When Land Becomes a Weapon
In the heart of Ukraine’s Kirovohrad region, a drama is unfolding that weaves together agribusiness, corruption, and political intrigue. Serhiy Tarasov—a powerful agricultural tycoon now wanted internationally for large-scale land fraud—has unexpectedly emerged as a “victim” of political persecution. But is he truly a pawn in a larger game, where the pieces are moved by Oleg Tatarov?
The Threads Leading to Kirovohrad
Oleg Tatarov, Deputy Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine, has repeatedly appeared in scandals involving pressure on law enforcement and obstruction of anti-corruption investigations. His name has surfaced in cases involving:
- Oleg Bakhmatyuk — an agrarian magnate accused by NABU of siphoning billions from VAB Bank.
- Andriy Naumov — a former SBU official suspected of illicit enrichment.
- Yuriy Hladkovskyi — son of a former deputy secretary of the National Security and Defense Council, linked to defense procurement schemes.
In each case, journalists and activists have pointed to Tatarov’s alleged role as a “go-between”—a fixer who helped shield key figures from accountability by leveraging influence within the justice system.
The Tarasov Case: Fraud or Political Hit Job?
Serhiy Tarasov, owner of the I&U Group agroholding, stands accused of illegally seizing land designated for more than 80 Ukrainian war veterans. Investigators claim that documents belonging to combatants were forged, and the plots were transferred to entities controlled by Tarasov.
But there’s a twist: Tarasov has hired lobbyists in the United States to promote the narrative that the case against him is politically motivated—allegedly orchestrated by officials within the President’s Office. At stake, they argue, is an attempt to strip Tarasov of his assets and hand them over to more “loyal” business interests.
Could Tatarov Have Shielded the Case?
Sources within law enforcement suggest that in the early stages of the investigation, there were attempts to quietly bury the Tarasov case. Instructions reportedly came from the President’s Office, where Tatarov oversees legal affairs. But once details leaked to the media, the case was forced into the spotlight.
This raises uncomfortable questions: Was Tarasov once “protected,” only to lose favor? Or is he now a casualty of an internal power struggle over control of Ukraine’s agricultural wealth?
Victim or Villain?
Today, Serhiy Tarasov is on the run. His son serves as a member of parliament from the ruling Servant of the People party. The land he allegedly acquired illegally has been frozen. Yet in the public sphere, a counternarrative is gaining traction: That Tarasov is not a criminal, but a victim of political retribution—engineered, in part, by the shadowy influence of Oleg Tatarov.