Tetiana Derkach for Duhovnyy Front
Quarantine is coming to an end and people are gradually returning to their usual activities. But the Ukrainian church environment returns to the traditional quarrels and information war. The Greek resource Romfea published a material in which ex-president of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko was predicted to be jailed for treason becauseof promoting the creation of the OCU, and the PCU was predicted an inevitable collapse. It is clear that this publication could not escape the attention of Ukrainian experts.
Let’s start with the fact that the Romfea’s text is a translation of “news” published by the Russian state propaganda site RIA Novosti. The text is called “Condemned for treason”. Leaders of the Ukrainian split are threatened with jail”. The title is made for those who don’t read it further. It seems that ex-president Petro Poroshenko will be judged for treason for his participation in the establishment of the OCU. The article is replete with a bunch of allegations that either have no evidence or are simply unrelated – just a great example of lies and manipulations. And the cause for this “scoop” was an activity of the State Bureau of Investigation at the residence of former Patriarch Filaret. Allegedly, this was done as part of a “pre-trial investigation into the incitement of interfaith hatred by a group of persons, including officials of public authorities”. The information virus was thrown in by Neonila Tkachenko, who calls herself the “chief lawyer of the UOC-KP”. There is no information about this on the website of the State Bureau of Investigation, Tkachenko published no video or photo evidence of the incident.
Let’s see what this is really about.
Who is Neonila Tkachenko?
An author of the news on the Russian site “RIA Novosti” builds almost all his or her theses on the Facebook messages by Neonila Tkachenko. She appeared in the church domain in 2019 and began actively promote the topic of “squeezing” from the UOC-KP of one temple in Odessa by a new bishop of the Odessa eparchy of the OCU. In the past, this person often flashed in local media – but mainly as an adventurer and swindler who deceived a large number of people for large amounts of money. You can read about criminal cases opened against Tkachenko. Local medias also write a lot about Tkachenko’s and her common-law husband Andriy Sydorenko’s ties to antimaidan activists, as well as about the couple’s ability to “change their shoes in the air” and quickly change their rhetoric and patrons.
Apparently, Tkachenko became “the chief lawyer of the Kyiv Patriarchate” for these moral qualities and received the right to represent its interests in court. But something isn’t fine here. According to the Ukrainian law, representation in court is provided only by lawyers, and Tkachenko doesn’t have a lawyer’s certificate. That’s why he turns all the court hearings of this fake church against the OCU into a circus and scandals. Here you can watch her shows. Since I had the “happiness” to cross paths with this person, I can testify that she gives the impression of complete emotional inadequacy and imbalance.
Everyone is suing everyone
Now let’s come back to the articles with the headlines “the creators of the OCU will be judged for treason”. I will explain some details to readers who don’t understand the peculiarities of Ukrainian politics under the President Zelensky.
The fact is that in Ukraine after the last elections, the new government began to destroy everything that the previous one did. We are almost the only country in Europe where there is no continuity of policy – both foreign and domestic. In addition, we have had a so-called oligarchic system of governing since the mid-1990s. The oligarchs are not just “rich businessmen”, they are people whose economic interests and political preferences influence the country’s key areas and spheres of activity. And in order not to tear the country to pieces by them, each new president is forced to build a balance of checks and balances. In early 2014 the President Yanukovych and his government fled to Russia, as did almost all of his “staff”. The new president Poroshenko began to cleanse the country of Yanukovych and the oligarchs, who, in his opinion, could break the new checks and balances. This primarily concerned billionaire Igor Kolomoisky. In 2019 this balance was broken and it led to oligarchic wars.
Kolomoisky returned to Ukraine triumphantly, and many of Yanukovych’s personnel returned – and everyone wanted revenge on his predecessor for humiliation and exile. And everyone started suing everyone, Yanukovych-era influence groups started their war to return to power. And first of all Petro Poroshenko got nuts. Almost all charges against him have been filed by one person – Yanukovych’s lawyer and former first deputy head of his administration Andriy Portnov. If we look at a list, we find that these cases have nothing to do with the OCU. Moreover, it is not a fact that these criminal cases have real legal perspective, apart from scandals and hype. Therefore, headlines in the style of “The creator of the OCU is accused of treason” – extremely manipulative. With the same success, they could write that “The father of five is accused of treason”.
And now, for comparison, let’s see which of the top Ukrainian officials under the President Zelensky has similar accusations. The following are accused of treason:
- the head of the Office of the President Andriy Yermak,
- the second President of Ukraine Leonid Kuchma,
- several pro-Russian parliament members headed by Viktor Medvedchuk,
- the Ambassador of Ukraine to Canada,
- the mayor of Kiev Vitaly Klitschko,
- the head of the Security Service of Ukraine Ivan Bakanov…
In fact, each Ukrainian top official has several criminal cases or proceedings pending. Even the former head of the Office of the President Andriy Bohdan has been charged with beating a goat at the zoo. Someone wanted to sue for treason the President Zelensky himself – but he has legal immunity. Now, I hope, readers (especially foreign ones) will have an idea of what is happening in the legal field of Ukraine under the new government. So the case against Poroshenko is a drop in the ocean of legal chaos in which we live now. And I will note that in each such case lawyers, attorneys and other lawyers or those whom we call “solvers” earn well.
