The former Minister of Defense of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic, Igor Strelkov, wrote in a blog on LiveJournal that he has data “from a number of sources” that the Kremlin is ready to return to the idea of ​​​​creating Novorossiya. The corresponding rhetoric will return to the federal media, this should scare Kyiv and force it to comply with the Minsk agreements.

Strelkov believes that “The Kremlin is very afraid of war”, therefore they intend to use the topic with Novorossiya as "scarecrow" for the President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko. “Like, “if you don’t calm down and don’t return to “sacred Minsk”, we’ll pull this out... It’s logical and even from their point of view, sensible. Only it was possible to scare the “best choice” of Novorossiya a maximum of one and a half to two years ago,” Strelkov argues.

In his opinion, this “The “scarecrow” will only spur the Ukrainian command to more radical actions,” which will ultimately have a negative impact on the overall situation in eastern Ukraine.

He further stated that war is inevitable, but ruled out a direct conflict between the United States and Russia. « I think we should use a new chance... War is still inevitable and we cannot hide from it» , - he wrote, addressing« patriots and Russian nationalists» .

According to him, urgent measures need to be taken "to the new stage of the struggle for Novorossiya did not end up in the dirty paws of Surkov’s crooks - all sorts of beards, Zakharchenkos, Antyufeyevs”, since they “they will salt everything.”

“In general, we need to think and act. I'm already planning to do something. For the sake of preserving the country and people, one can and should make any tactical alliances with those who have also been “written off as scrap” by their “dear Western partners.” Whether it will work out or not, I don’t know. But, of course, I won’t write about this in the open,” Strelkov concluded.

The fighting in eastern Ukraine began in late spring 2014. At that moment, the armed forces of the DPR, which declared independence from Kyiv, were headed by Igor Strelkov. However, already in August 2014, he left his military posts and returned to Russia. After that, he began to criticize the leadership of the Russian Federation in the media. In 2014, Gubarev was the head of the mobilization department of the DPR Ministry of Defense and held other high positions in the unrecognized republic.

https://www.site/2016-06-03/igor_strelkov_o_svoih_politicheskih_planah_oshibkah_kremlya_i_novoy_deklaracii

“In a situation of crisis, take power”

Igor Strelkov - about his political plans, the Kremlin’s mistakes and the new declaration

Ex-FSB employee Igor Strelkov (Girkin) became known to the general public in the spring of 2014, when, after the annexation of Crimea to Russia, he seized administrative buildings in the city of Slavyansk, Donetsk region, announcing the transfer of the city to the rule of the DPR. Strelkov fought in Slavyansk for several months, then headed the armed forces of the DPR, but eventually left the unrecognized territories and resigned. Strelkov has a lot of polemics in absentia with presidential aide Vladislav Surkov, whom he holds responsible for Russia’s non-recognition of the DPR and LPR and refusal to send a regular army there. After returning from Donbass, Strelkov led the Novorossiya aid movement for the DPR. He also participated in the creation of the “Committee of January 26,” which included publicists and public figures with nationalist views, and last week the organization was transformed into the “All-Russian National Movement.”

The movement has already published a declaration and declared itself by non-recognition of the Belovezh Treaty on the creation of the CIS and the demand for the annexation of Ukraine and Belarus to Russia. The declaration also speaks of the need to transform Russia into a state that would be controlled by the Russian nation and at the same time adhere to democratic values ​​and protect human rights and freedoms. Strelkov proposes introducing a visa regime for Central Asian states, but, on the contrary, simplifying entry for citizens of the United States, the European Union and other developed countries.

The Novorossiya movement occupies several small rooms in a building near the Taganskaya metro station. There are no repairs, and you have to walk carefully. As soon as you enter the room, you can feel from the smell that a cat lives here. A huge red cat named Khmury sleeps on Strelkov’s table during the interview. On the wall is a calendar with a portrait of Nicholas II; Strelkov also has such a portrait on his desk.

“In this regard, I do not argue with Navalny”

— You recently published a declaration. I would like to understand, firstly, who is its author. Secondly, there are obvious contradictions in it. On the one hand, we are talking about European values, about rapprochement with the countries of the First World, on the other hand, about the need to regain Ukraine and Belarus. In my opinion, this is incompatible.

— Firstly, the declaration is the fruit of collective creativity. Of course, the basic things were written by Messrs. Krylov and Prosvirnin, but it was corrected and supplemented by many people. I myself participated in editing the declaration and wrote individual paragraphs. Although I will not deny that the basic text was created by representatives of the nationalist wing. But the declaration is not the Ten Commandments carved on tablets of stone. This is a document that will be supplemented and corrected. We are not talking about fundamental changes - we are not weathervanes to constantly change, but this is a working document. It may change depending on changes in the real political situation. Agree that any democratic and legal norms can only operate when the state or society is in a more or less calm state. In conditions of a severe crisis, not only do they not work, they can lead to accelerated destruction of the state and society. Now the declaration is, in jargon, a set of our “wants” - what we would like to see ideally if the transition from the current situation occurs without any large-scale upheavals. At the same time, I am one of the most right-wing in the Committee, although I constantly oppose the nationalists. Because the right, without an alliance with the left, is now unable to create a structure that expresses the common opinion of patriotic forces. And the declaration expresses this opinion.

