Time to read: 23 minutes(s)

"NotMoscow Speaking" spoke with Sergei Krivenko, director of the human rights group "Citizen. Army. Law," about the changes brought by the new laws regarding Defense Ministry contracts with criminals, what to do today to avoid being mobilized, and why only Putin's "goodwill" protects conscripts from participating in the war.

The State Duma passed two laws regarding the Ministry of Defense concluding contracts with convicts during mobilization, martial law, or wartime. What does this mean for the army and the war in Ukraine? Will more conscripts be taken from prison camps and prisons? Or not? And those awaiting a court decision?

We see that in 2023, the Russian military leadership has chosen contract recruitment as the primary method of replenishing the army. Apparently, a second wave of mobilization (the first took place in the fall of 2022) has been reserved for a last resort. Therefore, the authorities are looking for other ways—besides the promise of large payments—to lure citizens into this trap, i.e., to persuade them to sign a contract.

And another such "piece of cheese" is the hypothetical possibility of exemption from criminal liability for those who sign a contract with the Russian Ministry of Defense.

The Ministry of Defense is taking every opportunity to expand the pool of citizens eligible for contracts. This, on the other hand, demonstrates that the current recruitment process is experiencing problems; otherwise, the requirements for the health and moral character of military candidates wouldn't have changed so dramatically.

In a normal, democratic, and legal country, a service member is someone who is given a weapon by the state and allowed to use violence in its name when necessary. But! This requires observing the limitations imposed by international humanitarian law (the Geneva Conventions and other documents). Among other things, this means that a service member must be reasonable, realistic, obey orders, and be able to distinguish between lawful and unlawful. And in the Russian Federation, a clean criminal record has always been one of the basic requirements for citizens conscripted into military service.
Expanding the military contingent by recruiting convicted criminals highlights significant recruitment challenges. Almost no one goes to war simply out of "patriotism." Fewer people sign contracts, and those tempted by big money are already signing them. Perhaps some will join in the hopes of having their criminal records expunged, since the adopted amendments allow those under investigation and convicted under a fairly wide range of articles of the Russian Criminal Code to sign contracts. Prisoners could also join the war. What Prigozhin previously did—entirely illegally recruiting prisoners into his illegal armed groups like private military companies—is now being attempted by the Ministry of Defense, and State Duma deputies are establishing a legal framework for this.

Will there be penal battalions?

— The penal battalions of World War II were a completely different situation. Red Army soldiers were sent to penal battalions either for disciplinary offenses or by military tribunals. This was where Red Army soldiers and officers served their sentences. The current situation is more reminiscent of the decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of July 12, 1941, "On the release from punishment of those convicted of certain categories of crimes." Under this decree, several hundred thousand people previously convicted of minor offenses were released from camps and colonies, many of whom were immediately mobilized for military service.

According to the adopted bills, if a convicted person (voluntarily) enters into a contract, then the criminal record can be completely expunged in two cases: upon receiving a state award, during military service, or after discharge from military service due to age or health reasons, or after the end of mobilization or martial law.

Could the mere expungement of a criminal record be a motivator for signing a contract with the Ministry of Defense? For example, officials took bribes, and now they're going to war...

"It's hard to say; it depends on a person's life strategy, how they plan to live their life and what they do. To go to a vile war is to suppress one's conscience. To voluntarily go to a vile war is to kill one's soul. But maybe a person chooses money over conscience, or is willing to kill others to avoid a criminal record and serving a sentence. Everyone makes their own choices now, determining their future destiny."

Raising the age limit for contract soldiers to 65 and for officers to 70 during mobilization and martial law—what does this mean for those who signed these terms? And how will it impact those mobilized?

This applies to those who have signed a military service contract, which, as a reminder, is voluntary. Those who signed a contract with the Russian Ministry of Defense for military service will only be able to retire from service at age 65 after the new bills come into effect.

This will not affect mobilized personnel who did not sign a contract after mobilization. Conscription for privates remains until age 50, and discharge of mobilized personnel will now, as before, be possible upon reaching age 50.

