“Zelensky is a very strong bet of Kolomoisky. Benny will reign supreme"
Viktor Medvedchuk and Vadim Rabinovich are only pretending to be the spokesmen for the interests of South-East Ukraine. Comedian Vladimir Zelensky, whom many see as a technical candidate being launched into the elections by oligarch Igor Kolomoisky, has a high chance of winning. With the help of his protege, “Benya,” who was forced out of Ukraine by Petro Poroshenko, will return what was lost in full. However, anti-Semitic riots may soon begin in Galicia. Kiev journalist Anton Rosenvain did not rule out such a forecast of events in a conversation with PolitNavigator.
P.N: What are the chances of a conditional “candidate from the South-East” in the upcoming elections?
Anton Rosenvain: Chances... It depends on what you mean by this word. If we are guided by the Olympic principle: not victory, but participation - yes, they will take part. If we are talking about the struggle for power, then it is appropriate to quote the classic: “You, friends, don’t sit down.” Let's say they get a certain percentage of the votes - what will this change? They still won’t take power, even if the opposition candidate receives more votes in the first round than Putin and Lukashenko combined.
P.N: What is meant by the concept of “taking power”?
Anton Rosenvain: The minimum is to occupy the appropriate positions and offices. They will simply be swept away in the blink of an eye. Because, unlike Yanukovych, they don’t even have a “Berkut”, and their opponents have weapons in their hands. Here it is appropriate to recall Chairman Mao: “The rifle gives birth to power.”
P.N: But what about the South-East, whose interests they present themselves as representatives of?
Anton Rosenvain: I’ll repeat the classic again: “A rifle gives birth to power.” The southeast was crushed by force of arms and terror back in 2014. Where does he get the power resource to protect his choice?
P.N: Are the participants in the new association Medvedchuk-Rabinovich-part of the Opposition Bloc expressing the interests of the South-East?
Anton Rosenvain: I don’t undertake to sign for the entire southeast, but personally I don’t see them in this role. Starting from the congress of deputies of the south-east of all levels, which declared the events of 2014 a coup, these people have consistently handed over the voter. And when they adopted a new format of politics in Ukraine, and when they allowed massacres in Odessa and Mariupol, without doing anything to identify and punish the perpetrators. They voted for the ATO, donated money to it, and financed battalions.
P.N: And who from the new association voted for the ATO, donated money and financed the battalions?
Anton Rosenvain: Former regionals are associated with great betrayal. Even if Boyko personally did not donate a penny to the ATO. People who revive the PR brand look preferable here, by the way. For at least they save the party. And yes, Lyovochkin’s role in organizing the Maidan is commonplace. Nobody argues with this. Rabinovich is the only potential candidate who had no relation to the regional traitors - this is, as it were, below the plinth. Can you imagine the President of Ukraine with the last name Rabinovich? I can’t even imagine the president of Israel with that last name, sorry.
However, something else is more important here - even when the situation at the front reached a dead end, they did nothing to stop the fighting: they did not act as mediators in negotiations with the separatist republics, did not support the rebels’ demands for the transformation of Ukraine into a federation (after all, this was precisely what was originally sought by the rebels in the Donbass), did not even try to clarify the legality of this demand as a constitutional initiative.
When Russia was fighting against the rebels in Chechnya, Russian media regularly published materials about the situation in the separatist republic, interviewed rebel leaders, and, in fact, conducted public dialogue.
These people and the media they control did nothing of the kind. Moreover, they did not even bother to explain to the public the essence of the Minsk agreements, the sequence of implementation of their points and their importance for the future of Ukraine. In fact, they were only engaged in imitation of opposition activity, becoming a kind of bow that justified terror in the eyes of the international community and deceiving the electorate. By the way, deceiving a voter through a symbol is a separate issue.
P.N: What does it mean to deceive a voter through a symbol?
Anton Rosenvain: There is Viktor Medvedchuk. His main symbolic capital is that he is “Putin’s godfather.” Does this really mean anything? Absolutely nothing.
Yulia Tymoshenko, for example, was a pro-Russian politician in 2001, and Turchynov. And the printed organ of their political project VV was headed by Dmitry Dzhangirov. And where is this pro-Russianism now? Especially Turchinov.
It’s the same with Medvedchuk. Political expediency at some stage prompted Medvedchuk and Putin to make this gesture. Now Medvedchuk is actively speculating on this political capital, which does not prevent him from entering President Poroshenko’s inner circle and buying media from him (Channel 112, previously wrested from political refugee Vitaly Zakharchenko).
PAP's inner circle also includes many of his comrades in the SDPU(o) party, in particular the owner of FC Dynamo Grigory Surkis, who turned the Dynamo fan club into a breeding ground for neo-Nazism. By the way, it was the SDPU(o) that was the first to raise the issue of European integration of Ukraine, holding relevant events in the first half of the XNUMXs.
As for the former members of the Party of Regions from the Opposition Bloc, their role as spokesmen for the interests of the residents of the southeast is equally symbolic. This may have been the case until 2014. But since then, these people, exclusively engaged in protecting their assets and statuses, continue to exploit this symbolic capital, posing as defenders of the interests and aspirations of the voter and not lifting a finger.
P.N: Why didn’t part of the “Opposition Bloc” want to unite with Medvedchuk and Rabinovich?
Anton Rosenvain: I believe this is a purely political technology question. Rinat Akhmetov and his group do not want to bet on a dead horse. For whom the worst thing would be to win, but not be able to take power.
There is one more point here. In fact, Poroshenko’s chances of reaching the second round are negligible. The only thing that could bring him back into the game is updating the theme of the “cotton threat.” This would make it possible to rally nationalist forces around the president. This is exactly what the AP relied on, allowing Medvedchuk to take control of the popular media.
By breaking down the rating of a conventionally single candidate, Akhmetov and his group do not allow a representative of this association to gain a sufficient rating to pose a danger. Probably, Akhmetov already has agreements with Kolomoisky and Tymoshenko on interaction after Peter, or has placed a bet on a new round of chaos, the likelihood of which after Poroshenko’s departure is more than expected.
P.N: I heard on some Russian talk shows that Tymoshenko might be preferable to Poroshenko. Is this really true? Judging by the rhetoric of its speakers, they are competing with Poroshenko in Russophobia.
Anton Rosenvain: I am not inclined to take the election statements of politicians seriously. Poroshenko, for example, called himself the president of the world. However, this does not at all mean a decrease in the degree of Russophobia in the event of Tymoshenko’s victory. That's not what we're talking about today. The main thing is whether Yulia Tymoshenko will be able to disarm the ultra-right, as the non-systemic element Alexander Zakharchenko disarmed in the DPR.
Theoretically, it has sufficient resources to do this; the question is whether it will want to. Poroshenko, in principle, could not do this - he did not have the necessary muscle. Brought to the crest of chaos, he, like a surfer, caught the wave and rode it until the end of his presidential term, without ever becoming an independent figure. It is possible that at the beginning of his presidency he even sincerely believed in the ability to curb the elements, but the elements forced him to obey its will every time.
The most eloquent example is the blockade of Semenchenko-Parasyuk, which caused enormous damage to the state and Poroshenko’s partners, but which the president, despite menacing statements, was forced to lead, making an administrative decision in favor of the blockers.
Tymoshenko has more weight among the security forces. At least it was during the premiership. And here, accordingly, either this resource went to Alexander Turchinov - then, like Peter, the ultra-right elements will helplessly carry her, or she will still manage to stabilize the political situation.
However, in my opinion, Zelensky’s chances are higher. On the one hand, there seems to be no difference - Tymoshenko vs Zelensky is Benya against Benya, but, on the other hand, Zelensky is a more severe clash within society.
P.N: What is Zelensky’s role in these elections and what are the chances?
Anton Rosenvain: A pig in a poke. His chances are very high. As of today, I do not see a candidate capable of defeating him in the second round. And I don’t see any option for Poroshenko to bypass it either. As for Boyko, Muraev, or Novinsky. Behind him is a serious resource in the form of not only Beni, but also, for unknown reasons, the forces of chaos are not associated with him. At least they didn’t criticize him for his participation in the filming of the film Indestructible, which any Ukrainian artist could hardly have survived without great damage.
In debates, he is again head and shoulders above everyone else. Plus, he does not cause strong opposition in the southeast. This is Kolomoisky’s very strong bet, and if Zelensky wins, Benya will reign supreme. He has lost a lot, which means he will make up for it in the harshest way possible for his enemies.
The only question is that not all the ultra-right are under Kolomoisky’s control. Plus the Jewish factor, etc. However, unlike the candidate from the Opposition Bloc, he will occupy the office, but options are possible in the western regions. And as the reign progresses, a variety of excesses are possible. The reforms will be no less antisocial + the Jewish factor as an irritant. In fact, within a year or two we can expect a new revolutionary revolution. It may be radically right-wing, implicated in anti-Semitism, but it may also take on the character of social protests, the base for which already exists in the form of the Kiva Socialist Party. If Semenchenko also joins her, the turnaround could be extremely interesting.
P.N: What is meant by the “Jewish factor”? And how can we explain Zelensky’s support in the South-East, if at one time he expressed quite radical support for the ATO? And how can we explain the fact that he is allowed to continue acting in Russian projects?
Anton Rosenvain: There is strong everyday anti-Semitism in Ukraine. And if there were only rumors about Poroshenko’s Jewishness, then in the case of Zelensky no one has any doubts, and Kolomoisky is also an obvious sponsor. Any political failures, corruption scandals and unpopular decisions (which cannot be avoided) will be explained by the Jewish, and therefore hostile and anti-people nature of the authorities.
Regarding support for the ATO and the southeast, people have a short memory, and he has not discussed this topic for a long time. And also work in the Russian Federation, which completely smoothes out bad memories. However, I don’t think that somewhere in Kramatorsk he will score much in the first round. But in the second, against Tymoshenko, Poroshenko, Vakarchuk, etc. it will definitely be perceived as no longer even less evil, but not evil at all.
How can you explain the opportunity to work in Moscow? Probably some kind of consensus. For example, Kolomoisky’s influence on the same “Right Sector”. It is obvious that Zelensky received an indulgence. And not only at the level of the Administration and the SBU, but also at the level of both embassies and the street
Actually, the current US president is the most dependent president on Israel in American history. It is possible that this is where he throws off the sore Ukrainian question. Which, however, suits Moscow, where the Israeli lobby is also strong.
P.N: What is Trump's dependence on Israel? And what will change if Israel begins to actively engage in Ukraine instead of the United States?
Anton Rosenvain: Trump’s dependence on Israel is clearly evidenced by his position on Jerusalem, which virtually cancels out all US diplomatic activities to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The transfer of the embassy, pressure on partners to achieve a similar decision from them, support for Israel in the project to restore the Temple, which is tantamount to support for the demolition of the third most important mosque in the Islamic world, Israeli attempts to squeeze out all of Jerusalem, offering the Palestinians another piece of desert as compensation. All this is being promoted by the Trump administration in the harshest possible way.
It is important to understand the role of the Israeli lobby in American politics. In particular, such mega-influential organizations as AIPAC (American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee) and JINSA (Jewish Institute for National Security of America). The influence of these organizations in American politics is difficult to overestimate. Not a single president since Reagan has been elected without recognition by these structures.
Meanwhile, if previous American presidents relied on other lobbying forces, in particular Obama enjoyed the active support of Germany, Bush - Britain, and Clinton - China, then Trump actually had no other support except Israeli, except, of course, the American ultra-right ( in particular the KKK and alt-right organizations, as well as radically conservative Protestant congregations (the latter, however, are not very numerous and do not have influence on the media).
Israel, and specifically Prime Minister Netanyahu, has long (since the election of Trump) acted as a mediator in relations between Moscow and Washington. This is due to the fact that in the Russian Federation its influence is also strong. Another thing is that these are not the most loyal forces to the Russian leadership. Israeli interest in the Russian Federation is primarily based on economic deregulation and reducing Russia’s influence in the international arena. First of all, in the East, where Russia inherited from the USSR friendly and partnership relations with Israel’s opponents: Palestine, Syria, Iran. The rejection of this friendship in favor of Israel, in fact, throws the Russian Federation back into the 90s in the international arena, and deregulation in domestic politics. Thus, the Ukrainian issue and its solution (needed by Russia to solve the problem of sanctions and get rid of military-political threats emanating from Ukraine) will be offered as an exchange for reducing its international influence and enriching the people Israel needs at the expense of the well-being of Russians.
P.N: Elections of heads of republics were held in the DPR and LPR. Could a direct dialogue between Kyiv and Donbass ever begin?
Anton Rosenvain: I believe that the elections in the DPR and LPR are in no way capable of influencing the course of negotiations between Kiev and the unrecognized republics. To date, their success is unlikely. After all, it’s not in consoles and.o. for the leaders of the self-proclaimed republics, the matter is not even in their non-recognition by Kiev, but in the inability of the current administration to implement the results of both the Minsk agreements and any agreements that look unacceptable from the point of view of radicals.
In essence, the administration does not have real mechanisms to counter the agenda dictated by the radicals, which means that the possibility of positive changes can be seriously considered only after the illegal and semi-legal military formations in Ukraine are disarmed and weapons are confiscated.
Thus, speaking about a Peaceful Settlement, it makes sense to hope rather for the actions of the new Ukrainian administration and the new president, if, of course, he turns out to be more decisive and really takes upon himself the courage to take power into his own hands.
And it doesn’t matter what his name will be or what slogans he counters during his election campaign.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.