“And yet I don’t understand, do you want reunification with Ukraine and Belarus or democracy?”

- Let me read you how it sounds. “We stand for the unification of the Russian Federation, Ukraine, Belarus, as well as for the unification of other Russian lands in a single all-Russian state, turning the entire territory of the former USSR into an unconditional Russian zone of influence.” Now, tell me, where is it said about war? I understand that when a person reads this phrase, he imagines Strelkov, the raid on Slavyansk, actions in the Crimea, five wars that I have, and believes that Strelkov will definitely build something like the Wehrmacht and go to conquer Ukraine, Belarus and everything whatever he wants. Where is this written in the declaration? Maybe our political opponents and numerous Kremlin bots, trolls, want to see such an interpretation that there is a stupid martinet, a fascist who dreams of gaining the glory of Napoleon. But that's not true.

— How do you see the option of a bloodless unification?

— I repeat once again that the declaration is a set of “wants”, what we strive for. For example, to unite Belarus and Russia it is absolutely not necessary to fight. I believe that with a sound policy and given that Belarus will not be treated as a possible object for plunder, unification is possible without any war and without any bloodshed. As for Ukraine, this is, of course, a different question. The war is already underway, and we are not going anywhere from it. This war must be won, because if we lose it, we will lose not only in Ukraine, but everywhere. My opinion doesn't change here. This dilemma has become uncontested since the reunification with Crimea. This action was correct, but I emphasize not its correctness, but its significance. After this, there are no options for reconciliation: either the defeat of the junta, or capitulation to the junta.

- And yet, if we follow your scenario, then there will be no talk of further rapprochement with the “First World”, as stated in the declaration - only a new wave of sanctions will follow.

— I have never been a lawyer, my main education was a five-month course at the Russian FSB Academy, where I studied the fight against the underground and the organization of work with the underground. I'm not a lawyer. But nevertheless, when such serious things as a declaration are discussed, it must be read verbatim, there is no need to compose it. We are for attracting representatives of business and politics from the so-called First World to Russia. But it doesn’t say that we are in favor of establishing friendship with the entire First World on their terms. No, we are for building a sovereign, free, legal - no matter how funny it sounds from me - state in Russia. If it becomes like this, then we ourselves will reach the same level as the First World countries. Moreover, we are now perfectly integrated economically into the First World system. Built at the level of a raw material appendage, a pipe through which all resources are pumped out of us, and we receive funds from this, which are also exported there. In this regard, I do not argue with Navalny: the whole system works on the corruption drive of “steal, sell, take abroad.”

“Our task is not to overthrow the regime”

— You started talking about the possibility of a change of power in Russia. How do you want to fight for power? Are you planning to run for the State Duma?

- No. I am not going to run for the State Duma. I have no taste for politics at all. When I say that I don’t want to get involved in politics, I’m not lying. I don’t want to do it now either. I am not interested in it, and I know very well what politics is, and I know very well what it is, from the point of view of a former employee of the state security agencies: this is an extremely dirty business where everyone lies. I can't stand lying.

- Then why did you do it?

- Then why did I go to Crimea, and then to Slavyansk. I haven't liked fighting for a long time. Napoleon also said that war requires a certain age. A person over 40 years old, especially one who fought before, does not want to fight. He has seen a lot, he knows very well that there is no romance there, the weight of what he has experienced is pressing, and there is no longer a taste for risk either - and risk is necessary in war. But I did my duty. I didn’t receive anything for Crimea—they didn’t even say thank you. I did the same thing in Slavyansk. If I had not literally been forced to take off my mask (why and how is a separate matter), you would have thought that Colonel Strelkov is a tough GRU captain with huge shoulders who shoots down planes with spit and burns a column of tanks with one shot. It’s the same in politics - I’m not in it because I like it or want it. I have no taste for power, especially in peaceful conditions; in war conditions, I can take it myself - that’s not a problem. I don’t understand anything about economics, although I read about it and educate myself, but I have no taste for it. I'm not interested in all these games with elections, ratings, the need to be popular with the population and lie for the sake of it. I'm not interested. But I now see a crisis situation in the country and cannot remain on the sidelines. Since it so happened by the will of fate that I have acquired a certain popularity and fame, I do not have the right to bury it in the ground, like the talents from the famous parable.

How will you then peacefully fight for power?

“We will not fight for power peacefully and generally fight for power now.”

- What are you going to do then?

“We said before that the current regime is doomed, it will devour itself.” Before our eyes, a regime that does not want to change is self-destructing. It is falling apart at the level of the economy, politics, and even the power vertical, because it is splitting. Our task is not to overthrow this regime, if only because we see in the example of Ukraine what overthrow leads to. Our task is when the regime begins to collapse, to have the strength that can save the country. We are not aimed at confronting the current regime, but at saving the country from disaster and building a new political future.

— That is, in a crisis situation, take power?

— Yes, in a sense, to take power in a crisis situation. There is simply no other option for coming to power now. Any person who lives in our country and is not a pathological hypocrite or a member of the United Russia party understands that all elections are simply a fiction and profanation, starting from the early 90s.

