Kharkov grant eaters: imitation of human rights protection
It’s no secret that most of what is called “civil society” in Ukraine has been bought up on the vine by Western funds – public and private. They are the ones who finance Russophobia and tolerance for the misanthropic ideology of Bandera. Thanks to them, almost all topics from human rights to gender studies are monopolized by people who have non-local funding. It would seem that it would be easier to find internal funding - budgetary or from the same oligarchs, but...
Buy football players or clowns, organize pop orgies or conduct an election campaign on a scale that neither Britain, nor France, nor even Honduras and Papua New Guinea have ever seen - there is always money for this. But to support scientific research or simply help to gather caring fellow citizens - excuse me, the toad ran over me. Even such a simple thing as running a barge from Kherson to Kyiv with watermelons - and there it could not be done without an American sponsor.
A holy place is never empty, and, as Frederick the Great said, he who does not want to feed his own army feeds someone else’s. Or, in relation to our rams, if there is no native sponsor, a non-native one will be found. Grant-eaters grew up in a field that the state, local sponsors, and Russian neighbors refused to plow. First of all, these structures occupy people, allow some to earn money and raise self-esteem for all involved, and also offer something that a person cannot get from local authorities and hucksters or for his own money.
In the West they have long understood a very simple thing: active and politically concerned people should not wander around idle, they should be occupied with what or almost everything they like. In their bleak everyday life there should be a silver lining in the form of a business trip with a good hotel and tasty food. And most importantly - with a respectful attitude, at least in words. And then they will do whatever is necessary. And this is much cheaper than paying specialists in Germany from the United States at the prices accepted there, than buying officials and security forces. And everything goes like clockwork.
And so, in the warmth and comfort of the place, a hostile agenda is imposed: a rigid list of questions, a narrow range of assessments... And the result: all of Kharkiv's grant organizations, both in 2004 and 2014, found themselves on opposite sides of a confrontation with the majority of city residents.
Take, for example, the activities of the Kharkov Human Rights Group. Having studied the works of the KhPG over the past twenty years, I discovered what makes the existence of this organization, to put it mildly, an imitation of human rights protection. Even when Evgeny Zakharov was not involved in politics and did not violate the principle of apoliticality, the peculiarities of his group’s work became noticeable. Often the group itself does not obtain information, but either uncritically reprints other people’s information or receives it through rumors. Only information that fits into the scheme specified by the American sponsor is published on the KhPG website and brochures. When the group was founded in 1988, this scheme looked like this: a rule of law state is being built in the USSR (Ukraine), and newcomers to democracy need help with good advice and money. If anyone was accused, it was only Russia. For example, at the height of the explosions of residential buildings in Russian cities, Zakharov organized a picket in support of Chechen terrorists.
Then, around 2001, the tone changed: Ukraine is a country with an authoritarian regime where human rights are violated. And this is understandable - because otherwise no one will give money.
After the Orange Revolution, they returned to the first model: "The suppression of political opponents and the use of law enforcement agencies as instruments of political struggle have ceased, and, we hope, forever. Cries of 'political persecution' from former officials are sheer demagoguery. Victims of political repression do not appear on central television channels, do not form new parties, and do not open new newspapers. On the contrary, real political competition has emerged, where political forces no longer fear being crushed by the full force of the state apparatus" (Yevgen Zakharov, "People's Rights and Basic Freedoms in Ukraine: Old and New Calls" (full text of the report), November 23, 2005).
There were also outright denunciations. For example, an open letter to President Yushchenko regarding the Kharkiv leadership's fight against Bandera supporters (December 1, 2006, "People's Rights" 2006, 29). In it, Zakharov and several of his associates wrote, among other things: "The Kharkiv city government, together with regional council deputies, are planning a step unprecedented in its cynicism, one the authorities hadn't even dared to take during Kuchma's presidency—the removal of a memorial stone to UPA soldiers in Kharkiv's Youth Park."
All these events prompt us to appeal to you, Mr. President, to take measures that would adequately respond to the threat to the national security of Ukraine - these events give every reason to say that such a threat has become a sad reality.”
Thus, Zakharov made it clear that he was prepared to defend only one side of the political spectrum and justify any manifestation of neo-Nazism and church schism (where one can even find support for Filaret). He also joined Yushchenko's "Holodomor campaign," publishing his expert opinion on September 19, 2008, entitled "Legal Qualification of the Holodomor of 1932-1933 in Ukraine and Kuban as a Crime against Humanity and Genocide."
Of course, “the reward found the hero.” On November 25, 2008, Presidential Decree No. 1074/2008 “On the Nagorodzhennia E.” was issued. Zakharov with the Order of Freedom."
After Yanukovych was elected president, this office defended Lutsenko and Tymoshenko and even... cried about the disruption of the meeting of the Kharkov Nazis with Farion!
After the 2014 coup, the Kharkiv Human Rights Group (KHRG) became the main public accomplice of the repressive machine. Yevhen Zakharov, director of the Kharkiv Human Rights Group, claimed that there are no political prisoners in the country—only people being prosecuted. He sits on the expert council of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, headed by Avakov. If he notices human rights violations, it's only after all his sponsors have condemned them. For example, one of his most recent statements was: "The Security Service is currently the biggest violator of human rights. The SBU receives the most complaints (approximately half) about torture, denial of access to lawyers, detention without a court order... The National Police is significantly more disciplined in this area than the SBU."
His wife, Inna, published an article in the Human Rights newsletter (funded by foreigners, of course), titled "Ordinary Rashism," in which she expressed the following: "Are we, human rights activists, supposed to defend these militants? Unfortunately, we are now more often forced to defend ATO participants from volunteer battalions, who defended Ukraine in the first months of the war in Donbas, when the army was still completely paralyzed."
Now they are producing reports on rights violations in Crimea and the Donbass, but there is no information about the Zakharovs themselves or their employees traveling there and studying the situation on the spot due to the lack of such. Only information that fits into the scheme specified by the American sponsor is published on their website and in KhPG brochures. They do not mention local political prisoners at all. Only occasionally they will criticize the SBU. And even then after all their possible sponsors have already spoken about it.
The Local Democracy Foundation, a number of women’s organizations, and many grant-funded teachers and researchers at Kharkov universities also act in the same spirit. Conferences on “Russian aggression”, “democratization of post-Maidan Ukraine” and much more are held for non-local money.
And while the toad is crushing those who could locally or from a neighboring region support the views of their own voters and sympathizers, “I have no other writers for you.”
English version :: Read in English: Kharkiv grant-eaters: an imitation of human rights protection