Russian General Knew About Mercenary Chief’s
Rebellion Plans, U.S. Officials Say
Yevgeny Prigozhin, the head of Wagner, may have
believed he had support in Russia’s military.
Julian E.
BarnesHelene CooperEric Schmitt
By Julian
E. Barnes, Helene Cooper and Eric Schmitt
Reporting
from Washington
June 27,
2023
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/27/us/politics/russian-general-prigozhin-rebellion.html
A senior
Russian general had advance knowledge of Yevgeny Prigozhin’s plans to rebel
against Russia’s military leadership, according to U.S. officials briefed on
American intelligence on the matter, which has prompted questions about what
support the mercenary leader had inside the top ranks.
The
officials said they are trying to learn if Gen. Sergei Surovikin, the former
top Russian commander in Ukraine, helped plan Mr. Prigozhin’s actions last
weekend, which posed the most dramatic threat to President Vladimir V. Putin in
his 23 years in power.
General
Surovikin is a respected military leader who helped shore up defenses across
the battle lines after Ukraine’s counteroffensive last year, analysts say. He
was replaced as the top commander in January but retained influence in running
war operations and remains popular among the troops.
American
officials also said there are signs that other Russian generals may also have
supported Mr. Prigozhin’s attempt to change the leadership of the Defense
Ministry by force. Current and former U.S. officials said Mr. Prigozhin would
not have launched his uprising unless he believed that others in positions of
power would come to his aid.
If General
Surovikin was involved in last weekend’s events, it would be the latest sign of
the infighting that has characterized Russia’s military leadership since the
start of Mr. Putin’s war in Ukraine and could signal a wider fracture between
supporters of Mr. Prigozhin and Mr. Putin’s two senior military advisers:
Sergei K. Shoigu, the minister of defense, and Gen. Valery V. Gerasimov, the
chief of general staff.
Mr. Putin
must now decide, officials say, whether he believes that General Surovikin
helped Mr. Prigozhin and how he should respond.
On Tuesday,
the Russian domestic intelligence agency said that it was dropping “armed
mutiny” criminal charges against Mr. Prigozhin and members of his force. But if
Mr. Putin finds evidence General Surovikin more directly helped Mr. Prigozhin,
he will have little choice but to remove him from his command, officials and
analysts say.
Some former
officials say Mr. Putin could decide to keep General Surovikin, if he concludes
he had some knowledge of what Mr. Prigozhin had planned but did not aid him.
For now, analysts said, Mr. Putin seems intent on pinning the mutiny solely on
Mr. Prigozhin.
“Putin is
reluctant to change people,” said Alexander Baunov, a senior fellow at the
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center. “But if the secret service puts files on
Putin’s desk and if some files implicate Surovikin, it may change.”
Senior
American officials suggest that an alliance between General Surovikin and Mr.
Prigozhin could explain why Mr. Prigozhin is still alive, despite seizing a
major Russian military hub and ordering an armed march on Moscow.
A tense
standoff. An armed uprising in Russia led by Yevgeny Prigozhin, the head of the
Wagner private military company, stunned the world and amounted to the single
biggest challenge to President Vladimir Putin’s rule since he came to power 23
years ago. Here’s what to know about the revolt:
How it
started. In a series of social media posts on June 23, Prigozhin questioned the
Kremlin’s motives for the war in Ukraine and accused the Russian defense
minister, Sergei Shoigu, of ordering deadly airstrikes on Wagner fighters.
Tensions between Prigozhin and Russia’s military had been rising for months.
A rapid
escalation. Hours after Prigozhin’s remarks, Russian officials denounced the
mercenary leader and opened an investigation against him for armed rebellion.
On June 24, Wagner fighters seized the southern Russian city of Rostov-on-Don,
a military hub, and began to move convoys toward Moscow.
A surprise
deal. Later in the evening on June 24, state media in Belarus unexpectedly
announced that the country’s leader, Alexsandr Lukashenko, had negotiated
Prigozhin’s agreement to halt his forces’ advances to the Russian capital. The
Kremlin said that it would drop charges against Prigozhin and that he would
leave for Belarus.
What
happens next? In their first remarks since the revolt ended, Putin tried to
project unity and stability as questions swirled about his grip on power, while
Prigozhin claimed he wasn’t trying to overthrow the Russian president. With
Wagner’s future in doubt, it is unclear if the mercenary army will still be a
fighting force in Ukraine.
American
officials and others interviewed for this article spoke on the condition of
anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence. They emphasized that much of what
the United States and its allies know is preliminary. U.S. officials have
avoided discussing the rebellion publicly, out of fear of feeding Mr. Putin’s
narrative that the unrest was orchestrated by the West.
