The far right’s disproportionate influence

Photo: Andrew Bossi (CC) commons.wikimedia.org

Black and white discourse

Nearly five years since the EuroMaidan, the right-wing movement in Ukraine appears to be thriving. In the post-revolutionary period, however, this movement no longer protects liberal-leaning values, but spreads fear and puts down left-wing views. While still a significant minority, these groups have acted aggressively, often with the unofficial blessing of the authorities who allow the far right to melt into the conservative mainstream and influence Ukrainian public opinion.

If the EuroMaidan defended European ideas, then the conservative and right-wing radical groups are Euro-sceptics in terms of economic and social policy. At the social level, the rejection of European values is especially noticeable in relation to issues like feminism and LGBT rights. For the Ukrainian far right, these ideas have become synonyms for immorality, just like the labels “leftists” and “liberals” have acquired a pejorative meaning. In the increasingly black-and-white discourse of the nationalists each attempt to defend progressive values risks being dubbed Kremlin propaganda spread by Russian agents.

Nevertheless, the majority of the population is still pro-European. Society either does not notice the impact that the radicals are having or it considers them as overly emotional patriots. Nationalism, within a country immersed in war, serves as a force to unite against the enemy. Therefore, their views are not seen as dangerous but necessary and a temporary phenomenon. Against this background, the marginal groups have managed to grow, and over the past number of years they have become increasingly more present and influential in mainstream political discourse. Recently, they have begun their takeover of higher education institutions, increasingly penetrated by right-wing views and groups.

Last year, Alexei Kurinnoy, a law lecturer at the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, wrote on Facebook that seeing students wearing mini-skirts and navel piercings tempted him to give them higher grades. He nevertheless “managed to survive, despite the spring”. The post provoked a strong reaction from students at the university and sparked a protest against sexism and sexual exploitation. But the rally was soon disrupted by representatives of right-wing groups, including Svoboda, the Right Sector and Falcon, who claimed they were there to fight against “leftists and feminists” and protect the teacher/patriot. In their view, the campaign against sexism was a Moscow-inspired provocation.

In one interview, the teacher had said that the protest was a result of his active social media presence. “I am a public activist who is engaged in actions that are controversial for the pro-Russian part of society. These include decommunisation and questions of national memory. In my posts I often refer to specific names, cases and situations. And this may be the reason why I was targeted,” he said. The teacher expressed his gratitude to the right-wing groups who supported him and helped to expose the Putin-like provocation. He also promised to continue to fight for Ukrainianness by all legal means, despite the hostile resistance. “We’ll talk about feminism later. Glory to Ukraine,” Kurinnoy added.

Campus conflicts

Following the same logic, students from the National Pedagogical Dragomanov University in Kyiv were sent to the Vladimir Cathedral for prayer during the lectures. Screenshots of correspondences between the students and their class presidents began circulating on social media. Participation in the event appeared to be “voluntary-compulsory” and it was made clear that non-attendance would be regarded as truancy. Female students were asked to wear head scarves and skirts. Some students came to the prayer service holding banners saying “I was forced to come here instead of classes”. Soon, they were confronted by Bohdan Khodakovsky, the leader of Tradition and Order, a political movement.

 “Today, together with other student-Christians, we came to the Vladimir Cathedral to declare that we will not allow anyone to humiliate our religion, and that we are proud of our belonging to the church,” Khodakovsky wrote on Facebook. This was the beginning of a prolonged battle to save the university from what the right has seen as moral decay.

In September 2017, teachers Anna Maria Basauri and Ekaterina Goncharenko, together with philosophy student Valeriya Zubatenko, announced the launch of a “gender club”. The club was meant to become a discussion platform, free from prejudices and stereotypes, where participants could discuss primary sources on gender theory, share their everyday experiences and analyse culture through a gender lens. After the university administration decided not to register the club as an optional university group, the organisers elected to gather at the Sklo university art space. The idea soon sparked a backlash from far-right groups operating on the university campus. 

