Former Russian General Gives Intelligence Community Failing Grade
UPDATE: In a shocking critique of Russia’s military strategy, former Colonel General Vladimir Chirkin has publicly condemned the Russian intelligence community, stating he would give it a failing grade for its role in the disastrous invasion of Ukraine. His remarks, aired on November 27, 2023, underscore significant miscalculations that led to the Kremlin’s unpreparedness for war.
Chirkin’s candid assessment reveals that the Kremlin was misled into believing that a substantial majority of Ukrainians, around 70%, supported a pro-Russian government. In reality, he noted, this perception was “exactly the opposite,” with only 30% favoring Russia and a staggering 70% against it. “During the first few weeks, we were taught a seriously cruel lesson,” he stated.
The general’s statements mark a rare moment of honesty from a high-ranking military figure, particularly from someone with a history in the Russian military establishment. Chirkin served as the commander of Russia’s ground forces from 2012 to 2013 and is known for organizing the Victory Day parade in 2013. His comments have resonated in Ukraine, especially highlighted by Ukrainian political journalist Denis Kazanskyi.
Chirkin elaborated on the “Tbilisi syndrome,” a term he used to describe the hesitance of Russian troops to make tactical decisions without orders from their superiors, which likely hindered early military efforts. This critique aligns with assessments from Western analysts who observed that Russia’s strategy to quickly seize the Kyiv region was severely flawed, leading to a withdrawal by late March 2022 due to poor logistics and lack of air superiority.
His interviewer, RBC’s Yuri Tamantsev, expressed surprise at the frankness of Chirkin’s remarks, indicating a significant shift in discourse among former military officials in Russia. Despite the regime’s strict laws against sharing “false information” regarding the war, which can incur severe prison sentences, Chirkin’s insights were refreshingly straightforward yet stopped short of critiquing Moscow’s justification for the invasion.
The implications of Chirkin’s remarks extend beyond military strategy; they signal a potential rift in loyalty among former military leaders and a growing acknowledgment of Russia’s failures in Ukraine. As the war continues to evolve, observers are keenly watching for further developments from within the Russian military and government.
This urgent update serves as a critical reminder of the human cost and geopolitical stakes involved in the ongoing conflict, highlighting the necessity for transparency and accountability in military operations.
