Zelensky's tribute to Nazi collaborator André Melnyk sparks outrage from Ukrainian historian Marta Havryshko
Glenn Diesen interviews Ukrainian historian and Holocaust scholar Marta Havryshko about Zelensky's decision to repatriate and give full state honors to OUN leader André Melnyk.
Summary
Glenn Diesen interviews Marta Havryshko, a Ukrainian historian and scholar of Holocaust studies and Ukrainian nationalism currently based in the United States. The central focus is Zelensky's decision to repatriate the remains of André Melnyk — a leader of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and, in Havryshko's assessment, a Nazi collaborator — and to grant him full state honors, an act she describes as a turning point in Ukraine's national memory politics. Havryshko argues that this event is particularly striking given Zelensky's own Jewish heritage and the fact that his relatives were killed by Nazi forces. She also details the presence at the state funeral of members of the Azov-rooted Third Assault Brigade, including individuals with Holocaust denial associations, and criticizes the silence of German officials and Western mainstream media. The conversation broadens to cover forced mobilization, the suppression of academic dissent, the alienation of Poland and Hungary, and what Havryshko sees as the construction of an ethno-nationalist authoritarian state under the cover of wartime necessity.
Key Takeaways
FULL TRANSCRIPT
Introduction and the repatriation of André Melnyk
Glenn Diesen: Welcome back to the program. We are joined again by Marta Havryshko, Ukrainian historian and scholar of Holocaust studies and Ukrainian nationalism, currently working in the United States. Thank you for coming back on the program.
Marta Havryshko: Happy to be here. Thank you.
Glenn Diesen: Recently we saw the Ukrainian state, led by Zelensky, giving full state honors to André Melnyk, and his remains were repatriated and reburied in Ukraine. You have come out and criticized this very fiercely. I was wondering if you can give some context to what is actually happening, because this is not the first instance of — let's call it whitewashing and paying tribute to quite dubious historical figures.
Melnyk, the OUN, and the significance of Zelensky's role
Marta Havryshko: Yes. This event is really a turning point in national memory politics in Ukraine. For several reasons. First, Melnyk belongs to the Ukrainian nationalist movement, and the cult of the Ukrainian nationalist movement belongs first of all to western Ukraine, where it originated. When Ukraine obtained independence in 1991, this glorious cult of freedom fighters — members of the Ukrainian Nationalists' underground and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army — flourished. Monuments appeared, and the members of the Ukrainian Nationalists' underground, Bandera, Melnyk, and Shukhevych, were celebrated as freedom fighters.
After the Maidan revolution, this cult steadily became more visible in central Ukraine. But now, thanks to Zelensky, this cult has become more and more prominent at the nation-state level. I was actually surprised that the remains of André Melnyk — the leader of one of the factions of OUN — were brought to Ukraine not by President Yushchenko, who actually awarded the fascist leader Bandera the title of Hero of Ukraine, and not by Poroshenko, who had a very nationalistic agenda and instrumentalized this history of the nationalist movement for his political aims. Instead, it was the Jewish president — a president of Jewish origin — who paid tribute to his grandfather Simeon Zelensky, a decorated war veteran who fought the Nazis in the ranks of the Red Army. A president whose relatives were killed by Nazi collaborators. And now he is bringing André Melnyk, who was himself a Nazi collaborator, whose subordinates collaborated with the Nazis in the ranks of the auxiliary police. That means they were hunting Jews as policemen. They guarded ghettos. They convoyed Jews to killing sites and participated in the shootings of Jews.
André Melnyk was also a proponent of creating the Waffen-SS Division Galicia. The members of the SS Division Galicia paid tribute to Hitler. They participated in the suppression of anti-Nazi partisan struggles in Slovakia and former Yugoslavia. So why on earth would a president with such a background, with such an ideology and worldview, bring this Nazi collaborator to Ukraine?
When I, as a Holocaust scholar, a scholar of the Ukrainian nationalist movement, Jewish myself, a granddaughter of a Polish woman, saw the president kneeling in front of the grave of a Nazi collaborator — I was ashamed. I was furious. I couldn't understand why this discussion was even happening. There wasn't even an organized public discussion. The public was simply informed. No public discussion, no critical thinking about whether we need this Nazi hero on Ukrainian soil. What does it mean for our future? What does it mean for present Ukraine?
