A very intriguing academic paper (“The far right, the Euromaidan, and the Maidan massacre in Ukraine,” Journal of Labor and Society 23(1):5-29, by the University of Ottawa’s Ivan Katchanovsky) thankfully published in March 2020, well before the Russian invasion of the Ukraine, examines the role of the Ukrainian far right in the Euromaidan in Ukraine, primarily in the Maidan massacre and other key cases of violence.
As the abstract states, “the involvement of far‐right organizations in these crucial events in the Ukrainian and world politics has been politicized and polarized in Ukraine, the West, and Russia” and “the findings reveal that radical nationalist and neo‐Nazi organizations had significant but minority representation among the Maidan leadership and protesters. However, the analysis shows that the far‐right organizations and football ultras played a key role in political violence such as attempting to seize the presidential administration and the parliament.”
In particular, the paper reveals involvement of the Right Sector in violent clashes with the Berkut special police force during the highly publicized dispersal of Maidan protesters on November 30, 2013. And how the Right Sector and Svoboda had crucial roles in the violent overthrow of the Yanukovych government, in particular, in the Maidan massacre of the protesters and the police.
I recommend reading the whole paper, which is even-handed and judicious. But some tidbits are particularly striking. Take this:
A comprehensive study concluded that the Maidan massacre of the protesters and the police was a successful false flag operation conducted covertly by the elements of the Maidan opposition in order to overthrow the Yanukovych government and seize power in an asymmetricarmed conflict (Katchanovski, 2015b, 2016b). These findings were replicated by Hahn (2018).However, these studies did not take into account newly available evidence, which was madepublic during the ongoing Maidan massacre trial.The Maidan massacre trial and the investigation by the Prosecutor General Office ofUkraine revealed various evidence that protesters were massacred by snipers in Maidan-controlled buildings on February 20. The absolute majority of wounded Maidan protesters, withwhose shooting Berkut policemen were charged, testified at this trial and the investigation thatthey were shot from Maidan-controlled buildings, in particular, the Hotel Ukraine or that theywitnessed snipers there and were told about them by other protesters during the massacre(Katchanovski, 2015b, 2018).The official forensic investigations which were made public at the Maidan massacre trialrevealed that on February 20 the absolute majority of the protesters were shot from side andback directions and from top to bottom directions, while videos and photos of the massacreshowed them facing the Berkut special police force on the same ground level. In January 2015,a forensic ballistic examination conducted upon the request of prosecution concluded that bul-lets extracted from killed protesters did not match the bullet samples from any Kalashnikovassault rifle which members of the Berkut special police force were then armed. The findings ofthis computer-based ballistic examination and results of the other 40 ballistic examinationswere reversed in a couple of ballistic examinations conducted manually in the very end of theinvestigation. Such unexplained reversals which contradicted other evidence, such as testimo-nies of wounded protesters and results of forensic medical examinations, suggested that thefindings of the new examinations of bullets were unreliable and likely falsified. The forensicballistic examinations also found that many protesters were killed on February 18–20 by hunt-ing pellets and expanding hunting bullets, in particular, with caliber that did not match calibersof weapons used by the special police company, whose members were charged with killing these protesters (See Katchanovski, 2018). Government ballistic experts in at least seven on-site investigative experiments determinedthat Maidan protesters were killed and wounded from Maidan-controlled buildings. But the investigation did not employ ballistic experts to determine bullet trajectories in the absolutemajority of the cases and did not do this even after the Maidan massacre trial ordered suchexaminations, specifically determining whether these trajectories were from the Maidan-controlled buildings. No evidence of orders by then President Yanukovych, his internal affairsand security service ministers, or police and security service commanders to massacre unarmedprotesters has been revealed by the trials and the investigations or made public by the prosecu-tion or the media. But despite the evidence, the government investigation denied the existenceof snipers in the Maidan-controlled buildings (Katchanovski, 2018).A U.S. architecture company argued in the 3-D model created for Maidan victims’ lawyersthat three Maidan protesters were killed from Berkut sectors. However, the wound locations of the killed Maidan protesters in the 3-D model did not match the wound locations in the autopsyreports, which were used in this simulation to determine the locations of the shooters and pub-lished on the its website.6A study by Katchanovski (2018) showed that their wounds locationsin this 3-D model were moved sideways and made from top to bottom to nearly horizontal inorder to fit Berkut positions, while actual locations of entry and exit wounds pointed toward Maidan-controlled buildings.
Bandeira (2019, pp. 206–207), Cohen (2018), Hahn (2018), Katchanovski (2016b, 2018), andLane (2016) noted the far-right involvement in the false flag Maidan massacre of the protestersand the police. However, they did not focus on this specific issue comprehensively. Kudelia (2018) also found that the violence was initiated by the far-right Maidan protesters, who killed and wounded many policemen, but argued based on government investigation that the Berkut special police force then massacred unarmed protesters in response to such provocation.This study focuses on the involvement far right organizations in the violence during the Euromaidan in Kyiv, primarily in the massacre of the Maidan protesters and the police on February 18–20, 2014 and in the dispersal of protesters by the Berkut police on November20, 2013. These events are selected because they were turning points, respectively, in the violent overthrow of the Yanukovych government and the start of the mass anti-government protests. They are also important because the Euromaidan is presented by the Western and Maidan governments, the media in the West and Ukraine, and many researchers, primarily, non-academic ones, as a nonviolent mass protest and a popular democratic revolution against theundemocratic government, which massacred the Maidan protesters on February 18–20, 2014 and violently dispersed the peaceful protest of students on November 30, 2013. The involvementof the far right in these crucial cases of violence is often ignored, denied, or attributed without evidence to Yanukovych government or Russian government agent provocateurs.
As result of their involvement in the crucial Euromaidan violence that led to the overthrowof the Yanukovych government, the far right after the Euromaidan radically increased theirinfluence in the Ukrainian politics. The far-right members became integrated in the Ukrainiangovernment, the police, the military, and the security services, took active part in starting andwaging the civil war in Donbas. The far-right organizations, leaders, and members are treatedas mainstream by the Ukrainian government and the media. The far right also obtained powerto overthrow the Maidan and post-Maidan governments by force or threat of force (seeKatchanovski, 2015b, 2016a). Far-right paramilitary organizations significantly increased theirstreet mobilization, legitimacy, and veto power and contributed to radicalization and shifttoward nationalism of the Ukrainian politics and government policies after the Euromaidan(see Ishchenko, 2018b)
The question one is left with, after reading this stuff, is: why should anyone trust NATO atrocity propaganda now, when it’s clear that they were lying to your face before? Do you think they’re now more professional and accurate?