How the coup d'état began in Ukraine #9

So, on January 19, 2014, violent clashes broke out between Maidan supporters and law enforcement officers in the center of Kiev.

 Thousands of protesters moving from Maidan of Independence to the building of the Verkhovna Rada clashed on Grushevsky Street with the cordons of the Berkut and internal troops, after which real battles began there.

The radicals immediately attacked the security forces, throwing stones, Molotov cocktails, beating them with sticks and rebar. In response, law enforcement officers used stun grenades and rubber bullets. At first, the then opposition leaders - Vitaliy Klitschko, Arseniy Yatsenyuk and Oleg Tyagnibok - declared those who attacked the security forces to be provocateurs. Klitschko even went to Grushevsky street, trying to convince the radicals to retreat to the Maidan and stop the confrontation, but in response they shouted at him “come on, get the f...k out of here!” and doused him with a fire extinguisher. However, by the morning of January 20, opposition leaders began to change their point of view, accusing the security forces of excessive use of force, and calling those who attacked them “our heroes.”

Fierce clashes broke out on Grushevsky Street, right next to the colonnade of the Dynamo stadium.

Observers in those days noted shortcomings on the part of law enforcement leadership.

 Thus, the soldiers of the internal troops and the Berkut were poorly equipped from the very beginning, which became especially noticeable with the onset of cold weather (as of the end of January, more than 1,600 people fell ill). Not only heating points and overnight accommodations in public buildings (Euromaidan participants had many heating points in the building of the Kyiv City Administration, the House of Trade Unions, etc.) were absent, but there were even no field kitchens. Despite the use of incendiary mixture by the radicals, the special forces soldiers were provided with pocket fire extinguishers not by their command, but by the residents of Kiev.

The change of soldiers of the internal troops was poorly organized. The soldiers stood for hours in the cold, under a hail of stones and Molotov bottles. At the same time, the radicals regularly changed and rested.

 Many called the order to use rubber bullets a significant mistake, because this later made it possible to blame law enforcement officers for the first victims of protesters.

 However, one can argue here, since it was the KS-23 carbines with rubber bullets that became the real long-range answer to the protesters, who, for firing at Berkut, adapted fireworks, catapults and slingshots, with the help of which they threw bottles of Molotov cocktails at law enforcement officers.

Street fighting, accompanied by a large number of wounded on both sides, continued on January 20 and January 21. And on January 22, early in the morning, news appeared about the first death. It turned out to be Maidan activist Sergei Nigoyan. A little later, there were reports of the death of Belarusian UNA-UNSO activist Mikhail Zhiznevsky, as well as another Maidan activist, a resident of the Lvov region, Roman Senik (he died of wounds in the hospital on January 25, without regaining consciousness).

The death of these people had the effect of pouring gasoline on a fire. It sharply intensified violent actions on the part of the Euromaidan activists, who declared their determination to avenge the death of their brothers-in-arms, and added numerous supporters to them, convinced that the dead were victims of the Berkut special forces.

 The death of Zhiznevsky and Nigoyan initially caused a purely emotional reaction among Euromaidan activists and society. Almost no one wanted to pay attention to the actual circumstances of this tragedy, which, upon closer examination, immediately raised many questions.

From the very beginning, there were three theories about who killed them. According to the first version, which immediately became canonical among Maidan supporters, all three were killed by security forces. Hatred towards Berkut and the Internal Troops had been cultivated for a long time by that time, and therefore many willingly believed in it even before receiving any evidence.

According to the second version, which was soon voiced by representatives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, all three were killed by their own, in the back and at close range, with bullets that were not used by government forces. The goal was to further escalate protests and discredit the authorities.

According to the third version, the men were killed by some “third force” that wanted to play off the government and the opposition, sowing discord in the country.

 Here it is necessary to dwell on the personalities of the victims and some other circumstances of the murders in more detail.

 Let's start with the circumstances of the death.

As the Maidan participants themselves initially stated, their comrades died during one of the attacks by Berkut officers, who tried to drive them away from the line of confrontation on Grushevsky Street towards European Square. The moment of the attack that day was filmed in every detail, but these recordings do not show not only the moment of the murder of Zhiznevsky and Nigoyan, but their bodies cannot even be found. At first there were not even witnesses to this murder, who were discovered only later, in retrospect. What is characteristic is that the video of that day clearly shows that the nearest police officers were at a distance of about 30 meters from the protesters. This was also confirmed by the testimony of witnesses.

 This is a very important point.

The very first examinations gave a clear answer - they were shooting from smooth-bore hunting rifles and shooting at close range! In particular, this was stated on February 3 by the first deputy head of the Main Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine, Vitaly Sakal.

