Who Killed Oleksandr Rzhavsky? And Who Killed his Son, Dmitryo?

May 22, 2022

(rough, incomplete)

< Bucha Massacre {Masterlist}

Introduction

Oleksandr Mykolayovych Rzhavsky (Ukrainian: Олександр Миколайович Ржавський) was an independent-minded politician critical of Ukraine's government and relatively supportive of Russia's. And yet the Russian occupiers of his city Bucha murdered him in his home when he refused to pour them more vodka, making him perhaps the most "ironic" victim of the infamous "Bucha Massacre."

To be clear, that's not an impossible scenario, with the wrong few soldiers and enough alcohol involved, regardless of ideology or loyalty. Furthermore, the claims seem to originate with Rzhavsky's family. Still, it remain questionable considering the apportionment of rational motive, the distinct possibility of coerced statements, and some circumstantial evidence this post will deal with. 

Even if true, the family's account makes the most sense as a drunken aberration, arising from one soldier's deranged mind. Yet to people trained to accept the most cartoonish of allegations against Russia and its people, the incident perfectly illustrates their evils. Some might see Putin's direct unhinged plans for genocide, starting conveniently with his own supporters... as if all that evil had left no room for logic. At the very least, this "ironic" murder shows the "true face" the subhuman Russian "orcs" who can only use up and destroy what others create. Anlexander Shvets, chief editor at Facts, would say "Moscow "brothers" showed him their true face. So that you don't even doubt anymore..." 

The speaker of the Odessa Regional Military Administration Sergey Bratchuk is one would gloat upon news of the murder: Rzhavsky "did not hide his pro-Russian views and spoke about the humanity of the Russians," and yet he "was shot dead in his own house. Well, son, did your [horse's ass?] help you?" Bratchuk was far from alone in this sentiment; the most common response to Rzhavsky's death is people laughing and calling it well-deserved - "karma" is mentioned. 

Some of those people would hardly feel differently if it turned out Ukrainian forces had murdered Rzhavsky as a collaborator, which is quite likely the truth of the matter. In a phone call allegedly made on March 30 - three days after his alleged death -  Rzhavsky can be heard refusing a Russian offer to evacuate the city with them, opting to return home despite warnings he might be killed as a traitor.  

As I'll explain below, Rzhavsky's son Dmitryo was brutally murdered in 2018, and it was investigated as a suicide. When his father followed him to the grave 4 years later, it was spun as the Russians suicidally killing their own supporters. The way the story plays so well to this propaganda technique is in itself strong evidence for a politically motivated false-flag murder. 

Mappable details, few as they are, add to the picture of deceit. As cited below, Rzhavsky's son Alexander jr. said "The Russians had a headquarters on our street in an apartment building" and one of his daughters mentioned he was detained by Russian forces as he passed their base at nearby "Victoria Park" on March 22. I could find no other reports mentioning a Russian base at a Victoria Park, and no such place is labeled on Google maps, but a hotel of that name appears in a generally wooded area in the north of the city that's shaded green like a park. It's not clear how far on what street their home was, but  FWIW the park is well within that held by Ukraine by March 19 per my information (see Who was in Control post for details - forthcoming). All the cited misfortune happened well after that. 

Perhaps there were still Russian troops based at the park instead, or even pseudo-Russians troops - an important possibility that I also should explore in more detail in another post. Briefly, though,  Ukraine and its front-line units might have maintained secret advances, deniable clearance operations, running concurrent with Russia's occupation so it could all be blamed on them. Mr. Rzhavsky for one gives clear reason for the hassle. All they'd need to convince most locals is captured vehicles or ones just painted with a V, stolen uniforms or just passably similar ones, plus some men able to speak Russian, willing to commit evil in Russia's name and to stay discrete about it. And if anyone's not convinced by that alone -  Rzhavsky for one probably would not be convinced - there's murder or implied threats to keep them quiet about it. 