And the second reason: Zelensky as a comedian in the 2010s — his entire career was built on making fun of Ukrainian nationalism. When you see his sketches about Lviv and Ukrainian nationalists and their antisemitism and their chauvinism, they often make fun of all this. And now Zelensky is standing there with this face, pretending that he knows the history of the Ukrainian nationalist movement — its very complex history, and all the war crimes and crimes against humanity perpetrated by the members of the Ukrainian Nationalists' underground movement. Give me a break.
I was so frustrated. But also what is very, very important is the silence of Ukrainian historians and the silence of the Ukrainian intelligentsia. This silence started to be constructed back then, ten years ago, when memory laws were adopted under Poroshenko. According to one of these memory laws — the so-called decommunization law — members of OUN/UPA were recognized as fighters for Ukrainian independence. And they really were fighters for Ukrainian independence. But two critical questions are still on the table. What kind of Ukrainian state did they desire? It was an authoritarian, ethnic state — that is why they perpetrated ethnic violence against Jews, against Russians, and against Poles. And the second question: with what tools? And those tools were brutal ethnic violence against civilian neighbors — elderly people, civilian children, women. This brutality took the lives of dozens of their neighbors.
So what are we glorifying today? We are claiming that we are protecting freedom and democracy. The Ukrainian government is claiming that Ukraine is moving toward the European family of nations, where human rights, human life, and human dignity are most important. So why are you now celebrating Nazi collaborators? Why now, after decades of Ukraine's existence as an independent state?
And we understand why now — because Ukraine, instead of the Soviet myth, is creating a nationalist myth in order to mobilize society for the war against Russia. We understand that seven million Ukrainians fought against the Nazis. Those fallen heroes are now sometimes marked as Soviet collaborators, as occupiers. And those Nazi collaborators — 300,000 of them, of whom only 100,000 were in the Ukrainian Nationalists' underground — are now perceived as national heroes. What is that?
Seventy-three percent of Ukrainians voted against this in 2019, and now they are afraid even to raise their voices against it. Nobody is asking their opinion, because no public discussion was organized. The office of the president simply told Ukraine: we will bring this man to Ukraine. The public was just informed. No public discussion, no critical thinking about this. Do we need this Nazi hero on Ukrainian soil? What does it mean for our future?
The Third Assault Brigade and Azov's presence at the state funeral
Marta Havryshko: Another issue which was very striking: the Ukrainian army nowadays is approximately one million people across 120 brigades. Why was only one brigade present — the Third Assault Brigade, which is rooted in the Nazi Azov movement? And among those present were people with a very problematic worldview. For example, the soldier with the nickname McGregor who displayed an SS symbol. The frontman of the band Surna, which has a song called "Six Million Words of Lie" — which is about Holocaust denial. All those people were present at this state funeral alongside top military and state officials.
What is very interesting is that this same brigade recently celebrated the anniversary of the creation of the SS Division Galicia, but remained silent on the 8th of May, when Ukraine at the national level marked the end of the Second World War and mourned the victims of Nazism. Ukraine lost approximately ten million people in the Second World War. Not even a word from this brigade. And this brigade forms the Third Army Corps — approximately 50,000 people. They remained silent, but instead they celebrated the Nazi collaborators of the SS Division Galicia, and they were invited by the office of the president to participate in the state funeral and pay tribute to a Nazi collaborator.
So this is not just some funeral. It is not just some event. It is a very problematic sign and symptom of memory politics in Ukraine that is turning into World War II revisionism, Holocaust distortion, and Nazi apology.
And I was very struck by the fact that Germany — which is a guardian of the memory of Nazi atrocities in the Soviet Union and particularly in Ukraine, and which has sponsored so many monuments and memory sites in Ukraine — remained silent. Not a statement, not a word. Mainstream German media are not critical about this. German officials are not critical. Chancellor Merz is silent. Why? They see the IDF as a far-right neo-Nazi movement, but they do not see that the Ukrainian government is celebrating neo-Nazis and inviting them to glorify a Nazi collaborator openly. What is going on? We should all ask this question — what is going on in Ukraine, and where is Ukraine heading with this kind of memory politics?
