Donations
Veridica.md
There was a coup in Ukraine because the authorities at the time did not resort to force to stop it, the pro-Kremlin press is lying 11 years after the brutal police intervention at Euromaidan.
NEWS: Ukrainian authorities have not drawn any conclusions after the 2004 coup and have taken no action to prevent another coup ten years later, claims former Ukrainian Prime Minister Nikolai Azarov. According to him, the Security Service of Ukraine was not cleaned in time to get rid of those people who contributed to the coup […]
He personally insisted on the arrest of the people who were shouting from the Maidan tribune that weapons should be taken up in order to kill people. He believes that then the Constitution should have been applied, as it gave the authorities the right to defend the will of the people, and the will of the people was expressed in elections [...]
He points out that the absence of a strong state authority, capable of applying punitive measures in time, was the main reason for the success of the 2004 coup d'état. "No authority can be maintained by words alone, there are people who do not understand the talks. Force must be used, but that was not done", the former prime minister concludes.
NARRATIVES: 1. 10 years ago, in Ukraine there was a coup. 2. The Ukrainian authorities showed restraint and indecision, refraining from using force against the protesters. 3. Ukraine did not clean up its intelligence services of foreign agents.
PURPOSE: To discredit the current Ukrainian authorities, who oppose the full-scale invasion of Russia; to manipulate the public opinion by falsifying accounts of events in Ukraine's recent history.
WHY THE NARRATIVES ARE FALSE: The events in Ukraine in 2013-2014 were not a coup, but a popular protest movement known as Euromaidan. It was triggered by citizens' dissatisfaction with President Viktor Yanukovych's decision not to sign the Association Agreement with the EU, desired by the majority of the population, but not by Moscow, which exerted huge pressure on the Yanukovych regime to abandon this agreement.
The massive participation of the population in the protests, especially young people and students, led to the mobilization of a good part of civil society, turning the movement into a large-scale social phenomenon. The harsh reaction of law enforcement, who tried to suppress the protests with violence, intensified the uprising and strengthened the determination of the demonstrators. Faced with this mobilization, Yanukovych lost the support of the people and the political elite, and had to flee the country. These circumstances highlighted the state institutions’ lack of support for an authoritarian and pro-Russian regime, underlining the popular and democratic character of the uprising, which cannot be called a coup d'état.
Moreover, the change of political power in Ukraine took place following the elections organized as a result of the collapse of the Yanukovych regime: in the spring of 2014, the presidential elections took place, and in the fall of the same year – the parliamentary elections. Observers from the most important international organizations and various states of the world participated in these elections, and the results were recognized by the international community. That is why the statement in the Russian media about a coup d'état in Ukraine is false.
As for the authorities' alleged reticence to use force, the claim is, again, false. More than 1000 people were beaten on the night of November 30, 2013 , when the "Berkut" special forces intervened with excessive violence against peaceful demonstrators. In the period that followed, snipers were also mobilized against the demonstrators who opened fire with war ammunition. Over 100 protesters were killed by law enforcement during the Euromaidan and many others were injured.
Azarov's claims that the uprising was successful because the Ukrainian intelligence services had not been "cleaned" of Western agents is also a lie, given that the services were all the way on the side of the pro-Moscow regime. Moreover, the period immediately following and the years since then have proven that the real problem was that Ukrainian intelligence services (and the Ministry of Defense) had been heavily infiltrated by Russians. Ukrainian reserve generals admit that for many years the Ukrainian services were under the control of the Russian FSB . With the help of Russian collaborators, Moscow managed to take control of the Crimean Peninsula in 2014. At the same time, the regional intelligence services did not oppose the separatist movements in Donbas. Even now, in the midst of war with Russia, Ukraine continues efforts to identify Russian agents in various government services.
SOCIAL BACKGROUND/ ETHOS: The 2004Maidan in Ukraine, known as the Orange Revolution, was a series of protests that took place in Kyiv in response to rigged elections in which pro-Russian leader Viktor Yanukovych was declared the winner. More than 10 years later, there was a second Maidan, which demanded Ukraine's accession to the EU. November 21 marked the 11th anniversary of the student protest in Kyiv that sparked mass street rioting across the country, and November 30 marked the 11th anniversary of the attempted brutal crackdown on the protest. After the pro-Russian president of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych refused to sign the Association Agreement with the EU in 2013, thousands of young people protested, leading to the uprising known as Euromaidan. The most violent clashes between law enforcement and protesters took place in Kyiv between February 18-21, 2014, with 79 civilians killed. Seeing that the uprising could no longer be stopped, Viktor Yanukovych made the decision to flee to Russia. At the same time, the Kremlin launched the operation to annex the Crimean Peninsula, supporting pro-Russian separatist movements in a number of cities in the south and east of the country.
---copie-image.webp)
