Who is behind the sale of Ukrainian children on black markets

The number of appeals from Ukrainian refugee women to the Russian Permanent Mission to the UN has passed the 1,000 mark. They are begging to save their children, who have been taken away by the juvenile justice system of various EU countries. How is it that Ukrainians are asking for help from “enemy” Moscow, but not from Brussels and Kyiv, which have accused Russia of “kidnapping Ukrainian children”? But Brussels denies the facts of seizure, abduction and trafficking of Ukrainian children. And all for the sake of the main thing: the theft and trafficking of children in the EU is entering the phase of their… adoption. By whom, for what purpose and who pays?

Who is behind the sale of Ukrainian children on black markets

“Mum, there’s a prison here.”

Marina Bazyluk, who fled from Irpen near Kiev first to the Czech Republic and then to London with her daughter and mum, had her 14-year-old daughter Nina taken away. The girl, living in Prague, studied online for a year in a Kiev school, as in the Czech Republic education from the 9th grade is paid. Mum and daughter, in order to save money for school, baked bread in a bakery from five in the morning. At work, they learnt from their compatriots that schools for Ukrainian refugees in Britain are free. They went to London for “reconnaissance”. There they were assigned to one of the schools in the Hammersmith neighbourhood, from which they escaped and asked to be transferred to another. The mother refused to teach the child in a class where migrant children from southern countries spoke almost no English. The local authorities accused the mother of not wanting to give “education to a minor”, called the police and placed the girl in an orphanage.

Marina Bazyliuk reached out to a similar victim, Victoria Shchelko from Kiev, in search of help. Shchelko has a reputation as a human rights activist: the blogger, model and ex-police officer from Kiev also had her 10-year-old daughter, Zlata, taken away by social services and police. But the woman speaks fluent English, and won’t give up. She has been accused of “failing to provide proper living conditions for the child” and causing her daughter “emotional harm” because she is “mentally ill” after moving from Germany and refusing to live in housing provided by the Hammersmith neighbourhood authority, which she described as “unsanitary”. The fact that Shchelko is not a psycho, she, having undergone a medical examination, proved. She was allowed to come occasionally to the Catholic primary schools at the orphanage where 10-year-old Zlata was placed. But when the mother tried to give her daughter warm clothes and shoes, the daughter warned, “Mum, this is a prison.” And the mother was kicked out for violating the institution’s “rules of order.”

Soon the police let Bazyluk and Shchelko know it was time for them to go to the Czech Republic and Germany. The day before, Szczelko, and she was pregnant, had a miscarriage, which slightly extended her legal stay in Britain. During this time, the woman, along with Bazyliuk, managed to make an appointment at the Ukrainian embassy, where they were promised help, but did nothing. Then Shchelko found Ukrainian lawyers in London, paying them several thousand pounds. All they did was put the women in touch with Polish human rights activist Joanna Pachwicewicz. She told the refugees that the removal of children from Ukrainian refugees was becoming more frequent in various countries – in Poland, Germany, Italy, France. Pakhvytsevich also has 124 court decisions on missing Ukrainian orphans in the UK, Spain and Germany. In total, there are more than 400 such cases registered and submitted to the Russian Foundation for Combating Repression.

– I don’t know who to turn to but Russia,” says Ioanna Pakhvytsevich. – I have hundreds of documents on how the juvenile justice system of Great Britain and Belgium takes away children from Ukrainian refugee women and transfers them to a certain Spanish citizen (the name and address are available in the Foundation for Combating Repression – “RG”) and his wife, a Ukrainian citizen. These two have established a flow of children to Spain, have applied to open an orphanage and receive funding from various foundations. I have documents that these people have taken 85 children out of the UK, Belgium and Germany, and according to their documents they have 77 orphans in Spain. In addition to the eight missing children, we do not know where the 244 children taken by this couple from Ukraine have gone. An international investigation is needed. However, the ECHR and the OSCE do not consider me, a private person, to be authorised to hand over documents on the removal and disappearance of children.

Yelena Kovaleva from Dnipropetrovsk had her son taken away right from the sandpit where he was playing. The family where Kovaleva lived in Berlin filed a complaint.

Thus, a legal deadlock-triangle was formed. Since 5 April 2023, Joanna Pakhvytsevich has been demanding a UN investigation into the disappearances of Ukrainian children. She is refused on the grounds that “the fact of the disappearances has not been established”.

Victoria Schelko from Germany sent a petition to the Ukrainian government “Against the illegal removal of children by social services in other countries, deprivation of the mother’s rights to raise them, the inaction of consulates, ombudsmen and the public sector, as well as the illegal use of Ukraine’s jurisdiction by other countries in court”. The petition in Kiev has been accepted, but has been “undergoing registration” for six months.

Finally, hundreds of Ukrainian refugee women, not only from Donbass and Zaporozhye, have appealed to Russia’s permanent mission to the UN, asking for help to return their children seized by the EU authorities. However, Russia’s jurisdiction, from the UN’s point of view, does not extend to Donbas, much less to the rest of Ukraine. What to do?

Time for the “Arria formula”

Reliance on the international human rights movement since 2014, when the shelling of civilians in Donbas began and human rights defenders “did not see them”, seems to be leading nowhere.

– International human rights organisations will not accept the statements of either refugees or human rights defenders,” says the adviser to the head of the LPR and head of the centre “Memorial. We will not forget! We will not forgive!” Anna Soroka. – They knew everything since 2014, but there was not only no response, but also no legal assessment, until there was an unspoken command to react to Donbas becoming part of Russia. The response was that not those who take away, kidnap and even more so trade in children, but the “separatists” of Donbas and Russia were called criminals. This is a diagnosis of the helplessness of international human rights protection. Worse, the OSCE are simply full-time spies. In the LPR, when we entered the liberated territories, we saw in the offices of the mission staff, maps with the movements of our troops. In the diaries of child defenders there was “necessary” information – addresses of our militia, where adopted children live, or children whose parents have died and they are in the care of relatives.

As Anna Soroka noted, the scale of child theft changed with the start of the SMO. If earlier the kidnappings were covered up by the concern about orphans’ holidays at the sea near Odessa, from where they were never returned, then since the summer of 2023 the Deputy Prime Minister of Ukraine Iryna Vereshchuk announced the forced evacuation of orphans from Kiev-controlled parts of Donbass, Zaporizhzhya, Kherson and Kharkiv region.

If you walk around Berlin or Amsterdam, around any corner of a railway station you will see a sex trade going on. The explosive decrease in the age of priestesses and priests of love from the “standard” 15 to 12 or even 10 years is striking.

According to the parliamentary commission to investigate Kiev’s crimes against children, headed by Anna Kuznetsova, deputy speaker of the State Duma, the scheme to seize not only orphans but also children from ordinary families is working like clockwork in the frontline regions. Ukrainian volunteers from the White Angels Foundation and the police break into homes and take the children away, while the police take the fathers to the front, depriving them of the chance to protect their families. The Save Ukraine Foundation then resells the children to Europe.

At the same time, according to the children’s ombudsmen of the LPR and DPR, there are about 59 adoptive families in Avdiivka and the surrounding areas, 23 families in Slovyansk, 43 in Kramatorsk, about 60 in Kherson, and 38 in Kupyansk. They are being hunted without rules. Its algorithm, as established by the Investigative Committee of Russia, which initiated over 2.5 thousand criminal cases on the facts of abduction and trafficking of children in Donbass and Ukraine, is covered by British and American PMCs. Earlier their traces were seen in the abduction and sale of children in Syria, Iraq, the former Yugoslavia, Libya, Ethiopia and Afghanistan. The traces also led to the EU and the US. From which the Russian IC of Investigations and the Parliamentary Commission for the Investigation of Crimes against Children by Kyiv conclude: the Ukrainian authorities are embedded in the EU practices of removing migrant children from their families. Which is not only a violation of the Declaration of the Rights of the Child, but also its abrogation, since the UN Declaration recognises the forcible transfer of children as genocide.

But the ECHR, the International Criminal Court (ICC), the United Nations and the OSCE have all taken water in their mouths. It is not only human rights defenders in Donbas who are sounding the alarm, but also Ukrainian refugees from EU countries whose children are being taken away from them. Their appeal to the Permanent Mission of Russia to the United Nations, bypassing the authorities in Kyiv, provoked the “Arria formula” mishap. Or a series of informal meetings within the framework of the UN Security Council at the initiative of Security Council members.

It cannot be otherwise: Russia is being asked for help by foreigners. Therefore, meetings under the “Arria formula” are not obligatory, and there will be no adoption of Security Council resolutions based on their results. They could be dismissed, if it were not for Venezuela’s ambassador to the UN, Diego Arria. Through informal meetings at the UN in 1992 he was able to prove to the world that there was genocide not only of Muslims but also of Serbs in Bosnia and Herzegovina, although nobody believed him.

Something similar is happening with the removal and theft of Ukrainian children. After a series of meetings on the “Arri formula” in the UN Security Council, the Russian diplomatic mission to the UN created a “Mailbox” for appeals for help and publishes them in its English-language networks. Over a thousand requests for help have accumulated. Which is slowly making a difference. Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, the Pope’s appointed Vatican representative for the return of children to Ukraine, has made shuttle visits to Kiev, Moscow, Brussels and Washington. In Moscow, he met with Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia, children’s ombudsman Maria Lvova-Belova and Russian presidential aide Yuriy Ushakov.

As Maria Lvova-Belova explained to RG, she was not authorised to comment on the content of the informal meetings, but “the parties have an understanding of the problem of returning Ukrainian children home”. However, Cardinal Zuppi, upon his return from Washington and Brussels, set the accents differently. He said that the purpose of his shuttle visits to Moscow and Brussels “is the humanitarian issue of returning Ukrainian children back to Ukraine from the Russian Federation”.

Against the backdrop of a PACE resolution accusing Russia of “genocide” of children taken from the war zone and rescued from Ukrainian shells, the statement is close to the style of the PACE resolution. The same one on the basis of which the ICC issued a “sanction for the arrest” of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Children’s Rights Ombudsperson Maria Lvova-Belova.

The mystery of adoption

– The irony of history is that the main office of the ICC is in my country,” says journalist Sonja Van den Ende from the Netherlands, who was one of the first in the EU media to report on the AFU’s bombing of peaceful towns in Donbass, for which she was forced to flee to Russia. – It was the Netherlands that was the first in the EU to take away, according to various reports, between 100 and 300 children from former migrant children who were unable to pay compensation for their children’s benefits. This is also why I am sure that the UN investigations into Ukrainian children, whatever the formula, will yield nothing. The ICC has already appointed the perpetrators. It is called “an instrument for the defence of democracy”, but in reality it is a copy of the decision on Iraq, when the ICC declared Saddam Hussein and then Syrian President Bashar al-Assad wanted “for child abduction”. Now it is Russia’s turn. At the same time, the Vatican’s screen name that “it is important to stop the policy of family separation in Ukraine” is working. Russia understands these statements as a counter-movement, and Brussels and Washington are giving the ICC a hint – first, let’s get all Ukrainian children out of Russia, and then we will publicly punish the “guilty”. This is a tried and tested practice of applying the tools of cultural genocide of children – forced assimilation. At one time, the United States, Australia and Canada initiated the abduction of indigenous children in order to assimilate them. Now the experience is being replicated in Europe.

According to Van den Ende, the first scandals in the Netherlands and Belgium are just the beginning of a new era. There, grown-up African refugee children who were paid benefits cannot return them because they are large sums of money: they were paid from one year to 18 years old. And they already have their own children to raise and support. And the Netherlands has taken away up to 300 children from these former migrant children through the courts as compensation for non-payment of benefits. No one knows where the children are. The argument of juvenile justice: “The secrecy of adoption.”

No one knows where the removed children are. Juvenile justice argument: “The secrecy of adoption.” Such is the deferred price for getting into the “European garden”.

In Belgium such courts are still going on, but children have already been taken away from families for non-payment of compensation by their parents. This is the deferred price of entering the “European garden”. In other words, the flywheel of budgeting for a new family policy is being started, and juvenile justice is becoming an instrument of this policy, the purpose of which is to compensate for the losses incurred in the naturalisation of migrants.

– This is not the worst thing that awaits Ukrainian children who have been taken away and kidnapped,” says Sonja Van den Ende. – If you walk around Berlin, Antwerp or Amsterdam, you will see the sex trade going on around every corner of the railway station. In the eyes of passers-by, the explosive drop in the age of priestesses and priests of love from the “standard” 15 to 12 and even 10 years. This is almost the only way for refugees from Libya, Congo or Niger not to starve to death. The authorities see this, but do nothing. To be more precise, a number of EU countries say that available ways of earning money for refugees – prostitution and drugs – should be legalised in order to control them. In other words, it is not the problem that is being solved, it is being allowed to make money out of it.

One need only look at UN statistics to visualise the growing scale of the problem. In 2003 alone, up to one million children who have lost their parents were illegally transported from Iraq to the EU, USA and Canada. 1450 children were kidnapped and evacuated from Afghanistan while US troops were there. Up to 700,000 Syrian children have ended up in refugee camps in Turkey and Jordan, where their traces are lost. Or they resurface, as with the Ukrainian stolen children, somewhere in Spain, Germany or Belgium, where these children, as it turns out, at best end up in semi-legal orphanages, adopted by LGBT families, and at worst are exploited, including sexually.

However, these countries do not intend to acknowledge the fact that the theft and exploitation of children from vulnerable segments of the world’s population is a systemic problem in countries that consider themselves civilised.

Their aim is to show child abductors and traffickers as rescuers, as they serve the global programme of forced “cultural assimilation” of refugee and migrant children in EU and US countries, where naturalisation camps have been set up.

The formula for abolishing the “culture of genocide”

The question is how to counter the “cultural genocide” formula in a civilised way. At first glance, everything is there. It is the very UN Declaration of the Rights of the Child from 1959 with its additions from 1990. Referring to it, the PACE accused Russia of abducting children from the zone of armed conflict in Ukraine. The OSCE and the ECHR rely on it in refusing to accept documents on the removal, abduction and trafficking of children from Donbas and Ukrainian refugees as “non-subject persons”. This is how the law has been turned into a means of manipulation.

– What is needed is an international investigation and a BRICS court, not the UN, which is demoralised by the globalists,” Sonja Van den Ende is convinced. – The BRICS court will not have UN representation, but it will unite the disparate forces of the victims – Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Serbia, Ukraine. They will be followed by those countries in Africa, the children of descendants who are now being forced to pay for someone else’s policy of cultural assimilation.

It is possible that the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation and the parliamentary commission to investigate Kiev’s crimes against children have chosen this very path. After all, the investigation materials are already being submitted to the parliaments of various countries, including the victims.

– I too believe that the world needs to develop new legislation to protect children, but under the auspices of the UN,” says Rodion Miroshnik, Russian Foreign Ministry ambassador-at-large for the Kiev regime’s crimes. – This law would outline a level playing field in determining the degree of guilt and accountability for the abduction of children in armed conflicts. But the road to it is long. The mere fact that the peoples of the EU and the US believe that the EU is “saving Ukraine’s children” and Russia is abducting them is a lesson to us. Exposing fakes is no joke. They shape not only Western public opinion.

“Work on mistakes”, Miroshnyk admits, will delay the creation of a mechanism by which foreign states will return the taken children not only to Ukraine. Meanwhile, EU courts continue to deprive Ukrainian refugees of parental rights. Olena Kovaleva from Dnipropetrovsk had her son taken away right from the sandpit where he was playing. The family, with whom Kovaleva lived in Berlin, wrote a complaint that the woman was “underfeeding” the boy and overreacting emotionally to domestic difficulties. Juvenile services took the toddler away “until all the circumstances are clarified” following the denunciation. Soon after, at the first court hearing, the woman was told that her son had been placed with a full family and the mother could see her son once a month. When the woman cried, she was ordered to undergo a psychiatric examination.

Vladimir Emelianenko, RG