The scandal over Ukraine’s now notorious blacklist of prominent international journalists has flared up yet again, as the Foreign Ministry digs itself in deeper in trying to justify the move.
Oksana Romaniuk of Reporters Without Borders on Sept.
18 published a list of journalists said to have been compiled by the Foreign
Ministry in late February. The list, a photograph of which Romaniuk posted on
Facebook after receiving the documents from an unknown source, apparently
served as the basis for the sanctions list signed by President Petro Poroshenko
on Sept. 16, which included BBC journalists Emma Wells and Steven Rosenberg,
among others.
The Foreign Ministry responded publicly to Romaniuk’s
post, reminding her on Facebook that the documents she published, under
Ukrainian legislation, were meant to stay confidential – apparent confirmation
that the documents were legitimate. The ministry also noted that the list in
question had not served as the basis for the finalized sanctions list.
After the publication of the list of sanctioned
journalists triggered international outrage, Poroshenko quickly backtracked and
canceled the bans on six of them.
But now the entire list is under scrutiny, as the documents
provided by Romaniuk exposed a worrying detail: several international
journalists were apparently sanctioned for their “anti-Ukrainian coverage of
events,” with nobody quite sure how such determinations about a reporter’s work
are made.
The sanctioning of foreign journalists for
“anti-Ukrainian coverage” follows “the Kremlin’s pattern of behavior all while
they (Ukrainians) are declaring new principles,” Romaniuk told the Kyiv Post,
saying the list was an “absolute embarrassment” for Ukraine at a time when
Ukraine needs international support the most.
“We are having our lawyers prepare documents to send
to the ministry to ask them who exactly decides what constitutes ‘anti-Ukrainian’
coverage, and what exactly the criteria are,” Romaniuk said.
“The best thing they could do now is admit that they
made a mistake and promise that those responsible will be held to account,” she
said, noting that she believed the list was hastily prepared at the last
moment.
“Ukraine spent so much time preparing (to introduce) these
sanctions … now they’ve released the sanctions and they are so badly prepared.
I think they were designed for some internal reasons, to show that something
big has been done ahead of elections,” she said.
The plan backfired, she said, because whoever prepared
the list exhibited negligence, incompetence, and a complete lack of
understanding of the media.
“They never consulted with media experts – at least
none of my colleagues ever received any requests from the Foreign Ministry,”
she said, adding that she and other media experts were in the dark on “what
kind of criteria they follow” in declaring a journalist “anti-Ukrainian.”
Despite heavy criticism, the Ukrainian authorities doubled
down, maintaining that the inclusion of these journalists in the list was fully
justified and the repeal was done only to appease international partners.
A statement released by the National Security and
Defense Council in the wake of the scandal said the decision to repeal certain
bans stemmed from a desire not to jeopardize “strategic relations” with the
European Union – not because a mistake had actually been made.
Alexander Scherba, a representative for the Foreign
Ministry, echoed that sentiment on his Facebook page on Sept. 18, writing that
the journalists were removed from the list “because it’s the wrong time to
antagonize our friends.”
He said that Ukraine was “under attack from a vicious
enemy,” implying that the bans were fully justified in the light of threats
from Russia and Kremlin propagandists.
Yet he also lashed out at the West for what he
described as double standards.
“On a more personal note. Once Ukrainian prisoners get
choked with a plastic bag in Russian jails it barely gets a yawn from the
Western audiences – but once three Brits get banned for a day, they do cry blue
murder? Isn’t it sad?” Scherba wrote.
Media experts continue to express dismay over the situation.
“I think the decision to ban international media covering Ukraine was
very unfortunate and apparently taken hastily, without thought for the
potential consequences,” said Rasto Kuzel, a media expert based in Slovakia and
the executive director of MEMO 98, a media monitoring institution.
“No one disputes the legitimate right of the Ukrainian officials to
protect national security, but restricting foreign journalists from entering
the country is clearly a move reminiscent of the past. The Ukrainian
authorities may not like or agree with everything reported by international
media, but this should not be a basis for creating administrative obstacles to
their entry into Ukraine. People in Europe deserve to have firsthand
information on what is happening in Ukraine, so I hope to see all journalists
taken off this list,” Kuzel said.
The Committee to Protect Journalists agreed with Kuzel, issuing a
statement on Sept. 17 in which they thanked President Petro Poroshenko for
removing European journalists from the list. However, they also pushed for further
action.
“We are glad that
Ukrainian authorities have reacted to the international outrage that the ban
provoked by removing six international journalists from the list,” Europe
and Central Asia Program Coordinator Nina Ognianova was cited as saying in the
statement.
“Now, President
Poroshenko’s government should remove all journalists and bloggers from the
list and allow them to cover the region freely,” Ognianova said.
The Foreign Ministry’s press service told the Kyiv
Post to “call back later” when someone “might know an answer” to the question
of who exactly compiled the list – and how they decided which journalists had
written “anti-Ukrainian” materials.
Staff
writer Allison Quinn can be reached at [email protected]
