Ukraine hasn’t held elections for six years—and the reason is the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian war.
A few months ago, statements by U.S. President Donald Trump—particularly his claim that Ukraine must hold elections—shocked many.
In response, the civil initiative “Holka” decided to compile a selection of Russian propaganda and disinformation that, for years, has shaped the information landscape and manipulated public consciousness.
This is a reminder: Russia has always interfered in Ukraine’s electoral processes.
The myth of “fraternal unity” has been a constant theme in Russian propaganda. Here’s an example: a leaflet created 100 years ago by poet Vladimir Mayakovsky. Even then, you can see how “unity” was constructed—by force.
Later, the Soviet Union would celebrate anniversaries of the so-called “reunification” of Ukraine with Russia and propagate the myth of a “brotherly friendship.” Notably, the annexation of Ukrainian territory was not even portrayed as a union, but a “reunion”—as if it were always Russian land.
Imperial election technologies were always used in Ukraine to discredit candidates who sincerely supported Ukraine’s independence, and to convince people that talk of “brotherly nations” was anything but propaganda.
So when the historic opportunity arose to restore Ukraine’s independence, Ukrainian dissidents knew they wouldn’t win the first elections. But they did everything to ensure the public would support the Act of Declaration of Independence in the 1991 referendum.
These are the kinds of leaflets “Aktiv Voli” (Activists for Freedom) distributed at the time.
And here are samples from the “Student Brotherhood.”
Leonid Kravchuk won the presidential race, while Vyacheslav Chornovil was elected to parliament. Importantly, Chornovil always relied on support from the Crimean Tatars, recognizing where the Russian threat would come from. In coordination with the Mejlis, he helped ensure that Mustafa Dzhemilev would enter parliament.
From the very beginning of Ukraine’s renewed independence, Russia set its sights on Crimea.
Here’s a campaign leaflet from presidential candidate Yuriy Meshkov in Crimea.
In 1995, Dzhokhar Dudayev—the leader fighting for the independence of Ichkeria—warned that there would be a war between Russia and Ukraine. He also noted that if the West let it slide, a large-scale war would follow.
A year after this warning, Dudayev was killed.
In 1999, just before the elections, the leader of the People’s Movement of Ukraine, Vyacheslav Chornovil, died in a car crash. He and other members of the Sixtiers movement had done everything they could to ensure Ukraine declared independence in 1991—and he had worked closely with the Crimean Tatars.
Photo: The crash site of Chornovil’s car and the truck involved
With no strong pro-independence candidate, the 1999 run-off election came down to then-incumbent Leonid Kuchma and communist Petro Symonenko. It was an election without real choice.
Under Kuchma, the Constitutional Court even ruled that he could run for a third term—arguing that the Constitution had been adopted during his first term and thus it shouldn’t count.
A real chance for Ukraine to elect a president who understood that independence meant continued struggle came when Viktor Yushchenko ran against Viktor Yanukovych. Pro-Russian forces saw they were losing—the polls made it clear. So they turned to dirty tactics, even poisoning Yushchenko.
Kremlin strategists worked to divide Ukrainians into “us” and “them.” They created the narrative of three “grades” of Ukrainians, attributing this division to Yushchenko’s team.
Так у другий тур за відсутності патріотично налаштованого кандидата вийшли чинний на той час президент Леонід Кучма та комуніст Петро Симоненко. Це були вибори без вибору.
A propaganda leaflet showing Ukraine divided into three “grades”
The co-author of this map was KGB provocateur Gleb Pavlovsky, who came to Ukraine to interfere in elections and shape the media narrative for the Kremlin. He worked for Putin’s administration and died a few years ago.
But that narrative alone wasn’t enough. They had to depict Orange supporters as drug addicts. That’s when the propaganda CD “Yushchenkomania” came out.
Sample of black PR: CD “Yushchenkomania. Free Yourself”
“Mythical oranges” at the Maidan, mentioned by Yanukovych’s wife, became a meme.
Then came the posters of the “Orange Brigades.”
More samples of black PR against Orange politicians from 2004
To drag down Yushchenko’s ratings, they didn’t just use dirty tricks—they sowed propaganda that laid the groundwork for war. Posters emerged promoting the idea of a civil war and portraying the U.S. and other Western partners as threats.
Posters from Yushchenko’s opponents, 2004
Poster in a train: “Are you ready for civil war?”
Presidential “technical” candidate Roman Kozak aired a video on national TV saying:
Mr. Viktor, Ukrainian nationalists supported you. Your wife is American!
Kozak claimed to represent Ukrainian nationalists while trying to siphon votes from Yushchenko by portraying him as a U.S. puppet. His party later disavowed him and expelled him.
At the same time, Natalia Vitrenko’s party—now banned as pro-Russian—aired videos claiming Russian speakers were oppressed in Ukraine.
Alongside the anti-American line, Kremlin-backed forces tried to brand nationalists as Nazis. Here’s what appeared on the streets of Donetsk in 2003 when “Our Ukraine” planned a convention there.
