Captured Russian Pilot Says He Was Ordered to Hit Civilian Targets

[left-of-center2012]

Video of a Russian pilot apparently admitting he had been ordered to bomb a civilian target has been widely shown on Ukrainian media. During a press conference streamed by Interfax Ukraine, the pilot, who gave his name as Maxim Krishtop, described how he had learned of his orders, which he carried out before being shot down on March 6 and captured by Ukrainian forces.

"In the process of completing the task, I realized that the target was not enemy military facilities, but residential buildings, peaceful people. "But I carried out the criminal order," said Krishtop, a lieutenant colonel and deputy commander of the 47th Aviation Regiment, adding that he was shot down by Ukraine's air defense system and taken prisoner. He said he carried out three bombing missions in Ukraine, some of which involved deploying FAB-500— Soviet-era air-dropped bombs with a high-explosive warhead

"I recognize the enormity of the crimes committed by me. I want to ask forgiveness from the entire Ukrainian people for the misfortune that we brought them," he said. "I will do everything in my power to end this war as quickly as possible, and bring those responsible for this genocide of Ukrainians to justice. I also urge all military personnel of the Russian Federation to stop carrying out military crimes against the peaceful people of Ukraine. " He concluded by saying: "I think we have already lost this war."

Krishtop appeared in a lineup of three Russian officers Ukraine claims to have captured and who were brought to speak to the media. The press conference comes amid numerous reports of low morale among Russian military staff and anecdotes of how many believed they were duped into fighting in Ukraine. Last week,
unverified video showed a Russian prisoner of war claiming that Russia's military were shooting their own wounded. Other videos circulated by Ukrainian authorities apparently show Russian soldiers tearfully regretting their presence in the conflict.

https://www.newsweek.com/russia-ukraine-putin-pilot-shot-civilian-1687191

[Kittycatkat]

1. Remarkable story on so many levels.

[Enter stage left]

2. c'mon Anonymous, it's your turn...

This should be aired over all over Russia 24 hours a day for as long as this war goes on.

Then tell what the penalties can be for war crimes against civilians.

Let's scare the hell out of the Russian troops, and those supporting them.

We have NOTHING to lose by trying this.

[XiJung]

40. Watch this

[Cognitive_Resonance]

3. Interesting that the captured pilots are experienced high-profile officers. nt

[XiJung]

4. Against Geneva Convention to put POWS on public display

As much as I detest what Putin is doing there is no need to sink to his sewer.

[Skittles]

6. I tend to agree with this assessment

the "statement" also sounds very.....rehearsed

[BootinUp]

7. agreed. nt

[XiJung]

8. I think it is safe to assume the individual POW

would say whatever he or she thought would most ensure their safety. It is unseemly

[uponit7771]

10. If the two countries don't officially declare war do they have to follow Geneva? I do agree that

... vids of POWs aren't convincing no matter what the POW says.

[Steven Maurer]

13. That's actually a very interesting legal point...

...so long as Russia refuses to call this a war, the Geneva conventions do not apply to their military. From a legal standpoint, such people are literally indistinguishable from murderers, subject to whatever Ukrainian laws specify, up to and including the death penalty.

Ukrainians can choose to be more civilized than this, and I would hope they are, but I don't think they will be in trouble regarding any rules associated with adhering to the laws and rules concerning war.

[XiJung]

41. Watch this

[Emrys]

25. The convention applies to any armed conflicts, whether declared as war or not.

Though, as I posted below, it's debatable whether this video contravenes the convention.

[uponit7771]

26. +1,

[yardwork]

27. This is not an area I know anything about...

I'm curious about the line between "terrorist attack" and "armed conflict." What is that line, and who decides?

[Emrys]

29. I think that would be another area for legal debate,

but I suspect it might rely on the duration of any attack and defence.

[yardwork]

31. That would seem to benefit the aggressor.

[Emrys]

34. There are separate charges and penalties for terrorism, I guess n/t

[msfiddlestix]

35. Might be correct, but the "laws" embodied in the Geneva Convention...

sort of seems like the Geneva Convention has been violated repeatedly by the very governments who created it.