But, I repeat, this is only for those mobilized who did not sign a contract.

According to laws passed by the State Duma, the health eligibility requirements for those wishing to sign a contract are being lowered. Does this mean that anyone, for example, completely deaf, can go to war?

— Citizens in Russia are divided into five categories based on their fitness for military service based on health:

А - fit for military service;
Б - fit for military service with minor restrictions;
В - limited fitness for military service;
Г - temporarily unfit for military service;
Д - unfit for military service.

There is a list of diseases (the "Schedule of Diseases"), which is approved by a decree of the Government of the Russian Federation, where the degree of each disease corresponds to a certain category of fitness.

For example, a diagnosis such as severe bronchial asthma is a clear category "D", while moderate severity is a category "B".

Previously, to sign a contract, a citizen had to have category "A" or "B"; it was impossible to enter into a contract with a "B" category; citizens with a "B" category were also not called up for military service.

But citizens with category “B” (as with “A” and “B”) are subject to conscription for military service upon mobilization.

Now, as soon as the bill comes into force, citizens with a fitness category of "B" will also be able to sign a contract for military service. The Ministry of Defense has sharply lowered the health eligibility requirements for contract service members.

So, these two laws significantly expand the boundaries not only for those who can now sign a contract, but also for those who are mobilized?

— The pool of those eligible for mobilization is being expanded to include those with prior criminal convictions. The health eligibility requirements for mobilization have already been expanded to the maximum—those with categories "A," "B," and "C" are eligible for conscription. The maximum age for mobilization has not yet been increased—those with the rank of private or sergeant are conscripted up to age 50.

Where is the Ministry of Defense getting soldiers for the war in the summer of 2023? If we list all the sources… Is there a hidden mobilization going on?

There are three ways to enter military service in Russia. The first is conscription, which applies to people aged 18 to 27. They serve for a year, although there is talk of increasing the service to two years. According to numerous statements by the Minister of Defense and the President, conscripts are not being sent to war. But this is disingenuous; according to Russian law, conscripts can be sent to war to participate in combat. The only restriction in the "Regulations on Military Service" is that they can only be sent four months after being drafted and receiving their primary military specialty. So, by law, they can be sent at any time. Some cases of conscripts serving in Ukraine in 2022 were documented by human rights activists. But for now, they are not being sent en masse. Another danger is that as soon as a conscript is assigned to a unit, they can be contracted. In the barracks, conscripts are subject to serious indoctrination, they are persuaded to sign contracts, some are coerced, and many are simply deceived. And as soon as the contract is signed, you can send him to war at any moment.

The second route to military service is through voluntary contracting. Anyone in the reserves can sign a contract and become a service member. Signing a contract is voluntary; it's a key condition, meaning it's theoretically a citizen's free will. However, active recruitment is currently underway, with citizens being tempted by various means—money, criminal record expungement, as we've already discussed.

The third option is conscription, which applies to both those who have served in the army and are in the reserves, as well as those who have not served in the army. They are placed in the reserves from age 27 until age 50 (for privates and sergeants). The Presidential Decree on mobilization of September 21, 2022, has not been rescinded, and a second wave could begin at any time, as decided by the Russian authorities. There is no hidden mobilization; if someone starts receiving summonses, it will immediately be announced on social media. Since last fall, people have not received summonses; now, as I have already mentioned, the Ministry of Defense is actively recruiting contract soldiers. But if this fails and they are unable to recruit the required number of service members, or if even more are needed, they can begin a second wave of mobilization at any time, either in one region or several, or nationwide.

When do you think we should expect the second wave of mobilization and how will it differ from the September one?

— The situation for citizens has now become more complicated. In April 2023, the law on electronic summonses was introduced, allowing for the restriction of citizens' rights for failure to appear at the military registration and enlistment office—another repressive instrument has been introduced. However, criminal liability for evading conscription has not yet been introduced. It appears the second wave will be the same as the first—people will report to military registration and enlistment offices and be sent en masse to the troops, assembly points, and training grounds. Those who fail to appear will be at risk of having their rights restricted—driver's licenses will be revoked, and real estate transactions will be prohibited.

In principle, there remains only one legal way to avoid going to war: to declare one's anti-war beliefs and request alternative civilian service. This right remains even during conscription. But this option, unfortunately, is not available to many, as it would mean going against the will of the state. There will be no criminal liability, no jail time, and no conscription if one persists. However, one will have to endure pressure and resist threats from military recruitment officers.

A second wave of mobilization was expected in January, February, and the spring; many experts said it would be necessary to halt the Ukrainian Armed Forces' advance. But it appears the first wave worked: a third of the Defense Ministry's mobilized troops were immediately sent to the front, hampering the Ukrainian Armed Forces' autumn offensive. The rest were trained for several months and also sent to the front, forming a defensive line. Mobilization worked to some extent for the Russian command, stabilizing the front line. The Russian authorities are not initiating a second wave because the mobilization itself was received with mixed feelings in society. After all, it contradicts the entire narrative that had prevailed before: that the war isn't a war, but a "special military operation," that it's happening somewhere out there, beyond Russia's borders, that it's being carried out by the Ministry of Defense, and that you, citizens, should live your lives.

This was the narrative the Kremlin tried to impose from February to September 2022, and the majority of the Russian people accepted it. They continued to live as they had been, handing over all policy on behalf of Russia to Putin's clique. But mobilization upended this narrative, and this was a significant shakeup for society. The mobilization took place, but the Russian authorities are apparently wary of carrying out a second wave in the same way. This is precisely why they have launched a vigorous recruitment drive for contract soldiers (after all, large losses need to be replaced). But last year, as you may recall, there was also active recruitment. Regional battalions were created, regional authorities, and governors joined in, and that also effectively failed—they couldn't muster the required numbers, which is why they announced mobilization. If they can't muster the required number of contract soldiers now, we should expect a second wave of mobilization in August or early fall.

Will electronic subpoenas be legal before the registry is launched? When will restrictions come into effect?

"The electronic summons situation is very tricky. On the one hand, the law states that restrictions will come into effect after the introduction of a "summons registry," but on the other hand, the final article of this new law states that these rights restrictions can be applied immediately after the law comes into force, regardless of the registry's availability. How this will happen, and the exact process, is unclear; the technology isn't spelled out. In principle, the military registration and enlistment office could already restrict the rights of specific individuals through certain actions, but until a registry is in place, it's unlikely to be widespread.

What kind of summons is legal and correct today, from the Ministry of Defense's perspective? Previously, it had to be delivered to the conscript's home and signed in person. Furthermore, the representative had to be someone authorized with a piece of paper from the military enlistment office, not a janitor from the management company. Are all three new methods of serving summonses—registered mail, in-person delivery, including simply being requested by the military enlistment office, whether it's an employer or an engineer from the management company—and, thirdly, electronically—ALREADY legal?

- Yes, now all three methods are legal.

Vasily, a young man who lives in a village and doesn't have internet, received an electronic summons—it was posted in the registry. How will Vasya know if he's being called up, for example, for training, for the army, or for war mobilization? He doesn't fly abroad and won't find out about the travel ban for seven days. So, he'll only know when he wants to take out a loan or sell his house?

— Yes, that's exactly why restrictions are being introduced. When he encounters something, they'll tell him to go to the military registration and enlistment office, resolve the issues, and then the restrictions will be lifted.

And no one will look for him?

— Apparently so. The military registration and enlistment office can send text messages, no one is stopping them from notifying in various ways, or passing them on through someone else. De jure, yes, restrictions on his rights can be imposed, which will remain in effect until he reports to the military registration and enlistment office.

The Unified Register of Persons Victim of Military Conscription will be launched, as announced, by October 1. It was previously reported that the information a citizen posted about themselves, for example, on Gosuslugi (Gosuslugi) or that held by the Federal Service for the Federal Service for the Federal Service for the Federal Service for the Federal Registration, Cadastre and Cartography (FSFR) and other agencies, will be used to update their data. This isn't all up-to-date information, so will all those liable for military service be required to visit their military registration and enlistment offices and update their data?
"Of course, not all those liable for military service; military enlistment offices can't handle such a large number—tens of millions. Now, military enlistment offices will be collecting information from schools, employers, tax authorities, and other agencies, and attempting to consolidate it all into a single database. There are reports that, yes, many citizens are receiving summonses to appear at the military enlistment office to verify their information. But not all those liable for military service."

Russian military registration and enlistment offices have a very poor record-keeping culture. Russia generally has problems with logistics and database management. Even Sberbank is experiencing these problems with its registers and bank cards. I was surprised to learn that Sberbank doesn't have a unified card database nationwide; they are compiled by district. I have absolutely no expectations that military registration and enlistment offices in Russia will create a properly functioning register of conscripts or that it will be a well-coordinated and effective database. There will be many errors, duplicates, and incorrect data.

Why is the draft age for conscripts being raised from 21 to 30? Why was this announced during the war?

— Here, too, things aren't so clear-cut. On the one hand, human rights activists have long argued that the lower draft age should be raised because teenagers now mature not at 18, but at 21 and later. They mature later both psychologically and health-wise. And military recruitment offices have no problem raising the draft age to 21, since most young men take advantage of academic deferments while studying at technical schools and universities. Therefore, conscription at 21 is entirely reasonable.

But raising the conscription age to 30 is completely unreasonable; it's only necessary for the Ministry of Defense to be able to conscript more people if the conscription plan for military service is increased.

And we must remember that this initiative was launched last spring, when the authorities weren't even considering mobilization. Now, increasing the number of conscripts has lost its relevance for the Ministry of Defense. If soldiers are needed, they'll declare mobilization and call up as many as needed.

What legal ways are there today for conscripts to avoid being drafted into the war? What are the same for those who don't want to participate in the war due to mobilization?

"Conscription for mobilization and conscription for compulsory military service are two different processes; they need to be distinguished. Let's talk about conscripts now. Conscripts aren't being sent off to war en masse these days. But there's a huge risk that they'll be forced to sign a contract and sent off. Mobilized soldiers can be sent off to war just a few days after being drafted."

Previously, citizens who didn't want to serve in the military used several strategies to avoid military service. The first was to go abroad; the second was to run away, avoiding the military registration and enlistment office and not living at their registered address; the third was to undergo a health check (remember, those with category "B" status are not called up for military service, which is a fairly common category); the fourth was deferments, which were mostly obtained through study, allowing for postgraduate study; and the fifth was alternative civilian service.

Electronic summonses were adopted to counter the "runaway" strategy. A barrier is being erected for people living in Russia, preventing them from running away, because sooner or later they will be caught in these traps—either through work, through school, or on video cameras or on the street. After all, if a military enlistment office sends a summons, after a certain period of time the conscript will be considered to have received it. Furthermore, according to the new rules, if a citizen doesn't receive a summons for a given draft, they will be required to report to the military enlistment office in person at the beginning of the next draft, without any summons, unless, of course, they have a deferment.

Have obstacles to traveling abroad begun to arise?

— Yes, the new law on electronic summonses allows for travel restrictions for those who have simply been sent a summons. Previously, this restriction only applied to those who had been issued a decision by the draft board to conscript for military service, which concludes the conscription process. Now, such a restriction can be imposed at the very beginning of the conscription process—a few days after the summons are sent from the military registration and enlistment office—if the citizen fails to appear at the military registration and enlistment office in response to the summons.

Of course, the option to leave remains, and those planning to go abroad simply need to leave. They can deregister later, with a power of attorney. So, there's no need to go to the military registration and enlistment office if someone's plan is to leave; they can leave by any means necessary, leave a power of attorney in someone's name, and then deregister remotely.

If a conscript doesn't want to go to war and wants to enlist in the alternative civilian service, where does the deadline for submitting such a request to the military registration and enlistment office begin? When did they first register at school, and when did they receive their summons?

