowed by prime min­is­ter Arseniy Yatsenyuk’s National Front with 21.3 per cent. The pro-European Samopomich party, led by the mayor of the west­ern city of Lviv, came in third with 13.2 per cent.

For­mer prime min­is­ter Yulia Tymoshenko’s Pro-western Father­land party man­aged to just meet the 5-per-cent hur­dle for stay­ing in the leg­is­la­ture by get­ting 5.6 per cent, accord­ing to the national exit poll con­ducted by three polling institutes.

Yat­senyuk and many other promi­nent fig­ures left the Father­land party in August.
Also in par­lia­ment, accord­ing to the poll, are: the nation­al­ist Svo­boda party (6.3 per cent); the Rad­i­cal Party of pop­ulist politi­cian Oleh Lyashko (6.4 per cent);
and the Russia-leaning Oppo­si­tion Bloc party (7.6 per cent).

Among those who failed to get in are the Com­mu­nists with 2.9 per cent and the nation­al­ist Right Sec­tor party with 2.4 per cent. How­ever, exit polls pre­dict that Right Sec­tor leader Dmytro Yarosh won a direct seat in his native Dnipropetro­vsk region, accord­ing to Svy­atoslav Oliynyk, a deputy regional governor.

The Ukrain­ian Elec­tion Com­mis­sion said that the turnout stood at 52.9 per cent per cent, based on fig­ures from 115 of the 198 vot­ing dis­tricts, the Inter­fax Ukraine news agency reported.

A dom­i­nance of pro-Western groups in the 450-seat uni­cam­eral par­lia­ment, the Verk­hovna Rada, means a sharp break with the pre­vi­ous Rada, elected for a five-year period in 2012, which was dom­i­nated by Russia-leaning forces.

Poroshenko has said he hopes that the snap elec­tion will bring more sta­bil­ity to the crisis-hit coun­try, where more than 3,600 peo­ple have been killed in a con­flict with pro-Russian sep­a­ratists in the east.

“I voted for Ukraine — sin­gle, indi­vis­i­ble, Euro­pean,” Poroshenko said on Twit­ter after cast­ing his bal­lot in Kiev Sun­day afternoon.

Ear­lier, the pres­i­dent showed up dressed in fatigues in a polling sta­tion in Kram­a­torsk, a city in the east­ern Donetsk region that was recap­tured by gov­ern­ment forces in July.

Poroshenko said that he aimed to pro­tect the right to vote of the more than 10,000 sol­diers serv­ing in the region.

Observers doubt, how­ever, that a new gov­ern­ment — expected to be formed as early as next week — will be able to end the fight­ing with pro-Russian sep­a­ratists in the east quickly.

Secu­rity was tight on Sun­day, and some 84,000 police offi­cers were on duty through­out Ukraine to ensure a peace­ful vote, the Inte­rior Min­istry said.

Vot­ing did not take place in the dis­tricts con­trolled by the sep­a­ratists, whose lead­ers have vowed to ignore Sunday’s polls because they con­sider Ukraine a neigh­bour­ing state. They have set their own elec­tions for Novem­ber 2.

Turnout in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, which are partly rebel-held, was much lower than else­where — just 31 per cent in Donetsk and 27 per cent in Luhansk, accord­ing to offi­cial figures.

Some 1.83 mil­lion vot­ers were reg­is­tered in both regions — only a frac­tion of their com­bined peace­time pop­u­la­tion of almost 7 million.

Over­all, 36 mil­lion Ukraini­ans are eli­gi­ble to cast a ballot.

Pravy Sektor: "Anti-Terrorist" Ukrainian government militias are drawn from this group and Swoboda

8. More depth on the nature of the “new” political makeup of the Ukrainian government is provided by German-Foreign-Policy.com. Note that the “moderate” Yatsenyuk’s party has Andriy Biletsky, founder of the Azov Battalion as an adviser. Poroshenko has Svoboda member Oleg Makhnitsky as an adviser, as well as Roman Svarych, the personal secretary to Jaroslav Stetsko.

“Nationalist Upsurge”; german-foreign-policy.com;  10/24/2014.