Oleksandr Rzhavsky: Background and Political Views 

After serving on the board of one bank and as the president of another, In 1998, Rzhavsky was elected a deputy of the Verkhovna Rada. He was a candidate in the 1999 and 2004 Ukrainian presidential elections, the latter as leader of the One Family (or United Family) party, but with very low returns. (Politrada - Oleksandr Rzhavskyy - Wikipedia - more biography at click-clicker )

A critical assessment at Cripo.com: "Alexander Rzhavsky's political views were rather "leftist" and pro-Russian. Thus, in the 2004 election race, he promised to fight the oligarchs using Putin's methods, disband the Ukrainian army (Ukraine renounces its army and become a World Center for Peaceful, Spiritual and Environmental Initiatives), and fund science and social programs. He disliked the Ukrainian government after 2014 and criticized its actions. He hinted that it was necessary to go to direct talks with the People's Democratic People's Republic of Belarus." After his death, an audio recording of Rzhavsky speaking against Ukraine joining the EU was published by Russian media. (Lenta)

NV.ua: "In his posts on the Facebook page, Rzhavsky claimed that it was Ukraine that did not fulfill the Minsk agreements, criticized the Revolution of Dignity and denied the presence of Russian troops in the ORDLO [temporarily uncontrolled territories of Luhansk and Donetsk Oblasts]. "

TellerReport: "According to him, "everyone who tries to argue with the nationalists, they eliminate. “Kalashnikov was shot, Buzina was shot, Dima Vydrin left because when his student was shot, he was told that “you are the next one scheduled,” the ex-deputy added. Rzhavsky stressed that for nationalists in Ukraine, “violence is in the first [resort].”"

A Murdered Son

The family already had a tragic and troubling recent history. Rzhavsky's son Dmitryo was brutally murdered, it seems, less than 4 years ago. A director of the company BLITS-INVEST LLC, Dmiitryo's body was found on June 29, 2018 in a commercial building near the company's headquarters, with both his wrists and his throat sliced. 

Rzhavsky said in their last correspondences, Dmitryo "wrote to me in Viber that they were threatening him and his family." Dmitryo allegedly had a conflict with "the entrepreneur K" he was contracting with. (Operativno) A small amount of money had gone missing: 32,000 hryvnias [about $1,100 US],  but that seemed "a minor reason for threats." (Ukranews). He suggests there was another motive, perhaps in addition to the money. 

Ukrainian police opened a murder investigation, but also pursued a "main version" where Dmitryo committed suicide. Rzhavsky disagreed, saying in an interview "my son could not cut himself, he suffered from hemophobia (pathological fear of blood) since childhood." He also raised detailed questions about the physical possibility of this suicide and about the crime scene. "I saw something that the cops didn't see," he said. "The version of suicide is beneficial to any district police department," Rzhavsky opined. "They conducted an examination and closed the case - there is no need to spoil the indicators, look for a suspect, witnesses." (Operativno) 

A week after Dmitryo's death, on July 6, his bereaved father held a press conference, supported by the Interfax news agency, entitled "My son wasn't killed, he was tortured to death. Dmytro's martyrdom doesn't interest anyone except for relatives." (Interfax) There he said "Dmytro did receive threats, ... death threats, the murder of his family." He said the investigation was progressing slowly, with mistakes in handling evidence and witnesses. Not waiting for that to bear fruit, "the family of the murdered conducts its own investigation and restores the picture of events." (Ukranews)

In 2018, Rzhavsky again became the head of the political party "Edina Rodina" - United Family - which he maintained until his death. (Telegraf) It's not clear how the parallel investigations into his son's death ever panned out, nor how that or the mentioned threats mattered in Rzhavsky remaining armed to defend his family from the ultra-nationalists, later claiming to even have a sniper rifle.

