Connect with us

News

Russian officer reveals why he risked it all to quit Putin’s war

Published

on

Russian officer reveals why he risked it all to quit Putin’s war

“We had been soiled and drained. Individuals round us had been dying. I did not need to really feel like I used to be a part of it, however I used to be part of it,” the officer instructed CNN.

He mentioned he went to seek out his commander and resigned his fee on the spot.

CNN is just not naming the officer or together with private particulars that will assist to establish him for his safety.

His story is exceptional, but it surely is also one in every of many, in keeping with opponents of the conflict in Russia in addition to in Ukraine who say they’ve heard of a number of instances of troopers — each skilled and conscript — refusing to battle.

Russian troops have been fighting low morale and heavy losses in Ukraine, in keeping with the assessments by Western officers together with the Pentagon.

Advertisement
The UK’s Intelligence, Cyber and Safety Company says some have even refused to hold out orders.

The Russian Ministry of Protection has not responded to a CNN request for remark.

An unknown mission

The officer who spoke to CNN says he was a part of the large troop build-up within the west of Russia that triggered international fears for Ukraine. However he mentioned he didn’t assume a lot about it, even on February 22 this 12 months when he and the remainder of his battalion had been requested handy over their cell phones whereas stationed in Krasnodar, southern Russia, with none rationalization.

That night time they spent hours portray white stripes on their navy autos. Then they had been instructed to scrub these off, he mentioned. “The order has modified, draw the letter Z, as in Zorro,” he remembered being instructed.

“The subsequent day we had been taken to Crimea. To be trustworthy, I believed that we might not go to Ukraine. I did not assume it might come to this in any respect,” mentioned the person.

As his unit gathered in Crimea — the Ukrainian area annexed by Russia in 2014 — President Vladimir Putin launched his additional invasion of Ukraine on February 24.

However the officer mentioned he and his comrades had been unaware, as no information was handed to them, and so they had been out of contact with the surface world with out their telephones.

Advertisement

Two days later they had been themselves ordered into Ukraine, the officer instructed CNN.

“Some guys refused outright. They wrote a report and left. I do not know what occurred to them. I stayed. I have no idea why. The subsequent day we went,” he mentioned.

It's nearly three months since Russia invaded Ukraine. Here's where things stand

The officer mentioned he didn’t know the objective of the mission; that the bombastic claims from Russian President Vladimir Putin that Ukraine was a part of Russia and wanted to be “de-Nazified” didn’t make it by means of to the lads requested to battle.

“We weren’t hammered with some form of ‘Ukrainian Nazis’ rhetoric. Many didn’t perceive what this was all for and what we’re doing right here,” he mentioned.

He instructed CNN he had hoped for a diplomatic answer and felt responsible about Russia invading Ukraine. However he added he was not properly versed in politics.

Into battle

Advertisement

The very first thing the soldier remembers after his unit drove over the border in an extended column of autos was seeing bins of Russian dry rations scattered in every single place and piles of destroyed tools.

“I used to be sitting within the KAMAZ [truck], holding a gun tightly to me. I had a pistol and two grenades with me,” he mentioned.

The power drove northwest, within the route of Kherson. As they approached a village, a person with a whip jumped out and began whipping the convoy and screaming: “You all are f**ked!” the officer recalled.

“He virtually climbed into the cabin the place we had been. His eyes had been teary from crying. It made a robust impression on me,” he added. “Generally, after we noticed the locals, we tensed up. A few of them hid weapons beneath their garments, and once they obtained nearer, they fired.”

He mentioned he would cover his face for disgrace in addition to security as a result of he felt embarrassed to be seen by Ukrainians there. On their land.

Advertisement

He mentioned the Russians got here beneath heavier assault too, with mortars aimed toward them on the second or third day they had been in Ukraine.

“For the primary week or so, I used to be in a state of aftershock. I did not take into consideration something,” he instructed CNN. “I simply went to mattress considering: ‘Right now is March 1. Tomorrow I’ll get up, it is going to be March 2 — the principle factor is to reside one other day.’ A number of occasions the shells fell very shut. It is a miracle none of us died,” he mentioned.

Reactions within the ranks

The officer instructed CNN he wasn’t the one soldier involved or confused about why they’d been despatched to invade Ukraine.

However he additionally remembers some perking up once they realized that fight bonuses would quickly be paid.