We sort of made it anachronistic or a relic of an era when we did have the moral high ground. That got severely chipped away at during Vietnam, and then who can forget Iraq? G'tmo? Abu Ghraib (sp?)?

I wonder how long it's going to take for us to repair that damage?

[littlemissmartypants]

15. Why?

[Skittles]

19. Geneva Convention

The Geneva Conventions and Protocols try specifically to protect all human beings affected by armed conflict, especially those who are not, or no longer, directly engaged in hostilities. These persons hors de combat are the wounded and sick, shipwrecked, prisoners of war and civilians.

if you agree with this treatment for American POWs, you need to agree for all

[littlemissmartypants]

22. What if they ask for a platform to speak? Would it deny them that request?

I agree so called "hostage videos" are horrible. But if I wanted to speak my truth, unencumbered why should I be prevented from doing so? Seems like it prevents me from having my rights recognized. But I guess I will try to read it and I might understand it better. ❤

[elleng]

17. Sadly, there IS a need; the 'sewer' was created by putin.

[Emrys]

24. That is legally debatable:

Reg. "Ukraine may not film POWs!". It is allowed. One may not humiliate POWs, but there is no ban on filming. And as the aggressor denies the very existence of own POWs, it is in their interest to be filmed + identified, so their families could be informed they are alive and fine

Here is the text of the related article. It is clear, that treatment which can cause harm to health or even death are banned. "Public curiosity" is banned also, but it relates to public demonstration of POWs (for example, to let POWs march through a civil crowd to "present" them)



For example, a show-like march of Ukrainian POWs in Donetsk in 2014, as they were exposed to violence and insults, was a clear violation of the Convention. Filming of a formalised interrogation is not.

Moreover, I would have argued, in a current situation filming is more than legit. Let me explain. Russian command tells its soldiers, Ukrainians are blood-thirsty Nazis. Films prove, that this is a lie. Effectively, they increase readiness of Russian soldiers to capitulate...

...and this may save lives. There is a situation, when a soldier still may continue fight. If he/she can, he/she may capitulate and his/her life must be spared. If otherwise! - a soldier capitulates just seconds before his case is lost, enemy is not obliged to spare his/her life.

The standard legal explanation is simple: capitulation guarantees protection only if it is conscious, and the soldier could continue to resist, but decided not to. Otherwise, there is no capitulation as is. An attacking soldier also may not always understand the enemy capitulates

So effectively, if a Russian soldier believes, Ukrainians would torture and kill him (as his commander lie), he will not be ready to capitulate, and this may cost him his life. The named videos provide a soldier with truth and therefore strengthen his rights and his position. END

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1499101946069848074.html

Original Twitter thread here:

Link to tweet

[yardwork]

32. Thank you for posting that. Very interesting.

The point about how Russia's lying to their own troops creates a moral imperative for Ukraine to tell Russian troops the truth was especially interesting.

Anyway, Ukrainians are fighting for their lives, with little military assistance from the rest of the world. I doubt they're too worried about the nuances of the Geneva Convention right now, with Russia violating every kind of norm.

[Emrys]

33. If Vlad wants to proffer war crimes charges under International Law,

I hope he'll make a personal appearance in the Hague to do so!

[XiJung]

39. No

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/russian-pow-videos-ukraine-international-law-1.6377305

Prisoners of war and detainees.

The law states they must be protected. This includes from acts of violence, intimidation, and ill-treatment.

They also must be treated with dignity, and not exposed to public curiosity – like circulating images on social media.

8:14 AM · Mar 4, 2022

[Emrys]

43. The piece I quoted above details the relevant law (I suggest you read it properly)

and explains more about how "exposed to public curiosity" is interpreted. It doesn't necessarily apply to video appearances.

Disagree if you will, though your basis is not clear. I said it was legally debatable.

[XiJung]

45. If its "legally debatable", as you say,...

....then it should not be done. And there it is.

[Emrys]

47. You seem more exercised by a video than the wholesale carnage being meted out.

The piece I quoted above gives a pretty clear and defensible rationale for why it could be justified on humanitarian grounds.

