dw.com
Ukraine Legalizes Return of 21,000 Deserters
In 2023-2024, approximately 123,000 Ukrainian soldiers were investigated for desertion, prompting a legal change allowing deserters to return to duty by March 2025 to avoid prosecution; around 21,000 soldiers used this amnesty.
- What crime did Ukrainian soldiers like Kosjantyn and Jewhen commit, and what measures did the Ukrainian government take in response to the widespread desertion?
- Kosjantyn and Jewhen, along with approximately 21,000 other Ukrainian soldiers, deserted their posts. Desertion is a crime under Ukrainian law, punishable by prosecution. However, a deal was struck allowing deserters to return to duty by March 2025 to avoid prosecution.
- What were the primary reasons behind the mass desertion within the Ukrainian army, and how did these factors contribute to the government's decision to allow returning deserters to avoid prosecution?
- The high number of desertions (around 123,000 investigations initially) overwhelmed Ukrainian authorities, leading to an inability to prosecute most cases. This led to the legalization of deserters' return to avoid prosecution, showcasing a systemic issue of soldier well-being and resource constraints within the Ukrainian army.
- What are the long-term implications of the Ukrainian government's decision to allow deserters to return to active duty, and what systemic changes are needed to prevent future instances of mass desertion?
- The Ukrainian army's acceptance of returning deserters, while offering a practical solution to manpower shortages, highlights underlying problems. These include exhaustion, conflict with superiors, and inadequate support for soldiers dealing with trauma or family issues. Failure to address these root causes could lead to continued desertion rates in the future. The war's psychological impact, as noted by soldier Milka, also contributes significantly.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article is framed in a largely sympathetic manner towards the deserters, highlighting their personal struggles and the army's willingness to accept them back. While it mentions the legal ramifications, it does so in a way that downplays the seriousness of desertion. The headline, while not explicitly provided, would likely reinforce this positive framing.
Language Bias
The language used is mostly neutral, but there are instances where words like "destroyed" and "suicide missions" are used to describe the soldiers' experiences, creating a more emotional tone. The term "chill" in Jewhen's quote might be considered informal and slightly loaded.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the deserters' reasons for leaving and their return, but it omits a discussion of the Ukrainian army's perspective on the systemic issues that might have led to the high desertion rates. It also doesn't explore the potential consequences faced by soldiers who don't return, beyond the mention of legal consequences.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplistic view of the situation, portraying the deserters as either having valid reasons (family issues, exhaustion, poor leadership) or being easily rehabilitated. It doesn't fully explore the potential complexity of motives, or the possibility that some deserters may not be easily reintegrated.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights a Ukrainian government initiative to address the issue of desertion in the army by offering amnesty to soldiers who return to duty. This demonstrates a commitment to resolving internal conflicts and maintaining military strength, which is essential for peace and security. The initiative aims to prevent further disruptions to military operations and maintain stability during wartime. The amnesty program directly addresses the legal and institutional aspects of dealing with deserters, improving the justice system's effectiveness.