Russian nationalist at the front – Part 1

This article was originally published in Danish on June 6, 2025.

---

Introduction

Here we present the first part of this two-part series of articles, which consists of two interviews on different topics to provide a perspective on Russia and the war in Ukraine from a politically active person on the Russian nationalist right wing scene, Alexei Miltjakov, leader of Rusich.

The two articles should help to clear up many of the misunderstandings that exist about Russia and the war in Ukraine – including on the right wing.

The blog naturally distances itself from violence, terrorism, and all other forms of illegal activity. The actions and views of individuals and groups mentioned in the article series are their own.

We have originally translated it from Swedish and published it with permission from the Nordic Resistance Movement. Source: https://nordfront.se/rysk-nationalist-vid-fronten-introduktion-och-ukrainafragan

It was originally published on Nordfront.se on March 7, 2024.

***

Russian nationalist at the front: Introduction, the Ukraine issue, and “denazification”

INTERVIEW • Last year, Nordfront interviewed a Ukrainian nationalist fighting in the Ukrainian army against Russia. Now it is time for a Russian nationalist fighting for Russia to share his views on Russia, Ukraine, and the ongoing conflict.

Last May, Nordfront published a two-part interview with a Ukrainian nationalist participating in the war against Russia. The background was the many questions that had arisen about the Ukrainian position, partly in light of the Euromaidan coup in 2014, but also the ongoing war in the country.

Just as one can question whether a nationalist is fighting for Ukraine, there are a number of questions surrounding how one can support the other side in the war. Russia has declared that its military special operation in Ukraine is an “anti-Nazi” campaign, and there are frequent reports of radical nationalists being persecuted in Russia.

When nationalists discuss the Ukraine issue, they often do so from a geopolitical or ideological perspective: some believe that it is best for the world if Russia wins and thus reduces NATO’s power, while others see Russia as a neo-Bolshevik force that threatens the whole of Europe. With these interviews, Nordfront wants to give the perspective of the nationalists who are actually participating in the conflict and risking their lives for what they believe in, regardless of which side they are on.

The person interviewed is Aleksey Miltjakov, leader of a paramilitary and nationalist movement called Reconnaissance, Sabotage, and Assault Group (DShRG) Rusich, which has been involved in the conflict in Donbass since 2014 on the side of the Russian separatists and further in Russia’s military special operation in Ukraine. Rusich recently came back into the spotlight when Jan Petrovskij, also known as “Veliki Slavian” (The Great Slav), who previously lived in Norway and also fought for Rusich in Ukraine, was sentenced to prison in Finland.

The interview questions were first written in Swedish, then translated into English and Russian. Miltjakov then wrote his answers in Russian, which were then translated into English and then into Swedish, followed by the same process with a series of follow-up questions. Nordfront has therefore tried to keep the translation as literal as possible. Comments in parentheses are Miltjakov’s own, while comments in square brackets and comments followed by “editor’s note” are Nordfront’s additions, which are only intended to explain something to the reader and are not comments on the answers themselves. In cases where a comment in square brackets comes from Rusich‘s own translator, this is indicated. We leave it entirely up to the reader to take a position on Miltjakov’s answers, just as we did when we interviewed the Ukrainian soldier.

In the first part, Miltjakov tells us more about himself, about Rusich, its role in Donbass and in the military special operation, as well as his views on Ukraine as a nation, the political developments since 2014, and the ongoing war in the country. We also ask what the “denazification” of Ukraine is really about. Miltjakov is also given the opportunity to respond to serious allegations made in a media report by young people.

In part two, we ask about Russia, what it is like to live as a nationalist in Russian society, and how Miltjakov feels that other nationalists in both Russia and around the world have reacted to the war.

Introduction and Rusich

Can you tell us a little about yourself, your background, your involvement in nationalism, and your role in the conflict in Ukraine?

I was born in Saint Petersburg in 1991 and went to school there. From the age of 14, I was actively involved in the right-wing nationalist movement and went to football matches with “ultras” (so-called football hooligans). I was one of the first in Saint Petersburg to advocate things like military training among right-wing youth and for radical right-wing movements to arm themselves (by purchasing legal weapons).

After the Russian authorities banned the “Slavic Union” (a right-wing sociopolitical movement) in 2009, which I was part of at the time, I left all movements and began to independently engage in the creation of a paramilitary, nationalist structure that was intended to fight for Russia’s interests. Since there was no war at the time, we simply focused on preparing ourselves, gaining experience and skills, and studying.

Between 2012 and 2013, I served in the Russian army – Airborne Forces, 76th Airborne Assault Division. In 2014, I arrived in the territory that previously belonged to Ukraine (the city of Luhansk) with a small group and started to create my own unit as part of the “Batman” task force, which was a regular and at the same time voluntary formation. We arrived there without knowing anything about the future – but it turned out well.

You are the commander of a group called Rusich. Can you tell us about Rusich, where it was formed and why?

Yes, I command a group called Rusich. The unit was formed in 2009, at that time consisting of a group of friends who were nationalists, patriots and right-wing radicals who wanted to learn how to fight.

In other words, unlike the usual nationalist movements of the time, which focused on various street actions, demonstrations, and so on, our goal was more specifically to prepare for participation in war, so we were armed and trained according to a military model.

Later in 2014, members of this group were at the core of those who traveled to defend the Russian people in Donbass alongside us. When we realized that our level of knowledge and training at the time allowed us to expand, we decided to go public with our name and began working independently.

Is Rusich today a purely paramilitary organization, or is it also political? If so, what ideology does it profess?

Rusich is a project, and the paramilitary part is only one component of the project. We also have a military-patriotic club, an information department, a finance department, and a number of other departments.

All of us are, of course, nationalists and patriots. Our ideological component is partly National Socialism, with additions from other national political movements. The reason is that classical National Socialism of the type found in the Third Reich is already outdated and irrelevant for Russia.

What is your ultimate political goal? Do you want to see a kind of pan-Slavic state, recreate the Russian Empire as a tsarist regime? Or something else?

Our ultimate political goal is the development of Russia in the traditional and classical sense as a white, European, heterosexual country and the unification of the Slavic peoples under Russia’s protectorate, as the strongest Slavic power.

There is no goal to purge Russia of all other indigenous peoples who have lived in this country for thousands of years; they must also be allowed to live in peace, harmony, and unity on Russian territory. But the Russians, as a state-forming nation, must have their own large nation-state, called Russia.

Do you mean that ethnic Russians should have a nation state within the framework of a broader Russian federation, and that the latter would also include other indigenous peoples with their own political entities?

Russia must become a nation-state for the Russian people at an official level, with a reference to the political supremacy of the Russian people in the state constitution. This should of course include territories currently occupied by “national republics” [today’s republics within the Russian Federation. ed. note] in present-day Russia and even more.

Other peoples may also live on Russian territory, but they cannot have any cultural or political autonomy, nor can they count on state support for their national languages and cultures. Only Russian can be the official language of the state, and only Russian culture should be studied in public schools.

What was Rusich’s role before 2014 and then after 2014 in Donbass and further after the start of the special military operation in Ukraine in 2022?

Rusich’s role in 2014 on the territory of the Luhansk People’s Republic was significant, as was that of the entire “Batman” force (of which we were a part at the time). Since Luhansk at that time consisted of a small group of poorly armed people with inadequate training, our role was very crucial.

After 2014, we participated in other battles and were part of other structures.

 

The [military] special operation, which began in 2022, became a very large-scale undertaking involving a large number of forces. But we fulfilled our role and did what was expected of us.

Is it true that Rusich is now part of the private military company Wagner [as reported in both the media and on Wikipedia. editor’s note]? And if so, what is your view on this?

No, today “Rusich” is not part of Wagner.

What is your view of the former head of Wagner, the Jew Yevgeny Prigozhin? Was he just a crook, or was his criticism of Russia’s military leadership justified and reasonable?

During the [military] special operation, Yevgeny Prigozhin proved himself to be a smart leader, capable of managing a large unit that delivered results, which was largely thanks to him. Incidentally, he has never condemned or tried to intervene against Russian nationalists and never tried to force them to renounce their ideological convictions.

It is funny that he is called a Jew. His mother is Russian, his father is Russian, he has always considered himself Russian and Orthodox, while always treating the pagans in his inner circle the best. Pay particular attention to the person who was his “right-hand man” for many years and the tattoos and views that person had. Also look at the pictures from Prigozhin’s house from the police raid—how many Orthodox icons were there and how many Jewish objects could be seen (zero).

His criticism of Russia’s military leadership was justified. Yevgeny Prigozhin is, of course, emotional, but his criticism was correct, and we fully support him in this.

How do you think Yevgeny Prigozhin died? Was it an accident or murder? And if it was murder, who was behind it?

We do not believe it was an accident. Any further speculation is beyond our competence.

There are some terrible stories on the Internet attributed to you, primarily animal cruelty (a video showing the torture of a dog) and even war crimes in eastern Ukraine. Is there any truth in this, and what are your comments?

There has never been a video of a dog being tortured on the Internet. If you can provide us with even a small part of this video, which directly shows how a dog is being tortured, we will send you an archive with unique photographs that will cause chaos on the Internet worldwide. If you cannot find the video, we will unfortunately not be able to give you these photos.

We did not commit any war crimes in eastern Ukraine because we were not military personnel at the time. But our position is always to be as cruel as possible to the enemy, that is true.

It is true that we have not seen any video, only photographs or what appear to be screenshots of a video of the alleged incident, as well as media reports about it. Is it correct to interpret your answer as dismissing the narrative as fake news, and if so, what is the real context of these images?

The photographs are not photoshopped, of course, but it is unclear why people believe that a photo of a corpse and the process of it becoming a corpse are the same thing.

We have been following the case of Jan Petrovsky from Rusich since he lived in Norway many years ago and up until today, when he is imprisoned in Finland and also under investigation for war crimes. Can you tell us more about his case?

We cannot say much about the case of Jan Petrovsky. We can only say that we do not believe he is guilty and that Finland has taken on a heavy burden that it may not be able to bear. Even though it has joined NATO.

Finland has no right to prosecute a Russian citizen for “crimes” committed outside Finnish territory. We are also completely convinced that Jan Petrovskij has not committed any crimes and that his case is exclusively political in nature, and that Jan himself is being held as a political hostage.

Russia and Ukraine

As a Russian nationalist, how do you view the Ukrainian nation? Are Ukrainians part of the Russian people or a separate ethnic group?

We do not view Ukrainians as a separate nation.

The eastern parts of modern “Ukraine” are traditionally Russian land, and the people who live there are Russians just like us. The border between us was created “thanks” to the Bolsheviks, whose goal was to weaken Russia by creating artificial republics along its borders.

Western “Ukraine” consists of Russians mixed with Poles, Hungarians, and Romanians, as well as Jews who lived there outside Russia, in the Jewish settlement area of the Russian Empire [an area in the western parts of the former tsarist empire to which the Jewish population was exiled—the Pale of Settlement; editor’s note]. There were no Ukrainians there either.

How did you view Euromaidan in Ukraine from a Russian perspective? Was it a popular revolution or a Western-backed coup?

We don’t view Maidan from a Russian perspective, but from our own perspective. The original slogan of Euromaidan was “We don’t want the CU, we want the EU!” (CU – a customs union between Russia and neighboring countries). While Ukraine was rebelling because they wanted to join the EU, we didn’t care about that.

