Russian nationalist at the front – Part 2

/7 Comments/in , /by

Russian nationalist at the front – Part 2

This article was originally published in Danish on June 18, 2025.

Introduction

Here we present the second 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-sovjetnostalgi-nationalism-och-omvarldens-reaktioner

It was originally published on nordfront.se on March 9, 2024.

***

Russian nationalist at the front: Soviet nostalgia, nationalism, and reactions from the outside world

Photo: Rusich
Aleksey Miltjakov

INTERVIEW • In part two of our interview with Aleksey Miltjakov, he talks about what it is like to be a nationalist in Russia, what Soviet nostalgia is all about, and how he perceives nationalists’ support for Ukraine.

Last May, Nordfront published a two-part interview with a Ukrainian nationalist who is 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 like Ukraine, Russia is a country that many nationalists question whether it is worth fighting for, which is why we also chose to interview a nationalist who is fighting for the other side. With these interviews, Nordfront wants to provide an insight into how nationalists on both sides think and live – after all, these are the men who are sacrificing their lives in a conflict that is essentially about two superpowers settling their differences.

In the first part of our interview with Russian nationalist leader and commander Aleksey Miltjakov, he talked about the paramilitary unit called the Reconnaissance, Sabotage, and Assault Group (DShRG) Rusich, which he commands. Miltjakov also answered questions about “denazification,” how a Russian nationalist and the Russian state view Ukraine and the war, and what differences there may be.

In part two, we go into more detail about the situation for nationalists in Russia, how the country has been affected by the war, and how nationalists in Russia and around the world have reacted to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. In addition, Miltjakov talks about what Russian Soviet nostalgia is really about.

Additions in regular parentheses are Miltjakov’s own, while additions in square brackets and additions followed by “eds. note” are Nordfront’s additions, which are only intended to explain something to the reader and are not comments on the answers themselves. Nordfront leaves it entirely up to the reader to take a position on Miltjakov’s answers, just as we did when we interviewed the Ukrainian soldier.

The situation in Russia

The Western world, led by the US, has imposed extensive sanctions on Russia and attempted to sabotage the Russian economy. Have the sanctions had any significant effect, or have they been a shot in the dark that has hurt EU countries more than Russia?

The West’s sanctions have probably not had much effect, as the standard of living in Russia has not declined over the past two years, but has even increased. Goods subject to sanctions are still being bought and sold.

Prices have, of course, risen slightly, but incomes have risen more thanks to the government’s injection of money into the defense industry across the country.

At the same time, it is nice to see that our own industries have started to develop, something that was not possible before due to high competition.

How have the war and sanctions affected Russia culturally and politically? Has the country become more nationalistic and united since the war began?

Yes, you can see how the country has become more united during the war, but unfortunately not in terms of nationalism. It is more accurate to say that Russia has been united by following Italy’s example during the time of Benito Mussolini—the country has been united against a common threat, regardless of internal national divisions.

Many oligarchs seem to have abandoned Russia during the war, and many Jews have also migrated. Is this true, and if so, has it had a positive or negative effect on Russian society?

Of course, not only oligarchs but also some “cultural figures” have left Russia—this clearly shows who is who.

And the oligarchs who are migrating to Israel definitely cannot call themselves Russians, just like the artists who have left the country. In this way, the country has of course been cleansed in a positive way, especially in the media.

What is your opinion of Vladimir Putin? Is he a strong leader who has grown with the task and is confronting the West to create a better world order?

Is he a Russian patriot fighting for Russian interests, or is he a cynical KGB agent controlled by forces behind the scenes? Vladimir Putin is, of course, a strong leader. And the confrontation with the West is one of the factors that has strengthened his leadership. Is he a Russian patriot?

Absolutely, Putin is definitely a patriot of Russia as a state. But from his perspective, the national question, as we see it, is probably not something that needs to be taken into account, as the country is seen as multi-ethnic (while it is de facto a mono-ethnic country for the Russian people).

Putin strives for strong power and a strong state. But this aspiration is not always in the national interests of the Russian people—for example, the attempts to replace Russians with immigrants from Central Asia, who currently demand less but work more and, moreover, almost for free. But even if this works now, it does not mean that the next generation will want to live as migrants.

Therefore, we believe that the government has some problems understanding that the country and the Russian people belong together. And one is impossible without the other.

Photo: kremlin.ru, CC BY 4.0
Vladimir Putin during a Russian Orthodox Christmas celebration at the Church of St. Simeon and St. Anna in St. Petersburg in 2018.

As a nationalist, what do you see as the biggest challenge for Russia besides the conflict in Ukraine?

What we see as the biggest problem for Russia, besides the conflict in Ukraine, is the absence and gradual destruction of a Russian national identity that has been going on for over a century. Smaller ethnic groups are getting their own national republics within the federation, which leads to local chauvinism that is essentially unchecked by the state and the police. At the same time, they are trying to take away the national identity of the Russian people, in order to partially replace Russian history and Russian culture with the multinational culture of all the peoples within the Russian Federation.

But while the United States, for example, was built as a state by settlers, Russia has always had its indigenous people, who have defended their right to exist with their blood for thousands of years. And the big problem is that, due to state measures, the country’s population does not feel Russian and does not feel proud of it. They cannot look at their history and feel a sense of community with Aleksandr Suvorov and Pavel Nachimov, with Dmitri Mendeleev, Ivan Pavlov, and Mikhail Lermontov, for example.

How does Jewish power manifest itself in Russia? How much power and influence do Jews have, and has it decreased or increased since the war? We have read about Moscow’s former chief rabbi, Pinchas Goldschmidt, who moved to Israel and urged all Jews to leave Russia before it is too late. Will we see new pogroms in Russia, and is the Russian political leadership aware of the problems that Jewish power can pose for a society?

Jewish influence over modern Russia is minimal. Yes, there is a layer of oligarchs who love to eat matzo [unleavened bread eaten by Jews during Passover. Ed.] and celebrate Hanukkah. Of course, it matters that Russians make up the majority of the country, while the financial elite is mainly represented by other peoples (not just Jews).

Thanks to the Bolsheviks, when the Soviet Union was approaching its collapse, all the national republics had their own state banks, capitals, and financial elite—except Russia. But in general, the situation here has gradually begun to change for the better. Jews are slowly but surely leaving the country and new Russian billionaires with Russian surnames are taking their places.

Before the start of the special operation [in Ukraine], there was a certain unorganized Jewish influence in culture, but this has largely disappeared thanks to these people leaving Russia and openly showing themselves to be enemies of Russia. At the same time, however, there are Jews who support Russia and the special operation, not only in the media but also financially.

Photo: Twitter
Moscow’s chief rabbi, Pinchas Goldschmidt, left Russia back in February. Now he is urging all Jews to flee the country “before it’s too late.”

Are Russians generally aware of how much the political and media elite in the West are stirring up hatred against Russia? The two largest evening newspapers in Sweden had headlines demonizing Putin on a daily basis for two years, and self-righteous liberals in the West who are otherwise opposed to racism often express themselves in a very racist manner towards Russians.

Basically, I don’t think they realize it. That is, Russians don’t get complete information from foreign media, so they don’t attach much importance to it. Besides, everyone in Russia knows that news in the West is not presented objectively.

Do you think there is a risk that Russia will be drawn into an open war with the US and NATO because of the warmongering from the West, the sanctions, and the extensive material support that NATO is providing to Ukraine?

Yes, a direct clash between Russia and NATO is not impossible. And here, Russia’s experience, gained in practice (unfortunately not so quickly), will probably outweigh the technical superiority of NATO countries when it comes to weapons, equipment, intelligence, and so on.

Nationalists and Russia

The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has led to a split among European nationalists, with some supporting Ukraine against the “Bolshevik hordes from Russia” and praising supposedly nationalist units in the Ukrainian army, while others say that Ukraine is a NATO/CIA psyop aimed at destroying Russia as a threat to Western totalitarian liberalism and globohomo. How have you experienced reactions from nationalists abroad since 2022?

