Introduction

The question of why Maidan helped to bring conflict and war to Ukraine is a complex one. The events surrounding Maidan and their subsequent escalations were multifaceted, involving both internal and external factors. This article delves into the historical context, the actual events that transpired, and the role of external influence, particularly that of Russia, in precipitating the conflict. By examining the timeline and key players involved, we aim to provide a comprehensive understanding of what transpired during this pivotal period.

Stage One: The Student Rally

The first stage of Maidan primarily involved a group of students who gathered to protest against the decision by Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych to suspend the signing of the Association Agreement with the European Union (EU). This decision was a significant blow, as the negotiations were finalized in February 2013, and the signing was scheduled to take place in Vilnius, Lithuania, in November 2013. However, just a week or two before this pivotal date, local sources hinted that Yanukovych would not sign the agreement. These rumors were initially dismissed by officials, who indicated that all the necessary paperwork for the ceremony was completed and there were no indications that the signing would not occur.

There were also allegations that Russian President Vladimir Putin promised Yanukovych a 15 billion interest-free loan and advanced 3 billion. Despite these promises, Ukraine eventually refused to sign the agreement. When this news spread, thousands of people began to gather in the central square, Maidan Nezalezhnosti, to voice their dissatisfaction. The initial crowd was small and primarily occupied a section of the pedestrian zone, but as the days went by, the protest grew in size and scope.

Stage Two: Escalation and Police Violence

The second stage saw the protest intensify as more people joined the demonstrations, demanding justice and a step back from EU integration. One of the key demands was to oust the Minister of Interior, a demand that was not met. As the days passed, protesters began to build barricades and block the main street, leading to a standoff with the riot police. Although this period was largely characterized by rough-and-tumble play rather than direct clashes, the authorities remained unwilling to negotiate.

This tense standoff lasted approximately a month and a half. The situation took a violent turn in mid-January when the first blood was drawn, marking the beginning of the third stage. It was at this point that Russian involvement became more apparent, with some of the riot police reportedly being from Russia and leaving graffiti with Russian city names. Additionally, Russia openly supplied Yanukovych’s forces with flashbangs and other police equipment, which had been depleted in failed attempts to disperse the protesters.

On February 18 and 20, 2014, two massive police attacks in Kiev resulted in more than 100 protesters and about 20 policemen killed. This massacre was a pivotal moment, leading Yanukovych to negotiate with opposition leaders, who agreed to hold snap elections. However, these elections never took place as Yanukovych and many top authorities fled to Russia, leading to Russia’s covert invasion of Crimea and the subsequent war.

The Role of External Influences

Russia’s involvement in the Maidan protests was instrumental in escalating the situation. According to the Ukrainian constitution, if the president could not perform his duties, the head of the parliament would become the acting president. However, Russia’s intervention led to the deviation of the constitutional process. Russian operatives attacked police stations in the Donetsk region, marking the beginning of a full-scale conflict.

The Russian government and their propaganda agents have long attempted to deflect attention from their actions. They label the Maidan protests a "coup" and place the blame for all the ensuing violence on the protesters and their leaders. However, the reality is that the Maidan movement was a natural response to an abrupt change in foreign policy under Yanukovych’s leadership, which reeked of high treason.

Yanukovych was not overthrown; he simply fled the country. If Russia had not interfered with internal Ukrainian affairs, there would have been no war and tens of thousands of lives would not have been lost.