His Final Weeks, Russian/Alternate Version

Rzhavsky initially doubted there would be a Russian invasion, comparing the constant dire warnings of that with COVID-19 "hysteria" as late as Feb. 14. Then he saw it coming but blamed Ukrainian provocation:  "Maidan and post-Maidan authorities, it is you who, with your incompetence and greed, have put the whole country, all citizens at risk of a real war." (Feb. 22) "I have appeared quite logical," he said on the 23rd, as he offered a confident, Marxist-style assessment of the geopolitical situation at the brink of what could be a real war. In part, he said: "During the negotiations, the Alliance saw the short-sighted, incompetent and stubborn leadership of our country scattered, looked at it, sighed and took all their citizens out of Ukraine, promising to help and observe from afar."

As Cripo critically put it, Rzhavsky "was very confused when Moscow once again attacked Ukraine" and from the start "he doubted who exactly was shooting at Ukrainian cities." When the war came to Bucha on the 24th, he posted on Facebook (6:55 AM) "There was a powerful explosion in the Gostomel area. I have heard it myself." At 12:14 PM: "Around the Gostomel airport you can hear the sounds of military planes and explosions. Who is this? " It seems that was the Russians, who dropped in by Gostomel, would be violently stymied at Bucha on the 25th and again the 27th, and who would be repulsed almost totally by the 3rd, but would then push back and establish general control of the city around the 5th of March. 

Rzhavsky would have less to say online in those days, but came back philosophically for a last post on Facebook, March 2 at 7:46 AM, seeming to question the invasion ("Why now and by means of open war? "). He wrote eloquently of the "absolute and cruel reality of the current moment," "a lengthy knockout of confusion," a new reality including tasks like "to guard, shoot, get food and drain gasoline for the generator." It was "a complicated, predictable post-apocalyptic future." 

What may be his last comment was to argue with a critic commenting on that post, early on March 3. A contact named Oleh Torgalo says Rzhavsky stopped communicating after March 4. (Cripo) Other accounts have communications going out for everyone about then. We have the family account (see below), but that cannot well fit in this narrative, in which there is almost no information on the days after this. 

As a prominent figure with pro-Russian views, Rzhavsky may have been turned to by the Russian occupiers, if not to assist their campaign, then just to make things run smoothly for his fellow citizens. On March 24, Rzhavsky was reportedly at liberty and able to host others, at least according to a comment on Facebook : "On the 24th, at the end of the circumstances, my friend and I fled the bombing in Kharkov, and we were taken shelter by Alexander Nikolaevich [sic]. Me and 12 others!" Kiev probably did not approve of such evacuations to Russian-held areas, where Rzhavsky would be hosting any such refugees. They sometimes call it kidnapping, and disapprove of people who facilitate it.

An alleged final word from Oleksandr Rzhavsky came as the Russians set to evacuate north and abandon Bucha on March 30. He was allegedly dead for 2-3 days when, Russian sources, say Rzhavsky had a final discussion by phone with what seems to be a Russian officer. A recording of this was published April 11 by RT (widely banned outside Russia - a second-hand posting on Youtube). As they reported "On the recording, it is also heard that the Russian military on March 30, before leaving the city, offer the deputy to evacuate in order to avoid danger, since Kiev considers him a traitor."

Russian statement: "The exits from Bucha were not blocked. All local residents were free to leave the town in northern direction, including to the Republic of Belarus. " This came into play especially at the end. 

He may have already been evacuated at the time of this call. It sounds like he's some place - perhaps in the city but not his home - where "there is water and it's warm here" as the caller reminded him. But Rzhavsky insisted he was “heading home” rather than staying or leaving with the Russians, The caller objected to this, warning "you will return home now and they will find you lifeless and hang this all on our leadership."  

He replied “Concerning my safety, I will be much calmer where there are my people, my family are ... if fate, then fate. This should be treated philosophically. And look: Bucha is in the grip [Ukrainian controlled?]. Who will go [to me]? Do you think some kind of quiet saboteur is sitting there and sharpening a knife?" They were known to be in charge. To kill him now ... was still quite possible, actually. They'd just have to backdate the killing, as they may have done. 