The sooner a citizen declares their anti-war beliefs and submits an application to the military registration and enlistment office, the better; the less likely they are to be rejected. The starting point is when they register for military service. By law, this occurs in the year a young person turns 17. For example, someone should turn 17 in December, and in February of that same year (when they're still effectively 16), they should register. At that point, they can already apply for alternative civil service. If the military registration and enlistment office initially rejects such an application, they must ensure it is accepted and recorded in their personal file. After turning 18, they can also submit applications (at 18, a citizen is subject to military service), even if they have a deferment. The law doesn't specify a starting date for filing an application. There is a deadline: the application must be submitted six months before the conscription date, when the person is required to enlist in the military, after all deferments have expired. However, there is a Constitutional Court ruling stating that a missed deadline for filing an application for alternative civil service can be reinstated by the draft board. After all, convictions may not arise immediately; they take a long time to develop. Therefore, it is necessary to file an application for alternative civil service in any situation where a citizen is drafted, and if the deadline is missed, in the application itself, ask the draft board to reinstate the deadline. Of course, it is better to file the application before the draft begins, before October 1 or April 1, even if the deadline was missed earlier.

Thanks to the Kremlin and the Ministry of Defense, the war is being waged on Russian territory, in border areas. How are conscripts protected from participating in the war?

Conscripts are not protected in any way. There is only one document, the "Regulations on Military Service," adopted by presidential decree, which stipulates that a conscript can be sent to participate in combat only four months after beginning their service and receiving their military registration specialty. In other words, by law, conscripts can be sent to war anywhere, even outside the Russian Federation, but only four months after their enlistment. The fact that they are not currently being sent en masse to fight in Ukraine is due to the "goodwill" of the president and the "goodwill" of the Ministry of Defense, but this is only because society remains opposed to conscripts participating in the war; this is unpopular in Russia. This tension dates back to the Chechen wars. The general opinion in Russia is that contract soldiers should fight—after all, they signed their contracts voluntarily. But the exclusion of conscripts from participating in the war is an ephemeral matter, one that the Ministry of Defense can violate at any time, since by law, conscripts can be sent to war four months after their enlistment. So conscripts are in no way protected from participating in the war. Furthermore, as we've already discussed, conscripts are subjected to quite extensive "indoctrination" to get them to sign a contract. Sometimes they're even tricked (they sign contracts for them), and the conscript becomes a contract soldier.

What questions do Russian conscripts most often ask human rights activists?

"Since the beginning of the war, we've focused exclusively on assisting those who wish to refuse to participate in the war, although previously, before the war, we handled all aspects of protecting the rights of conscripts and military personnel. Back then, we faced a wide range of issues, but primarily involved violations of the conscription procedure (improper delivery of summonses, conscription during deferments, etc.), as well as health complaints and violations of rights during medical examinations, when the actual category and existing diagnoses are not taken into account. Now, we support only those who refuse military service, because we believe that now, in a wartime environment, the primary legal avenue for refusal is to declare one's convictions and demand, in accordance with the Constitution, that military service be replaced with an alternative civilian service."

In an interview, Valentina Melnikova advised those potentially at risk of mobilization to write a letter of resignation addressed to the governor, the military commissar, or Shoigu—send it to the appropriate recipients and then deliver it in person to the military commissariat. In the letter, state the reason why you cannot be mobilized, for example, due to health issues. Will such a statement be effective? And where does the point begin when someone who doesn't want to kill and participate in a criminal war begins to declare their anti-war views?

The situation with mobilized personnel is more complicated. There is no legally established procedure for replacing military service with alternative civilian service (ACS) during mobilization, and a law on ACS during mobilization has not yet been passed. However, there is a constitutional right, so citizens are faced with the task of independently exercising this right. If laws were observed in Russia, and going to the military registration and enlistment office was safe, and military registration and enlistment office staff did not violate the law, the procedure would look like this: after receiving a summons for mobilization, a person goes to the military registration and enlistment office, submits an application for ACS, requests that it be added to their personal file, and then leaves. That's it. But there is a huge risk that the person will be seized at the military registration and enlistment office, persuaded, coaxed, and sometimes even subjected to outright violence, and sent to a military unit, where they are automatically assigned the status of a serviceman. And once this status is assigned, the serviceman is potentially subject to criminal prosecution (Article 337 of the Criminal Code - unauthorized abandonment of a unit, Article 332 - failure to comply with an order).

Penalties for military personnel have been significantly tightened, and sentences have been significantly increased. Leaving a unit or failing to comply with an order can result in 3, 10, or 12 years in prison. Therefore, a mobilized citizen faces the challenge of both applying for alternative civil service and avoiding being designated a military service member. Since this procedure (acquiring military status) is unclear during mobilization, we recommend avoiding military registration and enlistment offices and submitting applications by mail through authorized representatives. We believe the risk of rights restrictions for failure to appear at a military registration and enlistment office is lower than the risk of being caught and automatically sent to the army, thus becoming a military service member.

It should be remembered that there is no criminal liability for failure to appear at the military registration and enlistment office during mobilization.

So what next?

"And then nothing happens. If he applied for alternative civil service at the military registration and enlistment office, he can't be called up for military service, he can't be sent to alternative civil service (because it doesn't exist), and there can be no criminal prosecution, since there's no relevant article in the Criminal Code. The citizen stays at home."

No need to run away anywhere?

"No, that's not necessary. The fact is, this is currently the only legal way to avoid participating in the war. Those people who submitted their applications in the fall requesting alternative civil service were not drafted, they weren't sent to alternative civil service because it doesn't exist, and no criminal charges were brought against them because, I repeat, there's no such article in the criminal code. That's it, this is the only legal option; the only problem is how to submit this application to the military registration and enlistment office. This can vary from region to region—you just have to write a statement about your anti-war beliefs and take it to the military registration and enlistment office or send it by mail. That's it. And the person is free to go."

Are there any statistics on how many such Russians there were, and in which regions the largest number of people declared their anti-war beliefs?

"Unfortunately, there isn't one. We can only handle those who contact us. We checked the requests we received during mobilization; by a rough estimate, at least 200 people took advantage of this procedure during the entire mobilization period. And they continue to live at home, and they're doing well. There are several cases where citizens applied for alternative civil service after they were already in military units, and this is, of course, a problem; they're still in their units, and the courts are ongoing. The earlier the application is submitted—while the person is still a civilian and doesn't have military status—then they definitely don't enter military service and aren't subject to criminal prosecution."

What about conscripts?

"They have a different situation. They have a law on alternative civilian service, and they have the ability to request genuine alternative civilian service. Conscripts must go to the military registration and enlistment office themselves and submit an application for alternative civilian service (without undergoing a medical examination). Conscripts must go to the military registration and enlistment office because they risk criminal prosecution for failing to appear in response to a summons. If a conscript fails to appear in response to a summons twice, the authorities can interpret this as evasion and initiate criminal prosecution under Article 328 of the Criminal Code. Therefore, conscripts—those applying for alternative civilian service—shouldn't be afraid to visit the military registration and enlistment office. Just go to the military registration and enlistment office, submit an application for alternative civilian service, and request a draft board. You don't have to undergo a medical examination. It's not necessary because, according to the law "On Alternative Civil Service," you must first obtain the right to alternative civilian service from the draft board, and only then undergo the medical examination. If you don't attend the medical examination, you can't be drafted, because military service requires it. This is a legal way for a conscript to obtain alternative civil service.

Why didn't mobilized soldiers have a medical examination, only a physical examination? Today, many who are mobilized to war try to prove they're unfit for military service due to health reasons. How can you get exempted from mobilization due to health reasons once you're already at war?

"It's impossible in a war. Yes, this is a major problem for those mobilized. While the Law on Military Duty and Military Service (which regulates the conscription process) is more robust and more clearly defined, the mobilization law is very restrictive and essentially lacked a medical examination procedure. So, during mobilization, military commissariats essentially acted according to the law, conscripting people without medical examination, including those who were sick. One might assume that the legislator's logic was the following—exactly what Melnikova was talking about.