— You know that nationalists in our country, as a rule, are simply imprisoned. Aren't you afraid that you and your allies will end up in prison?

- Not afraid. Not because they can’t imprison me, but I’m just not afraid, that’s all. You understand how I differ from Navalny. Navalny has been a politician all his life, earned money, and for him personal comfort is a great value. I also love comfort. I’m not a hermit, not a monk, I like to drink good beer, I don’t mind eating delicious food, I like to travel. But in my life I have been in situations that Alexei Navalny never dreamed of. And I imagine what could happen to me if I end up in the zone or in the bullpen. Believe me, I've been in worse situations. Maybe from the outside it looked different, but when I was in Slavyansk, I understood that the bet was my life. Moreover, the chances that you will survive are much less than that you will win. I'm not such a frostbitten adventurer to be sure that we will win. I understood that the chances were not very great, that we were basically going nowhere, that maybe we would be supported, but maybe not. In the end, we were only half supported. And I understood that for me personally, the chances of getting out of this situation alive were about 1 in 10. And I didn’t go there for fame. Publicity still bothers me, I don’t like it when people recognize me on the street and run up for my autograph...

— Do you agree to give an autograph?

“Now they’ve forgotten me a little, and I can finally ride the subway again.” Now someone is taking a closer look, remembering something, but I flew out of the TV, and they may still remember Strelkov’s last name, but not his appearance. But getting back to your question. I'm not afraid that I'll be jailed. Moreover, I don’t think that I can be imprisoned, I think it is more likely that I will simply be removed - some kind of car accident or something like that. As a special services officer, I consider this a more workable option.

-Are you a fatalist?

- I'm not a fatalist. I proceed from the famous Roman principle “do what you must, and be what will be.”

“Putin’s team is only capable of stealing”

— You previously said that you support Vladimir Putin. Has your attitude towards him changed?

— Do you see the closet in the corner of the office? Behind him stands a portrait of Vladimir Putin, dusty, but before it hung on the wall above the table. It hung before the start of the Syrian adventure, but it hung not because I love Vladimir Putin and consider him the best leader in the country, but because while the war was going on and there was hope that he would lead it as the supreme commander in chief, and not as a capitulator - a defeatist, I was ready to perceive him as the supreme commander in chief. But now Putin is following the path of Milosevic, one after the other. He still has time to turn away from this path, but for now he is marching along it. If he turns away from this path, if we see the Putin of 2014 and a number of conditions are met, then I can support him again.

- What conditions?

— When Putin sharply changed his foreign and domestic political course in 2014, he had to simultaneously make a change in personnel. Yegor Prosvirnin always criticizes me terribly, but everyone simply remembers this quote from Stalin: “Personnel decides everything.” If you entrust the most necessary and useful work to a scoundrel and a scoundrel, he will definitely steal, screw, and sell. Putin has a permanent team. Some have been co-opted since Yeltsin’s times, some he himself collected from his cooperative, from his comrades on the tatami and in the gateways. This team is only capable of stealing and nothing else. I was sure that the process of personnel renewal would begin, that he would assemble a capable team for new tasks, because it is impossible to resist the West even politically when the children of the Minister of Foreign Affairs study in the UK, when his own children live in Holland, when the main person in Ukraine, the former family lives in London. You cannot fight against the enemy with potential spies as executors. Although, I think there are not only potential ones there.

But that did not happen. But you can’t go picking mushrooms in the rain in a passenger car, which is designed for walking on the autobahn. And now this passenger car is stuck, and he doesn’t want to get out of it. I don’t know whether he’s afraid to get out of it or doesn’t understand the need, but he sits in it and slowly drowns in the swamp.

Further. When we entered into confrontation with the West, we had to balance politics and economics. If we are building foreign policy sovereignty, we also need economic sovereignty; if we refuse it, then there can be no talk of independence. The pipe cannot be independent. It was necessary either to begin restructuring the economy, or to turn around and return policy in accordance with the economy. In our country, politics and the economy are going in different directions, and in the end we are not going anywhere, but are marking time and simply losing here and there.

— But they talk about import substitution.

“They can say whatever they want.” But, for example, Kudrin’s return to developing economic policy is an indicator that they are not going to change anything. Kudrin is the economics of the pipe. I don’t know what kind of financier he is and how he can save government resources (finance), but this is the economics of a pipe, and a degrading pipe at that. I recently gave a lecture at RANEPA and drew on the board a pipe through which raw materials flow from Russia to the West, where they are sold, part of the money is returned and immediately returned to the West. But the pipe has a certain carrying capacity. Conventionally, 100% of the resources are extracted, but not all of them reach the West, because there is an encumbrance on the pipe. The burden is nuclear weapons, the army, the navy, science, culture, social security, pensioners, the state apparatus. And this burden eats up roughly 50% of what could have reached the West in its entirety. Therefore, the Western economy is interested in the burden being reduced, and Kudrin wants to remove the burden. And this is you and me, this is our sovereignty, our independence, the army, this is ours. Those who don’t want to feed their own army will feed someone else’s.

— Have you considered the option, for example, of joining the All-Russian Popular Front to help Putin carry out reforms?