Rzhavsky also said he owned a “sniper rifle” and was able to defend himself and his family should any threat from Ukrainian extremists arise. "I do not accept all those tricks with violence against people who stand up. I don't accept it at all. And for them [nationalists], this is the basis — violence against a person." And so, in the Russian's version, Oleksandr Rzhavsky returned home, underestimating the threat he faced, and "was found dead ... shortly after the withdrawal of Russian forces from the area on March 30" and as predicted "the Russian troops were accused of his murder."

Naturally, the Russian claims and phone call have been challenged, but neither widely nor sharply. One anti-Russian site Lead Stories said "the RT article did not question the fact of Rzhavsky's death, but hinted that the Ukrainian side could be involved in this." Lead Stories was unable prove the call fake, nor of course to verify it was real, and mainly just raised doubt about when it was recorded,

"The circumstances of this conversation, as well as the identity of the alleged Russian soldier whose voice is present in the audio clip, are not disclosed, making it impossible to independently verify. It also lacks references to any events that could clearly indicate the day the recording was made." 

This suggests the Russians may have post-dated a real call in order to undermine the official story. 

Logically, that is at least as possible as backdating the murder, but the reasoning is weak. The call seems related to the final evacuation of Bucha "in the grip." Ukrainian control came just before and after the evacuation that happened on March 30. The call poses this as imminent, as a ship he could soon miss. 

That situation had not quite materialized by the 27th, and Rzhavsky was still at home in that version, not planning to return home. The circumstances of this call line up with a later date and a different story from what his family has told. If it's not fake, that's a huge problem.

Official Story, Family, Friction with "Facts"

The prevailing narrative - in which Rzhavsky was killed three days before the above phone call - comes totally, that I've seen, from a few comments or statements on Facebook. Everything else I've seen refers back to these (but I'm sure I haven't seen everything). 

The earliest explicit report was on April 7, by chief editor at Ukrainian news site "Facts," Alexandr Shvets, posting on Facebook: "When the aggressor troops entered Bucha and the occupiers settled in his vast estate, Rzhavsky tried to find a common language with them." But he was finally "outraged by their behavior and refused to pour vodka. Was shot dead immediately," in his own house, in front of his own family.

A "fact check" at Lead Stories agrees Shvets' post was where "The death of Rzhavsky was first reported." They noted how Shvets's characterization was rebutted by a few readers, including a surviving son, Alexandr Rzhavsky jr. He chided Shvets:

"...there is no need to disperse the fakes. No one has settled in our house. The Russians had a headquarters on our street in an apartment building. And in the evening, a drunk soldier of the Russian Federation broke into our house demanding more booze. Dad was trying to have a normal conversation with him, protecting my mom and aunt. He killed him because he could. There is no politics here. Just a terror."

Ensuing comments, including by Shvets, disputed this, insisting on the political lessons to be drawn, especially the irony entailed in Rzhavsky's views about "the Russian world." (and note: it was confusing at first when two Alexanders were discussing another [Oleksandr] and referring to each other by name, in screen-grabbed quotes)

The most pivotal statements come via the deceased's possibly hacked Facebook account - aleksandr.rzhavsky (not his son's account alexandr.rzhavsky.1),  credited to his daughters and "the family" and citing Oleksandr's wife and older sister. These were most likely authored by them, but possibly coerced somehow. 