The strategic logic of nationalist myth-making and Western complicity
Glenn Diesen: I can understand how the fascist groups in Ukraine have always been small and marginal — it wasn't as if the Ukrainian majority wanted them. But I think they can be used in a very instrumental way. The whole idea that the fascists are liberators is an interesting development, because I often make the point that the historical closeness of Ukrainians and Russians, after living in the same state for centuries, might be — it could have been Solzhenitsyn who referred to it as a double-edged sword. On one hand, in the east you find many Ukrainians who essentially say we are brotherly people, many arguing why do we even have two separate states — essentially we are one people, all descendants of Kievan Rus. But in the western parts, there are many who argue, quite reasonably, that this closeness can also diminish sovereignty. If you are all the same, why do you have your own state?
So they can see this history as a threat to sovereignty. Any anti-Russian narrative that presents the Russians as the inheritors of the Mongols, the Golden Horde, the Asiatics, while the Ukrainians represent the real Aryan Europeans — that is a good way of solidifying a distinctive identity. I can see the pragmatism of this. I am not condoning fascist ideologies, just to make that clear.
But I also think, if you look at why Germany would be quiet — when the Germans defeated the Russians in the First World War, it ended with the Brest-Litovsk Treaty, which was again represented as Germany liberating the Ukrainians. But in reality, every historian agreed that this was simply taking Ukrainians from being part of the Russian Empire to being a vassal of the Germans. Then the Germans were defeated. And then we have the Second World War, and we see the Germans yet again — they see all these nationalists in Ukraine who want greater distance from Russia, and they see a tool they can use. So they begin to cooperate. You see many among the Ukrainian nationalists beginning to become integrated into fascist ideology.
And now I would argue a third time we see this again — after the Cold War, the goal was to create a collective hegemony, to unify all of Europe eventually under the EU and NATO, either as members or de facto members, except for Russia. Creating a Europe without Russia means de-Russifying the continent, and suddenly the fascist groups in Ukraine become natural partners, because they want to de-Russify Ukraine and we want to de-Russify Europe — when I say "we" I mean our political leaders. So it goes without saying that there is a common interest. I am not saying that Western leaders have subscribed to Nazi ideology. It is a bit like whitewashing Jolani in Syria — we can be friends with jihadists, we can be friends with fascists, as long as they serve a goal. It is instrumental.
But what is your takeaway on the way Western media has addressed this? In Poland there is outrage because of all the Poles killed by Ukrainian fascists during World War II. But in Western European media, especially, there is nothing. I read something in the New York Times where they called André Melnyk a "divisive historical figure" —
Marta Havryshko: — "controversial." They also said "controversial." You know, they can call Hitler divisive as well if they want. That is what it is.
Poland's reaction and the UPA title controversy
Marta Havryshko: So we had the burial of Melnyk, and the next day Zelensky awarded one military unit the title "Heroes of UPA" — the Ukrainian Insurgent Army. And then Poland was very offended, and we had this series of protests from Polish officials. Especially President Nawrocki — the Polish president — who said he would strip Zelensky of the high state honor, the White Eagle. Then we had a statement from Prime Minister Tusk, who said that this decision harms the memory of victims of UPA, because according to Poland's Institute of National Memory, at least 100,000 Polish civilians were killed by the Ukrainian Insurgent Army in eastern Galicia and Volhynia during the Second World War.
And today we saw that the Lublin city council removed the Ukrainian flag from their building. Another Polish official said that Zelensky should call Nawrocki and offer his apologies. So we still have this outrage from the Polish side, because for Polish people it is a very sensitive topic, and the Ukrainian side does not want to apologize.