But then these events took a completely different turn. As soon as Chechen flags [Chechen separatist flags, editor’s note] and the “Right Sector” began calling for terrorist attacks on Russian territory, it became clear to every Russian that the events on Maidan Square [in Kiev] were taking a distinctly negative turn.

We naturally believe that the conflict was provoked by the West, solely to create tensions near the Russian border and in our traditional territories, which millions of our ancestors died defending.

Why is Russia opposed to Ukraine’s rapprochement with the EU?

For Russia, the European Union is a foreign organization that advocates tolerance, immigration, homosexuality, and various other abominations at the highest official level. Russia definitely does not need such an ally. Unfortunately, the European Union is not only a trade and economic association, but also a political one, with a unified political structure and propaganda.

It is obviously not advantageous for Russia to lose its historical territories, which are inhabited by a Russian population, to an enemy that supports the aforementioned filth and abominations.

In the West, Russia’s annexation of Crimea is portrayed as a very aggressive and threatening move by Russia, and it is said that the referendum was not conducted properly. What is your view on this?

First of all, there was no annexation of Crimea. The documents on the transfer of Crimea to “Ukraine” were signed by the crypto-Jew Nikita Khrushchev [leader of the Soviet Union from September 7, 1953, to October 14, 1964. Editor’s note.], who artificially separated parts of Russia from their motherland.

At the same time, Russians continued to live in Crimea alongside a small group of Crimean Tatars who returned after a well-deserved deportation (they were deported for collaborating with the Nazis and for committing genocide against Russians). In a well-meaning way, a strong leader of the Crimean Tatars had simply exterminated them, but Joseph Stalin generously gave them a chance to survive. What a waste – the Crimean Tatars (5 percent of the peninsula’s population) were the only ones whining about “Ukraine.”

The rest of the population were Russians, they always spoke Russian and waited for Russia for 23 years [from Ukraine’s independence in 1991 to 2014 when Crimea joined the Russian Federation. Ed.]. Thus, Crimea’s return to its homeland is a natural phenomenon. Crimea has historically always been a Russian-Slavic land. All this meant that the reunification was not difficult but was carried out as smoothly as possible, without any deaths, as the Crimean population fully supported the idea.

Is Russia a threat to the rest of Europe?

No, Russia does not pose a threat to Europe. We believe that Russia should cooperate and engage in friendly dialogue with European countries first and foremost, and not with Asian countries. Russia does not need alliances with other races when there are Europeans.

But in this case, Europe itself poses a threat to Russia. Not only in a military sense, but also in the sense that the influence of traditional values is rapidly declining in Europe. The white, healthy, heterosexual family as the foundation of society is becoming a thing of the past. Europe is importing millions of immigrants from Arab and African countries.

What is the point of Russia now being friends with France, which is inhabited by monkeys and already largely consists of Blacks and Muslims? Especially since, at this stage of its development, Europe is completely subservient to the US.

The war in Ukraine

How much did Russia support the separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk when the civil war in Ukraine started in 2014? Western sources say that the breakaway republics were heavily controlled and supported by Russia, while there seem to be quite a few Russian nationalists who instead accuse the Russian state of abandoning the Russians in eastern Ukraine and leaving them to their fate for a long time.

The support received [by the separatists] was insufficient; it should have been both better and more comprehensive. We do not believe that the Russians in Donetsk and Luhansk were abandoned to their fate under any circumstances. But Russia definitely did not provide the support that was needed at the time of the outbreak of the conflict in 2014.

Perhaps there were reasons for this. At least, Vladislav Surkov has told us about it in a personal conversation, but it is not yet time to report the details of that conversation to the press, especially not to the foreign press.

[Translator’s note: Vladislav Surkov was formerly head of all domestic policy in Russia and one of the five most influential people in the country.]

Why was it necessary for Russia to invade Ukraine in 2022?

If a military special operation had not been launched in February 2022, it is our opinion that Ukraine would instead have attempted to launch a large-scale offensive operation against the Donetsk and Luhansk republics in the coming months, which would have led to serious consequences and a large number of civilian casualties.

