Share Tweet Pocket Add to Bookmarks
You're reading: Russian media release text of Yanukovych’s letter to Trump
on social media

Editor’s Note: Russian media on Feb. 22 released the text of a letter allegedly sent by the ousted former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych to U.S. President Donald Trump.

Yanukovych claimed that he had sent letters to Trump, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Francois Hollande and Russian President Vladimir Putin in an interview published on Feb. 22 by German weekly news magazine Der Spiegel.

In the letter, Yanukovych gives his own chronology of the events of the EuroMaidan Revolution and Russia’s subsequent war on Ukraine in the Donbas. He also sets out his view on how the situation in Ukraine can be resolved.

Exclusive article

Sign up or subscribe to view more articles.
See All Plans
Monthly plan
Get unlimited article access, anytime, anywhere.

Yearly plan
Access all the exclusive content on and the complete online archive.

Add comment

Sorry, you must be logged in to post a comment.

Trump will never read this. It is too long. Our President is like an 8 year old child. He can only watch TV and read a few paragraphs at a time...

Yes. He should have just texted Trump something like "Let's do lunch".

I recommend a public pay-per-view hanging at Maidan Nezalezhnosti when karma and justice reaches this quisling thug.

have I missed something? Where does he mention Putin's invasion of Crimea and of Russian troops in Ukraine, of Russian troops shooting MH17 down, of Russian troops bombing Ukrainian civilians, of Russian paid terrorist bombing buildings in Ukraine of Russian FSB flights between Kyiv and Moscow during this Maiden time. Of FSB agents filling Ukrainian SBU and other government offices. or the fake referudum in Crimea that Putin's own Himan Rights Organization has stated was the worst thing that was done, the actual vote for was around 25%. Nor does he mention the murders, jailing of Crimean's, the removal of all Ukrainian books, signs and language in Crimea. Nor the fake arrests of Ukrainians and kidnapped to Russia. He does not mention how Ukraine has threaten Russia causing Russia to move most of its troops to the Ukrainian border. Nor does he mention why Russia refuses to honour Ukraine's borders and why Russia is sending tanks, BUK missile launchers, troops and full supplies for an army onto Ukrainian soil. Nor des he talk about the armed attempts by Russians in Odessa, Kharkiv or other Ukrainian cities that the government successfully blocked. Yanukovych does not mention that Russia fails to honour cease fires, that Russian troops and officers and Generals are activity present in Ukraine and directing all activity to kill Ukrainians.

I think this account is very jaded and look much more like a letter Putin wrote asking Yanukovych to sign it. It seems this is a joke letter and Yanukovych has been forced to write or sign it. If he does not then Putin will likely kick him out of Russia.

Nor does Yanukovych even mentioned that he asked Putin to invade Ukraine!!!! as he mentioned earlier by another letter, again likely forced to write and sign by Putin.

Does Yanukovych mention the billions he stole? Or that he forced the tearing apart of Ukraine's military for years for his own personal gain?

Putin is using Yanukovych as a stooge to push his story to an idiot President Trump who will likely believe anything as long as he can make money from Putin.

I think a lot of what is written is true. The US did have a big hand in the Maidan riots - fostered to a large extend by V. Nuland (thank goodness Trump fired her)

We are basically looking at a problem that goes back to 1954 and to solve it we need to analyze the events of 1954. Apparently there is a legal argument to be made over the legality of Politburo decree of 1954.

Like so many things in history, the roots of the problem are far back in the past and arguing over current events will not solve the problem. An Equitable solution needs to start in 1954.

It is rather like the Iraq War. The US keeps trying to put Humpty Dumpty back together again, when they really to analyze and modify the Sykes-Picot line.

An equitable solution starts with all Russian troops leaving Ukraine, including Crimea. Your argument is like stealing your neighbor's house and then arguing that the property lines established 60 years before need to be rethought.

What I am saying is that it is time to resolve the situation - both sides need to make concession.

Kiev Should Give Up on the Donbass

Kiev will trade Donbass for Leningrad. Deal?

Ukraine isn't giving up anything, including Crimea.

A thief can only keep stolen goods so long.

Let me give you all some facts of life. Russia will never let go of Crimea. And the US is not going to go to war with Russia over Crimea, no more than we will go to war over Lithuania. There would be no public support for this type of military action. The Congress and the American People would never support it. We are burnt out and sick of fighting wars. We really want to withdraw and fix stuff in the US.

You are dead wrong re; Lithuania, the US will honor it's NATO article 5 commitments.

The facts of life? Fact one: you are as American as Borsht. Stop saying WE like you speak for the rest of us.

Property lines get changed all the time.

You do know that Poroshenko is unable to fulfill the terms of Minsk II - the part about more independence and an amnesty. So I wonder why people keep talking about it.

Property lines changed with a gun?

And YOU know that Russia violated Minsk II before the emissaries even left town. AND there is no promise for general amnesty nor independence.