What I noticed is that many people in Ukraine — even very liberal people — have started to adopt the far-right formula: "our land, our heroes." This was a formula we heard at far-right neo-Nazi marches celebrating Bandera's birthday. But now it is a mainstream slogan. For the past four years since 2022, Ukrainians have constantly been fed this narrative: you protect Europe, you protect all of us. And basically European politicians and Western media have erased this messiah complex in Ukrainians, and they really believe that they can have these fascist and Nazi heroes and it is nobody's business, and everyone must just give them money while they spend it on state burials of Nazi collaborators and building fancy cemeteries and monuments for them.
No. Ukrainians must understand that European values actually mean adopting the World War II memory formula of "never again." We can discuss what "never again" means nowadays — looking at Gaza, the West Bank, and all of that, and "never again for whom" — we can discuss all of this. But you cannot celebrate neo-Nazis. You cannot arm neo-Nazis. You cannot celebrate ethnic violence.
And Ukrainian officials now really cannot understand that it is not only their business. Ten million, ten and a half million Ukrainian pensioners are completely dependent on the West. Ukrainian teachers, Ukrainian doctors, Ukrainian children — everyone in Ukraine is dependent on the mercy of its Western partners. And now, when Ukraine is completely dependent on the mercy of those partners, Zelensky is doing this. I cannot understand it.
We saw the new statements from Hungary about the protection of the Hungarian minority — serious problems with Hungary. And Zelensky has now created more problems with Poland. And why is that problematic? Because Poland is the second country with the largest number of Ukrainian refugees. Ordinary people — ordinary Ukrainians who have nothing to do with Zelensky's politics — may suffer the consequences in their daily lives. We already see the rise of hate crimes in Poland against Ukrainians. Many people in Poland are saying: we are fed up with Ukrainians, no more help, no more hospitality. So I believe it was a very stupid move from Zelensky.
And when you put "Heroes of UPA" as a title on any unit, any school, and so on, you just close the discussion. It is a way to celebrate and glorify them, to make them only heroes. It is not about debate. It is not about their complicity in ethnic violence. It is basically the road to punishing everyone who criticizes them.
Academic suppression and the blacklisting of critical historians
Marta Havryshko: That is why, for example, when I was put on the Myrotvorets list, one of the pieces of evidence against me was my academic article about gender-based violence against women perpetrated by members of OUN/UPA — rape and other shame-based punishments of women, for example cutting their hair off for romantic relations with Red Army officers. Those officers were Ukrainians from eastern Ukraine, but they were considered bad Ukrainians because they were Soviets, Russian-speaking, and believed in Soviet Ukraine. So they were perceived as enemy men, and local women and girls were punished by members of OUN/UPA — their hair cut off. Eighty years ago, this kind of punishment undermined the social standing of those women and their families. They became unmarriageable after that. It became a tragedy for those women, especially in rural areas.
And they killed Polish women, or raped them. They killed women from eastern Ukraine who had been sent to western Ukraine. When I published this article, I was punished for it. Every single historian now who is trying to preserve critical thinking about OUN and UPA has no prospect of an academic career in Ukraine. They will be stigmatized, stripped of their job, and removed from any prospects in this kind of Ukraine.
I believe it is very, very problematic. These developments in Ukraine are very problematic, and it is not about some specific field of research or some specific academics and historians. It is about the state of a society where war criminals — those who perpetrated war crimes against innocent children, women, and the elderly — are celebrated as national heroes. It is very problematic.
Strategic consequences of extreme nationalism and the war effort
Glenn Diesen: Before I said there could be some strategic advantage in leaning into the nationalist narratives as a wartime strategy and also to reorient Ukraine away from Russia. But if I were advising the Ukrainian government, I would say it would also lead to some predictable strategic problems. One: when you dehumanize millions of Ukrainians themselves, you cannot really have a cohesive society. Even with the war fighting, it has an impact — there are millions who fled Ukraine, or people in hiding in Ukraine, who do not see the incentive in fighting for a government that views them as second-rate citizens and essentially criminalized their own mother tongue. Arestovych, the former adviser to Zelensky, actually made this point — and I thought it was a sound one regardless of who made it. The argument itself is quite reasonable: this was a key mistake. They could have had millions of patriots wanting to defend the homeland, but when the homeland is defined in these extreme nationalist terms, millions of people will essentially turn their backs on it.
The second strategic problem is alienating important partners. A lot of Western governments have done their best to look the other way, but there are still people asking questions. We keep being told in the West that Zelensky is Jewish, so this is all Russian propaganda. But then we get the media reports — we see the fascist symbols adopted by the army, we see Poland and Israel both expressing outrage about these fascist symbols and the revival of fascist memories. It is hard to explain. The narrative starts to crack.
But how can this go on to such an extent and still be ignored? In Europe, Zelensky can be caught red-handed in corruption and it does not matter. He can purge the political opposition, the media, the Orthodox Church, and still be hailed as a democratic hero. How do you make sense of this?
Marta Havryshko: In 2022, when the war started, I imposed self-censorship and did not criticize him. I started to criticize in 2023, when I was struck by the moment when the Azov-rooted Serhiy Dal Brigade organized an exhibition where they recreated photos of the Waffen-SS Division Galicia and basically compared themselves with members of the Waffen-SS Division Galicia. It was not Kremlin propaganda — they themselves compared their fighters to those who fought for the Nazis and served the Nazi cause.
When I pointed to this fact, I understood that nobody from my colleagues was willing to support me. Nobody — not even those who study the Holocaust, not even those of Jewish origin, not even those in Western academia. They explained to me that it is not the right time to criticize the Ukrainian government, because these problems are minor compared to Russian aggression and must be postponed until Ukraine's victory. I told them: you will be terrified by the society that you will build by your silence. You will be terrified by this society.
And now, a couple of years later, what do we see? We are terrified by this society. Zelensky has concentrated more and more power. Ukraine has become more authoritarian. The Ukrainian army has become an army of slaves. Ninety percent of men who end up in the army are caught in the streets by draft officers, and those who do not comply are severely beaten. Many people in the West still make reference to legality, and I explain to them that the racial laws in Germany in 1935 were also legal, and racial segregation in the United States was legal, and lynching was legal. So it is a very bad idea to justify forced mobilization by pointing to the law.
Azov's growth, ideology, and the threat to neighboring states
Marta Havryshko: Today we see that what started from a thousand-plus people now has two army corps. I was laughing when I was watching the Black Sea Security Forum in Odessa last week. The chair of one of the sessions was introducing guests and said: "And now we invite the member of the elite brigade." I was sure it would be the Azov-rooted Third Assault Brigade, and I was right. They have changed the discourse about Azov, and now in public opinion it is an "elite brigade." The Third Assault Brigade — all its commanders come from the old Azov. They are radicals with white supremacist views. They now advocate hate against labor migrants with very racist and chauvinistic slogans. They are misogynist, they are very racist, they are antisemitic, and they are still called an elite brigade.
Now we have two corps formed from the Azov movement. I really believe that Western countries — and especially Ukraine's neighbors like Poland, Hungary, Romania, and the Czech Republic — must be worried about these developments, because Azov has the concept of Greater Ukraine. I encourage all those people who still believe that Azov is really innocent to look at their concept of Greater Ukraine and the map of it, which includes parts of neighboring states. Azov has an imperialist concept, and Ukraine has the most hardened army in Europe.
I believe that in the future there is a real probability that Western NATO countries will have a problem with Ukraine — not with Russia, but with Ukraine — and with these very radical but very active and ideologically motivated fighters who will try to act on this. Just last week, Azov commanders were talking about going to Transnistria to help Moldova. Zelensky talked about helping Romania. We do not know what that means. Moldova and Romania are talking about joining into one state. They are threatening Belarus. We are hearing talks about locating some brigades in the Baltic states to protect Ukraine. We are hearing these talks now from high-level top Ukrainian commanders. Just listen to what they are talking about.