The reaction from most nationalists in other countries is based on a misunderstanding, as Ukraine has been conducting competent propaganda abroad for many years, which also includes visits by the Ukrainian right wing to other countries. This has happened while nationalists in Russia have not been allowed to establish strong international relations. Ukraine also offered foreign citizens the opportunity to participate in a military conflict on their side in a closed ideological environment – which, of course, also had consequences. In general, this is one of Russia’s mistakes. In 2015, an international conservative forum was held in Saint Petersburg,1 in which I participated, and which was attended by representatives of many European right-wing movements. Unfortunately, however, these types of projects have not developed in Russia since then.

Photo: Nordfront.
There was considerable interest when nationalists from Europe and the US gathered in Saint Petersburg for the 2015 International Conservative Conference.

Some nationalists in the West argue that Russia is a non-white/multi-ethnic empire invading a European nation and allowing Asian hordes and Muslim soldiers to attack the Ukrainian people. How do you respond to this criticism?

How do we deal with this criticism? There is, in fact, a civil war going on between Russians and Russians, and Ukraine is geographically located just west of certain Russian regions.

Furthermore, Russia is a mono-ethnic state where – and I want to emphasize this – the majority of the population is ethnically Russian (90 percent). And the fact that there are many very small ethnic groups in Russia, consisting of a few thousand people in each group, does not make the country non-White or non-European. As for Muslims, it is much better that Muslims fight for Russia than against it. Moreover, the European right should not talk about Muslims when it is becoming increasingly difficult to find a White man in their governments or armies. Just look at the UK or France.

Some racially oriented nationalists – both in the West and in Russia – have previously been critical of the Russian government allowing large-scale immigration of Asians and Muslims to large cities such as Moscow. Do you agree that this has been a problem and is still a problem, or has migration changed because of the war?

Yes, we also criticize the state for immigration from Central Asia and the Transcaucasian countries. But we want to point out that a new concept in Russian politics is that as soon as someone receives a passport as a new citizen, they are registered in the military. Then they can receive a call-up for conscription, be mobilized, and sent to the conflict zone. We believe that the best solution would be to gather the majority of ethnic groups from these new citizens and send them to the worst areas on the front line.

For example, the state could gather 500 people in a separate Tajik assault battalion, 500 people in a separate Armenian mountain infantry battalion, 500 Azerbaijanis in an Azerbaijani engineering battalion, and so on, and send them to the most difficult parts of the front line. For every 500 of these people sent to war, 500,000 of their compatriots will return to their homeland.

But of course, those who survive these battles and prove themselves heroes should receive adequate treatment, because the person in question has sacrificed blood for Russia — in other words, he should receive all the privileges of a Russian citizen.

Photo: Rusich.
Aleksey Miltjakov on assignment at a secret location.

Russia appears to be a country that persecutes nationalists in general and National Socialists in particular. “Nazism” is often used in the debate as a synonym for Russia’s enemies, with its historical connection to World War II, or the Great Patriotic War as it is called in Russia. Have you experienced persecution for your beliefs?

Is it possible to be openly nationalist or National Socialist in Russia? Yes, of course I have personally been persecuted for my beliefs, but not really for my beliefs, rather for certain actions that may at some point have broken the law.

With emphasis on “may,” because we have a joke that says, “you’re not a fascist if you haven’t been caught.”

And yes, there is a certain amount of pressure, but at the same time: Why has the pressure from the security services arisen? Because the so-called national movement has been so marginalized and lacked objective prospects for the future. In other words, these militant organizations sometimes committed murder, given the prevailing situation, and sometimes this happened while they were drunk. This can be compared to the more well-planned and political assassinations carried out by, for example, the Born group [“Russian nationalist militant organization.” Ed. note].

And, of course, the state saw that these random murders were not about eliminating, for example, a leader of an ethnic mafia involved in drug trafficking or money laundering. Instead, they saw that, for example, an ordinary worker or a student had been murdered. In other words, there was nothing in it for the state.

This also gave law enforcement agencies and their employees who shared nationalist beliefs a reason to persecute representatives of the movement, especially the most prominent ones. The fact is that the formation of a National Socialist or nationalist movement simply had to be done in a slightly different way. At the same time, I have always openly declared that I am a nationalist and I am not afraid of the consequences.

Are you saying that the security services would not have persecuted nationalist groups if these acts of violence had been directed against, for example, criminal immigrants rather than ordinary people?

Yes, absolutely true. Within the Russian security services and the police, 20 years ago as well as today, there has been a fairly large proportion of honest people who have radically supported the fight against non-Russian organized crime.

Unfortunately, however, the cooperation between right-wing radical youth and Russian nationalists serving in the police has not been particularly successful, as the right-wing radicals, instead of fighting the gang leaders, have mostly chosen to attack ordinary foreign exchange students. This destroyed their image and alienated them from cooperation with the state.

Do you think that “Nazism” means the same thing in Russia as it does in the West? In the West, a ‘Nazi’ is usually considered to be someone who poses a threat to Jews, minorities, “democracy,” and so-called human rights. In the Russian debate, however, it appears that “anti-Nazism” is not primarily seen from a Jewish – or even ideological – perspective, but rather that “Nazism” appears as a historical arch-enemy of Russia, as Russophobia and as a threat to Russians and Russia itself. Can you elaborate on this?

Yes, it is true that the words mean different things. In Russia, a “Nazi” is an ethnic Russian who does not like the state artificially imposing multiculturalism on him and blurring his identity for the sake of “ethnic harmony,” as well as someone who does not like the existence of “national republics” within the country and that these, for some reason, have more political power than the original Russian region.

Speaking of the other creatures: in Russia, almost no one remembers the Jews, and when it comes to gays, our entire country dislikes them. So according to the Western agenda, all Russians should be Nazis. Putin made a really funny joke about transsexuals during a press conference a couple of years ago. In the West, that would have ended his career.

Returning to the question: when you say that Putin sees Nazis as a threat to Russians, that is a translation error. You understand that in 1991, after the final division of the country into different republics (a mistake by the communists), the Kremlin came up with an artificial concept to prevent further disintegration and even republics within the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic from breaking away (e.g., Tatarstan) and to unite all inhabitants of Russia. This is how the word “ROSSIYANE” (РОССИЯНЕ) was born. This group includes Russians, Tajiks, Yakuts, Bashkirs, and all other citizens of the modern Russian Federation. However, in English and all other languages, the words RUSSKIY (РУССКИЙ, ethnic Russians) and ROSSIYANIN (РОССИЯНИН, citizens of Russia but not necessarily ethnic Russians) are written and pronounced in the same way: Russians.

So Putin’s words actually have a completely different meaning; the Nazis are those who threaten the unity of the ROSSIYANE, in other words, the citizens of the Russian Federation, regardless of nationality.

Photo: Rusich.
Aleksey Miltjakov.

Another thing that nationalists outside Russia find difficult to relate to is the Soviet nostalgia that seems to exist in broader Russian patriotism. Wasn’t communism a failure and the Soviet era a dark period in Russian history? And how does Soviet nostalgia fit in with the glorification of the tsarist regime? Isn’t there a cognitive dissonance here?

It is not the Soviet Union as a political system that people long for. This is a longing for a strong state whose opinion on the international stage carries weight in many areas. It is a longing for a state ideology, when people knew what they were living and working for, and what the future held. A longing for the order that existed in the Soviet Union and a longing for high-quality, inexpensive products that were available to everyone.

Yes, there were many negative events, especially in the early history of the Soviet Union. But people do not miss the Red Terror, Trotsky or Lenin, or Stalin’s oppression, but rather the Soviet Union of the 1960s and 1970s.

And this longing comes from the generation that witnessed that era. The rest only know about it from stories, and in those stories there is no street crime, no drug abuse, and no prostitution. Although all of this naturally existed in the Soviet Union, it was so insignificant that the average person did not notice it.

It is not red terror, but rather a strong state and a clear state ideology that people in Russia lack. Image from a Soviet parade in Moscow in 1984.

How do you view nationalism in Ukraine, and groups such as Azov? They are portrayed as “Nazis” in Russia, and were also portrayed as such in the West before Russia invaded Ukraine. Do you consider them to be true nationalists?

Yes, such groups are of course nationalists, but again, I explained my attitude towards Ukraine as a nation in general earlier.

I also think it was a very smart move by Ukrainian Jews such as [former Ukrainian President] Petro Poroshenko, Zelensky, and [former Interior Minister] Arsen Avakov to give nationalists an opportunity to grow and develop to a certain extent and to integrate them into the law enforcement agencies. They are showing good results in combat, they are ideological and ruthless. And this is a dangerous and powerful enemy.

It is unfortunate that Russia did not work with these people before Crimea’s return, many of whom previously strongly supported Russia. They did not create good conditions for them to work on our side, for us.

When we interviewed a Ukrainian nationalist fighting on the Ukrainian side, he defended Euromaidan by saying that it gave nationalists an opportunity to advance socially, culturally, and politically. How do you view this?

Yes, Euromaidan certainly gave Ukrainian Russophobic chauvinists the opportunity to develop. At the same time, Ukrainian nationalists have now lost this opportunity. The prominent force on the Maidan was the right-wing radical Ukrainians, but after the Maidan’s victory, they did not receive any special privileges or bonuses. The Azov Battalion was created, which later grew into a regiment.

The radical right got an opportunity to gather in a separate unit and arm themselves. But at the same time, we know that they were subordinate to Interior Minister Arsen Avakov, an Armenian Jew who is the head of the “white” Ukrainian nationalists. And all the resources given to them were at a level that would ensure the complete lack of independence of this battalion and nothing more.

On the other hand, it is worth acknowledging that, yes, Ukrainian nationalists in general strengthened the country during the eight years between 2014 and 2022, when these people were given the opportunity to spread their views and ideology. And thanks to this, the Ukrainian nationalists and the society they had strengthened were able to resist when the full-scale invasion took place. After all, any state on the brink of collapse must show a particularly favorable attitude toward internal patriotic and nationalist forces, as they alone are ready to rally, both selflessly and selfishly, in defense of everything they hold dear and sacred.

Photo: spoilt.exile (CC BY-SA 2.0)
The portrait of controversial nationalist leader Stepan Bandera adorned the entrance to Euromaidan headquarters in Kiev in 2014.

The same Ukrainian soldier was convinced that there is no such thing as ethnic Russians, only a kind of neo-Bolshevik and post-Soviet identity. Russian nationalists similarly claim that there are no Ukrainians, that the population of Ukraine is simply Russian. What do you say about this? Are all Ukrainians really Russians, even the population in the western parts of the country?

They may well believe that Russians do not exist, given their propaganda. But then they forget the fact that they themselves, in this case, are not representatives of any ethnic group. As we pointed out earlier: Western “Ukrainians” are a mixture of Russians with other peoples: Poles, Romanians, Jews, etc.

But Russians in Russia still form an ethnic core. And if you look at the now liberated areas, you can see what kind of people lived on Ukrainian territory. Many are ethnically degenerate who, due to extensive intermingling, can no longer be considered Russians and therefore, out of sheer desperation, see themselves as Ukrainians. At the same time, Ukrainians have no clear characteristics. This is one of Ukraine’s attempts to steal shared history and apply something that does not belong to them to themselves. Just as they do with the Russians Oleg of Kiev, Svyatoslav I and Igor I [all descendants of Rurik and princes of Kievan Rus. Ed. note] and others.

We have seen how groups such as Azov praise Jews, travel to Israel and ask for rabbis to “come and bury our fallen Jewish comrades.” We have also seen how Swedish nationalists who traveled to Ukraine in 2014 to fight against Russians alongside other nationalists then returned and praised Jews and Arabs. Is Ukrainian nationalism today reduced to just hating Russians, or do you think there is something genuine left?

We believe that Ukrainian nationalism is primarily presented as opposition to Russianness, otherwise it would be completely pointless.

If Ukrainian nationalism had Pan-Slavic elements and aimed to unite Slavic peoples, there would be no Ukrainian nationalism as a concept.

Their trips to the rabbis and their admiration for everyone would be acceptable if it were a matter of judging a third-party conflict on, for example, Israeli territory, where one can choose a side to support. Although, of course, it would be ideal if both sides killed each other completely. But one must always choose between evil and evil and support the weaker evil. Today we can support the Arabs in their war, tomorrow we can support the Jews if the Arabs start winning—in other words, we should constantly create tensions.

But when their representatives are drawn into a conflict between two Slavic sides, there is an indication that they have nothing of their own to offer.

There are examples of Russian nationalists who have taken Ukraine’s side in this conflict, and some have even traveled to Ukraine to fight against Russia. They say they want to liberate their country from what they perceive as a hostile entity that currently occupies the Kremlin. Why do you think different Russian nationalists have drawn such diametrically opposed conclusions from this conflict?

Russian nationalists are fighting for Ukraine because Ukraine has given them a clear image of a nation state, where they are not persecuted for minor issues in the same way they are persecuted in Russia, where they are allowed to walk around openly with their symbols.

We have something that could be called a subculture. Subculture and celebration. And this concept is often more important to many of them than real political power and political influence. As we say in Russia: “To appear to be, but not to be.”

And this, of course, attracts many to their side. Some who went to Ukraine had legal problems in Russia, both real and imagined. And because of this, these people have now been given certain positions over there. Unfortunately, the Russian Federation did not give these people the opportunity to develop while they were in Russia.

Photo: legionoffreedom/Telegram
Image of Russian partisans from the “Legion of Russian Freedom” fighting on the Ukrainian side.

Thank you for taking the time to answer our questions! Do you have any final words you would like to address to nationalists or ordinary people in Sweden?

I would like to wish the Swedish people that they preserve their country, a country with a very rich history, interesting traditions, and white people. So that Sweden is preserved and, hopefully, after certain events have taken place, a friendship and alliance with Russia can develop to combat threats from non-European aggression

***

Notes

  1. The chairman of the Party of the Danes (now defunct), Daniel Carlsen, did not attend, but recorded a video message that was played for the conference attendees. See NRM’s article. ↩︎

Russian nationalist at the front – Part 1

/6 Comments/in , /by

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”

Photo: Rusich, Alexei Miltjakov.

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.

Photo: Rusich.
Aleksey Miltyakov.

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.

 

Photo: Rusich.
Soldiers from Rusich. The Nordic valkyn is one of Rusich’s two symbols. Valr is an Old Norse word for fallen warriors.

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).

Photo: FSB
Image from the home of the late Wagner leader Yevgeny Prigozhin during a raid by Russian security services.

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.

Yevgeny Prigozhin with Wagner warriors after the victory in Bakhmut.

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.

Photo: Rusich
The second symbol is a kolovrat, which is a symbol from Slavic paganism representing the cycles of life, birth and death, strength and honor. The man carrying the emblem is one of Rusich’s now fallen comrades.

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.

Photo: Kremlin
Russian President Vladimir Putin.

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?

After the war, yes, there might be a territory called “Ukraine” on maps, but whatever it is, it will not be a sovereign state. Ukraine does not even have sovereignty today, when it receives all its resources, including funding to pay pensions to the elderly, from the West. And as soon as this assistance ceases, the collapse of the state is inevitable. Moreover, the West will force them to fight to the last Ukrainian, until the state is completely emptied. Zelensky and [Ukraine’s former commander-in-chief] Valery Zaluzhny wanted peace and agreed to our demands just a month after the war began. But Biden and [then British Prime Minister] Boris Johnson forced them to continue fighting in order to receive continued aid.

Photo: Ukrainian President’s Press Service/Twitter.
Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson persuaded Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to abandon peace talks during a visit to Kyiv in April 2022.

Perhaps parts of the country’s territory will end up under Polish rule, some parts may go to Romania, and Hungary may get its share.

Regardless, the entire territory of what was then Ukraine will not be annexed to Russia. This, in turn, would require extensive resources to eradicate the Russophobic elements in western Ukraine. If this can be avoided, a small part of the West will be able to call itself “Ukraine.”