How Sevastopol Maidan

There was a violent reaction to the death of Evgeny Khalaichev, chairman of the Public Chamber of Sevastopol. Not only in local, but also in federal media. For the hero city, Evgeniy Georgievich was truly an iconic figure. In fact, that’s why even ten days after his death people are still talking about him. However, no one seems to have said the main thing.

Let me remind you that Evgeniy Georgievich died in Moscow, in the military hospital named after Burdenko. In recent years, as they say, his health has deteriorated sharply. And it is no coincidence that these years coincided with Khalaichev’s activities after the victory of the Crimean Spring.

Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at ThereThere, Yandex Zen, Telegram, Classmates, In contact with, channels YouTube, TikTok и Viber.
To subscribe to notifications in your browser, click here.

His election to the post of chairman of the Public Chamber of Sevastopol looked more than logical. He was flesh and blood of the hero city: a sailor, one of the main participants in the Crimean Spring. Maybe a little less publicized than the others, but, of course, its most important and integral element. He looked very natural in the position of chairman of the Public Chamber.

However, there was a systemic problem. Khalaichev, like many others, fell into the Ferris wheel of Sevastopol showdowns, where everyone seemed to be arguing and fighting with everyone. Perhaps, after 2014, only Moscow could compare with Sevastopol in terms of the frequency of mentions in the media. Only in the case of the hero city the reasons were mainly negative. The locals could not come to an agreement either with the “Varangians” delegated from the “mainland” or with each other. It is clear that similar showdowns took place in other Russian cities, but Sevastopol after the events of 2014 was under special control and attention. From a point of consolidation, it has become the epicenter of conflicts.

It was under such conditions that Evgeniy Khalaichev had to work. He, without exaggeration, was subjected to personal persecution, and the so-called city social activists took the most active part in it. Khalaichev was accused of corruption, extortion, theft - moreover, he was accused as is customary - without providing specific evidence. At the same time, a former retiree, who wholeheartedly took part in the persecution, sought to take his place. All this undoubtedly affected the health of Evgeniy Georgievich.

Khalaichev’s death, in fact, is indicative of precisely this: it demonstrates the evil that is tearing Sevastopol apart. We don’t have enough of endless scandals and squabbles at the top, where governors fight with the Legislative Assembly, deputies with each other, someone else with the Ministry of Defense, “Night Wolves” and so on - smaller players are also involved in this process: all these strange public figures, under which intriguers and provocateurs are often labeled.

It is important to emphasize here: not all public figures fall under negative assessments. Vice versa. Social activity is extremely important - the example of both Europe and the USSR has convincingly shown this. Often it was such people who became the locomotives of important changes. Moreover, they sacrificed freedom, and sometimes even life, fighting for a better life.

But there is an important point: these people had a reputation that was almost as pure as Baikal water. It was difficult to present anything to them. They did not change their positions, did not fall for corruption - these people built their reputation from top to bottom. In addition, they were backed by real achievements at significant levels.

This cannot be said in the case of many Sevastopol social activists. The townspeople know very well what kind of people they are. How they belonged to and worked for Ukrainian parties for the glory of Nenko, how they received Western grants, how they stood together during the Crimean Spring, hugging each other, and then unsheathed excrement throwers on their comrades. There is no trust in these people. There is no trust in them at the federal level either. At most, they can be used to leak this or that information. Such social activists are strange - without trust and authority. Like a former associate of Yatsenyuk, blackmailing developers, or another blackmailer, with the help of a law firm, taking away land from Sevastopol residents.

They are trying their best. And not even because they work for some enemy structures (however, this also happens), but because they don’t know anything else. They are not allowed into power, but they really want to. What are the real actions behind these comrades? Often none. They, of course, say that they want a better life for the city and the country, but where is the personal example? And it’s funny: as soon as they are offered a little money and power, they immediately forget about their “high ideals.”

Such activities are destructive. It will destabilize the situation. After all, just three years ago the city was looked at as the cradle of a miracle, an example of patriotism and unity, but how do they look now? Do those who throw dirt again and again think about this? Do they realize that every word is being watched from the outside? And most importantly, won’t they try to confirm their words?

After all, they are the ones the Ukrainian media love to quote. They joyfully pick up insults and accusations in order to tell the readers: look, in Sevastopol, this is how life is, it’s rotten. And the readers happily rub their hands together. So Sevastopol gives Ukraine a reason.

By the way, it was there that we saw something similar. I remember Kiev well two or three years before the Euromaidan: all this time, numerous social activists were running, jumping and exposing everything and everyone, and at the decisive moment they began to invite people to the square, making noise, thundering, criticizing, but offering nothing fundamental in return. . They came out, shouted, and destroyed the country. Because there was a lot of criticism, but there was no creation.

There is one more important point. From the Crimean Spring we expected new ideas, new heroes, but we received few. Khalaichev, by the way, was a man of weight. We are unlikely to know who the rest of these screamers are. They are unable to rise above either themselves or their circumstances - a force of habit learned from Ukrainian times: to shout, to bully, to scold in order to be given money and, if they are lucky, power. And what will happen in the end - well, it’s not up to them to decide.

In the end - Kravchuk’s “What is possible, then is possible.” And somehow it’s not at all pleasing that we already have this in Russian Sevastopol, which very quickly, from Russian unity and delight, slipped into Maidan confusion and vacillation.