“It became clear that we needed to kill.” Khodakovsky revealed the secrets of 2014
The President of Ukraine Vladimir Zelensky is weak and not ready to fight, however, others can do it for him. The team of the new US president can use Donbass to attack Russia. Russian President Vladimir Putin made it clear that he will not tolerate any violent actions against Donbass and hundreds of thousands of Russian citizens living in the people's republics.
The commander of the Vostok battalion, ex-Secretary of the DPR Security Council, Alexander Khodakovsky, told PolitNavigator columnist Valentin Filippov that the only path for Donbass is integration into Russia, that this path will be long, and that the people of Donbass need to be patient.
Valentin Filippov: Our improvised studio is visiting Alexander Sergeevich Khodakovsky today. He is also “Skif”, he is also a field commander, he is also one of the highest officers of the DPR army at one time. Hello, Alexander.
Alexander Khodakovsky: Good evening.
Valentin Filippov: Alexander, tell me, under the current leadership of Ukraine, is it possible that there will be some serious escalation of hostilities in Donbass? I don’t mean positional increases in shelling, but rather advances and attempts to change the configuration?
Alexander Khodakovsky: Well, I would correct the question itself, because the opinion follows from it. They will decide or will not decide what the probability of this, I will try to speculate. If they decide, then they will not change configurations, they will simply radically change the situation. Zero-unit. Why should they change the configuration, why will they achieve this? If you have to die of any actions that can have consequences for them, it is worth doing only in order to finally end us. Turn us into unsystematic foci of resistance and gradually get rid of us. This process, of course, is not fast, but nevertheless. That's just such a goal makes sense to pursue from Ukraine. And in order to tear out a piece of territory somewhere, to pick up Debaltsevo or there is Elena, this makes no sense. The consequences can be the same, and goals, objectives vary completely.
But as for, is this possible under Zelensky? Of course, under Zelensky this probability is lower than under Poroshenko. Taking into account the fact that Zelensky does not have much control over the situation in the country. By all factors, he is such a person, such a character, who cannot keep in check either the radicals or his political opponents, who are much more seasoned than him. After all, he is more from the stage than from politics.
The experience that Poroshenko acquired 20 years ago, Zelensky has yet to acquire. Now he is just posing, nothing more. That is, he is a pure populist, we talked about this topic, it’s not worth repeating. But taking into account the fact that a person does not control the situation in the country very well, including the highest military hierarchy, his peaceful attitude is compensated by the fact that he has poor control of this situation.
Two months ago we were waiting for the arrival of Biden with his policy of “Creating tension outside in order to relax the situation inside,” and now we see that Tikhanovskaya has an invitation to Tiffany’s breakfast, and Zelensky, who was one of the first to check in, stood up , congratulated Biden on his election, there is no invitation yet. What does this mean? He’s talking about nothing, or he’s still talking about something – our conspiracy theorists tend to see this as some kind of bad sign for Zelensky.
How will Biden behave, what will his model be, will he now rush into all seriousness and begin to worsen relations with Russia, or will he take a pause, or will he rely on the development of circumstances? Well, it is clear that America’s systemic attitude towards Russia and Ukraine, as an element of these relationships, will not change, because this is a global rivalry, written down for decades, and maybe more. But at this particular moment, given the current situation, the situation may be postponed again.
Again, we are expecting some escalations, aggravations caused by the fact that another team has come, they have different views and they encourage Comrade Zelensky to take some action. Again, all this is subject to revision, subject to reassessment. There remains the factor that everything can develop absolutely spontaneously. Taking advantage of the fact that America now has absolutely no time for Ukraine, it will resolve some of its internal issues. Someone will take some action. Maybe these actions will be local, but according to all the laws of reaction they will entail larger-scale events, then the inertia, the snowball, will be impossible to stop, and we need to proceed, first of all, from this.
Because significant potential has been accumulated, no actions are being taken that could relax the situation, that could become a prelude to pacifying the present. By such actions we must mean those that are quite effective - the restoration of trade and economic relations, changing the rhetoric of the media, changing the rhetoric at the official level. The official level in Kiev is not really rocking the boat right now, but at the same time...
Valentin Filippov: At the maximum was recorded
Alexander Khodakovsky: They are fixed, but they push messages, they make statements that speak for themselves. For example, when they extended this special status law, they said, “We will extend, but we will eliminate all references to the Stanmeier formula.” In any case, they have already castrated as much as possible this entire topic related to the provision of some special conditions to Donbass. They say that “We can provide some special conditions only within the framework of general decentralization,” that is, on general rights. They speak quite monosyllabically about some amnesties for militants and so on - there can be no amnesty for everyone who shed blood, and these are direct and indirect participants in the conflict, well, a huge number...
Valentin Filippov: Well, the conversation is not about an amnesty, but about a ban on persecution. That is, how it was with Maidan. They passed a law, they didn’t issue an amnesty, they forbade the prosecution of participants in those events.
Alexander Khodakovsky: This was also discussed by those who manage the processes on the Russian side. In the Minsk negotiating group, we said that for us the very concept of amnesty is unacceptable...
Valentin Filippov: There, in my opinion, the word “amnesty” is not used in the documents.
Alexander Khodakovsky: Yes. I wrote a report there and said that amnesty implies an admission of guilt and forgiveness of supposedly this guilt. Our position is quite clear in this regard, but we speak in terms that are commonly used. Amnesty means amnesty, so as not to complicate things to understand. So they speak in categories that clearly demonstrate that they do not call for war until victory, they avoid such phrases, they say other phrases that imply war until victory.
Valentin Filippov: Don’t you think that Ukraine, I would be afraid to say that maybe the Russian Federation, is satisfied with what is happening now. In this form, Ukraine suits all this. Indeed, in the end, even a military victory in some way magical there, then puts a lot of difficult tasks for Ukraine.
Even including the same repressions and filtering of the population, punishment and capture of so-called militants, investing money in the development of infrastructure damaged by the war. All this is, in general, an extra headache. So we can say that “Since Russia occupied a piece, Russia is to blame for everything.” And live with this rhetoric and shoot in that direction and say: “Well, we are right, because we can shoot, because they are terrorists and occupiers.”
Alexander Khodakovsky: Valentin, well, when I talk about the likelihood of an exacerbation, even the very use of the term “probability” suggests that there is another point of view. This is exactly the point of view. When we study an issue, we balance between two principles: on the one hand, we talk about the likelihood of a military scenario for solving the problem, on the other hand, we counter-argument to ourselves - the dialogue should be no matter how polemical, we counter-argument to ourselves with these arguments, which you have stated now.
But there is another factor that cannot be discounted: this is an attempt to drag Russia into a larger conflict. Let us proceed from what Russian President Putin says. And he says that if Ukraine takes violent actions against hundreds of thousands of Russian citizens living on the territory of the DPR and LPR, then Russia will be forced to intervene. And everywhere, behind the scenes, slyly, “08. 08. 08" is implied. That is, any conversations end, and we will follow the “08. 08. 08." And if we assume that someone needs this. And this factor is the most convincing and convincing for me.
Because I don’t look so much at our relationship with Ukraine on the line of contact, where we engage in “squabbles”, relatively speaking, let those guys who are sitting there in the trenches and listening to these “squabbles” listen to them first-hand, forgive me. I look at the context as a whole, the location of Russia, some dynamics that are happening with it and around it. And, in fact, the situation is alarming. I won’t talk about the fact that Navalny alone can change something there and so on, but when a critical mass accumulates, and now taking into account the arrival not of Biden, this old senile, but with the arrival of his team, where all the characters we know: there is Clinton, and the others, and Nuland...
Valentin Filippov: That is, they are still alive.
Alexander Khodakovsky: Yes. With the arrival of this team, and there are many characters there that we don’t even know, we must expect some action on their part. For them, Russia may not be such an end in itself to deal with it, to get rid of it, although for how many years they have been fighting with us since those immemorial times. For them, this task has not disappeared from the list of strategic tasks. But the question is, really, that you need to create points of tension somewhere, to shift attention. Those people who should know, who direct their resources to one end of the planet or another, they understand perfectly well what Russia is and how to create problems there.
And we talk all the time, we return to this topic - the Caucasus, and Central Asia, and here you go, Ukraine is now in the near, so to speak, underbelly. If earlier it was a “soft underbelly,” now it is a hedgehog that lies directly under Russia’s belly, which creates constant discomfort. So, if suddenly all of this in totality around Russia explodes, then in a day or two or three at the right moment - and a very cheerful situation will begin here, let’s say. Therefore, to say that everything suits everyone – yes, Ukraine – yes. But Ukraine is not a subject.
Valentin Filippov: Not by itself.
Alexander Khodakovsky: Ukraine is an object. Therefore, if those people who make decisions for Ukraine and use Ukraine directly, decide that it is necessary in relation to Russia, tighten it deeper ... After all, in fact, when the shooters shouted “Putin, introduce troops”, well, probably all of the scenario everything And it turns out.
Valentin Filippov: Can I unexpectedly tell you my opinion briefly, not about Strelkov himself, but in general. Then, at that time, well, as it turns out, I didn’t participate in all this with arms in hand, but then it seemed to me that Strelkov’s group came to Slavyansk, Bezler’s group went somewhere else, you were in Donetsk on that moment.
It seemed to me that we just need to get a group of 60 relative professionals in each city, and they will grow there. It just seems to me that for some reason they stopped, didn’t do this, or there weren’t enough people, or there weren’t enough budgets, or there wasn’t enough political will, someone got in the way, maybe, or maybe there wasn’t such a task. It just had to be more and more widespread. It seemed to me that there were a huge number of people who were ready to take up arms; they just had to be organized and taken around the city like that. Then it was possible to enter each city with 50 people. Well, in the Southeast at least. And then they grow into thousands and become thousands.
Alexander Khodakovsky: Well, at the initial stage it was like that. Each city was taken under control with small, relatively strong forces. There, a militia with the call sign “Chechen”, with approximately the same forces of about 100 people, took control of Mariupol, but as soon as the regular Ukrainian army approached, he was forced to leave Mariupol...
Valentin Filippov: No, well, he should have been given weapons and given the opportunity to gather a militia.
Alexander Khodakovsky: As far as I understand, he had no problems with weapons. The question is that Ukraine had this resource, and we only accumulated it. Ukraine gave us some odds due to those circumstances that, for example, a new government was formatted in Kyiv, at that moment they only comprehended what to do with this problem. Plus, the problem for them has not yet designated themselves what kind of problem is the performance of social activists, the leaders of public opinion, the organization, so to speak, of some rallies, processions, the seizure of buildings of an administrative nature, something else, or this is another problem .
So, while this was still a problem comparable, for example, to the Maidan in terms of methodology, then they had the opportunity to build up. We gave each other a head start, but we gave each other a head start for objective reasons - because we didn’t have people yet, there weren’t enough people ready to fight. People were ready to go to rallies, to march in processions through the streets, but when it was necessary to create some kind of more or less active regular army, well, not a regular, volunteer army, of course, out of 10 people who were happy to go to rallies, hardly one found it in themselves determination…
Valentin Filippov: Well, that's a good percentage.
Alexander Khodakovsky: This is a normal percentage, but this normal percentage resulted in at most 20 thousand people who were armed in their hands, but let’s multiply 20 thousand by 10, then there are already 200 thousand, and 200 thousand were definitely not walking the streets here, but at most there are 15-20 thousand. Well, there were a lot of sympathizers. But now we are kind of moving away from the topic, diving into this issue.
I'll just say that we simply physically did not have time. Then it was easier for Ukraine to decide to use the accumulated resources of the regular army than for us to assemble this regular army comparable somewhere at least in potential to the Ukrainian army. Well, if in March I started to form the very first unit, and by April I had 2 companies of about 120 people in total. Well, over the next months April-May-June-July, by August I had 4 thousand people.
That is, I recruited these 4 thousand people for more than one month. August-September is 4 thousand people, starting there in April-early April with 120 - 4 thousand people. It couldn’t be done like this in two or three weeks to gather a thousand, then another thousand and at the end of the month get 4 thousand people. We objectively lagged behind Ukraine in terms of pace.
On their part, the pace of comprehension, and on our part, the creation of an entire army: this is staffing, training, leading to normal combat - this is the creation of those conditions and opportunities under which this army can fight in principle. And we naturally created from scratch. Yes, no one has ever done this. Even in 1917 of the last century, the Bolsheviks, well, they already used a ready-made army, people whom they simply lured to their side, promised them factories to the workers, land to the peasants, whoever wants what will get it, so to speak. And the people who left the German front, at that time problems began in Germany...
Valentin Filippov: Yes. It is very convenient to return from the front and get land.
Alexander Khodakovsky: And we needed to create an army from civilians, from yesterday’s Afghans. Accordingly, we simply did not have enough time. And people, realizing that the first clashes have already begun - this is the end of April - beginning of May, some kind of military operations have already begun, there is Karlovka, other directions. It became clear that they would kill, and we would have to kill. This, too, to some extent, slowed down people’s enthusiasm, because you understand that this is a completely different conversation, this is not going to rallies with processions in the streets.
Therefore, there are objective reasons here, and when it was necessary, so to speak, to give up cities, and the same Strelkov, when he left Slavyansk, he objectively avoided encirclement, because there were no significant forces around him either in Artemovsk or in Kramatorsk, who could insure him. He could have left in stages, but he made the decision he did.
