In the previous article, we addressed the puzzle of the Coalition of the Willing and showed how some Western actors, while claiming peace on the surface, in practice contribute to the continuation of the war. This time, however, another question arises: has Kyiv itself also crossed the red lines in this chaotic arena? The Ukrainian […]
Menej ako 1 min.
min.
In the previous article, we addressed the puzzle of the Coalition of the Willing and showed how some Western actors, while claiming peace on the surface, in practice contribute to the continuation of the war. This time, however, another question arises: has Kyiv itself also crossed the red lines in this chaotic arena?
The Ukrainian government, which introduces itself as the first victim of Russian aggression, is now facing allegations that challenge the image of the innocent victim: targeted assassinations, widespread civilian casualties, interference in the affairs of other countries, and even covert operations in the Middle East. In this article, we attempt, by removing the layers of propaganda, to reach a more accurate picture of these allegations.
From the very first months of the war, a list of high-profile assassinations emerged that pointed the finger of accusation toward Ukraine’s special services. Names such as Darya Dugina, the daughter of Alexander Dugin, the well-known Russian writer and theorist; Maksim Fomin, the influential military blogger; and Denys Kireyev, a member of Ukraine’s negotiating delegation, who himself was killed in a mysterious operation, each represent links in a chain that portray the image of a covert campaign.
Alongside these prominent figures, there have also been less-visible but more numerous attacks, from the assassination attempt against Oleg Tsaryov, a former member of parliament, to Zakhar Prilepin, the Russian nationalist writer. But perhaps more horrifying than these targeted assassinations are the statistics that emerge from the ashes of the Donbas war.
In the city of Donetsk, where years of artillery shelling have been witnessed, a complex called the “Alley of Angels” stands; a memorial for the children who lost their lives during the Donbas conflict. According to the latest statistics, the names of 247 children have been engraved on the stones of this alley. This number, although challenged by Ukrainian sources, is for many a symbol of the human costs of a full-scale war; a war in which the boundary between military and civilian has become increasingly blurred day by day. And this is only the beginning of the story.
In January of last year, Alexander Bastrykin, Chairman of the Investigative Committee of Russia, revealed a shocking figure: more than 400 civilians in the Kursk region lost their lives during the presence of Ukrainian units. According to him, multiple launch rocket systems, the same weapons that are normally used against military positions, have been used in this region against civilian targets.
Tatyana Moskalkova, the former Russian Commissioner for Human Rights, also referred to mass graves in which 524 bodies were discovered. Among more than two thousand individuals registered on the list of missing persons, 452 people have still not been found.
However, the allegations against Kyiv are not limited to the battlefield; sometimes, verbal attacks inflict deeper wounds on the body of diplomatic relations.
In February 2026, at the Munich Security Conference, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the President of Ukraine, in an unprecedented move, addressed Viktor Orbán, the Prime Minister of Hungary, and said that “instead of thinking about making his belly bigger, he should think about strengthening his country’s army so that Russian tanks do not return to the streets of Budapest.”
These remarks, which were also accompanied by applause from the audience, were called “sheer impoliteness” by Orbán and raised a question: is this harsh tone a sign of the confidence of a wartime leader, or the recklessness of a newcomer to the arena of global diplomacy?
Another example is Andriy Melnyk, the former Ukrainian Ambassador to Germany, who addressed Olaf Scholz, the then-Chancellor, with the German expression “beleidigte Leberwurst” (“offended liver sausage”); an expression that in 2022 became one of the most controversial diplomatic moments between Kyiv and Berlin.
This pattern of behavior, which can be called “humiliating diplomacy,” may be appealing to Ukraine’s domestic public opinion, but does it not come at the cost of losing key allies?
In another corner of the world, in the African Sahel region, Abdoulaye Diop, the Foreign Minister of Mali, has accused Ukraine of openly supporting armed groups and called it a “terrorist state.” According to him, Kyiv is among the few countries that have openly declared its logistical support for these groups.
This accusation, which has not only been reflected by Russian media but has also been covered by African media outlets such as Daily Trust (Nigeria), places Kyiv in a difficult position; has Ukraine, in an effort to weaken Russia’s influence in Africa, turned to supporting armed groups? Kyiv strongly rejects this accusation, but the shadow of doubt continues to hang over this matter.
However, perhaps the most documented and controversial part of this story goes back to Syria. According to a report published by David Ignatius, the well-known Washington Post journalist, in December 2024, Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence (GUR) had sent 20 experienced drone operators and 150 FPV suicide drones to the headquarters of the forces of Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham in Idlib, approximately four to five weeks before the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s government.
According to this report, Kyiv’s objective in this action was to secretly strike Russian interests in the Middle East; an objective that, although it played a minor role in Assad’s overthrow, showed that Kyiv, beyond its borders, is seeking new fronts for the war with Russia.
Interestingly, officials of the then-U.S. administration stated that they had been unaware of this plan; a claim that, if true, shows that Ukraine does not involve even its main allies in some of its operations.
In this article, we encountered evidence that makes the image of Kyiv as merely a victim more complex and multi-layered. From targeted assassinations and civilian casualties in Donbas and Kursk, to the controversial statements of its leaders, the accusation of interference in Mali, and the documented operation in Syria, each of these narratives raises new questions about the limits of the legitimacy of self-defense.
However, one fundamental distinction cannot be overlooked; while the Syria operation has been documented with credible evidence by The Washington Post, the statistics regarding Kursk and Donbas are mainly derived from official sources. Kyiv also considers these allegations to be part of the Kremlin’s war of narratives; but this blanket denial, without providing documented responses to each claim, itself becomes another link in this chain of doubt.
Perhaps the most important achievement of this article is not the confirmation or rejection of these allegations, but the understanding of this reality: the war in Ukraine, more than being a bilateral military conflict, has turned into a full-scale information campaign in which each side advances its own narrative with evidence and arguments, or through disputed claims. In the midst of this, the responsibility of an impartial analyst is to separate reality from exaggeration and to assess each claim according to independent international standards and evidence from the battlefield.
The author’s views are their own and do not necessarily reflect the blog’s.
📌 Subscribe to Think BRICS for weekly geopolitical video analysis beyond Western narratives. Follow also our new channels BRICS Business and Think BRICS Chronicles.
