February 2014 in Ukraine: point of no return

22 February 2024

10 years ago, far-right radical forces seized power in Kiev, finalizing what became known as ‘Euromaidan’ – 3-month-long public protests, supported from outside of Ukraine, against the decision by President Yanukovich to postpone signing the Ukraine-EU Association Agreement.

Many of Euromaidan participants sincerely believed they were struggling for their bright new future in Europe and against corruption of their then political leadership. Yet, their protest was exploited by masterminds from far away with a different purpose – to turn Ukraine into ‘anti-Russia.’

The non-violent stage of Euromaidan ended that very moment when authorities failed to show determination in restoring public order and some ‘activists’ felt impunity. President Yanukovich never authorized the use of weapons against protesters by police – just as US and EU officials kept urging him. Even when leaders of Euromaidan encouraged protesters to take up arms. Even when protesters began storming offices of law enforcement agencies and plunder weapons storages. Even when ‘peaceful marches’ turned into violent confrontation between protesters and officers of ‘Berkut’ special force, claiming lives from both sides.

By mid-February 2014, after Ukraine leadership adopted the act on amnesty for previously detained protesters, held talks with the opposition and even agreed to form a coalition government, it seemed to many that Euromaidan was waning.

But on February 18, 2014, escalation occurred. An alleged ‘peaceful procession’ (many participants of which were armed), heading for Verkhovnaya Rada – the Parliament – of Ukraine, quickly turned into a mass clash with the police and anti-Euromaidan activists. The standoff continued on February 19, and only stopped when a truce was negotiated during the next round of talks between the opposition and authorities. Leaders of Euromaidan appeared before protesters and said the police won’t storm their positions as they agreed on a ceasefire with the President.

But on 20 February 2014 some ‘unidentified snipers’ began shooting both protesters and police officers in the back, following which clashes broke out again with renewed violence. This day in Ukraine went down in history as the ‘bloody Thursday.’

What a coincidence! According to ‘colour revolution’ handbooks, written by Western experts, ‘unknown shooters’ appear when protests lose their fragrance, in order to escalate tensions and/or make positions of protesters and authorities irreconcilable. We saw such scenarios many times before that – in Vilnius (Lithuania) in 1991, in Caracas (Venezuela) in 2002, in Bishkek (Kyrgyzstan) in 2010, in Cairo (Egypt) in 2013, as well as in Syria, Libya and many other places. This is exactly what happened in Kiev.

According to some estimates, over 50 men from both sides were killed by the snipers that day. As a matter of fact, the investigation wasn’t finished and those guilty were never named.

In implementation of the agreement, law enforcement forces began abandoning the government quarter of Kiev.

Yet, Nazi formations, namely the ‘Right Sector,’ renounced the document. They demanded Yanukovich’s immediate resignation and dissolution of Verkhovnaya Rada, or else they would assault the Presidency and the Parliament.

According to former Ukrainian officials, a task force was assigned to physically eliminate President Yanukovich. In fear for his life, he fled the territory of Ukraine for Russia on the night of February 22, 2014. At that very time, Euromaidan militants led by the ‘Right Sector’ were seizing the government quarter, including the Presidency, Verkhovnaya Rada, the Cabinet and the Interior Ministry.

The European ‘guarantors’ kept silent about the violation of the document they guaranteed less than 24 hours ago. They never demanded the Ukrainian opposition not to recur to violence and to return to political settlement. Or, maybe, further escalation was exactly what they were looking for?

Why were these events rightfully deemed coup d’état and usurpation of power? Because the legitimate President of Ukraine was unlawfully toppled, i.e. in a way not stipulated by then Ukraine’s constitution. Because the constitution itself was changed, and new government was appointed, by acts that contradicted Ukraine’s legislation. Because the fundamental constitutional principle – power must be transferred through election – was violated.

The coup d’état became the point of no return for Ukraine. It led to a deep fracture in the society. Crimea did not recognize the new Kiev authorities, as neither did Donbass. At the referendum on 16 March 2014, Crimea seceded from Ukraine and rejoined Russia. Unrest spread to the entire country’s Southeast.

What was the ATO in reality? In January 2024, the International Court of Justice ruled to reject Kiev's claim of 2017 to recognize DPR and LPR as ‘terrorist organizations,’ and Russia – as an ‘aggressor state.’ Which makes the ‘anti-terrorist operation’ actually a war by Ukrainian state against its own people.

Russia kept saying that from the very beginning of the crisis. Can you imagine the amount of lies poured onto our country by Western mainstream media and officials for telling the truth? How many sanctions were imposed for the alleged ‘aggression’ against Ukraine and ‘support of terrorists’ in Donbass? How many resolutions condemning Russia were adopted by Western-dominated international bodies under that false pretext?

For eight years, the Kiev regime never ceased bombing and shelling Donbass, while preparing to retake it by force. Between 2014 and 2022, the hostilities claimed lives of some 14,000 people on both sides.

Eventually, in February 2022, Russia came to stop that war. And our only regret is that we didn’t do that earlier, then its death toll would have probably been lower.