BY
The name of Ihor Kononenko has
appeared fairly frequently in the blog – usually annotated with “President
Poroshenko’s leg breaker in the Verhovna Rada” or “the mere mention of his name
has diplomats eyes rolling” or “to whom the presidential leash should be
applied”.
To be absolutely blunt, Mr Kononenko is an old and
loyal friend of President Poroshenko and is being allowed to run amok with all
the worst possible parallels to the Yanukovych regime approach to business and
state owned enterprises, whilst also acting as parliamentary enforcer for the
president.
Certain readers known to
this blog have first hand experience of Mr Kononenko. To be charitable he
is a predator. To be less so, he can go beyond “dubious” and “nefarious”
when it comes to the boundaries of the law.
There is no doubt that
President Poroshenko is aware of at least some of the deeds of his friend –
even if he doesn’t read the media (and he is probably the most PR aware
Ukrainian president ever) there is no way some deeds will not have been raised
directly by the diplomatic community with the president on occasion.
Sooner or later, should
the presidential leash not be placed upon Mr Kononenko and thus his appetites
somewhat reduced, a reader may foresee a situation similar to that of Viktor
Shokin whereby the international pressure from “friends of Ukraine” will
continue to build surrounding him to the point of ultimatums.
Also occasionally
mentioned by the blog is Alexander Granovsky usually annotated with “rising
star in Kyiv” or “whose political star is in the ascendancy” (or similar).
Although from Uman
originally, Mr Granovsky since his (Mechnikov) university days in Odessa, has
been a permanent business/public persona in the city – perhaps best known for
his activities with business partner from Boris Kaufman (also from Odessa).
That said both also have business interests that do not involve the
other.
Mr Granovsky’s business
history is as a reader would expect – he had owned more than a dozen companies
between 1997 and 2006 (which could be, but won’t be listed here), almost all
with “colourful” reputations or occasional scandals. Some have since been
sold, some have been retained, and new enterprises continue to appear.
Suffice to say those interests cover everything from port dredging, to
banking, to fertilizer, to hotels, to airports, media, alcohol, tobacco, and
more.
Mr Granovsky is also a
man inclined to be generous with the synagogue in Odessa being a major
beneficiary.
Regardless of
interesting histories (worthy of entries of their own) both Mr Granovsky and Mr
Kononenko are Block Poroshenko parliamentarians will significant gravitas
within both the party, faction and the parliament itself – albeit with
different and distinct roles in controlling events.
The past few days have
seen some interesting entries on Mr Granovsky’s Facebook. – a photograph of a
text conversation on Telegram was uploaded.
A conversation prime facie appealing to Mr Granovsky for help to fend off the
unwanted attentions of the predatory Ihor Kononenko.
“Хочу
обратиться ко всем симпатикам моего коллеги по залу Игоря Кононенко, чтоб
сообщить о том, что лично он, обращаясь ко мне в мессенджере телеграмм,
пытается втянуть меня в преступный сговор с не до конца попятной для меня
целью. Что-то мне подсказывает, что дело не чистое.
Доказательство ниже.
P.S.
Конечно же, какой-то “озорник” таким
образом пытается выманить деньги. Половина фракции тоже получила подобные
сообщения. Примитивно, но в каких-то случаях эффективно:(((“
Mr Granovsky accompanied
that photograph with a statement appealing to his parliamentary colleagues to
give Mr Kononenko a sympathetic audience, for he suspected intrigue of a
nefarious kind, stating that half of the Poroshenko faction had received
similar texts attempting to obtain money. His post insinuated that some
had indeed complied, paying off an unknown party.
It is without a shadow
of a doubt that Mr Granovsky has the telephone number of Mr Kononenko and can
authenticate (or not) the demands for money. Such faux intuition of
intrigue and public (Facebook) disclosure is quite unnecessary for a man
capable of getting immediate responses from Mr Kononenko.
“Короткий апдейт на тему хулигана, который прикрывался именем
Игоря Кононенко с целью выманить деньги у коллег по фракции и не только.
Следующие
несколько лет, судя по всему, он будет шлифовать свои навыки в 4 стенах.
Отдельное спасибо сотрудникам спецподразделения “Альфа” СБУ.”
On 17th December, a few
days after setting the scene on Facebook, Mr Granovsky via
Facebook once more,
gave public thanks to a SBU Alfa Unit for arresting somebody – (as yet
unidentified and as of the time of writing the detention has not been confirmed
by the SBU) – using Ihor Kononenko’s name to extort money from his
parliamentary colleagues.
Naturally questions arise.
Firstly just how
subservient to and/or scared of Ihor Kononenko are his parliamentary colleagues
to have simply paid this unknown offender acting under Mr Kononenko’s name
apparently without his knowledge?
As always, the questions
have to be asked as to who benefits, and why are things being done this way?
In publicly announcing
this affair on Facebook, does Mr Granovsky do more or less harm to the
“parliamentary leg breaker” and predatory image that Ihor Kononeko already has
among his parliamentary colleagues and the business community?
Although probably not
the case, if designed to do more damage, what motivates Mr Granovsky to make
such a bold move? Why now?
If designed to mitigate
Mr Kononenko’s image, is this a false flag incident created to deflect some
near horizon allegations against Mr Kononenko insofar as it will be held up as
evidence that his name is misused and/or spuriously attacked over events he
will claim he has no involvement in (whether he does or not)?
If it be the latter and
this is a preparatory false flag, what scandal is upon the immediate Kononeko
horizon that requires such theatre?
It is of course possible
that Mr Granovsky thinks it is simply a fun story that people should know about
– but Mr Granovsky is a clever man and is simply not that oblivious to the
perceptions and the questions that arise by making this affair public.
Something about this
just doesn’t seem right. Perhaps all will become clearer fairly soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment