Ukrinform Director General Serhii Cherevatyi: "I can be quickly returned to army. If there is such need, I will gladly return"
On May 27, a new director general, Serhii Cherevatyi was introduced to the staff of the state news agency Ukrinform. This event coincided with a public scandal over the activities of his predecessor, Oleksii Matsuka. Ukrayinska Pravda published the article "All their own. How the President’s Office Takes Control of Ukrinform", which discussed censorship under his leadership, the existence of gag ordes and loyalty to the President’s Office.
We met with Serhii Cherevatyi to find out what he knew about the situation and to find out what was happening at the agency. We also talked about the war, because he is a military man, a colonel who until recently was a spokesman for the Eastern Group of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
- On 24 May, you became CEO of Ukrinform. Who offered you this position?
Interim Minister of Culture Rostyslav Karandeiev. He said that now is a difficult time of war, and I have a good reputation. He said that Matsuka wanted to move to another job. So we talked to him. We didn't have much time to make a decision. In an hour, he gave me an answer. Perhaps, under different circumstances, if I had known the whole case of the situation around the agency, it would have been different. But after I finished my work there in March as the Deputy Commander of the OSGT Khortytsia for Strategic Communications, having a large amount of work and authority, I found myself at the Department of Military Journalism. Back then, many people told me that this was not enough for my experience and knowledge. There were various initiatives, but they did not work. I was already in a state where I was looking for specifics. And then I received a clearly articulated proposal. And it was quite interesting. I accepted it. On May 27, I was introduced to the team. I realized that the situation was not easy when one of the journalists at the presentation asked a question about this case. However, I immediately outlined my position: I have long adhered to European and Euro-Atlantic views and virtues, including human rights and freedom of speech. The only thing that my colleagues and I discussed in detail was that we are at war, so we need to be careful in matters related to the peace of society and the information security of the state. But, of course, there will be no persecution or harassment. Since then, we have been meeting with all the editorial offices in turn. We communicate frankly, calmly, and in a balanced manner. Yes, the situation with my predecessor was somewhat confusing. But the team and I found a common language. I was even surprised by the level of support in personal communication or on social media. Most of them are experienced people who found it easy to draw a moral and psychological portrait of me. I said: "You have done a lot for national journalism. Keep working calmly. There will be no shocks or persecution." My main task is to preserve everything that is working now and, if possible, multiply it in new formats without fundamentally breaking things.
- The case of the predecessor you are talking about was shown to the public by journalists of Ukrainska Pravda in the article "All Our Own. How the Presidential Office Takes Control of Ukrinform". They wrote about the agency's gag orders and the activities of its former head, Oleksii Matsuka, who was called a protege of Bankova. I understand from your words that you did not know about this situation when you gave your consent, right?
- At the time of the decision, I had no idea. Nor did I have any idea about Yurii Stryhun (a Ukrinform correspondent who received a draft notice after reporting the presence of gag orders in the agency - O.M.). It was two surprises.
- We will definitely talk about Stryhun as well. But first, let's finish here. Was there any pressure?
- Look, I can even be checked on a lie detector. No pressure was put on me, nor did I put pressure on the team. Moreover, those who have worked with me during this full-scale war, especially for 18 months on the Eastern Front, know that I have always paid maximum attention and assistance to Ukrainian and foreign media where it did not concern the security of operations and locations, etc. In other words, in terms of access to commanders, soldiers, and equipment. We understand that our war should be on the agenda. This is the first thing.
Secondly, there was no political segregation of the information agenda that I used to be responsible for - that it was ours or not. For more than a year, I had a former People's Deputy from Freedom, Yurii Syrotiuk, as my spokesperson, who gave interviews directly from the front. Taras Berezovets also closed the broadcasts perfectly. Kyiv City Council deputies Oles Maliarevych and Yurii Fedorenko (Achilles) had my maximum support, even when there were some discussions. Obviously, I am a moderate and adequate person in civilian life as well, so I behave accordingly.
- It was precisely about the civilian journalistic position that raised concerns. In particular, the head of the parliamentary committee on freedom of speech, Yaroslav Yurchyshyn, pointed out that you are a military man who must comply with the charter. That means you can take into account the position of the authorities. How do you deal with this?
- In the history of independent Ukraine, most of the persecutors of the press have been without badges, except perhaps some law enforcement officials. But the ideologues and executors were civilians who probably did not even serve in the military. I am a journalist by education. I have worked in this profession all my life. For me, journalism is a "blood type". Apart from the requirements of the charter, a military journalist in the Armed Forces is no different from a civilian journalist. That's why they adapt well after service. Most of my colleagues who move to civilian newsrooms and press services work as if they had never worn badges. Moreover, there is a great example of my teacher, Colonel Serhii Nahorianskyi, who headed the press service of Prime Minister Anatolii Kinakh and was among the best among his colleagues. Then there is Rear Admiral John Kirby of the US Navy, who is the Strategic Communications Coordinator for the US National Security Council. Can we say that he is some kind of tyrant? Are journalists complaining about him?
- In the United States, the situation with freedom of speech over the years of Ukraine's independence has been better than in Ukraine.