The election campaign, ending this week in today’s pro-Western Ukraine, is characterized by extremist nationalism. According to opinion polls, the party of the politician, who had promoted himself using videos of his violations of the human rights of alleged pro-Russian separatists, is set to become second in Sunday’s elections. Considering the civil war’s nationalist upsurge, other parties have begun accepting militiamen into their ranks. The commander of the fascist Asov Battalion, for example, is a member of the “military council” of Prime Minister Arseniy Jazenjuk’s party. Last week, Asov Battalion militia members participated in the violent attacks on the Ukrainian parliament. During the election campaign, it was alleged that Kiev’s troops had used internationally banned cluster munitions in the Donetsk region. New social cuts are anticipated – regardless of the winner of the elections – to pay for the essential supplies of Russian gas. Berlin and the EU, whose hegemonic sphere Ukraine joined this year, are refusing to give Kiev additional material assistance. Aside from these issues, the former Polish foreign minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, admitted that he had completely invented the serious allegations he made against the Russian president. German media have widely reported on these allegations.

Summary Execution

The election campaign in today’s pro-Western Ukraine has been shaped, to a growing extent, by extremist nationalism. Opinion polls predict the victory of the “Petro Poroshenko Bloc,” whose top candidate, Vitali Klitschko, had been systematically groomed by the CDU-affiliated Konrad Adenauer Foundation.[1] For months already, pollsters have been unanimously predicting that Oleh Lyashko’s “Radical Party” will come in second. With his violations of the human rights of alleged pro-Russian separatists, (german-foreign-policy.com reported [2]) Lyashko seems to attract a significant number of potentially fascist voters. Most recently, he aroused attention, when, in a TV talk show, he presented a prisoner – whom he claimed was a Russian soldier.[3] Lyashko also announced that, in the future, he will have captured separatists summarily executed. Polls give Lyashko more than ten percent of the vote. The Svoboda Party, which, up to now, had been the strongest force within the fascist spectrum, is expected to lose so many votes to Lyashko’s party that it will have to worry about whether it will achieve the 5% hurdle or have to depend on direct mandates. Svoboda may also lose votes to the “Right Sector,” which hardly has a chance of winning seats in the Verkhovna Rada.

“Crusade Against Untermenschen”

Beyond the spectrum of overtly fascist parties, particularly the “People’s Front” – the party of Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who had been put in power by the West – is campaigning with well-known rightwing extremists. Tetiana Chornovol, the former press secretary of the fascist UNA-UNSO organization, who, in the meantime has joined the Asov Battalion, is the second candidate on the ballot of the “People’s Front.” The “People’s Front” has also established a “Military Council” to profit from the country’s nationalist war frenzy. The “Military Council” also includes Asov Battalion commander Andriy Biletsky. Biletsky once declared, “the historic mission of our nation in this critical moment is to lead the White Races of the world in a final crusade for their survival,” in “a crusade against the Semite-led Untermenschen.”[4] His Asov Battalion had participated in the violent attacks on the Ukrainian parliament. These attacks began October 14, when the majority of the deputies rejected the motion for declaring October 14 an official holiday. The Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), which had also committed massacres on more then 90,000 Christian and Jewish Poles, was founded October 14, 1942.

Cluster Munitions

During the election campaign, there were also serious allegations raised against the government. According to recent reports – including those by western human rights organizations – Kiev government forces, particularly fascist militias, are committing serious human rights violations in the civil war in eastern Ukraine. It has also been reported that government units have used internationally banned cluster munitions in the Donetsk region. Cluster munitions are particularly dangerous to civilians. To date, 114 countries have signed the treaty banning cluster munitions. The Ukraine has not joined the treaty even after the pro-western coup in Kiev. According to Human Rights Watch (HRW), there is strong evidence of Kiev’s government forces having used cluster munitions in attacks in early October – at the time, the ceasefire was already in effect. According to HRW, at least six people have been killed and dozens wounded by these internationally banned munitions. The real number of victims is probably higher, according to the human rights organization.[5]

Verge of Collapse

For the period following the elections, regardless of election results, there are already indications of new social cutbacks. Economically, Ukraine is on the verge of collapse. This year’s economic performance will shrink by up to ten percent, correspondents report. The budget could reach a deficit of more than seven percent of the gross domestic product. Since the beginning of the year, the Ukrainian currency, the hryvna, has lost well over half of its value vis à vis the US dollar, causing the price of imported goods to soar. In addition, the costs of energy have also been rising; inflation is running at around twelve percent. No one expects the US $17 billion in IMF bailouts – up to 2016 – to suffice.[6] Therefore, now that Kiev has joined the Western hegemonic sphere of influence, it is insisting on financial support from Berlin and the EU. The German government is only willing to participate in limited financing. At best, a limited share of the costs for Russian gas deliveries to Ukraine could be covered, according to the EU’s Energy Commissioner Günther Oettinger’s entourage. The Ukrainian government must revise its budget. This implies wide-ranging social cuts. The fact that no final agreement has been reached with Russia on the supply of natural gas is advantageous to President Petro Poroshenko and Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk. The absolutely essential agreement and, with it, also the debate on more cuts, are, therefore, postponed until after elections.