Advertisement

“Somebody had a response, ‘Oh, one other 15 days right here and I am going to shut on the mortgage,’” he mentioned.

After a few weeks, the officer was deployed nearer to the rear, accompanying tools that wanted restore, he mentioned.

There he mentioned he additionally grew to become extra conscious of what was happening and had extra time and power to replicate.

“We had a radio receiver and we might take heed to the information,” he instructed CNN. “That is how I realized that retailers are closing in Russia and the economic system is collapsing. I felt responsible about this. However I felt much more responsible as a result of we got here to Ukraine.”

Setbacks in Ukraine trigger rare criticism of Russia's war effort by Russian bloggers

He mentioned his resolve hardened to the purpose the place there was just one factor he might do.

“In the long run, I gathered my power and went to the commander to write down a letter of resignation,” he instructed CNN. 

Advertisement

At first, the commander rejected the method and instructed him it was unattainable to refuse to serve. 

“He instructed me there may very well be a legal case. That rejection is betrayal. However I stood my floor. He gave me a sheet of paper and a pen,” the officer instructed CNN, including he wrote his resignation there after which.

Report of extra ‘refuseniks’

There have been different reviews contained in the tightly managed Russian media setting of troopers refusing to battle.

Valentina Melnikova, government secretary of the Union of Troopers’ Moms Committees of Russia, mentioned there have been many complaints and considerations heard when the primary items rotated out of Ukraine for relaxation.

Advertisement

“Troopers and officers wrote resignation reviews, that they may not return efficiently,” she instructed CNN. “The principle causes are, firstly, the ethical and psychological state. And the second purpose is for ethical convictions. They wrote reviews then and are writing reviews now.”

Melnikova, whose group was fashioned in 1989, mentioned all troops had the appropriate to file reviews whereas acknowledging that among the commanders would possibly refuse them or attempt to intimidate troopers.

Her group usually advises troopers on the right way to write these reviews and offers authorized counsel.

The Ukrainian Intelligence Directorate reported that in a number of Russian items, particularly the one hundred and fiftieth Motorized Rifle Division of the eighth Military of the Southern Navy District, as many as 60% to 70% of troopers had been refusing to serve.

CNN can not confirm that quantity.

In Russia, Melnikova instructed CNN there have been “many” instances of troopers refusing to battle in Ukraine however declined to provide particulars, citing authorized and security considerations.

Advertisement

Aleksei Tabalov, a human rights activist and director of a company serving to Russian conscripts, instructed CNN that he personally consulted two troopers who resigned from the navy.

“The identical guys who refused to battle and turned to us, there have been two of them, however from the brigade that they left, one other 30 individuals refused to battle,” Tabalov instructed CNN.

Tabalov mentioned that when submitting for resignation, the troopers cited that they didn’t comply with take part in a particular operation towards Ukraine when signing the contract.

Going absent with out go away from the Russian military is a legal offense punishable by jail sentences. Nevertheless, these serving beneath contract have a authorized proper to resign inside 10 days of leaving service with an evidence for the motive for his or her departure.

“I can not say that it is a mass phenomenon, however this phenomenon is sort of sturdy. For those who estimate for all of the instances from different organizations plus oblique data, the quantity goes over 1,000,” Tabalov instructed CNN.

Advertisement

He mentioned recruitment remains to be ongoing within the nation, and new troopers are sometimes from poorer areas with fewer prospects.

1000’s of Russian troopers have been killed in Ukraine for the reason that conflict started. The Ukrainian Armed Forces estimate Russian losses at greater than 22,000. The final time the Russian Ministry of Protection reported on losses was on March 25, reporting the deaths of 1,351 servicemen.

The ministry didn’t reply to CNN’s request for an replace.

The officer who spoke to CNN is now along with his household.

“What is going to occur subsequent — I have no idea,” he mentioned. “However I am glad I am again house.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

Video: The Fight for Rural America

Published

on

Video: The Fight for Rural America

One in five Americans identifies as rural, and since the 1960s, their votes have become increasingly Republican. Astead W. Herndon, a politics reporter and the host of the New York Times podcast “The Run-Up,” examines how Republicans expanded their rural advantage to historic levels and whether Democrats can remain competitive.

