by Scott Humor

A bit of background, Arseniy Yatsenyuk was a Ukraine’s Minister of Economy from 2005 to 2006; then he became Foreign Minister of Ukraine in 2007, and after that  he was a Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada (parliament) from 2007 to 2008.

In 2009 he ran as a candidate for the president of Ukraine, but people didn’t vote for him, a snafu he loudly attributed to his Jewish roots. Instead, people voted for Viktor Yanukovych. The result of this election was recognized by the US government and by the EU authorities as legitimate and constitutional.

However, vindictive Yatsenyuk tried to dissolve the Verkhovna Rada government, because in his view the parliament would prevent him from working.

Newly elected President Yanukovych offered him to become a Prime Minister of Ukraine,  but Yatsenyuk declined.

On January 25, 2014, President Yanukovych against offered Yatsenyuk the post of prime minister but he declined again.

On October 27, 2013,  Yatseniuk participated at the Trilateral Commission meeting in Krakow, Poland.  presided over by Jean-Claude Trichet (former head of the European Central Bank) on the topic “Ukraine and European Union.”

“The second day of the conference was devoted to the expected signing by Ukraine of an association agreement with the European Union. Speakers of the session included Ukrainian Minister of Foreign Affairs Leonid Kozhara, Supreme Rada Deputy Arseniy Yatsenyuk, former President of Poland Aleksander Kwaśniewski and former US Ambassador to Ukraine Steven Pifer.

The speeches were similar in tonality: Ukraine has no alternative to European integration and the only remain issue is the release of Yulia Tymoshenko, which must be resolved in three weeks’ time.”

Yanukovych wasn’t that sure about alternative-less integration with European Union, because he thought that this integration might destroy the country’s economy.

On October 30th, 2013, The United State president Barack Obama’s assistant secretary of state, Victoria Nuland, traveled to Ukraine in order to prevent Mr. Yanukovych from backing out of a promise to sign sweeping political and trade agreements with Europe.

According to the documents made public in a proceeding in the Landesgerichtsstrasse Regional Court on April 30, 2015, Nuland blackmailed the president of Ukraine.

“A Vienna, Austria, court has ruled that Victoria Nuland, the US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, attempted to pressure the President of Ukraine, Victor Yanukovich, into accepting Ukrainian association with the European Union (EU) by threatening Ukrainian oligarch Dmitry Firtash with arrest, extradition to the US, and imprisonment on allegations of bribery several years ago in India.”

“This record reveals that Judge Bauer heard evidence that the US Government had shown political favour for Yulia Tymoshenko to replace President Victor Yanukovich; intervened to block the Firtash-supported candidacy of Vitaly Klitschko as Ukrainian president after Yanukovich’s ouster on February 21, 2014; and sought reallocation of Firtash’s assets in the gas and titanium sectors. For more on the US interest in Ukrainian titanium, read this.”

While the United State directly intervened in Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych first agreed to sign an EU Association Agreement and then refused to follow the Americans’ demands.

“In the wake of the revelations in the Austrian court proceeding a record of part of what Nuland and Yanukovich discussed has surfaced. Tape-recordings of Nuland’s confidential remarks in Kiev have surfaced in the past and can be read here. The following content cannot be corroborated, and its accuracy should be treated with caution:

“NULAND: Mr President, we will have Firtash arrested unless you agree to sign the [EU] Association Agreement.
YANUKOVICH: Okay, I’ll sign.
In the background, a telephone rings. Audible footsteps, mumbling, as Yanukovich excuses himself to take the call. In his absence, Nuland whispers to Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt.
NULAND: We got the guy by the [f…… b….], huh?
PYATT: Way to go, Toria!
(Separate telephone tape, in Russian)
YANUKOVICH: You’re off the hook, Dima. This (American woman) АМЕРИКАНКА fell for it.
FIRTASH: МОЛОДЕЦ! (Good job) Mr President.”

For refusing to sign an EU Agreement, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, Poroshenko, Victor Pinchuk, and several other Ukrainian and American oligarchs, openly supported by Hilary Clinton, and the Obama administration organized bloody armed coup-d’etat, deposing the democratically elected President Yanukovich and replacing him with Arseniy Yatsenyuk himself.

Nudelman, which is the real name of Victoria Nuland, was called co-author of the February 21 coup d’etat in Kiev, that plunged Russians, Ukrainians and Europeans into tsunami of troubles, from which there is no easy way out, if at all, since the Americans are dead set to keep almost 1 billion people in the state of warm war for as long as they can.

Who has been avoiding any troubles so far was Yatsenyuk himself. After his resignation on April 2016, he moved to the United State with his personal fortune that grew, reputedly, in just two years to two billion dollars.

Since his departure for the US, Arseniy Yatsenyuk  indicated that he had no desire to return back to Ukraine, which was a pity considering how deeply the nation was delighted and grateful for everything he had done to her.

That’s why things got interesting when he did travel back to give his testimony in Kiev court on December 12, 2017.

In the video below, Arseniy Yatsenyuk is being questioned  by Yanukovych’s legal team in a “state treason’ case against ex-president Viktor Yanukovych. Questioned for over one hour, Yatsenyuk said many interesting things, for example how they planned to start the civil war in Crimea.

But one aspect of his testimonies is especially important, because Yatsenyuk, effectively, rebuffed the official Kiev authorities post-putsch narration .


Full video of Yachenuk’s testimonies in the court case Ukraine vs. President Yanukovich

December 12, Obolonsky district court of Kyiv Yatsenyuk said that the last time he talked to Yanukovych was on February 22, 2014.

“This was a phone call, this call was carried out from the premises of the chairman of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, this contact was via a mobile phone. If I remember correctly, it was a mobile phone of one of the members of the Party of Regions. And then I personally talked with Viktor Yanukovych about his further actions for the settlement of the political crisis, which took place in 2014.”

About the last meeting with Yanukovych

According to the Yatsenyuk, he claimed that there were “no threats to Yanukovych’s life, even after his “escape from Kiev in February 2014. “

His statement that Yanukovich “excaped from Kiev” is misleading. Yanukovich conducted a work related trip to Kharkov, and after that he went to Crimea, which at the time still was the territory of Ukraine.

Yatsenyuk testifies that:

“The circumstances of leaving the territory of Ukraine were much better known to Vladimir Putin, because also from his personal interview, it became clear how under coverage of Russian servicemen of the Russian FSB GRU Viktor Yanukovych left the territory of Ukraine. I know this information from an interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin, where he said how he saved Yanukovych.”

However, on February 22-23, Yanukovych was on the territory of Ukraine. He was in Crimea, that at the time still was an autonomous republic of Ukraine.

Yatsenyuk testifies that: “And again about the disappearance of Yanukovych…”

Yatsenyuk says that the president of Ukraine disappeared in the night of February 21-22, 2014. “Does Constitution of any state provide for the possibility, when the president simply disappeared? Moreover, not only that he disappeared, he also moved to the territory of the state that carried out military aggression against Ukraine… Viktor Yanukovych disappeared on the night of February 21-22, 2014. Nobody knew where Viktor Yanukovych was, moreover, if you saw the interview Viktor Yanukovych gave to the national channels, it was written for us in an unknown place, and then Yanukovych said that he would not sign anything.”

However, according to his open testimonies on record, Yatsenyuk said that he spoke to Yanukovych over the phone sometime during the day of February 22, and “he said that he was in Crimea.”

The Rada deputies voted to dismiss  Yanukovych at 17:00 on February 22, 2014.  So, the phone call took place sometime in the morning or lunchtime, before the Rada unconstitutional decision, when Yatsenyuk claimed that  Yanukovych  “disappeared.”

So, Yatsenyuk lies about “ Yanukovych ‘s escape from Kiev.”  It’s a provable fact that he went to Kharkov in official capacity.

Yatsenyuk also lies about the “president of Ukraine’s disappearance” and that “no one knew where he was on February 21-22.”. Yatsenyuk testified that he spoke with  Yanukovych over the phone and he knew that  Yanukovych was in Crimea, which was a territory of Ukraine at the time.

Finaly, Yatsenyuk lies that “nobody knew where Viktor Yanukovych was.” He Yatsenyuk personally knew where Yanukovych was on February 22 and he lied to the government and to the people about the fact that Yanukovych was on the territory of Ukraine in Crimea.

Yatsenyuk and other government officials used the Rada authority to announce to the nation that the president “disappeared” and that “no one knew where he was.”  He made this statement just hours after talking to the President and knowing that the President was in Crimea at that time.

In his court testimonies, Yatsenyuk simultaneously admitted that Crimea wasn’t part of Ukraine, and admitted perjuring himself in the Rada about Viktor Yanukovych whereabouts.

No one expected Yatsenyuk to say all that.  He admitted that he and a group of other lawmakers committed crimes against the state Constitution as for the  Article 109 of Criminal Code of Ukraine:

“Article 109. Actions aimed at forcible change or overthrow of the constitutional order or the seizure of state power shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of five to ten years. ….”

The supporters of EuroMaidan have been claiming that it was in accordance with the “spirit of Constitution” that the President was deposed.

However, this is not the case.

The Constitution provides only a limited list of reasons why presidential powers can be removed: in an event of death of the head of state, his incapacity due to illness, willful resignation, or as a result of a complicated and multistage process of impeachment. None of these conditions were fulfilled. A resolution to dismiss Yanukovych was taken solely on the grounds of Yatsenyuk’s  statements  alleging that  Yanukovych was “lost” during the armed uprising.

Scott Humor’s books in Amazon Kindle Store

ANTHOLOGY OF RUSSIAN HUMOR: from Maidan to Trump: humor and laughter in the time of global war, by Scott Humor

The Enemy of the State: An excerpt from How To Be Russian, by Scott Humor

Scott Humor’s paperback books

ANTHOLOGY OF RUSSIAN HUMOR: from Maidan to Trump: humor and laughter in the time of global war, by Scott Humor