_edited.jpg)
November 21st marked the tenth anniversary of the peaceful protests that were met with a violent government-led crackdown, but ultimately brought down the Russian-backed president Victor Yanukovych, breaking the cycle of post-soviet corruption and nepotism in the Ukrainian government.
Euromaidan in Kyiv 2013 | Evgeny Feldman (Wikimedia Commons)
On Tuesday, the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy, alongside European Council president Charles Michel, announced the commemoration of the “first victory in today’s war” and paid respect at the memorial site in Kyiv, built for those who were killed in the Maidan protests by government-led military violence a decade ago. Many civilians gathered at the Square of Independence in Kyiv in the evening, in solidarity and to show respect for one of the most monumental moments in Ukrainian modern history.
What was the Maidan Revolution?
Maidan, also known as the Revolution of Dignity or the Euromaidan, first began on November 21st 2013 when President Victor Yanukovych halted his promises of a pro-European trajectory, unilaterally delaying the signing of a European Union Association Agreement days before its planned signing. The cause of this abrupt halt in action was due to political and economic pressure from Russia which shifted the once-promised pro-European action and policy to that of pro-Russian. Many Ukrainians, especially those of younger generations, shared a positive outlook for tighter EU relations, eventual EU accession, and the general pursuit of liberty, fraternity and democracy. Thus, Yanukovich’s actions triggered discontent and caused many to gather in the main squares of several cities to protest such a political shift, of which the most notable and largest protests would happen in the Independence Square in Kyiv ‘Maidan Nezalezhnosti’. The primary location of the protests, alongside its basis, would then create one of the movement's names - ‘EuroMaidan’.
Protests were consistent throughout the winter months of 2013-2014, from November to February. Three days after the protests began, political oppositions, student organisations and long-time activists had rounded up between 200,000-300,000 protestors in Kyiv alone. By the Evening of December 1st, over 800,000 protestors were present at Maidan Square, with over 1.5 million people collectively throughout the country, making it the largest movement of civilians in modern Ukrainian history.
Furthermore, it became a mobilisation of civilians that was met with the largest unprecedented levels of violence since the state gained independence. On the evening of November 31st, 2000 security forces violently dispersed the protestors, most of which were students. Videos were released of security forces beating students and journalists and catalysed a larger number of protestors assembling on December 1st, with more angered slogans and atmosphere. Increased security presence and violence against demonstrators caused some to occupy the Kyiv City State Administration office, and create barricades in Maidan Square.
By January, mass protesting was deemed illegal, the amount of security increased and they were allowed to use live ammunition. This caused a temporary diffusion of protests but also triggered smaller protest groups to resort to more drastic means in response to the unfair anti-protest laws and management. While the government was using tactics of intimidation and did reduce the number of protestors assembling, it caused civilian bloodshed and increased unrest between citizens and the government, with some government figures resigning such as Prime Minister Mykola Azarov.
The climax of this revolution, and its bloodiest week, was its conclusion, from February 18th to the 21st, when the security forces began to try to retake the Maidan and break down the barricades in the square. Weapons were openly used on 25,000 protestors that remained behind the barricade, while protestors created bonfires, and used Molotov cocktails to protect themselves. Ultimately, 113 civilians were killed and hundreds more were injured.
The European Union pressed sanctions on Ukraine and brokered a deal between Yanukovich and opposition leaders, calling for early elections for May 2014, and an interim government in between February and the election period. Protestors were given amnesty, members of Yanukovich’s government were fired, and Yanukovich was charged with mass murder and ordered to be arrested by the interim government. Yanukovich fled Ukraine, marking the end of the revolution of dignity. He, alongside other members of his government such as that of Azarov, were spotted days later in Russia.
Why was it important?
The importance of the Revolution of Dignity was both literal and symbolic. It allowed for the literal removal of a government that was already failing to uphold the social and economic demands before the revolution, and that ultimately went against its promises and people. It caused a relatively deeply rooted pro-Russian government to finally give way and dissolve, and severed ties with Russian influence which would have reinforced the culture of corruption in high authorities. Symbolically, it serves as a prime example of where a civilian-majority-led movement was able to present their voices and ultimately succeed in shifting the power dynamics that were deeply accepted and institutionalised for decades. The revolution proved that change can indeed be achieved.
It can be considered as closure and the end of the drawn-out era of an internal hybrid post-soviet existence, creating a new slate to build a truly independent Ukrainian national identity, driven majorly by the civilians themselves.
What is its significance today?
The conclusion of Maidan was met with great relief and joy, but unfortunately, its aftermath was just the beginning of many difficulties; acting governments still had issues to actualize requests by the revolutionaries, the conflict caused the economy to decline, and corruption had not entirely vanished from the system - there was still a lot of work to do. However, a great feat that is acknowledged is that this revolution did not cause grave internal conflicts, violence and civil war, more so establishing a new common ground for society.
