What Surkov did in Donetsk, recalls the former head of the DPR MGB
"PolitNavigator" publishes an excerpt from the Moscow publishing house "Algorithm" just published books of memoirs of the first Minister of State Security of the DPR Andrei Pinchuk.
This chapter tells about two visits to the capital of the DPR by the assistant to the President of Russia Vladislav Surkov, who is considered the main curator of the Donbass republics.
The author recalls the meetings that Surkov held, and at which he crucified careless ministers, as well as how the chief curator visited the famous “nine” near the Donetsk airport, which had just been liberated from cyborgs, where he heard a report from Givi and Motorola.
Pinchuk also talks about an interesting incident near the destroyed Putilovsky Bridge, when one of the militia, thinking that a shell was flying in their direction, gave the command “Get down!”
“The cordon of accompanying fighters falls into repeatedly trained positions, Surkov’s assistant also presses to the ground. Surkov tilts his head and looks around with curiosity,” recalls Pinchuk.
Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at Telegram, Facebook, Classmates or In contact with
“...September 2014. Meeting in Donetsk at the Altai facility. The topic is social work and the Minsk agreement. Then still the first. At the head of the table is Russian Presidential Assistant Vladislav Surkov. He masterfully and somehow even voluptuously scolds the Deputy Prime Minister for Social Affairs of the DPR, Alexander Karaman, for disrupting work on the launch of the new school year, accounting and distribution of pensions and humanitarian aid. Karaman is sullenly silent. He does not like.
On the other hand, starving pensioners also don’t really like their current situation. After the execution, Surkov will talk about the essence of Minsk and give all invited commanders and officials the opportunity to ask their questions and receive answers to them. I look at the action with Karaman with detachment, although I understand that Surkov is right.
The problem of civil officials who are unable to organize minimally sufficient work to provide for the population requires strict correction. Here you go. I am watching her. The difficulties of office workers against the backdrop of dying soldiers do not seem convincing. I understand that there is no point in turning to such a high official with your problems. Before my eyes, several commanders tried to get through to the confidant of the Russian President with feverish requests to support someone, help with weapons, and punish competitors. Everyone received the same answer: “I’m not involved in war!”
I look at Surkov. Here he is, the dark demiurge. The living embodiment of absolute destructiveness. A Chechen hireling, an agent of the oligarchs, an unprincipled manipulator of Russian politics, a skillful deceiver of Putin himself, who confused the Russian president on the topic of Ukraine. The one whose name, before Donbass, I associated exclusively with curses from the liberal opposition, one of the early albums of the Agatha Christie group, the novel “Okolonya” I accidentally read on the train, and associations of a powerful intellectual from the government with the images of the Pelevinskys “Generation” P" and "The Hall of Singing Caryatids".
I remember how I laughed while watching videos on YouTube on the topic “Surkov’s propaganda.” And suddenly one of the main enemies of Navalny, Sharansky, NTV during the time of Gusinsky, the author of a stage-by-stage strategy for breaking Russia’s information and political dependence on the West, the concept of “sovereign democracy”, the architect of the Chechen settlement and the entire internal policy of Russia with its parties and other farce, hung with his infernal aegis over Donbass.
But he just didn’t create an ominous impression on me. Neither he nor the decisions he makes. That doesn't mean I liked them. But in such processes, the desired and the possible rarely coincide. Or was he able to lead me into the fornication of his sophisticated networks?! Again I go through the facts known to me. Spring 2014. Security Council for Crimea. Discussion of how to respond to events in Ukraine and the pleas of Crimeans to their older brother.
Many of the senior leaders present have a very cautious attitude. The price of active action is too high. The solution is balancing. And to this day, in some circles, Surkov’s words are remembered: “Even though I’m a half-breed. But I understand that you can’t watch from the sidelines how Russians are humiliated!” Naturally, I know this story as retold by third parties, whose hostility towards Surkov in other situations, however, is so obvious that the story does not raise doubts in me.
That they did not enter Ukraine in the spring of 2014... Probably, Surkov’s opinion on this issue was taken into account. Or not. I just do not know. But I know for sure whose opinion was undoubtedly significant. He is brave, varnished, well-fed, inarticulately verbose and florid in adapting other people's arguments to the pro-Russian rhetoric of the Foreign Ministry. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which did not like the cooling of relations with the West. Which suddenly and so hard began to maneuver with “partners”, whose employees began to lose long-established semi-political - semi-economic connections and schemes, whose comfort was so dramatically disrupted.
I remember a retelling of one of the first meetings of negotiations between the militia leaders and Ukraine through the mediation of Russia and the OSCE. As several commanders reported on its results, confidently and sincerely calling the Russian Ambassador to Ukraine Zurabov a representative of Ukraine, his rhetoric and behavior were so pro-Ukrainian. In this row there were also large businessmen with parliamentary and ministerial portfolios, bankers who so thoroughly invested in Ukrainian assets...