Photo: Anatoliy Medzyk, outdoor advertising in Donetsk
Vitrenko’s party also campaigned in Crimea, placing Nazi symbols on NATO logos—despite Ukraine giving up its nuclear arsenal and striving for NATO membership for years.
Vitrenko campaign leaflet
Their videos emphasized that only unity between Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia could bring peace:
We’ll protect your world, we’ll protect Ukraine from NATO.
In Crimea, election campaign materials urged people to:
“Kill the Ukrainian inside you,” “stop mooing in that language.”
Printed materials in Crimea before elections
Ten years after losing the first Maidan battle, Kremlin propagandists reused the Nazi narrative during the 2014 fake referendum in Crimea. Here are the posters they displayed then.
Photo: Outdoor advertising in Crimea, 2014
One major propaganda outlet was the Ukrainian Orthodox Church under the Moscow Patriarchate.
In one Moscow-linked church, chaplains from Kolomyia later reported seeing an icon of a naked Yushchenko burning in hell with nude women. Moscow clergy denied it.
As for Yanukovych, he was practically “canonized” in Luhansk. Here’s a box of candy bearing his image.
Candy box with Yanukovych’s face
There were even actual icons made of amber.
This icon dates back to Yanukovych’s time as head of the Donetsk regional administration.
Amber icon from Donetsk featuring Yanukovych
Socialists, too, mixed religion and racism in their ads—another tactic to push anti-Western sentiment.
Moscow clergy are FSB agents in robes. During the full-scale invasion, they’ve played a key role in supporting the enemy.
Photo: Evidence found by Ukraine’s Security Service during a search of UOC-MP property
In the temporarily occupied territories, propaganda never stopped. In Donetsk, they staged events like “Glory in Ukraine to whom? Bandera Kaput!”
Occupiers’ event in Donetsk region
Kremlin disinformation about Bandera continues. One claim is that the Ukrainian Church canonized him.
Fake image of a “canonized” Bandera
But what’s true is this: when Yushchenko became president, he officially recognized OUN-UPA as fighters for Ukraine’s independence. And OUN-UPA indeed fought for our statehood and for the collapse of the USSR.
Leaflet: “The USSR is a prison of nations”
Yushchenko submitted the Holodomor law as urgent legislation to parliament. It took years for the world to recognize the Holodomor as a genocide. Our diaspora, particularly the Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists, has played a key role in advocating for that recognition.
It’s worth noting that after the Orange Revolution, Kremlin strategists launched the political project “Not That Way” for Putin’s crony Viktor Medvedchuk. Leonid Kravchuk, Ukraine’s first president, joined it.
The same Kravchuk who supported Yanukovych in the 2004 election.
The “Not That Way” campaign featured ads with Shufrych, Boyko, Medvedchuk, and Kravchuk, claiming Ukraine wouldn’t join NATO and that Russia hadn’t raised gas prices—“they just couldn’t agree.”
These same Kremlin narratives—that Ukraine didn’t negotiate properly with Russia—would later be echoed by Trump.
The main point of those videos: stop Ukraine from joining NATO and instead unite with Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan.
Once again, we hear similar anti-NATO rhetoric from Trump.
Russian intelligence and fakes were also active during the Euromaidan. Journalists from Bihus.Info uncovered evidence that MP Oleksandr Dubinsky—now on trial for treason—was spreading false stories about sex workers in Maidan tents in 2014.
But decades of lies did not yield results for Russia. In 2014, Kremlin agent and traitor Yanukovych fled Ukraine—and Russia began its invasion with Crimea.
Despite the war, Ukraine has continued its fight. Over the last decade, we’ve seen several waves of “Lenin-falls.” Parliament and local governments launched processes of decolonization and de-Russification.
Our diaspora, now advocating in the U.S. after Trump’s shocking remarks, stresses that many Republicans have no understanding of the Holodomor—or of Russia’s centuries-long destruction of Ukrainians. Some believe the war started because Ukraine sought NATO membership. But that’s just another Kremlin lie. The Russian-Ukrainian war is existential—it began long before NATO even existed.
Even Germany has acknowledged Russian interference in its own elections this year. So the question arises: how can the U.S. demand elections in Ukraine amid a full-scale war—knowing that Russia would seize the chance to insert its agents into power?
Holding elections during war is not an option. Both the government and the opposition agree on this. The civil sector supports this stance. But history does not forgive unlearned lessons. That’s why we must prepare now—create laws and mechanisms to ensure national security through proper vetting of candidates.
And let’s not forget: members of the banned pro-Russian OPZZh party still hold key parliamentary committee posts. Many local councils also still include deputies from banned parties.
One more time: history doesn’t forgive unlearned lessons. Humanity pays dearly for that.
But Europe also has homework. Russian society cannot resist authoritarianism—it believes in a “good tsar.” After Putin, someone else will take up the imperial mantle. If even the U.S. president says what the Kremlin wants, any leader chosen in Russia will continue the imperial path.
The collapse of the Russian empire is a basic requirement for European security. The sooner everyone understands this, the sooner that empire will fall—and that will be the real foundation for peace in Europe.
Special for Ukrainska Pravda