Some may believe that the Maidan did indeed trigger a civil war or internal conflict, manifested through the prompt annexation of the South-Eastern regions of Ukraine, like that of Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk, soon after Yanukovich fled to Russia. While Russia denied involvement and claimed that it was simply pro-Russian separatist groups claiming their rightful independence, these separatist groups bore Russian insignia and weaponry and had close ties with the Kremlin. That is to say, it cannot be assumed that Maidan triggered an exclusively internal conflict, but it was at the hands of third-party military and political influence and pressure, as has been the case in different countries in the region.
While the revolution does seem like an internal event, Zelensky’s remark that this was the “first victory in today’s war” cannot be presumed untrue. It was considered a turning point for the Ukrainian people to establish their independence as a state and full-fledged goal of democracy. It set a boundary between itself and the post-soviet Russian shadow that continues to be cast and coerced throughout the Eastern Bloc. It is interesting to imagine the future of Ukraine if Yanukovich had indeed remained president. Would Ukraine have become similar to that of Belarus, with an authoritarian regime and close ties with Russia? Or would it have become a republic of the Russian Federation? When taking into account that Putin wanted to reinstate Yanukovich as president of Ukraine when trying to occupy Kyiv in 2022, the answers to these questions become more guided. With this, the removal of Yanukovich can indeed be seen as a “first victory” as it gives Ukraine at least the possibility to fight for its sovereignty, which otherwise would have not been possible.
Albeit years of military conflict and periods of instability since 2014, the revolution's legacy lives to tell the tale of how a relatively dormant society in regards to political engagement, still has the potential to pose sharp decisions and collectives of opposition, without the necessity of violence. This idea of a ‘dormant state of society’, is one of the factors that had both Kremlin and international bodies predict the current invasion in Ukraine to be decided quickly. Surrendering, acceptance of being “one people” and lack of military personnel were a few of the factors that guided many to reach such a conclusion. While there are many other defining factors at play with the longevity of both the conflict, but also the maintaining of Ukrainian statehood, the other aforementioned factors have been relatively dissolved. Annexed regions of Kherson continue to not welcome the occupation, Adviivka has not accepted defeat, and many of those who went abroad before or during the war are returning home to volunteer.
References
“Conflict in Ukraine’s Donbas: A Visual Explainer.” (2021, June 29) Crisis Group. Retrieved November 24, 2023, from www.crisisgroup.org/content/conflict-ukraines-donbas-visual-explainer.
Minakov, Mykhailo. (2018, November 21)“The Significance of Euromaidan for Ukraine and Europe | Wilson Center.”. Wilson Center. Retrieved November, 23, 2023, from www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/the-significance-euromaidan-for-ukraine-and-europe.
Ofman, Daniel. (2023, November 21). “‘The War Is Not over Yet’: Ukraine Marks 10-Year Anniversary of Pivotal Maidan Revolution.” The World. Retrieved November, 22, 2023, from theworld.org/stories/2023-11-21/war-not-over-yet-ukraine-marks-10-year-anniversary-pivotal-maidan-revolution.
Onuch, Olga, and Marples, D. et. al. (2014, July). “The Maidan, Past and Present: Orange Revolution (2004) and the EuroMaidan (2013-2014).” Euromaidan. Columbia University Press: New York. Retrieved November, 23, 2023, from https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:0761e853-1f4e-4e7c-9ed4-416631d7c2ab/download_file?file_format=application%2Fpdf&safe_filename=The%2BCase%2Bof%2BEuroMaidan%2Band%2Bthe%2BOrange%2BRevolution.pdf&type_of_work=Book+section
“President Michel Attends 10-Year Anniversary Commemoration of Maidan Uprising.” (2023, November 21). European Council | Council of the European Union. Retrieved November, 24, 2023, from www.consilium.europa.eu/en/european-council/president/news/2023/11/21/20231121-maidan-10-year-anniversary/.
Shveda, Yuriy, and Joung Ho Park. (2016, January). “Ukraine’s Revolution of Dignity: The Dynamics of Euromaidan.” Journal of Eurasian Studies [vol. 7, no. 1, Jan. 2016, pp. 85–91]. Retrieved November, 23, 2023 from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euras.2015.10.007.
Sobolieva, Alisa. (2022, August 24). “EuroMaidan Revolution.” Kyiv Independent. Retrieved November, 23, 2023, from kyivindependent.com/euro-maidan-revolution/.
Stelmakh, Iryna, and Balmforth, Tom. (2014, November 21) “Ukraine’s Maidan Protests - One Year On.” The Guardian. Retrieved November, 22, 2023, from www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/21/-sp-ukraine-maidan-protest-kiev.
“Ukraine Marks 10-Year Anniversary of Maidan ‘Revolution of Dignity.’ (2023, November 21). Al Jazeera. Retrieved November, 22, 2023, from www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/21/ukraine-marks-10-year-anniversary-of-maidan-revolution-of.
“Ukraine - the Maidan Protest Movement.” Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved November, 23, 2023, from www.britannica.com/place/Ukraine/The-Maidan-protest-movement.
“Understanding Ukraine’s Euromaidan Protests.” (2019, May) Open Society Foundations. Retrieved November 24, 2023, from www.opensocietyfoundations.org/explainers/understanding-ukraines-euromaidan-protests.
Comments