Generals and a colonel were detained for the failure of the defense of Kharkiv region in May 2024. Who exactly was detained and for what violations

20 January 15:14

SBI officers, in cooperation with the SBU and with the assistance of the Ministry of Defense and the Armed Forces Command, detained former commanders: two generals and a colonel, whose negligence allowed the enemy to seize part of the territory of Kharkiv region in May 2024. This was reported by the Security Service of Ukraine and the State Bureau of Investigation, Komersant ukrainskyi reports.

They explained that, according to the case file, the defendants are a brigadier general who served as the commander of the Kharkiv operational and tactical group, a lieutenant general who was the commander of the 125th separate brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and a colonel who was the commander of the 415th battalion of this unit.

A few hours before the official announcement of the detention, journalist Yuriy Butusov reported that the detainees were Brigadier General Yuriy Halushkin, former commander of the Kharkiv Operational and Tactical Directorate, and Lieutenant General Artur Horbenko, former commander of the 125th Lviv Brigade of the Terrorist Defense. Ukrayinska Pravda also named the commander of the 415th battalion, Colonel Ilya Lapin.

According to the SBU, the detained officials did not prepare the defense of the border areas of Kharkiv region and lost control during the Russian offensive, which led to the seizure of part of the territory of the eastern region of Ukraine, where fierce fighting is currently taking place.

The SBI explained in detail what the detainees are responsible for

In particular, SBI investigators found that the brigadier general determined the defense positions for the 125th Separate Tank Brigade that did not correspond to its combat capabilities, and he had other units that could have reinforced these positions. The commander also made a number of other mistakes, including not fully clarifying the directions of the enemy’s main attacks, and not sufficiently controlling the organization of preparation and conduct of defensive actions. He failed to maneuver the forces and means of the grouping in a timely manner, and did not organize support for the brigade’s units with artillery and air forces.

The former commander of the 125th separate terrorist defense brigade, a lieutenant general, also underestimated the enemy’s ability to resume the offensive in the brigade’s defense area and inadequately responded to the enemy’s increasing combat capabilities and threats. In particular, he failed to equip the combat guard positions, did not take measures to man the brigade, assigned overstated combat missions to the battalions, and, without conducting operational and tactical calculations, did not organize proper equipment of strongholds, engineering barriers, etc.

In addition, the former brigadier, having information about the enemy’s preparations for offensive actions, did not communicate it to his subordinates, did not ensure maximum mobilization and presence of all personnel of the brigade, including officers at their positions. Even during the battle, he failed to organize proper artillery fire support for the brigade’s units; he did not ensure the effective use of the brigade’s reserves, the brigade’s interaction with other units, and he did not know the actual situation on the battlefield.

The former commander of the 415th Battalion of the 23rd Brigade, in turn, failed to organize a defensive battle in the settlements of Strilecha, Krasne Liptsi and Slobozhanske, which were in the battalion’s defense line, did not determine which objects to include in the strongholds and how to prepare them for defense, ways to counter the enemy’s underground mine warfare, and places to equip shelters and warehouses.

During the repulsion of the enemy offensive, he failed to report to the senior commander on the results of the defensive battle, failed to take measures to stop the unauthorized departure of 12 battalion soldiers, and gave a combat order alone in the absence of an order from the senior commander. The former commander also ignored and failed to comply with the order of the brigade commander to restore the lost positions.

What punishment does the detainee face?

The SBU emphasized that specialized examinations initiated by law enforcement officers confirmed the facts of the criminal activity of the defendants.

After the detainees are brought to Kyiv on the basis of the evidence collected, according to the SBI, they will be notified of suspicion of negligence of a military official in service committed under martial law, which caused grave consequences (Part 4 of Article 425 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine).

The former commander of the 415th separate military unit will additionally be served a notice of suspicion of unauthorized abandonment of the battlefield (Article 429 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine).

The issue of choosing a type of detention is being decided. The defendants face up to 10 years in prison.

Василевич Сергій
Editor