He is very critical of the Poroshenko government claiming that his government has brought in "new repressions, censorship and discriminatory measures". The measures introduced by Poroshenko to the legislature with respect to the Russian-speaking east, which brought on the violent clashes in Kiev, were apparently a long way short of what had been agreed upon in the Minsk accord. There was no mention of the called-for “special status” to separatist areas, nor any specific details on autonomous rule in Donbass. Furthermore the proposals far from being a constitutional change could later be revised by a simple majority vote in Ukrainian parliament. At the same time the so-called “decentralisation” was accompanied by a strengthening of the presidential control over local self-government via centrally assigned “prefects” with broad powers.
And yet these tepid measures, far from what Poroshenko had agreed with Merkel, Hollande and Putin, were enough to cause the neo-fascist right wing groups to bring death and chaos to the streets of Kiev.
Ishchenko fears the growing power of the extreme right and the for the future of Ukraine.
I think the situation reveals once again the blinkered thinking of American neocons and fellow travellers who will support any group, no matter how odious, who are the enemy of the current enemy. Putin was the enemy; Yanukovich sided with Putin, although Putin apparently loathed the man; so any faction who was against Yanukovich was to be supported. This included Svoboda and Right Sektor who used murder and violence to overthrow the elected Yanukovich. The new government of Poroshenko was then beholden to the fascist groups and now could very well be overthrown by them, even though they lack much popular support.
It sounds a bit like a repeat of the support of the Mujahaddin in Afghanistan in the 90s, which led to Al Qaeda, or the support provided to any group opposed to the Assad regime in Syria, which led to ISIS.
Here is the link to the Guardian article: