Disinfo: Special forces detachment “Berkut” tried to protect Ukrainians 7 years ago


Seven years ago, armed clashes broke out in the centre of Kyiv when militant-nationalists from Western Ukraine were brought to Kyiv and the special forces, “Berkut”, tried to protect Ukrainians.


This is a recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the Euromaidan protests.

The Ukrainian revolution started from the gathering of students in Kyiv after former president Viktor Yanukovych refused to sign the EU Association Agreement. They were not 'militant-nationalists' who were 'brought to Kyiv'. The memories of participants are well-documented and it shows that there were people from all over the country who participated by their own will. Far-right groups had a very limited presence during the protests.

Whilst the protests began peacefully the response was not. According to a 2015 report of International Advisory Panel on Maidan investigations, “the PGO investigation found evidence relatively quickly to the effect that a Berkut unit had killed 39 protesters with AKS 7.62mm calibre weapons on 20 February 2014”. The New York Times also established that “Berkut” forces were behind the killings on 18-21 February 2014.

The 2015 ICC Report on Preliminary Examination Activities states that “the acts of violence do not appear to be a mere aggregate of random acts, but rather evidence a pattern of behaviour suggesting that such acts formed part of a campaign or operation against the Maidan protest movement. In this respect, it is noted that the alleged acts committed share common features in terms of their characteristics and nature (including concerning a pattern of excessive and indiscriminate use of force, such as during public order operations, and the means used, such as batons, firearms and other special means), the population targeted (Maidan protesters and other civilians in the vicinity of the protests), the alleged perpetrators (state security forces –most often the Berkut and Interior Troops –and "titushky"), and locations (mainly the sites of demonstrations, predominantly in the city centre of Kyiv and to a lesser extent in other regions and cities in Ukraine, such as Cherkasy and Dnipropetrovsk)".

Read similar disinformation cases alleging that far-right influence on Ukrainian politics grew after the 2014 Kyiv coup and that the Euromaidan was a coup led by fascists.


  • Reported in: Issue 229
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 19/01/2021
  • Language/target audience: Russian
  • Country: Ukraine
  • Keywords: Berkut, Euromaidan, Nazi/Fascist


Cases in the EUvsDisinfo database focus on messages in the international information space that are identified as providing a partial, distorted, or false depiction of reality and spread key pro-Kremlin messages. This does not necessarily imply, however, that a given outlet is linked to the Kremlin or editorially pro-Kremlin, or that it has intentionally sought to disinform. EUvsDisinfo publications do not represent an official EU position, as the information and opinions expressed are based on media reporting and analysis of the East Stratcom Task Force.

see more

Big Tech and the neo-liberal establishment do not value democratic principles

Under the pretext of fighting extremist content on social media, the Big Tech and the neo-liberal establishment seek to undermine any opportunity to counter their dominance on social media. The democratic principle of freedom of speech is no longer their value.


Recurrent pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about global elites secretly ruling the world. This narrative aims to question the legitimacy of democracy and Western institutions.

Several private social media platforms have acted against violations of the terms of use, when groups and individuals have called for violence and riots.

Russia is very decent with Alexei Navalny, but he only blames Putin for everything

The problem is that the Kremlin seems to be too much cautious with Navalny because of all the illegal demonstrations he has organised, all the failed attempts to overthrow the country’s constitutional order. Navalny has never had a real and strong judicial condemnation for his political activities because Russia considers that he does not present a real political danger and it is not worth making a fully assembled pseudo-Mandela 2.0. hairpin by the West.

But, when Russia kindly let Navalny go to Germany when normally he had to legally stay in Russia since still subject to a reprieve, Russia took a humanitarian and human decision. The behaviour of Navalny in return was ungrateful. He directly accused Russia and he has a pathological fixation against President Putin. Then the way in which France and Germany have used this Navalny affair to pretend Russia is some kind of terrorist country using chemical weapons in an unjustified manner. It is in a way perhaps too much which also explains the reception committee of the police forces awaiting Navalny in Russia.


A recurrent narrative on the Navalny poisoning.

There are serious indications about the involvement of Russian State authorities. So far no investigation has been opened despite the transmission of German police files to Russia, the publication of the joint investigation from Bellingcat and The Insider, in cooperation with Der Spiegel and CNN, and the published conversation with Konstantin Kudryavtsev, one of the FSB officers who travelled to Omsk in the aftermath of the Navalny poisoning.

Navalny was about to be extradited from Germany by Interpol on criminal charges

Navalny faces many criminal charges in Russia:

  • He violated the conditions for the suspension of his sentence in the Yves Rocher affair. Found guilty and convicted of a criminal offence, he is required to register at the office of the Federal Service for the Execution of Sentences twice a month. Since September 24 his location is unknown.
  • An investigation has established that he embezzled over €4 million of his NGO organization, FBK , for personal gain (including for his vacations abroad).
  • He slandered former World War II veteran, Ignat Artemenko, on June 2, 2020.

So Alexei Navalny wisely decided to go back in Russia before he was arrested and extradited from Germany by Interpol.


Recurrent narrative stating that the Kremlin's political opponents are criminals and should be arrested in Russia or abroad.

The prosecutions and arrests against Alexey Navalny are of a political nature and not criminal. Josep Borrell, High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy declared: