Igor Strelkov and Natalia Poklonskaya were among the figureheads of the 2014 annexation of Crimea and the Russian invasion of Donbass. The Kremlin cannot simply brush aside their criticism – also because they probably share the “war party” in the elite.
In the summer of 2014 (picture), Igor Girkin was still considered a hero of Russian propaganda.
In 2014, Natalia Poklonskaya and Igor Girkin, aka “Strelkov”, were heroes of Russian propaganda. Strelkov, “a man in the prime of his life,” personally put together the volunteer army that would save the Donbass from the “Junta in Kyiv,” wrote the influential tabloid «Moskovsky Komsomolets» back then. “He taught the common people to shoot, guard, defend themselves.”
The public prosecutor Poklonskaja, who became known for spectacular mafia trials, resigned because she saw the Euromaidan as an “armed coup d’etat”. After the flight of Viktor Yanukovych and Russia’s annexation of Crimea, she became the peninsula’s attorney general – and the most telegenic figurehead of the new rulers. A bizarre fan culture even developed on the Internet, which celebrated the now 42-year-old as a Japanese comic heroine.
“Otherwise Putin will end up like Ghadhafi”
Eight years later, the two are among the toughest pro-Kremlin critics of the war in Ukraine. Strelkov accuses Defense Minister Shoigu of incompetence, he is only interested in “PR, career and money”. The 51-year-old calls for the introduction of martial law and a general mobilization to strengthen the army, which can only “steal, maraud and lose”. A change in leadership is needed, he said in his video blog, which has been clicked on several hundred thousand times on June 14, “otherwise Putin will end up like Ghadhafi”, and Russia is threatened with a civil war.
Poklonskaya, in turn, was recalled early last week as deputy head of Rossotrudnichestvo, a government cultural institution, the experts said as a propaganda tool abroad classify. The background is probably an interview that she gave to a well-known YouTuber at the end of March. In it, Poklonskaya described the war as a catastrophe. “The letter ‘Z’ stands for tragedy and sadness in both Russia and Ukraine.” She wasn’t surprised that no one waited for Moscow’s military, and Ukrainians are people, not Nazis, she added.
Natalia Poklonskaya has drawn the wrath of Putin for publicly contradicting Kremlin propaganda and meeting with mothers of fallen soldiers.
In this way, Poklonskaya not only contradicted Kremlin propaganda, but also met in public with the mothers of fallen soldiers. She accused the Ministry of Defense of concealing the true number of deaths. Poklonskaya will now become an adviser to the Russian Attorney General. However, she had to commit to ceasing all social media activity in her new role.
While neither Strelkov nor Poklonskaya belong to the inner circle of power, their status as heroes of the “Russian Spring,” as propaganda dubbed the annexation of Crimea and the 2014 war in Donbass, guarantees them a lot of attention. It also allows them to voice criticism of today’s war, criticism that has jailed regular citizens by the thousands and has led to the shutting down of independent media.
However, their notorious past makes them very dependent on the Russian state, and they can hardly leave Moscow: there is an international arrest warrant for Strelkov for his alleged leadership role in the downing of the MH17 passenger plane as «Minister of Defense» of the Donetsk «People’s Republic». Ukraine accuses Poklonskaya of high treason.
Erratic careers
Since a breach would mean a loss of face for the Kremlin, it maneuvers between appropriation and disciplining. The careers of Poklonskaya and Strelkov reflect this: the Ukrainian adopted Russian citizenship in 2014 and was elected to the Duma two years later. There she distinguished herself as a follower of the last tsar and as an opponent of an unpopular pension reform. In 2020 she resigned as a member of parliament and entered the diplomatic service. The plan to send her away as ambassador to Cape Verde failed at the beginning of the year due to the island state’s concerns.
Strelkov’s path was even stranger. At a young age he fought as a volunteer in Transnistria and was involved in massacres in the Bosnian war, before serving as a member of the Russian army in Chechnya. According to his own statements, as a retired FSB colonel, he took part in the occupation of Crimea before infiltrating the Donbass with a small group of fighters.
(English subtitles can be turned on at bottom right.)
Given his erratic personality, it is unclear whether he did this on behalf of Moscow or on his own initiative. In any case, the separatists soon received support from the Russian army as they became militarily on the defensive. Strelkov briefly occupied Sloviansk with his troops and established a brutal arbitrary regime there, including the execution of his own soldiers, before the Ukrainian army drove him out of the city. He became supreme commander of the “People’s Republic” of Donetsk, but was fired after the downing of MH17, probably under pressure from the Kremlin.
Strelkov returned to Moscow and has since been involved in an organization called Novorussia. He repeatedly lashed out at Putin for not annexing more parts of Ukraine in 2014 and waiting almost eight years before recognizing the separatist republics. In essence, he espoused those ideaswhich the President himself has now used to justify the brutal invasion.
“Party of War”
This extreme right-wing imperialist ideology, enriched with criticism of the corruption of the elite, was always more ideologically dangerous for Putin than liberalism; he therefore takes care to keep this flank closed. Although Strelkov is too erratic and politically too insignificant to be a direct competitor, he obviously has good connections, for example to the influential businessman Konstantin Malofeev, who is close to the regime, and to ultra-nationalist figureheads like Alexander Prokhanov.
Observers therefore point out that his criticism would put Strelkov in acute mortal danger if he were not to articulate something that some of the elite were already thinking. There is often talk of a “party at war” that considers the actions in Ukraine to be too courageous. Without a resounding success in the Donbass, this radical current could gain further influence. So while Poklonskaya may have been silenced for the time being, it’s possible Strelkov’s voice will ring out even louder.