- If you climb into a pile of manure, you understand that you will get dirty? There are no options. But this disgusts me, I see all these people and I understand that these people can be entrusted with any task. But yesterday they were communists, until 1991, then they all became liberals and democrats, then - statesmen and patriots. But I’m not a weather vane, and I don’t want to be in the same boat with weather vanes. They can do nothing more than steal and adapt to the authorities. If Hitler comes to power tomorrow, they will all find themselves in the ranks of the NSDAP, if the Americans land tomorrow, they will greet them with tears of joy in their eyes. If Poroshenko drives in on a tank tomorrow, it will turn out that they all have a Ukrainian grandfather or a Jewish grandmother. And I'm not like them.

I'm trying to get [my point across] with all my might. I gave a lecture at RANEPA, after which I was banned everywhere. Even on the periphery. Everywhere there are calls from my former colleagues that “it’s impossible.” The vertical of power, imbued with general cowardice and loyalty, still has enough for this. A powerful blockade has been created around me; it is forbidden to mention me. Even Mr. Posner, when talking about the “fascist declaration,” mentioned Prosvirnin, Krylov, but not Strelkov. A popular figure must be forgotten, and then something can be done with it. But they don’t have enough time, they’re under time pressure. They would be five years old.

- Isn’t it five years?

- No. Maximum - two years. They are now pursuing the policy of Trishkin’s caftan: one piece is leaky, they cut off the other and sew it up. But the caftan is shrinking, there are holes everywhere. Two wars that we half got into and half got out of. They could have won one war with a snap of their fingers, but they were afraid. They got into another war, realized that they couldn’t win the war there, but they left their foot in the trap. Our contingent there is growing, and we supply Assad’s entire Syrian army. And there are no structural reforms or even understanding that they are necessary. They took Kudrin out of the cache - what if he works a miracle? And this is impossible.

“Everyone will hang between the battlements of the Kremlin. Kidding"

- Let's go back to the beginning of the conversation. Let's say you can seize power when the country begins to collapse. Where then will you put your political opponents - the same liberals, for example?

“Do you want me to pour oil on your soul?” Of course, everyone will hang between the battlements of the Kremlin - communists, liberals, United Russia members. Joke. I want to disappoint you. This will not happen for one simple reason. I am not a nationalist because I want to destroy all other nations, but because I feel sorry for our Russian nation. I treat all nations well, but I love mine more. We must have a chance for the future, not become common people - I am categorically against common humanity. I believe that without differences there will be no development. There is no development in a world where everyone speaks the same poor simple English, watches the same films and chews the same chewing gum. I am for the development of every national culture, but at the same time for the unity of Russia. What I mean is that the Russian people are greatly weakened, and every person is valuable. Of course, for example, Anatoly Borisovich Chubais is not valuable to me, and people like him are not valuable to me. And I don’t feel any hostile feelings towards ordinary white ribbon liberals. I believe that if we can achieve the construction of a normal state, they will find their place in it, and God grant that they be happy, rich, that they have many children.

—Will Chubais find his place in such a state?

- No, Chubais is not.

- What will happen to him?

— I think he has a business jet. In Kyiv, after Yanukovych fled, business jets took off 10 minutes apart. And then spend government resources to catch him with a personalized ice ax all over the world... I’d rather build a kindergarten with this money. And then he will be robbed anyway, these guys are only worth something while they are in power here.

— Let’s conclude the conversation by talking about Donbass. In light of Lavrov’s latest statements about Donbass as part of Ukraine and our non-recognition of Donbass, do you at all regret what you did?

- No. I don't regret it. Firstly, it is stupid to regret what has already been done. You can repent for your sins as a Christian, but regretting what I did sincerely is pointless. I didn’t go there for money, wealth, fame. I went there to help the local Russian population and helped to the best of my ability. Maybe he didn’t help enough, maybe he could have done more. In general, I believe that the war being waged by the people of Donbass-Novorossiya is correct, and if I could bring it to the end, I would be happy to see it through to the end. I am sure that Kyiv is a Russian city, and Russia without Kyiv is not Russia, but the Russian Federation. The Russian Federation is not Russia, unfortunately.

— I know that you maintain contact with Donbass. What do you think about the humanitarian situation there? For example, the same militiaman Alexander Zhuchkovsky periodically writes that a significant part of humanitarian aid is simply stolen.

“I can’t say for sure about the theft; I’m not standing there with a candle.” There are a lot of rumors, I think that most of them are true. There is a lot of indirect evidence that humanitarian aid is being stolen. If something depended on me, I would immediately create an investigative commission of trustworthy people and sort it all out. But for now I can’t say anything. Zhuchkovsky knows better, he is there in place, and I see no point in lying to him.

As for the humanitarian situation, there is no famine there now. The peak occurred in the winter of 2014-2015, when the socially disadvantaged, the elderly, actually died of hunger. Now there is no such thing. But the general level of Donbass is rapidly sliding into poverty as the region continues to collapse. Economic ties with Ukraine have been severed; there are no normal ties with Russia. The mafia runs everything. Trains of coal are sent to Ukraine under gray schemes, miners and railway workers do not receive money, and the money ends up in Kyiv and Donetsk in separate hands. In this regard, the situation is disgusting. And here we need to talk about the betrayal of the Russian population of Donbass by Moscow, economically and politically. There is poverty, stratification of society, the formation of a new group of oligarchs, and the impoverishment of the bulk of the population.

— Do you communicate with Alexander Borodai, with Konstantin Malofeev?

- No, I don’t communicate with either one or the other.

— What do you do every day?

— On a daily basis, I now lead a life somewhere between a blogger and a politician. The media ignores me and, since there are no resources to create a full-fledged political force, our job is to create a framed structure. The Soviet army had deployed and cadred divisions. The framed divisions had a minimum of soldiers, all the equipment and most of the officers. In a military situation, the division was ready for deployment within a week. While we do not have the resources for an expanded structure, we create a cropped structure. We are looking for colleagues who are ready to work without money, setting them tasks that do not require funding, and preparing for the time when we will need to accept crowds of volunteers. Otherwise, I am now more of a publicist and blogger than a political figure.

The publication uses archival photos of Igor Strelkov, including the period of his activities on the territory of the DPR.

02-12-2014 22:32

Girkin-Strelkov. Interview without cuts

Another interview with Girkin-Strelkov blew up the Internet community. But the reason for the great interest in him was not even what he said, but because the Kremlin’s mouthpiece, the Rossiya Segodnya news agency, for which it was made, released the publication in a thoroughly edited form.

The interview was conducted by journalist Alexander Chalenko, who is positioned as a supporter of the positions of first the Party of Regions and then terrorists.

We bring to the attention of readers the full version of the interview, which was published by PolitNavigator with an annotation by the author.

...Two hypostases coexist in Strelkov: “the god of war Wotan” and “an ordinary Russian intellectual.”

When you see him in his first incarnation, you understand what the principle of any Western democratic system means in practice - civilians must control the military.

He just gives the impression of a man who will send you to be shot without a second thought, and will not take into account civilian casualties if it is necessary to achieve a military goal. Very harsh. An impenetrable gaze.

When he “comes out of character,” he becomes an ordinary Russian intellectual: he jokes, ironizes, laughs, tells jokes, but at the same time he is irritable. In general, the same as all of us.

Strelkov combines phlegmatic and choleric. A very strange combination.

No boss habits. When we came to his office with Ruben Sergeev, the grandson of the first Prime Minister of the Donetsk-Krivoy Rog Republic Artem, he himself went to the next office to get chairs, although he could easily have instructed his subordinates to do this. When we drank tea and ate some kind of pastry, again, instead of asking the assistants to tidy up the table, he himself collected the cups and plates and took them out of the office.

Strelkov has a banal appearance. Such people are invisible on the street and no one pays attention to them. Medium height, narrow shoulders, thin neck. In clothes he is ascetic and simple. No designer bells and whistles. Dressed in some kind of “Soviet cut” suit. Thin tie.

Well educated. He speaks well. Clear wording. Gives good and informative interviews. Frank. It’s a pity that when his press service edited this interview, very interesting fragments disappeared, but, nevertheless, even in the edited form, our conversation turned out to be interesting.

As far as I know, in Novorossiya the steppe and thermal imagers made fighting with small arms impossible. Because of this, it is impossible for the warring parties to come close to each other. Therefore, this war is a war of artillery. What do you think about this?

Outside the urban agglomerations, of which there are a lot in the Donetsk Republic, the terrain is very rugged: a large number of ravines, heights, copses, lowlands, overgrown with bushes. There are a lot of mines and waste heaps that make the place closed.

Now there is a positional war, where there are almost no clashes with the use of small arms, there is a war of artillery.

- I was told that this war is in the urban agglomeration, because in the center of Donbass, leaving one city, you almost immediately find yourself in another. At the same time, civilians live there...

Understand, war is war. And in this war it is necessary to achieve victory. Anyone who will adjust in advance to the interests of the civilian population to the detriment of military interests will not be able to win. Unfortunately it is so. The population has suffered and will continue to suffer as long as the war continues. The sooner the war ends, the sooner the suffering of the civilian population will end. The rest is small group tactics.

- And what is it? Please explain.

You see, in military history, in military theory, there is the concept of a basic tactical unit that must perform certain tactical tasks. The more military affairs develop, the more military equipment improves, the firepower of units grows, the smaller tactical units become.

Relatively speaking, if during the First World War a battalion could solve certain problems with its firepower, the same tasks during the Great Patriotic War could be solved by companies. Now the same tasks can be solved by platoons.

In this case, the number of weapons and their quality, for example, rate of fire, have become such that the density of fire that a modern platoon can create exceeds the density that a battalion during the First World War could create. Or at least match him.

Accordingly, large masses of people only become big targets, which was actually demonstrated near Slavyansk, near Donetsk, where units of the Ukrainian army, which were much superior to us in numbers and technical equipment, could not really do anything with us and only suffered heavy losses. Due to their crowding, due to the fact that they moved in large masses, large masses of equipment, and we used it. They used small group tactics - a unit of up to a platoon or less. They groped for the enemy, pinned him down and called fire from our artillery and mortars on him. Due to this, the enemy suffered very heavy losses despite our relatively small losses.