All Ukraine needs to do is make a clear distinction between separatist acts and war crimes and all your thieving rapist friends still go to jail for a very long time.
Parliament just needs to declare all regions of Ukraine special to satisfy the "special status", so you can swing in the wind on that to.

Oddly enough Property Lines have been changed at the point of the gun -- Lots of time.

Provide pardon and amnesty by way of enacting a law that forbids persecution and punishment of persons in relation to events that took place in particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine. - Minsk II article 5

Why stop at 1954 might as well go back to 1654 and the Treaty of Pereyaslav the Russian's reneged on the deal with Bohdan Khmelnystky thus beginning the never ending Russian rape and plunder of Ukraine.
As far as 1954 are you alluding to Khrushchev transferring Crimea to the Ukraine SSR? Frankly it doesn't matter as Russia doesn't follow treaties or written agreements.

There was no Ukraine in 1654

Treaty of Pereiaslav was signed in late June 1630 between rebellious Cossack forces of Taras Fedorovych and Polish forces led by hetman Stanisław Koniecpolski.

There are more than one Treaty of Pereyaslav the one I am referring to is 1654. Also the nation state concept was far from the norm in the 17th century. The land that is now Ukraine was descended from the Kievan Rus who's territory existed before anything called Russia existed and included territory much larger than modern day Ukraine.

There has been ample work which suggest that Khrushchev's transfer of land was illegal.

But do not forget borders are not set in stone. Over the centuries they have changed a great deal and even since the end of the WWII there have been major border changes. So no one should think borders are cast in stone. The US divided Sudan in half, Timor was split, Czechoslovakia is no more. So it is naive to think borders cannot be changed.

I think it was wrong of Ukraine to declare independence without having border adjustments. I firmly believe that it was illegal for Ukraine to use Oblast boundaries as a national boundary. The real boundaries of Ukraine were those of W. Galicia or Ruthenia. I think an international boundary commission should have been formed to determine the real boundaries of Ukraine.

The Budapest Memorandum has no real force in law - it is a memorandum and the signatories made no commitment to a military defense - memoranda are really nothing put vague promise of discussing a topic sometime in the future. It not an ironclad guarantee of anything. The form of a memorandum was used and not a treaty because the signatories, especially the US, did not want to be bound by a document which might cause it to go to war.

Like so many areas where there are boundary disputes - and what is happening in Ukraine, is a civil war and boundary dispute. I think redrawing the Ukrainian boundaries would end the civil war. Also federalizing the country so that various oblasts or districts were given a large amount of autonomy.

Insisting on boundaries which are not sustainable and a cause of war make no sense. The whole situation in Ukraine is made worse by the fact that since it declared independence it's government has been marked as having a high degree of corruption.

Most of the best minds on Foreign Policy in the US think that it would be better for Ukraine to cut Donbass loose.

Kiev Should Give Up on the Donbass

Kiev Is Fueling the War in Eastern Ukraine, Too

Whether or not Khrushchev transferred land legally to illegally is really a moot point, if you go that route then everything that any Soviet leader did was illegal as the Bolshevik revolution of 1917 was a coup de tat which even Vladimir Putin doesn't want to celebrate! Should we find a descendant of the Romanov dynasty and put them back on the throne of Russia? WW II was the last great war of empires and the boundaries that were established after the was through instruments of surrender, treaties and UN agreements. The examples you put forth are not particularly good ones: East Timor was a Portuguese colony that declared independence from Portugal then Indonesia invade from the west end of the island of Timor eventually Indonesia left and East Timor came into existence. East Timor is predominantly Christian and Indonesia is Muslim. South Sudan again was either African traditional religions or Christian and Sudan proper is Muslim and has a high Arabic population. Finally Czechoslovakia was a agreed upon divorce of Czechs in the west and Slovaks in the east, unlike the first two where there was extensive fighting the Czechoslovak divorce was peaceful. Putting a name or label to territory is obviously the logical thing to do and the vast majority of what we now call nation states were not called what always called or labeled what they are now including Russia. Kieran Rus existed in what is now Ukraine and north into Russia, Belarus and Poland there was no Russia no Moscow, using your logic the boundaries that existed at the time of Ukraine declaring independence as the Soviet Union broke apart should have extended farther than what they did. The ethnic Russians living in Donbas were imports after millions of Ukrainians were deported or starved to death by Stalin during collectivization.
In essence nothing that Russia signs or agrees to is worth the paper it is printed on.
Occupied Donbas would be at peace if Putin removed all of his advisors, troops, artillery,tanks, APC's etc... Let the UN bring in a Peace keeping force and allow Ukrainian's to work out their differences without Russian interference. OF course Putin isn't interested in peace he is a force for discourse and killing.

You Russians are funny people "do as I say never as I do".

More in this section

Add a picture
Choose file
Add a quote

Are you sure you want to delete your comment?


Are you sure you want to delete all user's comments?


Are you sure you want to unapprove user's comment?


Are you sure you want to move to spam user's comment?


Are you sure you want to move to trash user's comment?

Spelling error report

The following text will be sent to our editors: