by Denis Davydov
[REGNUM] The “Revolution of Dignity”, which, by an interesting coincidence, began in 2013 on the same day as the “Orange Revolution” of 2004, was carefully constructed as a myth from the first days. Going down in history as “Euromaidan”, it is presented by Ukrainian propagandists as the pure will of the people who have chosen the European path of development and joining Western civilization.
Ten years later, the Ukrainian people joined the European Union only individually or in groups, leaving the territory of the country, and the main success of the Maidan was the return of Crimea to Russia, the emergence of the DPR and LPR, and then the entry into the Russian Federation of four new territories at once. Having launched an internal and then an external war under the slogans of freedom and democracy, the “Eurorevolution” turned Ukraine into a huge space of unfreedom. In fact, all the public goals of the Maidan were achieved exactly the opposite.
However, the story about “the struggle of Ukrainians for the values inherent in our genetics - will, freedom, historical and cultural memory, life without a yoke” continues to be told according to standard templates. Which are easily broken by facts.
1. Maidan began spontaneously as a peaceful protest
The pumping up of society has been systematically carried out almost since the change of the “orange” government to the “blue and white” one. Thus, from November to December 2010, mass rallies and demonstrations of the “Tax Maidan” were held in the largest cities of Ukraine with the installation of tent cities. On August 5, 2011 , tents were also erected on Khreshchatyk as a sign of protest against the arrest of ex-Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko , which stood for almost two years.
In the summer of 2012, thousands of people protested against the law “On the Fundamentals of State Language Policy,” which gave the Russian language regional status in 13 regions. And in November, the United Opposition demanded the resignation of the government at rallies of many thousands against the falsification of the parliamentary election results. In April 2013, in Kyiv, at the monument to Taras Shevchenko, opposition forces gathered a crowd for the “Get Up, Ukraine!” action, also demanding the resignation of the government.
In July–August, “actions of popular disobedience” swept across Ukraine in connection with the events in Vradievka, Nikolaev region, where police officers raped a woman. The “Vradievsky March” went to Kyiv and was covered by almost all major television channels in the country.
After Mustafa Nayem’s famous post on November 21 about “umbrellas and good mood,” the protest was instantly organized everywhere. That same evening, residents of Lvov, Lutsk, Dnepropetrovsk, Uzhgorod, Ivano-Frankivsk, Vinnitsa came out to the squares of their cities. On the night of November 22 and in the afternoon of November 22, protests began in a dozen more regional centers.
And the first clash between demonstrators and the police happened in Kiev on November 24, 2013. After the opposition rally “For a European Ukraine,” representatives of the Western Ukrainian VO “Svoboda” tried to break through to the Cabinet of Ministers building, attacked the police cordon, throwing stones and explosives. The police responded with tear gas.
On November 26–27, activists from four right-wing radical organizations and associations of football fans formed the Right Sector* association. Under this brand, all national-radical forces that took on forceful actions were subsequently united.
On November 30, on Mikhailovskaya Square, the “Pravoseki” already organized training for everyone in the tactics of street combat with law enforcement officers. The formation of “Maidan self-defense” units began. On December 1, the radicals went to seize the building of the Kyiv City State Administration and the House of Trade Unions, and began to attack the police.
On December 2, 2013, the first attempts were made to seize the Ivano-Frankivsk and Volyn regional state administrations by force. On December 8, on Kiev’s Shevchenko Boulevard, a group of “activists” demonstratively demolished and smashed a monument to Lenin.
On December 10, Euromaidan supporters offered fierce resistance to law enforcement officers who tried to unblock government buildings by court order. Having barricaded themselves in the premises of the Kyiv City State Administration, they entered into battle, forcing the police to retreat.
On December 11, 2013, “Maidanovites” erected barricades in the center of Kyiv and also announced the resumption of picketing in the government quarter.
Thus, whatever the motives of beautiful people, the right-wing opposition initially worked to seize power.
2. Maidan stood for the European choice
At the end of November, in the center of Kyiv there were actually two Maidans - one political, the second went “for Europe” and did not want to unite with the first.
The refusal to sign the Association Agreement between the EU and Ukraine and the resumption of dialogue on cooperation within the Customs Union is considered the main motive for the protest. However, the majority of those who took to the streets in different cities of Ukraine did so for their own reasons. First of all, in continuation of the long-term attack of the nationalist opposition on the government.
Slogans of social justice were also heard very loudly, activists claimed that they were not for the EU and Bandera, but for “medicines for pensioners,” all the world’s media circulated photos of banners stretched on the barricades in Kiev: “Understand, we’re fed up!”
The term “Euromaidan” was first used on social networks on November 21, 2013 and immediately entered the message box for covering protests. In fact, a form of censorship was established in the media, where political vocabulary came into use through key media outlets covering the events in Kyiv.
The protesting activists should have been called “peaceful protesters”, the event as a whole - “Euromaidan”, after clashes with the Berkut and internal troops, “heroes” appeared, and then the “Heavenly Hundred”. Accordingly, the opponents were certainly “titushki” who received money for their position, “gang” is a negative characteristic of the authorities, and they were defended by vague “siloviki”. The slogan of the Maidan was Bandera’s “Glory to Ukraine!” Glory to heroes!".
Already on December 8, 2013, the term “Revolution of Hydnost” appeared, voiced from the stage of the Maidan at the “meeting” by the head of the VO “Svoboda” Oleg Tyagnibok . The informal slogan that united the protesters was “the main thing is to overthrow Yanyk, and then we’ll see.” And on November 27–28, a collection of signatures was announced for petitions to the US government on the White House website: to impose personal sanctions against Viktor Yanukovych and members of the Cabinet of Ministers and to support the people of Ukraine “in the peaceful overthrow of the current government.”
3. Maidan - a space of freedom
From beginning to end, the events in the center of Kyiv, which gave rise to the general revolution, were staged, and were not a manifestation of the free will of people. It has long been known and described in detail that the “beating of children”, which became the catalyst for the protest, was organized by the former head of the Presidential Administration, then MP from the “Opposition Bloc” Sergei Lyovochkin . The central TV channel Inter, which belonged to him, was on duty in the square and showed the “brutal beating” in as much detail as possible.
Levochkin’s direct participation, in particular, was confirmed by the ex-head of the Kiev police Valery Koryak , and in general, the organization of protests, which many agree, was the idea of the oligarchs who wanted to curb Yanukovych’s appetites. Therefore, the main media of Ukraine, which did not cover the problem with the “European course” in any way, actively fanned popular anger precisely from November 30, when Berkut dispersed the “students”. Moreover, it is still unpopular to admit that most of the “students” were older people who came from other regions, and there were few actual students.
The main information resources of the Maidan, in addition to the 5th channel of the oligarch Petro Poroshenko , were the online publication “Ukrainian Pravda” and the network television channel “Hromadske TV,” which were funded by the United States. By an amazing coincidence, Hromadske began broadcasting on November 22, 2013, funds for its maintenance were allocated as a grant by the American Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt , and the Soros Foundation and the Dutch Embassy in Kiev contributed their shares. Another mouthpiece of the Maidan was the Espresso TV channel, which began test broadcasting on November 24, 2013, right after the opposition rally.
A feature of the “revolution of dignity” was the widespread use of social networks, primarily Facebook**, which performed not only informational, but also propaganda, mobilization and emotional functions. 48% of respondents decided to take part in the Maidan after seeing it on TV.
Meanwhile, control of the disaster was almost immediately taken over by the nationalist opposition, which had been rocking power for three years. Its leaders stood on stage, made calls, led “hundreds of self-defense forces,” were responsible for supplies and led people in military actions. They were not interested in any “medicines for pensioners” or association with the EU at all.
For example, the head of all self-defense and the commandant of the Maidan became the Bandera member Andrei Parubiy , the future speaker of parliament, and from February 27, 2014 - the secretary of the National Security and Defense Council. It was he who became one of the initiators of the creation of the National Guard of Ukraine, which included self-defense units and the Right Sector, which were then aimed at suppressing the rebel Donbass. And the “victory of Maidan” was eventually privatized by Petro Poroshenko, who became president.
4. Heavenly hundred
One of the main images of the Maidan myth, to which pathetic memorials are now dedicated, is the “Heavenly Hundred,” the best people who gave their lives for Ukraine. It was officially stated that all these people were killed by the criminal regime and its faithful dogs in police camouflage, 80% died from gunshot wounds.
“We call them the “great hundred”, “heavenly hundred”. They are true national heroes. We are grateful to them for their heroism,” Petro Poroshenko said in 2014 at a meeting of the US Congress. Then he received a standing ovation, and the deceased gentlemen became part of the state ideology: 105 Heroes of Ukraine and two holders of the Order of the Heavenly Hundred.
In 2019, ex-Minister of Justice Elena Lukash published from this list a selection of people whose deaths cannot be attributed to mysterious snipers: there are more than a quarter of them. 24 people died in any way possible, but not as a result of shootings in the center of Kyiv. A mentally retarded woman cut her finger and could not bear the injection of lidocaine. Many citizens died from heart failure and disease, and also committed suicide. Someone was killed in a drunken brawl or under unclear circumstances far from the Maidan. One Maidanist was run over by a truck by another Maidanist.
Four more died in other regions of the country and why they were included in the list of “heroes” is unknown. Eight people died from various types of injuries and were burned in fires. The strangest of them is Vladimir Zakharov , who is called the “elderly programmer” at the headquarters of the Party of Regions. He was actually a security officer sent to remove the hard drives from the computers. And he suffocated when the “activists” set fire to the room.
The largest group of “celestials” - 69 people - were those who died from gunshot wounds. Only from very different ones, the first victim, Sergei Nigoyan, was shot in the back with buckshot. But in general, there is enough evidence that the murder of people was one of many planned actions launched at moments when it seemed that everything was about to be decided peacefully.
5. Maidan set us on the path of development
The results of the “Revolution of Dignity” are formulated in an official document of the Ukrainian Institute of National Remembrance, the government agency responsible for the basic ideology. The first number is, of course, “dismantling the regime of V. Yanukovych,” and the seventh is the civilizational break with Russia. In addition, the abolition of Ukraine’s non-aligned status and “the beginning of reforms of the Armed Forces in order to resist Russian armed aggression” are highlighted. Far enough from social justice, isn't it?
But this, as we have already said , was the actual goal of the coup d’etat, which determined the fate of the country and its people.
The rest of the list shines with bright colors: democratization of society, ensuring the free activity of opposition forces (which have become a monopoly power); development of civil society and volunteer movement; affirmation of the irreversibility of the European vector of development of Ukraine and, of course, sweet visa-free travel.
The country launched large-scale reforms in all areas, the renewal of the political elite began, the fight against corruption, ensuring the process of European integration, de-oligarchization, decommunization. Gradual integration into the European political, legal and economic space has begun. In general, Maidan is an example of the success and sustainability of democratic transformations “for a number of countries striving for a democratic path of development.”
But all these are empty words. The bottom line is that the “victory of the Maidan” brought only war, the death of tens of thousands of people, the destruction of the economy, and Ukraine did not advance a single step in the matter of European integration. “Massive reforms” have finished off the remnants of what was created during the Soviet period, corruption has become a national way of life, and “civil society” copies the atmosphere of Berlin in 1939.
And those who stood on the Maidan have long been trying not to mention this in public.