Recent German media reports have demonstrated to what extent the western “freedom” PR campaign, even beyond the Ukrainian election campaign, is resorting to obvious lies for their power struggle with Russia. Last weekend, Radoslaw Sikorski, until recently, as Poland’s Foreign Minister, one of the EU’s most involved politicians in the Ukrainian conflict, was quoted claiming that in February 2008, the Russian President, Vladimir Putin, proposed to him and the Polish Prime Minister, at the time, Donald Tusk, that Ukraine be divided up between Poland and Russia. “Tusk, fortunately, did not answer. He knew that the room was bugged,” claimed Sikorski. By Wednesday, it was claimed that the “suspicion” of Russia currently pursuing “an old plan of conquest,” has now “been further reinforced” by Sikorski’s declaration.[7] However, by then, Sikorski already had had to admit that, contrary to his earlier allegations, he had not even been present at the said meeting. He had been told that “a similar” statement had been made. He has now also admitted that the meeting in question had not even taken place.[8] This incident is but one in a long line of absurdities being propagated by western political PR and media. (german-foreign-policy.com reported.[9])

Other reports and background information on Germany’s policy toward Ukraine can be found here: The Kiev Escalation Strategy, The Free World, A Fatal Taboo Violation, The Europeanization of Ukraine, Crisis of Legitimacy, “Fascist Freedom Fighters”, The Restoration of the Oligarchs (IV), Second-Class Stakeholders, Ukrainian Patriots, Ukrainian Maneuvers, A Lesson Learned and Under Tutelage.

[1] See Our Man in Kiev.
[2] See Radikalisierung im Parlament.
[3] Benjamin Bidder: Rechter Politiker Ljaschko: Der Mann, der die Ukraine aufhetzt. www.spiegel.de 22.10.2014.
[4] Ukraine crisis: the neo-Nazi brigade fighting pro-Russian separatists. www.telegraph.co.uk 11.08.2014.
[5] Ukraine: Widespread Use of Cluster Munitions. www.hrw.org 20.10.2014.
[6] Matthias Benz: Ein Land im Stresszustand. www.nzz.de 22.10.2014.
[7] Konrad Schuller: Ein schlechter Scherz? Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 22.10.2014.
[8] Sikorski entschuldigt sich. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 23.10.2014.
[9] See “Moskaus Drang nach Westen”.

9. It turns out one of the key fig­ures in the Poroshenko admin­is­tra­tion, who was also heav­ily backed by Pierre Omidyar’s pro-Maidan out­fits, was the per­son in charge of push­ing the lus­tra­tion laws. (This story was not included in the original program.) Of particular significance is the fact that Svitlana Zalischuk, the recipient of Omidyar’s funding, was a key player in coordinating the activities of the so-called “respectable,” “moderate” pro-EU political cadre with the overtly fascist parties such as Svoboda and the Radical Party.

“Omidyar-Funded Can­di­date Takes Seat in New Ukraine Parliament” by Mark AmesPando Daily; 10/30/2014.

Ukraine just held its first post-revolution par­lia­men­tary elec­tions, and amid all of the oli­garchs, EU enthu­si­asts, neo-Nazisnepo­tism babies, and death squad com­man­ders, there is one newly-elected parliamentarian’s name that stands out for her con­nec­tion to Sil­i­con Val­ley: Svit­lana Zal­ishchuk, from the bil­lion­aire president’s Poroshenko Bloc party.

Zal­ishchuk was given a choice spot on the president’s party list, at num­ber 18, ensur­ing her a seat in the new Rada. And she owes her rise to power to another oli­garch besides Ukraine’s pres­i­dent — Pierre Omid­yar, whose fund­ing with USAID helped top­ple the pre­vi­ous gov­ern­ment. Zalishchuk’s pro-Maidan rev­o­lu­tion out­fits were directly funded by Omidyar.