And at the same time, the smaller the unit, the harder it is to hit it, especially in urban areas. The enemy had a huge advantage over us in technology. But he could not realize this superiority, because it turned out to be shooting sparrows from a cannon. It is useless to use a Grad division against a dispersed infantry squad. It might hurt someone, but the efficiency will be extremely low.

- Right now they can’t take over the airport in Donetsk. What is the problem? Why are the battles taking so long? What would Igor Strelkov do to take complete control of Donetsk airport?

I wouldn't storm it at all.

- Why?

What for?

Because it was believed that before the militia began to take control of it, artillery fire was fired at Donetsk from the territory of the airport, as well as from the settlements of Peski and Avdievka.

Well, can you imagine the map? When you manipulate names such as Avdeevka, Peski, airport, you cannot imagine the connection. Avdeevka is a fairly large city with a population of fifty thousand. Sands is also a fairly large settlement. This is an urban-type settlement adjacent to the city. The airport is located at a fairly large distance between them. This is not just one agglomeration.

I repeat, artillery cannot be located at the airport, Piski and Avdeevka at the same time. Either she is there or there.

-Was there artillery at the airport?

There were spotters there. And the artillery was really in the area of ​​​​Pesok and Avdeevka. So, in order to take the airport, it was only necessary to destroy this artillery. The object for attack was chosen on a formal basis by people who do not understand anything at all in the art of war; here there was a struggle not with the cause, but with the effect. In order to take the airport, it was necessary to eliminate the cause, first destroy the artillery positions in Piski and Avdeevka. Then the airport could be taken without any difficulty.

And so we have a situation where all infantry attacks on the airport are repelled by artillery, which is out of range.

- Okay, why is this not clear to those involved in planning these operations?

Let's say that in terms of the level of military knowledge and planning of operations, these people are not much different from you.

- And Motorola?

Motorola is a good fighter. An excellent commander at the pre-platoon level. Whatever task is given to him, he performs such a task. In this case, we are dealing with a strategic decision, with those who threw Motorola and Givi at the airport, the capture of which was identified as the main task. I don’t know who determined this. I was away at the time. It was immediately clear to me that this was an unusable object. The attack on the airport is not only unnecessary, it is also harmful, since as a result of it the best units of the former Slavic Brigade were battered and suffered serious losses. Moreover, without any meaning.

You understand, as soon as they begin an attack, the enemy calls in artillery fire.

- Do I understand correctly that this problem can be solved?

Yes, this problem can be solved, but not by infantry units. It was necessary to act with the support of armored vehicles. But since Zakharchenko took all the armored vehicles from the Slavic Brigade to Oplot, he disposed of them.

Many of your critics say that Strelkov is just an FSB lieutenant colonel, so he has no experience in planning army operations. What is your answer to this?

I really am an FSB colonel, so I take it calmly, but in general I don’t advise you to name a military man a lower rank than he is. They are of greater value to military ranks than to civilians. Actually, the military hierarchy is built on this.

Of course, it was difficult for me to lead divisions and units when the army grew, when there were several thousand people in it, and the front already stretched over tens of thousands of kilometers. Naturally, we could not create a continuous front with such small forces.

- Do you have army experience in leading such units?

I don’t have such experience, I had experience as a commander of small units, but I had to plan special operations with a number of participants of 80-100 people. I was an operative in the fight against terrorism in Chechnya. I had to participate in many operations, but not directly supervise. The most I've ever commanded was a combined task force of 150 people for a couple of months in 2005.

And again, the completed units were not subordinate to me in a military sense, but only in an operational sense. I only set tasks for them, which they themselves planned and carried out. Now I often did not quite understand how to organize this or that operation, but I clearly understood what I wanted to achieve in this operation.

That is, I set goals and tasks that were feasible, and they were fulfilled. And thanks to this, we managed to practically thwart all the enemy’s plans that were aimed at our encirclement, defeat and destruction.

I really missed a chief of staff who could describe what I wanted. Strictly speaking, all high-level army commanders are divided into two categories: chiefs and chiefs of staff. The commander makes a decision, and the chief of staff develops it, that is, writes it out, lays it out. The work of both is absolutely necessary. It is not always the case that a good chief of staff can command troops well. And vice versa. For example, in one of his characteristics they said about Zhukov that he was an excellent combat commander, but could not stand staff work. Of course, I don’t compare myself with Zhukov, but, to be honest, I also don’t like staff work. Moreover, I don’t know how to do it. But I understand well the essence of volunteer, partisan struggle. I knew the quality of all my units, what they could and could not do.

Our army at that time was partisan. In many ways, it still remains the same. This is not a regular army.

- What are their differences?

On the one hand, they are much more proactive than a conventional army. On the other hand, they have weaker discipline. They solve problems that the regular army finds difficult to solve. For example, quickly move, maneuver, operate on the ground without convoys and supplies. These are the positive qualities of the partisan army.

But on the other hand, they don’t like to sit in the trenches, they don’t like to sit on the defensive, meaning in bad conditions. It is difficult for them to be led by someone they do not trust.

Now, when the construction of regular armies of the Donetsk and Lugansk republics is underway, in my opinion, a serious mistake is being made. When already established units are disbanded, they are transferred from one to another. By this they hope to achieve discipline and obedience to persons who are formally appointed. But the army remained volunteer in its essence. There are no mobilized people there. And ordering without taking into account these specifics, without taking into account already established traditions, causes serious damage, because people are deprived of motivation. They don't trust their commanders, those they don't know.