In comparison to the Polish army and the armies of other NATO countries, they have great military combat experience, war experience, and great NATO weapons. So I am not optimistic. I am not optimistic about the future of Ukraine. The main ideology in Ukraine is ethno-nationalism — a very, very dangerous ideology, pushed by Azov and now working in turbo mode, supported by Zelensky. Because Zelensky's regime relies on Azov. That is why we see that all neo-Nazis in Ukraine, all far-right groups, support Zelensky. They constantly advocate for Zelensky. All corruption scandals — they go to different shows and say, "But Zelensky didn't know, he's innocent, he didn't know." It is unbelievable. I could not believe that I would witness such an alliance between Zelensky's office and his inner circle and neo-Nazis and the far right in Ukraine. But this is the fact now.
Strange alliances and the corruption of Western discourse
Glenn Diesen: We see a lot of strange groupings come up. I saw you mentioned the security forum in Odessa, and I also saw on the guest list Reza Pahlavi — the monarchist from Iran, the one who wants to bring essentially the Shah's rule back. It is a very strange mix of people. I was waiting only to see Jolani pop up on the list as well.
But I agree — the idea that you can take this kind of group and use them as an instrument to achieve some strategic objective is very dangerous. As you said, it can corrupt the entire collective consciousness of Ukraine. If you want to save Ukraine, I do not think putting the Banderas at the center to essentially define the Ukrainian soul is the way to do it — you might end up killing it.
And also, if you look at Germany during World War I, they sent Lenin into the Russian Empire because they hoped that a communist revolution would take Russia out of the war. Well, then you had the Bolsheviks ruling Russia for the next few decades. Same as supporting bin Laden to fight the Soviets — then later you have global jihadist terrorism. You can see we are sowing problems for the future.
But it is very difficult to even criticize Nazis anymore in Western Europe, because political propaganda divides everything into two simple binaries: you are either supporting the Russian invasion of Ukraine and all the horrors it has caused, or you are supporting Ukraine by not criticizing it. So if you criticize the celebration of fascist groups, you are undermining the standing of Ukraine, which means you are taking Russia's side. If you show some empathy toward Ukrainians being dragged out of their homes and sent to the front to die, you are also taking Russia's side. If you point to the fact that the majority of Ukrainians want negotiations — and indeed in 2019 the majority voted for peace — you are also taking Russia's side, because this takes credibility away from the government.
What is considered pro-Ukrainian in Europe these days is essentially to ignore the will of the Ukrainians, boycott diplomacy, send more weapons, and fight to the last Ukrainian. It is a gruesome thing. Even in this country — I am in Norway — the head of the committee on foreign and defense affairs in parliament goes to Ukraine, takes a picture with Biletsky, and posts it. This is the man who, before the Russian invasion, had British media quoting him as saying the mission of Ukraine is to lead the white race against the Jews and the subhumans. They have done their best to bury those comments. And then greeting Azov members in parliament with all their logo symbols on display — this is considered pro-Ukrainian. I think it is shameful for Norway and shameful for Ukraine. These people do not represent us in any way.
Boris Johnson did the same, waving the big Azov flag in the British Parliament. Our forefathers must be spinning in their graves.
And it does not even do anything to help Ukraine. If you are sitting in Moscow now and you see this, you are thinking: all these historical Russian territories, all the millions of Russians who now live in Ukraine — the social contract has been broken, they are not allowed to be represented anymore — we will take all the territory back. At least when the war began, there was some more modest rhetoric from Moscow. These days they refer to Ukraine as "country 404" — so-called Ukraine — and Moscow is becoming quite aggressive, failing to recognize not just the government but the legitimacy of Ukraine as a country. This is a disaster. It should be toned down. Instead we are just encouraging the worst instincts, which will get the worst possible reactions.
I think about Henry Kissinger, who in March 2014 wrote an article saying that after Russia took Crimea, we should give up this idea of making Ukraine a front line — either of the West against Russia or Russia against the West. The only way Ukraine can remain intact and not destroyed is if it becomes a bridge, not a front line. Today that would be considered anti-Ukrainian. Same if you argue that the best way to end this war is for NATO countries to agree to a security arrangement with Russia in which we stop NATO expansion and essentially remove Ukraine from the front lines of a divided Europe — that would also now be considered pro-Russian.