Such an operation was, of course, planned under the leadership of the US, which was controlled by the old and senile [President Joe] Biden, because his son Hunter (a drug addict, incestuous, and pedophile) had serious business interests in Ukraine and covered up the criminal plans of Biden and the Democrats to launder millions of dollars in this thoroughly corrupt country.

In other words, the Biden family, with their record low support in American politics, needed to:

A) First and foremost, distract the public from the scandals surrounding the complete incompetence of the old man and the disgusting behavior of his son, and at least marginally increase political support, which has nevertheless crashed completely.

B) Second, spend the following billions of dollars on Ukrainian subsidy and aid programs, which no one can track given the record levels of corruption in that country.

A quick and successful operation against Donetsk and Luhansk could have helped Biden achieve these goals. But then Russia intervened.

This was an absolutely necessary military operation in self-defense, which, moreover, took place on Russia’s own territory (which the Judeo-Bolsheviks, through a misunderstanding, gave to the “Ukrainian” people). The point was to finally stop the bombing of peaceful Donetsk and finally liberate the Russian people, who through no fault of their own found themselves on the territory of another state when the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, and who have been waiting for Russia’s arrival ever since.

Was there no peaceful solution to the conflict?

There was obviously no possibility of a peaceful solution. If such a possibility had existed, it would most likely have been implemented. But there are a large number of people and groups on the Ukrainian side who benefit from the war.

And it is unlikely that the Ukrainian government would have agreed to a peaceful solution, that the radical Ukrainian elements and their big financiers, who are making millions from the war, would have agreed to it.

Doesn’t the invasion mean that Russia loses some of its moral superiority over the US now that Russian troops are invading an independent country just as American soldiers have done time and time again?

We do not see that it would be wrong to invade other countries and interfere with their sovereignty in order to promote our own national interests. The US and its allies do this, Israel does it (literally international terrorism at the state level) – and the whole world remains silent about it.

But at the same time, please note: the US invades distant countries that have no connection whatsoever to America, where there are no American residents, and on grounds that are vague to say the least.

All while Russia is restoring freedom to Russian people living on traditionally Russian lands, which found themselves outside Russia only because of the Bolsheviks and their artificial borders. All these people wanted was to read books in Russian, watch Russian films, and teach children in Russian schools (all of which has been banned in Ukraine since 2014).

And now the entire Western world and its puppet media are screaming that Russia is the aggressor. No, that is not true.

What would you say is Russia’s goal in the war today?

We don’t know what goals the Russian Federation’s political leadership is pursuing right now.

Our own view is that the minimum favorable outcome for Russia in this conflict is: the return of traditionally Russian territories, including the Kherson region, Odessa, and Kiev (i.e., beyond the Dnieper River), along with a buffer zone between Russia and NATO in western Ukraine.

In addition, the destruction of prominent representatives of Ukrainian Russophobia (who, for example, have publicly promised to kill Russians across the planet solely on the basis of their nationality). This is the minimum we consider adequate.

In 2022, there was a strong focus in official Russian rhetoric, as we heard in the West, on Russia “denazifying” Ukraine. This was also repeated by Vladimir Putin when he was interviewed by Tucker Carlson recently, when he said that all forms of “neo-Nazism” must be banned in Ukraine. What does this mean, and is this “denazification” rhetoric as common in Russia? There is a lot of confusion about this in the West, as Ukraine is led by a Jewish president and other Jewish politicians, while Putin is called a fascist and Russia stands for values that are labeled as far-right in the West.

To be honest, we don’t understand what “denazification” means. Obviously, the term was needed to explain the conflict to the Russian population, which exists within the state-imposed paradigm of the fight against Nazism as the country’s primary project and the victory over Hitler as its greatest achievement. But this is only characteristic of the current regime. If there is a change of power in Russia, the tone will also change and people will once again start talking about other important Russian achievements: space travel, the invention of airplanes and helicopters, the creation of television and radio, the foremost classical Russian culture, and Russian science.