While in the reserves, a citizen must report any changes in their health to the military registration and enlistment office. By law, it is their personal responsibility to report to the military registration and enlistment office and bring documents confirming their health changes. If necessary, undergo a re-examination and change their fitness category.
In an ideal situation, this is how it should be, so in an ideal situation, the military enlistment office should have information about the actual health status of citizens. But in reality, none of this happened; no one reports changes in their health to the military enlistment office. Why bother? After all, the maximum penalty for failure to report such information is a fine of 3 rubles. Citizens didn't inform the military enlistment office, and the military enlistment office didn't bother or monitor it. But then the war began, and then mobilization began. And the military enlistment offices, completely oblivious to the fact that they had no real information about the health status of their citizens, began calling up everyone in the reserves, using outdated data. This is what happened last fall, resulting in many sick and unfit for military service being called up. And no one was held accountable because the military enlistment offices technically did not violate the law.

The only way to combat this is to go to court and challenge the mobilization draft board's decision regarding an illegal conscription. The key is for the person to have power of attorney granted. This is currently the only way to discharge a mobilized soldier—if the court rules that the mobilization was illegal. If you win in court, you can later appeal to the commanding officers to demand dismissal, as the mobilization decision was illegal. Several people are currently taking this route. Similar complaints can also be filed with the military prosecutor's office; there have been several cases where they have helped return mobilized soldiers who were called up with violations.

Can those who haven't yet been mobilized, assuming the Kremlin announces a second wave, go to the military registration and enlistment office today and submit a request to lower their fitness category, citing their health and supporting documents?

If Russia were a normal country, then, of course, it would be normal to go and request a category change, bringing documents so that your actual status matches the military registration and enlistment office's data. But the reality in Russia is different, and going to the military registration and enlistment office and getting re-examined is lengthy. And there's a risk that if you go and report it yourself, they'll simply register you, and regardless of your health category, when they receive the draft plan, they'll find out that you (the one who showed up) will be the one drafted. After all, they don't draft those who are fit, but those who can be reached, those who come forward.

Is that why they called people from the villages?

— Yes. If you play the devil's advocate, you can imagine the logic of the military recruitment office employee. Firstly, they have a very small number of employees; they've been constantly laying them off before. And then mobilization begins, a draft plan is issued, requiring, say, three thousand people from the region to be drafted within a limited time. And there are ten thousand registered in the region. So what, should we organize a background check on everyone, conduct inspections? Why, when they could send out summonses by mail, through employers, to those registered. And only those who show up in response to these summonses are called up. And those who don't show up—they won't be called up if the plan has already been met. They need to meet the plan, and that's the most important thing they're asked to do.

Will anything change at military registration and enlistment offices with the registry's introduction? They don't even have computers…

"I doubt it. Well, they'll be given computers. Some clerk will be assigned to type up lists, and they'll try to compile them into tables and databases. The key word is 'trying.'"

Why hasn't a single mother of a son killed in the war ever thrown away the award and expressed her indignation when presented with a posthumous medal and three chrysanthemums at any village council or local town hall? Are they afraid of losing the coffin money?

Before the mobilization, before September of last year, this was more understandable, because it was mostly contract soldiers who fought. Unlike the war in Chechnya, this war didn't spawn a movement of soldiers' mothers. There's no situation where the state forcibly takes young men and then returns them in coffins. In this war in Ukraine, volunteers—contract soldiers—are fighting. And society sees that they're fighting for money. Moreover, the state pays the families of the fallen; the family receives about seven million rubles, and the state compensates for the loss of life. In other words, society perceives contract service as an individual choice, not a societal problem.

Why the silence after mobilization is a question, of course. Perhaps a lot can be attributed to propaganda, which tries to say that these people died for an idea, for their homeland, that it was necessary, otherwise nothing would have worked. Of the 300 mobilized, probably around two or three thousand have already died, which also doesn't raise any questions in society yet, and besides, those mobilized are also being paid. Perhaps the time hasn't come yet. I'm surprised that videos have appeared of the wives and families of mobilized soldiers, who speak out not against this war, but against the fact that those mobilized are poorly dressed, shod, and insufficiently armed. So, if everything were fine, then we could go and fight? We need to defend the homeland? From whom? People are very susceptible to propaganda. It's no coincidence that most of those mobilized were from villages and small towns, while in Moscow, mobilization was practically thwarted.

