Investigative journalist, Nashi Hroshi editor Yuriy Nikolov faced a wave of online attacks and criticism on social media after publicly comparing procurement prices for drones, Nikolov reported in an episode of the YouTube project Ye Pytannia. He explained how this attack differed from previous ones in a comment to ZMINA.
Nikolov said that the smear campaign had begun after he said that the prices for drones produced by Firepoint should be lowered and that the market should be opened up for a cheaper alternative. The journalist stressed that his aim was to save budget money in order to provide the Ukrainian Armed Forces with more weapons.
“I’m fighting for the possibility of bringing the prices down. I need us to have more drones at the front for the same amount of money. When you have a billion, you can spend it either on 100 drones or 200 drones. Which would you choose? We should be buying something cheaper for certain tasks and something more expensive for others, but we need to be able to buy more weapons for the tasks at hand,” Nikolov said.
The journalist said that actors in the defence sector and multiple Telegram channels then accused him of comparing incorrect drone specifications and alleged he lacked the experience to make such statements.
Nikolov believes that the posts attacking him aimed to help preserve the old system of procurement monopolies and to prevent public debate about pricing for drones and missiles. He added that he expects to face more pressure over his investigations in other areas.
In a comment to ZMINA, Yuriy Nikolov explained what, in his observation, made the latest online attack against him different from legitimate criticism.
“Criticism means analysing someone’s actions first and foremost. Constructive criticism is fact-based and assesses conduct, giving the person the opportunity to take the remarks into account and change their future behaviour. Criticism turns destructive when it shifts to purely emotional jabs at the target that aim to degrade them. And it turns into an attack when degrading the target becomes the job of trashy Telegram channels and other information outlets, where anyone can anonymously commission any text to be published,” he said.
At the same time, Nikolov stressed that his core message hadn’t changed: the state should be trying to buy more drones for the same sum. He explained that Ukraine’s budget was limited, so savings made in procurement allowed more weaponry to be purchased for the front’s needs.
Nikolov said he was advocating creating conditions that would encourage lower prices and competition among drone manufacturers.
“Right now, the arms manufacturer lobby is arguing that everything has to be done in secret, no tender bidding, because it’s a terrible secret; military procurement is so complex that nobody understands anything about it except a handful of people whom the defence industrial complex trusts. And it’s this complex that, by its very nature, has an interest in keeping the prices inflated. The defence-industrial complex is a business. And business is, first and foremost, focused on making a profit.
“Whereas different people entirely have an interest in getting more drones for the same amount of money — the consumers of the defence industrial complex’s output. So there’s a conflict of interest between these two groups, and that’s where the friction between them comes from. Sometimes it plays out as constructive criticism, sometimes as destructive criticism. And sometimes as expensive, well-funded online attacks,” the journalist explained.
Nikolov stressed that his goal was not to make Firepoint lower its prices. Instead, he considers it important to push for the creation of such a possibility through competition and tender bidding.
The journalist added that during the debate, his critics kept repeating the argument that different drones could not be compared. He believes that this was an attempt by defence sector actors to narrow down the group of people allowed to speak publicly about procurement and war economics.
Nikolov acknowledged that people who have worked in the defence sector for years have indeed accumulated considerable experience and knowledge. However, in his view, this doesn’t mean that only specialists are entitled to discuss the cost of weaponry and the efficient use of budget money.
The journalist explained that his goal was not to harm any particular manufacturer, but to enable the state to obtain more weaponry for the funds it has.
Nikolov suggested that the current wave of harsh criticism was not linked to the arms lobby alone, since people from other groups joined in it as well, including supporters of certain reformers in the government.
He is convinced that the attacks would intensify as his team continues to work on new investigations. Nikolov says he expects more attacks in the coming weeks, but that this will not derail his work. In his view, avoiding important topics simply because of possible criticism would mean doing nothing at all.
The 2024 attack on Nikolov’s apartment
On 15 January, investigative journalist Yuriy Nikolov reported an attempt at intimidation: unknown men tried to break into his apartment on 14 January, scaring his mother and neighbors, and left paper notes saying “draft dodger” and “traitor” on his door.
After the incident, the Telegram channel “Kartochny Ofis” posted about it, claiming that it was military servicemen trying to deliver a draft notice to the journalist. A provocative post about Yuri Nikolov was shared by the Telegram channels “Vertykal” and “Joker” at about the same time.
On 15 January, the Telegram channel “Joker” posted the video of Nikolov’s comment on President Volodymyr Zelensky and implied that the attack on the journalist’s apartment was retaliation for his remark about the head of state.
On 19 January, the police started a case over pressuring the investigative journalist Yury Nikolov to prevent him from performing his professional duties and persecuting the latter due to his reporting (Part 2 of Article 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine).
On 21 January, the police said they identified five people who tried to break into the apartment of investigative journalist Yury Nikolov.
On 26 January 2024 Yuriy Nikolov reported that that the police released the five men who had tried to break into his apartment.
On 28 January, Zhytomyr.city posted an address by two men on its YouTube channel. The men introduced themselves as Dmytro and Denys and claimed that an SBU employee named Oleksiy ordered them to attack journalist Yuriy Nikolov’s apartment. According to Zhytomyr.city, the men decided that they had been used “for some weird game” and mustered the courage for an open video interview.
In May 2024, Nikolov reported that the chief investigator in the case no longer viewed the attack as obstruction of the journalist’s reporting, classifying it as hooliganism instead.