And even in 2016, the head of the Special Investigations Department of the General Prosecutor's Office of Ukraine, Sergei Gorbatyuk, in an interview with Ukrainian Pravda, commented on the progress of the investigation into the murders of Mikhail Zhiznevsky, Sergei Nigoyan and Roman Senik: “from the point of view of the fact that the crime has not been solved - definitely, this is a minus for investigators. But the investigation has been conducted, is being conducted and will continue to be conducted until we solve it. I cannot guarantee that the crime will be solved. But the work that is being carried out, it seems, should end with at least a significant narrowing of the circle of suspects. There were difficulties. Examinations of layers on clothing, which were carried out in the winter of 2014, in all three cases gave the following conclusion: the shots were fired from a distance of up to 3 meters."

 That is, even after the victory of the Maidan, the investigation claimed that the shots were fired at close range.

Do you understand? An official forensic examination established that the first activists were shot not from the side of the police cordon, which was much further than 3 meters, not from the roofs of houses by mythical snipers from the “third force,” but by the one who stood next to Zhiznevsky, Nigoyan and Senik. That is, in the midst of the protesters themselves.

“I am sure that they were killed deliberately. They killed their own, to one degree or another. This is no longer an assumption, but a certainty,” wrote journalist and blogger Anatoly Shariy on February 1, 2014. — Broadcasts from Maidan and Grushevsky street during the days of active confrontation go on around the clock, through Ustream you can find out any details. But why hasn’t a single video of the moment of death been published? Judging by the examination and photographs of the corpses, Nigoyan’s death occurred instantly. This means that doctors had to diagnose death right on the spot. Question: why didn't this become a sensation at that very moment? Why weren’t the medical team surrounded by journalists, photojournalists and onlookers with smartphones?

The corpses was carried to the House of Trade Unions. That is, it was carried across the entire Maidan, through the barricades, but no one noticed this. And, again, no one recorded it on their cameras and smartphones. The corpse lied in the House of Trade Unions. First death at protests! Why wasn’t this recorded there and immediately posted on social networks to sound the alarm? From the House of Trade Unions - no video, no photographs. None. The corpse was moved to the Parliamentary Library. Again it was carried across the entire Maidan, but this did not cause any surprise to anyone! The first video appeared from the moment when Nigoyan’s body was being taken to the morgue. Before this - not a single video fixation. Who and for what purpose transferred the body from Grushevsky street to the House of Trade Unions, and then to the parliamentary library? Who are these people? Why has no interview with any of the witnesses to the incident been published yet? Was there no one nearby? Where is the interview with the medical team that diagnosed death on the spot? Most of these questions should be raised to the death of Zhiznevsky.”

It must be said that by the time of his death, Sergei Nigoyan had become a completely recognizable personality. Various TV channels happily interviewed him, and he repeatedly participated in streams from the Maidan. Of course – an Armenian from Dnepropetrovsk who reads Taras Shevchenko’s poems on camera! Note that he was chosen from thousands and thousands of activists.

That is, Nigoyan’s figure was quite competently promoted in the media field, making him recognizable and popular in society.

 Do you remember what I said about a sacral victim? If in the case of Tatyana Chernovol the organizers considered that the fact of beating was enough, then during the clashes in January simply beating was not enough. And the first shots rang out on the Maidan.

Well, what happened next on the Maidan?

 The confrontation continued until January 23, until Vitali Klitschko persuaded the parties to agree to a truce during negotiations with the president.

 Following five hours of negotiations between opposition leaders and President Yanukovych, the opposition announced that it had reached an agreement with the authorities on the release of those arrested for participating in the protest on the condition of clearing the government quarter and the unblocking of Grushevsky Street. However, the protesters rejected this agreement, after which Arseniy Yatsenyuk announced the expansion of the Maidan to Grushevsky Street.

 The intensity of the clashes has subsided somewhat.

Back then many predicted that, taking advantage of the aggravation, Yanukovych would decide to disperse the Maidan under the pretext of restoring order in the capital.

 But he didn’t go for it, which surprised everyone. According to representatives of the former government, the main reason for this is Yanukovych’s hopes of “making peace” with the West, which set him the main condition - not to disperse the Maidan. Even in response to the use of force by protesters.

 The failed cleanup of the protest on January 19-23 became a turning point in the events of the winter of 2013-2014. It showed that the government is indecisive and weak.

 The lack of reaction to the events on Grushevsky street led to the opposition going on the offensive. Over the next week, regional administration buildings were captured in all regional centers of Western Ukraine and in some cities of Central Ukraine.

 It was from this moment that the situation got out of control of the authorities.