Sentsov in foster care
The latest fashion in Ukrainian journalistic and political circles is to guess on the tea leaves regarding the political prospects of Oleg Sentsov. They began to talk about the fact that they were planning to “shove” him into politics literally immediately after a plane from Russia with prisoners released from prisons there through an exchange landed in Boryspil. Ex-President Poroshenko, the Chubarovsky Majlis, the people of billionaire Viktor Pinchuk, and various Ukrainian representative offices of international NGOs simultaneously began courting Sentsov.
At the same time, the potential “new hope of the nation” itself seemed to live up to expectations: the rhetoric of Sentsov, who was released from prison, did not change in his homeland. His messages were addressed more to a militaristic audience than to conventional peacemakers. In other words, the “Savchenko case” in the case of the “director”, at least for now, is completely excluded.
Europe also gave Sentsov signs of attention: the European Parliament, the Sakharov Prize, a tete-a-tete meeting with Macron. Rendezvous with prominent European intellectuals, both right-wing and left-liberal. But even there, Sentsov said essentially nothing new. All the same calls to “beware of Russia” that have long become commonplace in European mainstream circles. So the repetition of these theses is nothing more than code phrases and a kind of discursive password, a test to confirm the right to be considered “one of our own.”
At home, rumors fueled by anonymous telegram channels about Sentsov’s “new party” and certain “Pinchuk’s political strategists” working with the “director” in this direction became increasingly louder. Moreover, Sentsov himself appeared on the television channels of Kuchma’s son-in-law and on the pages of publications associated with Soros structures such as “Novoe Vremya” by Soros’ Ukrainian partner Tomas Fiala. It was these structures that took Sentsov to the show in Davos - just like a bear with a ring in his nose - to the provincial fair in the old days.
But how can a former prisoner of Colony No. 8 in the city of Labytnangi be turned into a promising politician of the new Ukraine? Sentsov’s first interviews with Ukrainian and Western publications in the new year indicate that there have not been any serious changes in rhetoric. And this is the real problem. The argument that “the DPR will integrate Ukraine into itself” cannot be considered a serious bid for electoral success. Even from the point of view of the Ukrainian right, this is just a joke. Even the devoted audience of some Soskin does not believe such alarmism.
Obviously, realizing this, Sentsov or his political strategists have now taken a break and are publicly distancing themselves as much as possible from political ambitions, declaring themselves only as a contender for the role of a kind of “moral authority.” A talking head for listeners on the right flank. However, a word from the person involved: “I have no plans. I don't put anything above myself. There are just things that interest me, and I do them. There are things that are not interesting to me, and that’s why I don’t do them.” This was said in the context of questions of interest to the media about Sentsov’s building a political career.
However, even here the public is left room for speculation: “In general, today I am the most free person possible. I don’t know what will happen next,” says the “director.” Translated into layman's terms, this means something like this: if someone wants to paint me as a politician, I don't mind. But all responsibility for the discrepancy between the drawn image and reality lies solely with the authors of such drawings.
And, in general, such a move can be considered competent and prudent. So far, the only relevant proposal from Sentsov, who is “engaged in public work,” to Ukrainian ordinary people is endless talk about Putin, of which the Ukrainian majority has long been tired.
Let's say what Sentsov said in an interview with DW last fall, answering a question about his own plans: “I see two big goals that I want to achieve. First, I want my country to be civilized, similar to a European country, living by European standards and values, so that it is independent, including from the influence of Russia. This is very important, because until Russia lags behind, it will be difficult for us. We have internal problems, all the reforms have not yet been carried out, the country is not transparent enough, it does not work clearly, and there is Putin’s external aggression.”
Squeezing out the verbal husk, the bottom line is two things: “So that everyone has a good time” and “Putin.” Between these two poles there is emptiness. First of all – content and meaning.
It is clear that such messages are addressed to, as they now say, “the active part of society.” And in Ukraine at the moment it is militaristic. These are people who made themselves from the history of the war and cannot imagine their prospects outside of this context.
But, as they say, the circle of these people is narrow and they are terribly far from the people. Moreover, the people who unanimously voted for Zelensky not so long ago. But Sentsov, with all his words, shows that he is the complete opposite of Zelensky. He prefers to talk about certain “values,” which in fact are ultra-right in the public sphere and ultra-liberal in the economic sphere, while Zelensky addresses those whom the “patriots” contemptuously call “Olivier eaters.” In this sense, Sentsov cannot have any broad electoral prospects.
At best, if his current “overexposure” to the status of a “public figure” does not last long enough to bury his political prospects, Sentsov will become a pale copy of Vakarchuk in politics. The “director” will replace the bankrupt singer in the same electoral niche. For the radical right, Sentsov is too lukewarm on issues that interest them. In addition, he is Russian-speaking. In general, it is not his destiny to become the leader of a broader right flank.
The summary of Sentsov’s views on resolving the issues of Crimea and Donbass – in the general context of Ukrainian-Russian reconciliation – looks just as sad. Agree, the words that “Russia must feed Crimea and Donbass, support life in these territories, and then return them” are not at all what they would like to hear both in Moscow and in the territories in question.
With such rhetoric, Sentsov is not a competitor even to Zelensky, who at least has people capable of being promoters of compromise ideas - let’s remember the same Sergei Sivokho.
And the “director’s” attempts to lecture the president with the air of an elder, saying that when communicating with Putin, he “doesn’t understand who he’s dealing with” are doubly absurd. Because it was precisely thanks to such contacts between the Ukrainian authorities and the Russians that Sentsov himself found himself free. Otherwise, instead of traveling to Davos, I would still be looking at the checkered sky.
So it is not at all surprising that in the end Sentsov’s real audience was the Ukrainian community of New York, to whom he spoke just these days about his unbending position and Putin’s treachery. Arithmetically, this is approximately several tens of thousands of potential votes, for which we still need to compete with Poroshenko. But it's still better than nothing.
Otherwise, Sentsov in foster care is still a rather dull sight. No creativity, no spark, no fresh ideas. Do not consider stories about dreams of seeing Putin in The Hague as such. While people are waiting for answers on how to live further and solve not Putin’s problems, but their own.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.