But I also wanted to say that Strelkov once said: “Putin, send in the troops.” And it turns out that we just bargained for 6 years of time. This is a lot. If this had happened at that moment, for example, Putin had reacted and sent in troops, of course we would have had a different result today. But why engage in fortune telling? Nowadays it is almost impossible to study the retrospective.
Valentin Filippov: Almost yes.
Alexander Khodakovsky: Hindsight is a thankless task. But the question is that now the scenario for the introduction of Russian troops if Ukraine takes any action is very high. And this is already a prerequisite. In essence, the situation is prepared for what the West would like. What we, for example, did not achieve in Novorossiya, without expanding the territory...
Valentin Filippov: Well, Russia sent troops to Crimea. And nothing.
Alexander Khodakovsky: As in Transnistria, the presence of Russian troops in Crimea makes any violent actions against these territories impossible, which many would certainly want for themselves.
Valentin Filippov: Well, you formed the army, everything is clear. Usually in the state, and the DPR is the state today, recognized - not recognized, but it has its own army. You can call this army the national police, the first army corps ... There is usually a doctrine, and it is not secret, usually. That is, the army is prepared for something, they explain to it and explain to the population: “Here our army exists in order to ....
Our task is to take Brussels if something happens,” or vice versa – “Retreat to prepared lines and wait for help. Scare away. Make a maneuver”... Well, I don’t know. There is some kind of doctrine... It must be.
Alexander Khodakovsky: Today our doctrine is exclusively defensive. It is clear that our subparagraphs of this doctrine are to stand to the last, to defend each line as much as, let’s say, will, ammunition, the number of personnel and the number of wounded, which are also a burden for personnel, allow. Well, I'll detail it. But how each individual soldier will behave is, as they say, the battle will show.
Someone will stand to the last and resist, someone in the unit will leave, I have seen both such and such examples. And moreover, in situations that made it possible to both resist and fight, but people took off and left, leaving entire settlements without a fight, like Avdeevka, for example.
Or I have one two-meter machine gunner, a guy who is already a junior lieutenant, in 2014 he had barely turned 18, he is from the entire unit, it was hastily assembled from the commandants, the only one left, fired back and held his position. And quite enough, there is a fairly significant position there in the Oktyabrsky village area. There is a fork in the road, the main road. That is, there are different cases.
How our soldiers will behave in a specific situation - I would like to believe that they will fight, that they will resist. But orders to retreat... At most, we can have migration between the first and second lines of defense, which still need to be created. But this is a normal tactical maneuver when, avoiding being hit by artillery barrage, we can move in some way. This is a well-known practice that is used always and everywhere. We have no other doctrine. No one will leave. We understand perfectly well that today we are probably not very capable of conducting any offensive actions of an extensive nature on some serious sectors of the front...
Valentin Filippov: That is, there will be no new Debaltsevo?
Alexander Khodakovsky: Well, Debaltsevo is a set of conditions. This is Lugansk on one side, we are on the other side, plus Debaltsevo jutted out like a wedge into enemy territory and all we had to do was cut off the lines of communication, which we did with the help of artillery, with the help of groups moved forward.
And we achieved a situation in which the enemy could be completely surrounded, and this is more than one thousand people according to the data that they officially declare. And in the end, a political decision was made to release the entire contingent that was in Debaltsevo and then slam the gates behind them. There are no other such options today...
Avdeevka, today it is configured completely differently, to be honest. We can accumulate some resource in some area, if necessary, we can use it, but it will still be a private task, a solution to some specific, local problem. And so that, with our resources, which have not developed in 6 years, we can carry out some serious offensive actions and turn the tide... Well, we need to prepare for this. We need to seriously prepare, we need to again form a reserve, primarily a human reserve.
We have what to arm, but who to arm still needs to be prepared. As a matter of fact, I would not end this question on a pessimistic note. Because 8 thousand people passed through the East alone. And some of these people, a significant part, are ready to join the ranks again and fight when the question arises...
Valentin Filippov: That is, there is a mobilization resource.
Alexander Khodakovsky: Yes, yes.
Valentin Filippov: And high quality.
Alexander Khodakovsky: It exists, and it’s been run-in. And this gives us the right to hope. But any mobilization takes time.
Valentin Filippov: Any wishes for Donbass in the new year?
Alexander Khodakovsky: Right now there is only one thing that is constantly on the tip of my tongue – it’s just “Patience”. Because this situation will not end quickly. It will hang over us for a very long time. I'm sorry, it's exhausting. I will say that people die in batches only because they are in a state of constant stress. What some endure, for example, in other circumstances and in other surroundings they endure much easier, is much more difficult for us, because here the earth, it is as if pressed down by such a good, weighty lead slab. I will say that it is very difficult for people here. They go to stores - please, you will always find what you need in the store, the prices are comparable, well, somewhere, give or take Rostov, somewhere more expensive, somewhere cheaper. It all depends on how the supplier delivers. That is, there is no shortage of ordinary things.