“When they saw me in the corridor, they tried in every possible way to touch me, humiliate me and provoke an argument. They said ‘Sieg Heil’ making a Nazi salute”, Zubatenko recalls. “I knew they would come to the opening of the club as they said that we should wait for them.”

As expected, four representatives of right-wing groups came to the first meeting of the club, but the organisers refused to let them in, arguing that they were not there for the discussion. In response, the group stated that their rights were being violated. The organisers finally agreed to allow them to participate under the condition that they follow the club’s rules: do not interrupt others and tolerate all views. The right-wing activists failed to follow these rules, however, and the organisers agreed that next time, they would be excluded from the discussion.

But that was easier said than done. A group of 15 right-wingers showed up at the next meeting. Some of them were university students. The discussion never took place as the unwanted guests accused club members of extremism, propagating a particular ideology and disgracing the university by spreading deviant views. The accusations were coupled with demands that the meeting organisers leave the premises. The main arguments against the club included the claims that gender does not exist and that the concept is unscientific.

While a representative of the dean’s office interfered in the argument, at first condemning the right-wing intrusion, she later stated that she understood their position. “Instead of discussing theoretical writings, we listened to the radicals talking to the deputy dean for half an hour on gender ideology, and that we want to enslave the Ukrainian people and force them to pay taxes which will be spent on toilets for transgender people,” the organiser reported.

Continued threats

Katekhon, an organisation that opposes “exposing children to homosexual propaganda, same-sex marriage, gender dictatorship and the killing of children,” published an article on its Facebook page about driving gender propagandists out of universities. The article referenced the gender club meeting and argued that hysterical female participants had to be calmed down by a representative of the university administration who, after listening to the position of the Christian students, solved the problem. Moreover, Katekhon drew attention to the fact that a number of articles around this incident were written in Russian and suggested that grants for the destructive activity of the gender club came from Russia. They also stressed that the story should be an example of a successful fight against LGBT rights and feminism, and called those who learn about such “deviations” at universities to contact the administration and Christian organisations or write to Katekhon.

The next day, through a third person, Zubatenko was told that the administration does not want any information about the incident to be leaked to the press and was advised to keep it quiet. The incident took place on the eve of the rector’s election so the university did not want the publicity. That evening, the Sklo art space was unexpectedly closed for renovation.

The threats continued and so did the passivity of the university administration. But the gender club decided to hold another meeting. Their discussion was soon interrupted by three men in balaclavas. Storming into the room, one of them shouted: “We are closing you down!” Shortly after, one of the young men used pepper spray on the club members. Some inhaled the gas and one sustained a chemical burn. The organisers have accused Oles Marinovich and Artyom Oleynik – students who regularly participate in actions like this – as the attackers. It was not possible to identify the third assailant.

Marinovich himself denies his participation in the attack. In his comment for Studway.com.ua, he claimed that the club members were trying to slander him, since they disliked his comments from past meetings at the club where he came “searching for dialogue”.

After the incident, Zubatenko wrote a statement and Basauri requested the expulsion of the student she recognised from the university. In response, the dean called a meeting with Marinovich and representatives of the student union who declared their neutrality. Neither Zubatenko nor Basauri were invited to the meeting. Two first year students, whose paths never crossed with Marinovich, were asked to represent the victims of the attack.

Responding to journalists’ questions about the incident, the vice rector, Igor Vetrov, said that the administration had already identified “certain names” and implemented “certain steps” against the attackers. He assured that the university would make every effort so that similar situations do not happen in the future. On the question of whether the university can expel the attackers, Vetrov replied, “No, absolutely not. It would be persecution. If they violated the law – this is the responsibility of the police.” The police, in turn, reported that they had not included Zubatenko’s case in the register of pre-trial investigations since she “did not go to hospital and refused to undergo forensic medical examination due to minor bodily harm.”

The dean’s office suggested that the club change its name to “the gender science club” and become officially affiliated with the university, which would require the university to take responsibility for its security. Such a move, according to the dean, would prevent further violence. The organisers, however, are sceptical of the proposal. They see it as an expression of tolerance for violence since the university failed to unequivocally condemn the attack.

Us vs them

Ukrainian national unity, in the eyes of the far right, rests on the imaginary dualism of “us” and “them”, where any position of a mediator is perceived as betrayal, any criticism as a provocation and any peacekeeping attempt as fraternisation with the enemy. These dichotomies concern both zones of direct military conflict and citizen initiatives. In Ukraine, intolerance has intensified. Threats of physical violence by right-wing radicals, who aim to suppress public expressions of alternative views on social and political issues, are way too common. Those holding views contrary to the far right are declared as “separatists” and “enemies of the people”. At the same time, violating the law, suppressing freedom of speech, inciting ethnic hatred, xenophobia and political cleansing often goes unpunished.

Moreover, not infrequently, the authorities not only fail to adequately respond to violence, but often directly support such actions. In September 2017 representatives of an LGBT Association were planning to lay flowers at the monument to the Heavenly Hundred Heroes in Mykolayiv. The event was cancelled after the group received threats from representatives of Falcon and the Right Sector, and because the police were not able to guarantee the safety of the participants. Furthermore, the organisers of the Lviv Publishers Forum received threats from far-right groups forcing them to cancel the presentation of a book about lesbian parents.

Similar violations and acts of discrimination take place on the level of public administration. The Poltava City Council published an open statement urging the Verkhovna Rada to ban the “propaganda of deviant sexual behaviour”, including gay parades and queer culture festivals, and to remove any mention of “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” from national legislation. On March 8th 2018 marches for women’s rights took place in several Ukrainian cities and a number of attacks against participants and journalists were reported. In Kyiv, a claim of administrative violation was filed against the director of Insight LGBTQ NGO, Elena Shevchenko. The reason was a complaint about a banner which was held by several rally participants depicting a naked woman whose foot was punctured with a trident-like object. The image was interpreted as a “violation of a state symbol”. On March 12th, a district court held a hearing in the case, which was attended by about 20 young people from far-right groups. According to Shevchenko and her lawyer, they arrived with golf clubs and gas cartridges, threatened her and exerted pressure on the court. Following the trial, they blocked the exit of the court building, which forced Shevchenko to call a private guard. The court’s session was postponed.

At the same time, police and law enforcement agencies react in emergency cases only, in order not to provoke the radicals. This was the case with the Rossotrudnichestvo (the Russian Centre for Science and Culture) in Kyiv which was attacked by the far right in February this year while the police stood by and watched. A similar situation occurred in Kyiv last January during a memorial event for the Russian human rights lawyer Stanislav Markelov and the journalist Anastasia Baburova (who was murdered in 2009). The police did not intervene while the group of far-rightists threatened violence. At the same time, the police detained several protesters to check their identity and registered them as witnesses. All these examples show that in contemporary Ukraine, restrictions on freedom of expression and the right to peaceful assembly continue.

Vertical control over public life has been replaced by horizontal control – exercised by “conscious Ukrainians” representing radical right-wing organisations. Most of these groups (such as the National Corps/Azov movement) have several wings: a political party, a military battalion and a civil youth organisation. The latter wing is actively involved in censoring public life as well as promoting the “patriotic education” of Ukrainian citizens and traditional values.

The majority of Ukrainian society does not support the far right, but they choose not to interfere and just stay quiet – like the dean at Dragomanov University. The level of self-censorship is increasing. Fear of provoking the radicals which can elicit an even stronger reaction raises questions about the current state of freedom of speech and expression in Ukraine.

Translated by Agnieszka Pikulicka-Wilczewska

Nina Boichenko holds and MA in cultural studies. She writes about the Ukrainian far right and the new national identity.

nationalism, right-wing, Ukraine