Oleh Torgalo spoke with one of Rzhavsky's daughters on the 4th (unclear how) and, as reported:

"She said that during the occupation, her father was twice abducted as the owner of a large estate, demanding a ransom, and both times he managed to escape without money. They were robbed, their phones and weapons were confiscated. And on March 27 Muscovites arranged a binge at their house. And when their father remarked to them and refused to give them vodka again, he was shot right in the house." (Cripo)

Daughters of the deceased, in a post on their father's account on or by April 9 (now private/unavailable, but previously cited) explained how Oleksandr Rzhavsky never expected this invasion, but "Every Ukrainian since the beginning of the war has had a complete reassessment of values, and [papa] was no exception." This suggests he had changed his views and only "wanted peace, so that people do not die, so that the authorities make the right decisions, so that the eyes of the people are not blind."" (NV.ua) daughters Yulia and Alice are credited in a different paraphrasing of the same post: "Russian scum entered the house and, at gunpoint, begged for a bottle of wine, they gave him alcohol (like food and phones earlier), so that he left and did not return. However, this Russian scum wanted not only to drink but also blood. He kept at gunpoint and my aunt, who ran to the aid of my dad, her younger brother, but it was too late" March 27 is cited. (ACLOS - Who is Olexander Rzhavsky and how did he die in Bucha (click-clicker.com)

They also deny that their house was a base of Russian troops, as Shvets had suggested. "It's just heresy and thoughts of an inflamed mind. For the curious, I will answer - their base was in Victoria Park, because it was there on March 22 that my father was captured, having left for humanitarian aid, where he was held for more than a day. After that, the soldiers unceremoniously broke into our house, took phones and food, and then left." Note: Kidnapped 3/22 and held more than a day, followed by a robbery of the family home vs. - by the other narrative - on 3/24 he was not just free but hosting others, presumably with Russian approval, but perhaps not at his own home.

"The official statement of the Rzhavsky family" was less propagandistic, and only posted April 11. It's currently public (it seemed like it wasn't for a while?), unlike the above, which remains invisible. It says in full:

"On March 27, 2022, in the territory of the own yard in the city of Bucha, in front of the eyes of his wife and sister, Alexander Mykolajovich Rzhavsky  was killed. He recently turned 63 years old.

Drunk from his own impunity a "Russian" soldier [took] the life of a man close to us who all his life tried to protect us from all sorts of evil. But his energy was not enough for our family and therefore he tried to be as useful as possible for his Ukraine, which he loved infinitely."

Sincerely yours truly,

Larisa Rzhavskaya, wife

Alexander Rzhavsky, son

Alexey Rzhavsky, son

Alice Rzhavskaya, daughter

Julia Rzhavskaya, daughter

Zoya Rzhavskaya, sister

Anastasia Kirieva, sister

The issues raised by the family to rebut Shvets seem minor compared to the questions I have: one drunk soldier vs. a group of them - there on a drunken visit vs. based there. Those are significant differences, but the main story is strangely agreed on - he was robbed and then killed by the Russians over nothing, not killed by Ukrainians for being a traitor. No one alive in Ukraine and in a position to know has been quoted as even suggesting this. The only real, public, dispute is over how ironic vs. just tragic that story is.

A "fact check" at Lead Stories notes how a question did emerge about the strange lack of reports before April 7, regarding a witnessed murder on March 27. Answering the question, Lead Stories notes "On his Facebook page, the son wrote on April 3: "Burn these Russians in hell! Let's not forget Bucha!!!" The post did not contain details of what happened, but people in the comments instantly began to express condolences." Indeed. I find that was posted 11:30 PM local time on the 3rd.  And ... "on April 4, Torgalo was able to talk to [Rzhavsky's] daughter," hearing a version of the same story.  

But even with that, the delay is odd. He was killed 3/27 but there was no news from 3/27 to "liberation" on the 31st, or even on April 1, or 2 or most of April 3. There was no news to the contrary I'm aware of in the same 7-day span, or any time since March 4th. But why would it still be so slow to get week-old news out of Bucha, with two surviving witnesses? 

This knowledge appearing only late on the 3rd is more consistent with a murder in early April. This also fits better with how it would take another week from then to assemble a family statement on the 11th, after a seemingly retracted version on the 9th. 