Continue Reading

News

Starmer wields the knife after shaky 100 days in office

Published

on

Starmer wields the knife after shaky 100 days in office

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

After almost 100 days in office, Sir Keir Starmer on Sunday finally decided to get a grip on his stumbling administration. “Keir will always wield the knife when it needs to be done,” said one Labour MP. “Now he has.”

The departure of Sue Gray from her key role as Starmer’s chief of staff was the catalyst for Sunday’s complete overhaul of the Number 10 operation. Many were left wondering why it had taken the prime minister so long.

Starmer, who hired Gray in 2023 to help him prepare for government, had been loyal to his chief of staff in office, in spite of fierce internal criticism of her management style.

Advertisement

But those close to the prime minister say that a morose and fractious Labour conference in Liverpool last month convinced him he had to draw a line under the mis-steps that had dogged his first months in office.

“Keir came back from the conference pretty chastened,” said one Labour insider. “He realised he needed to get a grip on things.”

In Liverpool party members expressed their concern at how Starmer had cut winter fuel payments for 10mn pensioners, then appeared unable to contain a row over his receipt of £32,000 in “freebie” suits and glasses.

Gray had become a lightning rod for discontent, with hostile internal briefings about her £170,000 salary and alleged “control freakery”. Labour special advisers, or Spads, claimed she was partly responsible for holding down their salaries.

Gray’s allies said all of this was grotesquely unfair on a hard-working and loyal member of the Starmer team, a view shared by many cabinet members.

Advertisement

But one senior minister told the Financial Times: “It was only a question of when, not if. Not everything was her fault, but the transition to government, the situation with the Spads and the unending freebies clusterfuck were all on her and made her position untenable.”

A person close to the discussions over the Downing Street shake-up said that after returning from Liverpool — via the UN General Assembly in New York — Starmer began lamenting the fact that Gray had “become the story”. 

Gray acknowledged she had become a “distraction”. She will now take up a role as an adviser to Starmer on relations with the UK’s devolved nations and regions, but her grip on the levers of power in Number 10 is over.

The former civil servant was also blamed for being a bottleneck in appointing people to key jobs, a problem that was rectified by the prime minister on Sunday as he announced a dramatic overhaul of his team. 

Morgan McSweeney, who was on the long march in opposition with Starmer, replaces Gray as chief of staff. It was McSweeney who helped to slay the threat of the Corbynite left and then masterminded Labour’s landslide election victory in 2024.

Advertisement

But some question whether he is cut out to be a chief of staff, especially given his lack of Whitehall experience. “Morgan is very popular with Labour staffers — this is like a players’ revolt in a football dressing room,” said one Labour veteran. “But he’s not the sort of person who puts things down on paper.”

There was a long-standing narrative at Westminster that McSweeney was part of a “boys club” around Starmer that was treated with suspicion by Gray. 

Starmer appointed two women to work as deputy chiefs of staff alongside McSweeney — Vidhya Alakeson and Jill Cuthbertson — a move seen by some Labour MPs as a riposte to any suggestion that the boys club had won.

Gray did not have any deputy chiefs of staff, an omission seen in Labour circles as contributing to a lack of grip at the centre and a sign of her unwillingness to share responsibility with others. “That was her choice,” said one ally of Starmer.

While Alakeson and Cuthbertson are highly regarded in Number 10 — the former is Starmer’s political director and the latter is a long-term Starmer lieutenant — Gray’s departure leaves the centre decidedly short of Whitehall experience.

Advertisement

In despatching Gray to the UK’s regions and nations, he has brought into his inner circle people who were already part of his trusted gang. “It’s a circling of the wagons,” said one person close to Starmer.

The exception is James Lyons, a former Sunday Times political journalist, NHS communications chief and TikTok media executive hired by Starmer to beef up his media team, which will continue to be headed by director of communications Matthew Doyle.

Lyons will have a strategic comms role, including oversight of Downing Street’s “grid” of future announcements. It is a common complaint of Labour staffers that the grid, previously under Gray’s control, has been chaotic.

Pat McFadden, cabinet office minister and part of Starmer’s inner circle, is said by party insiders to have played a key role in the shake-up, being close to both McSweeney and Lyons. 