- I'm not arguing with you. Although Trump might (smiles - O.M.). I'll tell you this: since I came to this position, the badges have become more of a symbol. The law works for me the same way it did for my predecessor. The only caveat is that I can be quickly returned to the army. If there is such a need, I will gladly return. However, for now, my knowledge and experience may be needed here. But definitely not in the matter of drilling or digging trenches in the courtyard of Ukrinform (smiles. - O.M.).
- After this scandal with accusations of censorship against your predecessor, how do you plan to bring the agency back to at least the level it was at before Matsuka?
- I started doing this from the first day when I realized we were in crisis. I got in touch with all journalistic organizations. I myself am the secretary of the National Union of Journalists. We talked with representatives of the Institute of Mass Information, with Natalia Lvovna Lyhachova (Editor-in-Chief of Detector Media - O.M.). I also met with diplomats. As I said, I meet with my team all the time. This is not about me but about the name and reputation of the agency. I may not be here tomorrow, but the team will be. In other words, I work on the issue we are discussing every day. There are also legal aspects. From what I've learned, you need to be well versed in it to understand what to call it-whether there were gag orders or some elements of them. But I keep emphasizing that we are a normal media outlet. We have experienced journalists with a position. I tell them: "I'm with you, in the same line. The most important thing now is to get Ukrinform out of the crisis."
- So were there any gag orders?
- I was shown some screens. I, like the rest of society, saw them in the press. When Oleksii and I had a conversation at a short meeting during the transfer of cases, he did not confirm this. I am a tolerant person. As long as there are no concrete decisions, I cannot blame him for anything. Our task was to transfer the cases in a civilized manner. We have done that. And I told the team that we are working in a steady mode and are changing evolutionarily and progressively. In other words, we are keeping what we had previously developed in the classical sense, adding multimedia - this process has already begun, so it would be foolish to stop it. But it should be organic and complementary. I am in constant dialog with everyone. I am focused on constructive. I have no prejudice against any part of the team. My experience allows me to see the professional qualities in people so that I can strengthen or help someone.
- Here I will recall the story of one of the agency's correspondents, Yurii Stryhun, who, after the UP story was published, confirmed the existence of the gag orders and received a draft notice to the TCR the next day. Commenting on this situation, you said that Matsuka had submitted data on conscripts to the territorial recruitment and social support centers on May 3, and you signed an order to reconcile the data in accordance with the Cabinet of Ministers' resolution. How did this story affect you?
- There were several posts on social media. I immediately started communicating...
- With him?
- With the media. When the messages started appearing, I had just been at a meeting before which I signed the documents that came from the TCR on May 31, so I had to respond, otherwise, I would have been administratively liable. The first to call for a comment was Suspilne, followed by IMI. It was on a Friday evening, so it was difficult to get the source documents. This is a civilian organization! I talked to our HR manager over the phone, who was out of the office at the time. We set the dates from memory. In my post, I explained that the TCR had sent an order to Yurii Stryhun to come to the Regional TCR on May 22, and I took up my duties on May 27. I didn't even know our respected correspondent at the time - I hadn't had time to meet him. But if we analyzed everything in detail right away, we would realize that I could not do that. What kind of influence would I have to have to resolve the issue of this particular person with just a phone call, even though I signed such documents for four other employees that day. I would have turned the wheel to punish him? That's what kind of demiurge I must be!" (smiles. - O.M.).
- But you have the right connections. Why not?
- Those who have been in close contact with Generals Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskyi and Commander of the Ground Forces Oleksandr Pavliuk understand that they can explain the direction of further movement very directly for such appeals. This is the first thing. Second, my moral and business qualities do not allow me to do such things. Having headed many teams, I have never done anything like this. Thirdly, legally, I could not do this.
- Did you talk to Stryhun?
- Yesterday (10 June - O.M.) we had a talk. By the way, it was very adequate. I asked him, "Yurii Borysovych, you understand that I could not even arrange this in terms of time, right?" He replied that he understood.
- Going to serve? Or to study?
- Not yet. Just declared fit for duty.
- Will he work for Ukrinform?
- Why not?! Do I have to fire him?! You know, I don't like to interfere with micromanagement, because it's about not trusting the people you work with. We have a big team here. It would be utopian to micromanage here. At the first meeting with the staff, I immediately said that the editors-in-chief have the final say on regional personnel issues. Accordingly, if we talk about Stryhun, he is a very experienced editor. And it's even hard for me to assess his professional qualities because I haven't worked with him. But I understand why this happened. We are all under stress because of the war. In any case, I do not condemn him. It's easy for me because I know that my legal position is impeccable. Moreover, you understand the world we live in - information is open. If you want, you can even find out who I called. The list of my calls did not include anyone who might be involved in this situation.
- But you do realize that because of this situation, you will be closely watched for some time and suspected of continuing to influence the agency's editorial policy?
- This is good because we are not Russia. We agreed to be in dialogue...
- With society. Are you in a dialog with Bankova Street?