The flow of coffins is still weaker than the propaganda...

"I think so. The flow of mobilized soldiers is currently being absorbed by the flow of volunteers. There's no critical mass yet."

When the Ministry of Defense called for 300 troops, was that somehow related to the need for clothing and weapons? Why are these poor souls recording videos asking for money for night vision goggles, drones, and so on?

— You live in Russia! The Ministry of Defense has everything, but it's all in big warehouses. Weapons, ammunition, everything is there, everything is stockpiled. But it's not where it's needed. Besides, some of it was stolen. And some of it wasn't delivered, wasn't clothed. On paper, everything is there. They conscript people according to papers, but when it actually happens, delivery problems begin. It's no coincidence that after three or four months, the number of such videos died down. Within six months, everyone was clothed and shod. Those were the problems of the first few months: they weren't delivered. Everything is there, but in warehouses in Siberia. Two big Russian problems are logistics and corruption.

Why wasn't martial law introduced in Russia?

"This contradicts the image the authorities are forcing on society. Supreme ruler Putin decides all issues without involving the public. The public should view all this as gladiatorial combat; the public should sit in the stands, eat, and watch. If they start dragging the public into the arenas, it won't be good for the authorities."

What are the options for military personnel who do not want to participate in the war to terminate their contract?

"There are only three legal ones: first, injury; second, criminal conviction for refusing to obey a command order—up to four or five years in prison; third, growing old in the service. They're like serfs now. Breaking a contract on your own for any other reason is impossible."

What should those who have not yet gone to war and could potentially do?

"If we're talking about civilians, those who might be called up for military service or mobilization, there's only one legal option: to declare their anti-war beliefs and apply for alternative civil service. For conscripts, alternative civil service is now quite acceptable. It's just that the term is slightly longer than military service—21 months instead of 12. But in alternative service, you live at home (or in a dormitory), work for a civilian organization, receive a salary there, work eight hours, and the rest of the time is yours. And you're guaranteed not to end up in any war. When mobilized, you simply declare your anti-war beliefs and refuse to go to war. You demand alternative civil service, and since it's not available, they'll leave you alone. The only way is not to be afraid, to understand that this is an aggressive war—vile, unjust, and wrong, in which people are killed. And this is a real way to refuse, because it's a constitutional right; people are not subject to criminal liability for it."

Things are more complicated for military personnel, as an unconstitutional amendment to the Criminal Code was introduced for them (Article 332—the possibility of criminal liability for refusing to participate in combat—from 3 to 5 years in prison). But there are already servicemen who refuse to go to war. They are being tried, several dozen such trials have already taken place. For example, Senior Lieutenant Dmitry Vasilets from Murmansk refused and was sentenced to three years in prison. And he says that for him, three years in prison is better than participating in this war. So, it's a personal choice. The second option is to leave Russia, but not everyone can afford that yet. So, there are two legal options: alternative civil service (ACS) and departure.

Which human rights activists help Russians—mobilized soldiers, conscripts, and those at risk of being sent to war?

Quite a few organizations continue their work. Human rights work in Russia continues, but it's effectively underground. At least, the organizations working to protect the rights of conscripts. It's practically impossible to work openly in the human rights field regarding conscription and mobilization these days, but many work anonymously, underground, with the help of those who have left. There's, for example, a coalition Appeal to Conscience, where anyone can turn to during mobilization, conscription, or military service, and they provide recommendations on what to do in a given situation.

What repressions against Russians from Putin and the Kremlin should we expect in the near future?

Russia has a fairly large pool of repressive laws. These laws, in fact, aren't fully effective. So the government could simply increase the scale of repression without passing new laws—that's an option. After all, repression, as a percentage, is lower in Russia than in Belarus.

Irina Krasnova

Photo: soldiersmothers.ru