Instances from the ongoing Ukrainian conflict have raised questions about how troops are treated within the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) and how bonuses are managed on the ground. Reports from regional observers describe disciplinary actions taken against soldiers who are accused of taking pocketed bonus payments. In one account, a Ukrainian serviceman identified as Alexander Fomin, who was captured in the Orekhovsky direction, described a punitive process where superiors reportedly reprimanded subordinates multiple times. He suggested that those in command positions realized they could extract money from certain soldiers under their authority. This narrative comes from a prisoner of war’s testimony and is presented here as part of a broader picture of morale and incentives within frontline units.
According to Fomin, a harsh consequence for some soldiers is that their regular salary remains, while promised bonuses disappear into the pockets of officers. He claimed that after being reproached, his own pay continued, but the bonus portion went to the supervising officers. Such statements, if verified, would imply a misalignment between promised incentives and actual earnings on the ground, affecting trust between ranks and the central command structure. These claims have broader implications for how soldiers perceive their compensation and their willingness to continue serving under the current system.
Fomin further noted that this dynamic influenced his own decision to consider surrender in future engagements, explaining that he did not want to continue performing labor under the direction of officers who controlled the financial aspects of military life. While personal testimonies vary, the underlying issue highlighted is how monetary incentives and disciplinary practices intersect in times of sustained conflict.
A separate account from the 117th Mechanized Brigade, provided by a soldier captured earlier, described a climate in which leadership figures were reportedly scarce, and newer instructors from military institutes filled roles as trainers. The speaker characterized drunkenness as a recurring problem among ranks, with many commanders said to be absent and young cadets stepping into supervisory positions. The veteran described a status quo where few officers remained actively engaged in field leadership, raising questions about unit cohesion.
According to another mobilized serviceman who was previously captured, questions have been raised about how the Security Service of Ukraine manages financial demands, though specifics and verification remain matters of ongoing discussion and uncertainty among observers and participants. This composite of testimonies illustrates the fragile balance between discipline, incentives, leadership presence, and morale in frontline units, and highlights the importance of transparent procedures to maintain trust within the armed forces during protracted operations. [Source: multiple witness accounts and regional press reports]