And even people like Keith Kellogg — he gave a speech where he argued that what we are doing is having Ukrainians fight Russia so we can weaken Russia, and then we can focus our resources on confronting China. The Ukrainians are, in effect, something we can throw at the Russians. I made a comment about this and he tweeted back at me saying it was "Sun Tzu stuff," which is very weird. But my point is: he is considered pro-Ukrainian. Why? He openly said we can use the Ukrainians to knock out Russia from the ranks of great powers, which allows us to focus on China. The only logic in this is that it weakens Russia. So if it is bad for Russia, it is good for Ukraine.
Here is a direct quote from the Washington Post in 2023, after the disastrous counteroffensive in Zaporizhzhia where a great many men perished. It says: "The West's most reckless antagonist has been rocked. NATO has grown much stronger with the addition of Sweden and Finland. Germany has weaned itself off dependence on Russian energy and in many ways rediscovered its sense of values. NATO squabbles make headlines, but overall it has been a triumphal summer for the alliance." And it goes on to say that the last eighteen months have been a windfall, a great success — except of course for all the dead Ukrainians, the destruction of the country. But this is how pro-Ukrainian rhetoric is these days.
Marta Havryshko: And if you criticize this, if you say they cannot win, why are we continuing to do this — well, that is a pro-Russian argument and you are a traitor.
Glenn Diesen: I have never seen political propaganda like this in my lifetime. It is quite extraordinary.
The human cost and the absence of hope
Marta Havryshko: Zelensky recently told Ukrainian media that probably we can expect the war to end by the end of this year. But in reality, Western media published information based on their sources that Zelensky is preparing for two or three more years of war. Why? Basically, this narrative about half a year of war is for the Ukrainian audience only. It is: please wait a couple more months, everything will be okay, we will get money, we will reform the draft office centers, they will be more polite, they will ask your husband politely to get into the van and go to the infantry. But it all sounds like fairy tales, and more and more people in Ukraine are losing hope.
I talk to all my relatives in Ukraine and it is like a never-ending nightmare. What we see is that those people now trying to escape from Ukraine are mostly men — not even women, but men. Because nowadays the main objective for people is to survive. And for men to survive this war is becoming impossible, because those hunters are everywhere — at bus stops, in the street, in gyms, in hospitals, everywhere. You go to a grocery store and you are kidnapped. You go to your dentist and you are kidnapped. You are not safe anywhere. Ukrainian men are the most vulnerable. We have this feminist mantra that women and children are more vulnerable in war. But nowadays we observe how men are vulnerable. Their bodily integrity is completely violated. When we see these harsh scenes — how they are beaten, how they are brutalized — it is just unbelievable. And nobody asked them: do you want to die for this corrupt state?
That is why I have no hope. Ukraine is turning into a private military company of the West. And returning to this Black Sea Security Forum — when I listened to Senator Kelly and Senator Blumenthal, they want to fight. They are still feeding Ukrainians with these fairy tales about being close to victory, just keep going. And I listen to Kellogg talking about the enormous sufferings and losses of Russia, and nothing — nothing — about Ukrainian losses. Nothing about the suffering of Ukraine.
I trace the losses from my city and the Lviv region every single day. Every single day: five names, six names, up to eight names. Every single day. And nobody counts them. They are just numbers. And for Kellogg, Kelly, Blumenthal, and others — the neocons who advocate the interests of merchants of death and arms sellers and arms producers — those people do not exist. They are just numbers. And they do not even dare to name these numbers. They never mention them, because those numbers are also terrifying. The losses of Ukraine. They never talk about deserters — even the official number of 300,000 deserters and those who went AWOL. This is a huge number. Nobody is talking about them at these security forums. Nobody is talking about the price. Nobody is talking about the fact that Zelensky cannot protect civilians from drone attacks and bomb attacks. Nobody is talking about the fact that Ukraine is also targeting civilians — as it was in Stakhanov, where those students were Ukrainians born and raised in Ukraine, and now in Ukrainian military and media discourse they are called collaborators, just collaborators who are not deserving of pity. They are just collateral damage.
