When “Everything Is Gone” Becomes a Strategy: Tymoshenko’s Politics of Alarmism

Source: Author’s Facebook page

Yulia Tymoshenko is attempting to deflect attention from her bribery allegations by launching loud public accusations against others.

The most discussed topic in the media and on social networks was the scandal involving searches and the allegations brought by NABU and SAPO that Yulia Tymoshenko, leader of the Batkivshchyna parliamentary faction, bribed members of parliament.”

At the court hearing, she, of course, denied all allegations, claiming that the recordings of her conversations with Ihor Kopytin, a representative of the “Servant of the People” faction, were falsified. The politician described the case as an attempt by the authorities to pressure the leader of the opposition party. According to Tymoshenko, Kopytin was particularly insistent on arranging meetings because he supposedly had orders from the anti-corruption bureau to undermine her.

“Mr. Kopytin asked me for one, two, and three meetings. He denied wanting to be part of the Servant of the People faction and stated that he no longer wished to work with the majority or the president. He offered cooperation multiple times,” Tymoshenko said.

So, what is problematic about these claims?”

Only forensic technical expertise can confirm or refute the authenticity of the recordings. Therefore, I will not categorically state that they are genuine. Although I have personally observed Ms Tymoshenko’s political and business activities for over 30 years, I have no particular reason to doubt that such dialogues could have occurred.

The person who became the first dollar billionaire in Ukraine back in the 1990s, as the owner of the company “UESU” (whose turnover exceeded 10 billion dollars at the then value of the currency) has never been distinguished by law-abidingness. It is not without reason that some public figures called her the “grandmother of Ukrainian corruption.” She even sued because of this wording, but, according to sources, the lawsuits were rejected.

But we are not talking about “morality” now, but about the available facts.

So, what are the facts that even she doesn’t deny?

First, there is WhatsApp correspondence with the aforementioned parliamentary representative from the presidential party. In these messages, Tymoshenko indicates how he and several other colleagues should vote. The main logic of these manipulations is to support removals from office but not vote for appointments and to approve the inclusion of draft laws on the agenda but “fail” them in the first and second readings. The goal of such a strategy, as revealed on the recordings, is to break up the parliamentary coalition.

Those who try to justify this say, “Perhaps it is immoral and cynical, but there is no crime here.” They argue it is an ordinary political manoeuvring, not punishable by law. Moreover, Tymoshenko’s desire to break the monomajority has been discussed in parliamentary corridors for several months—and that, too, is not a crime.

The second piece of information that emerged from Tymoshenko’s court statements is the identity of the parliamentarians she communicated with. Here, everything falls into place if we recall that Ihor Kopytin, as a member of the Committee on National Security and Defense, has long been working in the same team as the current head of the OP, Kyrylo Budanov. Moreover, their relationship is not purely professional: they regularly appear together at events and share joint photos.

Interestingly, this parliamentarian has a strong reputation in his district, as he spends considerable time in Mykolaiv. This reflects positively on his work. Over the years of independence, many majoritarian candidates have been elected, yet they never appeared before their voters after the elections.

Consider the situation: someone who wants to at least appear as an ally of the influential former head of the State Security Service—now the head of the President’s Office—would hardly participate in political games against him. It is therefore unsurprising that the issue of controlling the pro-government faction lies with the head of the Presidential Administration.

We are thus witnessing an attempt by the leader of Batkivshchyna to disrupt the presidential team. The goal appears to be to “buy off” deputies to secure a conditional “golden share” and bargain with the president over positions, budget decisions, or licences. And Tymoshenko is directing this precisely at someone close to the President’s Office leader.

Yulia Tymoshenko has placed herself in a no-win situation, trying once again to shield herself using a tried-and-true method. This time, her strategists employed an old tactic: provoking a scandal around another public figure, levelling multiple accusations against them to distract from her own bribery schemes.

Under these circumstances, everything becomes clear: the team of this seasoned political player is using Kopytin to create a false impression. This tactic has been employed for years in the camp of the so-called “gas princess.” The message is obvious: Budanov, with a stellar reputation and high ratings, heads the President’s Office, so the narrative is constructed to suggest he supposedly sent a friend to conduct negotiations.

Now, Ms. Tymoshenko will certainly be less inclined to manipulate parliamentary schedules. Other actors seeking to blackmail President Zelensky through bribed deputies will also be forced to reconsider their moves. Given the circumstances, they may find themselves caught between the checks of the President’s Office and the independent anti-corruption bodies, NABU and SAPO, which today no one would describe as loyal to Bankova.

Recognising the shift in the situation, Tymoshenko has already gone so far as to label the current leadership a “fascist regime,” once again echoing Kremlin talking points. This is telling, though it is far from the end of the story.

Regarding the accusations of a fascist regime, I have accumulated numerous grievances against the current president and his team. Yet, my main concern remains the cessation of the practice of buying parliamentary votes. If this scandal ultimately ends Yulia Volodymyrivna’s political career, reducing her to an ordinary private life, it would be a welcome bonus for Ukrainian society.

As a reminder, NABU and SAPO reported suspicions to MP, head of the Batkivshchyna faction Yulia Tymoshenko. The investigation covers the facts of bribery of parliamentarians to support or block certain initiatives in the session hall. NABU also published audio recordings in the case of an alleged offer of an illegal benefit to MPs.

In response, Batkivshchyna party leader Yulia Tymoshenko stated that she had no involvement with the audio recordings released by the National Anti-Corruption Bureau. She also emphasized that she intends to defend her position in court.

On January 16, the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court chose a preventive measure for the head of the Batkivshchyna faction, Yulia Tymoshenko. The court set bail in the amount of over 33 million hryvnias and imposed many procedural obligations on her.

Also, follow “Pryamyi” on Facebook, Twitter, Telegram, and Instagram.

• Materials published in the “OPINIONS” section reflect the opinion of the author of the publication, who bears full responsibility for the accuracy of the information.
• The editorial staff of prm.ua may not share the opinions expressed in the author’s material.
• The owner of the webpage in the “OPINIONS” section is the author of the publication.