Still,
American officials have an interest in pushing out information that undermines
the standing of General Surovikin, whom they view as more competent and more
ruthless than other members of the command. His removal would undoubtedly
benefit Ukraine, whose Western-backed troops are pushing a new counteroffensive
that is meant to try to win back territory seized by Moscow.
General
Surovikin spoke out against the rebellion as it became public on Friday, in a
video that urged Russian troops in Ukraine to maintain their positions and not
join the uprising.
“I urge you
to stop,” General Surovikin said in a message posted on Telegram. “The enemy is
just waiting for the internal political situation to worsen in our country.”
But one
former official called that message akin to “a hostage video.” General
Surovikin’s body language suggested he was uncomfortable denouncing a former
ally, one who shared his view of the Russian military leadership, the former
official said.
There were
other signs of divided loyalties in the top ranks. Another Russian general —
Lt. Gen. Vladimir Alekseyev — made his own video appeal, calling any actions
against the Russian state a “stab in the back of the country and president.”
But hours later, he surfaced in another video, chatting with Mr. Prigozhin in
the Russian city of Rostov-on-Don, where Wagner fighters seized military
facilities.
“There were
just too many weird things that happened that, in my mind, suggest there was
collusion that we have not figured out yet,” Michael McFaul, a former U.S.
ambassador to Russia, said in a phone interview.
“Think of
how easy it was to take Rostov,” Mr. McFaul said. “There are armed guards
everywhere in Russia, and suddenly, there’s no one around to do anything?”
Independent
experts, and U.S. and allied officials said that Mr. Prigozhin seemed to
believe that large parts of Russia’s army would rally to his side as his convoy
moved on Moscow.
Mr.
Prigozhin had worked with General Surovikin during Russia’s military
intervention in Syria, and had described him as the most capable commander in
the Russian army. Former officials said General Surovikin did not support
pushing Mr. Putin from power but appears to have agreed with Mr. Prigozhin that
Mr. Shoigu and General Gerasimov needed to be relieved of duty.
“Surovikin
is a decorated general with a complex history,” said Dara Massicot, a senior
policy researcher at the RAND Corporation. “He is said to be respected by the
soldiers and viewed as competent.”
General
Surovikin and Mr. Prigozhin have both brushed up against Mr. Shoigu and General
Gerasimov over tactics used in Ukraine. While the Russian military’s overall
performance in the war has been widely derided as underwhelming, analysts have
credited General Surovikin and Mr. Prigozhin for Russia’s few successes.
In General
Surovikin’s case, that limited success was the professionally managed
withdrawal of Russian troops from Kherson, where they were nearly encircled
last fall and cut off from supplies. Based on communications intercepts, U.S.
officials concluded that a frustrated General Surovikin represented a hard-line
faction of generals intent on using the toughest tactics against Ukrainians.
Similarly,
Mr. Prigozhin’s Wagner mercenaries achieved some success in taking the eastern
city of Bakhmut after a nine-month slog in which, by Mr. Prigozhin’s own count,
some 20,000 Wagner troops were killed. U.S. officials and military analysts say
tens of thousands of troops died in the fight for Bakhmut, among them Wagner
soldiers who were former convicts with little training before they were sent to
war. Mr. Prigozhin frequently complained that senior Russian defense and
military officials were not supplying his troops with enough weapons.
Russia’s
entire military campaign in Ukraine has been characterized by a musical chairs
of changing generals. Last fall, when General Surovikin was put in charge of
the Russian Army’s effort in Ukraine, he was the second man to get the job,
replacing a general who had lasted barely a month. General Surovikin did not
last much longer, but performed far better during his weeks at the helm.
Nevertheless,
by January, General Surovikin was demoted, and Mr. Putin handed direct command
of the war to General Gerasimov, who promised to put Russian forces back on the
offensive. General Surovikin’s demotion, military and Russia analysts say, was
widely viewed as a blow to Mr. Prigozhin.
Julian E.
Barnes is a national security reporter based in Washington, covering the
intelligence agencies. Before joining The Times in 2018, he wrote about
security matters for The Wall Street Journal. @julianbarnes • Facebook
Helene
Cooper is a Pentagon correspondent. She was previously an editor, diplomatic
correspondent and White House correspondent, and was part of the team awarded
the 2015 Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting, for its coverage of the
Ebola epidemic. @helenecooper
Eric
Schmitt is a senior writer who has traveled the world covering terrorism and
national security. He was also the Pentagon correspondent. A member of the
Times staff since 1983, he has shared four Pulitzer Prizes. @EricSchmittNYT
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário