By Nikita Sorokin
Europe’s football governing body UEFA has claimed that the Dnepropetrovsk bombings haven’t shaken its belief in the ability of the Ukrainian law enforcement agencies to ensure security at the upcoming Euro Cup 2012. Meanwhile, the investigation has put forth a number of theories on the causes of the explosions. Among some of the most probable forces behind the attack, experts say, are Ukrainian opposition activists or national radicals, allegedly trying to disrupt forthcoming Euro-2012 football tournament. However, no feasible version has been discussed so far.
Ukrainian officials have already waved off the possibility of a political strife instigating the April 27 bombing as groundless. One security service after the other has pinned the blame for the attack on a criminal feud, suggesting that the bombing could be carried out by a lonely wolf, inspired by Breivik’s killing spree. But it’s, in fact, a political motive that could well emerge as the main reason for the attack.
No doubt this tragic incident will affect the country’s tourist market. But it doesn’t have anything to do with Ukraine’s football or business, Director of the Ukrainian Institute for Global Strategies Vadim Karasev said in an interview to the Voice of Russia. Roots of the attack most probably go deep into the internal or external politics, he believes.
“The internal political reason is linked to intrigues of the secret service to spread panic, fear and confusion in Dnepropetrovsk and in Ukraine as a whole, to create a new political reality by curbing political activity, protests, severing right of the opposition and barring Tymoshenko from influencing political processes, to use the background of anti-terrorist conundrum to step up the influence of law enforcement on the political regime. The exterior political scenario reminds me of the Kyrgyz one, only Ukrainian style. When the former Kyrgyz president, Bakiyev failed to balance Kyrgyzstan’s relationships with both Russia and the US, the country’s two major strategic partners, he became too vulnerable and was oustered. He fled the country, destabilized and torn by internal strife incited by foreign secret services, and then saw its regime change. Might be, the same scenario is now being implemented in Dnepropetrovsk.”
According to Vadim Karasev, the fact that no EURO Cup 2012 host city – Kharkov, Lvov, Kiev, or Donetsk – was hit by the attack speaks against the anti-championship scheme. Head of CIS Institute’s regional office Kirill Frolov has also caught a glimpse of political motives behind the bombings.
“The political explanation clearly suggests itself. I’m shocked by the Ukrainian opposition’s cynicism. The announcement by Vladimir Jakovitsky (head of the Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada’s Committee on Culture) has struck me as particularly cynical. He claimed that the authorities had masterminded the expositions to disrupt the upcoming parliamentary elections and to impose dictstorship in the country. I am totally against portraying Viktor Janukovish as the devil himself. He doesn’t eat babies and he has no reasons, even political ones, to organize terror blasts. The Euro football championship is the trump card of the Regions’ Party. They failed to give people bread and are now doing their best to give them circuses. These bombings can only play in hand of the Orange Revolution oppositionists, who advocate another, Maidan-2, scenario for Ukraine.”
Cynical though it may sound, a criminal motive behind the Dnepropetrovsk terror act would be easier to accept. When a political strife reaches the level of bomb slinging, it triggers scary associations of the Arab Spring, because nothing will protect Ukrainians from unrestrained and violent passions that can engulf their politicians.