When I was recently in Donetsk, I talked there with soldiers from your Slavic brigade. I asked them who Igor Strelkov is to you. They answered me that he is our father. They are waiting for your return. And from other fighters I learned that two hundred people from your brigade, after arriving in Donetsk, transferred from you to the Vostok brigade. They seemed to be from Kramatorsk. Why did they leave you?

You know, this is a classic case of a journalist using information from the OBS agency. "One woman said."

- So there was no such case?

Two hundred people did not leave me. One mortar battery transferred to Vostok during the crisis near Shakhtarsk. Then the mortars were given to us, and the soldiers remained in “Vostok”, they were sent to Shakhtersk to support the “Tsar” battalion (the call sign of one of the commanders of the Slavic brigade, who became the Minister of Defense after Strelkov’s resignation - author’s note), which was fighting at that time in Shakhtersk.

For some reason they became convinced that we were leaving Donetsk. They heard that Khodakovsky vowed to defend Donetsk to the last drop of blood. They decided they were going over to him because he definitely wouldn't back down.

- They were local.

Yes, our team was 90% local. In general, this is a concrete example of what rumors can be.

The units left Kramatorsk on the instructions of their commanders, thinking that they were carrying out my order, and part of the commandant’s company left for Izvarino and was already holding a corridor there. Accordingly, I thought that they were all deserters. Then I found out that they, it turns out, were misled by their commanders, who then all ended up on Russian territory. This…

- Babai?

Babai. This is a largely anecdotal character. But these are the features of guerrilla warfare - constant mutinies and riots...

- Why didn’t you develop relationships with other militia commanders - neither Zakharchenko nor Khodakovsky? I even remember that your comrades wrote that they want to surrender Donetsk...

- You can’t put a scarf on every mouth. My comrades can say whatever they want. I didn't say anything like that. But it looked like the city might actually be surrendered.

Understand correctly, when the Slavic brigade entered the territory of Donetsk, all torn, dirty, fresh from the trenches... people fought for several months, continuous shelling every day and every night. Here they are entering Donetsk. The mayor of Kiev sits in Donetsk and no one touches him. Life in Donetsk is absolutely peaceful. Ukrainian policemen with state badges stand on the roads. And “Vostok” and “Oplot” are standing at checkpoints. Moreover, there are no barricades. You can go into the city. The equipment will come in and no one will stop it. Donetsk did not fight at all and did not intend to.

I got the clear impression that the Ukrainian side had no intention of storming Donetsk before we left Slavyansk; they hoped that it would return to them without a fight.

- All these are just your impressions or did you have accurate information that Donetsk would return to Ukraine without a fight?

I didn't have any accurate information. Moreover, when they tell me that I exchanged Slavyansk for Donetsk, this is a completely erroneous opinion. I left Slavyansk not because I was going to occupy Donetsk. Moreover, I really didn’t want to go to Donetsk; the commanders there were fighting with each other. I didn't want to get into this cesspool. But I was forced to do it.

The Russian Orthodox army, split into two parts, operated there. Each unit had 100-150 people. There was “Oplot”, there was “Vostok”, there were Cossack units. There were Bezlerites. There was the Miner's Division, the Kalmius battalion. No one obeyed anyone and did not interact with each other. Some of them took part in hostilities, and some did not. And there was a small unit that reported to me.

You said that you did not want to go to Donetsk, but where did you want to go when you left Slavyansk?

I meant that I did not want to come to Donetsk to seize power. I meant it. We were forced to leave Slavyansk to avoid defeat. We were already really in a complete tactical environment. There was only one window left, the last dirt road, which was inconvenient and subject to gunfire. It could slam shut at any moment.

We had practically no artillery ammunition. There were no mines for mortars. We were very bad with anti-tank weapons. We still had ammunition for small arms. But the problem was that the enemy practically stopped using infantry against us after the battles near Yampol, where they suffered very heavy losses.

- And the artillery war began.

- Artillery and tanks were effectively used against us because we had nothing to oppose. As long as we had mines and shells, we could somehow contain them. But at the time of leaving Slavyansk I had 57 minutes left. By this time I had two tanks, and not even one round of ammunition per tank, there were about 35 shells for two tanks. This is not a war. And the enemy in the Nikolaevsky direction had up to 100 armored units, including about 30 tanks. A fully equipped battalion tactical group with reinforcements and massive artillery support was advancing against us. And near Nikolaevka they clearly used tactics. Our grenade launchers did not work, more than 20 of them. They simply drove our militia into the city and began hammering with artillery. The five-story buildings were completely destroyed. Armor and artillery. Exactly the same situation could have developed in Slavyansk. Considering the superiority of the enemy, we could only inflict losses on them by constantly maneuvering. As I already told you, small group tactics. When we had room to maneuver, we could defend ourselves. In a stationary position, when we were surrounded by mines and barbed wire, we could not inflict serious losses on them.

Let's dispel another myth of the OBS agency. I heard from many in Donetsk the following complaint against you: you did not destroy your military warehouses when you left Slavyansk.