The result of Sunday’s upheaval is that Starmer ends his first 100 days in office with what looks more like a functioning Number 10 operation. Many Labour MPs, privately, believe it is not before time.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

‘Ridiculous and just plain false’: FEMA administrator knocks Trump’s Hurricane Helene recovery claims

Published

on

‘Ridiculous and just plain false’: FEMA administrator knocks Trump’s Hurricane Helene recovery claims
play

With the federal response to Hurricane Helene becoming a major focus of the presidential campaign in the home stretch, President Joe Biden’s administration continued to push back Sunday against former President Donald Trump’s unfounded claims about storm recovery.

Appearing on ABC’s “This Week” Sunday, Federal Emergency Management Agency Administrator Deanne Criswell said her agency has all the resources it needs to respond to Helene, which ravaged parts of Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and other states.

North Carolina and Georgia are key swing states, which has heightened the political stakes for the recovery effort and the jockeying around it.

Advertisement

Criswell defended FEMA’s response and shot down Trump’s claims that the agency is short on disaster relief funds because money has been diverted to help undocumented immigrants, and that help is being withheld from Republican areas, calling such assertions “frankly ridiculous and just plain false.”

“This kind of rhetoric is not helpful to people,” she added. “It’s really a shame that we’re putting politics ahead of helping people.”

Criswell noted that state and local officials have rebutted “this dangerous, truly dangerous narrative that is creating this fear.”

Trump has made a series of unfounded claims about Helene recovery at multiple events in recent days. He said at a rally in Saginaw, Michigan, Thursday that “Kamala spent all her FEMA money, billions of dollars, on housing for illegal immigrants.”

Advertisement

“They have almost no money, because they spent it all on illegal immigrants,” Trump said, adding that “They stole the FEMA money, just like they stole it from a bank, so they could give it to their illegal immigrants.”

FEMA does have a housing program, the Shelter and Services Program, that provides “financial support to non-federal entities to provide humanitarian services to noncitizen migrants following their release” from detention facilities, according to its website. It has $650 million in funding this year, but that money is separate from disaster relief funds.

“No money is being diverted from disaster response needs. None,” the White House said in a news release.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas told reporters during a White House press briefing last week that FEMA has enough disaster relief money to meet current needs, but not for additional storms.

Advertisement

“We are meeting the immediate needs with the money that we have,” Mayorkas said. “We are expecting another hurricane hitting.  We do not have the funds.  FEMA does not have the funds to make it through the season and… what is imminent.”

Congress recently appropriated $20 billion in disaster funds, but Biden said in a letter this week that more is needed.

“Without additional funding, FEMA would be required to forego longer-term recovery activities in favor of meeting urgent needs,” Biden wrote, saying the Small Business Administration is particularly in need of funds.

Fact Check Image of Donald Trump wading through flood water is AI-generated

Advertisement

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., was asked on “Fox News Sunday” about Biden’s letter and said “Congress will provide, we will help the people in these disaster prone areas.”

Johnson was pressed about Trump conflating FEMA funds for the Shelter and Services Program with disaster relief money and conceded that “the streams of funding are different, that is not an untrue statement of course.” But he argued FEMA shouldn’t be spending any money “for resettling illegal aliens who have come across the border.”

Trump continued to criticize the Helene recovery effort at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, Saturday. He zeroed in on the $750 payment FEMA offers disaster victims to help them with immediate needs.

“Remember, $750 to people whose homes have been washed away, and yet we send tens of millions of dollars to foreign countries that most people have never heard of,” Trump said. “They’re offering them $750 as they’ve been destroyed. “

The $750 Serious Needs Assistance helps “cover essential items like food, water, baby formula, breastfeeding supplies, medication and other emergency supplies,” according to the White House press release.

Advertisement

“There are other forms of assistance that you may qualify for to receive, and Serious Needs Assistance is an initial payment you may receive while FEMA assesses your eligibility for additional funds,” the release continues.

Republican National Committee co-chair Lara Trump, the daughter-in-law of the former president, also answered questions about Trump’s Helene claims during an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union” Sunday. Host Dana Bash played a clip of Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., praising the response to Helene.

“I’m actually impressed with how much attention was paid to region that wasn’t likely to have experienced the impact that they did,” Tillis said, adding “I’m out here to say that we’re doing a good job.”

‘Life-threatening’: Milton forecast to become hurricane, target battered Florida

Lara Trump defended the criticism of Helene recovery as “coming directly from people there.”

Advertisement

“You can go online, you can look at videos of people recording themselves and posting online saying: ‘We need help, no one has come here, we have nothing,” Trump said.

Continue Reading

Trending