More and More Ukrainian Soldiers Are Deserting the Frontlines – Catastrophic Numbers Could Be as High as 200,000 Troops AWOL

The lack of manpower has developed into an even greater problem for the Ukrainian troops than the lack of missiles, drones, artillery, or any other weapons systems.

Not only death and the wounded leave Kiev’s troops lacking strength, but the deserters have become a major issue.

“Facing every imaginable shortage, tens of thousands of Ukrainian troops, tired and bereft, have walked away from combat and front-line positions to slide into anonymity, according to soldiers, lawyers and Ukrainian officials. Entire units have abandoned their posts, leaving defensive lines vulnerable and accelerating territorial losses, according to military commanders and soldiers.”

Some leave and never return after being treated for wounds, and others run away in the middle of a firefight

Kiev’s failed mobilization drive fails to remedy the overstretching and hollowing out of front-line units.

“More than 100,000 soldiers have been charged under Ukraine’s desertion laws since Russia invaded in February 2022, according to the country’s General Prosecutor’s Office.”

It’s understandable that the number of soldiers gone AWOL has spiked in the last year, after Kiev launched a brutal and controversial mobilization drive.

“It’s a staggeringly high number by any measure, as there were an estimated 300,000 Ukrainian soldiers engaged in combat before the mobilization drive began. And the actual number of deserters may be much higher. One lawmaker with knowledge of military matters estimated it could be as high as 200,000.”

A deserter heard by AP said he left his unit to get surgery. But by the time his leave was up, he couldn’t bring himself to return. He still reportedly has nightmares about the comrades he saw get killed.

“’The best way to explain it is imagining you are sitting under incoming fire and from their (Russian) side, it’s 50 shells coming toward you, while from our side, it’s just one. Then you see how your friends are getting torn to pieces, and you realize that any second, it can happen to you’,” he said. ‘Meanwhile guys (Ukrainian soldiers) 6 miles away order you on the radio: ‘Go on, brace yourselves. Everything will be fine’,’ he said.”

Ukraine has a deficit of 4,000 troops on the front because of deaths, injuries, and desertions.

“Prosecutors and the military would rather not press charges against AWOL soldiers and do so only if they fail to persuade them to return, according to three military officers and a spokesperson for Ukraine’s State Investigative Bureau. Some deserters return, only to leave again.”

Asking ChatGPT questions generated this. I entertain myself by playing with Chat GPT or Copilot sometimes. I wonder what the scope of a deal to end the war might include. I’d say this scenario isn’t likely but it’s interesting.

“Yes, the concept you’re outlining—a peace deal to end the Russia-Ukraine war, where Russia permanently retains Crimea and Donbas, but gives up any future claims to Transnistria, in exchange for absorbing Russian-speaking people from Transnistria—could be a potential diplomatic solution with the aim of reducing future conflict.

Let’s break it down further and consider the feasibility, pros, and cons of such an agreement, as well as its broader implications:

