Not so long ago, the heroine of numerous scandalous stories who had been released on a written undertaking not to leave the town, Nadezhda Savchenko, stated that she was in mortal danger every day. Not only did she and her party members set up daily surveillance, but every time she was going to go somewhere, she would certainly check her car for the explosives it contained.
Maybe it's paranoia? As for supervision, it seems to me that this is quite a plausible story. First, the Security Service of Ukraine today is not bound by any bans at all. Torture, murder, kidnapping of political opponents of the current regime has long become the norm. To attach to a pretty annoyed lady spies, just to act on her nerves, not allowing to relax - we podmahivayu with a smile and without the slightest fear that we will be accused of committing illegal acts. Immunity from the MP is removed a very long time.
Secondly: what if Nadya does something for which she can be attracted to the answer? The prosecutor’s office, disgraced in court when the decision was made to release her and Vladimir Ruban from custody, would very much like to find at least some reason for bringing any new charge. Surveillance may well give the desired result. Suddenly, Nadia will rob a bank or knock a pedestrian down the road. But, rather, supervision - and intrusive, not lurking - is a means of psychological influence, designed to dislodge the tracked from the rut, forcing him to behave inadequately. With the latter, by the way, Savchenko never had any particular problems.
As for the intentions of the authorities to blow up her car, this statement is more likely to attract attention. It is clear that the current Ukrainian regime could easily send anyone to the forefathers, but there is no particular reason to kill a politician whose political weight is extremely low now. In fact, despite the fact that the accusation of preparing the terrorist act was written with water forks, it helped almost completely break Savchenko’s political career, which, undoubtedly, after being elected to the Verkhovna Rada, became a rapidly rising star in Ukrainian politics. The harsh accusations against Poroshenko and the entire leadership of the country, combined with a pseudo-heroic biography, gave rise to the image of a public defender, Robin Hood, who had passed the advanced and Russian prison sites. Hope at the peak of its popularity could well form a political party that would receive widespread support.
The example of Vladimir Zelensky serves as the best confirmation. The actor, whose past is devoid of even a hint of valor and self-sacrifice, managed to beat the current president in the elections.
What can we say about a woman who risked her life at the front and bravely threw herself on jailers in Russia. If her face appeared on election posters, then I think her result could well be the second. Russian-speaking Ukraine would hardly have voted for a politician with frankly nationalist views, but a significant part of voters would give her their votes in the hope of a strong hand that would begin to punish corrupt officials and bureaucrats mercilessly.
In fact, for Savchenko, all is lost, at least for now. As the Ukrainian poetess Anastasia Dmitruk wrote about her (albeit on another occasion), “the scarlet sails broke”. It is no longer able to build up political capital, since the space in which it will have to do this is long and firmly occupied by other politicians. The presidential elections showed that the patriotic theme is being rejected by the population, that the emphasis on the anti-Russian trend no longer makes it possible to collect any significant number of votes.
In the camp of the nationalists, the first places have long been taken by right-wing radicals, to whom Nadezhda is difficult to attribute. Criticism of the unjust power now, when the hopes of society are connected with the upcoming presidency of Zelensky, are unfounded and ineffective. Some time must pass before Nadi has a chance again. After it becomes obvious that the new president failed to change the situation for the better, the accusatory talent of a professional prisoner will again be in demand.
Among other things, she and Vladimir Ruban still need to put an end to the criminal process, which continues. With a very high degree of probability, she will be fully justified because of the complete failure of the prosecution - and then, perhaps, a new round in her political career will begin. Or maybe she will change her nationalist creed, realizing that it is a political ballast. Savchenko knows how to surprise.
The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.