I simply cannot comment on such nonsense. When I left, I had nothing left. There are 6 shells left for our combined artillery division of 9 guns. What other warehouses? Everything that we received through Voentorg, everything that we managed to get from some other sources, I immediately went into battle.

Khodakovsky and Zakharchenko had warehouses. We periodically begged them for something for our artillery and our tanks.

- Did they give it to you?

They did. Not to me, but to the commanders who received it through personal connections. At first, Zakharchenko obeyed me, until he was appointed prime minister. But Khodakovsky did not obey. He categorically did not obey. He simply did not make any contact. And since I had other tasks than to pacify disobedient commanders... he sits and sits, defends his sector and defends. And, God grant, that they continue to defend.

- What are the pros and cons of the Ukrainian army?

Stable in defense. These are the same Russian soldiers. They consider themselves ancient Ukrainians, Ukrainians, or something like that. Essentially, these are Russian people. They are unpretentious, ready for hardships. In general, all the qualities of a Russian soldier. I don’t see any other strengths in the Ukrainian army.

Everything else is a consequence of 23 years of collapse, the same as ours, multiplied by their mentality. Their bosses... beyond any criticism. The average officer corps is more or less.

- It is believed that private military companies fought against you in Slavyansk. Was it or wasn't it?

I can’t say that they fought...

- But were they there?

They were there.

- Which ones? Polish? American?

They said they were Poles. But they said that it was not only the Poles. Again, when there are no corpses with documents directly, then we can talk about this very approximately. Why do I say that Chevekashniks were sitting on Karachun, because there was a message from residents from Andreevka, from the nearest village, where they went down to the local store. Residents said that they were Poles. But they only carried out surveillance and security services. They served the same thermal imagers, guarded the ATO headquarters and the headquarters of the units that acted against us in Slavyansk. But directly, they were on the first line, they weren’t... in order for this to be possible to prove, it was necessary to win a serious military victory, capturing enemy territory.

- Why did so few local people sign up for your brigade?

The volunteers were given neither machine guns, nor boots, nor uniforms; I had nothing to arm the people with. But there are always few volunteers. Just look at the example of the last Civil War. There were very few of them on both sides. Whoever managed to mobilize more effectively won. Why did the Reds win? Because at the right moment they had more resources, which made it possible to carry out mass mobilization. Yes, these were extremely unstable troops who regularly surrendered, and were replaced by new ones, new ones, and new ones. The Soviet government got all the main warehouses of the Russian Empire, and got the main stocks of weapons. The main factories were located on the territory they controlled. And most importantly, the apparatus of the former tsarist army passed into the hands of the Reds. Military experts and all institutions.

The picture is the same in Donbass as everywhere else. If, God forbid, a war breaks out in Russia, the same thing will happen. Most people don't want to fight. And it is right. If everyone wants to fight, then what will we get? It's kind of creepy. This will never happen, thank God.

But if at one fine moment you receive a summons, you will appear at the military registration and enlistment office, whether you want to fight or not. You will have an alternative: either ten years in prison, or, please, go to war. As a matter of fact, this is how the Ukrainian army is now mobilizing. Nobody wants to fight there either, but they are mobilized and sent to war.

If I had a sufficient number of weapons and specialists in Donetsk, I would mobilize. The first thing the Minister of Defense should do is mobilize. And I had no resources at all. That’s why we had to recruit only volunteers, but we couldn’t arm the volunteers either. When I left Donetsk, I still had 150 unarmed people, although by that time there was an army of thousands. As far as I know, 27 or 28 thousand people signed up in May. They were ready to join the militia. But there was nothing to arm them with.

They needed to appoint a commander, but the commanders did not come. Most of the reserve officers, including Soviet ones, evaded.

Like in Russia in 1991, they surrendered their own power. Almost no one spoke up.

- Sorry, but you didn’t perform either.

Sorry, but I wasn't an officer either. I was a student. By that time, I had not yet taken the oath, but they did. Very few officers showed up in Slavyansk.

- Have you talked to them?

Yes. First came the Afghan Union. 24 people came. Among them are 6 officers. They said: yes, we are ready to serve on the barricades, next to the house. I answered: no, thank you, whoever comes to sign up for the brigade will serve as in the army, because I don’t need those who stand on the barricades. I need people who will follow orders. The next day, 3 people ended up coming. There is only one officer among them. The rest all decided that it was inconvenient for them.

When in Ukraine they say that NATO members will arm the Ukrainian army with their weapons, how serious is such information? After all, NATO and Soviet standards are different. We need to retrain. And besides, the supply of NATO weapons is very expensive.

I think that they will not rearm, they do not need it. They have enough of any equipment. They have enough for three more such wars. In addition, warehouses are now open for them in Poland and Hungary.

- Soviet technology.

Poles, Czechs and Hungarians will rearm and switch to NATO standards.

- What is needed, ideally, to defeat the Ukrainian army?

It is impossible to win by fighting half-heartedly. Or a quarter. To defeat the Ukrainian army, we must fight. Ukraine, despite its deplorable state, has much greater resources than the DPR and LPR. The Donetsk and Lugansk republics cannot defeat Ukraine on their own.