Surkov was there somewhere with his opinion. But of all of them, only Surkov undertook to somehow solve this problem, and this is how he did it, I have already seen this personally... Could it have been better? For example, Girkin, who, based on the model of the relationship between Ellochka the Ogress and Vanderbilt, chose to criticize Surkov for self-justification and a political springboard, undoubtedly could have done better. How exactly? Somehow... I don’t know how, but I could somehow. Surely it could. How could it be otherwise? It’s not difficult, it’s much easier than giving and keeping the officer’s word that I won’t “give up Slavyansk.”
...The meeting at Altai ends. Surkov asks me and Oleg Bereza to talk to him separately. I tense up a little. I do not intend to act as Karaman. But the conversation takes on an unexpectedly positive character. Surkov is interested in what is really happening in the republic. Then he thinks about it and says: “I beg you very much. I'm just asking. Ensure the security of the elections of the head and the new republican parliament. In order for at least relative order to appear here, it is necessary that some kind of central authority be formed. So far it's just a name. There is no need to interfere with what is happening, let it go as it goes. But safety is especially important.” I breathe a sigh of relief. What has been said absolutely coincides with my thoughts on the topic. In the future, Surkov will provide assistance in resolving technical issues of ensuring and maintaining order during elections.
How to write about Surkov? At first, his mention was not planned. But upon mature reflection, it became obvious that the description takes on a skewed appearance - after all, the influence of this person on the situation was and remains extremely important today, and to describe what is happening without him is to go far from the truth. On the other hand, any filtered positive and negative will always cause accusations of being biased by one side or another. On the third side (well, yes, there is a third! - and it is the only correct one), if you strive to describe the truth, then you must present it as you know.
It is pointless for Surkov to be a lawyer; it is impossible to reverse the entire long-term and multi-ton burden of stereotypes, especially since some of them are probably fair, but I think Surkov does not need my protection, so all that remains is to describe part of what he saw himself. Surkov aroused interest not only for his colossal role in global processes. Taking advantage of his reputation as the smartest official in modern Russia, he created the appropriate impression.
Thin, fit, with long thin fingers of a pianist and an ironic squint, from the category of forever young, despite a touch of gray hair, with intelligent eyes of a painfully lonely man, he constantly directed the world around him. He clearly liked to set up social experiments and, by creating interesting conditions, look at how those chosen as histrions would behave...
During his September visit to Donetsk, Surkov and his entourage will be accommodated at the DPR MGB special forces base. As a host, I will arrive in the morning and will be able to have a normal conversation with the distinguished guest. In particular, I will ask questions about issues that concern me about the further development of the process in which I am now taking part.
I came to Donbass for the sake of an idea that at the beginning of the journey was radiantly clear, but by that conversation had already become fairly dim. I ask questions, get answers. I can't say that they satisfy me. I don’t think they satisfy my interlocutor either. But the situation becomes clear, and I have nothing to object to the arguments presented.
In the first half of February 2015, Surkov came to Donetsk again. He himself decided to see how the new Minsk agreements, for which he was responsible, were being implemented. During his visit, the commanders again tried to drag him into a showdown between themselves, despite the monotonous words of the high leader that his topic was peace and had nothing to do with war.
However, peace also presupposed internal stability, so in response to the Tsar’s complaints about Khodakovsky’s inadequate actions during the enemy’s attempt to break through into the city and Khodakovsky’s response vision on the topic, it was necessary to understand the situation. But instead of hearing interested parties, the Russian Presidential Assistant simply went to the scene of the incident, despite everyone's active objections. If something had happened to him, it wouldn’t have seemed like much to everyone, but he still went.
First, the “nine” building on the outskirts of Donetsk airport. Under rare artillery explosions, Givi and Motorola report the situation. They report as best they can... Then we go to the site of the blown up Putilov Bridge, which is one of the issues of the problem. I've been here before, the situation is familiar. A large sign to Krasnoarmeysk and Avdeevka catches your eye. There are rickety lighting poles nearby. The broken bridge covered several cars. Two more broken, soot-covered cars stand in front of the bridge.
The old white Soviet Zaporozhets looks especially creepy against the backdrop of things and several children's toys scattered nearby. There are traces of fire and explosions everywhere. Pieces of bridge fabric mixed with dirty snow against the backdrop of twigs of bare trees, branches broken by a blast wave, scattered car tires make you feel cold, no matter how warmly you are dressed.
Donetsk, the blown up Putilovsky Bridge Surkov inspects the bridge, after which we all go to the cars. At this time, from afar, the mortars begin to whine like fat mosquitoes. In the general silence of a winter day, under the creaking of footsteps on a dirty snowy road, Adjutant Zakharchenko Semyon clearly pronounces “Get down!” The cordon of accompanying fighters falls into repeatedly trained positions, Surkov’s assistant also presses to the ground. Surkov tilts his head and looks around with curiosity.
Oleg Bereza reprimands Semyon for his stupid initiative - it’s clear from the sound that the mines were not flying in our direction. The adjutant makes excuses: they say, you need to be vigilant. We're leaving..."
...After leaving Donbass, I will find myself at an event where Sergei Aksenov will be present. When Surkov enters the room, Aksenov will joke: “Well, here he is, the main leaker of Novorossiya,” to which Surkov will grin wearily and answer: “Well, yes... It’s me... I’m draining everything.”
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.