The Myrotvorets website even put teachers from the Stakhanov college on their website, accusing them of collaboration with Russia. So basically Ukrainians are being raised in hatred even toward their own people. When I hear the words from Zelensky — "we will not leave our people, we will not leave Donbas because they are our people" — no. It has nothing to do with Donbas and nothing to do with the people. He simply does not want the war to stop, because stopping the war means losing power and losing the source of profit for him and his inner circle.
I am not optimistic about Ukraine. I am very concerned about this society that Ukraine is building — this highly militarized, ethno-nationalist, chauvinistic society, full of hate and full of censorship. I do not want this kind of future for Ukrainian children. That is why I took my child and left, and every single day I am happy that I saved my child from this. When I see these developments — when I see far-right organizations like Azov Centuria being allowed into Ukrainian public schools, performing "lessons of courage" and "marriage lessons" in Ukrainian public schools with all these hate symbols — I am just terrified. What are you doing? And all of this is so normalized in Ukraine nowadays. I feel very sorry. It is like hell nowadays.
Closing reflections on Ukraine's future
Glenn Diesen: The problem is also when the war is over, because of this new identity they are trying to create, many people like yourself will probably not come back. It is going to be very hard to rebuild if the people do not actually come back. What kind of country will one create? It is not something you can just say "we will deal with this later" — I think it is a big problem.
But for me, the main frustration is always this simple binary: you are either pro-Ukrainian or pro-Russian, that is all. And this essentially makes anyone immune to criticism, because you are not allowed to be pro-Russian. And apparently if you are worried about Ukrainians being sent to their deaths, that means you are cheering for the invasion. There is no middle ground.
I think back to March 2014, when Henry Kissinger wrote that we should give up this idea of making Ukraine a front line — either of the West against Russia or Russia against the West. The only way Ukraine can remain intact is if it becomes a bridge, not a front line. Today that would be considered anti-Ukrainian. Same if you argue that the best way to end this war is to agree to a security arrangement with Russia in which we stop NATO expansion and remove Ukraine from the front lines of a divided Europe — that would also be considered pro-Russian.
And even people like Keith Kellogg — he had this speech where he argued that what we are doing is having Ukrainians fight Russia so we can weaken Russia, and then focus our resources on confronting China. I made a comment about this and he tweeted back saying it was "Sun Tzu stuff." But my point is: he is considered pro-Ukrainian. Why? He openly said we can use the Ukrainians to knock out Russia from the ranks of great powers. The only logic is that it weakens Russia. So if it is bad for Russia, it is good for Ukraine.
I looked at this article from the Washington Post in 2023, after the disastrous counteroffensive. It says: "The West's most reckless antagonist has been rocked. NATO has grown much stronger with the addition of Sweden and Finland. Germany has weaned itself off dependence on Russian energy and in many ways rediscovered its sense of values. NATO squabbles make headlines, but overall it has been a triumphal summer for the alliance." And it goes on to say the last eighteen months have been a windfall, a great success — except of course for all the dead Ukrainians and the destruction of the country. But this is how pro-Ukrainian rhetoric is these days.
Marta Havryshko: And if you criticize this, saying they cannot win, why are we continuing — well, that is a pro-Russian argument and you are a traitor.
Glenn Diesen: I have never seen political propaganda like this in my lifetime. It is quite extraordinary. Any final thoughts before we wrap up?
Marta Havryshko: I just hope that this war will end, because there is too much suffering. And I hope that shows like yours and others will undermine this mainstream hawkish discourse in the West that keeps feeding this war and presenting it as raw Ukraine actually winning. Because I, and many, many people in Ukraine, are tired of this. Let's hope for the better.
Glenn Diesen: I agree. And a last example that could have been made: the head of German intelligence made the point that we should keep this war going for another five years so we can prepare ourselves for conflict with Russia. So this is yet another pro-Ukrainian statement — we need Ukrainians to go to the front lines for another five years so we can prepare ourselves. It is horrible. I cannot believe it has gone this far, and it will probably go even further if it continues. But like you, I hope this war comes to a quick end. There has been too much suffering already. On this very sad topic, nonetheless, thank you very much for your time. I appreciate it.
Marta Havryshko: Thank you, Glenn. Thank you so much.