Re-posting the same video to various people, then coming here and glibly declaring "And there it is." after opining "then it should not be done" is like awarding yourself an undeserved medal at a debate club.

[XiJung]

49. You can accept it or not n/t

[XiJung]

42. Watch this

[Emrys]

44. A different conflict in different circumstances. Not persuasive n/t

[XiJung]

46. Your distinction on the matter....

....is without a difference.

[Emrys]

48. Your contribution to this thread is hardly illuminating. n/t

[XiJung]

50. Or it is obviously illuminating n/t

[Emrys]

51. Nope. n/t

[XiJung]

52. Yeas n/t

[I_UndergroundPanther]

5. Shooting thier own wounded

Maybe thats what the
russian mobile creamatoriums are for burning the evidence..

[Grins]

9. "...forgiveness...for the MISFORTUNE that we brought them..."??

Odd use of words. His or the interpreter’s?

Misfortune is like turning your ankle while playing tennis, it’s a long way from dropping a bomb on buildings and people.

[Igel]

36. Yes.

Russian "beda", which runs the gamut from "trouble" to "misfortune" to "calamity". It's a bad thing that happens to you. It can be something done to you intentionally, but from the sufferer's POV it's something imposed and unavoidable. Being evicted is a beda just like a flood is a beda or burning the chicken you were going to serve your family or finding that ants got into the sugar bowl and you don't have any more sugar.

Just like "trouble" can run the gamut from "crap, I was late to work for the second time this month and now I'm in trouble with my boss" or we can talk about the Troubles in Ireland.

No problem with the use of the word in Russian.

The translator sort of botched the context--"misfortune" is the easy translation, but it's limited in horribleness. Beda is a really common word and "misfortune" isn't, so there's that going against that translation even if it's the first translation that comes to mind when I've run across it in learning the language or translating for fun or profit. Why? Because that's usually the first word given in Russian-English dictionaries. (I checked a few, Soviet-made, Western Soviet-era, post-Soviet, and all the ones I checked give "misfortune" as the first option. Maybe it's just a bit of archaic speech and 'misfortune' was more common 70 years ago.)

It can mean "calamity", which is better in English in this context. Maybe "catastrophe", but there's katastrofa for that.

[DemocraticPatriot]

11. No surprise.

However, i think that the majority of Russian attacks on civilian targets are the result of indiscriminate missile and artillery attacks. I don't belive the Russians actually bombed hospitals and such on purpose--- only that they don't give a shit where their shells come down-- they are ordered to level a city, and they are doing the best that they can--- those that will still fight for Russia....

[elleng]

18. Oh right, MISTAKES.

[yardwork]

28. Evidence suggests otherwise.

[Emrys]

30. Attacks on civilian targets have been a feature of conflicts for ages, especially from Russia.

The excuse is often that the adversary power is using civilians as "human shields", which isn't a legal get-out, but by the time legal toss is argued in any court, people are maimed or dead.

[Kablooie]

12. It may be true or it may be propaganda.

You never know but it sounds a bit extreme for a pilot who was recently captured and hopes for lenient treatment.

[speak easy]

14. "forgiveness from the entire Ukrainian people ... for this genocide of Ukrainians

...stop carrying out military crimes against the peaceful people of Ukraine".

Not the words of a soldier.

[lindysalsagal]

37. Frankly, I'm surprised the guy made the video. I thought it was name rank serial number..

Wow!

[Warpy]

16. Kid, scared out of his wits, reading a prepared speech

I tend to disbelieve stuff like this is heartfelt. They seem perfectly willing to follow murderous orders before they are caught.

[alphafemale]

21. Kid? He is at least 40. That said this is straight up propaganda. nt

[left-of-center2012]

23. "Kid ...". ?

He looks old enough to be some kid's grandfather.

[TreasonousBastard]

20. After 3 missions dropping bombs indiscriminately on civilians...

he's shot down.

So now he's sorry for being such an obedient louse.

All of them knew perfectly well what they were doing, but every ex soldier here knows how well the military abuses your loyalties. And if training doesn't do it, being shot at by soldiers who had identical training for the other side will.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

38. Heckuva job Pooty Poot