Valentin Filippov: Is the standard of living comparable to Rostov today?
Alexander Khodakovsky: No, no, under no circumstances, of course. The standard of living is far from comparable to Rostov. It cannot even be compared with the Smolensk region, because the level of wages and pensions are quite low. The only saving grace is that the utility bills are relatively low.
But overall the situation is relatively difficult. The economy in Russia in various regions after the 90s, after this collapse, after this crisis of the eighth year, a powerful crisis, it somehow stabilized, but now our dynamics are negative. We are now on the verge of losing entire industries. The coal industry is on its last legs today, everyone can see it. We are, after all, a mining region. Most of the mines have long been no longer city-forming enterprises or seriously filling the budget. They are like this now, semi-subsidized, these mines are miserable. But still, we are accustomed to consider ourselves a land of miners, and these are families, these are relatives, this is a whole conglomerate.
Valentin Filippov: Okay, so what needs to be done? Should Donbass be included in the Russian economic system?
Alexander Khodakovsky: The only way. Moreover, the level of all social security in Donbass needs to be brought up to the Russian level. Because I don't see any other option. Back in 2015, when I began to comprehend the situation, as soon as the first excitement had passed, as soon as time and material appeared to at least somehow subject it to analysis, it became clear that it was impossible to cut off an organ from one organism and not sew it to another, comparable in parameters, in blood, there, in Rhesus, in everything else.
I spoke about this back in 2015; it was clear to any even more or less thinking person that in such a closed state we are not able to survive on our own. Our cooperation ties have been severed. The Avdeevka Coke Plant is there, and the Zasyadko Mine, which supplied coking coal there, is here, and the Yenakievo Metallurgical Plant, which consumed this coal, is here. Not only was everything torn apart, the most important thing is that the sales market suddenly disappeared. And of course, it was already clear then that we were stagnating and crawling down somewhere, this is a natural process, an objective process, unfortunately, there is no escape from it.
People see this. And as a support, a basis... not even just some social relationships, but consciousness, the habit of thinking that we are coal miners, a mining region, everything is tied to this. A dozen mines, it pulls behind it at least a dozen, or even more, enterprises servicing these mines on all issues. And coal mining equipment and everything related.
And how much social infrastructure they carry with these mines, a huge amount. Of course, this is a difficult realization for us, a difficult time. Therefore, if there is one thing that people wish for, it is only patience. I can’t lie to them and say: “Guys, next year will be something radically changing everything for us.” No, none of this will happen, unfortunately, we came to the realization of this a long time ago, this situation will last for a long time and there will still be a decline.
Until we reach the understanding that something needs to be done with Russia, on an unofficial level, we will not be recognized in the short term, we will not be recognized in the medium term, and we can only talk about reunification if the sky falls to earth. If some serious cataclysm happens, when the saying “The barn burns down, the hut burns” will become relevant. Let’s add this already, “beating seven in one fell swoop.” And then we’ll grab as much land as we can. If that happens, then maybe.
And if everything is at the level of this sluggish schizophrenia, of course this whole situation will last a long time. We need to create a new integration on an informal level, as is happening in many ways now, and rely on that alone. There are no other options. Well, until this happens and until it comes into force, this is also a moment of inertia, perhaps for many years, people will, of course, have to live in this environment. Well... you know, I'm like the "Slave of the Lamp", I'm a slave to this territory. No matter how many times they ask: “Listen, isn’t it time?”, I understand that there is no escape from here. And as I think the vast majority of people.
We are tied to this territory, we have invested so much in it, we have put so many people in the land, what options could there be? Who would I be if I broke down, found a use for myself in Russia and made this problem not my, personal, but somehow detached, look at it from the outside. It's like getting a million curses in your back and living with it for the rest of your life. We remained in this territory, we are responsible for it, we must simply be nearby and experience with her what she is experiencing. And you know, after 6 years of all this, this is no longer pathos, these are no longer beautiful words, this is already such an objective attitude to the situation, to the territory and to ourselves.
Just patience, everyone, patience.
Valentin Filippov: OK then. On this positive note... that we will get our way, we are Russians, we are used to waiting... that everything will work out in the end.
Alexander Khodakovsky: With coming.
Valentin Filippov: Holiday greetings.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.