“If Ukraine loses, Europe will also be destroyed” – three key figures in the Maidan protests are fighting for the future of their country

Najjem, now 40 years old, is now deputy infrastructure minister in a Kiev government bunker and is trying to maintain the supply routes that were interrupted in many places by the war. Svitlana Zalishchuk and Serhi Leshchenko, two former comrades-in-arms of the “Euromaidan generation”, are fighting with him desperately for the survival of their country – and they can count on a lot of political and social solidarity. “The relationships we established in 2014 are so formative that they will remain forever,” Svitlana Zalishchuk describes the relationship between them. They are also known to the public as “the three musketeers”.

At the time, the activist Zalishchuk was behind the “Euromaidan” Facebook page, which, according to Nayem’s post, coordinated the protests. Today Zalishchuk works for the state-owned energy company Naftohas. The supply situation is precarious due to the conflict with Russia, she says on the phone from western Ukraine. “I’m trying to secure gas for the country from international partners for the next year.”

Serhi Leshchenko also belongs to the central Maidan activists and to the close circle of friends of Nayem and Zalishchuk. The 41-year-old became known nationwide as an investigative journalist in the noughties. Today he advises Volodymyr Zelensky and fights against Russian fake news, which is often spread from official government sources. “The most common claim is that the president fled,” says the man from Kiev, who, like Nayem in the capital, has been working through the night for more than two weeks with no more than four hours of sleep.

They have been walking together for 20 years

The paths of the “Three Musketeers” have always been closely intertwined over the past 20 years and date back to the first mass democratic movement, the “Orange Revolution” of 2004. All three activists worked as journalists and played important roles in civil movements in the years that followed censorship and for more transparency in politics.

The trio were partly responsible for Ukraine detaching itself from Russia’s orbit in the post-Soviet space and turning to Europe – a development that Vladimir Putin now wants to reverse with brutal force of arms. The Kremlin has always been suspicious of non-state social movements. As early as 2004, the government in Moscow interpreted them as “political techniques” manipulated by the West to infiltrate their sphere of influence.

However, the situation in Ukraine was always too complicated to be controlled from outside: The pro-Moscow politician Viktor Yanukovych, for example, converted the division of the pro-Europe camp into an election victory for the then still strong pro-Russian movement in 2010, but then tumbled between the two for years Brussels and Moscow. It was not until November 21, 2013, when the President, under pressure from Putin, unexpectedly buried the association agreement with the EU that “Euromaidan” began.

“The beginnings were so innocent,” says Zalishchuk. They raved about ideals and pursued the goal of building a modern Ukraine. But what followed was a massive wave of repression by the security forces and a radicalization of the protest movement in spring 2014. They set up barricades with burning tires on Independence Square, and soon there were regular skirmishes.

The situation escalated in mid-February when security forces shot and killed over 100 demonstrators. Parliament forced President Viktor Yanukovych to resign. Shortly thereafter, Russian soldiers without national insignia appeared on the Crimean peninsula, where the Russian Black Sea Fleet is stationed. They surrounded parliament, which then decided to hold an irregular referendum on independence.

Difficult march through the institutions

Dozens of pro-Russian activists were killed in clashes in Odessa, and in Donbass, Moscow-backed separatists militarily started a war in April that has continued to this day.

Even if the three are not objective observers of recent Ukrainian history, they are united in the conviction that their country has changed for the better despite violence and war. “Ukraine was reborn as a nation,” says Mustafa Najjem. “We have done a lot in the last eight years to be ready for EU membership and our army has gained a lot of experience on the battlefield – unfortunately.”

The careers of the three activists are exemplary in showing that this path has led over huge hurdles not only in foreign but also in domestic politics. Like others of the “Euromaidan generation”, they entered parliament in the wake of the early elections in autumn 2014. They joined the bloc of President Petro Poroshenko, who was elected a few months earlier, but at the same time kept their distance from the billionaire chocolate king.

>> Read here: How Putin’s war is turning the world economy into a battlefield

For the Maidan activists, the march through the institutions became a balancing act between ideals and realpolitik. They rightly refer to reform successes, for example in the energy market, in the tax system and in decentralization. A modern economy and a Western European attitude to life established themselves in the capitals. However, in the judiciary and in the fight against corruption, which is often politically abused, successes were mixed with setbacks. The power of the oligarchs is unbroken.

The trio soon broke their alliance with Poroshenko to reposition themselves politically. However, his attempts to set up a coalition of “euro optimists” together with Mikhail Saakashvili failed in 2016 due to internal conflicts and power struggles. In the 2019 general election, Zalishchuk and Leshchenko ran as independents, losing to candidates from Zelensky’s new party, Servants of the People. Najjem had previously retired.

Nevertheless, the “three musketeers” have since managed to secure important positions in strategic, state-related areas. Before returning to government, Mustafa Nayem was deputy director of the state-owned armaments company Ukroboronprom, Leschtschenko advised Zelenskiy in the election campaign and sits on the supervisory board of the railways.

Camp thinking is over

The three agree that it no longer matters who belonged to which camp before the war. Svitlana Zalishchuk even has to laugh briefly when she thinks back to the seemingly meaningless controversies of the recent past: Zelensky, who grew up speaking Russian, was criticized for wearing a traditional Ukrainian peasant shirt that was too similar to the Russian one. “Today, it’s no longer what you wear and how you speak, but what you do with it,” she says.

Najjem points to the great resistance against the invaders, especially in the south-east of the country, which is traditionally close to Russia, to illustrate that the east-west divide, which was still very noticeable in 2014, no longer plays a role. “Putin has united Ukraine like no one before,” he says. Because of this, the Russians would not take the capital. Leshchenko sounds a lot more exhausted and disillusioned after a long work week. “Ukraine has the strongest army in Europe,” he says. “But there are dark days ahead, and the West is partly to blame.”

The politician appears bitter over NATO’s refusal to enforce a no-fly zone over Ukraine. He doesn’t understand Allianz’s concern that such a direct confrontation between East and West would cause the conflict to spiral out of control. “For eight years we have been asked to reform. We did it, but we’re not part of Europe,” he laments. “Now we’re stuck in a war like in the Middle Ages and have no security guarantees.” The West still underestimates Putin, Leshchenko believes. “If Ukraine loses, Europe will also be destroyed.”

The trio ruled out concessions in negotiations with Russia. “We can’t compromise if there’s a gun to our head,” says Najjem. If the government in Kyiv were to recognize the annexation of Crimea and the independence of the separatist republics in Donbass, Salishchuk said this would be tantamount to capitulation. “That would mean that in the middle of Europe you can use force to redraw the borders and this will be accepted.”

Leshchenko remains in Kyiv, even though he knows that storming the city would be life-threatening for him. Like many in Ukraine, he sees no alternative to fighting. “I have a feeling a planet is about to fall on us and we don’t have a plan B,” he says. Najjem also wants to persevere. These days he thinks a lot about his family’s flight from Afghanistan when the Soviet troops withdrew in 1989. “Ukraine is my home. I do not want to become a refugee again.”

Svitlana Zalishchuk, on the other hand, packed a small suitcase after the initial shock and fled to western Ukraine. There she and her family stayed with a friend for the time being. She is in a state of limbo: “I only brought a pair of jeans and a sweater, I’m sitting in it now and working on my computer all the time.” She knows that she should go out and buy new clothes. “But once I do that, I accept that I might not be able to go home for a long time. I’m not ready for that yet.”

More: Difficult decision: which unjust states should replace gas and oil from Russia?