Russian and Ukrainian experts about the murder of Denis Boronenkov

Thursday, March 23, in the center of Kiev, was shot by a former Deputy of the state Duma Denis Voronenkov, who recently emigrated to the Ukraine together with his wife, also ex-Deputy of the state Duma Maria Maksakova. Killer Boronenkov, which wounded his security guard, died in the hospital. Earlier Boronenkov gave evidence to the Ukrainian Prosecutor’s office on case of former President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych. The President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko called the killing “an act of state terrorism by Russia”. In the Kremlin these charges was absurd and pointed out the responsibility of the Ukrainian authorities, who are unable to provide the ex-Deputy of the Duma security. Questions answered RFI editor Alexander Baunov and Ukrainian political analyst Vadim Karasev.

Editor Alexander Baunov: Neither the one nor the other hand there are not enough data to make categorical political charges. The fact that these accusations were made at the highest level — by President (Petro Poroshenko), from the attorney General, the head of security, it means that the main losers in this history is the legal state. Because in a lawful state first need to understand what happened and not to speak at the presidential level in the first half hour with the political version of not that as a major, and exceptional.


Boronenkov — a man with a very troubled history. He is an exemplary MP-patriot, a member of a rather notorious Communist party, who voted for all the odious repressive laws in the previous Duma. All thought was out of business. In Russia was instituted a criminal proceedings is clearly non-political nature, when he was still a Deputy. Politically to pursue Boronenkov was exactly not for that. After he was stripped of parliamentary immunity, two days later, he moved to Ukraine and became a political refugee. Why not earlier, if he’s so principled?

RFI: Why he was given Ukrainian citizenship if he voted for the annexation of Crimea, and so on?


That is a question for Ukraine. The Declaration that you are moving in the direction of Europe, but the only movement in Europe that you do is spitting in a nearby, aggressive, offended you country is not really a movement in the direction of Europe. Europe is built from the inside, not the outside. Europe is not someone you hate, even partly deserved, and what is happening inside you. And if you take as a political refugee person who voted for the Crimea, for all the repressive laws antyeuropejskie, with a troubled past with ties to Party of regions, Yanukovich, accused of raiding…


This is a typical MP for the former Soviet Union. He could be Ukrainian MP, it was full in the Russian Duma of all convocations. If they don’t want to see in the “United Russia”, they make a certain amount of money in the LDPR or the Communist party (“United Russia” still less need the money) and buy there the parliamentary mandate, which protects them from persecution. But in the next convocation he took off. This means that in the Duma it was decided that a person troubled enough even to sit there. So to say his contribution to the party funds, in this case, it didn’t work.


Could he have desired the Ukrainian authorities information on the same Yanukovych?


He left in December. It’s March. Imagine: a man believes he has critical information that he has not yet revealed. Respectively four months, he goes to a living target. The incriminating evidence you need to convey to the Trustee, if not directly to make public. To your opponents in the Kremlin, the Duma — whatever — knew that he was protected, that if something happens, then some information will be released. If in four months he has not released and not transferred to the Trustee, probably of this information. At least nothing, except that it will tell during interrogation in connection with the case of Yanukovych. He reported approximately the same as said Ponomarev.


It is possible theoretically to imagine that this is the punishment of a traitor. But the Kremlin also understand how it will look in the current situation, when Russia launched its tentacles is not something that the Ukraine and Washington, in France, Germany and so on, when the absolute demonic evil centered in the Kremlin, they lacked the murder of a man who, apparently, knows nothing. Although the act of transfer to the enemy the former Deputy, I think a lot of people here unpleasant. And before that, and the other side to say that this is a political murder ordered by our political opponents.


Ukrainian political analyst Vadim Karasev: Boronenkov testified, was well received in the fairly high echelons of Russian power. Therefore, it is more politics than crime, given the reputation of the murdered man and his business and criminal history. This can be for special services of the Russian Federation. But the question here is: if you’ve received such a command? Or is the initiative of individual representatives of the security services, given that some of them were office or other conflict with the Voronenkova. It’s one thing if the motives are personal, even of a representative of authority or intelligence, and another thing — the motives are not private, but political.


Voronenkov is an important witness in the case of Yanukovych. Should begin in absentia trial in the near future. Public speaking Boronenkov, of course, there was expected to be an important factor of media influence on the process and media influence of this process on policy.

RFI: He Boronenkov recently said that he had no specific information, compromising only “known facts”.


But he was going to be an important witness. In any case, so the Ukrainian government is filed. And secondly, it’s revenge for being so brazenly, defiantly came to Kiev, gave evidence. We don’t know until the end that told Boronenkov. He’s not going to say that told any important secrets. He was just interested in the fact that less heed is paid to the testimony that he gave. He is the former Deputy of the state Duma, well received in political and party circles in Moscow, in particular through his wife Maksakova, which was a well-known representative of this “class”. Here is the call arrival to Kiev, citizenship, the claim to the important testimony in the case of Yanukovych — it could cause a reaction, to punish, and another to specify what is allowed and what is not permissible.


— Do you think that the Kremlin deliberately could go to this event?


— Not saying it’s deliberately the first person to give this (indicating). But in some circles of the security services that could be considered. Can there be a personal interest due to a business conflict. Nevertheless, it is not the consumer, not the criminal, but still an assassination with political overtones.