Such a grandly telling story of Russian treachery against a slightly famous Ukrainian should have made excellent front-page news. There should have been more details to confirm the damning story, fresh on-camera interviews about the lessons learned, and all that. Instead, it seems the victim's family has been given the cold shoulder from the start. Consider Shvet's response to Alexander jr.: "Here you are, Alexander, and rewrote what was written in my post. The text in front of you - there is no word about being "sheltered". He distorts the protests to seem unjustified; they used the same word, translating "settled," He makes intent the issue, bringing in "sheltered," suggesting they both know that IS what he meant, and it's true. That's sneaky, and it tires to ignore that settled OR sheltered is denied - the Russians were just based elsehwhere. But Shvets sticks to what someone else told him, and then piles on the propaganda:

Do you demand an objective? The objective of the "Russian world", for which your father and his like-minded people were so saving, is that it broke into your house and killed your father. And you’re saying there’s no politics involved? Your right to say so. Our right is to protect our country from Russian fascist impurity. She didn't just break into the house of the Rzhavsky. But also in thousands of our homes. She not only killed Alexander Rzhavsky, but also thousands of Ukrainians who are innocent.

Oleksandr Rzhavsky was not "innocent." Unlike others, he brought it on himself, maybe even deserved to die. So implies Facts editor Alexander Shvets. Then, tellingly, he makes a show of cutting off the Rzhavsky family rather than sorting things out. If they couldn't yet make the leap to admitting Oleksandr basically deserved to die, there was nothing anyone needed to hear from them. This was done in solidarity with more heroic Ukrainians, of course. 

We will not interview you. You guys don't deserve this. We will be interviewing those who are fighting with the enemy for our independence, our country, our children, our politicians, who do not tolerate the "Russian world" in its wild and brutal manifestations, which now terrorizes all civilized humanity."

The family rebuttals were read as intended to "deny the words of the journalist about the pro-Russian views of the deceased." or as one comment put it "now, so that people do not spit on the grave, the whole family is enrolling as patriots. Gross !!!" denying the "politics," the irony ... and also, conversely, the motives for Ukrainian fascists to have killed him.  It was also "tolerance" of the "Russian world," for which there can be no tolerance anymore. 

The denials were too little and too late. The lessons learned were clear enough, with just a bare minimum from the closest sources. That came in delayed, limited commentary, mainly April 7 to 11, with perhaps no word from them since that phone recording came out, also on April 11. One wonders what they think of that.

So ...

The family can't be speaking at Russian gunpoint now that they're gone, but if Ukrainians killed Rzhavsky, then we should expect threats and false claims, so this testimony does little to contradict that possibility. Nonetheless, it might be accurate to what they saw, and they might have seen real Russian troops or fake ones, especially considering the area was likely inaccessible to real Russian forces since March 19, It sounds like all his troubles only came after Kiev's forces were most likely in charge. Maybe they were but they chose to have their pseudo-Russians occupy for a while, to get some dirty work done before they openly acknowledged control.

According to Russian sources, Rzhavsky was in some kind of contact with them at the end, and likely before. He possibly was "collaborating" - just to make things run smoothly for his fellow citizens, or maybe in continued support of the "Russian world." Helping relocate refugees, from within a Russian-occupied area might fit the bill. He allegedly hosted Russian forces at his estate. Shvets was told they "settled" there, although no one said Rzhavsky "sheltered" them, until Shvets suggested just that, because he always did mean that. It's disputed but alleged anyway, and this treason is already given as a possible reason for extrajudicial execution or, repurposed, as a cause for heightened "irony." 

No one is his family has even hinted that it went down like that, but still, let's consider this alternate narrative alongside the official version. In the end, it still seems possible these two might still be valid but flawed views of the singe truth somewhere between. Or, of course, one narrative is mostly bogus. It should be pretty clear that I suspect Ukrainian foul play and have to doubt what the family has said, but as I also noted at start, a drunken murder is not that outlandish either, and I don't lightly dismiss eyewitness testimony. 

The 2 versions in review, compared in a timeline:

See also http://acloserlookonsyria.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Killing_of_Alexander_Rzhavsky