Ear­lier this year, Pando exposed how eBay bil­lion­aire and Inter­cept pub­lisher Pierre Omid­yar co-funded with USAID Zalishchuk’s web of non­govern­men­tal orga­ni­za­tions — New Cit­i­zenChesnoCen­ter UAAccord­ing to the Finan­cial Times, New Cit­i­zen, which received hun­dreds of thou­sands of dol­lars from Omid­yar, “played a big role in get­ting the [Maidan] protest up and run­ning” in Novem­ber 2013. Omid­yar Network’s web­site fea­tures Zalishchuk’s pho­to­graph on its page describ­ing its invest­ment in New Cit­i­zen. Zal­ishchuk was brought into the NGOs by her long­time men­tor, Oleh Rybachuk, a for­mer deputy prime min­ster who led the last failed effort to inte­grate Ukraine into the EU and NATO.

Zalishchuk’s pho­tos also grace the Poroshenko Bloc’s web­site and twit­ter feed, as she emerged as one of the pres­i­den­tial party’s lead­ing spokesper­sons. The Poroshenko Bloc is named after Ukraine’s pro-Western pres­i­dent, Petro Poroshenko, a bil­lion­aire with a lock on Ukraine’s con­fec­tionary indus­try, as well as own­ing a national TV sta­tion and other prized assets. He came to power this year thanks to the rev­o­lu­tion orig­i­nally orga­nized by Zalishchuk’s Omidyar-funded NGOs, and has rewarded her with a seat in the Rada.

The president’s party tasked Zalushchik with pub­licly sell­ing the highly con­tro­ver­sial new “lus­tra­tion law” — essen­tially a legal­ized witch-hunt law first pro­posed by the neo-fascist Svo­boda Party ear­lier this year, and sub­se­quently denounced by Ukraine’s pros­e­cu­tor gen­eral and by Human Rights Watch, which described a draft of the law as “arbi­trary and overly broad and fail(s) to respect human rights prin­ci­ples,” warn­ing it “may set the stage for unlaw­ful mass arbi­trary polit­i­cal exclusion.”

The lus­tra­tion law was passed under a wave of neo-Nazi vio­lence, in which mem­bers of par­lia­ment and oth­ers set to be tar­geted for purges were forcibly thrown into trash dumps.

Zal­ishchuk, how­ever, praised the lus­tra­tion law, claim­ing that the legal­ized purges would “give Ukraine a chance at a new life.”

Shortly before the elec­tions, on Octo­ber 17, Zal­ishchuk used her Omidyar-funded out­fit, “Chesno,”to orga­nize a round­table with lead­ers of pro-EU and neo-fascist par­ties. It was called “Par­lia­ment for Reform”and it brought together lead­ers from eight par­ties, includ­ing Zalishchuk’s “Poroshenko Bloc” (she served as both NGO orga­nizer and as pro-Poroshenko party can­di­date), the prime minister’s “People’s Party” and lead­ers from two unabashedly neo-Nazi par­ties: Svo­boda, and the Rad­i­cal Party of Oleh Lyashko, who was denounced by Amnesty Inter­na­tional for post­ing YouTube videos of him­self inter­ro­gat­ing naked and hooded pro-Russian sep­a­ratist pris­on­ers. Lyashko’s cam­paign posters fea­tured him impal­ing a car­i­ca­tured Jew­ish oli­garch on a Ukrain­ian trident.

Mean­while, Zalishchuk’s boss, Pres­i­dent Petro Poroshenko, has led a bloody war against pro-Russian sep­a­ratists in the east of the coun­try that left at least 3700 dead in a half year of fight­ing. Human Rights Watch recently accused Poroshenko’s forces of “indis­crim­i­nate” use of clus­ter bombs in heav­ily pop­u­lated areas, that “may amount to war crimes.” Poroshenko’s forces include neo-Nazi death squads like the noto­ri­ous Azov battalion.

Last month, Poroshenko fur­ther cemented his ties to the extreme right by hail­ing Ukraine’s wartime Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tors, the vio­lently anti-Semitic UPA, as “heroes.” The fas­cist UPA par­tic­i­pated in the Holo­caust, and were respon­si­ble for killing tens of thou­sandsof Jews and eth­nic Poles in their bid to cre­ate an eth­ni­cally pure Ukraine. Many UPA mem­bers filled the ranks of the Nazi SS “Gali­cia” Divi­sion. The neo-Nazi Right Sek­tor, which spear­headed the vio­lent later stages of the Maidan rev­o­lu­tion, sees itself as the UPA’s con­tem­po­rary suc­ces­sors; Right Sektor’s leader, Dmitry Yarosh, believes that any “eth­nic minor­ity that pre­vents us from being mas­ters in our own land” is an “enemy.” Yarosh was just elected to the new parliament.

This week, Omidyar Network’s “investment lead” for Ukraine, Stephen King, accepted an award for Omidyar Network’s role in a major new USAID-backed project, Global Impact Investing Network. . . .

10.  Deputy com­man­der of the Azov Bat­tal­ion, Vadim Troyan, just become Kiev’s chief of police (Google trans­lated):
“Avakov Appointed Chief of Police of Kiev Region Zamkom­bata ‘Azov’ “; 10/31/2014.

Ukrain­ian Inte­rior Min­is­ter Arsen Avakov appointed chief of Research Affairs in Kyiv oblast party ATO, deputy bat­tal­ion com­man­der “Azov” Vadim Troyan.

He announced from the stage of the Cen­ter of Cul­ture and Arts of Ukraine Min­istry of Inter­nal Affairs on Fri­day, Oct. 31, trans­mits “Ukrinform”.

“I have an order that has appointed Lieu­tenant Colonel Vadim Troyan depart­men­tal head of the Kiev region, and I hope that the patri­ots who proved his loy­alty in bat­tle coun­tries that are com­pe­tent, able, together with the old experts to form qual­i­ta­tively new mili­tia, which we expect,” — said the Minister.

Avakov added that Troyan is a grad­u­ate of the Police Acad­emy, has expe­ri­ence, trust him, because he is well estab­lished in the ATO. “It frees Mar­i­upol with” Azov “, fought under Ilo­vaiskaya, par­tic­i­pated in the bat­tles of Shi­rokino. We trust him. And today, the deci­sion of the min­is­ter, he’s a police chief of Kiev region “- said the head of the Inte­rior Ministry.

In reply, Vadim Troyan assured that the Ukraini­ans will not let such a respon­si­ble posi­tion. “When I was study­ing, I dreamed of chang­ing the sys­tem and the fight against crime, to help the peo­ple of Ukraine. I think that this case is that God has given me — the bat­tal­ion, the min­istry and the peo­ple — I will not fail, “- he said.

11. To gain a sense of how long the OUN/B milieu has been operating and building its support base in the U.S., we revisit a portion of FTR #26. (The program was recorded in December of 1995 and features an excerpt of the book Sabotage by Michael Sayers and Albert E. Kahn.)



3 comments for “FTR #817 Can You Put Lipstick on a Nazi? (Part 2): Update on Ukraine”

  1. Oh look, deputy commander of the Azov Battalion, Vadim Troyan, just become Kiev’s chief of police(Google translated):

    Avakov appointed chief of police of Kiev region zamkombata “Azov”
    October 31, 2014, 15:17 | 20 hvilin
    Ukrainian Interior Minister Arsen Avakov appointed chief of Research Affairs in Kyiv oblast party ATO, deputy battalion commander “Azov” Vadim Troyan.

    He announced from the stage of the Center of Culture and Arts of Ukraine Ministry of Internal Affairs on Friday, Oct. 31, transmits “Ukrinform”.

    “I have an order that has appointed Lieutenant Colonel Vadim Troyan departmental head of the Kiev region, and I hope that the patriots who proved his loyalty in battle countries that are competent, able, together with the old experts to form qualitatively new militia, which we expect,” – said the Minister.

    Avakov added that Troy is a graduate of the Police Academy, has experience, trust him, because he is well established in the ATO. “It frees Mariupol with” Azov “, fought under Ilovaiskaya, participated in the battles of Shirokino. We trust him. And today, the decision of the minister, he’s a police chief of Kiev region “- said the head of the Interior Ministry.