Next, the Russian correspondent quotes Ms. Tkachenko again: “Poroshenko and Epiphanius and Nishchuk (former Minister of Culture) are under investigation for inciting inter-religious hatred. Great company. And do these people still claim church regalia and statuses?” What invesigation are we talking about? By whom, when and against whom is the lawsuit filed? What is a procedure status of Poroshenko, Epiphanius and Nyschuk? Tkachenko provided no documentary evidence of this “case”, it is impossible to find information about it. But RIA Novosti hastened to conclude that this is directly related to the establishment of the OCU in 2018.
“Bartholomew is under investigation”
If you look through the feed of Neonila Tkachenko’s posts on Facebook, you can be moved: vyshyvankas, Ukrainian flags, wreaths, huts… But let this pseudo-patriotism not mislead anyone. For example, in the same post, which says about the “great company”, Tkachenko writes: “Bartholomew is under investigation by the Turkish authorities. The accusations are serious – encroachment on Turkey’s national security”.
In fact, Bartholomew isn’t under “investigation by the Turkish authorities”. One Turkish newspaper published a list of individuals and organizations that are members of the FETÖ terrorist organization, founded by religious figure Fethullah Gulen, who was accused of plotting a coup against the President Erdogan in the summer of 2016. The scoop has been around for four years, but is still pulled to the surface from time to time. The list of “terrorists” includes the Patriarch Bartholomew, the Pope John Paul II, British, Israeli, German and American intelligence, as well as many prominent figures of the past, whom the publication associates with Freemasons. Well, you got it. This caused outrage even in Turkey itself. I don’t want to go into the description of the relationship between Erdogan and Gulen, there are enough sources about it. Let everyone decide for themselves whether Gulen was a terrorist and what was the reason for his conflict with the acting president of Turkey. But there is a big difference between the “investigation of the Turkish authorities for encroaching on Turkey’s state security” and the “accusations of the Turkish media”.
But here the question arises: where did Neonila Tkachenko get this news about the “accusation of Patriarch Bartholomew by the Turkish authorities” in treason? She reposted the information fabricated by the well-known Ukrainophobe Myroslava Berdnyk, a fierce supporter of “Novorossiya”, “militias” and the occupation of Ukraine by Russia (LJ account varjag2007su). According to her own confessions, in the environment of the terrorist Igor Girkin, who essentially activated the war in Donbass, there were also friends of Berdnyk (apparently, it’s about Igor Druz, who covered himself with an umbrella of the UOC-MP for a long time, was even an adviser to the acting Metropolitan of Bila Tserkva Augustine in the annexation of Crimea and the war in the Donbass, and now is in the “Donetsk People’s Republic”).
In 2016, as part of criminal proceedings, the SSU investigated Myroslava Berdnyk’s involvement in distribution of materials calling for a violent change of government and the overthrow of the constitutional order. According to the SSU representatives, “it has already been established that this destructive activity was coordinated with Russian curators”.
Neonila Tkachenko, a lover of embroideries and the Ukrainian language, allows herself to be re-respected without comment, and then makes false allegations about “Bartholomew under investigation.” As we can see, the suspicions about Tkachenko’s connection with pro-Russian forces have a serious basis. This, in turn, very significantly characterizes her protégé – the former patriarch Filaret, who has been constantly shaking the situation.
Manipulative effects and triggers against the OCU
The article in the Russian edition, reprinted by Romfea, is just a Klondike of manipulative technologies. Let’s list only the brightest.
“Poroshenko lost the elections to Zelensky, and after that the OCU bulged at the seams”. First, “after that” is not “as a result.” Second, the scandals of former Patriarch Filaret in the pursuit of his return to power are exaggerated by the Russian media. We are not talking about any “bulging at the seams” in the OCU. The same scandals are shaking, for example, the Church of Greece, where a retired bishop can anathematize the country’s leadership for speaking about the communion. As soon as this church was shaken by pro-Russian forces after the recognition of the OCU – nothing happened, the church lives on.
“People from Istanbul took control of the top of the PCU.” This may seem plausible only to outside observers or those unfamiliar with the “church’s inner cuisine”. And who didn’t “take control” of the top of the PCU – people from Washington, Soros, the US State Department…
The statements of the Russian correspondent about Filaret’s “fashionable office” where “searches took place” have the same value. First, it is immediately apparent that he had never been to Filaret’s “fashionable” residence. Secondly, there were not searches, but investigative actions. But the average reader is not interested in these nuances, right?
“If Poroshenko is convicted as a traitor to the homeland, it will affect Filaret’s prospects of defeating the OCU – he hopes for its collapse. If Epiphany is removed from power, all those who serve in the OCU, along with the parishes, will move to Filaret”, said an unnamed RIA Novosti source “in church environment”. First, Filaret has no prospects of defeating the OCU, regardless of whether Poroshenko is convicted or not. Filaret’s influence, authority, and resources are exaggerated. Secondly, the “source in church envitonment” should explain how the procedure for removing the head of the OCU from office takes place. But no explanations can be expected, because there is no procedure for the lifelong removal of the acting head of the OCU, except by the decision of the Local Council of the OCU (but such nuances are not regulated in the charter of the OCU). Third, no one will go to Filaret. For the OCU, he is already an turned page of history, which only creates scandalous information bubbles with the help of various adventurers.
This is, in fact, the story of the “betrayal” of the “leaders of the Ukrainian schism.” With the same success, anyone in the OCU can sue Filaret for treason because of a “letter of repentance” to the Council of Bishops of the Russian Church in 2017 or several attempts to thwart the recognition of autocephaly (for example, in 2008). I can advise our foreign connoisseurs of Ukrainian church cuisine, who are got used to consume the Russian media with full confidence, to check not only every fact, but also every sentence, where this fact can be manipulatively embedded.
