On July 6th, the New York Times published an astonishing investigation: In Ukraine, Killings of Surrendering Russians Divide an American-Led Unit. The article documents in grim detail how Chosen Company, an international volunteer battalion for Kiev, routinely executes Russian prisoners of war. It is the very first mainstream admission that this practice - a brazen breach of the Geneva Conventions, and a grave war crime - is widespread among Ukraine’s fighters, both foreign and homegrown.

Almost immediately after the proxy war erupted, ISIS-tier footage of the torture and murder of Russians in Ukrainian custody - unarmed, injured, surrendering and/or bound - began circulating on social networks and Telegram channels. However, save for a single incident in April 2022, when Georgian Legion fighters gleefully filmed themselves surveying a scene near Bucha, where they ambushed and killed multiple fleeing VDV soldiers, Western journalists have either ignored these abuses, or outright denied Kiev endorses or engages in such activity.

Georgian Legion chief Mamuka Mamulashvili has nonetheless justified this conduct, openly boasting that his soldiers “tie [POWs’] hands and feet sometimes” before killing them, and “not a single [Russian] will be taken prisoner.” The New York Times probe strongly suggests this strategy is not confined to the Legion. Multiple Chosen Company fighters testified to witnessing sadistic executions of POWs, and their fellow soldiers proudly bragging about carrying them out. A US veteran posted to the unit claimed they were flatly told by their recruiter:

“[It] was OK to kill POWs if they didn’t surrender in the strictest Geneva Convention standards.”

It may be the case that the New York Times revelations are a means of distancing Kiev’s Western backers from the actions of Ukraine’s forces. Yet, as we shall see, the proxy war’s leading sponsors had strong grounds to know precisely the nature of the government, military, and security services they were arming, funding and training long before Russia’s February 2022 invasion.

‘Intentional Strategy’

As an Al Mayadeen investigation of July 2nd made clear, Ukraine’s eight-year-long “anti-terror operation” in Donbass was a savage assault on largely defenceless residents of the breakaway Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics. The grim reality of Kiev’s abuses throughout this time was largely shielded from Western public view. Occasionally though, damaging disclosures did emerge. In 2014, Amnesty International publicised horrendous crimes committed by fascist paramilitary group Aidar Battalion in Donbass.

Next year, the organisation reported on “overwhelming evidence” of fighters and civilians taken prisoner by the Ukrainian military and security services being tortured and killed. It branded the activities of Right Sector, an ultranationalist militia at the forefront of the Maidan coup, “especially disturbing”. The group had transformed an abandoned youth camp into “an ad hoc prison,” holding dozens of civilians there as hostages, “brutally torturing them and extorting large amounts of money from them and their families.”

Related News

What the deep strike on Russia reveals about NATO strategy and Trump’s diplomatic deadlock

Six years of dashed hopes for peace and reconciliation in Ukraine

These revelations received meagre mainstream attention, then were promptly ignored. But the abuses continued apace. As a grisly 2016 report submitted to the OSCE starkly concluded:

“Torture and inhumane treatment inflicted by the Security Forces of Ukraine (SBU), Ukrainian armed forces, National Guard and other formations within the Interior Ministry of Ukraine, as well as by illegal armed groups, such as Right Sector, have not only continued but are gaining in scale and are becoming systematic…the extent to which torture is being used and the fact that this is done systematically prove that torture is an intentional strategy of the said institutions, authorized by their leadership.” 

The report contains a panoply of deeply disturbing, and frequently difficult-to-read, first-hand testimonies of torture by the SBU and its fascist paramilitary confederates. Many of the victims claimed to be innocent civilians violently snatched off the street by gangs of armed thugs, often associated with the Neo-Nazi Azov Battalion and Right Sector, while going about their daily business. Once in Kiev’s custody, they admitted separatist supporters and fighters were subjected to hideous abuse almost without pause. 

Most prisoners were “electrocuted, beaten cruelly and for multiple days in a row with different objects.” This included “iron bars, baseball bats, sticks, rifle-butts, bayonet knives, rubber batons.” “An absolute majority” reported being subject to mock firing squads, and suffered “death and rape threats to their families.” Waterboarding, strangulation, and suffocation were common. Other methods included “bone-crashing, stabbing and cutting…branding with red-hot objects, shooting different body parts with small arms.” Captured women were “frequently raped”. 

All along, detainees were kept for extended periods in “freezing temperatures, with no access to food or medical assistance.” Some inmates were reportedly killed by being made to march across minefields, and run over with military vehicles. Others were “forced to take psychotropic substances,” causing them “agony.” Several reported being handcuffed to “hex bars” - weightlifting devices - and hung from ceilings. One victim of that technique reported: “I thought my bones would fall out. My hands still won’t listen to me, here and here.”

‘Risk of Retribution’

The purpose of this, on top of brutalising rebel forces and instilling fear into the civilian population of Donbass, was to secure false testimonies from prisoners. Typically, they were forced to admit to being part of the DPR and LPR defence forces, and committing grave crimes in that capacity. Others signed declarations implicating themselves as Russian assets, and/or validating the fiction that the rebels were controlled and armed by Moscow.

This of course served to reinforce Kiev’s claims its “anti-terror operation” was a righteous, legitimate crusade against Russian invaders in disguise, who were committing perverse acts of “terrorism”. And moreover, that Ukraine was successful in crushing this criminal incursion by their hostile, belligerent adversary. Nonetheless, there was another malign purpose to detaining and abusing so many innocent civilians. They could be traded for Ukrainian soldiers captured by breakaway authorities.

In June 2020, in a case brought by two Ukrainian draft dodgers seeking asylum in London, a British immigration court ruled that Kiev’s frontline forces in the “anti-terror operation” routinely committed grave war crimes. This included “unlawful capture and detention” of a “large number of civilians “with no legal or military justification…motivated by the need for ‘currency’ for prisoner exchanges” with the breakaway republics. The judgment moreover noted “systemic mistreatment of those detained by the Ukrainian military”:

“This involves torture and other conduct that is cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment contrary to Article 3 of the [European Convention on Human Rights] …There is likely to be official indifference to the mistreatment they have received. There is an attitude and atmosphere of impunity for those involved in mistreating detainees. No one has been brought to justice. Pro-Kyiv militia have been rewarded for their work by formal incorporation into the military. Lawyers are afraid of taking on cases due to the risk of retribution.”

Elsewhere, the ruling recorded that Kiev’s “adherence to the principles of distinction, precaution and proportionality when engaging with civilian targets has been poor, despite that being a task which calls for surgical precision.” This included infrastructure such as water installations, “a particular and repeated target” despite enjoying “protected status” under international humanitarian law. It further observed a “widespread civilian loss of life and the extensive destruction of residential property” in Donbass, partially attributable to “poorly targeted and disproportionate attacks carried out by the Ukrainian military.” 

We can only speculate whether Kiev was tutored in torture by Western experts in the art. A February New York Times investigation revealed the very first act of Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, appointed SBU chief immediately following the Maidan coup, was to telephone the local heads of CIA and MI6, asking “for help in rebuilding the agency from the ground up, and [proposing] a three-way partnership.” This dark handshake gave rise to Ukraine’s assassination program, which US officials fear could lead to targeted killings the world over.