    In reply, Vadim Troyan assured that the Ukrainians will not let such a responsible position. “When I was studying, I dreamed of changing the system and the fight against crime, to help the people of Ukraine. I think that this case is that God has given me – the battalion, the ministry and the people – I will not fail, “- he said.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | November 1, 2014, 6:00 pm
  2. It turns out one of the key figures in the Poroshenko administration, who was also heavily backed by Pierre Omidyar’s pro-Maidan outfits, was the person in charge of pushing the lustration laws:

    Pando Daily
    Omidyar-funded candidate takes seat in new Ukraine parliament

    By Mark Ames
    On October 30, 2014

    Ukraine just held its first post-revolution parliamentary elections, and amid all of the oligarchs, EU enthusiasts, neo-Nazis, nepotism babies, and death squad commanders, there is one newly-elected parliamentarian’s name that stands out for her connection to Silicon Valley: Svitlana Zalishchuk, from the billionaire president’s Poroshenko Bloc party.

    Zalishchuk was given a choice spot on the president’s party list, at number 18, ensuring her a seat in the new Rada. And she owes her rise to power to another oligarch besides Ukraine’s president — Pierre Omidyar, whose funding with USAID helped topple the previous government. Zalishchuk’s pro-Maidan revolution outfits were directly funded by Omidyar.

    Earlier this year, Pando exposed how eBay billionaire and Intercept publisher Pierre Omidyar co-funded with USAID Zalishchuk’s web of nongovernmental organizations — New Citizen, Chesno, Center UA. According to the Financial Times, New Citizen, which received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Omidyar, “played a big role in getting the [Maidan] protest up and running” in November 2013. Omidyar Network’s website features Zalishchuk’s photograph on its page describing its investment in New Citizen. Zalishchuk was brought into the NGOs by her longtime mentor, Oleh Rybachuk, a former deputy prime minster who led the last failed effort to integrate Ukraine into the EU and NATO.

    Zalishchuk’s photos also grace the Poroshenko Bloc’s website and twitter feed, as she emerged as one of the presidential party’s leading spokespersons. The Poroshenko Bloc is named after Ukraine’s pro-Western president, Petro Poroshenko, a billionaire with a lock on Ukraine’s confectionary industry, as well as owning a national TV station and other prized assets. He came to power this year thanks to the revolution originally organized by Zalishchuk’s Omidyar-funded NGOs, and has rewarded her with a seat in the Rada.

    The president’s party tasked Zalushchik with publicly selling the highly controversial new “lustration law” — essentially a legalized witch-hunt law first proposed by the neo-fascist Svoboda Party earlier this year, and subsequently denounced by Ukraine’s prosecutor general and by Human Rights Watch, which described a draft of the law as “arbitrary and overly broad and fail(s) to respect human rights principles,” warning it “may set the stage for unlawful mass arbitrary political exclusion.”

    The lustration law was passed under a wave of neo-Nazi violence, in which members of parliament and others set to be targeted for purges were forcibly thrown into trash dumps.

    Zalishchuk, however, praised the lustration law, claiming that the legalized purges would “give Ukraine a chance at a new life.”

    Shortly before the elections, on October 17, Zalishchuk used her Omidyar-funded outfit, “Chesno,” to organize a roundtable with leaders of pro-EU and neo-fascist parties. It was called “Parliament for Reform” and it brought together leaders from eight parties, including Zalishchuk’s “Poroshenko Bloc” (she served as both NGO organizer and as pro-Poroshenko party candidate), the prime minister’s “People’s Party” and leaders from two unabashedly neo-Nazi parties: Svoboda, and the Radical Party of Oleh Lyashko, who was denounced by Amnesty International for posting YouTube videos of himself interrogating naked and hooded pro-Russian separatist prisoners. Lyashko’s campaign posters featured him impaling a caricatured Jewish oligarch on a Ukrainian trident.

    Meanwhile, Zalishchuk’s boss, President Petro Poroshenko, has led a bloody war against pro-Russian separatists in the east of the country that left at least 3700 dead in a half year of fighting. Human Rights Watch recently accused Poroshenko’s forces of “indiscriminate” use of cluster bombs in heavily populated areas, that “may amount to war crimes.” Poroshenko’s forces include neo-Nazi death squads like the notorious Azov battalion.

