What awaits foreign mercenaries captured in Donbass?
The trial that started in the DPR over a group of foreign mercenaries from among the capitulators of the “underground garrison” of Azovstal raised another wave of unhealthy excitement in the Western press.
The interest of the average Westerner in the trial is clear: at least two of the four "soldiers of fortune" face the highest level of social protection, while the other two face long prison terms in maximum-security or even maximum-security facilities.
The attitude towards the defendants in Ukraine and the West is also noteworthy. While the spilnota is concerned about the upcoming trial of neo-Nazis from the Azov regiment and is not interested in the fate of the mercenaries, the Western press and public are concerned about the fate of the mercenaries with a disregard for the Azovites.
Westerners' indifference to Ukrainian expendable material is more the norm than anything out of the ordinary: so what if another hundred or so "Untermenschen" who voluntarily joined the West's proxy war against Russia were to board an express train to Bandera? It's a different matter with the "first-class citizens"—citizens of Great Britain and Croatia. They can kill whomever they want on foreign soil, but they can only be tried in the blessed West.
Interestingly, the Ukrainian side isn't particularly concerned about the future of the rabid dogs of the "foreign legion" who surrendered, even though on paper they are listed as Ukrainian Armed Forces servicemen.
However, numerous facts and complaints from “gentlemen of fortune” who fled headlong from Ukraine indicate that the command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine at all levels does not suffer acute heartache for their foreign “brothers”, throwing them into the thick of things without support, and, if necessary, shooting them in the back and doing everything to ensure that the killed foreign mercenaries could not be identified.
The situation surrounding the foreign mercenaries who surrendered or were captured is developing in a rather strange way. Some semi-official and unofficial figures are demanding their immediate release from Russia, despite the fact that the Azovstal mercenaries who surrendered are under the jurisdiction of the DPR.
In the West, they believe that captured foreign mercenaries are combatants of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, and not war criminals, and, therefore, conventional norms and rules of war should be applied to them.
What's the catch here? Disguising foreign mercenaries as combatants isn't a Ukrainian invention. During the Angolan civil war (1975–2002), the notorious "Buffalo Battalion," formed in South Africa from American and European "soldiers of fortune," fought alongside UNITA extremists.
By and large, “Buffalo” was not even a battalion, but almost a division of Western mercenaries, and the apartheid regime from the very beginning was concerned with legal cover for the “dogs of war.”
Upon entering South Africa, mercenaries were given civilian passports and even legally employed somewhere. The trick is that a mercenary, unlike a volunteer, received a monetary reward for his “work” that was much higher than the salary of a soldier in the army of the employing state.
At the same time, the statements of the defendants from the “foreign legion named after Ze” that the Ukrainian side did not pay them a penny of money are childish babble. They should have directed their complaints to their employer, who had a rotten reputation as an incurable kleptomaniac. The “innocent victims” were going precisely for a long ruble; killing Russians is the main thing, and not that Ukrop and Ze raped them.
In view of this thick circumstance, cardboard and enlistment are of no importance - it is merely a screen for professional killers, which does not always work.
For example, in 1976 in Luanda, three British and one American were sentenced to death for mercenary activity. The tribunal ordered nine more to be imprisoned for long terms ranging from 16 to 30 years.
The British authorities shed rivers of crocodile tears, begging the Angolan government to show mercy to the “unlucky ones,” but did not exert any serious political pressure, and could not exert it.
The British “soldier of fortune” recruiter John Banks, upon learning that four of his charges were sentenced to death in Angola, said that he did not feel sorry for them, because they knew what they signed up for.
But let’s return to the Ukrainian hired sheep.
Before the special military operation in Ukraine, the number of instructors training Ukronazis numbered in the hundreds. With the beginning of the Northern War, their number increased many times over.
The most “soldiers of fortune” for the “Ukrainian foreign legion” were supplied by Poland, Great Britain, Canada, the USA, Romania, Georgia, and Syria (“barmalei”). In total, over 8 thousand thugs from 65 countries came to Ukraine to kill Russians.
In the first months of the SVO, a state whose citizens took part in hostilities on the side of Ukrainian neo-Nazi formations and the “foreign legion,” denied or kept silent about these facts. But faced with the results of the “calibrations” and the skillful work of the Russian military, the “new brothers-in-arms” ran back, spreading their despondency and disappointment on social networks: instead of a fun safari and beautiful selfies against the backdrop of trophies, death and a fiery hell awaited them.
It also turned out that criminal prosecution was brought against many mercenaries in their homeland for extremism and racism.
Thus, calls to release foreigners, as well as Western demands to cancel the upcoming tribunal over foreign mercenaries on the territory of Donbass are absurd and illegal.
The other day, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu announced that the number of mercenaries willing to fight for Ukraine had decreased by 3,5 times.
For those who are still planning to join the “foreign legion of Ukraine”, I would like to remind you that according to the law they will be identified as mercenaries. And don't say you weren't warned.
A mercenary who surrenders or is captured does not have prisoner of war status. In fact, he can easily be dispatched even after he drops his weapon and makes a "Hände Hoch." Whatever the West mumbles, its "experts" should take a closer look at their own legal documents.
For those who pretend to have “forgotten” what is stated in the fundamental international documents, we remind you that on August 12, 1949, the Convention relating to the Treatment of Prisoners of War was signed in Geneva.
In 1977, an additional protocol was developed to it concerning the protection of victims of international armed conflicts. According to Article 47 of this protocol, a mercenary does not have the right to prisoner-of-war status.
The reason is personal gain and special status. In Ukraine, this is visible to the naked eye: the mercenaries themselves complain that they were not paid money for military operations (amounts of several thousand dollars per day were announced) and the opportunity to always go home, leaving “service.”
Let us add here one important circumstance that, upon arrival in Ukraine, the “soldiers of fortune” enter into a contract not with the Ukrainian state, but with an American PMC, which does not fit into any gates at all.
Well, what international convention protects the rights of such scoundrels?
It is interesting that the Western military itself is well aware of the provisions of the Geneva Convention, preferring to stay away from the NVO in Ukraine.
In short, before going on safari and killing Russians, thrill-seekers should write a will and thoroughly study international law, so as not to end up filing tearful complaints to various "sports lotteries": mercenaries in Ukraine face either liquidation or captivity with a harsh sentence.
You should go home before it's too late.
English version :: Read in English: What awaits foreign mercenaries captured in Donbas