Primary colours: Kiev at war. A photo-essay from the Ukrainian Capital prepared by Joseph d'Urso.

One year after the historic events on Kiev's Maidan Square the city remains gripped in political drama. Whilst the shooting in Ukraine's capital has stopped, the echoes of the conflict in the east of the country resonate in different ways.

Our special correspondent Joseph d'Urso was in Kiev last week and he sent in this photo-essay for commonspace.eu.


 


♦ Every stall, scrap of fence, streetside entertainer - everything in Kiev is political at the moment. Everything, everywhere makes some reference to the guns rumbling in Ukraine's east.  


Even the small currency booths, ubiquitous in every eastern European city, tell a story. When I arrive on February 22nd one US dollar is worth 28 hyrvnia. Two days later it is 33. Then it falls again. The old women who run the exchanges begin to add their own zeroes in pen. 

 





♦ Pensions denominated in Ukrainian currency are becoming increasingly worthless, while young people's dreams to travel abroad are becoming increasingly improbable. Paul, dressed as a tiger, and a panda bear who would rather not share his name, earn money having their photos taken with tourists.

 They do not seem very busy this February. "Lots of people died here. We see many people crying. But we can make them smile. F*** Putin!" says Paul. 


♦ People did die, last year, on the patch of concrete behind the tiger and panda. One hundred protestors were gunned down a year ago by government forces attempting to break up the 'Euromaidan' protests. President Yanukovich was removed from office shortly after, with new elections held in May.


The ghosts of the 'heavenly hundred' still haunt Kiev. Along the street where sniper fire rang out lie flowers, lanterns and pictures of the dead. Their birth dates span the decades, but their death dates all read February 2014. Many were teenagers.

 

♦ It is a far cry from the summer of 2012, when tourists occupied the city for the European Championships. Kievans still speak fondly of the Swedish contingent who camped for weeks in the woods on the left bank of the Dnieper river. Lyudmila, a tour guide, shows a picture of her with James Milner and Phil Jagielka, two English footballers, outside one of Kiev's main cathedrals that summer. "I used to get thirty people on tours," she says. "Now I'm lucky to get one or two.

"Last week, trudging through snow to the stadium where England were knocked out of the tournament by Italy in 2012, beach parties felt a world away. FC Dynamo Kiev were playing Guingamp, a French side, in the knockout stages of the Europa League. When Dynamo came from behind, a second goal hitting the net, the ‘ultras' section of the crowd drew attention away from the pitch as eyes swivelled to a remarkable spectacle: thousands of topless men jumping up and down in the sleet.


 

Play was suspended for ten minutes as fans ran on the pitch to charge at the few dozen brave souls who had made the journey from France. Ultimately the Ukrainian side won. Fans piled onto the metro after the final whistle chanting Glory to Ukraine! Glory to heroes!, and a ruder song about Vladimir Putin. Dynamo are facing England's Everton FC in the next round. Phil Jagielka will return to Kiev.

In the crowd, the ubiquitous blue and white of Dynamo was heavily peppered with the gold and blue of the Ukrainian flag. On occasion the red and black of a more muscular Ukrainian nationalism could be seen: the flag of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army which fought the Soviets in the Second World War.

♦ In the current political situation, red and black represents the Right Sector, a far-right party who did badly in last May's parliamentary elections, but have been organising volunteer fighters to battle separatists in the east. The controversial group seem a normalised feature of life in Kiev, openly raising money in the Maidan. A demonstration outside the National Bank of Ukraine, with a crowd demanding the resignation of Valeriya Hontareva, the bank's chair, sees more red and black than blue and yellow. 








♦ The insignia of the Azov Battalion, bearing some resemblance to a swastika, can be seen on posters and graffiti.
 




♦ More common, however, are men like Ruslan, standing beneath the gold and blue national flag of Ukraine and raising funds for the 'ATO' (the Ukrainian army refers to the operation in the east of the country as an 'Anti-Terrorist Operation'). If you walk onto the Maidan now, an ATO man will doubtless shake his bucket at you.






♦ To some extent, life goes on as normal. At the spectacular Pechersk Lavra, pilgrims and monks mingle, and people venerate the dead saints in their caskets by candlelight underground. But there are few tourists, and certainly no English footballers.






♦ However outside St Michael's, another spectacular monastery in the centre of Kiev, there are burnt out vehicles and shell casings. This equipment, with its Russian serial numbers, is on display as 'evidence of the Russian military aggression on the territory of Ukraine'. In Kiev at the moment, any distraction from war can only be temporary.


source: Photo-essay by Joseph d'Urso for commonspace.eu

(c) commonspace.eu
 

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).
Editor's choice
News
UN Security Council Presidential Statement on the Role of Diplomacy during Active Hostilities

UN Security Council Presidential Statement on the Role of Diplomacy during Active Hostilities

The United Nations Security Council is today expected to adopt a presidential statement on the role of diplomacy during active hostilities. The draft text, which was authored by Pakistan, underscores the importance of maintaining diplomatic engagement even after the outbreak of armed conflict, with a view to containing escalation, facilitating cessations of hostilities and ceasefires, and creating conditions conducive to peaceful political settlements. Resolution 2788 of 22 July 2025, which was initiated by Pakistan, reaffirmed the Council’s commitment to the peaceful settlement of disputes under Chapter VI of the UN Charter. A year later, on 23 July, the Council convened an open debate to review the resolution’s implementation and examine ways of making more effective use of the peaceful dispute settlement tools available under Chapter VI.   The draft presidential statement builds on previous Council products, such as resolution 2788, but it is the first to focus specifically on the role of diplomacy in containing and de-escalating active hostilities. Since the open debate in July, Council members have continued to call for intensified efforts towards de-escalation and dialogue, although differences persist over how proactively the Council should promote mediation and other peaceful means of dispute settlement, particularly in situations where the consent of the parties is contested. In his statement opening the general debate of the 81st session of the General Assembly on 22 September, Secretary-General António Guterres highlighted the devastating consequences of ongoing conflicts in Ukraine, Sudan, and the Middle East, warning that these and other crises illustrate what happens when “force outpaces diplomacy” and stressing the urgency of sustained diplomatic engagement. The negotiations on the draft presidential statement do not appear to have been particularly contentious, although Council members expressed differing views on some elements of the text. Pakistan circulated the initial draft to Council members on 14 October. Following informal consultations with Council members to address comments on the initial draft, Pakistan circulated a first revised draft on 23 October, incorporating several proposed amendments. On 29 October, Pakistan circulated a second revised draft, which it placed under silence procedure until the following day (30 October). After the US broke silence, a third revised draft was circulated on 3 November and placed under silence procedure until this morning (4 November). The draft subsequently passed silence. The agreed presidential statement emphasises the importance of maintaining direct and indirect channels of communication between parties to armed conflict to reduce the risk of miscalculation and create opportunities for sustained political engagement. (click image to read more)

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)