    Last month, Poroshenko further cemented his ties to the extreme right by hailing Ukraine’s wartime Nazi collaborators, the violently anti-Semitic UPA, as “heroes.” The fascist UPA participated in the Holocaust, and were responsible for killing tens of thousands of Jews and ethnic Poles in their bid to create an ethnically pure Ukraine. Many UPA members filled the ranks of the Nazi SS “Galicia” Division. The neo-Nazi Right Sektor, which spearheaded the violent later stages of the Maidan revolution, sees itself as the UPA’s contemporary successors; Right Sektor’s leader, Dmitry Yarosh, believes that any “ethnic minority that prevents us from being masters in our own land” is an “enemy.” Yarosh was just elected to the new parliament.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | November 1, 2014, 7:06 pm
  3. The head of the Donbas Battalion threatened to overthrow Poroshenko if a single city is surrendered to the rebels:

    Euromaidan Press
    Donbas Battalion delivers ultimatum to Poroshenko

    The Donbas Battalion declares: “Should a single city be surrendered, the president will fly off his chair, there will be a military coup and the soldiers will take power into their own hands.”

    In an interview with channel TVi, the commander of the Donbas Battalion, Taras Konstanchuk, stated that if the President of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, surrenders a single kilometer of Ukrainian land in negotiations with the “DNR” and “LNR”, he can expect a military coup and the central government will be seized by soldiers.

    He added that every time the soldiers feel that the deputies of the Verkhovna Rada are adopting incorrect or useless laws, they will come and set fire to tyres before the parliament building.

    “Until we start controlling what they actually do, nothing will make sense. We should come into the building and say: “What kind of laws are you adopting, you lazy bums? There’s only one way you’ll leave here, and that’s feet first.”- said Konstanchuk.

    On Tuesday, October 4, the President of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, repealed the law on the special status of Donbas.

    With that permanent coup threat in mind, note that it doesn’t look like the Donbas Battalion will be feeling the need to carry out a coup any time soon:

    School shelling deaths in Ukraine hurt peace hopes
    Nov. 6, 2014 11:13 AM EST

    DONETSK, Ukraine (AP) — The shelling of a high school in Ukraine’s rebel stronghold of Donetsk has chilled even the battle-hardened in this weary nation.

    The killing of two teenagers as they were playing soccer after lunch Wednesday is a stark reminder that the cease-fire agreed upon in September has only really ever existed on paper. Four other students were wounded, according to Dr. Vladimir Voropayev, chief of the children’s trauma unit at the regional hospital in Donetsk.

    The warring sides — government troops on one side and pro-Russian separatists on the other — now look as far from any lasting settlement as they ever were.

    In the soccer field at Donetsk’s school No. 63, two bloodied coats still lay out in the open Thursday as relatives and staff gathered at the scene.

    Alexander Yeliseyev, the father of one victim, 18-year-old Andrei, walked by in shock as he gathered belongings left behind when his son’s body was removed — a dark brown coat and a pair of sneakers.

    “They went to play football at about 2 p.m., while I was at work. And then the shelling began. Here you see the result,” Yeliseyev said, gulping back sobs.

    He said 14-year-old Danya, another student, was also killed.

    Authorities in the Ukrainian capital, Kiev said the security services will investigate the shelling of a school, but officials already appear to have made their mind up. Security spokesman Andriy Lysenko said preliminary information indicated the shells flew into the school from a location controlled by separatist forces.

    The rebels, however, swiftly blamed Ukrainian forces for the deadly attack, saying government troops often indiscriminately target residential areas in eastern Ukraine.

    All that is certain so far is that the school where the shells landed is at least 2 kilometers (1.2 miles) from the nearest government position but close to rebel posts. That would appear to lend weight to claims of Ukrainian culpability — government troops shelling the rebels — but Lysenko said the shelling was planned in advance by the rebels to discredit government forces.

    Government officials have failed to produce cast-iron evidence of such claims in the past, and independent rights groups say there’s evidence that government artillery has hit homes in eastern Ukraine. Residents of stricken areas have frequently complained that rebels deploy artillery near homes, invariably drawing return fire.

    The UN estimates more than 4,000 people have been killed over six months of fighting between Ukrainian government forces and pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine. That includes several hundred who have died since a much-violated cease-fire was signed in early September.

    At school No. 63, which was lavishly refurbished last year with funds provided by local billionaire Rinat Akhmetov, a dozen teachers and sobbing parents huddled by the soccer field Thursday as the roar of outgoing missile fire was heard a few kilometers (miles) away.

    Two mortars had landed on the school premises Wednesday: one next to a concrete porch by the school, shattering a few windows. The one that killed the students landed behind a goalpost, scorching the ground and leaving a small crater.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | November 6, 2014, 12:11 pm

Post a comment