- Since the beginning of the war and until March of this year, I have been in dialogue with my press officers and General Syrskyi, his staff, the commanders of the Eastern Front units and the journalists who worked there. I saw the president only once. It was in Bakhmut. At that time, I did not stand out for him among others (smiles. - O.M.).
- It's not the president who decides on such issues. There is, for example, the head of the Office.
- I also saw him only once with the president. That was it!
- Other people, for example, Mykhailo Podoliak, who is in charge of information policy there.
- We met in Kyiv at a forum more than a year before my appointment, which I came to from the front. My position then was to use everything that helped us in the war. We had a short conversation about Marathon for 15 minutes and that was it.
-So now there is no influence of Bankova Street?
- No! I'm telling you the truth. Where I am and where the President's Office is. I came to Kyiv in March, was treated for a month, then the department and here. When was I going to establish connections with Bankova Street in this mode?" (smiles. - O.M.).
- You have just mentioned that in March you returned from Khortytsia, where you were a spokesperson for the Eastern Group of the Armed Forces of Ukraine...
- I am very proud of my team! These are young officers who grew up before my eyes. Illia Yevlash, Alan Zhanhozha, Roman Chop, Volodymyr Fito. Plus the brigades' press secretaries, such as Mykyta Shandyba or Iryna Rybakova. Everyone worked very hard. This is important work and invaluable experience.
I say this: those in the trenches are saints, and we are chroniclers of the lives of saints. Everything should be aimed at them. So we tried to do our job as well as possible. My colleagues did incredible things. Imagine: the second week of the defense of the capital. I approach the commander, General Syrskyi, and say: "Let me make a movie about the Battle for Kyiv". He asks me what the hell I'm doing. I: "If we don't do it now, they won't know whose merit it is. It is necessary for history." We were even allowed to fly drones then. We also shot The Battle for Kharkiv in the same way. In total, we made about eight such films. We tried to record everything. When the full-scale war began, the number of subscribers to our Land Forces Facebook page grew by several tens of thousands a day. Because we were among the first to call for resistance, for the destruction of the enemy without any tolerance. We were later blocked for this. But the first three weeks or so were simply golden. We tried to present information creatively, from posters to films.
- Speaking of Kyiv. Recently, there has been a lot of talk about a second offensive on the capital. Even the president did not rule out this possibility. Could there be such an attempt?
- Based on what I see in the public domain and know from my sources, I do not see the enemy having the capacity to launch such a powerful offensive. Not even the ability to achieve what he announced in the Kharkiv region. I served for two and a half years with General Oleksandr Syrskyi and a little less with General Oleksandr Pavliuk. We still have many military leaders of a level that the enemy does not have. For example, Generals Kyrylo Budanov, Anatolii Barhylevych, Oleksandr Hruzevych, Andrii Malynovskyi, Oleksandr Komarenko and others. We have not yet fully realized what a national treasure we have. At one time, Israel realized the value of its military elite. We will have the same thing. As for Kyiv, I repeat: I do not see any prospects for the enemy.
- But now they get claws into the Kharkiv region.
-Look how long they have been capturing Vovchansk. Of course, in any case, it hurts us a lot, because we are losing our best soldiers and civilians. But the Russians are a laughingstock for the whole world. A bloody one. Obviously, they cannot achieve anything strategically. Even when we were waiting for Western help, we gave them a decent rebuff. I was at Khortytsia at the time and saw with my own eyes how the military leadership made difficult operational decisions. The vast majority of them were successful. This is an indicator of great experience, military talent and courage. Not everything can be said now, but time will tell. The main thing is that we must maintain unity and resilience. Because now is the most difficult period of the war, when there is a certain fatigue. But I am sure that we are stronger than the enemy. And we will defeat him.
- This immediately raises the question: when is this possible? Do you agree with the opinion of a large number of military personnel that this war will last for a long time?
- This is too universal an answer. To analyze, you need to have a lot of information, such as who will win the US elections, what kind of assistance will be provided to us, what kind of equipment will be available, how much we, as a society, will maintain unity and mobilize and resist, what socio-political and economic processes will be taking place in the enemy's country. There are many components. But the fact that the enemy failed to break us immediately was a key factor. That's why I would even say that we have already won. They were counting on a blitzkrieg. But they have no military capabilities to conquer Ukraine. They are also losing both equipment and manpower. They are recruiting personnel from the socially disadvantaged population who want to earn money. They found such an opportunity to replenish their ranks. However, they still have not succeeded in doing anything during this time. If the main achievement in a year is a district center like Avdiivka, you realize that this is not a world-class army. By the way, they still need to rethink their losses. I think they are enormous.
- But they don't reckon with them!
- Strangely enough, they manage to replenish their ranks. Putin has been in power for 25 years. The propaganda machine is working. They have managed to destroy all more or less living things or to get them out of the country. But all this does not create brilliant commanders or formations of the level of the US Marine Corps. Yes, unfortunately, the war has become protracted. But thanks to the help of the free world and our own resilience, we can hold on to our territory.
Olha Moskaliuk, Censor.NET
Photo: Kyrylo Chubotin, Ukrinform and from the personal archive of Serhii Cherevatyi
