Does shelling in Donbas means some kind of loss of some kind of control over mercenaries by Russia?

Appeal to the press office of the Presidential Administration of Ukraine on its latest scandal statement.

Dear press office of the Presidential Administration of Ukraine who believes that shelling in Donbas means some kind of loss of some kind of control over mercenaries by Russia.

You know better, of course.

But there are a few things that are painfully obvious and make your statement very questionable.

First of all, it is impossible to lose control over those who you hired (over mercenaries). You just stop hiring them and the problem is solved. Russia cannot lose control of its mercenaries in Donbas. It sends them there, manages their rotation, feeds, dresses, arms, pays wages and signs orders for the use of weapons. The mercenaries cannot live without ammunition, food, medicines and wages. Therefore, Russia controls them every second, completely and uncompromisingly.

Secondly, dear press office, if even you obtained some kind of secret report or open analytical assessments about Russia’s problems in managing the mercenaries, you needn’t publicize it. Because we accuse Russia of waging a war against Ukraine. And the statement that Russia does not control mercenaries in Donbas perfectly falls into the logic of the Russian propaganda line – we are not there, and if Ukrainians want peace, let them make arrangements with Donetsk and Luhansk. I hope, dear press office, you are not going to accept this “logic”? For if you are ready to accept this logic, you will have serious problems with your employer – President Zelenskyi, who has clearly, unambiguously and repeatedly stated that it is necessary to talk about peace in Donbas and Crimea with Russia, and not with mercenaries. And the last paragraph of your message cites his words that Russia is trying to disrupt negotiations. So, is it trying to disrupt or is it not controlling the situation? Do you get the picture? It’s easy: if Russia has problems in Donbas, we use this instead of saying that we know.

And, thirdly, dear press office, the war had begun before you were appointed to office. A long time ago. Five years ago. There have been about 18 or19 different kinds of truce, ceasefire, etc. over this time. And there have been tens of thousands more violations of ceasefire, truce, etc. And very often violations reached their peaks when negotiation efforts intensified. That is, it was Russian tactic to make Ukraine agree to what was disadvantageous to it: shoot and kill more. Therefore, an increase in the number of shelling and casualties resulting from the shelling is most likely not indicative of Russia’s loss of control over mercenaries. On the contrary, Russia has perfect control over them, uses them as a perfect lever in negotiations, and also that there are no changes in Russia’s “negotiation tactics”.

How can we avoid these logical traps? Do not rely only on your understanding of what you have heard, seen, read (including from the president), but also communicate with the professionals responsible for the directions. Over time, you will become skilled at this, but you should never stop consulting.

Source: Bohdan Yaremenko’s FB

EMPR