Feedback He forges his decrees like horseshoes —
some get it in the groin, some in the forehead.
Some in the brows, some in the eyes.
Osip Mandelstam
(Translated from Russian by: David McDufff:
Osip Mandelstam. Selected Poems. London:
Writers and Readers, 1983.)
The words of Osip Mandelstam about the actions of the “soul-killer and peasant-slayer” Stalin remain fully relevant today. Decrees are still being forged rapidly in our very time as well, striking blows at all kinds of “peasants,” that is, ordinary people — and gender is not always relevant here (although in matters of military service it is still men who are being targeted).
Even those who might seem to benefit from the military-patriotic mobilisation of all the forces of the Russian Federation are suffering. Arms manufacturers and various military companies are also being hit. Rostec, a Russian state-owned defence conglomerate, reacting nervously to reports about the hardships faced by the military-industrial sector, has acknowledged: “Severe liability has been introduced in Russia for failure to fulfil the state defence order — this is the demand of the time, and there can be no alternative” (the post is illustrated with a photograph of Stalin and promotes what is presented as a “grand national idea”).
Special decrees now regulate matters of loyalty and devotion to the interests of the state. Previously, people receiving a passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation were not required to take a swear; later this requirement was introduced for adults — and now, under the latest decree, it has been extended to children from the age of 14. Children are now required to solemnly swear “to be loyal to Russia and to respect its culture, history, and traditions.” Those (children or adults) who refuse to take the swear will have the decision on granting citizenship revoked; the decision will also be revoked if citizenship has been granted but a person dies before taking the swear of loyalty and respect for traditions.
Revoking a decision in case of a dead person — for whom an irresistible circumstance such as death prevented the taking of a solemn swear — is strange and cruel. Yet such revocation will have consequences for descendants: a passport itself is of no use after a person’s death (it is usually confiscated in exchange for a death certificate), but the fact of a parent’s citizenship can be extremely important, as it confers rights to children. It is unclear why a decision on citizenship must be revoked, since a dead person is no longer capable of betraying the country or its traditions, even if they did not swear when receiving a passport (especially given that the decision to grant citizenship is taken before the passport is issued and before the swear).
But this is not even the main point. What is most striking, in my view, is the medieval belief that people who have sworn will be more bound in matters of loyalty than those who were unable — or simply did not manage — to swear.
I have worked with medieval swears of loyalty, and this is a very interesting subject. Swears were usually articulated on reliquaries — that is, containers holding the remains of saints — or on other objects regarded as sacred at the time (the Bible, an icon, or a cross, in the case of Christian swears). When people believed that divine punishment awaited them for breaking a swear, there was a real point in demanding such promises of loyalty, although betrayals still occurred — but with fear and trembling. Swears and pledges have survived to nowadays in those areas of social relations that took shape in the Middle Ages — church institutions, monarchical ceremonies, and to some extent the army. But children receiving passports are something entirely different. Not only in the Middle Ages, but even quite recently, children were not provided with passports at the age of 14, and the passport system itself belongs to modern and contemporary history.
Other groups of people are also required, under wartime decrees, to pronounce a swear “of loyalty to the Russian Federation.” Back in 2023, Putin signed a decree obliging volunteers, employees of state enterprises (established in regions during periods of martial law), and members of territorial defence units to swear in the following words:
“I solemnly swear loyalty to the Russian Federation, undertake to observe sacredly the Constitution of the Russian Federation, strictly to carry out the orders of commanders and superiors, and conscientiously to fulfil the duties entrusted to me. I swear to be devoted to Russia and courageously to defend its independence and constitutional order.”
What stands out in this text is the touching choice of adverbs: the Constitution must be observed “sacredly,” orders from superiors must be carried out “strictly,” and independence must be defended “courageously.” The sacredness of the Constitution (which would seem to be a legal document rather than a sacral text) is evidently linked to the idea of what is essentially a military swear rather than a civilian pledge. Moreover, employees of state enterprises established “during periods of martial law,” upon examination of Federal Law No. 207 of 13 June 2023 (to which the decree is tied), turn out to be employees of little more than “knife and axe”: the law concerns a militarised structure, Okhrana (State Unitary Enterprise “Special Purpose Centre ‘Okhrana’ of Zaporizhzhia Region”) operating in the occupied territories of Ukraine. These employees are tasked with carrying weapons both to combat drones and to “assist” the police and security services.
The theme of war is also linked to applications for citizenship or residence permits by male migrants from almost all countries of the former USSR. The relevant Presidential Decree No. 821 has been in force since November 2025. Men aged 18 to 65 are now required to present either a contract with the Russian army or a substitute document (a certificate of completed service or of inapplicability for service). An exception is made for citizens of allied Belarus, while for migrants from certain other countries (Kazakhstan, Moldova, Ukraine) this requirement applies only to citizenship applications and not to residence permits.
Thus, the requirement to sign a contract with the army of a country at war is imposed on foreign nationals even before they are able to apply for permission to reside in the Russian Federation. In doing so, citizens of many countries are pushed towards violating the laws of their countries of nationality (in all countries of Central Asia and the South Caucasus, mercenarism is a criminal offence), without any guarantee that they will even receive the desired document in return, since applications may be rejected for various reasons. For example, having a wife who is a citizen of the Russian Federation is no longer considered as a ground for obtaining a residence permit; lawyers report that there are already cases of people being stripped of Russian documents that they had obtained on the basis of marriage. As a result, in order to obtain the desired right to live with one’s family in Russia, such persons must violate the law of their own country, risking a serious prison sentence at home, while still possibly being denied the right to live in their spouse’s household.
In a joint publication issued on the occasion of International Migrants Day (18 December), the Anti-Discrimination Centre “Memorial” and human rights defenders from Kyrgyzstan noted:
“The rights of migrant workers — most of whom are citizens of Central Asian countries — are grossly violated by Russia, where millions of migrant labourers still live and work. Migrants’ families are being forced out of the country, with children denied access to schools; electronic surveillance of migrants’ lives and movements is being carried out; unbearable living conditions are being created through police control, harassment, and deportations. The gravest crime committed by Russia against citizens of neighbouring countries is the waging of an aggressive war against Ukraine, in which citizens of Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and other Central Asian republics are often coerced into participation.”
The fate of citizens of Kyrgyzstan who signed contracts with the Russian army and later ended up in captivity is described in a short documentary film. The main conclusion of that publication is clear: involvement of foreign nationals in the aggressive war constitutes a war crime of the Russian Federation. No decrees can justify this.
Stefania KULAEVA
Expert, Anti-Discrimination Centre “Memorial”,
Originally published on the blog of Radio Svoboda (in Russian)