Ukraine's protestors

Maidan on my mind

Feb 15th 2014, 16:41 by G.C.| KIEV

UKRAINE'S "opposition" or "the protestors" are much-used terms. But who are they?
Under one in twelve of those living in the ever-more elaborate tent structures on Kiev's
Independence Square are members of any party. Less than a third belong to any
organisation whatsoever. The Maidan (which can mean the wider protest movement and
those on the square itself) is hard to pin down.
For many demonstrators the opposition parties are merely a slightly-less-bad section of
the country's corrupt establishment. Yet tens of thousands turn out every Sunday and
listen to the leaders of those parties, who meet with the authorities, and with Western
diplomats. The protesters deplore the existing political framework, but they are working
within it: they control the politicians, not the other way round. True, but not necessarily
comforting: violence broke out on January 19th, despite opposition leaders' calls for
calm. Shortly afterwards, the politicians ramped up the rhetoric themselves with threats
to "go on the attack".
So who is in control? Pro-government and Russian media use the presence of far-right
groups as a way of discrediting the protestors. The claims are exaggerated, but not
wholly unfounded. Oleh Tyahnibok's Svoboda [Freedom] party, originally the Social-
National party of Ukraine) is the only one of significant size in terms of membership. It
has ties to the British National Party and French National Front. It scored 10% in the
2012 election and polls around 5-7% lately. Nowadays its leaders present a moderate
image. But Svoboda activists have been criticised for bullying tactics in establishing
control over occupied buildings, and critics also highlight ties to the neo-Nazi C14/Sich
group.
Most of the organised units of the Maidan Samooborona (self-defence) forces, though,
are under the leadership of Andriy Parubiy, a nationalist-leaning MP from Arseniy
Yatseniuk's Batkivshchyna (Fatherland) party. These are the volunteers guarding the
barricades, wearing protective clothing and carrying makeshift weapons. Most have no
affiliation to far-right groups.
Some of Samooborona's more fearsome units, though, belong to the Pravyy Sektor
(Right Sector), which formed in November as a coalition of ultra-nationalist groups. It
has an estimated 500-700 members, and a good deal of influence, particularly because
of the role it played in the violence that started on 19 January. Yet anarchist groups were
also at the forefront of those clashes and further back from the front line you could find
a cross-section of Ukrainian society, with protesters who have no connection whatsoever
to radical circles cheering the fighters on.
Not all the radicals are far-right. Spilna Sprava, a civic movement that drew
condemnation and violent retribution in January after occupying three government
ministries, is led by Oleksandr Danilyuk, a longtime activist on other issues such as tax.
His and other groups have been the subject of speculation that they are Moscow-backed
provocateurs. No proof has been offered and the allegations are denied.
A range of civil society groups, NGOs and activists are nowhere near the far-right. Often
though, they are just as exposed to violence and harassment as Samooborona units are.
The popular Automaidan, which organises motorcade-style protests, has seen one of its
leaders kidnapped and beaten, countless cars torched, and one activist killed. Yet car-
owning Ukrainians keep signing up.
Centre.ua, whose Chesno (Honestly) project exposes politicians' misdeeds, helps
Ukrainian NGOs communicate with foreigners. It is under investigation for money
laundering (it says the charge is ridiculous as it has undergone a stringent international
audit).
Journalist-activists Ihor Lutsenko and Tetiana Chornovil, both of whom have been
severely beaten, sit alongside politicians, singers and other public figures on the Council
of Maidan, theoretically a bridge between civil society and the political establishment.
Democratic Alliance, a small centrist party that campaigns against corruption, is also
represented here. They complain that the council is dominated by the mainstream
parties.
Outsiders see a contradiction between these "pro-Europeans" and the radical right. But
for Ukrainians it's different. Despite the gulf between liberals and hardcore nationalists,
all participants in the movement agree that they are fighting kleptocracy and corruption.
The movement was started by those who believe closer ties with the European Union
will help escape those problems, and that Russian interference will not. Not all of the far
right groups go along with the Europe bit, but that is already a secondary, tactical issue.
Pro-European Ukrainians feel they are allied with far-right groups against a more
sinister enemy. The tactics used by the riot police, with six protesters dead, have only
strengthened the conviction that drastic times call for drastic approaches.