Five years ago, she stood alongside the president at official events and explained to journalists what Zelenskyy meant. On Sunday, September 13, her name appeared in an appendix to the National Security and Defense Council decision — among ten people whom the President's Office accused of spreading disinformation and Russian propaganda. This concerns Yulia Mendel, Vladimir Zelenskyy's press secretary in 2019–2021.
The document states that sanctions were imposed against 10 Russian and Ukrainian individuals for spreading disinformation and Russian propaganda, as well as for supporting Russia's aggressive policy against Ukraine. The restrictions are a classic sanctions package: asset freezing, ban on trade operations and transit, suspension of financial obligations, prohibition on privatization and government procurement. The duration is ten years.
Why now
The formal pretext emerged back in May. In May 2026, in an interview with Tucker Carlson, Yulia Mendel claimed that the Ukrainian delegation at negotiations in Istanbul in spring 2022 was allegedly ready to accept all Russian demands to end the war, citing only conversations with unnamed individuals. In the same conversation, she added another story: Mendel claimed that in 2019 during the Normandy Summit in Paris, Zelenskyy allegedly personally promised Putin that Ukraine would not join the Alliance, although she provided no documentary evidence for this.
The platform itself amplified the effect. Political scientist Valery Klochok noted that the interview is beneficial for Russian propaganda through its presentation and platform — Carlson has worked with narratives favorable to the Kremlin for years, and a Ukrainian former official in his broadcast automatically added weight to these theses. Moreover, Yulia Mendel's scandalous interview with Tucker Carlson coincided with a new wave of resonant topics around Bankova and Yermak, so the statements fell on already inflamed informational ground.
Who benefits
Decree No. 901 was signed in conjunction with other sanctions packages on the same day — against Russian citizens and companies associated with Rostec and against shadow fleet vessels. In this context, Yulia Mendel ended up on a list of 10 people who "spread disinformation and Russian propaganda, support Russia's aggressive policy against Ukraine" — meaning she was formally placed in the same category as sources of coordinated Russian influence, rather than simply an inconvenient critic.
For Bankova, this is an advantageous move for two reasons. First, it shifts focus from uncomfortable questions about Yermak to a figure whose reputation is already undermined by controversial statements. Second, it sends a signal to other former officials: public criticism, backed by supposedly "conversations with people," can now cost not just reputation but also assets.
Opponents' reaction
The President's Office made clear back in May how they view Mendel's words.
"This lady did not participate in negotiations, did not participate in decision-making, has been out of it for a long time, and who told her what and whether it actually happened — it is frivolous to comment on," the President's Office told journalists.
Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiha went even further: Sybiha called Mendel's performance an attack against Ukraine that harms the country's interests and plays into Russian narratives, emphasizing that Mendel's words are an attack not against the president but against her own country.
Mendel herself responded to the sanctions with a different argument — not about the content of her statements, but about the procedure itself. The former spokesperson called the restrictions against her unconstitutional, emphasizing that these are sanctions against a Ukrainian citizen imposed by decree of the National Security and Defense Council without a court decision or verdict.
Honest frame
Two truths converge here that do not cancel each other out. Mendel's statements about Istanbul and Normandy are not backed by any documents and contradict the President's Office position, and she herself had no access to negotiations after her dismissal in 2021. But the mechanism by which the state responded — not a court, not an investigation, but a National Security and Defense Council decree with a ten-year duration against its own citizen — is an instrument Ukraine previously applied mainly against foreign aggressors and collaborators.
The question for the coming months is straightforward: will Mendel challenge the decree in the Supreme Court, as other targets of personal sanctions have already done, and will the document withstand a constitutional review if the restrictions target words rather than proven cooperation with the aggressor?
