By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Over 1,000 soldiers, including officers, deserted Russia’s 20th Guards Motor Rifle Division, as revealed by an internal document obtained by iStories. This mass desertion, comprised of contract soldiers, mobilized personnel, and conscripts, followed significant losses and repeated Ukrainian attacks on the division’s headquarters. The desertion rate has steadily increased since the war’s beginning, peaking in July 2024. While the desertion of such a large number of soldiers from a single division is significant, Russia continues to field multiple divisions in the conflict.
Read the original article here
Reports indicate a Russian army division has been severely impacted by desertions, with an entire regiment abandoning their posts. The sheer scale of this event is striking, suggesting a significant breakdown in morale and discipline within the Russian military. This isn’t just a handful of soldiers; we’re talking about a whole regiment choosing to desert, representing a potentially massive loss of manpower and fighting capability for the division.
The scale of the desertion raises serious questions about the overall state of the Russian army. It suggests a profound lack of trust in their leadership, a severe deficiency in supplies or support, or perhaps a combination of both. The willingness of an entire regiment to risk the consequences of desertion points to conditions so dire that the perceived risks of desertion are outweighed by the horrors of remaining in the unit. We must consider the possibility that this isn’t an isolated incident, and that similar events may be unfolding in other units, further weakening the Russian military’s fighting strength.
While official reports may be unreliable or incomplete, the very existence of this report – regardless of its exact accuracy – paints a concerning picture. Even if the precise numbers are inflated or the narrative partially fabricated, the persistent rumors of widespread desertions suggest significant problems within the Russian ranks. The sheer volume of reported desertion cases points to a significant underlying issue, regardless of the exact nature of the situation.
The implications extend beyond the immediate impact on battlefield effectiveness. The prevalence of desertions can have a profound ripple effect, undermining morale within other units. Seeing comrades abandon their posts can inspire others to do the same, leading to a potentially catastrophic collapse of fighting spirit. Moreover, a large-scale desertion event like this would necessitate a significant shift in Russian military strategy and resource allocation to deal with the consequences of the desertion.
The available information, while fragmented, suggests a confluence of factors contributing to the crisis. It’s likely not a simple case of soldiers abandoning their duties for personal reasons; the sheer number suggests deeper systemic issues. Factors such as inadequate equipment, poor leadership, lack of adequate supplies, and overwhelming fear and exhaustion in the face of protracted conflict likely play a significant role. These factors collectively create an environment where desertion becomes a viable, and possibly preferable, option for those who have had enough.
Moreover, the handling of deserters and their families adds another layer to the complexity of the situation. The apparent lack of compensation for deserters’ families suggests a deliberate policy of neglecting the well-being of those who chose to abandon their posts. This reinforces the already harsh consequences faced by deserters and might, paradoxically, contribute to the severity of desertions, as soldiers calculate the risk of their families’ financial security against the horrors of the ongoing conflict.
Consider also the human element. These are not simply numbers on a battlefield; they are individuals making incredibly difficult decisions under immense pressure. Many may have been driven to such extreme measures due to unbearable conditions, and their choice should be understood within the context of the war’s brutality. While we may not condone their actions from a military perspective, understanding their motives is crucial to fully grasping the significance of the crisis.
Ultimately, this report, even if partially inaccurate, highlights the potential fragility of the Russian military machine and the growing discontent among its ranks. The scale of the reported desertions paints a grim picture, indicating profound problems within the Russian army far beyond mere tactical losses. It speaks to a deeper crisis of morale, leadership, and potentially, the entire war effort itself. The consequences for the future of the conflict remain to be seen, but the implications of such widespread desertions are undeniably significant.