But in Ukraine, there is actually no clear Nazism or real nationalism. Nationalism is, after all, love for one’s people.

Instead, their entire ideology is simply based on Russophobia, in other words, doing anything just to be different from Russia. Just like their artificial language [Ukrainian], which is a highly distorted version of the Russian language. This was what drunk, illiterate peasants from the southern regions of Russia spoke, and they added even more errors to the language and then adopted it at the official level, just to be different from us. Incidentally, you never hear the Ukrainian language on the battlefield—both sides shout in pure Russian.

At the same time, at the first sign of danger, a large part of the Ukrainian population fled in fear to Europe and destroyed European taxpayers’ property—this is their true ideology and their true ideas. Where is nationalism, in other words, love for the people and attempts to defend them?

What we see, on the other hand, within the framework of the special operation, is decommunization. Since Ukraine never existed and was artificially created by communists, its complete eradication will be part of the decommunization and rectification of the mistakes of the red communist system.

Liberals in the West accuse Russia of having plans to “wipe out” the Ukrainian people. They refer here to things that have been said and written about “denazification,” where some Russian opinion makers have portrayed the entire modern Ukrainian culture as something problematic that needs to be dismantled. What do you have to say about these accusations? Are they hysterical exaggerations or legitimate concerns?

As mentioned earlier, we do not believe that the Ukrainian people exist. Those who consider themselves Ukrainians are, from an ethnic point of view, either entirely Russian or a mixture of Russians and other peoples inhabiting the areas surrounding western Ukraine.

We are not talking about wiping out the Ukrainian people—how can you destroy something that does not exist? The Ukrainian people have not had enough time to take shape.

We mentioned earlier our own vision of the goals of this conflict and these territories, whose return we see as part of our mission. Please note that our list does not include cities in western Ukraine, such as Lviv and Ivano-Frankivsk. These are historically Polish-Austrian cities and land areas, and we make no claims to them. However, for the sake of Russian security, western Ukraine should become a neutral buffer zone between us and NATO.

But the Jew [Volodymyr] Zelensky makes no secret of the fact that his goal is to wipe out the ethnic Russian population among Ukraine’s citizens. Just look at the territorial composition of their conscripts and their mobilized army now, who are dying in their hundreds every day – mainly people from central and eastern Ukraine, in other words ethnic Russians who even have a strong Russian accent when they speak Ukrainian. But the inhabitants of Lviv are not being conscripted – after all, there is almost nothing Russian about them, they are mainly a mixture of Jews, Poles, and Hungarians. In other words, the core of the future Ukrainian nation, which is only now in the process of being created.

What does Ukraine need to agree to in order for the Russian invasion to end? Are there any official demands from Russia, or do you have any thoughts of your own about what would be reasonable?

We don’t know what demands the Russian Federation will make. But to stop and leave Ukraine with its current resources, pumped up by the West, would only be to postpone the conflict to the future. No, the enemy must be defeated, both on the battlefield and in the political arena.

As for the terms of surrender, all documents from Ukraine’s military intelligence service (GUR) and Ukraine’s security service (SBU) must, of course, be transferred to Russia, and the employees of these security services, spies, people who have carried out terrorist acts against the Russian Federation, and so on, must be arrested or executed. But Ukraine will never agree to this as long as it has the support of the West.

How long do you think the war in Ukraine will last and how do you think it will end?

We have no choice but to win, because Russia cannot lose this war, and we do not know how long it will last. My personal opinion is that the war is guaranteed to continue for another two, maybe three years.

And this will only end the hot phase of the war, but the conflict will then move into a stage of counterterrorism operations to clean up the Ukrainian underworld, which will also take time.

Regardless, it is impossible to defeat Russia.

After the conflict, would a sovereign and independent Ukraine in some form be acceptable to Russians in general and to you in particular?