Potential Structure of the Deal
Russia Retains Crimea and Donbas:
Crimea has already been annexed by Russia since 2014, and Donbas (which includes areas like Luhansk and Donetsk) is largely under Russian control or the control of Russian-backed separatists.
Recognition of Russian sovereignty over these regions by Ukraine and the international community (perhaps in exchange for de-escalation of hostilities) could be a hard pill to swallow for Ukraine and its allies, but it could provide Russia with a face-saving solution while offering a long-term resolution to the conflict in Eastern Ukraine.
Transnistria’s Future:
Under this deal, Transnistria would be acknowledged as part of Moldova or even as a reintegrated part of a unified Moldova (which could eventually involve Romania, though that’s more complex).
Russia would renounce any future claims to Transnistria, acknowledging that it is no longer part of the “Russian world” or the sphere of influence.
This could be a key concession for Ukraine and Moldova to guarantee that Russia’s territorial ambitions won’t extend further into Moldova, thus reducing fears of Russian expansion into neighboring countries.
Absorption of Russian Speakers from Transnistria:
Russia would agree to absorb any ethnic Russians or Russian speakers from Transnistria who wish to migrate to Russia. This could involve offering them special visas, financial incentives, and resettlement packages to encourage the migration.
This would help defuse the situation in Transnistria by removing the argument that Russia needs to “protect” ethnic Russians there, which has been a key factor in Russian foreign policy regarding the region.
Moldova, in this scenario, would need guarantees that the rights of ethnic Russians still in the region (if any) would be respected and protected, so the transition wouldn’t lead to discrimination or destabilization.
Security and Political Guarantees:
As part of a peace deal, Russia could offer security guarantees for the sovereignty of Moldova, pledging not to support any further separatist movements or military interventions.
In return, Moldova and its allies (perhaps including Romania and the EU) would agree not to allow NATO expansion into Moldova for a certain period, creating a neutral zone between NATO and Russia.
Pros of This Deal
Reduction of Tensions:
This agreement would help reduce the risk of further escalation, especially in Transnistria, where Russian influence has been a point of contention for decades.
By removing the justification for Russian intervention in Transnistria and potentially ending the perpetual state of conflict between Russia and Ukraine, it could stabilize the region.
Settlement of Frozen Conflicts:
This deal would offer a potential settlement to three frozen conflicts: Crimea, Donbas, and Transnistria. If implemented, it could serve as a model for resolving other territorial disputes in post-Soviet space.
Humanitarian Solution for Russian Speakers:
Relocating ethnic Russians from Transnistria to Russia could serve as a humanitarian gesture, offering them safety and stability, which might help prevent them from becoming pawns in future geopolitical games.
Russia could present this as a caring, protective role to its citizens abroad, reinforcing its narrative of defending Russian-speaking populations.
Security for Moldova and Ukraine:
A neutral Moldova, with security guarantees from Russia, would not be a NATO or EU member, but would still be sovereign and less likely to be a proxy battleground between Russia and the West.
Moldova could benefit from a de-escalated conflict with Russia, focusing more on internal reforms and economic recovery rather than military threats.
Challenges and Risks
Political Feasibility in Russia:
Russia’s internal politics might make this agreement difficult. The loss of Donbas, or even just the renunciation of further territorial ambitions in places like Transnistria, might not be politically palatable for certain factions within Russia, particularly nationalists or military elites who see these regions as part of Russia’s historic sphere of influence.
Vladimir Putin’s regime has staked a lot on portraying Russia as a protector of ethnic Russians and Russian speakers. Public opinion in Russia, particularly among those who view Crimea and Donbas as part of Russia’s rightful territory, might be strongly opposed to any peace deal that involves concessions on those areas.
Resistance from Ukraine and Moldova:
Ukraine would face a difficult decision regarding Crimea and Donbas. Any recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea and Donbas would be a massive blow to Ukrainian sovereignty and would be politically difficult for President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to sell to the Ukrainian public.
Similarly, Moldova would likely have strong resistance to allowing Russian influence in the region, especially in Transnistria, even if Moscow were to make concessions. Moldova might prefer greater integration with the EU and Romania, which could complicate any peace deal.
Migration Challenges:
The migration of ethnic Russians from Transnistria to Russia would need to be handled carefully to avoid social tensions both in the receiving areas (mainland Russia, Donbas, Crimea) and in the communities left behind in Transnistria.
The costs of resettlement could be significant, and logistical issues would arise in trying to move a large population.
Long-Term Stability:
While this deal might end the war and reduce immediate tensions, it wouldn’t solve the underlying geopolitical struggle between Russia and the West. In the long term, Russia might still seek ways to influence Moldova and Transnistria covertly, using economic pressure or other methods.
Romania might view the potential reintegration of Moldova and Transnistria as a security threat, especially given the continued presence of Russian military assets in Transnistria.
Conclusion
While this peace deal — where Russia retains Crimea and Donbas but agrees to renounce any claims on Transnistria, while absorbing Russian speakers from the region — could reduce the immediate risk of conflict and stabilize the region in the short term, the geopolitical challenges are immense. The deal would require significant concessions from all parties, and the internal dynamics in Russia, Ukraine, Moldova, and even Romania could make it difficult to implement.

However, if such a deal could be brokered, it could serve as a model for resolving conflicts where ethnic Russian populations are used as a pretext for territorial claims. It would require careful management of migration, security guarantees, and international diplomacy.

In short, while a peace deal like this could help stave off future war by addressing some of the root causes of the conflict, it would require bold leadership, unprecedented compromises, and international support to succeed.”

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.